Originally Reviewed – 6/22/2010

Whenever Oscar nominations are announced in mid January, the one category I tend to skim over is Best Foreign Language Film. Usually, the nominees haven’t seen a stateside release and if they have, they simply don’t show up on my radar. So, when making my Oscar picks for any given year, I generally go on buzz and critical response alone. While it may be a touch disingenuous when making those recommendations, usually twenty raving critics can’t be wrong. So, when this year’s frontrunners included A Prophet, White Ribbon and The Secret In Their Eyes, I went with the crowd and picked A Prophet. When A Prophet lost to Secret and I actually saw the film, I was shocked; not only was A Prophet one of the best foreign language films I had ever seen, it was the best film of year for me thus far, period. Yet again, I hadn’t seen the eventual winner and now that I have, I need to abashedly retract my annoyance from my review of A Prophet: the Secret In Their Eyes most certainly deserved its 2010 Oscar and is a wonderful piece of filmmaking that should be sought out as soon as possible.

The storyline juggles two timelines centered around Benjamin (Ricardo Darín); one where he’s a 40 something prosecutor working on an Argentinean murder case and the other 25 years later, newly retired and still mulling over the killer that “got away”. In addition to this, you also get a truly touching story of unrequited love between Benjamin and his boss, Irene (Soledad Villamil) and the main story of Benjamin and this partner Pablo (Guillermo Francella) sleuthing for the killer. The film does a wonderful job of balancing each of these deceptively complex storylines, with no arc overtaking the other. It’s this careful balancing act that, in my mind, elevated this film over A Prophet for the Oscar, as it really does have a little of everything.

While the story and direction are incredible in their own right, the film is one of the finest acted stories I’ve seen this year. Each cast member digs deep to create interesting, complex and very human characters. The fine acting enhances the great screenplay even further creating a truly breathtaking experience. While some moments border on melodrama, by the time those instances crop up, you are too invested to really care, making this is a an easy movie to get caught up in. Also, it’s worthy to note that the cinematography is absolutely stunning, especially in the famed “soccer stadium” scene. Not to give anything away, but not since Children of Men have I seen such an inventive use of the “one take scene” and it comes at a point in the film where things are just starting to drag, revitalizing the movie all the way to its somewhat predictable but still astonishing end.

Widely praised and lauded during its theatrical release overseas, The Secret In Their Eyes lives up to the hype and trophies. With a central whodunit much like this years Girl With The Dragon Tattoo, Secret up the ante and provides a dark story laced with wit, humor and suggested romance in a way that startles, thrills and mesmerizes. Yes, I know I am at the point of gushing over this movie, but it’s destined to be in my top 5 of the year and is worth a viewing at your first opportunity.

Score – 90%

Originally Reviewed – 6/17/2010

Most viewers and critics agree that Judd Apatow knows how to write and produce a movie. So, on paper, taking the most entertaining character from the very funny Forgetting Sarah Marshall and giving him his own 109 minutes makes a whole lot of sense. Even if the film’s a stinker, one could make some serious coin from a sentimental sequel to a great movie. For me, the question was does the hard living, hard rocking and hard…well…you know character of Alda Snow have enough in the tank to warrant his own film. The answer is an emphatically enthusiastic, “Yeeaaah, why not”.

The story is as bare bones as it gets. All around nice guy Aaron Green, played by one of my least favorite people in Hollywood, Jonah Hill, is tasked by his record exec boss (Sean “Puffy” Combs) to escort his musical idol Alda Snow to his 10th anniversary concert at the legendary Greek Theatre in Los Angeles. Along the way, Alda gets Aaron in all sorts of trouble involving hookers, booze and something called a “Jeffery”. The result is a madcap, drug induced, trans-continental romp that leaves the audience almost as exhausted as young Aaron is at the film’s conclusion. And you know what? It’s all pretty damn funny.

The star of the show is Russell Brand, who does his British rock star shtick for the whole film and rarely disappoints. My biggest concern going into the film was how Brand was going to handle the eventual “quiet, introspective” moments, but Brand does a fine job in showing the character’s other side. While these scenes are mostly disposable, it does give the film a bit of an arc and a depth, which was appreciated. The other side of the coin is Jonah Hill and Brand’s straight man and while I’m not the biggest Hill fan (fine, I can’t stand him), he plays the best part in his career as the nice guy caught up in the Alda Snow tornado. For the first time, Hill actually relaxes the brash, foul mouthed persona he’s known for and the result is his best performance yet. Rose Byrne and the surprisingly funny Sean Combs round out a well utilized supporting cast.

Kudos also has to be given to writer / director Nicholas Stoller for crafting a very funny yet accessible comedy that satisfies on a number of levels. Unlike this year’s Hot Tub Time Machine, which stuck in the gross out jokes out of necessity, Greek has it’s moments of cringe but they all work within the context of the story, much like they did in Forgetting Sarah Marshall. Fans of the aforementioned flick will also get some of the inside jokes that are peppered throughout the movie.

All in all, Get Him To Greek is a wild ride through the dark side of celebrity and the coldness of the modern day music industry while remaining a fun comedy for everybody else. While it’s not quite a comedy with a heart, it does provide enough back story and substance to both Brand and Hill’s characters, giving the film a small emotional backing to go with all the debauchery. Although it doesn’t quite reach my standard for modern day comedy, The Hangover, it’s certainly one of the funniest films of the year and is worth seeing.

Score – 70%

Originally Reviewed – 6/14/2010

Let’s do a little guided meditation before the next review, shall we? That’s right…close your eyes, focus your mind’s gaze to a fixed point on the horizon and relax. Now, imagine yourself in the office of a film executive delivering the following movie pitch:

Producer : So, what’s this movie all about.

You: Well…it’s about street art.

Producer : Street art? That’s it?? Well, what happens?

You : :::big breath of air::: Well, it’s the story of a obsessive filmmaker, who’s really just a crazy person with a camera, who becomes obsessed with street art so much so that he spends years filming the artists tagging up Los Angeles with no intention of doing anything with it but when pressured, he comes up with something that’s total crap so the head street artist named Banksy, whose face you never see and has his voiceovers modulated, take his documentary and makes a documentary about the documentarian. Oh yeah, this all may or may not have really happened…we’re not too sure.

Confused? Interested? Excited? Maybe a little of all three? Fantastic. Welcome to the best documentary of the year so far, Exit Through the Gift Shop.

Strange synopsis aside, Exit is truly one of the oddest yet well composed films you’ll see this year. One moment, it’s a showcase of some truly fantastic street art, the next it’s a documentary about street art culture and towards the end becomes a mediation on how hype plays a crucial part in the validity of modern art. Filmed like a documentary and framed like a creative narrative, Exit blends styles, genres, and expectations in a way that mirrors the way street artists blend graffiti with their environment, creating their unique artistic style. In a way, Exit could be seen as a filmed form of street art, just by the way it’s presented to the audience. No matter how you view it, Exit is a startlingly well crafted film that does all the little and big things right.

Aside from shots of some of the most interesting street art you’ll ever see, Exit also features interesting, vibrant characters. From the thrift store owner turned obsessive film maker to the reclusive Banksy to the art snobs who inhabit a good part of the third act, Exit allows everybody to tell their side of the story in an interesting and unobtrusive way. The depth of the characters is what elevates the movie from standard documentary fare to a real cohesive story. First time director Bansky also does a remarkable balancing act in the creation of this film, leveraging real time footage and personal interviews that never lags the storytelling. Very remarkable for someone who’s known for creating murals on public buildings, not making movies.

Despite the circular and deceptively complex narrative, the film is a coherent, dizzying and breathtaking 87 minutes that leaves you panting for more at its conclusion. Exit Through the Gift Shop is easily one of the best films I’ve seen so far this year, and should definitely get some looks come this Oscar season for Best Documentary. Whether or not it’s an actual documentary has been debated among film critics, but for me, who really cares when you have a picture of this depth and quality. Highly recommended!

Score – 90%

Originally Reviewed – 6/8/2010

Ah, Sir Robin of Loxley. Most of us remember the legendary character as a swashbuckling adventurer, shooting arrows, rescuing damsels in distress and outwitting the evil Sheriff of Nottingham. Even though the character was written as a criminal of sorts, his mantra of robbing from the rich and giving to the poor had a sense of chivalry and charity about it that was uncommon in literary / film heroes. This combination of wit, charm and a gentleman’s grace has been the hallmark of the character since the 15th century. So, what should we expect from a 21st century interpretation at the hands of Ridley Scott?

Mud and boredom.

Robin Hood “2010” is the modern re-imagination, or in this case regurgitation, of the classic film franchise that does nothing but make you pine for Kevin Costner in tights again. While one would think the directing / acting team of Ridley Scott and Russell Crowe would provide a more modern, visceral take on the classic character, all you get is Gladiator Lite or, more appropriately, Gladiator Dull. Everything in this film fails in almost epic proportions. The writing is uninspired, the action is predictably stale and any ounce of life or intrigue the character inherently possesses is siphoned out by the shoddy direction. In a word, this film is a lifeless bore and everybody involved needs to take a piece of the blame.

Surprisingly, the cast holds the least amount of responsibility for the debacle. Russell Crowe, as Sir Robin, plays the part with the same kind of earnest growl that was seen in Gladiator, only this time he’s engaging in PG-13 play fighting, not severing heads in Rome. Crowe plays the part as well as can be expected and while he doesn’t have the natural charisma required to play the part, still could have done a decent job given better material. Cate Blanchett is also fine as the girl power version of Maid Marion, but falls into the same pitfalls as Crowe does. It also doesn’t help that Blanchett and Crowe have almost no on screen chemistry, leading to long drawn out scenes of banter than have no spark. The main bright spot in the cast is Kevin Durand, who plays the part of Little John. Durand is the only cast member who looks as though he’s actually seen Robin Hood and plays the part with the kind of enthusiasm one would expect of the entire cast.

Notice one recurring theme in the above paragraph: story, story, story. The main nail in this film’s coffin is a plodding, meandering borefest of a story that takes two and a half hours to go nowhere. While I understand the point of setting up the “new Robin Hood”, you need to entertain the masses a bit while getting there. Rather than some swordplay and robbing from the rich, you pay $12 to see Robin Hood banter with some dead guys dad, watch Blanchett till fields and see about 5 seconds of the Sheriff of Nottingham. By the time you get to the epic final battle, you’re so busy flaking sleep crust from your eyes, you really could care less who wins or loses.

The rest of the film simply floats along this script of fail with not a life raft in sight. The direction is uninspired, the score is standard adventurer fare and the cinematography captures the gritty, muddy landscapes adequately, yet never beautifully. The cinematography was particularly puzzling as everything was cast in an ugly grayish green hue that made me, in the words of Louis Black, almost slit my wrists, just so I could see color. Gone are the green trees and lush foliage of Sherwood Forrest, only to be replaced with muck, soot and grime. This, mixed with the shoddy story and bland direction, gives the movie an overly serious and brooding tone that sucks any semblance of life from the feature, and in turn, bores the audience to tears. Maybe the eventual sequel will actually have a point or a conclusion we care about, but until then, give this film a miss. After all, it’s Robin Hood; we really didn’t need the setup in the first place.

Score – 40%

Originally Reviewed – 5/20/2010

The revolution WILL be televised…or at least shown in limited release on select screens throughout North America.

Staged, written and set in modern day Terhan, No One Knows About Persian Cats is the story of two friends searching the underground Iranian music scene for band mates in preparation for a gig in London. Trouble is, they don’t have a passport and live in a society that forbids any sort of creativity whatsoever. Along the way, they meet an eccentric promoter, meet fellow underground musicians, and discover how difficult it is to make music under the tight grip of Iranian rule.

The above synopsis is pretty much all you need to know about this film. Ninety percent of the movie is framed like this: couple goes to underground Iranian band looking for bandmates, listens to one of the band’s songs, drives around Tehran with wacky manager and repeat. The story structure is a very simple one that really doesn’t allow much in terms of character development or storyline. While there are moments of introspection, all it really consists of is, “I have a bad feeling about this” and “I don’t think we’re going to make it.” The rest of the film, aside from the end, is filled with quick cuts of poverty stricken areas of Terhan and musicians simply playing music. Luckily for the film, that’s all you really need.

The hallmark of this film is the music and the enduring spirit of those who are making it. The cast, from the leads on down, is made up entirely of real musicians from the Iranian underground music scene. This style is reminiscent of the Irish musical Once and the technique gives the film a similar feel, but has a vastly different purpose. Where Once is, at its soul, a love story, Persian Cats is a cry for freedom from oppression voiced in the music and the music is, for the most part, fantastic. Every genre from Avenged Sevenfold style hard rock to indie to hip hop is represented in this film and showcases the best the area has to offer.

Even with the excellent music, the film would’ve have been nothing but a giant Middle Eastern music video if not for the fascinating look into Iranian sub-culture and the government that threatens its very existence. According to the film, the arts are highly controlled in Iran. Everything written, created or played has to go through a Censorship Board for approval. Forget getting together with your friends to jam; in America, if the neighbors call the cops because your band is too loud, they tell you to lower it. In Iran, they throw you in jail for two months. This sense of urgency and guerilla style filmmaking gives Persian Cats its energy and makes you wonder how this film even got made, never mind seeing a stateside release. If a 10 minute jam session nets you jail time, imagine the penalty for making a feature length film about that very government.

While the film features no name actors, a threadbare plot and an ending that may leave some filmgoers a little cold, No One Knows About Persian Cats is an energetic documentary style film that succeeds solely on the spirit of the people involved and the underlying message they are trying to convey. The film speaks like a desperate cry for freedom in the midst of societal repression and hits right to the heart of anyone who can empathize with what these musicians have to go through to do what many of us take for granted. Add to the mix some excellent music played passionately by the people who wrote it and you have yourself a little indie that could and does so wonderfully.

Score – 80%

Originally Reviewed – 5/20/2010

If there’s one almost constant in the universe, it’s that sequels rarely surpass the quality of the original film. Maybe it’s the lack of freshness, maybe it’s the high expectations or maybe it’s just bad luck that drive these flicks straight to the bargain bin, but a sequel is simply a tough nut to crack. From The Matrix to Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles, sequels almost always lead to a letdown. So how did director John Favreau do with his second crack at the Iron Man franchise? In my opinion, just fraknin’ fine.

Iron Man 2 finds our beloved Tony Stark in quite a few pickles. Not only is he being pressured by the government to surrender his Iron Man weapon to the US Army, he has a mad Russian after him to avenge the “stealing” of his father’s arc reactor (Mickey Rourke), a rival industrialist looking to make a suit of his own for the military (Sam Rockwell) and a secret agency looking to recruit him, headed up by an eye patch wearing Samuel L. Jackson. Add to that a love triangle between him, Pepper Potts and his new assistant, a back stabbing best bud and all sorts of daddy issues, and you can see this film has a ton going on, with mixed results.

With a complex and muddled script, Iron Man 2 really bites off more than it can chew and the result is a thick narrative that does nothing except set up the eventual sequels. As a result, things like plot structure and character development are thrown to the wolves, creating an uneven experience. Still, Favreau knows how to direct the franchise and he does his best to connect the web of plot points as well as create some kinetically satisfying fight sequences. Even as the main cast balloons to over double the original film, Favreau does a fine job of keeping everything moving, remarkable given the bloat in the screenplay.

As for the cast, the only returning members are Downey and Gwyneth Paltrow and while Downey does his Tony Stark shtick to perfection yet again, the introduction of Scarlet Johannson as Tony’s new eye candy reduces Pepper Potts to a withering, weeping damsel in distress and a poorly acted one at that. While the script really didn’t give her much to work with, Paltrow does a shockingly bad job in the role reprisal, surprising considering how good she was in the first installment. The rest of the cast, with the exception of Sam Rockwell who is a scene stealer as the competing industrialist, just chews their lines and gets through the feature. Don Cheadle does his best with his limited screen time, Mickey Rourke was very believable yet uninteresting as the Russian madman and Johannson adds some sexiness to an otherwise bland cast of supporting characters. Again, the cast does their best with their diluted screen time but the acting quality is nowhere near the original film.

Luckily, the film holds together due to Downey’s great performance and the skilled direction of John Favreau. Without those two, this could have been a mess, but the film is a satisfying second stanza that bridges the fantastic original and the eventual sequels quite nicely. While nobody arcs here (Stark is still a loveable dick, Potts is constantly fretting, etc, etc), the film doesn’t take a step back and still provides some visceral thrills that make it an enjoyable go-round. Some reviewers have said this movie is merely a 2 hour advertisement for the sequels, and while I can see where they’re coming from, I still think the film stands up fine on its own. While it’s not the achievement the original was, Iron Man 2 works nicely as a solid start to the summer movie season.

Score – 70%

Originally Reviewed 5/10/2010

When it comes to why I leave the comfort of my cozy apartment and brave the streets of Manhattan to see a film, it all comes down to motive. Sometimes, I want to get swept up in an emotional drama, other times I want to laugh along with an audience and sometimes I simply want to watch things blow up on a big screen. When it came to Kick Ass, I just wanted to see some serious…well…ass kicking. Story, plot and acting be damned, I just wanted to give my endorphins a bit of a rush and hopefully have a good time at the flicker show. Imagine my dismay when I walked out of the movie, not disgusted, not exhilarated but thoroughly uneasy.

Kick Ass is the second feature film from director Matthew Vaughn and is a far cry from his first flick, Stardust. The story centers around a geeky comic book kid who, after getting fed up with the bullies of the world knocking him down, creates an alter ego named, not surprisingly, Kick Ass. After a few brushes with ne’er-do-wellers, often with disastrous results, Kick Ass finds himself the center of an Internet phenomenon and gardeners the attention of two “real” superheroes: Big Daddy, played wonderfully by Nicholas Cage, and Hit Girl, his 12 year old daughter. Add into the mix Red Mist, played by Christopher Mintz-Plasse, and you have yourself a decent cast to start with.

The film has a promising start as I really enjoyed the home grown superhero aspect and connected with the lead who only wanted to see what ordinary Joe Shmoes could do to make life better for the people around him. When he’s in the comic book store with his friends wondering why regular people can’t be superheroes, the film touched on something that was simple yet profound. I even excused the silly way Kick Ass gets his “powers”…again, this isn’t a documentary or anything. Unfortunately for the film, the tone drastically changed in the second and third act.

My main problem with Kick Ass isn’t with the violence, which isn’t that bad, or the action, which isn’t that intense, but it’s with the overall tone and feel. Kick Ass could have been a whole lot of fun, even with the body count, but the film gets mired in an odd desire to be everything all at once. The movie isn’t content with being a rousing yet violent comic book adaptation, with a homegrown feel. The film also wants to be dark yet teen comedy, gritty yet campy and inspiring yet shocking. And, after all that, the film STILL could have held together, somehow, someway, if it weren’t for the nasty undertones, primarily surrounding the character of Hit Girl.

Now, I know 90% of you are saying, “C’mon, she was awesome!” or “Wow, what are you, 80?” or “Time to change your Huggies, Grandpa”. Sorry, but there’s something simply not right about a 12 year old girl brutally slaying 40 henchmen, getting shot in chest by a ’38 and throwing around the F-word like it’s the word “was”, especially when there is no need for it. For the sake of Pete, there’s one scene where Hit Girl is lying flat on her back getting the snot beaten out of her by a 40 year old man. I’m all for comic violence, but that’s just mean and unsettling.

The problem is that the Hit Girl character, while very well played by Chloe Grace Mortez, is only cussing and killing up a storm for pure shock value. If the language had some connection to the story, you could excuse it, but when it’s there just to get people talking about it, it looses all validity. For example, if this was a dramatic film about a young girl living in the streets, maybe then the language would have some context, but here, it’s reduced to a Howard Stern bit. To my mind, if we’re at the point in pop culture where we need a mass murdering pre-teen to yell C U Next Tuesday to get us giggling, sorry, but I can’t get behind that.

But, it’s not all Hit Girl’s fault. The second half of the film is replete with an almost sadistic undertone that bogs down the story to the point where I just wanted it to be over. Shame to, because I really wanted to kick back with Kick Ass and enjoy the story of an everyday kid becoming more than who he his. Kick Ass is like an apple wrapped in a coating of stomach bile; there’s a center there that’s worth getting to but you have to stomach a lot of sourness before you reach it and it makes you wonder why they didn’t just omit the blech in the first place. Hopefully the eventual sequel tones down the nastiness and re-focuses as there is a lot to enjoy in this world of real life superheroes. Just would’ve been nice to enjoy it without getting smacked in the face by the random brutality.

Note: This is a solid 6 out of 10 film for me, but since I can’t honestly recommend this film to anybody, I had to mark it at 50%

Score – 50%

Originally Reviewed – 5/4/2010

Funerals are rarely funny but somehow, someone always laughs at one. Not to be Debbie Depressing, but I’ve been at a few and inevitably somebody in the back of the room starts snickering about something. Maybe it’s just a natural reaction to tragedy, but there is humor to be mined from the morbid setting of a family funeral which is where this very funny British import finds its material.

The direct brother of the recently released Chris Rock film, Death At A Funeral is a smart, silly, if not uneven farce about a funeral gone horribly wrong. Featuring an ensemble cast of very talented British actors and directed by Frank Oz (yes, the Mrs Piggy, Yoda Frank Oz), DAAF tows the line between smart relational comedy and sophomoric gross out humor and while the film sometimes dips too strongly to either side, there is a lot to laugh at in this import.

The cast itself is unilaterally great, as each character compliments this family in hilarious turmoil. From the egotistical author back from the US for the first time in ages to the dwarf who claims to have a “special relationship” to the deceased, every character has the appropriate amount of depth to go with their craziness. The role of the elderly grandfather is particularly hilarious, especially in the “bathroom scene”, which is one of those aforementioned tip the scales scenes, but still provides belly laughs.

The script is also well done, giving the comedic actors lots of room to create the funny. Dialogue is quick, witty and completely genuine while the screenplay itself, although not without its pitfalls, allows the hilarious parts of the story to really shine. While every joke doesn’t work as it should, there is enough character to this film to make it work as a whole.

The film also takes time out of the lunacy to establish character connections, cement relationships and provide just enough back story to keep this film from spiraling into nonsense. The only real downside is that the story itself is barely believable and some of the jokes take the easy way out, but again, it’s a true farce in every sense of the word, so these types of transgressions are totally acceptable.

To be fair, I can imagine a good deal of people out there shunning this film for the subject matter alone, and if that’s the case with you, fair enough. While this film isn’t a masterpiece by any stretch, it’s a breezy hour and a half that will provide some laughs, some groans and the occasional guffaw. If the trailers and reviews for the remake are leaving you cold, get out there and give this film a spin. Chances are, you wont be disappointed.

Score – 70%

Originally Reviewed – 4/15/2010

Interesting, artistic and sometimes head scratching, Toyko! is a spirited trio of films directed by three auteur directors, Michel Gondry, Leos Carax and Bong Joon-ho. As the title would suggest, all three shorts are set in Tokyo and feature a combination of slice of life drama in the big city with off beat and occasionally stunning imagery. Of the three films, one is excellent, another is visually mesmerizing and the third is a big stinking pile. Which is which…keep reading to find out!

The first film, entitled Interior Design and directed by Gondry, is the best of the three. It’s the story of a young filmmaker and his tag-along girlfriend as they try to make their way through a new life in downtown Tokyo. While the first two-thirds of the film play like a straight ahead coming of age story, the final third quickly turns into an interesting display of classic Gondry camera trickery and visual flair. The film also hits home at just the right points with a message that’s sweet and endearing. Definitely the best of the three and worth the price of admission alone.

Then comes the second film, Merde, directed by Carax and is that aforementioned stinking pile. While the film is visually interesting, its aimless story, ham-handed inner meanings and bizarre ending make it the sore spot of the trilogy. The story about a strange sewer dwelling creature causing increasing amounts of mischief through the streets of Tokyo, is a shuffling and shiftless as it’s protagonist, full of mean spirited moments, odd violence and one scene that’s downright gratuitous for no real reason. Even the visuals, which should have been this films hallmark, wear off after two minutes, leaving the viewer with 25 minutes of tedium. The final third of the film is especially painful, with over the top acting and a storyline that goes nowhere. Not worth seeing, at all.

Luckily for Tokyo!, the final film, Shaking Tokyo, directed by Bong Joon-ho, is a return to tone and form for the trilogy. The very sweet story of a Japanese shut-in who, after falling for the local delivery girl, decides to step out for the first time in ages, is a sweet and artfully directed short. The most mesmerizing of the three films, Shaking takes the viewer on a wonderful ride through the streets of Tokyo in a stylish and beautifully realized way. While this is least “visual” of the three films, this one connects the most on an emotional level. Great work by a true artist.

As a whole, Tokyo! is a fine example of true artists stretching their minds and creativity, for better or for worst. While the second film really doesn’t do the other two justice, Tokyo! Is still a bright oasis in a land of bland filmmaking, and should be checked out by fans of the genre. Luckily for the film as a whole, one common thread exists and that’s the city itself featured as a central character. All three films do a great job of showcasing the different facets and fold of Tokyo and is worth a watch for that reason alone.

Score – 70%