Tag: writing

Categories
Uncategorised

Adapting Roald Dahl

There are few people who manage to capture the imagination of a global audience in the way that Roald Dahl does through his stories. Over the years we have seen numerous adaptations in a wide variety of mediums and genres through the eyes of a huge spectrum of visionaries. From directors including Danny DeVito and Tim Burton and genres stemming from Mel Stuart’s musically charged classic to Wes Anderson’s progressive stop-motion animated masterpiece. The scope of adaptations made to date only adds to the genius of Dahl’s creativity and highlights the strength of the imagination the man in the shed conjured. Watching the 1971 adaptation, Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory feels just as timeless as Tim Burton’s take in 2005 despite the films bringing a polar opposite aesthetic to the novel.

Originally, I was going to try and list my favourite adaptations but much like the films of directors such as Kubrick or Paul Thomas Anderson, each one is unique for particular reasons and I found it impossible to come up with a reasonable list that sums up my love for Dahl’s stories. Netflix announced in November 2018 that they were going to adapt a number of his works and the excitement and hype ever since has been astrominical. Anne Hathaway is rumoured to have been cast as the Grand High Witch (who was brilliantly played by Anjelica Huston in the original film) in their production of The Witches. This particular remake is being directed by Robert Zemeckis to boot showing the demand around these projects.

Dahl wrote both children and adult books but is probably more known for the former. However, it was his experience and openness to discuss an array of topics (including his autobiographies Boy – Tales of Childhood and Going Solo) that allows him to approach his writing with a fearlessness, bringing a new and exciting perspective to literature. Even when creating his own universes and language, Dahl never patronises the reader and I think this is what has translated so well into the film adaptations such as Nicolas Roeg’s The Witches (1990) and Danny DeVito’s Matilda (1996). Both are great examples of films that are primarily aimed at children but are perfectly suitable for adults as well. No one is excluded from a Dahl tale. Also, the nostalgic draw also undoubtedly contributes to the hype as adults of today probably read his books as children. Dahl has become synonomous with Western (particularly British) childhoods.

I am hugely excited to see what these Netflix adaptations bring as they promise to show a more faithful and darker side to the Dahl bibliography that perhaps has been left out in previous adaptations. Not that has is a bad thing as each adaptation has brought something unique in the way that Dahl has in each of his books but it’ll be interesting to see The Witches with its original ending and a Charlie and the Chocolate Factory with the right balance of book loyalty and darkness (the Tim Burton one slightly overdoes it in my opinion). I am mainly looking forward to The BFG however as that is the one that captured me most as a child. I found the giants absolutely terrifying and I am looking forward to seeing how Netflix adapt it. I enjoyed both adaptations but I feel that the Steven Speilberg take was a bit sillier than it needed to be (although I completely appreciate that The BFG as a character is rather silly). I would probably say that if pushed to choose, my favourite films adaptations would be either Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory (1971), The Witches (1990) or Matilda (1995) which is odd because none of the films are 100% faithful but the final cut doesn’t compromise Dahl’s vision and that is the most important thing.

Which is your favourite Roald Dahl book and/or film adaptation? Let me know in the comments below!

Categories
Uncategorised

Who’s Afraid of Virginia Woolf? (1966)

Based on the Edward Albee stageplay of the same name and marking Mike Nichols’ directorial debut, Who’s Afraid of Virginia Woolf? follows older couple, Martha (Elizabeth Taylor) and George (Richard Burton) as the cracks in their relationship between to crack and crumble with the arrival of newlywed couple Nick (George Segal) and Honey (Sandy Dennis). Very much like the stage production, the film itself is minimalistic and relies on the strength of the actors’ performances which is provided in spades. Elizabeth Taylor who gives her best performance since her Tennesee Williams duo with Cat on a Hot Tin Roof (1958) and Suddenly, Last Summer (1959).

The screenplay is nothing short of amazing. Adapted by Ernest Lehman and there are only minor differences to the film, largely due to location. The Albee play is set only in Martha and George’s house whereas the film gives us a short break in a local roadhouse. It’s not a change that creates any detriment to the film and makes for an opportunity to see how these characters act outside of the comfort of the homely setting. Martha and George’s son is given a name in the film, Nick, in the film adaptation but does not have a name in the play. Again, this is an understandable change as it creates a more emotional charge for the audience as it feels more “real” and relatable when giving him a name. This is similar to the narrator in Truman Capote’s novella Breakfast at Tiffany’s who is given the name, Paul Varjak, which probably makes it easier to confirm especially when protagonist Holly Golightly refers to him as “Fred” after her brother. Changes as small as these don’t compromise the vision of the film and in Lehman’s case, it brings a different dimension to Albee’s play and enhances it in some ways.

Taylor had had her fair share of turbulance with the press and public as her lifestyle and general sexuality was judged and she was seen as a poor role model but this film allows us to see that she isn’t afraid to “deglamourise” and get gritty when needed. She has always been a brilliant actress as previously proven but portraying Martha gives us a chance to see the darker side as Martha manipulates and instigates. She is such an unlikeable character but Taylor has such a presence that it is impossible to feel Martha’s power as she dominates with her physicality. She manipulates the audience into feeling how she wants them to feel, gaining sympathy when needed and repulsion when required. Her performance is nuanced and showed that her career was far from over.

Richard Burton on the other hand plays the oppressed husband waiting to explode as Martha provokes again and again. One of the best actors of the Golden Age of Hollywood, Burton was seriously undervalued during his lifetime and found himself without an Oscar despite seven nominations under his belt. This was indeed one of those performances and despite his brilliance, this really is Taylor’s film. That isn’t to say that his performance isn’t excellent because it is among his best of the best and shows the potential that he was capable of being succombing to alcoholism.

The supporting actors, Segal and Dennis shine as the young couple seemingly in love. The longer they spend time with the miserable elders, they start to see parallels in their own relationship. Sandy Dennis is particularly eyecatching as Honey, the initially subdued housewife who then begins to disagree with her husband. It captured the Academy’s attention as well who award her with the Best Supporting Actress gong. The arrival of the young couple gradually means that the film becomes a game of Chinese whispers as secrets are thrown around to the wrong people and conflicts happen every five minutes. It’s a spiderweb of the complexity of relationship and ultimately seeks to find the foundation of their relationship and destroy it. The ending then leaves the question of what happens next as their years of marriage and lies lay bare in front of them.

The film is a great example that plays can be adapted successfully to the big screen without making big compromises. The film allows the actors to bounce off each other rather than blending into a spectacle. Seeing Taylor and Burton onscreen is always a treat as well and to see such volatile performances makes the film raw and honest. It’s a film that feels enormously progressive for its time as the couple grieve over the death of their son, deal with their bad habits and open up about their tumultuous marriage. The characters are not trying to be likeable because they react as their character would react rather than catering to a Hollywood audience as the big studios would play it.

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

Categories
Uncategorised

Top 5 Daniel Day-Lewis Performances

When it comes to listing the greatest actors in history, it would be pretty arrogant to not throw Daniel Day-Lewis’ name into the mix. The man puts the method in method acting and is renowned for his ability to truly become his characters. His refusal to break character offscreen or follow the typical hollywood lifestyle brings a sense of mystique to this genius who clearly has a passion for acting. Famously selective about his roles from early on in his career, he may not have the most extensive filmography but what is there is only the best and is full of brilliant collaborations with the best actors and directors.

He is the only actor to have won the Best Leading Actor Oscar three times and remains a titan in acting, even if he has retired (he has “retired” before and returned so who knows if this retirement will stick). Day-Lewis is in a league of his own when it comes to actors working today (the closest would probably be Joaquin Phoenix or Gary Oldman).

It’s been hard to pick top 5 but I have managed to do so. Here is my list of top 5 performances in chronological:

My Beautiful Laundrette (1985)

This early entry in Day-Lewis’ filmography is perhaps one of his most controversial. Made in 1985, Day-Lewis portrays Johnny Burfoot, a white Londoner who embarks on a romantic relationship with Omar Ali (Gordon Warnecke) who is struggling with his identity as a British-born gay man of Pakistani descent in volatile, racist Britain. The eeriness of this film comes in how relevant it feels today 35 years on. Stephen Frears refusing to bow to stereotype in this film, creating characters that are rounded and break the mould. In a general landscape that isolated homosexuals, My Beautiful Laundrette shows a relationship filled with adventure and excitement. The chemistry between the two leads is magnetic and it’s great to see a film about a gay couple that has a happy ending, something that is notoriously refused in the majority of mainstream LGBT+ cinema.

My Left Foot (1989)

The one that propelled Day-Lewis to stardom. Portraying disabled artist Christy Brown, Day-Lewis went full method for the role and refused to break character offscreen to channel the struggle of Brown’s experience with cerebral palsy. It brought Day-Lewis a global audience and his first Academy Award nomination and win. Christy is mischievous and hilarious, aiming to live his life to the fullest. A supporting cast led by Fiona Shaw who plaus Dr. EIleen Cole, Christy’s carer and Brenda Fricker as Bridget Fagan brown, Christy’s mother (who also won a Supporting ACtress Oscar for her performance) brings an authneticity to this low-budget Irish production. The film relies on the performance of its actors and refuses to use any Hollywood flares or special effects. This is a great introduction into the career of Daniel Day-Lewis and shows how capable and fearless he was from early in his career as well as providing an insight into what will become a flourishing and groundbreaking filmography.

Gangs of New York (2002)

The film that paired Day-Lewis up with Martin Scorsese for an epic that explores the conflict between Irish and Italian Americans. Based on a true story, it’s a film that explores what it takes to be a “true” American. In this nativist vs. immigrant plot, Day-Lewis plays William “Bill the Butcher” Cutting, a cruel leader of the nativist gang who refuse to allow the Irish settlers ownership on American land. Leonardo DiCaprio plays Amstardam whose father Vallon (Liam Neeson) dies at the hands of Bill in the opening scene and seeks his revenge years later under his new alias. The film itself falls short of its potential due to its odd pacing and the overall scope of the film feeling too big for its three hour running time but Day-Lewis’ performance elevates it and makes it worth the watch. Bill is maniacal and devious with no redeeming quality but he is also extremely charismatic. It’s flamboyant and subtle at the same time. Only Day-Lewis could pull the performance off in this way.

There Will Be Blood (2007)

The role to end all roles. The character of Daniel Plainview is nothing short of iconic. Day-Lewis is on fire in this role as a greedy prospector who soughts to purchase land that sits on oil. The film deservedly won him his second Best Actor Academy Award and for good reason. It’s a brilliant performance that shows the true greed of mankind and how much they are willing to destroy in order to gain more power. This film marks his first collaboration with Paul Thomas Anderson and serves as a definite high point for both of their careers. They are a duo who click together so well with Anderson’s penchant for brilliant character development and Day-Lewis’ commitment to character is unlike any other. It’s the movie that gave us “I drink your milkshake” in what can only be described as one of the best film endings. Add Paul Dano to the supporting cast and you have one of the best combinations of a director/writer and cast seen in 21st century film.

Phantom Thread (2017)

Day-Lewis’ “final” role sees him reunite with Paul Thomas Anderson as a renowned couturier, Reynolds Woodcock, inspired by a culimation of designers including Charles James. He’s a man with an inpenetrable exterior that is soon challenged by a chance encounter with waitress, Alma (Vicky Krieps) who becomes his muse when his creativity wanes. They spark a professional and romantic relationship and his business starts booming again as Reynolds finds his inspiration to design. Always watched over by his eagle-eyed sister, Cyril (Lesley Manville), we see the highs and lows of Reynolds’ career and the challenges he faces when the sparks begin to fade. The character contrasts greatly with the previous Anderson outing. Reynolds is a more subdued character who can say just as much with a simple grimace or flourish of the hand in the same way that Daniel Plainview used his persuasive chat to manipulate. Day-Lewis was deservedly nominated for the major awards in what is a beautiful swansong to a brilliant career.

As you can see, there are many brilliant performances that didn’t make the list, in particular In The Name of the Father (1993) and Lincoln (2012), the latter of which won him his third Best Actor gong. It’s always difficult choosing my favourite performances but how do you do it when pretty much every performance is perfect? There really is no wrong answer when it comes to Daniel Day-Lewis as it is likely that you will feel impacted by his performances.

Which film is your favourite from Daniel Day-Lewis? Let me know in the comments below!

Categories
Uncategorised

“I have nothing left to give”: Anxiety in mother! and Midsommar

As I have discussed in a previous post, horror seems to the genre that directors are turning to to discuss important issues that may be seen as taboo. One topic in particular is mental health and in particular, anxiety, has be woven into the genre but in a way where it is more than a character worrying about monsters. Darren Aronofsky’s 2017 mother! and Ari Aster’s summer smash Midsommar both explore anxiety through the eyes of a female protagonist thrust into the centre and horror of a cult. They have a lot of similar traits but are shown in completely different ways. Both protagonists are 20-something white women in volatile relationships who are trying to create homes for themselves and find their purpose.

Both films are essentially about place and belonging. Home is integral and is the (literally in mother!) heart of the story. This is more explicitly so in mother! as we see the titular character (Jennifer Lawrence) renovating her house right before it descends into chaos at the hands of her husband, Him (Javier Bardem). Aronofsky’s brilliance as a director shines in this film as we never leave mother’s side. The house becomes a metaphor for mother and the anxiety that she feels is felt by the house itself. As the camera follows her, we get a literal female gaze of her home from being a place that she has literally and figuratively built to the remnants as it bursts into flames and destruction. mother’s anxiety comes from the claustrophobic portrayal as the home becomes increasingly invaded. It’s a heavy film that builds all of its emotion like the foundations of the house. We never leave the house because mother never leaves the house. She is physically and emotionally trapped by the relationship she is in. Building and renovating the house gives a false sense of control but Him has been pulling the strings the entire time. When she falls pregnant and becomes increasingly stressed, the shots become longer and strained. The film is an unflinching look at the invasive nature of anxiety and the struggle that it brings. It’s a not-so-subtle allegory for the Bible but it elevates this experience and becomes an unhinged tale of manipulation and control resulting in a climax that spirals out of Him’s control and becomes bigger than the vision he planned. This is due, in part, to mother’s reluctance to go along with his plans and the insistence she has on keeping her baby to herself. She is the closest creation he has to perfect, but in the end it isn’t enough. Her fears are realised and much like the house, she succumbs to the loss.

Midsommar by comparison is a much more straightforward film. The second feature by Ari Aster (full review can be read here), has a simple linear beginning, middle, end but that is where the simplicity ends. Following Dani (Florence Pugh) as she ventures to Sweden with her estranged boyfriend, Christian (Jack Reynor) and his friends to partake in a Commune’s ceremony, Midsommar also provides an unflinching portrayal of anxiety through its protagonist. Damaged by the tragic loss of her family, Dani’s life is forced to a standstill as her boyfriend becomes emotionally distant and she becomes more isolated. After he reluctantly offers her a space on their trip to Sweden, Dani accepts in the hope of finding adventure and distraction from her life. Unlike mother!, Dani’s anxiety was already ingrained as her sister’s bipolar grew more severe as time went on. Her opening scene sees her debate whether to actively respond to her sister’s troubling emails which in turn then results in the tragic murder/suicide of her sister and parents. If mother! showed an implosion of anxiety, Midsommar is an explosion. Dani’s anxiety gradually blooms during her time in the commune as she embraces the traditions unlike Christian and the others. In a similar way to mother!, the camera shakes with the anxiety as Dani experiences her panic attacks. When she is in the Commune, her anxiety is sympathised with in a way that seems alien to her. She becomes comfortable and relaxed in a way that we do not see beforehand. Much like the mural that is presented at the start, Dani’s journey is like the seasons as we start in the harsh winter in America to the open Spring in Sweden. Using pathetic fallacy may seem on the nose and perhaps it is, but in this film it enhances the experience and adds texture. The environment becomes reflective of Dani’s experience. The drug trips are a great example. When she takes drugs at the Commune entrance with Christian, she experiences a bad trip paralleling her confusion and alienation from the others. Compare this to the dance competition later on where she becomes open among the other women and begins speaking Swedish shows a completely different person.

It’s no surprise that we are seeing an increase in films that explore mental health so explicitly. With more people being open about their experiences, it has become an important talking point and naturally films become reflective and reactive to the social climate. Films like mother! and Midsommar provide a different perspective by adding those horror elements and unflinching narrative. The results are, ironically, a realistic portrayal of the inner struggle of anxiety by turning the characters inside out, their emotions become the visual canvas for the films. By no means am I suggesting that mental health has never been explored in films but it’s interesting to see it being explored in such a unique way that doesn’t see the protagonist immediately thrown into a psychiatric unit. The characters of mother and Dani are deeply complex. They have their own needs and desires and struggle with remaining an outsider to their peers. mother! shows a failed attempt whereas Midsommar goes down a route that is more successful but not in a way that would be deemed acceptable by those who did isolate her in America.

Both directors also wrote the scripts and their visions show a consistency with their own portfolios. Aronofosky is more experience and tends to write from the perspective of the outsider striving for success whereas Aster’s debut Hereditary follows a female protagonist who struggles to feel motivated when she emotionally finds herself spiralling downwards in a similar way to Dani. Both scripts are claustrophobic with Aronofsky opting to create a claustrophobic setting with an isolated cast. Even their names are unknown as they become known by their societal expectation whereas the characters in Midsommar are assigned their societal roles by the Commune at the end of the ceremony.

In conclusion, it’s clear that these are films that have a lot to say about society as a whole and what really makes an individual an outsider. Can an outsider ever truly fit in? Even then, is fitting in even the best solution? As shown in mother!, fitting in equates to chaos. The Commune in Midsommar hides its unspeakable actions behind the guise of ceremony and Dani becomes accomplice to this by accepting the events that occur. I am interested to see whether both directors further this narrative in future films and to see how mental health is portrayed in films in the future in general in a social climate that is becoming more and more uncertain each day.

Categories
Uncategorised

Top 10 Tom Hanks Performances

It’s no secret that I am a huge Tom Hanks fan. He has been one of my favourite actors for as long as I can remember and there is a reason why he is so loved by everyone. An extremely talented actor and nice personality, Tom Hanks has built a reputation for being one of the most respected actors in history and it’s easy to see why. It was so difficult for me to pick a top 5 so I’ve gone ahead and done a top 10 instead. This list is only the tip of the iceberg for this man’s career and shows his range. We see him evolve from a kid adult to a prison officer working on Death Row to portraying Walt Disney himself.

Hanks is an actor who encapsulates his roles and is a constant draw for the box office. He’s worked with some of the best directors and actors around particularly Robert Zemeckis (Forrest Gump, Cast Away and The Polar Express) and Steven Spielberg (Saving Private Ryan, The Terminal, Catch Me If You Can and Bridge of Spies). There’s no performance that he has done that I don’t love. Admittedly, the Dan Brown films are one of my guilty pleasures even though they are absolutely ridiculous but Tom Hanks brings such an enthusiastic performance that I find them so much fun to watch, especially Angels and Demons.

Here are my top 10 in chronological order:

Big (1989)

Big is one of those films that I could watch time and time again and never get bored. Following Josh Baskin, a young boy who wishes to grow up and then does overnight. This film is made even better when he grows up into Tom Hanks. Hanks has so much fun as adult Josh in this role as he fills his apartment with everything a cool kid had in the 80s. He is the perfect mix of charming and hilarious. I mean, who doesn’t love the scene with the piano?

Sleepless in Seattle (1993)

It wouldn’t be a true Tom Hanks list without featuring a classic Nora Ephron romcom with Hanks and costar Meg Ryan. My favourite of the bunch is Sleepless in Seattle which makes my heart melt every time I watch it. Hanks plays Sam, a grieving architect whose son calls into a radio show to tell their story. In true Ephron form this film is the true epitome of the romcom genre and is a delight to watch. The climactic scene on the observation deck of the Empire State building has me screaming at the TV every time.

Forrest Gump (1994)

Possibly the most famous Tom Hanks role, Forrest Gump sees Hanks play the iconic titular character who sees the world in a different way. Bringing Hanks the Best Leading Actor Oscar for the second year in a row after the previous year’s Philadelphia, Forrest Gump propelled Hanks into a global phonenom and landed him at the top of every director’s list. His performance is not condescending nor over the top as he places a heavy focus on Forrest’s naivity rather than his disabilities.

Toy Story Franchise (1995-present)

It would have been a crime not to include these but I couldn’t pick just one. Tom Hanks’ Voicework as Woody the toy cowboy is nothing short of extraordinary and really brings the toys to life. For over 20 years, Pixar have charmed us with the story about a group of toys who watch their owner grow up. Hanks’ performance is worked up and super stressed as Woody struggles to keep his control. He’s a brilliantly flawed character who constantly makes mistakes doing what he thinks is right. The fourth installment that was released this year was revolutionary for Woody as he finally embarks on a life that he wants.

Saving Private Ryan (1998)

Hanks’ first collaboration with Spielberg is probably the most dramatic and to that point, “blockbustery” of his career. Playing Captain John H. Miller who leads a small group of soldiers to find and rescue the missing Private James Ryan (Matt Damon), Hanks made his mark as the big leading man in cinema. It’s the film that should have swept the Oscars but was beaten by Shakespeare in Love in a huge misjustice for the Best Picture gong (don’t get me started). What separates this film from other war films is that Hanks between the heart of the film and shows the emotion behind the fighting.

The Green Mile (1999)

The Green Mile is one of those films that brings me to tears every time I watch it. Following Hanks as head prison officer, Paul Edgecomb, working in the Death Row block. When a 6 foot black man, John Coffey (Michael Clarke Duncan), is jailed on the block, mysterious events begin to happen that cause Paul to challenge his morals and his faith. It’s a brilliant film that I don’t think receives the praise that it deserves, mainly due to it being the second prison based Stephen King adaptation after The Shawshank Redemption in 1994. Hanks is fantastic as Edgecomb. He is sharp, observant and has a strong moral compass. The scenes with him and Duncan make for some heart wrenching cinema as the truth behind Coffey’s imprisonment come to light.

Cast Away (2000)

If I had to pick one Tom Hanks performance to put at the top of my list, this would be the one. It’s iconic, it’s fantastic and it should have earned Hanks his third Oscar. Hanks plays Fedex driver, Chuck Noland, who survives a plane crash and becomes stranded on a desert island for year. The premise is simple but the film is anything but. Hanks goes all out to deliver a career best performance that sees Chuck removing teeth with an ice-skate blade, catching fish with a spear and finding companionship with a volleyball called Wilson. What makes this film truly standout is Hanks’ ability to keep the audience’s attention by himself for the film’s 143 minutes.

Catch Me If You Can (2002)

This fun flick sees Hanks reunite with Steven Spielberg for the chase of a century as Hanks plays FBI agent, Carl Hanratty on the hunt for Frank Abagnale Jr (Leonardo DiCaprio), a young conman across the globe. It’s a brilliantly entertaining film to watch as Hanks fails time and time again to capture Abagnale. Hanks and DiCaprio are an odd pairing for leads but it works really well and you can tell that both are having a good time.

Captain Phillips (2013)

This gem of a film is a stellar thriller that showcases Hanks’ timelessness as an actor. Playing the titular character whose cargo ship is overrun by Somali pirates, Hanks works brilliant alongside Barkhad Abdi who plays Somali pirate, Abduwali Muse. Most of the cast in this film are fairly unknown and it’s nice to see that although Hanks is the lead, that others are given the chance to shine, particularly Abdi, who won a BAFTA for his performance. Hanks isn’t an actor who has to hog the spotlight every time he is onscreen.

Saving Mr Banks (2013)

Tom Hanks as Walt Disney. Do I even need to say more? It’s one icon playing another and it is perfect casting. I absolutely adore this film and am always watching it when it is on the TV. Following author P L Travers (Emma Thompson) as she is pursued relentlessly by Disney who wants to adapt her famous Mary Poppins books into a film, we see Travers enter a world she has no interest in. Hanks is truly magical as the big man himself and lights up the screen everytime he appears.

So there you have it! We have journeye through the highlights of this legend’s career. With a deserved life achievement Cecil B Demille award on its way from the 2020 Golden Globes, Hanks’ career is far from over. I am excited to see his upcoming films.

Which Tom Hanks performances are your favourites? Let me knows in the comments below!

Categories
Uncategorised

Unpicking the Witch: Suzy and Rose in Retrospect

When watching Dario Argento’s horror classic Suspiria (1977) and its thematic sequel Inferno (1980), it’s understandable that the mind would instantly capture the bright cinematography and bloody violence that occurs throughout the film. What Argento doesn’t receive credit for, however, is the portrayal of its female protagonists, Suzy Bannion (Jessica Harper) and Rose Elliot (Irene Miracle). Both characters are artists with Suzy a student a prestigious ballet school and Rose an aspiring poet. Both find themselves living within the confines that house demonic and powerful witches who create darkness and chaos and delight in killing and torture. I love both of these films (I have written reviews on both which you can read here and here) with both leaving a lasting impact on how I view horror films. The writing is fantastic and the cinematography is highly creative but it was the portrayal of these women thrown into impossible circumstance and their determination and strength that stood out to me. Compared with the trend of horror films at the time where we see women portrayed as the damsel in distress and in need of a man to save them, Argento omits men almost entirely in Suspiria and the protagonist, Mark in Inferno is far from the traditional “strong men” that you tend to see in films.

Starting with Suspiria, Argento’s big breakthrough into English-language horror was a technicolour masterpiece filled to the brim with fake blood and guts. Following aspiring dancer Suzy, a new student at a prestigious dance school, as she begins to investigate mysterious disappearances of other students and staff alike. We first see Suzy leaving the airport in Freiberg into a torrential storm. The cuts and use of music when the automatic doors of the exit are opening and closing brings that otherworldly atmosphere to the film. Her introduction to the staff sees her intervene in an interview with the police when they enquire about a missing girl. What transpires is an environment in which Suzy becomes even more of an outsider than before as her bids to fit in make her stand out to the witches that run the academy. Naturally, Suzy is reluctant to believe the stories that her friend Sara tells her but as people begin disappearing one by one, Suzy becomes resourceful and finishes the mission that Sara started. Suspiria only has a handful of male characters with the bulk of the cast being made up of the female staff and students.

Rose Elliot in Inferno is much like Suzy in her ways. The film opens with her reading about The Three Mothers, three witches who use their dark powers to control the world. She is warned off the subject by a male antiquarian but she goes ahead with her investigation regardless. What follows is a fantastic scene in which Rose dives into a pool to retrieve a lost necklace. Upon swimming into a corpse, she is understandably frightened but still pushes on with her investigation and writes to her brother Mark, asking him to return to New York to help her. Rose’s mission doesn’t end happily and Mark ends up getting the credit but his findings are based on his sister’s research without whom he wouldn’t have figured out the mystery. Rose’s contribution to the film can be felt throughout despite her absence in the second half. Her character also seems more developed and intriguing than Mark which is odd for a genre that (at the time) excluded strong women from their narrative.

inferno_01.jpg

Both women are also artistic as discussed before and their talents not only add to their character development but these skills assist them in desperate times. Suzy’s curious nature inspires the witch to attempt a physical injury by inflicting a hemorrhage on her during class causing her to become bedridden. This fails to slow down her investigation, however, and the loss of best friend Sara inspires her to get to the bottom of things. The same could be said of Rose whose love of books and research adds to her observant nature and her ability to attune her focus on figuring out who owns the building.

I really enjoy both performances because the characters don’t come across as reliant even when they ask for help. They are indifferent to the male heroes we see in horror films. Argento also doesn’t sexualise the protagonists  which is refreshing to see as women in horror are usually subject to appearing in demeaning scenes such as unnecessary nudity and rape scenes. There’s a reason why his films are timeless and even watching now they feel current and progressive, showcasing his real talent for filmmaking.

What do you think of Argento as a filmmaker? Which film of his is your favourite? Let me know in the comments below!

Categories
Uncategorised

High Life (2018)

As part of an initiative to bring lesser-known films to Wrexham, 73 Cinema aim to show a variety of films that would otherwise have required a trip to bigger cities to view. Based in Ty Pawb, the second chosen feature was High Life (2018), Claire Denis’ first English-language project starring Robert Pattinson in the lead role as a death row inmate who is sent to space with other inmates in order to conduct experiments for those on Earth. Their major mission is to venture to the far ends of the Solar system and the minor mission is to attempt reproduction in space. Denis is a filmmaker who refuses to follow the rules and the brilliant use of non-linear structure reflects this. The film opens with remaining survivor, Monte (Pattinson) repairing the ship as his baby daughter, Willow, cries hysterically, causing him to lose a piece of equipment. There are moments of deep isolation in Monte’s eyes that are soon swept away when Willow starts to laugh and play. Willow becomes his driving force to survive.

Denis’ direction is outstanding and the film is beautifully still. The use of one major primary location is genius because it allows us to feel the claustrophobia. What is brilliant is how small the ship looks from the outside but it seems so big inside with each segment of the ship looking as though it is in an entirely different space. It’s difficult to believe that the same ship contains the garden that grows their food also contains the aptly-named “Fuck Box”, a room where the passengers go to obsessively masturbate. Monte is the only passenger who avoids the room, choosing to lead a celibate life and making him appear alien to the others. Pattinson knocks it out of the park with his performance. Monte is quiet and subdued, allowing the action of the film to be carried out by the more extroverted characters but he is also the most resilient of the bunch. Despite his crime, he has a strong moral compass and doesn’t lend himself to the violence easily. Pattinson carries this film and his performance as Monte appears natural. It’s a role that he was born to play.

The supporting cast are also strong with stellar performances from Juliette Binoche as the sinister Dibs, the ship doctor who is determined to complete the reproduction mission for her moment of glory and Mia Goth as troubled passenger, Boyse who is reluctant to participate in the experiment. Dibs is a character who can never be trusted and her presence onscreen immediately brings unease. She is unapologetic for her actions and what she does to Monte and Boyse is hugely upsetting and she shows no remorse. She is aware of her crimes and the monster she is but chooses not to linger on it with the exception of an emotional scene between her and Boyse in which she confronts her crime. It’s a moment in which Dibs becomes human and seems equal to the others. On the other hand, Goth is an actress who has shown much promise and fearlessness in her film choices since her debut in Lars von Trier’s sex-fuelled Nymphomaniac (2013). Her performance as Boyse shows a clear growth from her earlier work and I predict that she will have a long career. The scene in which she escapes in a ship to enter a blackhole is deeply disturbing and makes for one of the craziest death scenes I have ever seen in film.

High-Life-5

As ever, the screenplay is what I pay attention to the most and the film has so many qualities that I admire. Written by Denis and Jean-Pol Fargeau, the film could be described as a sci-fi horror set in space and yet is one of the most human features I have seen. It’s a claustrophobic study of human nature and the strength to survive in unknown conditions. As discussed, it is hugely intense and the script relies heavily on the actions rather than the dialogue. A lot of the time, the physicality and expressions of the character take us through a scene rather than what they are actually saying. Like the mission, the script also takes us into the unknown with twists and turns at every scene and motives change or emerge. There are only a couple of scenes based in Earth to give us a contextual glimpse into the background of the mission and the ship is used a primary location.

It is important to note that High Life is not a film for everybody. It doesn’t hold back in its grittiness with excessive violence, explicit rape scenes and suicide but it’s also a film that creates an intricate study into the human mind when thrust into impossible situations, demonstrating just how far people will go to ensure their legacy. Even in the vacuum of the universe, there is an obsession throughout the film with the idea of legacy and being heroes but in the end, it doesn’t matter. It is Monte’s refusal to engage with such ideals that has meant he is the last survivor. The final scenes between him and teenage Willow (Jessie Ross) bring the film to its hopeful conclusion as they venture into a black hole.

What did you think of High Life? Let me know in the comments below!

Categories
Uncategorised

Scanners (1981)

Another film that I watched on a whim on BFI player is one that has been on my list for years. Scanners is a sci-fi horror directed and written by David Cronenberg and follows a sub-species of humans called Scanners, people who can control others with their minds. When one Scanner, Daryl Revok (Michael Ironside), goes rogue and starts to hunt down other Scanners in order to take over the world, security system corporation Consec uses social outcast, Cameron Vale (Stephen Lack), to infiltrate the community to bring Revok down. Assisted by the allusive Dr Paul Ruth (Patrick McGoohan), Cameron must hone his powers in order to face Daryl whose powers are much stronger than the other Scanners. He teams up with the powerful Kim (Jennifer O’Neill) and they work together to bring Daryl down.

The plot itself is linear as Cameron goes from social outcast to leading the fight against Daryl. We see him come out of his shell and become stronger than the Scanners until he is strong enough to fight Daryl. The climactic scene between them is fantastic and unexpected. Relying on the actors’ physicality and strong use of gory special effects, the scene is larger than life but also extremely simple due to its setting and the focus on the actors. Cronenberg knows that he doesn’t have to go above and beyond to create an effective fight scene and therefore brings no distractions. The focus on facial expressions also adds to the intensity of the film. I personally like that the film throws you into the situation and we are introduced to the world of Scanners through Cameron’s own realisation and experience.

The most iconic scene in this film is definitely the head explosion where we first meet Daryl in which he violently kills a fellow Scanner by causing his head to explode. Very few scenes in films make me jump and this one truly did. The brilliance of the physicality of the Scanning process is highly intense and the build-up in this scene had me on edge the entire time. I also think that the character of Daryl is one of the films highlights for me. He is an interesting character who was clearly distressed and reactive to the environment around him. He is relentless in his quest for world domination, even attempting and succeeding to violently kill other Scanners in order to do so. This contrasts with Cameron who is hugely reluctant to join his cause and has no inner conflict to do so. The two Scanners are polar opposites on the sides of bad and good.

MV5BMjMyYmIyYmEtM2JlNy00ZjQ0LWFhZGItZGViODliZmNlZGIyXkEyXkFqcGdeQXVyNjUxMjc1OTM@._V1_.jpg

I really like the style of the film. It’s sci-fi but doesn’t feel like it due to its realistic setting. The Scanners themselves look like regular humans and the Scanning effect is very physical and relies on the actors rather than the special effects which are bring the results. The special effects are one of the strong points and are brilliantly gory. It is not a film for the faint of heart. There are exploding heads, charred bodies and plenty of guts throughout. Even the scenes that don’t have gore are full of horror as we see the affect that the Scanners have on other humans. It doesn’t feel like a horror in the traditional sense, however, because of its sci-fi aspects so it’s a film that sits in its own genre.

Cronenberg’s long time collaborator Howard Shore provides a score that really brings the film to life. The Scanning process is enhanced by Shore’s score with it’s use of futurstic sounds and abnormal tones. Being an avid fan of Peter Jackson’s The Lord of the Rings Trilogy (2001-2003), one of my favourite aspects is Shore’s revolutionary score so listening to this soundtrack made me realise what a great talent he is. He captures the tone and unease of the film perfectly that it seems that the film is shaped by the score at times, particularly those intense scenes when the Scanning is reaching the climactic point.

Overall, Scanners is a film that brings special effects in abundance but also asks a lot of its actors and the result is a great film that revolutionised the horror genre. It’s a film that showcases Cronenberg’s brilliant mind and imagination and his reluctance to follow trends and put himself in a box.

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

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

Top 5 Leonardo DiCaprio Performances

Leonardo DiCaprio is a rare sort of actor nowadays. He is the most profitable outside of those who have worked in superhero franchises and manages to still pull in an audience of all kinds. Beloved since his career-making turn as an autistic teenager in 1993’s What’s Eating Gilbert Grape? DiCaprio has evolved from child star to young heartthrob, playboy to a mature rounded actor who can seemingly master any role he plays. This year saw his second collaboration with renowned director, Quentin Tarantino and it hs propelled him into the race for the Best Actor gongs this awards season.

During a time where his star someone seems to still be on a rise despite being at the top of his game, I thought I’d compile a list of my top 5 performances from DiCaprio. This proved difficult and it’s not to say that anything excluded means that it’s bad, I just didn’t have the space.

Here’s my top 5 in chronological order:

What’s Eating Gilbert Grape? (1993)

The film that brought DiCaprio to worldwide attention and melted the hearts of a global audience, DiCaprio plays Arnie Grape, the younger brother of the titular character (played by Johnny Depp), who acts as his carer. Playing a role such as Arnie is deeply complex and requires much maturity that a lot of actors don’t possess, but DiCaprio shows his dedication to the craft beautifully. Arnie is a hopeful individual who Gilbert thinks the world of. DiCaprio’s performance is tender and layered as we see the character’s frustration rise throughout the film until it explodes. It earned DiCaprio a well-deserved Oscar nomination for Best Supporting Actor (many people even think he should have won). A role such as this would be a good enough highlight for any actor’s resume, but for DiCaprio, this is only the beginning of a blossoming career.

Titanic (1997)

I would be lying if I said this wasn’t my favourite DiCaprio performance. The iconic love story that defines the Hollywood blockbuster and tells the fictional story of two star-crossed lovers on the doomed 1912 liner that sank to the sea after hitting an iceberg. DiCaprio plays Jack Dawson, an artist with a hard-working attitude who wins tickets for the Titanic at a game of poker. He stays in a third-class cabin with his friend Fabrizio (Danny Nucci) and fate hands him a meeting with the beautiful first-class passenger, Rose DeWitt Bukater (Kate Winslet). If What’s Eating GIlbert Grape? was a stroke of luck then Titanic cemented his superstar status. He lost out on a much-deserved Oscar-nomination but he was instantly recognised by fans everywhere. Jack and Rose’s story immediately became synonamous with classic Hollywood and the film is still loved around the world. I can’t even begin to explain how much I love this film. It must be among my most watched films of all time and partly because of the sincerity and heart in DiCaprio’s performance.

The Aviator (2004)

DiCaprio’s first collaboration with Martin Scorsese showed that DiCaprio is more than capable of leading a dramatic feature at top billing. He does so perfectly in this Howard Hughes biopic in his turn as the legendary producer through the high times of his career. DiCaprio won a Golden Globe for his performance and lost out on an Academy Award. The Aviator is an interesting insight into the Golden Age of Hollywood and what people will do to hold onto the power and fame that they have. Even against a strong supporting cast, particularly Cate blanchett in an Oscar-winning turn as Hughes’ love interest, Katharine Hepburn, DiCaprio holds himself with ease. I was torn between this and his more recent Scorsese collaboration, The Wolf of Wall Street but I think that this film bridges the gap between his heartthrob days and his breaking into “serious” acting as he isn’t afraid of allowing him to become immersed in the role.

Django Unchained (2012)

After scheduling conflicts got in the way of him playing Hans Landa in Inglourious Basterds (2009), Quentin Tarantino cast DiCaprio as the evil plantation owner, Calvin Candie who is introduced into the 3 hour film halfway through but manages to make such an impact that it influences the entire film. The film follows former slave, Django (Jamie Foxx) as he and bounty hunter Dr. King Schultz (Christoph Waltz) seek to track down and free Django’s wife, Broomhilda (Kerry Washington) who has been sold to Candie and works at his Candieland plantation. It’s a film that was mired in controversy from the beginning due to its excessive use of racial slur and extreme violence. The hard-hitting parts of the film come from Candie’s treatment of the slaves such as forcing them to partake in “Mandingo fighting” where two black men are forced to fight to the death for their owners’ entertainment. The scene is brutal and hard to watch as Django looks on helplessly as Candie cheers as his man wins. What makes this role so different for DiCaprio is that this role is the first where his character is not lovable in any way. Candie’s evil nature is clear when he has a slave ripped to shreds by dogs in front of Django to show his power as a white man.

Once Upon a Time in Hollywood (2019)

In his second collaboration with Tarantino, DiCaprio is promoted to the leading role as fading actor, Rick Dalton. Once Upon a Time in Hollywood is witty and shows DiCaprio in top form. I have written a full review which you can read here. I wouldn’t be surprised to see DiCaprio’s name filling up nomination spots come awards season as this is a role that he pulls off fantastically as the self-pitying, alcoholic actor.

As I come to the end of this list, I want to give a really special shoutout to his mega turn as Jordan Belfort in martin Scorsese’s 2013 hit, The Wolf of Wall Street. Admittedly, this is the top 5 that my gut went with and it breaks my heart not to include this or his Oscar-winning turn in Alejandro Gonzalez Inarritu’s The Revenant but as I said in my introduction, there are so many performances to choose from and they are the five that made the biggest impact on me.

What do you think? What’s your favourite Leonardo DiCaprio performance? Let me know in the comments below!