movie i'd love to watch! ...alone, maybe.

because i don't know many people who would enjoy watching movies about psychopaths in love or dystopian movies that don't involve strong female characters and young adult love.

(i really don't.)

first off, we have Mr. Right. 

ah yes, a title like that with a thumbnail of Sam Rockwell pointing revolvers at someone for the trailer video, what's not to love already? the first thing you need to know about me and movies is that i have a strong love/hate relationship with Sam Rockwell. he's played countless baddies throughout his acting career: the most notorious being Eric Knox from Charlie's Angels, as he was toying with Dylan's heart (which was as much mine) and threatening to murder our beloved Charlie once and for all; whereas the rest are him being quite lovable psychopaths (much like the one you see in this trailer). now, the only reason why i have such a strong love/hate relationship with this particular actor is because he is such an incredible actor that he would make you forget himself as a person for a good hour and a half, and just watch you from within the story, as your emotions and morale crumble at his feet.

seriously, this guy was the biggest douchebag of all time.

among other reasons, i also seem to be very fond of weird lovers. it's somewhere a little beyond quirky yet not too far till you reach batshit crazy. Only Lovers Left Alive, Juno, Zombieland, you name it. then again, my version of batshit crazy and yours could be infinitely different.

enter trailer #2.

i am highly aware that Anna Kendrick plays the naive (almost stupid) girl in both these movies, and i truly think there's an increasing demand in the market for her to be a little bit less badass and smart since Pitch Perfect and Into the Woods. i have absolutely nothing against that because she always ends up being smart and badass anyways.

here lies Ryan Reynolds. i mean, here sits Ryan Reynolds. most of my friends (i assume) would know that i'm a huge fan of Ryan Reynolds--to the point that i would watch all his crappy American-jokes-filled movies. (still haven't watched Buried, though. maybe i should do that.) Ryan Reynolds is the perfect American joker stock character. he's crude, he's sexy, he gets away with pretty much anything. however, The Voices says otherwise. i mean, he still gets away with anything--spoiler alert, he's a murderer--but he's a lot nerdier and weird in this one. count me in for a mental roller-coaster ride with Ryan Reynolds and his pets + dead girlfriend!

finally, something without humor and Anna Kendrick in it.

but you really need to be on my team for this one: who would miss anything with Tom Hiddleston in it? we all know by now that he's in way too few modern-day kinda movies. when you're signed to the Marvel Universe, you need to do at least 2 of those movies a year. which doesn't leave a lot of time to make other films, considering he's a theatre buff and those of us who are stuck outside of UK or US will never stand a chance to watch this man reciting Shakespeare live.

High RiseHigh Rise is an intellectual movie. sure, it's a book adaptation, but when you visualize a book to that detail, and then put Tom Hiddleston in the middle of all this chaos, you've got yourselves a highly acclaimed film. honestly, i'm looking forward to this one. not just because of Tom Hiddleston (though mainly he's still the reason), but because i'm a tremendous fan of dystopian stories. this reminds me of Snowpiercer already.

if you'd love to watch another Marvel superhero rough it out in a dystopian world, i'd recommend Snowpiercer.
lots of bloodshed though. you have been warned.

yeah, like i said. i'm going to watch most of these on my own. feel free to do the same.

entangled minds.

so i watched Gone Girl on my laptop last night. i remember when it first came out, people went to watch it and there were so many different views and opinions on the film. it was one of those movies that you don't really know if it's good or not until you watch it for yourself. 

Gone Girl is a movie about the disappearance of one Amy Elliot Dunne, the wife of our protagonist, Nick Dunne. it's a crime/thriller/mystery mash-up kind of movie, and if i were to compare this to something else that i have watched before, it might be a milder version of Hannibal (the series). psychological horror is highly evident in this movie, and the sort of fright and terror it gives you aren't sudden jump scares, but the gradual kind of fear that lingers, even until after you've finished the movie.

ONTO SPOILERS NOW! 

read at your own risk. 

do not go gentle into that night.

through Interstellar, Christopher Nolan has created an exquisite specimen that is part documentary, part fiction, part history, and all human emotions. from the tiniest details within to the entire film coming a full circle, he makes story-telling seem profound, magical, out-of-the-world and yet, at the same time, complete with so much ground and substance. Nolan makes story-telling seem so effortless. perhaps the framework of the entire plot would later be scrutinized and criticized, but what mattered the most to me was the first impression he had made with this film. breath-taking was what it was. every silent moment, every tear shed, every heartstring tugged, every emotion felt.

every struggle, every drop of greed, every bit of relief intensified to ten-fold--no, twenty-fold. \

man sets out to explore the Great Unknown. 

the age-old story.

two: faith.

this blog post has absolutely nothing to do with the sort of faith you're thinking of. this post is titled 'faith' mainly because i am still very much depending on faith, just trusting myself and my God in whatever i do and wherever i go within campus or outside of campus, when i'm alone. i haven't made any friends in class yet, but i promise i'll talk to someone soon. soon. *tries not to look too creepy*

documenting my life here in Singapore may prove to be quite some fun. feels like i'm writing a travel journal (:

anyhow! today i had my first day of classes. two modules : Shakespeare in His Time and Ours along with Introduction to Film Studies. both are extremely fascinating subjects to me, although i must say the latter still strikes more of an interest to me, since it's something relatively new to me and a sort of course that is not exactly done back home. Shakespeare was a lot of talk about, well, Shakespeare. although i have a tonne of things to brush up on Shakespeare (since i've only read ONE of his works, bravo, Xin Wei the Literature Major), but listening to Prof. Walter (Walter is, i personally think, a name recently made cool by the fantastically-filmed film, The Secret Life of Water Mitty) speak on the details and issues of Shakespearean writing and culture really led me to think. i love watching lecturers go on and on talking about what they know so much about. you really see the passion in their gestures and tone.

Introduction to Film Studies, on the other hand, is a subject i did not expect to be so technical. i took on the first class by learning a bunch of terms and definitions. although they weren't as painful to learn as stepping on a Lego piece, they were still new terms to my tiny, tiny brain. but i learned a lot! from differentiating story from plot and so on, today was a really fruitful day. 

OKAY NOW NO MORE STUDY TALK. 

interesting bits of the day?

we got to watch Memento, a film directed by the infamous Christopher Nolan, which was based on a short story written by his brother, Jonathan Nolan. freaking Nolan brothers who freaking messes with our fragile minds. 

the trick to you watching Memento is me not telling you what the story is about. i think that's the trick to watching every Nolan movie. including the Batman series. ah, Nolan never disappoints. even though i probably had my mind scrambled up so much halfway through the movie i wasn't so sure about what i was watching anymore. Guy Pearce was spectacular in this movie, too. my last impression of Guy Pearce was this:

and then in Memento, he's like this:

an entirely skinny, sunken, almost desperate sort of body was what he had in Memento, unlike his usual muscular, hypermasculine bodies he flaunted in most of his action movies. it was like Christian Bale's transformation from The Machinist to Batman Begins.

life in Singapore is going to be both challenging and interesting. 

bring. it. on.

The Amazing Peter Parker.

so i finally watched this movie.

SUMMARY(EQUIVALENT OF A MILLION SPOILERS BUT REALLY WHO HAVEN'T WATCHED THIS ALREADY?!)

(well... except me because i refuse to watch it for some maniacal reason.)

(moving on.)

so the summary of this entire movie? 

it should be entitled The Amazing Peter Parker instead of The Amazing Spider-man. 

aside from the glorious Andrew Garfield butt-appreciation everywhere in the movie, and Emma Stone's goddess-like beauty, intelligence and most of all, wit, the movie is about Peter Parker. to me, it is not about Peter Parker's dear Uncle Ben getting shot, dying, then him realizing that responsibility is something he has been missing out on and he should use his powers(from being bitten by a new species of spider) to do good and save some people. it is not about that. throughout the entire movie, i only saw Peter Parker. 

Peter Parker being a dork; Peter Parker being a super-intelligent high school kid; Peter Parker being intensively and effectively funny; Peter Parker being himself. 

in the Tobey Maguire version of Spider-man(what are you talking about, OF COURSE we're going to compare these two franchises), he actually made me feel like there was a change in Peter Parker, and when he put on that suit, he was Spider-man and no one else. i know it's a very vague feeling to describe, but to me it is simply like that. 

however, i did enjoy the Andrew Garfield version, because it was funny and although there were parts that needed some explaining to do, most parts seemed logical to me, and that was good. that was what i was looking for. something realistic but still obviously impossible. like how he actually needed things to swing on and did not just spray his spider-web into the sky(AND LITERALLY NOTHING) then swinging to wherever he pleases. 

Andrew Garfield portrayed a much more child-like, wild Peter Parker compared to the Tobey Maguire version, where he is more reserved and shy. personally i like the Andrew Garfield version better, but i think Tobey Maguire was a better Spider-man. confusing, i know. i apologize.

the best part about this movie? is that Emma Stone played a smart heroine/lead female role for the first time, perhaps, in comic-movies history. 

finally, have a really bad drawing of Gwen Stacy done by yours truly.

i wanted to write a longer review but it's getting late and i'm getting sleepy.

so good night.

ta.

to love another person is to see the face of God.

day two of exams period and i decide to go watch Les Miserables with my course mates. wonderful decision made. here's what i liked about the movie (SPOILERS ALERT) :

1. the cast (and assigned roles)

oh. my. Lord. the cast. i mean, i know to expect godliness from Hugh Jackman and Anne Hathaway and even Amanda Seyfried, then came in a few surprises like Russell Crowe with a really deep, resonating voice, who, in my opinion, played the conflicting Inspector Javert very very well! he was actually one of the characters who really drew me in, and i got really curious about the bit where he says he was born in the prison. i think he's actually the character i was intensely curious of, overall. 

then we have characters and actors who play these characters like Gavroche(played by the young Daniel Huttlestone, who is absolutely AMAZING and YES he deserves capitalization on ALL THOSE LETTERS), Enjolras as played by Aaron Tveit, who has a lovely surname and definitely a lovelier face. i believe he played the hot-blooded youngster very well, i really liked his spirit and leadership in the movie. also we have the actress who got the honour of singing the all-famous song, On My Own--Samantha Barks, who takes up the role of Eponine! Eponine was definitely my favorite character, aside from Javert and Gavroche, because i could relate to her so darn well (unrequited love? check check check check check.) and Eponine was just, ugh, such a beautiful character. beautiful with all her tragedy, her loss of opportunity (not being Cosette, the all-lucky one who got to get away with Jean Valjean, albeit living a life on the run, but let's not forget Cosette also ended up with Marius) and most of all, her death. although she finally had a tiny moment with Marius right before her death, i still cursed Marius in my mind throughout the entire movie for loving the oh-so-pretty Cosette. sigh. 

2. the cinematography

if you pay attention, it's not always you can see everything in the background of a scene unless the director/cinematographer WANTS you to. most of the times the camera focuses on the actors singing and just blurs out the background, which i find so beautiful, because at the moment when they are singing, especially solos, their faces are entirely focused on that you can see each and every freckle on their face. it just manages to give off such a realistic, a face-to-face, close-up feeling. it felt like a musical watched up-close, and that was an incredibly overwhelming emotion. definitely helped in heightening all emotions during a song.

3. the songs

OH THE GLORIOUS SINGING. Russel Crowe and Hugh Jackman and Anne Hathaway and Daniel Huttlestone and Samantha Barks and even Eddie Redmayne(who played the young, handsome Marius)! ALL OF THEIR SINGING. too good. the surprise? Sacha Baron Cohen and Helena Bonham Carter. my favorite villains! okay not exactly villains but ooooooooooooh they're just most entertaining to watch! i would watch the movie over and over again just for them. brilliant performers, i say! 

and i do love how each character or each particular scene has a set theme song specially made for them--a song for the slaves, the French Revolution, the lovers(Marius and Cosette), Jean Valjean and Javert, i really loved the idea of having your own theme song which resonated so clearly with the character's personality or relationships and interactions with other characters. too brilliant for words.

what i didn't really like :

1. Cosette

Cosette could've been more than just a pretty face, a lovely voice, a soul who crashed into Marius' soul, but instead she wasn't. she was just all of that and nothing more. Amanda Seyfried is a very wonderful singer (although i'm personally not fond of her high-pitched notes), but this character, as presented in the movie, seemed a little less. i won't blame anyone for this, because i think overall the movie is brilliant, and really this is the only thing i have real complaints about, as i hate to see beautiful actors such as Amanda Seyfried to only play a beautiful character. perhaps it seemed too typical for me, but i really didn't enjoy Cosette's character at all. 

all and all the movie was intensely GREAT. 

i would watch it again in the cinema. definitely. 

you're a wallflower, Charlie.

this.

this book. this story. this author. this movie. these people. these stories they each have. The Perks Of Being A Wallflower is amazing. definitely one of my favorite books, and now, one of my favorite movies as well. it was captured so beautifully. no HD, no graphic effects--everything was filmed in a 90s, grainy sort of effect. it was so broken, so choked up, so much of everything all at once. it was infinite. 

perhaps one of the first book-to-movie movies that did not disappoint me entirely. after all, Stephen Chbosky was both the author, the screenplay writer and the director. lovely. there's nothing much i can say about this movie except it being the most bittersweet thing in the world. read the book. watch the movie. feel the story in your veins.