Kieran Frost's "100 Greatest Films"

[Kieran_Frost]

GHOST IN THE SHELL (1995)
dir. Mamoru Oshii
writer. based on the 1989 mange of the same name by Masamune Shirow

ONE SENTENCE SYNOPSIS: 2029, New Port City, Japan. Major Motoko Kusanagi successfully assassinates a diplomat from defecting; leading down a rabbit hole of cybernetic technology where all roads lead to the mysterious Puppet Master.

THOUGHTS: This film was confusing. I applaud the world they’ve created, and I am confident THEY know what world they’ve created… I just wish they’d let me in on the secret more. I trust their vision, I just think they failed to communicate the nuances of this society. Does everyone have a ghost, who decides who gets one; are you human and get given one or as a robot it makes you a cyborg once attached? The stakes were unclear, and therefore the importance was… less. That said there was so much to praise. The music is very Vangelis score for Blade Runner (1982), which I love. The use of downtime is very cool, the calm before a storm . A peaceful pause for us to ingest philosophy and comprehend what has come before. A shrewd move. In-fact the pacing and plotting is very meticulous; which I applaud! And a lot of the artistic choices were quite… fun. It’s very Blade Runner meets RoboCop (1987). Speaking of visual choices… *deep breath*… we come to the female nudity (I know, I know, I’m a broken record). I care less in animated films, as an actress isn’t being asked to strip naked for her paycheck, but still… COME ON! Why does she have to get naked for her thermo-camouflage to work, but men can use theirs full clothed? Did the male Puppet Master have to be caught in the naked body of a pert breasted cyborg women? (literally spends the whole film topless, **** heaving). Sometimes I wish directors would just go buy a porn mag, jerk off and come back to set, free of the need to get titillation through art.

OVERALL
An impressive, visually creative film with complex ideas... that are maybe too complex for me; but it's cultural footprint is clear in every shot. A film I appreciated more than enjoyed; and one with far too much disproportionate female nudity; but it's a must see for the importance to the genre.
~ rating: ★★★☆☆ [grade: B]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MOBILE SUIT GUNDAM I (1981)
dir. Yoshiyuki Tomino
writer. re-edited from the 1980 anime series of the same name

ONE SENTENCE SYNOPSIS: The Principality of Zeon has declared independence from the Earth Federation, triggering a One Year War where half of humanity perishes; leading to the creation of the RX-78 Gundam; massive metal robots desired to tip the scale for Zeon.

THOUGHTS: Mobile Suit Gundam I (1981), Akira (1988) and Ghost in the Shell (1995) are the holy trilogy of essential anime viewing. I’m very happy to have finally ticked all three off my watch list; and now consider myself (OFFICIALLY) informed enough to offer an opinion on anime. Ha! This was fascinating to watch. Much like Shogun Assassin (1980) this isn’t actually a film, it’s a re-edit of a TV series to create a film; adding in and reanimating and re-recording some moments and vocals to form a cohesive whole. It’s also a cornerstone of anime; this is the grandfather of the giant robot genre of anime. Its influence on shows like Evangelion, Power Rangers and Transformers is profoundly evident; and like Akira (1988) re-imagined anime across the world for decades to come. Sadly like many cinema trailblazers, a lot of the music, story beats and ideas are now almost cliché; which isn’t the films fault as they popularised such concepts that others have run into the ground. And the action is very… repetitive. He charges in, shoots, shoots, blocks; and wins because he’s just ‘a wunderkind’. It’s not really about skill, beyond everyone insisting he’s special. But what makes the film engaging is all the downtime moments. We explore the mundane, the everyday life of workers and how the exist in this tumultuous environment; of inequality in society from the military to the ordinary worker. Neither side is ‘evil’; in-fact the ‘heroes’ are very toxic in their attitudes to duty and masculinity. While the ‘enemies’ explore romance, mourn their fallen comrade and display great affection. It’s not black-and-white; far from it. It’s quite anti-war, questioning if there is any point in conflict; while shaming those who display such dogma to duty in battle. The entire sub lot with the mother was BEAUTIFUL; dismantling the mythos of what victory does to soldiers. Overall a film more fascinating and praise worthy than enjoyable. But for any anime fan… it’s a must see; as it’s an originator of so many animes that come after.

OVERALL
Just a fascinating treat and profoundly anti-war. I massively appreciated the world building and complexity, the sowing together of plots and ideas. It's not a masterpiece (most specifically because it's only PART I of III); and for it's length can be very repetitive; but trailblazers are rarely perfect. It's still a must see, please do watch it.
~ rating:★★★★☆ [grade: B+]

[Kieran_Frost]

I have a list of films to get through, I've never seen (to name a few): City Lights (1931), the Great Dictator (1940), Modern Times (1936), Amores Perros (2000), the Blues Brothers (1980), Sunrise (1927), the Best Years of Our Lives (1946), the Battle of Algiers (1966), 8 1/2 (1963), Persona (1966), la Strada (1954), Avatar (2009), Tokyo Story (1953), Dead Poets Society (1989), Ghost in the Shell (1995), Witness for the Prosecution (1957), Talk to Her (2002), the Wages of Fear (1953), Sherlock Jr (1924), the Gold Rush (1925), Three Colours: Red (1994), Ikira (1952), Bicycle Thieves (1948). I could go on. The list is huge. No-one can see them all, as long as we slowly tick off many of the greats, we can consider ourselves versed in cinema. Plus finding some of them is HARD (unless you want to spend a fortune).

Thought it was a fitting time to (gently) brag how I'm eliminating lots of films off my watch list from years back. Most recently...

DEAD POETS SOCIETY (1989) [nom.]
dir. Peter Weir [nom.]
writer. Tom Schulman [OSCAR]
Starring: Robin Williams [nom.], Robert Sean Leonard, Ethan Hawke and Josh Charles

ONE SENTENCE SYNOPSIS: 1959, Vermont. Todd Anderson (Hawke) begins his junior year at Welton Academy, a prestigeous all-male preparatory boarding school; where he meets the unorthodox teaching methods of new English teacher, John Keating (Williams).

THOUGHTS: In many ways this is the antithesis to the Prime of Miss Jean Brodie (1969); where cultivating boldness and carving your own path is celebrated rather than reviled. And the scenes where Robin Williams imbues said passion are captivating to watch (a character he would later refine to perfection in Good Will Hunting (1997)). It’s just a shame the collective ensemble aren’t… as well rounded. The complexity of their journey was mostly whittled down to sad faces or wide eyed excitement. I appreciated their literal youth, they felt like actual high-school kids (acne and all), and it was refreshing that the collective group of teenager didn’t have Marvel-esq jacked body with six packs at 17… but their acting talent was still very green, and the major moments lacked true depth or heartbreak. It has also not necessarily aged well: it’s a tad… jarring, nowadays, to watch a film exploring the hardship of a group of privileged rich, white, str8 men; boo hoo, ha! Though I also found it oddly refreshing to explore their struggles, DIFFERENT but still very important (esp. regarding mental health). Though the issue of rewarding a blatant lack of consent against a passed out woman… yeeeesh. So there are problems, but I actually think director Peter Weir saves the film, elevates the somewhat lightweight dialogue, problematic events or melodrama into something beautiful and engaging (the cinematography, the use of silence and movement, generating mood in the splicing of time; all gorgeous). Think of it as the companion picture to Scent of a Woman (1992), similar origins and ideas, where stellar work by some carries the film beyond the pitfalls of the writing. THAT SAID… a film built on the importance of literature has a criminally inaccurate depictions of A Midsummer Night’s Dream. That first Puck scene is far more than 5mins into the script. How would Bottom talk through that full head covering (impressive, though it was). AND WHY is he still wearing it come curtain call? My assumption: because the extras had one costume for that shoot and seemingly none of the creative team had read the bloody play to know this is so very wrong. Someone get me the shame bell, I’m marching Peter Weir naked through the streets of Westeros for that!

OVERALL
An enjoyable film with an incredibly captivating performance by the late-great Robin Williams. Peter Weir elevating a rather... Lifetime special script, which did not deserve the Oscar it won. At the very least I now have a better understanding for the cultural reference of "O Captain, my captain".
~ rating: ★★★☆☆ [grade: B]