The Happiness of Kati

Brief synopsis: Kati, who lives with her maternal grandparents, finds out that her mother is suffering from an incurable illness. During summer, her grandparents take Kati to see her mother, who has only a few days left. There, she learns why her mother had to leave her to be reared by her grandparents and about her mother's past.



The movie can be cut into three parts: Kati's life with her grandparents, her reunion with her mother and finally, her life after mother's death. The first 30 or 40 minutes of the movie introduces the viewers to Kati, her grandparents, her friends and her life in the province of Ayutthaya. During these, the viewers are treated to provincial life that are lacking to city residents through many beautiful scenery and shots. Another cute part of the movie involves Kati and her friends; whether it's the naivete of the kids or the fear of the bully at the school - these scenes will bring smile to your face.



Then, we move on to the second part of the movie. The scene shifts to interaction between Kati and her mother. There, she found out things about her mother and eventually, how to cope with her mother's death. Now, comes my complaint - where the first part contains some humorous scenes, the second part will try audience's patience. The problem may lies in the fact that Kati's mother, who is suffering from an illness, is immobile and she comes off as a stick figure. So, she sits there, turns her head, smiles and whenever she talks, she still has on a wooden expression that I just feel Kati would be better off talking to a tree. And, I think this is the biggest failing of the film. Whereas I should be sobbing, feeling sorry for Kati, I found myself looking at the watch, bored out of my mind.


The final part is about 30 minutes and it deals with Kati after her mother's death. She finds out about her father (well, sort of), about her mother's past (some of it anyway) and finally, her reunion with her grandparents. These parts are refreshing - though some of the parts can be deleted without affecting the overall movie.

And that is my problem with the movie. The movie religiously sticks to the book and as we all know, that is not necessarily good. No addition, no deletion and this makes the movie predictable for those who have read the book and a bit confusing for those who have not read the book. For example, Aunt Da and Uncle Kunn: people who have not read the book will have no idea how they become close to Kati's mother.

Overall, the movie has its moment, coming mainly from the first part of the movie. It bogs down in the second half, but picks up slightly in the final stage. What I like the most about this movie are: the scenery of the provincial life, the dialogue between Kati and her friends and Kati's grandparents, who in my opinion, are the best grandparents on screen, and the acting of all the children in this film.

What I don't like are: the acting of Kati's mother (sorry, but I think she tries too hard that it comes out flaky), the slowness of the movie particularly in the second part and the movie faithfulness to the book. I was also annoyed by the occasional written message about her mom every time the movie shifts scenes. It acts like a title chapter, but since this is not a book, I find it awkward in a movie. It disrupts the flow and rather than letting the audience finds out about Kati's mother (or her lack of appearance), we are told by a one liner every now and then.


Having said all of these, the movie is not hopeless. It is a good movie, but not a great movie. And more importantly, this is actually a feel good movie - you won't come out crying. Kati's life is not sad by any means. She has a loving grandparents and her mother's friends. She survives most of her childhood without her mom, so you wouldn't expect her to breakdown after her mom's death; you will love Kati's grandparents and, eventually, Kati's hair cut :).

The Joker Steals the Show

Batman da da dah da da... Batman da da dah da da... The opening tune to the TV series Batman should be common to everyone who has lived in the U.S. in the past 20 years.

Out of all the superheroes, I like Batman the most. Why? Well, he IS human just like us. Superman is a Kryptonian, Spiderman is, well, an arachnia while the Hulk is...green. Second, Batman is the penultimate philanthropist.

Out of all the villains, I like Joker the best. Joker has always struck me as evil, chaotic, yet silly person. I mean, remember Jack Nicholson's rendition of the Joker? Who would be scare of that? Ok, until this new version of Batman: The Dark Knight.

The Joker (Heath Ledger) is freakingly freaky. Okay, there's the smiling face except it's a scar and not a red paint (like earlier versions). And then there's the tongue that keeps sticking out like a lizard every time he talks. Creepy...yet sadistically humorous.

Every time he is on screen you feel like covering your face with your hands like you always do in a horror movie. The laugh, the hair, the face and the tongue...and you realize, despite his name, the Joker is hardly the funniest person in the world.

At the end of the movie (and it's a long movie), the scene where the Joker is hanging upside down, laughing away with skyscrapers as backshot...is artistically creepy and beautiful. It shows the difference between our hero and the villain. Batman, his mission accomplished, is grim while the Joker, captured, is having the time of his life.

And as soon as you are out of the movie, you just want to go back in again. Hell, if only HE could scare the living shit out of you again.

La Vie en Rose

Non, Rien De Rien,
Non, Je Ne Regrette Rien
Ni Le Bien Qu`on M`a Fait,
Ni Le Mal
Tout Ca M`est Bien Egal
Non, Rien De Rien,
Non, Je Ne Regrette Rien
C`est Paye, Balaye, Oublie,
Je Me Fous Du Passe

Those are the words to the song, Non Je ne regrette rien, sung by Edith Piaf. It is also one of her most famous - others include La Vie en Rose, Milord, L'hymne a l'amour - songs performed by Edith just before her death. And, of course, if you've seen the movie, this is the last song performed by Paif.

This past weekend saw me watching most of the Oscar nominated Best Pictures movies from Michael Clayton to There Will Be Blood. But, the movie that I was really looking forward to seeing was La Vie en Rose. And it's not the movie itself that I wanted to see, but the acting performance of Marion Cotillard as Edith Piaf.

Why? I was listening to a podcast of my favorite radio talk show and one of the guests, though not a movie critic but have seen just about every movies every year - American and foreign - said that Cotillard gave the greatest single acting performance, male or female, he has ever seen. Yep, that was enough to persuade me.

And, oh, what a performance.

Good thing that she won an Oscar too because it would be sacrileged if she hadn't. And speaking of post Oscar, I was listening to a certain movie critic, Arch Campbell, rambling about how he was still trying to figure out why "a French film won Best Actress". Really, Arch can you just be a bit more americanphile? Because I don't think there are enough American haters out there in the world. IMHO, the award should be given to those who deserve it the most; what does it matter if the film is French, English or Mongolian. I don't see British critics calling for heads when she picked up the BAFTA. Geez...

But, let's get back to the movie


The movie is pretty difficult to follow through its non linear storytelling. I didn't know who Edith Piaf was (and let's face it, few people under the age of forty would know who she was)so it took me a while to actually follow the story. In sum: La Vie en Rose is a movie about the tragic, yet triump life of Edith Piaf.

She was abandoned by her mother when she was young. Brought up in a brothel, following her father in a circus and living on a street, supporting herself by singing. A locally famous cabaret owner spotted her talent and things grew from there (though not without problems). She came to New York to perform and at the zenith of her career, became the highest paid entertainer in America. All of these triumphs, of course, are entwined by series of unfortunate events, which I won't go into details.


But, La Vie en Rose is all about Cotillard's performance covering Piaf life span from 20 to 40s (though she looked like a 60 year old woman). You wouldn't think much of it until you see a picture of Cotillard. She's tall, beautiful and healthy looking whereas Edith Piaf was small, oddly looking and a fragile person. That's when it hit me how hard it must be to play her and convince the audience that they are she is Piaf. So, double kudos to the make up artist as well (and he did win an Oscar for it). My favorite scene is when she found out about the death of Marcel and she completely broke down. Heartwrenching. (Reality: Piaf did not even cancel her performance that night!).

Other than Cotillard's performance, the thing that I love most about this movie involves a scene where Raymond is teaching Piaf how to sing. Pronunciate...nobody can understand the song if you are mumbling the words. Seriously, somebody should tell most of the singers nowaday that NOBODY can understand a word they are singing. I mean, if all one has to do is mumble (and have no vocal range), then I can be a singer. Art? No, it's craptastic. And that is one thing La Vie en Rose is not.

Translation:
No, nothing of nothing
No! I don't feel sorry about anything
Not the good things people have done to me
Not the bad things, it's all the same to me.

No, nothing of nothing
No! I don't feel sorry about anything
It's paid for, removed, forgotten,
I'm happy of the past