Film Reviw

                                                          The Phantom of the Opera (2004)
 

Director: Joel Schumacher 

Cast: Gerard Butler as Erik / The Phantom, Emmy Rossum as Christine Daaé, Patrick Wilson as Raoul, Vicomte de Chagny, Miranda Richardson as Madame Giry, Minnie Driver as Carlotta Giudicelli

Synopsis: The angel of music patrons Christine, promoting her on the main role of the musicals. He thinks she should belong only to him, but everything changes when a strong opponent in the person of Vicomte de Chagny appears.

Review: After a change of the Opera House's shareholders, something strange began happening there: constant accidents, letters from the Phantom of the Opera (Gerard Butler) with his requirements. The angel of music would do everything Christine (Emmy Rossum) to become the prima donna of the theater. He taught her music, the music of the soul and the heart, he loved her, he befriended her; and there her play had a resounding success, instantly turning the girl into a new star of the Opera. Christine' old friend Raoul (Patrick Wilson) congratulated her, and since that moment the struggle between two rivals began. Only the last play became crucial for all of them: the main roles were performed by Erik and Christine, who at the end teared off the Ghost's mask, revealing his disfigured face. Taking the girl, he ran to his refuge, where Vicomte found them.

So, without further ado as it's clear that the film is magnificent, and first of all, thanks to the director Joel Schumacher, who managed to combine classical music with modern filmographie. Separately I would like to draw your attention on a good selection of actors and their incredible performances. Gerard Butler was irresistible and unique in the role of the Phantom. And his voice, which touches the soul... He was imbued with the spirit of the patron, the genius and the angel of music. And an excellent part with Butler was performed by Emmy Rossum with a distinctive appearance, so suitable for air and amorous Christine, with such a beautiful and gentle voice. But most of all I was impressed by Minnie Driver as Carlotta Giudicelli, the most extravagant woman of the Opera, who knew her own worth.

The costumes and scenery were simply stunning: they reflected the reality of that time, moving the audience in the atmosphere of tension and at the same time air atmosphere. About the music we can speak a lot and for a long time, so I'd like to say only the most important: music was just beautiful, thank so much the composer Andrew Lloyd Webber.

All in all, unfortunately, I neither read the novel by Gaston Leroux nor watched Andrew Lloyd Webber''s musical of the same name, but after watching this film adaptation I'll correct this mistake. The movie is really very impressive, soulful, sublime!

Film Review

Ed Wood (1994)

Director:  Tim Burton

Cast: Johnny Depp as Ed Wood, Martin Landau as Bela Lugosi, Sarah Jessica Parker as Dolores Fuller, Patricia Arquette as Kathy O'Hara, Lisa Marie as Vampira, Bill Murray as Bunny Breckinridge, George "The Animal" Steele as Tor Johnson, Mike Starr as George Weiss.

Synopsis: He was a screenwriter, director, producer, actor, author, and film editor of his own horror and science-fiction films. But all of them were low-budget ones. That’s why posthumously he was awarded as Worst Director of All Time.

Review: Ed Wood (Johnny Depp) was trying to join a film company. So having heard about producing the story about Christine Jorgensen's life, he began writing, producing, directing in Casual Company. However, the film shooting was broken down, and Ed started a new one, titled Glen or Glenda, initially conceived under a different name. Unfortunately this one was also failed because of financial problems. But Wood didn’t give up, and meeting a former film star Bela Lugosi (Martin Landau), who acted in his unsuccessful films, started another one called Bride of the Atom. At its premiere the crew was driven out of the theatre, and Ed shot Plan 9 from Outer Space, which actually was normally received by the audience.  

So the film is a bit unusual for Tim Burton, because he seriousness, nevertheless, there is something to laugh at, and this something is a human obstinacy. In fact, this picture has a certain sense, which everyone sees on his own. Thus for me, for example, the meaning is talent. And I think everyone will agree that it’s impossible to start making movies only because you want it, not being familiar with the technique and rules of shooting. But sometimes people are so full of optimism and faith in ourselves that simply don't notice that everything they produce, do no good and no income at all.

This is a biopic film, which tells us the story of a failed career of Ed Wood, whose role fulfilled the incomparable Johnny Depp. His participation proves the fact that just gets used to this role, even his voice, intonation, gestures and mimicry transfer his mood. But, it seems to me, it will be wrong not to note other actors’ participation (especially Martin Landau embodied Dracula so likely), who also gave a special atmosphere to the film. As all of them really got used to the role. And in the role that Burton gave them, and in that which was in the middle of the twentieth century..

All in all, Ed Wood is a very good film, which helps us to understand Edward’s destiny, his life and purpose in it, his priorities. We got to know that Edward really liked movie and shooting and was talented in his own way, and fulfilled his ideas as he could. 

Rendering 14: 'Vladimir Vysotsky - 75'

The article ‘Vladimir Vysotsky – 75’ was published by Daria Manina in The Voice of Russia on January 25, 2013. It discusses a famed Soviet-era actor and singer-song writer Vladimir Vysotsky and carries comments on his fame and influence.

   Speaking of Vladimir Vysotsky, it’s necessary to note that he as the idol of millions in the former USSR, still ranks prominently among the top famous Russians, second only to the world’s first cosmonaut Yuri Gagarin, with other 20th -century celebrities such as as Marshal Georgy Zhukov, writer Leo Tolstoy, Joseph Stalin, Vladimir Lenin, Alexander Solzhenitsin and Andrei Sakharaov all trailing behind, according to a nationwide poll held by the VTsIOM polling agency. 

   However, it isn’t disclose why 32 years after his death, Vyssotsky remains an iconic personality. And analyzing that, it’s necessary to emphasize that the answer comes in his songs: there are some 600 of them – composed on virtually any imaginable topic and sung in a completely amazing style to the self-accompaniment of a seven-string guitar. There are a lot of comments on that fact, as the magnetic power of his songs was such that it made everybody absolutely sure that all he sang about had happened to himself. And the impression was that he himself had been in a prison camp or served in the army during the war. It was there, deep within him and came out so naturally. His lyrics, more than just rhyme, struck a responsive chord with the listeners.

   Giving appraisal of that fact, it should be pointed out that Vysotsky’s heart-rending sincerity, often expressed in the form of a parable, plunged him in to disfavor with the Soviet authorities. “Wolf Hunt”, one of his best-known songs, is a screaming allegory about a doomed artist deprived of the freedom of creation.

It’s an open secret that the peak of Vysotsky’s fame coincided with a period of stagnation in the Soviet Union: there was no room for splashes in that stagnation. No one was permitted to criticize the regime, say or hint something of the sort – sanctions followed immediately.

   There is every reason to believe that Vyssotsky was not a dissident. Of course, few mini-records of his songs were released in Russia during his lifetime, but without a doubt he played key roles at the immensely popular Taganka Theater in Moscow, and he constantly appeared in movies. Finally, he was allowed dozens of concerts a year. Multitudes of copies of amateur audio recordings of those concerts spread across the country.

   In resolute terms in conclusion the author makes it clear that Vysotsky was famous, but he wanted official recognition and he deserved it. But he was denied recognition during his lifetime. It was until after his death at the age of 42, that he was awarded the title of Meritorious Artist of the Soviet Union. And I think Vladimir Vysotsky is not only the idol – he is the legend of Soviet and Russian history, as more than 30 years since his death in 1980, he continues to draw crowds in Moscow.

Rendering 13: 'Commemorating Vladimir Vysotsky - Russia's best-loved bard poet'

The article ‘Commemorating Vladimir Vysotsky – Russia’s best-loved bard poet’ was published by Benjamin Hutter in Russia Beyond the Headlines on January 24. It reports about the Russian artist the late Vladimir Vysotsky, as today more than 30 years since his death in 1980, he continues to draw crowds in Moscow. That year Vysotsky would have been his 75th birthday.

   Speaking of commemoration of his birthday at tribute concert at Crocus City Hall, it’s necessary to note that Vladimir Vysotsky made an appearance, speaking on a huge screen that dominated the Hall; he told about his childhood memories. It’s an open secret that the man had a voice of a real drunkard (as parents’ friends used to say), that was a difficult task for his imitators.

   Moreover, Vladimir Vysotsky was not only actor, but an author and singer of his songs, poet, the author of the prose works; however, his songs were never officially permitted in the Soviet Union; he was only recognized officially as an actor (he was an actor at the Taganka Theatre; performed in Shakespeare’s “Hamlet”, and in the film “The Meeting Place Cannot Be Changed”). Analyzing such a situation, it’s necessary to note that despite of that that fact everyone knew when and where his next concert would take place.

   Giving appraisal of his work, it’s necessary to mention that Vysotsky’s songs are like an embodiment of life, as they are like a whole drama: a piece of theatre that can be read, again and again; and each time you find new emotions, a new meaning. So generations grew up on his songs. However, it must be mentioned that Vladimir Vysotsky was the first Russian rocker, though his attitude and his deep, intellectual lyrics.

   The article concludes by saying that Vysotsky’s legacy is so profound that some see him as untouchable in terms of the heights he reached. The greying heads of those who were the singer’s contemporaries can be counted on the fingers of one hand among his fans. This jubilee was attended by thousands of Muscovites, offering Vysotsky that which he desired above all else during his lifetime – immortality. So I think you will agreee with me that it is possible to write books about him, and after that not everything will be said, as Vladimir Vysotsky is the most bright and outstanding personality of art music, cinema and the theatre of our history. He performed Hamlet and repeated his life: both of them died young and misunderstood. However, such people cannot be forgotten!

Rendering 12: 'The Great Gatsby to open Cannes 2013'

   The article ‘The Great Gatsby to open Cannes 2013’ was published by Ben Child in The Guardian on March 12, 2013. It discusses how Baz Luhrmann's much-anticipated 3D take on The Great Gatsby, F Scott Fitzgerald's romantic tale of the gilded jazz age, is to open the Cannes film festival. 

   Speaking of the film, it’s interesting to record the stars of the fourth adaptation of Fitzgerald's 1925 novel to hit the big screen, like Leonardo DiCaprio in the title role of Jay Gatsby, Tobey Maguire as his wide-eyed confidant Nick Carraway and Carey Mulligan as manipulative socialite Daisy Buchanan. And there is general feeling that just this drama will open the 66th Festival de Cannes out-of-competition on 15 May. Besides, the article takes a special view of Luhrmann’s words, as for him, as well as for those who acted in The Great Gatsby, it is a great honor to open the Cannes film festival. He also stressed that F Scott Fitzgerald wrote some of the most poignant and beautiful passages of his extraordinary novel just a short distance away at a villa outside St Raphael. 

   Analyzing the situation, it’s significant to mention what chronicles this particular film. It is about the young, midwestern Carraway's entanglements with a wealthy circle of hedonistic east coast aristocrats, including the titular Jay Gatsby, the host of wild and lavish New York parties. In spite of the fact that while not popular upon its initial publication, it’s very likely that the book went on to be recognised as one of the great American novels and a powerful celebration and indictment of the roaring twenties. 

   Giving appraisal of the director, it’s necessary to point out his career, as prior to his film the most famous adaptation was Jack Clayton's Academy award-winning 1974 version, which was scripted by Francis Ford Coppola. And now he directed this film, which actually was previously filmed in the silent era in 1926 by Herbert Brenon, a version viewed as closest to the original text. Later, in 1949, the same film directed by Elliott Nugent remains largely unseen. 

   Moreover, there are signs that The Great Gatsby will open across France on the same day it screens at Cannes, and that is due in the US on 10 May and the UK a week later. And it’s an open secret that it will be the second 3D film to open Cannes following the Pixar animation Up in 2009. 

   So the article draws the conclusion that Cannes veteran Steven Spielberg was revealed as the surprise president of the jury for this year's festival last month. Like the US film-maker, Luhrmann is a regular on the Croisette, having screened Strictly Ballroom in the Un Certain Regard section in 1992 and Moulin Rouge as the opening film of the 2001 edition. 

   As for me, I'm looking forward for the release of this film on the screens. And moreover, speaking on this film and its director, we are to take into account that Baz Luhrmann is the director of Moulin Rouge, which had a great success. So I think this particular film (The Great Gatsby) deserves such a honor.

Rendering 11: 'Warner Brothers: ninety years of grit and greatness'

   The article “Warner Brothers: ninety years of grit and greatness” was published by David Gritten in The Telegraph on April 4, 2013. It discusses the great event, as that day Warner Bros celebrated nine decades of individuality, big characters, and challenging realism on the big screen. 

   Speaking of Warner Bros, it’s necessary to remark that the world of film changed in 1927 with the premiere of The Jazz Singer in New York City. Starring Al Jolson, it launched the era of the “talkies”, and was the prototype of movies as we know them today: a synthesis of sound and vision. And as that film had then been in existence for just four years, undoubtedly Warners deserved a place in the pantheon of great Hollywood studios. And of course it’s an open secret that over the years there have been so many more reasons to celebrate Warners. 

   Analyzing the company’s career, it’s significant to emphasize that Warner Bros made its mark with big-screen realism. Thus from the early Thirties it generated a cycle of gangster films and crime dramas, that held up a mirror to Depression-era America, and appealed directly to ordinary people having financial troubles. And there is a general feeling to believe that all of them had the same themes regarding a house style: urban settings, snappy dialogue and a brisk pace, with scripts and performances that never strayed into sentimentality. What’s more notable that even the actors in these films distanced Warner Bros from the norm.  

   Giving appraisal of the situation, it’s necessary to point out that unlike Warner Bros, other studios relied on handsome young men to star in films that would transport audiences on clouds of escapism. Besides, the article draws the fact that two key directors created a house style for Warners around this time: Mervyn LeRoy specialised in social dramas with a bracing dose of reality, and Michael Curtiz, who made more than 100 Warners movies over 25 years. Of course not all were masterpieces, but nor were they frivolous; most of them were staged in a real world. 

   Without a doubt it’s hard to predict the course of events, but would another studio have done it differently? That’s why the article takes a fact that the values espoused by Warners in those early days has held good at the studio for a long time. It can be approved by Martin Scorsese’s breakthrough movie, Mean Streets (1973), which was made for Warners. And the careers of two very different film-makers, Clint Eastwood and Stanley Kubrick, also seem to confirm the notion. Both enjoyed long relationships with Warners; professionally, they regarded it as home. 

   Thus the author concludes by saying that even today, a distinctive film-maker like Christopher Nolan calls Warners home, and it’s hard to imagine him equally comfortable elsewhere. Of course, Warners’ output is as varied in quality as any other studio – but over 90 years it has created a legacy unlike any other in Hollywood. 

   So I think everybody will agree that Warner Bros is one of the major film studios, which has the largest collection of movies in the world. What is more important that the company, during the history of its existence, focuses on maximizing current and next-generation scenarios to make films available to audiences.

Rendering 10: 'The Golden Eagle Award'

The article ‘Golden Eagle – 2013’Who got the main Russian award?’ was published by Nino Takaishwili in Woman.ru on January 26, 2013. It reports at length and carries commentaries about the 11^th award ceremony ‘Golden Eagle,’ which winners were Danila Kozlovskiy, Anna Mikhalkova, Irina Rozanova, Sergey Makovetsky and many others.

   Speaking of the ceremony, it’s interesting to note that the choice of its presenters was the surprise for everybody, as they were the actress Anna Snatkina and her husband Victor Vasiliev, who, it seemed, was honored for that the first time. There’s every reason to believe that the zest of the award was the presentation of the films that pretended to the main prize in the category of ‘The best feature film of the year’: the video was represented, where children tried to say something about each of nominees. And according to the audience, it succeeded.

   Analyzing the ceremony, it’s necessary to emphasize that The Best Actor got Danila Kozlovskiy for the role in Духless/Soulless; in the nomination ‘The best actor on the television’ the winner was Sergey Makovetskiy for the role in Case of the Grocery №1; the Best Actress took Anna Mikhalkova for the role in Love with an Accent, though she wasn’t agree with the Academy with the choice, as there were nominated other two outstanding actresses – Roza Hairullina and Renata Litvinova. After the ceremony Nikita Mikhalkov said that he liked his daughter’s work, as it was her best role. It would be wrong not to mention other nominations and winners: the Best Supporting Actress took Viktoriya Tolstoganova for the role in Spy, though she was nominated for several times but it was her first prize. However, the film The Horde by Andrey Proshkin took five awards (the Best Director, Best Cinematography, Best Art Direction, Best Costume Design), though White Tiger by Karen Shahnazarov won the Best Picture, as well as Music, Editing and Sound.  

   The article concludes by saying that there were four winners: Soulless by Roman Prygunov, The Horde by Andrey Proshkin, Spy by Alexey Adrianov and Vysotsky: Thank God I’m Alive by Andrey Smolyakov; and enumerating winners for the Award: Best Picture – White Tiger, Best TV movie – The White Guard, Best TV Series – Zhukov, Best Documentary – Anton’s Right Here, Best Animated Film – Bach, Best Director – Andrey Proshkin, Best Screenplay, Best Actress, Best Actor, Best Supporting Actress, Best Supporting Actor, Best Cinematography, Best Art Director, Best Costume Design, Best Original Music, Best Editing, Best Sound and Best Foreign Film – The Artists.

   As for me, I will say in brief that I am glad we have the actors and directors, worthy of the award "Golden Eagle", as the future of the Russian cinematograph depends on them.

Rendering 9: 'Films That Make the World a Better Place'

The article ‘Films That Make the World a Better Place’ was published in the web site KustendorfFilm and Music Festival on January 22, 2013. It discusses the formation of the omnibus 7 Days In Havana, its forms and to define the reach and potential benefits.

   Speaking of the omnibus, it’s interesting to note the film director Elia Suleiman’s opinion about short films’ creation in the whole. So first of all, the most important thing, that must be mentioned, is that short films are like a chance for the director to work at his feature films in a relaxed setting. Besides, they are like ‘dress rehearsals’ and a great chance to try some new ideas and pictures before the feature film.

   The second thing, that Suleiman mentioned, is the usage and meaning of humor in short films, as    humor is not the consequence of an artistic strategy, but a thing that is humanly inherent. And, analyzing its role, it’s necessary to emphasize that the most important thing for humor is choosing the right moment. It’s all about repetition and anticipation of repetition, as well as a tiny, barely noticeable change of detail as tools to use in order to bring forth the moment for presenting the point. Moreover, there’s every reason to believe that humor is the thing that breaks continuity in the same way that laughter creates a hole in the passing of time; it’s a medium of political action, a reason that always cancels out manifestation of rules.

   Giving appraisal of the omnibus, Emir Kusturica’s opinion about it must be noted, as it’s a result of a work put in by people that were gathered around an idea, which in the end made no one in that group sure what the idea actually is. For him it’s an open secret that Suleiman is a spiritual descendant of the great Jacques Tati, as his film (The Time That Remains) must surpass spontaneity in order to truly become a work of art.

   In conclusion Suleiman draws his attention to the moment that he creates films not with a mission or a concrete idea concerning social engagements, but because he hopes that he will make the microcosms that forms his audience more festive and happier.

   The only thing that I can say is that I absolutely agree with Suleiman that film directors have to create such films that make people happier. I really think it’s true, as sometimes a film with humor (that’s placed in the right moment) make people smile, not drama or catastrophe movies, as they make us happy only for a very short period of time, during which we understand how our relatives and friends are important for us, we are happy that they are with us and people in the whole world are good and kind. But it is just a momentary insanity. Films with humor make us smile even in poverty, which we have to overcome with a smile, and believe that your life is like the film with a happy end (how trite it may sound).