TV Review: Supernatural

I’m a total horror buff. Like most of my kin, my affair with the occult started way back in childhood with camp fire stories and grandmother tales. Today, TV seems to have replaced all the traditional media of yesteryear (sorry, gran) but you wont hear me complaining. TV gave us the sexy vampire killer ‘Buffy’, a virtual paradise for conspiracy geeks in ‘The X-files'. It has completely whetted my appetite for the paranormal. And with Supernatural, I have just got hungrier.

Supernatural, created by Eric Kripke, is a fantasy/horror series following the adventures of the Winchester brothers Dean (Jensen Ackles) and Sam (Jared Padalecki). The story goes like this: Years ago, after seeing his wife die in very mysterious circumstances, John Winchester (their father played by Jeffery Dean Morgan) became obsessed with the occult and devoted his life to vanquish all evil.

In such an unnatural environment, the boys grow up with the knowledge of evil which the general populace is unaware of. This upbringing does take its toll on the boys, especially Sam who yearns for a normal life. After Sam turns 18, he moves out in pursuit of normalcy with Dean continuing in the ‘family trade’. But as fate would have it, the father goes missing and the brothers join forces once more, retracing their father’s steps to solve his disappearance. The series continues from there with the duo moving from one adventure to another taking on all things that go bump in the night.


Photo 1: Mrs. Winchester dies in ‘mysterious’ circumstances
Photo 2: John Winchester with young Dean And Sam

From the the ‘Lady in White’, a ghost based on tales told worldwide of women who, in an act of desperation, kill their children and then themselves because of a cheating husband to a ‘Djinn’ a creature much like an evil genie, Supernatural keeps throwing up a vast array of mythic monsters. Every baddie is well researched and has its origins on actual folklore or legends. More recently the show has had its full share of biblical demons and angels which according to alternate theories are not the white feathery images normally imagined to be.


Supernatural baddies (L to R): Lady in white, Djinn, Reaper

If the bad guys are good, then the best part about Supernatural are the stories. Every episode is a complete story in itself. Be it about vampires, tricksters, zombies or demons, the men behind the show have always managed to round off an episode. There is a main thread for each season that takes the plot forward but missing one in the middle will have no effect on your understanding. Even the alternate one-off are quite enjoyable with popular celebs throw in for good measure. The latest in this line was a blood thirsty Paris Hilton playing herself.

Slick production values is another great plus. Supernatural can easily boast of amazing special effects that can rival any Hollywood horror flick. The entire series is crafted with an eerie atmosphere complete with a scary score that will make the hair on the back of your neck stand.  I guess coming from the stables of Warner Brothers Television Unit does help.


Great production values with slick effects creates eerie atmospheres

The creators’ fascination with Rock & Roll is quite evident from the use of AC/DC songs that start off each season. From ‘highway to hell’ to ‘black is back’ or even the latest season which features ‘thunderstruck’ as the opening theme. Sometimes even the episodes have titles like ‘In my time of dying’, ‘house of the holy’, ‘ Sympathy for the devil’ etc. A tribute to Led Zeppelin, Rolling Stones and other bands from the era gone by?

While the protagonists are quite popular among the shows audience, the creators have shown keen intelligence in their casting. In one stroke, they have straddled two strata of audience: ‘Just out of College’ Sam known for his teenage appeal for the youth and ‘Vintage Chevy driving, Rock & Roll buff’ Dean for the young adult. Both brothers are crafted with a distinct personality that make them unique and makes for great on screen chemistry.

As the series motors on, sibling dynamics ensue with brotherly squabbles. Light, humorous comments is a trademark of the brothers conversations which do help in lightening the tension onscreen.
For example:
Dean: Ya' know she could be faking.
Sam: Yeah, what do you wanna do, poke her with a stick?
[Dean nods]
Sam: Dude, you're not gonna poke her with a stick?

 
Sam  (L) and Dean (R) have distinct personalities that gel well with each other

Even returning characters like Bobby the mentor (Jim Beaver) who you might say is quite the hillbilly, Castiel, Heaven's fallen angel (Misha Collins) are well thought out. As the series rolls on, these characters play pivotal roles and are instrumental in the development of the main characters.


Photo 1: Sam and Dean’s hillbilly mentor Bobby
Photo 2: Castiel, heaven’s fallen angel

Trying to summarize episodes will take away the fun of watching Supernatural. Not to give away the plot of the main thread but I cant resist a teaser about the recently started 5th season (the final one, if rumours are to be believed) which features the end game with hell’s main man ‘Lucifer’. A final season replete with Heaven’s fiercest arch angels and Hell’s most dreaded demons is to sure to give this show a closure it rightly deserves.

So then, if I can say so, Supernatural is a definite must-see for all Horror/ Fantasy fans. Even if you are not, Supernatural is loads of fun and excitement for its gripping storyline, well rounded characters, scary bad guys and amazing special effects.

9/10

Review: The Great Dictator (1940)

Guest Reviewer: Ravikant Kisana

Multiplexes recently entertained us with Quentin Tarantino’s Inglourious Basterds — a visually stunning and terrifically tongue-in-cheek take on the World War II genre of movies. However, the movie does beg the question of whether this line of films needed a bold revision. Even as the ‘fanatic’ Basterds hunted down ‘humane’ Nazi soldiers and a comical Hitler, a small section of the audience veritably squirmed in their seats. There was something wrong here. History may be long forgotten, but some sore topics should not be subject to a revisionist pop-culture treatment.

It was with this somewhat disturbing, nagging feeling in my mind that I revisited one of the classics from a forgotten time, directed by Charlie Chaplin. And the genius of one of the greatest film-makers of the 20th century reassured me that once upon a time, film-making was not just about breaking conventions. It was about making a statement, galvanising the masses, providing hope and inspiration when there were none — and doing it all with a comical swagger that simply had to make you smile.

Charlie Chaplin in and as The Great Dictator

The Great Dictator (1940) by Charles Chaplin, stands as one of the greatest WW-II films ever made; and such is the irony that a film as meaningful and deep in such times should be a classic comedy.

On a lazy Sunday afternoon, reclining snugly with a big bowl of butter pop-corn, you don’t really want to get into that German epic shot in documentary style on Spanish conquistadors from the 16th century. At such times, Charlie Chaplin is your man!

The Great Dictator is his first ‘talkie’ in the true sense of the word. It stars Chaplin in a double-role as a Jewish barber — a lovable and sensitive simpleton — juxtaposed against the comically fiery Adenoid Hynkel, supreme dictator of the fictional land of Tomania.

The film opens with an elaborate World War I sequence where Chaplin, as the Jewish private, valiantly rescues an exhausted commander by the name of Schultz. Hilarious scenes ensue as they pilot a plane to safety, only to crash it later. And in this accident, the ‘Jewish’ private suffers a memory loss.

Cut to 20 years later, and Hynkel has taken over as the supreme commander of Tomania. He opens with a fiery speech in an incomprehensible language. Having studied tapes of Hitler himself to mimic his mannerisms, Chaplin goes on to lampoon the ‘Great Dictator’ in his own inimitable style, even as an abbreviated English translation voiceover adds to the humour.

The plot moves into gear when the Jewish private — who was in a mental institution for the last 20 years — escapes to come back to the ghetto and run his barber-shop. Suffering from memory loss, he has no idea about Hynkel’s campaign against Jews and a series of funny incidents take place between him and Hynkel’s storm-troopers. After the war, Chaplin later regretted having made fun of the storm-troopers in the Jewish ghetto, saying had he known the full extent of horrors, he would never have been able to do that. But while making the film, the year was still 1940 and the world had yet to learn of the holocaust; and in so, Chaplin can be forgiven for running riot in the ghetto, if only for making you laugh so hard that your sides ache.

The lust for power, shown by childishly playing with a globe

Hynkel, meanwhile, dances ballet with an inflatable globe, day-dreaming about becoming the emperor of the whole world. It stands as one of the most iconic sequences of cinema, a beautiful interlude showcasing the lust of power in a very childishly innocent manner through a dictator who bounces a globe on his buttocks!

The movie is chock-a-block full of high quality humour as Hynkel discusses plans to invade Osterlich (Austria) with his ‘ally’ Napolini (based on Mussolini), the dictator of Bacteria. Eventually, Osterlich gets invaded by Hynkel and is soon run over by his military might. However, in the crowning moment of glory — Hynkel’s victory rally — the inevitable switch happens. Hynkel is mistakenly apprehended as the runaway Jewish barber, while the actual barber is erroneously assumed to be the great dictator himself.

Thus, the petty barber finds himself addressing a massive victory rally. The world is looking to him. And here Chaplin delivers possibly the most stirring monologue in the history of cinema. The camera zooms in to his face and Chaplin talks directly into it — breaking character, breaking all the rules and breaking the illusionary ‘fourth wall’ of the screen: Chaplin talks to you, the viewer.

Chaplin breaks the fourth wall for his final monologue

He talks to you, to the people, to the world; and in an impassioned speech for the rights of man and what it means to be a human-being, he leaves with the hope for a better world beyond the dark clouds that seem to be gathering. And you can see in the eyes of the man that he truly, fervently believes that these lines spoken into the void of a black camera could go on to change the world. It’s hard not to stand up and applaud.

And so as the movie ends and so does your pop-corn, you end up wishing that the world had really changed. After all, the idea of a bunch of fanatics gunning down the Fuhrer was really not the change you had hoped for…

Rating: 8/10

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

When not doling out advice for brands at O&M, Ravikant Kisana can be found decimating two gigantic burgers at a time

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

TV Review: Studio 60 on the Sunset Strip

 

I generally have a difficult time convincing people to watch The West Wing, with most attempts being met by “Shee, why would I want to see a show about the US political system?” To be fair to them, I used to have a similar attitude till I watched Studio 60 On The Sunset Strip, created by the same writer-director duo. And it was only after being bowled over by Studio 60 that I couldn’t wait to watch The West Wing.

 
This is my third draft of a review about Studio 60, with the first two going well over 3,000 and 2,000 words respectively. While I’d like to delude myself into thinking that my writing could keep you entertained that long, better sense prevailed; so here’s the shortened version.

The plot of the show revolves around the lives of the cast and crew of a late-night comedy show called Studio 60 on the Sunset Strip, which is an obvious reference to Saturday Night Live. [Note: To avoid confusion, henceforth, ‘Studio 60’ refers to the real-life show, while ‘Sunset Strip’ refers to the fictitious show within the real series]

After being repeatedly put down by the network’s producers, Sunset Strip’s creator rants on air about falling standards in Hollywood and bad television, in what can best be described as homage to Paddy Chayefsky’s 1976 film Network.

This rant happens to come on the first day of the network’s new President, Jordan McDeere, played by Amanda Peet (The Whole Nine Yards, Syriana). If you weren’t already a fan of Peet’s work, you will be after watching this show. The show’s creator and writer, Aaron Sorkin (A Few Good Men, The West Wing, Charlie Wilson’s War), has a penchant for writing strong female characters and Peet takes the baton and breaks all records in crossing the finish line.

 

Top (centre): Aaron Sorkin and Thomas Schlamme

Bottom: Amanda Peet, Matthew Perry and Bradley Whitford

 

Jordan McDeere’s first act as President is to bring back the most talented production team in the program’s history: Matt Albie and Danny Tripp. The duo is now enjoying a successful movie career, but are convinced into coming back to the show — the ‘how’ of which is explained through the first episode.

Matt (Matthew Perry, of F.R.I.E.N.D.S. fame) is the writing genius behind the fictitious Sunset Strip, and is kind of an autobiographical character for Sorkin. Perry is fantastic as always his portrayal of this flawed, funny and charming lead of the series. All the acting talent that he couldn’t display as Chandler Bing comes rushing out in a performance that should have garnered him an Emmy, but sadly didn’t.

Danny (Bradley Whitford, previously seen in The West Wing and Billy Madison) is the show’s producer and Matt’s best friend. Whitford is an underappreciated actor and, by all accounts, the best acting talent on Studio 60. The character of Danny, and indeed his chemistry with Matt, is loosely based on Thomas Schlamme and his creative relationship with Sorkin. Schlamme and Sorkin co-created Sports Night and The West Wing, and have won enough awards together to fill a large trophy room.

Sorkin generally writes shows with a lot of characters, so Studio 60 is filled with other actors who will knock your socks off. Really, if you thought the three lead actors are great, you will be astounded by the performances the rest of the cast delivers. I won’t go into much detail about that, as it’s better to see them unfold.

 

The incredibly talented cast of Studio 60

While the characters are great, it is definitely the unique style of a Sorkin-Schlamme production that makes the show work. Studio 60 gives a behind-the-scenes look at the hypertension of a weekly, live comedy show. Sorkin is among the best dialogue writers in the world, and Schlamme is one of the best directors for dialogue. The ‘walk and talk’ approach they have perfected for the long conversations between the characters works like a charm, invoking urgency and energy into what would otherwise have been a dull few minutes.

If anything, the show’s only fault is that the urgency seems a bit too unrealistic at times. The creators suffer from a bit of a hangover from The West Wing, where every decision really was a matter of life and death. Port the same urgency to a comedy show being watched by a regular viewer, and it’s bound to come off as an exaggerated. To empathise with the characters, you really need to be working with tight deadlines on a regular basis — a background in newspapers would help here, as it did for me!

Unfortunately, and rather unfathomably, Studio 60 was cancelled after a single season of airing. This leads to the series finale seeming quite rushed, and does not do justice to what is one of the finest television series you will ever see. Still, it becomes that much easier to recommend it as you can buy or download the show and be done with it quite quickly. In fact, think of it like a super-elongated movie rather than a TV series!

 
With a stellar starcast and one of the best Hollywood writers of all time, Studio 60 absolutely cannot be missed. In fact, if you ask me, this is the best show to have been prematurely cancelled by a network — and that list includes some fine names like Arrested Development and Firefly.

No matter what you do, don’t give this one a miss. And once you are left stunned and speechless (or perhaps endowed with over 3,000 words of speech about it), remember to start watching The West Wing next.

 

Rating: 9/10

Re-Watch: MacKenna’s Gold (1969)

When the ‘Re-Watch’ section was introduced, it provided the perfect platform to revisit some of the movies deemed as ‘Classics’ and see how relevant they are in our age.

A friend once mentioned that older movies are slow and laborious; which is true, as movies are a good reflection of the society they were made in. Today’s movies are fast and edgy, in accordance with our lifestyles, while olden cinema took the audience on an unhurried (yet measured) path, which synced with their routines.



Armed with this perspective and almost 20 years later, I watched the 1969 classic MacKenna’s Gold again. Starring the usually impeccable Gregory Peck as marshal MacKenna and the highly talented Omar Sharif as the outlaw Colorado, this Western is has the perfect ingredients for an adventure: lost Apache gold and, of course, ‘cowboys and Injuns’ (Indians, for those who can’t read accents!).

Director J. Lee Thompson starts the film off with a turkey buzzard flying high in the desert skyline while the titles roll. And they roll and the turkey flies. Then the turkey flies and the titles… well, you get the drift. That’s all you’re going to see for the first five whole minutes of the movie – no exaggeration!

When the buzzard finally lands, MacKenna is attacked by an old Apache, who has the map to the fabled Canyon d’Or – a land of pure gold! A gun fight pursues, MacKenna fatally wounds the old man, disregards the map as an old Indian legend and burns it.
Tailing the old Apache is the outlaw Colorado, his band of ‘free thinking’ Apaches and a captive daughter of the town judge, Inga Bergmann (played by Camilla Sparv). They soon capture MacKenna, who has a history with Colorado. But since he’s the only one who knows the way to the canyon, Colorado makes a deal to keep him alive and let Inga go free if MacKenna takes him to the gold.

 A pact is made between MacKenna and Colorado for the girl

From here, it’s all adventure as the motley crew moves from landmark to landmark on the map as more characters come on board, like the villainous Sgt. Tibbs (Telly Savalas).

Characters make or break a movie, but McKenna's Gold squanders the tremendous potential that its great cast of actors held: From the ‘hardened but upright’ marshal MacKenna to the ‘victim of circumstances’ outlaw Colorado, none of the characters have been fully explored in the movie. Yet, both actors manage to deliver great performances in the circumstances.

The randomness of new characters is particularly irksome. New ones are introduced after every 30 minutes, without developing the existing characters. And just as suddenly as they were introduced, they get bumped off for no apparent reason. Eli Wallach (Tuco, from The Good, The Bad and The Ugly) is the prime example of this. What a waste of a fine actor!

The rest of the story is filled up by a love triangle between the Apache woman Hesh-Ke (played by Julie Newmar), Inga and MacKenna; savage Apache attacks; and gold fever. The plot goes completely wayward, leaving only the mystery about the legend’s authenticity.

Love triangle between MacKenna, Inga and Hesh-Ki (not in picture)

Oh and one more thing: When the sun climbs higher in the sky, shadows grow shorter and not longer! The entire movie ending was based on that alone! Bah!

For the benefit of those who have not seen the movie (although I seriously doubt it), I won’t play spoilsport and reveal anything further. But should you watch it? Only if you answer ‘yes’ to the following questions:
A. For pure nostalgic value of the childhood fantasies about finding hidden treasure
B. You want to find out which is Gregory Peck’s worst movie
C. As a child, your parents forced you to shut your eyes during Julie Newmar’s nude waterhole scene
I would strongly suggest that you do not soil your perception of McKenna's Gold as a ‘classic’ and give this one a total miss. But I would say that it’s worth a watch for how much it makes you respect the rest of the movies of that age.

 Mysteriously, as the sun rises, the shadow lengthens

MacKenna’s Gold actually makes you realise how underappreciated most Westerns are. Working with the static and desolate deserts as backdrops requires great skill from a director to induce life into a shot. The climax in The Good, The Bad and The Ugly followed only the eyes of the three men in the gun duel. It was not only stylised direction, but was also done with a purpose to introduce dynamism. And the prime example of dynamism going horribly wrong is watching a buzzard fly around the screen for five whole minutes.

The movie also makes you value the amazing direction and photography skills required at the time, when modern tricks like CGI were nowhere to be found. This is one of the saving graces of MacKenna’s Gold. The movie is replete with trick shots and wide-angle frames. There are scenes where a camera was fixed to a horse to give the audience the horse’s perspective, and one where it was attached to Gregory Peck’s back as he is dragged around the desert carpet by a horse. And it was among the first few movies to boast of helicopter shots!

MacKenna’s Gold is full of trick photography and wide angles

If you can forget all the flaws, then the movie is good to watch as a lesson in the history of Westerns and inventive camera-work: The trick photography, camera angles and the fantastic imagery of the Canyon d’Or are all breath-taking.

P.S. – If you don't believe what you have just read and think I’m being too harsh, here’s the YouTube clip of the opening title credits with the smash hit Ol’ Turkey Buzzard. I dare you to watch it…

Ol’ Turkey Buzzard
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aRA3SrkqDSE



Rating: 4.5/10

Review: The Soloist

If you ask me, the best movies are those that make you sit back and ponder. Great cinema is that which has a vicarious effect on the audience, leading to a personal perspective about situations that you have not experienced yourself.

I imagine it is a difficult art to make a movie that compels the audience to relive someone else’s experience. Such film-making has been mastered by directors like Scorsese, Lynch, the Coen brothers and Almodovar; and while they may not always taste commercial success, they usually remain immortalised in the audience’s mind.

With The Soloist, director Joe Wright (Atonement) has attempted this tough act and almost manages to pull it off. The film is based on the book by the same name, which in turn is based on the true events in the life of an LA Times columnist named Steve Lopez (played by Robert Downey Jr.), who is searching for his next big story.

A chance meeting with Ayers gives Lopez the story he is seeking

He finds the story in a chance meeting with the homeless Nathaniel Ayers (played by Jamie Foxx) and his two-stringed violin. After some research, Lopez discovers that Ayers is actually a brilliant musician with an unsound mind – a former cello prodigy who has taken to the streets after being abandoned by his family due to his illness.

Nathaniel Ayers: A young and talented soloist

Lopez goes on to write a series of articles on Ayers, while personally helping him out away from the spotlight. The true friendship that develops between the two has its share of ups and downs like any relationship; but ultimately – and predictably – it transforms both their lives.

A friendship that transforms both their lives

But to be fair, The Soloist is not about the story line, and instead is an exercise in bringing a few issues to the light as well as letting two fine actors spar on screen.

The movie provides an interesting take on schizophrenia, dispelling the popular perception that equals it with multiple personality disorder, as done in films like Primal Fear. Schizophrenia is about a person who suffers from distortions of reality, and director Wright has portrayed it very well indeed.

A nice touch is the depiction of intermittent moments from Ayers’ past, which goes deeper into the affliction and adds a flavour to the general atmosphere of the movie.

The other issue that The Soloist seeks to highlight is the plight of ‘transient people’ (legalese for homeless) in the US. Given the strong familial bonds in India, it’s very difficult to imagine a person from a well-to-do family that ends up homeless. From a desi perspective, it’s a good look into the self-centred nature of the American societal system.

As for the acting, Oscar-winner Jamie Foxx does a decent job as the musically gifted Ayers. But the passion that should accompany an intense love for music seems somewhat superficial; which is odd when you consider that Foxx is a musician himself and won an Academy Award for playing Ray Charles!

Robert Downey Jr., once again, proves his acting prowess as a successful journalist with a flawed personal life. The Iron Man gets a heart as the movie unfolds, as his own life is enriched in the process of helping Ayers.

Downey once again demonstrates his acting prowess

But just as the movie soars, it all comes crashing down with an abrupt climax and you won’t be able to shake off the feeling that you got cheated out of some closure. The Soloist promises a lot but fails to deliver by the time the credits start rolling. I just hope that Wright isn’t keeping an open slate for a sequel (based on the pursuits of the real Ayers and Lopez) but rather kept it as it is for an artistic touch. Not that it worked…

So should you watch the movie? Well, there are three types of people who I would recommend it to: those interested in learning more about schizophrenia; those looking for a break from pot boilers and slick action flicks; and fans of Robert Downey Jr.

Rating: 6.5/10