The Butterfly Effect review

 Number 578 on the top 1000 films of all time is the science-fiction thriller 'The Butterfly Effect.'

Evan Treborn (Ashton Kutcher) is a young man who used to have unexplained blackouts as a child. Once grown up, he's realised that he can time travel whenever he reads certain entries of his journal. He begins going back in time to right his wrongs and change not just life, but girlfriend Kayleigh's (Amy Smart,) her psychotic brother Tommy (William Lee Scott) and their friend Lenny (Elden Henson.)

Science-fiction films always have the tendency of prioritising the big philosophical themes over the characters sic 2001: a Space Odyssey. However, I would argue that the opposite happened here. The premise is interesting enough - a real life embodiment of the Butterfly Effect - the smallest of actions can have the biggest of consequences. Or as the opening line reads: "it has been said that something as small as the flutter of a butterfly's wings can ultimately cause a typhoon halfway around the world."

But this original concept was let down by its execution. It felt very much like a teen movie with a loose science-fiction premise. It didn't help you had Ashton Kutcher as the lead. He wasn't particularly bad as a dramatic actor, but he is much better known for his role as dumb teenage pretty boy Michael Kelso in the 70's show. He certainly wasn't able to shake off his teen heart-throb image here. It also didn't help that much of the film took place on a university campus. The film came out in 2005 and it sounds and looks like it did. The characters are so dated in the way they talk and dress. For a film about time travel, somewhat ironically, this film is anything but timeless.

Much of the film also took place in flashbacks showing our principle cast as children and alter teenagers. And the child actors were just not good especially Logan Lerman and John Patrick Amedori as Evan at ages seven and thirteen respectively. When the adult Evan goes back in time, he embodies his younger selves, but with his present mind. And so when they're speaking, it is actually the adult Evan speaking and the dialogue sounded awful coming out of the younger actor's mouths. Their delivery was just awkward and unnatural.

This is a shame as this did have the potential to be an interesting film. It was an entertaining enough thriller, but it very much failed as potent science-fiction.

Oh Brother Where Art Thou review

 Number 472 on the top 1000 films of all time is the Coen Brother's comedy-drama Oh Brother Where Art Thou.

Inspired by Homer's the Odyssey, three convicts Ulysses 'Everett' Mcgill (George Clooney,) Pete (John Turtorro) and Delmar Mcdonnell (Tim Blake Nelson) escape from their chain gang in Mississippi to find the treasure that leader Everett hid before he was sent to prison. Hijinks and shenanigans ensue.

This is the third Coen brothers' film I've seen after Fargo and the Big Lebowski, and this has to be the most surreal yet. And I'm going to come out and sat it, the Coen brothers are too surreal for me. Oh Brother Where Art Thou is pretty weird from the heroes meeting Baby face Nelson to the valley flooding saving them from being remanded to prison. And apparently this wasn't deux ex machina as Mcgill constantly references how the valley will be flooded. But what does this all mean? Nothing probably, which I imagine is the point. 

Having said that, the film produces some genuine laughs and scares. We quickly realise that Everett is the brains of the operation, manipulating the weaker-minded Pete and Delmar to help him achieve his true objective. Along the way, they are lured away by sirens who drug and rob them and supposedly turn Pete into a toad. Of course this wasn't the case, but seeing Delmar's distress was very funny to watch.

Later on, they meet one-eyed bible salesman, Big Dan Teague (John Goodman) who squishes the supposed Pete the Toad and then beats Delmar and Everett and robs what little they have left. While he is beating Delmar, Everett nonchalantly asks him what's wrong. This kind of off-beat humour made the film very comical.

Yet it was also scary. The trio crash a KKK rally, just as they are about to perform a lynching. But the whole sequence was freaky from the Grand Wizard spouting his nonsense to the burning crosses and the ritualistic chanting. It was an abstract and disturbing spectacle.

My favourite part of the film had to be the music. Arranged by T-Bone Burnett, who later famously scored the television series True Detective, we're treated to period-specific music ranging from blues to country to folk. Most of the music is worked into the actual narrative giving the film a great authenticity, which also complimented the autumnal sepia-tone. 

The three leads, to get some quick cash, form a music group along with a Robert Johnson wannabe, and produce a record, quickly becoming local celebrities. Although all the actors were dubbed, it was great fun to see them perform. But I also loved all the gospel and blues music from the chain gang singing at the beginning to the congregation singing their hymns when Pete is baptised. And, of course, I'm not the only one who loved this music as the soundtrack won the Grammy for album of the year.

Overall while this film was entertaining with an award-winning soundtrack, it was just too damn weird for me.

The 400 Blows review

 Number 174 on the top 1000 films of all time is Francois Chauffert's 1959 coming of age drama 'The 400 Blows.'

Antoine Daniel (Jean-Pierre Lenard) is a school boy growing up in Paris. Plagued by behavioural problems, he acts up in schools and causes trouble at home.

The 400 Blows is considered to be one of the best French films of all time, but I am at a loss to why. Partly based on Chauffert's own troubled childhood, The 400 Blows did remind me of Ingrid Bergman's work. Granted it wasn't as nearly as abstract or surreal, but the same themes of introspection and a misunderstood character rebelling against a tyrannical system were present. 

Now I have no problem with character-driven films that study characters in depth. But for these to work, the characters in question have to be interesting and empathetic. Antoine Daniel was neither of these. He is barely even a rebel. Stealing type writers and writing on school walls hardly makes him a rebel without a cause. On that note Rebel Without a Cause explores similar themes and does it so much more effectively, mainly because of James Dean's brilliant performance. I really believed the alienation and isolation he was feeling.

Not so with Jean-Pierre Lenard. I just didn't care about him. Later on, upon trying to return the typewriter, he is arrested. His despairing parents send him to a psychiatric institution where it's revealed that he was an illegitimate child born to a mother that didn't want him. While this goes some way to explaining his behaviour, I think it came too late in the film. I had just stopped caring at this point. Plus Antoine reveals how his mother would shout at him, but I saw little evidence of this. Rather, his parents seemed to resort to bribes to control his behaviour as opposed to violence.

Honestly, I thought Antoine was just another poxy little kid causing trouble for the sake of it and the 400 Blows was a pale imitation of its far superior predecessors.