The film is almost entirely shot on location in Hong Kong, which is mildly novel since not so often do US supernatural heroes grace the exotic orient (or at least have their entire film here). Chris Evans is the lead man as Nick, a guy who can move things with his mind (essentially he’s a foot-soldier). In the intro scene, Nick’s father dies at the hands of the evil but certainly lamely-named “Division”, which is a US government agency doing all kinds of evil research on these gifted people. The face of Division is Carver (Djimon Hounsou, who’s had much more interesting roles before), a “pusher” who can manipulate others’ thoughts (remember that episode from The X-Files?). Other notable characters include Dakota Fanning as Cassie (a “watcher” who can predict the future), and Carmilla Belle as Kira, who is Nick’s love interest and the center-piece of the plot puzzle. Skinny (some people might say hot) Chinese actress Xiaolu Li also makes an appearance, as a fully one-dimensional “watcher” representing another faction trying to hunt down the good guys.

Writing the above paragraph makes me realize that the characters sound much more interesting on paper than what is actually on screen. Essentially this is an issue with the plot – speaking of which, there’s not much. Basically the three different parties – the good guys, the Division, and the Hong Kong local equivalent of the Division – run into each other randomly in various parts of Hong Kong, and sometimes they fight, while sometimes they only talk nicely and behave themselves. At one point in the second act, the good guys must make a “plan without planning”, since any real planning will be foreseen by the antagonist watchers – indeed, “like a plan without planning” probably sums up the chaotic plot best.

At the end of the day, Push just feels like a special episode of Heroes, without the interesting personalities of that TV series. There are some flashy visuals and action sequences, but nothing really spectacular. A misfire.

4/10

What’s good about this film is its great look and feel. There are a few rather spectacular effects sequences, the first of which is a long-take where we follow Nicolas Cage on the scene of a massive disaster. It’s a truly thrilling and chaotic scene. (The later scenes aren’t as effective, although the body-counts are much higher.) And the color hue looks right for the film’s moody ambience. The characters, led by Nicolas Cage’s widowed MIT astrophysicist, are generally convincing.

What’s bad about the film is its plot. (To quickly summarize: Cage is an astrophysicist who finds a string of numbers that predict future disasters… and he therefore tries to prevent them from happening.) At the end of the day, it’s the story that makes or breaks a film, and in the case of Knowing, the cast and crew are working with poor material. While it’s fine for the film to be debating about determinism vs. random theory, in terms of storytelling it is probably not acceptable for the protagonist’s efforts to be wholly useless – indeed, by the film’s climax, the audience is left wondering what the film was all about, if everything was predetermined. There is no relief, or justification, for the protagonist’s hardships, and that’s just bad storytelling.

7/10

Kathryn Bigelow

Kathryn Bigelow曾经是James Cameron的太太，而这位女导演和其前夫一样，是专注于动作、科幻等类型片的，观其电影往往充满阳刚之气，因此想象生活中这也应该是位巾帼不让须眉的女豪吧。。。

Point Break (1991)

Point Break的主演是当时新（Keanu Reeves）老（Patrick Swayze）两位帅哥。这是一部相当常规的警匪片，这么多年下来能够有点cult地位依赖的是扎实的动作场面和有些新意的情节设定。Keanu Reeves饰演一位新FBI探员，为了破连环银行抢劫案而需要学习冲浪（因疑犯为Swayze率领的一个冲浪团体）。影片里角色大玩冲浪、跳伞等冒险运动（精彩瞬间由连续的慢镜头捕获），而年轻探员当然也是事业爱情（与一个冲浪女孩）两不误。

说起来我知道这部电影是因为专门搞怪警察搭档类电影的喜剧片Hot Fuzz，那部电影值得一看！

6/10

The Hurt Locker (2008)

The Hurt Locker是去年的片子，因为发行问题最近才刚刚在美国上映。影评人士颇推崇此片，认为这是第一部好看的描述伊拉克战争的电影。这可能有点言过了。这是部还算好看的片子，讲述在伊拉克的负责处理爆炸物的EOD小队（就理解为拆弹专家就可以了）的执勤。在情节上影片是由一系列事件构建的，即该小队在换岗回美国前的最后四十多天里的若干出勤任务。

作为一部动作片，这些孤立的片段大多是颇为成功的，无论是视觉效果（爆破场面非常漂亮）还是悬念与张力的制造。但将其串成一部两个多小时的电影，多少有点审美疲劳，尤其当导演明显有意通过这些片段去塑造角色形象并对战争的破坏进行描述时。或许可以说电影对于战争生活的刻画是非常成功的，但是观后觉得角色与剧本都有些牵强，影片也不该做得那么长。

作为题外话，导演做了件很有想象力的事情，就是请来了几位大明星（Ralph Fiennes和Guy Pearce）客串，并在这些角色出场五分钟内将其杀死。

7/10

Paul Thomas Anderson

P.T. Anderson两年前的There Will Be Blood险些为这位70年生人的年轻导演带来小金人，也仅是其第五部大银幕电影。

Boogie Nights (1997)

Boogie Nights是Anderson的第二部电影，也是其成名作。这是一部颇有些写意的描述一众小人物的电影。故事描述70-80年代的美国色情业，并跟随一个“天赋异禀”的少男Eddie（Mark Wahlberg）的男优事业的崛起与陨落而向观众展示了一个时代与一个行业的历史横截面。

我几乎是从第一个场景就喜欢上了这部电影。喜欢展示摄影技巧的Anderson模仿了Scorsese在Goodfellas里面Henry与Karen第一次进Copacabana的那个移动长镜头，用一个非常潇洒的长镜头带我们进入了五光十色的夜店，并迅速地完成了主要人物的介绍。（在片中Anderson还会反复运用这种移动长镜头。）复古的音乐、角色的服装与发型─虽然是中国80后，但我毫不怀疑地相信美国的70年代就是这样。

影片的主要角色轻而易举地就有十来个，虽然每个戏份都不多，但个个个性鲜明，而演员阵容以今日来看可谓空前强大（在那时大抵都是崛起中或已过气）。

从风格上看，影片有几分Pulp Fiction的味道（群戏、幽默与暴力的混合）。强烈的时代感让影片多了些厚重，尤其情节虽然描述的是色情业与色情影星，但倘若直接理解为好莱坞也是完全没有问题的（角色所遇到的问题与世态炎凉等等）。如果能够接受电影里不可避免地会有的若干色情场景（实际上导演处理得已经很隐晦了），那么这是一部非常好看的电影。

9/10

Magnolia (1999)

Magnolia是Anderson在Boogie Nights之后的作品，也是一部描述一众角色的群戏。角色更多，时间更长（三个小时），明星更大牌（Tom Cruise亦有贡献），但恐怕这些恰恰证明了更多并不一定更好。

很显然这是一部非常有野心的电影，但是我不喜欢的原因有两个。一个是唠唠叨叨的配乐─在电影前半段在各个不相干人物的叙事之间快速切换时，电影经常配以非常紧张的弦乐，仿佛将有什么大事情发生（然而没有）。我完全不能理解这种配乐背后的动机。另一个原因是这部影片少了些Boogie Nights式的自我调侃（毕竟，一部描述色情影星的电影能有多严肃与高雅呢？），而多了太多自命不凡。其实最后电影的主题很简单，但Anderson非要扯上三个小时，而很多角色都看起来有点歇斯底里。

6/10

《财经》那篇文章的观点，倘若摘录一番，大体有以下几条（我的个人解读筛选，详见原文）：

1. 目前非常高调的政策扶持（创造基层岗位、建立见习制度等），虽可缓解短期就业压力，但并不利于劳动市场的自我调节
2. 大学生就业难并不在于接受高等教育的绝对人数太多，而是在于高等教育的结构性失衡，培养模式完全不适应市场需要
3. 结构性失衡即体制问题；应当引入市场竞争（发展民办教育），并让高校掌握办学、招生自主权

我想第三点的这些推论/建议是非常敏感并有争议的，但《财经》作为一个向《经济学人》看齐的刊物（我的个人理解，并且这是一个伟大的奋斗目标），有这样的“自由主义”倾向是非常自然的。此外，中国高等教育也的确显露出了太多的计划经济特色，让市场发挥作用，从逻辑上说是没有问题的（困难在于操作层面─此可参考中国其它正在执行的改革，如医改）。

那么不妨先说说容易的。我对于第二点的体会是非常深的，因为自己的大学经历。以至于毕业以后，我对于任何学生来找我问找工作的事情，我从来都非常乐意，因为自己当初路走得颇有些周折。

我当初学的是电子工程。论专业，我们系在全国应当是最强，没有之一；所以，我从来没有怀疑过我们老师的专业水平，如果说，你想在电子领域有一番深造，这儿肯定是国内的首选。问题是，倘若我本科毕业后想进入其它领域呢？

在我们系，有一个常识是所谓的“4、6、8”，即排名前40%的学生有资格保送博士，前60%的学生有资格保送本系硕士，前80%的学生有保送外部的资格（如去中科院等）。后20%的“差生”当然爱干嘛干嘛吧，基本上是被视作被淘汰下来的。从本科入学第一天，几乎所有的人都已经接受了毕业了自己还会继续读书的事实，无论是出国还是推研。

这样重要的一个决定，很少是经过深思熟虑的；至少学生是很少被告知，大学还有另外一种出路，就是工作。在我们系，本科就业就等于是教育失败，这是从老师到学生潜意识里的想法。也因此，培养方案里面从来没有关于把学生引向社会的内容，一切都是围绕塑造专业人才而努力的。

有人会说，作为中国内地的最高学府（好吧，之一），教学目标就应该是追求学术、技术上的最高水平，而不是把学生打造成能在外企找得到工作的人（有些老师对于学生“扎堆”去投行、咨询非常不以为然）。然而教育理应是双向选择，且高考志愿的填报有多少是学生自己的成熟决定恐怕非常值得商榷。在大多数学生还没有明确自己真正的人生目标和奋斗方向时，学校已经把一个目标强加给了学生。尽管学校名义上有着转系等流程，但实际操作门槛之高、名额之少，也至多是杯水车薪。

出国留学、国内读研与就业工作，本应是三种完全平等地位的选择，却在我们系有了自然的优先排序（出国>读研>工作）。在经管，情况有可能是工作>出国>读研。其实无论哪种排序，泛泛而言都是荒谬的。这三种选择各有利弊，只有适合不适合的问题，没有哪个比哪个更牛的问题。由于这种近乎天生的偏见（或者说主流意见），大多数学生恐怕并不会认真了解每种选择的利弊。也有不少人干脆是从众的（反正大多数人都推研了，我能推就推呗）。

固然，职业规划的最终责任在于个人，但现在的培养方案中毕竟是完全忽略了对职业规划的引导。（这就好比了解性知识的最终责任完全在于个人，但中国的性教育现状对青少年的不良发展有不可推卸的责任一样。）我印象里，大学四年，只有我选修的一门全校选修课在这方面对我有一些帮助（就业中心开设的《就业指导》）。系里的老师好像从来没有提过就业二字。

这样的直接后果是，那最后的20%，真的是直接被淘汰了。

（困了，不写了。反正观点就是对学生的培养思路需要“与时俱进”，写来写去就是发发牢骚而已，没有新意。）

Che并没有纠缠于意识形态。影片没有讨论格瓦拉的革命理念，没有讨论其世界观是如何形成（这方面不妨参考2004年的The Motorcycle Diaries，描述了年轻的格瓦拉骑摩托车游历南美大陆从而萌发革命理想的过程）。在这部电影中，没有why，只有how，即在古巴卡斯特罗与格瓦拉是如何一步步地成功，而在玻利维亚格瓦拉又是如何一步步走向死亡。

Benicio Del Toro饰演格瓦拉，其表演已获得充分肯定（08康城电影节最佳男演员）。不仅仅是形似（造型和那个风靡全球的t-shirt上的脸几乎一模一样）；他举手投足间确流露出一个真实的丛林游击革命者的风姿。

历史上的格瓦拉是争议人物；而这部电影并没有探讨其争议性，是纯粹的仰视（也因此，这并不是严肃的传记）。观众看到的是一个充满了理想主义的革命家，是一个严肃地视解放全人类为己任的浪漫主义青年。影片下部开场时，我们看到了切与第二任妻子和4个孩子在一起的场景；切对于家人无疑是深爱的，但他仍会义无反顾地抛下家人，抛下在古巴的权力与地位，而投身到玻利维亚的丛林中。

上部与下部的鲜明对比在于，上部中我们看到了切所信仰的理念获得成功，而下部则是充满挫败感。切在生命的最后时刻，恐怕仍是坚信全世界无产阶级的胜利终会到来，而自己的就义则无非是此漫长革命的铺垫；然而观众在这个时刻不能不开始质疑其理想的脱离现实─这是个幻灭的时刻，是切由神变为人的时刻，而在这一刻，他身上所有让人深深着迷的魅力也就随着其身躯的倒下而一同消逝了。

8/10

早上7:55的飞机。落地是10:30。机场比较小，一条跑道。飞机是降落后直接在跑道上掉了个头进的停机坪，好像以前去过的机场没有这么做的（可能是跑道与候机楼、停机坪的位置关系，即候机楼比较偏跑道的前半部分）。

客户接机，直接奔赴客户总部。路上没有什么景色，或者说，城市的外观还是颇为破旧的。或许是因为路线，没有看到很新的楼。（本来，我们会在新落成的香格里拉住一晚，貌似那个地段新楼会多一些。）

道路的路况并不好。大概由于热胀冷缩以及重型货车的压迫，路面会有一段一段的隆起，司机不断地减速、加速，如果夜里开车大概会非常不爽。

然而这里的经济活动非常旺盛。路上的货车一辆接一辆；刷着“发货全国”、“发货广东 山东 东北”等等大字的“货运中心”一个接一个。一个破败的苏式的老楼（估计是80年的吧。。。），正门上面简单的三个字“水泥店”。在这里，华丽的营销是多余的。

温州有轻工业的传统。我们路过了不止一个鞋楦厂。想起了《激荡三十年》里面关于改革的论述，温州是时常冒出来的地名。这里可以崛起，与旺盛的民间资本运作不无关系（时常被称之为非法的民间信贷与融资，往往是每次宏观调控的重点打压对象）。

客户人很友善，会议很好很强大。1点半开完了会，立刻上车回机场。在机场的餐厅吃了碗排骨面，要70块，再次印证了越是小机场吃饭越贵的道理。上了回北京的飞机，海南航空，被告知因为航空管制要在地面停一个小时。舱内非常热，“空调要起飞后才能正常运转”。好吧，漫长的旅行。

这的确是个很有技术难度的镜头。要实时完成特效，以及大量替身的场面调度，中间还有一段“感情戏”，这对于班底是个很大的考验─而吴宇森等人做到了。

单以技术而论，《辣手神探》大约是吴宇森电影里的里程碑。从片头茶楼的动作戏开始，吴宇森似乎就在向观众发出挑战─在其枪林弹雨的电影世界里，生命的价值只是几颗子弹，平民、警察、匪徒，没有谁不可以死。这是一个没有任何道德底线的世界，手中有枪，枪里有子弹，就是王道。

然而或许由于过于追求技术的卓越（每个动作戏都运用了十分繁复的镜头切换，暴力在这里是美轮美奂的），《辣手神探》缺乏了真正的血性。这是个没有灵魂的电影，无论周润发的警察，还是梁朝伟的卧底阿浪，都只是单纯由“这个案子我一定要破”的直线条思维驱动的，其决策和后果也往往让人不敢苟同（譬如阿浪见人杀人，见神杀神，杀了对自己有提拔之恩的老大及一众兄弟，也杀了不少警察）。这与《英雄本色》以及《喋血双雄》的境界实在相去太远─在那两部作品里，我们看到了吴宇森所推崇的兄弟情义，看到了真正男子汉的样子，而在《辣手神探》里，只有血腥，没有血性。

6/10

To give you some perspective – I have always regarded the Terminator series as one of the best science fiction franchises ever made. I think I first saw Terminator some 16 years ago, around 1993. I couldn’t fully appreciate it at the time (since I was only 10 years old), but the gritty, violent and graphic depiction left a deep impression. Then I saw T2 in 1994. Those two films, along with a few other select films (the first two films of the Alien franchise, The Abyss – yes, a lot of James Cameron films), defined my early taste for science fiction, and perhaps even broadly films in general. I would always love dark, apocalyptic scenarios (if just to remind us how good we have it going now), and the relationship between man and machine / technology and civilization would always fascinate me.

Oh, and did I say that Terminator 2: Judgment Day is one of the best films, ever?

Okay. Having paid my homage to the franchise, it’s now time to comment on the latest installment. After the disappointing-but-expected Terminator 3 in 2003 (that was a fun summer tentpole flick, but doesn’t live up to the franchise’s proud history, and its disappointment was to be expected, given what I had read about its production process), the Salvation project gained a lot of anticipation and was heavily hyped up. Everyone loved the images released. McG and crew definitely got the visuals right – finally, this is the apocalyptic future that the series has always alluded to but never fully visualized. And the cast inspires confidence – Christian Bale is one of the biggest names around these days, and his success with Christopher Nolan and the Batman franchise reboot just gives us a lot of room to imagine what good things may happen to this film.

And for the opening half of the film, I was fully engrossed. Although everybody knew beforehand that Sam Worthington’s character, Marcus Wright, is a cyborg who believes he’s human, there was still ample tension to the plot. When would he realize his condition? And how would that affect his actions?

The first half of the film is very much an origin story. We discover Kyle Reese (played by Anton Yelchin, who has that delicious role as Chekov in the latest Star Trek), who as fans of the franchise know, would be the father of John Connor, after he is sent back in time to protect Sarah Connor. And to a certain extent, we discover John Connor, who we’ve only seen as a child and a young man in previous films. Here he is finally the leader of the resistance.

Marcus Wright is the link between these two pivotal characters, whose narratives are developed in parallel right until the final climax. While this is a promising setup, the plot ultimately does not culminate into something that satisfies the build-up. The second half of the film gradually results in a rescue mission by John Connor to save his future father, with Marcus giving him ample assistance. I was hoping for some more meaningful interaction between father and son.

I did a quick scan of the major reviews on RottenTomatoes last night. Seems like most critics reached consensus on how “programmed” and “robotic” this film was. I think this is somewhat harsh – the narrative is routine, and there’s no surprise ending, but the origin story is still solid. I do agree with someone’s observation that the lack of a central, identifiable antagonist was a major issue why this film lacked tension. Because there are so many terminators, the threat level of every single one of them has dropped dramatically – make no mistake, they are hard to kill, but the audience knows that the protagonists won’t die at the hand of an ordinary terminator. This is why the Governator’s ultra-high-profile late cameo (via the wizardry of CG) is such a delightful final twist – finally we have a bad guy that is a match for the good guys.

In terms of the action, the film pays ample homage to the proud traditions of the franchise. The motorbike, the truck (and the long chase sequences where these tools are employed), hand-to-hand combat, the rugged industrial setting (the factory in T1, the iron mill in T2, and here it’s the T-800 assembly line) are all there. Even the famous one-liners make a come-back. “Come with me if you want to live.” And of course, “I’ll be back.” Indeed, I felt the film was too soaked up and too occupied basking in the glory of old, and was not bold enough in striking its own place in the franchise – ultimately, this film adds nothing especially important to the Terminator-verse.

And I didn’t like some of the more cheesy settings that reminded me of the disastrous 2nd and 3rd installments of the Matrix trilogy. John Connor is called “the prophecy”; Marcus has a late scene where he encounters his makers, and it’s very much Neo vs. the Architect redux. (I hated the whole feel of that scene.)

The first two films of the franchise always had us pondering on the relationship between man and machine, and more importantly, what is the essence of humanity. Arnold Schwarzenegger’s terminator in the second film gradually understood human emotions – “I know now why you cry, but it’s something I can never do.” (hmmm, one of the best tear-jerking lines for guys?) In Salvation, Marcus Wright steps up to take this role. Here is a cyborg with a human heart, and real human memories – this is a man who’s literally given a new body – and this is certainly the ultimate existential observation: we are human not because of our flesh, but because of our soul. It’s an interesting premise, but the film doesn’t use it fully at all, only resorting to the cliched plot device of letting the robot sacrifice himself in the name of humanity. Marcus’s inner struggle, which could have been a very powerful narrative, is too hastily touched upon, and that deprives the film of real emotions.

6/10

The film boldly attempts to give the original characters a whole new angle by introducing a rather convuluted alternate universe narrative. Because of the time traveling endeavors of certain protagonists and antagonists, young Kirk and Spock et al. find their lives along a completely new track, and the young crew aboard the maiden voyage of the USS Enterprise find themselves in perhaps the most critical mission ever – to save Earth from certain destruction from the energetically bad bad-guy named Nero (portrayed by Eric Bana).

Kirk, played by up-and-coming actor Chris Pine, is cocky and assertive. Spock, played by that spooky guy (Sylar) from Heroes, Zachary Quinto, is almost a perfect find for the role. And the rest of the cast, while not spectacular, is equally on par (with Simon Pegg landing a delicious role as Scottie, providing ample comic relief). Of course, the cameo role by Leonard Nimoy as Spock will certainly bring tears of joy to die-hard fans.

Speaking of which, I’ve also saw a fair share of the original series when I was that kid living in UK. And some episodes from Star Trek: The Next Generation, as well as a number of the big screen films. Perhaps what’s most fascinating and engaging about the series, is the simple mission stated by the USS Enterprise – to boldly go where no man has gone before. It perfectly captures that enduring aspiration of man to outgrow oneself, to jump higher and reach further. This is Star Trek’s ultimate charm.

8/10

There’s something sad yet poetically beautiful about aging. It’s a fact of life that everyone needs to come to terms with. Nothing in this world lasts forever, perhaps the least of which being our flesh. Aging, therefore, brings us a new perspective upon this world, but what that perspective is could be wildly different for different people, and even different for the same person at various stages of his/her life.

For instance, as we age and gain experience, we could learn to avoid our mistakes. We learn to be more cautious, more wary of things that look too good to be true. Painful memories of past hurts construct an invisible shield, protecting us from future harm.

But these shields also block out what could be some of the most beautiful and authentic feelings in life, and distort our goals and priorities. We become pragmatic, and pursue material goals instead of ideals and dreams. Thankfully, aging gives us another chance – a last chance – later in life, when we could reflect and understand what the most important things in life truly are.

Apologies for the above offbeat musings aside, Last Chance Harvey, as the title suggests, is about Harvey (Dustin Hoffman) and his “last chance” to make something out of his life. Harvey is a mildly successful commercial music producer, but his career is facing a crisis. His personal life is disastrous, as he is flying off to London from New York to attend his daughter’s wedding, only to find that he is positioned as an outsider by his ex-wife, and that his daughter has asked her stepfather instead of him to participate in the ceremony.

At perhaps the lowest point of his life, he meets the equally hapless Kate (Emma Thompson), who has the thankless job of surveying travellers at Heathrow airport (she works for the Public Statistics Service). Kate is way past the age of “young”, but still hasn’t started a family, and her mom is “peculiar” to say the least ever since her father ran off to continental Europe with his secretary.

Of course, judging from the look and feel of the poster above, you can guess that Harvey and Kate hit it off. It’s a fragile relationship, unrealistic from the word go, but somehow by the end of the film’s 90 minutes, the couple has found a way to face their true emotions. And this is where aging comes in – for both of them, there is an subtle sense of urgency, a feeling of “this or never”, and they share a common view of what matters to them most.

Last Chance Harvey is not a melodramatic love epic. Its premise is simple. It works because of the strong leads and the great dialogue. Their feelings and emotions are sincere and authentic, and this old pair shows the audience what love could and should be – and how poetic it is.

8/10