The Chronicles of Narnia: The Voyage of the Dawn Treader

CAST: Ben Barnes, Skandar Keynes, Georgie Henley, Will Poulter, Tilda Swinton, Laura Brent, Gary Sweet, Arthur Angel, Simon Pegg, William Moseley, Anna Popplewell and Liam Neeson DIRECTOR: Michael Apted SCREENWRITER: Christopher Markus & Stephen McFeely PRODUCERS: Mark Johnson, Phillip Steuer and Andrew Adamson GENRE: Adventure RUNNING TIME: 115 min DISTRIBUTOR: Twentieth Century Fox

Technical: 3.5
Moral: 3
CINEMA Rating: PG 13 (Children aged 13 and below with parental guidance)

The two youngest Pevensie children Lucy (Georgie Hensley) and Edmund (Skandar Keynes) reenter the magical kingdom of Narnia through a picture of a sailing ship that comes to life and floods the room with water. This time their unbelieving cousin, Eustace Scrubb (Will Poulter) is with them, and the trio find themselves afloat a real sea and face to face with the ship, Dawn Treader, captained by the new king of Narnia (Ben Barnes). They climb on board and soon they are island-hopping with Caspian on a quest to free the land from the curse supposedly originating from the Dark Isle.

The Chronicles of Narnia: Voyage of the Dawn Treader is important enough to merit the presence of the Queen and the Duke of Edinburgh at the movie’s recent Royal premier in snow-blanketed London. While this fact does not guarantee that the movie will match the record of its predecessors at the box office, it nonetheless gives a kind of assurance that this latest of the Pevensie children’s adventures will add to the magic of the Christmas season for movie-going families. The Lucy and Edmund characters come to the limelight as the older Pevensie children Peter (William Moseley) and Susan (Anna Popplewell), on the brink of adulthood, are busy with other things: Peter with his studies, and Susan with travels with their parents. With plenty of flying dragons, dwarves, sea creatures, various warriors and interesting swordfights, Voyage of the Dawn Treader is not wanting in special effects that will bring glee to a younger audience than Harry Potter’s, particularly with the antics of the swashbuckling mouse Reepicheep (voiced by Simon Pegg). This is not to say that it’s a movie for youngsters alone; even the adults in the audience do laugh with the children, and ooh and aah The role of Eustace, the Pevensies’ snooty cousin perfectly assigned to Poulter, steals the thunder from everything, as you’ll see below. over visual delights like row-boating on a sea of white lilies, for instance.

Some critics sneer at the Christian undertones in C. S. Lewis’ series, but even for non-Christians, they do have valuable messages to convey. Some are found in the wisdom of the resurrected Aslan (voiced by Liam Neeson), the lion who stands for righteousness. Others are reflected in the challenges and temptations to vanity, power and ill-gotten gold encountered as Caspian and the children search for the seven lost lords of Narnia. Wisdom and righteousness are virtues extolled in all religions, whether or not they believe in the resurrection of Jesus. The most dramatic and real transformation, however, is that of Eustace, the cousin, who starts out as a skeptic, desperately and foolishly clings to the only world he has ever known, and is a first-class pain in the neck—until the magical baton touches his hand.

The Chronicles of Narnia: Voyage of the Dawn Treader reminds us of the value of innocence. Too often, we leap out of childhood all too quickly, and our childlike belief in God is outgrown in the process. But when we are confronted with mystery, and grace touches us despite our stubbornness, we regain our original innocence, and we begin to believe in God again. That, it seems to CINEMA, is the message to adults in this “movie for children”. By Teresa R. Tunay, OCDS

Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, Part 1

CAST: Daniel Radcliffe (Harry Potter), Emma Watson (Hermione Granger), Rupert Grint (Ron Wesley), Helena Bonhan Carter (Bellatrix Lestrange), Ralph Fiennes (Lord Voldemort), Michael Gambon (Professor Albus Dumbledore) DIRECTOR: David Yates SCREENWRITER: Steve Kloves NOVEL: J.K. Rowling GENRE: Drama, Action & Adventure, Mystery & Suspense, Science Fiction & Fantasy RUNNING TIME: 150 minutes DISTRIBUTOR: Warner Bros. Pictures LOCATION: England
Technical: 3.5 Moral: 3 Rating: R 14 (Aged 14 and above)

Harry (Daniel Radcliffe), Hermione (Emma Watson) and Ron (Rupert Grint) have begun to bloom into adulthood. Gone are the childish games at Hogwarts School of Wizardry, and though they have the power to materialize where they will, they are now on their own in a wide, wild world, as the Ministry of Magic, led by villain Voldemort (Ralph Fiennes) plot their destruction. But how can they fight off Voldemort and his Death Eaters, when they have seemingly outgrown the powers they had so marveled at in their childhood? That Harry now keeps his white owl in a cramped parrot cage speaks of the predominance of new emotions burgeoning in the young heroes’ hearts, among them the wonders of sexual maturity.

Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, being the first half of the last installment of Rowling’s series, recalls the numerous characters in the previous chapters. Thus, it won’t make sense to you if you are seeing Harry Potter for the first time. It requires an exceptionally retentive memory to piece together the past episodes in order to grasp how this particular one now becomes the logical outcome of the evolving saga. As usual, Harry Potter the movie is Harry Potter the movie—always looked forward to by fans with breathless anticipation. You might be disappointed if you are waiting for more wand-wielding wars among wizards, or flying objects (though there’s a flying bike here) and phenomenal pyrotechnics, because the magical element in this episode is watered down by the human element of coping with a teenagers’ hormonal changes. In fact, many of the forest scenes where the trio helplessly run from their attackers are so reminiscent of those in Twilight-New Moon-Eclipse movies that you half-expect a werewolf to spring from the bushes. One unforgettable portion of Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows is the Story of Death and the Three Brothers, read by Hermione and depicted as a graceful version of a puppet shadowplay. (Watching it while enjoying the “comfy-comfy” wide seats and the superb sound system of the newly renovated Market-Market Cinema 1, we hoped that stretch of spellbinding puppetry would never end! They could make a whole new movie using that device!)

If there’s something that flies faster than a witch’s broomstick, it is time. And this is so effectively portrayed in Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows where the protagonists are learning fast to rely more on their human instincts than on magical tricks. You cannot help but recall how small they were in the first Harry Potter movie, and now you realize you’ve seen these kids grow up! Hermione is now an attractive young woman who has retained her mental brilliance, Harry has grown into an empathetic gentleman increasingly aware of his destiny, and Ron is, alas!, overpowered by a slipping self-esteem and dark gripping jealousy. When Harry and Hermione kiss topless, you’ll see how time flies, indeed! After all the magical mumbo-jumbo of past episodes—which seemed mere child’s play for the Hogwarts kids Harry, Hermione and Ron—they now must confront the first flush of adulthood which no magic wand ever can control. The message is: no matter the extraordinary powers they have, humans are still human and their first task is to master themselves if they must be of use to the rest of humanity. CINEMA recommends you watch this with teenagers and see what they think especially of this brainteaser of a message. – By Teresa R. Tunay, OCDS

My Amnesia Girl

CAST: John Lloyd Cruz, Toni Gonzaga; DIRECTOR: Cathy Garcia-Molina; PRODUCER/ DISTRIBUTOR: Star Cinema; RUNNING TIME: 100 minutes; GENRE: Romantic-Comedy; LOCATION: Manila

Technical: 3
Moral: 2.5
CINEMA Rating: For viewers 18 and above

Nagkakilala sa isang dating/ match-making event ang ahenteng si Apollo (John Lloyd Cruz) at ang photographer na si Irene (Toni Gonzaga). Mabilis ang mga pangyayari at agad nahulog ang loob nila sa isa't-isa at nagkamabutihan. Yayayain ni Apollo si Irene na magpakasal ngunit sa araw ng kasal, habang palakad si Irene sa altar ay biglang uurong si Apollo at iiwan si Irene nang walang anumang pasabi. Makalipas ang ilang taon ay wala pa ring asawa si Apollo at tila hindi pa rin makalimutan si Irene at malabis ang pagsisisi sa ginawang pag-iwan dito. Sa muling pagku-krus ng landas nila ni Irene ay malalaman niyang may amnesia ito na bunga marahil ng natamong trauma sa pag-iwan niya dito sa araw ng kanilang kasal. Magiging daan para kay Apollo ang amnesia ni Irene upang makabawi sa mga nagawa nitong kasalanan at magpapanggap na bagong manliligaw ni Irene sa pangalang Paul. Lingid sa kanyang kaalaman, si Irene ay nagkukuwanri lamang na may amnesia upang siya ay sadyang gantihan at pahirapan. Saan kaya hahantong ang pagbabalat-kayo ng dalawang ito? Paano kung malaman ni Apollo na nagkukunwari lamang si Irene?

Nagawang bigyan ng bagong bihis ng pelikula ang tila gasgas nang tema ng amnesia sa mga kuwentong Pilipino lalo na sa pelikula. Ginamit ng My Amnesia Girl ang maraming makabagong pamamaraan ng pagkukuwento upang gawing kapana-panabik ang bawat susunod na eksena. Bagama't pawang napabilis ang mga rebelasyon sa manonood, naging epektibo pa rin ang kwento sa kabuuan at nabigyang kadahilanan naman kung bakit maraming sekreto sa kuwento ang hindi itinago sa manonood. Naging mas nakakakilig nga naman at nakaka-enganyong panoorin ang dalawang tauhan na tila naglolokohan at hindi nagkaka-alaman. Ang tunay na hiyas pa rin ng pelikula bukod sa husay ng direktor at manunulat ay ang walang kupas na kahusayan nila Cruz at Gonzaga. Napanatili nila ang kilig, katatawanan at maging ang tamang timpla ng drama kung kinakailangan. Tuloy ang mga manonood ay natatawa, kinikilig at lumuluha ng magkakasunod kundi man minsan ay magkasabay. Ang mga pangalawang tauhan ay pawang mahuhusay din. Salamat din at panandilaan tayong nakawala sa mga titulo ng popular na kanta bilang pamagat ng pelikula at may isang kuwentong bago sa panlasa ng Pilipinong manonood.

Ang kuwento ng My Amnesia Girl ay uminog sa kasinungalingan at pagbabalat-kayo. Bagama't nagawa ng pelikulang gawing katatawanan at nakaka-kilig ang makita ang dalawang pusong nagmamahalan habang naglolokohan ay marami pa rin itong aral na inihain. Una na dito ang hindi magandang naidudulot ng pagsisinungaling. Sa hinaba-haba ng takbo ng kuwento na uminog sa kasinungalingan, ipinakita pa rin na sa bandang huli'y katotohanan pa rin ang mananaig. Tunay ngang "ang pagsasabi ng tapat ay pagsasama ng maluwat". Matindi rin ang naging balik kay Irene ng kanyang matatawag na "maliit na kasinungalingan" at mapapatunayan na wala ngang kasinungalingang maliit at ito ay kasinungalingan pa rin bali-baligtarin man. Mas higit na nakababahala naman ang hindi gaanong naipaliwanag na dahilan kung bakit si Apollo ay bigla na lamang tumalikod at kumaripas sa araw mismo ng kasal. Sa napaka-habang pinagdaraanang proseso sa sakramentong ito ay hindi dapat naba-bale wala at tinatalikuran nang ganoon lang ang kasal nang walang matinding dahilan. Nagkulang marahil sa pagsasaliksik o sa paghahagod ng pelikula sa aspetong ito. Hindi rin husto ang naging paliwanagan ng dalawa sa kung ano nga ba ang naging mali sa kanilang relasyon. Kahanga-hanga naman sa isang banda ang ginawang pagpapatawad ng dalawang tauhan sa isa't-isa. Patunay na ang pusong nagmamahal ay laging handang magpatawad. At ang paglimot sa ginawang pagkakamali ng kapwa, bagama't mahirap, ay posible pa rin sa wagas na pag-ibig. Ang kaiga-igayang pagganap Gonzaga at Cruz, na sinusuportahan ng mabilis at katukso-tuksong dialogue ay hindi sapat upang maituring ka ganoong kahanga-hanga ang pelikula. Ito'y isa pa ring "feel good movie" sa kabila ng magaling na pagsasalarawan ng mensahe nito. At tulad ng lahat ng mga "feel good movies", ang panganib nito sa nanonood ay ang maaaring pagliligaw nito mula sa katotohanan. Bukod sa rito, ipinapakita na ang mga magsing-irog ay halos nagsama na bago ikasal, tila nagsasaad na ang pundasyon ng kanilang relasyon ay posibleng "good vibes" at "sexual compatibility" lamang. Ang isang dibdibang relasyon na magwawakas sa patawaran at kasalan ay hindi tapat sa katotohanan kung ito'y mistulang "formula" lamang ng pagkakamali-pagpapatawaran-at-ayos-na-ang-buto-buto! Kung nailabas sana ng pelikula mga ugat ng pagkakamali at pagpapatawad, maaaring nabigyan ng CINEMA ng mas mataas na "rating" ang Amnesia Girl. --By Rizalino R. Pinlac, Jr.

Megamind

CAST: Will Farell (Megamind), Brad Pitt (Metro Man), David Cross (Minion), Tina Fey (Roxanne Richi), Ben Stiller (Bernard) DIRECTOR: Tom McGrath, Careron Hood SCREENWRITER: Allan Schoolcraft, Brent Simons GENRE: Action & Adventure, Animation, Kids & Family, Comedy RUNNING TIME: 96 minutes DISTRIBUTOR: Paramount Studios

Technical: 4
Moral: 3 ½
CINEMA Rating: PG 13

"Megamind" is the most brilliant supervillain the world has ever known. And the least successful. Over the years, he has tried to conquer Metro City in every imaginable way. Each attempt, a colossal failure thanks to the caped superhero known as "Metro Man," an invincible hero until the day Megamind actually kills him in the throes of one of his botched evil plans. Suddenly, Megamind has no purpose. A supervillain without a superhero. He realizes that achieving his life's ambition is the worst thing that ever happened to him. Megamind decides that the only way out of his rut is to create a new hero opponent called "Titan," who promises to be bigger, better and stronger than Metro Man ever was. Pretty quickly Titan starts to think it's much more fun to be a villain than a good guy. Except Titan doesn't just want to rule the world, he wants to destroy it. Now, Megamind must decide: can he defeat his own diabolical creation? Can the world's smartest man make the smart decision for once? Can the evil genius become the unlikely hero of his own story? MRQE

Megamind is the most brilliant super-villain the world has ever known. He finally conquers his nemesis, the hero Metro Man but finds his life pointless without a hero to fight.

Bored without a nemesis, Megamind uses his powers to create a new superhero. Unfortunately, when he decides on using a TV cameraman as his test subject he ends up creating Tighten, a would-be hero turned villain.

Unstoppable

CAST: Denzel Washington (Frank), Chris Pine (Will), Rosario Dawson (Connie), Ethan Suplee (Dewey), Kevin Dunn (Inspector Werner) DIRECTOR: Tony Scott WRITER: Mark Bomback
GENRE: Action/Adventure, Drama, Suspense/Thriller RUNNING TIME: 98 min.

Technical: 3.5
Moral: 3
CINEMA Rating: R 14 (For viewers aged 14 and above)

Thinking he had brought the train to a full stop, the engineer (Ethan Suplee) dismounts. But to his surprise, the train pulls away, under full throttle. On another train, veteran engineer Frank Barnes (Denzel Washington) is training a new man on the job, Will Colson (Chris Pine). The half-a-mile long runaway train is carrying hazardous materials—according to the station yard master Connie Hooper (Rosario Dawson) who is in charge of dispatch and operations—and is speeding towards a head on collision with the train carrying Barnes and Colson. To make matters worse, rookie Colson and veteran Barnes are like oil and water, bickering for control as the precious minutes tick away. Besides sidetracking the collision they know they have to set their mutual disdain aside in order to stop the unstoppable locomotive from hurtling towards a populous district of Scranton, Pennsylvania.

It might not be a good idea for people suffering from hypertension to watch this movie. It is such a superb thriller that keeps you at the edge of your seat—and your neck and shoulder muscles tense from beginning to end. Nearly all Hollywood movies these days come up with a chase scene, either for laughs or for thrills, and if it’s for thrills, the chase is usually between the good guys and the bad guys. But in Unstoppable, the chase is between people and a train! And as the sound effects and photography establish beyond doubt—particularly in those shots where the train rockets towards the audience over the camera placed on the tracks—the runaway train is a murderously heavy machine: having no soul, it couldn’t care less what it destroys.

It’s the people who provide the soul in the story. Barnes and Colson know that even with the right decisions, things could go wrong and thus spell their death. Nonetheless, in their race against time towards a possible tragic ending, they exchange glimpses of their family life which in turn enable them to bond and put their animosity aside. While the story and viewer attention is naturally focused on the problem posed by the runaway train, a softly voiced message is beneath it all: human beings thrive on the love of a family. Making Unstoppable more worthy of viewing is the fact that it is inspired by true events surrounding an incident on May 15, 2001 when an unmanned CSX train “ran away” and in two hours sped through 66 miles before it was stopped in a similar way as the movie shows. Perhaps young kids wouldn’t care to watch Unstoppable but CINEMA gives it a PG 13 rating just the same.

Due Date

CAST: Robert Downey Jr., (Peter Highman), Zach Galifianakis (Ethan Tremblay), Michelle Monaghan (Sarah Highman), Jamie Foxx (Darryl), Juliette Lewis (Heidi), Danny r. McBride (Lonnie) DIRECTOR: Todd GENRE: Comedy RUNNING TIME: 95 minutes LOCATION: USA DISTRIBUTOR: Warner Bros. Pictures

Technical: 3
Moral: 3
CINEMA Rating: Audience Age 18 and above

High-strung father-to-be Peter Highman is forced to hitch a ride with aspiring actor Ethan Tremblay on a road trip in order to make it to his child’s birth on time.

Two different personalities: Ethan is wild, clumsy, bearded and disheveled while Peter is composed, handsome, dry and sarcastic.

Peter a strung-out guy who just wanted to get home to California to see the birth of his child while Ethan is an aspiring actor who is heading to California to pursue his dream in Hollywood.

Both are booted off a Los Angeles-bound flight, their only option of getting there is to rent a car and drive. Given that they cannot stand each other, chaos ensues.

Each one with different sensibilities is funny, some with dark humor and some slapstick. Peter and Ethan’s experience of shame and guilt and their acceptance lead them to become friends.

You Again

CAST: Kristine Bell (Marni), Odette Yustman (Joanna), Victor Garber (Mark), Jamie Lee Curtis (Gail), Sigourney Weaver (Ramona), Jimmy Wolk (Will) DIRECTOR: Andy Fickman SCREENWRITER: Moe Jelline GENRE: Comedy RUNNING TIME: 105 minutes LOCATION: USA DISTRIBUTOR: Touchtone Pictures

Technical: 3
Moral: 4
CINEMA Ratings: PG 13 (For viewers aged 13 and below with parental guidance)

Successful PR pro Marni heads home for her older brother's wedding and discovers that he's marrying her high school arch nemesis, who's conveniently forgotten their problematic past. Then the bride's jet-setting aunt bursts in and Marni's not-so-jet-setting mom comes face to face with her own high school rival. The claws come out and old wounds are opened in this crazy comedy that proves that not all rivalries are forever. (MRQE)

A relevant movie showing the effects of bullying in school and how envy and jealousy can lead to violence. You Again proves that acknowledgment of one’s guilt over offense committed even many years back can heal the victim. The message of forgiveness though shown in comedy situation is effective.

The Social Network

CAST: Jesse Eisenberg, Andrew Garfield, Max Narendra, Justin Timberlake, Armie Hammer Jr, Josh Pence DIRECTOR: David Fincher SCREENWRITER: Aaron Sorkin MUSICAL DIRECTOR: Trent Reznor GENRE: Drama RUNNING TIME: 120 minutes LOCATION: USA. DISTRIBUTOR: Columbia Pictures

Technical: 3.5
Moral: 2.5
CINEMA RATING: R 14 (For viewers aged 14 and above)

The Social Network explores the moment at which Facebook, the most revolutionary social phenomena of the new century, was invented—through the warring perspectives of the super-smart young men who each claimed to be there at its inception. The result is a drama rife with both creation and destruction; one that audaciously avoids a singular point of view, but instead, by tracking dueling narratives, mirrors the clashing truths and constantly morphing social relationships that define our time. Drawn from multiple sources, the film captures the visceral thrill of the heady early days of a culture-changing phenomenon in the making—and the way it both pulled a group of young revolutionaries together and then split them apart. (MRQE)

Till My Heartaches End

Cast: Kim Chiu, Gerard Anderson, Mark Gil, Desiree del Valle, Matet de LDirector: Jose Javier-Reyes; Screenplay: Jose Javier-Reyes; Producer/ Distributor: Star Cinema; Running Time:100 minutes; Location: Manila; Genre: Romance, Drama

Technical Assessment: 3
Moral Assessment: 3
Rating: For Viewers 14 years old and above

Mataas ang pangarap ng baristang si Paolo (Gerard Anderson) at makikilala niya sa pinapasukang coffee shop si Agnes (Kim Chiu), isang probinsiyanang nagpunta ng Maynila upang mag-review sa nursing board exams. Magkakalapit ang kanilang loob habang unti-unting inaabot ni Paolo ang kaniyang mga pangarap. Magiging matagumpay si Paolo sa bagong karera bilang real estate agent. Yun nga lang, sa pagbabago ng kanyang mundo ay hindi naman makasabay si Agnes na nagiging ugat ng madalas nilang pag-aaway. Habang nararating ni Paolo ang tugatog ng tagumpay ay unti-unti namang napapalayo si Agnes sa kanya. Dagdag pa dito ang pagnanais ni Agnes na sundan ang kanyang ina sa America. May patunguhan pa kaya ang pagmamahalan nila sa kabila ng marami nilang pinagdadaanan?

Isang tipikal na kuwentong pag-ibig ang Till My Heartaches End na sinubukang bigyan ng bagong-bihis sa pamamagitan ng paggamit ng naiibang paraan ng pagkukuwento. Ang kuwentong pag-ibig ng dalawang pangunahing tauhan ay inilahad sa punto de vista ng mga taong nakapaligid sa kanila. Isang makabagong paraan ito ng pagkukuwento. Yun nga lang, halos hindi maramdaman ang damdamin ng dalawang bida. May pagka-malamlam ang pagganap ni Anderson at Chiu sa kabila ng kanilang sinseridad pero may kilig pa rin ang kanilang tambalan. Maayos ang kuha ng kamera at malinis naman ang daloy ng damdamin ngunit tila nakakainip paminsan-minsan ang paikot-ikot na problema ng dalawang bida. Marahil ay sinasadya naman ito sa kuwento. Epektibo ang mga pangalawang tauhan pero hindi naman gaanong nabigyan ng kuwento ang mga ito at naging halos palamuti na lang. Sa kabuuan ay nakaka-aliw at nakakakilig pa rin ang pelikula at ang pagsusubok nitong bigyan ng bagong timpla ang isang tila gasgas na kuwentong pag-ibig.

Ipinakita ng pelikula kung paanong ang dalawang magkaibang pagkatao ay maaring magkatagpo sa pag-ibig. Dumaan sa maraming unos ang pagmamahalan nila Paolo at Agnes dahil sa maraming komplikasyon sa kanilang paligid at sa pagkakaiba na rin ng kanilang pananaw sa buhay at pag-uugali. Totoong-totoo ang mga problemang ito at naging totoo rin ang pelikula sa pagsasabing mahirap talaga itong lutasin sa kabila ng pagnanais ng isa’t-isa na magparaya. Ngunit tunay na pag-ibig pa rin ang natatanging pag-asang pwedeng panghawakan sa bandang huli. Marami ring argumento ang pelikula na nararapat pag-isipan ng manonood ukol sa kung ano nga ba ang dapat mas bigyan ng halaga, pangarap o pag-ibig? Maaari bang magtagpo ang paghahangad ng yaman at pagpapayabong ng relasyon? Sa nagbabagong panahon at nagbabagong mundo, saan nga ba dapat ilugar ang puso? Sa ipinakita ng pelikula, sinasabi nitong pagmamahalan at relasyon pa rin ang pinakamalaga sa mundo ngunit hindi naman nito lantarang ipinakita ang nararapat na sakripisyong kaabikat nito. May mga ilan ding nakakababahalang mensahe ang pelikula tulad ng maaaring ipagsawalang-bahala na lang ang ilang maseselang isyu sa relasyon gaya ng pagsiping sa iba. Bagama’t wala namang ipinakitang maseselang eksena bukod sa ilang halikan, masasabi pa ring ang tema ng pelikula ay nararapat lamang sa manonood na may edad 14 pataas. --By Rizalino R. Pinlac, Jr.

Eat Pray Love

A review by Peter Malone

For the many readers who liked Elizabeth Gilbert’s book, they will know that the title refers to the twelve months that the writer took out of her life to take stock, enjoy and marvel at the world, and to come kind of self-forgiveness and acceptance. She spent four months in Rome (eat), four months in India (pray) and four months in Bali (love). For those who did not read the book, the film is an opportunity for them to accompany Liz on her geographical, psychological and spiritual journey.

What makes the film easier for many audiences is the fact that Julia Roberts plays Liz Gilbert. Twenty years ago, she was the glamorous Pretty Woman. Ten years ago, she was the feisty saviour of victims, Erin Brockovich. Now she offers a character for women in mid-life who want to take an initiative to discover their better selves. Julia Roberts, looks beautiful at all times, but harried at first, becoming more radiant and then, without make up, her older, even plainer, self. Though we are conscious that it is Julia Roberts we are watching, she does transform herself into Elisabeth Gilbert making the journey credible.

Though the film is long, the first episodes are rather hurried, too hurried to really grasp the personalities of her husband who loves her (Billy Crudup) but whom she divorces, of her younger, actor partner (James Franco). We get glimpses (and during the journey some flashbacks) of the relationships and why they failed. Viola Davis is solid as her best friend.

Then the film settles down to indulge us with the vistas of Rome and plenty of food, glorious food, Italian-style. With good friends and learning the difference between entertainment and real pleasure (Italians pointing out that this is a mistake that busy Americans make), Liz puts on the kilos with happy abandon. And, then she is in India.

At the ashram in India, Liz assumes the dress styles, the rituals, the manual work of service (yes, that is Julia Roberts scrubbing floors), the silences, the hospitality and the meditative space that leads her to a conclusion that ‘God is within me, as me’, a reflection worth some more reflection. The film captures the colours of India, even at a wedding, and should entice happy visitors to Italy to take a second look at their affluent world in comparison with the poverty and hardships of India.

There is a standout sequence in the Indian episode, a clip that could stand alone for use in seminars on alcoholism and self-improvement. The writing of the film takes off and is brought to dramatic power by the performance of Richard Jenkins.

What do you do when you have purged yourself of some spiritual ailments? Go to Bali, seek the help of a wise man and some alternative healing – and allow yourself to fall in love. That requires inner freedom, an acknowledgement of past failures but, most importantly, discovering self-forgiveness. In the beauty of Bali and with Javier Bardem on hand, it is, after many difficulties, possible.

The trouble with Eat Pray Love is that one wants to respond to the character and how she handles her journey rather than sit back and accept the film and Liz Gilbert. This is very much a First World story, the aftermath of New Age fashions and the discovery of Eastern mystic practices if not Eastern religion. Very few (very few) women can take the time, let alone afford the time and expenses for such a journey. This is the spiritual trek of a wealthy woman. While holiday and break are necessary, and Liz is introduced to some mysticism and asceticism in India, we ask, ‘to what purpose?’. By the time she has come to terms with herself and found love, we wonder what the moral bases of her life consist of, what is the nature of her integrity and the tension between some absolutes she has discovered and the relative importance of principles to be held on to or discarded.

Many men in the audience have found sharing this journey a tedious movie experience. Many women will be encouraged to follow Elizabeth Gilbert in her search in as much as their means allow them. Her story, book and film, is at least an attempt, in a pluralist world that has become even more pluralist, to attempt a search for life values.

CINEMA RATING: Technical: 3 Moral: 2.5 R 14

White House

Cast: Gabby Concepcion, Iza Calzado, Joem Gascon, Lovi Poe, Angel Jacob, Maricar Reyes; Director: Topel Lee; Screenplay: Lamberto Casas, Jr; Running Time:100 minutes; Location: Baguio; Genre: Horror

Technical Assessment: 2
Moral Assessment: 2.5
Rating: For Viewers 14 years old and above

Isang kilalang ispiritista si Jet Castillo (Gabby Concepcion) na aalukin ng trabaho ng isang malaking estasyon ng telebisyon na gagawa ng isang “horror reality show” kung saan ang mga kalahok ay ikukulong sa isang haunted house at ang makakatagal ng tatlong araw ay mag-uuwi ng isang milyon. Pinuntahan ni Jet ang sinasabing haunted house sa Baguio na kilala bilang white house. May mararamdaman siyang di kanais-nais- mayroong nagmumulto sa bahay na nagbabadya ng panganib dahil maaari itong makapanakit. Tatanggihan ni Jet ang trabaho at pagsasabihan ang executive producer (Maricar Reyes) na huwag nang ituloy ang programa. Ngunit magiging mapilit ito at itutuloy ang pagpapa-audition sa mga nais maging kalahok. Samantala, ang nag-iisang anak na babae ni Jet ay magkakaroon ng kakaibang karamdaman. Mapagtatanto niyang kinuha ng isang masamang espiritu ang kaluluwa ng kanyang anak. Dahil ang hinala niya ay isa itong espritu mula sa white house, kakailanganin niyang bumalik doon upang mabawi ang kaluluwa ng anak. At dahil wala siyang oras na dapat sayangin, masasabay ang paghahanap niya sa espiritu sa pagsho-shooting ng reality horror show. Dito masasaksihan nilang lahat ang malalagim na pambibiktima ng multong tinatawag na black lady (Iza Calzado).

Sinubok ng White House na magpakita ng kakaibang pelikulang katatakutan sa pamamagitan ng paghahalo ng tinatawag na reality TV show na usong-uso sa panahong ito. Nakakaintrigang panoorin ang pelikula dahil dito. Dagdag pa diyan na pinagbibidahan ito ng mga kilala at respetadong mga artista sa industriya. Ngunit sa simula pa lang ng pelikula ay pawang magiging malaking pagsisisi ang panonood nito. Karamihan sa mga sitwasyon na kinahantungan ng mga tauhan sa kuwento ay pawang bunga ng kani-kanilang katangahan at kabalintunaan. Lahat ng ninais ng pelikulang iparating sa manonood ay bigo. Bigo itong magtanim ng takot at misteryo sa manonood.. Nakabulatlat antimano ang anumang nais itago ng pelikula kung kaya’t wala na itong gulat sa bandang huli. Maganda sana ang mga special effects na mukha namang pinagbuhusan ng talino ngunit dahil palpak ang pagkukuwento, ay pumalpak nang todo ang pelikula sa kabuuan. Mababaw ang karakterisasyon ng mga tauhan na hindi man lamang pinalawig, tuloy, walang kakampihan o kakaawaan man lang ang manonood. Marami pa sanang pwedeng iganda ang pelikula ngunit sinayang nila ang pagkakataong ito. Marahil nagkulang sila oras sa paghahabol na maipalabas ito sa panahon ng Undas.

May ilang malilinaw na puntong nais sabihin ang White House sa kabila ng kakulangan nitong teknikal. Una ay ang dalisay na pagmamahal ng isang ama sa kanyang anak na gagawin ang lahat, susuungin ang panganib mailigtas lamang ang anak sa kapahamakan. Ganyan ang ipinakita sa katauhan ni Jet. Pangalawang ipinakita sa pelikula ang pagsasalarawan ng kung paanong ang mass media ay ginagamit at pinagkakakitaan ang kasawian ng iba. Ipinakita ring pinarurusahan ang sinumang naglalagay sa buhay ng tao sa alanganin maging ito man ay isang taong may mataas na katungkulan. Pangatlo ay pinaigting ng pelikula ang kapangyarihan ng kabutihan laban sa kasamaan. Naging matagumpay man si ‘black lady” sa simula ay hindi pa rin ito nanaig sa bandang huli. Yun nga lang, marami nang buhay ang nasayang at nawala nang ganun-ganun na lamang. May mangilan-ngilan lamang tanong at nakakabahala sa kuwento. Tulad halimbawa ng hindi paglilinaw kung bakit ganoon na lamang kasama ang tinaguriang “black lady”. Saan nanggagaling ang kanyang poot at galit? Tila yata hindi ito masyadong napalawig sa pelikula. Pinalabas na sadya lamang siyang masama at may makitid na pag-iisip. O marahil, may diprensiya siya sa pag-iisip? Maging yun ay hindi malinaw. Hindi rin maganda ang mga ipinakitang larawan ng kababaihan sa pelikula. Ang isa ay kaladkarin, ang isa nama’y ubod ng hina, at ang isa nama’y labis ang kasamaan. Ang karamihan sa mga tauhan sa pelikula ay isteryotipikal. Ang lalaking bida naman ay tila lumalabas na bayani at tagapag-sagip. Hindi rin gaanong ipinakita ang kalakasan ng pagdarasal sa pelikula dahil hinayaan nitong maraming buhay ang mawala. Para bang walang silbi ang mga dasal at orasyon laban sa masamang espiritu. Hindi napalawig ang kapangyarihang taglay ng panalangin sa kabuuan ng pelikula. May mga ilang eksesan pang nakababahala tulad ng lantarang pagtatalik sa labas ng kasal isinasapubliko pa sa kamera, at paggamit ng ipinagbabawal na gamot na pinalabas na katawa-tawang gawain sa halip na ipakitang ito ay masama. --By Rizalino R. Pinlac, Jr.

Life as we know it

CAST: Katherine Heigle, Josh Duhamel, Josh Lucas, Christina Hendricks, Hayes MacArthur, Jean Smart, Melissa McCarthy, Majandra Delfino, Faizon Love, Will Sasso. DIRECTOR: Greg Berlanti. WRITERS: Ian Deitchman, Kristin Rusk Robinson GENRE: Comedy-Drama. RUNNING TIME: 115 minutes. LOCATION: United States. DISTRIBUTOR: Warner Bros.

CBCP-CINEMA Ratings: TECHNICAL: 3 MORAL: 2.5
R 14 (For viewers aged 14 and above)

Holly Berenson (Katherine Heigl) is an up-and-coming caterer and Eric Messer (Josh Duhamel) is an aspiring network sports director. After a disastrous first (blind) date arranged by their best friends Peter and Alison Novack (Hayes MacArthur and Christina Hendricks) the only thing they have in common in their dislike for each other and their love for their goddaughter Sophie, the child of Peter and Alison. When Sophie’s parents die in a car accident, Holly and Messer find themselves the unwilling surrogate parents as stated in the Novacks’ will. Messer and Holly are oil and water forced to live under the same roof in raising a child not their own. When they realize Sophie is an orphan and has nobody else in the world, they agree to put aside their differences. Parenting is done in earnest as Holly and Messer juggle career ambitions and competing social calendars to honor their best friends’ wish. (Warner Bros.)

Fans of Katherine Heigl will love this movie—besides being easy on the eyes, Heigl has good comic timing, which explains why she is so much in demand for rom-coms. It’s good to remember that Life As We Know It is a romantic comedy, a genre that may include the facts of life and living but which also may capitalize on these facts as props to justify the improbable plot. The most factual thing about this movie is its portrayal of details where it concerns the experience of sharing a home with a baby: the sleepless nights, poop-and-vomit management, feeding time tantrums, and god-knows-what-other tragedies that can be caused by an unattended toddler.

Like most rom-coms, Life As We Know It comes across as formulaic and in many instances may feel like an expanded television 30-minuter; but unlike most rom-coms, it is premised on love for others, concern for the helpless, trust and loyalty among friends, and goodwill of neighbors. Points for reflection are: 1) having to care for a baby when one is not prepared for it, and 2) what a shared experience of raising an orphan can do to erstwhile enemies. While being surrogate parents to a toddler helps them mature as persons, proximity accelerates physical intimacy between the pair, leading them to skip courtship—which is what happens in so many Hollywood movies, when boy and girl bed even before they get to know each other’s name. Despite the laughs and the artifice, Life As We Know It may still move you to be involved—especially as Sophie begins to call her surrogate mother “mama”—to be concerned about the future of so many Sophies in our midst.--Teresa R. Tunay

The Town

CAST: Ben Affleck, Rebecca Hall, Jeremy Renner, Blake Lively, Pete Postlethwaite, Chris Cooper. DIRECTOR: Ben Affleck. SCREENPLAY: Ben Affleck, Peter Craig and Aaron Stockard, based on the novel “Prince of Thieves” by Chuck Hogan. CINEMATOGRAPHY: Robert Elswit. MUSIC: David Buckley, Harry Gregson-Williams. GENRE: Drama-thriller. RUNNING TIME: 124 minutes. LOCATION: United States. DISTRIBUTOR: Warner Bros.

CBCP-CINEMA ratings: TECHNICAL: 3.5 MORAL: 2.5 R 18 (Restricted to viewers aged 18 and above)

Doug MacRay (Ben Affleck) is an unrepentant criminal, the de facto leader of a group of ruthless bank robbers who pride themselves in stealing what they want and getting out clean. With no real attachments, Doug never has to fear losing anyone close to him. But, that all changes on the gang's latest job, when they briefly take a hostage, bank manager, Claire Keesey (Rebecca Hall). They let her go unharmed, but sometime later she meets an unassuming and rather charming man named Doug... not realizing that he is the same man who only days earlier had terrorized her. The instant attraction between them gradually turns into a passionate romance that threatens to take them both down a dangerous, and potentially deadly, path. (Warner Bros).

Director and co-writer Affleck's screen version of Chuck Hogan's 2004 novel "Prince of Thieves" is meant to be a serious film , yet it is able to cater to the crowd that finds thrills in car chases and bloody bank heists. The story is clear and is enhanced by good direction and tight editing. Cinematography is well-conceived, imbuing a sense of urgency and tension to high- action footage and an intimate feel to close ups that capture the depth of each character’s portrayal. Casting couldn’t have been better, as proven by the flawless acting of the lead characters. Affleck has done a good directing job in that he is able to pull together otherwise ordinary elements into a fresh, cohesive whole.

Can a man commit crimes with impunity and still love anyone else but himself? Can a lifetime of violence be reversed by an uttered intention to change? It seems a tribute to the good in man that one who has been brought up in violence and crime—inheriting his bank-robbing “career” from his father as part of a warped but accepted cultural tradition, much like in the olden days when fathers and grandfathers molded their progeny to their trade—still has a modicum of human goodness in him to resolve to turn his back on evil and take the road to decency. But the will to change is tested and tried through time. There are people who have been killed, abused, betrayed and denied—may the offender simply dispose of them in the new world he wants to create? In this film, time and the future are left to the viewer. Nonetheless, The Town gains merits in painfully trying to depict the effect of the “sins of our fathers” on us and in giving hope to those who yearn for a better world. A sensitive and morally weighty film, but its theme won’t interest young teens, and its well-intended message may be missed, if not misconstrued, by immature viewers.-By Teresa R. Tunay

Petrang Kabayo

Cast: Vice Ganda, Eugene Domingo, Luis Manzano, Candy Pangilinan, Gloria Romero, John Arcilla; Director: Wenn Deramas; Screenplay: Mel-Mendoza Del-Rosario ; Producer-Distributor: Viva Films; Running Time:120 minutes; Location: Manila; Genre: Comedy

Technical Assessment: 3 Moral Assessment: 3
Rating: For viewers ages 13 and below with parental guidance

Nakaranas ng malabis na kalupitan si Peter (Vice Ganda) sa kamay ng kanyang ama (John Arcilla) nung siya’y bata pa.Dahilan upang siya’y maglayas. Mabuti na lamang at natagpuan siya ng isang haciendera (Eugene Domingo) na kinupkop siya at itinuring na sariling anak. Subalit lalaking malupit si Peter sa mga tao man o hayop lalo na sa mga kabayo dahil na rin sa dinanas niyang hirap sa kanyang ama na ginawa siyang panghalili sa kabayo sa kalesa nito. Nang mamatay ang itinuring na ina at ipinamana sa kanya ang hacienda, lalong naging malupit si Peter sa mga tauhan nila. Dahil sa malabis na kalupitang ito ni Peter sa mga hayop ay isusumpa siya ng diyosa ng mga kabayo na sa tuwing siya ay magagalit o magmamalupit sa hayop man o tao ay magiging isang kabayo siya kung kaya’t siya'y magiging si Petrang Kabayo. Magawa kaya ni Peter na magbago dala ng sumpang ito?

Bagama’t hindi maiiwasang maihambing ang Petrang Kabayo na ito sa orihinal na bersyon ni Roderick Paulate noon, masasabi namang nagawa ng pelikulang punuan ang inaasahan ng manonood na maaliw. Salamat sa napakahusay na pagganap ni Ganda bilang Petrang Kabayo at nagawa nitong palutangin ang katatawanan sa kabila ng mangilan-ngilang kabagalan ng pelikula sa pagkukuwento. Dahil kay Ganda, nabigyang buhay ang kabuuan ng tauhan at kuwento ni Petrang Kabayo. Pawang mahuhusay din naman ang kanyang mga kasamang tauhan ngunit dahil siya ang bida at ito ang kauna-unahan niyang pagbibida sa pelikula, ay malaki ang inaasahan sa kanya. Nagampanan naman niya ng buong husay ito at walang humpay sa kakatawa ang mga manonood. Ang sunod na lamang sigurong aabangan ay kung makaya pa kaya niyang masundan o mahigitan ang nagawa niya sa Petrang Kabayo. Hindi kaya maglaon ay maumay rin ang manonood sa kanya at sa kanyang mga patawa?

Maganda ang pangunahing mensahe ng pelikula ukol sa pakikipag-kapwa tao at pakikitungo sa iba pang nilalang ng Diyos tulad ng hayop, na sa pelikula ay naka-sentro sa kabayo. Ang hayop, tulad ng tao ay dapat ding inaaruga, pinagmamalasakitan at binubusog ng pagmamahal. Inakala ni Peter sa simula na makatarungan ang kanyang pagiging malupit , gawa ng mga naranasan niyang kalupitan mula sa ama, ngunit nagkamali siya at natauhan din naman sa bandang huli na hindi ito nararapat. Napagtanto din niyang sa kabila ng lahat ng kalupitan at kasamaang dinanas sa ama ay pawang kabutihan naman ang ginawa sa kanya ng nag-ampon sa kanya. Matagal bago naghilom ang sugat ni Peter na siya sigurong magiging tanong ng mga manonood. Una, bakit ang tagal pa rin naalis ng poot sa kanyang puso gayong nagkaroon na siya ng magandang buhay? Pangalawa, kinakailangan pa bang magkasakit ang isang tao upang siya ay magbago? Pangatlo, bakit naging mahirap kay Peter na maging mabuti sa mga taong hindi naman naging malupit sa kanya? May ilan pa ring diskriminasyon sa pelikula sa mga itinuturing na pangit at maging sa mga bakla bagama’t ito ang pangunahing tauhan. Hindi rin naging malinaw kung paanong si Peter ay lumaking bakla. Dahil nga ba ito sa pagmamalupit ng kanyang ama? Bunga ng impluwensiya? Sinasabi bang ito ay nangyayari na lamang at hindi ginugusto ninuman? (O ginawa ba lamang bakla ang bida dahil mas nakakatawa ito kaysa kung ang gaganap na Peter ay si Cesar Montano, halimbawa, o kahit si Vhong Navarro?) Hindi naman ito pinalawig ng pelikula pero kahanga-hanga pa rin ang ipinapahiwatig nitong mensahe ukol sa pantay-pantay na pagtingin sa tao: mayaman man o mahirap, maganda man o pangit, ano pa man ang kasarian. –Ni RizalinoR. Pinlac, Jr.

Wall Street: Money Never Sleeps

CAST: Michael Douglas, Shia LeBeouf, Carey Mulligan, Josh Brolin, Frank Langella, Susan Sarandon. DIRECTOR: Oliver Stone. GENRE: Drama. WRITERS: Allan Loeb and Stephen Schiff, based on characters created by Stanley Weiser and Stone. RUNNING TIME: 130 minutes. LOCATION: United States. PRODUCTION: 20th Century-Fox

CINEMA Ratings: TECHNICAL: 3 MORAL: 3 For viewers 14 and above.

Imprisoned for stuffing his pockets while bankrupting his firm, Wall Street trader Gordon “Greed is Good” Gekko (Michael Douglas) is released from behind bars in 2001. Seven years later, he’s the author of “Is Greed Good?” and is back in the limelight as a lecturer to the business community. In one of his lectures promoting his book, he meets up and coming trader Jake Moore (Shia LaBeouf) who catches his attention only when he introduces himself as being in love with Gekko’s daughter Winnie (Carey Mulligan). Winnie hasn’t spoken to her father for years since the death of her brother which he blames on him. Gekko sees in the young man a way to reconcile with his daughter. Winnie remains distrustful, but Jake is convinced of Gekko’s repentance and sincere concern for Winnie’s future.

Gordon Gekko is definitely the most colorful character in the movie, played with convincing abandon by Douglas. Indeed, the most interesting footages in Wall Street: Money Never Sleeps are those with Douglas in them. Frank Langella also plays a brief but memorable role as Jake’s mentor Louis Zabel who finds an instant solution to the dire financial state he is in. LeBeouf perhaps looks too wholesome to be credible as an ambitious young man—there’s not enough glimmer of covetousness in his pretty boy looks, but that’s more casting’s fault than his. Mulligan does her role in earnest, and while she’s crying half of the time, she does her best to project the anguish and firmness of her character. Despite a somewhat routine dialogue, it’s a good movie, actually—fast paced, informative in a way, appeals to both intelligence and emotions, and provides a twist towards the end that shifts the story’s center to an unexpected axis.

Not only is Gordon Gekko the most colorful character in this movie; he is also its moral center. He is the repentant sinner upon his release from federal prison, a remorseful father who has realized what he has missed in those long years, but when an opportunity presents itself, he drools and backslides like any other money-monger whose motto is “In Greed We Trust”. How does Gordon Gekko end up? We’re not about to spoil your fun—suffice it to say that the conclusion is a home run for pro-lifers.

Legend of the Guardians: The Owls of Ga'Hoole

Technical: 3.5
Moral: 3
Rating: PG 13 (Aged 13 and below with parental guidance).

Brothers Soren and Kludd may look the same outside but inside these barn owlets are worlds apart. Soren (voiced by Jim Sturgess) won’t get tired of the bedtime story their father tells about the Guardians of Ga’Hoole, a noble band of warriors who vanquished the evil army named the “Pure Ones”. For Kludd (voiced by Ryan Kwanten), however, such are silly stories only daydreamers like his brother could buy.
Sneaking out of the family nest one night to try their wings at “flying”, barn owlets Soren and Kludd tumble off a branch to the ground. But before they are captured by a hungry wild boar, they are swooped away in the talons of huge mean-looking owls. Their captors turn out to be the minions of the Pure Ones who run an “orphanage”—in reality a training camp that brainwashes abducted owlets to serve their wicked purposes.

Aware of their captors’ nefarious activities to annihilate the owls of the “lesser species” (meaning those outside of the Pure Ones’ dominion) but deceived by the promises of their evil Queen Nyra (voiced by Helen Mirren), Kludd accepts to be a future soldier while Soren is sent to the camp’s slave labor area when he defends a tiny elf owl Gylfie (voiced by Emily Barclay). Soren and Gylfie think the owldom must be warned of the Pure Ones’plan to wipe them out, but who will escape the camp to do it? An old warrior from the ranks of the Pure Ones, Grimble (voiced by Geoffrey Rush) trains the young pair to fly so that they may one day escape the camp and warn the unsuspecting owls.

Directed by Zack Snyder and brought to the screen by Animal Logic, the same studio that made that penguin movie, Happy Feet, this owl film is definitely something worth hooting about. It’s a visual treat, right from the start. The animators certainly created a magical world—forest, sea, sky—that one could only wish to be real in its majesty and beauty.

This is one time you’ll forget about those plastic 3D glasses you’re wearing as you note the fine details, colors and textures that the film is never short of: the subtle lighting shifts on the owls’ feathers ruffling in the breeze, on the scenic backdrops of sea or storm, on Soren’s flight through a nasty funnel cloud, or on the clouds made translucent by their gliding across the sun. Such gorgeous photo-realism takes Legend of the Guardians several notches higher than even the better animation films so far made, especially with the impressive rendering of the owls’ eyes.

From childhood we know that owls, with their wide, intelligent looking eyes, have traditionally symbolized wisdom, but being nocturnal, they can hardly be scrutinized at the zoos, so we have never really seen how they move their eyes. But now, Legend of the Guardians gives us owls with eyes as expressive as humans’. We know a bit about CGI and how difficult artists find it to capture the eyes in animation, but here we have owls’ eyes so realistically conveying human emotions about equally human concerns, like their family’s future or vanquishing evil, that we could come to think they’re not really owls, much less animated owls, but actually human beings in owls’ clothing!

Preposterous though that may sound, Legend of the Guardians depicts laudable ideals and most assuredly delivers a message on the human condition. Perhaps the story and the script are rather familiar to adults, but to preteens in search of heroes a tale of bravery like this would be uplifting, inspiring us to self-confidently keep our head and heart in the right place in the face of adversity.

The movie is definitely worth a peek for viewers of all ages, but please keep the younger children (below primary school age) and nervous 10-year olds out of the audience. Although it’s a worthy story about the quest toward self-awareness, the dark story is generously spiked with intense situations, and startling fierce encounters between good and bad owls—the stuff nightmares are made of.

You’d never think that owls would be concerned with heroism, honor, adventure, peace, legends, power, family, orphans and class distinction but Legend of the Guardians says they are, indeed. Well, as we have said, these owls to us feel like humans. The only thing that will probably jolt you out of this “humanowled” world is the warriors’ intricately crafted combat masks. Appreciating the craftsmanship you’d think, “Gee, how could owls make such exquisite metal masks?” Then you’ll realize: it’s only a movie! --By Teresa R. Tunay, OCDS

I do

Cast: Erich Gonzalez, Enchong Dee, Dennis Padilla, Pokwang, Isay Alvarez ; Director: Veronica Velasco; Producer: Malu Santos; Screenwriter: Veronica Velasco; Distributor: Star Cinema; Genre: Comedy/ Drama; Location: Manila; Running Time: 100 minutes
Cast: Steve Time: 88

Technical: 3 Moral: 2.5 Rating: For viewers 14 and above

Si Yumi (Erich Gonzalez) ay naniniwala sa kapalaran at nangangarap na balang araw ay makikilala niya ang kanyang Prince Charming at sila’y ikakasal sa kanyang dream wedding. Nang makilala niya si Lance (Enchong Dee), aakalain niyang ito na ang kanyang hinihintay. Magiging mabilis ang pangyayari sa kanilang dalawa at makalipas lamang ang ilang buwan ay magugulat na lamang si Yumi na siya ay nabuntis na pala. Sa takot ni Yumi sa kanyang pamilya ay agad niyang niyaya si Lance na magpakasal kahit hindi pa ito handa, bukod sa hindi rin matanggap ng pamilya ni Lance na ikakasal ito sa isang hindi nila katulad na Tsino. Magiging malabis ang kalituhan ni Lance at hindi nito itutuloy ang pagpapakasal kay Yumi. Maraming beses silang mag-uurong-sulong sa pagpapakasal dala ng maraming aberya, pati ang komplikasyon sa kani-kanilang pamilya, damay na rin ang kanilang anak. Matupad pa nga kaya ang inaasam ni Yuming dream wedding?

Bagama’t kung tutuusin ay gasgas na ang kwento ng I do, nagawa nitong bigyan ng bagong bihis ang tila palasak nang konsepto. Maraming nakakaaliw na eksena na binigyang buhay at kulay ng mga batikang komedyante at aktor. Ang mga bida naman, bagama’t halatang mga pa-cute pa ay nagawa namang umarte sa mga eksenang kinakailangan at sadyang ibinagay sa kanila ang kani-kaniyang papel. Pero nagkulang pa rin sa hagod ang pelikula. Bukod sa kakulangan ng hagod ang pag-arte ng mga pangunahing tauhan lalo na si Dee, kulang din sa lalim ang kabuuang pagkukuwento ng pelikula. Hindi gaanong napalalim ang mga tunay na isyung dapat tinalakay. Sa halip, nasobrahan ng pagkaka-sentro sa kasalan ang kwento, kaya’t halos mawalan na ito ng saysay. Maaring ito rin ang gustong palabasin ng pelikula sa kabuuan ngunit nabigo ito dahil sa mahinang pundasyon ng kuwento. Sa kabuuan tuloy ay madali ring makakalimutan ang pelikulang ito.

Ang kuwento ng mga kabataang mapupusok na nauuwi sa di-inaasahang pagbubuntis ay palasak na rin sa lipunan. Isa itong problemang dapat pagtuunan ng pansin at hindi magkakaroon ng solusyon kung dadaanin na lamang sa tawa. Ito ang ginawa ng I Do – ang gawing katatawanan ang isang napakaseryoso, at maging mga sagradong sitwasyon. Walang nakakatawa sa maagang pagbubuntis nang wala pang kasalan. Magiging sanhi ito ng marami pang komplikasyon na dapat sanang ipinakita sa pelikula upang maging halimbawa sa mga kabataang manonood. Oo nga’t mabigat na ang buhay at hindi na dapat lalo pang pabigatin ngunit sa ginawang pagpapagaan ng I Do sa sitwasyon ay lalo itong naging nakakabahala. Wala ngang matinding halikan o hubaran na ipinakita ngunit ang pagkauwi ng isang bubot na relasyon sa pagbubuntis ay hindi dapat ipinagsa-walang bahal ng perlikula. Wala man lang matapat na pagsisisi mula sa sinumang tauhan. Bagkus, nakatuon pa rin ang babaeng tauhan sa maraming ilusyon— ilusyon ng pag-ibig at pagpapakasal. Hindi dahil sa isa itong mahalagang sakramento kundi dahil, isa itong magandang palabas. Hanggang sa huli’y parang hindi naman nabago ang pagtingin na ito. Para bang ninais pa nitong sabihin na, basta’t mahal mo’y, yun na. Hindi isina-alang-alang ang kahalagahan ng sakramento at ang malalim na inspirasyong kaugnay dito. Sa malaking bahagi ng pelikula, naging insidental at tila palamuti na lamang ang naging anak ng dalawang tauhan. Kahit paano mo ito tingnan, ito’y isang kamalian. --By Rizalino Pinlac, Jr.

Charlie St. Cloud

GENERAL INFORMATION

LEAD CAST: Zac Efron, Amanda Crew, Charlie Tahan, Augustus Prew, Donal Logue, Kim Basinger, Ray Liotta DIRECTOR: Burr Steers SCREENWRITER: Craig Pearce, Lewis Colick PRODUCER: Marc Platt GENRE: Drama RUNNING TIME: 109 minutes DISTRIBUTOR: Universal Pictures LOCATION: New England, USA

Technical: 4 Moral: 3 For viewers 14 years and above

Overcome by grief at the death of his younger brother, Charlie St. Cloud takes a job as caretaker of the cemetery in which his brother is buried. Charlie has a gift and special bond with his brother (Sam) whom he can see. Charlie meets up with his deceased brother each night to play catch and talk, but when a girl walks into Charlie’s life, he must choose between keeping his promise to Sam, or going after the girl he loves. The movie presents life after death in a realistic way: the dead are still alive though in a different form.

Muli

Cast: Sid Lucero, Cogie Domingo, Rocky Salumbides; Director: Adolf Alix, Jr. Screenplay: Jerry Gracio; Running Time:100 minutes; Location: Baguio; Genre: Drama/ Adult

Technical Assessment: 3
Moral Assessment: 1
Rating: For Viewers 18 years old and above



Magsisimula ang kuwento nang dekada 70. Pagkalabas ng seminaryo, si Jun (Sid Lucero) na ang namahala ng kanilang inn at humalili sa yumao niyang ina. Mahihikayat si Jun na sumali sa isang komunistang kilusan na naghahangad ng pagbabago mula sa diktadurya, at dito ay magkakaroon siya ng relasyon sa kapwa lalaki nilang lider. Sa kasamaang palad ay masasawi ang kasintahan niyang ito at ibubunton sa kanya ang sisi kung kaya’t siya’y ilalaglag ng samahan. Makikilala naman niya ang abugadong si Errol (Cogie Domingo). Magsisimula sila sa kaswal na pagkakaibigan na hahantong sa isang sekswal na relasyon. Lilipas ang panahon at makakapag-asawa si Errol at magkakaroon ng dalawang anak. Minsan isang taon ay umaakyat si Errol ng Baguio upang makipagkita kay Jun kahit pa ito’y may iba na ring kinakasama. Sa pagdaan ng mga taon ay hindi malilimot nina Jun at Errol ang isa’t-isa ngunit may kani-kaniya na rin silang buhay pamilya at pag-ibig, at ang kanilang relasyon ay hindi rin tanggap sa lipunan. Magawa pa kaya nilang mapanindigan ang kanilang pagmamahalan?

Ang Muli ay uminog sa iba’t-ibang panahon ng kasaysayan ng Pilipinas mula dekada 70 hanggang sa kasalukuyan. Maganda sanang panimula ito at tila isang bagong bihis para sa isang kuwentong pag-ibig na namamagitan sa dalawang lalaki. Ninais ng pelikula na pagsabayin ang paghahayag ng kalayaan ng bansa mula sa diktadurya at ng kalayaan sa paghahayag ng piniling kasarian o sekswalidad. Ngunit hindi ito naging maliwanag sa kabuuan ng pelikula dahil hindi gaanong naipakita ang malinaw na koneksyon ng dalawa. Pawang lumalabas na nagkataon lamang na naganap ang kanilang kuwento sa nasabing panahon. Ilagay man ito sa ibang panahon o lugar, hindi pa rin magbabago ang takbo nito. Hindi naman matatawaran ang husay ng mga nagsiganap lalo na si Lucero na naging kapani-paniwala sa kanyang papel. Maging is Domingo at iba pa ay pawang mahuhusay din. Nabigyang buhay nila ang kani-kanilang ginampanang tauhan. Yun nga lang ay nagkulang ng kaunti sa hagod ang karakterisasyon kaya lumabas na napakababaw ng kanilang mga pagkatao. Mahusay naman ang kuha ng camera at paglalapat ng musika.

Maraming ibinatong argumento ang pelikula sa lipunan at simbahan. Pilit nitong inilalarawan ang namamayaning kaapihan ng mga mamamayan, sa larangang ekonomiya man o sekswal, na nag-uugat sa gobyerno at lalo na sa simbahang Katoliko. Naging talamak , tahasan at talaga namang lantaran ang ginawa nitong pagkukuwestiyon sa turo ng simbahan ukol sa relasyon at sekswalidad. Pinalabas nitong makitid at sarado ang isipan ng simbahan sa usaping homosekswalidad. Hindi isina-alang-alang ng pelikula ang kahalagahan ng pamilya. Bagkus, malabis nitong binigyang pansin ang sekswal na relasyon ng dalawang lalaki na wala namang lalim kundi nakaugat lang sa pagluluto ng isa ng kaldereta. Bukod dito, wala nang makitang dahilan kung bakit nila minamahal at inaantay ang bawat isa. Sa tuwing sila’y magkikita, pagtatalik lang naman ang inaatupag nila. Walang malalim na kumustahan, walang matinding pinag-uugatan ang kanilang pag-iibigan. Naipakita naman kung gaano katindi ang naging epekto kay Errol ng ginawa niyang pagsisinungaling sa asawa ngunit sa bandang huli’y niromansa pa rin ang pag-iibigan nina Jun at Errol. Kung magiging ganito ang basehan ng wagas na pag-ibig, wala nang pamilyang mabubuo at ang lahat ng pagkakaibigan ay parati na lamang mag-uugat sa kababawan o tawag ng laman. Hindi marahil nauunawan o natatanto ng mga gumawa ng pelikula na ang simbahan ay sadyang maunawain at maawain sa sinumang nagkakasala. Ngunit ang kanilang isipin at palabasin sa pelikula na walang masama sa relasyong homoseksuwal ay siyang tunay na nakakabahala. --Rizalino R. Pinlac, Jr.

Resident Evil: After Life

LEAD CAST: Milla Jovovich, Ali Larter, Kim Coates, Shawn Roberts DIRECTOR: Paul W.S. Anderson SCREENWRITER: Paul Anderson PRODUCER: Paul Anderson RUNNING TIME: 97 minutes LOCATION: Tokyo & LA

Technical: 2.5 Moral: 2 For viewers 18 and above


Resident Evil opens with gripping scene showing umbrellas on a rainy day in Tokyo. In the middle of all this hustle and bustle stands a girl, dripping wet and apparently stoned. Soon she sinks her teeth into the neck of an innocent passerby—aaah, so she’s “one of them,” a newly converted zombie, one of those that will engage Alice (Milla Jovovich) in her battle to save the world from the bad guys.

Real life fashion model Milla Jovovich slips back into her black tights as Alice for this fourth entry in the series based on the video game. In post-apocalyptic Los Angeles, Alice is armed with an arsenal of high-powered guns and flying knives to fight off zombies infected with a virus developed by the Umbrella Corporation (with headquarters in Tokyo). Whatever the zombies’ role is in the bad guys’ attempt at world domination is obscured by their clicheic participation—mobbing after humans, waving their arms and sputtering monosyllables which together may be taken to mean they want the humans as snacks, just as moviegoes crave popcorn and soda.

Clearly, Resident Evil relies on its main attraction Jovovich to make a story out of a video game. If there is an attempt to make a moral pronouncement, it is pitifully overshadowed by the stylish presence of its main star, shown throwing flying knives are people in an obviously choreographed way, and in all-too-often close-up shots that distract from the story with her parted lips. Even if you didn’t know that Jovovich is a five-star fashion model whose face and figure has appeared in so many high-end advertisements, you’d wonder here if she’s a heroine out to save humankind or an endorser selling guns. One question pops up: is it okay to be killing so many people on the way to finding the real culprits? What happens to the families of those killed? But what do you expect when a video game is given flesh and blood via a full length feature film? Forget about the justice and the value of human life and the consequences of killing. The lesson Resident Evil: After Life incidentally teaches is: if you want your kids to grow up smart, cut down their video game playing.