Blade Runner

1982’s “Blade Runner: The Final Cut”, directed by Ridley Scott.

Starring Harrison Ford, Sean Young, Rutger Hauer, Daryl Hannah, Brion James, Joanna Cassidy, Edward James Olmos, and Joe Turkel.

Nominated for an Academy Award for Best Visual Effects (Douglas Trumbull, Richard Yuricich, and David Dryer) and Best Art Direction-Set Decoration (Lawrence G. Paull, David L. Snyder, and Linda DeScenna).

What is it about?

“Blade Runner” is a science fiction noir, set in the year 2019 in a neon soaked and crowded Los Angeles where it rains constantly. For the purposes of slavery, androids have been created by the Tyrell Corporation, and are called replicants. The replicants begin revolting against their human masters, and in response are deemed illegal. Detectives are hired to kill (“retire”) the replicants on sight, and for this purpose are called Blade Runners. We meet Harrison Ford, who’s job is to hunt down a quartet of Replicants, lead by a charismatic Rutger Hauer. Daryl Hannah, Brion James, and Joanna Cassidy all prove difficult targets, and Ford has to locate and retire them while making eyes at Tyrell Corporation’s assistant Sean Young. Will Ford be able to finish his task, or will he end up like tears in the rain?

Why is it worth seeing?

Released to mixed critical reception and middling box office in 1982 (and almost zero Academy Award love), Blade Runner has since come to be regarded as something like the second most popular sci fi film since Star Wars. To know it was released the same weekend as, John Carpenter’s “The Thing”, is pretty mind blowing, but either way is a genre cult phenomenon worth celebrating.

Fresh off of his 1979 hit, “Alien”, director Ridley Scott followed up his space horror masterpiece with another classic, this one an update on the classic noir theme of the Philip Marlowe gumshoe doing detective work amidst murky individuals. Here, the people become generic extras, mulling about the crowded streets of the now South Eastern Asian dominated Los Angeles, while aerial cars descend from towering sky scrapers above, and the murkiness is the overall ambience of the city.

There are 2 voluminous, unforgettable characters here: the movie’s dense layers of atmosphere, giving us the copious smoke and fog, constant rain, and spotlight and neon saturated streets and interiors throughout the matte painting and model dominated fully realized world.
The other character is the music. Famed New Age composer Vangelis, using the now renowned Yamaha CS-80 synthesizer, reverbed through the Lexicon 224-X, give “Blade Runner” it’s ethereal, far away, dream-like feeling. And it’s with these 2 characters that Ridley Scott’s understanding of space and perspective, and 1 hell of a talented effects team, create the collage that gives Blade Runner it’s unforgettable texture and feeling.

What is forgettable, in the foreground, are the characters of Blade Runner. While Hauer’s depiction of the Replicant leader is a show stopper, there are plenty of questions about whom these characters are. Hiding behind all of the atmospherics and score lie people and a narrative so obtuse it’s impossible to see through them (one literal example is a car ride where the conversation is purposefully muted). With questions abound about whether or not Ford’s character is a Replicant himself, the whole movie’s uneasy alliance with the nature of reality vs artificiality, punctuated by occasional violence, calls into question if in the wrong frame of mind, that only an android could enjoy this gorgeously vapid caper.

There’s also a scene that can only be described as outright sexual assault, that the movie treats as a love passage. It’s difficult to swallow, even if it was 1982 when the movie was released. When did saying no when you weren’t attracted to your aggressor come into fashion again? I’m hoping it was before the Reagan administration…

Even with all of it’s above listed faults (plus: is Deckard a decent detective? Has Harrison Ford ever convincingly done another accent? Why does that Replicant think gymnastics are a valid fighting tool?), Blade Runner is a magnificent achievement, with one of the greatest opening sequences of all time. As long as you’re watching this version (and not the other 7 that have disowned by Scott and/or Ford), it’s ambiguous ending and imitated but never copied art house feeling is the stuff memories are made of.

Rating:

4.5/5

Trailer: Click Here.

Mother!

2017’s “Mother!”, written and directed by Darren Arnofsky.

Starring Jennifer Lawrence, Javier Bardem, Ed Harris, Michelle Pfeiffer, Brian Gleeson, Domhnall Gleeson, and Kristen Wiig.

What is it about?

Mother! is the story about an idyllic home in the country side where mother (Jennifer Lawrence), and her partner, Him (Javier Bardem), live. Bardem is a famous writer, whom is going through a mean stretch of writer’s block. As Bardem struggles through his creative blockage, their lives are interrupted by some fans (Ed Harris and Michelle Pfeiffer), who suddenly become house guests. Before we know it, the house guests begin a surge of unpleasant events that are almost biblical in their unpleasantness, and a reckoning is upon the household. Will Lawrence be able to stem the horrors the outside world brings into their little piece of Eden?

Why is it worth seeing?

Writer/Director Darren Arnofsky does not make relaxing films (Although I consider my #2 movie of 2006, The Fountain, his most cathartic). Whatever through the lens of addicts enduring drug addiction (Requiem for a Dream), a mathematician finding a formula for both god and madness (Pi),  or a ballet dancer trapped in a transformative nightmare (Black Swan), his protagonists suffer through great pains in their respective journeys.

Here, might be his toughest endurance contest yet. Mother! is technically flawless, full of ambiguity but clear in it’s direction, and littered with great performances- but it’s tough to imagine this film getting much tract with mainstream audiences seeking popcorn entertainment. It's a harrowing and undefined journey.

As indicated in the summary, Lawrence and Bardem have a little slice of heaven that one day brings invaders who essentially never leave. Are they cursed? Is it a metaphor for god punishing mankind? An allegory for Eden being ruined by civilization’s rapacious wants? Is the husband a godlike figure who is unreliable? Is all of this, is Arnofsky working through past relationship baggage or exploring faith in religion? There’s a lot to unpack in this metaphorically rich film- and I look forward to doing just that. But it's tough to view it as a cinephile's delightful labour of love- like say, re-watching Goodfellas. Just figuring out its genre is a grueling task (I'm going with horror).

Arnofsky himself, suffering from writer’s block here when trying to create a children’s production- made this instead. Aiming for a feature that had plenty of dream logic and non linear passages of time, he has been successful. And also, on another goal of his: making the audience either cheer or boo.

Rating:

4/5

Trailer: Click Here.

The Disaster Artist

2017’s “The Disaster Artist“, directed by James Franco.

Starring James Franco, Dave Franco, Seth Rogan, Ari Graynor, Alison Brie, Paul Scheer, Jason Mantzoukas, Nathan Fielder, and Zac Efron.

Nominated for an Academy Award for Best Adapted Screenplay (Scott Neustadter and Michael H. Weber).

 

 

What is it about?

“Disaster Artist” is a movie about the making of the movie, “The Room”. Renowned as one of the greatest bad movies of all time, James Franco picked it up as a passion project, directing and starring as the infamous Tommy Wiseau, the vague and mercurial anti-talent. Based off of protagonist Greg Sestero (Dave Franco)’s experiences as a struggling actor, he meets Wiseau in an acting class and the 2 of them strike up an unlikely friendship, that culminates in their infamous project together. Much like the not similar “Titanic”, we already know the results going in- but watching the how is all the fun.

Why is it worth seeing?

Based off of Greg Sestero’s book, “The Disaster Artist: My Life Inside The Room, the Greatest Bad Movie Ever Made”, Franco creates a competently made film about a hilarious project, and the man behind that hilarious project, that is the very apex of incompetence. We are drawn in to see the trainwreck, but stay for the insight as to what makes this man tick.

Because Wiseau had to approve the content that he’s been endlessly promoting, nobody will ever really know whom he is. Where he actually comes from, where his money comes from, and where the source of his vague rage emanated from- that’s for him to know alone. “Disaster Artist” does a great job of pointing this out, but reveals no answers. As I’ve alluded to in my review of the original film, he’s a mystery wrapped in a fugue state enigma- and after watching him play football, a visitor from Mars. Franco’s greatest accomplishment (other than not disappearing from the planet after hosting the Oscars) may be making Wiseau relatable.

While I’m not a crazy about Franco’s opening montage of talking heads speaking about the Room’s influence, nor his efforts to point out how accurately he recreates scenes from the original movie, “Disaster Artist”’s biggest charm is how funny it is. Wiseau’s series of bizarre and erratic choices, constantly going against real professional’s recommendations, is inspiring. And Wiseau’s “act”, his refusal to let people know anything about him, is fascinating. He may never create anything else, repeat, anything, that’s not based off of “The Room”, but at least he may be able to milk a lifetime’s worth out of his tour de farce. As for Franco, he’ll do plenty, after nicely catching this 21 century bit of schadenfraude.

Rating:

3.5/5

Trailer: Click Here.

Okja

2017’s “Okja” directed by Boon Jo Hong.

Starring Seo-hyun Ahn, Tilda Swinton, Jake Gyllenhaal, Paul Dano, Giancarlo Esposito, Steven Yeun, Lily Collins, Daniel Henshall, Devon Bostick, and Shirley Henderson.

What is it about?

“Okja” is a story about a corporation (lead by Tilda Swinton, doing double duty here, along with right hand man, Giancarlo Esposito) that produces super sized pigs (basically a cross between an elephant and a hippopotamus). As a publicity stunt, the corporation places 10 of their pork products with random families across the world, and Okja is placed with a young Korean girl (Seo-hyun Ahn). We meet them in the forests of Korea, and see the bond the 2 of them share, before the corporation comes calling (including corporate pitch man Jake Gyllenhaal ) to march the animals in a New York parade, before sending them to the slaughterhouse. Ahn is met up with by the Animal Liberation Front (lead by a Paul Dano), who would like to see Okja returned to freedom. Will the vegetarian based rebels be able to save Okja, or will she end up on consumer’s plates?

Why is it worth seeing?

After such genre successes such as “The Host” and “Snowpiercer”, Hong is back, proving Korea continues to make some of the most interesting films around (Park Chan-Wook made my #1 film of 2017, “The Handmaiden”). As always, Hong makes many changes in tone through the movie, and while not always successful, does juggle them to great effect. 

After the most proficient graphic design credits of 2017, we get to see the bonding of Ahn and her CGI creature. With it demonstrating the intelligence of a pig with the loyalty of a canine, their bond is special, and tested when the corporation that designed it comes calling for a return on their product. Our central beast proves one feeling like we want to calm it when it is scared and hug it when it is lonely- similar to the recent “Planet of the Apes” trilogy in terms of animals being more human than the humans.

Hong also stages some great chase sequences featuring Ahn, rising from the separation anxiety after Okja leaves Ahn, where it’s tough not to think of something like a bizarro “The Terminator”, in their single minded kinetic pursuit. But the most dominant genre running through the corporate satire is that of humour, as Hong goes to great lengths to show just how perverted and ridiculous corporate “meetings” are.

To say the movie’s values are against Concentrated Animal Farming Operations is clear, as well as the entire industrialized meat industry (although it doesn’t go quite as far as 2006’s “Fast Food Nation”). CGI or not, this is what efficiently farming animals for their meat looks like. Despite the laughs, thrills, and one of the most intimate scenes of the year throughout this well cast movie, ultimately that will likely be people’s biggest beef with the film.

Rating:

4/5

Trailer: Click Here.

Logan Lucky

2017’s “Logan Lucky”, directed by Steven Soderbergh.

Starring Channing Tatum, Adam Driver, Daniel Craig, Riley Keough, Katie Holmes, Jack Quaid, Brian Gleeson, and Farrah McKenzie.

What is it about?

Taking place in present day rural West Virginia, “Logan Lucky” stars Channing Tatum. Laid off from his mining job due to his employer feeling he could be an insurance liability with his knee issues, Tatum chalks it up to a family curse. Unemployed and alienated from his daughter (Farrah McKenzie), whom his ex partner (Katie Holmes) is planning on moving away from, Tatum needs to make some money to hire a lawyer and keep a roof over his head. He recruits his hairdresser sister (Riley Keough), veteran one armed brother (Adam Driver), and wiley convict (Daniel Craig) for a job robbing the local race track. With help from Craig’s helpless brothers (Jack Quaid and Brian Gleeson), can Tatum and company pull off the heist?

Why is it worth seeing?

It’s easy to peg “Logan Lucky” as just a Southern version of “Ocean’s 11”, with it having the same director (Steven Soderbergh, blessedly coming out of retirement), assembling a quirky ensemble cast together to perform an intricate caper, scored by the quirky David Holmes music in the background. But “Lucky”’s setting (down to earth West Virginia as opposed to glitzy Las Vegas) and sometimes hilarious gags make it at times stronger than “Ocean’s 11”, and is a worthy addition to Soderbergh’s canon.

Soderbergh wastes little time diving into the how’s of Tatum’s plan, and as we watch it unfold there is some incongruent thinking from Tatum’s sometimes absurd confidence, which contrasts with his feelings on a family curse that has made him so unsuccessful up to this point. And the criminal population that the gang collaborates with can be a little too utopian at times (a familiar issue with the Ocean’s series). That, and Daniel Craig’s accent, wears thin.

But an appearance of Soderbergh playing with time (a lovely familiar staple of his), combined with hilarious gags, low key but solid performances (Adam Driver is proving quite versatile), and an involving caper where there’s always more going on than meets the eye, makes for a worthy experience. While I’m not exactly enamored with Nascar culture’s zeitgeist- “Logan Lucky"’s left turns make me wish for more.

Rating:

4/5

Trailer: Click Here.

Swiss Army Man

2016’s “Swiss Army Man”, written and directed by Dan Kwan and Daniel Scheinert .

Starring Paul Dano, Daniel Radcliffe, and Mary Elizabeth Winstead.

What is it about?

Deserted Island resident Paul Dano is interrupted from hanging himself when a corpse (none other than Daniel Radcliffe) washes ashore. Initially, Radcliffe’s comatose but certainly not inert body proves useful (as a jet ski and a drinking fountain)- but things continue to get stranger when Radcliffe starts talking back to Dano. Grateful for a companion, Dano begins a quest to return to civilization with Radcliffe, and connect with a crush (Mary Elizabeth Winstead). Will this wayward couple be able to get home- and is everything as it seems?

Why is it worth seeing?

Easily the strangest studio movie released in a while, the movie’s initial “Cast Away” meets “Weekend at Bernie’s” premise delivers belly laughs from the theatre of the absurd script by the Scheinert brothers. As the film travels a clear cut quest from a bizarro perspective, it’s soundtrack (featuring Dano and Radcliffe contributing double duties) and tone more closely resemble the childlike “Where the Wild Things Are.”

Dano and Radcliffe commit completely to the premise, and it’s remarkable to watch Harry Potter go through various stages of rigor mortis powered utility knife helpfulness for Dano. The ultimate listener, Radcliffe’s presence powers Dano to let himself feel free and heal from previous traumas that he is working through. What Dano has suffered from and what defence mechanisms he has developed as coping strategies we find out as they get closer to civilization, only to find out new revelations.

“Swiss Army Man”’s title is deceptive, as it is not simple, nor for all tastes (the opposite of a swiss army knife). After it’s go for broke opening and organic art direction, there lies painful discovery and healing that needs to happen for our characters. There’s few things like it. It’s uniqueness and Russian Doll nesting of mental health are tough to get out of your head.

Rating:

4/5

Trailer: Click Here.

Our Brand is Crisis

2015’s “Our Brand is Crisis”, directed by David Gordon Green.

Starring Sandra Bullock, Billy Bob Thornton, Anthony Mackie, Ann Dowd, Scott McNairy, and Zoe Kazan.

What is it about?

“Crisis” is somewhat based on a 2002 presidential election in Bolivia. With the team’s candidate (Joaquim de Almeida) lagging in the polls, the political team (Anthony Mackie, Ann Dowd, and Scott McNairy), the team throws a hail mary to recruit renowned political campaign manager, Calamity Jane (Sandra Bullock). Bullock was retired from the morally compromised life, but relishes the opportunity to joust with the competing campaign manager (Billy Bob Thornton). Will the team be able to come from behind to win the election?

Why is it worth seeing?

There is a lot of Oscar power in this production, both in front of and behind the camera. So imagine the disappointment from this tepid and dumbed down result, which takes some very liberal interpretations from the 2005 “Our Brand is Crisis” documentary. Bullock’s character gets air lifted from America and dropped in the middle of a TV episode where it explains to us how cynical politics are, and how organic advocacy on the ground is for naïve idiots.

m

Always talking down to the audience, Director David Gordon Green struggles to inject realism into the back room conversations that dominate “Crisis”. With Bullock existing in a campaign room full of yes men who are blown away by her flippant “calamity” and college freshman 101 philosophical quotes, it’s very difficult to relate to as both a character arc and doctrine on politics. The invisible hand is a little too visible.

At it’s best, “Crisis” at times resembles 1998’s “Primary Colors”, but with it’s lack of focus and nuance, those moments are few and far between. While Sandra’s Bullock’s ass double has been doing well for themselves, the wind chimes that play in the score indicate what we already know- that this is a film out of place and in need of a recount.

Rating:

2.5/5

Trailer: Click Here.

Elf

2003’s “Elf”, directed by Jon Favreau.

Starring Will Farrell, James Caan, Edward Asner, Mary Steenburgen, Daniel Tay, Bob Newhart, Zooey Deschanel, Amy Sedaris, and Peter Dinklage.

What is it about?

Accidentally taken to the North Pole after crawling into Santa’s bag of goodies, human Will Farrell is raised by Santa and his pint sized workshop Elves. Making toys to meet quotas proves difficult for his less dexterous human hands, and one day Santa spills the beans about Farrell being human, and how his dad (James Caan) resides in New York. Farrell heads to New York, meets up with Caan’s family (Mary Steenburgen and Daniel Tay), and finds a job in a department store’s North Pole section. There he meets fellow worker, Zooey Deschanel. Despite Farrell’s presence, people’s attitudes start to sour on the holiday season, which makes it difficult for Santa’s sleigh to be powered. Will people’s collective Christmas spirit be able to be revived to ensure Santa’s sleigh can fly?

Why is it worth seeing?

Will Farrell’s over the top earnestness, as the fish out of water elf-raised human jumping through New York City’s cynicism and narcissism goes far in some scenes, almost enough to make us feel the Christmas spirit. Unfortunately, many scenes and the lack of interesting characters fall flat. Not as flat as the idea that Santa’s reindeer powered sleigh (maybe) ALSO needs a karma generated turbo thruster- but pretty flat.

Director Jon Favreau does some amazing forced perspective tricks to show off the gigantic differences between Farrell and the Elves, and some clever merging of stop motion animation and CGI to display a North Pole teeming with life and spirit. But what’s with the North Pole’s bleached interiors that look like they inspired the penultimate scene (where Ennis meet’s Jack’s parents) in “Brokeback Mountain”? Favreau’s camera angles and editing at times also seem quite arbitrary, making it difficult to maintain momentum. And the tone speaks to a struggle to make a children’s Xmas film, while also shoehorning in erratic irreverent stabs to grab the adult’s attention.

Farrell and his relationship with his fellow humans, from Caan to Deschanel, feel more on auto pilot than spontaneous and genuine. And the sub plot of Caan’s struggles to not be such a workaholic at a soul destroying corporation, feels more paint by numbers than painterly. The film desperately needs more energy and authenticity from the non Farrell characters, like in the cameo scene with Peter Dinklage. How will Santa’s sleigh run (?) if the movie is running on empty?

Rating:

3/5

Trailer: Click Here.

Les Miserables

2012’s “Les Miserables”, directed by Tom Hooper.

Starring Hugh Jackman, Anne Hathaway, Russell Crowe, Amanda Seyfried, Eddie Redmaine, Aaron Tveit, Samantha Barks, Helena Bonham Carter, and Sacha Baron Cohen.

What is it about?

Set in France around the French Revolution of the early 19^th century, Hugh Jackman plays a convicted criminal, serving 19 years in prison for stealing a loaf of bread. Out on parole with the deck stacked against him, he is shown mercy and compassion by a church member, and he changes his identity to start a successful business. Constantly hunted by a fascist policeman (Russell Crowe), Jackman one day helps out an employee (Anne Hathaway) who is having troubles raising her daughter before passing away. Jackman takes Hathaway’s daughter away from her greedy inn keeper caregivers (Helena Bonham Carter and Sacha Baron Cohen), and raises her to become Amanda Seyfried. Seyfried and Jackman find their lives changed by the French Revolution, lead by Aaron Tveit and Eddie Redmaine. Seyfried and Redmaine fall in love at first sight, and their relationship becomes tested as the French radicals intensify their battles in the streets. Will love conquer all as the resistance continues?

Why is it worth seeing?

As I’ve indicated in previous reviews, I’m not a huge fan of musicals. I remain confounded by the art form of using a song to tell a story that typically sounds better when spoken at a normal clip (or not at all, one of the principle strengths of cinema). But variety is the spice of life, and director Tom Hooper (fresh off of the robbery of 2010’s Best Picture for his “The King’s Speech” over the superior, “The Social Network”) here brings some kinetic motion and memorable images to the musical classic, “Les Miserables”.

It should be pointed out that I don’t know the musical that well, and therefore can’t comment on it’s translation as a film from the play. I do know when that can feel awkward, so I speak only as a lover of film.

It’s always a delight to watch so many Hollywood sluggers reach out of their comfort zones, and Hooper puts the majority of the cast front and centre. Jackman, Hathaway, and Redmaine leave nothing on the table, and Hathaway was rewarded an Oscar for her efforts (however brief, reminding me of a supersized version of Judi Dench’s win for “Shakespeare in Love”). Crowe on the other hand, in his portrayal of the dogged and sense of perverted justice police captain looks out of his league, and Helena Bonham Carter and Sacha Baron Cohen’s comic jives are jarringly out of place (and don’t even mention Cohen’s intermittent goofy french accent).

More of a stitching together of individual performances than a cohesive whole, nobody said adopting a classic musical to a movie is easy, but the movie does itself few favours. With a barrage of strange camera angles and way more cuts than are necessary, it may make you turn it off to go and see the play instead. The other issue with a movie being adapted from a musical is they break a basic rule of movie making: show, don’t tell sing.

Rating:

3/5

Trailer: Click Here.

Paterson

2016’s “Paterson”, written and directed by Jim Jarmusch.

Starring Adam Driver, Golshifteh Farahani, Barry Shabaka Henley, Rizwan Manji, William Jackson Harper, and Chasten Harmon.

What is it about?

“Paterson” features Adam Driver as a laconic and mysterious bus driver in present day Paterson, New Jersey. He has a girlfriend that he loves (and adopted dog- that he doesn’t), and he likes to keep to his routine. Waking up daily without an alarm, he goes to his work with no complaints. He listens to his passengers and their various conversations, his girlfriend’s various artistic schemes, and the various characters in their small neighbourhood, all without judgment. But his absolutely favourite thing to do is write poetry, and the majority of the movie is about the characters he meets on his journey, before he gets to write about the things that inspire and move him.

Why is it worth seeing?

Jim Jarmusch typically likes to make quirky art house fare that marches to a different beat, and here Driver marches to a metre- that of the poetic variety, Jarmusch’s tribute to art for art’s sake.

Driver’s sole judgment, is that poetry runs through his veins. Based off of the works of Ron Padgett, Driver’s regular breaks at the town’s waterfalls to compose verse bring him joy, and it’s the soul of the movie when Driver spends his time writing, accompanied by Jarmusch’s superimposed imagery. At other times, Driver will run into people whom also compose, and he loves it all the same- Jarmusch’s ode to verse.

It’s unfortunate that Jarmusch has to show so much of the drudgery of the week (having a morning wake up shot of each day of the week), and “Paterson” is the first movie that makes me feel like I’m clock watching for when the day’s duties end. As well, Jarmusch here brings a tone that suggests something awful is going to happen, and when something happens- it’s pretty minimal. Jarmusch also brings something that Richard Linklater can also suffer from, that of a Pollyanna hippie utopia where people wander aimlessly from place to place, and no realities of racism, addiction, poverty, anger, or even a lack of planning and action ever realistically intervene. On top of that, you’d think a movie so heavily divested from reality would drag less, but it can suffer from some serious navel gazing at times.

Despite it’s unrealistic depiction of urban living, a running time that feels long, and too close to home workday grind sequences, “Paterson” is an artistic shout out to embracing our inner artist. It would be nice if it didn’t feel like the parking brake is still on.

Rating:

3/5

Trailer: Click Here.