wm28 Reviews

But I'm a Cheerleader (1999)

An exceptionally remarkable eye-opening film on adolescent soul

[9/10 · 18 March 2009]

To many viewers this is probably not much more than a well-made, feel-good satirical comedy about teenage homosexuality and adult homophobia mixed with some heart-warming moments, and indeed it serves that function of somewhat superficial entertainment well. But it is a lot more than that. If you watch carefully, this is an incredibly honest, revealing and touchingly sensitive film on teenage identity crisis and identity search interacting with social influences. It tells you more than any psychology book could tell on adolescence, because one cannot put all that into words. Natasha Lyonne as 17 year old Megan (the heroine of the story) demonstrates amazing qualities of acting in a role which is probably the most demanding any actor or actress can face: that of a changing adolescent personality re-discovering one's inner, formerly suppressed unconscious self over two months, while still remaining herself in a way. If you compare her different faces at different phases of the story, e.g. when she "just cannot think of anything" at the camp, and when she looks into the bathroom mirror much later in the film washing her teeth, you will see what I mean. If you are not distracted by hilariously funny bits and jokes and you do not consider poor acting by Cathy Moriarty, it is in fact a top quality drama made superbly. Intimate conversations between the two leading actors (Natasha Lyonne and Clea DuVall) tell more in one minute of this film about life than most movie star celebrities do throughout their whole career. Natasha Lyonne should have received an Oscar for this as best actress, and she should have been offered leading roles in less superficial films than "American Pie". A talent wasted. Her performance in this film is an extraordinary achievement and a very touching experience for anyone sensitive enough to resonate to it. I highly recommend it for re-watching it several times: you will not get bored if you are attentive enough.

We Were Soldiers (2002)

A good step towards depicting the reality of war but not far enough

[6/10 · 6 August 2008]

This movie delivers the message "not even the winner wins any battle" very effectively. In addition, it is more realistic and showing more of the psychology of war, bereavement and fear than most American war movies do, creating a multi-dimensional picture of a sequence of events at wartime. Still, if psychology of war is the main issue (instead of the plot which is very simple in this case) it could have been a lot better if the movie had shown much more of the Vietnamese soldiers' psychology and understanding of the war. The way the Vietnamese commander is depicted is very shallow and stereotypical. In addition, there are some unrealistic happenings in the movie. First of all, a trained soldier, especially a commander of an infantry unit (Lt. Co. Hal Moore) would NEVER face enemy machine gun fire attack standing upright (with a handgun in his hand). Everyone MUST lie down in that situation to minimize risk of injury; if you join the army you learn that on the first week. I know it looks a lot more heroic and brave on the screen standing that way but doing that is plain stupid and irresponsible, an equivalent of playing Russian roulette. Second, if an infantry unit expects enemy attack waiting in a ditch, soldiers should not stand at whispering distance to each other. The defendants must keep at least 4-5 meters distance between themselves on the defense line, otherwise a single hand grenade may kill several of them at once. Again, that is probably a compromise movie makers made to create a more appealing outcome. To sum up, reality of war is a lot less romantic than most war movies, and still less romantic than this more realistic war movie; but I suppose people do not want to see reality of war in the raw because they are more inclined to enjoy a movie that reinforces their beliefs and stereotypes and which satisfies their romantic hero images and illusions. After all, movie makers want to make money, and I must admit they made an OK compromise on this one. One must keep in mind that this is still not a documentary, though.