The BOURNE SUPREMACY

THE BOURNE SUPREMACY
By Reymundo Salao
Oftentimes Disturbing
The Guardian, October 9, 2004

Hands down, I just love espionage movies. It is because these are the stories that actually happen in some parts of the world, especially in these times of terrorism and war. There is a sense of realism, and the secrecy and intrigue that goes with it.

In a TV interview, Matt Damon said there are only few sequels that stand out as classics to satisfy the excellence of the original, among them are the Godfather 2, The New Testament, and The Bourne Supremacy. I would agree to that. This film is one of the best espionage-suspense films that I have seen. THE BOURNE SUPREMACY is an adaptation of the book of the same title, written by Robert Ludlum. Although this isn't truly a faithful adaptation of the book, the tweaks and the alterations are well-done and have made this film a consistent sequel to the first movie/adaptation "Bourne Identity" for it answers many of the questions that the first movie posed.

In this sequel, Jason Bourne is now happily living the quiet life with the love of his life, Marie (played by Franka Potente) in Goa, India, away from the world of spies and conspiracies, away from the world of assassins. But Jason is still bothered by some nightmares of his past as a government assassin, a memory that was erased from his mind due to amnesia a few years back. Meanwhile, miles away, a CIA operation was botched and a couple of agents were murdered by a stealthy assassin who, in the process, planted Bourne's fingerprint on the scene of the incident. With such a frame-up successful, the CIA organized an operation to capture and bring Bourne to justice. Bourne, on the otherhand, knowing the hunt on his head has once again commenced, arms himself with his lethally brilliant skills in cloak and dagger, to turn the hunter into the hunted.

The movie is superbly brilliant, from the acting to its directing. this sequel is directed by Paul Greengrass, which meets up to his predecessor Doug Liman, who directed the first film with a certain modern-spy-thriller panache that is very lively and somewhat upbeat, and never misses on the action and the intriguing storyline. An example is that of an action scene, a fist-fight where the focus of the camera is closed-up on the characters and the intensity seen in their faces, and less-focused on the fighting techniques, since it is more interesting to feel the impact of the fight directly from the character's expressions. It may be contrasting the fact that there have already been so many action movies that focus on the martial arts and the stunts, and not so much on the acting that takes place during the fight scene. In so many aspects, acting on this movie is magnificent. When Matt Damon acts on this film, he really gets into his role, it is as if he really is a different person, as if he really is Jason Bourne. A character who is haunted by his past, a character that intends to pass through the gates of redemption and intends to, once and for all, end the haunting of the ghosts from his past. Recurring from the first film are the characters of Brian Cox, who always delivers an impressive performance, always playing a villainous character whose ruthlessness is as deep as it seems, and there's also the character played by Julia Stiles, who looks more pretty when she does not play a lead character as she is on this film. But the other main character, opposite Bourne, is the character played by Joan Allen, who also delivers a shining performance, especially at the scenes when she's having a conversation with Jason Bourne. Both their characters make a great clashing duo. And oh, in the end, there's this intense car-chase action sequence where we find Bourne against another assassin. In a typical action movie, the hero usually gets to fist-fight with the toughest bad guy. On this film, their duel takes place with their cars. Intense is the word, it stands up to, and even surpasses the chase scene of the first BOURNE movie.

Overall, BOURNE IDENTITY is one of the never-should-miss action movies of the year. Breathtaking action. Great intrigue. Brilliant action sequences. Triple-A acting. Brilliant dialogues. Superb storyline. Bourne Supremacy indeed has that SUPREMACY.

The BOURNE SUPREMACY

THE BOURNE SUPREMACY
By Reymundo Salao
Oftentimes Disturbing
The Guardian, October 9, 2004

Hands down, I just love espionage movies. It is because these are the stories that actually happen in some parts of the world, especially in these times of terrorism and war. There is a sense of realism, and the secrecy and intrigue that goes with it.

In a TV interview, Matt Damon said there are only few sequels that stand out as classics to satisfy the excellence of the original, among them are the Godfather 2, The New Testament, and The Bourne Supremacy. I would agree to that. This film is one of the best espionage-suspense films that I have seen. THE BOURNE SUPREMACY is an adaptation of the book of the same title, written by Robert Ludlum. Although this isn't truly a faithful adaptation of the book, the tweaks and the alterations are well-done and have made this film a consistent sequel to the first movie/adaptation "Bourne Identity" for it answers many of the questions that the first movie posed.

In this sequel, Jason Bourne is now happily living the quiet life with the love of his life, Marie (played by Franka Potente) in Goa, India, away from the world of spies and conspiracies, away from the world of assassins. But Jason is still bothered by some nightmares of his past as a government assassin, a memory that was erased from his mind due to amnesia a few years back. Meanwhile, miles away, a CIA operation was botched and a couple of agents were murdered by a stealthy assassin who, in the process, planted Bourne's fingerprint on the scene of the incident. With such a frame-up successful, the CIA organized an operation to capture and bring Bourne to justice. Bourne, on the otherhand, knowing the hunt on his head has once again commenced, arms himself with his lethally brilliant skills in cloak and dagger, to turn the hunter into the hunted.

The movie is superbly brilliant, from the acting to its directing. this sequel is directed by Paul Greengrass, which meets up to his predecessor Doug Liman, who directed the first film with a certain modern-spy-thriller panache that is very lively and somewhat upbeat, and never misses on the action and the intriguing storyline. An example is that of an action scene, a fist-fight where the focus of the camera is closed-up on the characters and the intensity seen in their faces, and less-focused on the fighting techniques, since it is more interesting to feel the impact of the fight directly from the character's expressions. It may be contrasting the fact that there have already been so many action movies that focus on the martial arts and the stunts, and not so much on the acting that takes place during the fight scene. In so many aspects, acting on this movie is magnificent. When Matt Damon acts on this film, he really gets into his role, it is as if he really is a different person, as if he really is Jason Bourne. A character who is haunted by his past, a character that intends to pass through the gates of redemption and intends to, once and for all, end the haunting of the ghosts from his past. Recurring from the first film are the characters of Brian Cox, who always delivers an impressive performance, always playing a villainous character whose ruthlessness is as deep as it seems, and there's also the character played by Julia Stiles, who looks more pretty when she does not play a lead character as she is on this film. But the other main character, opposite Bourne, is the character played by Joan Allen, who also delivers a shining performance, especially at the scenes when she's having a conversation with Jason Bourne. Both their characters make a great clashing duo. And oh, in the end, there's this intense car-chase action sequence where we find Bourne against another assassin. In a typical action movie, the hero usually gets to fist-fight with the toughest bad guy. On this film, their duel takes place with their cars. Intense is the word, it stands up to, and even surpasses the chase scene of the first BOURNE movie.

Overall, BOURNE IDENTITY is one of the never-should-miss action movies of the year. Breathtaking action. Great intrigue. Brilliant action sequences. Triple-A acting. Brilliant dialogues. Superb storyline. Bourne Supremacy indeed has that SUPREMACY.

SPIDER-MAN 2

SPIDER-MAN 2: A VERY HUMAN ADAPTATION
By Reymundo Salao
The Guardian, July 3, 2004

Just when you thought they were going to sell out to the fame and success of the first one, SPIDERMAN 2 proved to be a superhero film that held strong to the similar reputation of the first Spidey movie; that of being not merely an eye-candy-action-packed extravaganza, but a movie that has a very rich storyline and brilliantly-developed characters. Nevermind the overhype, never mind the endless promos and commercial tie-ins, because at last, after seeing the film, you must realize the fact that the beauty of Spiderman 2 lies much on the story’s characters and the interesting drama that unfold, and not on the “action-figure-superhero” aspect of it. Instead of trying to cashing in to the popularity of the first by pleasing the audience with more action, stunts, and CGI, the filmmakers seemed to have focused more on the drama between the characters this time. Not to say that it lacked in visual candy, when in fact, it did have greater fight sequences than the first Spiderman movie, and the adventures are more thrilling. But there is a larger tip in the balance that makes the movie heavy on the drama side. Not to say that it becomes more of a weepy chick-flick, but rather, a movie that focuses more on the regular struggles in life: like complications in friendship, paying the rent, pressures in not finding a well-off job, and a frustrating love life. Giving it more life and more of the human touch. Usually on a sequel whose fame and anticipation is of this grand scale, we would have expected numerous action sequences all throughout the film. With Spiderman 2, it seemed to have just disregarded the fact that it was going to be the most popular sequel of the year, and maintained the storyline realistically focusing on the life of it’s main character, Peter Parker, and the consequences that surround the fact that he must be Spiderman. Because the main characters of Peter Parker, his Aunt May, his friend Harry, and his love interest, Mary Jane, have been well-introduced in the first movie, the sequel was left with the liberty of giving more weight to each of them with twists and turns that makes us become so engrossed on the whole Spiderman world the way soap operas do to its fans.

Speaking of soap operas, it is also worth mentioning, the excellent consistency between the two Spiderman movies, as the events of the first movie is greatly in harmony with that of the second movie. This is perhaps due to the reason that the film was faithful to the storyline of the comicbooks. Hollywood has time and again murdered comic adaptations, thereby destroying the original beauty of the genres. This is why Batman HAD to be re-written, this is why The Hulk HAD to be rewritten, this is why The Punisher HAD to be rewritten. It is because their film adaptations in the past had greatly damaged their franchises. With Spiderman, the filmmakers already have the impressive storyline to base it on; all they have to do is be faithful to it. And as the first film has great consistency to the second, the second has started to establish its consistency with the inevitability of a Spiderman 3.



This may be due to the fact that the director Sam Raimi, is himself, a great fan of the Spiderman comic book since his teen years. His devotion for the Spidey genre may have made this project much of a labor of love. Raimi’s unique “classic horror” style can be seen throughout the film. He is the director responsible for such films as “The Quick & the Dead”, “The Evil Dead Trilogy” (it’s part 3 is popularly entitled “Army of Darkness”), and the not-so-popular superhero “Darkman” (with Liam Neeson and Frances Mcdormand) which has some aspects of Spiderman attached into it.

Alfred Molina, who plays the new villain, Dr. Otto Octavius is already an actor of respectable reputation, and his performance is up-to-the-role, excellent, as expected. In an early scene where he is having a pleasant conversation with his wife and Peter Parker, the scene and the acting evokes a realistically pleasant atmosphere that you wouldn’t expect Dr. Octavius to later evolve into the mad villain, Dr. Octopus. James Franco as Harry Osborn, the son of the late Green Goblin, has succeeded in portraying a character whose death of his father has gradually twisted his personality. His Anger for the Spiderman is real, and his vengeful determination convincing. Kristen Dunst , who played Mary Jane Watson, was all the more charming in this movie, as her character moves on to become famous for becoming a model and a stage actress, but still is confused with her feelings for Peter Parker. And Tobey Maguire as Peter Parker delivers a performance worthy of a respectable acting trophy. He vividly gives life to his character, a complex young man whose life is torn by his duties as Spiderman, his duties as a working student who must earn a living, his duties as a friend, and his duties as a man who loves. The character of Peter Parker is not an easy character to portray. Peter is a geek, who despite all the trials and miseries of life, does not easily fall off into a dark sense of brooding contempt. Instead, he just feels the pains of life, and does what little he can, to roll with the punches and adjust to the misery. And the miseries of Peter in this movie can rival the miseries that are found in Sharon Cuneta films. This is what is great about this Spiderman storyline is that to be truly heroic, one must also face the trials not only set by dangerous villains or catastrophic accidents, but by what difficult choices life has to offer. You’re Peter Parker a.k.a. Spiderman, your best friend hates you because you’re responsible of his father’s death, you cant go abusing your powers, you would have enough time for school and work but only if people wouldn’t need your help, worse, you cant have a relationship with the woman you love. That pretty much sucks, doesn’t it? With great power comes great responsibility. But the risks are too high. Can Peter leap through it?

Also worth mentioning is the performance of Rosemary Harris as Peter’s Aunt May, who, in both the comics and on the film, serves as Peter’s touchstone. With more focus on her character, she greatly adds more heart to the film. Then there’s the minor character of Professor Curt Conners, whose arm was cut off during an accident. In the comic books, the character of Curt experiments with reptile specimens as a desperate move to “regrow” his arm, the way lizards normally do. He didn’t expect the experiment would cause grave side-effects mutating him into the monstrous “Lizard”. Well, perhaps, we can expect him in the next sequel. The end of this movie also gives us another idea of what is in store for us on the next Spiderman movie as one of the characters discover something that will surely shock Spidey’s senses.

DAWN OF THE DEAD (2004)

DAWN OF THE DEAD: ULTRA-LOVELY
Oftentimes Disturbing
by Reymundo Salao
The Guardian, June 26-27. 2004

When there’s no more room in Hell, the dead will walk the Earth. That’s a really cool sounding tagline, especially if you have a creepy deep baritone voice to say it with. This is the tagline for the movie “DAWN OF THE DEAD” which is now (FINALLY!) showing in our local cinemas. This movie is actually a remake of the 1978 movie “Dawn of the Dead” which is actually part 2 of George Romero’s “Dead Trilogy” with “Night of the Living Dead” as its part 1 (1968), and “Day of the Dead” as part 3 (1985). In 1990, Tom Savini directed a very impressive remake of “Night of the Living Dead”. This is the version which has lately been shown over the cable TV movie channels. To the new eager fans of the Dead Saga, this film can be a good prologue to watching “Dawn…”

Rewinding back to 1995 when I first played The Resident Evil playstation game, my love for the zombie genre was reawakened, and ever since then, I have been looking for a copy of the 1978 movie “Dawn of the Dead,” that classic zombie film that I saw when I was still in my elementary years, which at the time, is THE best zombie movie made. The world of zombies is a perverse morbid wonderland, a world laid to waste by lumbering flesh-hungry walking corpses. I searched high and low, from all the old video shops that have survived the Betamax era, up to the new video shops and video stores, hoping I could find a re-release of it on VCD or DVD format. So far, DVD copies of it are sold in the US. I’ve also been scouring the Pirated DVD stalls where it is more reliable source, when looking for classics. Finally, when rumors came out that a “Dawn…” remake was going to be released, I went nuts! I was like bereserking out in excitement, but I was also afraid that the remake would only tarnish the reputation of the original. Just like that “Planet of the Apes” movie which COMPLETELY ruined the rep of the original. The original was superb, the remake was mosquito-manure.

What terrified me more was finding out that this “Dawn of the Dead” remake was made without the personal approval of George Romero, and that the scriptwriter was the same scriptwriter for the “Scooby Doo” movie. I was like WADAPAK?! The director was a nobody too, I mean, who’s ever heard of Zack Snyder?

But my paranoia was laid to rest when I saw the movie. IT WAS MARVELOUS. Well, not in a “blue-sky, butterflies in your stomach-kind-of-marvelous”… but more like chaotic-creepy-apocalyptic, bloody-gorey-morbid (something munching in your stomach), suspense-action-scare-feasting, panic-mayhem non-stop thrill-ride horror-drama! In a nutshell: a sh!tload of horror.

Getting right down to the details, this zombie movie goes directly into the mayhem without having a rather preachy prologue. In order to add to the sense of enigma, it is part of the Dead Trilogy not to give an exact explanation of how and why there are the zombies, except that of the closest logical explanation that it is some form of infection that is easily spread throughout the victims. In this remake, the zombies are a bit more hyperactive than the lumbering ones in the original. This makes sense because it would be more realistic for hyperactive zombies to decimate the Earth, than it is for the slow ones of the old movies. In our day and age, the military already have the science to quarantine such infections. In this movie, they can’t, because the zombies are fast and rabid, and have easily managed to turn cites into hell.

The storyline of this remake is indeed different from the original. But the idea of fortifying inside a mall for survival, remains. The film is so fast-paced that there is but little dull moments. And when the action and thrill slows down, it is replaced by interesting dialogues, attention-grabbing scenes, and a storyline that balances the eye-candy with a rich plotline of survival, human nature, and the drama of choosing the greater good in a time of chaos. “You can discover more about a man in an hour of plague, than in a year of conversation.” This is an old Greek proverb (duhh… was it Plato? Socrates?) that can be applied in this movie, Because we cannot deny that calamities may bring out either the best in us or the worst in us, reflected by the variation of well-developed characters. And to think that in a fast-paced movie, these characters were developed merely by their admirable acting.

Horror or non-horror fans will surely get a munch of good meat (get it?) out of “Dawn of the Dead.” You do not want to miss this apocalyptic zombie-fest. Right now, I am hoping that they will remake “Day of the Dead” as well. And I still am searching for a copy of the original 1978 version of “Dawn…” Got a copy? Pahulama ta bi!

TROY

TOURING TROY
By Reymundo Salao
The Guardian, May 22, 2004

The first time I heard the buzz that there was going to be a film version of Homer's "Iliad" with the obvious title "Troy", I immediately jumped to the conclusion that it was another movie cashing in on ancient and/or mythological war sagas to add to the list of sure-winners like Gladiator, Lord of the Rings, and the Last Samurai. I could imagine some producer trying to jump into his library of Cliff-Notes trying to look for some classic piece of literature that has a great deal of action and war in it.

I might have guessed that it would be quite astounding to see the Iliad on film, especially with how cinema special effects nowadays have become quite flawless. I was a bit excited to see the Trojan war, and both the Greek and Trojan gods clash, on film. But there wasn't going to be any of the gods, goddesses, and freaky heroes to behold. I thought they wanted people to flock to this film with the promise of a breathtaking war scene with gods and titans throwing thunderbolts and balls of flame at each other. Instead of a CGI extravaganza to be the film's ad campaign, it resorted to an old tactic: cram as much beautiful actors and actresses into a film with a setting that involves a lot of skin exposure. Hey, it's the time of the ancient Greeks; everybody's entitled to look so vain, like they were meticulously tanned and endlessly covered with the best body lotions, not to mention, the shampoos that made each character look like a commercial model for beauty salons. With actors and actresses like Orlando "not another archer" Bloom, Diane "where have I seen this girl?" Krueger, Eric "still kinda angry" Bana, Brad "wearing a skirt" Pitt, and Rose "beat-up cute" Byrne, this film is like a fashion magazine, only with swords and gore. Even the menacing Tyler Mane, as Ajax, looks pretty. If you're a warrior, you still had to look like a member of a boyband. On the other hand, there was the rockin' Trojan official Glaucus played by James Cosmo (remember him also playing another heroic senior citizen war leader role in Braveheart and Gladiator?), the always convincingly tyrannical Brian Cox who played King Agamemnon, and the revered Peter O'Toole as King Priam of Troy which delivered a fine performance that brought this film the much needed serious critical boost. This only goes to show that you had to be over fifty or overweight to look seriously cool in this film.

Sean "Boromir" Bean was also in this film, in case you failed to see his name (in small caps) in the poster credits. As far as I can recall, this is the only film I saw where his role doesn't have a jerk factor (look him up on "Goldeneye" and "Ronin"). He plays the Greek hero, Odysseus, who devised the use of the Trojan Horse, and also one of the wiser generals of the Greeks during this war. It was an odd surprise to see him become the film's epilogue narrator all of a sudden, when his character was quite overshadowed throughout the film. The director, Wolfgang Petersen ("Das Boot" 1981, "The Perfect Storm" 2000, and "Air Force One" 1997), could have at least set him up to narrate at the beginning to make sense why he's narrating the end. And no, I don't think it's enough that just because he's Achilles' trusted friend. Even the last line made my head itch "I lived in the time of Achilles" …So what? That didn't actually make sense, did it? For a Greek Tragedy that line sounded like it was meant for either a David Lynch film or a Tom Green film. With Odysseus being played by a prominent actor, will there be a film adaptation of "Odyssey" as well?

Some may not like the film for it excludes the role of the gods and goddesses. In one way of seeing it, including the mythological aspects of the story may lessen the dramatic impact of the story; the romance of Paris and Helen, and the "War is bad" aspect of the storyline. The producers may have opted a less fantasy-driven ancient war movie that would have more of a historical feel, just like "Gladiator" and "The Last Samurai".

But then again, here we see another Hollywood habit of adulterating the classics to their own (commercially-driven) will. Little do they know that many teachers still hope to use these films to reinforce their manner of educating their students with ancient literature. Instead, children will learn to succumb to the Hollywood versions and disregard what the pioneers have originally done.

But in the long run, "Troy" is still very worth watching. It may have some little flaws that we may love to mock, but you wouldn't want to miss seeing it. You don't want to miss this summer's most action-packed war scenes, especially the exhilarating sword-fights, and the highly anticipated duel between Hector and Achilles. The ladies wouldn't want to miss Brad Pitt in a skirt, while the guys wouldn't want to miss the tease-naked scenes of Rose Byrne and Diane Kruger.

The Passion of the Christ (article)

ANTICIPATING THE PASSION

Everybody's talking about THE PASSION CHRIST. I'm also one of the many who is extremely anxious to see this film, directed by Mel Gibson, about the last moments of Jesus Christ's life, and the torment he went through before he was crucified. According to previews, this film is extremely violent. Understandably, when he was captured, Christ was indeed beaten up, lashed, spit at, mocked, tortured, and had been crowned with thorns that had further bloodied him up. This much is true. One can't just mellow down the violence factor of Christ's torment and claim to portray a realistic interpretation of his last hours alive. I mean this was in ancient times, you can imagine how animalistic violence can get during those days. In the US, the film was given a "Restricted" rating due to its violence. But here in the Philipppines, it was given only a "Parental Guidance" rating (Hardcore ta ya, Bord!). I think this may bedue to the fact that though this film may exhibit violence in extreme proportions, as long as it is within the reasonable context of Christ's history, it would still be educational, not only historically, but most of all, spiritually as well. Besides, we Filipinos are quite familiar with the degree of pain Jesus got during his capture. We never held back our children from learning the hard truth that Jesus has gone through the brutality of torture, for our salvation. This is exhibited through storybooks, statues, paintings, and murals. Ever since our elementary days, we already know of the "pasyon" and "penitensya", that old traditional religious practice, which is the lashing of oneself, inflicting pain upon oneself, even having oneself actually crucified in the cross, trying to "share" Christ's pain, all as forms of repentance. Actually I kind of miss seeing people actually practicing "self-lashing penitensya". Perhaps it is because it is now considered to be obscure that nobody takes time to practice it anymore.

Americans are very keen on guarding the violence in television and cinema that it sometimes borders to a kind of corny uneven censorship reminiscent of Morato's MTRCB days. That is why critics from the US regard the movie to be "gory and extremely violent" What do they expect? A Walt-Disney-type movie? Then there's the big anti-Semitic issue, wherein many Jews raised a fiery issue that the film is Anti-Jew. Well, isn't it already written in history? The writers and the director didn't change the "villains" of the film; previews indicate that this film was even done in the purest of adaptations and biographies ever. It was very much a "by-the-book" kind of movie. What would've these critics wanted? That Christ's story would be rewritten, so as to make it Jew-friendly? Perhaps they wanted the "villains" to be, say, The Yakuza or The Mafia? Okay, maybe Mel Gibson should get Joe Pesci and Ken Watanabe as the bosses who ordered Jesus' arrest. Would the critics be satisfied if that were to happen? Maybe they would want Judas to be portrayed as an ex-spetsnaz commando played by Dolph Lundgren. Would that be not anti-Semitic anymore? At least, here in the Philippines, this film would generally be appreciated without much of an issue.

x-x-x

It's nice because THE PASSION OF CHRIST would probably increase the interest of the movie-going public upon their spirituality. There was a time, around the years when TEN COMMANDMENTS was made, that a plethora of religious and specifically Christian movies came out. There was THE ROBE, KING OF KINGS, and some movie about ST. PETER (Although I find it disturbingly strange how Greek Mythology movies like VULCAN and CLASH OF THE TITANS similarly came out later on. Daw ka tayug lang gid ya, bord!).

Movies are usually the medium from which people that are lazy enough to pick up books, get their info from. And with such efficient medium, stories of Saints, martyrs, and religious figures can easily be shown to one and all.

I find it a bit funny though. Because I saw this satire (a highly recommended movie), entitled "DOGMA", which has some great deal of theology and a great deal of humor in it where, in one scene, an angel (portrayed by Diehard villain Alan Rickman) says in sarcasm "quote something out of a Charlton Heston movie, and all of a sudden, everybody's a theologian" Some kid might someday claim that he learned about Jesus Christ, not from paying attention to his Christian Religion lesson, but from a Mel Gibson movie. See you at the theaters when it is finally shown!

24 (the TV series saga)

24
by Reymundo Salao
Oftentimes Disturbing

My mother falls asleep every time we watch an action movie. No matter how magnificent an explosive action sequence goes, no matter how spectacular the visual effects, not even some of the most-attention grabbing dramatic performances of actors and actresses can get her to have that longevity of attention throughout the entire duration of the movie/storyline. The rarity of movies/TV shows that can get her interested is close to none. That changed when she saw “24”.

When I first read about 24 in an article in a foreign magazine, I was intrigued by its unique approach of storytelling. This is a TV series which happens in real-time, which means that all the events in the storyline happens within 24 hours, divided into 24 episodes, an hour-long each. There is no shifting from one timeline jumping to another, If the setting of the story is set beginning from 12 midnight, the first episode ends at 1 am. There is no flashback, neither does it have shortcuts of time. (It kind of reminds me of Tom Clancy’s OP-CENTER pocketbook series where the duration of the storyline occurs and wraps up within 24 hours) If you watch all the episodes of 24 in its entirety, it would virtually take you the whole day to finish it. All 24 hours of it.

24 is an action-espionage drama about Jack Bauer, an agent of America's CTU/Counter Terrorist Unit, which is an intelligence agency that deals with Counter-terrorism that has gathered information that there is an assassination attempt on an African American Presidential candidate, Sen. David Palmer. The intensity of the story rises as Jack realizes that his daughter Kimberly is kidnapped, and that some agents of CTU had been killed as there is evidence that there is a mole (insider) in the CTU working against them. On the other hand, David Palmer finds out that a reporter is about to come out with an expose that his son is involved in a murder incident that has been covered up. As the clock ticks each and every complication, suspicion, betrayal, danger, and death strikes our characters.

When it first aired on the AXN channel, I immediately stuck myself following the series. But eventually, one could inevitably miss some episodes once in a while, no matter how good a TV series is, you cannot easily get the schedule of your TV shows in sync with your personal time. It was only a matter of short time when my close buddy Eugene discovered that there already was a 24 Season 1 (all the 24 episodes of the entire season, on six discs) DVD available (in Arlegui, Metro Manila. On the places Bong Revilla wants to close down). When he was done with it, I immediately borrowed his 24 collection, since it was the perfect time for me to be broke and to just stay home with my coffee, my 2 peso mamons, and my DVD player.

The saga of 24 can grab the attention of anybody. It has an immense degree of suspense that transmits the fears and the desperation of characters unto those who watches it. You cringe as characters are killed, you scream off your seat as some characters suddenly become traitors, or as the problems heighten. There is also the “who-done-it” atmosphere which makes you doubt most of the characters. There are characters that turn out to be villains, there are also characters which you trust and sympathize, but you are swept off with the twist of events that make them villains. There is also the interesting duality of issue that is divided between Jack’s running after the bad guys while trying to look for his family’s captors, and there is David Palmer’s problem as to trying to choose between saving his son, or saving his votes, and there is the problem of trust that poses as a breather-drama from the action and suspense brought about by Jack’s other half of the storyline. There is a great balance between action, suspense, and drama. And it is undeniable that there is no dull moment in 24. each and every tick of the clock is worth watching.

It may sound freaky to watch all the episodes in a straight span of 24 hours. For our part, we began to watch the series 3pm of Sunday till 2 in the morning, Monday night 7pm to 1 am, Tuesday night 7pm to 1 am, and Wednesday 8 pm to 12 midnight. Yes, we were that mad over 24 during that week. And yes, it is THAT good. It did not win the many awards it garnered for nothing.

SEASON 2 (may contain spoilers of Season 1 and Season 2, you can skip to the last paragraph)

We have recently concluded watching our marathon of Season 2. And yes, we spent almost an entire day watching the first hours of it, since we began watching on a Saturday. On the second season (which is about to start on AXN, and is in its final episodes in ABS-CBN) Sen. Palmer is now President David Palmer, the president of the US, who has found out that a terrorist group known as Second Wave is about to detonate a nuclear bomb in California, precisely on that day. In relevance to the current situation, he must enlist the aid of his trusted counterterrorist agent, Jack Bauer, who has resigned from CTU, and still devastated over the death of his wife, Terri, and is left in agony by his daughter Kim. It took a lot of convincing, but eventually Jack has gotten back into running after the terrorists. If you thought Season 2 would slack off, you’re dead wrong, because in this season the suspense is heightened and the complications are more than twice as shocking. We get to see the traitor Nina Meyers once again as she is tied with the terrorists. Her presence adds to the aura of fear and villain-hate. You can smell the hate that if you were in Jack’s shoes, you’d just want to torture her to death for what she did to his wife Terri.

The main storyline of Season 2 has a mirror image to what has happened during the days before the US has declared war against Iraq, although the writers claim it was unintentional. While in the storyline, President Palmer tries to hold his own government back from declaring war against the Arab countries suspected of funding Second Wave, America has, in reality, already declared war on Iraq. While this much is true, it kind of hints that what Bush has done was the evil act as what a comparison of the two may suggest.

As a conclusion to a feature that I still feel like discussing further on, all I can conclude is that so far, 24 is THE BEST television series that has ever been made. I could always set aside X-files, Friends, Mission: Impossible (the 1990s television series), Adultswim, or Buffy and Angel. But 24 is at the top. The second season is about to air on AXN. The final episodes of Season 2 is shown tagalog-dubbed at ABS-CBN on sunday evenings, and the third season is currently being shown in the United States. The first season is now available in DVD & VCDs (not only in pirate stalls but also) in video shops and video rental clubs.

(If you have your own reviews & articles on 24, please email me at tripxyde@hotmail.com)

KILL BILL, Vol. 01

MY TARANTINO FAVORITISM
KILL BILL vol. 1
By Reymundo Salao
Oftentimes Disturbing

Have you noticed that the past three big films that has been showing since January were included in CNN’s Best Films of the Year? The Return of the King, which was a fantasy epic that is now rumored to win a landslide on the Academy awards, the Last Samurai, a Samurai epic, which was Tom Cruise’s “finest performance”. And now, KILL BILL. A bad mother##cker with a big sharp samurai sword. One of it’s tagline is “Speak softly, and carry a big sword” Cheesy? Well, just watch the film and prove yourself wrong.

Kill bill is like a homage to 70’s grindhouse films. It is a movie that knows it is a movie. It has its own universe and does not need to conform to the standards of reality. Neither it is trying to be under the category of sci-fi or fantasy, it is clearly just a homage to old action movies.

Many of the film’s elements were actually inspired from that of the many movies and television shows that Tarantino loved. For instance, many of the actions of the samurai elements were inspirations from a 70’s ninja TV series. The hero of the series is Hattori Hanzo, the same character in Kill Bill, who gave Black Mamba the samurai sword. There was also the concept of a group of female assassins, which was inspired from 70’s chick assassin flicks, which were the earliest templates from which the concept of Charlie’s Angels was copied from. Even the name of the group “Deadly Viper Assassination Squad” had that retro-feel, that no real-life assassination organization would name their group as cheesy as that, except on 70’s action flicks. It’s like when you watch a Chuck Norris movie from the 80’s or a Lito Lapid as a legendary-hero-kind-of-movie, you know that somehow, you love it with a weird sense of audience. Take those elements and stylize those cheesy aspects, give them more art and life. It seems that this is what Tarantino did in KILL BILL.

I loved the nostalgia that saturated the film. The intro logo sequence of the Shaw Brothers Production, which was actually a production outfit which released Kung-Fu films of the 70’s, was an ideal jumpstart that led me on to grin throughout the film with sheer enthusiasm. The black & white prologue of a beat-up Uma Thurman, was astounding. The simplicity of it was more impacting than a multi-million stunt sequence prologue from a Bond film.

Although the storyline had a simple plot, the dialogues were injected with a lot of chuckle-inducing wit and panache. The stress of the film lies in the coolness of its medieval-type-honor-vengeance-mission, when warriors must settle their issues with an honorable duel. This is one cliché that has a surprising impact.

The film reeks of macho action. But at the same time, hands it over to women empowerment. Girl power with a very sharp killing edge. Like is the spaghetti westerns that were made by Sergio Leone, Uma Thurman was Tarantino’s Clint Eastwood. The bad-ass who wouldn’t stop her one-way quest for revenge. He doesn’t only blow-off her enemies, he bangs their head in the door, he bites off their bloody lips, slashes off their limbs, cuts them to pieces, decapitates their heads, and even scalps them. Bloody? Yes, deliciously bloody. This is one movie; you’d want to force your 5th grade theology teacher to watch.

The music was a major element in this film as it marinates its essence with that nostalgic oldies action. All the music here was geniusly arranged that fit all sequences to a perfect tee. My friend even said that the film transforms the ugliest songs into supercool themes. Its as if some of the songs were that of Japan’s Imelda Papins. Almost all the tunes here were music from an era long forgotten. If you have seen Tarantino’s other films, you wouldn’t be as surprised, but you would still have your attention 200% on focus as you would surely enjoy how these songs become immortalized in this film before your senses.

KILL BILL was also included as one of the best films of 2003 according to CNN (it was released November 2003). No doubt about it, it is a masterpiece. Tarantino has outdobe himself once more. Tarantino achieves, in this movie, to make an obramaestra with absurd and obscure elements, and succeeds miraculously creating a product that is magnificent and groundbreaking. We can do no more, but wait for the sequel. I will surely rant more when the sequel comes.