നായകൻ (Nayakan) (2010)

Director: Lijo Jose Pellissery
Writer: P.S. Rafeeq
DOP: Manoj Paramahamsa
Cast: Indrajith, Thilakan, Siddique, Jagathy
Language: Malayalam

The film revolves around a Kathakali artist, Varadanunni (Indrajith), who joins the underworld to take revenge on those who killed his family.

Malayalam cinema is going through a new wave movement right now and there can be a debate about which film's release can be considered as its starting point. Many cite Rajesh Pillai's 'Traffic' as it and its commercial success could be the reason for it. It is a film which I didn't particularly like but was a decent attempt nevertheless. If you look bit more back in history, Lijo Jose Pellissery's debut feature, Nayakan is a more valid candidate as the striking characteristic of this new wave is a more visual way of storytelling and Lijo is the best exponent of it. Traffic was one which relied too much on speech as a very obvious exposition tool and that was its main drawback.

Nayakan is more of a technical achievement, which is a given in LJP films, than being an interesting story with interesting characters. Like his recent film Angamaly Diaries, which is also his best one yet, it is told in a quite non-linear fashion. The characters in it are quite campy and some of the performances and getups quite amateurish, including the one from the director. Siddique character in it seems to be a reference to Gary Oldman from Leon. Both LJP and Prashanth Pillai have grown tremendously well in their craft but Nayakan still is a very worthy effort as a debut one. It kind of becomes quite non- interesting by around the midpoint of the film but the glorious climax action sequence helps the audience to leave on a high-note.

Rating: 3/5

Jason Bourne (2016)

Director: Paul Greengrass
Writers:. Paul Greengrass, Christopher Rouse
Cinematographer: Barry Ackroyd
Cast:.       Matt Damon, Tommy Lee-Jones, Alicia Vikander, Julia Stiles

As is the case with other Bourne films, Bourne is on the run from CIA hit squads as he tries to uncover things from his past. One would think there isn't much to discover after the end of Ultimatum, the third film in the trilogy which tied the trilogy together nicely like Dude's rug, but they just add one more mystery for him to solve regarding how he ended up as a CIA agent.

The film begins with Julia Stiles in an 'Anonymous' kind of hacking setup hacking the CIA files to obtain the files relating to their black-ops programmes including treadstone. Bourne was living kind of an exiled life but is lured back in when his interest gets piqued by what Stiles hands over to him. On the opposite side there is Tommy Lee-Joness, playing the typical CIA villain from all other Bourne films, and Alicia Vikander who heads the cyber division. Vincent Cassel plays the asset who is hunting Bourne on orders from the villain. If you haven't still figured it out, you can watch the recent honest trailer on Bourne trilogy which points out that all these films have basically the same plot and setup as a backbone to show off its action setpieces.

The latest film which comes almost a decade after Ultimatum, touches upon things that have changed since then like increased privacy concerns related to social media, hacking threats, wikileaks etc. It also plays on the refrain that the likes of Facebook were funded by CIA as a surveillance tool.

Performances are great and the action setpieces are top notch. It is certainly the weakest among the Matt Damon as Bourne films but still a very good watch. Some have complained about Alicia Vikander's role being very light weight but I thought it was an interesting take on an ambiguous ambiguous character when contrasted with the usual way such female characters are portrayed. Bourne says less than 100 words during the whole film. I do feel that there will be another Bourne film on its way which might resolve the unresolved threads from this film. That might also change the mixed opinion that the film has generated.

PS: The social media honcho is named Arun Kaloor and I wonder whether he is supposed to be a Malayalee.

Rating: 3.5/5

Les amours imaginaires (Heartbeats) (2010)

Director: Xavier Dolan
Writer:    Xavier Dolan
Cast:       Xavier Dolan, Monia Chokri, Niels Schneider
Language: French (Quebec)

The story of three close friends who are involved in a love triangle. That would seem like a very cliched story-line and going by the poster you can surmise that it involves two men and a lady. But the difference is that the object of desire is not the woman in it. The lady and one of the guys, who is gay, have a long term friendship. The middle guy in the poster is a new friend of theirs and both of them have a crush on him and they know that. They are not sure of his sexuality and so the film proceeds from there. 

That is a synopsis that would make you wonder why it took this long for someone to come up with such a story-line. Film is laugh out loud funny throughout. Dolan chose to make it in a cringe-comedy fashion as the camera just lingers on the faces of its two main protagonists as they get confused and humiliated over the course of the film. Film begins in documentary style with several people talking about their relationships and break-ups. It also comes up at several different points later in the film and Dolan uses it to pad up the film and also as an exposition tool. He makes it a point to have someone explain Kinsey's concept that sexuality can be classed into seven types starting from strictly hetero-sexual and ending with strictly homo-sexual. Going by recent scientific studies it seems that only few can be considered to be in the extreme ends of this spectrum. The interview like segments in the film had several funny ones in it. It serves as useful editing cuts and to signify passage of time as well in the main story but I thought it was kind of lazy film-making and was not really necessary in the film. 

The other two films (Mommy, Tom at the Farm) I have seen of Dolan's have been on the intense side and so the out and out comedy style of this film surprised me a bit, but in a pleasant manner. I had actually put off seeing it thinking that I would need to get in the right kind of mood to watch it. Great soundtrack is a given in his films and this one is not different. The recurring song in it is Dalida's Italian 'Bang Bang' song, YouTube video linked above, whose English version is familiar to me from Tarantino's 'Kill Bill'. Dolan was just 20 years old when he made this film and it got premiered at Cannes in the Un Certain Regard section. Come to think of it, Bertolucci's 'Dreamers' is somewhat similar in terms of its three characters but that one had a looking from outside quality to it as the film was told from the perspective of the new one in the group of three and it was the siblings that stayed mysterious. And while watching Heartbeats, I thought the main two protagonists were siblings till around the middle of the film at which point it was made explicit that they were just friends. Anyway, it is a great watch and certainly much better than Dreamers. 

Rating: 4.5/5

Rubicon (TV series) (2010)

Creators: Jason Horwitch, Henry Bromell
Cast:       James Bridge Dale, Jessica Collins, Lauren Hodges, Dallas Roberts, Christopher Evan Welch, Arliss Howard, Michael Cristofer

Will Travers is an analyst at a New-York based federal intelligence agency who is thrown into a story where nothing is as appears to be. He discovers that he maybe working with members of a secret society that manipulates world events on a grand scale. The series is probably inspired by how intelligence was massaged to get a consensus for War on Iraq in the aftermath of 9-11 attacks. 

I stumbled on to this series after reading a review of Mr. Robot in LA Review of Books. This was cited as a very underrated one with similar conspiracy sensibilities as well as for respecting audience's intelligence. It was broadcast in AMC and was cancelled after the first season, comprising of thirteen episodes. It also had other problems like the creator leaving due to creative differences after the pilot and show was later taken care by Henry Bromell, the executive producer. You could see over the course of the season how that affects the series as there is a conflict between whether it is primarily about the conspiracy or is it about Office politics and team dynamics. That is especially apparent in the season finale which seems a bit directionless and understated in a bad way. 

Overall, it is still a very good watch and a breath of fresh air when compared to traditional TV staple. It does have the cheap look of a TV series, which is not true for Mr. Robot. The fact that it didn't get renewed for a second season doesn't really matter since it reached its logical conclusion and anything after that is better if not done. Same is true for Mr. Robot, which has been renewed for second season, and I can only see it going downhill from here after the excellent first season. In Rubicon, performances from all concerned are very good but I found James Bridghe Dale's acting in the very last sequence of the series a bit underwhelming. Michael Cristofer is deliciously hammy and he will play a bigger role in Mr. Robot's next season, which is great news. Arliss Howard's 'Kale Ingram' is the Doug Stamper (House of Cards) equivalent for this show and like Doug for HoC, he is my favorite from this show. Just found out that he played John Henry (LFC and Boston Red Sox Owner and figurehead of FSG) in Moneyball. 

Rating: 3.5/5

                                                                           

Restrepo (2010)

Directors: Tim Hetherington, Sebastian Junger
Features:  The Men of Battle Company 2nd of the 503rd Infantry Regiment 173rd Airborne Brigade Combat Team

A year with one platoon in the deadliest valley in Afghanistan during the war. It is set in the Korangal valley which borders with Pakistan and the body count was 50 for US there during the entire war. It was filmed by Tim Hetherington and Sevastian Junger who were working for Vanity Fair as embedded journalists during the war. The title comes from an outpost there which was named after a platoon medic who got killed earlier in the campaign.

It is a case of a documentary being more gripping than any feature film could be in depicting such a scenario. It is not just a case of us being stumped by all of  it being real but we are genuinely intrigued by the narrative and also  the plight of the soldiers as well as local people over there caught  up in a war. Embedded journalism can be always problematic since it gives us always what they want us to see/read. The documentary gets past this hurdle by not being political at all and just showing ground level things that happen during the war. It never comes across as heroic but people just trying to get by surviving the whole thing. There is no voice over narration and the low quality of footage adds to its realness. The climax is nothing heroic in the Hollywood sense but us being relieved along with them for getting the fuck out of there in one piece at the end of their deployment.

I have no idea how the journalists managed to get all of this in between as well as during the fighting. The platoon took enemy fire almost everyday, perhaps making it the longest exposure to combat any for US since the second world war. Tim Hetherington got killed during the Libyan civil war in 2011 and that shouldn't come as a surprise for those who've seen this documentary. I was not that enamored by Hurt Locker which felt like a propaganda film for US army. Restrepo coveys more without having to spell it out for you and the message that you get is definitely anti-war.

Rating: 4.5/5

                                                                    

Copie conforme (Certified Copy) (2010)

Director: Abbas Kiarostami
Writers:  Abbas Kiarostami, Caroline Eliacheff
Cast:       Juliette Binoche, William Shimell
Language: French, English, Italian

In Tuscany to promote his latest book, a middle-aged British writer meets a French woman who leads him to the village of Luicgnano. While there, a chance question reveals something deeper.

The film starts with a discussion on the new book from the writer titled- 'Certified Copy'. It is a book on art which questions the idea of originality taking the value attached to the original paintings for eg. As the writer explains later in the film, why should one disparage a copy work of 'Mona Lisa' since it also captures the emotion of the picture in an accurate way and in a sense Da Vinci's work is also not original since it is also a copy of the expression in her face. We are shown Binoche attending the press conference with her kid and leaving a calling card for the writer. When they eventually meet on a Sunday, it looks like she is trying to court him and the discussion they have is around the ideas from the book. From the start of the film, what we have towards Binoche is a sense of irritation and she continues in that vein throughout the film. A lady from a restaurant asks her questions thinking that they are a married couple and she tags along with the writer also seeming to join in. From there the film takes a weird turn as it looks like they do have quite a shared history and have been in a relationship for fifteen years. It seems that he is quite successful in his line of work and has become tired of her and their kid and lives a life of his own. She is resentful because of that and want to fix things by living together again whereas he is not at all sentimental and feels that where they are now at is just natural progression of things in a relationship when all the false hopes that people have at the time of marriage are vanquished. Bincohe is a sorry sentimental figure the whole way through but I suppose some of my own biases are coming through there.

If one supposes that they are indeed a couple, be it in a marriage or a mistress relationship, then the first 30-40 minutes of the film will look like a great convolution to misdirect us in to thinking that they were not. I am sure plenty of things from the beginning parts of film won't make much sense. So I guess the writer is just role-playing and the whole exercise is like a psychological counselling for her. Maybe they both play the same role they are playing here but with different people in their respective marriages and they are just demonstrating the discussion they had on the idea of perfect copies and the concept of originality. In the end it acts as a very surreal film without any usage of surreal imagery or time and space jumps. I really have to watch it again to determine whether it supports any of the two obvious interpretations.  It can do come across as a bit pretentious but I enjoyed watching it.

It was Kiarostami's second collaboration with Bincohe after 'Shirin'. Film marked the debut for William Shimell who is a well known opera singer. Film got an automatic ban in Iran since it depicts Western culture and la general lack of agreement with Binoche's attire. It won her best actress award at Cannes and she highlighted the plight of Jafar Pinahi during her acceptance speech.

Rating: 4.5/5

ลุงบุญมีระลึกชาติ (Uncle Boonmee Who Can Recall His Past Lives) (2010)

Director: Apichatpong Weerasethakul
Writers:  Phra Sripariyattiweti, Apichatpong Weerasethakul
Cast:       Thanapat Saisaymar, Jenjira Pongpas, Sakda Kaewbuadee
Language: Thai

On his deathbed, Uncle Boonmee recalls his many past lives.

When you are watching a film from a place like Thailand you don't expected to be treated with an extremely surreal kind of work. That said, Nicolas Windning Refn's 'Only God Forgives' was a surreal film set in Thailand but that is essentially a Western film. This one solidly exist in the Lynchian Universe but with an Eastern twist dealing with concepts like reincarnation and Karma. Another difference is that characters in it are very down to Earth kind whereas Lynch gives them a very cinematic flourish and stylization. Film very much look like featuring Ozu characters directed by David Lynch. 

Uncle Boonmee is suffering from kidney issues as he lives as a farmer in north east part of Thailand which borders Laos. He blames himself for his suffering and attributes it to Karma due to his past as an army officer who hunted communists and for the bugs he killed in his farm. 'An Act of Killing' was another film which tackled the issue of persecution of Chinese/Communists in Indonesia. I didn't know that it happened also in Thailand, but I guess it is not that surprising since those were the cold war days during which USA supported many un-democratic governments to do the same resulting in the latter using it to crush any opposition. Even though title of the film states that he is is recalling past lives, it is more a case of ghosts of his dead family members visiting him and him reminiscing about things he did in the past. Then again there is one sequence of a princess from distant past getting fucked by a catfish which must be from one of his earlier incarnations. I suppose what the director is trying to do is provide a connection to Thailand's history and the present through the film. The last sequence of the film is set in the urban part of Thailand where an amateur monk is caught between his earlier life and newly found monk life. I don't presume I understand exactly what the director is trying to convey in its entirety but when you watch these kind of films-it is almost always a case of enjoying the unique atmosphere and gleam whatever meaning you can. I like these kind of films where you watch it through the halfway mark in a sleepy fashion and in the latter part you don't want it to end since you have kind of begun to get the point.

The film won the Palme d'Or at the Cannes and was the first Asian film to do so since 1997 (Abbas Kiarostami's 'Taste of Cherry') and the first Thai film to do so in the festival's history. It is definitely something that one need to rewatch and I will definitely be checking out other works from the director. It is a very pleasant take on death and the director saw it as a metaphor for the death of use of films for film-making. 

Rating: 4/5