Do me a favor and listen to the song while you read this. It doesn't matter if you don't understand the words. That's the beauty of it.
I haven't watched anime for the longest time, and I don't know why. It's not that I've outgrown it; I still read One Piece manga even though I can lo longer be bothered with watching the anime series. I used to love anime. The story lines are usually more mature and have more depth than Western cartoons. Heck, they even have more depth than a lot of live-action TV series out there.
I read on Twitter that someone recommended watching Kimi no Na wa | Your Name for its brilliant use of lighting and cinematography. So I looked for the anime on a whim -- well, I was procrastinating and watching a movie was one of the best excuses to not write -- and I managed to watch it tonight. Right before writing this.
We all know if I immediately write a review on something, I have strong feelings about it.
Wow was I blown away. Yes, the movie is visually stunning. But. Much more than that, it is beautiful in its entirety. Kimi no Na wa is one of those quiet movies. You know, those without an antagonist or monsters or quests. What I'm saying is that it's not for everyone. Adventure lovers can find it boring. So read no further.
Kimi no Na wa by Makoto Shinkai revolves around the comet Tiamat whose blazing path becomes visible as it makes its 1200-year orbit around the sun. Seventeen-year-old Mitsuha Miyamizu, raised in the ancient ways of Shinto but hating her life in her sleepy town, experiences these vivid dreams where she becomes a seventeen-year-old boy in Tokyo named Taki Tachibana. Taki experiences the same dream, where he wakes up in Mitsuha's body. Eventually both of them realize that during these "dreams", they switch bodies. I don't want to say more for fear of spoiling this beautiful, beautiful movie.
Watching Kimi no Na wa reminds me that I live for quiet stories. Stories without antagonists or monsters or quests. Not so much in-depth introspection typical of a literary work (even I find those boring), but stories where the main characters don't have to triumph over an antagonist. Stories without bad guys.
Yeah, yeah. These stories are boring, you say.
For me, there is strength in the quiet. These stories envelop me like a subtly colored quilt blanket and keep me warm, comforting me, staying with me long after the stories are over. There's a staying power in these stories. And there is so much beauty.
The first novel I finished writing is a quiet one. Well, more than one literary agent said so, so I guess it's true. Too quiet, even. The current one I'm writing, despite the adventures, is also quiet. Maybe once it's done, it'll get rejected over a hundred times, too.
I may write in multiple genres, but I love writing quiet stories the most. It is where I find my strength, where I discover and explore beauty.
Maybe one day I'll get to share these quiet novels with the world. For now, I'm thankful that I've found myself again.
Let me start with a disclaimer: I’m not a football fan. You Americans call it soccer (because apparently football is what you call a game where you clasp the ball under your armpit most of the time, but I digress). I wanted to watch Ola Bola because of the hype. Because it’s Malaysian, apparently.
Not made in Malaysia. Malaysian.
Before we get into a heated debate, let’s be clear that Ola Bola is a sports movie, pure and simple. As such, it follows the sports genre formula to the letter:
Underdog — new coach inherits a crappy team — star player rebels against the new coach — training montage — team starts winning — good team comes to taunt — final game, losing the first half — inspirational half-time pep talk — team wins by a point — more inspiration.
It’s not even a spoiler, okay. It’s an actual used-and-abused movie trope. Don’t believe me? Click here and here. Only, there isn’t any death scene. Hmm.
The premise is this: it is 1980 (thank God I’m not of that fashion era!), and the Malaysian football team is gearing up for the Moscow Olympic qualification. They lost the qualifying match to Korea back in 1976, so they are determined to qualify this time. The captain, Tauke, needs that qualification, and is pushing the team. They get a new coach from England, and…read the trope above.
There are three significant things that make Ola Bola different, though. One: it’s a Malaysian narrative. Two: the main characters have lives — even jobs — that have nothing to do with football. Three (and the most important of all): the movie is a subtle and subliminal clarion call for all Malaysians to wake up from their comfort zone and unite.
People are enthusing that Ola Bola is Malaysian. That’s what Malaysians say when someone or something great is not Malay. You’re a great sportsperson/author/actor/designer but not Malay? We are proud of you, you great Malaysian you. Other than that, we keep hearing declarations like “pergi balik negara asal kau la!” (go back to your country of origin).
Malaysian birth certificate, Malaysian identification card. The negara asal is Malaysia. Duh.
When you slap the term “Malaysian movie” on Ola Bola, I find it distasteful, and doing the director, Chiu Keng Guan, a disservice. I think it’s a Chinese movie, what with the first 15 minutes being in Chinese and all (I think Cantonese and Mandarin dialects are used, but I may be wrong. Maybe it’s just Mandarin.) and with the credits written in both Chinese and Malay. But the characters also converse in English, Malay and Tamil. They don’t converse one another in Malay or English for the benefit of the audience; they speak their natural languages in their natural environments. There’s even my favorite “Why ah?” line. In other words, the narrative is inherently Malaysian, with all its nuances and flavors. For foreigners who want a taste of near-modern Malaysia, this movie is a must-watch. I refuse to slap the term “Malaysian movie” on Ola Bola, though.
The main characters (Captain Tauke, goalie Muthu and aspiring sports commentator Rahman) have their own lives and families, as well as their own sets of worries and hardships. Taukeh works non-stop (rubber tapping, office clerking and then helps his girlfriend at the funfair at night ON TOP of football practices and games — #lebihdari2kerja) just to make ends meet, and his younger sister disapproves of his chasing his football dream — or so it seems. Muthu, the eldest son of the family, is getting flak from his dad for not being there to help deliver coconuts to shops. Rahman…well he always gets his twin daughters mixed up.
Anyway.
There are no Datuks and Tan Sris and overbearing (and overdressed) Datins in this movie. These three focus characters have their own versions of kampung houses and families. We the audience get a taste of these culturally diverse lives that are united by a common thread: the bond of family. Also, nasi lemak. I kid you not. Paraphrasing Tauke in his conversation with Rahman, “kulit kita lain warna, tapi kita sama-sama makan nasi lemak.” Our skin colors may be different, but we all eat nasi lemak. Something like that. What’s so beautiful about this movie is that these culturally different lives are showcased in a way that is not forced onto the audience as with the “Ahmad, Ah Chong and Raju” problem that is prevalent in our patriotic/inspirational movies and advertisements where racial unity is shown in a stereotypical manner (read: pretentious).
Speaking of, talk about being subliminal. Talk about inception. I’m not sure if most other audience members realize this, but the part where the coach talks about the Malaysian team being too deep in its comfort zone, and a change will do it a lot of good, as well as the older version of Tauke’s speech at the end…wow. Good speeches. Deep. Like I said, a clarion call for all Malaysians to wake up, but done in a subtle and tasteful way. Subliminal.
The actors are mostly new and green, so the underacting that at times can be lackluster is expected. I also think the three Caucasian teams they went up against used the same players. Comic relief that borders on slapstick is also rampant, but hey, it’s entertaining as hell. We were all laughing with abandon during the funny bits. And the trope. Come on.
These imperfections hardly matter, though. During the ending speech, the random lady beside me sniffled. Heck, even I felt a little patriotic watching Ola Bola. Because it is a beautiful movie in spite of its imperfections. The cinematography…masya Allah, it’s superb. There’s this (totally unnecessary) scene where the team boards a Nuri helicopter and we get a montage of random but breathtaking aerial views of Malaysian mountains, islands, paddy fields, swamps and forests, and I whispered to Sab, “this isn’t Malaysia. It’s so beautiful! But wait. That’s totally Sabah. Can the helicopter fly that far?” The match scenes are also realistic — as realistic as a non-fan can expect, at any rate. The spirit of the bond created when cheering for your fellow countrymen is palpable. It reaches out throughout the cinema hall.
So why the dramatic title? I felt depressed watching the movie because it’s a fictional Malaysia. It’s Malaysia as how it should be, and not how it is. There is no mention of Melayu or Cina or India at all. When a team member is in trouble, the other helps out. “I cover you,” as Muthu tells Ali.
There is no. Mention. Of. Race.
How beautiful — and sadly fictional is that?
Malaysians (especially the Malays) are so wrapped up in paranoia and distrust that even a good Samaritan helping another person gets highlighted as “Malay guy helps a Chinese aunty” or “Malay elderly refuses the help of an Indian doctor”. It’s depressing that instead of fellow Malaysians, we are forced into clusters and labels of our own doing. Our children are taught to distrust other races. We are conditioned to look at immigrants from countries like Indonesia, Bangladesh, Nepal and Myanmar as lesser beings. Non-Malays are always reminded of the pre-Merdeka past, and to be grateful for the generosity of Malays.
Inilah barisan kita
Yang ikhlas berjuang
Siap sedia berkorban
Untuk ibu pertiwi
I won’t even bother translating these lyrics because Malaysians understand the words, and the meaning behind the words. Only that we have chosen to let the lyrics be just meaningless words.
Watching this movie depresses me because it portrays a beautiful Malaysia that we are drifting farther and farther from every day. It also gives me hope because while it is not a Malaysian movie, the movie is for Malaysia. It is also the best movie Malaysia has produced to date.
“Kita menang sama-sama, kita kalah pun sama-sama.”
We win as one, we lose as one.
May the beautiful words be more than just fiction, insya-Allah.
I leave you with the beautiful song "Arena Gemilang" by Zee Avi.
As someone who loves watching Science Fiction movies and shows, and who is also a Science Fiction writer himself, I had a total fanboy moment when I watched the trailer of Ex Machina for the first time. Go ahead and watch the trailer I've embedded. I'll wait.
You're back? Good. It looks good, doesn't it? In robotic/android Science Fiction, the trope that is regularly employed is the Pinocchio issue: a construct who wants to be a real boy. If a robot is equipped with artificial intelligence (AI), will it destroy humanity like Ultron of the Avengers: Age of Ultron movie is set to do, or will it preserve humanity like The Vision does? Asimov's Three Laws of Robotics are also discussed at great length in android stories, be them directly or indirectly. What are these laws, you ask?
A robot may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm.
A robot must obey orders given it by human beings except where such orders would conflict with the First Law.
A robot must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Law.
I, Robot uses these laws and discusses about what happens when these laws are corrupted. A thoroughly good movie, that. In my story, "Act of Faith", the same rules are used, albeit indirectly. I discussed about whether a robot has a soul, and if so, can it be a follower of the Faith?
Here we have Ex Machina. In the movie, Nathan, a genius who founded a popular search engine, has created androids and wants a third party to test his technology, so he calls in one of his employees, Caleb. He uses a modified Turing test to see if Caleb will treat a robot like another human even though he is aware that he is interacting with a robot. Ava is a humanoid android that doesn't even pretend to look fully human. Her abdomen is transparent, and her limbs are covered with mesh instead of skin.
She still looks beautiful.
I can't say much without giving spoilers, but like any other thriller, Ex Machina raises the question of trust. Can Caleb trust Nathan? Or should he trust Ava? How can he trust either of them--or even himself--when he develops an existential crisis?
Even using a minimalist setting (one location) and cast (just three of them, unless you count in the ever-silent Kyoko), this movie manages to evoke a mini-existential crisis within my psyche. Something like what The Matrix did. What if our existence is just a lie? What if what we know is not real? What is real, anyway? Who gets to decide?
Ex Machina doesn't even care about Asimov's Three Laws of Robotics. Here, what makes a robot human is not free will, but the instinct to survive. How far will a robot go to ensure its survival?
It's sad to see that Nathan's goal for developing these androids is to create lifelike companion/sex bots. It's sad to see that at this day and age, women are still seen as sexual objects. Ex Machina is still an amazing movie, regardless, because of the storytelling and the character development/arcs. Layers upon layers are peeled off from these three main characters to reveal who they are, what their essence is.
The only qualm I have is how easy, how convenient the ending is. I guess I expected more? Breanna can attest to my aversion toward convenient endings. It's the ultimate struggle/conflict, and the protagonist has to risk losing everything in order to earn victory. The keyword here is "earn". While there is no question that all three of them have gotten what they deserve, but I don't think one of them has earned it.
Overall, it's a beautiful, thought-provoking movie. It approaches the android trope in a tasteful, novel manner, and I highly recommend it.
A chance encounter between a disgraced music-business executive and a young singer-songwriter new to Manhattan turns into a promising collaboration between the two talents.
I didn't know about this movie when it came out. I don't even know if it was released here in Malaysia. I was just browsing for new movies to watch some weeks ago, and my interest was piqued by the synopsis. I readily admit that I love movies about music. Not the High School Musical kind, but the Fame and Once kind.
I acquired this movie some weeks ago, but I only managed to watch it tonight. Man, what a mistake it was.
For waiting too long to watch it.
Begin Again is about a young singer/songwriter from England (Keira Knightley) who followed her boyfriend (Adam Levine), who has just singed a major record deal, to New York. He gets caught up in the newfound fame and attention, and she leaves him when he betrays her trust. Her friend forces her to play a song at a small bar, where a music executive who's just lost his job (Mark Ruffalo) discovers her.
There's a stark contrast between the treatment given by a major record lable and a music executive who only has his passion left. There's also a stark contrast between a musician who's caught up in a tide of a corporation that's bent on selling a label, and another musician who's adamant about staying true to herself.
This is where the magic happens. The contrasts, they aren't shoved into your face; they are elegently subtle that you don't notice them at first. And when the contrasts click, oh how they click.
The movie starts slow, and it only takes off at the tent pole, the middle of the movie. Just like Once, however, it's the brilliant music that keeps the viewers' attention. The brilliant acting as well, but it's the music that makes this particular movie.
Not the songs, though they are a part of it.
The music.
Also, just like Once, the chemistry between the two main characters is so strong that we root for them, that we want something to happen between them. I won't give any spoilers, but the ending cannot be anymore perfect than it is.
This movie is not for everyone. Definitely not for everyone. And I won't shove it in your face. I do, however, recommend it to family and friends who ride on the same wavelength (on occasions) as I do, musically and artistically. Most important, however, Begin Again moved me. It has inspired me to be great at my own pace, in my own way.
It's been a long while since I was instantly moved by a book or a movie. I should have watched this movie the instant I acquired it. I should have stolen some time instead of being too busy to take time off for myself.
May more brilliance like Begin Again be shared with the whole world. Thank you, Mr John Carney.
Yeah. None of you thought I do Malay movies, much less write about one.
I surprise even myself, sometimes.
I wish I can tell you that I approached this movie with an open mind, but we all know that would be a lie. The thing about Malay movies is that they are generally made of suck of the highest order. It's either about the hedonistic lifestyle of the rich, or about a kampung girl losing her innocence to someone from the city, or about the vast difference of social standings, or about bad main characters who learn their lessons a little too late, or "comedies" that are actually full of slapstick. Most of the time you can tell how the story ends 10 minutes into a movie, because Malay movies are so bloody formulaic.
So I approached "KIL" with a certain trepidation. I heard that it's a good movie, different from what we usually get. I wanted badly for it to be good, but my prejudice against Malay movies was too strong.
The premise is simple. Akil, or Kil, acted by Redza Minhat, has given up on life and contemplates suicide. He even attempted to off himself several times, but he could never see it through. When he discovers about a company named Life Action Bureau (LAB) that specializes in killing clients who want to commit suicide, he grabs the chance and signs the contract. That's when good things start to come into his life, and he slowly appreciates being alive. The stake is losing his life to an unknown assassin, the same life that at the beginning of the movie he wants to throw away, but toward the end he is desperate to keep.
Right from the start you can tell that it's a quiet movie, subdued, almost dignified. You can tell that there won't be any rempit motorcycles or racing modified Protons, or Malay folks getting drunk (Muslim Malays are barred from consuming alcohol, btw).
Just plenty of cigarettes.
Let me tell you that I am in love with the cinematography and music score. Forget the fact that the movie is a low-budget one, filmed over 11 days. The cinematography is absolutely gorgeous. It doesn't have that typical Malay movie vibe. ALHAMDULILLAH FOR THAT! I expect this level of cinematography from Indonesian and Thai movies, so "KIL" blew me away with this particular awesomeness. The music score is spot-on and complements the story.
Acting-wise, Redza Minhat has done a great job. Sure, his dialogs are sometimes stilted, and I notice a certain awkwardness and discomfiture, but overall, he's a convincing protagonist. A lot of people complain about Cristina Suzanne who portrayed Zara, the person who becomes the reason Akil wants to live, and I think I can see why. She has this Kristen Stewart & Keanu Reeves vibe about her. One expression to rule them all. However, her quirkiness comes through when the story calls for it, and if someone like her comes into my life, I wouldn't want to kill myself either. It's not just about her looks, which is pretty but not gorgeous. Zara is almost like Zooey Deschanel in "500 Days of Summer".
Come to think of it, "KIL" has the same atmosphere as "500 Days of Summer".
Which is a good thing. Trust me.
I did mention that the premise is simple, right? The twists, however, hot damn, I appreciate the twists to the highest order. The reason behind Kil's desolation only comes later in the movie, but the foreshadowing is good. Zara's true identity is revealed through a sub-plot that mirrors the main storyline, but that's not even the twist. The foreshadowing is good. There's not a single deus ex machina moment. AT ALL.
If there is one thing Malay filmmakers can take away from this movie, it is its excellent foreshadowing. The twists don't feel contrived, and everything comes together in a satisfying ending. The denouement is good, too.
"KIL" is not a movie about the hedonistic lifestyle of the rich, or about a
kampung girl losing her innocence to someone from the city, or about the
vast difference of social standings, or about bad main characters who
learn their lessons a little too late, or "comedies" that are actually
full of slapstick. It is not fast-paced, so it is not for action lovers.
What it is, is a big step forward for the Malay movie industry.
I watched "The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey" during its opening weekend. By some unavoidable drama, I missed the first ten minutes or so. And I hate missing the first part of any movie. Like "Lord of the Rings", I've read the book long before the movies came to existence. Loved the story, but found the storytelling a bore.
Anyway. Even before watching the movie, I've been exposed to viewers' reactions on Twitter. They either loved it, or they hated it. Nothing in between. When I watched the movie, I absolutely loved it. However, at a certain level, it doesn't work. I left the theater feeling unsatisfied. Not cheated, but hollow inside. As I said, unsatisfied.
It took me over a month and a second viewing to really digest my reactions. Since I'm a writer as well, I can't help but analyze the movie through a writer's eyes. So here's what I think:
The things that made the movie work:
"The Hobbit" is a high-quality epic Fantasy. I may have strayed to other genres, but Fantasy will always be my home. There aren't many Grade A Fantasy movies out there, therefore I cherish each and every one of them.
The short book has been stretched into three movies. As such, Peter Jackson takes his time to tell the story. Sure, people complain that it takes over one hour before Bilbo finally leaves Bag End, which would have likely taken no more than fifteen minutes had the movie been compressed into one or two episodes. What's important here is that I get to appreciate the beautiful settings and the superb cinematography even more. Nothing is rushed, but nothing is bogged down. Beautifully done, I say.
The score. Oh, the score. Howard Shore is a genius.
Did I mention that the settings are beautiful? Well, they are. The CGIs are seamless.
The scene with Gollum. AMAZING!
The things that did not make the movie work:
The ending. I was wondering what made the story so unsatisfying. The character arc is complete. This is a story about Bilbo Baggins, and he starts off a complacent hobbit who doesn't want any adventure. At the end of the movie, he has found a reason to stay with the dwarves. He has found his purpose. Then I thought about the lack of big moments--the climax. After the second viewing, I find this untrue. There are plenty of climatic moments. For one, Bilbo spares Gollum's life and this is a major moment, which would have been significant had this movie been shown before LotR. As such, everyone (who hasn't read the book) already knows that Gollum survives to play a significant role in LotR. There's also the completion of Bilbo's character arc as I mentioned. There's the death of the Goblin King, and the encounter with Azog the Defiler. Plenty of big moments.
Then I realized it. The party was rescued by an external element: the eagle lords. They were cornered into a corner (or, quite literally, at the edge), with no way to defend themselves, and out of nowhere come these great eagles to rescue them to safety. Sure, Gandalf seemingly summoned them using the ONLY MOTH THAT SO HAPPENS TO BE ON THE SAME PINE TREE, but this is a classic example of a deus ex machina ending. Totally unsatisfactory; cheating, almost. This article agrees with me view.
Similar to point (1), this movie falls victim to the dreaded unfinished episode. Maybe because it's not meant to be a trilogy in the first place. Some Fantasy series I've read have the same problem--some games, too. In every story there is a major antagonist, an arch enemy. In LotR, it's Sauron. In "The Hobbit", it's Smaug the fire dragon. Smaug is introduced at the beginning, and he awakens at the end. Check. In a series, there are lesser antagonists or bosses, obstacles the heroes need to overcome at the end of each book/episode, leading up to the ultimate boss at the end. Azog is the lesser boss, but there isn't a conclusion with him at the end of the first movie. The Goblin King is introduced at the 2/3 mark, which, in itself, is a sin as new elements cannot be introduced at and after the 2/3 mark, and his airtime is so little, with his death so easily obtained, that he's not really considered an obstacle.
The 48fps 3D theater. I'm used to 3D, and it's becoming more and more subtle, enriching the movie instead of being used as a special effect, but the 48fps just doesn't work. The images are HD-sharp (too sharp for a cinema), but what jarred me was the extremely fast-moving fast movements like crackling fire and scampering characters. It's like the movie is put on fast-forward, which ruins an otherwise excellent show.
Sure, the negative findings are more detailed, but that doesn't mean I won't be watching the movie over and over and over and. Over. Again. It's a beautiful movie, and it's a compelling story. Maybe I'll love it even more when I get to watch the whole story as a marathon.
Let me be upfront: I read stories and watch movies from a writer's perspective. I look for what works, what doesn't, and everything in between.
And this movie works.
I heard plenty of negative reviews before watching "Snow White and the Huntsman", so I approached it with much trepidation and prejudice. I was expecting to be disappointed by this movie, like I was with so many fairytale retellings.
So let's get something straight. This movie is a fairytale, and doesn't pretend to be anything else. The story is told in an epic fantasy manner, with magic, fairies, dwarves and all. The only deviation from a classic fantasy is how the women are empowered. Snow doesn't wait helplessly for Prince Charming and others to save her. She saves herself, and then some. She leads an army, Jeanne d'Arc style. And I love it. Damsels in distress are overrated.
When you look at the poster, your eyes are not drawn toward Snow White (Kristen Stewart) or the Huntsman (Chris Hemsworth), but toward Ravenna (Charlize Theron). There's a damn good reason for that too. Where in classic fantasy, the Stepmother is the archetype of evil, in this movie, Ravenna is given a back story and a motivation for being who she is. This retelling is as much her story as it is Snow's. Maybe it's because of Ms Theron's superb acting, but I care about her as much as I care about the good guys. As a writer, this is something big. If a storyteller can induce empathy toward the bad guy, then the storyteller is of a different league altogether.
Sure, Kristen Stewart has only one facial expression: troubled. Keanu Reeves also has one facial expression: duh. But both of them are A-listers, and somehow they make sales. They are blessed. Get over it. Snow doesn't stand out as much as Ravenna, but this doesn't lessen the storytelling.
And you may notice that all the characters are Caucasians. Before you shout #racefail, let me remind you that Snow White is a white man's fairy tale. We Malaysians don't expect Caucasians to be in epic fantasy movies like "Puteri Gunung Ledang", and having them in the movie would have diminished it.
The scope of "Snow White and the Huntsman" is grand, the graphics and the cinematography are exemplary, and the scene with the white stag IS AMAZING! The story has just the right amount of twists to make it fresh without detracting the essence of the fairytale.
This movie is not for children, but I know plenty of adults out there expected something...more. So this movie is not for everyone. It is a fairytale, pure and simple. For those of us who still believe in magic, this movie is beautiful.
And for writers out there, this movie is a lesson in how storytelling works. Kudos to the director, Rupert Sanders, and the screenwriters, Evan Daugherty, John Lee Hancock and Hossein Amini. Thank you for bringing the magic to life.
