Twilight falls on Twilight

The Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn part 2
My rating:




I said in my review of The Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn part 1 that I would defend the entire film series as being not as bad as everyone thinks they are. And believe me, I have heard some very bad things about them. Well, TMBF always (has a tendency to, on occasion, be known to) keeps his promises, so here it is: seriously, they're not all that bad. They're not all that good either, but they're a lot better than the books. Now, granted, I have not actually read Stephenie Meyer's books, but I read plenty of online commentary on them - which also means I had the entire storyline spoiled for me - long before I started watching the movies. And on my objectivity as an amateur film critic, I will attest that the Twilight movies - the movies, not the books - have been muchly unfairly maligned.

And it's certainly easier to attest as such when the last movie happens to be as not bad as it is.

Bella Swan (Kristen Stewart) has become what she has always wanted to be - a vampire. She is also mother to the newborn Renesmee (Mackenzie Foy), her child with Edward Cullen (Robert Pattinson) and a vampire/human hybrid who matures at an accelerated rate. And Renesmee has a guardian in Jacob Black (Taylor Lautner), who has "imprinted" on the child and is bound to her for life. Even as Bella adjusts to her new existence - learning the ropes of being a vampire, raising her daughter, easing the worries of her long-suffering father Charlie (Billy Burke) - trouble brews. The Volturi, led by Aro (Michael Sheen), believe that Renesmee's existence is a violation of vampire law, and are coming to Forks to exact deadly retribution. The Cullens seek help from other vampire covens from around the world, but even though their band is joined by the Quileute werewolves, the Volturi will not be deterred - threatening a bloody battle that many may not survive.

The sole and only reason I am giving this movie a 3-½-star rating is that climactic battle scene. Wouldn't you know, turns out Twilight is at its best when it gives us proper action scenes that acknowledge the awesomeness of vampires vs. werewolves vs. vampires. (I say "acknowledge", because the rest of the time, they sparkle.) That is one big, long and epic battle scene, bigger and longer and epic-er than the last time the Cullens and the Quileutes joined forces against Victoria's army of newborns. That is also a battle scene that does not happen in the original book - and the fact that the plot built up to it only to chicken out at the last minute is one of the biggest complaints against the book. Director Bill Condon and screenwriter Melissa Rosenberg find a way to show us the battle and yet stay true to Meyer's ending. Some may think it a cheat, but I thought it was pretty clever and cool.

Which is exactly what Condon and Rosenberg should have done in adapting the book; and which is exactly what Rosenberg has been doing for five movies now. And these five movies, while never really very good, have been leaps and bounds better than their source material. There's none of Meyer's widely reviled prose; Bella Swan is much more tolerable, even sympathetic, when she's played by a human actor than when she's a first-person narrative stream of incessant self-pity and self-absorption. Kristen Stewart is even quite good in this, displaying more life and energy in her performance than ever before; perhaps Bella is right about the fact that she was born to be a vampire. As a matter of fact, I've never had any problems with Stewart's acting in these movies, and I think there's something sexist and ugly in all the hate she's been getting. Robert Pattinson and Taylor Lautner sure don't get as much vitriol (and I personally think Lautner is the weakest actor among the three).

And I am certain that Rosenberg and every director on the franchise is fully aware of all the WTFery in Meyer's storyline, and has been doing their best to mitigate it. As much as Meyer's Bella is a spineless, feckless wet rag of a heroine, movie-Bella actually has moments of strength and courage. In Breaking Dawn part 1, Bella insists on keeping the baby that is slowly and gruesomely killing her - and Americans in particular went nuts arguing this is a metaphor for the pro-life side of the abortion debate, because America goes insane over the abortion issue like few other countries do. But Stewart and Rosenberg made it the choice of a young girl that is understandable and consistent with her character, even emphasising her strength of will in holding to that choice despite overwhelming objection from Edward and the Cullens. And then there's the part when Jacob imprinted on the newborn Renesmee - an astonishingly tone-deaf plot development that is unavoidably paedophiliac. But Condon stages the scene as a moment of divine grace, in which Jacob falls to his knees, humbled by the higher power that has transformed his murderous hate into love.

Okay, there's only so much a good screenwriter and director can mitigate that, since they're still hobbled by the need to stay faithful to the books. (If they weren't, I'm sure they'd cut out the whole grown-man-falls-in-love-with-a-baby-and-waits-till-she-conveniently-grows-to-adulthood-super-fast-to-marry-her thing.) In fact, their efforts to make palatable this, the single most insanely stupid thing Meyer has ever written, don't entirely succeed this time. Bella rages at Jacob once she learns of the imprinting, but the scene is played for laughs - and includes the line "You nicknamed my daughter after the Loch Ness Monster?!" that I don't know whether to laugh at or not. It's also very cagy about showing the relationship between Jacob and Renesmee - which, on one hand, is a relief - but on the other, it also means this hybrid human-vampire child, on which the entire plot revolves, is never more than a blank. She has no personality whatsoever; we're only told that everyone loves her, but we're never given any reason why we should.

It doesn't help that when she's a baby, she's this hideous inhuman CGI creation that is the movie's single biggest misstep. Was it too hard to find a real baby?? Whose idea was it to overlay an unnaturally wide-eyed, creepily smiling, computer-generated thing onto a goddamn baby?? Yes, there are things about this movie that that climactic fight scene can't make up for. The small army of sympathetic vampires that join the Cullens include several characters that look interesting, but don't get nearly enough screentime. (Maybe if Rosenberg had cut out that useless fan-pandering scene of Bella and Edward exploring their oh-so-pretty new house...) For all that Stewart tries to play Bella as a stronger-willed person this time round, she still isn't; when Edward credits her for bringing their small army together, it rings hollow. And truth be told, as cool as that fight scene is - made even cooler with the deaths of many long-time characters, and some of those deaths are pretty damn satisfying - there's a distinct sense that it was filmed by a director with little experience making action films.

Still, I pronounce Breaking Dawn part 2 an actually not-bad movie, and I feel no shame in doing so. I still feel the best of the series is Eclipse (no uncanny-valley-plunging CGI baby there, for one thing), but this one's a close second. And I feel no shame in saying the whole series is far from the trainwreck the books are. The first two are definitely the weakest, but the rest does offer some satisfaction for fans of supernatural thrillers, especially of the vampires 'n werewolves variety. (Maybe if you liked the Underworld franchise, but you wanted more Selene/Michael and Sonja/Lucian romance.) In any case, the saga is over; it ends with a credit sequence showing every actor who played every character throughout all five movies, which is pretty cool and a nice ode to fans. I'm not one, and you may never be one either - but give it a try, and you may just find yourself not hating them any more.

NEXT REVIEW: The Perks of Being a Wallflower
Expectations: can't miss a movie like this when it makes it to our screens

Komedi, mana engkau pergi?

Istanbul Aku Datang
My rating:




Pembikin dan cendekiawan filem Amir Muhammad menggelar filem ini, bersama dengan Gol & Gincu dan Pisau Cukur, sebagai "Gedik Trilogy" terbitan Red Films. Ketiga-tiganya diarah oleh Bernard Chauly, ditulis oleh Rafidah Abdullah, dan memaparkan watak utama perempuan yang muda, periang dan (ofkos) gedik. Saya tidak menonton Gol & Gincu tapi saya menyukai Pisau Cukur, dan saya ada memuji saudara Chauly sebagai salah satu pengarah filem yang paling cekap dan berwibawa. Namun Chauly dan Rafidah nampaknya jarang mengeluarkan filem; sudah tiga tahun sejak Pisau Cukur baru muncul Istanbul Aku Datang, babak ketiga dalam Gedik Trilogy ini. Saya sebenarnya tidak merancang untuk menonton filem ini, tapi mujurlah ada pembaca blog memberi komen yang merekomenkan filem ini. Saya gembira kerana sempat menontonnya - tapi bukan kerana ia best sangat.

Kerana saya berpeluang menulis tentang apa yang membuat sebuah filem komedi romantik bagus, dengan memberi contoh apa yang kurang dalam filem ini.

Dian (Lisa Surihani) membuat keputusan yang terburu-buru untuk mengembara ke Istanbul, Turki agar dapat bersama kekasihnya Azad (Tomok) yang sedang belajar di universiti di sana - tetapi dia kecewa dengan sambutan dingin dari Azad. Ketika mencari tempat tinggal, Dian tertipu oleh seorang lelaki Turki (Mert Yavuzcan) dan terpaksa tinggal serumah dengan Harris (Beto Kusyairy), seorang lelaki dari Malaysia yang langsung tidak senang berkongsi tempat tinggal dengan Dian. Tetapi sambil hubungan Dian dengan Azad bertambah renggang, hubungan Dian dengan Harris pula bertambah mesra - sehingga Dian harus memilih siapa diantara mereka berdua yang memiliki hatinya.

Kekuatan tulisan Rafidah adalah dialog yang lucu dan bersahaja, yang berjaya menggelikan hati penonton-penonton dalam panggung saya. Arahan Chauly juga menampakkan sentuhan ringan yang efektif, mewujudkan suasana kelakar bagi filem ini. Tapi saya rasa keistimewaan filem-filem terbitan Red Films yang utama ialah watak-watak heroin yang menarik dan mendalam, yang juga memberi peluang bagi pelakon-pelakon wanita memberi persembahan yang mantap dan mencabar. Watak perempuan sebegini jarang dilihat dalam filem tempatan (dan bukan sahaja dalam filem tempatan), jadi sayanglah kalau Red Films tidak lebih kerap mengeluarkan filem. Humor dalam Istanbul Aku Datang adalah bernada mesra dan murah hati; jenakanya tidak memperli sesiapa, dan tiada watak yang benar-benar jahat atau patut dibenci. Ini semua benda yang saya suka.

Apa yang saya tak suka ialah jalan cerita yang tidak teliti dan tidak tekun. Kita tahu ini sebuah komedi romantik, jadi kita tahu Dian dan Harris akan jatuh cinta. Tapi kita tidak melihat mahupun merasainya. Mula-mula mereka saling membenci, tiba-tiba timbul perasaan cinta. Watak Harris pun tidak terbina; siapa sebenarnya mamat ni? Apa personalitinya, apa bezanya dari Azad sehingga Dian memilihnya sebagai kekasih? Mengapa sampai hampir babak klimaks baru kita tahu apa pekerjaannya? Dan mengapa Rafidah dan Chauly hanya menggunakan adegan-adegan montaj berlagu bagi menceritakan kisah cinta mereka? Bagilah mamat dan minah ni betul-betul berkenalan, bersama dialog yang mencuit serta menyentuh hati. Kalau harapkan montaj saja, ini penceritaan yang sungguh malas. Cerita ini malas!

Sifat malas inilah yang amat mengecewakan saya. Genre filem ini ialah komedi romantik, tetapi komedinya setakat separuh pertama sahaja. Lepas pertengahan jalan, langsung tiada lawak jenaka lagi. Mengapa, saudara Chauly dan saudari Rafidah? Ini bukan cara nak buat cerita romantic comedy; walaupun dilema percintaan heroin anda makin serius, unsur komedi tetap perlu ada. Separuh keduanya bertukar menjadi melodrama yang sappy dan telalu sentimental - dan masalahnya, jika separuh pertama adalah komedi, begitulah jangkaan penonton terhadap cerita seterusnya. Penonton sudah bersedia untuk ketawa. Penonton dalam panggung saya ketawakan adegan Harris mencuci rambut Dian, dan pasti ini bukan niat anda bukan, saudara Chauly dan saudari Rafidah? Anda ingatkan adegan ini sedih dan pilu, bukan?

Pemilihan pelakon juga agak ragu-ragu. Lisa Surihani adalah antara pelakon wanita yang paling popular dan berkarisma; tiada masalah bagi beliau membawa watak heroin Red Films. Tetapi kedua-dua pelakon gandingannya pula kurang sesuai. Tomok Indrawan sering kelihatan kayu, terutama bila berlakon disamping Lisa yang ceria. Beto Kusyairy pula, mungkin beliau dihampakan oleh skrip yang tidak membina wataknya, seperti yang dikatakan. Tetapi saya tetap rasa Beto salah dipilih sebagai watak utama lelaki dalam filem komedi romantik. Raut mukanya sentiasa serius dan garang. Lakonannya dalam babak-babak komedi adakala tidak natural, dan beliau tiada banyak chemistry dengan Lisa.

Tetapi saya tidak patut terlalu keras mengkritik filem ini. Dahlah saya memberinya 3 bintang, kerana ia tetap sebuah filem yang menghiburkan - malah saya ingin melihat banyak lagi filem tempatan sebegini. Selain komedi yang bersahaja dan dialog yang kelakar, ia juga memaparkan keindahan kota Istanbul dimana ia difilemkan; filem ini boleh dilihat sebagai travel porn yang berjaya. Chauly juga boleh berbangga atas kejayaan ko-produksi ini bersama kru dan pelakon Turki. Dan sudah tentu saya tidak mahu menunggu tiga tahun lagi sebelum keluar filem seterusnya dari Chauly, Rafidah dan Red Films. Kekuatan mereka amat dialu-alukan - dan kelemahan mereka pula sesuatu yang perlu diperbaiki dengan lebih banyak latihan. Kita tunggu babak seterusnya dalam Gedik Quadrilogy nanti.

NEXT REVIEW: War of the Worlds: Goliath
Expectations: man, I have nooooo idea 

Tiga hari bersama dua bahlol

Untuk Tiga Hari
My rating:

Adalah tidak wajar bagi seorang pengkritik filem untuk melangkah masuk ke panggung dengan prasangka dan prejudis. Namun bagi TMBF yang masokis hendak mengulas filem-filem Melayu, kadang-kadang ini tidak boleh dielak. Untuk Tiga Hari adalah sebuah filem yang diarah dan dilakon oleh Afdlin Shauki, salah satu daripada bilangan pembikin filem tempatan yang saya hormati. (Bilangan ini amat kecil.) Tetapi ia juga mempunyai premis yang langsung tak masuk akal bagi saya. Begitu juga, ia sebuah lagi adaptasi dari novel tulisan Ahadiat Akashah; sebelum ini, filem adaptasi novelnya yang pertama juga sama tak masuk akal. Apakah Afdlin dapat menggilap tahi Ahadiat sehingga menjadi permata? Kerana prasangka saya ialah, cerita asal Ahadiat ni memang tahi, menampakkan dua watak utama yang pada pendapat saya amat keji.

Alangkah terkejutnya saya, bila saya dapati filem ini setuju dengan pendapat itu.

Zafrin (Rashidi Ishak) dan Ujie (Vanida Imran) pasangan yang bercinta, tetapi dipaksa oleh ibubapa masing-masing untuk kahwin orang lain. Maka Afin mencadangkan bahawa mereka mengahwini pilihan orang tua mereka - Afin kepada Juwita (Ayu Raudhah), Ujie kepada Armi (Afdlin Shauki) - tetapi bercerai selepas hanya tiga hari. Kedua-dua mereka pernah kecundang dalam percintaan; Remi (Zizan Razak), teman lelaki pertama Ujie (semasa muda dilakonkan oleh Ainul Aishah) telah mengahwini gadis lain, manakala hubungan Afin (semasa muda Zizan Nin) dengan Balqis (Dira Abu Zahar) ditentang oleh ibu Afin (Khatijah Tan). Dalam tiga hari mereka berumahtangga dengan suami dan isteri yang penyayang, Afin dan Ujie mula ragu akan perjanjian mereka.

Ni yang tak masuk akal bagi saya: apa rancangan bangang mamat dan minah ni?? Kahwin hanya untuk menenangkan hati orang tua, tapi lepas cerai hati mereka tenang lagi ke? Akal korang tak panjang sangat ye? Alasan mereka pula, kerana dipaksa. Wei, korang ni masih kecik ke? Belum habis menyusu lagi? Rupa je dewasa, tapi tak reti nak berdikari atau memilih pasangan hidup sendiri. Kalau tak setuju dengan kata orang tua, cakaplah tak setuju. Bukannya suruh kau derhaka pada mak bapak, tapi pujuklah sampai diorang faham pendirian kau. Orang tua menang degil, bukan senang nak pujuk, tapi itu kan kewajipan seorang anak. Afin dan Ujie berdua ni pengecut, tak berani nak menuntut kedewasaan dan kebebasan diri sendiri. Lalu mereka sanggup memperdaya dan mematahkan hati dua insan yang tak pernah bersalah terhadap mereka. Apa kejadah punya cerita yang menampakkan dua bahlol ni sebagai watak utama??

Rupanya ini cerita yang pada akhirnya mengiktiraf kebahlolan mereka. Disini saya bagi SPOILER ALERT, kerana saya terpaksa menyingkap pengakhiran filem ini untuk mengulasnya dengan teliti: Ujie memilih suaminya Armi dan meninggalkan Afin yang sudah bercerai dengan isterinya Juwita, lalu Afin tinggal keseorangan. Malah ada babak dimana bapa Afin (lakonan Zaibo) memarahinya atas sebab sama yang saya tulis diatas; apasal pulak dia salahkan ibunya menghalang percintaannya, sedangkan dia sendiri yang setuju mengahwini orang yang dia tak cinta? Tak sangka cerita ini tiba-tiba mengambil haluan ini. Akhirnya Afin - yang dahulu mengilhamkan rancangan kahwin tiga hari ini dan mendalanginya dari mula - menerima padah yang setimpal dengan perbuatan kejinya.

Namun ini tidak cukup untuk menjadikannya filem yang baik. Afin dihukum, tapi Ujie lepas begitu sahaja, malah dihadiahkan seorang suami yang setia dan kaya-raya. Ujie tak bersalah ke? Kita tak nampak ibunya (lakonan Fauziah Ahmad Daud yang tersangat nyaring dan over) degil atau bengis macam ibu Afin; macam tiada halangan pun kalau Ujie memilih pasangan sendiri. Dia tetap menurut kata kekasihnya, tetap memperdaya suaminya, dan tetap melukakan hati Armi bila mengaku akan niatnya untuk bercerai demi lelaki lain. Tapi Armi macam tak marah dan tak tersinggung dikhianati cintanya, malah tetap memujuk Ujie menerimanya sebagai suami. Akhirnya Ujie macam jadi heroin dan Afin jadi watak tragedi. Adil ke ni? Apa kemuliaan Ujie yang menjadikannya layak mencapai kebahagiaan, sedangkan Afin tidak?

Saya tak faham apa tujuan cerita ini. Ada selitan adegan-adegan seorang ustaz (lakonan Hafizuddin Fadzil) memberi ceramah kursus kahwin - jadi ini filem cereka ke filem pendidikan tajaan JAKIM? Filem yang mengikuti jalan hidup dua watak celaka ini dan mengundang simpati kita terhadap mereka? Yang memaniskan kecelakaan dan keburukan perangai mereka dengan lawak jenaka? Disini saya boleh katakan bahawa arahan Afdlin cukup cekap dan berkesan dalam menggarap adegan lawak yang bersahaja, serta adegan drama yang bertujuan menyayat hati. Lakonan dari barisan pelakon pada keseluruhannya mantap - walaupun Khatijah Tan melakonkan watak jahat yang terlampau jahat tahap dewa, tetapi sesuai jugalah buat cerita ini. Sinematografinya juga cantik, dan ia sentiasa memberi gambaran sebuah produksi yang berkualiti. (Saya juga ingin memuji sebuah babak kelab malam yang buat pertama kalinya bukan dilihat sebagai sarang maksiat. Kelainan yang amat menyegarkan!)

Namun sepanjang jangka masa filem ini, soalan yang sentiasa bermain-main dalam fikiran saya ialah, "Wei, movie, kau tak sedar ke Afin dan Ujie ni sebenarnya dua manusia yang pendek akal, pentingkan diri sendiri, dan berperangai amat buruk?" Kalau sampai babak akhir baru ia menjawab, "Ya, kami sedar! (Tapi Afin je, Ujie okey)," itu sudah jauh terlambat. Saya rasa sebab utama saya tak suka filem ini ialah falsafah yang berbeza. Pengajaran filem ini bukan "bertanggungjawablah atas hidup anda sendiri dan jangan sakitkan atau salahkan orang lain." Dari apa yang saya lihat, pengajarannya ialah, "kalau dah kahwin, kekalkanlah perkahwinan itu, tak kira ikhlas ke tidak atau ada perasaan cinta ke tidak." Ini suatu pandangan yang terlampau asing bagi TMBF.

NEXT REVIEW: Looper
Expectations: pretty high! 

Budi the leap year idiot baby

29 Februari
My rating:




It isn't too often that I review a Malay film in English. This is because - and here's a glimpse behind the scenes here at TMBF - I get my highest number of hits whenever I do a local film review in BM. (Which really behooves me to do them more often, but with shit like Salam Cinta and Halim Munan in cinemas, I just can't be arsed.) But when I do write an English review of a Malay movie, it's for a variety of reasons; one of which is because I need the language I am most fluent in to express my extremely strong opinions of that movie. Or maybe I'm just feeling a little too lazy to take the extra effort to write in BM.

And in this case, it's because I have no idea how to say "twee" and "precious" in BM.

Budi (Remy Ishak) was born on the 29th of February in 1896, which gives him the magical ability to age only one year for every four years. In 1941, he is orphaned when the Japanese invade Malaya, and becomes a resident of an orphanage where he becomes best friends with Razak (Izzue Islam), who is blind. In 1957, just after the Merdeka declaration, he meets and falls for a Chinese girl named Lily (Jojo Goh) - but her father's (Chew Kin Wah) objections to their interracial relationship forces them apart. Though he spends the next decades searching for her, Budi will not see her again - until 2012, when he is living in Penang and runs a florist shop with two employees, Johan (Fizz Fairuz) and Arif (Muniff Isa).

It's right there on the poster - the first 3D Malaysian-made movie. Which... why? There's nothing about this film that seems to need 3D. It's not an action movie, nor does it have spectacular visuals or special effects. It doesn't even have shots of things flying at the screen, which is far from the best use of 3D but would at least justify having it. I saw it in good ol' 2D and didn't think it ever needed any 3D at all. (Which, to be fair, is how I feel about almost every 3D film anyway.) And I think this is symptomatic of what's wrong with 29 Februari - namely, it doesn't know what kind of movie it wants to be.

It's clearly reminiscent of The Curious Case of Benjamin Button and Forrest Gump (there's even a scene where Remy Ishak is digitally inserted into footage of Tun Dr. Mahathir from 1985), although the premise is different enough to stand on its own. The thing is, both those films were made for adults. Both were rated PG-13, both dealt with adult subject matter, and both had an adult sensibility. 29 Februari is not and does not, on all counts. The characters, the dialogue, the humour, are all juvenile and shallow and one-dimensional. Characters like Razak and Lily's sister (whose actress' name I can't find) are positively annoying; the former does nothing but whine and complain about his blindness, the latter is downright evil in how she keeps sabotaging her sister's and Budi's relationship. Even that central romance does nothing to make us root for them. This is a couple whose conversations involve such deeply insightful topics as, "Kalau Budi jadi kelip-kelip, ke mana Budi nak terbang?"

And for a film that traverses 116 years, there's nothing epic about it; it hardly ever truly examines this grand sweep of Malaysian history. We see Budi's parents killed when the Japanese invade, but we don't know how he actually lived during the occupation; we see him at Stadium Merdeka during Tunku Abdul Rahman's declaration, but after that he never seems to care that he is now a citizen of an independent nation. There's also a scene that takes place during the May 13 riots in 1969, but again, it's more interested in talking about his lost love Lily than in what's happening to the country at the time. But what really sinks this story is the fact that Budi can live over a hundred years, yet still be so dumb.

Seriously, does he mentally age 4 times as slow as other people too? In 1941, physically he is 11 and he looks as such. But he's also been alive for 45 years, and he sure doesn't act like a 45-year-old. And in 1957 when he meets Lily, he is 61 years old but he should look 15 (which makes it a boo-boo that Remy plays him at this point), and yet he behaves just like a lovesick teenage boy. Worst of all is when he encounters Lily again in 2012, yet appears shocked that she is now an old woman. Dude! You did not know that you age slower than everyone else?? It took you 116 years to find that out?? This is a guy who should have accumulated over a century's worth of experience, maturity and wisdom - qualities that, incidentally, this very movie lacks utterly.

Oh, and it's also a musical. Now, correct me if I'm wrong, but is 6 song sequences - and only 4 songs, since one is repeated twice - a little, well, little for a musical film? I'm not too fond of musicals, and this movie is just the reason why: because musicals always have this artificiality about it, hence why people tend to break out into song and dance. 29 Februari has that artificial, contrived feel in spades; it tries so hard to be sweet and romantic and epic but just turns out far too twee and precious. Like it thinks a pretty tune set to some grand orchestral arrangement is all it takes to evoke soaring emotion. Oh, did I say song and dance? No - there are song sequences but no song-and-dance sequences. There is no dancing in this musical film. See what I mean about not knowing what kind of movie it wants to be?

I'll give it credit for being ambitious. I'll give KRU Studios credit just for attempting a magical-realist-fantasy-historical-drama-musical-romance. I'll give Remy props for an effective, impressively nuanced performance, and Jojo Goh for a charming presence; I'll even admit they both had some nice chemistry despite their dumb-as-rocks dialogue. (Although I'm sick of seeing Chew Kin Wah as the Designated Chinese Villain in Malay Movies.) But I don't think Edry Abdul Halim, who directed Magika, is a good director yet - nor Amir Hafizi, who wrote Hikayat Merong Mahawangsa, a good writer. Aside from Remy and Goh, everything good about this movie is in what it tried to be. Maybe Edry's and Amir's problem isn't that they don't know what kind of movie they're trying to make. Maybe their problem is that they're just not good enough to make it.

NEXT REVIEW: Kepong Gangster
Expectations: ohhh boy - no idea how this one's gonna turn out

A cartoon turned live-action, but still pretty flat

Mirror Mirror
My rating:




Due to my inexcusably long delay in writing my last review, I almost skipped this one; nowadays it seems like all I ever do is scramble to catch up with the newest releases. But seeing as there's another Snow White movie opening later this summer, I suppose it behooves me to catch the first of 2012's two competing modern takes on the classic fairytale, so I can compare them. (Hollywood parallel development always seems to happen in twos, e.g. two volcano movies, two big-space-rock disaster movies, two animated insect movies, etc.) Also because I'd missed out on Tarsem Singh's previous movie from earlier this year, The Immortals - and only because, again, I take so damn long to write these reviews. It was pretty damn tempting to just forego Mirror Mirror and pick Battleship, however.

But it would've been nice if the movie gave me a better reward for my choice.

Snow White (Lily Collins), the princess of her kingdom, lives with her stepmother the Queen (Julia Roberts), a cruel, petty and vain tyrant who has ruled the land since Snow White's father the King disappeared years ago. On Snow White's 18th birthday, she ventures for the first time in years outside the palace walls, and witnesses the suffering of her people - but this transgression turns the Queen's barely-tolerated irritation with her into outright enmity. The Queen orders her manservant Brighton (Nathan Lane) to take her into the forest and kill her, but she is found by a group of seven dwarf bandits - Grimm (Danny Woodburn), Butcher (Martin Klebba), Wolf (Sebastian Saraceno), Napoleon (Jordan Prentice), Half Pint (Mark Povinelli), Grub (Joe Gnoffo) and Chuckles (Ronald Lee Clark). Meanwhile, the visiting Prince Alcott (Armie Hammer) from a neighbouring kingdom has already met and fallen for Snow White - and has also met the bandits, under much less genial circumstances - but the Queen has her sights set on marrying him as the solution to her financial problems.

The only Tarsem film I've seen to date is The Cell, of which I remember little other than some spectacularly fantastical visual imagery that also has a pretty big streak of macabre. Mirror Mirror is also very pretty to look at, but Tarsem has also made a much more light-hearted and kid-friendly movie this time round. In fact, the shortest and sweetest description of it would be that it's a live-action cartoon - specifically, a DreamWorks-ish animated film in the vein of the Shrek series. The broad comic sensibility is there, as is the willful disregard of realism (this kingdom apparently consists of a palace and one village) and the snarky modern sensibility to a classic fairy tale. But frankly, to compare it to a DreamWorks production is both damning it with faint praise as well as overrating it.

Let's get into the specifics. The movie is almost entirely driven by its performances (certainly not by its plot, which is kinda messy), and there are two standouts. Julia Roberts always struck me as a curious choice to play fairy tale villain; the closest she came was arguably Charlie Wilson's War, which I enjoyed, but thought Roberts was terrible in it. She fares somewhat better here, in that she's clearly having fun in the role, a prerequisite for any actor playing a broadly comic scenery-chewing villain. Still, chewing scenery has never been her forte (and if I were to be honest in what I think of her, I'd say acting isn't her forte). I'd say pretty much any other female actor of her generation could've had just as much fun playing it and done a better job to boot. (When I said "standout", I didn't necessarily mean they were good; just that they made the biggest impression in the movie.)

The other is Armie Hammer, playing Prince Charming Alcott. There are hints of a role-reversal here, with Snow White coming to his rescue a couple of times and him being somewhat beleaguered throughout the movie (the bandits get the jump on him twice, leading to him showing up at the Queen's palace sans shirt - twice), but it never really commits to a girl-power interpretation of the tale; it doesn't help that in their one swordfight scene together, Alcott toys with the clearly ineffectual Snow White like a big bully. And then there's the part where he succumbs to a Love Puppy potion, which has him panting and licking other people and boo-hoo-hooing when he's away from his "master" like a literal puppy. What marks these two standout performances is that both performers really commit to them; Hammer certainly does in his puppy scenes. He's clearly enjoying himself, but turning him into a laughingstock is a curious - and dubious - choice.

And then there's Lily Collins, who was apparently chosen just because she looks the part. Snow White is dull, both due to Collins' performance as well as the writing. She has zero chemistry with Hammer, and their romance never stirs the heart. The seven dwarfs are fun to watch, but they're still a collection of caricatures rather than characters in their own right. There's also a late-third-act cameo by Sean Bean, and it'd be a spoiler to reveal who he plays (although it's also pretty predictable) - but the man looks positively embarrassed, tasked with injecting some gravitas into a movie that just spent 90 minutes having none. After all, this is a movie in which Nathan Lane is turned into a cockroach, then laments the fact that he had his modesty outraged by a grasshopper.

Okay, yes, it's entertaining. Yes, it's charming. Yes, its good-naturedly frothy fun is hard to resist. But it's all quite shallow; it's only funny enough to raise a chuckle but not hearty laughs, and only sweet enough to raise a genial smile but not genuine emotions. I couldn't shake the feeling that if this had been an animated film, it would've been better. It would've had more gags, prettier visuals, even better acting; it always seems as if it's being held back by the limitations of live-action productions. But even if it were animated, it would only prove that Shrek (at least the first one) did it better, and also had enough imagination to take on more than just one fairy tale. And even the Shrek series has been overshadowed recently by Disney, the grand master of modern animated fairy tale adaptations - with an assist from the Pixar brain trust. That's what I meant by damning with faint praise; it's reminiscent of DreamWorks, but not Pixar.

NEXT REVIEW: The Flowers of War
Expectations: White Hero saves Poor Pitiful Asians!

Jangan panggil dia penyu!

Cinta Kura-Kura
My rating:




Ampun dan maaf diminta dari pembaca-pembaca TMBF sekalian. Dah lama saya tak mengulas filem Melayu, dan saya sudah terlepas peluang bagi filem-filem seperti Suatu Malam Kubur Berasap, Papa I Love You, Sesuatu Yang Tertinggal, Keramat, Bujang Telajak, Sumpahan Kum Kum, Azura dan Hantu Dalam Botol Kicap. Tiada alasan yang boleh saya beri, melainkan baru-baru ini saya selalu malas nak tengok filem dan tulis rebiu. Tapi saudara Nizam Zakaria telah mengundang saya ke Gala Premiere filem arahannya yang pertama, Cinta Kura-Kura, dan hutang budi ini perlu dibayar dengan sebuah rebiu. Kini pasti anda tertanya, apakah undangan ini telah menjejas integriti dan keobjektifan TMBF? Apakah beliau teruja sangat dapat menghadiri event glemer serta bergosok bahu dengan selebriti-selebriti fofular, sehingga pasti rebiu ini memuji filemnya setinggi awan?

Hakikatnya, saya rasa filem ini best. Ko percaya ke tak, ap tu you lah. (Lagipun, malam tu Tiz Zaqyah tak endah aku pun.)

Nani (Tiz Zaqyah) tinggal bersama abangnya Amin (Bob Yusof) dan memelihara seekor kura-kura bernama Nico (Zizan Razak). Adam (Aeril Zafrel) pula ahli kumpulan muzik dan tinggal bersama ibunya Mak Uda (Norhayati Taib). Kedua-dua hidup berjiranan, dan mula jatuh hati antara satu sama lain apabila Amin menyertai band Adam sebagai penyanyi utama. Tetapi oleh kerana Adam tak reti beza antara penyu dengan kura-kura, Nico tidak menyukainya dan ingin menghancurkan hubungan cinta antara Adam dengan pemiliknya Nani. Oh baidewei, Nico serta semua kura-kura lain dalam filem ini boleh bercakap dan berjalan atas dua kaki dengan pantas. Di samping itu, seorang pemilik kedai haiwan peliharaan bernama Fazli (Fizz Fairuz) juga ingin mengorat Nani, dan Nico juga berkawan dengan dua ekor kura-kura di kedainya bernama Atok (Shy8) dan Mira (Fara Fauzana). Tetapi Fazli mengerjakan perniagaan haram, membekal haiwan terlindung kepada Mr. Lim (Chew Kin Wah) yang menghidangkan haiwan-haiwan tersebut di restorannya. Dan antara hidangannya ialah daging kura-kura...

Saya agak bahawa kebanyakan filem Melayu disasarkan khususnya kepada penonton lelaki. Ini kerana filem-filem yang paling berjaya di pasaran - KL Gangster, Hantu Bonceng dan Kongsi, antara yang lain - menjual unsur-unsur aksi dan rempit yang memang diminati golongan laki-laki Melayu muda. Tapi baru-baru ini muncul pula filem Ombak Rindu, sebuah kisah cinta melodrama yang juga amat berjaya, dan saya pasti kejayaannya terhasil dari penonton-penonton wanita. Ini suatu petanda yang baik, menunjukkan industri filem tempatan sihat dan mampu menampung berbagai segmen penonton. Diharap ini akan membuatkan Cinta Kura-Kura juga berjaya, kerana ia sebuah filem yang jelas menyasarkan penonton anak gadis muda urban.

Bukti ini kerana pertama, ia cerita komedi cinta. Dan kedua, "bintang" filem ini bukanlah Aeril Zafrel atau Tiz Zaqyah, tetapi sebuah kura-kura kartun CGI yang bernama Nico dan diberi suara oleh Zizan Razak. Nico adalah suatu ciptaan yang amat menggelikan hati, jelas dibuktikan dari gelak ketawa gadis-gadis remaja yang duduk sebelah saya di panggung setiap kali kura-kura ini beraksi. Dan walaupun dia memang comel sepertimana watak CGI dalam filem live-action pasti comel, bukan kecomelan saja yang dia ada. (Rujuk filem-filem seperti The Smurfs atau Alvin and the Chipmunks, yang tidak patut ditonton sesiapa yang berumur 12 tahun ke atas.) Nico ada personaliti yang diberi oleh Nizam yang juga menulis skrip disamping mengarah, dan skripnya juga memberi dialog-dialog yang lucu kepada Nico serta watak-watak lain. Saya boleh kata filem ini adalah komedi yang benar-benar kelakar.

Ini sesuatu yang jarang dilihat, kerana kebanyakan filem komedi Melayu yang pernah saya tonton adalah bodoh, bukan kelakar. Tapi filem ini berjaya mencuit hati saya. Dialognya sedap didengar, dan lawaknya timbul secara bersahaja dari watak-wataknya - contohnya adegan-adegan Mak Uda meleter Adam, atau ahli-ahli kumpulan muzik Adam. (Satu daripadanya dimainkan oleh Harun Salim Bachik yang tak pernah tak kelakar.) Nico suka membaca buku cerita "Arnab dengan Kura-kura" milik Nani dan memperli watak arnab itu. Ada juga sebuah running gag dimana kereta Fazli sering memainkan lagu dangdut. Saya juga tertawa dengan kemunculan seekor gajah semasa babak penamat (tak boleh saya nak jelaskan lebih sebab spoiler). Sentuhan-sentuhan kecil inilah yang meyakinkan saya bahawa Nizam adalah seorang pencerita yang bijak dan berimaginasi.

Kelemahan yang boleh saya nyatakan ialah pada kisah cintanya. Perasaan cinta antara Nani dengan Adam tidak begitu terasa; babak paling romantis ialah sebuah perbualan telefon dimana Tiz dan Aeril tidak berinteraksi secara bersemuka. Juga saya rasa Aerillah pelakon yang paling lemah dalam filem ini. Yang lain semua, termasuk Norhayati Taib, Fizz Fairuz, Chew Kin Wah serta pelakon suara bagi watak kura-kura, semuanya memberi persembahan yang over the top sedikit, tapi lakonan Aeril agak kaku dan kurang sesuai dengan nada komedi cerita ini. Nasib baiklah ada Tiz yang sungguh menawan hati dalam filem ini. Walaupun beliau paling terkenal dengan peranannya sebagai seorang MILF wanita berumur dalam drama TV dan filem Nur Kasih, namun di sini dia cukup meyakinkan sebagai anak gadis berusia awal 20-an yang masih berperangai keremajaan.

Kalau difikirkan lama-lama, ada juga beberapa lubang plot yang tidak masuk akal - misalnya, kenapa Nico seorang (seekor?) saja kura-kura yang boleh berjalan atas dua kaki? Mengapa kura-kura tak berani nak dedahkan kebolehan mereka bercakap walaupun nyawa diri diancam? Tambahan pula, watak Amin abang Nani seolah-olah menghilang waktu separuh terakhir, kerana dia sudah tiada kaitan dengan ceritanya. Namun saya sedia merekomenkan filem ini kepada siapa-siapa - khususnya jika anda perempuan yang ingin menonton sesuatu yang kiut, samada Aeril, Tiz ataupun kura-kura CGI yang bersuara macam Zizan Razak. Saya ingin melihat lagi filem dari Nizam, dan anda juga patut inginkannya. Jadi sila ke pawagam menonton Cinta Kura-Kura pada 1 haribulan Mac nanti. Kalau filemnya best, saya takkan segan nak mengiklankannya.

NEXT REVIEW: The Descendants
Expectations: hope to not watch it while I'm feeling sleepy

The Malaysian social network

Relationship Status
My rating:




Now here's a neat idea for a film: a Love Actually-style (or God forbid, Valentine's Day-style) series of interconnected stories that each represent the various relationship statuses that Facebook allows you to post, namely Single, In A Relationship, It's Complicated, Engaged, Married, Divorced and Widowed. (What, no Separated?) And at the same time, a look at modern love and romance in the era of online social networking. Not a bad little high-concept idea at all, one you'd expect someone in Hollywood to have come up with before Khairil M. Bahar, the Malaysian filmmaker who wrote, directed, edited and even acted in it. I've seen his short in 2009's 15Malaysia project, which I thought was cute but otherwise unimpressive; also, he appears to be part of - or at least close friends with - Perantauan Pictures, under whose banner this movie was released, and whose previous feature film I found to be less than impressive (although it seems Khairil wasn't involved in that one).

Fortunately, Relationship Status is definitely better than The Joshua Tapes. But it kinda stumbled in the last lap.

Dave (Gavin Yap) is a magazine writer in an open relationship with Anna (Davina Goh) - or at least, he was, until they had an argument. His roommate Joe (Khairil Bahar) is still recovering from a bad breakup. His editor Selena (Susan Lankester) is still coming to terms with the recent death of her husband. The IT guy at his office Eugene (Benji Lim) is ready to propose to his filmmaker girlfriend May (Amanda Ang), but faces opposition from his family, particularly his sister (Adeline Ong). Two subjects in May's documentary film are Nina (Shuba Jay) and her boyfriend (Alfred Loh) who met on Facebook. The office's receptionist Hawa (Ruzana Ibrahim) is pregnant and happily married to her husband Ramli (Baki Zainal). Her old schoolmate is Trisha (Daphne Iking), who is going through a divorce from her husband Jason (Tony Eusoff) following his affair with Anna - whose torch that she still carries for him is partly the cause of her argument with Dave.

Relationship Status is that rarest of animals: the Malaysian-made film that caters to an urban, sophisticated, English-speaking audience. Which is pretty damn rare in a film industry that almost exclusively targets unsophisticated Malays and Mandarin-speaking Chinese (even if that second market was created a scant 2 years ago). And I think it's one that that audience would enjoy a lot. The script is witty and often very funny, with occasional ribald humour and even a masturbation joke. There are a couple of mentions of Sid's Pub, a KL watering hole whose regular clientele are exactly the kind of people this movie is aimed at. There's even a Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy reference, which isn't explained for anyone who doesn't recognise the line from that book. One of the joys of local films is getting to see people, places and situations from your own life up on screen, and this movie has it in spades for a segment of Malaysians who've never had that opportunity.

Particularly in regards to its depiction of love and romance in the Facebook era. Khairil's screenplay displays a great deal of insight into how online social media affects relationships, and I'm sure it'll evoke many a pang of recognition - whether it's the heartbroken guy who keeps stalking his ex's FB profile, or the grieving widow trying to guess her late husband's password in order to access his still-active page, or the disapproving family who cites pictures of the girlfriend partying at clubs as grounds for their disapproval. But despite its insightfulness, there's still a somewhat, well, gormless approach to Facebook and online social media. It's like Selena's magazine's upcoming cover story on social media. Yes, just that - social media. Anything specific about social media? No, just social media - like it's still this shiny newfangled thing worthy of magazine cover stories in freakin' 2012. That's what I mean by gormless.

Which brings us to the film's biggest problem: it has no ending. I'm not kidding. Almost every single one of these stories ends with absolutely no resolution; one exception being Dave's and Anna's, and even that one employs the cliché of the guy running across the city to tell the girl he loves her. (The other one being Selena's, who manages to come to terms with her husband's passing - but then again, does she ever actually find his FB password? We don't know!) Does Eugene stand up to his asshole family? Does Joe get over himself? Does Hawa's and Ramli's marriage survive? Do Trisha and Jason reconcile? None of these questions are answered, which is just bloody frustrating. Every couple's relationship in this story either starts off rocky or becomes rocky, and the movie pretty much just leaves them there. And for the ones who start off happy but become troubled, it's always because of Facebook.

Seriously, I think most people will come out of this movie with one takeout: "Facebook ruins relationships!" Which is just an annoyingly Luddite attitude that I'd been led to believe this film was above. I don't know if it was deliberate or accidental, but with a character like Nina - the Facebook addict who suspects her boyfriend is cheating on her just because he talks to someone on the phone whom she doesn't know, which makes her a bloody shallow and insecure twit - it doesn't seem very accidental. It's like Khairil wants to raise the question of whether Facebook is a good or a bad thing, and seems to learn toward the latter - which is a bad answer, because it's the wrong question. Facebook is neither a good nor bad thing; it is a thing, that has already irreversibly changed the way we communicate. Just like it's past time for any magazine that has any shred of relevance to write stories about social media, it's past time to ask whether it's good or bad. What we should be asking is how to make it good and avoid the bad; to use it well, instead of allowing it to magnify our worst instincts.

For a while there, Relationship Status was almost the movie to ask, and attempt to answer, that question. The fact that it failed is why I didn't rate it higher - but the fact that it's still an entertaining, well-written, well-crafted little film is why I didn't rate it lower. (Reasonably well-acted too; nothing outstanding, but nothing jarringly poor either. With the exception of Will Quah, who seemed to forget that he's playing a guy who's father had just died.) I'm still quite mightily impressed by Khairil's writing and direction, and I'd love to see more from him. I wouldn't hesitate to recommend it to its target audience of English-educated, Facebook-connected, in-love-or-seeking-it young Malaysians, as I'm sure they'd enjoy it. And it's still got a killer high concept, one that may even earn it some attention from overseas. It's just a pity it didn't fully live up to all that potential.

NEXT REVIEW: Ah Beng The Movie: Three Wishes
Expectations: bit iffy about this one

"Kisah cinta agung" kepala hotak engkau

Ombak Rindu
My rating:




Sesebuah filem haruslah dinilai atas dasarnya sendiri. Ini sepatutnya menjadi Peraturan #1 buat pengulas filem, tapi bukan semua pengulas yang reti. Ramai reviu yang menunjukkan kedangkalan penulis mengecam filem yang diulas atas sebab ianya bukan filem yang ingin ditontonnya; e.g. dia tak suka filem aksi, jadi dia hentam filem aksi kerana banyak sangat babak aksi. Tetapi juga ada satu lagi Peraturan #1 buat pengulas filem: sesebuah filem haruslah dinilai berdasarkan pendapat sendiri yang jujur. Komen yang paling tak guna dalam ulasan filem ialah yang berbunyi "jika anda peminat filem sebegini, anda akan minat filem ini." Adalah mustahil jika penulis cuba meramal apa yang akan mendapat sambutan dari orang lain, macamlah "orang lain" ini mempunyai citarasa yang sama keseluruhannya. Suka atau tidak, mesti berani mengatakan suka atau tidak. Kedua-dua peraturan ini merupakan Peraturan #1, sebab tiada satu yang lebih penting dari yang satu lagi; dua-dua mesti diimbang dan dicari titik persamaan di antara mereka.

Tetapi adakalanya sukar - terutamanya bila sesebuah filem nyata dibikin dengan elok, tetapi mendatangkan reaksi mual dan marah.

Izzah (Maya Karin) seorang gadis kampung yang bekerja sebagai ustazah, berkawan dengan Mail (Bront Palarae) yang menaruh hati terhadapnya, dan tinggal bersama makciknya (Delimawati) yang sakit tenat dan pakciknya (Kamarool Yusof) yang kejam. Malangnya, Izzah dibawa oleh pakciknya ke kotaraya KL dan dijual kepada bapa ayam, lantas dirogol oleh seorang anak kaya bernama Hariz (Aaron Aziz). Hariz kemudian membeli Izzah dan menyimpannya sebagai perempuan simpanan dan hamba seks, tetapi mula jatuh hati dengannya lalu menikahkannya. Namun begitu, Hariz sudah bertunangkan seorang pelakon filem bernama Mila (Lisa Surihani), dan ibunya Dato' Sufiah (Azizah Mahzan) juga menggesanya supaya mengahwini Mila. Walaupun Izzah dilayan baik oleh Pak Dollah (Zaidi Omar) dan Mak Jah (Normah Damanhuri), pekerja keluarga Hariz, namun dia terpaksa menghadapi pelbagai rintangan dan kesengsaraan demi cintanya terhadap si perogol Hariz tu.

Masyallah. Inikah "kisah cinta agung" yang berjaya meraut lebih RM12 juta di box-office? Kisah cinta antara wanita yang lemah dan tidak berpewatakan dengan lelaki yang menderanya secara fizikal, emosional dan seksual? Filem ini menjual female submission fantasy, atau fantasi pengakuran wanita, kepada masyarakat dimana hampir 40% wanita menghadapi keganasan rumahtangga. Dan apakah mesej disebalik fantasi ini? Jika anda didera, diseksa dan dicabul kehormatan anda, baik diam saja? Hanya kerana laki kau hensem macam Aaron Aziz? Kau ingat makin kau biar diri kau didera, makin pendera kau akan jatuh cinta dengan kau? Kalau kau lawa macam Maya Karin mungkinlah, tapi kalau tak, mampuslah kau? Pasal filem ni, rosak segala usaha NGO seperti Pertubuhan Pertolongan Wanita (WAO) dan All Women's Action Society (AWAM) yang bertungkus lumus membantu dan memberi kaunseling kepada wanita mangsa penderaan suami.

Dan si Izzah ni abende? Heroine paling tak guna dalam sejarah perfileman Malaysia. Langsung tidak mengambil apa-apa tindakan aktif mahupun membuat apa-apa keputusan, hanya bereaksi kepada segala yang berlaku dalam cerita ini (dan reaksinya 90% ialah nangis). Tiada personaliti, tiada harga diri, tiada usaha untuk memperbaiki hidupnya dan tiada tanggungjawab keatas kebahagiaan dirinya sendiri. Biar orang lain jaga dia je, dan kalau orang tu kejam terhadap dia, harapkan tangisan je akan buat orang tu kasihankan dia. Macam ni nak jadi heroine? Siapa nak jatuh cinta dengan perempuan macam ni? Hanya lelaki yang egotis dan dominan macam Hariz, yang inginkan hamba bukan isteri. Lelaki yang benar-benar menghormati kaum wanita dan menganggap wanita sebagai sama taraf akan memilih perempuan yang bijak, berkemampuan dan berpendirian. Yang macam Izzah ni, memang tak layak nak hidup bahagia dalam dunia ini.

Sigh... sekali lagi sebuah filem yang buat aku berang masa mula-mula, makin lama makin buat aku hilang rasa marah itu. Sebab fantasi yang dihidangkan oleh arahan Osman Ali, serta skrip yang ditulisnya bersama Armantono (diadaptasikan dari novel Fauziah Ashari), dimasak dengan cukup sedap. Ini sebuah melodrama yang tak tahu malu ingin memeras airmata dari penonton, dan saya rasa ia digarap dengan baik. Sinematografinya efektif dalam menangkap alam sekitar pantai, sawah padi dan ladang teh yang indah dan romantis. Plotnya tak cincai dan bangang macam Lagenda Budak Setan (yang juga diskripkan oleh Armantono dan diarah oleh Sharad Sharan yang kini menjadi penerbit Ombak Rindu). Paling nyata ialah perubahan watak Hariz dari pendera yang keji kepada hero romantik penuh berperasaan yang mampu menggoyangkan lutut penonton wanita, dilakonkan dengan mantap oleh Aaron Aziz. Rupanya yang kendu gilababi sudah tentu membantu, tetapi beliau juga ada kemahiran disebalik kehensemannya. (Tak seperti Farid Kamil.)

Cerita melodrama mesti ada watak jahat, dan filem ini ada dua. Yang paling menyerlah ialah ibu Hariz yang dipersembahkan dengan penuh over-the-top oleh Azizah Mahzan. Seringkali saya dapati Osman sangat teruja menunjukkan betapa eeeevilnya watak Dato' Sufiah ini, sehingga mekap dan pencahayaan pun berganding dengan lakonan Azizah bagi menjayakan kejahatan yang amat menghiburkan. Watak jahat kedua ialah Mila tunang Hariz yang saya tak sangka sebenarnya bukan jahat sangat. Lakonan Lisa Surihani menggambarkan seorang gadis yang dimanja teruk, sehingga bila Hariz ingin putuskan tunangan, dia buat perangai macam budak kecil yang tak dapat mainan yang dia mahu. (Ramai yang kata lakonannya terlalu over, tapi saya rasa inilah sebenarnya watak yang paling sesuai dengan bakat Lisa.) Tetapi kemudian kita lihat Mila ini juga ada dalamnya, ada perasaan yang tidak diduga dan mampu menimbulkan rasa simpati. Malah, saya sanggup kata dialah watak yang pada akhirnya paling mulia dan berani dalam cerita ini.

Heroinenya pula bagaimana? Tetap tak guna. Saya juga kurang terkesan dengan lakonan Maya Karin; beliau seperti tidak tahu apa nak buat dengan watak yang begitu lemah dan pasif. Penonton pula, nak buat apa dengan heroine ini dan cerita ini? Saya berdoa agar mereka takkan jadikannya sebagai pedoman, atau jadikan Izzah sebagai contoh wanita solehah, sebab ya Allah tidak. Hakikatnya filem ini adalah sebuah fantasi yang memaniskan sesuatu yang amat pahit bagi beribu-ribu wanita dalam realiti. Inilah dilema yang TMBF hadapi bagi menulis rebiu ini; dari segi pembikinan ia cukup baik sebagai filem melodrama yang kuat melo-nya, tapi dari segi mesej dan pendirian ia amat durjana dan celaka. Jadi saya beri 2-½ bintang, rating yang berada ditengah-tengah skala ukuran. Saya dengar penerbit filem ini nak hantarnya ke Cannes Film Festival yang akan datang, dan saya tak sabar hendak membaca ulasan media asing yang pasti akan menghentamnya habis-habis. Sebab orang barat jauh lebih peka terhadap isu jantina dan feminisme dari orang Malaysia, yang jahil menganggap cerita ini sebuah "kisah cinta agung."

NEXT REVIEW: The Muppets
Expectations: do they have a lot of fans here?

This movie is broken

The Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn part 1
My rating:




I gotta say, lately I've been feeling inclined to defend the Twilight movies. Partly because hating on Stephenie Meyer's teen supernatural soap opera is getting old, even if I don't disagree with any of the harshest criticisms against it (e.g. unhealthy central relationship, blatantly self-indulgent storyline, anti-feminist and chauvinist values, really bad writing). But mostly because it's the movies we're talking about here, which are made by wholly different people besides Meyer - and much more talented people to boot. I think these people have been trying their damnedest to actually make good movies out of these books, and I think they've succeeded to certain degrees. I ain't budging from my opinion that the third one, Eclipse, is a decent fantasy action-thriller. So it was out of a sense of obligation that I decided to watch and review the latest one - more out of obligation than real anticipation, since my enjoyment of the third one didn't really make up for the previous two.

None of that prepared me for how utterly the movie has been ruined by our ever-wise Lembaga Penapisan Filem.

Bella Swan (Kristen Stewart) has finally agreed to marry Edward Cullen (Robert Pattinson), and Edward has finally agreed to turn Bella into a vampire. But first, their first year of marriage will be Bella's last as a human - and when Jacob Black (Taylor Lautner) learns that they plan to consummate their marriage, he becomes angry, fearing for Bella's safety. The newlyweds have their honeymoon on a private island off the coast of Rio de Janeiro, and their first night is... eventful... but Bella seems otherwise unharmed. Then the unthinkable happens - Bella gets pregnant, an unprecedented occurrence in vampire history. They return to Forks, seeking the care of Carlisle (Peter Facinelli) and the rest of the Cullen clan, but Bella's human body is unable to cope with the baby's accelerated growth rate and superhuman strength - and despite everyone's fears for her life, Bella insists on having the child. Meanwhile, Sam Uley (Chaske Spencer), the leader of the Quileute pack, has deemed the child an "abomination" and a violation of the werewolf-vampire treaty, and prepares to make war on the Cullens - which drives Jacob to leave the pack and reluctantly join the vampires in order to save Bella's life.

Gaahh. IMDB records this movie's running time at 117 minutes, which means almost 20 minutes have been snipped out. This includes the sex scene, which isn't too big a deal; being a PG-13 movie, it's pretty much meant to fade to black then cut back in the morning after anyway. But the cruelest cut is during the birth scene, almost all of which is gone - Bella goes into labour, and then almost immediately we see the newborn baby bouncing on someone's knee. This is the climax of the entire movie! And this means there is absolutely no reason to watch this in Malaysian cinemas; the only option is to download a pirated torrent or get a bootleg DVD. What especially annoys me is that that birth scene was the only thing I was looking forward to in this film, due to how over-the-top gory and sadistic I'd heard it was in the book. I wanted to see how director Bill Condon and long-time series screenwriter Melissa Rosenberg handled it. But I didn't. Gaaaaahhh.

Which means it's gonna be hard for me to review this film - or rather, hard to give an accurate rating. There's still a lot to talk about though. It's about middle-of-the-road as far as Twilight movies go; better than the first and second, but not as good as the third. Better in that a Bella and Edward who have actually decided to get married is better than a Bella and Edward angsting over each other (and Jacob). Not as good in the sense that the plot is somewhat rambling and doesn't build up much in the way of narrative tension. Most of the first half is taken up by the wedding and the honeymoon, which is basically romance porn for chicks (and catnip for Twilight fangirls of the Team Edward persuasion); basically nothing noteworthy happens other than a brief altercation with a suddenly-jealous-all-over-again Jacob, and Bella's attempts to seduce Edward after their first night. The latter of which is more fun, for the couple of brief scenes of Kristen Stewart in skimpy nighties. But on the whole, it's pretty dull, mostly because Stewart and Robert Pattinson still can't muster up any real romantic chemistry. I don't hate them, I think they're both talented performers, but even after four movies, they just can't make these characters work.

And in the second half, the focus suddenly switches from Bella to Jacob. Which is accurate to the novel's structure, but in a movie it just feels weird, like the main character has suddenly gotten sidelined. Also, Taylor Lautner is by far the worst of the three principal actors here - Stewart and Pattinson can at least say they've been good in other movies - and putting him front and center makes for no compelling viewing at all. And here is where the plot finally gets started, which is also problematic; early on, the big bad werewolf leader Sam Uley is all "no, Jacob, don't get your panties in a twist, the vamps are our friends." Then later, he's the one who's all, "OMG vampire baby treaty broken abomination kill kill kiiiiilll!" (And he's in CGI werewolf form when he makes this declaration; if we'd seen an actual human actor say it, we might be a little more convinced.) When the major threat in your plot comes from a bunch of folks we'd spent three previous movies establishing that they're badass-but-basically-nice, the outcome ain't gonna be particularly suspenseful.

See, one of the biggest criticisms against the entire Twilight franchise is how it neuters the concept of vampires and werewolves - more the former, since it ain't werewolves that sparkle in sunlight. Which is why the most successful Twilight movie is the one that reminds us that, hey, did you know that vampires and werewolves are inhuman creatures who eat people? I don't even think it's all that bad a thing to combine that with a teen romance, as long as that sense of menace and danger and, yes, horror, is preserved. Keep that, and even the mushy, angsty, juvenile romance elements can be palatable. And so can most of the other things the franchise has been accused of, which I don't think can fairly be laid on the movies. Such as...

...y'know what, I can't. I actually want to mount a defense of the Twilight movies, and I know what I want to say about it, but I gotta wonder, what's the point? What's the point in doing it in a review of this movie, which in the form I watched is completely defective? I'm serious - this is the worst censorship of a cinema release in Malaysia I have ever seen, worse than even the last time our treasured Censorship Board severely pissed me off. I was actually ready to give Breaking Dawn part 1 a 3-star rating, until it got to the omitted birth scene and I had to stifle the "What??!" that almost burst out of my mouth. So, faced with the choice of rating it on the movie it's supposed to be versus the movie I actually watched, I'm forced to go with the latter. When Breaking Dawn part 2 gets here, I'll be ready to expound on how Condon and Rosenberg made Meyer's story agreeable, if perhaps still not quite good enough to recommend, and mollified most of what people object to about Twilight - which is exactly what, as professional filmmakers, they're meant to do. And as all the teenage (married!) sex and body horror is over and done with, there shouldn't be as much censorship. There better not be.

NEXT REVIEW: Petaling Street Warriors
Expectations: yay James Lee and Namewee!