Well, it is a Japanese movie, so no one cares whether you're living in sin or not.
But really, making a decision to marry someone when you're 14 is pretty stupid, even if you aren't Romeo and Juliet.

I've seen all of Studio Ghibli's feature-length films (including the God-awful Tales from Earthsea), and probably most of their shorts and OVAs. I haven't voluntarily watched a dub of anything in at least the past 14 or 15 years, but luckily for me, all of the Japanese DVD-releases of Ghibli movies come with an English subtitle track. Whisper of the Heart is my absolute favorite. The death of the director, Yoshifumi Kondo, was a huge blow for the Studio as he was incredibly talented and basically Miyazaki and Takahata's chosen successor (Miyazaki did the screenplay for Whisper).

If you haven't seen it, I highly recommend The Cat Returns, which is a spin-off of Whisper of the Heart. It's the only film they've ever released that feels like Ghibli but that also feels like a modern film rather than a quaint/nostalgic/reverent look back at an earlier time. There's a youthful energy to it that none of the Studio's other movies have. It works with the thread topic, too, because the main character is in high school and the story is pretty accessible for younger kids.

I really like The Lady in the Water and I don't think it deserves its 24% rating on Rotten Tomatoes or its reputation as a shitty film.

Sure it's got it's problems, but the movie mostly suffers from having too many ideas rather than too few, and this would not be a bad problem to have if Shyamalan had been willing to approach the script with an editing eye (ie, listen to Disney).  In any case, this movie is overwhelmingly about Paul Giamatti and his relationship with the people around him, and that part of it is just excellently done. Weighting the good against the bad, I'd say there's quite a bit more of the former than the latter.

Cloud Atlas wasn't in fact a cloud atlas and featured very few shots of clouds at all.

I hate to say this, but The Neverending Story quite clearly does end, in both the book and movie. An Elaborate Series of Interconnecting Tales might have been a better title, for the book at least.

ETA:

I want to see this movie. I also want Rain Man do come to Tokyo and stop this deary cold rain we've been having.

Happy-Go-Lucky          9/10     

Ah, Mike Leigh. I could kiss the man, I really could. 

The movie stars Sally Hawkins as the persistently cheerful and optimistic primary-school teacher, Poppy. Happy-Go-Lucky is one of those films that makes you wonder if she's crazy or is she the most sane character on screen. It's typical of Leigh's style; no real script, just repeated improvisation and character work until each scene is fully fleshed out. The actors remain unaware of major plot points until they start work on that scene, so every laugh and grimace and look of surprise feels genuine.

The story follows Poppy through her various encounters with people and it can seem a bit mundane. But she is such an engaging and likable character that I was just enjoying watching her and her friends, until I suddenly realized that the plot had started long ago and the story was just carrying me along for the ride.

The performances are wonderful, particularly Eddie Marsan as Scott. He's said that he thought he was preparing for a drama, because Scott is such an intense character, and it wasn't until he started working with Sally Hawkins that he realized how funny it was. Scott really does feel like a character from a serious drama who gotten sucked into Poppy's lighthearted comedy and has his world turned upside down. The scene with Poppy's pregnant sister, Helen, was also really great, as we watch how some of those around Poppy react to her upbeat and carefree manner. The one slightly disappointing aspect for me was Poppy herself. She didn't get quite fleshed out the way I'd hoped. But overall it was an enjoyable little film.

Tell No One          7/10

I don't know about this one, maybe the book is better. Although the author has said that he likes the movie's ending better.

I started this one feeling rather excited. It feels like an adaptation of a novel, but not in a bad way. Everything was building so well, it was seamless. It was fast paced, exciting, and smart. Not revolutionary or genius, but very smart. Like, our hero doesn't make the myriad of stupid mistakes so common in this kind of story, and the police are competent and intent on doing their jobs rather than being a bunch of bumbling idiots. Mika'ela Fisher plays a total badass. And all throughout the clues seem to be leading to something spectacular. At least, I made it to the climax thinking whatever came next was going to be so awesome.

And my goodness, what I got was... lame.

The reveal is just totally unworthy of everything that led up to it. The villain's motives are weak and his actions are insanely excessive, which is fine if the movie acknowledges that he's kind of crazy. But instead gives him one very short scene that tries to justify what he's done. The mystery behind the death of the lead character's wife is far-fetched, and none of the answers we're given satisfactorily explain anything. The cloak & dagger shit feels like it belongs in a James Bond film or the next movie in the Bourne series; it's completely out of place here. And when I think about the "inciting incident," the body count in this movie is kind of ridiculous.

But despite its problems, I know what a harsh judge I can be, and I can't say I didn't enjoy myself for first 120 minutes. For the last ten, your mileage may vary.

Rango          5/10

I really, really, really don't like the "liar revealed" plot line. Most of the time it's lazily done and the character essentially has absolutely no reason to lie in the first place. In Rango, there's no character-based reason for him to lie, the circumstances don't really call for it, the lie itself isn't really pertinent or useful, his execution of the lie is incompetent, and when the lie is finally revealed, the payoff is underwhelming. They should've just stuck with the fish-out-of-water theme it had going at the beginning rather than tacking on the dumb "liar revealed" plot.

Other than that, the movie is internally inconsistent and confusing. Much like Teague's complaint of Tropic Thunder, it vacillates between spoof and satire, which makes for some good visual gags but also makes it a lot harder to invest in what's going on. Why on Earth do some animals act mostly like animals while the townsfolk are drinking out of tiny chameleon-sized glasses and wearing dresses? Why does Beans have hair? Whatever happened to Mr. Merrimack? That never got properly explained. Why are the fox and raccoon characters the same size as everyone else while Rattlesnake Jake and the hawk are gigantic? And why do Rango's eyes never move in different directions? One of the coolest things about chameleons and he never does it once!

Although I did like some of the side characters and some of the humor in the film, overall I just couldn't get into it. I must add, though, that it is very, very pretty.

It's only 7pm here, so I feel entirely justified in yet again replying to someone else's very good post, and here I am agreeing again.

VFX matter very, very little to me. In all likelihood, I'm only going to notice them if I'm already enjoying everything else the movie has to offer; if I'm not enjoying it, the VFX bring me no subsequent joy. It's all just a lot of sound and fury signifying a ridiculous budget wasted on film I will never watch again.

I don't have to deal with all of the hype for Gravity, but I also haven't heard very much praise for anything other than the VFX, which makes it unlikely I will ever see this movie.

I'm game, although my Star Wars loving buddy is backpacking in India at the moment, just when his excessive knowledge of trivia would be most appreciated.

How many pages of dialog are we talking about? I imagine a lot of the jargon is gonna kick my ass, but I'm nonetheless oddly keen to try.

The fact that the director was given any access at all is probably a small miracle. Artisans of Ono Jiro's caliber are notoriously camera shy in this country.

It is commonly said that there are a great many other small restaurants just like Sukiyabashi Jiro all over Japan that are considered worthy of a Michelin star (or two or three) but which have refused the honor because they don't want the fame that goes with it. I was watching a variety show a few weeks ago where various tv personalities visited half a dozen restaurants famed for their cuisine and attempted to convince the owners to let them film the place for tv. Four out of the six refused to even allow the front of the building to be shown on camera; only one gave them full access and allowed them to meet the chef.

In general, to be a master of your craft in Japan means you inhabit a very secretive world that doesn't invite scrutiny. This, of course, makes it damn near impossible to get anything even remotely resembling the drama necessary to tell a good story. For that reason, I applaud the director for even getting close. But Jiro still feels like only half a movie, and I was a bit disappointed by that.

1. ElfQuest - Wendy and Richard Pini have been trying to get a movie version of their comic book series done for years now. I'm dying to see an animated version of this story on the big screen. I would sacrifice my other two wishes just to get this one made.

2. Howl's Moving Castle - Someone needs to fix the awful mess Hayao Miyazaki made of Diane Wynne Jones's delightful book. Being Studio Ghibli, it's an absolutely gorgeous film, of course, but Miyazaki butchered the story in his adaptation and the voice acting is completely off the mark in both Japanese and the English dub. The spin-off/sequel, Castle in the Air, would also be much appreciated.

3. The Neverending Story - As much as I adore the original film, I completely understand why Michael Ende didn't want his name anywhere near it. The book deserves a more faithful adaptation, preferably as two films, because it really is wonderful.

Appropriately enough, the latest Metal Floss video is about abandoned and incomplete film projects. 

I watched the director's cut of The Act of Killing, and good Lord, is it too damn long. I was feeling antsy and more than a little bored well before it hit the two hour mark, so I don't think I would have any more appreciation for the theatrical cut.

For me, the problem with The Act of Killing is that it is burdened by Joshua Oppenheimer's original intent when going to Indonesia: interviewing and filming the stories of survivors of the 1965-66 killings. But talking to the survivors proved extremely dangerous for everyone, and the only ones left alive who knew exactly what the death squads had done were the members of the death squads. So the documentary makes the villains the stars of the film, with only a short cameo by survivor.

I get the feeling that this didn't sit well with Oppenheimer, and so he had to make sure he gave these villains enough rope to hang themselves. Unfortunately, a lot of the screen time spent with the paramilitary group and various mustache-twirling politicians ultimately feels excessive. It helps set the stage, but at 100 minutes in, we don't need to be introduced to some new evil asshole, basking in his evil assholery, who promptly disappears and bears absolutely no impact on the film overall. It's like Oppenheimer didn't trust his audience to recognize the evil elephant in the room unless he pointed it out to them over and over and over again. But the more we see them, the less they seem to connect to Anwar's story and the whole thing seems to drag on forever.

There are two people I would've like to see more of: Anwar's friend, Adi Zulkadry, and Suryono, the man who told the story of his stepfather's murder. To be honest, I'm not sure in what way further footage of Suryono would be able to help tell the story, but it sure would be nice to hear a bit more from survivors of the killings rather than the perpetrators. Adi, on the other hand, is such an interesting contrast to Anwar. He is hyper-aware of the evil he has wrought. He seems rather well-educated, knowledgeable about the politics involved, that no good can actually come of them making this movie that seeks to glorify their brutality. His grim pragmatism is a bit terrifying, but it doesn't seem to have given him much more peace of mind than Anwar.

I should point out, because the movie doesn't, you only find this sort of open bragging about the massacres in Northern Sumatra. A lot of people were killed in Bali and Java as well, but it's only in Sumatra, where the death squads were led by organized crime, that you'll find people willing to be so incredibly frank about their crimes.

Also, the confusion over the word "gangster" is because the subtitles fail to distinguish between the English word, the Indonesian word, and the Dutch root word. The Indonesian word is preman, and roughly translates to hoodlum, thug or gangster. However it is based on the Dutch root word, which actually does mean "free man."

I fail to see how this contradicts my point. Having Moses break into the car and the scene where Hi-Hatz recruits him to sell for him are enough to establish him as a "bad" kid making a series of bad choices, which he ultimately regrets and attempts to make up for. But the mugging is rather a lot for him to make up for during the movie's short run time.

Yeah, Jerome says something to the effect of them being just as scared as Sam was. But again, because we start from her POV, we never get to see them as a bunch of nervous kids deciding to mug somebody for the first time.

My point was that it isn't necessary and contributes nothing to the story. Living in a high crime area, with drug dealers and violence, is enough of a set up without actually having the kids gang up on and rob a woman in the opening scene.