RUST AND BONE Written by Jacques Audiard and Thomas Bidegain Directed by Jacques Audiard Starring Marion Cotillard and Matthias Schoenaerts
We can all carry pain, often better than we might expect. French director, Jacques Audiard’s RUST AND BONE is a frank and honest reminder of just how much of that pain we can actually bear. His follow up to the brilliant, A PROPHET, creates its own narrative path toward a level of understanding that can only likely be had by those who have come to the very edge of losing everything they hold dear. For those of us fortunate enough to not know this kind of pain, and for those of us who aren’t afraid to go there, Audiard makes it possible for us to get a glimpse of just how crippling that pain can be.
RUST AND BONE is a romance for those who walk around angry with the world, for those who have lost all faith in even the idea of love. Audiard splits our time almost evenly between Ali (Matthias Schoenaerts) and Stephanie (Marion Cotillard). He is directionless father, who has just taken responsibility for his young boy; and she is a killer whale trainer, who is in a bad relationship. They meet in a bar one night, when he breaks up a fight she gets hit in, and drives her home. Shortly afterwards, she gets into an accident at work with one of the whales during a show and loses both of her legs. They find each other again when she leaves the hospital and form a relationship that is clearly foreign, and frightening, to both of them. Both actors play their parts as entirely self-involved individuals masquerading as self-sufficient ones, so much so that they are practically oblivious to how damaged they’ve become at their own hand. Cotillard, in an inherently showy part, takes a decidedly more subtle approach than one would expect, which allows her to get uglier than I’ve ever seen her get before.
There is nothing sentimental about RUST AND BONE and it requires a certain ability on the part of the viewer to be able to handle its weight. Beneath that weight though is a tiny bit of hope that one would have thought to have been long dead. As Ali and Stephanie begin to spend more time together, and as a physical connection grows between them, they become aware, little by little, of the walls they have built around themselves over time. They were originally meant to protect but have evolved into a tool to keep them separate. The fight back is not an easy one in the least but, like the film itself, it is worth going through to come out the other side enlightened.
LIFE OF PI Written by David Magee Directed by Ang Lee Starring Suraj Sharma, Irfan Kahn and Rafe Spall Francis Adirubasamy: A mouthful of water will not harm you, but panic will.
LIFE OF PI is an almost entirely unbelievable story that provides a great deal of solace and inspiration for so many who have been fortunate enough to read it. Its scope is so vastly epic, essentially biblical in nature. For years, Yann Martel’s 2001 Booker Prize winner had been called unfilmable. Directors, from M. Night Shaymalan to Alfonso Cuaron, came and went without finding a successful way to translate the incredible story of a boy trapped at sea with a bengal tiger to the screen. Enter Academy Award winning director, Ang Lee, the man with the sensitivity and vision necessary to make LIFE OF PI into the inconceivable spectacle it needs to be in order to meet its goal - proving the existence of God.
From the moment Lee sets the scene, the Pondicherry Zoo, in India, where Piscine “Pi” Patel (newcomer, Suraj Sharma, chosen by Lee from over 3,000 auditions) grew up with his family, the language of the film is light and lyrical. The animals in this zoo move with grace and a sense of purpose and Lee follows suit as though he is truly letting the nature of this wondrous tale unfold in front of us. The story is being told by a present day Pi, played by Irfan Kahn, who plays this elder incarnation like a man enlightened by all that life has shown him. Khan is telling his story to an author (Rafe Spall, in a role that was originally Tobey Maguire’s), presumably based on Martel. His narration, which is heavy at first but eventually gives way for the action itself, lends a much needed resonance to the sometimes implausible chain of events.
Pi’s family decides one day to pack up everything they own, including the great wealth of animals in their collection, and move from Pondicherry to Winnipeg. The promise of a better life is put to the ultimate test for Pi, when the freighter inexplicably sinks in the midst of a storm just a few days after leaving port. Pi is the only survivor, well, human survivor anyway, which is not at all surprising when you see how immense his escape from the sinking ship is. This is the other reason I’m happy they waited so long to make this movie. Lee’s usage of 3D is exemplary in LIFE OF PI. Not only does it make for a dazzling visual feast, but it highlights the distance the character feels from his lost family, from land, from God.
While some directors would get lost at sea for this long in a movie, Lee comes alive. His ocean, one that could be very static if not tended carefully, is a constantly changing symphony of movements that are both terrifying and mesmerizing. And to move back and forth between the never ending ocean and the confined space of the rescue boat so seamlessly, is a true testament to what mastery Lee commands and his deep understanding of the audience. A story that is supposed to make you believe in God has to be immense to accomplish such a lofty goal. What Pi endures on that boat with his feline shipmate, Richard Parker, should not be believed, but yet to read it on the page, is to behold an extraordinary tale of strength and spirit. The fact that Lee has so triumphantly captured both the bewilderment and inquisitive insight of the book is in itself enough to make me a believer. Only God could craft something so moving through the hands of one of His children.
LAURENCE ANYWAYS Written and Directed by Xavier Dolan Starring Melvil Poupaud, Suzanne Clement and Monia Chokri
LAURENCE ANYWAYS, the third film from Canadian director, Xavier Dolan, is a mesmerizing love story of epic proportion and extraordinary circumstance. After astonishing the cinema elite with his first feature, J’AI TUE MA MERE, Dolan stumbled in his sophomore effort, LES AMOURS IMAGINAIRES (in some eyes, at least, as I enjoyed the film more than most). He withdrew as a filmmaker after that experience and has now returned with a story so grand, it needs nearly three hours to be told. And while some might interpret the length as pretentious and unnecessary, I see it more as evident growth for the filmmaker himself, and furthermore, a true testament to just how deep love can run between two people.
Laurence Alia (Melvil Poupaud) is a 35-year-old college professor. He is working on his first book of poetry; he is receiving awards for his talent; and he is happily in love with his partner, Fred (Suzanne Clement). Thanks to two passionate and powerful performances, we can see quite clearly what a great bond there is between them, and that it would require a major blow to even begin cracking the foundation of what they have. That blow comes when Laurence announces to Fred that he has been living a lie for years. He can no longer go on living as a man when he knows, in his soul, that he was in fact meant to be a woman. Naturally, Fred is thoroughly freaked out. When two people are so intertwined in each other’s existences though, it can be incredibly difficult to separate from that, no matter what the reason is. Their love goes further than just the body but can changes to the body blind them to it?
Dolan continues to establish himself as a unique and fascinating Canadian voice, drawing comparisons to the likes of Wong Kar-Wai and perhaps even more aptly, Pedro Almodovar. LAURENCE ANYWAYS spans a full decade, the 90’s to be specific, which allows Dolan, who was also responsible for editing and costumes on the film, to take his time with his characters and their relationship. It also allows the viewer to come to terms on their own with Laurence’s decision and subsequent transition. Transsexuality is still taboo to this day, so setting this story twenty years ago not only highlights even more so how difficult their lives must have been, but also just how brave they both were for choosing love and holding each other’s hands throughout every moment of this great change. By the time the film closes, it is clear that Dolan has pulled off a pretty tricky feat; LAURENCE ANYWAYS transcends transsexuality to become a spectacular lament for love itself.
A LATE QUARTET Written by Seth Grossman and Yaron Zilberman Directed by Yaron Zilberman Starring Christopher Walken, Philip Seymour Hoffman, Catherine Keener and Mark Ivanir
At the onset of first time narrative filmmaker, Yaron Zilberman’s A LATE QUARTET, Peter Mitchell (Christopher Walken), tells his Juilliard class the story of Beethoven’s “Opus 131”. This particular piece, written specifically for a string quartet, is a challenge for even the most seasoned musician. For Beethoven wrote it without any places to break throughout the atypical seven movements. Peter, a celebrated cellist himself, asks his class to imagine what it must be like to get through such a piece, what with no opportunity to retune your instrument while playing non-stop. He asks his class but in fact, it is Zilberman’s audience that is truly being asked the question. A LATE QUARTET is his answer.
The Fugues is a string quartet that has been performing together for now 25 years. The players that make it up are some of the finest in the world and the same can be said for the actors portraying them. Walken, who anchors this emotionally unwieldy film, is joined by Philip Seymour Hoffman, Catherine Keener and the reasonably lesser know, Mark Ivanir. When we first meet them, it is evident that they are a close group, that they know how each other plays and how to play together while elevating the group as a whole. Musical symbolism is abound in A LATE QUARTET - Is first violin higher in rank than second? Is it better to play perfectly or to take risks? - and, at first, the questions are subtle and insightful. As time goes on, say around the third or fourth movement, if you will, Zilberman starts to lean toward the melodramatic. Suddenly, this composed, elegant effort is turning into a “VH1 Behind the Music” special for the classical crowd.
As the quartet readies for their 25th season, Peter, who is much older than the remaining members, is diagnosed with the early stages of Parkinson’s. As he respects the music above all else, he announces to his longtime friends and colleagues that he will do everything in his power to play with them on their first concert, but that this will be his last. Naturally, this throws everyone off and the question becomes whether the quartet should continue at all. This threat to the comfort and world they’ve all known for so long brings all of their insecurities to the surface and poses the film’s most pertinent question about the role of the individual within a larger group. With so much emotion to balance, Zilberman demonstrates great promise as a director but he still needs some more practice before he tackles his next opus.
SILVER LININGS PLAYBOOK Written and Directed by David O. Russell Starring Bradley Cooper, Jennifer Lawrence and Robert De Niro Pat Solitano: She is my friend with an F. Danny: Capital F. Pat Solitano: Yeah, for friend.
The one thing I took away from David O. Russell’s SILVER LININGS PLAYBOOK is that you have to deal with the bad in order to get to the good stuff. Always focusing on the silver lining never gives you the opportunity to face your demons and allows them the chance to grow while you’re looking the other way. Russell makes an apt point here as applying this theory to watching this film is really the only way to enjoy it.
There is one other thing I learned while watching this film, that Bradley Cooper has the potential to take on stronger, more dramatic parts. Cooper plays Pat Solitano, whom we meet moments before he exits a mental facility, where he is being treated for bipolar disorder, convincing himself aloud that he’s better now. It is never really clear to either of his fantastically fussy parents, played by Robert De Niro and Jacki Weaver, whether he truly is any better but they take him in regardless. Meanwhile, it never needs to be made clear to Pat’s new friend, Tiffany (Jennifer Lawrence), because she is often just as messed up as he is. Together they learn to heal each other ... through amateur dance?
Considering how visceral Russell went last time out with his Oscar-nominated work on THE FIGHTER, I am genuinely surprised by how tame SILVER LININGS PLAYBOOK is. A fantastic ensemble elevates Russell’s screenplay, with moments both touching and amusing, but never to the point where it breaks free of its more conventional trappings. But when you weigh the film’s faults against it’s own silver linings, its still worth the experience.
ANNA KARENINA Written by Tom Stoppard Directed by Joe Wright Starring Keira Knightley, Aaron Taylor-Johnson, Matthew MacFayden and Jude Law Anna Karenina: This is wrong. Count Vronsky: Makes no difference. Anna Karenina: You’ve no right. Count Vronsky: Makes no difference.
Director, Joe Wright, reunites with his apparent muse, Keira Knightley, for their third collaboration together and what will be the fourth film version of Leo Tolstoy’s classic, ANNA KARENINA. After branching out with his contemporary thriller, HANNA, Wright returns to the period pieces that made his career (ATONEMENT, PRIDE & PREJUDICE) and what a welcome return it is. Not only does Wright know how to translate potentially dated material for modern audiences without sacrificing the source, but his take on this particular tale only further establishes him as one of the world’s most exciting directors working today.
For those who aren’t already familiar with it, Anna’s story is a tragic one. She was married at the age of 18 to an older politician (Jude Law), bore him a son, and for some time, her life was good. Being so young though, she didn’t know what she was missing. Enter the attractive and persistent Count Vronsky (Aaron Taylor-Johnson) and suddenly, Anna learns of something she thought she had already figured out - love. An affair will ruin her standing in society though so, with the stakes raised high, she must choose between passion and position.
Wright stages this period melodrama in the only place that it can be allowed to embrace its more sensational elements, the stage itself. He playfully moves the action back and forth between a majestic theatre and exquisitely elaborate locations with transitions that energize the piece in ways that will constantly surprise and delight the more open-minded viewer. It is easy to see some more casual filmgoers being put off by Wright’s style but there is simply nothing casual about ANNA KARENINA.
It is a wonder to me why Pixar just cannot get a break at the Academy Awards. Sure, their feature length films pick up nods, and often wins, in the animated category almost every year (sorry, CARS 2), but for some inexplicable reason, their short films only periodically pick up the nomination. They haven’t actually won in the Animated Short category since 2002’s FOR THE BIRDS. After sifting through their latest anthology, PIXAR SHORT FILMS COLLECTION VOLUME 2, you too will surely be scratching your head and wondering the same thing.
This second collection of Pixar shorts features 12 films that run about 75 minutes in total. There is filmmaker commentary on each film and the disc also features a few rare shorts from Pixar gurus, John Lasseter, Andrew Stanton and Pete Doctor. The most notable difference between the fare in this compilation compared to their last, is the abundance of films featuring characters from their features. Some of these films, including YOUR FRIEND THE RAT (a good natured history lesson about why rats are not the worst, featuring Remy from RATATOUILLE) or HAWAIIAN VACATION (a faux Hawaiian romp, featuring the folks from TOY STORY) stand strong on their own. Others, most notably the CARS and UP inspired shorts, seem more like after thoughts than stand alone ideas.
And then, there are four of the most endearing and wonderful animated shorts I’ve ever seen. Sure, most of the animated shorts I see are from Pixar, but that in no way takes away from how amazing these particular films are. PRESTO is a brilliant homage to Bugs Bunny, which features one hungry, little bunny forced to participate in a magic act in order to get his carrot dinner. Having had enough with playing for his pay, he decides to have a little fun with the magician’s act. PARTLY CLOUDY is a hilarious little piece about an unlucky stork who has to deliver all babies no one else wants to, like the electric eels and the baby crocs. LA LUNA, the latest Pixar short which screened before BRAVE in theatres this summer, is an absolutely gorgeous piece about a young boy finding his own path, reminiscent of “The Little Prince”. And DAY AND NIGHT, a wildly imaginative piece about the wonders that are particular to both periods of time, is by far my favorite of the bunch. Its genius is that while you delight in the spectacle, you are suddenly and subtly reminded that you should not fear what you do not know. How this particular film didn’t take home the Oscar, I will never understand.
The short film is an obscure art form. So much hard work goes into them and yet, rarely do audiences ever get to see them. Fortunately, Pixar not only continues to keep them alive in the eyes of the public, but they also continue to make great examples that will endure much longer than a lot of the disposable features out there today.
PIXAR, THE BRAVE. An interview with BRAVE director, Mark Andrews
Who would have ever thought that the studio who brought you rats in kitchens, robots in space and monsters in closets would be considered brave for telling a princess story? Yet, here we are. Pixar Animation Studios is set to release their 13th feature length animated film, BRAVE, this month, and all anyone can seem to focus on is the fact that for the first time in Pixar history, the protagonist is a girl.
“It is weird,” BRAVE director, Mark Andrews, tells me when I ask him if the attention his main character’s gender is garnering, is at all strange to him. “It’s not like we have a big dry erase board that says, ‘Pixar films until 2025: Girl picture, giraffe picture, something in Saudi Arabia!’ If we focused on that aspect, on marketing, on what we haven’t done, then we would be playing to that instead of playing to the strengths of the character and the story.”
These particular strengths are what Pixar has come to be known for and this can be at least in part attributed to their incredibly organic attention to detail. “We are more focused on building something from the ground up instead of hitting some bar or some expectation,” Andrews tells me of the Pixar philosophy, when we meet at Toronto’s Casa Loma, during the BRAVE press tour. “We’re still very much in the canon of Pixar, which is to say you’re going to get something where you don’t really know what to expect, but trust us, its gonna be good.”
The film had just screened, to great fanfare, for Toronto audiences the night before. Naturally, Andrews wore a kilt to the event. In what is now a great Pixar tradition, a number of the film’s animators, along with Andrews, spent a couple of weeks in and around the highlands of Scotland to take in the scenery. Andrews considers this research pilgrimage to be invaluable if you want to get out of your head. “You have to go, you have to touch everything to get here,” Andrews motions toward his heart at this point. “And once I get here, then I can get it on to a page or into a painting or tell somebody else about it because I can give them these details to hold on to. You get to the character of it all.”
Andrews, hard at work
The character everyone is talking about is Merida, a red-haired fireball of a character, as bullheaded as she is fearless and forward thinking. Not only is Merida, voiced in the film by BOARDWALK EMPIRE's Kelly McDonald, the first Pixar girl but she’s also a princess at that. “Disney’s done the princess, y’know, a lot,” Andrews jokes boisterously. “We knew we had a princess. It serves the story and raises the stakes but we knew we were making an anti-princess. She’s everything a princess is not.”
Taking on a princess in a long line of princesses, while still making sure to make the character modern and relatable to today’s crowd, meant tweaking the formula a little. “Being a princess and being a woman are very different things. It’s not this old adage that you have to be saved, that you have to fall in love to be complete,” Andrews states with the pride of a father. “Merida’s not questing for happily ever after. She’s discovering who she is and how she fits into this world, on her own terms.”
Merida marches to her own beat
And so even though I began all of this by pointing out how odd it is that there is so much focus on Pixar first’s in BRAVE (add first fairy tale and period piece to the list while you’re at it), as opposed to the film itself, Andrews is happy for the attention nonetheless. “I kinda like that everyone is gravitating to the specifics about the film so that when they see it, they’re going to see it’s so much more than just a picture about a girl.”
BRAVE Directed by Mark Andrews and Brenda Chapman Written by Mark Andrews, Steve Purcell, Brenda Chapman and Irene Mecchi Voices by Kelly McDonald, Emma Thompson and Billy Connolly Princess Merida: If you had a chance to change your fate, would you?
Not surprisingly in the least, Pixar’s 13th animated feature, BRAVE, is breathtaking from the very beginning. The sprawling Scottish highlands are already beautiful in their natural state but when Pixar uses their imagination and technical ability to recreate something, that place is reborn anew on screen. Ordinarily, they have the same ability to reinvigorate even the oldest of stories and this time around, they take aim at the very familiar princess archetype and while they do make BRAVE into an altogether compelling and rousing coming of age tale, I’m not sure I would call it an altogether brave effort.
Princess Merida (voiced by Kelly McDonald, who replaced Reese Witherspoon when she couldn’t do it, thank God) has always been more interested in playing with swords instead of playing with boys. Her father, King Fergus (Billy Connolly), encourages her while her mother, Queen Elinor (Emma Thompson), strives every day to make her into a proper princess. In order to maintain the order of the land, Merida must marry one of the first born princes from the neighboring kingdoms, but Merida is adamant about not wanting to be any part of this. In fact, this is what Merida is best at, knowing what she doesn’t want as opposed to knowing what she does. This is why, when she pays a mysterious (and hilarious) witch to change her fate, she isn’t the least bit specific about how exactly she would like it to be changed. And so it is altered, but the question becomes, is this new path any better than the old one she was on or is it actually worse? And worse still, can Merida even make it back to her true path now that she’s embarked on this one?
BRAVE is efficiently told without a trace of fat to be found. And while there are no unnecessary distractions as a result, the whole thing feels a tad rushed and bit slight considering the pedigree putting it out there. That said, Pixar’s best efforts (especially for a film that changed directing hands, and subsequently changed direction drastically, half way through) do elevate BRAVE far past its minor shortcomings to be extremely enjoyable and exciting. Merida should stand strong and proud in the long line of great Pixar characters. She shows us and herself that our fates are living and breathing inside of us at all times; we need only be brave enough to see them and embrace them.
THE AMAZING SPIDER-MAN Written by James Vanderbilt, Alvin Sargent and Steve Kloves Directed by Marc Webb Starring Andrew Garfield, Emma Stone, Rhys Ifans and Denis Leary Spider-Man: Hey! Watch it! I’m swingin’ here! I’m swingin’ here!
My guess is that calling the new Spider-Man reboot, “The Occasionally Amazing but Mostly Just OK and Reasonably Redundant Spider-Man” might not have been a slam dunk, marketing wise, so I get why they went with the shorter, THE AMAZING SPIDER-MAN instead. The fact is, this latest film incarnation of everyone’s favorite web slinging superhero exists for one reason and one reason only. If Sony didn’t put out another film before a certain date, they would lose their rights back to Marvel, and one of their most successful film franchises would be finished. So they took a gamble and decided to start from scratch on a series that only finished five years ago, hoping that just enough time had passed for the next generation to claim Spidey as their own. The gamble has paid off financially, which is of course the only way that really counts, but as for its critical success, my opinion is still swinging from side to side.
Under the direction of (500) DAYS OF SUMMER helmer, Marc Webb, who incidentally loses all trace of originality and personal voice as part of this massive machine, THE AMAZING SPIDER-MAN takes us back to when our lovably geeky hero, Peter Parker (Andrew Garfield), was still in high school. It isn’t long before he is bit by a radio active spider when he breaks away from the group at a laboratory focused on cross-species genetics. And not long after that, Peter can just tell; something is not right from his spider bite. The problem here is that this whole spider bite bit has already been done, and not so long ago. Sure, everyone is entitled to their own different take on the tale but Webb’s doesn’t feel all that different than Sam Raimi’s 2002 version. You can’t really mess too much with an origin story, unless you want to enrage the fanboys (and girls), but that doesn’t leave today’s viewer, whose memory may not have entirely faded after just ten years, to feel like they’re watching something they haven’t already seen. By the time Parker loses his Uncle Ben (Martin Sheen) in a senseless mugging, it feels like a plot point we just had to get past rather than the pivotal moment it truly is.
To overcome the more plodding details of the plot, Webb must differentiate his Spider-Man visually and through character. Garfield is a great Peter Parker. In his teenage form, Parker is very shy and befuddled around others. He has a strong moral compass but he hasn’t yet figured his whole self out so his motivations can occasionally be heavily influenced by his ego. And once he’s flying through the air as Spider-Man, Garfield continues to soar in the part. He is a more aggressive, more raw, more fearless Spider-Man than Tobey Maguire ever was. His cunning often caught me off guard and Spidey’s rumbles with The Lizard (Rhys Ifans) are some of the film’s more exhilarating moments. When it comes down to it, if you’re a fan of Spider-Man movies, THE AMAZING SPIDER-MAN can be an incredible ride. I for one love flying through the air on nothing but a web and a prayer, but when this ride comes to its inevitable end, some may feel like they’ve already been on it before.
LINCOLN Written by Tony Kushner Directed by Steven Spielberg Starring Daniel Day-Lewis, David Strathairn, Sally Field and Joseph Gordon-Levitt Abraham Lincoln: Do you think we choose to be born or that we are fitted into the times we are born into?
As I sit here writing this review of LINCOLN, the latest film from the figurative president of Hollywood, Steven Spielberg (WAR HORSE), millions of Americans are hitting the polls to vote in the presidential election. The race is incredibly close and there is much at stake. It is this current political climate that makes LINCOLN even more poignant than it inherently is, and elevates it to an even more meaningful place. As Spielberg positions Mr. Lincoln as a family man, as a storyteller interested in rewriting history, he gives the audience a president that is just as complex as today’s candidates. He also gives us a man that loves his country and its future so much that he transcends political party allegiance.
Based on a densely worded and often surprisingly amusing screenplay by Pulitzer Prize winner, Tony Kushner, LINCOLN focuses its attention on the weeks leading up to his assassination in 1865. In these weeks, Mr. Lincoln (as embodied here by the almost always revelatory Daniel Day-Lewis) is about to be reinstated to his second term as President of the United States. The American civil war is in its 4th grueling year, with hundreds of thousands of casualties already counted and he, like a great deal of the country, is desperate for it to end. He will not allow that end to come though unless it involves the abolishment of slavery, the central issue to the war. With a divided house and a race to make change before the war is over, Mr. Lincoln sets out to add a 13th amendment to the Constitution abolishing slavery once and for all. How he goes about doing this though brings into question how far morality can be stretched in the name of the greater good.
LINCOLN is far from Spielberg’s best work but, thanks mostly to Day-Lewis’s uncanny performance (seriously, someone needs to tell me how this man consistently transforms himself so brilliantly) and Kushner’s crafty script, it is still his best film since 2005’s MUNICH. Some of the more personal elements to the story, Lincoln’s complicated relationship with his melodramatic wife (Sally Field) and almost clichéd relationship with his eldest son (Joseph Gordon-Levitt) who wants to enlist against his father’s wishes, distract somewhat from the bigger picture. Fortunately, that bigger picture is plenty big enough to eclipse these minor missteps. We are talking about eliminating slavery after all, which was just as much a war of a different sort behind the political scenes as it was on the battlefield. And, as the 13th Amendment to the Constitution comes closer and closer to passing, LINCOLN becomes a truly liberating film experience. Great change takes great strength and even greater men of resolve and character. LINCOLN is a wonderful and welcome reminder that we are still capable of making such momentous strides to this day.
360 Written by Peter Morgan Directed by Fernando Meirelles Starring Jude Law, Rachel Weisz, Anthony Hopkins and Ben Foster
The concept that we, as human beings, are all tied to each other in some way is one that most people understand on the basest of levels. Many might not think anything of it, while I’m sure many others think the theory is without merit. To genuinely try to conceptualize the grandness of the idea though can be overwhelming. Regardless, it is often fodder for filmmakers, including Fernando Meirelles, the Brazilian director of CITY OF GOD. His latest, 360, takes the viewer around the world to understand that we are just living in one big global community. Who knew that such a big trip could feel so slight?
Even talented scribe, Peter Morgan (FROST/NIXON, THE QUEEN) cannot revolutionize the 360 concept. The trouble with tackling this topic is that the filmmaker’s hand is shown in the first act of the film. The audience may not know precisely where they’re being led but they know that it will be from one insignificant moment to the next in an elaborate game of connect the dots. Subsequently, no attachments are made to the characters on screen and thus, very little engagement in the film is established. Gifted actors like Jude Law and Rachel Weisz (who won an Oscar the last time she worked with Meirelles on THE CONSTANT GARDENER) appear and disappear almost as quickly. Only Anthony Hopkins manages to carve out a memorable scene, with a passionate confession at an Alcoholics Anonymous meeting. And then he’s gone.
Life is made up of these fleeting moments and 360 does a good job demonstrating how even the seemingly least significant of those moments, derived from chance encounters in airports or dentist offices, can lead to life altering events. It does so in such a banal and uninspired fashion though that all it truly made me feel is that I would be better off making connections with people instead of watching people make them.
STRANGERS ON A TRAIN Written by Raymond Chandler and Czenzi Ormonde Directed by Alfred Hitchcock Starring Farley Granger, Ruth Roman and Robert Walker Bruce Anthony: I admire people who do things.
This is why people avoid making eye contact on the subway today. In Alfred Hitchcock’s STRANGERS ON A TRAIN (1951), two men accidentally bump each other’s feet sitting across from each other on a train, and embark on a conversation that will change their lives. Naturally, they don’t know this at the time. Well, one of them almost certainly doesn’t and it isn’t ever quite clear what the other gentleman is thinking, but that’s the genius of Hitchcock. You can never truly relax into what you think you know because you’ll likely be proven wrong about that before very long.
Based on Patricia Highsmith’s first novel, STRANGERS ON A TRAIN, is a truly disturbing thriller. Two total strangers (Robert Walker and Farley Granger) meet on a train and before they’re done lunch, one of them suggests that each of them commit a murder for the other, to avoid connection to the crime. It may not be your typical train chat but if you can surrender to the idea, and it’s actually quite easy to do so thanks to the colorful performances of Walker and Granger, then you are in for a twisted ride. Walker in particular is especially devious, seamlessly weaving homoerotic subtext and waves of daddy issues into his chilling portrayal.
STRANGERS ON A TRAIN, one of the greatest thrillers of all time according to the American Film Institute, is stunning in its first Blu-ray release. The Oscar-nominated black and white cinematography is particularly impressive, whether you’re admiring the grandness of a championship tennis match or cowering at the climactic merry-go-round sequence. This latest release also contains an earlier version and a commentary track for the final version that consists occasionally of a stretched inclusion but is mostly insight into the mind of the master. This is easily one of Hitchcock’s best and a must for any collection.
MEHTA’S CHILD An interview with MIDNIGHT’S CHILDREN director, Deepa Mehta
I will admit that I was reasonably nervous to meet one of Canada’s most celebrated film directors, Deepa Mehta, but I know now that I needn’t have been. The moment she walked in the room to discuss her latest epic, MIDNIGHT’S CHILDREN, all of my hesitation fell away. It wasn’t her stature that put me at ease, even though she is a tiny wisp of a woman, but rather something much deeper than that. There is just something about her spirit that makes you feel welcome. Before long, we would be discussing the merits of THE AVENGERS vs THE MASTER and debating when it is acceptable to cast Robert Pattinson in anything. This was one cool lady.
A healthy spirit, and a belief in that kind of thing, is a useful tool when tackling a work as spiritually engrossing as MIDNIGHT’S CHILDREN. The 1981 novel written by Salman Rushdie, long before he became the controversial figure we know him as today, juxtaposes the birth of a child with the birth of India’s independence in 1947. The book, which not only won the Booker Prize in the year of its release but the Best of the Booker Prize on both the 25th and 40th anniversary of the award, has been called unfilmable. That would not deter Mehta in the least from making it but she has no idea how it will be received.
“It might be really well received; it might be really trashed. It might become controversial; it might not. There is no formula to predict how any of this will do,” Mehta explains of her thoughts on the finished product. She then goes into a story about her father that endeared her even more to me.
Mehta, at the Canadian premiere of MIDNIGHT'S CHILDREN in Toronto.
“My father was a film distributor in India so I grew up with movies,” she begins candidly. “He said, ‘Remember this always. There are two things in life you will never know about. One, is when you’re going to die. And the other is how a film is going to do.’” We pause for a brief but necessary chuckle at this revelation. Then Mehta concludes, “There is no formula to predict how any of this will do. My dad is right. In a way, you can’t totally give up your expectations. I haven’t been able to give them up 100% but its more realistic to leave it to the powers that be.”
Mehta had wanted to work with Rushdie for some time but MIDNIGHT’S CHILDREN was not her first choice to tackle. To hear her tell how it came to be though, it seems almost fated. “I don’t know know what made me ask him, ‘Who has the rights to Midnight’s Children?’ I’ve always loved the book; I read it many years ago. It wasn’t a well thought out question. It was purely organic, purely instinctive.”
She may not have known quite what she was getting herself into at first but Mehta is very happy that it came to be in this particular fashion. “I’m glad I hadn’t thought it out because if it was premeditated, I might have been too scared. It is an epic; it is 60 years of post-colonial history. It is the parallel of a coming of age of a young man and the coming of age of a country. Sometimes it’s good to just jump off the deep end.”
MIDNIGHT'S CHILDREN stars, Satya Bhabba and Shriya Saran
Regardless of how far Mehta far would have to jump, there was no way she was going to miss out on the opportunity to work with Rushdie, a man she had admired for years. “It was one of the finest experiences of my life, a very interesting collaboration,” Mehta describes, in what is the closest I can see this composed woman getting to gushing. “Salman, as we all know, has a great mind. He is pretty brilliant. But also, he has a great sense of humour and he is very honest. So if something is not working, you can just explain to him why you think something isn’t working. There is no matter of ego.”
Mehta insisted that Rushdie write the screenplay, something he had never done before. And so he was tasked with pairing down an 800-page opus to a 130-page script.
“The reason I wanted him to do it and he agreed to do it is because only he could be the one who could be disrespectful to his work. It is an iconic novel; it’s the Booker of the Bookers! So, when there are aspects of the story that aren’t working in the movie, only he has the absolute authority to chuck them away.”
Mehta on set with young Saleem, Darsheel Safari
Rushdie’s final script focuses on Saleem Sinai (played as an adult by Satya Bhabba, whom most people would recognize from SCOTT PILGRIM VS THE WORLD), as he struggles to find his place in not only his family, but his country as well. With so much history to overwhelm the viewer, Mehta knew that Saleem’s character was the key to the success of MIDNIGHT’S CHILDREN all along. “I really wanted to focus on the life of Saleem, who is a whimsical character. We balanced what was happening to him with what was happening to India at the same time. The emotional journey is not the emotional journey of a country, but it’s the emotional journey of a person. We feel emotional about what happens to a human being, not necessarily what happens to a country.”
Not that concentrating her efforts on Saleem was necessarily any easier than painting more broadly. “Once I focused on Saleem and stayed with him, the rest became easy. In fact, it was the particular Saleem, as opposed to the universal, which was much more difficult. I mean, the big scenes are a cinch. You have a lot of extras but you get good assistant directors for that. Yes, it’s overwhelming but it’s those intimate scenes that are tough. Those are challenging and they are very, very satisfying. That’s where performance comes in and you know there is truth.”
Mehta and Rushdie celebrating the film's success
MIDNIGHT’S CHILDREN is Mehta’s ninth feature film and her most ambitious project by far. The film is now playing in Canada, the country she calls home after moving here in 1973. In fact, the film also has Indian distribution secured, with a release expected later in the year. We already know that she is leaving the film’s reception to fate but before we conclude our time together, Mehta reminisces one last time at how she had to prepare for this enormous undertaking.
“Somebody asked me once how I prepared for this film and I said I joined a gym. I just looked at the script and said I had better get my act together. I got a trainer and everything. You really need that stamina to survive that kind of thing, getting up in the morning and you know you’re going to work a 14-hour day. It’s not just your wits but it’s how long can you stand on your feet.”
Apparently this lady is not only cool but hysterical too.
SKYFALL Written by Neil Purvis, Robert Wade and John Logan Directed by Sam Mendes Starring Daniel Craig, Javier Bardem, Naomie Harris, Ben Wishaw, Ralph Fiennes and Judi Dench James Bond: Everybody needs a hobby. Silva: So what’s yours? James Bond: Resurrection.
James Bond is getting older. His shot is not as on point as it once was; his stride not as fast as in his younger years. In fact, it saddens me to say that his stomach is not quite the washboard it used to be either. There is one notable offshoot to Bond’s decline in prowess though. With age, comes wisdom and with SKYFALL, the 23rd film in the 007 spy series, that wisdom lends its weight to what is without question one of the most exciting and emotionally charged adventures the series has ever seen.
Sam Mendes, the Academy Award winning director of AMERICAN BEAUTY, opens his crack at the Bond series with the man himself, once again embodied by the masterful Daniel Craig, blurred in the background. As he comes into the light and into focus, we direct our attention to his eyes. These are the eyes of a determined man and before either he or we are able to blink, he finds himself in a high-speed bike chase that takes him to the rooftops of Istanbul, overlooking the Grand Bazaar. Why waste time really? This is an action film after all and Mendes has a clear and firm understanding of what the audience wants from their favorite international spy.
Bond has grown into a complex character over the years. In his last outing, QUANTUM OF SOLACE, his complexities got the best of him. Bond was melancholy and the film suffered for it. In SKYFALL he is no less tortuous but Mendes handles the character with much more control and allows the film’s intricate and energetic action sequences to drive the film forward. Without the weight of Bond’s suffering to hold the film back, he commands even more attention and emerges with even greater strength as a result. This is all the more impressive considering what he has to endure at the onset of the film.
Before the first chase is through, Bond is lost and presumed dead. Naturally, the audience knows he isn’t dead, as this would make for an awfully short film. What he goes through should have surely killed him but somehow he is reborn, resurrected even, and all that once haunted him now seems to propel him forward with a more profound momentum than he has had for some time. It is never explained how Bond survives, although I suspect it has something to do with the healing power of Adele’s opening credits theme song, but the fact that he does live on, confirms his innate greatness and grander purpose.
MI6, the British intelligence agency that Bond serves, is under attack. Bond’s longtime boss and sometimes friend, M (Judi Dench), is the actual target of this aggression. Her reign over the agency is being questioned because a top secret list of undercover agents the world over has fallen into the wrong hands. As names leak to the public little by little, confidence in her ability to manage dissipates at the same rate and her methods are called antiquated and quaint. The question as to whether MI6, and subsequently Bond himself, are still relevant is plainly posed and SKYFALL affirmatively reminds everyone that they are far from finished.
Mendes infuses the Bond series with a level of pedigree it rarely sees. Enlisting John Logan to assist Bond screenwriter regulars, Neil Purvis and Robert Wade, raises the personal stakes for the major characters, as all of them have done things that they aren’t necessarily proud of. Bringing on Roger Deakins, arguably the greatest cinematographer working in film today, invigorates the visual look of the film in so many unexpected ways. His work in Shanghai is particularly creative, which not only makes the fight scenes explode off the screen, but also makes the film a serious visual awards contender. And finally, casting actors as talented as Ralph Fiennes (M’s new boss), Ben Wishaw (a welcome return and updated version of classic character, Q) and Javier Bardem (doing what Bardem does best, the bad guy), elevates everyone’s acting game to the next level.
Despite all of this undeniable ability, both in front of and behind the camera, it is Mendes himself who deserves the most applause. His control over this always elaborate, always exciting and always engaging experience is infallible. He can take the film from quiet and tense one moment to loud and intense the next without missing a beat. SKYFALL is something of a cathartic experience almost. Bond is reborn and while his past transgressions inform the man he has become, they do not dictate the man he is going to be going forward. And after people see the newly reincarnated James Bond, they will no doubt be ready to follow him wherever he goes next.
RUST AND BONE
