THE NIGHTINGALE

Aisling Franciosi     Sam Claflin     Baykale Ganambarr     Michael Sheasby

      The Nightingale in this story is an Irish woman with a lyrical, clear-as-a-bell voice caught up in the colonization of Australia 1825.  Having served a prison term, she needs papers from her husband’s superior to absolve her of her crimes and be free.  She has an infant and she and her husband are trying desperately to escape to parts unknown.  The problem is Leftenant Hawkins (Claflin), who has a hold over both Aiden (Sheasby) and Clare (Franciosi), has no qualms about exacting services from her against her will.

     I wanted so much to love this movie.  The writer/director Jennifer Kent, cinematographer Radek Ladczuk, and musician Jed Kurzel all worked together on the well received Babadook (2014) in which a woman is forced to deal with supernatural forces.  In contrast, in this film the main protagonist, Clare (Franciosi), must confront and deal with a real man whose ethical/moral principles never seem to have registered.  We admire her fortitude and perseverance in overcoming one obstacle after another, only to find herself trudging through the Australian outback, guided by an Aboriginal, Billy (Ganambarr).

     My primary issue with the film is in the character of Clare, a woman tough as nails in some scenes, but sinking into passivity in others when real action is required.  It’s an inconsistency in character that is simply not plausible.  I didn’t necessarily expect her to be super-hero heroic—as in recent films attempting to highlight the power of women—but I would expect the fire that propelled her toward vengeance and fuel her stubbornness toward her black guide would last to the end when she finally confronts her tormenter.  But she freezes at significant times, which is inconsistent with how she is portrayed earlier in the film.  There are also lapses in judgment, which seem uncharacteristic for someone of Clare’s temperament.

     The Nightingale is beautifully filmed, but would have benefitted from more judicious cutting of violent scenes that go on too long and some of the scenes where the actors are trudging through brush.  Aisling Franciosi makes a wonderful Clare, showing her honesty, solid values, and fortitude in the face of adversity.  Sam Claflin captures the smooth sleeze of a lieutenant who has been promoted beyond his capabilities and has no compassion for others, but only for his own advancements.

A beautifully rendered film about a convicted Irish woman’s struggles in surviving and maintaining her family in Australia.

Grade:  C+                                    By Donna R. Copeland

ADRIFT

Shailene Woodley     Sam Claflin

     Imagine yourself on a sailboat on stormy seas for over a month, when it’s often touch-and-go as to whether you’ll make your destination.  It will take all your skill and ingenuity to survive (if you do).  If these kinds of movies are thrilling and wondrous to you, you should go to Adrift.  

     I, on the other hand, get exhausted and feel inadequate as I watch the characters perform all kinds of brilliant jerryrigging with whatever they have to make do.  But actually, that is just one of the strong points of this film (setting aside my own hang-ups), particularly well executed by Shailene Woodley.  The actress is a wonder in being onscreen almost the entire time, and needing to show a huge range of all different kinds of emotions and physical feats.  She has clearly proven her mettle as an actress here, even as much or more as in her award-winning roles in The Descendants, The Spectacular Now, and Divergent.  

     Another issue I have with the film is a favored technique of directors nowadays—jumping back and forth in time—although by the end of the story I could see why it might have been useful in this particular case.  The opening scenes are jarring in that we don’t know what has happened—but clearly it’s something major.  Then we’re tossed back and forth through past and present events that are intended to tell the story of these two people, Tami (Woodley) and Richard (Claflin), falling in love.  Interspersing the love story into the unmitigated, harrowing boat scenes may be necessary for balance and to keep the audience engaged throughout.

     These two people are portrayed in a very appealing light—another plus in the film—both adventurous and slightly devil-may-care, gentle, respectful and admiring of each other, and just naturally drawn together.  It’s an easy coming together of two contemporary young adults who can goof around, but have good sense and substance when need be.

     In basing his film on the true story about a couple getting caught in a hurricane and stranded in the Pacific Ocean without communication or navigation tools, director Baltasar Kormakur (Everest, Reykjavik) and his crew including cinematographer Robert Richardson (JFK, The Aviator, Hugo, Django Unchained), composer Volker Bertelmann (Lion, “Patrick Melrose”), and production designer Heimir Sverrisson (The Oath, The Secret Life of Walter Mitty) have created a beautifully rendered, stunning account of an unanticipated adventure.  

Bottom Line:  A thriller on the open seas, with the boat’s creaking sounds remaining with you long after.

Grade:  B                                    By Donna R. Copeland

JOURNEY'S END

Sam  Claflin     Paul Bettany     Asa Butterfield     Stephen Graham

Toby Jones     Tom Sturridge     Robert Glenister

     This is an unusual movie in depicting the fears of troops in war as much as the bravery—which makes sense to me.  It takes place in the spring of 1918, the fourth year of World War I, in northern France.  British Company C is informed that the Germans are about to make a major offensive on March 21. Then, a brigadier general orders an operation a few days before, in which two officers and their soldiers will storm the German forces 60 feet in front of them and capture a German, which would be a huge feather in the cap of the British Forces.

     Before this happens, we’re introduced to a few members of Company C.  Captain Stanhope (Claflin) is in charge, aided by his second, Osborne (Bettany).  Osborne (whom every calls “Uncle”) is a seasoned officer soon to retire, and he has the job of backing up, shoring up Stanhope, who has problems with bravery and leadership that are kept secret.  When a new recruit appears, it presents multiple problems. Raleigh (Butterfield) is the brother of Stanhope’s betrothed, and they were in school together.  Raleigh so admires Stanhope, he has volunteered and used connections to be assigned to his company.  But Stanhope, realizing that he has a drinking problem, fears what Raleigh might say to his sister about him.

     Stanhope is just neurotic enough to dread this intrusion/perceiver threat, and gives Raleigh mixed messages.  Raleigh is a gung-ho new recruit who always looks on the bright side, and he sees nothing about what Stanhope fears.  Then one of those coincidental moments occurs; the colonel orders an operation the night before the expected German raid, and pressures Stanhope to assign Osborne and Raleigh, two men with whom he has emotional connections—with a few other soldiers to the mission, which is to capture a German to gain intelligence.  Stanhope tries, but is unsuccessful in convincing the colonel to have him assign others to the operation.

     This film is not so much about these specific events in WWI as it is about the emotional and personal rigors that men go through during war.  It shows the unaccountable bravery of Captain Stanhope in talking his soldier down from imminent desertion in the face of fear, and then falling apart himself when he is with someone he trusts.  He is a sensitive, artistic type, who is clearly not made for war, but apparently fell into his position because of his intelligence—or something else; we’re not told how he got into military service. Anyway, he did well enough to be made a captain and pays a huge price for it in the trauma and losses he experiences.

     Director Saul Dibb graphically shows the personal, seldom told, experiences of war by men who have joined the military for a myriad of reasons, some with more conscious motivations than others who, in a way, simply find themselves there. All the drama takes place in dark, vulnerable trenches in northern France, which serves to highlight even more the dramas going on inside the soldiers.  It gives equal time to both the fears and the bravery of the men, and is unusually eloquent about the obliviousness of upper level brass in planning major operations and recommending the officers and men to carry them out. Like so many realms in our society, the movers and shakers fail to keep their ears to the ground and stay knowledgeable about fundamental elements, remaining instead in their ivory towers.

     The cast of Sam Claflin, Paul Bettany, Asa Butterfield, Stephen Graham, Toby Jones, and Tom Sturridge is well chosen, and each actor contributes significantly to the authentic feel of this story.  They give life and inspiration to the conception of R. C. Sherriff, the novelist who wrote the original screenplay on which this film is based.  

An unusual account of war, showing the doubts and fears of men, along with the bravery.

Grade:  A                                    By Donna R. Copeland

MY COUSIN RACHEL

Rachel Weisz     Sam Claflin     Holliday Grainger     Iain Glen     Pierfrancesco Favino

      The film begins on an intriguing note, with the character Philip (Claflin) asking questions of himself:  “Did she?”  “Didn’t she?” “Who’s to blame?”  Then the setting moves to the country estate in Cornwall, where Philip manages his guardian’s landed property.  He supervises the help competently, and seems to be beloved.  But social skills are at a minimum, as he was orphaned at a young age and now lives and works primarily with men.  He is close in a male-male kind of way with his godfather Nick Randall (Glen), who frequently brings his daughter, Philip’s cousin Louise (Grainger), along.  It’s Randall’s hope that there will be a match between Louise and Philip.  But there is little chemistry between the two; Louise is supportive of Philip, giving him subtle hints, and attempts to playfully tease him, but he is oblivious.

     Intrigue sets in when Philip receives messages from his guardian Ambrose [who has moved to Italy and married a woman named Rachel (Weisz)] who thinks he is being poisoned…by Rachel].  Philip instantly flies to Italy, only to find that Ambrose has died and Rachel has departed.  The only person he meets is an oily character named Rainaldi (Favino) who seems to be taking care of Ambrose’s affairs.

     Intrigue is heightened when Philip gets word that Rachel—whom he has never met—is coming to visit.  Clever storytelling reveals more of Philip’s personality in his naïveté about women and his jumping to conclusions about Rachel, based on little information.  He’s ready to read her the riot act…and then he meets her.  She is beautiful, first of all, but kind, thoughtful, and attentive as well.  He is clearly not equipped to see her in an objective light.  He welcomes her and begs her to continue living on the estate.

     Up to this point, I was taken in by the film (based on Daphne du Maurier’s novel, with a screenplay by Director Roger Michell) with its suspense and sumptuous cinematography (Mike Eley).  Unfortunately, at this point, the characterization goes into the absurd, especially in regard to the character Philip.  Granted, infatuation with a beautiful person can make both men and women seem fools at times, but the ensuing turn of events stretches plausibility.  The film tries to “explain” Philip’s obsession (orphan, lack of experience with women) and leave the ending scenes ambiguous but still plausible, but it didn’t carry me along.  One clue was that the screening audience laughed at scenes that were supposed to be serious. 

     The set-up of this film was wonderful, it’s just too bad it couldn’t follow through with clever intrigue and turns of events.  And we were in no way prepared for the ending, not in the sense that it threw us for a loop, but that it had a hint of a deux ex machina quality to it (i.e., we’ll just throw this in to make you scratch your heads).  I haven’t had the privilege to read du Maurier’s novels, but I would guess she managed to end her stories better than this one did. 

      On the other hand, Rachel Weisz is a supreme actress who is able to convey beauty, sincerity, mysteriousness, and depth of character in all her roles, and keeps us captivated.  Sam Claflin (Me Before You, Hunger Games) is well cast and shows his ability in portraying a flawed character with the best of intentions.  Holliday Grainger, Iain Glen, and Pierfrancesco Favino provide fine supporting work.

A beautifully filmed, mostly engaging story of an ill-fated character.

Grade:  C+                                    By Donna R. Copeland

THEIR FINEST

Gemma Arterton   Sam Claflin   Bill Nighy   Jack Huston   Richard E. Grant   Jeremy Irons   Eddie Marsan

     How do stories get made?  I like to think that the process shown in Their Finest is art imitating life—that after a bit of brainstorming, the writers sit down and flesh out the script.  In this instance, the story has many layers—comedy, romance, and drama—all while the Germans are bombing London in WWII.  The comedy comes from the actors doing very human things, having touchy egos and eccentricities.  The romance(s) involve the main character, Catrin (Arterton), her artist husband, and another character.  The drama shows us what it is like to live in a city being bombed—the hits and destruction, the near misses, parts of ceilings and whole buildings falling all around.  In the midst of this the British people carry on as if they’re programmed to do so.

     Catrin is elated when she lands a job as a writer for the British Ministry of Propaganda, which is to make a film to boost morale in the country, but eventually, it wants to wow American audiences with it and possibly convince the U.S. to join in the war effort.  Mentoring Catrin is Tom Buckley (Claflin) who seems more egalitarian toward women than other men of that time, and when Catrin attempts to move the film they are making toward a more female slant, he is one of the few who get it.  But they have their disagreements and conflicts too.

     Some of the humor derives from the way men treat women, which seems quaint today, but was actually typical in the early 40’s.  So baldly stated:  “You’ll be paid—of course we can’t give you what a man would make—so, two pounds a week.”  “OK”, she agrees, and feels so proud to be earning anything.  Male egos, actor egos, administrative “spies”, crusty forward women—they’re all put through the comedic mill. 

     Dramatic pull is considerable as we see Catrin struggle with her life and Tom taking an interest in her and boosting her self-esteem.  The actor Ambrose Hilliard (Nighy in one of his spotlight performances) is vain and touchy at first, but gradually relaxes and allows his real talents to emerge.  One of the most rewarding aspects of the film is to see a number of characters make positive changes, often as the result of feedback from those around them.  Award winning actress Gemma Arterton (The Girl with all the Gifts, Tess of the D’Urbervilles) is perfection in portraying a woman of the time—outwardly compliant, charming, and helpful—but thoughtful and with strong opinions inside, and above all willing to take risks.  Her face hardly moves, and you know what she’s thinking, or wonder what she is thinking. 

     Lone Scherfig’s direction of this film-within-a-film shows considerable talent in revealing her understanding of and sensitivity toward women in this film, as in An Education.  She can manage complex, layered dramas that tell multiple stories at the same time, while getting across moral, ethical, and humanitarian principles along with pure entertainment.  Composer Rachel Portman travels on the same wavelength with an impressive, award-winning filmography (Emma, Bessie, Never Let Me Go, Chocolat). 

A film-within-a-film incorporating comedy, drama, and romance.

Grade:  A-                        By Donna R. Copeland