Sin #74: When Good Goes Bad

It all starts with a rebellious teenager. Donnie’s got issues; first of all, he has strange visions of a man dressed as a grotesque rabbit who apparently knows when the world will end, then he gets obsessed with black holes (with some astonishing revelations) and time travel.

“Donnie Darko” is the brilliant debut of Richard Kelly, and it is simply a formidable calling card that became an instant midnight cult film. People saw Kelly as a director of great ambition and imagination and expected mighty things of his next movie. Unfortunately he delivered one of the most wretched pieces of entertainment of its year with his “Southland Tales”, which is an incoherent mess of epic proportions.

While “Donnie Darko” focused intently on its hero, “Southland” is scattered all over the place in an unconvincing futuristic dystopia that never comes to life. The first mistake is its quirky and unconventional casting that ranges from The Rock to several members of Saturday Night Live (not to mention Justin Timberlake in an inexplicable role; he also gets to deliver one of the most awkward musical scenes I’ve seen while covering The Killers’ All the Things That I’ve Done).

Even though “Southland Tales” is a complete failure, I still had faith in Kelly. Surely he would see the mistakes of it and return to his roots by making a more grounded story. He surely tried with “The Box” but sadly with it, he has taken an intriguing premise and run it to the ground in a smorgasbord of overall lunacy and absurdity. The film starts promisingly as a mysterious man hands a couple a box with a single button; if they press it they win exactly one million dollars but someone they don’t know will die. The next events in the movie are impossible to predict since they head into the realm of cheesy existentialistic sci-fi (how far does the story remove itself from its earlier scenes!).

There are some directors who seem to walk a tight rope every time they make a movie; you never know if they will succeed or fail. Terry Gilliam is one of them. While “The Imaginarium of Doctor Parnassus” was an entertaining and lovable fantasy, “Tideland” descended into perversity while being incredibly dull. Kevin Smith is another example since his stories usually involve junkies and fart jokes. In his best movies (like the great “Dogma”) he is able to combine an adolescent kind of humor with some pretty meaningful themes (well, not really that meaningful but sweet). Recently however, Smith sold out with the appropriately titled “Cop Out” which is one of the dumbest cop buddy movies I’ve ever seen. Here is another film hammered by some irritating casting decisions. By making Tracy Morgan into the obnoxious sidekick, Smith has made the movie unbearable (it is important to say that this is the first movie he has directed in which he didn’t write the script, hence the lazy jokes). Desperation quickly crawls into this vacuous vortex and the movie remains painfully unfunny throughout even though it’s in a desperate bid to remain entertaining.

I’m afraid Kelly will never do something as intriguing and powerful as “Donnie Darko” (and by the way, I’m pretending the sequel “S.Darko” doesn’t actually exist). He remains a man of big ideas but somehow he is unable to channel them successfully. With “Southland Tales” and “The Box” he reveals himself as basically a one-trick pony. On the other hand I still believe in Gilliam and Smith because they’ve showed me their strengths on more than one occasion and they remain engaging and creative filmmakers. I think they work better outside the system, inside the independent and art-house constraints whose limitations can be seen as more of a blessing than a curse.

Sin #73: Most Wanted

The increasing violence and insecurity have risen to dangerous heights across the Mexican country; in a sense, some towns near the border have resorted to the ways of the Wild West by turning the desert into a battlefield. The bloodshed, product of the drug war, has gotten worst over the months and now seems to taint the bicentenary celebration of September in many cities (Monterrey has been the city most affected by the violence, not to mention natural catastrophes that have devastated several urban areas).

Society has always had an affinity for violence and the Western genre has always been a formidable way of focusing it and simplifying its conflicts. There are the good guys (handsome, proud and honorable men) on one side and the villains (ugly, despicable killers) on another. The good guys inevitably win the fights and the bystanders cheer as the heroes ride victorious into the sunset.

For a taste of the genre there’s no better introduction than playing “Red Dead Redemption”, a videogame for Playstation 3 and Xbox 360 developed by Rockstar that takes the “Grand Theft Auto” engine and transports it to the Wild West in a story of revenge and, indeed, redemption (for those fans of GTA, I got to say that many staples are still present including pillaging and going on an endless murdering rampage). It’s a cinematic experience that’s engrossing and utterly involving, not to mention a lot of fun (without a doubt it’s yet another triumph for Rockstar).

In cinematic terms, the genre has had its ups and downs. For a while westerns became opportunities for character actors like John Wayne or Clint Eastwood to develop their tough-guy personas, but then its popularity fizzled and westerns were perceived as almost an ancient relic of dated clichés.

Today, the genre has made a comeback (with some original works like “Appaloosa” and several remakes, like the Coens’ version of “True Grit”, soon to be released with Jeff Bridges in the John Wayne role); some films have even risen from their ancient roots by injecting new life into their stories, like the “3:10 to Yuma” remake starring Russell Crowe and Christian Bale.

“3:10 to Yuma” introduces a story ripe for clichés but director James Mangold keeps the action real and focuses on the acting of its talented cast. Crowe creates an intriguing villain, suave, mysterious and very capable of exploding in terrible acts of violence and yet, charming and likable. Ben Forster is the true monster of the piece as a young man on the mission of rescuing his mentor. Bale is a farmer longing for the respect of his family.

The movie follows these characters on a doomed journey but I liked its ending which finds the right balance between poetic truth and irony.

A very different kind of western comes in the form of a Korean movie (I know the phrase Korean western sounds bizarre) called “The Good, the Bad and the Weird” which isn’t a parody of “The Good, the Bad and the Ugly” but more of a tribute to that classic film. It’s equal parts Sergio Leone and “Kung Fu Hustle”. The movie follows a group of characters in search of a buried treasure (the characters make a leap of faith since none of them knows exactly what’s buried).

The great thing about “The Good, the Bad and the Weird” is its endless invention and great energy; it features astonishing cinematography (especially in a virtuoso opening scene inside a train), a fantastic soundtrack and performances that never wink at the audience. It’s a joyful adventure.

These movies are current examples of a genre that gets constantly reinvented, and since the truth is always stranger than fiction, it’s nice to see stories where the good guys actually win and can ride proudly into the sunset.

Sin #72: Confessions

Documentaries have a way of packing much more of an emotion wallop than the usual sensationalistic stories we hear from the news. They provide a personal input and tap directly into the psyche of their subjects, drawing us in. A few weeks ago I saw a documentary called "Dear Zachary: A Letter to A Son About His Father" that features one of the most shocking stories I've ever seen on the screen. It all starts with Andrew Bagby, a medical student with two wonderful parents and great friends (the movie is directed by Kurt Kuenne, one of his close friends). Andrew is lonely and depressed in his internship and one day meets a medical resident named Shelley Turner (a woman in her 40s that has already 3 estranged children from different men). His friends know that something is very wrong with her but Andrew starts dating her for a while; he then senses her jealousy and manic depressive tendencies and tries to leave Shelley. In a violent rampage she kills him and flees the country. What happens next is truly horrific as justice lets Dr. Turner walk away and then she reveals that she is pregnant with Andrew's son.

The story of "Dear Zachary" is the stuff of tabloid glory and a more morbid filmmaker could easily have turned it into a soap opera of unnerving melodrama. Fortunately the movie never takes that road and instead it becomes a powerful tragedy of a failed system and the suffering of an entire community (the one bright spot in the whole piece is the heroism shown by Andrew’s parents, who have faced terrible struggles).

Another amazing work is “Tarnation” in which a man named Jonathan Couette makes a home movie documenting his life. Within a 200 dollar budget, the use of editing tools from a Macintosh computer, hours of video footage and family pictures, it goes very deep and affects us with its protagonist’s honesty.

“Tarnation” doesn’t feel like a regular movie and sometimes enters into the realm of conceptual video art with its use of old movie footage and kaleidoscopic color scheme; it’s like a video diary on acid but its accumulative power is undeniable. The footage Couette captures related to his psychological disturbed mother reminded me of the family footage in “Capturing the Friedmans”, another disturbing and haunting work that focuses on the destruction of the family nucleus after the shocking accusation of the father’s pederasty. The details of the case sometimes go on such a level of pornographic detail that it makes us recoil in disgust but, just like a car wreck, we can’t look away. The Friedmans are so tormented by the sins of the father that they remain a fascinating case for any psychiatrist and a hypnotic voyage into madness for audiences.

These three documentaries feature some of the most harrowing scenes in recent memory and subjects that are intrinsically frail and weak, in other words, completely human. While none offer comfort at the end and leave us really in a state of emotional exhaustion, they create a stark portrait of the dark nature of man.

Sin #71: Charming, To The Last

I love watching movies about the hypocrisy of the aristocracy in social gatherings. In Robert Altman’s brilliant “Gosford Park” we get to sneak into a lavish dinner filled with colorful and eccentric characters (who get involved in a mysterious murder case); there is the rich tenant having an affair with the maid, the wife who mocks and despises him, the sister complaining about everything in the house (including the marmalade and, especially, her allowance) and many more, which include unusual guests like an actor pretending to be the assistant of a clueless American producer.

“Gosford Park” features great performances from its amazing cast (a cast that features virtually every British performer, although the Harry Potter movies really have the distinction of featuring every English actor working nowadays). It’s really fascinating to see Altman juggle with so many stories and yet never lose focus of the big picture.

No one was better however, at poking fun of the Bourgeois like director Luis Buñuel with his two films, “The Exterminating Angel” and “The Discreet Charm of the Bourgeois”. Both are drenched in a surrealistic and morbid cloud that turn the whole affair into a black comedy of manners; “The Exterminating Angel” features the gathering of a wealthy group that through some strange force are compelled to stay in the house even after the evening is long over. They’re not trapped (the doors are wide open) but they simply cannot leave. It’s hard to unravel the meaning of the movie (even with some strange occurrences like the arrival of farm animals, which surely represent some kind of symbolism) but Buñuel keeps us involved up till the very ending, which seems appropriately weird in accordance to the past events. Buñuel made several movies in Mexico and “The Exterminating Angel” is one of his best (the most acclaimed of the era remains “Los Olvidados”, a potent social critique of the state of poverty in the country).

“The Discreet Charm of the Bourgeois” was made during his French period and also features a meeting between a group of aristocrats. This time dreams interweave with reality in a series of bizarre sequences. The film starts with the arrival of the friends of a rich couple at a lavish mansion; they were, through a misunderstanding, expected to arrive till the next day so nothing is ready. They all decide then to go to a fancy restaurant where they realize about the death of the owner and how their evening is interrupted by the funeral. They decide to leave. The movie follows this pattern over and over in sometimes hilarious results.

“The Discreet Charm of the Bourgeois” is a very strange film; it doesn’t have a linear narrative and loses itself in its self-indulgent fantasies. With that said, I have to admit it’s never boring and some sequences are very inspired in a surrealistic sense (I specially love the whole subplot with the priest who becomes a gardener and can finally avenge his parents murder, at the hand of his family gardener).

These movies take us to the slick world of the upper-class, and the social distinctions of the “upstairs-downstairs” set of values. They’re all wicked fun at the cost of the bourgeois.

Sin #70: Grumpy Old Men

Few scenes are as poignant in the movies as the early sequence in Pixar’s “Up” that begins with Carl’s marriage to Ellie and ends sourly in her funeral. Time passes and he becomes bitter as he watches the neighborhood where he grew up in become one gigantic shopping mall. Carl spends his days missing Ellie, and reminding himself that he could never take her to Venezuela where she dreamed to live one day among the jungle and vast mountains.

Carl brings closure to his relationship with Ellie at the end of “Up” (with the help of a little boy scout named Russell and a talking dog appropriately named Dug) and is truly grateful for his adventures but there are certain seniors that aren’t so lucky. Take Walt Kowalski, played by Clint Eastwood, in “Gran Torino”. After his wife’s death he becomes stuck in his old crippling home and hating the multiethnic cultures that have invaded the neighborhood (especially the Asian neighbors that seem friendly enough, although the teenagers are suffering from the gang violence and prejudice). Eastwood gets to say: “Get off my lawn” which seems to perfectly encapsulate geriatric behavior in today’s society.

“Gran Torino” isn’t one of Eastwood best movies, but it demonstrates that at 80 years old he is still one of cinema’s most important screen presences. His performance is like an anthology of the tough-as-nails screen personas he has played over the years and represents his swan song from acting (his late roles also pocked fun at his age, like in the funny “Space Cowboys”, where he shared the screen with other veteran actors like Tommy Lee Jones, James Garner and Donald Sutherland).

Another showcase for an acting legend is the British film “Harry Brown” which features yet another fantastic performance from the great Michael Caine. In the movie Caine plays a retired army officer living in a slum seized by violence, drug trafficking and vandalism. His best friend has recently been murdered by one of the gangs roaming the streets and he is off on a revenge rampage that takes him deep into the dark belly of the London criminal underworld. Contrary to Walt Kowalski, Brown isn't against the use of brute force against criminals (he does what it takes to bring justice, sometimes to brutal results). Although the movie has been compared to "Gran Torino", it is grittier and more involving giving us a chilling look at the most affected areas of South London (it has a "Death Wish" kind of vibe, and it also reminded me of Jodie Foster's “The Brave One”).

These movies show us that old age isn't necessarily a time of passiveness and that it's never too late to get a hold on life and learn through others (although I certainly wouldn’t recommend going on a killing rampage). It’s refreshing to see movies that showcase seniors in the title roles since most movies seem to be made by young people and are always about young people. “Up” is such a nostalgic trip because it gives us a lifetime in a few minutes and then begins with an old man waking up, which is how most of us will end up.

Sin #69: Moore Than Meets the Eye

My first encounter with the work of Michael Moore came right after he had won the Oscar for best documentary back in 2002. I became curious for the movie after the controversy with his speech (where he spoke plainly against President Bush, to equal measure of booing and cheering from the attending audience). I purchased “Bowling for Columbine” in DVD and loved it. Moore’s detractors said it was nothing but a piece of propaganda that fudged facts and manipulated the audience with weak arguments (some even said Moore was a traitor for making it) but there was no denial that Moore’s film had sparked debate among audiences about the purchase of guns in America (shedding light on the NRA and the gun-obsessed culture) and the policies of the US government on foreign soil.

After “Columbine” I decided to check out the rest of his work. I saw his first feature titled “Roger and Me”, a moving and observant portrait of Moore’s hometown in Flint, Michigan and the consequences of GM’s factory closure (it even had an impact on his own family since his father was a worker there). Then I stumbled upon “The Awful Truth”, a hilarious and insightful series of sketches where Moore and his team go on a quest to show society’s flaws (I still smile thinking of Crackers, the crime fighting chicken and Pistol Pete).

His most successful documentary came in 2004 with “Fahrenheit 9/11”, an adaptation of his book Stupid White Men and an attempt to stop George Bush from winning the re-election (an objective he sadly failed to realize even with the film making more than 100 million dollars at the box office, a record for any documentary). “Fahrenheit 9/11” won the prestigious Palm D’Or at Cannes and remains a fascinating account of a post-9/11 America.

Still, my favorite documentary is “Sicko”, which tackles the difficult issue of health care (certainly one of the biggest concerns in Barack Obama’s candidacy). In “Sicko” Moore travels to Canada, France, Britain and even Cuba to prove how distinctively flawed the US system really is (especially the corruption inside insurance companies). “Sicko” is not about big political statements but more about the people’s rights to receive proper care, in a way it’s the most humanistic film he has ever made.

His most recent movie might be his most ambitious, “Capitalism: A Love Story” tries to pinpoint exactly what went wrong with a system that rewards the rich (who own 80% of the world’s resources) and has failed to benefit the rest of a population that is quickly slipping into an economic recession. “Capitalism” shows us an angrier Moore, although he also seems defeated as tragedies continue to build. He gives us people losing their jobs and a government unwilling to help them (there is a powerful sequence where he shows a post-Katrina New Orleans that feels like a ghost town, even years after the catastrophe).

Michael Moore will always have a loyal following as well as equally devoted detractors. His biggest contribution is creating debate as well as making terrific entertainments. His movies are skillfully adept at creating moments of seriousness and pain and merging them with humor (contrary to a documentarian like Errol Morris, Moore is more interested in entertaining than educating).

Certainly all of his movies are wonderful modern works that capture a moment in our difficult political and social climate.

Sin #68: Things to Learn in Prison

Prisons have become a playground for the wicked. Every day we hear in the news about phone extortions directly from jail, bribes to guards and violence between inmates as many of the occurrences that happen on a day-to-day bases. Imagine yourself entering prison and facing a system that demands violence to survive (we realize that prisoners don’t enter to reform, they merely enter to strive).

In the French movie “A Prophet” we meet Malik El Djebena, a man caught between the rivalry of two groups: the Corsicans (the dominant mafia) and the Muslims (who seem to be comfortable in small schemes of drug trade and petty crime). Malik is offered a choice almost immediately, either kill an important Muslim and be offered protection or be killed. For Malik the choice is obvious although the act itself gets pretty messy and gruesome since he is not a killer.

“A Prophet” is an amoral tale that focuses on the crime scheme and its inner connections and how a man climbs his way to the top. Malik is far from your typical protagonist and there isn’t a single moment in the film where he is looking for redemption (even though he is sometimes tormented by some of his actions, especially his first murder).

For the most part guards keep a blind eye as long as they are being bribed and for inmates like Cesar Luciani (the mob kingpin) jail becomes almost a resort.

The characters in “A Prophet” don’t live the brutality of prison life as seen in “Hunger”, a spellbinding and intense Irish production that features a stunning performance by Michael Fassbender (who starred in “Fish Tank” and Tarantino’s “Inglourious Basterds”).

For those who refuse to abide the rules there are a number of tortures that include endless beatings or confinement in a disgusting room covered in human feces. Death isn’t a far though for prisoners, even for terrorists who are willing to go to extreme measures like hunger strikes to protect their ideals.

“Hunger” contains several virtuoso sequences that transform a regular drama into a poetic and tragic tale (there’s a conversation between an inmate and a priest done in one take that is brilliantly acted). At the end we gaze at the amazing transformation of Fassbinder, who as Bobby Sands acts as the leader of the movement and its inevitable martyr.

Both Sands and Malik are criminals and while their movies never glorify their behavior they certainly observe how a corrupt system favors those who deserve punishment. The overall message is: the system is flawed. Even in a thriller like “Cell 211” there’s a strong element of social critique as the inmates of a Spanish prison take hold of the establishment and demand changes from the abusive staff. That film is mostly content on delivering an entertaining and arresting (no pun intended) experience but you can also realize that beneath its fictitious elements lies an accurate portrayal of prison life. It’s a very good movie.

“A Prophet”, “Hunger” and “Cell 211” are very different films, but each of them shows us that jails are dangerous and corrupt asylums that cannot be called places of healing. In our cynical times we are not permitted to witness a man that truly repents for his actions (I remember Morgan Freeman’s terrific speech in “The Shawshank Redemption” before the prison committee). As long as the system stays the same, the cycle of violence will continue forever.

Sin #67: All My Dreams

“Don’t Wake Me, I Plan on Sleeping In…”

Sleeping In-The Postal Service

Dreams have fascinated filmmakers ever since the dawn of cinema. This year Christopher Nolan (one of the boldest and most ambitious directors currently working) delivers us “Inception”, his latest mind-bender which might just change our perception of dreams as a narrative entanglement that reveal layers within layers of dreamscape while emasculating a sense of emotional frailty. In “Inception” he takes us on an intellectual ride that doesn’t condescend to the summer blockbuster crowd; it’s an ambitious and incredibly smart movie that works within the structure of a heist movie (or even a Bond action adventure) while introducing complex ideas (there are echoes here of other great sci-fi works like “Blade Runner” or “2001”). Without a doubt, one viewing is not enough to assimilate all of Nolan’s intricate plotting and abstract concepts.

I’ve read several theories on the movie and the cleverly ambiguous ending which is definitely open to several interpretations. If you haven’t seen “Inception” I recommend you save this reading for later, since I don’t want to spoil the experience.

First of all, about that ending; some say Dom Cobb’s cipher is about to collapse as the screen goes dark, others believe it keeps spinning endlessly, revealing that Cobb is still inside his dream. There are several clues that suggest Cobb might have never woken up at all (and that Mal, his wife, might not be dead). My own theory is that she escaped the dream world and failed to convince him to accompany her back to their children (speaking of which, they never seem to age and are always seen in the same position throughout the story). Cobb might be another reinterpretation of Leonard, the hero of “Memento”, who leads a tragic life stuck in an endless loophole of despair (Leonard thinks he is avenging his wife’s death while Cobb thinks he is trying to go back to his children). Both characters are paranoid and refuse to look beyond their own dilemmas. In the climax, Mal ominously tells Cobb about his delusions of worldwide corporate persecution and asks him: how are you certain of your reality?

With this argument we might even ask if the process of inception is even possible. Maybe the true target is not Robert Fischer, the tycoon’s son, but Cobb who is truly lost within his subconscious. Of course this is only one of the many hypothesis “Inception” has inspired and it’s such a complex movie that I believe it will be endlessly discussed for years to come; It’s really an amazing achievement. It also represents the second Leonardo DiCaprio movie in a year that deals with deceptive realities (the other one is Scorsese’s “Shutter Island”. Both movies focus on intense performances by the actor, who has shown great maturity with his choice of roles).

Another movie that drifts within dreams is “Waking Life” from director Richard Linklater. The movie is a series of conversations between professors, poets and philosophers with a young man who suspects he might be dead (or trapped within a very strange dream). The film uses rotoscopic animation to convey several surreal visual styles (that change depending on the conversation).

Even though the movie doesn’t have a traditional storyline, “Waking Life” is hypnotic, intriguing and utterly original.

“Inception” and “Waking Life” are unique cinematic experiences that go where few movies dare to go. They will certainly haunt your dreams.

Sin #66: Third World Poverty

For millions of people in Mexico, poverty is synonymous with way of life; after all, over 20 percent of the country lives in extreme poverty and many are forced to abandon country life for a job in the city with terrible wages. As an alternative they will immigrate to the United States to work as illegal aliens in fast-food chains or janitors for big corporations. It’s a sad state of affairs, but society’s pyramidal structure and capitalist system prevents the government from giving the poor a more worthy lifestyle and an education, since it doesn’t favor the rich minority who control most of the country’s resources.

A couple of years ago, Danny Boyle released “Slumdog Millionaire”, a film that garnered world-wide acclaim and even went to win several Oscars including best picture. The movie might be a feel-good fantasy about a boy that goes from rags to riches but its greatest asset is in its portrayal of poverty in Mumbai. The earlier passages echo “Oliver Twist” in the journey of a boy living in the brutal streets try to survive along with his brother and Boyle’s vibrant vision makes the setting realistic while avoiding the romanticized view we often see in these types of stories (although the movie’s heart is essentially romantic).

The authenticity of the movie is also reflected in the casting process as the children portrayed aren’t professional actors and their real life draws parallels from their characters. There was actually a controversy a while back about their lifestyle after the shooting wrapped, with some claiming they were exploited and were still living in poverty (there were some bizarre rumors about Rubina Ali’s father trying to sell her, she plays young Latika in the film).

While many people applauded “Slumdog Millionaire” (I liked it quite a bit) I wish most of them would notice another movie released the same year called “Chop Shop”, directed by Ramin Bahrani. “Chop” is an American independent production that doesn’t deal with formulas or happy endings but merely observes an immigrant boy living in America and trying to survive while he takes care of his sister.

The most shocking aspect of the film is its location in New York, since it isn’t the same New York we often see in Woody Allen or Martin Scorsese movies because it almost feels like a third world country slum. The morality lines begin to fizzle in this setting and we realize that sometimes one finds shelter in illegal activities. “Chop Shop” might be slow for some but it is a riveting slice-of-life work of cinema that delivers a startling reality.

In many ways Bahrani’s film reminded me of “Los Olvidados” (its English title is “The Young and the Damned”), one of Luis Buñuel’s best films. In it we meet several boys living in the slums of Mexico City during the fifties. “Los Olvidados” had a rather controversial opening in Mexico as the movie was deemed to be brutal and unapologetic in its depiction of poverty. Buñuel’s vision was pretty hard to embrace in this country although the film got plenty of acclaim in other places (Buñuel has never been shy to controversy, especially with the shocking “Un Chien Andalou”, a short film in which he collaborated with the great Salvador Dali. It is said they put stones in their pockets in case the audiences attacked them).

While poverty is still a huge problematic pretty much everywhere, these films do a good job in not letting us forget those who need a hand the most. They’re the kind of films that change our views and can potentially make a difference.

Sin #65: The Story of a Girl

Every time there’s an author writing a potential bestseller there’s a producer behind trying to turn it into a movie, mainly because the success of it is pretty much guaranteed. Of course, it’s always tough adapting a book and we’ve seen countless adaptation that have failed miserably either because they are way too faithful to the original source or not close enough. Most of the best passages in a book work better in our imaginations than on the movie screen so it’s always a tricky business.

Take something like “The Da Vinci Code” for example, a movie which I hated. First of all I must confess that I’ve never read anything written by Dan Brown so I can’t judge the quality of the adaptation; all I know is that the movie is bland, tiresome and tedious, with characters who never come alive (not even with the skill of some very fine actors like Tom Hanks or Audrey Tatou). People who love the book call it a real page-turner, dynamic, exciting and very entertaining. So, what went wrong?

Then there’s “The Twilight Saga”, Stephanie Meyer’s love story between a girl and a vampire (merely the remnants of the concept really since Meyer ignores almost every convention from the vampire mythology. If its real vampires you seek go read an Anne Rice novel). So far, there has been three movies based on the books and it’s astounding to witness its popularity among female fans (I guess there are some men in there, but they are among the minority for sure). Some twilight enthusiasts (or twi-hards) criticize screenwriter Melissa Rosenberg (who has some obvious talent since she writes for the TV show “Dexter”) for tweaking several details from the book but I certainly don’t envy the task of adapting those awful books (although the fourth one presents outrageously contrived developments that might result in some laugh-out-loud moments).

So, is there a recent example of a good bestseller adaptation? Fortunately yes, there is; case in point, the first adaptation of the Swedish bestselling novel titled “The Men Who Hate Women” by author Stieg Larsson (who unfortunately passed away after completing his trilogy of books). The title of the movie version is “The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo” and it’s one of the most involving detective stories I have ever seen.

Its greatest strength isn’t in its murder mystery spanning several decades (although it’s a fantastic whodunit filled with suspense) but more on the creation of extraordinary and unique characters who command our attention from the get-go. On one side we’ve got Mikael Blomkvist, a journalist facing jail time who accepts the proposal of a rich man (who can’t move past the disappearance of his niece some decades ago), on his last months as a free man. Then there’s Lisbeth Salander, a tattooed Goth chick, who begins investigating Blomkist and ends joining him in solving the case. A relationship develops between them, although Lisbeth remains a mystery (I can imagine she will be further developed in the next installments).

The performances in “The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo” are brilliant (Noomi Raspace definitely deserves an Oscar nomination) and the film is a haunting thriller, not to mention one of the best films of the year. The movie is the first in the Millennium trilogy (since the other two movies were filmed back-to-back they are already available as well). Without a doubt the movie is a prime example of a successful adaptation of a bestseller, Robert Landon could learn a thing or two from Lisbeth.

Sin #64: The Giants on the Windmills

“Don Quixote de la Mancha”, written by Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra, remains one of the most influential books ever written (it is considered the first modern European novel). For decades it has been the ambition of filmmakers to adapt its story to the screen but there seems to be a curse attached to the legend of Quixote; Orson Welles spend his entire career filming pieces but died before he could finish the movie and in 2000 Terry Gilliam failed spectacularly to shoot his own surrealistic take.

There’s something endearing in Quixote and his madness; after all, he represents the dreamer and idealist, slaying dragons and seeing giants instead of windmills and pursuing the love of the lovely Dulcinea (a sweet maiden in his heart but really just a hardworking maid). The story of Quixote seems to be a perfect match for the imagination of director Terry Gilliam (one of the most uneven but creative forces working today) but the production was a catastrophe waiting to happen. “Lost in La Mancha” documents the making of “The Man Who Killed Don Quixote” (the title of Gilliam’s film) starring Jean Rochefort as Quixote and Johnny Depp as his loyal partner Sancho Panza. The story is about an advertising agent who travels through time to 17^th century Spain and meets Quixote who mistakes him for Panza.

Gilliam is no stranger to chaotic productions; he went way over budget on his ambitious “The Adventures of Baron Munchhausen” and had to fight with the studio for his cut on “Brazil”, but nothing could prepare him for the disaster of Quixote. First of all, the funding for the film was significantly less than he anticipated (even though it was a small budget for his vision, it was a considerable budget for European standards), then came the terrible floods that destroyed several sets and changed the terrain that was already shot. If that wasn’t enough, his actor Jean Rochefort had to be hospitalized and no longer could ride a horse (there are some scenes shot where they show him in great pain). At this point every element whether natural or man-made was against the filmmakers.

After firing a producer and with the impatience of dozens of investors, the production was finally shut down to the grief of everyone involved. Gilliam moved on (his next two movies, “The Brothers Grimm” and “Tideland” were atrocious but he bounced back with the quirky and inventive “The Imaginarium of Dr. Parnassus”, Heath Ledger’s final film). After the release of “Lost in La Mancha” Gilliam was bombarded with questions about the film and the hope about it ever getting made; he seemed defeated and pessimistic about its chances of reaching the screen. After finishing “Parnassus” however, Gilliam admitted that he had the rights for “Quixote” back and was definitely moving forward with the production (it’s now confirmed that Ewan McGregor will substitute Depp, who can’t commit to the project because of his hectic schedule, and that Robert Duvall will play Quixote. Filming starts in September). It now seems that in 2011 we will finally get to see “The Man Who Killed Don Quixote”, 10 years after its disastrous first attempt. Hopefully it will be worth it.

Sin #63: Art in Transformation

We’ve all been warned on documentaries like “An Inconvenient Truth” or “Collapse”; the world, as we know it, will undergo a serious transformation thanks to our process of industrialization fueled by greed. The most serious problem is currently happening on our gulf as the oil spill has quickly started to fill the pacific ocean and will eventually cover every single ocean; there seems to be no solution to the continuous spillage and, as usual, politicians keep passing on the blame (hell, even the CEO of BP refuses to take responsibility on the matter). Only time will tell how much damage it will really do to the marine ecosystem.

As technology continues to offer us breakthroughs in the areas of science, art, health and entertainment I can’t help but wonder if we’ve to finally pay for our decades of excess. Few movies seem as prophetic to me as Godfrey Regio’s “qatsi” trilogy which may be seen as a profound statement on mankind, its evolution and the consequences of its supposed “growth” or just merely as an elongated and rather pretentious series of music videos.

“Koyaanisqatsi” (or “Life out of Balance”) is the first movie in the trilogy and is all about industrial tyranny, consumerism, militarism and exploitation. It’s a breathtakingly beautiful work of images and sound whose power continues to haunt audiences more than 25 years after its original theatrical release (its influence can be seen in dozens of commercials that use the same filmmaking techniques).

“Powaqqatsi” (“Life in Transformation”), the middle film, is not as effective as “Koyaanisqatsi” for the fact that it feels a bit more repetitious and monotonous. The film is more about the delicate nature between man and nature but even though is isn’t as powerful, one can’t deny the visual wonders Regio displays on screen.

“Naqoyqatsi” (“Life as War”) is different from the previous installments. First of all, its images are all seen through digital filters which give the film a haunting and eerie look and its themes seem to evoke technological engineering and artificial intelligence. Even though “Koyaanisqatsi” is the most memorable of this unique trilogy, “Naqoyqatsi” is the one that most deeply resonates, especially in today’s society.

The thing that is most striking in these films, besides their visual wonder, is the score from composer Phillip Glass. Although he’s made a number of movie scores, he’s never been better than working on the “qatsi” trilogy (some movies even recycle some of the tunes). On “Naqoyqatsi” he got work with the great Yo Yo Ma and together they deliver a phenomenal emotional symphony.

These movies are meant to provoke a strong reaction from the viewer who will either find them hypnotic and profound or will simply dismiss them as yet pseudo intellectual dreck. Watching them I find myself glued to the images and moved by the music and thinking about mankind, his actions and, specially, the consequences.

Sin #62: Life's a Stage

I’ve always admired the theater. I haven’t seen a lot of it since theater is pretty difficult to find here where I live. A couple of months back though I went to see a Mexican production of “The Good Canary”, directed by John Malkovich and starring Diego Luna. It wasn’t a particularly accomplished play (it had the obligatory clichés of addiction) but at least it amused me and presented me with a different kind of entertainment. Watching a local play however (without the pretentious flair of international acclaim) was a much better experience since I saw a hilarious story of comical farce entitled “The Story of the Polar Bear that got Stuck Inside the Bathroom of a Restaurant” (that’s the title more or less, in a rough translation).

I’m aware that mounting a stage production can be an awesome feat since it involves the labor of dozens of technicians and especially the actors who have to bring it to life. Orson Welles, before reaching fame with “Citizen Kane” (often considered the best movie of all time), worked in theater and was known for having one of the biggest egos in the business. In “Me and Orson Welles” he is portrayed as a womanizer and a drunk but also as someone who took his craft very seriously and had a grand vision.

It’s a shame that the movie chooses to focus on a young man named Richard Samuels, played by Zac Efron, instead of the great man. He is the typically idealistic actor who plunges himself, through mere luck, into an expensive production of Julius Caesar directed by Welles. Efron brings an unwanted modern sensibility that hurts the delicate nature of the movie and robs it of its real attention on Welles and Christian Mckay’s virtuoso performance.

The movie is also an odd choice for director Richard Linklater who’s one of the best of indie directors and whose films range from experimental (“Tape”) to the commercial antics of Jack Black (in “School of Rock”). “Me and Orson Welles” isn’t one of his best movies but it features a great performance and represents an interesting spotlight on the plays of the thirties and the craft involved.

My favorite movie about the theater is Mike Leigh’s “Topsy Turvy” which presents us with the genius of Gilbert and Sullivan, two brilliant composers of the 19^th century whose plays have been beloved by many but whose relationship wasn’t always as rewarding. The film is astonishing in giving us a full behind the scenes of every aspect of the production including actor’s rehearsals, choreographies, costume fittings and production design among others. Mike Leigh’s films are famous for being “crafted” in a tight collaboration between the director and his actors; there isn’t a script but more of an outline and the actors rehearse for months before stepping in front of the cameras. This dynamic gives his movies a special vibrancy and realism and the opportunity to witness terrific performances. The whole cast of “Topsy Turvy” is brilliant but a special nod must be given to Allan Corduner and Jim Broadbent who create two distinctive personalities that perfectly relate to each other on an artistic sense, albeit not on a personal one.

My favorite scene in the movie involves the singers around the piano rehearsing one of the songs (although it’s hard to pick a favorite scene since the film contains dozens of wonderful moments). It’s truly a fantastic movie.

I wish that I went to see more plays or enjoyed a musical or two every once in a while but for now I guess that I must be glad for the cinematic adaptations (the good ones that is).

Sin #61: The Pixar Legacy

The first “Toy Story” came in 1995, I was 10 years old. It was the first feature length to be made entirely on a computer but its technical merits were completely overshadowed by its characters. Suddenly Woody, Buzz Lightyear and the gang became iconic and Pixar Studio came out of the gate with an astounding adventure that captured the imaginations of both kids and adults alike.

We’re living in 2010 and now Pixar Studio has become synonymous with great storytelling and superb animation. Just this month they released the third installment of “Toy Story” and I’m glad to inform that they haven’t lost their Midas touch; “Toy Story 3” is a glorious closure to a popular and beloved franchise.

After the original “Toy Story” they had a sort of slump with “A Bug’s Life” which had the misfortune of having been released close to “Antz”, a Dreamwork’s feature that had an all star cast (including a main voiceover by Woody Allen) and, in my opinion, a superior storyline. “A Bug’s Life” remains a simple and unsophisticated fable and Pixar’s worst film but they quickly got back in shape with “Toy Story 2” an enchanting sequel that introduced new characters (like Jesse, the cowgirl or Zorg, Buzz’s nemesis).

Next came “Monster’s Inc”, a funny film that somehow felt a little shallow; they would change that with “Finding Nemo”, a beautiful sea adventure that combined Pixar’s whimsical sense of humor with an emotional oceanic travelogue (it was, without a doubt, their most visually enthralling movie).

“The Incredibles”, Pixar’s next film, failed to engage me like “Nemo” did. Even though it featured some very good action sequences, the story felt like yet another variation on the superhero myth (fused with the dynamics of a regular family). It tried to introduce more mature elements but the story lacked a proper villain and its length made it feel a little bit tedious. With “Cars” however, Pixar returned to a gleefully un-ambitious comedy; even though it is geared for a sequel next year it isn’t a particularly inspired movie that necessarily demands it.

After “Cars” the studio hit a stride of amazing films. “Ratatouille” is a delicious and sophisticated dish of a movie that becomes the first story to target adults before their children; it’s a film that deals with deep themes, like the appreciation of food and the devotion of an artist for creation (and also the task of critics in art). I particularly adored the sequence where a critic is immediately transported to his childhood after he tastes a dish; it’s a striking and moving scene that encapsulates the message of the entire picture.

And then comes “Wall-E”, a science fiction parable about consumerism. The first 45 minutes virtually contain no dialogue and the characters have to convey strong emotions through beeps and robotic sounds. The film creates a touching love story and a surprising hopeful ending about a new beginning for human civilization. “Wall-E” is a joy to behold.

In this streak of amazing works there’s a very special movie called “Up” which may be Pixar’s most emotionally heartfelt movie (the opening sequence is a little masterpiece of emotion that shows an entire life in about 15 minutes). “Up” deals with themes of mortality, loyalty and bravery and combines them in a story of fanciful delight.

Pixar films feel lovingly hand-made and even the short films that precede each feature are brilliantly conceived. In a way their latter films are reminders of a time of innocence and purity, when we lacked the affliction of modern times (and still there are some underlying darker themes to be found). Whatever meditation and reflection they generate, the fact is that they are so much fun and each member of the family can take something completely different from them; for me that’s the mark of a great film.

Sin #60: Superhero Movie

We all know how it goes. A kid is stung by a radioactive spider or a scientist is exposed to gamma rays or maybe a rich man with a childhood trauma decides to put on a costume; everybody has a clear idea of the origin of superheroes. In a way their stories are very silly, basic juvenile fantasies about idealism and justice. When relieved of any rationale or psychological depth all they amount to are endless fights between good and evil.

Movies about superheroes resonate when they deal with darker themes. In Christopher Nolan’s “Batman Begins” we meet a man lost in his own guilt and obsession, he then begins his training and finds a way to channel his fears and create a symbol against the criminal underworld. He doesn’t put his mask for purely idealistic purposes, there’s a fetishistic element in his obsession, as if punishing the guilty will bring his soul some kind of redemption (his moral code, however, prevents him from killing). The further consequences of his action lead to dire results in Nolan’s brilliant sequel “The Dark Knight”, where Batman meets an enemy beyond his comprehension. The Joker represents anarchy and chaos, a force of evil meant to corrupt the ordinary and mundane and show the darker side of human nature. At the end of “The Dark Knight” Batman is on the run, becoming a fugitive from the very people he swore to protect.

There’s a movie in theaters right now that has caused some controversy for its depiction of violence and foul language involving minors, that movie is the aptly named “Kick-Ass” which is one of the most enjoyable takes on the superhero genre I’ve seen. “Kick-Ass” doesn’t have the panache of the Nolan films since it doesn’t take itself too seriously but it’s interesting in the way it collides naïve heroism with brutal cold-blooded realism. Yes, “Kick-Ass” is a high school nerd obsessed with comic books but there’s an element of truth to the character and the movie perfectly captures the teen spirit in a globalized internet frenzy media world (in which facebook, twitter, youtube and myspace have become a major aspect in the way we interact with each other).Even though the movie is named after its protagonist, the most memorable character remains Hit-Girl (in a star-making performance by Chloe Grace Moretz); she is a deadly weapon in the disguise of a sweet innocent child. All I’ve got to say about the movie is that it’s a lot of fun. Another recent example that cleverly parodies the genre is “Defendor” starring Woody Harrelson in a story about a mental patient who becomes a masked vigilante. It’s an unconventional film that starts funny but gradually becomes poignant and rather sad(and features yet another terrific performance by Harrelson).

The thing about the superhero narrative arc is that it becomes tiresome after a while; for example, I thoroughly enjoyed the first “Iron Man” in part because it is an economical and ingenious action movie and in part because Robert Downey Jr. remains one of the most charismatic actors in the movies. But the Iron Man sequel didn’t do it for me because it felt like a hollow and unplanned marketing plug. Contrary to “The Dark Knight”, the story didn’t expand its themes and give maturity to its characters. Since superhero movies are pretty common these days (ranging from the heroes of Marvel and DC comics) it’s pretty certain that we’ll see a lot of takes on the genre. Let’s hope at least one or two can shake the monotony.

Sin #59: A Lifeless Ordinary

When I was a kid I was a clear target for bullying; most of the times they made fun of my weight, my height, my glasses…hell, anything that made me look “abnormal” was an excuse for a tirade of verbal abuse. Still, I grew up ok (well, some might debate me on that) and now I can look back and feel a sense of accomplishment for surviving that period.

Although my childhood had its problems, it definitely wasn’t as tough as Dawn Wieners’, the heroine of “Welcome to the Dollhouse”. With her big glasses and ridiculous dress, she is repulsive even to other outcasts (and only has one friend in the whole world who, appropriately, she makes fun off with insulting homophobic remarks). At home things are even worse as her adorable little sister gets all the attention and all she can do is abuse and insult her mercilessly. But one day, things sort of change for Dawn as she falls in love with an older guy who sings in his brother’s band. The guy is a jerk but she doesn’t care, for her he represents an escape from her repressed reality.

Dawn is not a particularly appealing character but I liked her anyway, mostly because she resembles a real teen on a real school environment. While most movies create a glossy and artificial vision of youth, “Welcome to the Dollhouse” cuts to the bone and doesn’t sugarcoat its characters’ situations. And even though sometimes the movie borders on surrealism (especially with the incident about the sister’s kidnapping) it always stays focused on Dawn and her own perception on things around her (including a rather poignant if ambiguous final scene on a school bus).

While youth is all about exploration and maturity, adulthood is all about settlement and resentment. Most of the times it leads to an unhappy life, while sometimes it can lead to lust and depravity; basically any vice will do to take us far from the routine and mundane. Just look at the characters of “Happiness”, a wicked satire of American society that doesn’t blink in the face of taboos. We have the suburban family and their hypocritical facade that’s hiding a pedophile father, a man who makes dirty phone calls and lusts for his neighbor (only to be turned off when he discovers her kinky side) and the neighbor’s sister who is miserable and lonely and survives endless humiliations practically 24/7; and there are more, a lot more (including the sister’s parents and a Russian illegal immigrant).

The director on the films is Todd Solondz and both share a bleak tone with burst of very, very dark humor. While none are graphically explicit, they certainly deal with themes that will disturb a lot of viewers, especially on the implication of the character’s actions and their emotional corrosion. Both movies are fascinating and very sad, but also hypnotic since they evoke very strong reactions from us by creating compelling characters (the actors give wonderful performances, especially Dylan Baker who has a breathtaking scene where he confesses his sins to his son).

“Happiness” and “Welcome to the Dollhouse” are the kind of experiences where you don’t know whether to cry or laugh; its unsettling material that goes to places where most movies chose not to go. With both works Solondz establishes himself as one on the most audacious directors on the American independent front. While they are no easy films to take, they are definitely unforgettable.

Sin #58: No Joystick Allowed

Videogames have come a long way since the early days of Pong and Pac-Man where people usually went to arcades, dropped endless quarters and obsessed about reaching the highest score (this obsession has nothing to do with age, just look at the rivalry between Steve Wiebe and Billy Mitchell to become the top scorer in Donkey Kong as seen in the amazing documentary “The King of Kong: A Fistful of Quarters”). As videogames became more sophisticated so did their storylines, and with the introduction of iconic characters like Mario, Sonic, Megaman and Link, the movie industry quickly took notice and began to find ways to adapt their stories to the screen.

The result however was astonishingly bad and after a series of fiascos, videogame garnered a pretty negative reputation. I admit that when I went to these movies I had somewhat decent expectations; after all I was a fan (I played a lot of videogames in my childhood, especially fighting games). But the filmmakers had no earnest respect for the material and were really more interested in cashing in a quick buck at the expense of our juvenile desires. A clear example can be seen with “Street Fighter”, which is based on the popular fighting game (that has had dozens of sequels and spin-offs); the movie is an atrocious adaptation that doesn’t even manage to pay homage to the original characters, it turns the whole enterprise into another one of those dreadful Jean Claude Van Damme action movies.

“Mortal Kombat”, based on another popular franchise, at least had a cheesy but more faithful transition to the screen. Even though it isn’t really a good movie, it’s a fun time waster (not the biggest appraisal, I know). The sequel though sucks out all the fun, it’s terrible.

Last weekend I saw “Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time” which is based on the videogame by the same name. Since it’s directed by Mike Newell (who made, arguably, the best Harry Potter movie) it was expected that it would break the videogame curse and become the first decent adaptation. Unfortunately the film sometimes forgets to play less like a cutscene from the game and more like a movie. It should be more playful by taking cue from Alfred Molina’s hilarious and tongue-in-cheek performance but still its way more fun that the awful “Clash of the Titans” remake. The problem, as with the “Silent Hill” movie (an atmospheric and haunting experience that manages to be truly scary), is that it tries to satisfy the fans by sticking to close to its original source without pulling off an accessible movie for audiences unfamiliar with the game.

On Roger Ebert’s website there was a bit of a controversy a while back after he claimed that videogames could never become art. Enraged fans debated for weeks that games had become sophisticated enough that they could stand against any movie and that games like “Metal Gear Solid”, “Final Fantasy” or “God of War” had merits enough on their own to be considered works of art. Ebert demurred and confessed he had never properly played any game and was afraid to become addicted to them. I understand both parties’ point of view but Ebert should have made some research before making such a bold statement.

Whether videogames are art is irrelevant when one has the task of adapting them to the screen. We still have to linger over the possibility of a truly successful adaptation. In the meantime grab a joystick, play the games and ignore their movies.

Sin #57: Modern Musicals

Ever since Al Jolson spoke the first words in a motion picture back in 1927 (with “The Jazz Singer”), Hollywood has had a dear affection for musicals. For a while they provided grand entertainment and audiences loved to see the elaborated choreographies backed up with catchy tunes. But then, they kind of fizzled out and musicals were deemed old-fasioned and corny, almost a relic from the past.

In 2001 there was a movie that single-handedly brought back the musical genre for a new generation. That was Baz Luhrmann’s “Moulin Rouge”, a movie that combined an ancient and well known story (the love affair between an artist and a dying prostitute) with several covers of modern pop songs; the effect was both delightful and awe-inspiring, finally there was a fresh take on the genre and the movie became a big hit leading to other movies to follow its example (a year later “Chicago” took home the best picture Oscar, although it pales in comparison to “Moulin Rouge”). Today, there are many musicals around the corner and most of them are stale and boring.

A few weeks ago I saw “Nine” from Rob Marshall (who also made “Chicago”) and was startled at the cast he managed to convince to appear in it; we have Daniel Day Lewis, Penelope Cruz, Marion Cotillard, Nicole Kidman, Judi Dench, Sophia Loren…these are some very talented actors (especially Lewis who burned the screen in “There Will Be Blood” and is known to be an extreme method-actor) but they are all wasted in a lousy remake of a Fellini classic that features not a single memorable song. “Nine” resembles a fashion shoot; it’s all glitz and glamour signifying absolutely nothing.

A recent musical I did like was Julie Taymor’s “Across the Universe” that featured very well known songs from The Beatles to tell a love story in the hippie era. While not every cover is successful (I hated the “Let it Be” cover), the movie is powerful and visually inventive (especially during the “Strawberry Fields” sequence) and remains an entertaining tribute to the lasting power of The Beatles.

Some musicals, however, can be true endurance tests for audiences. Take “The Producers” for example; in the theater it became a massive hit and was even an integral part of season four of “Curb Your Enthusiasm” (resulting in hilarious situations for its star Larry David) but as a movie the musical is a complete stinker. Not only are the songs pretty bad but the performances are outrageously awful turning people into grotesque caricatures; the film is a mess.

Coming back from a trip I saw another awful musical called “Dreamgirls” that managed to be a unique musical in the sense that the stars didn’t actually sing but rather screeched the tunes as if paid by the decibel level. Everybody praised Jennifer Hudson’s performance (she even won an Oscar for it) but I found her annoying and irritating not to mention unbearable. “Dreamgirls” is the kind of film that gives musicals a bad name.

I don’t have anything against the musical genre, in fact two of my favorite movies of the last decade were musicals (“Sweeney Todd” and “Once”) but those films had great characters and their songs defined their personalities and helped tell a good story. Movies like “Nine” or “Dreamgirls” don’t care about anything except the technical aspect of their musical numbers, turning the whole venture into a cold, frivolous exercise. Musicals went in and out of fashion once and we are seeing it happen again. Every time I sense something bad about to happen I simply remember my favorite things and then I don’t feel so bad…

Sin #56: No Country for Young Men

Cormac McCarthy is the kind of author that takes the brutal, the heinous, the vile and painful as a poetic anchor for describing human misery. His stories are dark glimpses into the life of characters that are stuck in an endless purgatory of suffering. I’ve tried to finish reading his “Blood Meridian” but simply cannot; it’s an odyssey so harrowing that at times I’ve had to put the book down to catch a breather. McCarthy describes the violence in such startling detail that even the stench of a corpse is palpable through the pages.

This kind of despair is difficult to capture on film, where audiences expect to at least empathize with its hero (as a film “Blood Meridian” might feel like an endless slog through hell without a ray of sunshine to be found). When I heard “The Road” was being adapted I was afraid that Hollywood might glamorize the story and make it accessible for Cineplex-attending audiences (its trailers sold it as a post-apocalyptic action movie, almost a “Mad Max” clone). But then I remembered its director John Hillcoat, who made a stunning Australian movie called “The Proposition” a few years ago that felt positively McCarthian in the way its blood-soaked violence defined its characters and I knew that he was the right person to adapt this story to the screen.

After watching “The Road” I felt I’d gone on an unforgettable and painful journey to the heart of darkness, which is the right feeling for this story. Beyond the barren landscapes and the cannibalism, the story is really about a father and son struggling to survive in a world where hope has been completely forgotten. For it to work the movie needed brave actors and Viggo Mortensen and young Kodi Smit-McPhee deliver extraordinary performances. Their connection feels authentic and its closing scenes are heartbreaking.

On interviews McCarthy has said that “The Road” is really about him and his relationship with his son and in factual truth is more of a love story than merely a horror thriller; one could say there’s something of a happy ending in its final sequence (even though happy is a very poor word to describe it).

It’s curious how some filmmakers use a canvas of despair to entertain and excite while others use it to provoke thoughts about the human condition. Take two movies for example, “I am Legend” and “Children of Men”; the first is an ordinary action movie starring Will Smith as the last person on the planet (or so he thinks) and the second one is an equally action packed cerebral exercise in doomed fascination. “I am Legend’s” scenario happens after a mysterious vaccine turns people into crazed zombies (although they look nothing like the zombies from the George Romero pictures or “28 Days Later”, more like ugly avatars from a lousy X-Box game); on the other hand, in “Children of Men” there isn’t really a scientific explanation, we have to accept that there’s simply no more children being born. I hated “I am Legend” as much as I loved “Children of Men”, and that’s saying a lot (one thing that bothered me with “Legend” was how dim the violence seemed thanks to the filmmakers intent in making the movie family-friendly).

Still, “The Road” casts a spell unlike any post-apocalyptic film, mainly because it focuses intently on a relationship between father and son. McCarthy may see it as a love story and a hopeful one at that but it is unrelenting in its starkness. Still, the love comes through.