May 2011 – Behind the Proscenium

May 31, 2011May 31, 2011

Midnight In Paris [REVIEW]

Midnight In Paris

With Wit, Reviewed By Kimmo Mustonenen

Gil and Ines, a young American couple on vacation in Paris.

Although their marriage is expected to fall, they are constantly disagreeing on everything – he thinking “it would be good living in the French capital to write novels”, as she swears by their future home in Malibu.

He likes to roam the streets and soaking up their history (like crusty bread), while she thinks only run wine tasting dinner parties (no blame here).

One evening when Ines decides to follow friends to go dancing, Gil tries to return to their hotel alone and lost his way. The stroke of midnight rang in the city, a strange car stops in front of him.

Absorbing!

The new Woody Allen film opens on a generic rather unusual, reviewing dozens of places in Paris like so many postcards – bucolic.

There, I said it.

But make no mistake: it is true that it shows the face of tourism in the French capital, Midnight in Paris is less a tribute to the city – a cry of love for art and artists that it was born in it. What?

Putting aside some of his recurrent obsessions, death, psychoanalysis, hypochondria – making them anecdotal, Woody Allen returns to the story and delivers an enchanting story about the magnificence of the past (although not the future, tense).

Gil (excellent Owen Wilson), uncomfortable in her present life, took refuge after the twelve strokes of midnight sounded in an era that has never known but it was nostalgic.

Drawing on the feeling quite mundane (who never dreamed of being born in another time? Lady Gaga?)

A spring fertile screenplay, Allen is fun and brings to life a fantasy totally impractical: the cross of his idols and dead girl (?!?) to blend in an ideal society where love and art would be kings and/or Prime Ministers – but probably kings.

Unafraid to play the card background contrasts between Paris the day (bling bling, superficial) and Paris by night (mysterious, intoxicating, wine), delivering a purely imaginary, Woody Allen creates the desire and inclination to follow Gil in its temporal incursions, which do meet, among other personalities, his literary idols.

He also leans on it for a casting weight, composed of both French and American stars (no Ginnifer Goodwin), including successive appearances are as many surprises as moments of pure delight (it is interesting to note the terms with Woody Allen chooses which his interpreters, who are both rising stars of American values and secure the French film, just to ride the wave [hang ten!] and attracting a wide audience).

Faced with so many fantasies (we had more cerebral Woody – get it?), one can not help thinking of the magic of The Purple Rose of Cairo or minor film but jubilant, the Curse of the Jade Scorpion.

For if the sauce is so good, it’s also because Woody Allen has not waived, for once, the ingredients sacred romance, tense and winks moviegoers, in that order.

Add to that some beautiful scenes where, once is not habit, the comedy situation exceeds that of the word (the scene of the “spoiler removed” is in that already mythical), and you obtain one of the films in greatness.

What?

Woody? The most charming of the last ten years!

Kimmo Mustonenen – Behind The Proscenium
Follow @KimmoMustonenen

May 27, 2011May 31, 2011

Kung Fu Panda 2 [REVIEW]

Kung Fu Panda 2

With Wit, Reviewed By Kimmo Mustonenen

As much as the makers love it, just a two track for a successful film to hang on, so suspicious and critical viewers will see the movie, the sequels mostly.

No wonder even particularly that in Kung Fu Panda 2, the same rules as most sequels are, unfortunately: we get the story hardly new to see, but just old wine in new bottles (I like wine!) and other strip has the rather pale imitation.

What?

In animation, the sound then, unfortunately, do not hide the fact.

In 2008 came Kung Fu Panda from Dreamworks Animation forged in the cinema and told the very sympathetic story of a somewhat clumsy panda, which, while not Kung Fu fits so, but it is the chosen one.

We then experienced the development of soup dishwasher without self-awareness towards the greatest Kung Fu fighters that China has ever seen.

This time, the sympathetic Po as the chosen prove herself and sees an evil enemy confronted with, will cut off the Kung Fu. To defeat this enemy, Po far in his past have to go back and create memories that he has been ousted.

Major theme in Kung Fu Panda 2 is the origin of the Po and the fact that it seems otherwise give pandas to none. Despite this fact very appropriate points of contact to the first part of the writers do not make it real, and the creativity of its predecessor to bring back the flair.

Relying too much on the curiosity of the clumsy panda with big belly as a Kung Fu master and missed the chance to further develop the characters.

Overall, the story seems really nice to be heading past the very first part plagiarized.

Po must find itself again and again he has to recognize reality (what?) as it is through the area “fight” and often by luck and the Furious Five (NOT Fast and the Furious Five – different movie!) in general comes through only.

Here one might well expect character development, certain one that everyone involved but fails.

The animation is, as in the first part, great looking and very creative, for example, when it comes to the memories of Po. But landscapes to convince also know the care and variety.

Overall, should Kung Fu Panda 2 put up with criticism that is actually the same story told again in modified form?

During the first part by innovation of a Kung Fu fighting panda was able to score even more so this time it looks rather bleak when the creativity of the story is about.

How can you know otherwise?

If you think about this weakness but can ignore about it and just the only good animated pictures happy, then you may well have his fun.

For children it should be noted that especially in the dialogues of the original version to more severe sentences is that the synchronization could be defused yet again.

Otherwise, the rub is just for families but to recommend it because the children can enjoy the various animals on. And they will.

Kimmo Mustonenen – Behind The Proscenium
Follow @KimmoMustonenen

May 27, 2011July 14, 2011

The Hangover Part II [REVIEW]

Manka Bros., Khan Manka, Kimmo Mustonenen, Behind The Proscenium, Kyrle Lendhoffer, Todd Phillips, The Hangover Part 2, Craig Mazin, Scot Armstrong, Bradley Cooper, Ed Helms, Zach Galifianakis, Justin Bartha, Ken Jeong, Paul Giamatti, Mike Tyson, Jeffrey Tambor, mason Lee, Jamie Chung, Sasha Barrese, Gillian Vigman, Aroon Seeboonruang, Nirut Sirichanya, Yasmin Lee, Nick Cassavetes, Sondra Currie, Schnitrnunt Busarakamwong, Bryan Callen, Brody Stevens, Nimit Luksameepong, Michael Berry, Andrew Howard, Danai Thiengdham, Thana Srisuke, Pairot Noiply, Penpak Sirikul, Sanita Jai-Ua, Chanicha Shindejanichakul, Vithaya Pansringarm, Kim Lee, Palakorn Chaiklang, Palakorn Gunjina, Pongsatorn Sawadchatchawan, Kaweeit Chaikaew, Pure Watanabe, Rattana Janprasit, Jetsada Yuktabutra, Tanner Maguire, William A. Johnson, Aedin Mincks, Dylan Boyack, William Jiang, Lynne Kidder, Fred North, Crystal, Christina Ebert, Karen Jean Wu, Steve Bing, Scott Budnick, Joseph Garner, Daniel Goldberg, Jon Jashni, Chris Lowenstein, David Siegel, Thomas Tull, Vineet, Jeffrey Wetzel, Christophe Beck, Lawrence Sher, Debra Neil-Fisher, Mike Sale, Oliver Ackermann, Jennifer Corey, David Clark, Lloyd Bunnak, Jeanne Byrd, Fred Fein, Tim Williams

The Hangover Part II

With Wit, Reviewed By Kimmo Mustonenen

The new adventures of Phil, Alan and Doug, who embark on a journey in the exotic Thailand for the wedding of Stu. Obviously the stag night you will lose another “piece” (dirty!).

As usual, be faced with the need/desire to make a second chapter of a successful film is always a challenge (see “Kung Fu Panda 2″ – or don’t!). Especially when it is a comedy that does not include any serial, but that simply was lucky enough to guess a cast and a history of working well together.

The case of Hangover is a prime example: the same four rogues can repeat the success of stellar first episode?

Empirical evidence shows that the answer is yes! Huzzah!

Of course, Todd Phillips is the first to realize that one of the four is quite pointless, Doug/Justin Bartha, and in fact had already left on the roof of the hotel throughout the first film.

This time it leaves his hotel in favor of his brother’s betrothed to Stu. Teddy, by the way, is the son of Ang Lee. What?

Freed of the character who does not laugh is the trio “base” that embodies the classic stereotypes: the embarrassing Alan, who, besides being awkward all over the threshold of acceptability, it is always over the top; the clumsy Stu, that under the surface of respectability hides the nature of a beast of war; and the ever-staid Phil, who besides being the “beautiful” is also consciousness (this is my longest sentence).

To catch the public and raise the bar even further, the director, increasing the coefficient of action of the film and makes it even more surreal situations already at the limit.

The first move: to move to Bangkok’s after Las Vegas in America there would be nothing at then – Alan to zero and place a tattoo-also identical to that of Tyson in the face-to Stu. Really.

Obviously this time someone will disappear, but will leave a finger as a souvenir!

No babies, but mostly monkeys and nothing she blonde with blue eyes, but a transvestite Thai and if not enough here is the return of Mr. Chow’s more chilling than ever. Yes.

Needless to say, “reel” final photo is from censure (and probably will, not in Europe).

At the end of the second episode is a more Eastern and more adrenaline than the first, but any coach will confirm that: Never change a winning team, though we doubt it can get to third with the same form.

P.S. Game of Thrones is good! Get out and watch some T.V.!

Kimmo Mustonenen – Behind The Proscenium
Follow @KimmoMustonenen

May 25, 2011June 1, 2011

Bridesmaids [REVIEW]

Bridesmaids

With Wit, Reviewed By Kimmo Mustonenen

Yes, I know I’m not the target audience for a movie called Bridesmaids.

But if a producer Judd Apatow guarantees with its name, then this promises to be something different to what the title suggests. And as expected, is also a film Bridesmaids of opposites.

This is thoroughly Chick Flick, but the only genre in which a woman with the words “It’s like hot lava” poops in a sink (yes!).

It is a film about female friendships, but in a way that men can understand very well because he stringing together not only Sex And The City bimbo stereotypes. It is a film one can laugh, the one affected and one marks his sincere compassion for all figures.

The pivotal point of the bride alarm is Kristen Wiig, who is their role vulnerable, but strong play. It is one of the few women in Hollywood who are really funny without descending into silliness.

Although it appears from a foot in the next, it never seems ridiculous, and as a spectator while you laugh over their misfortunes, but never over (at) it.

Instead, you feel with her and pressed her fingers crossed that she finds it to a successful conclusion. Must be comedies, then the audience does not care.

That’s bad.

For many years Kristen Wiig fans of this unequal, long, emotionally engaging and representing discreetly ambitious film is a welcome and overdue step away from their popular skits on Saturday Night Live and toward something that is sustainable and powerful. Apart from this it is a pretty funny movie.

If Bridesmaids is a women’s film, then call me quiet a woman. The film is witty and funny, touching and lewd. It crosses borders by making it cheerfully ignored.

In a moment of alarm for a bride is broad-gauge farce explores the sex (but not enough), from the standpoint of a woman from the next moment then it is a comedy of manners and class, which plays off against each other two bridesmaids.

If I were waiving thumbs, Bridesmaids would get more thumbs than my hand part protrudes.

And that is good.

Kimmo Mustonenen – Behind The Proscenium (Kimmo On Kino)

May 24, 2011May 31, 2011

This Must Be The Place [REVIEW]

Manka Bros., Khan Manka, Behind the Proscenium, Kyrle Lendhoffer, Kimmo Mustonenen, Paolo Sorrentino, Umberto Contarello, Sean Penn, Fraces McDormand, Judd Hirsch, Eve Hewson, Kerry Condon, Harry Dean Stanton, Joyce Van Patten, David Byrne, Olwen Fourere, Shea Wingham, Liron Levo, Simon Delaney, Heinze Lieven, Seth Adkins, Peter Carey, Sarah Carroll, Ron Coden, Bern Cohen, Tim Craiger, Davis Gloff, Grant Goodman, Kris Graverson, Robert Herrick, Jann Hight, Julia Ho, Sarab Kamoo, Sam Keeley, Kef Lee, Madge Levinson, Andrea Mellos, Gordon Michaels, Gavin O'Connor, Clarence Olinger, Inga R. Wilson, Elli, Dave Krieger, Mark C. Schwarz, Joseph Smith, Ronald M. Bozman, Carlotta Calori, Francesca Cima, Nicola Giuliano, Ed Guiney, Andrew Lowe, Stefano Massenzi, Andrea Occhipinti, Viola Prestieri, Laurent Petin, Michele Petin, Will Oldham, Luca Bigazzi, Cristiano Travaglioli, dooner, Lava Buckley, Piero Messina, Cannes Film Festival, Tree of Life, Terrence Malick, Alice Cooper

This Must Be The Place

With wit, reviewed by Kimmo Mustonenen

Here’s another “Nazi” this time after last week’s scene that happened in with Lars Von Trier.

This time by Paolo Sorrentino, the political correct approach and without any relation to the Prankster (he went upside down) in Trier, in “THIS MUST BE THE PLACE” is opposite of an exemplary character that explains one of the greatest actresses of the era, Sean Penn.

As another type rocker Alice Cooper comes to America to seek his dark character a Nazi actually means bringing the target of revenge and strong parental memory.

What?

We will give the Commission President De Niro a prize? The suspect, to be honest.

(As indeed it was Terence Malick not stepped foot in order to hear “anyone” yes “to the asking the long and short, for the experiential ecstatic experience “TREE OF LIFE“.)

Sean Penn said the film collaboration with Sorrentino was excellent and that somehow it had assessed the potential of this director, from Cannes in 2008.

For the film, which will describe a visual narrative, himself Sorrentino said he talked about working in America is something that clearly makes you realize that this country is “THE LAND OF CINEMA”, and how to filming the streets is something unprecedented.

But, Mr. Sorrentino, what it means for you finally the relationship of characters in the film?

“But this first of all,” he said, and continues “first of all we have before us the relationship between a former Nazi and a rocker older dude, which can not be stopped or rock and roll, nor child, so this is all the narrative challenge for me, this polarity.“

The “THIS MUST BE THE PLACE” is a powerful film. The memory of the vengeance and the projection of guilt watering the frame.

The Penn, this robust actor of character, stands as an irresistible pillar in the center of this creation, without showing that anything can escape from within the accuracy limit of his personality, as we move towards the big finale.

YES!

With this film, which complements the image interpretation and word, now the director establishes the tone and opens the door to a bright future films.

Let us take, although it is surprising to me the Golden Palm in this movie (I would have this be given). I insist on the Terrence Malick and a second level in front of the dynamics of the best years long, the likelihood of a third Golden Palm, which in this case will make history.

But do you think De Niro would prefer the Belgian social realists of minimalism, from the mystic fellow? Not think so!

Even when Ginnifer Goodwin’s birthday was yesterday. Love.

Kimmo Mustonenen – Behind The Proscenium
Follow @KimmoMustonenen

May 23, 2011May 31, 2011

The Tree Of Life [REVIEW]

The Tree Of Life

With wit, reviewed by Kimmo Mustonenen

Sometimes a filmmaker’s own reputation also be fatal.

This applies even if one of the industry has such a legendary reputation as Terrence Malick.

With only two films in the 1970s (Badlands, 1973 and In the Days of Heaven, 1978), he became aware of and was regarded as a gifted poet of American cinema.

The myth was also fueled by his passion for philosophy and his mysterious withdrawals from the film industry, his now 40-year career in this ensured that Malick in time only four feature films has been realized as a whole.

No wonder that after this history, the expectations of Terrence Malick’s long-promised movie The Tree of Life were huge – maybe too huge.

At the press screening in Cannes film was the least quieter applause with clearly audible boos considered next.

What happened? Indeed.

On the surface, Malick tells of the struggle between two competing principles in the world whose existence and rivalry it represents the basis of a family. These lives during the late 1950s and early 1960s in Waco, Texas and consists of a sternly father (Brad Pitt) and a mild, often a little dreamy-acting, understanding and empathy capable mother (Jessica Chastain – much like Ginnifer Goodwin in Bigger Love, but less cute) and their three sons, of particularly ,among Jack (Hunter McCracken), is central, especially because he always gets together with his father.

What?

Than in a swimming accident, one of the other two brothers died (and it is for the later mysterious appearance and disappearance of this child are also numerous other interpretations), is the family, which is of choleric father out with a heavy hand, before a crucial test.

In later years, recalls Jack (played by Sean Penn as an adulterer) at this time and tried to work with his life by remembering to come to terms. However, there are many things in history that remains open, because a number is only suggested. And it could give almost every turn, a different explanation.

Malick, a great fondness for detailed descriptions of nature, that has, at least since his magical pictures from the 1970s, where wheat fields like a giant red sea in the wind sway known.

In The Tree of Life director dares even a twenty-minute excursion into the world of the elements and shows images of exquisite beauty, the sequence almost has a visual trip will leave the drug (just say “yes”).

Bizarrely shaped rock formations, underwater photographs, swaying fields of sunflowers, volcanic eruptions and other illustrations of the forces of nature are in sum probably the entire duration of the film for more picture to see it in about as the people whose story the film tells

What?

Also during the story, the basis for these excursions is the contemplative lives, mainly through the power of images and their uniqueness. There is hardly a setting that does not attract attention, detail, dynamic solution looking for (and find).

Constantly in motion, the camera hovers between people, cuts to the people, then jumps back in detail or extreme wide angle, the composed landscape shots are carefully removed from and thus forms a picture puzzle of lamenting elegance.

Above that is on the soundtrack is a mix of sparse dialogue, detailed off-narration, natural sounds and a lot of classical and sacred music, often with a chorus presented one that carried the tone of the narration strengthened – only to be softened later up.

The Tree of Life is a thoroughly ambiguous work, which at least partly, as fascinating as puzzles gives up (and at least two-three-seen four times or have to get used one way thicket of interpretations and possible interpretations has beaten the by). And even then, in discussions with others, resulting in conversation more and more signs and directions or as a model Martin Heidegger would say Malick, “Ways and blind alleys.”

Me, too.

A film for the exquisite viewfinder – and definitely in a double sense. Right?

Kimmo Mustonenen – Behind The Proscenium
Follow @KimmoMustonenen

May 20, 2011May 31, 2011

Pirates Of The Caribbean: On Stranger Tides [REVIEW]

Pirates Of The Caribbean: On Stranger Tides

With wit, reviewed by Kimmo Mustonenen

In his latest adventure, goes fourth from Captain Jack Sparrow (Johnny Depp) on the search for the fabled fountain of youth. But not only he, the Spaniards have learned of the promising young well and has sent three ships.

The English crown is again the idea of an immortal Catholic monarchs not enthusiastic and asked why Jack’s eternal rival Hector Barbossa (Geoffrey Rush) with the search.

Officially, he is now sailing as a privateer flying the flag of the British Royal Navy. And then there is an impostor, who claims to be Jack Sparrow, and also hiring a team in London for an expedition

The race to eternal life, the counterparties to exotic locations and great in the middle into an adventure. Mermaids (!), which prove to be far more dangerous than one would expect generally, voodoo, zombie sailors and the legendary pirate Blackbeard (Ian McShane) meet Jack on his way.

Is the most dangerous to him but once a woman, Angelica (Penelope Cruz) he shares a common past – what plans the master of fraud and conspiracy has for the future, Jack is initially remains a mystery.

Bruckheimer, Depp, the Fourth: The producer and his favorite actors put in the new Pirates of the Caribbean back to the wheel and spin the finest yarns.

Like the first three parts, which together have recorded over 2.7 billion U.S. dollars, has Strange Tides beautiful to look, exciting entertainment for a mass audience, and still is Johnny Depp, the role of Jack Sparrow as the Body written.

Pirate Captain includes this time the best moments of the film – it is again a pleasure to see how the actor and his dreadlock mane and felt rum flag staggering and mumbling from one adventure to the next stumble, even the most absurd situations Stoic masters, always charming, always bold and always attentive to his own advantage. Oh, Johnny!

Even at first glance offers Alien Tide with its opulent furnishings. The move by Penny Rose-designed costumes and sets of the Oscar-winning production designer John Myhre viewers immediately back to the 18th Century but no further. The latter has surpassed him in the first quarter of the film itself, because it plays in London.

Place on a remote Caribbean island or in a dilapidated pirate Jack Sparrow may now say in the metropolis at the heart of the British Empire mean mayhem – of which he makes frequent use.

What?

Before that is not even an involuntary audience with His Majesty King George immune. This was before by stutter stricken he was.

Also on Myhre’s account go to extraordinary pirate ships, which of course in the new Pirates of the Caribbean may not be missing. The “Black Pearl” this time puts although a pause, but as Jack’s one true love or the submersible “Flying Dutchman” from Pirates of the Caribbean 2, the filmmakers leave in “Strange Tides” another ship from the deck that has no equal looking for: Blackbeard’s “Queen Anne’s Revenge”.

Macabre decorated with the bones of his victims, the bow is a creepy figurehead, the character played by Ian McShane, dark pirate control them with a wave of his sword.

Also directed by Rob Marshall, who has replaced three parts Gore Verbinski, it remains a hallmark of the Pirates of the Caribbean series that they spiced the classic genre of the pirate movie with all sorts of fantasy elements.

Fantastic is the journey that the excellent ensemble of actors is taking to Johnny Depp, Ian McShane, Penelope Cruz and Geoffrey Rush to rousing music by Hans Zimmer, to the end.

It is developing an exciting, but also little surprising story – perhaps the only criticism which one can make the film. Remained to be hoped that the creators go out in the next few parts will never come out of ideas.

Better than the first part was not a Pirates of the Caribbean everything – even Alien Tide is “only” a very good pirate movie with Johnny Depp again superb in the lead role.

Hollywood News! Jennifer Lawrence as Katniss in The Games of Hunger? No way Hozay! You know who I rather… and her initials G. Goodwin! Make it so, Nikki Finke!!!

Kimmo Mustonenen – Behind The Proscenium
Follow @KimmoMustonenen

May 20, 2011May 31, 2011

Melancholia [REVIEW]

Manka Bros., Khan Manka, Jill Kennedy, OnMedea, Behind The Proscenium, Kimmo Mustonenen, Lars Von Trier, Kyrle Lendhoffer, Kyrle Lindhoffer, Ben Silverman, movie review, Melancholia, Cannes press conference, Kirsten Dunst, Kiefer Sutherland, Dogma, enfant terrible, Charlotte Gainsbourg, Keifer Sutherland, Charlotte Rampling, John Hurt, Alexander Skarsgard, Stellan Skarsgard, Brady Corbet, Udo Kier, Jesper Christensen, Deborah Fronko, Cameron Spurr, Bettina Brokemper, Remi Burah, Madeleine Edman, Thomas Eskilsson, Meta Louise Foldager, Peter Garde, Marianne Jul Hansen, Peter Aalbaek Jensen, Lars Jonsson, Katrine Sahlstrom, Marianne Slot, Louise Vesth, Manuel Alberto Claro, Morten Hojbjerg, Molly Marlene Stensgaard, Jette Lehmann, Jessica Balac, Mouns Overgaard, Maj-Britt Paulmann, Peter Hjorth, Pontus Klange, Anders Refn, James Velasquez, Rikard Andersson, Klas Ankelstam, Anna Lundin

Is Nazi lover Lars now feeling “Melancholia” (ha!)?

With wit, reviewed by guest critic Kimmo Mustonenen

Impacts Cannes: The apocalyptic drama “Melancholia” are pushed into the background – of a provocateur Lars von Trier and his statement that he was a Nazi.

The man is 55, but his reputation as the eternal enfant terrible of cinema, he apparently wants to do justice to all eternity. Not only in his radical films for which he is loved all over the world and feared, but also outside in a lot more confusing life (is his).

At the press conference in Cannes on Wednesday afternoon to his apocalyptic drama “Melancholia”, he was – unfortunately – in this respect too great shape.

He said not only to gentle horror of his leading lady Kirsten Dunst, she was suffering from depression, but claimed this week to shoot on the request of his actors a porno. Yes!

What?

And when this was not enough, he outed himself as a Nazi even – after his family had German roots. Hitler was indeed made “a few bad things”, but “I can imagine him in his bunker, in the end, sad.” Lordy.

The manager of the Film Festival will take place this kind sardonic submissions not funny. In the early evening, they said in such a short communiqué as sharp, they would never allow such submissions become the stage of Cannes.

Lars von Trier had to ask an explanation for his behavior, now apologized, saying he had “carried away by a provocation” to.

The most peculiar tendency to self-promotion was already in the press release for “Melancholia” are visible. There, Lars von Trier makes ado self insult to the principle.

“Cream of the Cream,” his film has become, and only the poster, the film stills, the trailer: The see everything “sort of shit” from. Likely to say the enfant terrible with the fact that his new film is a great place. In any case, somehow.

See? I am not afraid to say it.

At least it is pleasing – or so it seemed up to the press conference – that Lars von Trier has made a deep depression, he set two years ago with “Antichrist” is a frightening monument, found apparently.

“Melancholia” but told by an identically-giant planet speed towards the earth and swallows them, of nothing less than the end of the world – by swallowing (what?).

But instead of torturing his film characters, as then, his audience physically and mentally, Lars von Trier celebrates its fatalism and nihilism in a disaster film, as we have seen him in such peace before. And for his concise history, he needs only one scene with highly transparent personnel.

What?

Justine (Kirsten Dunst in fine forming, but no Ginnifer Goodwin) and Michael (Alexander Skarsgard) celebrate their wedding in a castle, one with an adjacent golf course on the lake, Justine’s sister, Claire (Charlotte Gainsbourg) and her husband John (Kiefer Sutherland).

With the hand-held camera filmed nervously close to the people (like “Cloverfield” – awesome!), the party, not least through active support of the embodied by Charlotte Rampling bride’s mother, similarly gruesome next, as was the family party in Thomas Vinterberg’s Dogma classic “Festen” (1998).

The couple separated on the wedding night, and the mentally unstable Justine remains with Claire’s family on the property alone. Meanwhile, the planet is approaching inexorably Melancholia: In five days he should, say the optimists among scientists, just pass by the earth.

Only Justine (turning whiter)- or rather, feel – better. And she suspects the reason the reverse story of creation. The earth is as evil as the earthlings, and a life out in space after the big bang, there is not anyway. But this is too much.

If I say again, why see it, no?

A new masterpiece by Lars von Trier? In “Dancer in the Dark”, which he won the Golden Palm in 2000, reaches “Melancholia” not approach (“Melancholia” to “Dancer in the Dark” – I’m not clear). But even if the movie almost seems to shrink in proportion as the light blue shimmering star grows into full-length canvas size, it remains a suggestive impressive experience.

Just like the astronomers, because if the human race should flourish once a similar fate, please call the killer planet differently. Like Conan. Or Jack Bauer.

“Melancholy” does not kill, but is a worthy temperament that helps understand life.

Kimmo Mustonenen – Behind The Proscenium
Follow @KimmoMustonenen

P.S. Ginnifer Goodwin to make fun in new television serial this fall on television! More news when known!

May 12, 2011May 31, 2011

The Beaver [REVIEW]

Jodie Foster, Mel Gibson, Kyle Killen, Cherry Jones, Anton Yelchin, Riley Thomas Stewart, Zachary Booth, Jennifer Lawrence, Jeff Corbett, Baylen Thomas, Sam Breslin Wright, Kelly Coffield Park, Michael Rivera, Kris Arnold, Elizabeth Kaledin, Matt Lauer, Jon Stewart, Terry Gross, Folake Olowofoyeku, Lorna Pruce, Bill Massof, Diane Dreyer, Steve Golin, Keith Redmon, Ann Ruark, Marcelo Zarvos, Hagen Bogdanski, Lynzee Klingman, Allison Hall, Avy Kaufman, Gwen Bialic, Guy Efrat, marcos Gonzalez Palma, Francisco Ortiz, Emma Baksi, Charles Birns, Erik Feig, Matthew Fleischman, Michael Gugger, Manka Bros., Khan Manka, Behind The Proscenium, Kyrle Lendhoffer, Kimmo Mustonenen

With wit, reviewed by Kimmo Mustonenen

“The Beaver” is nearly successful, despite the condition of his film script, which was capable I simply do not (cannot) to assume. I confess it is possible, too, that a man could be in the lowest point in the situation, to be healed, by project engineering his psyche into a hand puppet.

I am not it am possible safe, or even advisable to form a serious film over. What? We go through the film with Mel Gibson, which he carries one toothy beaver on its left hand, and which an entire lot of dis-believingness causes, so that we shift. Over.

Nevertheless is here different of Mel Gibson’s-fine achievements, an announcement that he is finally a great actor.

His personal life is in the ruins because of the illness of dipsomania (and Russians), which fights it still with (and with the Russian). He I thinks, which is responsible for his impudent acts and statements, that this is not the good man, who I saw many movies in.

Of, which I know over alcoholism, I believe that he goes through personality conflict that it is content on some days and by rage and crazy head on others used up, and that such changes are symptoms of the illness. Form your own diagnosis. I did.

It took something courage of master Jodie Foster to refer this film in Gibson. I believe that her Gibson knows, his good side and respect its talent. It was certainly the right choice for this material.

Everything, his troubles, summed by looking by her opening shot, an exhausted man, who swims on a raft in a swimming pool, his arms broad like crucified the Christian.

A voice (later uncovered, around the Beaver to be had, what?) informs us that this dark Walter is a man, thus deeply in the lowest point, it his family alienated and nearly his business destroyed. Bummer.

We meet his much-suffering Mrs. Meredith (Jodie Foster), its applied son carrier (Anton Yelchin) and its doubting colleagues. Meredith throws him finally out, not without love, but love with.

He buys a bottle, bangs into a motel, tried to kill himself and by the hand puppet (Beaver) is interrupted. It finds that the puppet has a voice, he lets it speak for him and begins to again enter his life of the previous past.

Brillianter even still, Gibson and author Kyle Killen do not form you the slightest attempt to use the illusion of ventriloquism; Gibson manipulates the puppet and speaks of its own mouth, in an admirable if unexplainable Cockney accent.

His life improves in kinds, which I leave, so that you discover, yourself. I leave you also to surprise around me if Matt Lauer in wait on a material “Today” program quite became with a hand puppet interview, as it does here. What?

A parallel plan refers carriers, which son also, whose gift, papers for schoolmates is to be written, who read, as if they were written by those class participants themselves. What?

The category Valedictorian asks it to write you a speech. If she’s (she’s a she, if that is unclear) that intelligently, why can’t write it? She’s however, that interesting to go through problems, the carriers in one discovers lateral history, bending those, to lead us away from the film’s through-line.

Which kind of the film with the same letters however “The Beaver” does not result to be? We never know.

But without “The Beaver” we would have never witnessed a sexual threesome, a hand puppet with including. Juicy.

Maintaining Gibson must be serious several times, with the production of this film, but don’t you think when filming this sex scene, the urge to suppress laugheter had too much pain? That is the deadly error in this sincere effort.

So well, as Gibson is, his character is gotten caught still between the tragedy of the man and the absurdity of “The Beaver”.

One thumb waiving high. Two, but for the missing of Ginnifer Goodwin. She should be in every film.

Even Fast and the Furious Five, which I will be reviewing soon.

Kimmo Mustonenen – Behind The Proscenium
Follow @KimmoMustonenen

May 11, 2011May 31, 2011

Priest [REVIEW]

Paul Bettany, Karl Urban, Cam Gigandet, Maggie Q, Lily Collins, Brad Dourif, Stephen Moyer, Christopher Plummer, Alan Dale, Madchen Amick, Jacob Hopkins, Dave Florek, Joel Polinsky, Josh Wingate, Jon Braver, Casey Pieretti, Theo Kypri, John Griffin, David Backus, Roger Stoneburner, David Bianchi, Tanoai Reed, Arnold Chon, Henry Kingi Jr, Cory Goodman, Scott Charles Stewart, Min-Woo Hyung, Austin Priester, Marilyn Brett, Kanin Howell, Julie Mond, Michael D. Nye, Reiner Schone, Kevin T. McCarthy, Boyuen, Anthony Azizi, Pramod Kumar, Lafayette R. Dorsey, Josh Bratman, Michael De Luca, Joshua Donen, Glenn S. Gainor, Steve Galloway, Stuart J. Levy, Mitchell Peck, Sam Raimi, Nicolas Stern, Christopher Young, Don Burgess, Lisa Zeno Churgin, Rebecca Weigold, Rick Montgomery, Albert Cho, Aaron Critchlow, Steve Danton, Charles Gibson, Cecilia Mak, Jennifer Blair, Dawn Turner, Zia Bales, Matthew Cuny, John Graham, Manka Bros., Khan Manka, Kyrle Lendhoffer, Kimmo Mustonenen, Behind The Proscenium, movie blog, movie reviews, Rotten Tomatoes

Priest

With wit, reviewed by Kimmo Mustonenen

Another comic, another fairy tale, everything is so commonplace that one can only sit back and anticipate the events of the film.

Even the trump card – an explanation of all that is happening on the screen, issued at the beginning of the tape.

What?

And, apparently, the authors rely on the most stupid – you are no parables, all shows pictures, against which the voice of simple monosyllabic sentences, explains:

“There have always been people, and have always been vampires.”

Thanks Voice!

In the distant future, the remnants of civilization are concentrated in cities surrounded by wasteland. In the desert, scattered small settlements and numerous colony-reservation containing vampires.

About how the U.S. turned into a desert, why in the towns, settlements, all seem to the Wild West, and big cities are more like dungeons that hold the power of the totalitarian-minded priests – come on now! Not reported!

In the comic, the previous film, showing only the Middle Ages and the recent past, but says nothing about what needed nuclear carpet bombing.

However, one detail still unknown – the vampires have helped overcome the guys from the church SWAT called “pastors.” These brisk as worms, priests, nearly all suppressed the rebellion of vampires, but after all that they needed neither the church and were dismissed.

Everything changes after one town attacked the vampires and kidnapped relative of one of the pastors. That, of course, goes against the decision of the church council and sent to rescue a girl who suddenly (!) turns out to be his daughter. Well, the church council also not be a fool after sending him to the other shepherds with orders to return to the apostate dead or alive.

I always want to look into the eyes of filmmakers, who took off one of squalor, not complacent, and immediately, the very next day after failing to hire them to be taken to create a new epic movie.

What?

I must admit that Scott Charles Stewart learned a lot since his debut – sadly, nauseating film “Legion“, the most interesting aspect of which was an advertising trailer.

In the “Shepherd” Scott realized that, firstly, the religious themes are already not too terrified minds, especially those viewers that they believe in the Buddha and other Bhagavad-Gita, and secondly, two billion potential viewers on Christian motives for and large, do not care.

Therefore, hastily changing the archangels with the priests uncertain religion, only the cross (and even then – not canonical) reminiscent of Christianity, and all sorts of adversity Doomsday – and also vampires.

Still, the film is ready. Especially handy is the sidekick Paul Bethany, has played in a masterpiece of “Legion” of the main good-natured person that went against God’s will.

“What’s next?” – thought Scott Charles Stewart. Indeed, one priest, struggling with the vampires, does not go far, and in general – “Blade” is still fresh in memory (tax evasion). Means it is necessary to add something, right?

The main villain invented obviously under the influence of the film “John Hex“- yet another monstrously miserable comics masterpiece, as a vampire in a cowboy outfit (with a dog, and a fox… Megan Fox that is. What?) – it’s sort of cool, not un-sucky. It turned out funny film – it is not clear to whom it is intended.

Fans of horror and vampire fighters will spit on the pathetic dialogue, causing a gagging impulse, whereas these impulses should call the cruelty of prohibitive. Kids watch this film – though there’s no nudity and vulgarity, to sleep after such horror, kids will, quite frankly, bad. BAD!

Mass audience? It is unlikely that someone decides to go on a date for this movie here. There are only fans of the “Legion “, but judging by the collections, such – not enough to swear by.

And then there was unbearably serious Paul Bethany. In his companions gave Maggie Q playing the protagonist in love with a colleague on a religious commandos, and Cam Gigandet in the role of the local sheriff who helps the protagonist. All of this trio looks absurd – well, they did not seem like to a team, no chance to meet people of liking.

Somewhere that does not sink or float.

Or swim, by floating.

What?

And when they start talking … well, about the conversations I have already mentioned.

The only thing I can not praise this film – the visual design. Locations quite a lot you see, they are interesting and varied. Plus a few scenes where the pastor and his comrades destroy the vampires and their minions are well supplied. With regard to 3D – a help for him very little, and watch in 3D there are not at that and no one else.

Verdict : Compared with the “Legion” – this film is a real breakthrough. No “Fast and the Furious Five“, but yes. But Bethany is still dull, and Scott Charles Stewart, whatever.

Just add Ginnifer Goodwin, and at hand is a classic.

Ginnifer Goodwin. What?

Kimmo Mustonenen
Follow @KimmoMustonenen

May 5, 2011May 31, 2011

Something Borrowed [REVIEW]

Manka Bros., Khan Manka, Kyrle Lendhoffer, Behind The Proscenium, film review, Kimmo Mustonenen, Kate Hudson, Ginnifer Goodwin, Colin Egglesfield, John Krasinski, Steve Howey, Ashley Williams, Geoff Pierson, Jill Eikenberry, Jonathan Epstein, Leia Thompson, Sarah Baldwin, Mark La Mura, Lindsay Ryan, Kirsten Day, Christopher Peuler, Herb Lieberz, Jimmy Palumbo, Mary O'Rourke, Marina Hirschfeld, Tim Dunavant, Noel Poyner, P.T. Walkley, Scott Hollingsworth, Nicky Kulund, Jared Schlemovitz, Yolanda T. Cochran, Broderick Johnson, Andrew Kosove, Aaron Lubin, Pamela Schein Murphy, Ellen H. Schwartz, Molly Smith, Hilary Swank, Steven P. Wegner, Alex Wurman, Charles Minsky, John Axelrad, Sari Knight, Mandy Sherman, jan Musky, David Bausch, Keith Adams, Alan B. Curtiss, John Carrafa, Marlo Carroll, Kristyn Macready, Valerie Joy Wilson, Emily Giffin, Jennie Snyder, Luke Greenfield

Ladies and gentlemen, dear loving readers. As I, Kyrle Lendhoffer, put finger to keyboard today I am thankful that I have a wonderful friend like Kimmo Mustonenen. While I work (and play!) to accommodate myself to my new Los Angeles lifestyle, I can fill my column with the witty stylings of that Fabulous Finn Fan-tard – Kimmo. He’s been using my press credentials to good effect. And with that – BEHOLD! Something Borrowed. Go, Kimmo… GO!

Something Borrowed

With wit, reviewed by Kimmo Mustonenen.

Rachel and Darcy have her whole life long best friends. The two could not be different.

While Rachel has, in recent years, studied law and taught like to make their life into something decent, to Darcy has hung around at parties, looking for Mr. Right.

This blonde has found the ultimate in Party Queen Rachel’s fellow students Dex.

Rachel actually had his eye on the budding lawyer, has left her best friend, but then the field and accepted the freshly baked love happiness in the years to come without comment.

At Rachel’s 30^th birthday and only weeks before the wedding of Darcy and Dex admits she Dex in a moment of weakness, however, that she was in love, as a student up to his ears in it.

Dex must have had similar feelings for Rachel, as it comes, as it had to: the two end up in bed.

How could this happen? Fishing in foreign waters – and then another in which her best friend? What?

It fits not at all to the faithful and generous Rachel, or does it?

With Something Borrowed the screen is once again haunted by a romantic comedy.

No other genre is to satisfy the female audience easier and faster than this one.

Nice must it be romantic, a bit humorous, though sometimes exciting, a little tragic, or a touch kitschy. In short, a romantic comedy, with the right ingredients, baked quickly.

Unfortunately, one can, however, Something Borrowed not rush into the category of film, cinema halls and untroubled win hearts in no time for themselves.

Luke Greenfield’s adaptation of the novel by Emily Giffin relies on familiar genre patterns, adds the elements together, however, failed particularly to a film.

The well-known game to conquer the heart boys is “foreign fishing” by playing far too long. 110 minutes of film wind whipped the two opposite players, disguised in the best of friends costume, a constructed story corner after another.

The whole structure looses more credibility and calls for an ever longer a breath from the audience. “She gets it, they do not get it …” The flower is plucked from the earth, has more petals than it can bear on its delicate stem.

Even the most interesting, though not necessarily a new idea, to have two best friends who secretly mutate to rival inside the race for the dream man, saves the romantic comedy is not over its verbosity and lack of wit.

Something Borrowed must ultimately be satisfied to be a film that has a nice feature that in the highly competitive genre can not compete, however.

Too bad, because with Kate Hudson and Ginnifer Goodwin is Something Borrowed not only on two well-known, but also look at two talented leading ladies. While Kate Hudson, for her role as bitchy Liv from Bride Wars, expands further, there Ginnifer Goodwin, the chubby girl who longs for nothing more than to love and affection skillfully, lovingly, please.

Unfortunately, the monotonous script does not provide a good platform for the interaction of the two. While one would have liked to see from Hudson also got another aspect, one can permanently dreamy/sad quickly to a Goodwin only partly borne.

While everything is threatening to Borrowed a lengthy and unimaginative uniformity to blur, Ethan (John Krasinski) appears in the only bright spot imaginative character structure.

The few funny scenes to his credit – that is, given the short screen time that has Krasinski, but ultimately filled only half as good as it could have been. A bit more “Ethan” if Something Borrowed certainly been good, and for more variety in the otherwise rather dull, if in between time and again, provided nice entertaining narrative flow.

If only.

But Goodwin is real cute.

Kimmo Mustonenen
Follow @KimmoMustonenen

May 2, 2011May 31, 2011

Thor

Manka Bros., Khan Manka, Kyrle Lendhoffer, Kimmo Mustonenen, Kenneth Branagh, Ashley Miller, Zack Stentz, Don Payne, J. Michael Straczynski, Mark Protosevich, Stan Lee, Larry Lieber, Jack Kirby, Chris Hemsworth, Natalie Portman, Tom Hiddleston, Anthony Hopkins, Stellan Skarsgard, Kat Dennings, Clark Gregg, Idris Elba, Colm Feore, Ray Stevenson, Tadanobu Asano, Josh Dallas, Jaimie Alexander, Rene Russo, Adriana Barraza, Maximiliano Hernandez, Richard Cetrone, Darren Kendrick, Joshua Cox, Justice Smith, Joseph Gatt, Luke Massy, Matthew David Ducey, Jason Camp, Buddy Sosthand, Blake Silver, Jamie McShane, Dale Godboldo, Patrick O'Brien Demsey, Jim Palmer, Seth Coltan, Ryan Schaefer, Matt Battaglia, Joel McCrary, Isaac Kappy, Juliet Lopez, Rob Mars, Carrie Lazar, Harley Graham, Alexander Wright, Hilary Pringle, Shawn-Caulin Young, Kinsey McLean, Kelly Hawthorne, Dakota Goyo, Ted Allpress, Samuel L. Jackson, Jeremy Renner, Victoria Alonso, Mike Bodkin, Louis D'Esposito, Kevin Feige, Debra James, Craig Kyle, David Maisel, Patricia Whitcher, Patrick Doyle, Haris Zambarloukos, Paul Rubell, Sarah Finn, Bo Welch, Pierre Buffin, Debra James, Ben Grayson, Grit Menzzer

Dear readers, as I am still under the weather – and still getting used to living in sunny (too sunny) and beautiful (too beautiful) Los Angeles – I am happy to, once again, allow Kimmo Mustonenen to write a guest review. Here is Kimmo with a very brilliant take on Hollywood’s newest 3D blockbuster – THOR! Go, Kimmo… Go!

——————————————

Thor

By Kimmo Mustonenen

The film follows the powerful but arrogant warrior Thor, who is diagnosed from hubris at the beginning of the film. When he puts the entire Asgard in danger as he becomes manliest and refers to the earth in which he loses all his powers and becomes merely a human being again.

To begin with, I think that Thor was a very entertaining action movie, not too many working one-liners that otherwise very often seen in American action movies. The leading role in Thor played by Chris Hemsworth is a relatively new actress with not too many films under his belt, some may recognize him from the Star Trek movie? Or A Perfect Getaway? The role of the arrogant Thor is he doing well in all cases and is looking forward to see when he takes the role of Thor again in the upcoming movie The Avengers.

The girl in this film is played by none other than Natalie Portman, as you probably memorable seen in films such as No Strings Attached or Black Swan, and soon you will be able to see her in the comedy film Your Highness. But Thor, Natalie Portman plays the role of a physicist who studies the theory that they may arise portals “wormholes” between our world and other worlds. In the midst of her studies she runs goes without saying at Thor when he is sent off to Earth and the sparks hit almost directly between the two.

Then, we must not forget the wise Anthony Hopkins, who may assume the role of Odin in the film, however, he is active only barely half the movie. But he takes the role of the strict parent who just wants best for their children very well, much better than he did with his role in the film The Rite. Last and almost least, has Stellan Skarsgård a role in the movie Thor, not the biggest but not the least, he played Eric Selva in the film is friends with Natalie Portman’s character.

One last thing about film is that it really did not need to be in 3D, there is nothing in the film directly, which brings together a “wowie” feeling just because it is 3D.

In my opinion, was the movie where as good if not better without 3D. So you went and saw the movie, arrived late and tell me what you thought? Was it good? Lived it up to your expectations? Was it necessary that the film was in 3D?

Please comment!

Kimmo Mustonenen
Follow @KimmoMustonenen