Director: Mike Leigh Writer: Mike Leigh Cast: David Thewlis, Lesley Sharp, Katrin Cartlidge
Johnny flees Manchester to London, to avoid getting a beating from the family of of a girl he has raped. He visits his former girlfriend's house and spends his time sometimes wandering and subjecting people he meets with his Philosophical rants.
I loved it the first time I watched this films a few years back and this time round I loved it even more. It is like listening to 'True Detective's Rust Cohle without a murder mystery to solve and with plenty of wit. Johnny is a philosophical bully and there is also a character called Jeremy (Greg Curtwell) who is a physical bully. Both of them don't have much regard for the lives of people who are just getting by with mundane jobs. The rant Johnny has with Brain, the 'Insecurity' officer, would be the high point of what he has to say. It is in my opinion Mike Leigh's best work even though it is slightly different to what he is generally famous for.
Louise: So what happened, were you bored in Manchester?
Johnny: Was I bored? No, I wasn't fuckin' bored. I'm never bored. That's the trouble with everybody - you're all so bored. You've had nature explained to you and you're bored with it, you've had the living body explained to you and you're bored with it, you've had the universe explained to you and you're bored with it, so now you want cheap thrills and, like, plenty of them, and it doesn't matter how tawdry or vacuous they are as long as it's new as long as it's new as long as it flashes and fuckin' bleeps in forty fuckin' different colors. So whatever else you can say about me, I'm not fuckin' bored.
Perumthachan (Thilakan) is a pious, respected and master carpenter of mixed background. He has a son whom he raised after his wife died during the child birth. At the beginning of the story the father is resentful towards his son since he considers him to have killed killed his wife but nevertheless he teaches him his craft and he grows up to, under many people's eyes, surpass his father. Even though people play up the rivalry and jealousy of father towards his son the film is ultimately about the universal theme of generation gap.
This generation gap is evident by the different ways in which father and son react when they respectively had their dalliances with the upper caste women for whom they were working. Perumthachan was deeply regretful about his lust and asks his Gods for forgiveness whereas his son doesn't find anything wrong with it. He questions the conventions and asks his father why he is happy to consider himself to be of lower caste due to his mother's caste and at the same time don't mind his Brahmin parentage getting the credit for his skills. The ending of the film is a bit abrupt for those who are watching it for the first time.
It was interesting to see the portrayal of women in this film. With the 'Marumakathayam' system that was prevalent in Kerala, the women are shown to be much more independent willed in terms of the choices that they have for their marriage as long as they stick to the same caste. I wonder how true it is to the history. Anyways the film is great watch.
Director: Michael WInterbottom Writers: John Curran, Jim Thompson (novel) Cast: Casey Affleck, Kate Hudson, Jessica Alba
A West Texas deputy sheriff is slowly unmasked as a psychotic serial killer in this adaptation of Jim Thompson's novel by the same name.
Filmmakers have been trying to adapt the novel to the screen since the 1950s. Stanley Kubrick, whose 'The Killing' was adapted from a Jim Thompson novel, considered 'The Killer Inside Me' to be one of the most disturbing book he has read. In the 80s Tom Cruise was attached to the project and in the 90s Quentin Tarantino was trying to get it made with Brad Pitt attached to it. In the 2000s it was the turn of Andrew Dominik with him trying to get Leonardo DiCaprio to take the role of Lou Ford. He then decided to go on to make the terrific 'Assassination of Jesse James' and the project fell into the hands of Michael Winterbottom.
In a way it is good that Lou Ford is not played by a big star. In the film audience should be revolted by the idea that they have some sympathy towards Lou Ford and having a big star would have made it less disturbing. He is a repulsive character from the get go and is excellently played by Casey Affleck. There is not much motive for the killings that he commits and it is the people who are suspecting him attaching motives to it. He is using these as an excuse to do his killing. Jessica Alba getting beaten to pulp would be one of the most disturbing scenes that you will ever see and the crew were even avoiding eye-contact with her when she was wearing the makeup for that scene. Lou was sexually abused as a child and in one scene he is shown taking bible from the shelf which was sitting next to a Freud book (no coincidence). In it he discovers nude photos of the housekeeper/babysitter from his youth who strongly resembles Joyce (Jessica Alba). He reminisces that he was made to spank the babysitter who was also having a relationship with his dad. These incidents from his childhood have shaped his character and it influenced the relationships with Joyce and Amy (Kate Hudson), with the sadomasochistic nature of it. In the first half of the film it works as a normal crime film where you are keeping on guessing about the motives and by the latter half you get a sense that it is striving to be much more and to be fair from the title of the film it should be obvious.
It might not be for everyone and it received mixed reviews during its release with many complaining about violence towards women and misogyny. The character being a deeply disturbed individual doesn't mean that filmmakers are trying to promote it. The fact that despite all this, if you are still sympathetic towards the character, then well that exactly is the point. It is complex.
Director: Wes Anderson Writers: Wes Anderson, Stefan Zweig (Inspired by the works of), Hugo Guinness Cast: Ralph Fiennes, Tony Revelori, Adrien Brody, Tilda Swinton, Edward Norton, Willem Dafoe, Jude Law
The adventures of Gustave H, a legendary concierge at a famous European hotel between the wars, and Zero Moustafa, the lobby boy who becomes his most trusted friend.
The film starts with a teenage girl sitting in front of the monument to a writer in a cemetry. In the book a character known as author is remembering a trip he made to 'The Grand Budapest Hotel' in 1968 where the current owner of the hotel, Moustafa, tells him the story of Gustave which happened in the 1930s. The three broad timelines have got different aspect ratios and it is another great one from Wes Anderson with both light and dark humor, stunning visuals and violence. Its is typical of Wes Anderson to have a blow job and finger cutting scene in what seems to be a children' film. It might just be his greatest film though 'Rushmore' and 'Royal Tenenbaums' could be considered more affecting. It is not going to win any new fans for Wes Anderson but it will well and truly reward the faithfuls.
Film centers around the mentorship between Gustave and Moustafa, excellently played by Ralph Fiennes and Tony Revelori respectively. During the course of the film I was reminded of 'The Shining', 'Se7en', 'Shawshank Redemption', 'Inglorious Basterds' among several others. Nazis are not explicitly named as such and symbol in their uniform is also different. One reason could be that the film received German funding or just Wes Anderson being playful. It is difficult to describe the film except that it is quintessentially in the Wes Anderson universe and is fucking great.
Writers: Harry Grey (Novel), Leonardo Benvenuti, Piero De Bernardi, Franco Ferrini, Ernesto Gastaldi, Stuart M.Kaminsky, Sergio Leone, Enrico Medioli
Cast: Robert De Niro, James Woods, Elizabeth McGovern
A former Prohibition-era Jewish gangster returns to the lower east side of Manhattan over thirty years later, where he once again must confront the ghosts and regrets of his old life.
When it was done shooting, Leone had around nine hours of footage for a film that was supposed to be 165 minutes long. The script took years in making and the number of people credited for it is testament to that. The three hour forty nine minutes version that I saw is considered to be the director's cut and the one that was shown in Europe. It was well received at the Cannes. This version is not chronologically linear. The studio decided to release it in the US with a shorter bastardized chronologically correct version which was both a critical and commercial failure. If you make it in chronological order it wouldn't make much sense especially the Chinese theater scenes which makes or breaks theories about this film.
Even the 3:49 version is short by 45 minutes of what Leone wanted it to be. The scenes that were cut involved: Explanation of mob-union relationship, Noodles-Eve relationship and Noodles-Carol old age meeting. I wish I could see with this 45 minutes added because the mob-union storyline is pretty weak as it is. Film is a an elaborate story of friendship and betrayal between Noodles (Robert De Niro) and Max (James Woods) and who betrayed whom would depend on your interpretation of the film. The first version would be the straight up interpretation where Max drove Noodles to call Police in all of them in order to kill his mob partners including Noodles who are holding him back and fake his own death so that he could start a new political career with their money. The second version would be that in the Police encounter, which happened due to Noodles tip, resulted in the death of all three of his business partners and the film is him imagining things on his opium den. I am leaning more towards the second interpretation especially because of the last shot of the film in which Noodles is seen laughing at the audience high on opium. Also the first scene of Noodles at the opium scene shows him clearly reminiscing the call he was about to make to the Police with the phone ringing at the Chinese theater also being heard to ring around 24 times.
Film under this current version works more as a story about friendship and betrayal rather than a gangster storyline. We can add Deborah to the list along with Noodles and Max in this 'Menage e trois' of friendship and betrayal. There is a scene in which Carol suggests that they could make it a foursome which is also a suggestion to the audience that the film is about these four characters. It would make sense because Max cannot stand Deborah and Noodles cannot stand Carol and this is alluded by the characters twice in the film. The first time I watched it I didn't like parts of it especially their childhood scenes which I thought was poorly acted. This time round I found it to be alright and any problems I have with the film would be because of the editing they were forced to do to reduce the running time. Noodles raping Deborah could be seen as the pivotal scene of the film because the same night, Carol also entered into their fold. The greatness of the film is summed up by the driver during the rape scene which happened in a running car and was shot from inside the old Hollywood style in the way backgrounds move. Driver can be seen as a representative of us the audience with him showing an unsure disgust at Noodles. We are also unsure because we are more sympathetic towards Noodles and Deborah has been a prick tease for him all his life.
This was Sergio Leone's last film and he died without making the Leningrad siege film he was supposed to make. Ennio Morricone's background score is as usual a highlight of the film. It is now my second favorite Leone film after 'The Good, the Bad and the Ugly'.
Director: John Schlesinger Writers: Waldo Salt, James Leo Herlihy (Novel) Cast: Dustin Hoffman, John Voight, Sylvia Miles
Joe Buck (Jon Voight) is a Texan cowboy/stud who
moves to New-York to work as a gigolo. He is way out of his element in the new
city and struggles to find work. He befriends a cripple and street con artist,
Rizzo (Dustin Hoffman), and the film depicts there struggle for survival in
NYC. In one sense it is an odd couple film.
Throughout the film several flashback/dream
sequences of Joe's earlier life are shown in a tacky way. It offers us clues to
why he has ended up this way. These sequences are also a bit unreliable since it
is shown from Joe's subconscious and there is a sense that he is twisting some
of the events to cope with them. He was raised by his grandmother and he is
aspiring to be a gigolo for rich lonely socialites in NYC. There must be some
Freudian stuff going on there. His girlfriend from Texas is also a recurring
theme in these sequences. At some points she is shown as loyal to him but
ending up getting gang-raped. In some other sequences it is shown that she
cheated on him and later on she is shown accusing him of raping her. All these
events must have deeply affected the personality of Joe.
Rizzo is much more smarter than Joe but he is a
cripple. His story is much more straight forward and performances by both
Hoffman and Voight are really excellent. Voight got the minimum wage that an
actor could get for this role since he was desperate to land this role. The
final scene of the film is done very poignantly and the reactions remain true
to their characters. This was the first and only X-Rated film to win the
academy awards for best motion picture. Now it is rated 'R'.
Director: Cary Fukunaga Writers: Charlotte Bronte (Novel), Moira Buffini Cast: Mia Wasikowska, Michael Fassbender, Jamie Bell, Judi Dench
Jane Eyre is a mousy governess who softens the heart of her employer but soon discovers that he is hiding a terrible secret.
Charlotte
Bronte's novel from early 19th century has been adapted around 24 times
and this is the latest one. In this adaptation they have played up the
dark Gothic feel of the Thornfield Hall and its owner Rochester played
by Michael Fassbender. Unlike in the novel, the story is told in a
non-linear fashion through flashbacks. The point at which the film
starts is Jane Eyre fearfully fleeing from the castle and almost ending
up dead. This sets the tone for how we watch as the story unfolds since
we are always dreading about how their relationship goes. I was almost
glad when I eventually found out why she had fled from her employer and
after that the story is almost straightforward. It is ultimately a very
predictable and soap operatic story made far more interesting in this
version of it through the non-linear narration and the overall darkness
which was anyways there in the original novel. Great performances from
all involved, especially Mia and Fassbender playing the two lead
characters.
I was reminded of '12 Years a slave' by around
half way point of the film with strange similarities between some of
the characters in both the films. If one really thinks about it, it is
almost the same story (In relation to Fassbender and Lupita's characters
and their relation). For me the most interesting character in 12 Years a
slave was the one portrayed by Michael Fassbender anyways.
I
have been seeking out Cary Fukunaga's works after seeing 'True
Detective' and both 'Sin Nombre' and 'Jane Eyre' turned out to be
excellent films. He is certainly one to look forward to. He will be
serving as Executive Producer for season two of 'True Detective'. It
will be interesting to see how it turns out because I think having
single director for the entire season really made a difference to its
quality.
