timucin_savas Reviews

A Hero (I) (2021)

Farhadi is a hero!

[10/10 · 4 September 2023]

How to go about this marvelous film of Farhadi's? No there is no pun on the "marvelous". On the contrary, movies like this always make us question the core of what makes a beautiful film.

It must be startling for the western audiences to see how so trivial-seeming issues lead to literal devastation of a human being in Iran. The story is simple: Rahim has been in jail for three years because he didn't pay up his debt to his guarantor, who happened to be his ex-father-in-law. He is released temporarily on a weekend, whereby his girlfriend provides him a handbag full of gold coins, incidentally found by her on the road. Tempted to pay off at least part of his debt to ensure he can be released, Rahim finally decides to give the handbag back to its original owner.

What is it that Farhadi is so good at? Well, he leaves almost all assessment to the audience. Is Rahim right or wrong, is he telling the truth or not? How about his girlfriend? What does the prison management want? What are the motives of almost all characters included in the story? It is up to the audience to decide. Even in the case of the taxi driver, yes he was an ex-inmate, but then did he expect something at some stage?

Even then the audience should decide what is right or wrong for themselves. The characters are almost always in a fight against an enormous wall of institutions: prison, city council, donor organizations, etc. They are lonely, weak, vulnerable, the system is set up in a way to glorify the State, the individual is desperate.

Of course, this is Iran, and Farhadi is threading a fine line to be able to make a veiled attempt at showing the world how the system is corrupt in Iran. This is Iran, where liberties are crushed in the name of ideology. For example, it was difficult for me to understand why in the world Rahim's son was housed with his sister's family and not by his son's mother. She never even bothers to ask about her son's condition when they confront at the photocopy shop.

To summarize, Farhadi is a master in filmmaking and story-telling.

Schumacher (2021)

Can't hold back the tears!

[10/10 · 18 September 2021]

One can't hold back the tears to some extent not only because of Schumacher but also because you understand how life moves on through the years. I started my F1 journey just as Schumacher joined Ferrari. So maybe my own tumultuous life between 96-00 coincided with the highly competitive and difficult years of Michael where he struggled albeit he was already a two-times world champion with Benetton before joining the Scuderia and that's why I felt so emotional.

Brilliant film-making with no overall narrator and the story is told through historical footage together with friends, peer racers and by his family and that ending is so heartbreaking. Yet as the audience we love watching tragedy since the ancient Greece and Michael Schumacher as the main character of this film has the ups and downs of a tragedy hero, whose story culminates in a tragic end.

The Senna documentary by Kapadia was also fantastic and it is sort of like Schumacher's story starts where Senna's ends. Senna I came to know by hearsay, but Michael's racing life unfolded in front of my own eyes. There is still hope for him and I wish he could watch this film as well.

Stalker (1979)

Not as brilliant as touted!

[4/10 · 28 August 2021]

Stalker...Tarkovsky...One of the most talked-about films in the history of cinema. This is the first Tarkovsky film I have seen and I know that both Tarkovsky and this film are highly regarded by directors, movie professionals, cinema students and film critics and connoisseurs.

But here I am on IMdB as a movie fan and it is good that I can also contribute my two cents into this discussion. First off, there is a sense of "pretentiousness" about this film from the get-go. Maybe I am wrong and this is the director's style. The camera is very slow and there are lots of long takes. I mean I don't necessarily have a big problem with this, however this style is more akin to stage play and for filmmakers it is lost opportunity. I guess you can have a big screen at the back of a stage and then some cameras to reflect the play on the big screen. This is used in concerts but haven't experienced it yet in a theater, maybe Broadway does it.

Again, I love the long takes in a movie, but where the scenes allow the audience devour the images and action on the screen. Not in any way related to Stalker but recent films like Victoria (one shot) or Extraction (one long take of 10 minutes scene) come to my mind.

Of course, I understand that the stuff I talk about above is more related to the technical side of movie-making and that Tarkovsky is more about high art cinema. Yet this film doesn't hit the right notes in that respect as well:

Acting is mediocre at best. There is no way the audience can identify themselves with any of the characters on screen. One can say the director's name is so big he won't allow the actors to hijack his film. Noted!

Script is not good. The "pretentiousness" that I mentioned early on invades almost all the dialogues in the film. It is not the characters that are speaking, on the contrary all voice belongs to the director or the scriptwriter, which is by the way again Andrey Tarkovsky.

As if it is not sufficient for the director to have conquered all the dialogue, certain characters talk to the camera directly in order to make some explanations. This is like Picasso climbing on the stage and talking about one of his paintings for two hours, explaining the meaning behind his painting.

Art is mainly about feelings, sorry, if the director is unable to instigate the feelings in me which should lead me to question the meaning of life, what is right and wrong, who are we, then that director should better keep quiet.

Yes art is also politics and one can think about the circumstances at the time of this film's production. It is the communist Soviet Republic where regime critique is frown upon so artists need to shroud their artwork in a way to reduce potential oppression by the government. That is why allegory and satire has become so popular in such countries.

Fine but what is the film talking about then? On the face of it, it is wailing about the lack of spirituality and religion in the USSR. The stalker is a priest or better yet the "messiah" trying dangerously to show the truth to the interested but materialistic intelligentsia. And actually this is it: There are hardly any elements of sci-fi (except for the very end of the film) and I am not sure if there was ever any consideration for environmental pollution as this is still pre-Chernobyl time.

Now coming to art as politics again, was the director justified in his soul-searching exercise? After the turbulent 80s and the collapse of the Soviet Union, although god and church and religion returned to Russia, the society didn't heal. On the contrary today it has become a country where inequalities are emphasized and creating lots of Russian billionaires with the rest of the society not doing well. Again, one can be a good director, but apparently not a good visionary.

Aesthetically, were the scenes or photographs appealing? Not really, you can play around with black and white and color and then back to B&W or you can shoot good photos, but overall it wasn't inspiring.

One-Way to Tomorrow (2020)

Life is a journey!

[8/10 · 20 June 2020]

Not many directors take notice but trains are good locations to shoot films, for one thing because they are slow. This slowness and the passing scenery adds to the emotions of the characters. I mean even if you miss the train you can hop on a taxi and catch it at the next station. Leyla and Ali are not in a rush as they are on their way to the same wedding and this journey becomes an opportunity for them to face their past.

Decent acting from both actors and a good script and direction that keeps the audience in the film until the end. I am not sure if it was the intention of the filmmakers that the journey starts in Turkey's gloomy capital and ends in sunny bright coastal city of Izmir. And there is hope in Izmir! Beautiful ending!

Inception (2010)

Inception! The Grandest Film of All Time!

[10/10 · 9 June 2020]

This is the tenth year of Inception and I can fairly say this is the best film of the 21st century. I have seen it a few times and I guess less than three times won't be sufficient for any audience to understand what is happening here. As in other grandiose works of art, it inspires multiple interpretations. There is no one answer here, so it is not like finding the meaning of life or finding the truth behind the film, no. So although I inserted a spoiler alert, I don't think anyone can spoil this film and that is the beauty!

Obviously I read about the film here and there but avoided Nolan's own comments intentionally. Nolan gave us the film, we watch it and each of us take something from the film, we don't need Nolan's explanations separately. Having said that I assume this was the masterpiece that Nolan strived for as a filmmaker and if we call Memento his apprenticeship masterpiece Inception is his mastership masterpiece.

As the Wachowskis waited for the right time to shoot the Matrix, it looks like Nolan also waited about ten years to initiate making of this film. So what do we have here? At first glance we have layers, layers of dreams, lots of action, some drama and obviously a complicated structure that could have become a fiasco with a not-so-talented director and shall I say without DiCaprio.

The second or third time you watch the film you understand that there is more than that to the film. So it is not that at the first layer it is not a good film as an action-packed heist movie. As one of elite "auteur" directors, who also happen to be immensely popular with the audience (like James Cameron to some degree), Nolan wants to talk about "other stuff" here. Think about 1001 nights, where Shehrazade becomes Shahriyar's wife but not to be killed, she dives into a complex labyrinth of stories and drags the reader with her. In Inception we also dive into the story and layers, so the inception as an idea (triggering a change in the targeted person's subconscious) is actually what as audience we are exposed to and we experience. I mean Nolan challenges the movie audience here, we all become clones of Fischer, we are taken into the layers of dreams one after the other and we never question if anything makes sense or not. Yes there will be those movie geeks who will go after each and every goof in movies but forget about them because Nolan doesn't care about them. Because he understands if he can keep to a reliable plot it would be very difficult to distract the audience.

And why not, these are layers of dreams right? Layer zero looks like reality, but who is sure of that anyways. As Morpheus asks: "What is real Neo?" So in the same way, welcome to the desert of the real here. Inception talks about movies and movies are very akin to dreams, as audience we have similar feelings in a dream and a film. Think about the Paris Café scene, where Cobb tells Ariadne if she remembers how they ended up in that café. This is the same impact we feel as movie aficionados, we are thrown into a film, and we can't make sure how things turned out and how we ended up in our seats fully overwhelmed! Is this not what we experience in our dreams? And if one can reach catharsis, does it matter, it is in a film or dream and as such are we not all accomplished filmmakers while dreaming proudly?

Of course, there are multiple interpretations to Inception in addition to film-making theory. I have read articles going into detailed analyses of philosophical and religious undertones and further subtext readings. Maybe yes one can empathize with those as well, but I was more interested in the feeling of the film, that grandiose feeling that enhances its impact after seeing it multiple times.

The year is 2020 and I wanted to rush for writing this review before seeing Tenet! Let's see if Nolan will be able to overwhelm us one more time...

Into the Night (II) (2020–2021)

Serious problems!

[4/10 · 4 May 2020]

Filmmaking is tricky. Sometimes all the money spent in a film or a TV show results in a failure. Let's talk about what is not working here. First off, the pace is a little bit rushed. The story about the sun bringing disaster to Earth is fine and it deserves a fair background. Regardless, the series cut to the chase and dive into this crisis situation very fast. The episodes are named after the characters, good idea, and the expectation is that we are going to learn more about them. Unfortunately that is not the case, we just see a couple of minutes of something which gives hardly any idea about the characters. Even one lead character was left behind in Canada and there was no mention of her thereafter.

It appears that casting is also a problem. There is hardly any chemistry between the characters. But to some extent this is expected because almost all nationalities are represented. When you have so many nationalities in play it becomes a joke, farcical. Hearing multiple languages doesn't work, although almost all speak French in one way or another.

And finally the most important thing is that again to reiterate the concept is fine, I mean you can build a really good story on this premise. So this is meant to be an action-thriller and there will be multiple struggles along the way. But one key ingredient is missing: There is almost no tension. For this type of a story the director should have built some serious tension, I mean if survival is at stake the audience should feel the tension and the fear. I didn't feel anything and what I saw was the characters didn't feel it. It is as if there is a small hiccup with their journey instead of the need to race against the clock so that they had to continue their flight into the night and avoid the sun.

I made it until Episode 4 and finally dropped it altogether. I was expected to be entertained, the producers wasted a good opportunity.

21 Bridges (2019)

Not bad I guess!

[7/10 · 21 November 2019]

The film was a pleasant surprise. Nothing new here but the camera work and action scenes were marvelous. Although the plot is not original the story was fine with good editing. Interesting take on "Manhattan island", however the script could have been better and acting was average at times. Nice Friday night flick!

Alpha (II) (2018)

Survival story

[8/10 · 24 September 2018]

I should say I wasn't expecting much from this film before I started watching it at the theater. However what I saw was a solid survival story, which took place almost 20,000 years before. The opening scene was quite impressive. Acting was shouldered by the lead actor and the wolf. Interesting to get an idea about how people lived at that time. And the language I understand was something the filmmakers came up with as obviously noone can have an idea of how people spoke thousands of years before writing was invented. The location looks like Northern Europe with harsh winters and all and it is interesting to see a tribe of people living under these harsh conditions where chances of survival is low.

Deadwind (2018–2021)

Finnish Gem!

[9/10 · 22 September 2018]

Some shows resonate with the viewer from the get-go and this is one of them, at least for me. Well-sketched characters, good acting and a backdrop of cold Helsinki complementing a crime story. I am happy that Netflix is able to pull out these shows and presenting them for our viewing in other parts of the world. I am definitely looking forward to Season 2. And finally the audience can feel some genuine chemistry between Karppi and Nurmi, which adds to the value of the series.

Downrange (2017)

Asian horror for the fans!

[8/10 · 17 May 2018]

Wow! I had no expectations going into this film and what a ride! Rejoice the Asian cinema aficionados this is an Asian film with American actors. Pacing, rhythm, editing and production are all good, especially the camerawork where we get to see the sniper for the first time. I like these one location movies. It looks like a survival movie, but then the ending hammers it as a horror flick, reminding me of Haneke's Funny Games as well.

I could have rated this even more favorably if the acting was better and if the story included something that connected the sniper to the victims.

Clair Obscur (2016)

Interesting atmosphere

[7/10 · 30 March 2018]

The director is walking a thin line here and hardly avoids falling into the orientalism trap. Difficult to master this balance though, because this is not Tanna. Both female leads really good, male actors are a couple steps behind.

This part of the country is similar to Northern Europe, rain and storm and dark clouds, giant waves hammering the beach. If there was any intention of symbolism here, it wasn't well placed though.

Both leading characters were developed well, but we are so used to TV series these days one wishes we should have learnt more about them. Would they have had different lives if they had kids?

Bad Genius (2017)

Bad Film!

[3/10 · 26 March 2018]

I am a big fan of Asian cinema, mainly Korean, Hong Kong and Japanese. I am excited whenever a new country in Asia joins this group as my expectations are high from a story perspective. I am not worried about the cinematic techniques a lot at this stage. However Bad Genius was really disappointing.

What was the objective of the film? The story was a bit lame indeed, I expected for a twist, game-changer until the end of the film, unfortunately there was no such thing. The characters were a bit one-dimensional, making it hard for the audience to empathize with them. The character changes were forced at best, there was no natural flow. So the story is about cheating, however I felt that the film was cheating instead. This was not an Asian film, it was almost a Hollywood script with the action superseding characters most of the time. It felt like the main motive of the characters, to go to US or Australia to study and work was actually the motive of the director as well: How to make it to Hollywood.

The main characters had the cinematic aura however acting was mediocre overall. The film does not deserve an average rating of 8, not at all.

Some background story to Lynn and Grace could have made the story better. Given the 130 minutes length the audience deserved some more details. And the last scene, such a waste, the script meandered here and there and ended like this, such a gross disappointment.

And then what happened to Lynn's glasses? She removed them during the photo shoot-out never to put them back again. Strange!

This was my first Thai cinema experience except for a couple of Tony Jaa movies. I am looking forward to better films from Thailand.

Amar (2017)

Beautiful film!

[8/10 · 13 January 2018]

Innocence. Such was the time where youngsters were all vulnerable and there is nothing in life but love. The film portrays a beautiful picture of those times without diving into much drama or thrill. This is life as it gets real and a turning point, where decisions taken will have an impact on the rest of these students' lives. They are unsure what to do, they don't know about what will make them happy, they want to experience life fully.

Beautiful cinematography especially for the long opening and closing scenes where we see Laura and Carlos together, where the film gives the feeling of love-making rather than pure sex, which one can find in 99% of films these days.

Acting is powerful, both young actors perform well, especially Maria Padrese fills the screen much similar to Adele in Blue is the Warmest Color.

I tend to like first films, first books, debut albums. This is no exception!

Fasten Your Seatbelts (2014)

Such a disappointment!

[4/10 · 17 November 2017]

In the middle of the film, they ask Elena how she feels and she says "confused". It is the director, who is confused indeed. What was the point of the film? Opposites attract? There was no chemistry between the lead characters, even when they were nude. Acting was terrible except for Elena, who tries to shoulder the entire film. Unfortunately, the film does not work as a drama and neither as a comedy. I lose respect for films, in which directors try to talk through the characters. Actually, there is nothing in this film that will require the audience to fasten their seat-belts.