Tag: diego luna

The Book of Life


The Book of Life (2014)
★ / ★★★★

“The Book of Life ” is written so blandly by Jorge R. Gutiérrez and Douglas Langdale, the rather unique animation—the characters looking blocky and very marionette-like—is overshadowed by a screenplay that challenges the audience to keep their eyes open. One would think that because the animation looked so distinct, the material would strive to be more compelling or unique, full of surprises. This is not the case and thus the picture is not only a big disappointment, I felt like it was a waste of film.

La Muerte (voiced by Kate del Castillo) and Xibalba (Ron Perlman), leaders of the Land of the Remembered and the Land of the Forgotten, respectively, make a wager involving three childhood friends. Maria (Zoe Saldana) has won the hearts of both Manolo (Diego Luna) and Joaquin (Channing Tatum) but she must eventually decide who she wishes to marry. La Muerte thinks that Maria will choose Manolo while Xibalba believes Joaquin has it in the bag. Who will Maria choose?

I felt no passion writing that last paragraph because the story is as standard as it sounds. There is no excitement in the story because right from the very beginning, we suspect who Maria will choose ultimately—and she does. And while the script does show good qualities of each man, there is still a lack of tension or drama because there is an obvious and constant leaning toward one character both in terms of character design and what he stands for. We never believe that Maria would ever choose the alternative.

Listening to renditions of various songs from pop culture is like enduring the sounds of nails being scraped on a chalkboard. A tip: If one were brave enough to offer a rendition, it should at least be as good or better than the original material. Otherwise, it comes across laughable, lazy, and out of nowhere. It appears as though a lot of effort is put into making the picture, so why didn’t the filmmakers take a chance and create original songs?

The idea is to make money, right? So let us Look at Disney animated films. Despite mediocre efforts, like Chris Buck and Jennifer Lee’s “Frozen,” because more than a handful of songs are either endearing or memorable, sometimes both, it made a lot of money. Sometimes the songs themselves can sell a movie. Yes, part of the game is to make money but another part is to get people to actually see the work. The animation here, solely from a visual standpoint because I had not seen anything like it before, is worth seeing.

Genuine comedy, subtle cues, and creativity are drowned by mindless action, from bulls charging at a matador to bandits terrorizing a small town. It is difficult to care about what is happening because we never grow close to the characters. Other than wanting to marry the girl, Manolo and Joaquin do not seem to have a specific motivation that everybody can relate with at one point or another. We deserve much better than this.

Y Tu Mamá También


Y Tu Mamá También (2001)
★★★★ / ★★★★

Best friends Tenoch (Diego Luna) and Julio (Gael García Bernal) were left by their girlfriends to visit Europe for the summer. Despite their promises to not have sex with other people, the two saw it as a perfect opportunity to meet other women, experiment with drugs, drink until they pass out, and live easy before school started again. But when they met a beautiful woman named Luisa (Maribel Verdú) at a wedding, the boys made up a story about going to an undiscovered beach. To their surprise, Luisa accepted their invitation, unknowing that she wanted to run away from her cheating husband and temporarily forget about her doctor’s grim news. Directed by Alfonso Cuarón, “Y Tu Mamá También” is a peerless example of a sex comedy that uses sex to explore its characters’ friendships, highlight the lessons they’ve learned throughout their journey, and what it meant to be young and reckless. As most American teen sex comedy have consistently proven, it’s far too easy to use sex as a weapon of perversion instead of staring at it in the eyes and realizing, with respect, that it’s a natural and beautiful part of our lives. To describe all of the elements I loved about the picture would be an injustice because much of its magic had to be experienced. But I do have to mention one scene that, in my opinion, defined the film so perfectly. Near the end of the trio’s road trip, Luisa was talking to her husband in a telephone booth. On a mirror next to the booth, we could see Tenoch and Julio playing foosball. The shot looked simple but, for me, it held a lot of meaning. The booth was lit but the reflection was dim which I surmised was a symbol for their respective knowledge about what it meant to love both emotionally and physically. Tenoch and Julio thought they knew how to pleasure a woman. But Luisa tried to teach them that sex, or meaningful sex, wasn’t about the strength of penetration or how long a man could last without ejaculation but the growing emotional connection and investment between the two parties. The conversation in the booth had a lot of sadness and maybe a bit anger but the reflection held temporary joy by means of friendly competition. I perceived it to be a summary of Luisa and the two friends’ respective mindsets during their travel. Although the two images were different, both were about characters entering a new phase in their lives. Cuarón had a fantastic ear for dialogue and sometimes I wondered if some of the conversations were unscripted. The naturalistic acting was also enhanced by an inspired environment that looked unedited or untouched, something that we would see if we visited a seaside village right this very moment. If more coming-of-age sex comedies were high caliber as “Y Tu Mamá También,” perhaps most people would be able to ask and talk about sex and sexuality without having to be embarrassed or feel judged.

Rudo y Cursi


Rudo y Cursi (2008)
★★★ / ★★★★

“Rudo y Cursi” stars Gael García Bernal and Diego Luna as brothers who started off as workers in a banana plantation and, with the help of a soccer scout (Guillermo Francella), eventually became Mexico’s soccer stars. One of the things I liked most about this movie was it allowed two very different characters to start off in the same level of happiness (or unhappiness). But when they finally achieved stardom, they were rarely on that same level and that caused tension, resentment, and bitterness which ate them inside out. But what’s even more impressive is that writer and director Carlos Cuarón painted the picture in a light-hearted manner with a real sadness in its core. It was easy for me to buy the fact that Bernal and Luna were very competitive brothers because of their lingering chemistry from “Y tu mamá también.” Although their characters genuinely loved one another, they forget that one time or another because they constantly got caught up in their own problems and inner demons. Such issues were commented on by the narrator who discussed things like the similarities and differences between a mother and a uniform, passion and talent, and the labyrinthine world of fame. The way their luck and fortunes fluctuated from golden fevers to pitiful desperation engaged me throughout. This is far from a typical sports film where a lead character goes through all kinds fo hardship in life and finally gets that big break. It’s really more about the dynamics between brothers who constantly had to build themselves up and could not help but compare themselves to each other in order to determine if they were good enough. (Which kind of works as a cautionary tale.) Carlos Cuarón’s debut film impresses on many levels which, admittedly, could have been a lot stronger if it had a better sense of pacing. I was just glad that it actually had a brain despite the sport.

Frida


Frida (2002)
★★★ / ★★★★

“Frida” is a biopic that focuses on how Frida Kahlo emerged and evolved as an artist as well as a person who shines despite her many flaws and tragedies. Salma Hayek is simply electric; although pretty much everyone defines her for her beauty, I’ve always seen some kind of inner strength in each of her roles and I was happy that it was at the forefront in this picture. Frida’s relationship with her sister (the gorgeous Mía Maestro), husband (Alfred Molina) and father (Roger Rees) are fascinating because each of those three characters have shaped Frida’s many colorful (and very dynamic) personalities. Julie Taymor, the director, shows her audiences impressive visual effects such as when Frida’s paintings would become a real-life scene and how some real-life scenes would become paintings. I’m not at all familiar with Frida’s artwork but after watching this film, I want to look more into them because they are symbolic in the least. Now that I’m aware of what the events that prompted Frida to paint certain works, I think I’ll be able to appreciate them more. There’s a great atmosphere of culture that pervaded this film and it made me think of my own culture whenever there’s a wedding or a big gathering of some sort. Every actor is so into his or her own character and the film popped whenever they would talk about art, passion, politics and the uncertainties of life. The film then becomes more than a visual experience; it becomes a powerful emotional exprience that has a distinct resonance. However, I wish this film would’ve been entirely in Spanish (except for the scenes when the characters are in the United States). I thrown off a bit when I realized that everyone spoke in English despite living in Mexico. Also, as a Diego Luna fan, I wish he was in it more or was given more to do. Still, this is a very good (if not sometimes ordinary) biopic even though the second half could’ve been stronger by focusing on Frida as an individual instead of other characters that have more to do with politics.

Milk


Milk (2008)
★★★★ / ★★★★

This film made me so proud to be a part of the LGBT community. Sean Penn. Emile Hirsch. Josh Brolin. Diego Luna. James Franco. Alison Pill. Victor Garber. Joseph Cross. Lucas Grabeel. When I saw the aforementioned names a few months ago on IMDB when they were still filming in San Francisco, I knew I had to watch “Milk” and that I would love it unconditionally. Thankfully, it managed to surpass even my highest expectations. Gus Van Sant have directed impressive films in the past (“My Own Private Idaho,” “Good Will Hunting,” “Elephant,” “Paranoid Park”) but I thought he would tell the story of Milk with a more commercial style. I was elated when I saw his signature awkward camera angles, forcing the audiences to watch crucial scenes via a reflection on a whistle or mirror and everything inbetween. Having seen the brilliant 1984 documentary “The Times of Harvey Milk,” I knew of the events that are about to transpire in Van Sant’s film, but that never stopped me from hoping that somehow reality and fantasy will trade places and give me a happy, satisfying ending.

The performances are nothing short of electric. Sean Penn deserves an Oscar nomination because he fully embodied Harvey Milk. From the clips the documentary showed, Penn had the mannerisms of Milk to a tee to the point of disbelief. From the majestic speeches he delivered to the more intimate moments with his lovers, I found myself thinking that I’m not watching Penn act like Milk, he IS Milk. He delivered his lines with such quiet power and wit, sometimes it’s difficult to tell if he’s simply joking or poking fun of someone (or both). It was also refreshing to see him smile so much because I’m used to seeing his more serious side (“21 Grams,” “The Interpreter,” and particularly in “Mystic River”). As for Emile Hirsch, who plays Cleve Jones, I’ve seen every movie he’s in and loved all of them (“Imaginary Heroes,” “The Emperor’s Club,” and “Into the Wild” stood out to me), but this is the film that he shines in every single frame when he’s not the main actor. He has this rare talent of mixing energy with quirkiness to make an extremely charismatic character, despite his (sometimes horrendous) hairdos. Last but certainly not least, James Franco, who plays Scott Smith, made me feel safe every time he speaks. He understands his character’s complexity so whenever he and Penn would kiss or hug or converse at the dinner table or the bedroom, you get this feeling that they’re made for each other.

Despite all of the actors’ positive qualities, their characters are far from perfect. Milk is especially flawed because he has the tendency to put his goals in front of his friends and even his own well-being. He cares so much for the advacement of everyone else’s rights that he forgets that he’s not invincible, that it’s alright to take a break once in a while and get away from all the political madness. As for Brolin’s Dan White, he’s not portrayed as a complete monster. He is portrayed as a man who cares and desperately wants to provide for his family; a man who stands up for his beliefs but at the same time suffocated by such beliefs; a man who sees so much changes before his eyes, that he’ll do anything in his power to stop such a powerful force. If we can learn anything from both Harvey Milk and Dan White, it’s the fact that one person can make all the difference.

My friend who I went to see “Milk” with said that he wishes that this film came out before people got to vote on Proposition 8 in California, which aims to “restrict the definition of marriage to a union between a man and a woman and eliminated the right of same-sex couples to marry” (Wikipedia). I was amazed with the many parallels that this film had with today’s issues (Milk and his army battles Proposition 6–which would have called for the state to bar gays and lesbians from being teachers). On one hand, it makes me feel like we’ve come so far from the 70’s when it comes to accepting, not just gays, lesbians, bisexuals, and transgenders, but all types of minorities. On the other hand, it makes me feel like we haven’t progressed much at all because society is still stuck in this false idea of heteronormativity.

Putting my political views aside, “Milk” is definitely one of the most important films of 2008 because discrimination is still a monster we have not defeated. We might have scratched it a bit or even cut off its arm, but it recovers every time the envelope is not pushed. People have the tendency to forget something when that something is not in front of them. Even if one does not approve of homosexuality, the film’s craft should be appreciated; Van Sant’s decision to sew in actual footages from the ’70s worked wonders because I felt like I was living in that time period. Astute implications regarding politics and the fusion of public and private spheres are enough to qualify this for a Best Picture nomination. Not to mention Danny Elfman’s majestic score really makes the audiences feel how much is at stake. At some points during the film, I literally wanted to get up from my seat and rally on the streets of San Francisco with them. Definitely see this one with friends or just random people in the cinema (just make sure you’re not alone) because there are a lot of jokes and laughter that are worth sharing. By the end, of course it’s a tearjerker because we get to witness losing the Martin Luther King, Jr. of the gay rights movement. The ending of the picture really put tears in my eyes because the story of the great Harvey Milk is finally put on the spotlight (there were a plethora of behind-the-scenes drama since the 1980’s on how the story should be told, who will direct, et cetera). Maybe this film will even inspire those who are sick of hiding from true selves to come out. I cannot help but smile a little more, stand up a little straighter, put my head a little higher, every time I imagine Harvey Milk declaring, “I am Harvey Milk and I am here to recruit you!”

“You’re going to meet the most extraordinary men, the sexiest, brightest, funniest men, and you’re going to fall in love with so many of them, and you won’t know until the end of your life who your greatest friends were or your greatest love was.” — Harvey Milk to Cleve Jones