We were trying to watch the movie 2 nights a go, while Yoko was out with my Mom. We got 30 minutes and then she came home and demanded to see Curious George. I woke up the next morning and tried to watch it again while eating my breakfast. I got 40 minutes and uh-oh, nature calls.

So I brought the DVD to work and tried to see it during lunch. Just then I realized that it's not a good lunch movie, since it involves blood, body parts and such. Then came the ending, I was awestruck.

The movie was tight, with the tight camera works and tight acting. As we were prepared to see the mist and what's it about, we were forced to face the other thing entirely. As with the 'what's in the mist' it just a nifty touch of the movie, it "really" told us about something else. What human could be when they're desperate or scared. It's bone-chilling, it's real, it's good. I could really taste the desperation and despair. We have no future. The ending was just the ribbon that tied them up prettily. Or bleakly.

I know, right now I am in the middle of pretty chaotic deadline, but I just cannot resist. Before I saw Atonement, I thought this was just another war-era movie. I bought because - you know - James McAvoy was in it.

But turned out... I loved it! The movie kinda reminded me of English Patient, but with more punch and 'younger' attitude. But they were both at the same tear-jerker level alright. I loved it that Atonement sometimes used non-linear story line. And I just loooved the twist near the ending.

I don't like Keira Knightly, but it's safe to say that she performed well. Don't let me start on dear James. He was cute, endearing, passionate and well... sexy as hell. But don't take my word for it because I'm hardly objective. But don't you just want to take him in your arms and...

Aaand I cried my eyes out. The last time I cried in a movie was when I saw "Finding Neverland" and I was 2 months preggie. So watch it. It's a chick flick with gore twists and war scene. There's something for everybody.

Yes, Benjamin Franklin Gates is back. Yes, it's another treasure chase all over again. But now with some kind of a twist. His great grandfather's name is tainted, and he has to clear it by finding the treasure. Owkay. But why in US of A? If I hadn't misheard the treasure was of south american origin. Why would they put it up there? Convenience I guess... so they could claim it as 'national treasure'.

The movie is quite entertaining. With many surprise appearances by good actors. Well, maybe it was a surprise for me because I haven't googled the movie before I saw it. Not a bad theatre movie, if you enjoy the prequel.

PS. Note to Nicolas Cage: please lose the obviously-bad rug and go bald with dignity. Aren't you learning anything AT ALL from Ed Harris?

*Spoiler Alert*
I kinda knew what to expect, since I watched the prequel on HBO. But I forgot they cut all the super-gory stuff on the channel, so I guess I kinda didn't. But I get the idea, so the I was pretty much nervous since the beginning of the movie.

Right I was. At the first 10 minutes we were given already a disturbing picture of a decapitated body. Oh dear. And then we were be able to see from the 'other' side, AKA how the transaction is proceeded. The customers were introduced. Oh boy.

Then the movie moved on to the next level. Left nothing to the imagination. Picture of a woman slashing a girl's naked body without guilt? You got it. A man maimed to death by dogs? You got it. You want to cringe without end with a picture of a man's penis and balls got cut? Got it. Shit.

I know for sure that this movie is a fruit of a sick imagination. SICK indeed. But surprisingly entertaining. My question: did this movie run in the theatres in US? If it did, they are SICK!

I got this book from Reading Lights on Jl. Siliwangi Bandung for only 50K. And it's worth every kepeng of it.

The story is revolving around wealthy Seton family. The widowed mother, the son, the daughter, their spouses and their pre-teen daughters. Each family has its own problem. Then something happen. Spencer McCollough (who is Nan Seton's son in law and the spoke person of FERAL- the Federation of Animal Liberation) is accidentally shot by his own daughter, and with his brother in law's rifle gun. What happened before and after the accident? Those are the parts you should enjoy.

The author tells us the story with a unique style. Descriptive without making it boring and without never-ending sentences. The characters are believable and have their depths. It also tells us about the controversy of animal rights versus hunting, without being preachy and never fails to present the argument from both sides. The book also taught us to be thankful for having fully functioning limbs and always in alert that they could be taken away from you without warning.

I truly loved it.

For our third Anniversary, we decided to catch the long-awaited movie of the year (at least by us).

It didn't disappoint at all. The fast-moving, flesh-eating, bloody-eyed infected creatures were scary. The camera movement did best to add the horror. The music score only heightened the feel of despair we could feel that tomorrow is bleak. The story had its flaw, but who cares, really? I only wanted to dwell in the thoughts of doom.

I couldn't face some of the violence in this movie. Can you believe that there were two children in the theatre, brought by their stupid-stupid parents? Hubby couldn't concentrate on some of the beautiful gore because he couldn't stop thinking that there were children watching that also. He complained to the theatre attendant later only to be answered: "ortunya engga apa-apa kok". What the hell? If the parents aren't smart enough to present their children with violence and blood at such early ages, can't the establishment do something about it? Or LSF rating system is just a crap that should be flushed?

Truthfully, I'm rather tired with Hollywood movies. I saw 'Perfect Stranger' and 'Deja Vu' recently, and both movies started promising and ended badly. Well, at least for me. The endings were so cheesy, I couldn't wait to push the 'stop' button on my DVD player.

I've seen Zodiac's preview once too often, and even then, I couldn't wait to see this movie. I love Se7en, and I love stories about serial killer, especially the 'based on real case' kind. And I am not disappointed.

Don't expect this movie to be like Se7en, it's not that gory, fast-paced, nor is it bone-chilling. David Fincher made it a bit strange, with all the murder scenes up front and then the characters that try to solve the case afterwards. But it's good anyway. The story is a bit confusing, and the police work seems sloppy, but it makes it real. I've suspected they make the CSI officers 'super efficient' on the series. The cops on Zodiac are far more believable.

Jake Gylenhaal and Robert Downey, Jr. delivers big time. Oh yeah, this is one of those 'star studded' movie, where everybody is somebody although they have only few lines. To name a few, Clea Duvall, Dermot Mulroney and Chloe Sevigny.

Highly recommended for avid detective novel readers.

I thought I wouldn't have the chance to enjoy this movie, for we had quite 'strategic' seats. Sitting next to me, there was a guy, whose girlfriend, sitting next to him (from what I heard) hadn't seen the previous movies of the pirates and kept asking him questions everytime a new character came up on the screen: "Ini jahat apa baik?" and her boyfriend, being such a schmuck for dating the airhead was always answering with long explanations.

Behind us, there was a group of men and women who felt obliged to narrate everything that we could see on the screen: "Chow yun faaaat!" and "Hiii kepitingnya banyak" and "Loh kok hilang? Dia kemana?"

God Damn it.

About 30 minutes later, I finally told the boyfriend: "Mas, bisa engga ceritanya nanti aja? (Kalo engga, cewenya suruh keluar dulu, nanti saya belikan dvd 1,2 dan 3 lengkap suruh dia nonton sendiri)" the words inside the brackets were my fall back plan, incase he didn't shut up from my first warning. But he did. From then on, when her gf asked him stupid questions he would answer: "engga tau" or "nanti aja" ha di ha ha.

The crowd behind us finally shut up after 1.5 hours (nobody could talk that long, for the movie runs for almost 3 hours).

Anywho... about the movie... it was well made, both visually and stori-wise. Love the characters and the ending. Very entertaining. Not bad for a sequel.

The only bad thing from this movie is the timing. But it's not their fault it came out almost precisely as the Prestige's release. But deep down inside (oh, I use it too often lately) I knew, a movie with Edward Norton and Paul Giamatti couldn't be that bad.

But I need to erase my memory of the Prestige first. I also need to lower my expectation. And voila! The movie was great!

Eisenheim was a magician, broken by his childhood romance with a Duchess, he went around the world to find a true mystery. Fast forward 15 years later, he became a famous illusionist whose tricks awed people so much. He then found his Duchess again, somehow, but in a very different situation.

Paul Giamatti gave superb performance, as an inspector torn between his fondness of Eisenheim and his order from the Crown Prince of Vienna. Edward Norton was cute as ever.

It's highly recommended for anyone who had seen the Prestige so long ago, it has became a dim memory.

I was kind of reluctant to see this movie. Even though I know somewhere deep down inside (ssah!) I would have to see it someday. That someday turned out to be yesterday.

I raised my eyebrows when I read somewhere that they made a fictitious movie out of the non-fiction book. I liked the book so much, I read it twice. And I think it wouldn't be the last time. I would read it again every time I am tempted to dial 14045.

My feelings weren't that wrong. The movie quotes my favorite lines from the book and bastardize it to so-so dialogues. My favorite line from the book was: "There is shit in the meat", I used it from time to time to see people's reaction, but now I cannot use it again, for people may think that I took it from the movie. See how shallow I am?

The characters of the movie were: a marketing executive of Mickey's Burger, a cashier girl at Mickey's somewhere in Cody ( I didn't quite catch the state, I think it was Montana), Mexican immigrants fresh from the border who work for the meat packing company, and environmentalist students. They were personalizations to the backgrounds (real) story from the book.

What surprised me was that there are many famous actors that were 'lured' into taking a role in this movie. Greg Kinnear, Ethan Hawke, Bruce Willis (!), Wilmer Valderrama and Ashley Johnson. Maybe the movie meant to underline the book with disturbing visual images. But I strongly think that a documentary would do a much better job. Because for many people that don't read the book might think that the movie is fictitious.

You want to know more about how the shit get into the meat? And why celebrating your kid's birthday at McDonald's isn't a swell idea, or why the french fries at McD's isn't a 'vegetarian' diet? Read Eric Schlosser's Fast Food Nation. If you like it and you want to know why United States is so keen on illegalizing marijuana? Read 'Reefer Madness' by the same author.

I learned from my past experience, that, if you haven't seen or heard or read anything about a movie, if it's good, it gives you such a delightful feeling. Like this movie.

All I know was Will Ferrell was on it. And it's enough for me. It turned out, Emma Thompson, Dustin Hoffman and Maggie Gyllenhaal was on it too. So I was pleasantly surprised.

Will Ferrell was Harold Crick. Harold Crick works for IRS. He lives his life the same way he does for 12 years or so. Until one day he hears a voice that narrates his every move and thoughts. Who is this voice? I wasn't that surprised when I found out. If you read Sophie's World I guess you would've guessed it too.

But all and all, this movie is such a beauty. Emma Thompson gave superb appearance. The dialogues were touching and intelligent at the same time. Will Ferrell isn't exactly on the same 'calibre' as Emma Thompson, but, you know, he's Will Ferrell. There was a 'crash' of destiny scene that totally made sense. And you don't need Morocco or Tokyo to make that happen. Inarritu, eat your heart out.

Watching this 2 hours 16 minutes-long movie was like listening to a politician talking non-stop about an issue. Made you want to scream: "Stop beating around the bush and make your point, already!!"

Truthfully, I was getting tired of this kind of movie. I really don't want to know if a "cosmic-coincidence" would make one's life connected with the other life that was so out of your mundane sphere of life. I don't really care if a Japanese tourist gave a rifle to a Moroccan guide, and the rifle ended up on the hands of Moroccan children who shot at a tourist bus. Shit happens. What are you trying to tell?

I read somewhere that Inarritu meant this movie to be about family relationship. Father-child, husband-wife, etc. But I didn't get that vibe from this movie. I think it's more about miscommunication. Again, so what? If one wants to think about and ponder about every miscommunication that happen in one's life, there'll be no end to it.

I got the feeling maybe the movie miscommunicated with me. The scenes that were supposed to be touching, puzzled me. For example: when Susan (Cate Blanchett) told her husband (Brad Pitt) that she wanted to pee. The husband asked for a bin for her to pee into. Then helped her to pee into the bin. They ended up kissing passionately while she was still peeing. Wha...? Did I miss something? Which part of the 'peeing in the bin' action that was supposed to be erotic? Go and ask my sister, she had her share of peeing in the bin last week (sorry, Fi, cheap shot, I know, but I really didn't get it).

The movie wasn't all bad. The pictures were really beautiful and real. Moroccan desert, urban Tokyo, Mexican wedding. Some of the actors deliver. But I don't think Brad Pitt had enough line in this movie that could make him one of the nominations. But the story, why the story? It's just weak and cliche and uninteresting. Maybe the time line would confuse you a bit and made you expect a surprising ending. Maybe this movie meant to be 'deep' and made you ponder long after. But it only did annoy me.

To tell you the truth, I don't know what to put in the 'genre' space. When Dr. Nicholas Garrigan decided to go to Uganda, I thought: oh, it's one of those 'Constant Gardener' drama. I went on watching. When Nicholas met Idi Amin and saw how passionate he was, and how he was child-like in many ways, even when he saluted his guests in his party: "Please enjoy the Ugandan delicacies, don't worry, no human meat" I thought: oh, it's something like a satire comedy. And the movie went on.

Murder. More murder. Blood. OmyGod. Even a bit gore. (that's it, no spoiler)

I'm only mildly aware that Idi Amin was a dictator (he was waaay before my 'melek politik' time). But I do think the movie was about an image that westerners would have for him. Aaah, what do I know...

Anyway, Forest Whitaker was so awesome, I even forgot quite many times that he is an english-speaking actor. James McAvoy highlighted his screen mate's acting by his incredible performance. In clinch, this movie is a kind of movie that makes you cringe one too many times. Maybe because it's surreal, or because it's too real.

I bought the DVD because I was curious, without even trying it on. Thank God the picture quality is already good, but sorry, no credible subtitle (there, you don't have to ask no more).

PS: this is words from imdb that I thought worth quoting: Still, Whitaker is fuming and unforgettable. He totally embodies the spirit of the oft-discussed and debated mad dictator, so much so that when the closing credits roll and we see stock footage of the real Amin, you'd swear these were images of Idi Amin playing Forest Whitaker.

I know I wrote a review on this one, but I guess it deserves more words. At least after I watch the 2nd season.

The series were about a group of convicts who were trying to flee from a prison. Master-minded by Michael Scofield, who seemed to never run out of ideas and plan Bs whenever their so-called perfect plan went wrong. And they went wrong alright.

When LOST made me scream: "I want to know what and who's behind all this fucked up crash conspiracy story!" and also made me cannot stop watching it, Prison Break makes me grunted: "Oh, no, what now?!" and makes me keep on watching it because I want to know how a plan that went wrong about 12,324 times could be made right again. Somehow.

Damn it. Damn the writers.

Last Tuesday, my nanny went home to her village. So I figured, I would be playing with and watching Yoko quite a lot, why bother to work? So I went to Vertex and bought enough DVDs to fill those 5 days. These are the DVDs

1. United 93. Normally I wouldn't pay even 4000 rupiahs to see this movie. But Times magazine named it one of the best movie in 2006. I got curious. I wished I didn't, tho. The movie is mediocre, trying so hard telling us what happened on that plane that 'didn't hit the target'. Came American bravery and heroism. Gets old. All that I could think of was how religious those terrorists were. Even on their last seconds they kept chanting Allah's name and prayers. Allahu Akbar! PS. I am more curious on what happened to other plane that did 'hit the target'. Why didn't they make movies based on those?

2. Talladega Nights - The Legend of Ricky Bobby. 100% Will Ferrell. Aimless, politically incorrect, stupid-intelligent ranting. I haven't got tired of Will Ferrell, so naturally I loved it. Something bugged me tho. How come even with aimless dialogues and out of context scenes they managed to tell a straight story, when Indonesian directors are still trying to hard to make a 'smart' dialogues and couldn't tell even a logical story?

3. Little Miss Sunshine. Love this movie. Love the fact that they made everything that could be wrong, went wrong (confirmed my faith in chaos). Love that they handled it like us, mere mortal would handle it. Love Steve Carell that he effortlessly could shook off the image from The Office and 40 Year Old Virgin. Love Alan Arkin and his ever convincing bitterness. Especially love gap-toothed (like Yoko) Abigail Breslin, who was said to be the next Dakota Fanning (not as creepy, hopefully).

4. The Covenant. Teen flick meets Harry Potter. Boring and predictable. The actors have hot bodies tho. Especially loved the scene where they wore nothing but swim trunks. Yum.

5. Prison Break - Season 1. This series is one of the many proofs that TV has made its come back. Full of twists and turns. Exaggerated mean people in the penitentiary. Highly recommended for boring weekends.

Actually I am kinda reluctant to post a review on this movie, but since no one else has done it, here it is.

The story line is... actually I am not sure I got the story line, as I usually didn't on Bond movies, there are bomb makers, terrorist investors, card playing and stuff. I think it's about a bunch of terrorist groups, which want to make money for their terror acts, and they put their funds into this one person, who claimed that he could double their money in no time because himself could make terrors.

Where Mr. Bond come in this picture? He prevents the terror, of course, what else can he do? The movie is unnecessarily long, yet full of action-packed scenes that I am sure you tough guys would love.

I just love the fact that Daniel Craig doesn't remind me of my uncle or father. And in my personal opinion, his poker-faced, cold yet smooth persona fits the description of a carrier of a license to kill best. Don't let me start on his body. I love Eva Green. She's so pretty. I love the fact that this James Bond doesn't smile much. Unlike pretty 'cengengesan' other Bonds.

Well, at least this James Bond movie isn't so forgettable like the other ones...

Yep, I'm gonna say it. This is the best movie I've seen in years!!
Sebagian besar dari bagusnya film ini adalah karena gue tidak membaca review, sedikit sekali melihat preview dan film ini memang jarang dibahas dimana-mana (mungkin karena keburu tenggelam dengan film lain yang promosinya lebih heboh: The Departed, Casino Royale). Tapi, man oh man, you MUST see this.

The plot is a bit confusing at first, but don't take my word, because I'm a bit 'telmi' these days, I'm sure you'd find it fine. But once you get absorbed in the story there's no turning back. The story about 2 magicians' rivalry is well written, and wonderfully executed. And the actors, Michael Caine, there's no need to comment further. I had no idea Christian Bale could do a very good English accent (he IS American, isn't he?). There's also a surprise appearance of David Bowie.

(Sori bolak balik bahasa) Film ini seperti makanan hasil ciptaan satu chef yang sangat berambisi ingin memasukkan semua bahan yang enak-enak, tapi herannya, voila! it works! Semua unsur dimasukkan tanpa mengganggu cerita utama, malah jadi kejutan yang menyenangkan.

Love it. Watch it. Seriously.

Like Niang's predicted, this movie was basically revolving around the remote control thingie. The jokes kinda old. Well, 'old Adam Sandler type of jokes' though, so it's not bad at all. I love all of Adam Sandler movies. Except 50 First Dates.

There are moments where I was holding back a tear. Or an almost tear. Whatever. There are moments that makes you think (ssahh!) that however bad or boring times you get for now, if you have it with the ones you love, you don't want to fast-forward it. Those bad times are the ones we'd sentimentally talk about; "remember when we have no money? wow that was something, huh?" (this is a conversation I would be having with Niang 5 years from now. Or not. Whatever).

But I can proudly say I didn't cry at this movie. I wish I could say the same thing about 50 First Dates. But please note that I am still ashamed because of it.

I got this book from a bin sale at tobucil. I wasn't expected much. But DID I find something. I've read the book twice and it hasn't ceased to make me laugh and (sometimes) miserable at the same time.

Bits: the story is about a man coping with his fatherhood, and how he seemed to can't let go of his carefree youth (who doesn't?) and ended up having two separate lives. A life as a father and a husband, and a life as a working single man.

For those of you who're still coping with new motherhood or fatherhood, be prepared to read your innermost feelings of fear, joy and boredom in this novel, written with such humor and cynicism that would make you want to laugh and cry at the same time.

For those of you who're just married and thinking about having a baby: don't read it. Might want to change your mind. Or not. Depends on your courage and how much you love NOT being a parent.

When I first saw the cover of my husband's book, I thought 'Freakonomics' was just a humor book. Later I found out that the book was a collaboration between a University of Chicago professor and an award-winning journalist. And how the book answered my thirst for knowledge!!

Mind you, the 'knowledge' I refer here is quite obscure yet interesting facts that I could throw casually in a conversation so I could make myself appear 'smarter' or 'more knowledgable'.

Anyway, about the book, it still taught you to challenge the 'conventional wisdom' that is usually far from the truth. You believe in Occam's Razor? Think again. The answers are lie in the numbers. And those numbers are usually the ones that the 'experts' overlooked. If you asked a question, the answer is most likely not the obvious. The questions in this book may sound silly, such as 'why drug dealers still live with their moms?' and 'what's the similarities between a real estate agent and ku klux klan?' but the answers might delight you. I am beginning to like economics (this is coming from someone who got a 'D' in economic and refuse to retake the class because she hated it so much).

I wish there were Indonesian economists who have this approach, instead, we only have Safir Senduk. How sad is that?