GONE GIRL: A Perfectly imperfect crime!

Is there anything such as the ‘perfect crime’? Those who believe in truth and cosmic justice and the long hand of the law will tell you that there is no such thing; the truth will always come out. But, what if the crime was intended in such a way that the truth would come out, but not in its true form, but in a manipulated form which would mislead, confuse and concoct a truth that never was. Gone Girl is that ‘perfect crime’. A perfect crime, planned with just the right amount of imperfection that it looked like the perfect crime gone wrong.

Gone Girl is one of the tautest and smartest psychological thrillers to come on screen in recent times. It is not a thriller in the strictest sense of the word, it is a crime drama, that is not as much an investigation as it is a revelation. Yes, the drama unravels itself scene after scene, and it always remains a step ahead of even the shrewdest brains who have watched thrillers by the dozen. A wife has disappeared, and the husband knows nothing about it, her parents know nothing about it, and the neighbours know nothing about it, and now the cops want to know all about it. Prime suspect, the husband. Yes, he has the motive, he has the opportunity and he is the last person who saw her, perhaps the last person who saw her alive! All eyes on the husband as he bumbles through the initial phase of the trouble, he mismanages his image and before he knows he has been branded the killer of ‘Amazing Amy’. Is he the killer or not? Has he committed the perfect crime and set someone up, and will the cops ever get to the bottom of it all? Watch Gone Girl for the answers.

The best thing about Gone Girl is that you don’t know who to trust, at least until the end of the first hour of the film. Everyone is under the shadow of doubt, everyone is a suspect and everyone is a possible victim. And then comes the revelation as the audience gets to know the identity of the manipulator. From then on it is a guessing game as we try to figure out what the manipulator is going to do next; who is going to be set up, who is going to be framed, who is going to be killed? If the first hour confuses you in many ways about the truth, the second hour amazes and startles you with the sheer criminal genius of the manipulator. The modus operandi of the crime is brilliantly explained and you can look and look and think and think about any loopholes and you wouldn’t find them, unless you are a forensic expert maybe. Then, comes the great surprise when the manipulator gets manipulated! Can the manipulator come back?

Gone Girl is a brilliantly written non-linear narrative which puts us back and forth, before the crime and after. Even though it has Ben Afleck, one should give the honors to Rosamund Pike for an absorbing performance. Afleck too has some aces up his sleeve, but Pike takes the cake. Tyler Perry comes across as the ultra-cool litigator.

One thing that elevates Gone Girl to the level of a mind-twisting thriller is the editing; deft and absolutely controlled. The economy of sound in the entire movie is also very much helpful to the overall mood. You might have seen many films where there are clever and cruel manipulators who play others in masterly ways, but Gone Girl deviates from all these films in the way that it ends, which justifies the especially long epilogue. You won’t have a clue. I have a great urge to add a final one line that would aptly sum up the content of Gone Girl, but I’d hate to be a spoiler for you. Read the comments section for that one line if you want to. Watch Gone Girl in theaters. It is undoubtedly one of the best of this year and perhaps the last few years too.

Unpredictable and taut crime drama 4/5

TICKET OF THE WEEK: BRAD PITT vs. BEN AFLECK

This week is really exciting as tow big stars come together for a clash at the Indian box office. Two weeks earlier it was Robert Downey Jr. vs. Nicholas Cage, in a battle that Downey seems to have won quite convincingly. This week it gets bigger with new poster boy of ‘pure’ cinema Ben Afleck and old faithful Brad Pitt fighting it out. The good thins is both their movies carry excellent pre-release and overseas reports, and neither of them is a routine action plot with the hero firing at aliens or terrorists.

                            

Gone Girl:

Ben Afleck is back in the big time after a couple of years. After Argo, great things are being expected of him every time he does anything on the screen, and Gone Girl seems to be one that has the potential of living up to all those expectations. Billed as a thriller, it shows the character of Ben Afleck being framed for the murder of his wife. Sounds like a very interesting premise and for those who have seen Argo and know the promise that Ben Afleck holds as a cinematic brain, then you surely wouldn’t miss this one.

Fury:

Brad Pitt on screen is always an exciting prospect, and when it is in the action/drama category, it is bound to be almost irresistible. Pitt’s last outing was World War Z which didn’t quite satisfy everyone. This time, he drops the Z and goes back to a real world war and explores the minds of soldiers marching to the warfront. Any movie based on a World War will have interesting, gripping and often touching stories to tell. It is indeed a wonder that more than 60 years after these dark times ended, the stories about them, of the people who fought and died iijn them, and of the families that suffered in silence, are yet not fully told. It shows us that humanity itself was greatly challenged when the whole world went to war without knowing what or whom they were fighting. The movie has some well known faces besides Brad Pitt and is surely something you got to catch on the big screen.

Does Kaththi need two Vijays?

While Kaththi it's doing great business at the box office and almost the entire media is unanimously praising it as a week made entertainer, one thing about the movie leaves a lingering doubt in my mind. Why are there two Vijays in the movie. Except for the marquee value of having Vijay playing a double role there really doesn't seem to be a necessity for two characters. Yes, we have to admit that the two characters are completely different from each other and that Kathiresan is able to accomplish what Jeevanandam might never have with his methods. But my question is why did there have to be a Jeevanandam and then bring Kathiresan to pose as Jeevanandam. Would the movie have been any different if there had been only one Vijay, named Kathiresan or Jeevanandam, having the qualities of Kathiresan?

Kaththi is focused on the right lead by Kathiresan to bring justice to the village. The double role card played by Murugadoss doesn't have any  significance in the plot. It does not carry any suspense because it is revealed to its right at the start, it does not serve as a turning point at any portion of the film, nor does it cause any major confusion to the characters in the film itself. The only instance where the double role factor has any impact is in the one scene where the antagonists discover that the person they are dealing with is not Jeevanandam, but someone who has taken his place. But even that moment turns out to be of little consequence in the subsequent events and hence the question to Murugadoss; why did you bring in two Vijays?

We all love to see Vijay on screen, especially when he died something new and different on screen. So natuirally, when we saw that Murugadoss was using him in a double role, we think that there is something special in store. But, what we get is a rather underplayed Vijay who is replace very early in the first half by the normal exuberant and energetic Vijay, who then proceeds to do what Vijay does in most of his films, which is sing, dance, fight and emote like only he can. What makes Kaththi good is the fact that it has a solid screenplay and great social relevance, which takes it a notch above a regular 'Vijay' movie.

. So naturally, when we saw that Murugadoss was using him in a 

The double role, I believe, is an unnecessary burden on the screenplay which helps only to add a prologue and an epilogue to an interesting story. The central plot in itself was good enough to make a good movie without resorting to this redundant gallery show, and yet Murugadoss chose to do so, which is puzzling. The double role in Kaththi somehow reminds me of the double role played by the villain of Ghajini, which was a jarring note in an otherwise fantastic movie. Now, the double role in Kaththi is not nearly as bad, but one only feels that it could have been avoided. Please do not take this comment as one that says that Kaththi is a bad movie. It is an immensely enjoyable entertainer with social relevance. The double role however seems to be an unnecessary appendage. What do you think? Please let me know.

Sex Tape

Sex was never this funny! Lol

It begins with explaining how boring your life can be when you grow up. A couple discovers that marriage and two kids makes ex almost impossible. And before they know it, the hardly remember how good they were at it. How do they spice it up, how do they get it back? They do something crazy to turn on the heat, which in this case happens to be a three hour long sex tape where they pretend to be sex gurus showing each and every position in the ‘book’. But technology has robbed us of so much privacy that even the most intimate of moments cannot be kept private. A few careless hours, and before they know their raunchy porn video is on the ‘cloud’ network. Now, almost everyone who is someone in their lives, which includes their kids and the mailman, is one click away from seeing the wild carnal details that they filmed in such detail. It’s a mad scramble to retrieve their ‘honor’ before it all goes up in ‘porny’ smoke.

‘Sex Tape’ is all about that mad scramble and less about the

actual tape. The trailers made one thing clear; this is a fun/comedy movie, and not a hot sexy one. The film stays true to it. Yes, there are a few moments in the beginning that are inevitable to set up the premise. But never once does the streak of humor go missing, which is the best thing about Sex Tape. It is a tough balancing act by the director handling such a subject to not make it look like a ‘sex’ movie, and at the same time to not turn it into childish run-around movie. The need of the lead pair, at first to reignite their sex life, and then later to destroy the evidence, is well articulated, which is what connects it to the audience.

But, serious stuff aside, the movie is really a lot of fun. Thanks mainly to its lead pair of Jason Segel and Camerone Diaz. They have played the devoted couple who realize that they are ageing but yet want to have a shot at their younger, more romantic days again, with conviction. And, they share a good comic timing, which makes their verbal exchanges really enjoyable. And, the script has written in a couple of tailor-made situations for slapstick humor which thankfully work quite well without stretching out for too long. There is a bit of melodrama towards the end, and a scene in a huge server room, which seems a bit too far fetched. But, we can understand the writer’s lack of options to effectively finish the script on a sweet note. The pre-climatic portions definitely do not live up to the energy and fun of the earlier parts.

Finally, if there is one thing about the movie that is

consistently good and funny and amusing, it is the dialogues. Most scenes would have fallen flat if it were not for the witty lines. Admitted, it does play on our guilty pleasures, but what else can we expect when a couple is looking for a self- made porn movie. It has been cleverly used to keep a naughty smile and the occasional laugh on your face for almost the entire duration of the movie. Its not the regular Hollywood rom-com that you get dime-a-dozen. Go for Sex Tape to have an amusing couple of hours. Sex was never so funny! Lol.

Mostly witty and funny – not sexy!

2.75/5 

The Tickets of the Week - Choose your movie!

Three releases from Hollywood this week. All have pretty well known stars and so the choice is a bit tough because it surely is not easy catching all three in theaters. So, here is a peek at what is in store.

1. Sex Tape.

Marquee Name: Camerone Diaz.

The ‘Charlie’s Angel’ was last seen in a major release in Bad Teacher. Well, is she a marquee name in India? Not always. But, with a movie named ‘Sex Tape’, the interest is definitely increased. But, this one is more of a comedy/drama, with very little of the ‘title’ element. Expect to have a laugh riot, if the movie delivers what it promises.

2. The Judge

Marquee Name: Robert Downey Jr.

Well, the name Robert Downey Jr. might not bring people into theaters, but if you say the words Iron Man, the barometer jumps a few inches. Robert Downey Jr. is hugely popular as Iron Man/Tony Stark and to a lesser extent as Sherlock Holmes. It would be very interesting to see him on screen after a long time as something that is not Iron Man or Holmes. This is far removed from the action and thrills; The Judge is a family drama, with a bit of courtroom stuff. Interesting premise. And you have Robert Duvall and Billy Bob Thornton for company. Definitely an inviting option.

3. Left Behind

Marquee Name: Nicholas Cage

Cage ceased to be a big draw after Ghost Rider ran out of steam. Now, going by his last few movies, one has to approach a new one with quite a bit of apprehension. The last few years have damaged his legacy a bit and we hope for our sake and Cage’s that this one stems the rot. Looks like a fantasy action flick with a little bit of sci-fi thrown in. We have had quite a few action movies this year, so this one has to be quite good to catch our attention. Besides, there are many action films yet to release this year. So, the idea of waiting for a bigger better option doesn’t seem that bad.

Bottom Line: In spite of big names like Robert Downey Jr. and Nicholas Cage having releases, it is Cameron Diaz’s Sex Tape that has managed to get more shows in Chennai city than the other movies. Is it Diaz, is it the movie’s title, or is it something to do with how the movie performed globally? Friday has the answers.

Dracula Untold: Vampire, war, vengeance

Dracula, the bloodsucking count, has captured moviemaker’s imaginations for decades. He has been told, retold, reinterpreted and reinvented time and time again in different forms. What began as an eerie tale of a count who became undead at night to drink human blood has transformed over the years. Dracula has been painted as a schemer, a womanizer, a merciless killer, even a complete idiot (in a spoof). The name Dracula has moved out of the horror genre and into pure action over the past few years. So, what else is left that is new and that can be tried with Dracula? He is now a savior, a prince who takes up a curse so that he can wield the power that saves his people. Now, that is something new!

The prince was once a ruthless slayer, a warrior who impaled his enemies. But he now wants peace

and no more war. As they say, peace is forged by war, and even though he hates it, war comes to his doorstep because there are other men who covet power above all else. The prince has to defend his people and he knows that the enemy is too big and its will too strong. To conquer the enemy the prince will have to invoke a power that might just take him to the dark side. He makes the choice. Does he cross over to the dark side or does his soul have the strength to use the powers only to defend his people and nothing else?

In many ways, this is not a real Dracula film. The only thing ‘Draculaic’ about it is its name. The premise has parallels with many other warrior movies we have seen over the years. Its about one man’s will to save his fellow men from the wrath of the enemy. The only difference here being that the man chooses to become a terrifying monster to fight his battles. The fun in watching Dracula films is in watching him being the antihero! Here, the protagonist is more righteous than anyone else – hardly the stuff that Draculas are made of. He resists his unquenchable thirst for human blood, he resists attacking his own people even when they try to take his life. Yet, he is Dracula.

The film moves at a fairly leisurely pace with no major spikes throughout its duration. It is a pretty

linear and simply narrated action set piece, where one battle follows another at regular intervals. The action blocks themselves are pretty enjoyable though we have seen many like this, and quite a few that are better than this. The only times when we really sit up during the fist 75 minutes or so is during the prince’s encounter with a demon inside a deep dark cave during his quest for unlimited power. But the film really does surprise you with the way it ends. From the moment he becomes the monster you see the prince fighting the evil within him, unleashing it only during the battles. You can see him trying to remain human even as the dark threatens to engulf him. And then, the end is something that most of us would not predict. Thos final 15 minutes or so make Dracula Untold worth a watch.

Finally, with a character as popular and mythical as Dracula, the dialogues ought to have been far far more fun and memorable. The only thing one can remember is ‘Let the games begin’!

Verdict: ‘Undraculaic’ Action flick with an unpredictable end

2.5/5

Annabelle: Scare me once before the end..please!

‘Before The Conjuring, there was Annabelle’, said the teasers that told us that this movie was coming. It was indeed a smart move to remind the audiences of The Conjuring, which was very well received in Indian cities. But, what the makers may have overlooked is that with the mention of The Conjuring, there would also be expectations; to be spooked, chilled and thrilled in the same way, or maybe in even better ways. Annabelle was the opening note of The Conjuring, and also made a significant impact in one of the story’s turning points, and so it is indeed exciting that an entire movie is focused on the demented doll and its doings in this world. Question is, does it make for a good horror movie?

Let’s get one thing clear, Annabelle is made in much the same way as The Conjuring. Many horror

film buffs had felt that The Conjuring was a bit too underplayed, with too few spooks and chills than normal. They said, it was not exciting enough. But, those who prefer more substance than shrieks and screams had found it very interesting. Annabelle tries to take us down that path. The makers have banked on a solid screenplay built around a good story. There is very little in terms of intentional scary stuff, be it graphic visual representations or curdling sounds. The director does not try to put scary things in your face and make you jump out of your seats or shriek in horror. Yes, there are moments when things come out from behind doors, there are dark corners, flickering lights, rain beating down on the window panes, creaking chairs, a big church with a weird looking statue; all these tell tale signs that something supernatural, or extranatural is lurking about. But, sitting through the 100 minutes of the movie, I never once felt my heart beating faster than it normally would, nor did I gasp. Yes, I did empathise with the young woman and her baby for being caught up in a warp of inhuman presence, but I never felt afraid, which is where perhaps Annabelle fails as a horror flick.

I have a theory about horror flicks. When we go to watch a horror film, we know what we are getting into; so there is no question of being surprised when a ghost appears on screen. The success of a horror film lies in planting the seed of eerie expectations in our mind about what is going to happen. It is about giving us clues about which corner or which door might reveal the supernatural. It is about getting us all wound up and then surprising us just a second before or a second later than we expect. It is that moment of uncertainty in which the horror film comes alive. Annabelle hardly ever comes to life like The Conjuring did. The moments like ‘hide and clap’ and the ‘hanging corpse’ that caught us unawares in The Conjuring are hard to find in Annabelle. I don’t know, maybe we have become familiar with the director’s style as a result of which he is not able to stay a step ahead of us. At least, that is how most of the audience reacted! There wasn’t any nervous shifting, no uneasy screams or an eerie silence in the movie hall, a sign that a horror flick hasn’t caught the audience by the scruff of their neck.We also miss the methodical approach, of exorcism or incantations that we have enjoyed in other horror flicks.

Some might call comparisons with The Conjuring as unfair, but the makers invited it by almost

branding Annabelle as a prequel. Make no mistake, this movie does a good job of narrating the story of the Annabelle doll, has well defined characters and portrays the mental disintegration of the protagonist in a very believable manner. Thanks to these two movies, even the most rational of minds now clearly knows the differences between ghosts and demonic spirits. But all that doesn’t add up into a good horror flick. It fails in its primary objective- which is to scare! Annabelle finally ends up diluting the aura of fear that was built around the Annabelle doll by the cameo in The Conjuring.

Annabelle – Good story, fails to thrill!

1.75/5.