Darkest Hour (2017)

Director: Joe Wright
Writer: Anthony McCarten
DOP: Bruno Delbonnel
Cast: Gary Oldman, Kristin Scott Thomas, Lily James, Ben Mendelsohn

During the early days of World War 2, the fate of the Western Europe hangs on the newly-appointed British Prime Minister Winston Churchill, who must decide whether to negotiate with Adolf Hitler, or fight on against incredible odds.

The timeline shown in the films is roughly the same as Christopher Nolan's Dunkirk, which ditched all the political moves and took you straight to the battlefront. So this film can be basically seen as a side-piece to that showing the decision making process that was involved leading up to the retreat from Dunkirk. The Conservative party was not that keen on electing Churchill as their PM but there was pressure from Labor to ditch Chamberlain after his appeasement steps towards Hitler was deemed a historical mistake. Even after getting elected as PM, he was under pressure from Chamberlain and his cohorts who were still trying to get him to negotiate instead of a confrontation. The film is basically about Churchill coming to the decision of not to negotiate with Hitler culminating in that famous speech at the Parliament.

Indians do have a special hatred for Churchill often citing his racism and his mishandling of Bengal famine as reasons for it. They tend to view this film through that prism, criticizing it for lionising Churchill. These are the same people who crib about Dunkirk for it not having any Indian soldier on the beach. I wonder whether they also buy tickets for 'Tiger Zinda Hein'. The film doesn't portray Churchill as someone who got everything right. There is reference to his mishandling of famine and Gallipoli setback during first world war. He got Hitler right but many things wrong. A film set in that time period is obviously gonna concentrate on the war angle.

Not saying it is without faults. There is a London tube scene towards the end which is gonna make or break the movie for many. I just cringed through it. It is well worth a watch overall with an amazing central performance from Gary Oldman who is totally unrecognisable. I still would've given the award to Timothée Chalamet as I prefer performances that don't rely on makeups or body transformations. I'm a fan of Joe Wright's 'Atonement' which also had that stunning  Dunkirk tracking shot.

Rating: 3/5

The Shape of Water (2017)

Director: Guillermo del Toro
Writers: Guillermo del Toro, Vanessa Taylor
DOP: Dan Laustsen
Cast: Sally Hawkins, Michael Shannon, Richard Jenkins, Doug Jones, Michael Stuhlbarg, Octavia Spencer

At a top secret research facility in the 1960s, a lonely and mute janitor forms a unique relationship with an amphibious creature that is being held in captivity.

Guillermo del Toro made his mark initially with the Spanish horror films that he made which culminated with Pan's Labyrinth, which was more like a horror film masquerading as a children's fantasy, that made him known to the wider audience after its success at the Oscars. I haven't actually seen any of his films post that which are more known for their production design. The shape of water is no different and it has got a pretty basic plot to go with it but through some really established characters. What makes it interesting is the genres that it touches on and del Toro's brief but bloody and brutal flourishes. Michael Shannon is playing a typical Michael Shannon role but that doesn't matter because he is so good at it. Rest of the cast does a great job including Doug Jones, who also played that dude from Pan's Labyrinth. They didn't go Dr. Manhattan with him though even though it is R-Rated and they had a convenient biological excuse for it which they address. It is set in a Cold War 60s research facility and it is highly recommended that you watch with the best possible print that you can get. It reminded me of Predestination's retro and clean look.

Overall it is a great watch even though it is not as affecting as 'Pan's Labyrinth'. It has received 13 Oscar nominations and is one of the favorites for winning Best Picture. I am rooting for 'Get Out' and 'Three Billboards', both of which I enjoyed more and has more of a rewatch value. Guillermo del Toro's films are generally ones that you wouldn't be that keen to revisit even though you enjoy them.

Rating: 4/5      

Mudbound (2017)

Director: Dee Rees
Writers: Dee Rees, Virgil Williams, Hillary Jordan
DOP: Rachel Morrison
Cast: Carey Mulligan, Jason Clarke, Jason Mitchell, Mary J. Bilge, Jonathan Banks, Rob Morgan

Two men, one black and one white, return from home after world war two to work on a farm in rural Mississippi, where they struggle to deal with racism and adjusting to life after war.

It is basically centred around two families, one land owning white one with a full blown racist grandfather and a black family with aspirations to buy some land so that their kids won't have the same fate as theirs. It is based on the novel with the same name from Hillary Jordan and is told from multiple perspectives with many of its characters taking turns to do narrations. Novel as a medium allows for internal monologues and it is something that is not viable in films. Use of narration is generally considered as a sign of weak storytelling in films but I didn't have a problem with it in Mudbound because of the multiple perspectives that it is going for. Netflix picked up the film for distribution and I wonder whether they insisted on the narration.

World wars brought about significant social changes in Europe. Increased participation of women in workforce was as a result of first world war and the German air raids of England and the consequent state of mind of the people, where any day could be their last, and staying in closed quarters during the raids have said to have influenced the change in sexual norms of the society. The United States, which was quite far removed from the battlefront, didn't experience the same changes and the black soldier is returning back to the racist hellhole that is American South. The white soldier, an airforce pilot, is retuning to stay with his brother's family who have bought this farmland recently. There is this 'Iyobinte Pusthakam', which again was influenced by 'Irakal', vibe to their storyline. Overall, Mudbound is a stunning watch and hits you hard. Rachel Morrison has become the first woman cinematographer to be nominated for the academy awards. But Roger Deakins seems to be a lock for his work in Blade Runner 2049.

Rating: 4.25/5

The Disaster Artist (2017)

Director: James Franco
Writers: Scott Neustadter, Michael H. Weber
DOP: Brandon Trost
Cast: James Franco, Dave Franco, Seth Rogen

When Greg Sestero (Dave Franco), an aspiring film actor, meets the weird and mysterious Tommy Wiseau (James Franco) in an acting class, they form a unique friendship and travel to Hollywood to make their dream come true. Faced by rejections, Wiseau decides to make a film with his own money. The result is the so bad its good cult classic 'The Room', which he wrote, directed, produced and starred.

I haven't actually seen The Room in full but have seen its famous sequences like 'Oh, hi Mark', 'You're tearing me apart' and 'You're my favourite customer'. You don't really need to see it to actually enjoy this film. It is adapted from book written by Greg and Tom Bissell, a journalist, on the making of 'The Room', which James Franco first read before actually watching the film. Seth Rogen was already a fan of the film and co-produced the adaptation. When James first approached Wiseau to buy the rights, he was asked to approach Johnny Depp to play the titular role which would have been curious as he has already made a similar kind of film in 'Ed Wood'.

I was initially put off thinking it was James Franco playing a double role. I actually binned watching David Simon TV Series 'Deuce' because of the same factor. Anyway, James Franco is unrecognisable playing Tommy Wiseau and he apparently stayed in character while directing it. Film grows on you gradually as it is not clearly a spoof but quite a sympathetic portrayal. Visually it is quite bland like typical Seth Rogen LA films. They've recreated the scenes from the original film in spectacular detail and they are displayed side by side during the end credits. It doesn't resolve the questions like how old Wiseau is, where he is from originally and how did he get the money to make the film. Sexual allegations against James Franco have taken the wind out of its sail during the awards season after him winning the golden globes award. Do wait for the post credits scene.

Rating: 4/5

Best of 2017

More like favorites actually...

1. Angamaly Diaries (Lijo Jose Pellissery)
2. Get Out (Jordan Peele)
3. A Ghost Story (David Lowery)
4. Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri (Martin McDonagh)
5. The Death of Stalin (Armando Ianucci)
6. Columbus (Kogonada)
7. Maayanadhi (Aashiq Abu)
8. Loveless (Andrey Zvyaginstev)
9. Dunkirk (Christopher Nolan)
10. Thondimuthalum Driksakshiyum (Dileesh Pothan)
11. Lady Bird (Greta Gerwig)
12. mother! (Darren Aronofsky)
13. Good Time (Safdie Brothers)
14. The Florida Project (Sean Baker)
15. Mudbound (Dee Rees)
16. The Square (Ruben Östlund)
17. Call Me By Your Name (Luca Guadagnino)
18. Sexy Durga (Sanal Kumar Sasidharan)
19. The Killing of a Sacred Deer (Yorgos Lanthimos)
20. Okja (Joon-ho Bong)
21. Logan Lucky (Steven Soderbergh)
22. T2: Trainspotting (Danny Boyle)
23. Split (Manoj Night Shyamalan)
24. The Shape of Water (Guillermo del Toro)
25. The Disaster Artist (James Franco)
26. John Wick: Chapter 2 (Chad Stahelski)
27. The Meyerowitz Stories (New & Selected) (Noah Baumbach)
28. Baby Driver (Edgar Wright)

Lady Bird (2017)

Director: Greta Gerwig
Writer: Greta Gerwig
DOP: Sam Levy
Cast: Saoirse Ronan, Laurie Metcalf, Tracy Letts

In 2002, an artistically inclined (self-declared) seventeen-year-old girl comes of age in Sacramento, California. She has a very difficult relationship, typical teenage kind, with her mother who wants her to pursue her college studies in Sacramento itself while she wants to go to a college in New-York, which is apparently the place for artsy fartsy kind of people. She is currently studying in a catholic school and is also going through friendship and relationship struggles that are typically associated with the age.

The film is kind of semi-autobiographical in mood and tone rather than events wise. I was predisposed to dislike the film because of the Oscar buzz associated with it and has never been a big fan of actor-turned directors. It won me over by the 30-minute mark and is a fine watch. There are portions where you think it is doing the typical teenage coming of age tropes but remains somehow fresh in its treatment. That is probably because it never stresses too much on one aspect of her life- her friendships, romantic relationships or her relationship with her family members. Ultimately, the film is about her relationship with her mother but both of them are portrayed as quite flawed. Have seen some people complaining about hers being an unlikable character which is something I don't really get. Films are not meant to have you follow a protagonist that can only be likable. It is only about 90 minutes long and leave you wanting more which is always a good thing.

There have been some comparisons with 'The Edge of Seventeen' but Lady Bird is even more rawer and thus less cinematic. Even more apt comparison would be with this year's 'Columbus', which was another coming of age drama where the protagonist is contemplating leaving her hometown to pursue studies/career. In Columbus, she doesn't want to leave the hometown in order to take care of her mother while in Lady Bird it is just the opposite. Both of them are great watches, filmed in contrasting styles and moods. I have been a great fan of Greta Gerwig's collaborations with Noah Baumbach and it is good to see her jump seamlessly into directing. The film has earned five nominations: Best Picture, Best Actress, Best Director, Best Supporting Actress and Best Original screenplay. It wouldn't be surprising if it wins Best Picture since the others involved are not that universally liked (Three Billboards & Shape of Water).

Rating: 4.5/5

The Death of Stalin (2017)

Director: Armando Ianucci
Writers: Armando Ianucci, David Schneider, Ian Martin, Peter Fellows
DOP: Zac Nicholson
Cast: Steve Buscemi, Simon Russell Beale, Jeffrey Tambour, Michael Palin, Paddy Considine


Follows the Soviet dictator's last days and depicts the chaos of the regime after his death.

I had recently watched the BBC series on Cold War and thus was familiar with most of the names and their fates in this film. Not having any idea will also work because you won't know who will come on top at the end. Beria (Beale), the torture minister/NKVD head, was the one to take all the initiatives immediately after Stalin's death. He cuts off Moscow from rest of Russia and hand it to NKVD instead of the red army. The politburo is still coping with Stalin's absence and Khrushchev (Buscemi) starts to exert pressure gradually on the acting successor, Malenkov (Tambor), by influencing the likes of Molotov (Palin). The chief of the red army, Zhukov (Jason Isaacs), also makes a grand entry with his zillion medals in the second half of the film.

The first half of the film works pretty much like an absurd comedy but many of the things that is shown actually happened. The guards manning Stalin's bedroom don't check up on him after hearing him collapse because there is a Stalin diktat refraining anyone from disturbing him while sleeping. Central committee has to discuss before calling up on a doctor, a hard task considering that the good ones have been already sent to the Gulags. A respirator from USA was available but wasn't used because of fear of how will Stalin respond if he recovers. The events shown in the film are compressed to happen over by the time of Stalin's funeral when in real life it happened over a period of one year. The second half of the film is much more darker, culminating with Khrushchev becoming more like the Buscemi we know.

It is a great watch overall and one of the best from last year. The film is an adaptation of a French graphic novel. Political incompetence is familiar area for Ianucci. Thankfully, he doesn't use fake Russian accents in the film and each of the actors uses their own English accent, which makes sense as Soviet Union was pretty big in size. Some of the outdoor scenes have a cheap feel because of budgetary constraints but it kind of works because that is how it is in those shitty History Channel documentaries. The film has been banned in Russia.

PS: Modi ministers will relate a lot to it if they watch this film.

Rating: 4.75/5