Thursday, May 7, 2015

CLOUDS OF SILS MARIA


Juliette Binoche     Kristen Stewart   Chloe Grace Moretz







This film is as elegantly composed as the music in the soundtrack (Handel, Pachelbel, Albarti) and the camera work of Yorick Le Saux.  It deals with the human experience of time, illusion, and change.  Maria (Juliette Binoche) is an older actress who made a name for herself in the role of Sigrid, a character by which she still defines herself.  The character was young, feisty and self-confident and played opposite Helene, an older, domineering female boss who falls in love with her assistant and falls prey to her manipulations.  Now, Maria is being pursued by a director who wants to revive the film “Maloja Snake” on stage, and he would like for her to play the role of Helene.  Maria is struggling in her personal life and as an actress with the business of aging, so resists at first, then relents, telling herself she does it out of an obligation to honor the memory of the first director whom she reveres.  (That director is no longer alive.)  The fact that the actress who played Helene in the first production died soon after the film was completed spooks Maria as well.
Clouds of Sils Maria reminds me of the current film, Birdman, in blurring the boundaries between the characters and the actors.  The older woman/younger woman relationship in the film is parallel to that of Maria and her younger assistant, suggesting that Olivier Assayas, writer/director, would like for us to see the universality of the issues and conflicts.  (Although the main characters are women, it may be that Assayas does not intend the audience to think the relationships in the film are gender specific.)  The new director even argues with Maria about the characters, emphasizing that they are both the same woman; it’s just a difference in time and perspective.  Maria’s assistant, Val (Kristen Stewart), helps Maria practice her lines, and they are very close, spending most of their time together.  At times, it’s not clear if their conversations are from the script or the parallel processes that are going on between Maria herself and Val.  Val does complain now and then that Maria does not take her seriously or respect her opinion.  She has to bite her tongue and rolls her eyes when Maria is being obstinate or is unaware/oblivious to the contemporary world.
When Maria is introduced to Jo-Ann (Chloe Grace Moretz), the ingĂ©nue who will be Sigrid in the new production, she has already formed an opinion about her based on the “gossip” Val relates to her from the tabloids.  Jo-Ann’s acting out has provided plenty of fodder for the media, and she is constantly fleeing from the paparazzi.  Maria takes a condescending attitude toward her, but when she is actually in her presence, she is impressed with her maturity and commitment to acting.  It does take Val to point out to Maria that she was primarily swayed by Jo-Ann’s flattery.
Clouds extends beyond the commentary about Maria’s relationships to the profession of acting, to Hollywood specifically, and to the media’s role in making/breaking potential stardom.  The three actresses give outstanding performances, which is especially noteworthy for Stewart; this is probably the best in her career.  Assayas demonstrates that he has an astute understanding of women, human nature, and the arts. 
The film is in the European style of giving nature a meaningful place in the drama, slow panning of the breathtaking landscape in the French Alps, extended conversations, and deliberate pace.  In that vein, it is interesting to learn that “Maloja Snake”, the name of the proposed play, refers to a weather phenomenon in Italy’s Engadin Valley, in which heavy mists descend upon, then “snake” through, the mountain passes, portending that something bad is about to happen.  The descriptions about it suggest that it is a metaphor for the happenings in the film.

A complex work of art with astute observations of human nature and contemporary Western culture.

Grade:  A-                         By Donna R. Copeland


Thursday, April 30, 2015

MISERY LOVES COMEDY

--> Amy Schumer   Bobby Cannavale   Jon Favreau   Jimmy Fallon   Judd Apatow   Freddie Prinze, Jr.   Martin Short   James L. Brooks   Lewis Black   Richard Lewis   Matthew Perry   Christopher Guest  Kevin Nealon   Jason Reitman   Bob Saget   Steve Coogan





-->
Misery Loves Comedy is a clever title, it turns out, because in this revue of comedians’ entry into that world—what came before—and what has happened since does reveal some of the highlights—successes and failures—that drew them like moths to a fire.  Sometimes it was that they suddenly realized they could be funny and that they enjoyed the limelight.  The other side is the experience of absolute failure (dead silence in the audience) and feelings of utter worthlessness.  Parents’ reactions to their acts had a profound impact on them; e.g., “You can always go back to Conan, right?” or simply  “Your jeans fit nice.”  Rather than deterring them, such comments made the comics more determined to pursue their dreams.
For some, joking is a way of coping.  Cannavale tells about getting beat up at school, and when he tells his family and they don’t have much of a response, he makes a joke, and then they laugh.  Jermaine Clement says he was always laughing at his family; he loved his uncles’ jokes.  Jim Norton realized that no one—even football players—bothered you if you were funny because they were afraid you might mock them.  He finds making people laugh a “power thing.”  Nick Swardson found that comedy took over and did for him what drugs were doing so he couldl dispense with them.  After constantly failing at sports, Apatow in desperation to be socially acceptable made people laugh by pretending to be a slot machine.  He’d put rocks up his nose and have people pull his arm down, whereupon the rocks would fall out of his nose.
Other times, the comedians were simply playful.  Guest discovered ventriloquism, which he would do in class.  The teacher didn’t know where the sound was coming from, inaccurately guessed, and made the wrong person leave the room.  Apatow would take a huge recorder and wangle his way into studios to interview stars like Jerry Seinfeld.
But the comedians also talk about their craft—how important timing is, how they can predict with their “laugh ears” when a laugh is going to erupt, and how they have been inspired by those who came before (especially Lenny Bruce Richard Prior, and George Carlin).  Several talk as well about the bond among comedians, how they’re drawn toward each other at gatherings and talk shop.
The film ends with a brief discussion about whether one has to be miserable to be funny.  Altogether, this is an informative and interesting film that is successful in getting behind what makes us laugh at comedy—and comedians.  Lovers of comedy will likely be especially drawn to this interesting and entertaining documentary.

What makes a comedian?

Grade B-                                                    By Donna R. Copeland

Tuesday, April 28, 2015

AVENGERS: AGE OF ULTRON

Robert Downey, Jr.   Chris Hemsworth   Mark Ruffalo   Chris Evans   Scarlett Johansson   James Spader (voice)   
 Jeremy Renner   Samuel L. Jackson   Don Cheadle   Aaron Taylor-Johnson   Elizabeth Olsen   Paul Bettany   Andy Serkis






This version of the Avengers features a dizzying number of battles with characters flying at each other through the air at lightning speed.  The story opens with the Avengers in an eastern European country, Sokovia, raiding a Hydra outpost led by evil scientist Strucker who has used Loki’s scepter to create the superhuman Maximoff twins out of humans, one of whom, Pietro (Taylor-Johnson), can run at superhuman speed and the other, Wanda (Olsen), can read and manipulate minds and throw scarlet energy blasts. 
But the Avengers overcome Strucker, and when Stark (Downey) and Banner (Ruffalo) take over his lab, they discover artificial intelligence in the scepter’s gem, which Stark wants to use for his “Ultron” peacekeeping defense program.  Unbeknownst to them and to their chagrin, however, when he appears, Ultron is sentient and hatching a plan to “save” the earth from mankind because they’ve done such a bad job.  While the Avengers are celebrating their victory over Hydra and Strucker, Ultron begins to take action by eliminating Stark’s A.I., J.A.R.V.I.S., and stealing the scepter, which he plans to use to upgrade his body and construct an army of fighter drones.  In addition, he talks the Maximoff twins into joining him in his efforts.  He is persuasive, because he talks only of peace, but fails to mention his grandiose plan of extinguishing humans and populating the earth with metal creations in his own image. 
When this is discovered, another battle ensues, and Wanda is able to make chaos among the Avengers by hypnotizing them into stupors and transmitting hallucinations that relate to their personal underlying fears, resulting in undermining any sense of team spirit they had.  Now they realize they need a break for rest and teambuilding, so they head for Hawkeye’s (Renner) farmhouse to rest up.  But their recuperation is interrupted by the arrival of Nick Fury (Jackson), informing them that Ultron has forced Banner’s scientific colleague Dr. Helen Cho (Claudia Kim), to use her synthetic tissue technology to perfect his body, so they head for South Korea to foil his efforts.
In the process, allegiances shift among different characters, Stark is able to resurrect J.A.R.V.I.S., which Thor activates with lightning, resulting in a new robot called Vision (Bettany).  The ultimate battle ensues in Sokovia, where Ultron has major plans to use the city in his efforts for global extinction of humans.
Director Joss Whedon, who is also one of the writers, is known for inserting emotional elements into his action films to make them more than simply action scenes with special effects.  This is usually successful, but not so much in Avengers:  Age of Ultron.  The side stories of Romanoff and Banner, Hawkeye and Wanda, and War Machine’s repeated corny jokes, for instance, seem patched in rather than seamlessly integrated into the overall story.  He is successful, however, in making the action interesting and exciting, and by now, after so many iterations, most of the characters have depth and distinct personalities.  As an added bonus to me, Whedon is a master at inserting classical music and literature into the sci-fi action genre—e.g., operatic aria playing in a laboratory that is creating A.I.’s.
The film’s impressive cast, music (Danny Elfman and Brian Tyler), cinematography (Ben Davis), and special effects make this a movie well worth seeing for those who are fans of the superhero genre.

Can the Avengers save the planet?

GRADE:  B                      BY DONNA R. COPELAND

Thursday, April 23, 2015

LITTLE BOY

Jakob Salvati     Cary-Hiroyuki Tagawa     Emily Watson     David Henrie     Tom Wilkinson     Kevin James







            Little Boy is full of paradoxes, and at first I wasn’t sure what to think of it.  At times, it seemed like a story with a religious point of view (Christian at first, but then Eastern beliefs were mixed in); at times, it seemed to be admiring violence, but at other times, it seemed anti-war; and numerous times it seemed to imply a causal connection between events that were simply correlated in time. 
            Pepper Busbee, aka “Little Boy” (Salvati) is a slight, meek child of around eight who is small for his age and who is bullied by the heavy-set punk in town and his lackeys.  The refreshing part is Pepper’s completely innocent, inquiring mind.  He has an extremely close connection with his father who plays with him and uses fantasy to build up his self-confidence and self-esteem.  Unfortunately, this is during World War II, and the father is called away for military service.  In addition to Little Boy, he leaves behind his wife Emma (Watson) and older son London (Henrie).  London isn’t really old enough to manage his father’s business well, and he seems to have a chip on his shoulder and have a weakness for drink, so things will not go smoothly in the father’s absence.  In addition, the screenwriters (Director Alejandro Monteverde and Pepe Portillo) made Emma, the mother, out to be a “weak Willie”, who seldom gives guidance or comfort or sets limits when she needs to.  To the film’s discredit, the fully talented and skilled Watson is hung out to dry.
            The film deals with discrimination against other nationalities in the form of the local Japanese man, Hashimoto (Tagawa), showing the cruel ways in which a small town un-welcomes such a person in their midst.  London is one of these; however, the priest (Wilkinson) has subtle ways of protecting him, and unwittingly gets him and Little Boy acquainted.  Now, Hashimoto has a friend and Little Boy has two father figures to stand in for his beloved dad, the priest and the Japanese man.
            Much of the story is played out in Little Boy’s magical and religious efforts to bring his father back through mind control and charitable tasks that are similar to those in the Bible (e.g., give shelter to the homeless) that the priest has given him to fulfill so that divine intervention might come into play.  This ploy is challenged a bit by Hashimoto who relies more on a Zen-like philosophy.  A strong point of the film is juxtaposing these two points of view of two friends without taking sides with either. 
            Little Boy is engaging with good direction and skillful acting, and I especially appreciated its exemplifying differing points of view without taking a clear stand.  Yet, there was the irritating experience of feeling like the filmmakers were coming down on the viewer too heavily, as if the audience wouldn’t get the point or like a preacher who is trying to convert the nonbeliever.  It also seemed unnecessary—and a little cheap—to insert a sleazy character like Dr. Fox (James) who makes inappropriate advances on Emma when her husband is away.  Of course there are people like that, but the interchanges do not seem to belong in this type of film.
            Finally, I concluded that the bottom line of Little Boy was that small things and small people could have a huge impact on those around them and that belief in oneself is essential for that to occur.  From that standpoint, it seems like an uplifting story told something like a fairy tale, with “good” and “bad” elements made fuzzy so that the listener has to think.

A sort of modern fairy tale set during WWII.

Grade:  C+                        By Donna R. Copeland

Wednesday, April 22, 2015

THE AGE OF ADALINE

Blake Lively     Michiel Huisman     Harrison Ford     Ellen Burstyn     Kathy Baker


-
            The Age of Adaline ties in with the fantasies of most adults to stay young forever.  There is an amusing “scientific” explanation for how this happens in the movie that will make you smile.  Although most of the film is predictable, it is fun to play with the idea of the kinds of repercussions a person would have to deal with should it happen, and the choices one might make.
            Without going into the details, let’s just say that Adaline (Lively) does not age, and she makes the choice to keep it a secret, stay on the move to avoid detection, and avoid long-term relationships.  This means she can only see her daughter Flemming (Burstyn) occasionally, and as the years go by Flemming looks more like her grandmother than her daughter.  But also through the years, Adaline becomes more depressed and lonely, and when her path crosses that of a persistent Ellis (Huisman), she is sorely tempted to change her course, especially when Flemming urges her to indulge herself and grab onto some happiness.
            I could have done without two major coincidences toward the end of the story that the writers J. Mills Goodloe and Salvadore Paskowitz inserted, which made me think it was merely a way to have the story end on a good note.  A more interesting conclusion would have been to simply follow Adaline and Ellis continuing on the journey as it was set up in the beginning.
            Blake Lively captures well evasiveness and sidestepping the truth when Adaline is confronted with the curiosity of new and old acquaintances.  Her own beauty makes it plausible when others seem to be awestruck by Adaline’s appearance.  At the same time, Adaline can’t resist showing off her memory and intelligence when she gets a chance, and Lively does this just as well.  Huisman’s natural charm and attractiveness make him an ideal love interest for the main character, and he maintains a good balance between genuine caring and playful flirting.  Ford and Burstyn as his parents are up to their usual standards of quality.
            Director Lee Toland Krieger keeps the film moving in a light-hearted, entertaining manner, and although the film might not appeal to everyone, it certainly will to those who enjoy romantic fancies.  A major strong point is musician Rob Simonson’s soundtrack, which gives us a sampling of music from early 20th Century (Ella Fitzgerald) through the ‘60’s and ‘70’s (Bob Dylan, Jefferson Airplane) to 2010 (Stephen Lu). 

An interesting romantic fantasy.

Grade:  C+                        By Donna R. Copeland

Sunday, April 19, 2015

CHILD 44

Tom Hardy     Noomi Rapace      Joel Kinnaman      Vincent Cassel      Gary Oldman     Charles Dance     Jason Clarke




World War II has ended, but in Stalinist Russia a reign of terror pervades, as related in Child 44 based on a prize-winning book with the same title by Tom Rob Smith.  This should be a better film than it is, with its outstanding cast.  Since I haven’t read the book, I don’t know how well the script follows Smith’s book, and maybe Richard Price (screenplay) simply wasn’t up to the job.  I also found the editing (Pietro Scalia and Dylan Tichenor) nerve-wracking and choppy.  The story does not flow easily, and it’s always several seconds or minutes into a new scene before the viewer can figure out what is going on and who the players are.  Cheap shots like showing only the bottom parts of the actors and hearing voices before speakers appear seem to be attempts to heighten the mystery, but this is completely unnecessary; the story is dramatic enough without camera and editing tricks.
           We see Leo Demidov (Xavier Atkins in early years; Hardy in later years) weeping about his father’s death, escaping from an orphanage, and ending up in military service, where he becomes a hero.  For that, he is appointed to the MGB (later to become the KGB) where he is to round up traitors.  He is shown to be more compassionate than most, particularly his fellow officer Vasili (Kinnaman).  When Vasili shows himself to be cruelly vengeful and cold-blooded, Leo attacks him publicly, which will have dire consequences for Leo and his wife Raisa (Rapace).
           We’re given a picture of the MGB when a suspected traitor (Jason Clarke) is routed out at a farmhouse, and when Leo asks him why he ran from the officers if he was innocent, the reply is, “When you’re followed, you’re arrested; and when you’re arrested, you’re already guilty; so you tell me, why did I run?”  We see many people being rounded up at home, at work, or on the street for apparently the flimsiest excuses.
           In this context of fear and paranoia, an atmosphere where the illusion of an idyllic state is more important than truth and justice, murder can go undetected, which is especially unfortunate in the case of a serial killer of children, who knowingly exploits this fact and literally gets away with murder(s).  Most of the rest of the story deals with this and the outrageous vindictiveness of Vasili who will make Demidov pay dearly for his public reproach.  But Leo is conscientious—even though he and Raisa are pursued as traitors—and doggedly pursues the cases of the murdered children.
           The whole story of Child 44 is an intriguing one that keeps the viewer keenly involved and invested in the outcome, so it’s a shame that with the fine cast and Ridley Scott as one of the producers, Director Daniel Espinosa was not able to bring about a work of higher quality. 
 
There is no murder in paradise.

Grade:  C                                         By Donna R. Copeland

Friday, April 17, 2015

EX MACHINA

Domhnail Gleason     Oscar Isaac     Alicia Vikander




 In Ex Machina, Alex Garland, writer/director, weaves a tantalizing sci-fi tale that is part horror, part ethics/morality (whether A.I.’s should be treated humanely), and part romance.  In keeping with the title, the work is constructed so that by the end of the story we have been given information that lets us know just how bad things are.  “Deus ex machina” is a literary term meaning “god from the machine”, and refers to a plot device whereby a problem towards the end of the story is unexpectedly solved by the insertion of something or someone new.   Although the “Deus” is left out of the title of the film, references are made to the god-like role the creator of the A.I. has, especially since his invention is made more human by being sentient and emotionally aware. 
            Garland is a master at juxtaposition:  An ultra-modern home/laboratory set in the beauty of nature’s flora and fauna; a research site that appears to run smoothly and effortlessly with the help of the latest technology and a researcher fully in control, yet it could be called “the house of paranoia” when suspicious activities make their appearance; opening scenes are accompanied by the tuneful music of Schumann’s “Scenes from Childhood”, but in time there is a sense of dread, and the music becomes cacophonous.  A scene that is bright and revealing will suddenly turn dark, when secrets come to light.  CEO Nathan Bateman (Isaac) is a fitness freak, yet imbibes liquor and wine constantly.
            Caleb (Gleason) is incredulous but overjoyed to learn that he has won a contest among young coding specialists in the computer search company he works for.  He will get to spend a week working on a top-secret project with the eccentric CEO who wrote the Blue Book of code.  Caleb is a bit taken aback when he is flown by helicopter to a field in the mountains and told to follow the river until he comes to a house.  Nothing else is orthodox after that either, even simply getting entry into the house.
            After entering, he encounters Nathan, who is indeed a physical specimen, and who is presently at a punching bag.  As he guides Caleb through the property with enigmatic descriptions and instructions (“Your key opens any door you’re permitted to go through, but won’t work on those you’re not”), it is also clear that he is intellectually sharp and a challenging teacher.  It is some time before Caleb learns what Nathan’s project is.  But finally, he is introduced to Ava (Vikander), Nathan’s newest creation, and told that he will be doing a Turing test on her (finding out just how sentient and human-like she is). 
            Delightful special effects show Ava’s mechanistic appearance while including sufficient human qualities to make her attractive.  Then when she unexpectedly dons wig and clothes, she is indeed a handsome woman.  Also appealing is her command of language, her soft voice, and pureness of logic.  Vikander cinches the role with just the right mixture of human and A.I. qualities. 
            Oscar Isaac’s talent shines through as a bearded, complex character with many admirable and despicable facets to his controlling personality.  Gleason is making a name for himself lately in any number of films (Harry Potter movies, Calvary with his father Brendan, and Unbroken), and was named as one of European films’ “Shooting Stars” in 2011.
            The excellent script, special effects, and acting make this the best sci-fi film I’ve seen.  I’m looking forward to what I hope will be many more productions by Alex Garland.

Fascinating!

Grade:  A                        By Donna R. Copeland