Tag: cinematography

Categories
Uncategorised

Top 5 Joaquin Phoenix Performances

Undoubtedly the man of the moment in the film that has the festival circuit buzzing, Joaquin Phoenix is the frontrunner for awards for his titular performance in Todd Phillips’ origin story Joker. During a film climate that seems dominated by superhero films, Joker seems like it is doing something entirely different by twisting the tone and idea of the superhero movie. It feels that after years of playing the underdog in Indie features and his reluctance to entertain the spotlight, the mainstream media has finally caught up. It feels only right that I compile a list of my top 5 performances although it’s very tricky to do so.

Here’s my top 5 in chronological order:

Gladiator (2000)

I never thought Gladiator would be in a top anything list. Truth be told, I find the film overwhelming overall but the one element of it I absolutely love is Joaquin Phoenix’s brilliant performance as the evil Commodus, the power hungry son of Marcus Aurelius who gives power to Maximus (Russell Crowe) until a new empire is formed. His lust for power knows no bounds as he murders his own father and has Maximus arrested. It’s Phoenix’s performance that brings the real depth to this film. He could have easily played this role as a cartoonish villain but instead brings a snakelike presence to the character. His strength comes from the power that others give him rather than strength that he has by himself which comes to fruition in the final fight scene with Maximus.

The Master (2012)

Undoubtedly my favourite Joaquin Phoenix performance, The Master follows ex-marine Freddie Quell (Joaquin Phoenix) as he becomes involved with a cult called The Cause, led by Lancaster Dodd (Philip Seymour Hoffman) and his wife, Peggy (Amy Adams). I won’t dwell too much on this film, mainly because I have written an extensive review for this film (which you can read here). Phoenix brings his A game to his performance and it truly is a career best. The scene where he initially undergoes “Processing” with Lancaster in which his darkest secrets and even darker past are revealed. It’s a brilliantly shot scene that brings together to titans of acting and should have won both Phoenix and Hoffman Academy Awards.

Her (2013)

Spike Jonze’s romantic Her shows a tender side to Phoenix in the role of Theodore Twombly, a depressed soon-to-be divorcé whose job is writing intimate letters for people who are too afraid to do so. He is so emotionally intense and yet detached at the same time as he begins a sexual relationship with his OS (voiced by Scarlett Johansson). Featuring a stellar cast that is rounded off by Amy Adams and Rooney Mara, this was one of the best films of 2013 and brought Spike Jonze a much-deserved Oscar for his screenplay. It’s a saddening portrayal of love and heartbreak in the 21st century. This is a film that easily could have fallen into ridiculous due to its eccentric plot but the sincerity that Phoenix brings to the role allows the audience to become truly invested in the plot.

Inherent Vice (2014)

Phoenix’s second collaboration with Paul Thomas Anderson brings renowned author Thomas Pynchon to the big screen in what is the only adaptation to date. Based on the drug-infused novel, Inherent Vice, we follow Doc Sportello, an alcoholic, drug-loving cop in 1969 as he tries to bring down a drug lord. It’s a hallucinogenic mesh of colour, music and Joanna Newsom who stars as a narrator only Doc can see. The film itself is hugely underrated, possibly due to the fact that it is too bizarre for a lot of people. Being a big fan of Pynchon, I was so excited to see how it would work adapting one of his books into film and it works perfectly. Phoenix is perfect casting and carries off Doc’s happy-go-lucky attitude with ease. He heads up a star-studded cast fantastically and commands the screen whenever he is on it. He brings the perfect amount of slapstick while also keeping the character’s dignity intact. It’s truly a brilliant film that I think is wrongly overlooked.

You Were Never Really Here (2017)

Lynne Ramsay’s gritty New York City based nightmare follows Phoenix as hitman, Joe, who lives and breathes violence and killing all while living with his elderly mother in his childhood home. He specialises in rescuing trafficked girls. He’s a character who’s backstory is stained with violence and abuse and there isn’t much else that he is capable of doing. He is quiet and alone but happy in his loneliness. When tasked with retrieving a Senator’s daughter from traffickers, Joe embarks on his hardest mission yet. The film is bloody and holds no punches. It’s brutal from beginning to end with devastating results. The direction and writing is super tight and brought both Phoenix and Ramsay prizes at Cannes Film Festival in a rare double win.

With the release of Joker, it seems that Phoenix is going to break into the mainstream and he’s the frontrunner come award season. It seems that these awards are long overdue. If it were up to me, he’d have a couple of oscars in his cabinet already but sadly that hasn’t been the case. I’d hope that those who are introduced to phoenix’s talents as the Joker watch him in other films and see his talents beyond that superhero universe.

I’ll be posting a review for Joker as soon as its released and I’m looking forward to seeing whether it would break into my top 5.

What do you think of my list? Do you agree or disagree? Let me know in the comments below!

Categories
Uncategorised

Inferno (1980)

Dario Argento’s second feature in his Three Mother’s trilogy transport us from the Freiburg set Suspiria (1977) to New York where a young writer, Rose (Irene Miracle), is suspicious of a curse within her building. After reading an antique book titled The Three Mothers, she finds that the apartment block she lives at was once occupied by one of the Mothers. The Three Mothers rule the world with sorrow (Mater Suspiriorum who lives in Freiburg), tears (Mater Lachrymarum who lives in Rome) and darkness (Mater Tenebrarum who resides in New York). With Mater Suspiriorum meeting her demise in Suspiria, we now see Mater Tenebrarum face off those who rebel against her rule in New York. Tenebrarum is the cruelest of the sisters and the deaths in this film definitely reflect that.

Directed and written by Argento, Inferno carries on the themes explored in Suspiria but on a seemingly bigger scale. The stronger scenes are those based in the Mother’s domains as their presence can be felt at every corner. Argento’s love for the dramatic is also carried on in this film with lingering suspense and exaggerated deaths. Upon a traumatic discovery in the cellar of her apartment block, Rose writes to her brother, Mark (Leigh McCloskey), who is studying music in Rome and begs him to come and help her solve the mystery. From the moment Rose posts the letter, deaths begin to happen to whomever the siblings come across with Mark dealing with Mater Lachryrum during his time in Rome. Like Susie Banyon (Jessica Harper) in Suspiria, Rose is a strong and independent female character which is refreshing to see in classic horror films. Romani Albani is brought on as cinematographer and does a brilliant job of bringing Argento’s vision to life by bringing contrasts throughout the film from the surreal apartment that Rose’s sickly neighbour, Elise (Daria Nicolodi) lives in to the gritty sewers of Central Park. It feels like visual growth from Suspiria.

The film is filled with suspense from start to finish with a breathtaking scene in the cellar as Rose tries to search for the clues to lead her to the mysterious owner of the building. When her necklace falls into a deep pool, she is forced to dive and founds an underwater ballroom in a scene that sets the tone for the rest of the film. Argento never allows the audience to feel settled and the only scenes that don’t contain scares or violence tend to be those where background story is given in Argento’s signature fairytale way. Even the introduction begins with Rose reading an excerpt from The Three Mothers aloud in a way that makes it seem like an adult fairytale. Much like Suspiria, the experience of Inferno is heightened by the amazing soundtrack with a score composed by Keith Emerson who does a brilliant job. He combines new electronic sounds with dramatic operatic pieces to add to the unbalanced ambience that the film creates. It’s a striking score that I think is overlooked due to the iconic association that Argento has with The Goblins who composed the stellar music for Suspiria. What Emerson does is create an entirely different film with his unique sound.

My favourite scene comes near the beginning of the film when we are first introduced to Mark who is attending a classical music session. As he tries to read Rose’s letter, he is distracted by Mater Lachrymarum who is disguised as a beautiful student (Ania Pieroni). He can see that she is mouthing something at him and he feels pain. It is an intense scene as the wind picks up and he is visibly uncomfortable. When he snaps out the pain, she has mysteriously disappeared and he accidentally leaves the letter behind. It’s a brilliant scene that uses the classical music as the main force of emotion as the gradual crescendo coincides with his building pain.

Although the film overall isn’t as tight as Suspiria, I think it is highly underrated. I think that Suspiria is a stronger film because it focuses on the first witch but Inferno brings in the remaining witches with the first act showing killings in Rome before travelling to New York. I think the short running time of 90 minutes means that we don’t spend much time in either place. On release, this film was critically panned but over the years has developed much love in retrospect. In some ways I find this film more interesting than Suspiria because it brings in the legend of The Three Mothers. Much like Suspiria, the aesthetic of the film is beautiful as well with Argento’s signature use of bright contrasting colours to set the mood of the scene and plenty of gore and blood throughout. There is clearly a lot of passion that was put in this film and it’s a shame that the film did badly on initial release. It’s a horror film that I think will only get better with time.

What do you think of Inferno? Did you like it or loathe it? Let me know in the comments below!

You can my review on Suspiria here!

Categories
Uncategorised

Midsommar (2019)

As Summer is coming to an end, I thought it would be apt to write a post on my favourite film of the season. Unsurprisingly enough, it comes in the form of a summertime nightmare with Ari Aster’s second feature Midsommar. Following on from his brilliant debut, Hereditary (2018), Aster has managed to surpass expectations and once again brings us a new and refreshing take on traditional horror. The film follows college student, Dani (Florence Pugh) who joins her boyfriend, Christian (Jack Reynor) and his friends: Mark (Will Poulter), Josh (William Jackson Harper) and Pelle (Vilhelm Blomgren) on a trip to Sweden to observe a rare festival among Pelle’s familial commune. Things quickly turn sour as members of the group begin to disappear without a trace. It’s easy enough to expect a film in the same vein as The Wicker Man when introduced to the pagan style life the commune leads in the Swedish woods.

Florence Pugh’s leading turn only helps to further push her presence as an actress to watch. Dani is one of the most complex female characters to arise from modern cinema. We see her shift from the Westernised world that she lives in where there is no hope for her to the cult where she begins to feel belonging. It’s a haunting portrayal of depression and anxiety and is shown in an explicit way that hasn’t been explored before. The events in the film happen due to other’s people actions but they are always directly in relation to Dani and her welfare. Pugh’s acting chops are really highlighted in the dance scene where she becomes so absorbed in the competition that she finds herself speaking Swedish fluently with her competitors. The scene is transformative for Dani as she allows herself to be open to the ceremony and the community.

Photo_03

The supporting cast also knock it out the park with their performances. Will Poulter in particular gives a career best as the ignorant Mark, who literally and figuratively pisses all over the commune’s celebrations. Whereas Dani’s demons are hidden below the surface, the male characters’ flaws are on show for all to see. Whereas Dani is ridiculed for her struggles in US, the tables are turned for the men in the commune as women dominate the landscape. The film’s goriest scenes are mainly at the cost of the ignorant visitors and yet it doesn’t feel like a slasher film. The audience, like the characters, are outsiders but they are invading the ceremony and evoke little sympathy from the audience because of their ignorance and greed. Jack Reynor also excels as Dani’s emotionally distant boyfriend, Chris. He has allowed himself to become so detached to Dani that he acts emotionless and unsympathetic when tragedy strikes at the beginning of the film. He is unwilling to see how wrong he treats her as she struggles to fight for his love and repair things. During the film, we see Christian’s confidence shaken as he becomes targeted by the cult.

As expected, Aster’s script and direction showcase his talent as an original voice in film and his fearless approach to filmmaking. He isn’t afraid to explore taboo subjects or make the audience uncomfortable. One such scene is during an ättestupa ceremony where two elderly people jump from a high cliff. Aster doesn’t allow the camera to turn away as we see the bodies hit the ground. The reactions that Dani and co feel become all the more real because Aster forces the audience to experience it as well. It’s a film that demands the attention in details from its audience. Every aspect of the costumes and set have been well thought out and serve a purpose that pay off later in the film. The use of striking visual sets make it a memorable film and the immaculate beauty of the cult’s village make the strict lifestyle all the more terrifying. I think this film shows a growth in directorial vision from Aster’s standpoint as he really allows the audience to get into Dani’s psyche. The true brilliance of this film is Aster’s ability to contrast Dani’s claustrophobic feelings to the open space that the commune live in so effectively.

midsommar-cult-happyfaces-700x308

Another aspect I loved about the film was the use of costumes. Not only the ethereal and fresh qualities the commune colours have which seem refreshing when we first see the village. The standout costume, however, comes in a brilliant floral creation worn by Dani in the films final scenes. In any other film, it would seem ridiculous but it makes sense in this film. It both stands out and blends in at the same time and plays a big role in the terrifying climatic scene.

If it were up to me, this film would be a safe contender for various mainstream awards but I am aware that it is too violent and “out there” for some. It is not a film for the faint of heart or easily offended. Between the subtle cannibalism, male frontal nudity and graphic sex scenes, this isn’t a comfortable film to watch but that is what makes it such a brilliant piece of cinema.

What did you think of the film? Did you like it as much? What was your film of the summer? Let me know in the comments below!

Categories
Uncategorised

Women’s Voice In Film

Women in film has become a huge talking point for film development in recent years, partially due to the #metoo movement that outed the abusive patriarchy in film seeing women given less power both in representation and finance. A lot of discussion on the internet (from men mostly) questioning whether there truly is a problem in the first place, do the women deserve the harassment they face and most importantly, do we really need these gender swap remakes? The answers to these questions are simply: yes there is a problem, no a woman never deserves harassment and of course we need as much female representation as possible.

It’s not secret that the days of Golden Hollywood, although seemingly flawless and iconic, foresaw the way women in film were treated by their bosses (producers and directors). From the infamous “casting couch” to the manipulative studio contracts, Hollywood presented itself as a mecca of dreams but proved to be a breaking point of mental illness, drug and alcohol misuse and domestic abuse. This period sees the breakdown of many stars including Judy Garland, Marilyn Monroe and Bette Davis just to name a few. It seemed that solace could only be found at the bottom of a whiskey glass.

So what does this issue have to do with Hollywood today?

Well, to begin with, despite the elimination of studio contracts in the 50s due to the collapse of the Hollywood studio structure, it appears that female filmmaking is still viewed as a niche rather than as an equal offering. The fact that we even discuss a film as “female” or celebrate female creators and strong female characters shouldn’t be something we celebrate in the 21st century. Especially considering that we’re at a century of accessible filmmaking that has distributed across the globe. AFter everything that has happened globally regarding women’s issues such as voting rights, reproductive rights, fighting the wage gap, it’s unsurprising that the fight for the female experience through a woman’s perspective has been equally difficult. After all, film is a brilliant and affordable medium to translate issues to a global audience using visuals to gain awareness for issues. Take last year’s Oscar-winning short documentary Period. End of Sentence. that looks at female poverty in India where women are forced to quit school due to periods as they are unablt to afford sanitary products. In terms of fictional feature films, we have seen a resurgence of female driven comedies with Bridesmaids accredited with starting this trend. Other offerings in recent years have reverted back to teenage years with 2019’s Booksmart and 2017’s Lady Bird among the big fish. it’s great to see original stories created by women being given mainstream releases and have subsequently done well in the awards circuit. As well as comedies, we have also seen female-centred dramas such as Todd Haynes’ beautiful and iconic LGBT love story Carol (you can read my review here) starring Cate Blanchett and Rooney Mara, which I would argue is the best love film of the century so far. Now these Indie films do incredibly well, but why hasn’t this translated as well into mainstream films? I’ll try to break this down.

It’s known that the majority of people who will go and see an original story created and performed by women is going to be seen by women. That’s all well and good but considering that men are the majority of the cinematic audience statistically, it’s important to get men to see films created and performed by women too. This is for a number of reasons and since the film industry is a business, the most important issue is money. If more men see the films then more money is given to the filmmakers and then more films created by women can be made which would eventually make the idea of the “female film” as old and traditional as the Golden Age of Hollywood. This brings me to the gender swap remakes. If you looked at the highest grossing films in recent years, chances are that they are filled with sequels, reboots, prequels and remakes. Using this information, it is a smart idea that in order to bring a female perspective to a high-grossing film, you must incorporate strong female roles into these films. However, this hasn’t been without a share of complaints from a small portion of the male audience. Take the Marvel and DC Universes for example. Admittedly, I am not a huge fan of the Marvel Universe but I have never heard such negativity from a male audience regarding it’s iconic female characters before. It seems that every other film is released with no issue, Marvel films particularly tend to sell out every initial screening and exceed in both critic and audience circles so when they decided to do a film dedicated to Captain Marvel, this should have been a celebration for a strong female character to join the achievements of its predecessors; however, this sadly wasn’t the case. A portion of the male audience was outraged by Brie Larson’s interpretation of the role as well as her feminist statements. It’s all well and good when the male superheros want to prove their stereotyped masculinity (which is an old school trope that Marvel appear to be fighting as well by bringing vulnerability into the male characters) but when Captain Marvel doesn’t need a man to save the world and more importantly, doesn’t want a man with her to save the world, this is a major issue. It was a role that should have been celebrated but instead, while Endgame was adored for bringing its emotion to the male characters (Iron Man specifically), Captain Marvel is viewed in a negative light because she veers away from the traditional “eye-candy” trope that Golden Hollywood has been feeding the audience with for years. I hope that as these franchises expand and more female characters are incorporated into their respected universes, the male audience that openly despises the likes of Captain Marvel and Wonder Woman may be open to the idea of the strong, independent women without thinking of them as simple love interests or sidekicks rather than the leaders of their own stories. Despite this small male audience who tweet outrageously about the femalecentred films, DC is clearly proud of the overwhelming success of Wonder Woman as they are bringing Patty Jenkins back for the second film (I did actually enjoy Wonder Woman! The first segment featuring the Amazonians is astonishing direction and writing).

I am not writing this article to be negative or bash the male audience because the male audience is important to the plight of female filmmaking as well and it is only a small portion. I think that there has to be an understanding that it is much harder for a woman to get a film made than a man. Once that statement is understood and acknowledged then the discussion of female film becomes a welcome idea and celebrated. But in a world where the Indie films created by women are renowned for their originality, why do we need gender swapped films such as Ghostbusters? Do we actually need them?

As I said at the top of this article… yes, yes we do!

Why do we need them? By remaking films with gender swapped protagonists, it gives the audience a new perspective on a femiliar setting. It’s easy to be angered when a classic like Ghostbusters is given an update with the best female comedians much like the original with men. It’s a brilliant film by itself (it obviously isn’t as good as the original) but I don’t think the intention was to “outdo” the original. I think it was to show that women could be given an ordinary role without the woman part being of any importance. I think that if Ghostbusters was remade with a male cast, there would be the usual complaints of “we don’t need a remake” but the abuse hurled at the stars of the film showed that there is sexist view from this portion of male audience. It seems to not only be that women have “taken” the roles, but that women are put in powerful positions without being the love interest. There is also an argument that representation is important and when given the opportunity to make these remakes, it’s another opportunity to put women in the driving seat which is only a positive.

Some of the films I love such as Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind and Frances Ha feature brilliant female characters. Clementine Kruczynski (played fantastically by Kate Winslet) in the former and Greta Gerwig as the quirky titular character in the latter are women who have their flaws and struggles but at the end of the day, are independent and strong. Both films directed by men but show the important of strong female presence in film. Eternal Sunshine’s script won the Best Original Screenplay Academy Award suggesting that there is a demand for these female characters. Another film that is a force of nature is 2016’s Turkish offering, Mustang, about five young sisters who are forced into marriage after wrongly being accused of sexual activity with a group of boys in their class at school. Written and directed by Deniz Gamze Erguven in her directorial debut, Mustang is one of the best films I have ever seen. The film is shown through the eyes of the youngest sister, Lale, giving the audience an innocent glimpse into an oppressive world without explicitly saying so. Much like the message of the film, the writing and directing is subtle with a lot of stillness and peace in moments of chaos. Another brilliant female-led offering is 2018’s The Favourite which was hugely snubbed in the Oscars this year and has not one, not two but THREE stellar leads in the form of Olivia Colman as Queen Anne (who deservedly won an Oscar for her performance) and Rachel Weisz and Emma Stone as the women vying for the queen’s attention. It’s a complex triangle of lust, power and manipulation. This answers the question whether women can carry a film with a resounding YES!

At the end of it all, more needs to be done to finance and distribute mainstream films created by and starring women but this isn’t to say that none exist at all and the offerings we have had in recent years particularly show a huge improvement to the films of the Golden Era. Women have proven time and time again that they can create films that are both critical and commercial (when given the chance) successes.

What are your favourite films created by and/or starring women? Let me know in the comments below?

Categories
Uncategorised

The Cornetto Trilogy

Quality: Original. Film Title: Shaun Of The Dead. Photo Credit: Oliver Upton. Copyright: © 2004 Universal Studios. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.

The Cornetto Trilogy consists of three films by writer/director Edgar Wright that are unconnected in plot but star Simon Pegg and Nick Frost in the lead roles and stars a different flavour Cornetto at some point in the film. The trilogy began with horror Shaun of the Dead (2004) followed by action Hot Fuzz (2007) and concludes with sci-fi The World’s End (2013). Each film was critically and commercially well-received and has a dedicated fan-base. As with any Edgar Wright film they all have strong language in abundance, brilliant soundtracks and a striking aesthetic. I go back to these films time and time again and find myself noticing things that I hadn’t seen before.

Here’s a quick summary of each installment in chronological order:

Shaun of the Dead (2004)

Part horror, part family drama, all comedy. Shaun of the Dead follows Simon Pegg as the titular character whose life seems to be going nowhere (except local pub, The Winchester that is). Accompanied by his lazy housemate, Ed (Nick Frost), Shaun navigates his way through a random zombie apocalypse that has befallen the country to get to his ex-girlfriend’s house in a bid to win her back. It’s a film that is filled with a lot of heart and even more guts that is both genius and revolutionary in the horror comedy genre. It’s one of those films that you can quote for hours on end. Horror comedy is not an easy genre to pull off well critically and in a sincere manner but Shaun of the Dead does this through its flawed protagonist who is as layered as the blood paving the streets.

Hot Fuzz (2007)

The second film in the trilogy is an action-packed story filmed in Edgar Wright’s hometown. Overachieving police officer, Nicholas Angel (Simon Pegg) is relocated to the tiny village of Sandford, aptly known as “the safest village in Britain”. As a series of gruesome deaths occur throughout the village, Nicholas believes that there is a murderer on the loose despite the townspeople constant protestations that the deaths are accidents. Alongside local police officer, Danny (Nick Frost), the pair attempt to track down the killer and bring them to justice. Although it does have strong points, it is my least favourite of the trilogy for a number of reasons. Unlike the other two films, it is plot heavy rather than a character study and I personally prefer the latter. Action isn’t my favourite genre but I do think it is a strong film that brings something different to the genre.

The World’s End (2013)

The final film in the trilogy is also my favourite. Simon Pegg plays Gary King, an alcoholic who hasn’t moved on from school days and longs to complete the Golden Mile in his hometown which he failed to finish as a teenager. The Golden Mile is a pub crawl that consists of 12 ending with the titular pub, The World’s End. He gathers up his childhood mates, including his former best friend, Andy (Nick Frost) and they attempt to conquer The Mile while fighting off an alien invasion that has turned the townspeople into androids (or Blanks as they are called in the film). Featuring a brilliant cast as always and a higher budget than the two previous films combined, Wright is tasked with giving this trilogy the grand finish it deserves and he succeeds with flying colours. Everything about this film emulates the previous installments with its attention to detail, layered characters and brilliant script. The writing in this film is what I enjoy most about this film as the timing and pacing is flawless.

The Cornetto Trilogy is a career-defining set of films that put Edgar Wright on the map. Not many directors can easily transition from low to high budget but Wright does this easily. He’s clearly a lover of a wide spectrum of films and isn’t afraid to pay tribute in an original way.

What is your favourite film in the Cornetto Trilogy? Let me know in the comments below!

Categories
Uncategorised

The Man Who Knew Too Much (1956)

On hearing the news that icon Doris Day had died yesterday, my mind immediately went to some of her greatest roles like Calamity Jane (1953) and Pillow Talk (1959); however, I always found myself most affected by her brilliant performance as the mother looking for her kidnapped son in Alfred Hitchcock’s The Man Who Knew Too Much. A remake of Hitchcock’s 1934 film of the same name, this Hollywood remake stars James Stewart and Doris Day as a husband and wife whose son, Hank, is kidnapped while they are holidaying in Morocco. It is revealed that their son is being used as a pawn while the kidnappers plan to assassinate an important ambassador during his visit to London. It’s a film that shows the importance of family in a time of politically turmoil that feels just as relevant in its post-war 1956 as it did in pre-war 1934.

The Man Who Knew Too Much is my favourite Hitchcock film and much of it is attributed to Doris Day in her role as Jo Conway McKenna. The role is clearly tailored for Day as she plays a professional singer. This may not seem like a stretch as we watch her beautifully sing the Oscar-winning song “Que Sera, Sera (Whatever Will Be, Will Be)” but this changes the moment Hank is kidnapped. Day effortlessly brings an emotional depth to her character that she hadn’t really displayed earlier in her career, showcasing her talents as a dramatic actress. In particular, her acting in the final act of the film shows an explosion of all these emotions and her distress and longing to see her son are brought to her heart-breaking final performance of “Que Sera, Sera” that seems worlds away from the performance at the beginning of the film.

Made with a large Hollywood budget, Hitchcock makes use of multiple locations across two continents and yet somehow, the murder scene that place in the open market of Marrakesh feels equally as claustrophobic as the climatic orchestral scene in the Royal Albert Hall. Hitchcock never allows the audience to let their mind wander in his films as we are quickly assured not to trust anyone. One of my favourite locations used is a small Taxidermist’s shop and the struggle James Stewart has escaping the workers is tense as he is almost stabbed by a swordfish. Another intense scene that is recreated in the remake is the chapel scene in which the protagonists discover that the kidnappers run a local church. As the mass is under way, they clear stand out in the congregation and it is only a matter of time before they have their confrontation with the criminals. Everything about this scene in both the original and remake is brilliantly done because Hitchcock ensures that everything is directed slowly. There isn’t much physical movement as the mass takes place, the hymns are slow and droll with the speaker calm and paced in his sermon. The suspense is driven up until the moment everyone has left and they are the last visitors in the church.

It would be a true crime not to talk about the music in depth. Aside from its Oscar-winning hit that became synonymous with Day throughout her life, music is also integral to its film because it is used for the climatic moment during the assassination attempt. As in the original, it is the clash of cymbals that signals the shot. The kidnappers play the piece on a record player beforehand so the audience knows the moment. This is a clever move on Hitchcock’s part because we then know the moment when the shot will occur. Opposed to the suspense of the chapel scene, the Albert Hall scene is faster paced as the music quickens and the camera shifts between the gunman, Day, the ambassador and the orchestra. I feel that Hitchcock improved on this scene from the original as he used the same musical piece but it feels that the suspense is really played out and the production feels bigger as a whole which I feel the original lacked.

It’s a shame that this film isn’t discussed as much as some of Hitchcock’s other films because although it’s not a horror in the traditional sense of the word (ie. Psycho and The Birds), it still contains elements of horror from the writing and directing. I think it is a film that shows Hitchcock not only pushing boundaries on filmmaking but also showing how he is willing to improve on his own work.

What is your favourite Hitchcock film? Let me know in the comments below!

Doris Day, 1922-2019

Categories
Uncategorised

Fiddler on the Roof (1971)

When it comes to discussing musicals, there will be a few that spring to the minds of many such as West Side Story and The Sound of Music. One of the best and most iconic musicals ever is the 1971 film adaptation of Fiddler on the Roof. Following lovable milkman, Tevye (Topol) who lives in a small fictional town Anatevka that has a strong Jewish population. This community is in the midst of facing harassment from the current military regime and the film sees this harassment grow as tensions worsen. Directed by Norman Jewison from a script written by the stage production’s writer, Joseph Stein, Fiddler on the Roof remains a favourite among musical fans thanks to its array of songs and emotional storyline that still feels timeless today.

One of my favourite characters and performances, Topol is nothing short of exceptional throughout the film. Being the audience’s way into the world of Anatevka and often breaks the fourth wall by talking to the audience. He is an outsider to the wider society but it also seems that he is an outsider within his own community as well. In my mind, no one but Topol can pull the lead performance with such dedication and commitment to the character. It could be argued that Topol is synonymous with Tevye and vice versa but that is by no means an insult. Tevye is a deeply complex character, a man so ingrained in his religion and place in the community but there is also a struggle to fight against the ideals expected from him as he longs for more than what he has. who laments his life as a poor man as he tries to navigate the matches of his three eldest daughters. Tevye is a man who likes to talk and sing about the importance of tradition but the life he leads is anything but. He misquotes scripture, goes back on a promise to let the widowed butcher marry his eldest daughter, Tzeital, and allows a communist from Kiev to educate his younger daughters. Tevye is a man who wants to follow traditions but is inherently progressive which makes him an outsider amongst his own community at times.

Now I can’t write why I love Fiddler and not talk about the songs. From the lively intro “Tradition” to Tevye’s iconic soliloquy “If I Were a Rich Man” and of course the beautiful “Sunrise, Sunset”. There aren’t as many songs in Fiddler as there are in other musicals but each song makes use of the space and the cast onscreen. No two songs sound the same and yet they will be stuck in your head one way or other. With John Williamd adapting the music from stage to screen, the film doesn’t feel like a stage production at any point which can easily happen, especially when the locations are limited.

Another aspect that I appreciate is the colour palette for the film. Strong hues of orange glow against the rural backdrop of browns and greens. It brings a natural richness and peace to the film, particularly during the opening credits. Aside from the sunset glow, the candlelit setting for Tzeital’s wedding to Motel is another beautifully created scene and is directed flawlessly. Despite being set in an open space in the village with everyone in attendance, the reception after the ceremony feels claustrophobic as chaos ensues.

Overall, Fiddler on the Roof is a film that should be watched by all film fans not just musical fans. With a three hour running time, it’s easy to think that watching a musical for that long would be daunting and (dare I say) boring, especially if you’re not necessarily an avid musical fan but the pacing is fantastic and it doesn’t feel that long. With an intermission placed so you can easily take a break should you wish to, Fiddler on the Roof is an experience that should be enjoyed at least once. Featuring one of the best characters brought to the screen, it is sure to delight most people thanks to its fantastic music, captivating performances and beautiful landscapes.

What do you think of Fiddler on the Roof? Let me know in the comments below!

Categories
Uncategorised

Carol (2015)

One of the best films of the 21st century so far and a defining mark of LGBT+ cinema, Todd Haynes’ Carol is a film swimming in emotion as it explores the realities of a lesbian relationship in the 1950s. Adapted by Phyllis Nagy from Patricia Highsmith’s controversial novel The Price of Salt, Carol tells the story of Therese Bellevet (Rooney Mara), a young twenty-something trying to find her way in 1950s New York. Whilst working as a Christmas temp in a busy department store, Therese has a love at first sight encounter with Carol (Cate Blanchett), an older soon-to-be divorcee who is a darling to New York society. Much like the Christmas backdrop, the film is a present revealing more layers with every watch.

Haynes pulls out all of the stops for this production, playing all of his cards as a visionary. He managed to take the words on the page and create a universe that seems to belong to Carol and Therese. From the costumes by Sandy Powell to the music by Carter Burwell, the film is orchestrated by a beauty that stays throughout the film. What made the novel so controversial on release was its happy ending which was unheard of for stories regarding homosexuality and Haynes wanted to keep that. He wants the audience to know that this is their world and it is a beautiful one. The film appears traditional on the surface and yet groundbreaking in subtext. I think it is a huge mark in LGBT filmmaking.

The script by Phyllis Nagy is nothing short of phenomenal and is brilliantly faithful to the book. The changes that are made from the book are minimal but also crucial as I think the right choices were made to tell this story onscreen. My favourite scene in the film is when Therese agrees to go to lunch with Carol and the two get to know each other. It is natural and intimate with the sexual tension cutting through the undertones. Nagy makes every word linger and makes sure that no line is wasted. The film is fantastically paced, feeling like a slow train chugging forwards towards the inevitable climax that causes their bubble to burst. The sharp focus on the women themselves makes their love appear literally timeless, as if the world around them doesn’t matter. When the outside world does interfere and threaten them, it is done so that the audience is jolted back into reality from the dream that the women’s relationship had given.

Cate Blanchett’s performance as the titular character is glamorous to look at but tinged with the pain that has fallen on her and her family as her relationship with her husband, Harge (Kyle Chandler) has broken down. Carol has been known for her relationships with women, namely her best friend Abby (Sarah Paulson), who has remained a constant in her life after their romance ended. Blanchett takes control of the screen and is so captivating with every glance and word. There is an inevitable sadness that surrounds Carol even as she embarks on her love affair with Therese as she knows that the chances of their relationship surviving against the 1950s society isn’t likely. Her maturity and knowledge of the world allows her to be a mentor of sorts towards Therese as she knows how she is feeling.

Rooney Mara’s performance as Therese is the audience’s way into the events of the film as hers is the primary perspective throughout the film save for one or two scenes regarding the custody of Carol’s young daughter. Mara won the Best Actress Award at Cannes Film Festival and it’s easy to see where. Therese is at a very conflicting time in her life. Where Carol is assured and secure in her own sexuality, Therese doesn’t quite know what she wants or even understand her feelings at first. As the film unfolds, Therese becomes more confident and independent, breaking off her relationship with partner, Richard and focuses on her career and blossoming relationship with Carol.

Overall, I really recommend you check Carol out if you haven’t seen it. I can’t count how many times I have watched it despite it only being a few years old but I always found something new to focus on whether that is the score or set design. A film that was sorely overlooked by the Academy when it came to the Oscars, Carol will no doubt be a film that critics and film buffs will be looking back on fondly.

What did you think of Carol? Let me know what you think in the comments below!

Categories
Uncategorised

91st Academy Awards – Technical Awards

_D5A6932.NEF

My last blog on this year’s Oscars concludes with the Technical awards. This year has seen a huge number of large scale blockbusters that heavily use CGI to achieve their vision as well as smaller films that rely on using what they have. Both methods take imagination and it’s great to see films recognised across this spectrum.
Just in case you want to read my other blogs on this year’s Oscars, I’ll put the links below here:
Acting Awards
Creative Awards – Part 1
Creative Awards – Part 2
Creative Awards – Part 3
Here is my roundup of this year’s technology award winners!

Best Visual Effects
It seemed that Black Panther was the favourite to take this award home but the team for Neil Armstrong biopic First Man won. I feel that this film was deeply overlooked in various categories, particularly sound editing and this one throughout awards season but to see it recognised for its terrifically executed effects was deserved. I don’t think I have ever felt so claustrophobic watching a film before but this film managed to accomplish this from the first scene. Although the cast was the main talking point for this film on its release, I think that the visual effects were the standout feature of this film.

Best Sound Editing
I was happy to see First Man nominated in this category but given that it was up against box office smash Bohemian Rhapsody, I knew that it would lose. Personally, I feel that First Man should have taken this home but Bohemian Rhapsody is a film that relies heavily on its sound editing. I think that First Man used sound in a way that I hadn’t expected or seen before.


Best Sound Mixing
Again, Bohemian Rhapsody was the expected winner here and didn’t disappoint. I was happy with the win considering how they utilised mixing the Rami Malek’s vocals with Freddie’s so it wasn’t simply a case of Malek lip syncing his way through the film. It helped enhance Malek’s amazing performance and I think the win in this category was thoroughly deserved.

Best Editing
A lot of wins for Bohemian Rhapsody in the categories in this blog and this is the one of the film’s wins that I strongly disagreed with personally. I think that my main problem with the film as a whole was its editing. There were scenes that consisted of numerous cuts that made the film jittery. The film on the whole doesn’t flow well because it is badly paced and the editing is one of the main contributors to this problem. I thought that Hank Corwin should have won this category for his brilliant editing in Vice. It was innovative and unexpected, keeping the audience in a state of discomfort as we didn’t know what would happen next. The editing in Vice reflected the erratic nature of its subject and I think it conveys this fantastically.

Best Cinematography
Without a shadow of a doubt, this was Alfonso Cuaron’s for the taking and he won it completely deservedly for Roma. He manages to convey the problems of a Mexican classist society by keeping the focus solely on protagonist Cleo. Cleo becomes an embodiment of the working class female and the struggles of living a life that seems to be against her. Her story is told in black and white but the film is anything but. It teeters on a spectrum of emotions as we see Cleo in her darkest moments as well as her happier times as she navigates a pregnancy. Cleo’s friendship with her employer is beautifully conveyed as well as the two women bond over their mutual struggles.

That’s it for my Oscars roundup! What did you think of this year’s ceremony? Leave your comments below!