Reviews by Jimmy Tancredi

This new adaptation of Charlotte Bronte's classic has its magnitude from the present work to the coeval public which has no access to literature or to the elder version.

As expected, the film has a commanding art direction by Will Hughes- Jones, which is quite lower in scale to other classics of the time, but is of equal quality in the costume, and in the choice of locations in the rejuvenation of the period in which women were simply props from their husbands, unable to participate in decisions and cursed to see the horizon of its narrow windows.

There are not many mysteries: Jane Eyre (Mia Wasikowska) is a young woman who, humiliated by her aunt and sent to a strict school, became the governess of the of Mr. Rochester's daughter (Michael Fassbender). Eventually the tormented boy is enchanted with the conviction of the girl and her presence as well as direct and clever in the way that she answers him.

So, Mia Wasikowska, who is an actress I do like, considering a little flat and not charismatic, precisely just because she can revive the coldness and austerity of a woman who hopes to achieve big dreams in life. Michael Fassbender, confirming the upward curve in his career, has an extraordinary performance as the tormented Rochester, stuck with a secret past that does not allow love.

Plus the steady direction which Cary Fukunaga mixes the superstitions of the time and turns the large estate of Rochester in a place almost in awe. What never ceases to be.

In short: it's a renowned literature told with the degree of wealth enough to be absorbed by the public, but no big mystery or innovations.

It is a rundown of the major human emotions, the singularity of each one and the variegated cultures. From the conventional happiness, to the joy disguised as everyday life and also of the anguish, sorrow, and especially the incredible divergences in the world.

It's splendid to see and hear many-sided world views, beliefs, expectations, and even fears from people in such a jovial manner.

I finished the flick with a antagonistic perception, that we are very different from each other dissimilar, but only flimsily. Inherently, we all have those days, life, longing, and suffering experienced by almost the same things. Basically we are all human, connected by the same joys.

The director Tate Taylor bet in simple stories in the design of the Crusades and that was his biggest hit, the film ended up making a decoy of both public as prizes, should appeal to all audiences, despite being a drama.

It exposed the relationship of black women working as maids in the 60's, in Mississippi, in a clear time of racial segregation, to white households, some other stories of humiliation and misery, are reported by these women who had to be strong to endure so much suffering, to see it all on the perspective of our current reality, then becomes a bit shocking, and this is not even a movie or the most violent and crude about it, some passages will even invest in a tone comic, which becomes a relief, before so many sad looks.

The female cast of the film is marvelous, Viola Davis is a wonder, and it's my favorite for the Oscars, her work moves a lot and is very realistic, Octavia Spencer is another that seems lit, fully immersed in character, for sure will be remembered for this movie. Emma Stone, here, only confirms her "Star Quality", which had already shown long ago, showed that not only holds the cast of a movie studio, as she is still a great actress, who also gives a show in the drama, since we are more accustomed to see her doing comedy. Bryce Dallas Howard is ridiculous and overwrought, like a villain from a novel by Walcyr Carrasco. In this cast, the men characters are quite rifeless and do not make much difference onto, here the strength is the in women.

By all means most people will love the movie, and absolutely most critics will find several defects. Here's what I think: The film is pure cliché, especially in the final forty minutes and applies for a retrial very cheap sentiment to please the general public. There are quite a few points made in the film just to make the viewer feel good. But you know what? It worked very well. It has stirred and felt good. It was a very pleasant experience and I cheer up for the nomination for Best Supporting Actress, which I believe will eventually happen.

I found a delightful film, beautiful script, enjoyable acting, beautiful art direction and everything else ... What is disenchanted is knowing that in Iran and many other countries with this "religion" exists outside of fiction, and women are deprived of many things. The world has gone through so much and it has not changed yet.

On the political level this film is sensational! It's a real lesson about the current "circumstances" that Iranian society is found, a consequence of the xiita revolution which occurred in country in the late 1970, which overthrew a dictator and the other was placed in power.
The conversation they have in the "rental shop" shows well, and even an ironic way, the manipulation of the media and culture promoted by the government, as well as references and links to the human rights from the movie, which are fantastic. The "submission" of the women to men, by imposition, is also present in much of the film, many scenes that reach right to revolt and indignation.

However, the romance part, although the relationship between them is beautiful and the characters were combined, is too vague and ends up being disappointing, the final says it so.
I was under the impression that the beginning is the end of the film, was so open that I ended up leaving that question.

The Tree of Life by Terrence Malick is brave and goes to the limit of the philosophical weights always pretentious and complex, through an intricate montage of images and sounds (yes, who knows what Godard wanted to do in terms of narrative language in Film Socialisme and failed miserably), we see the beginning and the end of life, from the the macro to the microcosm.

The incredible sequence of 18 minutes following the creation of life in the universe from the Big Bang to the simplest cell in the earth is a catharsis. Uncommon in the today’s cinema, it shows signs of what the film is a work unique sensory, a spectacle narrated Kubrickian, 2001 – A Space Odyssey of our time, all recreated from the lens of the Hubble telescope and Douglas Trumbull, coincidentally or not, a veteran of the special effects who also participated in 2001.

The sequence serves as a reallocation of human life on a universal scale, we are all so tiny towards everything that the universe has passed and still arrogant enough to believe that everything revolves around us, as seen in the permanent collections of "God" something which is totally absent in the film. The loss of one human life even though affects the undeniable and irreversible way the life all around us, is negligible towards everything else. It is a double-edged sword, because every minute we are reminded through memorable images with the photography by Emmanuel Lubezki, which are often the simplest things, life is found in every corner of the planet, each microorganism is a miracle for itself that defies existence.

Although Sean Penn doesn’t even have a dialogue in the film, his role is crucial to represent the grief of the modern world that increasingly moves away from nature and grace, and why not, the enjoyment of life itself. This fellowship has been lost, and not towards the tacky thing, but through the symbolic gesture of planting a tree and create a life that is relegated to the memories, life just passing without realizing it. It is a sadden detachment set in depressed physiognomy of Jack. Because all that time went too fast, and somehow never going to look real.

It is good to note how far off the narration for the movie itself contributes, the personality of each character is made forcefully, and the dialogue is unnecessary. Life is unable to be defined by words, just images you are entitled.
That's why this film was conceived as a work so important to feel alive , like the purest art . A gesture, like the hand of a father resting on the shoulder of a child choked with regret, the foot of a newborn child insured by the hands of the same father, barefoot in wet grass, a look, no matter how small, who can only be captured with proper fluidity by the camera upsidedown suggesting all this intimacy.
And that's why despite the controversial end, the feeling of leaving the exhibition hall of Tree of Life is such a rewarding experience. I am an atheist and yet I must say I felt astounded by the sequence on the beach, the reunion of the father, son, brother and mother, where every word is given, only a look just to fix any remorse. Believe you in the afterlife, heaven, god or whatever, it’s an inspiring representation. And as corny as it sounds, the words whispered in a given moment is timeless, "unless you love, your life will flash by", for every single moment that gives meaning to life.

An urban legend getting an American production above the average, even with amateurish technical about. However, this is the great charm of the film, to bring a touch of reality to something that frightens people, while not real. With an unstable nature documentary footage, the two rookies directors, Daniel Myrick and Eduardo Sanchez, lead an unusual thriller that explores witchcraft in a peculiar way and extremely evil. What is most interesting in this production, is the fact that directors can create fear in the viewer, without the least show directly the source responsible for it. Imagine what you can not see. How can you not be afraid of it?

The power of an urban legend is something that can be measured against the influence which it carries in the middle. In some cases, above the power is so vast that people around the world are interested in such stories. Based on this concept of influence, the plot of this production is a journey of three film students, to explore the long- cherished legend of the Blair Witch, however, what is shown on the screen, are just the roll of film found by police, after the mysterious disappearance of young people. Starting from a premise that the suspense has good things to come, the two directors work in the background that is extremely favorable for the development of the script.

The amateur footage further contributes to the enhancement of the heavy atmosphere, which is already present in the photography involved. The naturalness of it is the factor that close ties to production reality. The sound system works like a soundtrack orchestrated by a great professional who knows very well to put it in the context of the film. Adding these two questions film, photography and soundtrack, we get a product that pleases and amazes the viewer, while every sudden movement of the camera. It is clear in this production, the film does not require cutting-edge technological improvement, to satisfy your audience.

The script is working well and can, from the start, accumulating records that direct the viewer to understand the outcome. The development of the argument is a gradation of psychological conflicts of each character, which tracks the tempo until the final minute. Playing with the psyche of each character , the filmmakers create claustrophobic situations that reflect the viewer, keeping it stuck in that atmosphere without answers and with every move closer and with a look at the picture provided by amateur camera in the darkness of night, where the script comes to apex of the gloom .

Combining certain techniques is a superlative effort to create something new, taking the proper proportions of gender addressed. Working from the premise peculiar form, the script can do justice to what is stipulated in your synopsis so enjoyable and interesting for the audience. The technique is not mainly attributed to technology, but on good ideas, falling in the right hands. Exercising a right direction and leading the film gradually, the two rookies prove that gender is not lost, but it takes a few bumps to get it moving again.

It’s by all means a good film with great performances and a storyline that can really grab our attention. But for me, the strongest point of the movie is still showing a different side and very interesting from the "madness":

Instead of focusing on a character with clear problems (in the style, "Beautiful Mind", "Shutter Island" or "Awakenings"), what you see is a social side, collectively called the "insanity". It is this differentiated approach that allows the construction of a plot so engaging. And then, instead of having a single girl being interrupted by recurring dreams and memories, we have a whole group of girls with their youth and trimmed expectations for the drugs, isolation, fear of asking for help, and finally the "female - alpha" oppressive (lackness for a better term). And if the disease is collective, so is the cure. Only through the interaction between patients is true that the prospects of healing begin to emerge. Who hasn’t seen a group of healthy young friends having fun at the bowling alley? And genuinely defending the ice cream store? And who can doubt that the moment of maximum transparency between them, at the end of the film, was the catalyst to the improvement of them all over the 70 years?

Another unique approach of the film and just so important, is the break with that cliché: "the institution and society doesn’t want the cure of patients. "What there is, in fact, is a combination of several types of professionals, some more than others prepared, some more some less known, some more and others less willing to help. The common nurses, nurse John, psychiatrist and nurse Valerie Wick have different ways of acting and this influences sometimes negatively, sometimes positively recovery of patients. And this is no surprise, is a reflection of the society itself, composed of untrained people (Suzanna 's parents), genuinely concerned (the driver) or even "backers" of madness (as the father of Daisy).

Finally, it is interesting to notice that Brittany Murphy committed suicide, as did Wynona Rider in one of her first speeches, interrupted her career and now - with Black Swan - is already showing signs that she’s giving a comeback, Angelina Jolie is one of the most influential women in the world and been talking some truths (if anyone has read her article in "the Economist") and Elisabeth Moss to come from a family passionate about music (like her character Polly).

Swank is an undeniable talent. It may not be possessed of a beauty worthy of Hollywood standards but delights rightfully so. Casually because she played properly fair. Being a good actress is not having a perfect face.
Particularly, I think this is the best movie I've seen of hers. And there's more of hers that I have the pleasure to see...

With this film, you realize how imortant not to lose the grip of being in a classroom. Who works in such spot recognizes it. You inspire me to teach their ideas. As I am shy with the public, I need good ideas to teach. I saw this movie, great tips about it.

Bright, with riveting performances and leaves you to ponder when the letters begin to rise ...

I must confess that I am fascinated by this film . Forward to the totally uncompromising history we’d expect a film with a slack lilt. But the extraordinary sensitivity of the film, which has a very well written script, a technical part that speaks for itself and one direction with a strong personality, dynamic camera movements, well done and very tasteful, saves the film from any monotony. And I should point out that the technical part of this film is a explendid sideshow. From the wonderful photograph of the film, through excellent art direction and going to the soundtrack, leaves nothing to be desired. I think it’s sublime the script to present its characters through what they mostly like to do and thus vice versa. The narrative’s feature may sound a little strange at first, but getting into the fun and relaxed atmosphere of this great romantic comedy plus distincts viewers learn how to appreciate every minute of information as soon as every time a new character comes in. The film manages to flow well in introducing into a very interesting story full of details, sometimes not noticeable to a single examination. The great, Audrey Tautou, Amélie gave life to the most sweet and charming as possible, with wide-eyed denoting the curiosity of the character that as a child has been deprived of her social life and who somehow is learning now, at age 23, how to live in society.

I didn’t expect much from Hardwicke by the stigma of being the director of Twilight, but the movie is good, although I find it kinda underrated. Thirteen has the right footprint for the concept that proposes in its shaky shooting, editing, the soundtrack, the exaggerated characters and the extreme interpretations, which may produce a stereotyped framework, but very intense. The film highlights the formation of teenagers’ personalities, especially in the influence of mates, in this case ended up influencing Evie Tracy that without a solid family base and the most different questions of this phase eventually bowed to find people to aside. Always craziness-hilarious by the life that we don’t have total control of what we can fall into temptation.