#Hollis Mulwray

[blackcur-rants]

I think part of what makes "Chinatown" such a heartbreaking and devastating movie is that...it honestly starts off as kind of a comedy.

Like seriously, there are a lot of good jokes at the start of that movie. There's the scene where the farmers let their sheep loose in Mulwray's presentation on the dam. There's the scene where Jake is sitting by the pipe and gets hit in the face by water. There's the scene at the mansion where the doorman (played by James Hong if I remember correctly, btw) just casually shuts the door in JAke's face like he's just some annoying salesman. There's poor Jake being basically just a glorified marriage counsellor who gets wrapped up in ridiculously convoluted city politics like a blue-collar Ned Stark. And there's also the kind-of offensive but also dang thematically important joke that Jake hears from his barber and then repeats to customers at his office. It's a pretty funny and witty screenplay for that first half or so.

And then the big swerve happens. And everything changes and is recontextualised, to the point where you can easily see Jake hearing the racist joke from his barber and then repeating it to his customers as a metaphor for generational cycles of violence.

And that's all I'm saying.

[tilbageidanmark]

Movies I watched this Week #108 (Year 3 / Week 4):

Un Flic, Jean-Pierre Melville’s last moody flick, a French Heist Noir. With Alain Delon playing the cop this time instead of the crook, and Catherine Deneuve just showing her beautiful self. A minimalist exercise in style and genre. 4/10.

🍿 

7 more by Polanski:

🍿 His genial first film, Knife in the water, as strong as some of cinema’s best debut features (‘Citizen Kane’, ‘Sex, lies and videotapes’, ‘Badlands’, ‘Breathless’, ‘The Iron Giant’, ‘Margin call’, ‘Who’s afraid of Virginia Woolf’, Etc). Co-written by Jerzy Skolimowski (Whose ‘EO’ I just saw last week, and whose complete canon I am going to pursue). A very tense psychological power game with only three players, which surprisingly does not end in violence. A terrific saxophone score. 8/10.

🍿 Venus in Fur, a surprising discovery! Featuring only two characters on an actual Parisian stage, a playwright who looks like a young Polanski, and his real-life wife Emmanuelle Seigner, as an actress who shows up late for an audition. it’s an engaging erotic power-play, a masochistic love story, and it deals with repression, domination, role playing, degradation and cross-dressing. A perfectly-dark subject matter for this brooding director. 9/10.

🍿 For his next number, Polanski directed his wife in another tight two-hander, Based on a True Story, with similar slow-burning psychological threats. This time about a depressed writer who is being befriended by Eva Green, a super obsessive jealous admirer. Co-written with Olivier Assayas, with some inside literary throwaway lines about Amos oz , Cormac McCarthy and Don DeLillo. 6/10.

🍿 First watch: The Pianist. I found the first 1/3 of the film artificial and glossed out in the worst-traditional Hollywood way: Everything was ‘too nice’, and too clean, and not horrible enough. Later in the ghetto and toward the end as Warsaw gets destroyed, it became a bit more “real”, if you can call it that. I can’t stand most movies about the holocaust, because they obviously have to smooth things out, make them palatable. Lanzmann’s ‘Shoah’ was an exception. Coincidentally, I saw it on Friday, on International Holocaust Remembrance Day.

(Also, how did they shave in the holocaust?...)

🍿 Both ‘The Pianist’ from Warsaw and his Parisian The Tenant were made in English, which made it impossible to take them seriously. The tenant is the last of Polanski’s “Apartment Trilogy”, but it doesn’t compare to ‘Repulsion’ or ‘Rosemary’s Baby’. I can’t remember how original were the themes of sexual guilt, anxiety, cross-dressing and paranoia in 1976, but they surely didn’t age well.

🍿 “...It won't hold. I won't build it. It's that simple - I am not making that kind of mistake twice...”

To me, Chinatown is one of the ‘Best films of all time’. It’s like a song I can listen to again and again and again.

The quintessential LA film, the haunting nostalgia to an era that existed only on celluloid. A perfect dark Noir on every level: the perfect screenplay, the masterful sound and score, even the character names are iconic, Lieutenant Lou Escobar, Russ Yelburton, Hollis Mulwray, Noah Cross, Emma Dill. And Jake “Gits” who appears in every scene and gradually being pulled into the tragic mystery together with us, not realizing that he is played for a fool. This film is about duality, (Sister/daughter, money/power, water/drought, the city and the valley) and about ‘Eyes that are Flawed’. Always 10/10.

🍿 I was planning on seeing all of the Polanski movies I haven’t seen yet, but I had to stop after The Fearless Vampire Killers. Good for him for meeting Sharon Tate during the shooting of this lame Central European vampire ‘parody’, but it took me 3 days to finish it, it was so so tedious. 1/10.

If I were to write a new vampire comedy today, I would call it ‘Garlic’.

🍿

“Life is brief; fall in love, maidens, before the crimson bloom fades from your lips . . .”  Ikiru, Kurosawa’s timeless retelling of Tolstoy’s ‘Death of Ivan Ilyich’ about the ‘meaning of life’. A terminally-ill salaryman realizes that he never really lived.

I plan on taking a deep dive into Takashi Shimura‘s vast portfolio. 🍿 

3 with Alba Rohrwacher, 2 by Paolo Genovese:

🍿 The pupils, a short by Alice Rohrwacher (who directed some episodes of Elena Ferrante‘s ‘My brilliant Friend’). A somehow-related topic to ‘Friend’, it tells of a group of young girls at a Catholic boarding school during the war, and stars Alice’s sister Alba as the Mother Superior. The day after watching it, I was surprised to read that it was nominated for the 2023 Oscars!

🍿...”How many couples would split up if they looked at each other’s phones?”...

Perfect strangers is a perfectly acceptable drama about a group of middle class friends who meet during an eclipse of the moon for their regular dinner. But this time they decide to play a game, and leave their phones in the middle of the table. It’s dark, dialogue-rich, witty and intelligent. 7/10.

This movie has a completely unique history though: Since 2016, it had been re-made into 24 versions, in 24 countries - I never heard of any other movie like that!

🍿 Genovese next metaphorical film, The Place, from the following year, had one of the most unusual stories I ever saw on film. It all takes place at a small cafe where an ordinary looking man meets with various people, and grants them any wish they have, if they perform an arbitrary task he assign them. Yes, it’s the story of Faust, and yes, apparently is is based on a concept from an earlier Canadian TV-show, but I found it absolutely fascinating. 9/10. 

🍿 

Another nominee for this year’s Oscars, My year of dicks. A feminist animation short about a 15-year-old girl in the early 90′s who is determined to lose her virginity. Explicit, real talk and original about the first sexual experience from a girl’s point of view.

🍿

2 award-winners from Finland:

🍿 Grand Prix winner at Cannes, Compartment Number 6 is different: It starts in a claustrophobic, uncomfortable and compact sleeping car train, which a Finnish woman has to share with a gruff and unfriendly Russian miner. This is the first film I ever hoped to see from the bleak, arctic desert of Murmansk. It ends up literally at the edge of the world, with wide and endless frozen landscapes all around. 8/10. 

🍿 The White Reindeer, a 1952 folk horror tale about a Sami woman, wife of a arctic reindeer herder, who turns into a witch in order to make her new husband attracted to her. Not too interesting.

🍿

You people, a new rom-com. It started frantically in a upper-middle-class, plugged-in Brentwood synagogue on Yom Kippur with super hipster Jonah Hill’s family that made me wanna throw up. But soon it turned into a super-sweet romance of super-sensitive Jewish Hill who falls for Eddie Murphy’s black daughter, and sometimes-funny update to ‘Guess who’s coming to dinner’ 55 years later. Eventually it fizzled out into a typical Netflix-level sitcom. 3/10.

🍿   

2 unrelated depression musicals:

🍿 "Never again will I allow women to wear my dresses!”

Israel Beilin’s (Irving Berlin’s) musical Top Hat with Frederick Austerlitz (Fred Astaire) and Virginia Katherine McMath (Ginger Rogers). Wonderful high-society dance numbers (mostly in single-shot) in great rooms with 20 ft. ceilings. (Photo Above). 🍿 Re-watching Pennies from Heaven, a strange and uneven musical soap opera by Herbaert Ross. The musical numbers with Steve Martin,Bernadette Peters and Christopher Walken lip-syncing and dancing in Busby Berkeley-style extravaganza, were marvelous. But the depressing drama about a drifting, amoral and horny sheet music salesman who falls in and out of love with a mousy teacher turned prostitute was appalling. It does re-create (nicely, but for no apparent reason) Edward Hopper’s Nighthawks in one scene, and also uses a scene from Fred Astaire and Ginger Rogers’ ‘Follow the fleet’ as background, in another.

🍿 

Re-watching the revenge flick Law Abiding Citizen with non-actor Gerard Butler. I remembered it as a technologically-sophisticated ‘fight for justice’ story. But no: It was just sadistic entertainment for sadists, which opened with a brutal child-killing and Clockwork Orange rape, and and continued from there. 2/10.

🍿 

Stand up with Jimmy O. Yang: Good Deal. Leaning hard into his hapless Jian Yang character from ‘Silicon Valley”.

Bonus: 25 minutes of The best of Jian-Yang.

🍿 

Throw-back to the art project: 

Adora in Chinatown (again).

🍿

(My complete movie list is here)

[kinonostalgie]

Chinatown (1974), directed by Roman Polanski and starring Jack Nicholson and Faye Dunaway, is a landmark neo-noir film that masterfully blends mystery, crime, and political intrigue. Set in 1930s Los Angeles, the film explores themes of corruption, power, and moral ambiguity, making it one of the most influential films of its genre.

The story follows private detective J.J. “Jake” Gittes (Nicholson), who is hired by a woman claiming to be Evelyn Mulwray (Dunaway) to investigate her husband, Hollis Mulwray, a prominent city water engineer. Gittes quickly uncovers a web of lies, as the real Evelyn Mulwray reveals that the woman who hired him was an imposter. As Gittes delves deeper, he uncovers a massive conspiracy involving the manipulation of Los Angeles’ water supply, political corruption, and deeply buried family secrets.

Jack Nicholson’s portrayal of Gittes is a career-defining performance, capturing the sharp wit and cynicism of a private investigator who gradually realizes he’s in over his head. Faye Dunaway gives a haunting performance as Evelyn, a woman with a tragic past, while John Huston’s turn as the menacing Noah Cross adds a chilling presence to the film.

Polanski’s direction, combined with Robert Towne’s Oscar-winning screenplay, creates an atmosphere of unease and inevitability. The film’s famous line, “Forget it, Jake. It’s Chinatown,” encapsulates its bleak view of systemic corruption, where power and greed triumph over justice. Jerry Goldsmith’s haunting, minimalist score adds to the film’s noir tone.

Chinatown is a complex, meticulously crafted film that exposes the darker side of human nature and institutional corruption. Its morally ambiguous ending and intricate plot twists have solidified it as a timeless classic, influencing both noir and mystery genres for decades.

[introvertguide]

Chinatown (1974); AFI #21

The next movie that we reviewed was a very dark example of neo-noir film directed by Roman Polanski, Chinatown (1974). This film was a throwback to very dark crime thrillers that reflected the outlook of a Great Depression followed by world war. Polanski was experiencing a very dark period since he had just moved to America to get married and immediately lost his wife and unborn son in a horrific murder. The film was well received by critics and audiences, but it could not stand against the award winning juggernaut which was The Godfather Part 2. Polanski’s film was nominated for 11 Academy awards but only took one home for best original screenplay, a category that didn’t include The Godfather Part 2. It is hard to describe how incredibly down beat this film is without spoiling too early, so let me give the breakdown with the standard warning:

SPOILER ALERT!!! THIS IS A MURDER MYSTERY SO THE PLOT IS ABOUT TO BE WELL SPOILED!!! IF YOU WANT TO SEE THE FILM FIRST, NOW IS THE TIME TO STEP AWAY!!! COME BACK AFTER YOU SEE THE FILM!!!

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

In 1937, a woman identifying herself as Evelyn Mulwray hires private investigator J. J. "Jake" Gittes (Jack Nicholson) to follow her husband, Hollis Mulwray, the chief engineer at the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power. Gittes tails him, hears him publicly refuse to create a new reservoir that would be unsafe, and shoots photographs of him with a young woman, which are published on the front page of the following day's paper. Back at his office, Gittes is confronted by a woman who informs him she is the real Evelyn Mulwray (Faye Dunaway) and that he can expect a lawsuit.

Realizing he was set up, Gittes assumes that Hollis Mulwray is the real target. Before he can question him, Lieutenant Lou Escobar fishes Mr. Mulwray, drowned, from a reservoir. Under retainer to Mrs. Mulwray, Gittes investigates with suspicions of murder and notices that although there is a drought, huge quantities of water are being released from the reservoir every night. Gittes is warned off by Water Department Security Chief Claude Mulvihill and a henchman (Roman Polanski) who slashes one of Gittes' nostrils. Back at his office, Gittes receives a call from Ida Sessions, who identifies herself as the imposter Mrs. Mulwray. She is afraid to identify her employer but tells Gittes to check the day's obituaries.

Gittes learns that Mulwray was once the business partner of Evelyn's wealthy father, Noah Cross (John Huston). Over lunch at his personal club, Cross warns Gittes that he does not understand the forces at work, and offers to double Gittes' fee to search for Mulwray's missing mistress. At the hall of records, Gittes discovers that much of the Northwest Valley has recently changed ownership. Investigating the valley, he is attacked by angry landowners who believe he is an agent of the water department attempting to force them out by sabotaging their water supply.

Gittes deduces that the water department is drying up the land so it can be bought at a reduced price and that Mulwray was murdered when he discovered the plan. He discovers that a recently deceased retirement home resident is one of the valley's new landowners and seemingly purchased the property a week after his death. Gittes and Evelyn bluff their way into the home and confirm that the real-estate deals were surreptitiously completed in the names of several of the home's residents. Their visit is interrupted by the suspicious retirement-home director, who has called Mulvihill.

After fleeing Mulvihill and his thugs, Gittes and Evelyn hide at Evelyn's house and sleep together. During the night, Evelyn gets a phone call and must leave suddenly; she warns Gittes that her father is dangerous. Gittes follows Evelyn's car to a house, where he spies her through the windows comforting Mulwray's mistress, Katherine. He accuses Evelyn of holding the woman against her will, but she says Katherine is her sister.

The next day, an anonymous call draws Gittes to Ida Sessions' apartment, where he finds her murdered and Escobar waiting for Gittes' arrival. Escobar tells him the coroner's report found salt water in Mulwray's lungs, indicating that he did not drown in the fresh water of the reservoir. Escobar suspects Evelyn of the murder and tells Gittes to produce her quickly. At Evelyn's mansion, Gittes finds her servants packing her things. He realizes her garden pond is salt water and discovers a pair of bifocals in it. He confronts Evelyn about Katherine, whom Evelyn now claims is her daughter. After Gittes slaps her (a lot), she tells him that Katherine is her sister and her daughter; her father raped her when she was 15. She says that the glasses are not Mulwray's, as he did not wear bifocals.

Gittes arranges for the women to flee to Mexico and instructs Evelyn to meet him at her butler's home in Chinatown. He summons Cross to the Mulwray home to settle their deal. Cross admits his intention to annex the Northwest Valley into the City of Los Angeles, then irrigate and develop it. Gittes accuses Cross of murdering Mulwray. Cross has Mulvihill take the bifocals at gunpoint, and they force Gittes to drive them to the women. When they reach the Chinatown address, the police are already there and detain Gittes. When Cross approaches Katherine, Evelyn shoots him in the arm and starts to drive away with Katherine. The police open fire, killing Evelyn. Cross clutches Katherine and leads her away, while Escobar orders Gittes released. Lawrence Walsh, one of Gittes' associates, tells him: "Forget it, Jake. It's Chinatown."

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

I really cannot emphasize how much of a bummer ending this film has. It is right up there (down there) with Sophie’s Choice. A man who pays to dump water so that he can purchase cheap farm land, kills his partner who threatens to tell, and rapes his own 15-year-old daughter is the antagonist. In the end, he is released to take custody of his young granddaughter without punishment after the police shoot the daughter that he raped. The investigator who tried to help and solved the mystery is left with no say and a slit nostril for his troubles. Polanski later said in interviews that he wanted to emphasize the futility of trying to find justice in Los Angeles. Both his life and this movie really proved that as a fact. It is funny that the screenwriter who won the academy award wanted Cross to die and Evelyn to live, but Polanski insisted and the dark tone is what pushed the award in their favor.

There was some discussion about finding an actor that was willing to be the lead with a bandaged face or prosthetic injury for most of the movie. It was still all about face time and dialogue, so most lead actors didn’t want to cover up their face. Nicholson was not actually known for his good looks as much as other actors, so he was more willing to take on the role. Actually, it was Nicholson who wanted to work on a project with Polanski and suggested the script in the first place. Also, Nicholson really connected with Polanski at the time and was not afraid to play dark roles. Jon Huston was not as keen on the heavy pedophile incest role since he had a lovely young daughter of his own (actress Angelica Huston). It turned out to be a good choice for all the actors involved.

Something that came up during the viewing with my housemates was reactions to the scene when Jack Nicholson is slapping Faye Dunaway when she is admitting that the girl she visits is both her sister and her daughter. She keeps alternating between “she’s my sister” and “she’s my daughter” and each statement is punctuated with a slap in the face by Jack Nicholson. It is supposed to be deeply serious and a major reveal in the movie, but we were laughing so hard at the absurdity. It was truly unrealistic and more of a trope of film noir than anything else (slapping a hysterical woman). It truly was a throwback to 40s and 50s style Hollywood and some of the standards of film story telling at that time were a bit silly. 

I have reviewed this move in more ways than I thought because I realized on this viewing that the video game L.A. Noir borrows very heavily from this film. So many aspects, from the locations to the situations to the soundtrack, were all put into the video game. I have spent many hours of my life playing through that game a number of times and I am shocked each time. I am curious if Rockstar Games had to pay any money to Roman Polanski for such a close similarity to the film? I tried to look it up but didn’t find anything, so probably not. 

So should this film by on the AFI to 100? For sure. It is an Old Hollywood story about even older Hollywood. It stands out as one of the darkest endings that I have ever experienced. It has major star power and surrounded by amazing stories of Hollywood. Would I recommend it? I sure would. It is a great trip around old Hollywood with some of America’s greatest actors. I think just as interesting is the story of Roman Polanski (who I did an article on as well) and why his head space was so dark during the production of this film. Definitely worth a watch and a background deep dive.

[sixtysecondspoilers]

Murdered utilities exec and wife to Faye Dunaway, Hollis Mulwray’s “mistress” is actually his “daughter” and sister-in-law, ‘Katherine’, owing to the fact that Dunaway was raped by her father, John Huston, and carried the child to term. Huston’s also involved in shady land dealings in 1930s LA.

[tonybino29]

Chinatown (1974)

Chinatown, directed Roman Polanski in 1974. It’s a great 70's noire film. It is visually, emotionally and intellectually engaging throughout. Los Angeles in the early-1930s. A private detective, JJ Gittes, played by Jack Nicholson, is hired by a woman to investigate her husband, as she suspects he is having an affair. Her husband, Hollis Mulwray, is the chief water engineer for the city of Los Angeles. Soon after Gittes delivers the photos that seem to confirm her suspicions, he meets the real wife of the man. Intrigued, Gittes investigates further. Then Mr Mulwray turns up dead.

Chinatown clever, slow-burning Drama/mystery. Jack Nicholson, Faye Dunaway, and John Huston deliver great performances. This film not only has some really great twists and turns during its amazing story but Nicholson shines on this film. Some may consider Chinatown to have one of the best and most memorable ending scenes in film but in away it seems and feels abrupt, but then it really wouldn't be a noire film right? The film brings forth multiple questions on the stance of cynical America in it's decade. It  examines deep, convoluted questions while still pacing itself at an enjoyable pace and with the engaging characters.

Chinatown is a 130 minutes and sometimes slow and heavy but absolutely worth watching. Although Chinatown is fanatic, its not perfect. It loses momentum towards the end and focuses more on the sub-plot rather then the main plot. The sub-plot is important element of the film also though. The film may need a couple viewers to really absorb all its details in depth but overall, anyone into dramas or thrillers should watch this movie.    

May 10th, 2019 5:20pm

[dizigang]

Çin Mahallesi

Hollis Mulwray 1930’larda Los Angeles belediyesinin su dağıtım departmanında baş mühendistir. Ida Sessions, polis kökenli özel dedektif J.J. 'Jake' Gittes’e kendisini Mulwray’in eşi Evelyn olarak tanıtır ve onun bir başka kadınla birlikte olduğundan şüphelendiğini söyleyerek onu takip ettirir. Gittes, Mulwray’in çekici bir kadınla birlikte fotoğraflarını çeker ve dava kapanır. Bir süre sonra Mulwr... source https://dizigang.com/film/cin-mahallesi

[deliciousengineercollector--blog]

Những bộ phim trinh thám hay nhất mọi thời đại

New Post has been published on https://wikicachlam.com/nhung-bo-phim-trinh-tham-hay-nhat-moi-thoi-dai/

Những bộ phim trinh thám hay nhất mọi thời đại

Trinh thám là thể loại có sự lôi cuốn kì lạ đối với nhiều khán giả, những tình tiết trong phim sẽ lôi cuốn và kịch tính đến phút cuối cùng. Cùng điểm qua những bộ phim trinh thám hay nhất mọi thời đại hấp dẫn lôi cuốn mọi khán giả.

Phim trinh thám hay nhất mọi thời đại

The Silence Of The Lambs

Tựa đề Việt là Sự im lặng của bầy cừu, phim kể về cô gái mất tích liên quan đến một kẻ giết người hàng loạt. Người có thể làm vụ án sáng tỏ là tên tù nhân tâm thần, chuyên ăn thịt người Hannibal Lecter (Anthony Hopkins ). Cô nhân viên Clarice phải làm nhiệm vụ khai thác thông tin từ tên Hannibal. Bắt đầu từ đây nhiều bí ẩn đã dần sáng tỏ.

Bộ phim trinh thám này đã đạt nhiều giải Oscar.

The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo

Tựa đề Việt Cô Gái Có Hình Xăm Rồng là phim trinh thám của Mỹ chuyển thể từ tiểu thuyết cùng tên nhà văn Thụy Điển Stieg Larsson, nội dung phim đó là sự truy tìm sự thật đằng sau vụ mất tích cô gái 40 năm trước.

Phim The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo đã được đề cử 5 giải Oscar và nhiều thành công vang dội trên toàn cầu về thể loại phim trinh thám.

Chinatown – Phố Tàu

Thuộc thể loại phim trinh thám phá án gay cấn,  phim xoay quanh gia đình Hollis Mulwray gia đình giàu có. Giả vờ là người vợ Evelyn của Hollis, tên Ida Sessions nhờ thám tử tư J. J. Jake Gitters (Jack Nicholson đóng) điều tra về người chồng ngoại tình.

Jake chụp nhiều bức ảnh Hollis bên cạnh thiếu nữ trẻ. Khi Hollis bị giết, Jake điều tra vụ án này và trong quá trình điều tra đó có nhiều sự việc bí mật được hé lộ.

Trance

Tựa đề Việt mê cung kí ức, bối cảnh diễn ra đó là vụ cướp Simon nhân viên bị va đập đầu và bị mất trí. Chỉ có Simon mới biết nơi cất giữ bức tranh giá trị. Anh đã bị bắt cóc nhưng không thể lấy thông tin từ anh nên đã nhờ Elizabeth – nhà thôi mi��n.

Bộ phim là hành trình lục lọi kí ức để đi tìm những món đồ giá trị.

Gone Baby Gone – đứa bé mất tích

Cô bé sống ở vùng Boston bị mất tích, cảnh sát điều tra nhưng không có kết quả. Dì của cô bé nhờ trợ giúp của một thám tử tư. Thám tử đã đặt danh tiếng và cuộc sống không chỉ anh mà còn nhiều người thân vào vòng nguy hiểm.

Cuộc truy tìm để lại nhiều tình huống gay cấn, hấp dẫn cho khán giả.

True Detective – Thám Tử Chân Chính

Thám tử chân chính bộ phim truyền hình trinh thám Mỹ hay và có nhiều mùa (Season) khác nhau.  Trong mùa đầu tiên phim kể về cuộc truy tìm kẻ sát nhân ở Louisiana,  cuộc truy đuổi bộ đôi thám tử địa phương (McCounaughey và Harrelson) truy tìm tên sát nhân giết người trong 17 năm.

Phim từng được công chiếu trên HBO.

Zodiac – Kẻ giết người hoàn hảo

Trong thời gian dài kẻ giết người hàng loạt biết đến tên Zodiac khiến ai cũng phải sống trong sỡ hãi. Hắn gửi thư chế nhạo cảnh sát tố cáo sự vô dụng của cảnh sát.

Hai nhân viên Paul Avery và Robert Graysmith tham gia điều tra tung tích hắn nhưng bắt được hắn không phải là việc đơn giản. Quá trình điều tra và tóm gọn hắn diễn ra trong kịch tính.

The Da Vinci Code

Mật mã Da Vinci dòng phim kinh điển về đề tài trinh thám, phim xoay quanh âm mưu của Giáo hội công giáo nhằm che giấu sự thật về Chúa Giê-su. Người quản lý bảo tàng Louvre bị ám sát, bên cạnh thi thể ông ta có 1 đoạn mật mã và Robert Langdon (Tom Hanks) chuyên gia nghiên cứu biểu tượng học của Harvard đang trở thành đối tượng bị nhắm đến là kẻ chủ mưu.

Hành trình đi tìm nguyên nhân cái chết và những âm mưu đáng sợ bên trong sẽ lôi cuốn mọi khán giả.

Mulholland Drive

Cô gái sau tai nạn bị mất trí nhớ. Cô lấy tên Rita, mặc dù có cuộc sống mới nhưng quá khứ vẫn đeo đuổi cô.

Những người trong chiếc xe của cô họ có bị sao không? tại sao người bạn Betty của cô lại xuất hiện lúc này, bộ phim có kết thúc đặc biệt mà đủ khiến bạn phải bất ngờ.

The Number 23

Số 23 bí ẩn là phim kể về gia đình Walter Sparrow (Jim Carrey) cuộc sống yên bình với cô vợ và con ngoan ngoãn, cứ thế đến khi anh phát hiện cuốn tiểu thuyết  The Number 23.

Walter bị cuốn vào tiểu thuyết và nhiều rắc rối nảy sinh, những nội dung tiểu thuyết dần dần ám ảnh anh và gây ra nhiều nỗi kinh hoàng.

Những bộ phim trinh thám hay nhất mọi thời đại bên trên chắc chắn là những bộ phim mà bạn nên xem về thể loại trinh thám, hình sự cực kỳ hấp dẫn, kịch tính mà chỉ xem đến phút cuối cùng bạn mới tìm ra kết quả. Chúc các bạn xem phim vui vẻ.

[mourningsickness]

Claire Vaye Watkins’s ‘Gold Fame Citrus’

Claire Vaye Watkins’s debut novel, Gold Fame Citrus (Quercus, 2015), opens on an arid Laurel Canyon, whipped by unrelenting ‘crazy-making’ Santa Ana winds. A dry place that has birthed a host ‘countercultural’ figures – from Joni Mitchell and Jim Morrison to Marilyn Manson –, for nearly two decades “passing through” Laurel Canyon was a compulsory pitstop on the road towards superstardom. It has been mythologised in various cultural iterations – most famously Graham Nash’s ‘Our House’, written about then-lover Joni Mitchell, whose own (better) 1970 album Ladies of the Canyon also drew obvious inspiration from the neighbourhood [1].

More troublingly, the Canyon was also the setting for the brutal murder of silent film actor, Ramon Novarro on 30th October 1968. His killers, brothers Robert and Tommy ‘Scott’ Ferguson, then aged just 22 and 17 respectively, entered his home under the pretext of soliciting their sexual services, believing a vast sum of money to be hidden somewhere in the house. Novarro, a Mexican Catholic, had been one of MGM’s leading Latino stars during the 1920s and a romantic idol, having starred opposite Joan Crawford, Greta Garbo and Myrna Loy. His homosexuality remained a closely-kept secret throughout his career (Louis B. Mayer reportedly attempted to coerce him into a “lavender marriage”, which he refused), and was the cause of much internal struggle in an era when success was contingent on the presentation of normative sexuality. Then in his late 60s, Novarro had a history of arranging for prostitutes to visit his Canyon home for sex and companionship. The Fergusons obtained his number from a previous guest.

Over dinner, Novarro read the brothers’ palms; during their trial the pair proclaimed him to be a lousy fortune-teller. He was subjected to several hours of torture intended to extort the location of the money from him. Eventually, the pair left the house with 20 dollars retrieved from his bathrobe pocket, leaving Novarro to choke to death on his own blood [2]. These sinister events formed a counterpoint to the Manson Family murders of 1969, which took place roughly a year later, in Laurel Canyon’s northern counterpart – that “senseless-killing neighbourhood” Haight Ashbury [3]. Though the canyon’s entanglement with celebrity soured, it remains a popular residential location. Google informs me that, today, the area is still favoured by stars such as Moby and George Clooney. Both keep homes there.

I read Gold, Fame, Citrus not long after having read Joan Didion’s The White Album (Simon & Schuster, 1979) for the first time, which perhaps explains why I was suffering from a bout of “murder mind” [4]. One of its essays, ‘Holy Water’ takes as its focus the complex, sprawling networks of dams and aqueducts that keep Los Angeles county in water. In it, Didion (a Sacramento native) visits the Operations Control Center for the California State Water Project, one of numerous government agencies responsible for shifting the ‘trillion gallons’ of water that are pumped across the state each week. Here, she writes: ‘Some of us who live in arid parts of the world think about water with a reverence others might find excessive. The water I will draw tomorrow from my tap in Malibu is today crossing the Mojave Desert from the Colorado River, and I like to think about exactly where that water is. The water I will drink tonight in a restaurant in Hollywood is by now well down the Los Angeles Aqueduct from the Owens River, and I also like to think about exactly where that water is’ [5].

At the time of reading, I found this essay vaguely anticlimactic, following as it does the incendiary piece from which Didion’s book takes its title. As someone who lives in a damp English climate, her preoccupation with the bio-political regulation of water supply across the state of California felt alien to me. Coming from a place where water has always felt abundant, I couldn’t fathom the scale of these operations, nor could I place Didion’s strange anxiety. Despite the glut of climate fictions I’ve encountered, I found it hard to imagine what drought might actually look like. It felt implausible in London, a city where the gravest threat it had posed was the hosepipe ban of my childhood summers, or the ugly reservoir grazing the stretch of motorway on the way to my grandmother’s house. Reading Vaye Watkins’s climate dystopia – with its vision of a west coast drained even of groundwater – brought Didion’s essay, along with L.A,'s broader history of precarity, into stark focus.

Doubtless Watkins, herself raised in the Mojave Desert, has also read ‘Holy Water’. Drawing on the ‘Water Wars’ of the 1920s for her own novel’s casting of the near-future, she reveals a similar preoccupation with how California keeps itself liquid. The Water Wars began following the construction of a 233 mile aqueduct in 1913, which saw the Owens River forcibly diverted towards a reservoir in the San Fernando Valley [6]. Following the project’s completion, the aqueduct guzzled so much water that Owens Valley, known formerly as ‘The Switzerland of California’, was effectively transformed into a desert, stoking rebellion among local farmers and ranchers, who sabotaged part of the system in 1924, laying dynamite at the Alabama Gates [7]. This inheritance is made explicit in the book’s preface, which refers to the words spoken by pioneering engineer William Mulholland over his finished project: ‘There it is. Take it’.

Hollywood, for its own part, has already mined the Water Wars narrative. Roman Polanski’s 1974 noir classic Chinatown is loosely based on legal disputes that were still ongoing in 1970, following the LADWP’s construction of an aqueduct in Inyo County that stood in direct contravention of groundwater protections. Indeed, the film’s first victim, Hollis Mulwray, is purportedly based on Mulholland (if you listen closely, you may still be able to hear the producers riffing on those names). Ironically, the film is also tangentially connected to Watkins’s novel. Her father, Paul, was a member of Charlie Manson’s notorious ‘Family’, though he left shortly before the murder of Polanski’s pregnant wife Sharon Tate, later going on to testify in court.

                                                             *

When we first encounter Gold Fame Citrus’s two central protagonists, Luz and Ray, holed up in the former mansion of a Hollywood starlet, we are also encountering this history. Marginalised former residents of California – descended from the feckless grifters responsible for the ‘failed experiment’ of the state – are now known derogatorily as ‘Mojavs’ (GFC, 70). Signs on elementary schools read: ‘MOJAVS NOT WELCOME. NO WORK FOR MOJAVS. MOJAVS KEEP OUT’ (GFC, 23). Those who have chosen not to ‘evac’, remaining behind in Los Angeles, are plagued by a feeling of ‘sostalgia’, a term coined by Glenn Albrecht to describe the alienation and distress brought on by environmental change that lies outside inhabitants’ control [8]. The “good vibes” of LA have endured, if in mutated form. Venice Beach has become a hotspot for raves, but also for black-market trading – of blueberries, Ovaltine, all-cotton socks and other elusive commodities.

Luz and Ray’s days are for the most part consumed with trivial tasks that elide the quiet desperation of their circumstances. Even in this carnivalesque nightmare, traditional gender roles seem to prevail: Ray digs out the ‘shitting hole’ in their backyard; procures crates of stale ration cola; kills a prairie dog that winds up in the library; while Luz (a former model) naps and plays dress-up in the starlet’s abandoned closet. In an effort to shake up this mundanity, they attend a ‘raindance’ on Venice Beach where they encounter a small, pale-haired toddler whose ‘people’ radiate bad vibes. Between them, they make a snap decision to (benevolently) kidnap her, and return to the canyon. They call the ‘baby’ (infantilised because she remains curiously underdeveloped throughout) Ig, after one of the strange sounds she makes. Fearing retribution from Ig’s ‘people’ – a disparate band of punks, seemingly not including her parents – they head east on the advice of a former comrade, Lonnie, whose compound the couple have left on bad terms (Luz having fucked Lonnie, out of obliging boredom rather than actual desire).

When they run out of gas, somewhere on a desert trail flanked by jagged salt-rock formations, Ray heads out to find help. Uttering the haunting last words “I’ll be right back”, he leaves Luz and Ig on the backseat of the oven-like car (GFC, 102). Here, the novel – along with the couple – splits. We follow Luz into the Amargosa Sea (a sprawling, hostile ocean of sand ‘blown off the Central Valley and the Great Plains) and leave Ray for dead (later it emerges he has been holed up in a subterranean prison complex, somewhere in what was formerly New Mexico) (GFC, 72). Though the Amargosa is reportedly lifeless, ‘a dead swath’, it is the source of their salvation (GFC, 72). Their rescuers form part of a lone, nomadic community, a gaggle of lost souls who have dedicated themselves to the dune sea and to their “prophet” leader, Levi. ‘Descended from a long line of dowsers’, Levi is apparently able to glean water from sand, though his methods of extraction are later revealed to be deeply suspect (GFC, 72). The cultish sway of his charisma is, clearly, reminiscent of Manson. In this aspect, Watkins’s novel reminded me of Emma Cline’s wildly successful debut The Girls (Chatto & Windus, 2016), which rehashes many of the same tropes. Like Manson, Levi himself proves to be the worst kind of mirage – an abusive narcissist preying on the vulnerability and soft-mindedness of others.

The encroaching desert, we are repeatedly told, ‘curates’ its inhabitants. Luz, already born a figurehead, has been “chosen". In another life the adult Luz was ‘Baby Dunn’. A propaganda initiative cooked up by the Bureau of Conservation, she was adopted as a symbol at birth, her life and its milestones chronicled by public media. She retains a baby book, stuffed full of newspaper clippings: “Governor Signs HSB 4579; Every Swimming Pool in California to Be Drained Before Baby Dunn Is Old Enough to Take Swimming Lessons”; “Berkeley Hydrologists: Without Evacs Baby Dunn Will Die of Thirst by 24” (GFC, 11). As the ‘fame’ of its title would suggest, the novel is preoccupied with the cult of celebrity, itself a form of self-destructiveness often wilfully sought out. The hardback cover resembles a peach melba, metallic pinks and white leaking over a desert-yellow background, invoking the pastel palettes favoured by Paris Hilton and Lindsay Lohan in the early 2000s. (Tellingly, its lead endorsement is a quotation from Vanity Fair). Though Watkins depicts a canyon bereft of celebrity residents, this “trashy” aesthetic nonetheless gestures towards the car-crash lifestyle that often accompanies certain brands of live-fast-die-young fame.

Like the Laurel Canyon, the Amargosa also spits out new forms of life. If our own species has struggled to adjust, then animals in Watkins’s novel appear more amenable to life in the scorched world. Midway through the novel there is an interpolated bestiary, a compendium of the Dune Sea’s flora and fauna replete with illustrations: a bioluminescent bat, the Mojave ‘Ghost Crab’, a spiny land eel, a carnivorous turtle that has evolved to walk on long legs resembling stilts. The government have led the public to believe no life exists in this “wasteland” so that it can be “nuked” without qualm, Levi begs to differ. For Luz this revelation – that there are animals where they shouldn’t be – marks a source of hope. She carries the primer around with her, reading to Ig from it like a surreal bible – evidence of weird, wonderful life. Luz’s devotion recalls the novel’s opening and her unfulfilled ‘yearn[ing] for menagerie’:

Where were the wild things seeking refuge from the scorched hills? […] Instead: scorpions coming up through the drains, a pair of mummified frogs in the waterless fountain, a coyote carcass going wicker in the ravine. And sure, a scorpion had a certain wisdom, but she yearned for fauna more charismatic. “It’s thinking like that that got us into this,” Ray said, correct (GFC, 7).

Ray’s commentary is astute: few people would shed a tear at the prospect of a future without such a scuttling, ‘repellant’ creature as the scorpion. But the imagined loneliness of a world without them is palpable here. Notably, the book begins with a ‘little live thing’ bursting onto the scene – the wild prairie dog that Luz locks in the starlet’s library. Luz’s exhilaration during this episode intimates some room for optimism in the apocalypse. Perhaps a new vision of community, grounded in a quest to be ‘part’ of something outside oneself, or a broader desire for communion both across and within species. Yet, quickly, her excitement collapses into anxiety. Having welcomed the prairie dog, she begins to fear it might be rabid. Her willingness to have Ray dispatch with the animal suggests that Watkins’s characters are, in fact, less concerned with the conservation of ‘wild things’ than with safeguarding themselves [9].

Despite its commitment to a post-humanist landscape, Gold Fame Citrus seems ultimately to offer us a humanist vision of apocalypse. And while Watkins's book works beautifully as a novel of ideas, her characters often feel tediously out of step with their circumstances. The plot can feel faltering on occasion. As Emily St. John Mandel puts it in the New York Times: ‘The work suffers occasionally from a condition fairly common to apocalyptic novels, which might be described as the “now what?” problem’ [10]. So, too, does Watkins's prose which, though wonderful at times, is also overworked, or try-hard in places (can a dune, for example, really be ‘dreadful’ with moonlight?). These linguistic flourishes, as well as its formal playfulness, are perhaps part of its charm, adding to the broader disorientation of reading the world's end. While some of these digressions I found myself wanting to ‘get through’, others work to haunting effect. In one stand-alone section, the narrator describes a desert monument, constructed as a sinister hazard-warning for generations to come:

The Landscape of Thorns was erected atop Yucca Mountain to frighten our distant and curious descendants on a primal level. It is an assembly of multilingual stone message kiosks and concrete spikes jutting from the mountain, skewering the sky…. Our young people… made rubbings from the message kiosks there… The rubbings say, This place is not a place of honor. No highly esteemed deed is commemorated here. Nothing of value is here. What is here is dangerous and repulsive to us (GFC, 220).

More terrifying still this is based on a real project, backed by the Trump administration [11] .The abject horror of such a prospect, however, is offset by the narcissism of protagonists who seem consistently absorbed with more pedestrian concerns. Critics have praised Watkins for the fact that her characters undergo no redemptive arc, that they end just as fucked up as at they were at the beginning. Certainly, she does not subscribe to a conformist restitution narrative; the end of the world is not a case for new beginnings here. In this sense, the novel marks a departure from the Roland Emmerich fantasy of the post-apocalyptic world “cleansed” and primed for rejuvenation, or the Spielberg disaster-logic of a bad patriarch becoming good [12]. Gratingly though, the same heteronormative, patriarchal dynamics one might expect of a less conceptually interesting text persist: the love triangle that dominates Book Two, alongside Luz’s guilt over her past sexual betrayal, make it feel almost soapy at times. She worries frequently too about her attractiveness, particularly her attractiveness to men – her 'fat Chicana ass', her thin top lip, her filthy hair. Perhaps it’s wishful thinking to hope that I would be hung up on loftier things in the apocalypse (certainly my browser history, with its tally of eBay visits and skincare vlogs, would suggest otherwise). But I’m unsure that bushy brows, or my boyfriend’s enjoyment of my emaciated breasts, is what would keep me awake at night in a future where my primary liquid intake consisted of bottles of expired cola.

In a 2016 interview with The Guardian, Watkins expressed her irritation with the ‘traditional’ genre of dystopian fiction, suggesting that all too often:

It’s just one note. It’s just: it’s dire. We’re plod, plod, plodding along, one foot in front of the other, and the ash is grey – and it’s just the same emotional key struck again and again and again. And I wondered: how come nobody’s ever having sex in the apocalypse? Or telling jokes? [13]

I’m all for having sex in the apocalypse. But surely sex in the apocalypse (and in a world where infertility is rife) ought to be darker, messier and decidedly queerer than this? Instead, the queerest it gets is when Luz submits to an unconvincing tantric partnership with two other women – something she does mostly unwillingly – in an effort to impress the gruff, messianic figure with whom she has fallen “in love”. [14] Perhaps I was expecting something closer to the monstrous, playful sexuality that abides in the work of Angela Carter or Leonora Carrington. At the very least, I hoped that abusive men (or, indeed, ‘benevolent’ men who infantilise women with terms of endearment like ‘baby girl’) might have become extinct. Instead, women still bear the scars of men’s desire – one character in particular, Dallas, does so visibly. Far from anarchic or carnivalesque, sex in Watkins’s apocalypse doesn’t look like all that much fun.

Perhaps one cause of the enduring “brokenness” of its characters, Gold Fame Citrus subscribes to a brand of narrative determinism that dooms us to repeat our mistakes, whether personal or ecological. This transpires most strongly in the novel’s sustained focus on motherhood, together with Ray and Luz's struggle to preserve the figure of the quasi-nuclear family. In this way, the novel appears to harbour a myth of reproductive futurism, wherein survivalism is actually about fighting for our children, not ourselves. [15] It takes the discovery of a child to break through the inertia of Laurel Canyon; notably, it is only once this dream has collapsed, itself becoming unsustainable, that the novel (along with Luz and Ray’s journey) can end. In turn, like Luz before her, Ig is co-opted by a new Manson-esque “family” as a PR object – destined to become the shining face of the campaign to save the Amargosa Sea. In a future plagued by sterility a child is, by its very nature, given over to symbolism. Perhaps this reproductive cliché is unavoidable in dystopian fiction. In his book Liquid Love, sociologist Zygmunt Bauman argues that in our anxious, unsettled times even children have become ‘objects of emotional consumption’, commodities over which we deliberate long and hard before deciding whether or not to ‘invest’ [16]. The act of family-making thus entails a kind of risk assessment; as it transpires, the cost of such attachment proves too great for Luz to bear.

Like love or desire, natural disaster exposes our ineluctable vulnerability to external forces, whether the material impacts nature, or the whims of other. This fact was showcased only recently. Just a few months ago in January 2018, wildfires raged across California’s forests, decimating over 281,900 acres and forcing some 230,000 to evacuate their homes. The chronic drought afflicting the state seems to indicate that, more likely than not, this will only become a broader pattern of events in the future. The fires have also been shown to have long-term negative health impacts particularly for pregnant women, children, the elderly and those of lower socioeconomic status – all of whom have a greater propensity towards asthma, and other respiratory diseases. For humans then, the dystopia Watkins envisions seems already on the cusp of unfolding. And yet, despite the dryness, the desert also teems with life. Ojai Valley, California, originally settled by the Chumash tribe, lies a couple of hours away from L.A. An uncommonly fertile region, wildflowers, olives, apricots, oranges, almonds, as well as “pixie” tangerines all thrive there [17]. Though touched by the fires, this April the valley will witness a rare botanical event: “fire followers”, a particular kind of seed that is activated by exposure to flames [18]. Where most plants can take years to grow after burning, these are germinated only ‘when stimulated by intense heat’: ‘“[Flowers like] cacomite and mariposa lily have co-evolved with fire for millions of years. They’re impossible to start from seed — you literally have to set it on fire, or put it in proximity to smoke, to activate the seed”’. [19] In this parched landscape, it may be the task of the nonhuman to flourish.

Footnotes

[1] See Lisa Cholodenko’s 2002 film, Laurel Canyon.

[2] Less well-known are the 1981 ‘Four on the Floor Murders’, in which three members and one associate of the “Wonderland Gang” drug-ring died a few doors down from the home of then-California Governor, Jerry Brown.

[3] Joan Didion, The White Album (New York, NY: Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 2009), p. 15.

[4] See Maggie Nelson, The Red Parts (London: Vintage, 2016).

[5] Didion, p. 59.

[6] See Wikipedia for a fascinating (and more thorough) exposition of these events: <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_Water_Wars>

[7] A second diversion in 1941 re-routed water away from outlying farmlands and away from the Mono Lake, forcing its ecosystem (integral to sustaining the patterns of migratory birds) into a state of total depletion.

[8] Glenn Albrecht et. al, ‘Sostalgia: the distress caused by environmental change’, Australasian Psychiatry, 15 (2007), 95–98 (p. 95).

[9] Later, the trustworthiness of the bestiary and its “neo-fauna” are called into question by the fact of Levi's duplicity and psychosis. Though it is inferred that it was probably a fabrication, this remains unresolved at the novel's close.

[10] Emily St. John Mandel, ‘“Gold Fame Citrus”, by Claire Vaye Watkins’, New York Times, 2 October 2015 <https://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/04/books/review/gold-fame-citrus-by-claire-vaye-watkins.html> [Accessed 27 March 2018].

[11] For more on the Yucca Mountain revival see: <http://www.latimes.com/local/california/la-me-stranded-nuclear-waste-20170702-htmlstory.html> and <https://knpr.org/knpr/2018-03/yucca-mountain-legislative-action-budget-request-expected-soon>

[12] See Slavoj Zizek, ‘The Family Myth of Ideology', in In Defence of Lost Causes (London: Verso, 2008), p. 55.

[13] Alex Clark, ‘Claire Vaye Watkins: "How come nobody’s ever having sex in the apocalypse?"’, The Guardian, 31 January 2016 <https://www.theguardian.com/books/2016/jan/31/claire-vaye-watkins-gold-fame-citrus> [Accessed 25 March 2018].

[14] Levi’s own interest in female pleasure is apparently so lacking that we are – in an offhand detail – he has never once performed oral sex during the length of his affair with Luz.

[15] See Lee Edelman, No Future: Queer Theory and the Death Drive (Durham, NC: Duke University Press, 2004).

[16] See Zygmunt Bauman, Liquid Love: On the Frailty of Human Bonds (Cambridge: Polity Press, 2003).

[17] Alex Schechter, '"Fire followers" to bloom in California after deadly wildfires', 27 March 2018 <https://www.aol.com/article/weather/2018/03/27/fire-followers-to-bloom-in-california-after-deadly-wildfires/23396358/> [Accessed 5 April 2018].

[18] Schechter, '"Fire followers"'.

[19] Schechter, '"Fire followers"'.

Bibliography

Albrecht, Glenn et. al, ‘Sostalgia: the distress caused by environmental change’, Australasian Psychiatry, 15 (2007), 95–98.

Bauman, Zygmunt, Liquid Love: On the Frailty of Human Bonds (Cambridge: Polity Press, 2003)

Clark, Alex, ‘Claire Vaye Watkins: "How come nobody’s ever having sex in the apocalypse?"’, The Guardian, 31 January 2016 <https://www.theguardian.com/books/2016/jan/31/claire-vaye-watkins-gold-fame-citrus>

Didion, Joan, The White Album (New York, NY: Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 2009).

Schechter, Alex, '"Fire followers" to bloom in California after deadly wildfires', 27 March 2018 <https://www.aol.com/article/weather/2018/03/27/fire-followers-to-bloom-in-california-after-deadly-wildfires/23396358/>.

St. John Mandel, Emily, ‘"Gold Fame Citrus", by Claire Vaye Watkins’, New York Times, 2 October 2015 <https://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/04/books/review/gold-fame-citrus-by-claire-vaye-watkins.html>.

Vaye Watkins, Claire, Gold Fame Citrus (London: Quercus, 2015).

Zizek, Slavoj, In Defence of Lost Causes (London: Verso, 2008).

[rapchieuphimak]

Top 15 phim trinh thám cực "hack não" mà các mọt phim không thể bỏ qua (P.3)

Sau đây là 5 bộ phim cuối cùng trong danh sách 15 bộ phim trình thám cực hay mà bạn không thể bỏ qua:

  11. The Da Vinci Code/ Mật Mã Da Vinci (2006)

Mật Mã Da Vinci dựa  trên cuốn tiểu thuyết nổi tiếng cùng tên của Dan Brown. Nội dung phim xoay quanh Robert Langdon và một vụ điều tra người quản lý bảo tàng Louvre bị ám sát. Cạnh thi thể của người này là một loại mật mã bí ẩn mà không ai giải được, duy chỉ có cháu gái của người quản lý và Robert Langdon biết các manh mối của bí ẩn đó được che giấu trong những tác phẩm của Da Vinci. Từ đây một cuộc tìm kiếm bắt đầu diễn ra, dẫn họ đến những bí mật động trời mà Thiên Chúa giáo được che giấu suốt 2000 năm qua, có khả năng thay đổi toàn bộ lịch sử thế giới.

  12. Chinatown – Phố Tàu (1974)

Nội dung của Chinatown xoay quanh gia đình Hollis Mulwray, một chủ đất giàu có ở California. Ida Sessions – một kẻ đồng mưu đã giả danh người vợ Evelyn của Hollis để nhờ thám tử tư J. J. Jake Gitters điều tra về vụ ngoại tình của anh.

Những tưởng chỉ đơn thuần là vụ điều tra ngoại tình, thế nhưng trong suốt quá trình điều tra, vị thám tử đã  phát hiện nhiều bí mật đáng sợ, có liên quan đến những mạng lưới tham nhũng và lừa gạt tinh vi.

13. Old Boy/Báo Thù (2003)

Oldboy bắt đầu vào một đêm mưa gió năm 1988, người doanh nhân Oh Dae-Su đã bị cảnh sát đưa về đồn sau khi gây gổ với người khác. Tuy nhiên, trong lúc một người bạn tới bảo lãnh, Oh Dae-su ngồi đợi ở ngoài và biến mất bí ẩn ngay sau đó.

Khi tỉnh dậy, ông phát hiện mình đang bị nhốt trong một căn phòng khách sạn rẻ tiền bị bịt kín mọi lối ra. Trong căn phòng chỉ có đúng một chiếc giường, một chiếc bàn, một nhà tắm và và chiếc TV. Ban đầu, ông tưởng đây chỉ là một trò chơi khăm của bạn bè nhưng dần dần, ông nhận ra mình đang bị cầm tù thực sự mà không hề biết rõ lý do tại sao. Hằng ngày, thức ăn luôn được đưa qua khe cửa và dù ông có ra sức hành hạ bản thân hay gào thét thế nào đi chăng nữa thì đáp trả lại vẫn luôn là sự im lặng.

Khi xem TV, Dea-su được biết rằng vợ mình đã bị giết hại và đã bị coi là thủ phạm của vụ án mạng này. Vhẳng còn gì để mất, ông đã tự mình rèn thể lực hàng ngày với hy vọng một ngày nào đó có thể thoát ra khỏi đây, tìm ra lời giải và trả thù kẻ đã biến cuộc sống của ông trở thành địa ngục.

Thế rồi, vào năm 2003, Dae-su tỉnh dậy và được trả tự do sau 15 năm. Lúc này, ông nhận được một cuộc điện thoại từ một kẻ tự nhận mình là chủ mưu của mọi việc và thách thức ông trả thù.

  14. 12 Angry Men/ 12 Người Đàn Ông Giận Dữ (1957)

12 Angry Men là một bộ phim được chuyển thể từ vở kịch truyền hình cùng tên của Reginald Rose, kể về một bồi thẩm đoàn có 12 người đàn ông đang bàn thảo về tội trạng của một bị cáo. Tại Hoa Kỳ, trong hầu h��t các phiên xử hình sự qua bồi thẩm đoàn, tất cả các bồi thẩm viên phải nhất trí khi kết luận bị cáo có tội hay vô tội. Bộ phim đặc biệt ở điểm gần như chỉ dùng một bối cảnh: trừ một đoạn mở đầu xảy ra trước tòa án và một đoạn ngắn ở trong phòng vệ sinh, toàn bộ bộ phim diễn ra trong một phòng họp bồi thẩm. Trong toàn bộ 96 phút của bộ phim, chỉ 3 phút là có những cảnh phim diễn ra ngoài căn phòng này.

Nội dung phim kể về một thanh niên bị tình nghi giết cha ruột của mình. 12 người của bồi thẩm đoàn bắt đầu phiên làm việc của mình và tất cả hội thẩm viên đều muốn kết thúc nhanh chóng vụ án vì các chứng cớ đã quá rõ ràng. Trừ một người duy nhất. Ông không muốn sinh mạng của một con người lại có thể được quyết định chỉ trong vòng chưa đầy 10 phút.  Ông có một sự nghi ngờ riêng đối với vụ án kì lạ này. Và ông quyết định: tìm cách thuyết phục mọi người. Sau mỗi lần lật lại vụ án lại có thêm một số người đồng ý rằng cậu bé kia vô tội. Vậy mấu chốt của câu chuyện thực sự nằm ở đâu.

  15.Gone Baby Gone/Đứa Bé Mất Tích (2007)

Nội dung phim được huyển thể từ quyển tiểu thuyết Mystic River của tác giả Dennis Lehane,  kể về cuộc điều tra và tìm kiếm bé gái 4 tuổi bị biến mất một cách kỳ bí của 2 thám tử tư tại khu vực đen tối nhất thuộc thế giới ngầm tại Mỹ. Sau lời kêu cứu từ người dì của đứa bé, cả hai vị thám tử bắt đầu vào cuộc truy tìm dù biết rằng họ đang mạo hiểm tình cảm,quan điểm và cả mạng sống của chính mình. Nhưng một điều họ chẳng thể ngờ là những quyết định mà học đưa ra trong suốt cuộc điều tra đã mãi mãi làm thay đổi cuộc sống của họ…

  Bạn có thể click vào phần 1 và phần 2 của loạt bài viết để xem toàn bộ danh sách nhé!

Xem thêm tại: Rapchieuphim

[foglampblog01]

ดูแลไฟหน้าเสมือนดวงตาของคุณเอง

แม่แบบงานพินิจพิจารณาบท ข้างในงานเขียนแบบ “ภายในสู่นอกบ้าน” (Inside Out) เพราะว่างานยกมาสมมตตัวเองยังไม่ตายนักแสดงแห่งร้อยเรียง เพื่อได้รับ “ความจริงช่องอารมณ์” (Emotional Truth) ข้าวของตัวละครแห่งหนกำลังวังชาเรขา ลูกจากตอนจอเงิน ไฟตัดหมอก jazz เปลาะ CHINATOWN จดข้อความย่อยเพราะRobert Towne ผนังตรงนี้ประพันธ์ข้างในวันที่ 9 ตุลำเปรื่องปราด 1973 เป็นที่บังตาในที่มีกิตติคุณกับนับถือหาได้ว่าร้ายดำรงฐานะแบบฉบับที่งานร้อยกรองตอน ม่านนี้ทั้งเป็นฝาเด่นดีเลิศ (Climax) เวสน์ในที่อวัยวะ 2 (ประโยคตัวหนังสือโงนเงนหนาในที่เครื่องหมายวงเล็บ ตกว่าคายกตัวอย่างข้างในงานถวิลข้าวของสิ่งมีชีวิตร้อยเรียงย่อหน้าช่วงนุ่งภูตผีครอบครองตัวแสดงที่ทางนิพนธ์) เรื่องย่อความ Jมันสมอ��Jมันสมอง Gittes ทั้งเป็นสายลับเอกชนเนื้อที่ควรจ้างปันออกสืบเสาะ ตริตรองการอาสัญ ราคาไฟตัดหมอกมาสด้า2 ข้าวของ Hollis Mulwrayยังไม่ตายกษัตริย์ผู้สั่งสำนักงานน้ำดิบปุพำพร้อมทั้งกระแสไฟสิ่งบุรี Los Angeles, Mulwray หล่นน้ำตายในที่อาณาบริเวณฝายกีดน้ำเปล่า Gittes ตั้งขึ้นหัวข้อริมนิที่รองณ 2 ความ คือว่า 1. Mulwray ถูกต้องประหารพิราลัยเพราะว่าเกี่ยวบารมีพร้อมทั้งงานไอ้หนูกำไรไปกงการสาคร เพราะผู้ทรงอิทธิพล มีอันจะกินชื่อเล่น Noah Cross 2. ผู้ตามสรรพสิ่ง Mulwray สมัญญานาม Evelyn Mulwray คือผู้พิฆาตสวามี น่าฟังค้นเจอเตือนภรรดรความเก่งกอบด้วยกรณีสัมพันธ์เข้ากับอิตถีมนุษย์สด Gittes ไล่หลัง Evelyn ในที่ ไฟตัดหมอก vios เมื่อทำเนียบสิ่งหล่อน สอดส่องแอบมองผละแข็งนอกทัศนาผู้เยาว์หญิงอีกสัตว์สองเท้าหนึ่งข้างในบ้านเรือนถิ่นที่ดูท่าถูกต้องตั้งเคล้าคละพร้อมทั้งจองจำ จนถึง Evelyn เดินออกลูกละอาคารบ้านเรือน Gittes ย่างเท้าคลอดลงมาเผชิญหน้าด้วยกันเจ้าหล่อน หลังจากนั้นขืนใจสละย่อมเยาอื้นความสัตย์จริงด้วยว่ารมณีคนวงในเวสน์ Evelyn บรรยายนินทาหล่อนลงความว่าภคินีสิ่งของเจ้าหล่อนเอง อย่างไรก็ตาม Gittes รู้ความจริงมาริก่อนหน้านี้ตวาด Evelyn เปล่ามีกนิษฐา แต่ถ้าว่าเปล่าได้เว้ากระไรดามที่เช้าตรู่รุ่งขึ้น Gittes บรรจบหลักฐานอะไหล่ยิ่งใหญ่รวมความว่า หน้าแว่นบด ไฟตัดหมอกวีโก้ สิ่งของผู้วายชนม์ โปรยปรายชูไว้ภายในแอ่งน้ำในที่บ้านพักอาศัยตัวเอง ในที่ ทันที Gittes ปรากฏชัดหาได้ประเดี๋ยวนี้ดุผู้ล่วงลับจัดหามาสัมผัสการฆาตกรรมพร้อมกับถึงแก่มรณภาพข้างในแนวสระ พร้อมทั้งปักใจเชื่อมั่นเตือน Evelyn ถือเอาว่านักฆ่า ฆ่าสำประกอบด้วยตนเอง พนมแล้วจึงทวนจากพื้นดินที่อาศัยข้าวของ Evelyn สืบเสาะเอาที่จริง กับครบครันพื้นที่ปรากฏชัดแก่ตาผู้พิทักษ์สันติราษฎ์ณงานฆาตกรรมแห่งพนมพบ ผู้แสดงที่คำกล่าว JมันสมองJมันสมอง Gittes อดีตสมัยตำรวจนักสืบ ที่ชินหล่นช่องรักใคร่ชอบพอเข้ากับหญิงมนุษย์หนึ่งในที่ Chinatown ในขณะที่สิงขรดำเนินงานข้อหาพื้นที่จักลุ้นเจ้า ไฟตัดหมอก honda city แต่��ีชีวิตสำเรื่องที่ทางกระทำการสละให้หล่อนสัมผัสขาดใจ Gittes โศกเศร้ากับจำนนกับดักเดโชปื้อ จะลำให้กำเนิดออกจากผู้พิทักษ์สันติราษฎ์ จบดึงขึ้นกงสีนักสืบเอกชน พื้นที่โดยมากจากนั้นค่อนข้างหมายความว่างานค้นหาณใจความสำคัญเชิงกามารมณ์ Gittes ถูกต้องตระเตรียมจ้างประทานเคลื่อนที่สอดแนมคดีความเป็นชู้กับข้าวเด็กข้าวของ Hollis Mulwrayกับจนถึง Mulwray โดนประหารชีวิตักษัย Gittes จึ่งพบนินทาสิงขรสัมผัสลวงชำระคืนสดเครื่องอุปกรณ์ข้างในงานวางแผนการการฆ่า Mulwray Gittes ซึ่งเป็นสมาชิกพนิตเกียรติยศพร้อมทั้งเปล่าหวั่นใจเดชะ ยินยอมเปล่าจัดหามาที่อยู่จะไม่ผิดกุใช้ ภูเขาจึ่งตกลงใจหาหำที่แท้ พร้อมกับคราวนี้สิงขรพึงปรารถนาคว่ำบารมีมืดระวางเขาคุ้นถอดใจมาจากนั้นหนเอ็ด อย่างไรก็ตามงานตรวจสิ่งไศลยุ่งยากรุ่งโรจน์จนกระทั่งภูเขาอัสดงขุมมลัก Evelynในที่ม่านบังตานี้ ของแดน Gittes ต้องประสงค์คือ “ค้นหาสัจธรรม” ไฟตัดหมอก

[atleastoneperday-blog]

[noirbynight]

Los Angeles Water Commissioner Hollis Mulwray (Darryl Zwerling) refuses to build a controversial new dam in the middle of a drought.  Certain people are not pleased, in Chinatown (1974).  

source: screenmusings.org

[cinemacuervo]

>> ESTE MIÉRCOLES 17 DE NOVIEMBRE EN @ciudadania_espaciocultural - 6 PM CONTINUAMOS EL SENSACIONAL CICLO 🔥NOVIEMBRE NOIR🔥 CON LA IMPECABLE PRODUCCIÓN DE 1974... ::: CHINATOWN ::: dirigida por Roman Polanski *Jake Gittes es un detective privado que trabaja en Los Ángeles poco antes del inicio de la Segunda Guerra Mundial. Una mujer que dice ser la esposa del acaudalado terrateniente Hollis Mulwray le contrata para que investigue un posible adulterio. Jake consigue fotos del hombre con una joven, pero luego se sorprende al descubrir que Mulwray ha muerto asesinado. De esta forma, entrará en una oscura trama de negocios inmobiliarios tras la que se esconde el poderoso Noah Cross. El estilo del film noir se caracterizó por tener guiones complejos, con tramas sorpresivas donde siempre permeaba la violencia, la traición y la mentira. La corrupción humana y la imperiosa necesidad de escapar se muestran en CHINATOWN con una asombrosa narrativa, tan elegante en su realización que le valió a esta película el Óscar al Mejor guión cinematográfico. Considerada una de las películas clave del film noir ¡NO TE LA PIERDAS! >> PANORÁMICA DEL FORTÍN #530 https://g.page/Venaditoespacio?share ENTRADAS $25 TODAS LAS MEDIDAS DE SEGURIDAD / TRAE CUBREBOCAS PLEASE 😷 (en Ciudadanía - espacio cultural - El venadito) https://www.instagram.com/p/CWUIWCGLtUO/?utm_medium=tumblr