George had pushed himself in the previous chapter. This seems like overstretching things. Now, does that pay off? Come on, that's subjective. But, no.
Day Of The Dead
I, or anyone for that matter, would be and should be austere towards the writer and director George Romero's beloved zombie-defining trend-setting horror franchise. It comes with a lot of expectations. It should deliver considering the hype and momentum it carries. Now, unlike others I tend to not lean on the subject that is shown but rather the way it is shown. So for a satirical psychological horror thriller franchise as such, I will take the most remote-est storyline of this world. And I mean, break the genre, bend the rules, change the formula and isolate yourself as far as you can from the gold mine that I, we, George knows, should be a safer ground. In fact, make it everything listed before. This hotchpotch of ingredients should be the recipe. And though, George does not and may never combine these many risky factors, he is, I think, in his own way, breaking the established ground. What made these "dead" so infamously ruthless and grossly scary, he has tried to lop off that very subject matter. "He could be domesticated!" George, talking about one of the ghouls, pleads to his audience through a character and their slips the glass out of his hand. What made his formula so unique, is bashed with a hammer. The aim is good. He practised hard. But on that. Just that stroke. Another issue, is of course, the way the rest of the blank is filled, the time is spent. It is the same blood dripping, spraying all over, organs pouring out imageries that gets better as an achievement in technical procedure on how it works. Not in storytelling. That part is the same. Overcooked.
Noah had me choked up for the entire runtime of his thundering masterpiece. This profound experience is so rare, that it has happened to me only once. In Marriage Story.
Marriage Story
The writer and director, Noah Baumbach is spewing love. Not the usual way of expressing. But then, miscommunication is a major factor in this film. He is sugar-coating or bitter-coating a love story, by deconstructing, reverse-engineering a love story. Although that is what it seems at first. The film, above all, wonder me the most, is when it balances both sides of the coin. Every now and then, I think about what happened, why we are here, just as those characters do. It all makes sense and nothing fits despite the description, the definition. And still you don't feel cheated. And Noah dodged that bullet so effortlessly that you- at certain points in the film, even when there is no particularly emotional hurdle to cross- melt with a cathartic smile and tears, in its simple wittiness. The film deliberately follows Adam Driver's perspective. Now, that is a perfect choice, considering he "is walking on" something that he doesn't fully understand, just like us, the audience. Hence, he comes off warm and even pitiful at times, more than he actually might be or should. For following Scarlett Johanson would have come off calculative rather than spontaneous. Not something that the film wants to put out. It is vulnerable phenomena to be in. And to experience it, you should be out of control. Desperation is what drives the greed. And greed, something you keep it off the table from Day 1, is what it will come to. Not materialistic but philosophical. You'd want to be how you think of yourself to be. And in these scenarios where you are highly conscious of your decisions and acts. Legacy (Henry, in their case) is what you hold on to or at least fight for, now that you are sober.
As far as the scares are concerned, I am not scared. Lucky for George, he has plenty of other colors to paint this wall with something else.
Dawn Of The Dead
If Night Of The Living Dead is confined, specific, Dawn Of The Dead is all over the place. Showcasing all the repercussions and boasting all the showcased scenarios. For the second one, the writer and director, George Romero is pushing himself along with the storyline. The social satire, just like and unlike the previous chapter, has aged well. Though the previous chapter didn't value what is currently prioritised, it surely on the other hand whips what we shouldn't value. That analysis or theory of the film is represented visually and is stated with an isolated personality which is personified as a part of a branch of a structure. If not character driven, these scenarios in its world wouldn't hold any place. But this is where George takes his time. He enjoys these moments. And this idea is scary. Something that translates to the filmmaker itself. If there is no joy, you are not emotionally attached, you are not tapping to their beat and not bobbing your head to their plans, you will never survive. And to survive is to be gifted in this film. The very thought of an escape is celebrated. And just like the franchise always does, the humans are the troubled bodies bouncing inside these walls. Them taking things for granted, overconfidence in their capabilities and exploitation of the gifts of nature. You see even after we are dead, we are a slave to that cycle. It keeps spinning and is eating us alive or even dead in this case. There are similar patterns in their behaviour, heavily armoured or numbingly defensive, it's eventually the same thing.
The arrogance, the miscommunication is horrifying. There is no deal, nothing on the table, no table at all. Everything is up for grabs and burns.
Night Of The Living Dead
Among many filmmakers achieving their own various milestones in their first project, this one could be the ideal example, the milestone of that sub genre list- if there is any! The co-writer and director, George A. Romero has a poetic speech. Even rhyming, I would persist. Leaving all the evolutions of ghouls or zombies or whatnot aside, I would like to focus on the structure of the script. It is better if you understand the intentional poem behind all the scenarios in order to truly enjoy this could-arguably-be called popcorn flick. But there is much more than entertainment. Yes, you will get the occasional scare, the hair pulling annoyance to not be able to control and a classic game of pitting one chip against another. But this is one page poem. Written with a mirroring symmetry. It has a start and a finish. Something you won't be able to differentiate. And all the elements in the script is brimming with this ingredient. The dialogues, the intentions, the faulty logistics, worn out philosophises and now even the political incorrectness, some might point out. If someone doesn't get along they would start their equation through that very formula. And even end on it. Their salvation relies upon each other's theories and so does damnation, but then there is arrogance in the air. This eye-for-actually-nothing world hungrily feeds on upright abusive nature. The **** are off and the humility, sociality comes off shamelessly. The living is scarier than dead ever will be. For in this Night Of The Living Dead, your companions are not only dumb, cold, rancid species (just as you are) but also has a motif. Greedy motives. There always is. It is human to be. Not zombies.
Jillian Bell works hard. Both as a character and for the character. And by hard, I mean, they mean, watch her go through this pound by pound.
Brittany Runs A Marathon
For Paul Downs Colaizzo, the writer and director, this is an incredible achievement. Almost as if participating and winning the marathon. This is something he has done the first time and he is hitting all the right notes. And I am even going to call this one, a crowd pleaser. Now, not only doesn't it just uses a concept that is common and often lightly taken. But even his take has a particular new spin, a new angle- even the cinematography helps a lot when it shoots those new ideas on screen and you see a completely odd frame suggesting the birth of that notion- that is meticulously charged. The camera work focuses, crops and sharpens those details, enhancing this familiar tale into a bright New York morning of social media world. It specifically focuses on a definite crowd and yet comes off for everyone. Now, that is definitely not for the diplomatic approach of it; for there are a couple of scenes that might suggest it. But it is the tendency of that graph to always, and mind you always, land on something you'd expect. From the montage sequences that rises up to the unnerving meltdowns that we all are looking forward to. Aforementioned, within these 100 minutes, the film touches all those sweet notes delicately on the floor. And by the time, Brittany Runs A Marathon, that floor, the track has been more of a habit, than a home. Not a habit you cannot push yourself away from but the ones you create consciously. Among many, many supporting characters, my favourite is her, Bell's roommate, showcasing one of the most common and least represented groups of people in the movies, that we actually survive daily.
The Hoax is nothing like you'd expect. Sort of like the very definition of the title. Hey! There's your first clue. They are getting things right.
The Hoax
Lasse Hallstrom, the director, is an optimistic fellow. He has to be. Or so he projects himself as. Armed with a bizarre true story and even ridiculously funny script. The film easily has ten moments, steps in each act of the film that drops your jaw in the air. Now, that is a good script. But I think what Lasse does here is something much smarter and efficient. You'd think that after a while, the shock therapy would grow weary. But where there were supposed to be "mehs" there is perpetually an awe. And his first way in, is through the pace. It moves with a ferocious speed, even at times neglecting characters and their priorities. Lucky for them, they have a great cast and equally great performances in their side, especially Alfred Molina as the "co-author". There is another major improvement in the film and it is how meticulous it is. You'd think that a film like such, of such genre, that displays time passing by rapidly will rely upon montage sequences and a train of various scenarios whooshing in front of us. And instead we get proper hand picked set pieces driving carelessly in this safe street. Which makes me think about the genre, now. "The comedy" genre of the film is actually a major contributor in the dramatic elements. We get the essence of sketchy scenes. Now, where we draw lines in comic films are completely different then where we would draw in dramatic ones. Lasse pushes back and forth between these genres to make the most absurd plot swallow with delight in our face and the most mundane requirement feel like responsibility. That is what it all comes to, responsibility.
War Dogs is in many ways a mistake. A good, admirable one. But nonetheless a mistake. Almost as if Jonah Hill's character is going to deny or defend it.
War Dogs
The co-writer and director Todd Phillips makes a wannabe Adam McKay alike biography. Unfortunately, it is not smart. It is not sensible. What it is, is light on feet. And that's a double edged sword. That is not to say that when the time comes the film fails to draw in necessary emotions. Though not powerful, that pull you feel towards these characters is through performance and not the way it is portrayed. Phillips is smart enough to realize that within the next four lines the script asks him to shift the tone in a snap. What he then does, is make us walk through long one shot elaborated scenes that puts us right into the middle of the desert- often, literally! This is how the film remains to be for the most part of its run. You see each of these artists, on screen, straining themselves to achieve something higher from the script that never even existed in the first place. There is disappointment. Dissatisfaction comes from the incompleteness. Certain expectations are built in this completely-new-world, for the audience, and we are repeatedly shot down. We never get to seal the deal. The good scenes are overpowered by the dull ones and its muddy speech, is somehow, the spine of the film. How will it stand tall, then? Even Todd who is exceptional in sliding in his sense of humour, fails to cook its content into favoured crisp texture. Neither are these dogs trustworthy, nor are they an important piece of the puzzle at war times. If anything they are the ones spoiling the definition, the meaning behind all of it; if there is!
This theory is more convincing. It is humble and confident in its logistics. I bought it because they weren't selling it.
The Report
The writer and director Scott Z. Burns has returned after a while in the director's chair with an effective procedure and one and only one thing in his mind. Politics. While the film mostly works tediously on the journalism, the crux of the plot is puppeteered by the politics. It is framed as a part of democracy, war, partition and correction. These corrections are actually massively hungry in its nature. It pushes every party into believing that they are right. They might be pushing few boundaries and bending a few rules as a part of an excuse that they call it as their contribution in fighting against the evil. And though everyone is aiming for peace. This very difference, in every step, makes our unsung hero stand tall. And it is an unsettling feeling that we have. We gravitate towards him like some typical western genre hero would pull us. Adam Driver is on a surreal run. He is stretching his bones and begging for us to read The Report that he has written. There is unfathomable hard work and unfiltered devotion to be right. And then comes the force outside this circle that tries to pop out this bubble with all the schemes it can think of. Which then creates what could be described as this king and slave dynamics. This equivalency of owning others' birth rights does not only gets on theirs but our nerves too. The performance nourishes those sentiments with beautiful language in which Burns paints their emotions. The only regret of mine are the dark cringing images that the film projects. It can be too much to handle. To be fair, I shouldn't have been eating that bucket of ice cream while watching it.
Todd's welcoming gift to this article alike film is important. Grammatically incorrect and even lofty in its speech. But suitably important and that is enough to peddle.
Dark Waters
The director Todd Haynes's desk is under tons and tons of paper. The challenging ones are shuffled in a two hour narration and sprinkled incoherently as opposed to a proper structure. It is very rare to see a film that is directed by someone and written by someone else and still lacks a definite pattern. Maybe that is the pattern or simply I don't get it- it's usually the latter one, trust me. But what Todd needs primarily is steadiness. Accepting the calmness, the patience that a job like such offers. Waiting for the formality to settle in and then stir the soup. He is just not ready to let it sit for a while. What we then get is always, everything is said to be in motion, no matter how inedible it grows. It is preposterous how the family drama, the conflict that could have easily rattled you, instead just disenchants you from buying into what they care about. It takes a lot of time for them to finally get into our head, almost in its final act, do we get to sit and mourn, meaningfully. To be honest, I am also going to blame the lack of chemistry between Anne Hathaway and Mark Ruffalo. Ruffalo who is basically a wild bear wearing a suit with manners and etiquette like some member of a White House joining for a big dinner, Hathaway unfortunately feels too sober to enjoy and let it affect her. She is simply not open enough. She had to hold the inner "warning" monologue of Ruffalo and instead she is found to be a delicious side dish that just doesn't fit into this cruel chemically conspired world.
You think of it and you see it. You catch Rian plotting something, he catches you back with a grin observing the truth. This goes unmentioned and every second, for two hours.
Knives Out
The writer and director Rian Johnson has all the attention he would want from me. Actually, more than he can imagine. And maybe that is why his film communicates so intensely to me. It has been my whole life watching films and I don't think ever has a filmmaker outdone himself or herself every time. Every time I go through this mechanical factory of Johnson and I come out with a page of poem in my hand. Johnson's film is not just good but also impeccably difficult to resist, to dislike. The entire film is the pulp. The scheme. There is no bite. No structure. No sleazy attitude or excuse that tells you, the audience, to go through necessary changes, developments of storytelling and asks you to sit by as it sets every set pieces one by one. From the minute you enter this house, it's a GO. This high calibered cast is skillfully juggled and stirred with their whisk of borderline offensive humor. You are told to sit in the middle of a dinner table and you are pushed like some prop **** as these shady rich brats lashes you, charges you with upright white lies formed.. poorly! What? The distractions aren't distracting enough? Johnson is way ahead in this game. You can't even see him let alone catch him. He has staged the film within a few days, a short period of time. It's all temporary. Things, behaviour, intentions flickers faster than a broken tubelight. Just as his films are. You have to be up to date with the current intentions, suggestions, innuendos of the film. For the film is, both politically and wickedly strong. Never preachy but always on the mark. Knives Out is potent, ambitious and inspiring.
So what do you do when you have defined the genre, sealed it tight, preserved with time that keeps mining excelsior from it. You open the bottle, says Marty.
The Irishman
The director Martin Scorsese tells his story, his perspective, his unbiased take visually. He is one of the few directors alive and working passionately, hungrily(!)- You'd think that maturity over the years would decay his obsession, but he is latched onto that young man's game like any other new filmmaker trying to make his or her mark.- and sophisticatedly that brought the "catalyst" element into the TO-DO list of a director. I mean, think about it, his films spend more time on slow motion shots,- in this said-overly-long-but-you-don't-actually-want-shorter runtime the slow motion takes are basically the front page cover that comes in like fliers in such biographies- elaborated jokes and dead silence where Robert De Niro, Joe Pesci and Al Pacino alike dicey actors chews the script paper, the rest of the blah-blah historical events are fast forwarded with long physical sequences. Now if you look into those thousands and thousands of storyboards, Marty though not writing the script; the screenwriter Steven Zaillian did a fabulous job, is in control of the film more than you'd imagine. Never have I seen his film, where a footage falls short or the displayed images fall flat. Everything hits the sweet spot right into your heart. And this one, the most. Especially for me. The Irishman is a surprisingly satisfying and oddly a perfect end; if he makes it his last of the gangster genre, to all the films that he has piled upon his desk. The show that is placed so delicately in front of us, is neither an answer to escape nor salvation nor payback nor some bloodlusted revenge. It is exactly what Marty did, does. Remembering those times, simply that. The final act is one of the finest things I have experienced in recent times.
Decades ago, we wanted more of Tom. Nothing has changed, the good nature, the sheer brilliance, the gifted talent that he is. We still want, need more of Tom.
A Beautiful Day In The Neighbourhood
The director Marielle Heller has never seen a fall. And the way she is going with, there will never come a day. Only because she has got style. Now, I know that watching this film or reading the logline of it or even thinking of the genre it drills in, "style" is not what you would imagine is her way in. And though it is not, she cannot help herself glorify the emotional journey that these characters are going through. Just walk yourself again with Matthew Rhys and how he drinks in the surrounding of his. Whenever the film transcends from one scene to another, the models of buildings in the city and bridges and cars in traffic and whatnot location are displayed resonating a clean if surprising message. It took me a while to fully understand the intentions; not that I still do, of the makers. For there comes a time when these characters do jump outside the four walls, we get to experience the outer world. But also at that time we are told that we are delusional if we think, this is what we are seeing. For Rhys is delusional. The film completely relies upon his body language, his facial expression, his practical perspective. When he first encounters Tom Hanks kneeled down, probably uncomfortable, puppeteering and singing a song or when the background score takes the charge of the film as Rhys rattles the cage hungrily or when he is told to be silent or metaphorically to calm down, we are with him, trembling on our feet. Tom's presence remains just like the role of Fred Rogers in our life. He comes in bits and pieces, episodically and enlightens what is already A Beautiful Day In The Neighbourhood.
The film has an extremely tedious routine that it begs us to go through. All the amazing fireworks moments are just not amazing enough to distract us.
The Mexican
To call the director Gore Verbenski's "adventurous" film an oddball is.. actually, perfect. You wouldn't get more "out of the box" version of a textbook con-this-con-everything film. The script feels improvised in every sense. The storyline follows a familiar, expected, often dull structure and the elements spiraling out the treats of the film or the originality- if we can call it that- of the film through adding a punchline to that very scene. Every scene, in fact, is staged and written in a form that looks like it is trying to dodge an unmentioned bullet. And that bullet is not shot out from the gun The Mexican but their own version of police from the subconscious department that never allows them to state what is in front of them. The physical sequences along with the verbal too, then goes round and round, making a tomfoolery out of it- that by the way is the joke of it all, especially Brad Pitt's character who as always is amazing in such sketchy roles- rather than confronting its fear. And when it finally accepts what it has to do, that it is time to be itself, completely, naked and upright. Those moments is what you will cherish. Fortunately, Julia Roberts and James Gandolfini have those moments in their pocket. Their eerie bonding and the nature of feeding on each others' incompetence makes this drive safe and fruitful. Gandolfini shines from all corners commanding the screen like never before. You have got to have something special when you come out as the star from a project where Brad and Julia are at the helm of it all.
Hence, Minority Report feels like the first headline you read in the morning newspaper. It's a good feeling.
Minority Report
Spielberg felt in a rush, to me. Maybe he was following Cruise. It is not the first time one of his films has been a victim of this phenomenon and it won't be the last if it will be dealt like this. The director Steven Spielberg occasionally does dip into the entertainment pool to expand his filmography. And as always we have left the screen satisfied and amazed at the spectacle that he puts enormous effort into. Those details pay off just like it does here. And while I am satisfied with the product, never for a second it convinced me that this is coming straight from Spielberg's vision. Don't get me wrong, there are few details added in the film regarding the futuristic materially rich world and the style and efficiency it comes with. But something doesn't add up. While the ambition is big, the reasoning felt short to me. For instance, I can understand the incompetence of the film to fully craft a nail biting chase sequence involving jet packs. But what I had issues with are cereal boxes that are animated. Sort of like, from the magical world of JK Rowling. These pictures animate and they endorse themselves perfectly. Just like the film does of Spielberg's sci-fi workshop. The emotional storage is empty, this time. In that sequence itself, Tom Cruise mourning over his son and the memories that he revisits feels misplaced and poorly choreographed. Yes, it could be argued that he is a stress eater and what not. But it then, doesn't communicate with us properly like it should have. The film in such ways repeatedly undermines what could have been heavy emotional moments. What we are left with is a highly paced entertaining action packed thriller which keeps changing the priorities and the headlines.
Sandberg's film has empty threat, stake, emotion, impact on us, its exhausted audience, that cannot wait for the light to turn on and the screen to turn off.
Lights Out
The co-writer and director David F. Sandberg has nothing to offer. And he is inviting us. This daring is neither admirable nor childish enough by us to reject it. We cannot, I cannot just say NO to the small wonders that Sandberg in its own bumps and trumps, can display. Now, is that all a coincidence or a genuine artistry taking place. What we do know for sure, is that this is an empty call. It is the part where the makers are bluffing. But even in a bluff, after a point, there is something that is revealed. Good or bad. In here, the void is dangerously arrogant. It is not going to and will not succumb to any obligatory notes of the film. Often this bold take could be beneficial but here it is peddled to nowhere. I would gladly stand up on the stage that it is not their fault, they didn't have any answers. But in haters' defense, there wasn't any question. First of all the genre isn't respected itself. It claims to be of horror and functions- or does not function- like a psychological drama. Psychological drama? Sure, why not. I'll take that as well. But when it comes the time for it to be that, it directs towards the sci-fi aspects of the storyline. There is no coherence on where the boundary is. What is white and what is black. What is in and what is out. What is light and what is dark. And now you can understand my annoyance when the warning sign, the title on the poster screams, Lights Out.
In terms of musical genre, Frozen 2 is balanced, if not perpetually gifting its audience what they expect.
Frozen 2
Chris Buck and Jennifer Lee, the co-writers and directors, may not be able to convince everyone to hum along this time. Especially not the audience as large as they gathered previously. But it is not their fault. They went for a more mature and lighter yet equally moving version of the stereotypical Disney formula. Now, I have been experiencing these Disney films since the very beginning just like most of us. And it has worked every time if done properly. And I have always wondered how that "teamwork" aspect draws you in. Melts you down. And makes you laugh, happy with tears in your eyes. But now that I think about it and am out of the screen watching this mesmerizing second chapter of the Frozen, I feel that the "optimism" also partakes majorly on bombarding you with satisfaction that rains on your command. I say "your" for the emotion, at the end of the day, remains subjective. The makers offers you plenty of equation and relationship and range and situation to cave yourself in. That unfathomable, unfiltered optimism along with the prophecy that states, "It is not what it seems" are the hidden gems in the script that is pulsating way too strongly for any of the evil spirit to tone it down. There are moments, there is this core theme of the soundtrack that advances the storyline beautifully. And fortunately, the songs revolving around it and the climax justifying it, is the call, the tease of the Holiday season we all want. What I love about this franchise, is that it is never only about the lead character. I know we've had proper supporting characters before too, but none of them contributes so profoundly as they do here.
Bless Bale and Damon and Balfe and Ford and Ferrari. So rare when everything, everyone, cries for one lap. One perfect lap.
Ford V Ferrari
The director James Mangold is deservedly and in my case surprisingly in the lead in the Oscar race for the Best Direction trophy. And I am including the best of this year's most controlled films. There are many indie films that packs a linear, safer and comforting punch than this at-times-commercial-yet-fully-artsy drama. I have never seen him so confident and empowering on screen. And not to forget his large chunk of the film spends time on the road, in the run, at the face of Bale's snide-y looks that resembles to me with that mysterious Alfred Borden way of scanning out from The Prestige.
With a whoosh the film goes by like the Ferrari(!) and speaks mostly, structure wise, a pretty standard tale. Not at all biography but sports alike, the film feels. You are aware of where and how things would go and yet Mangold insists to you to experience these moments with this incredibly rich cast. Those tiny moments where it flowers you with flood of imaginative thoughts and ideas that scares and educates you, is the best asset of the film.
The nuanced performance then and then only emerges up, visible to the naked eye, teary eye by then. The helps that Matt Damon provides, the rejoicing moment between a husband and a wife after landing a well paid job and Christian Bale's performance staged, framed, mostly around his face, are the moments where you go through a religious experience of discovering cinema in a nail-biting match about patience. Another thing about Ford V Ferrari that caught me by surprise was how both the lead roles were actually underdog characters. That doesn't happen everywhere. No one dares.
Orphan takes big and big leaps as it progresses. I should say "age" and not "progress" for it also makes less and less sense as it grows.
Orphan
And we meet again. The director Jaume Collet-Serra and I were just getting along and I came upon this project of his. Not to say, not to forget that I am not fascinated and mesmerized by his direction. But once again it is not him that is arrogantly high on the material it projects but the screenwriters David and Alex. They are proud and in love with the rabbit they have hidden under the hat. And I have seen people occasionally dish out the rabbit. But it is not just those final moments of the trick but the entire pitch of it.
There is no proper call of a judgement on what goes around in this house. Not haunted, not dysfunctional family and not the correctness or incorrectness of the judgement but the arrogance to stick by whether it is or not. Addition to that, the way each character is dealt with is also not profoundly dull but even insulting at times. For the difference between how these character and we are treated is nothing. There is no border between it.
With elaborative manipulative scenarios placed in narration with fast editing and loud background score and good performances we are told to get mad over and our feelings amped up strongly towards these odd characters. And we do. It gets hold of you and doesn't leave you easily. And I think it is not that the storyline is working. It is because we are vulnerable and out of control. We are told to observe, just observe, as the film and family collapse on the cheesiest and slippery floors with no ground or grip to hold onto any of its statements or theories. And we sit by and simply take it. Bravely take it all.
It is wildy and deliberately misleading. You don't get that in a genre like such just like the character that doesn't fit in a film like such.
The Informant
The director Steven Soderberg has been in these cases for so long. Almost a pro. "Almost" is relative here for Matt Damon is the king. The Godfather. He has been here only for a day and he wins over your heart. Convinces you that he is on your side and all of that by a guy who has had an experience of only a month. And Damon's performance has received a lot of buzz for his physical transformation too. And it completely shows. The way he walks and poses and sits with an unapologetic man spreading.
Everything in every possible way he calls out for attention that is never actually not addressed. And you'd think that if something goes loud, it would collapse within a moment. But Damon knows this script through and through. The script misinforms you just like the character does, the plot does and every other aspect of the film does, Damon also changes the way his part of the contribution is usually interpreted. Tricking you is what the film wants.
Movie magic, the fooling objective of the job gets checked away smoothly. I know the film doesn't get usually mentioned, but this is one of those Soderberg films that despite its polished formal looking set pieces and the fact that it is a film about real events, it is utterly fictional. Beautifully fictional. Like some superhero comic film. Where twists and turns is part of its existence. The way it breathes. It is certainly not one of his stylish but definitely an earnest film. If this deal is to be done in a black alley. Then be it. They will make you sign it by the end of this meeting.
So it is about a group not coming but working together. That's the premise and there is no chemistry. And yet I liked it. It is smarter than it pretends to be.
Old School
Todd Phillips, the co-writer and director, is one of those filmmakers that gets comedy right. We see people take comedy lightly and as a result the comedy starts taking them for granted. As in, even good sketch scenes and one liners have failed repetitively if there is no head or leg to its existence. Over the years, you see these happening.. nay, escalating where you see a series of jokes stitched together in the form of highlight. This post social media world where patience is the last thing on the audience's list.
They are usually gobbling over these attention seeking humor. Where the root and stem is chosen, overpowered by the fruit. But what it, if looked at the bigger picture, shows is that there is no need to endure either the hard work by the audience or put up by the makers. And hence comes these few filmmakers who believes in the entire characters. All sides of it. All dimensions.
Phillips makes sure you see each side of them before you experience the wildness, the mistakes and their surprising skills. In fact, even his jokes work like that. It starts with an innocent or childish or amateur ideas then leads up to its peak and then we are also shown what the aftermath result is. These layers may get unnoticed if you are mesmerised in Will Ferrell's commitment to physical comedy. Old School is old if looked at the ideas it explores. It sounds like an idea that is pitched to the producers to get them all riled up over the script. Luckily, derivation is not a disadvantage but a proud armour.
Roberts is practically given a higher themed role that deserved better treatment and respect than it got.
My Best Friend's Wedding
The director P. J. Hogan and the writer Ronald Bass seem to have some sort of miscommunication. For the film feels different on paper and looks completely different on screen. It works for the most part of it and that is its only shield. But I am going to give the credit to the performance. And Julia Roberts is leading the pack. It is her humbling nature, her overconfidence and the mistakes between those moments that makes her vulnerable and desperate. Carrying these many baggages, especially the desperation factor of her character that could easily resonate with the audience and this is not something that is going to help, Roberts is still charming.
She owns the goofiness like no one and what you get is basically a one man show put up with determination but ease. And the first half is basically just that. Just her making wrong decision, throwing herself out, fighting and not regretting it at all. And that is why it remains light footed, entertaining and attractive. And then there is this conversation between Roberts and Dermot Mulroney in a stadium where they stand and reminisce about their relationship.
Now Mulroney is speaking in that scene but the camera is focusing on Roberts and how she deals with these arrays of emotion where she is flattered and scared and goofy and intentionally enticing yet sinister and drunk on her evil one dimensional plans. She covers up the screen and takes over each character just as she has in this article of mine. But you shouldn't complain. Roberts is one of those rare actors that fluently embodies a physically comic role and dives entirely into the absurdity of what it demands. My Best Friend's Wedding has everything that shouldn't work. From a compromising marriage to maid of honor that is rooting for something else. But hey, the food is good.
Neither Godfather nor Sopranos, it is more like a soap opera episode with a staggering twist.
Dinner Rush
The director Bob Giraldi's last film goes back to the beginning of this 21st century, almost two decades ago. And I say last film, because after that he hasn't made any, which is kind of unusual in show business especially after adding to that fact is that, this is an amazing film. Simply brilliant. Thrilling. And also charming. Where did they get the room to fill that in. And where all these flavours were supposed to overpower each other making it a muddy hotchpotch of failed attempts, the film is crystal clear when it shifts from one table to another. You don't see that coherence, that confident in storyteller's language.
For frankly, that is the only achievement in the film that makes it apart from other crime dramas. For underneath all the dressing, it's a gossip town is what it is. That's what lightens up this night. The entire film has to and does run on simply conversations shared by these people trying to have a good time. In return we get some of the best bar games, flirt talks, gossip columns, cut throat politics, jealous exes, fed up customers and work affairs.
All these things are shot left and right and never sets together for one goal in one direction. And maybe that's why this runny dish- I know it's not fair that just because the film has a restaurant in it so I just use the metaphors revolving around it- is all over the place and still the most ordered item in this rich formal place. Dinner Rush is perfectly titled. It has people having dinner in it. And they are in a rush. Dinner will always speak to you, rush was the difficult part and they have got that objective checked with a smile on their faces.
It is the old style filmmaking residing between the temperament that warms the tea and whistles the kettle. I'd like to have a cup of that.
Doctor Sleep
Mike Flanagan who directed and adapted this controversial novelization for the screen is an apt choice to voice the second swing by Stephen King on Dan's character and the supernatural element it possesses. Why controversial? It actually is like being in a tug of war game where you are the price. But I think Flanagan found a sweet spot, that gray area that any horror director would love to have in plenty. And that is why his procedure that takes its time properly, gets the job done. It couldn't be more book-ish. It reeks of old book and I love every aspect of that. Each character, every fabric of information that stacks and builds the final countdown brick by brick is simply novelizing.
No regrets. If you have to host a news show as such, you have to stage it like this. No need to celebrate or electrify, just words floating around, so loud, so big that even performance and other characteristics gets overlapped by King's vision. In this sense it feels, I don't want to say anti-Kubrick but definitely pro-King. But you can only walk far away if you are expecting for the audience to read this story on screen rather than experience.
Ergo, comes these stills and thrills that has the mind bending look that appears like Stanley Kubrick's dream. The swooshing and whooshing of the adrenaline rush that warps these characters to their self-created reality and the deafening snapping of reality that wakes them up. Another asset is of course Ewan McGregor as Dan with this time axe on HIS hands. McGregor's performance is magnificent, child like it seems to me, even though he tells it to be inspired from Jack Nicholson's madness. He cries when he is terrified and falls for the easiest motion that exists. All in all, Doctor Sleep is a functioning system. You don't see that nowadays.
I see Pinkman in Paul who is armed with moving performance and Snape in Rickman as always gloating but this time without the half-smirk on his face.
Eye In The Sky
The director Gavin Hood has been lucky. And I don't want to be that guy that says that the day is over as soon as you land a project. It goes without saying that he works incredibly hard and hence is successful in his well established rhythm. I say only lucky or even well suited for a job as such, because I have experienced his big budget blockbuster films that may have not worked but definitely has dared to go big and made a splash around the town. And this is actually a great combination. Usually, these big banner films like say.. Marvel, choose their storytellers wisely and mostly the ones who have excelled in making Indie films and romanticize, dramatize and glorify tiny aspects, relationships, characters and essential elements.
Which makes sense on hiring such makers since the fireworks of visual effects will always be dazzling for the audience, the only think they require now is someone making them care for the characters. But lately I have seen a couple of examples where they have flipped the coin of such themed ideas. And that is that now these Indie films gets sponsored if some commercial filmmaker chooses to tell the story of such importance both politically and socially.
So now the tactics that these makers are inherited with and that is to keep the audience at the edge of their seats, comes in handy and makes the formal paperworks interesting and juicy. Eye In The Sky remains gripping through this effective formula. You see direction and editing go hand in hand just to make you give the chills of a chase scene by staying in one room among the same characters and the same objectives. That last part, the objective, that endorses the film in every language.
Brolin makes you care about everything and he keeps himself at the bottom of the list. No wonder, he is at the top of mine.
Only The Brave
The director Joseph Kosinski's films are not something that have caught my eye. And that is saying a lot, considering how his filmography contains one of the biggest, shiniest, loudest colourful CGI films like Tron : Legacy and Oblivion where mind you, once again the biggest star Tom Cruise was roaming about alone. And if you know the spoilers of the film there is more than Tom Cruise in the film- jumble this sentence at your own risk. Also, this is one of those films that has been on my radar but never actually got the chance to see it.
And not only because there is Josh Brolin at the heart of it or the film got a good reception but the fact that the film covers different timelines in the story about these indeed brave men. The story hops around a lot. And showcases snippets of character's value, disease and hopefully the hint of medicinal pills that will keep them alive. While doing so the film could easily so loud, cheesy, predictable and amateurish. It is one of the most difficult jobs to pull off.
Hence, fascinated by what new method does Kosinski deal with this time jump I was amped for this biography. So what he uses is a sharp, on-your-face editing that embraces these video clips and tells frankly what the deal really is. You get used to with this procedure in these two hours to the extent that you start demanding to be treated like that. Only The Brave is a success on that very note. For it is a story about people living a lifestyle that we cannot imagine or adapt just as the supporting character often fails to and so it has to and it HAS to mold you to that gruesome training that they call routine.
Bryce Dallas Howard is a gem. It's fine if you don't buy it, just watch her and Joaquin Phoenix share their childhood.
The Village
M. Night Shyamalan, the writer and director, over the years has managed to create his own followers, fans with a specific voice and taste. Now I might not be strongly one of the members of the elite group but his grammar is something I understand and occasionally fall for. And this is what I love the most about his films. It is not something that actually makes you think or makes your head spin with jaw dropping visuals, what it is, is a slow burn and what it does is make you fall for it, slowly, like falling in love. It could happen within two hours or just an instant. And his films does spiral out, does advance in a way that every scene lacks a missing puzzle.
And it is always that one missing puzzle. So it can happen that you can fall in that one moment. But this one works somewhat different than his usual films. In fact it works in the opposite direction. Usually his film starts somewhere in the middle of the desert and then finds a proper track as it ages. The film ages and things start to make sense as every element falls into places. What we have here is outrageously arrogant.
Yes, I understand that the storyline asks for the film to make sense, have correct order from the first stage and it also asks for the chaos to flood in and upset the expected outcomes. But when the film shines the light on the hidden matter, where it is anticipated to check off all the avant garde activity into certain mannerisms, the film keeps that vacant and us, strangely alone in the middle of the woods. The Village could not be more isolated, it makes sure you feel the same way after you've had its tour.
Bespectacled. I love that word. Just like every other plot development in the film.
Cloudy With A Chance Of Meatballs
Phil Lord and Christopher Miller, the powerpack duo, the writer and director, are trending like the next thing nowadays. And their fame traces back to this project that puts these skillful storytellers on the map. If you watched their film in the order like I did, you'd be able to see their growth and their current version's structure like Neo played by Keanu Reeves does in the Matrix Trilogy. Ignoring the fact that I just thought of my myself as "the one" and what I just said could be and is easily wrong, Lord and Miller makes a great team. One thing that you would find common is how smart their characters are.
And if they treat their characters like it, they do their audience as well. And naturally then, there plot also moves rapidly and remains smart and intact in what it has to derive at the end of the day. There is also this business in not just the motion of the cameras but also the information passed on like a light joke. The film is easily gripping when too much goes on screen. And what we may call "Easter eggs" the delightful treats are in fact easy to grasp.
This is something that their other animated film, The Lego Movie, did suffer from. With too many characters, jokes and elements constructed in front of the screen, you get disenchanted and feel cheated, left out of the inner circle, as you fail to stay with the images moving on the screen. Cloudy With A Chance Of Meatballs has a more simpler linear narrative arcs, that are predictable and charming. We know of these recipes, we have been at this dinner table and yet can't wait to have more of this finger licking good; that's not stealing, by the way.
It is exactly like the title suggests, it is sweet and every one is going to like it.
The Peanut Butter Falcon
I don't use this word. I don't like to. But the film is "cute". Sweet. The writer and director Tyler Nilson and Michael Schwartz is frankly out on about with an ice cream truck gifting us free multi flavoured ice cream. The only job that they then have is to make sure we like this flavoured ice cream and also not are lactose intolerant. I am going to be honest. I don't like the flavour. Especially not the way it looks. This freestyle beach life or sea life is something that I don't get ever attracted to but then with such substantial if not stylish film is served, you cannot keep yourself away from the dish.
There is also the completeness in the script. As in, it follows the perfect script formula where every element, every scene, every piece of information leads to something. And it has every right to get, give, wherever, whatever it wants. It would then barely be disappointing for the viewers. As it never is. But there is this one other final update on this stereotypical script. And that climax is if not satisfying, is definitely mature and mind clearing to me.
The performance on the other hand also walks by smoothly just as the film does. There is nothing extraordinary, nothing special and nothing new to put a red ribbon on what it has to say. Still The Peanut Butter Falcon is the only one you would root for, bet on. And it is because the other contestants aren't good enough and he is a real people pleaser. He doesn't seek attention and that's why you would be attentive, intrigued towards him. There is also this bizarrely genius formula that it repetitively uses and it is that it goes to enormous extent to just push the characters for another step.
The choreography of how they talk is incredibly exhilarating, almost as if they are fighting with their swords.
The King
David Michod, the co-writer and director, has a non-violent approach to this infamous story about war and betrayal. Neither does it come off mature nor pretentious. But what it is, is that it is really smart for its age, for its runtime, for its era that it speaks about. And these snippets of wittiness gives us enough sugar, energy to run on our own. And some might argue that these antic alike wins in a game that might not usually be perceived as a game, are not enough to make us compromise and sit through when these characters mourn or exhale continuously. But actually, this very pathos is what gives us power, them rage and purpose to stand up against the general consensus.
Everyone wants to prove that they are special. And the ones observing this era go passing by and I mean the elders, the sophisticated counsellors and not the audience. They are the ones that would be heading in the other direction. And that is how you they and you weigh in the characters and their importance. There is nothing humbling but definitely righteous to see the crux, the friendship between Joel Edgerton and Timothee Chalamet spiral out in the form of a father and a son.
And a father and a son is more appropriate title than say teacher and a student. Not that they don't learn from each other or that there is no emotion flowing between them but along with all the education that they need, they are also in desperate pursuit of a father and a son. This tied up promise, unsaid promise, is frankly beautiful. The King is smart, the people guiding him are, the people following him are, the people fighting him are. So the people watching and experiencing them better be.
It is a vibrating story about vibrating characters, hence they don't go anywhere.
Adopt A Highway
Logan Marshall-Green has a medicinal journey in his mind and its tickets are worth more than they ask for. This debut on both paper and screen has a surprising calmness. You don't see such control often in filmmakers. Now you can argue as much as you like whether it was a small budget that was helping him or few scenes or less crowd or experienced crowd. But the truth of the matter is, the end result is a sweet delight. Often we see stories pushing our protagonist into self discovering journey that leads them towards new places both physically and mentally and no matter how breathtaking they have been.
None of them actually made me feel the urgency to have that very trip, to be around that swooshy air and sensible being that we are rooting for. The film puts you right into the spot where Ethan Hawke goes through. It is present and alive. Which makes Hawke's work easy going. And also with him in charge of being the face of the movie there are no regrets on performance. You see Hawke adapt its surrounding lickety split.
When around child he absorbs her notion to a degree that his gullibility comforts us when the storyline has to take appropriate harsh decisions. When around an expressive personality that is taking over his things, he does try and wrap around her as well in order to show his gratitude and welcoming nature. And when her boss boss around supportively, he seeks the motherhood-ness that he always wanted. No wonder then, that the film focuses on a brief period of time and bounces around few characters, to keep his innocence alive. For after he goes out, after he Adopt(s) A Highway, he is ready to take responsibility.
So Ralph comes in later, way too late. And still he takes over the film like, um.. you know who must not be named.
Official Secrets
Gavin Hood is so not the director I would think of when a geo-political story is to be deconstructed on the screen. And is probably the only reason why this film works the best than any other maker could have made. We have a general perception by now on how to receive a film. You feel the tone of the film within the first five minutes and start adjusting yourselves accordingly. The assumption is both part of educating yourself on how to catch a film and also the disadvantageous alibi that one cannot get rid off. But every now and then a film comes that is uniquely volatile on the speech and has a spin that you'd be fooled by its nature. Not manipulative just incredibly fresh and uprightly vocal.
And that is the only reason why the film works. Against a standard script and a textbook execution, this brand new information flashed in front of you, is why you enjoy a film like this. Yes, enjoy. Entertaining is not the feeling you were hoping to receive in a film like such. And I know it might look like the film is substantially gifted and perhaps is why gripping throughout the course. But it is also the way it is structured.
There is real commercial visible in the way every information is passed. And there is nothing bad about that. Endorsing a material and sticking by the promise is what every consumer, viewer could hope for. For a film like Official Secrets that is about the dirty works going under the table the film is awfully clean. And not in some formal, paper-ish style but the old western genre kind. Your space is respectable and everyone gets room, lines, moments to fire the gun; the duel is soothing.
The chemistry is hilarious, if not emotionally empowering as it think it does and that's probably the unsung rule.
Zombieland: Double Tap
Ruben Fleischer, the director's return to this infamous, beloved land is just as it was supposed to go in the previous adventure. Mediocre. But unfortunately, they couldn't. So they waited for almost a decade and attempted to swing by and satisfy their needs. Joking aside, the film is successfully joyous on being light footed and entertaining. Despite having no particular moving moments for me, I call this a success as it would definitely not be rolled under that cliched list of films that were ruined by the makers that wanted to grab the money from the box office rather than the whisperings.
That is its biggest achievement. And only. It somehow manages to dodge every expected textbook issues a film with this caliber and in this position gets shot with. And mind you these fired bullets are not by someone else but us, the fans, itself. We are the ones that wants to see through the hokum of film's existence. At the back of our heads, the fear gives birth to the overprotected ideas that we have towards the characters. We want to call out the absurdity of the plot.
And in order to not give us the satisfaction on calling out their bluffs, what the writers have done wittily is not let you leave the company of these four good companions. So even when in Zombieland: Double Tap new characters are introduced, the film never leaves perception of these four familiar faces. When some valley girl barges in, then Emma Stone becomes the audience and takes charge of the show and when two hunters are to be introduced, the mirroring gag takes place. And while one musician is always been talked about what Woody Harrelson and Rosario Dawson talks about is not each other but their fascination over the king, Elvis Presley.
It feels like a long SNL sketch and I am only saying that it is long for the runtime I saw or else I thought it was of the same length.
The Little Hours
Jeff Baena, the director and the co-writer of this hilarious I-don't-think-satirical comic film, has all my attention I can give. And there are no regrets. Not even for a second. Despite its ups and downs. I am sure that the film has plenty of different aspects and things that is to be swooned over. But let me focus on one. Okay. So there's this one joke, in an entire film. A comedy film. First of all you've got to take your hats off for that bold move. Now, there have been such rare projects as such that has made its way up to the top. But no one walked on one track, one tune.
And the joke is- I hope you are ready for it- that these characters, the personalities they possess, is not actually how they are and behave. This contradiction between their appearance and nature is the ongoing and the only gag the film has. So now how do you make it last long, in fact, throughout the film. Well, the first is obviously that you push the boundary gradually as the film ages knowing where you are going with these sketches and how impactful the destination is.
And the second one, the surprising factor, the soul reason why it works every single time, is the reaction to these outrageous actions. Not only these reactions or characters are mirroring the enactments of the audience. But also is subconsciously telling the audience how to act in these circumstances. The observer is told to lose it completely in various ways, different positions, situationally. Now was this intentional or a fluke, is a latter matter. The result is that it works. Charmingly it flows by rather than it floods in. The Little Hours is little and feels barely like of an hour, everything in a good way.
You will be rewarded. But that reward is piled under white lies that are obviously not convincing.
Motherless Brooklyn
Edward Norton, the second time director's definitely-a-first official writing credit, is everything. Has everything. From a commercial look in its bigger picture to an art-sy rhythm in details. You'd think that a script with these qualities will be balanced. And instead if anything it is immensely unsettling. The film tries to be everything and gets only few handful of things right and it had small hands and loose grip. This was the actual "big reveal" it was going for. And when it finally discloses the curtains, you are disappointed. I mean they did work hard and had an incredible cast to put up a dazzling show.
The film also gives room for the performers and the audience to chew in the material properly. In order to do so the film celebrates, flaunts, milks on probably wrong moments that might be correctly motivated but is amateurishly staged to ever connect with the audience. It explains things more than it should. So it could be smart but it also often suggests that we, the audience are slow along with the characters floating around, swinging a bat that is nowhere near in contact with the ball.
It has a background score that doesn't ring a bell and editing that misleads its audience. I can point out ten moments easily where they should have placed and moved the camera differently or would have chosen the other angle shot in post production. The actor-turned-filmmaker has got the former job to the point. We are following him in every frame and never, not even for a second, he, Norton, manipulates us into empathy, with his complex situation in this hefty case. Motherless Brooklyn's cast is cradled carefully, Norton cares the most in the film, it's just that no one looks out for him as he looks out for everyone else.
The scrutiny is left all the way to our imagination and when the time comes to answer, it never matches the description we had in our head.
From Hell
The Hughes Brothers, the directors, aren't actually living up to the reputation of the Brothers' show. Not to say that every of such duos have given us the best that there is out there. But if you look closely, you will find one quality embedded in them, in their work. And it is that they are entertaining. They'll hook you in and convince you, no matter how outrightly wrong and questioning their methods would be. And this is really annoying for the makers, since they could never arrest you with their thrills. And to top it off, the film claims to be of horror genre and not for a single moment are you ever enchanted.
So shocking, disenchanting the viewers is a secondary element. From script to execution, this gossip-y gullible town thinks similar of its audience who is told to feed off from those same elements. Now one going through those same events than the one's observing would definitely be more into it. And even that is not the case here. Addition to that, these "ones" that are told to go through and are in it, also doesn't seem to enjoy.
Even the actors, the performance feels too effortful to ever be taken seriously. Johnny Depp, the sung, off-the-boundaries, police detective, is way too reserved to ever put itself into danger. The stakes never communicates with us. And it is primarily because these performers won't care for any of the ongoing fiascos in this spooky town. How are we then supposed to buy into the gossip that they are numb towards. Why would we invest on something so formal and subjectively pretentious. From Hell is from hell. The methods, the laws and the routine is something that would never appeal to us. Why bother, then? is the final reaction we have as we bid goodbye to this doomed town.
Julie and Anne are pals, buddy, chums, sista-s, girlfriends. They wanted me to say that, so I thought I mention it.
The Princess Diaries
I wish the director Garry Marshall's film was something that I could recommend to someone. It is a classic Disney film. In the sense that it could not reek more of stereotypical characters that has made it what it is. From the goofiness to the walking emotional therapy it possesses. Each element of the film is familiar, likeable and pathetically outdated. And I say that considering the fact that it came around almost two decades ago. The script repetitively bumps into montage sequences that is supposed to delight us with various gags. Now these comic sketches has to be and does make us drool over these characters.
But the film suffers, sacrifices its integrity or more accurately its consistency in order to serve the purpose of having a firm grip over its audience. It has that. I will give that to it. But after I was halfway through the film, it hit me suddenly that it wasn't their fault- actually, it was. The makers never actually had anything substantial to say in this film. Naturally, then, they would surf around with known, cliched scenarios trying to pass the time. Why does it have to pass the time? Because it has to carry the emotional weight at those final moments.
And it could only be achieved after making us stay, follow, drive around these characters for almost two hours in order to get us attached to these royal beings. Anne Hathway's first role couldn't have been better than this. Not only does it capture her goofy hard working personality but also makes her "first time" counts. Helping her lose the virginity is none other than Mary Poppins (Julie Andrews) guiding her and us into the royal-esque world. You won't learn anything that you already didn't know, but it is certainly fun to ride along with her and wave by.
Loud colours. Cheap insulting jokes. Cheesy set. Cartoonish production and costume designing. And one of my favourite love stories.
Down With Love
This could be my favourite outing that resides in the director Peyton Reed's world or filmography. And mind you Peyton Reed gave us Marvel's light hearted superhero and still this film remains to be the one that feels "out of this world". It is one of those films that will stay with you for weeks. Popping on your hand like some jewellery piece that you saw by the window and can't wait to buy. It grabs you by your collar and rattles your body like a puppet until you fall merrily to the set rules by the maker. The film feels extremely simple and it goes to tremendous lengths to prove its simplicity.
And how binary can it make your life. And even while doing so, even while weaving out various complicated theories and set pieces, it never gets difficult to swallow. "Don't close your eyes" is what's order around Ewan McGregor playing a powerful name in the city and "Open your eyes" is what's whispered around Renee Zellweger who's humility is catching on fire. This balance of two different worlds is euphorically attractive. You cannot not love the way these guys talk.
The conversations are incredibly funny and wrong. Deliberately wrong. It is important you figure that out quickly. You should be aware of the kind of jokes that cheers up the makers. And it is not the properties, characteristics of the characters nor the situational humor that fits in on the narration. Things should rhyme and remain symmetric, no matter what the circumstances are. Now this is the subtexted ongoing joke in the film. You better get ready to follow this system or this is going to be a bad day for you. Down With Love never goes down, actually. You'd think that it would be a disadvantage. You are wrong.
Liam Neeson, for once, is not hunting nor surviving alone. I like this team spirit.
The Grey
I think I could presume Joe Carnahan, the director and the adapter of the novel "Ghost Walker", smirking over his intentions on making this film. Now, this is something that carried me through this film even at tough times. And believe me there were plenty of troubling times in the film. But more on that later. Let's just stick to the elephant in the room. The bigger picture. And that is that the film is not about the heroes. But those supporting them. It is a story about someone else, if considering and it is speaking about, say.. the one. And in the lead is Liam Neeson. Being, the one.
And it is his performance that tells us it is not about him. He has been telling you since day one. It's just that you realize it later. And maybe that's why his performance starts fitting in on this hostile environment as we start aging around him. In those last moments, Neeson provides us enough reasons to fall under his shade. Comforting is our response in a not-so-comforting state. The film is a complete film in that confrontation. But it comes with a baggage.
And the baggage being that that friendliness is only established if you are speculative and even to a certain extent repellent with the ideas thrown at our face at the beginning. Another repetitive issue we come across is the reach of Joe's film. You see him reaching over for something and he gets hold of it firmly. The only issue is that we can see through our naked eyes, that he could have gone a bit further without any strain and yet he resists or ignores. The Grey has that gray area between our imagination and its answers, which often is interpreted by us as incompetency.
In this suspicious blame game, emotions have no part. They don't have any say. And you know what I liked that this time.
Non-Stop
And we are back. This was not intentional, trust me. And also this time it is not the writer but the director who has got a hold of me, now. Although if you would rummage around my recent catalogue, you'd find Liam Neeson reigning in my mind. So, the director. Jaume Collet-Serra. I think I am getting to know the taste of his films now. They aren't pretentious. I'll give him that. They come in with one agenda. And they make sure you have that badge worn, if not endorsed by you, after you leave the screen. And that is that it is entertaining. It is one gripping ride.
This mid-air hijack suspense thriller is a smooth ride. Just like the plane. I know it doesn't sound like one. But trust me. It is smarter, intuitive and a charming adventure. At the heart of it, is Liam Neeson. And around him is a big plane, that might look like small. And in that smallness, not just physically but also philosophically, your film is safe and sensible. The compactness is intentionally buoyant and never gets too much for you to handle.
It is not there to suffocate you but to allow you to bounce off within those confined walls or more accurately characters, and feed off of them merrily. There is no other joy in the film, in any film, then to be teased or provoked by the storytelling and let your imagination wander and fill the empty space in your mind with powerful theories. And I think for that matter only, Non-Stop was criticized majorly for its final act. A definite answer, no matter how magnanimous, could never replace the towering vision of an individual's mind. Preferably for thoughts aren't bogged down with responsibilities, but the film is, the character was, Liam was.
This grandma's cookie has a sweet afterthought recipe that you have to be prepared for beforehand.
The Farewell
The writer and director Lulu Wang is on mark. To say that she is onto something would be understating things. And I do mean just this film and not her work throughout her career. For the film is armed with an extremely powerful script. And if looking at her procedure, her execution of this film, it certainly follows textbook rules efficiently. There might not be any boundaries broken or creativity flared across the screen, but just authenticity is displayed. And if thought about it, her own script doesn't leave anything for her to stretch and celebrate.
The script is beautifully, sharply and almost necessarily edited. Each sequence makes sense, one after the another adds up and lines up fittingly. It flows like it should. If you take out one string of this film, the entire film falls apart. The theme is specifically specific in terms of the situational objections it creates yet, with an incredible set of characters and cast, the branches are important in this tree and they set out arguably one of the finest generic and timely film. It also is said to be funny.
But it isn't funny in the sense that it makes you chuckle. It makes those characters happy and not us. We as an audience are told to be focused on entirely something else. Those sub texted narrative points is where The Farewell makes this emotionally simple and sweet departure so heavy. The Farewell also has this one fine quality that I miss these days. And that is that there is no way you can predict where this is all going. Leading towards. We are sort of like the Nai Nai character in the film. But then it doesn't matter if the elders (the younger in the story and the makers outside the story) says to just tuck it in.
Naomi is the blood and dust of the investigation, she found God along the road, a ghost seems like a joke, now
The Ring
Gore Verbinski, the director, I suppose was never looking to create a pop culture storm. And he did. I mean I was too little to understand the cultural impact it had. But it certainly traveled to me even decades and way too much distance later. And I think that he wasn't looking for a response as such for the film barely feels commercial. It is also not a horror. You have to go through that staggering final act and right after the credit starts rolling you realize the harrowing nature of the film and why it so boldly claims to be of that genre.
For the film, the script in its structure is a good gripping story about a thorough investigation done right. Also along with that, the film has a short film in the storyline that she, Naomi, has to decode which I loved the most. Naomi Watts tries to understand the art form with clues spread across this art house short film. That's the premise. That's the film. And with a countdown ticking at the back of their and our head the film uses those elements as tools to increase the pace of the film.
I saw it with my father and all he wanted to know, always was what day it was. The Ring is a sensational horror film primarily for it doesn't treat itself and its audience like the way it is endorsed. There are no cheap setups, no loud screams and no bourgeois schemes installed separately to scare us an excuse or definition of boasting that "This is a horror." Another aspect of the film is mythology, so malleable that it throws you out convincing you that it is not mythical. This juggling has you as a ball and you're going to have a time of your life, figuring out what happens at the end of the day. Seventh day.
Liam would have conquered the screen, if the editing would have hold a frame for a while.
Run All Night
And we meet again. The writer Brad Ingelsby fascinates me. His writing procedure, his character and the way they travel in his plot tracks is equally intriguing. They take detours, they take uncalled stops, they bump into randomness and they also ask us to stop this everlasting train. And I know I usually give credit, at first. to the director who in this case is Jaume Collet-Serra. I just wanted to swoon over Brad's filmography and how it has caught my eye over the years. Not that I have anything new to add to those already said and observed things. This project, the stereotypical action thriller and it is extremely typical in its genre, has something else that I'd loved and exhaled over. It is its irrelevantly fast edited scenarios.
And not some physical action sequence but even a conversation is crisply edited out. No. Not crisply, but wrongly. Multiple times we can see the dialogues lapped over physical sequences to pace up the film in a briskly adventurous night. What it instead results into is a disappointing questionable set of scenarios that doesn't respect anything. Neither the action nor the characters nor the actors and what they are diving or dying or performing for is accounted into a disrespectful character.
Character, I say, for it repeatedly pops up on screen and also has his own arc in the sense that it gets less and less visible and annoying. Run All Night seems, is simply terribly edited. It cuts to another frame within a blink or like a blink. It feels unintentional, wrong and doesn't quite add up. There is a disturbance between conversation. This violence is much louder than any other explosives and bangs. And on the other hand, the final act is incredibly slow and settling which in its own way makes up for that uncalled editing that jumps back and forth.
No technical aspects, no major aspects are helping My Cousin Rachel. Why?
My Cousin Rachel
The writer and director Roger Michell's adaptation of the ironical cynicism is not the joke that they were looking for. That we are looking for. That the author of the novel looked for. Every breath of the film wants to be witty in its tone and sharply confident in its language. The ironic taste in the story then comes alive in the film when the film doesn't feel at all like it should have. Intention is one thing and interpretation, another. The film hangs around between these two phenomenons trying to defy the logistics placed by themselves.
Remember, irony is what's needed and what's going to work. Contradiction is a sign of failure. Yet, with all the hokum we see nowadays in cinema, I'd be happy to take this mistake. And it is because at least it aspires to be considered among those elite group. And so what if it is found at the bottom of the list. The attempt is admirable. And also they have got the incredible casting for this period set piece. Rachel Weisz playing the title role is every reason to not speculate her intentions.
I don't think I'd have bought anyone else's sweetness or friendly nature if it was not for Rachel's body language. My Cousin Rachel has everything misplaced in an ordered world. Or at least a world that seeks and requires order. Correction is a latter argument that we are going to be tangled in, the first and foremost is privacy and rights. Earning those things is Rachel vividly expressing her vague plans. She has to hesitate and deliberately make mistakes, she has got that part figured lickety split. The supporting character is where the film grows weak especially when it is supporting to an extent that it is almost a parallel role.
Mountains and forests and deserts and war, everything is surpassed victoriously, except for the building that we call, "home".
The Way Back
Peter Weir, the co-writer and director fails to novelize the idea of seeking and losing. There are hints in the film where you can see him finally getting the right message communicated to you, the audience. But these glimpses come in rare. You are asked to earn them just as those characters earn drops of water amidst hot dry desert drowning them on their own decisions. But I would argue that those are improvisational and not actually the crux behind the scene. That- the notion that tells you that you are present in that moment, among these brave men- scene doesn't seem to be the motif.
And I could be wrong and presumptuous in this note but then there is never anything, any final result that amounts all those speculative innuendos or emotional delights to something. Anything. I would take anything. What it has in its mind as the big finale- and I don't mean just the film's climax but each last scene of the acts throughout the film- has nothing to do with the journey that we embark upon. And that is that there is no real reason for them to expect us to care for these moments that they are building towards.
If you are about to snatch away something from the viewers or are about to gift them with something they desire, you'd have to at least make us inseparable from that element or yearn for those treats like a child. The film lacks romance between it and us. For the romance between the characters is easily communicating with us through brilliant performances especially by Colin Ferrell, Saoirse Ronan and Ed Harris. Colin oozes a threateningly irrational vibes making us speculative towards his character. Saoirse and Ed makes you go back with a soothing and satisfyingly empty heart in The Way Back.
You know what baffles me the most, it is that it is thoroughly entertaining.
The Nightingale
The writer and director Jennifer Kent's period drama is a gut wrenching action film done right. And it is film-sy, no matter how much it may deny. And it is a revenge based action thriller, just polished better. I mean it is no F. Gary Gray's '90s action film and neither some Mel Gibson's buddy cop adventure. Yet, I find hints of both of those personalities present in them. If it has the balance of, say.. Gray's The Negotiator then it also has Gibson's loftiness from the Lethal Weapon franchise. The balance as in we are given glimpses of both the parties. The good and the bad. The good suffers and tries to and does win, the little wins as much as they can. And the bad celebrates without enjoying by perpetually dying and losing in front of their own eyes.
There is crude grammar in the script that it foliates in the face of horror; Kent returns back to her genre every now and then to be honest and truthful to these tragic characters and the tragedy they are a part of. And there is also one of the best friendships created and solidified in this dreadful journey. There is innocence and real persuasion on what or where they are going towards. Not just directions but the company too is what's at a loss here.
And you can see that in both those sides. The bad ones are hunting together out of fear and not compassion while the good ones have suffered too much to trust a single soul to sleep blindly and sing loudly. Reaching out to their art forms is how The Nightingale showcases their destination to salvation. The revenge, the blood, the rituals, the dance, the birds and the madness, that's all spiciness toasted for a gripping narration.
A perfect blend of sound effects and editing zapping you with an enormous "boo".
The Babadook
Jennifer Kent's debut as a writer-director is a monstrous call for attention. It is surprisingly one of those few horror flicks that I have encountered that fully uses every aspect of filmmaking in one direction. It channels everything to one simple thing. And it is not a scream that she wants from you, nor an awe gasping moment and definitely not a cheap elaborative sketch spread across the script for an insensitive commercial parlour trick. What she is interested in throwing out, is the character driven plot. All those scenes tied together just gives you a very strong case on what and how theses characters work. And they work fine. More than fine. They are extremely diligent on what they look like.
How they are received by the others. In fact, every character is interested in doing so. Even the demons come with an introduction, a warning and are interested in following those set rules by them. They want to be taken seriously. Like they hold importance. A value that they could never reach. But would like to possess. And that is the crux of the supernatural element in the film. The entity is something that is not considered real.
The psychological system feeds on fear and grows on your weakness or at least that's what we are told. And maybe that's why among these many set of characters, the kid, the child stands out different. His inexpressive behaviour, nature without any pattern doesn't make sense and it also does. This normalized humane behaviour that blends in at the back of our mind is what's alienated throughout the film. The Babadook then truly transforms into a monstrous lie. The horror title is deserved and the payoff is the oddest emotion that we carry and that is of course that we are attached to the idea.
Murphy plays on the ground, the stage is for someone else and he is generous enough to know that and give it to others.
Dolemite Is My Name
Brewer's film is a groovy Marvin Gaye song. Just like the one it is played in the back by Snoop Dogg at the beginning of the film which we will come back on later. By the way, I am going to mention everyone working behind this light hearted film. From the writers like Scott Alexander and Larry Karaszewski to the director Craig Brewer. Everyone working on one thing. And that is why this teamwork pays off in the best possible manner. It is a smooth glass of Bourbon. That's what it does the best. And mind you it is not a Bourbon that feels smooth after you've had a long hard day in your office but the one that feels easy when it is some weekend dinner party.
Coming back to the first scene of the film. And we come back for it paints the "comeback" of Eddie Murphy in the best way. That is an introduction that every actor would kill for. And Murphy never takes it for granted. So the scene goes like this. He, Murphy playing Rudy Ray Moore, is convincing someone acclaimed in the music field of his own art form, something that in the film, just as it did in reality, never travels for them throughout the film.
It is that arc of his character to not be able to convince but find a place for him that he has to and does create for himself. Something that cannot be touched and replaced. Murphy over the years has been criticised too. But his image has remained what it is, for his personality and not for the characters he portrays or the jokes he drops. Dolemite Is My Name is getting Oscar buzz for obvious reasons and at the helm of it, is Murphy. But I don't see any reason to even aspire or pursue it. Acknowledgement is one thing and being a "man of the people" another. I think he won.
We are letting it go a lot and in return we occasionally get a few morbid chuckles to survive.
Sky High
The director Mike Mitchell grabs a teenage superhero flick like a fascinating idea. Don't get me wrong, it is. The metaphors are sugar coated or more precisely cloaked or masked in a way to gather the crowd lickety split. But let's be honest. You need someone like Edgar Wright to stay true to the tone of the insanity of the genre. What Wright did in Scott Pilgrim Vs The World, is simply untouchable. The zip in his language is still untouched. And malleability, that never gives the audience room enough to be shocked or be distant with the imageries, is to be inspired from.
Which by now, you can guess that this is what I had a problem with. With this film. The film's first half is incredibly transparent. And the second half exactly as we could see through, in the first. So why does it still hold on to you. It is not the good old sleazy one liners. It is not the endorsement of its concept. It is definitely not the "I will not be that kind of a film" attitude. It is actually daring to go where one would never go. Wise ones. And that is to still rely upon those denials.
There is nothing wrong with crafting a film just to shock the viewers. Just not to give them what they get, what they expect. You can shape it however you like. The only issue, then, is with the antics that they are stepping upon. You can distract the viewers, but don't expect the distraction to be the spine of the narration. Dodging answers is not an answer. Dodging is making a choice. And choices are the worst aspect of the film. From the visual effects department to flawed characters and questionable premises they and the school and this entire world is set upon.
The climb is high. High on everything. Overstuffed yet empty. There is no difference in rattling or shivering.
Everest
The director Baltasar Kormakur is not to be blamed. Well, a little. But he shouldn't carry the load, no matter what his title in the film says. So is it the script? Yes and maybe no. How about we give it the equal parts blame as we did to the direction. So is it performance? Not actually, but also maybe. Crowd the maybe list, the blame list more and more. But there is something that I loved about the film. And it is Josh Brolin. His performance is what surprisingly delights us. But I don't even want to focus on that. My eye is on his character. A sensational three dimensionally complex character.
The crowd pleaser and yet not fully adaptable. Brolin puts the right amount of spiciness in the vanilla personality that his character is. And I think it is to do with how suspiciously he invades the screen. And what better way to analyse that then to take the introduction of his character itself. In the first act he arrives interrupting someone, something with a friendly attitude. He jokes around by taunting others and cheers up the environment.
He is the first one to shake your hand and loses his temper in a snap that could be argued that it is not completely uncalled for. Understandable but definitely not something as an audience you look for in your rooting character. And this is just the tip of the iceberg. His character oscillates beautifully like this, it's just that you have to look closely. Everest on the entirety is a mess. It is not mapped out, it is not meant to be climbed upon. If not, then it certainly makes a good case for it. It looks beautiful if that helps, from afar. Less dangerous. Less substantial.
Rachel McAdams is the winner of the show, think about it, she, her character goes through everything, in this film.
Mean Girls
The director Mark Waters, I know, is responsible for this coming-of-age or teenage dream film. But I am going to slide this credit over to the writer; she adapted the screenplay from a book, Tina Fey. Especially after what she has done now. To any of you who don't know, what she has done now, is brought this film into theatre. A musical show that is successfully rocketing upwards with groovy songs and the already hyped up fame that was received from this very film. Coming back to the film. Tina Fey's nuanced and easily adaptive humor is the only reason I stuck around to this infamous pop culture film. Why?
Despite a tangible concept, something that we all can resonate with, the film somehow alienates us and the characters as well. What remains safe at the end of the day are just the characters. That loneliness is unforgiving. Everything else is forgiving. The script is written in a way to be sealed as a time capsule. What it forgets while constructing this bulletproof idea, the get out clause, is the world they are surrounded with. And the Fey tries immensely to ground them into reality, by keeping them in contrast with their parents.
But this obligatory section is barely fulfilled satisfactorily. What they get is a pitiful nod from us. So why does it still work? I think it is because of the fantasized revenge-driven character of the film that Fey paints such intricately. And then there is the casting. Rachel McAdams lives up to the centered role she is given. She is a supporting character, still there is not a doubt where she doesn't own the scene. With a sassy yet heartwarming body language, the word vomit of the film shouldn't be Regina George or Mean Girl(s) but Rachel McAdams.