#7 Melinda and Melinda


Melinda and Melinda

Year: 2004

Director and Screenplay: Woody Allen

As I said in previous entries, my “reviews” are my own opinions about a movie, what my own eyes see. I don’t even like to search anything about the movie before I write my thoughts on it. On the other hand, what I do like to do is search to see what’s the movie about before I watch, usually I only read the storyline or the synopsis, to see if it’s gonna interest me. In this case, I only watched the movie because I wanted to know more Woody Allen movies, I don’t recall if I read anything about it before, but I must have seen something interesting. It took me a while to see it, but finally the time came. In my opinion, things always come in the right time, even if it doesn’t seem so. And that goes for movies and books too I guess. The movies I see or the books I read make sense to me most of the time if I’m the one who’s picking them up, meaning that if someone else is trying to make me see a movie or read a book “out of my time” I wont enjoy it as much and it won’t have the meaning I’m searching for (even if I don’t know I was searching for that certain thing, it ends up making sense).

But anyway, let’s talk about Melinda and Melinda. So far I have been very pleased with Woody Allen. When I was younger I was told he was a bit rude to a journalist from my country who was interviewing him, so I never sympathized very much with the guy… But today I can understand the rudeness and the stupidity of the woman: she asked him to make a joke for the interview… Came on dude… He’s not gonna work for free just for you! Besides, those jokes take time to be constructed! But recently I was told about his personal life and it’s pretty fucked up, so I don’t know what to say about him. Either way that has nothing to do with me and I’m only here to appreciate him as an artist. Also recently I had to to a short-film and I chose comedy, based on the Seinfeld style. I was recommended to see some Woody Allen movies, as the jokes I was looking for could relate. And I wasn’t disappointed even though he doesn’t always go for comedy. In this case, he went for both.

The film starts with a nice dinner between friends who discuss what life is about: comedy or tragedy. One of the friends tells a hypothetical story with a girl named Melinda as the protagonist. The two guys who were more excited about the discussion – they seem to be movie makers – start to explain their own versions of this Melinda’s story. One sees it as a perfect romantic comedy while the other sees a clear tragedy. I liked the tragedy most, I’m kind of drawn to tragic people. But the comedy was sweet. Both versions involved the same elements: Melinda and her friends, broken hearts and love affairs.


Melinda is a girls with emotional issues, more prominent in her tragic story: pills, cigarettes and a harsh past. So the story is more complex in this version I guess, more heavy if you will. The actors are all different on both stories, except for Melinda: only her characterization changes. Even the music changes according to the genre we are watching. This is what’s interesting about the movie: to see how different people approach a same situation in life. Some say we have to laugh to hide our tragedies, and thus make jokes out of everything, Some say life is naturally tragic and there’s no joke about it. To me both perspectives are right as I see real beauty in tragedy but I think we really have to laugh it out sometimes, otherwise we can’t deal with it… Too bad we can’t always be that strong.


Don’t need to tell you who is the tragic one do I? Through the characterization of this persona we can see who’s more of a light dove and who’s the wrecked heroine. On one hand we have people who are simple, who are dynamic and happy despite all. We have no tears, no drama, only awkward situations that lead to funny comebacks, for more tragic they can be. On the other hand we have a more sophisticated group: they are rich people, serious, they only laugh to show off, they’re not that happy and the twists in the story don’t lead to funny moments. I won’t talk about the story’s details because what matters to me are THESE details I just talked about (and it would be confusing and a never-ending text): the way one can arrange things to look a certain way (in movies in this case, the technical aspect) and the way people can approach life. Is it really a choice or are some people pre-disposed to be dramatic and others more positive?

The end of both stories are a bit similar, as well as other aspects, with some slight differences. For example: we have two guys who fall fall for Melinda but she doesn’t end up with none of them. There is betrayal in both.  And In both someone tries to jump through a window. In the tragic story, Melinda commits this act, and her story ends with her friend commenting she’s one of those persons who are always going to need help. I see this Melinda as a beautiful person though, meaning she desperately needs love and understanding. (I don’t know, as I said, I’m drawn to tragedy, I have that side.) On the love comedy we see a happy ending, a happy Melinda even throughout the whole movie, despite the pills she took in the beginning – to apparently kill herself! She ends up with the man she loves after all. All ends well.


But the question remains in the end: is life a imminent tragedy or a big joke we have to make the most of? Tell me your thoughts!


#6 One Point Zero

paranoia05One Point O

(Also known as One Point Zero, Paranoia 1.0, amogst other versions, all more or less the same)

Year: 2004

Director and Screenplay: Jeff Renfroe and Marteinn Thorsson

Prepare yourselves for one fucked up movie! Everything, from the colors to the story is mindfuck. It’s about a guy – Simon – who’s suppose to deliver a code to a firm but doesn’t make it on time because his computer gets a virus. Meanwhile he’s receiving this strange empty packages which are driving him crazy and paranoid. Plus, he’s always drinking milk, and that was one of the things that got my attention: what’s the thing with milk anyways?? Why would he be buying and drinking milk so strictly, moreover when he’s allergic to it? At least that’s what his friend says… But can he trust anybody?


Almost the whole movie takes place on his apartment building. The whole scenario is strange, with predominance of the colors ochre, green and golden. It’s warm but cold at the same time. The corridor of his flat is all metallic except for the doors, a very strange corridor if you ask me. Besides, it’s supervised with cameras linked to the landlord’s room! Why?!?

The neighbors are also odd (well I guess all neighbors are odd) – one is building a robotic talking head and has an “intelligent” couch that cleans itself, another one lives underground, among the pipes and such and has little tiny robot insects and Simon thinks he’s crazy ’cause the man think they are ought to get us all, but he got away… – and he gets to know the ones he didn’t already. At some point, one neighbor dies, followed by the landlord. Meanwhile his disease is getting worse and he starts getting more and more paranoid, not being sure whom to trust. No one on the building seems to know anything about the packages, but the first person to die ends up saying, in his final words, he was receiving packages too. Empty packages, with nothing but air in them. This is pretty freaking odd!!! This guy has nothing but Cola 500 in his fridge, and the landlord has it full of meat! Wtf?!

The talking head often tries to contact Simon to warn him! How and why does a talking head wants to warn him about what’s going on and is always scold by his creator? That german guy is very suspicious indeed when he says his couch is broken…


Among the neighbors is a lady – Trish – with whom Simon gets involved. She tells him to “come inside”, meaning “cum inside”, and so he does, and we can understand this in the end when her belly is shown, after Simon’s death.


Yeah… he kinda dies…

He  realizes who were sending him the packages: his friend, who explains to him what they contain: an invisible nano-technology virus – 1.0 – that sends messages directly to the brain: thus making him buying the milk. The landlord and the other neighbor who died bought meat and Cola 500. In the end, before his death, Simon is getting spasms and uncontrolled speech – side effects of the virus, bugs if you will.

The film ends with Simon lying on the floor, smiling (wtf, why?…) and without the top half of his skull, brain missing. In the beginning of the movie we see him reading a paper where it says someone got killed and the brain was missing, so we assume the killer got Simon as well, after those two people on his building. Howard – the guy living underground – appears just before his death, saying he’s gonna help him just like he helped the landlord and his other neighbor, so what I get from here is that either Howard is a killer who collets brains, or he’s an extreme conspiracy theoretic who happens to be right and puts an end to the plans of the people trying to infect other with that nap-technology by removing the source of the infection: the infected person’s brain.  And That0s when they show us Trish’s belly, telling us that Howard din’t make it, an infected human being is being generated.Deborah_Unger_in_One_Point_O

And I didn’t even mention the odd sex virtual-reality game!… Are they all part of the conspiracy? What are your thoughts?

#5 Vicky Cristina Barcelona

600x386px-LL-8343e2ac_Scarlett Vicky Cristina BarcelonalVicky Cristina Barcelona

Year: 2008

Director and Screenplay: Woody Allen

Let’s talk about unbalanced relationships and insecurities shall we?

Vicky and Cristina are two friends who go on vacation to Barcelona where they get involved in a love adventure with a seductive spanish guy who basically screws their minds for a while. Oh, did I mention her ex-pshyco-wife is involved too?

vicky-cristina-barcelona-penelope-penelope-cruz-4121525-900-600-full1The characters are very well constructed and are very different from each other. Vicky is working on catalan culture, about to marry and have the life she wanted. Cristina is still searching what the hell is love and, after all, still searching for herself – she had done a short film recently and is now experimenting photography (a common interest with María Elena) and wites poetry too, so despite all her assumed searched for love, I think she’s trying different paths to also understand herself, and even her brief relationship with her newly found spanish companions are a proof of that. Juan Antonio is a painter, very affective and open minded in love and his ex-wife, María Elena, is basically a psycho bitch from hell with serious emotional problems, but they love each other fiercely. I liked María Elena because she is also very honest and I didn’t actually find as her evil as she might seem. I found her needy despite all her violence, she’s a needy hurricane. Juan Antonio, despite being the cause of all the tumultuous vacation of the two friends, seems innocent, after all he was always honest and open about his intentions. Both girls get involved with him and her reactions are different, since her personalities are different. Cristina is more open, adventurous and intuitive, while Vicky is more rational and although she may look like she’s confidant, she’s actually scared and gets to a point where she herself says so. Her perfect world and marriage are shaken by a love story she only dreamed of and she questions all her stability and future plans. Her fiancé never finds out. Cristina gets further and ends up living with Juan Antonio and eventually María Elena too, having all three a relationship that apparently works very well for Juan Antonio and his ex-wife, but ends up being too much for the blonde girl.Juan Antonio and María Elena’s relationship is a violent and fiery one. As I said, her temper is very violent but Juan Antonio just can’t live without her because of her beautiful personality underneath: carefree, artistic, a painter just like him, in fact, before him.

One can see how the girls arrive to Barcelona shinning and smiling, and how they leave wrecked. Yes, this all happens only on their vacation and one is led to think everything is going to go back to normal once they’re in America again. In my opinion, the film portraits two opposite views on love: the open minded and the ideal. Often we find people with plans and strong ideas for their lives, strong people, confident, rational and successful. And we find people who seem unstable and carefree more needy or even weak. One can see how things are not always what they look like. Successful people can very well be wearing their mask to hide they problems, while carefree people can very well be more brave and take opportunities when they see them, without fear of loosing what they supposedly have for granted. That’s what happens in this movie literally.

Javier Bardem and Rebecca Hall on the Tibidabo mountain Vicky Christina Barcelona movie imageWhat also happens in this movie is a characteristic I have seen in other Woody Allen movies: the good music, the european bohemian life and the good wine (besides the love issues): always the best things of life. One can enjoy spanish guitars and dream of being on those little latin restaurants, candle lights on the table, good food and artistic environment. (I’m thinking I wish I knew what he knows, culturally. I know I still have a lot to learn and to appreciate. But damn, I love those bohemian ambiences! We can see it too in “Midnight in Paris”! A great movie that gathers many artists from another era. I shall talk about it someday.)

I found it a great movie. Specially great characters. All the issues are very direct, there’s nothing to not to much to think about, the characters themselves say what’s on their minds. But it’s interesting to see how we can feel them and relate to them in one way or another, or even how we wish to be like them. And as I said, you’ll wish you’d also be in barcelona, dinning some good food and wine and listening to spanish guitar… Don’t you think?


#4 Cloud Atlas


(Ok, first of all let me just say something. I’m not a professional critic or anything, I write my “reviews” based on what I personally feel about what I see. I try to use the correct terms to describe things, but I don’t like to sound – or be for that matter – like a snob. So when I don’t understand something, I say I don’t understand it. So don’t take my opinion as a “professional opinion”, I’m just kinda thinking out loud here, to help you and myself reflect about films. With this in mind, I shall proceed… )

Cloud Altlas

Year: 2012

Director: Tom Tykwer, Andy Wachowski and Lana Wachawski

Screenplay: Tom Tykwer, Andy Wachowski and Lana Wachawski

“Cloud Atlas” is a movie based on a novel by the same name by David Mitchel and I didn’t even know that, so obviously I didn’t read the book, just watched the film. And before I came here to write about it I decided to watch a few reviews on youtube, just to see if I was doing my job well, since it’s the first time I’m writing reviews (except the ones I did for school papers). I was happy to find people were saying the same things I was thinking moreover with such a complex movie. Just one thing was said that differed from what I interpreted.

First of all the name Cloud Atlas reminded me of the world map, so I went to search and see what was a cloud atlas. It happens it has nothing to do with it, it’s the designation people created to the different types of clouds, most useful to meteorologists, something like that. The movie revolves on our different lives, in the past, present and future, on our souls and on how our every action is connected through time and influences everything. However, to me, there is a parallel story we can observe: the story of those who dare: dare to defy the rules, no matter how harsh they are, to follow their hearts and what they feel is the correct thing not only for them, but for everybody, and no one else has the guts to challenge. The world need this kind of people.

But let me contextualize you. The movie tells 6 different stories in 6 different times/eras. That’s how it begins, by showing us those times. Then, as it progresses, we accompany those stories with the scenes all mixed up. One time we are watching a scene in the 30’s then we jump to the year 2144 in a completely different scenario. The thing about the changing between the scenes is that we often begin one scene like we were following the previous one. Besides, the actors are always the same on all those different eras! But it doesn’t necessarily mean they are their own re-incarnation. You see, there are some characters who have a peculiar birth mark, and I noticed those are the bold characters, the ones who dare to change things and possibly sacrifice themselves for the rest of us. Having said that, I watched one review where it was said the ones who had the mark were always the same person – meaning, always the same soul just in different vessels, so to speak. I didn’t see it like that, I saw it as they were all connected in some way, through family bounds or something, but never though of them as the same soul. As I was watching the movie and realizing the ones who had the mark were always the defying ones, I though they just had that attitude, it was in their blood because they were somehow connected. (I don’t know, I just saw the movie, have to see it more times to check if the same-soul-in-different-vessels makes sense to me.)

Although the main subject is re-incarnations and the outcomes of our actions, there are two phrases that struck my mind:

“…and so to know thyself is only possible through the eyes of the others”

“If I had remained invisible, the truth would stay hidden. I couldn’t allow that.”

The first one made much sense to me, because even today I still try to find myself and I think I always have certain doubts about myself. Sometimes I would like to see how other people would describe me, but would that be me? Or just the notion others have about me? I am me, I know me. But you know what they say: we have a better understanding when we see the big picture, and one cannot see the big picture of oneself being so close. Anyway, that’s on a personal level. In the story context, Sonmi, the asian looking girl who’s speaking there, is talking about her own story, which is the story of millions just like her.cloud_atlas_sonmi

They were, well, basically slaves, and didn’t even know the world beyond their workplace. At one point she is saved and shown how the business really is – a shocking reality. So basically, she does what’s in that little youtube video I posted.

As for the second thing, it’s related what I just said. She decides to sacrifice herself for her “sisters”, she made that choice, knowing she would die. And bravery and honor are things that really amazes me. In a time like ours, where (I think) more and more people realize how manipulative our “civilized” system is, how many secrets it hides, how many schemes it uses to control us all and how we seem not to be able to do something about it, a person having the balls to step forward and say “No! I won’t tolerate this no more. I’m ready to die for my fellow human beings!” is something truly commendable. Pity human kind has reached this point… I hope one day we can all see beyond our own selfishness and be corrupted no more.

I could continue talking about that subject, a lot!, but I’ve decided to keep this blog strictly about movies/doc and their reviews. I can make this type of personal comments, but I’ll try not to elongate the matter… So let’s move forward.

185252c2-71f8-499b-a342-b53b2974c08b_Cloud-Atlas-trioWhat can I say more about “Cloud Atlas”? It’s a very long movie and very complex to watch, one really must pay attention. I have seen better physical characterizations, but I don’t really care about it that much, I’m more focused on the story itself. I’m saying that because I didn’t like to see Hugh Grant as an old man. But James d’Arcy was kinda cute. Or maybe it’s because of their psychological characterization: D’Arcy plays an adorable guy with a lovely and tragic love story, and Grant plays a grumpy old man who’s sick of helping his crazed brother with financial support, throwing him in a nursing home (that and for having had an affair with his wife!). Meh… I didn’t really like D’Arcy’s face in 2144 era… It was odd, but it was a futuristic scenario so… I guessed people would indeed look a little different. Well, I’m just talking about this characterization thing cause I saw people talking about it too. I don’t want to be influenced by other’s opinions, so I wasn’t sure if I would do a research on other reviews or just retain my research about the film itself. As I said, as it is so complex I decided to see what others have to say about it, and I wasn’t even gonna talk about characterization… Oh well, at least I know I’m writing well on my reviews.

As I was saying previously, in these six different times, actors are always the same, just in different roles, even different genders! But I only realized that in the credits, they show us all the roles of each one! I like when in movies I can see which person is the bad guy before it is known. That’s when you spot a good actor (and a good director btw). The eyes, the body language, it says it all! In this case, try to see where Tom Hanks plays the bad guy! It’s not where you first think it is! Damn, that laugh is creepy!…

cloud-atlas-wbp07So, that’s pretty much all I have to say about this movie here. I thought it was an awesome movie that depicted unconventional heroes, involved our never-ending journey in this universe and our actions and their consequences to the world around us, present and future, but a bit complex to understand and watch. (Once again, as I’m writing I come to conclusions I wasn’t able to if I only saw it and moved on, so this has been a cool exercise for me to do! And I now know it was made from a book, so eventually I’ll have to read it.) The scenes were all connected in some way, either by the characters or by the situation (our lives eventually cross and our actions are reverberated), which I found pretty nice. I don’t really care about the physical characterization when that’s not the main point, as long as I understand the whole movie, and this was one of those cases. My favorite era to watch was 2144 because we can relate to it despite the advanced technology depicted on the movie (we’re almost there). And that’s it! How about you?

(ps: I know it’s already September 28 and so no post was made yesterday, but its 2 am and for me it’s still september 27, so this was my daily review for September 27!)

#3 Mr. Nobody

Film Title: Mr Nobody

Mr. Nobody

Year: 2009

Director and Screenplay: Jaco Van Dormael

Ok, so today I’m gonna talk about an awesome mind blowing film.

First of all, it immediately catched my attention because it involves science and mind-twist ever since the beginning. It talks about parallel universes, the butterfly effect, string theory, and has analepsis and prolepsis throughout the whole movie. The characterization is also very good and one of the first things I notice were the shots. For starters, the movie begins in a fast sequence of scenes, every one with the main character – Nemo Nobody – dying. We have to take his name in consideration too:

– Nemo is a Latin word meaning “no man” or “no one”. (wikipedia)

On the last of those scenes we see old Nemo in a hospital, with a doctor. The doctor is trying to help Nemo recover his memory, for he doesn’t remember much and think he’s 34 years old, despite being 117 and the oldest mortal on Earth (eventually Humankind invented the regeneration of cells, which gave us quasi-immortality). So Nemo begins to recall…

As I was saying, the shots got my attention because we can see how they have very little depth of field, which I interpreted as his memory – he doesn’t fully understand what’s going on (but he understands it all in the end!). One minute he’s with a woman, the next he’s with another woman, all of them his wives. Wtf! He’s focused, but everything else is blurred. And he’s disorientated most of the time.

As the film progresses we can begin to understand the parallel universes thing, not only because Nemo explains it in one of his lives, but because we start to connect the dots. He has 3 wives (so at least 3 lives) and they all meet when they’re children and even as adults. Eventually everyone follows their own path, but one can think: “what if I did that instead?…” But no matter what, every choice we make is correct, every path we take is right. There are no coincidences, but we still can make choices. But Nemo doesn’t know what to choose! He knows the future! He knows what’s gonna happen if he chooses one thing or another. So this is clearly very confusing. Why does he have 3 lives then?

Through the whole movie we observe his different lives: the one with Anna, the one with Elise and the one with Jeanne.

Anna is apparently the perfect girl for Nemo, but they get separated. Elise is emotionally unstable since childhood, but he loves her anyway. And Jeanne is a wrong choice, an empty choice. But he lived all these lives, he can remember it all in the end, and ultimately, he questions his existence. Does Mr. Nemo Nobody really exists?

Everything is very confusing, and Nemo himself has to figure it out as well as we do! We could think of ourselves as the journalist who visits him at the hospital. We can’t understand how in the hell is it possible for him to be at different places at the same time!

Everything happens fast although the movie is very long. I won’t spoil the stories, but I can also say that Nemo’s not the only one who feels there is more to life than his own reality. We can see how other characters also feel that they have different paths they could have taken. But to him is different, because he knows both past and future. This is still a bit confusing to me, because if he knows, how is it so hard to choose? At one point, Anna tells him it must be boring always knowing what’s going to happen. But does he really chooses? Or does he simply let it flow? Is he conscious of his choices? Well, I think he’s conscious about his choices with Jeanne, he knows he doesn’t love her. As for Anna and Elise, well, they are just different paths, different possibilities of what would happen based on a choice he has to make as a child. That’s the crucial point of the whole movie: that decision, the one that will make his life what it is today.

Besides the analysis of the story itself, I noticed somethings I want to share.

I could relate to at least 2 of the characters (well, I think one must always relate to someone, or else we won’t watch the movie). I’ve questioned myself why am I me? Why am I here in this place and time? What if I chose other paths? I had those paths in front of me, but chose this one. Is there another me elsewhere? More successful, or poorer?… More confidant, happier?… Did I already die elsewhere? And more: can this be a right choice? I don’t know any other reality, so how would I know? All we can do is continue because, as the film (and science) tells us: time only goes in one direction. We can’t go back. We can’t choose our life again. So we might as well live. Live everything we can. If we stop to think “what if…”, we just don’t live.

We tend to be very selfish about our choices. We think we’re making the best for ourselves and tend to forget others around us. But that doesn’t mean we are a bad person. We just make choices… We can accept them (as Anna did) or we can regret them (as Elise). How often do we ask ourselves what went wrong? But there’s no point in worrying for we can only move forward.

Another thing I noticed is that the movie shows us a lot of water. Apparently we are born on the water (nothing new here, we all start in the amniotic sac), but throughout the movie we see this element many times. (One of the things I can never understand in movies where someone is drowning inside of a car is why don’t they just open the god damned door and swim to the surface, although in this movie there’s a scene where he leaves through the window. Do cars instantly lock when underwater??…). From what I read, water in dreams often means emotional issues. One can understand the emotional turmoil Nemo’s suffering besides his confusion… It kind of makes me thing about The Butterfly Effect (of course), and also The Truman show and The Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind.


So that’s all I can think of for now. As I was writing this post I was able to gradually understand the film, so I guess writing about what I see helps me in this way. I didn’t realize many things just after watching the movie, so it’s good to meditate about what we see in order to grow culturally and spiritually I guess. What did you think of it?

#2 Young Frankenstein

ImageYoung Frankenstein

Year: 1974

Director: Mel Brooks

Screenplay: Mel Brooks and Gene Wilder

This is a story about a guy, Dr. Frederick Frankenstein, the great-grandson of the Baron Victor Von Frankenstein (a supposedly mad scientist who wanted to revive dead tissue cells and caused great aversion amongst Transylvania villagers), who is about to finish his work. Baron Frankenstein didn’t finish his “masterpiece” in life, so his mistress, Frau Blücher, arranges everything for Frederick, without realizing it, have the will to finish the work. Note that Frederick Frankenstein refuses to be associated with his family name, he wants to be known for “his own contributions to science”, not those of his crazy ancestor. He even has nightmares about it! As the film progresses he slowly accepts his “mad genius” and wants the experiment to be successful, as he realizes it could be possible to revive dead cells and that would be a great discovery! So he, Igor, his servant, and Inga, his beautiful assistant, manage to do just so with an enormous dead body, to whom they call “The Creature”. Well, something goes wrong, the Creature escapes, there’s a riot along the way, Frederick’s fiancee comes visit him in Transylvania while he’s falling for Inga and you’ll see a lot of puns, Mel Brooks’ style.

There are a few scenes I want to talk about though (spoiler alert!).

The first is when Frederick locks himself in a room and tries to calm dow the Creature. This is a scene where he treats the Creature as a son (although one might think he does it because he has no means to escape the room, so he turns to another way of not being killed perhaps). But he believes the only way to save the Creature (from the anger of the villagers) is with love, he wants to tell him he is good and beautiful and loved. That’s touching, the Creature is (supposedly) hideous and dangerous, and the only way he finds to treat him is with love. Isn’t that the way everyone should be treated? Even the bad guys? Especially the bad guys? If one doe not receive love, how is one gonna know how to give it back? And so he goes and teaches him many things…

…to show to a public audience. And this makes me a bit sad. The Creature is shown to an audience as if he were a freak (well, he was, but it made me sad because I though he was just a big sweet giant who’s only afraid of fire). During the act, a lamp crashes and because he’s afraid of fire, he panics. The audience goes wild and despite Frederick’s warnings not to humiliate the Creature, everything goes wrong. In this scene we can see how Frederick gets mad about the Creature’s reaction… So does he love him or not? Is it the love for his creation, his experiment, or is it the love for his “son”?

I think we cannot say for sure, but in the end Frederick makes the ultimate sacrifice for the Creature: he submits himself to an experiment to switch his brain with the Creature’s in order for him to behave normally and get rid of the people’s rage once and for all. And everyone is happy in the end. Its all very quick in the end actually. The people don’t even question what happened, they just accept the fact that the Creature is now a normal man and no longer a danger. But that’s good everything turned out fine I guess.

One thing I notice in Mel Brook’s movies is that they are very simple in the way there isn’t any malice on them. Sure, he does some dark humor jokes, but they are very funny without being too explicit or too rude. And people end up happy!

So basically, it’s a good movie, with a nice and touching story, funny scenes and old fashioned special effects! Not every movies have to have a morale in the end, and as I begun to write this article, I thought there were not much to say about it, but as I went on, I realized love is the answer. At least for this story. As Gene Wild said in an interview, nowadays films have way too much curse and swearing and explicitness that isn’t always necessary.

There are many events along the movie I didn’t mention here, mostly (very) funny moments, since I wanted to debate my thoughts  about the scenes that made me think beyond the screen. Nevertheless, I must say I love Brook’s puns in every movie!

So, what do you think about it?

#1 Movie Generation


Hello world!

On this first post of the Movie Generation I want to explain what’s this all about.

Movie Generation is a place where I’m going to share my view, my opinion and my insights on movies I watch. I’m kind of a “movie-eater”, so this is a good way to share not only movies for us all to watch, but also our appreciation on them! And I say “our” because I’m counting with your collaboration: your comments and feedback! What did you think of the movie? What do you think was left unsaid? What’s your opinion on my review (or other reviews you might have seen?)

But I’m going to try to offer you more than that: facts, articles, curiosities… Everything I know and find, I’ll show it to you too. And once again, I’m counting on you to do the same for me! If you think there’s something you could share with me and this blog, please feel free to  type it down!

I  chose the name Movie Generation because I think I’m a part of that “generation”, the people who watch movies daily (or almost) and like to think about what they just saw, and are continuously searching for more. It’s not necessarily a generation, its more of a kind of people with an interest, but generation sounded kinda cool. :p Movies make us see things we usually don’t see, make as understand and think about the world around us and ourselves.

My favorite genres are Horror/Terror, Mind-Twist (or Mind Fuck, however you prefer), low-budget Horror/Terror, Dark Humor, Thriller and Sci-Fi. Oh! And Asian Horror! And Documentary! But I also like some dramas and comedies, depending on the film… Well, I guess I can see everything, not counting with BW movies, for some reason I can’t watch them until the end… I know it’s kinda bad since the beginnings of cinema are all BW… Maybe I just didn’t find BW films I can relate to yet… However, there’s one I saw entirely: Young Frankenstein! Ha! I might as well start with that one! I also used to watch Charlie Chaplin when I was a kid!

I also decided to start this blog to deepen my interest in movies. I have a degree in that area and took another course on “Directing”, so… since I don’t have the means to make my own movies yet, I could start by sharing my thoughts about the millions of movies and docs out there with whoever’s interested! Besides, I’m sharing stuff I learned along the way with you too, as I said before! Feel free to use that information, share some with me too, or even correct me if I’m wrong! 

I’m gonna try to update the blog daily, so you don’t get bored and leave!

(Note: The categories on this blog are displayed with # – which are people – and without # – movie titles.)

Let’s begin!