A Separation

Asghar Farhadi's A Separation opens rather tamely. Simin (Leila Hatami) seeks a divorce from husband Nader (Peyman Moaadi), but she isn't granted one. After she moves out, a chain of events happen follow Nader almost to personal ruin.

Of course that description is as vague as I can make it without giving anything else away. I think the less you know about certain films, the more you're bound to like them. (This has been applied to a number of films I've seen as of late.) Anyway, I'm just adding in filler. Let's add something substantial.

Farhadi depicts the domestic situation between Simin and Nader as something reminiscent of a John Cassavetes film. What happens to Nader is worthy of something from Sidney Lumet's work. Safe to say Farhadi was influenced by other directors.

Farhadi's screenplay is fantastic as are the performances from Hatami and Moaadi. It's these aspects that go into a film that should be in full effect in, well, any film. Crap, I'm rambling again. Moving on!

Long story short, A Separation is a brilliant film. This pretty much confirmed that not only should I watch more foreign films, I realized that foreign films are often better than what Hollywood cranks out. Anyway, go see this if you haven't.

My Rating: *****

Lincoln

The main problem with doing a film about history is that most of the time they end up being history lessons performed by actors. There aren't many films that stay true to the facts and keep their audiences captivated.

Graciously, Steven Spielberg's Lincoln does that very thing. (Thank God too.) He doesn't play the sentiment card like he did with Schindler's List nor does he brutalize the facts as Munich so vividly displays. Lincoln instead plays by the book (well, Doris Kearns Goodwin's book Team of Rivals: The Political Genius of Abraham Lincoln) and follows the rules.

Apparently one of the key aspects of any history-based film is that you need a cast like no other. Among the huge (and I do mean huge) cast for Lincoln, the names include Sally Field, David Strathairn, Tommy Lee Jones, Hal Holbrook, Joseph Gordon-Levitt, James Spader, John Hawkes, Tim Blake Nelson, Jackie Earle Haley, Lee Pace, Bruce McGill, Jared Harris and Michael Stuhlbarg. And those are just the supporting actors.

The film unsurprisingly belongs to Daniel Day-Lewis. Like so many of his other performances, the perception of him simply acting vanishes the moment we first see him in action. Suffice to say he'll get some serious recognition when the time comes. (On that note, has any of his performances not been nominated for anything?)

In toll, Lincoln is great. Personally I'm grateful Spielberg didn't make this an overly sentimental film. (If he did, this review wouldn't be as glowing.) It may not be the kind of film for everyone, but I certainly loved it.

My Rating: *****

A Serious Man

It's amazing that Larry Gopnik (Michael Stuhlbarg) doesn't go mad at some point in Joel and Ethan Coen's A Serious Man. I mean, with all of the immense stress he undergoes, it's almost impossible not to completely snap under pressure.

What are some of the things Larry goes through? Let's see...his wife wants a divorce, his brother won't leave (or do anything productive), his kids are driving him crazy, and a student is blackmailing him. (Believe me, I'm trying to make it sound less hectic than it actually is.)

The Coens based A Serious Man partly on their upbringing. (It makes me wonder what the hell happened in their early life that inspired their films.) It shows that suburbia in the 1960s wasn't ideal as most films from that very era depicted. Ah, hell in the form of reality. Gotta love it.

I also have to talk about Roger Deakins' cinematography. (Again, how has he not won an Oscar or three by now?) He captures the harshness of home life pretty much effortlessly. (Then again, he did shoot Revolutionary Road as well.)

A Serious Man is quite good though I can't bring myself to say that I loved it. It's not exactly my favorite film of the Coens either. (That goes to O Brother, Where Art Thou?) Still, I can understand why many liked it so much. (Personally, it's just another film off my list.)

My Rating: ****1/2

Life of Pi

This is something that happens every year. (Don't deny what I'm about to say.) Every time the awards season rolls around, everyone starts to saying, "Oh, this is the best year for movies." It happened last year, it's happening this year, and I bet it'll happen next year too. (I'm not complaining. It's just something I've noticed.)

One of this year's films that makes that claim ring true is Ang Lee's Life of Pi. It's films like this that keep my faith for cinema's future intact. (Though to be honest a number of films from both last year and this year have managed to keep my hopes up.)

I haven't read Yann Martel's novel but Lee tells the story beautifully. (Anyone who saw Brokeback Mountain knows that he can effortlessly depict a story from page to screen.) It's a fantastically woven story, that goes without saying.

There's apparently a trend in Hollywood as of late where most films are getting the 3D treatment. The thought of a film like Life of Pi getting it seems like the most idiotic idea ever. Personally, the 3D makes the story come alive even more. Much like Hugo last year, Claudio Miranda's cinematography sings with the addition of 3D. Suffice to say if you're going to see this, 3D's a must. (And on a different note, Mychael Danna's score is equally gorgeous.)

Anyway, Life of Pi is without a doubt the most gorgeous film of this year. This is the kind of film you need to see on the big screen otherwise the magic would feel...lacking. But don't just take my word for it. See it for yourself. (Which, of course, you should.)

My Rating: *****

In the Realm of the Senses

If there's one thing in that's always bound to stir up a little controversy, it has to be sex. (Remember Shame last year?) I still don't get why sex in films gets more of an uproar than glorified violence. Before I get carried away, onto the review.

If I had to choose the film that's tied with sex and controversy, it has to be Nagisa Oshima's In the Realm of the Senses. What else do you expect from a film that was either cut or banned in every country? (It still gets the same treatment it originally got back in 1976.)

Amusingly, it isn't strictly about its very graphic sex scenes and explicit nudity. It also depicts the possessiveness that can come with a relationship. (The possessiveness shown here is much like the kind Adrian Lyne depicted in Fatal Attraction eleven years later.) No one said all relationships would end happily ever after.

However, there's no denying the pornographic nature of the film. (What else can you say after witnessing the leading lady giving the leading man an actual blow job?) It's understandable why it caused so much commotion back in 1976, more so why it still does thirty-six years later.

Anyway, In the Realm of the Senses is an...unique sort of film. Surprisingly, there's some depth to it amid all of the lurid sex scenes. I say some because when it comes to the non-sex scenes, it pales in comparison to Last Tango in Paris and Shame. It's a film you should watch if you dare.

My Rating: ****

4 Months, 3 Weeks and 2 Days

From my personal experience, foreign films are usually more complex than their Hollywood equivalents. (I'm not bashing Hollywood, mind you.) I think it's because foreign film industries have less restrictions than Hollywood. But maybe that's just me.

A recent example of a bold foreign film is Cristian Mungiu's 4 Months, 3 Weeks and 2 Days. Depicting Romania during the dying days of communism, the film depicts a time of desperation for anyone in certain circumstances. (Though, to be honest, even people today find themselves in desperate measures.)

It's hard to say who goes through a bigger ordeal throughout 4 Months, 3 Weeks and 2 Days: Gabita (Laura Visiliu), who wants an abortion, or Otilia (Anamaria Marinca), her roommate who organizes everything to make it happen. I'm going with Otilia because she has to get everything without raising any suspicion. (Why Gabita couldn't handle the job is beyond me.)

Mungiu does an interesting job with the whole development of the story. It is at first appearing as a film that's cold and unattached but as it wears on, it becomes more emotionally involved with its characters. That's something I want to see more out of Hollywood.

4 Months, 3 Weeks and 2 Days is a brilliant film, that goes without saying. The use of static camera and muted tones adds to the bleakness of the film. If you haven't seen it yet, you honestly should.

My Rating: *****

Wild Strawberries

Death isn't something anyone looks forward to. All one can do is accept what will eventually happen to them. But then you wonder...did I live a good life?

That's the question on Isak Borg's (Victor Sjostrom) mind throughout Ingmar Bergman's Wild Strawberries. On the day he is to receive his doctorate, he suffers a sort of existential crisis. He examines moments in his life, wondering if he did anything wrong when he was younger.

Bergman apparently knew the human mind and how it works (just look at Persona), as well as the meaning of life an death (The Seventh Seal), family conflict (Autumn Sonata), and judgment and morals (The Virgin Spring). Wild Strawberries has all of those themes and boy, are they on full display beautifully.

It seems fitting that Wild Strawberries was Sjostrom's final film. After all, a film about a man examining his life is practically a perfect swan song for either an actor or a director. (An ideal metaphor for their career? It would seem so.) He definitely gives one of the most essential performances in the history of cinema.

Wild Strawberries is the kind of film that only the most astute of directors will make. Bergman is obviously one such director. Is Wild Strawberries his best film? Well, it's one of them, that's for sure. (My vote goes to either Persona or The Virgin Spring.)

My Rating: *****

Got any suggestions?

I'm trying to improve the blog a bit so it doesn't seem too monotonous every day. But I want to know what you have to say. What can I do to make Defiant Success better?

I honestly want to know.

The 7x7 Link Award

Hey, guess what I got tagged with for the third time this year? (Guess that shows I'm popular or something.) Anyway, Meredith gave me this award and since today's Thanksgiving, might as well give my thanks for it. Let's see if anything has changed since the last time I got this.

Tell everyone something that no one else knows about.
Haven't I said enough about myself? Jeez. Uh...I have a really restless mind. It's always buzzing about with ideas. It gives me a headache to be honest.

Link to one of my posts that I personally think best fits the following categories:

• Most Beautiful Piece
• Most Helpful Piece
• Most Popular Piece
• Most Controversial Piece
• Most Surprisingly Successful Piece
• Most Underrated Piece
• Most Pride-Worthy Piece

Let's get this over with.

Most Beautiful Piece Not one about physical beauty this time though it is about an aspect of actors I like.

Most Helpful Piece Still going with the BOOK VS. MOVIE posts. (Don't expect me to change my answer.)

Most Popular Piece Combining my last two answers, and saying my lists of my 100 favorite things about movies and 100 film facts about me.

Most Controversial Piece Being lazy again, going with a previous answer.

Most Surprisingly Successful Piece Probably the one where I announced I'm writing a screenplay. (It's nearing completion too!)

Most Underrated Piece I'm actually a little upset that my comparison of Heart of Darkness and Apocalypse Now didn't get that much recognition. I thought it was pretty good.

Most Pride-Worthy Piece Still going with my classic re-casting of The Talented Mr. Ripley.

Pass this award onto seven other bloggers.

• Nikhat @ Being Norma Jeane
• Diana @ Aziza's Picks
• Alex @ And So It Begins...
• Stevee @ Cinematic Paradox
• Sam @ Duke and the Movies
• Andrew @ Andy Buckle's Film Emporium
• Nostra @ My Filmviews

Now go away. I have family to be with. (Oh, and happy Thanksgiving to my fellow American bloggers.)

The Lovers

It's made clear early on in Louis Malle's The Lovers that Jeanne Tournier (Jeanne Moreau) has a busy personal life. Not only is she married with a child, she also has a lover. However, it's also made clear she has grown bored with them. They simply don't thrill her anymore.

It's hard to say if she's actually bored with them or that the initial spark has long fizzled out. (Malle doesn't specify at any point.) All that's confirmed is that Jeanne wants some excitement in her dull life.

Enter Bernard Dubois-Lambert (Jean-Marc Bory), a man who helps Jeanne one fateful day. Their initial meeting is mutual at best. But time wears on (just mere hours), and possible feelings develop.

This is where it gets interesting. Malle doesn't condemn Jeanne for her promiscuous behavior nor does he glorify it. He merely depicts her as a woman who wants attention from a man, physically or emotionally. And Moreau makes her come to life. Think of Jeanne as a femme fatale minus the lethal nature amid her seductive attitude.

It slows down during the second act, but The Lovers is an interesting film. The controversy it received back in 1958 seems tame now but you can clearly see how it got critics in an uproar. It may not be my favorite Malle film (that goes to Atlantic City), but it did convince me to see more of his work.

My Rating: ****1/2