செவ்வானம் மூடிய அஸ்தமனத்தின் பின் இரவின் இருளின் முற்றுப் புள்ளியோடு முடிவடைந்ததாய் சொல்லப் பட்ட... நாளொன்றின் பின்னலும் தினமொரு புதிய பொழுது நீள்கிறது தீர்ந்து போன பத்தியின் சாம்பலின் நசிவிலும் வீடெங்கும் விரட்டி விட முடியாது நிறைந்து கிடக்கும் வாசமாய் நீயும் நானும் பேசி முடித்து விட்ட வாக்கியங்களின் நீள் அமைதியின் பின்னும் இன்னும் சொல்லி விட முடியாத தேவையுமில்லாத உணர்வுகள் நீளப் போகின்றன சுவாசமுடன்
இந்த
படம் எனக்கு குடுத்த ஃபீலிங்க் விவரிக்க முடியாதது... சின்ன வயசுல கருப்பு
வெள்ளையில படிச்ச ராணி காமிக்ஸ், முத்து காம்க்ஸ் எல்லாம்
ஞாபகபடுத்திடுச்சு....
ஒரு கார்ட்டூன் மாதிரியான மேக்ல ஒரு படம்
எடுக்கனும்ன்னா??? எப்பா என்னா உழைப்பு.... காமிக்ஸ் கேரக்டர்க்கெல்லாம்
உயிர் வந்து அது எல்லாம் துப்பாக்கியும் கையுமா சுத்துனா எப்படி
இருக்கும்??!!.. அப்படி இருக்கு.
செம வயலன்ட்...செம ஸ்டைல், கண் கொள்ளா
காட்சிபடுத்தல்....Mickey Rourke ஒரு காட்சியில் தண்ணீரில் காருடன்
மூழ்குவார்... கார் ஒரு புறம் மூழ்க அவர் மேலே நீந்தி வரும் காட்சி...
அக்மார்க் காமிக்ஸ் காட்சி... அசந்து விட்டேன்..!! (அந்த காட்சியை ஸ்க்ரீன்
ஷாட் எடுத்து கமென்ட்டில் போடுகிறேன்).
கதையினு பார்த்தா... ஒரு
கலவையான காமிக்ஸ் கதை... ஆக்ஷன் த்ரில்லர்...// காமிக்ஸ் நாம கதை தெரிஞ்சா
படிக்கிறோம் ?? எஞ்சாய் பண்றதில்ல?? படம் வாய்ப்பு கிடைத்தால் மிஸ்
பண்ணாதீங்க... //
நிறைய நல்ல படங்களை அது கருப்பு வெள்ளையில இருக்குன்னே பார்க்காம விட்டிருக்கேன்.... :( So Sad.... இனி எல்லாத்தையும் பார்த்துறனும்...
:)
If film noir was not a genre, but a hard man on mean streets with a lost
lovely in his heart and a gat in his gut, his nightmares would look
like "Sin City." The new movie by Robert Rodriguez and Frank Miller plays like a convention at the movie museum in Quentin Tarantino's
subconscious. A-list action stars rub shoulders with snaky villains and
sexy wenches, in a city where the streets are always wet, the cars are
ragtops and everybody smokes. It's a black-and-white world, except for
blood, which is red, eyes which are green, hair which is blond, and the
Yellow Bastard.
This isn't an adaptation of a comic book, it's like a comic book
brought to life and pumped with steroids. It contains characters who
occupy stories, but to describe the characters and summarize the stories
would be like replacing the weather with a weather map.
The movie
is not about narrative but about style. It internalizes the harsh world
of the Frank Miller "Sin City" comic books and processes it through
computer effects, grotesque makeup, lurid costumes and dialogue that
chops at the language of noir. The actors are mined for the archetypes
they contain; Bruce Willis, Mickey Rourke, Jessica Alba, Rosario Dawson, Benicio Del Toro, Clive Owen
and the others are rotated into a hyperdimension. We get not so much
their presence as their essence; the movie is not about what the
characters say or what they do, but about who they are in our wildest
dreams.
On the movie's website, there's a slide show juxtaposing
the original drawings of Frank Miller with the actors playing the
characters, and then with the actors transported by effects into the
visual world of graphic novels. Some of the stills from the film look so
much like frames of the comic book as to make no difference. And
there's a narration that plays like the captions at the top of the
frame, setting the stage and expressing a stark existential world view.
Rodriguez
has been aiming toward "Sin City" for years. I remember him leaping out
of his chair and bouncing around a hotel room, pantomiming himself
filming "Spy Kids 2" with a digital camera and editing it on a computer.
The future! he told me. This is the future! You don't wait six hours
for a scene to be lighted. You want a light over here, you grab a light
and put it over here. You want a nuclear submarine, you make one out of
thin air and put your characters into it.
I held back, wondering
if perhaps the Spy Kids would have been better served if the films had
not been such a manic demonstration of his method. But never mind; the
first two "Spy Kids" were exuberant fun ("Spy Kids 3-D" sucked, in great part because of the 3-D). Then came his "Once Upon a Time in Mexico"
(2003), and I wrote it was "more interested in the moment, in great
shots, in surprises and ironic reversals and closeups of sweaty faces,
than in a coherent story." Yes, but it worked.
And now Rodriguez
has found narrative discipline in the last place you might expect, by
choosing to follow the Miller comic books almost literally. A graphic
artist has no time or room for drifting. Every frame contributes, and
the story marches from page to page in vivid action snapshots. "Sin
City" could easily have looked as good as it does and still been a mess,
if it were not for the energy of Miller's storytelling, which is not
the standard chronological account of events, but more like a tabloid
murder illuminated by flashbulbs.
The movie is based on three of
the "Sin City" stories, each more or less self-contained. That's wise,
because at this velocity, a two-hour, one-story narrative would begin to
pant before it got to the finish line. One story involves Bruce Willis
as a battered old cop at war with a pedophile (Nick Stahl). One has Mickey Rourke waking up next to a dead hooker (Jaime King).
One has a good guy (Clive Owen) and a wacko cop (Benicio Del Toro)
disturbing the delicate balance of power negotiated between the police
and the leader of the city's hookers (Rosario Dawson), who, despite her
profession, moonlights as Owen's lover. Underneath everything is a
deeper layer of corruption, involving a senator (Powers Boothe) whose son is not only the pedophile but also the Yellow Bastard.
We
know the Bastard is yellow because the movie paints him yellow, just as
the comic book did; it was a masterstroke for Miller to find a
compromise between the cost of full-color reproduction and the economy
of two-color pages; red, green and blue also make their way into the
frames. Actually, I can't even assume Miller went the two-color route
for purposes of economy, because it's an effective artistic decision.
There
are other vivid characters in the movie, which does not have leads so
much as actors who dominate the foreground and then move on. In a movie
that uses nudity as if the 1970s had survived, Rosario Dawson's stripper
is a fierce dominatrix, Carla Gugino shows more skin than she could in Maxim, and Devon Aoki employs a flying guillotine that was borrowed no doubt from a circa-1970 Hong Kong exploiter.
Frank
Miller and Quentin Tarantino are credited as co-directors, Miller
because his comic books essentially act as storyboards which Rodriguez
follows with ferocity, and because he was on the set every day,
interacting with the actors; Tarantino because he directed one brief
scene on a day when Rodriquez was determined to wean him away from
celluloid and lure him over the dark side of digital. (It's the scene in
the car with Owen and Del Toro, who has a pistol stuck in his head.)
Tarantino also contributed something to the culture of the film, which
follows his influential "Pulp Fiction"
in its recycling of pop archetypes and its circular story structure.
The language of the film, both dialogue and narration, owes much to the
hard-boiled pulp novelists of the 1950s.
Which brings us, finally,
to the question of the movie's period. Skylines suggest the movie is
set today. The cars range from the late 1930s through the 1950s to a
recent Ferrari.The costumes are from the trench coat and G-string era. I
don't think "Sin City" really has a period, because it doesn't really
tell a story set in time and space. It's a visualization of the pulp
noir imagination, uncompromising and extreme. Yes, and brilliant.
‘When we speak of listening with compassion, we usually think of listening to someone else. But we must also listen to the wounded child inside us. Sometimes the wounded child in us needs all our attention. That little child might emerge from the depths of your consciousness and ask for your attention. If you are mindful, you will hear his or her voice calling for help. At that moment, instead of paying attention to whatever is in front of you, go back and tenderly embrace the wounded child. You can talk directly to the child with the language of love, saying, “In the past, I left you alone. I went away from you. Now, I am very sorry. I am going to embrace you.” You can say, “Darling, I am here for you. I will take good care of you. I know you suffer much. I have been so busy. I have neglected you, and now I have learned a way to come back to you.” If necessary, you have to cry together with the child.” “Breathing in, I go back to my wounded child; breathing out I take good care of my wounded child.”
You have to talk to your inner child several times a day. Only then can healing take place. Embracing your child tenderly, you reassure him that you will never let him down again or leave him unattended. The little child has been left alone for so long. That is why you need to begin this practice right away. If you don’t do it now, when will you do it?
If you know how to go back to her and listen carefully every day for five or ten minutes, healing will take place. When you climb a beautiful mountain, invite your child within to climb with you. When you contemplate the sunset, invite her to enjoy it within you. If you do that for a few weeks or a few months, the wounded child in you will experience healing.
With practice, we can see that our wounded child is not only us. Our wounded child may represent several generations. Our mother may have suffered throughout her life. Our father may have suffered. Perhaps our parents weren’t able to look after the wounded child in themselves. So when we’re embracing the wounded child in us, we’re embracing all the wounded children of our past generations. This practice is not a practice for ourselves alone, but for numberless generations of ancestors and descendants.
Our ancestors may not have known how to care for their wounded child within, so they transmitted their wounded child to us. Our practice is to end this cycle. if we can heal our wounded child, we will not only liberate ourselves, but we will also help liberate whoever has hurt or abused us. The abuser may also have been the victim of abuse. There are people who have practiced with their inner child for a long time who have a lessening of their suffering and have experienced transformation. Their relationships with their family and friends have become much easier.
We suffer because we have not been touched by compassion and understanding. If we generate the energy of mindfulness, understanding, and compassion for our wounded child, we will suffer much less. When we generate mindfulness, compassion and understanding become possible, and we can allow people to love us. Before, we may have been suspicious of everything and everyone. Compassion helps us relate to others and restore communication.
The people around us, our family and friends, may also have a severely wounded child inside. If we’ve managed to help ourselves, we can also help them. When we’ve healed ourselves, our relationships with others become much easier. There’s more peace and more love in us.
Go back and take care of yourself. Your body needs you, your feelings need you, your perceptions need you. The wounded child in you needs you. Your suffering needs you to acknowledge it. Go home and be there for all these feelings. Practice mindful walking and mindful breathing. Do everything in mindfulness so you can really be there, so you can love.’
Thich Nhat Hanh, Reconciliation: Healing the Inner Child.
ஈரம் அறியாத ஈனர்களுக்கு இன்னமும் குடைபிடித்துக்கொண்டு எப்படி உங்களால் எங்கள் சிதைந்த உடல் வடித்த ஊனத்தின் மேல் நின்று மௌனிக்கமுடிகிறது?
...
இரத்தம் காய்ந்த வடலிகள் இன்று இளம்பனைகளாய் காலம் அவற்றின் கறைகளைக் கழுவியபோதும் காதுகளில் இன்னமும் ஓலங்கள் கேட்டபடியே! புதைந்துபோன சிதைவுகளோடு நினைவுகள் புதைக்கப்படாமலே நீறுபூத்துக் கிடக்கிறது!
எங்கள் வலிகளைத்தோண்டி தோண்டி உங்கள் வாய்ப்புகளை தக்கவைத்ததுபோதும் கிழக்கில் விழுந்த சூரியனின் உதயத்துக்காய் ஆவிகளாய் நாம் அலைந்துகொண்டிருக்கிறோம் மேற்கு நோக்கி உங்கள் பிச்சைப் பாத்திரத்தை ஏந்திக்கொண்டிருங்கள் பல்லிழித்தபடிக்கு!