Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time (Mike Newell, 2010)

I had fond memories of the Prince of Persia game as a kid − well, mostly of watching my dad playing the game. Even so, I wasn’t as enthusiastic about this film but am glad to say it was better than I expected.

I wasn’t familiar with the plot, which centre on a magical dagger that has time-travel abilities. Prince Dastan (Jake Gyllenhaal) reluctantly teams up with Princess Tamina (leader of a country the Persians invade at the start of the film, played by Gemma Arterton), in order to stop the powerful dagger from getting into the wrong hands. As a result, Prince of Persia is a mix of fantasy, science fiction elements and of course, some sword-fighting action.

I enjoyed the film more than I thought I would and once I learned that Jerry Bruckheimer (who worked on the Pirates of the Caribbean films) was one of the producers, I wasn’t that surprised. Similarly to the Pirates of the Caribbean films, there were themes of betrayal, loyalty, magical and otherworldly devices, and good old fashioned sword-fighting. Prince of Persia also had some humorous moments, which I wasn’t expecting. Actually, in Pirates of the Caribbean, Captain Jack Sparrow and Elizabeth also reluctantly work together at first − so I guess these Disney films have even more in common than I first thought.

Anyway, I also really liked the set design and the beautiful Persian locations depicted in the film. I wasn’t really a big fan of Jake Gyllenhaal as I hadn’t seen many of his films but I think he really suited the character of Prince Dastan (and not to mention, looked quite appealing in the role of a rugged, heroic prince!). So while fans of the Prince of Persia video games would probably want to see the film for nostalgic reasons or just pure curiosity, I would recommend the film for anyone who likes films involving sorcery and swords or ancient cultures, and definitely fans of the Pirates of the Caribbean franchise.

4/5

The Social Network (David Fincher, 2010)

When I first heard they were making a film about Facebook, I thought it was a joke. Once the film was released, I still wasn’t very interested in it but I ended up watching it purely because I’m a cinephile and I like to be open to a range of films and not only watching ones I like.

I think what gives The Social Network its appeal is the life of Mark Zuckerberg − his very unusual life as a college student/billionaire. While most students would just be focused on studying and other everyday aspects of college life, Zuckerberg had his mind and efforts focused on a business venture − not without its personal, financial and legal complications. The film is cleverly structured to try and hold the audience’s interest while ultimately just retelling a few years of the life of this individual. This is done by cutting between the two lawsuits he is involved in, and the chronological development of Facebook.

It is the interesting life of Zuckerberg or the overall plot that was the best quality of the film for me as I wasn’t able to connect with the characters, especially Zuckerberg, who I found a little repelling and insensitive. If I had to choose a favourite character or one that I empathised with most it would be co-founder Eduardo Saverin. I don’t know if it’s some sort of 'nerd' stereotype of if the film depicts a real reflection of Zuckerberg’s personality (although Mark Zuckerberg himself has said it isn’t). Ironically, you get the impression that despite creating this groundbreaking website that connects millions of people around the world, Zuckerberg is actually quite a lonely, isolated person. Then again, I wouldn’t take everything in this film as face value because it is not all factually accurate.

I found Sean Parker (Justin Timberlake) a particularly annoying character, sort of like the sneaky stranger you see in films, who ends up breaking a solid friendship. I found it ironic that Justin Timberlake portrays someone from Napster, given that no doubt people would have used Napster to illegally download Timberlake’s music. But also, the film gives the impression that Parker is a founder of Napster, when he actually isn’t − nor is he a founder of Facebook. (Also, on a sidenote, I found it amusing to see Brenda Song star in a film that is so different from those light-hearted, comedic children's Disney TV shows she is a part of − I can't help but associate her with those films!)

While I see the appeal of The Social Network, I personally didn’t really find it that remarkable or worthy of any Academy Awards − although maybe for the script, which was based on a book (as I said, it is a skilful way to construct what is essentially a retelling of a few years of someone’s life). The music, on the other hand, was so eerie and dark, it would’ve suited a horror and at times the music seemed to drown out the dialogue (and I don’t just mean in the club scenes). It was an interesting choice to have Nine Inch Nail musicians scoring the film − that would explain the darker edge to it. But I almost found it really grating and almost insulting to have one of my favourite Beatles songs, “Baby, You’re a Rich Man”, playing during the end credits of this film − and at the same time, it was sort of undoing or mocking the seriousness and drama exuded throughout the rest of the film. Anyway, yes, Facebook is a significant idea and development that has dramatically changed the way many people (including me) connect around the world but this film was just nowhere near as noteworthy to me.

3.5/5

Katyń (Andrzej Wajda, 2007)

This film attracted a lot of attention, particularly in Poland, and given my Polish background, the film had a more significant and personal connection with me.

The title of the film refers to the mass executions of officers and public servants by the Soviet secret police in 1940. The Soviets denied responsibility for the massacre until 1990, when it formally acknowledged the ordered killings and cover-up that had ensued. The “secret” nature of the massacre forms a significant part of the way the event is portrayed in the film.

Unlike for instance, Life is Beautiful, a film set during the Holocaust, which really tugs on the heartstrings, Katyń seems like a colder, more distanced portrayal of another of the war’s horrors. It feels more like the film is focusing on the political situation of the time, as a way of trying to come to grips with the event, as well as be able to give Poland’s uncensored account of what was (and perhaps still is) one of the lesser-known yet one of the most significant mass tragedies to have taken place during the Second World War, to the rest of the world watching through the medium of cinema.

The film, directed by celebrated Polish director Andrzej Wajda, features a few personal stories entwined with each other but I think it is more about reflecting the general state and sentiment of the country at the time − the confusion, the cover-ups, the propaganda and just the unknown. So, I feel as if, sympathy and emotion take a back seat in the film, which is more about showing people the situation Poland was facing, physically, emotionally and politically. It’s a country struggling between two forces, trying to find the lesser of two evils: the Germans and the Soviets. On the one hand, you have Nazis and Auschwitz, and on the other side of the country (literally), the Soviets are undertaking a secretive massacre in the Katyn forest. It’s just incomprehensible to me − and I usually feel like this whenever I watch something about historical tragedies and events that I, thankfully, did not have to live through but through my heritage, feel connected to. Years ago when I first heard about the Katyn massacre from my parents, I had trouble believing it. It was hard enough to come to terms with the Holocaust, and to hear of more large-scale secret mass killings of Polish people by another country, just blew my mind.

I knew this review would have a more personal touch but it’s quite unavoidable, and watching films like these will unfortunately have this effect on me, and on many others I’m sure. But it’s through telling peoples’ stories and reflecting on them that can help create wider discussion and education and hopefully, leave some mark for future generations to remember and try to avoid repeating.



4/5

Chaplin (Richard Attenborough, 1992)

The first thing I noticed as soon as the opening credits for this film appeared was the high calibre of the cast. Obviously you have Robert Downey Jr playing the lead role of Charlie Chaplin (his Academy Award nomination for this film was definitely deserved), as well as Anthony Hopkins, Dan Aykroyd, Marisa Tomei, Milla Jovovich and Geraldine Chaplin, who is in actual fact, Charlie Chaplin’s daughter, playing his mother in the film.

It would be no simple task to condense the incredible life of Chaplin into one film, so I was curious to see how this one would pan out. We see a few what moments of Chaplin’s early life, such as scenes with his mother, who is later taken to an asylum. The film focuses on Charlie’s personal life − of course, at some points we see how it sometimes took a backseat to his busy career − but his relationships with women, as well as America, are really put under the spotlight. The film portrays Chaplin as a decent, humble, good-natured individual who gets quite swamped with attention and fame. As a result, he does seem to live quite an isolated life, in a way, which is manifested through his affairs and four marriages.

Anyway, I really enjoyed the film, and found the cinematography quite creative and fitting. For instance, when Chaplin is trying to escape with his film reels, the footage speeds up as him and his group comically pop their heads around the corner and then speed away − using techniques seen in Chaplin’s films themselves.

Given that Chaplin is based on a biography and autobiography, and the fact that his daughter is involved in the film, I’d like to think this film is a truthful and accurate account of his life. Regardless, it is an endearing, enjoyable film, which brings to life the comic legend that is Charlie Chaplin.

4/5