Categories
Uncategorised

Why Parasite’s win is important

Going into the 92nd Academy Awards, it seemed that pretty much every category was a lock. Joaquin Phoenix was favoured to take home the Best Actor gong for Joker, Renee Zellweger winning Best Actress for Judy and Sam Mendes was the strong favourite to win Best Director for 1917 with the latter ultimately winning Best Picture. How much the Academy surprised us then when the Best Director trophy was awarded to Bong Joon-ho for Parasite and then his film won the Best Picture award, beating the odds. Personally I was very happy as I had placed a bet on Parasite to win so there was a monetary reward for myself but the happiness goes to another more serious level. 1917 is a prime example of a quintessential award film. Don’t get me wrong, 1917 is a brilliant film that is full of revolutionary technical achievement, particularly Roger Deakins’ cinematography but it is no secret that the Academy and other Western award bodies have a love affair with war films. So much so that it has become a running joke in the film industry that to win awards, you have to make or star in a war film.

For those who are not in the know, Parasite is a Korean film exploring classism and inequality in a society that only benefits the rich and leaves those poorer to live in the gutter (quite literally). It has been the source of much hype since its premiere at last year’s Cannes Film Festival where it won the top prize, the Palme d’Or, in a rare unanimous vote, marking the first Korean film to win the prestigious award. Korean cinema is among the best in the world and has been a leading institution for years for filmmakers and film lovers and it felt like it was finally getting its due in the mainstream. Bong Joon-ho has previously delved into English-language with Snowpiercer (2013) and Okja (2017) which have become much-loved modern classics and released to acclaim; however, I think it’s poignant that Bong’s ascendance to the global audience has come from a Korean-language film that explores Korean society. It is very much detached from Western society in both its subject matter and filmmaking technique, allowing Bong to direct without the restrictions that Western studios demand. The fact that a film like Parasite, a film that is inherently unique in its style and content can beat a film like 1917 shows that there is an appetite for a different kind of film experience. It also shows a promising step forward in what audiences now expect. Naturally, franchises such as the Marvel and DC films still top the box office but Parasite concrete proof that people want more variety in the cinemas as well. Parasite’s subsequent box office success after its award wins confirms this. Now that it’s been given the chance to screen in more cinemas, it’s been able to demonstrate that there is an audience who want to watch foreign-language films, snubbing the assumption that Western audiences don’t want to watch films with subtitles.

There are many people who dismiss award season as pointless and dim, viewing it as celebrities patting themselves on the back. I don’t think it is as simple as that though. The truth is people do pay attention to awards season and follow the films that are successful. Of course, a lot of time there are the usual suspects who are nominated time and time again, sometimes undeservedly but when you have a film like Parasite that isn’t given the same chance as a mediocre English-language film then the exposure that award season brings is crucial for the film’s box office success.

Overall, there were some brilliant films this award season but Parasite was the clear standout. The fact that it won the major awards is a sign that the Academy is looking at artistic merit and not just succumbing to making it a popularity contest. Parasite’s win may not seem significant but the importance cannot be understated. Hopefully this will spark the beginning of an awards body that seeks to be more inclusive and diverse, giving all films an equal chance.

Here are my reviews for some of the films of the 92nd Academy Awards:

Winners: 1917, Joker, Jojo Rabbit, Judy, Marriage Story, Once Upon a Time in Hollywood, Parasite, Toy Story 4

Nominees: A Beautiful Day in the Neighborhood, Bombshell, The Irishman, The Lighthouse, The Two Popes

Snubs: Dolemite Is My Name, Hustlers, Midsommar, Uncut Gems

What did you think of Parasite’s winning streak at the Oscars? Let me know in the comments below!

Categories
Uncategorised

1917 (2019)

1917 is a World War I epic that seems to be the one to beat when it comes to the Best Picture award. Co-written, directed and produced by Sam Mendes, the film acts as a tribute to his grandfather, Alfred Mendes, based on stories that he would tell about the war. Following two young soldiers, Schofield (George MacKay) and Blake (Dean-Charles Chapman) who are tasked with travelling across enemy lines to warn off a British attack before they fall into a trap set by the Germans. The film has become well-regarded for its flawless editing, designed to look like two continuous shots. As well as beautiful technique, 1917 also boasts a stunning cast that includes well-loved actor of the big screen such as Colin Firth and Benedict Cumberbatch as well as TV favourites such as Daniel Mays and Andrew Scott. As expected, Mendes delivers and the continuous shots and editing only exemplify the non-stop nature of war. There is only one point in which the audience is allowed to relax at the start of the third act of the film. The writing is simple as Mendes lays focus on the physicality and the atmosphere rather than the dialogue. There are few monologues and those with speeches such as Andrew Scott’s Lieutenant Leslie are at rare moments of stand still. Co-written by Mendes and Krysty Wilson-Cairns, the script is minimalist in dialogue. Even when following the two Lance Corporals on their journey, we never really hear Schofield’s backstory because he is so withdrawn. One brilliant scene is when Schofield is picked up by a passing British unit and they are sat in the back of a truck. Schofield sits silently as the soldiers around him comment on their various backgrounds, imitate their General and comment on whether occupying other countries is worth the damage. It’s a poignant scene which brings in a humane aspect that is often missing from World War films.

The performances are impressive, particularly by George MacKay who is always on camera. He carries the film in the same way that he carries the message to the troops. It is no easy feat as an actor to hold so much pressure from such a big film but MacKay has shown promise from the early days in his career and his subsequent breakout performances in Pride (2014) and Captain Fantastic (2016). 1917 exploits MacKay to a mainstream audience that he won’t have been subject to in such a way previously. His Lance Corporal Schofield is reluctant to go on the mission and keeps his cards close to his chest but his determination to see it through is fearless, particularly in the final scenes as he runs through the trenches. Schofield and Blake appear to have different takes for their mission at the beginning. Blake is insistent on setting off immediately whereas Schofield logically believes in waiting until dark. Because of the emotional stake that Blake has in the mission (his brother is among the troops heading into the trap), Schofield has to ensure that Blake’s heart doesn’t lead his head.

1917

The two protagonists balance each other out as Blake risks his own life to save Schofield when a bomb is set off in a German trench. Chapman is also fantastic as Blake who appears naïve due to his sentimental nature. When encountering a German soldier whose plane was shot down in a dogfight, Blake’s gut reaction is to assist and get the soldier some water to ease the pain whereas Schofield doesn’t hesitate to shoot at the enemy. As mentioned before, the supporting cast is littered with stars from the small and silver screens. Admittedly, the supporting cast are granted one scene each so it’s more of a cameo, but each actor makes the most of their moments. Andrew Scott particularly delivers a brilliant monologue as a Lieutenant who has little hope in winning the war whereas Benedict Cumberbatch’s Colonel Mackenzie views he retreat from battle as a sign of defeat. The fleeting appearances from the supporting characters is thanks to the perfectly linear narrative of the film itself. We see the two Lance Corporals setting off to warn the Devonshire Regiment and ending with Schofield sat beside a tree in a mirror image of the opening shot.

It would be a big misjustice not to mention the revolutionary cinematography and editing provided by Roger Deakins and Lee Smith, respectively. Both men are at the top of the game in their respected fields and they work fantastically as a team. What these men have managed to achieve feels as claustrophobic and in your face as the war itself. There are many comments from people saying that the continuous effect took some getting used to but for me it felt natural and flowed perfectly. The editing is in a similar vein to the technique used in Birdman but on a bigger scale. What Deakins does so brilliantly is simultaneously provide big explosions shots filled with action while also maintaining great focus on the individual protagonists’ faces. Despite everything that is going on around the soldiers, the audiences’ eyes are fixated on the characters. Deakins’ colour palette is muted as expected in a war film with greens and browns. There are no exaggerated colours or futuristic spectacles. Deakins ensures that the film is very much grounded in its reality. Together, Deakins and Smith manage to create a film that is visually captivating and stunning, making the best use of the environment given and its limited landscapes.

19172

On the musical side of things, Thomas Newman’s score for this film is beyond incredible and has deservedly earned him his 15th Academy Award nomination. This year has seen a strong competition in the score category with both Thomas and Randy Newman pulling punches for their scores for 1917 and Marriage Story, respectively. Undoubtedly, the Best Original Score gong will go to Hildur Guðnadóttir for her stellar work on Joker making her the first woman to walk away with the award. It shouldn’t go unnoticed, however, that Thomas Newman’s score is among his best. Much like the editing, the film is reliant on its score which acts like a thread connecting the scenes. Needless to say, if Newman does end up winning, I wouldn’t be disappointed.

Overall, 1917 has proven to be a much better film than I had originally anticipated and I found myself moved and stunned by the technical and artistic achievement that Mendes has managed to pull off. I’m not sure if it’s a film that you need to watch more than once as I personally got everything out of the film that I needed in one go. I imagine that in time, it will become renowned and known for its technical aspects and the uniqueness in that field rather than the characters.

What do you think of 1917? Let me know in the comments below!

Categories
Uncategorised

Frances Ha (2012)

Watching this for the first time during university was truly revolutionary. Noah Baumbach’s film follows the titular character (played flawlessly by Greta Gerwig), a contemporary dancer who struggles to maintain a secure lifestyle in New York after her best friend Sophie (Mickey Sumner) moves out of their apartment. Filmed in black and white, stripping back the New York background in a way that feels like an homage to Woody Allen’s Manhatten, Frances Ha is witty and heartbreaking while creating a brilliantly developed character who feels real and leaves you thinking long after the credits roll. Directed by Baumbach and co-written by him and Gerwig, Frances Ha has earned its place among the great indie films of the 21st century for its mix of quick wit and improvisation. Following Frances and told from her perspective, Frances Ha is a seemingly simple film in that it doesn’t explore a specific plot but it demonstrates the struggle young people have and what they will do in order to achieve their dreams.

Frances Halladay is enigmatic and fiery. She has an array of bad habits such as smoking and bad money management but she has a passion for life and sees the magic in the everyday. This love for life is magnetic and we begin to see New York from Frances’ perspective. Her New York is an entirely different place. She has plenty of struggles but somehow she is able to bounce back and flit from place to place knowing that everything will figure itself out in the end. Despite not having a “real” plot, the film sees Frances become reliant on herself. Her initial identity is completely tied to Sophie but when Sophie moves, Frances is forced to carve her own path. She’s one of my favourite characters in film with good reason. She’s quirky, doesn’t let go off her dreams and importantly, doesn’t allow a man to dictate or motivate any action unless she wants it to. For all her flaws, Frances brings her strength subtly and isn’t aware of her own power.

Frances Ha allows a deeper focus on characters rather than plot. The natural approach the actors bring mean that the audience forgets that they are watching a film rather than a documentary. Mainly set and filmed in New York, there are also scenes that take us to Sacramento and Paris. No matter where Frances goes, she doesn’t change and the world remains just as black and white as ever. We see Frances at a turning point in her life. At 27 years old she is starting to lose a grip on her dream as a dancer and begins to understand that she will have to compromise to maintain security. Because it’s not plot driven, it feels as though the audience has stepped into this moment in her life and that there will be a big breakthrough for her but Baumbach is a grounded visualist brings a more realistic approach and finds a more believable solution.

I have touched on the cinematography before but it deserves its own observation. Baumbach’s New York feels like it doesn’t belong in a specific time or place. The decision to film in black and white definitely contributes to it but also Frances’ ability to largely avoid modern culture and do her own thing gives the film a detachment and allows it to become immersed in its own universe. The decision to make it black and white added a quirky aesthetic to the film and made it a talking point but ultimately, it is a film that relies heavily on its actors and Gerwig in particular who is in the majority of the film. Inspired by the French New Wave, the film is minimalist and brings a European style to the US. Although it doesn’t bring whistles and bells, it is contrasted by Frances’ extroverted personality. Without Baumbach or Gerwig, Frances Ha would not be the film it is and would not be the indie success that it is.

There is something that continuously draws me in with Frances Ha. Every time I watch it I notice something new whether it is a particular performance, the cinematography or the writing. It’s a film that maintains its topics and place in the mumblecore movement. As both Gerwig and Baumbach’s careers have skyrocketed to new heights with both releasing two of the best films of the year with Little Women and Marriage Story respectively, it’ll be great to see them collaborate again. Their 2015 film Mistress America which was their last collaboration was also a fun watch but for me, it is Frances Ha that remains my favourite. It’s a film that is strongly feminist and feels relatable as someone who aspires to make a living in the creative industry.

What do you think of Frances Ha? Let me know in the comments below!

Categories
Uncategorised

Marriage Story (2019)

Finally got around to watching this one and boy, was it worth the wait. Noah Baumbach’s tale of a couple coping with the struggles and heartbreak of divorce had received a lot attention and more than deserving of the hype. Scarlett Johansson and Adam Driver play New York based married couple Nicole and Charlie Barber who are pitted against one another by their lawyers when going through their divorce. Directed and written by Baumbach and containing many signature improvised scenes in true Baumbach fashion, he truly has outdone himself with this flick and created a film that is deeply human and resonating on many levels. He does not want the audience to pick sides as each side is justified and wrong in their own ways. Both characters lay out the others’ strengths and weaknesses in the opening monologues, setting the tone for the rest of the film. The film seems more stripped back in direction than Baumbach’s previous endeavours but then this feels like his most personal project and in many respects, the most heartfelt.

Johansson and Driver bring the best performances of their careers to date and both will receive nominations for sure and stand a very good chance at bringing home Oscars. Johansson takes a break from the Marvel franchise and it seems that she revels in being Nicole, an actress who longs to return to her native Los Angeles to make TV shows and films. Nicole is deeply passionate about being an active member of the family unit, particularly when it comes to being a mum to their son, Henry. She plays with him for hours on end and constantly rewards him for completing simple and menial tasks. Driver’s Charlie on the other hand resents rewarding his son for going to the toilet and instead wants to instill maturity and push his son to do his homework and work on his skills. What both parents share is an undying love for their child and the mutual understanding that the divorce outcome must be beneficial to Henry’s needs most of all.

As Nicole’s lawyer Nora, Laura Dern is glamorous, unstoppable and manipulative. She swoops in with compliments for Nicole on their first meeting, decked out in a beautiful outfit and sky high heels that become a signature throughout. She is a hugely intimidating character who begins to create a narrative on behalf of Nicole. In the courtroom scene, Nora refuses to back down and the articulation and intelligence that Dern brings to the role is surely going to bring that overdue Oscar. Dern has always been a reliable actress, wowing time and time again but with Marriage Story, she is able command the control of the scenes that she is in. She is truly mesmerising in her speeches and empowering in her confidence.

There are many scenes in this film that caused me to pause and take in the perfection but the big one has to be Nicole and Charlie’s huge argument as they cannot agree. It’s brutal, real and incredibly improvised. What starts as neutral smalltalk soon turns into a hurtful explosion full of abuse hurled at both sides and Nicole and Charlie both rip into each other for their weaknesses and expose the problems in the marriage that had been bubbling the surface and kept from the audience until this point. This honesty soon makes way for the ridiculous as they begin to insult each other for points and it soon ends with Charlie’s meltdown in which he curse Nicole and hopes she is smited with illness before being run over and wishing she was dead. Immediately, he falls to his knees in defeat as he instantly regrets his words and the two apologise. The exhaustion of the scene radiates off the screen. Before this scene, the tension is clearly brewing but both parties delude themselves and pretend everything is ok and can be relatively normal given the circumstance but here we are presented the reason and the breaking of the foundation.

This film subverts the usual divorce storyline in that the characters do not get back together at the end. This isn’t to say it isn’t a happy ending. In fact, both characters are much happier for it and we see the positive outcome and newfound respect that the protagonists have for each other. The end scene being a breath of fresh air in the aftermath of their court session. It’s a film that you cannot help but feel affected. The realism and authentic approach makes it seem like you are watching a real marriage fall apart. The genius of Baumbach’s writing is that he makes you sympathise with one party then the other and then you end up feeling sorry for both and wanting the best for them. Nicole and Charlie have done bad things during the course of their marriage but that does not make them bad people.

I think that Marriage Story will be a film discussed for many years and has revolutionised filmmaking for streaming culture. The film does not make any attempts to blend in nor does it want to be trendy. Baumbach is simply delivering quality cinema and making it accessible for everyone. There is an audience for it and I think a simple film like Marriage Story is a perfect way to break the ice further in the same way Roma did. I would give this film some major awards, particularly for its writing and acting. It’s a well-rounded film that is truly captivating from start to end. You feel that you truly get to know Charlie and Nicole equally throughout.

What do you think of Marriage Story? Let me know in the comments below!