Indrani DasGupta's Profile - Rotten Tomatoes

Want-to-See Movies

This user has no Want to See movie selections yet.

Want-to-See TV

This user has no Want to See TV selections yet.

Rating History

Water for Elephants
6 years ago via Rotten Tomatoes

Don't wait for the DVD, you'll miss the point. All three (four, really, because Tai/Rosie is great actor) leads do well and the movie has an old Hollywood glow to it that's been missing for years in Tinseltown. However, perfect it's not. Why? Mainly, two reasons: 1) a less than commendable emphasis on the cinematography rather than character development. This is somewhat understandable as Francis Lawrence seems to have assembled an academy-winning crew and probably couldn't help but let them do their thang. And 2) slight tedium in editing during the middle sequences. That said, Reese Witherspoon was a stellar circus act and played jaded but romantic hopeful Marlena to perfection. Christoph Waltz's scenery-chewing prowess had ample display but I'd like to see him as the "hero" in his next venture as I'm not German or Austrian so I haven't seen enough of his work. As for Robert Pattinson, I'm not going to say "woah the dude CAN act after all" as I already knew that. What he's done with the badly-written Edward is really commendable. He made THAT role iconic and this one luminous. The kid has a bright future if he chooses well. Lastly, Rosie. If ever there was a natural actor -- she's it. The movie stayed with me for a while, so that must mean something. Imperfect as it is, I'd rather spend my ten bucks on this than Fast Five.

Remember Me
Remember Me (2010)
7 years ago via Rotten Tomatoes

I'm curious: are all American critics balding, insecure men with rampant penis envy aimed at a 23-year-old kid who dares to emote for a living? If so, is this something that's going to be a fixture in the American cinematic universe for the next 20 years? I ask, because as far as I can tell, Robert Pattinson, the actor, is here to stay.

I've heard that critics are actually (gasp!) telling people NOT to watch this movie. Seriously?! You know, for the first time in about three years, this makes me appreciate and empathize with the frustration my Republican and Hillary-ite friends and family exhibited... their complaints about the American "free" Press in general may have been on the dot. Since when have we become the kind of fascist/dictatorial culture where a handful of men and women can tell us what to see, think, do, like?

My advice -- as an American filmgoer -- to American film critics: get therapy and get off of our backs.

End of rant.

As for the movie: 'twas good (not great). It was surprising, affecting, provocative, satisfying. It's not a story that bears much analysis. It's heart. All heart. I lost someone near and dear to me in 9/11. I still have nightmares. It goes unprocessed still -- that loss. I do not need analysis, I need catharsis. This story provides it.

Four things stand out: the acting, the interactions, the pacing, and the resolution. The undertow of emotion that a functional depressive contends with daily is effective in Pattinson's young yet fast developing hands. The ensemble was brilliant; especially, Cooper, Brosnan, Ellington, and Jerins. The relationships are luminous -- especially the ones between Tyler and his posse of beloveds. The resolution -- out of the blue: exactly as it happened. None of us anticipated that, and I didn't anticipate this. The pacing adequately reflects the mood of pre-9/11 NYC and then 9/11 NYC. I know, I was here. Everything... *everything* slowed down. Just as in one of those ghoulish, silent, unending nightmares. The movie depicts that in a tortuous, emotionally driven, three minute apogee. I took my parents (my 83-year-old father and 72-year-old mother) and they were silenced into quiet tears by that hushed, poignant end. They had expected a story of love and loss. They hadn't expected a big dollop of soul.

Star Trek
Star Trek (2009)
7 years ago via Rotten Tomatoes

I can't fault anything that helps revive the franchise enough to bring my fanboy pals out of their parents' basements. Quinto and Pine were simply divine. Kudos for a fantastic cast... that took some doing. The missing 10% stems from the lack of a compelling villain (no real fault of Eric Bana) and an accompanying narration. Nero's no Khan. Then again, Pine's no Shatner. As long as we accept those limitations, nuTrek's on its way to the final frontier.

Avatar (2009)
7 years ago via Rotten Tomatoes

Saldana was sublime and the tech kept in step with her. However, I lost count of how many times I yawned watching this one. Where's the story, folks?! In the end, that 30% goes to Saldana. She needs to break out of the Trek/Avatar genre and get herself a meatier role. She deserves one.