Bone Tomahawk (2015)

Director: S. Craig Zahler
Writer: S. Craig Zahler
DOP: Benji Bakshi
Cast: Kurt Russell, Patrick Wilson, Matthew Fox, Richard Jenkins

Four men set out in the Wild West to rescue a group of captives from cannibalistic cave dwellers.

It is a straight up Western set after the end of civil war and to be more specific in the 1890s. I didn't know that the concept of frontier towns existed in US that late. The white Americans don't make much distinction between the usual Red Indian tribes that they encounter and the cannibalistic clan that they are dealing with in this film. The colonization of America is these days depicted in an overly apologetic manner as opposed to the whitewashing that was there in an earlier era. It has kind of swung back too much the other way as if all the Red Indian population was wiped off in a deliberate manner ignoring the role played by the diseases that their immune system was not equipped to deal with and the natural conflicts that would have occurred when settlers came in. Applying today's standards to historical events have got a lot to do with it.

This film focuses on the frontier conflict aspect with characters that are true to their historical settings. There is no attempt to sugarcoat things or be too much apologetic about it. This can cause it to be an uncomfortable viewing for many and it is especially famous for one particular gory scene. To be fair they give an early warning with the opening scene itself. It is a good watch overall even though it kind of peters out towards the end. The character played by Richard Jenkins is quite annoying as he was in 'The Shape of Water' as well. Video and audio being out of sync in the print that I watched didn't help matters.

Rating: 3.25/5

Suburra (2015)

Director: Stefano Sollima
Writers: Stefano Rulli, Sandro Petraglia, Carlo Bonini, Giancarlo De Cataldo
DOP: Paolo Carnera
Cast: Pierfransesco Favino, Alessandro Borghi, Greta Scarano
Language: Italian

A gangster known as "Samurai" wants to turn the waterfront of Rome into a new Las Vegas. All the local mob bosses have agreed to to work for his common goal. But peace is not to last long.

It is a neo-noir mafia thriller film, based on the 2013 novel of the same name by Carlo Bonini and Giancarlo De Cataldo. It is set in 2011 when the Pope is about to resign and the government is about to fall. Italy's financial health is in crisis mode after being bracketed into the so-called PIGS country grouping and the land use law has to be passed before the government falls. It is basically the post 2008 developed world told as a Mafioso story. The establishment is mixed in with the Mafia and the little people among the Mafioso represents the general public. Everybody is in on the crime but just that the scale of it is different. Film ends with a clusterfuck scenario where little people have gone batshit crazy disturbing the equilibrium and the future is uncertain, which is pretty much like the scenario is for Eurozone countries that were in economic doldrums post 2008.

There are so many characters in the film that it took around 45 minutes to establish all the connections. You really need to pay attention to figure it all out but the pay-off is really good. It is quite predictable towards the end but that is not a problem as it is just a case of you figuring out what they are going for. It is really stylish and follows the events that happen over a few days. Some of the narration cards in it didn't have subtitles but I figure it was counting down the Apocalypse. There is a Netflix series spin-off which acts as a prequel to the film following the events from 2008 onward. Stefano Sollima was the director of 'Gomorrah', which I haven't watched, and he has also directed the Sicario sequel which is going to get released soon. My disappointment about Denis Villenueve not directing it has been assuaged after seeing this film. Sicario: Soldado's trailer gives the impression that it is more of an action film but I think it is just a ploy to get asses in the seats. Really looking forward to it now. 

Rating: 4.25/5

Green Room (2015)

Director: Jeremy Saulnier
Writer: Jeremy Saulnier
DOP: Sean Porter
Cast: Anton Yelchin, Imogen Poots, Patrick Stewart

A punk rock band is forced to fight for survival after witnessing a murder at a Neo-Nazi skinhead bar, which is quite secluded. They're trapped in the Green Room with a bunch of skinheads headed by their leader, Darcy played by Patrick Stewart, waiting outside to deal with them.

What prolongs the situation is that Darcy does not want any more people becoming aware of the murder and they initially try to lure the band out of the Green Room. Saulnier had called it the third film in his 'Inept protagonist' trilogy or 'Clusterfuck trilogy'. I have seen the second one, pretty well received 'Blue Ruin', which I found to be pretty good but little overrated. Not sure if I will find it better if I re-watch it now. The ineptness of the band members in dealing with the situation comes out well and that is quite realistic. Compared to them, the neo-nazis are pretty regimented and tactical. They're not portrayed as super smart super villains. Horror films are so associated with the supernatural these days that it was quite refreshing to see one that is purely situational. I didn't think of it much as a horror film while watching it but it is definitely aimed as a deliberate effort to subvert the genre clichés. There is even one instance where they think out loud that they should split up.

This is the second film I've seen recently where the protagonist/s are making dumb decisions one after the other. But Connie from Good Times gave us the impression that he is quite smart by making those decisions super quick with full conviction. In Green Room, we're aware that the decisions are dumb even as they make them. Overall, it is a very good watch if you can stomach the gore.

Rating: 3.5/5

Mississippi Grind (2015)

Directors: Anna Boden, Ryan Fleck
Writers: Anna Boden, Ryan Fleck
DOP: Andrij Parekh
Cast: Ben Mendelsohn, Ryan Reynolds, Sienna Miller

Down on his luck and facing financial hardship, Gerry (Mendelsohn) teams up with younger charismatic poker player, Curtis (Reynolds), in an attempt to change his luck. The two set off on a road trip through the south with visions of winning back what's been lost.

The film is from the makers of Ryan Gosling's breakout film 'Half Nelson', for which he got an Oscar nomination, and the tone of this film is also similar. The addiction in the film is related to gambling instead of drugs. It is not the glitzy kind of casinos that they visit as they are fairly low-key and the people they meet are everyday Americans. Stylistically the film is very 70s and Bendelsohn does remind one of Dustin Hoffman from those days in terms of both appearance and performance. The tone of the film is closer to 'The Gambler' (1974) rather than 'The Rounders', in which Matt Damon did another one of his reluctant genius kind of roles. The film mostly progresses as Gerry's story but the mysterious nature of Curtis character is also peeled away over the course of the film. The question of whether Gerry is chasing money or trying to get his addiction fix is the prime motif and the film ends leaving it hanging. We really will for it to end well for him but the you feel he is gonna squander it anyway subsequently.

The film was made on a very low budget which is keeping with its aesthetics. It is a very good watch with good performances all round. It is supposed to be a loose remake of Robert Altman's 'California Split' which I haven't seen. That reminds me of 'Nashville' which has been there on my to watch list for a long time.

Rating: 3.25/5  

Dheepan (2015)

Director: Jacques Audiard
Writers: Jacques Audiard, Thomas Bidegain, Noé Debré
DOP: Eponine Momenceau
Cast: Antonythasan Jesuthasan, Kalieswari Srinivasan, Claudine Vinasithamby
Languages: Tamil, French

Dheepan is a Srilankan Tamil warrior who flees to France and ends up working as a caretaker of flats outside Paris. Dheepan is not his real name and he had fled Srilanka with a lady and a girl posing as the deceased Dheepan family so that they could use their passports.

Film doesn't delve deep into the nuances of LTTE conflict in Srilanka as it anyway assumes the French audience doesn't know much about it and needn't be given too much details. The atrocities committed by the Government forces during the last days of the conflict did make Worldwide headlines. All these kinds of ethnic conflicts do have a universal language. The film did come out a time when the refugee crisis in Europe was making headlines and it earned Audiard a Palme d'Or at Cannes.

The apartment projects that Dheepan is working in is a Banlieue like setup and largely occupied by other non-first generation migrants. It is also beset with first-world problems like drug related gang wars. Same time Dheepan is also dealing with the fake family that he now has and his fake wife is reluctant to invest much into it. It is an engrossing watch from the get go and is difficult to describe the tone of the film. It basically is about how Dheepan and his 'family' integrates into the French society even though at its margins. People might find problems with how it ended as some have interpreted it as Audiard juxtaposing civil war in Srilanka with the gang wars in Europe. I saw it more as him showing the latter very much as a first world problem rather than equating both of their scales.

PS: It was indeed very strange to see a Tamil language film set in France.

Rating: 4/5

High-Rise (2015)

Director: Ben Wheatley
Writers: Amy Jump, J.G. Ballard
DOP: Laurie Rose
Cast: Tom Hiddleston, Jeremy Irons, Sienna Miller, Luke Evans, Elisabeth Moss

Life for the residents of a Tower block begins to run out of control. It is set in a luxury tower block during the 1970s and it represents social hierarchy with the higher you live means higher your position is in the social order. The architect of the building, played by Jeremy Irons, resides in the top floor and this social hierarchy was not intended by him as he wanted the tower to be a crucible for change. Tom Hiddleston plays a bachelor doctor who had moved recently into the apartment.

It is an adaptation of a British dystopian novel with the same name from J.G. Ballard. It is very well acted, technically excellent and gorgeous to look at but suffers from the fact that its theme is not quite novel these days. We almost had the same thing, but set in a train instead, in Snowpiercer which worked surprisingly well. Snowpiercer had the veneer of a genre action film. Ben Wheatley's effort is more in-depth with point of views from all sides. But I found it to be a little too straight-forward, quite like Neon Demon which also I saw recently. It might go on to become a cult classic like Terry Gilliam's 'Brazil'.

Ben Wheatley is a very promising director with Kill List being my favourite film of his. A Field in England is also a great and weird watch and I have to revisit it soon. I didn't enjoy Sightseers particularly. High-Rise was his first biggishly produced film even though it is still a small production compared to Hollywood standards. Jeremy Irons is always a great screen presence and come to think of it, the only film I've seen Hiddleston in previously was the excellent 'Only Lovers Left Alive', in which his character was quite the opposite. High-Rise is not recommended for all but certainly for Ben Wheatley fans like me. Others should probably watch Kill List first.

Rating: 3/5

ഒഴിവുദിവസത്തെ കളി (Ozhivudivasathe Kali) (2015)

Director: Sanal Kumar Sasidharan
Writer:    Unni R 
Cinematographer: Indrajith S
Cast:      Nistar Ahamed, Arun Nayar, Pradeep Kumar, Baiju Netto, Reju Pillai, Abhija Sivakala
Language: Malayalam

The film follows five middle-aged men who get together for a booze party during an election day in Kerala. Their main intention is fun and refreshment but as time passes, they open up to their own true wild nature and starts getting really honest about things. Tired and bored of arguments, they decide to play a game that they used to play in their childhood.

It is based on a short-story by Unni R and was filmed without a screenplay. So what you hear is mostly improvised dialogues with the actors probably knowing where to go broadly based on the story. The portion after the interval, which comprises of around 52 minutes, is a single long take and is really an achievement for Malayalam film industry. Most of it happens within a room but you do have them going outside after an argument in pouring rain (artificial). That said, the trick you have to pull when you go for these extreme long shots is that you shouldn't make the audience feel conscious about it. That is not the case here as the camera sometimes follow very slowly some of its characters into other rooms and you get shots of walls lingering too much. Still, it is a commendable achievement when coupled with the fact that dialogues are improvised. 

The five friends in the film represents all Malayalees. You have a Brahmin, a newly rich NRI guy, a pseudo-liberal government officer, a middle caste bourgeoisie guy and finally someone from lower caste who is dark in complexion. All of them, despite being friends, gradually behaves in the manner they are expected to behave based on their caste and economic background. In Kerala, due to land reforms and all, Brahmins don't exert power like they do in the rest of India as economic heft is not their anymore. It is usually the non-Brahmin upper caste and middle caste people, who got rich, that behave in the most odious way when it comes to propagating the old social order. That is not to say that it is restricted to Hindus because caste system pretty much works across all religions in Kerala. The five characters in the film more or less adhere to their own social hierarchical place and the Dalit among them is named Dasan, which translates as servant. It is him that is made to do difficult jobs like climbing a tree to get a jack-fruit and kill a chicken for them to cook. He is also the one who is interested in politics while the remaining ones have a contempt for it. The NRI guy boasts about voting for NOTA, while the Brahmin guy procures a bottle of alcohol on the false promise that he will get his family to vote for a party. Some of them also longs for the good old days of Emergency when the trains ran on time and files moved quickly in Govt offices.This is another argument that one hear from idiots who think a dictatorship is something thing that India requires.

Finally, the game that they play involves drawing lots to determine who will be the Judge, King, Minister, the Police and the thief with the Police having the duty to declare him as such and find the thief among them. Even though they are drawing lots, all of them end up with the role that they are expected to play in terms of their position in the social hierarchy. The game then becomes a reflection of the state of corruption and social justice in India. Over the course of the film, they discuss various topics in an alcohol fueled manner including their attitude towards women and their own patriarchal selves. They use sync-sound for the film and some of the dialogues are a bit hard to decipher. It is highly recommended to watch it in a theater with good sound equipment.

The title of the film translates as 'An Off-Day's Game'. It won the state award for best picture in 2015 and it is very nice to see it getting a good release and response. It was made with a budget of just 14 lacs. Good thing about the film is that it doesn't shout its politics from rooftops and you can gleam whatever you want to from it. The performances are excellent from all concerned and it is a must-watch.

Rating: 5/5     

Er ist wieder da (Look Who's Back) (2015)

Director: David Wnendt
Writers:  David Wnenedt, Mizzi Meyer, Johannes Boss, Minna Fischgartl, Timur Vermes
Cast:       Oliver Masucci, Thomas M. Koppl, Marc-Marvin Israel
Language: German

Adolf Hitler wakes up in the 21st century. He quickly gains media attention, but whereas Germany finds him hilarious and charming, Hitler makes some serious observations about society.

The premise is that a struggling TV director finds him wandering the streets and thinks of making a show where, what he thinks of as a very good Hitler impersonator, will interact with German people. Hitler finally gets a show for himself where he is making his own honest observations which strikes a chord with the German people considering the migrant situation that Germany is facing today. The film was released in October 2015, just about the time migrant crisis was getting worse. So, the film is very effective in holding a mirror to the current German attitude and points out how easily it can degenerate into fascism. 

It is a very funny film and I guess some of the laughter it will generate in Europe will be the nervous kind. It is filmed in 'Borat' style and there are plenty of other cinematic references as well. There is one scene which reminded me of 12 Monkeys and it even got a Western themed and styled sequence. There is also this inevitable 'Donwfall' parody scene which I think almost everyone has seen on YouTube in one form or the other. The whole thing about the ambitious female TV programming head championing the totally questionable show is a play on Sidney Lumet's 'Network' as well.

Overall it is a great watch with a tremendous central performance from Oliver Masucci. They could have easily played it safe by making Hitler a totally ridiculous character. The film was a big box office success in Germany, surprising many, and one could say that Germany has matured enough to be self-critical using Hitler as a very relatable character. I don't know if the film was made in a social experimental semi-documentary manner, like 'Under the Skin', because there are many faces from the streets which are blacked out. Wouldn't surprise me if many of the characters shown in the film are their real selves. The funniest sequence in the film is Hitler getting beaten up by Neo-Nazis. The subtitles that I had was not the best and so some of the jokes might have been lost in translation.

Rating: 4/5 

Son of Saul (2015)

Director: Laszlo Nemes
Writers:  Laszlo Nemes, Clara Royer
Cast:       Geza Rohrig, Levente Molnar, Urs Rechin
Language: Hungarian

In the horror of 1944 Auschwitz, a prisoner forced to burn the corpses of his own people finds moral survival upon trying to salvage from the flames the body of a boy he takes for his son. It is quite obvious that he knows that it is not really his son, if at all he had a son to begin with, and it is a coping mechanism for the guilt that he has for having his life spared for now by taking up a role as a 'Sonderkommando'. He insists on finding a Rabbi to give a proper burial for what he presumes to be his son.

The film tells the story from a point of view, I think, has not been previously explored in films about Holocaust. It is filmed in an extreme closeup fashion, maybe due to budgetary constraints and as a way to not overly concentrate on the grimness of his surroundings in a manipulative manner. Make no mistake, the film is a good watch, but comes with an overratedness factor that is quite common for Holocaust films. It is second year in a row that a Holocaust film has won the Academy award in the Best Foreign Film category, with the last one being Ida- a patently undeserved choice considering the strong competition that it had. One can't help but think about that Extras episode in which Ricky Gervais advises Kate Winslet to do a Holocaust film to finally win an Oscar. 2015 has been quite an average year and I haven't seen any of the other competing films in this category, except for Mustang, to authentically commend on whether 'Son of Saul' deserved the award. 

Son a Saul is a good watch but I really don't get the near perfect rating that it seems to be getting from almost all the critics. It took me three sittings to finish the film and I didn't watch it in a tired sleepy manner. Don't know if that is my fault or the film's. I didn't care that much for the central performance and the whole Rabbi thing didn't convince me either. 

Rating: 3/5

D'Ardennen (The Ardennes) (2015)

Director: Robin Pront
Writers:  Jeroen Perceval, Robin Pront
Cast:      Veerle Beatens, Jan Bijvoet, Eric Godon, Jeroen Perceval
Language: Dutch (Flemish)

A brutal home-jacking goes hopelessly wrong. Dave, one of the two robbers, manages to run off, leaving his brother Kenneth behind. Four years later, Kenneth is released from prison and much has changed. Dave has his life back on track and is trying to help Kenneth however possible, but is witnessing how the highly strung Kenneth tries to win back his ex-girlfriend, who is actually dating his brother now. 

The film really meanders at the beginning which terrifically sets up the brilliant last act as it becomes more stylized gradually. On that regard, it reminded me of the film 'The Guest', which also had a terrific soundtrack. The basic plot doesn't seem much but it is a gripping watch and we don't usually see protagonists who belong to this social class, in Western films, unless it is dealing with drugs. TBF, Belgian films that I have seen mostly features such social class (Broken Circle Breakdown, Rundskop). It was not surprising to see Michael R. Roskam's, director of Rundskop, name during the end credits.  Another great thing about this film is that is that it is not very expositionary and we are left to piece together the puzzle of what happened over the years. The first few minutes of the film features three different time period over the four years. It is a very confident way of film-making. 

The characters are played excellently by all concerned and you also get to see Jan Bijvoet, who was in Borgman. The actor who played Dave, Jeroen Perceval, was also involved with the screenplay of it. This film is highly recommended for people who like intense indie down to earth thrillers. 

Rating: 4/5

Room (2015)

Director: Lenny Abrahamson
Writer:   Emma Donoghue
Cast:      Brie Larson, Jacob Tremblay, Sean Bridgers

A kidnapped mother and son make a daring escape, and experience a dramatic homecoming provoking a look into the power of imagination and the unstoppable force of a mother's love.

The IMDB synopsis that I listed above is a load of horseshit. I went into the film without knowing anything about it and it completely blew me away. With the title 'Room' and a mother and her son being the protagonists had me expecting a film like 'The Babadook'. The film doesn't really get into the reason for their confinement till about twenty minutes into it. I was thinking it was a 'Village' like situation with the mother showing some vileness. When he turns five, she thinks he is old enough to know that the world is not contained to their room and there are other real people outside. She also reveals to him that she was kidnapped as a teenager and was confined to this room. She plots an escape plan for them and it succeeds in getting themselves freed. This happens without any cheap cinematic twists and all of it happens by around half way into the film. It still manages to be exhilarating and will certainly well you up. Normally you would expect a film to end there but this one is more ambitious as it also dwells into how they adjust back into civilization. 

Brie Larson deservedly won the academy award for her portrayal and I think the kid should also have won it or at least nominated. I also can't fathom why it wasn't a serious contender for 'Best Picture' award in what was really a mediocre year for mainstream films. Maybe because they handled it in an adult manner without being too manipulative. Film is an adaptation of Emma Donoghue's novel with the same name and she also wrote the screenplay for it. The basic plot of people getting kidnapped and living in captivity is quite a common occurrence in USA and you will wonder why no one thought of making a film on it. Lenny Abrahamson was quite an odd choice to be the director for this film as his previous one, 'Frank', was quite a different breed to this film. The color tone in both films are quite similar and while Frank ended in a very melancholic note, Room is much more hopeful.

Rating: 5/5

Mustang (2015)

Director: Deniz Gamze Erguven
Writers:  Deniz Gamze Erguven, Alice Winocour
Cast:       Gunes Sensoy, Doga Zeynep Doguslu, Tugba Sunguroglu
Language: Turkish

When five orphan girls, raised by their uncle and grandmother, are seen innocently playing with boys on a beach, their scandalized conservative guardians confine them while forced marriages are arranged.

It is a female-directed film and, I don't know if it is because of getting used to female-centric films from male directors, I found the initial parts of this film to be very unsubtle. I think it would have been better if they showed what prompted their confinement to have happened due to natural course of events of them having grown up. One could see it as lazy film-making with director using it as easy way to get to things that she wants to sink into. But I guess we have to give her some benefit of doubt as the mannerisms of the girls remains consistent throughout the film and them being orphans, raised by their grandmother, could also be one reason for them being given a longer leash in a conservative society. 

The film is set in a remote village around 1000 kms away from Istanbul, which is considered as a place of freedom by the girls. It is quite ironic, since Turkey under Erdogan has taken a turn for the worse by embracing conservatism like India has also done with the coming to the power of a religious fundamentalist, Narendra Modi. While Erdogan is dismantling the secular nature of Turkey, imposed by Ataturk, Modi is dismantling our secular traditions which is considered to be quintessentially Nehruvian. Turkish films are a gateway to see and be amazed by the Turkish society which stands in stark contrast with other Muslim majority nations. Nuri Bilge Ceylan is a favorite of mine and his films have more in common with films from Western Europe, with themes of modern alienation and existentialism, rather than  Persian films which tend to be more about societies at large. 

Overall, Mustang is a very good watch and it is the sort of film that would be received very well in places like Kerala, which was indeed the case when it came here for IFFK. It got nominated in the Best Foreign Language Film category at the Oscars, where it was sent as a nomination from France. Performances are raw and very good from all concerned. Ending happens in a feel-good manner but works really well because we really want it to happen that way.

PS: I didn't know that, in Turkish marriages, virginity test for the bride happens after the first night, when the groom's relatives barge in to check out the bed-sheet.

Rating: 3.5/5

Anomalisa (2015)

Directors: Charlie Kaufman, Duke Johnson
Writer:      Charlie Kaufman
Cast:         Davide Thewlis, Jennifer Jason Leigh, Tom Noonan

A man crippled by the mundanity of his life experiences something out of the ordinary.

The theme of the film is 'Fregoli Delusion', a rare disorder in which a person holds a delusional belief that different people are in fact a single person who changes appearance or is in disguise. The film achieves it by having all the characters in it, except for two of them, being voiced by Tom Noonan. The hotel that the main character checks in is named Fregoli. It is the film that Charlie Kaufman wanted to fund through Kickstarter and was conceived as a 40 minute one. But the end version is 90 minutes long and you really feel that it would have been more suitable as a forty minutes project. I really can't understand all the hype its getting. It is a good watch but is comparatively a light-weight project from Kaufman after 'Synecdoche New-York'. It is in stop-motion animation format and it is not as if it is groundbreaking. Richard Linklater handled it ages ago with two excellent films that were also rich in content- A Scanner Darkly & A Waking Life. Anomalisa's story of a man going through mid-life crisis seems a bit simplistic in comparison. 

Overall, it is a good watch but it would have worked better as a short film. It seems Kaufman decided to play it quite safe after he went full retard with 'Synecdoche New-York', which was fucking excellent even though I didn't have much clue about what was going on. One silver-lining is that there is a good rendering of 'Girls just want to have some fun' in Anomalisa. 

Rating: 3/5

The Hateful Eight (2015)

Director: Quentin Tarantino
Writer:    Quentin Tarantino
Cast:       Samuel L. Jackson, Kurt Russell, Jennifer Jason Leigh, Walton Goggins, Tim Roth, Michael Madsen, Bruce Dern, Demian Bichir

I just wrote the names of eight main characters to make sure that there were indeed eight. The IMDB synopsis is: In the dead of a Wyoming winter, a bounty hunter and his prisoner find shelter in a cabin currently inhabited by a collection of nefarious characters. 

Film is billed as Quentin's eighth film, which is factually correct if you ignore Four Rooms and consider both volumes of Kill Bill as one film, and he has already declared that he will stop at 10. I hope that is as truthful as his statement was about not making 'The Hateful Eight' after the script got leaked. I am generally considered as a Tarantino fanboy and some of my friends have even given me a nickname of 'Tomantino', but I have been kind of falling out of love with his latest offerings. I thought 'Inglourious Basterds' was a glourious return to form but his followup to that, 'Django Unchained' was ultimately a disappointment. I did gave it a 4 but that was more because of me being in denial. His longtime collaborator and editor, Sally Menke, had died before he made Django and based on his two films after her death, it seems his films really misses her especially when it comes to reigning him in and keep in check the running time. I love both Pulp Fiction and the Basterds and both were really long films but you really don't feel it when you are watching them. You do feel it for both Django and Hateful Eight. That said, it might have been different if I had watched The Hateful Eight at the cinemas because you don't have the option of pausing it and take a break. Even the format of it being a mystery also would have suited more if you are watching it at the cinemas. 

From what I have written above, you might think that I didn't enjoy it. That is not true because it is a very enjoyable watch but just that the standards we expect is just too high. I haven't seen 'The Thing' and they use Ennio Morricone's unused theme that he made for that film titled 'Bestiality'. Going by the IMDB synopsis of The Thing, there are plenty of nods to that film especially with the ice-cold winter setting and nobody trusting anybody aspect. Apart from that, you can also compare it to Taraninino's first film 'Reservoir Dogs' with regards to the setting and relationship between the various characters. You also get a long speech just before the interval which would remind you of that Christopher Walken-Dennis Hopper sequence from 'True Romance'. Like this speech is inferior to that one from True Romance, the film is also a lesser version of Tarantino's best works. I just wish he would come out of this 'Period films' phase of his career which started with the Basterds. Performances are great from all concerned, except maybe Madsen, in a very screen chewing manner. There are plenty of great sequences but you just think the sum is not as good as the parts. There is this whole racial politics discussions in it which is also very relevant to the current politics and reality of America. I also liked the aspect that the Black characters in it are portrayed as people who don't like Mexicans. I also loved Tim Roth's speech regarding true justice and mob justice which is also very relevant to the current politics of India.

Overall it is a very good watch but that is just not good enough when you are watching a Tarantino film. His films are meant to be great for re-watches but I don't think it will be so for this one. Ennio Morricone finally won a deserved Oscar for his work on this film. Samuel L. Jackson was great till just about the last act of the film where he kind of loses his dignity (TBF, that would happen if you get shot in the nuts). There is also a delightful cameo from a certain actor. Unlike his last two films, which had major stars and were financially his most successful, this film had an ensemble cast without any stars. The $144 million that it manged to collect is truly remarkable and proves his stature as a superstar director.

Trivia: The guitar that Kurt Russell smashes to smithereens is an 1870 antique piece and he was meant to use a fake replacement during that scene. Jennifer Jason Leigh's reaction to that is genuine.

Rating: 3.5/5

The Revenant (2015)

Director: Alejandro Gonzalez Inarritu
Writers:  Mark L. Smith, Alejandro Gonzalez Inarritu, Michael Punke
Cast:       Leonardo DiCaprio, Tom Hardy, Will Poulter

A frontiersman on a fur expedition in the 1820s fights for survival after being mauled by a bear and left for dead by members of his  own hunting team.

The trouble with these kind of films (127 Hours is another one) is that you already know the basic plot of the film even before watching them and that is always become a challenge for the filmmaker to keep people interested in other ways. One of the ways is to set them in breathtaking locales and the knowledge that they actually went to such locations and shot the film under very difficult conditions will give the makers some leeway. I will acknowledge that it is indeed breathtaking and a very ambitious project but as a film it didn't work very well for me. It more or less felt like an extended episode of 'Man Vs Wild', albeit directed  by a master filmmaker and filmed by the excellent Emmanuel Lubezki, who won his third consecutive Oscar for this film. The backstory of Leo, regarding his native American wife and the mystique way it if filmed, came off as very pretentious. It is meant to make us really feel for the character and his son but I don't think they succeeded on that regard. I would have preferred a simple raw version without any backstory, which would have also helped in cutting down its running time of close to 150 minutes, around twenty minutes too long. I found myself looking at my watch after just 45 minutes or so.

As far as I am concerned, there is not a whole lot wrong with Tom Hardy's actions. It was the logical thing to do. And I do think the makers have also given a tinge of ambiguity to most of the characters but it is not deep enough. The captain of the expedition actually arranges a separate team to take care of an injured Leo, with rewards on offer, after he found himself to not have the gumption to shoot Leo to end his and their ordeal. You also get the token references to the plight of native Indians and the whole politics of Colonialism but they just sound a bit lame and half-arsed. So what I am saying is that the while the central part of film, which is about survival, is done very well, the other aspects that were required to make it a great film didn't work for me. 

Overall, it is a good watch and needs to be seen on a big screen. The theater where I watched it also got in on the act by putting the AC a tad too cold to suit the movie experience. As far as Oscars are concerned, Mad Max: Fury Road deserved to win both Best Director and Best cinematography award ahead of 'The Revenant'. Both Leo and Tom Hardy were fantastic and it is a deserved win for Leo, albeit in an award-bait role. I do think this one would rank as Inarritu's worst along with Babel, but that just indicates the greatness of the rest of his filmography.

Rating: 3.5/5

Nina Forever (2015)

Director: Ben Blaine, Chris Blaine
Writers:  Ben Blaine, Chris Blaine
Cast:       Abigail Hardingham, Fiona O'Shaughnessy, Cian Barry

After his girlfriend, Nina, dies in a car crash, Rob unsuccessfully attempts suicide. As he begins to overcome his grief, he falls in love with a co-worker, Holly. Their sex life is complicated when Nina, unable to find rest in the afterlife, comes back to life to sarcastically torment them whenever they have sex.

It is basically a comedy film with a tinge of body horror. Kiwi film 'Housebound' was a recent one which successfully mixed horror and comedy and this one could be classed as a similar one even though the tone is a little bit more serious. I am not a big fan of horror films and whenever I watch them these days I try to explain it away as psychological issues. Most of the ones that I do end up turns out to be psychological thrillers anyway rather than pure horror (The Babadook for eg). This one is also along those lines even though both of them could see Nina. There is a minor twist in the end with regards to who is responsible for Nina and it is not done in a disingenuous way. It gives a proper closure for the film and also is in keeping with the opening scenes of the film where a boyfriend ditches Holly for being too vanilla and not complex enough. 

It is very funny and the way they try to navigate the Nina situation is hilarious. At first Holly tries to accommodate Nina by trying out a menage-e-trois situation which doesn't work. The she tries to remove all physical traces of Nina from Rob's apartment but that doesn't work either. We are given hints about who is responsible for bringing Nina into the situation during those scenes when she starts appearing even when they are not having sex. Holly even tries out having sex with Rob on her grave and that also ends up not working as Nina quips that don't say the word 'Closure'. It is self-referential in that sense. Overall it is a great watch if you can stomach body horror. It is gonna be a cult classic.

Rating: 4/5

Steve Jobs (2015)

Director: Danny Boyle
Writers:  Aaron Sorkin, Walter Issacson
Cast:       Michael Fassbender, Kate Winslet, Seth Rogen, Jeff Daniels

Steve Jobs takes us behind the scenes of the digital revolution, to paint a portrait of the man at its epicenter. The story unfolds backstage at three iconic product launches, ending in 1998 with the unveiling of the mac. 

It is a film that became a box office failure because of the plethora of Jobs films that came ahead of it. That was a shame because it is the best film out of the lot even though I am making that call without watching the other ones (Who the fuck wants to watch one with Ashton Kutcher anyway?). I am familiar with the story from the film 'Pirates of Silicon Valley' and some documentary that aired on CNBC after his death. There are chiefly two camps when it comes to Steve Jobs- One venerates him like a God while the other think he is an exploitative asshole. The film will satisfy all the other neutrals like me because it treads the middle path and kind of tries to explain the man. That, said the general reaction have been that it is too unkind to him. Some people associated with Jobs have also denounced it. I just think it is safe to assume that there is a quite heavy dose of fiction to it and the makers are quite honest about it. You can safely assume that things won't be this dramatic ahead of all these product launches. What is brilliant about the making that all his characteristics are explained without being too obvious about it. His complicated relationship with his daughter being explained with his own daddy/mummy issues (he was adopted) will sound certainly lame but it isn't so when you watch it. 

Michael Fassbender is my favorite actor from his generation and he continues to amaze. As for recent Danny Boyle films, I tend to enjoy his less successful ones than the hits like Slumdog Millionaire and 127 Hours. It might just be a breakthrough role for Seth Rogen, who plays Steve Wozniak, and Kate Winslet is excellent as usual. But it is a shame that Kirsten Stewart won't be winning awards in the supporting actress category for her role in 'Clouds of Sils Maria'. 

PS: I think Bill Gates will be bitter about why no one cares about his story. I guess someone should do it as a charity. 

Rating: 4/5

റാണി പത്മിനി (Rani Padmini) (2015)

Director: Aashiq Abu
Writers:  Syam Psuhkaran, Ravisankar
Cast:       Manju Warrier, Rima Kallingal, Dileesh Pothan
Langauge: Malayalam

The story revolves around two women, Rani and Padmini, who are on a journey from Delhi to HImachal Pradesh with different purposes but happen to end up together by chance. 

It is basically an odd couple road film with Padmini being the older more traditional Kerala girl and Rani being a younger tomboy sort. One would think that it is a bit more serious toned story of self-actualization going by the poster and synopsis. It is actually served with dollops of comedy with very cartoonish side characters. There are things that are ridiculously bad about their backstories in terms of characterization. Padmini got a villain like mother-in-law who is forcing his son to go for a divorce because her daughter-in-law decided to go for a job. Why her husband agrees for a divorce, only God and Aashiq Abu knows. You could maybe justify it by saying that non-resident Keralites, who haven't integrated to their place of stay, tend to be more conservative than people living in Kerala as they seem to live in a time warp. In Rani's case, she is on the run from an underworld don about whom she informed the Police. Since, from the get go, her story is presented in a comedic track you can forgive the cartoonish nature of the characters. The backstories are revealed only gradually and Rani's story is told only after the interval. 

I hadn't seen any of the films featuring Manju Warrier since her comeback but going by her performance in adverts, it seems she has lost some of the naturalism. That is the case for this film as well but some of  the blame lies with the director. I think all the directors consider her to be very senior to them and are afraid to correct her performances these days. It is Rima who steals the show in this film in terms of overall performance and the chemistry between the two is quite good in a confrontational sense. Their relationship isn't too saccharine to make it intolerable and I got reminded of a similar genre film- 'Planes, Trains and Automobiles'. Some have criticized it for its unsubtle feminism but I thought it was handled with much more intelligence than '22 Femle Kottayam', which was universally praised but I found to be very overrated. There is this guy who approaches Rani in a restaurant with a seemingly casting couch like offer but in the end it turns out that the guy was genuine. Aashiq Abu has also poked fun at Malayalee's misguided notion that all films should have a message and a film can only be good if it satisfies that criterion. Here you have Padmini, the traditional girl, insisting that she likes stories with a message. Both Rani and Padmini tell a fantasy story which are visualized in the film and I found both of those to be hilarious. 

Overall it is good watch despite its very obvious flaws. Songs and BGM are great with stunning cinematography, amply aided by the stunning locations. At 140 minutes, it is about 10-20 minutes longer than it should be. I think people will enjoy it for what it is if they watch it being aware that it is a light comedy film. It is a treatment that we haven't seen so far in Malayalam and the audience also needs to get out of their comfort zone to enjoy it. It was a worthy effort from Abu and his team.

Rating: 3/5 

Spotlight (2015)

Director: Tom McCarthy
Writers:  Josh Singer, Tom McCarthy
Cast:       Michael Keaton, Mark Ruffalo, Rachel McAdams, Liev Schrieber, Stanley Tucci

The true story of how the Boston Globe uncovered the massive scandal of child molestation and cover-up within the local Catholic Archdiocese, shaking the entire Catholic Church to its core.

Boston is a unique place in USA with a very distinct cultural identity. It is very Irish and Catholic and you need that information in hand to realize how big a story it would have been there when Boston Globe broke it. The film follows Globe's 'Spotlight' team, the oldest continuously operating newspaper investigative unit in the United States.  It is based on a series of stories by the Spotlight team that earned The Globe 2003 Pulitzer prize for public service. The film begins with the appointment of Liev Schrieber's character as the Chief Editor of The Globe. He is an outsider and a Jew. The film is set in 2001 and when they start talking about cuts due to the creeping presence of online media, you do worry that they are gonna for a nostalgic sermon about the goodness of the old model. That worry is misplaced since they don't pursue it further and it is the Chief Editor who initiates the story as he thinks that enough follow up was not done for the story of an abusive priest and there is something institutional about Catholic Church's culpability that they can focus on. He is an outsider and sometimes it takes to be an outsider to shake things up. There is this one line that he delivers which sums up the scandal: 'It takes a village to raise a child but it also takes a village to abuse one'. 

I'm a sucker for media led investigative stories and count 'The Insider' and 'All the President's Men' as among my all time favorite films. So it was quite natural for me to get excited about Spotlight. But the tone of the film is sharply different from the two films that I mentioned in terms of how less cinematic it is. Some would say it is more realistic but there are things in it which didn't really work for me. I thought the parts in which they show couple of reporters' (Mark Ruafflo and Rachel McAdams) private lives didn't really work for me and found them to be quite half-baked. I am a big fan of Ruffalo but thought his mannersims for the role was unnecessarily distracting. Don't know if he is basing it out of the real life person he is portraying, and if so, you don't really need that level of accuracy when you are playing someone who is not that famous. Michael Keaton, Liev Schrieber and Stanley Tucci were excellent in their respective roles. I actually didn't recognize Tucci in his getup with hair even though found the face to be very familiar. 

Overall it is still a great watch but don't think it is the 'Best Picture of 2015' material that they are talking about. At the end of it they show places from around the world where instances of child abuse from Catholic priests were unearthed after Globe broke their story and Ollur in Kerala also figured in it and it is not very far from where I live. The story is here: Kerala church priest, accused of raping nine-year-old, arrested. The film also cites a psychiatrist priest who studied the phenomenon for the Catholic church who says that as per his studies, 6% of Catholic priests in USA have molested children. The celibacy rule for the priests, unsurprisingly, is to blame and 50% of them are not celibate anyway. It is indeed funny how Catholic Church wants prohibition of alcohol in Kerala when they can learn from their own clusterfuck that prohibition never actually works.

Rating: 4/5

Legend (2015)

Director: Brian Helgeland
Writers:  Brian Helgeland, John Perason
Cast:       Tom Hardy, Emily Browning, Taron Egerton

The film tells the story of identical twin gangsters Reggie and Ronnie Kray, two of the most notorious criminals in British history, and their organised crime empire in the East End of London during the 1960s.

Tom Hardy plays the role of the identical twins in the film and when you have such a scenario playing out in a film, how well the actor is doing can be judged by whether you are not conscious about the fact that the same dude is playing the two roles. Since the two characters have very distinctive mannerisms and behavior, that aspect is handled with great ease and it is a great performance from Tom Hardy. Sadly the film ends up as a showpiece vehicle for Tom Hardy to display his acting skills with the other characters and story aspects not being interesting enough to make it a good watch. When you are making gangster films of this nature, you can either go the Goodfellas route, where you make the protagonists likeable and ones whom you can root for despite their criminal activities, or you can go the 'Black Mass' route, where they are just thoroughly unlikeable psychotics. Legend kind of treads the middle path and fails to satisfy the audience even though the film has some very good moments. You really don't care much for the wife character of Ronnie and that can be a problem when the entire film told from the perspective of their relationship. That said, the misdirection involved regarding the fate of the narrator was a cool trick and reminded me of 'Me, Earl, and the dying girl'.

Overall it is a decent watch without being any good at any point of time. Tom Hardy is always interesting in all the films that I have watched of his and this is no different and people can check it out purely because of his involvement. The film just left me feeling the same way as when I watched 'Bronson' even though this one was much more enjoyable to watch. Got to say Americans in general have got gangster films tone right down to a tee when compared with the Brits. You can also sense the same when the Krays meet their American backers. There is a sense of small-time British brashness compared to the professionalism of US mafia.

Rating: 2.5/5