Category: movies

I haven’t seen the original Tron, but I can say that Tron:Legacy, set twenty years later, is a stunning visual feast. Though the lead actor’s acting skills aren’t memorable, the rest of the cast makes up for this misstep. Jeff Bridges is perfect as the Creator trapped in his own program, Olivia Wilde is both hot and adorable (“Do you know Jules Verne? What is he like?”) and Michael Sheen, with his cane and manic eyes, gives the film a lovely Clockwork Orange hue. I love the idea of the Games, the isolated algorithmic programs, the out-of-control Created. And the visuals! The music! Daft Punk! I love how everything’s over-the-top. I wouldn’t mind seeing this film again.

* * *

We saw the film in Newport Cinemas inside Resorts World Manila for free. Or rather, in exchange for points. Jaykie’s family goes to RW often, so they urged me to get a membership ID even if I don’t really play. (I played maybe twice, and I lost both times. Malas.)

I got the ID for free months ago, and Jaykie’s mom loaded it with points. Last night, Jaykie and I used our IDs to get movie vouchers for just 50 points each and buffet dinner for 188 points each. (Movie promo’s only till end-year though. We’re planning to go on the 27th to watch Rosario.)

The first two films were near-faithful adaptations of the first two Harry Potter novels written by J.K. Rowling. Helmed by Chris Columbus, who directed Home Alone, among other films, the first two had that feel-good, cheery feel, despite the monsters. And anyway the ghosts looked like Casper and the troll looked like a CGI joke, so there was no real dread, no real sense of helplessness.

Alfonso Cuaron stepped in to direct the third film. Focus went from story details to style: the Whomping Willow was used to show the passing of months, the dementors were filmed underwater to approximate fluidity, and the film ended in a freeze-frame. Most fans considered it their least favorite film perhaps because it felt radically different from Columbus’s installments, but it was a beautiful film. However, details concerning the Marauder’s Map etc were edited out. It’s this annoying sickness that will hound one Potter film after another -important plot points get edited out, and we are left with scenes that, though enjoyable, feel like fillers.

The fourth film introduced new characters and surprised me with its humor, but there was a glaring error in the characterization of Dumbledore – he was the Zen teacher, what was he doing pushing Harry against walls and sounding like a crazed high school principal? The fifth film was blah, the only saving grace the lovely Helena Bonham Carter – she made a perfect crazy bitch. The sixth film was quite enjoyable and engaging for me – until it forgot to explain why the Half-Blood Prince is called the Half-Blood Prince. Not even a line? Really?

And then the last film, cut in two. It opens with an extreme close-up of Bill Nighy’s eyes, which, coupled with that determined voice and the flash of cameras and the news of dire things to come, made me settle more comfortably in my seat: ah, this is going to be good.

And it was. The film offers several memorable moments, and a soaring soundtrack. There is humor when the trio enters the Ministry of Magic, beauty in the lush landscapes and the misplaced innocence of a particular wedding, and horror in the torture of beloved characters (Helena Bonham-Carter, you crazy bitch, I adore you). The animation, which made me sit up and pay close attention, reminded me strongly of Guillermo del Toro.

There are still dragging moments, too much exposition, too many characters, but the film is a necessary step. Now that we’re so close to the end.

Dr. Tokita invents the DC Mini, a revolutionary device that allows the user to view a person’s dreams, as if it were a film. His colleague, Dr. Chiba, uses the device – illegally – to help patients outside the research facility. In dreams, Dr. Chiba assumes the form of the spunky, red-haired Paprika. Her current patient is Detective Toshimi, who is plagued with recurring dreams.

One day, Tokita and Chiba learn that the three DC Mini prototypes have been stolen, and dreams begin to bleed into each other.

This film by the late Satoshi Kon is said to have inspired Christopher Nolan’s wildly popular Inception. Kon’s film is decidedly the less lucid of the two, and strangely enough, the less filled with dread. This despite the nightmarish scenes. It’s a great ride.

After leaving the cinema, Jaykie and I had somewhat the same opinion: we enjoyed the film – immensely – but did not feel any emotional attachment with any of the characters.

I enjoyed Mark Zuckerberg’s scathing one-liners, but did not feel sorry for him when he lost the trust of his lovely girlfriend (“Having a relationship with you is like having a relationship with a Stairmaster”), and his only friend. He sort of deserved it. I enjoyed Napster founder and now Facebook stockholder Sean Parker’s various assholery (played brilliantly by Justin Timberlake), but did not feel sorry for him when he got busted by the police while doing cocaine. He sort of deserved it. I understand the pain of being double-crossed and having an idea robbed from you by a person you trust, but the Winklevoss twins and Eduardo Saverin ended up settling and going home with millions of dollars (Saverin’s take-home was said to be an “undisclosed” amount, which probably translates to a “fucking big” amount), so I couldn’t say boo-hoo they got 60-plus million instead of a billion dollars and feel sorry for them either. In fact, whenever I recall the Winklevoss twins’ (played by one actor, Reaper‘s Armie Hammer) expression of despair during the trial, I end up laughing. It was an anguish you couldn’t take seriously. It was like watching an episode of Jerry Springer, or watching children fight.

Why does it feel so trivial? Because it was childish dirty business? Because everyone was rich? Because it’s Facebook?

But hot damn, it was all very fascinating. Everything worked: cinematography, music, screenplay, and the actors are spot-on. Watch it.

And read this New Yorker article for additional info.

The technology site Silicon Alley Insider got hold of some of the messages and, this past spring, posted the transcript of a conversation between Zuckerberg and a friend, outlining how he was planning to deal with Harvard Connect:
FRIEND: so have you decided what you are going to do about the websites?
ZUCK: yea i’m going to fuck them
ZUCK: probably in the year
ZUCK: *ear

In another exchange leaked to Silicon Alley Insider, Zuckerberg explained to a friend that his control of Facebook gave him access to any information he wanted on any Harvard student:
ZUCK: yea so if you ever need info about anyone at harvard
ZUCK: just ask
ZUCK: i have over 4000 emails, pictures, addresses, sns
FRIEND: what!? how’d you manage that one?
ZUCK: people just submitted it
ZUCK: i don’t know why
ZUCK: they “trust me”
ZUCK: dumb fucks

According to two knowledgeable sources, there are more unpublished IMs that are just as embarrassing and damaging to Zuckerberg. But, in an interview, Breyer told me, “Based on everything I saw in 2006, and after having a great deal of time with Mark, my confidence in him as C.E.O. of Facebook was in no way shaken.” Breyer, who sits on Facebook’s board, added, “He is a brilliant individual who, like all of us, has made mistakes.” When I asked Zuckerberg about the IMs that have already been published online, and that I have also obtained and confirmed, he said that he “absolutely” regretted them. “If you’re going to go on to build a service that is influential and that a lot of people rely on, then you need to be mature, right?” he said. “I think I’ve grown and learned a lot.”

Zuckerberg’s sophomoric former self, he insists, shouldn’t define who he is now. But he knows that it does, and that, because of the upcoming release of “The Social Network,” it will surely continue to do so. The movie is a scathing portrait, and the image of an unsmiling, insecure, and sexed-up young man will be hard to overcome. Zuckerberg said, “I think a lot people will look at that stuff, you know, when I was nineteen, and say, ‘Oh, well, he was like that. . . . He must still be like that, right?’ ”