This week on the InSession Film Podcast: Extra Film segment, Jay and Ryan get together for an animated extravaganza as they discuss Disney’s Ralph Breaks the Internet and the Japanese anime film Mirai.
It’s been an up and down year for animation in 2018, but these two films do up the ante as far as best animated film goes this year. For reasons they go into, you may be surprised by which film they really liked out of the two – although there’s overall more positivity this week than normal.
Listen to the show and let us know what you think about both films in the comment section below. Thanks for listening!
– Movie Review: Ralph Breaks the Inernet (6:56) Director: Phil Johnston, Rich Moore Writers: Rich Moore, Phil Johnston, Jim Reardon, Pamela Ribon, Josie Trinidad Stars: John C. Reilly, Sarah Silverman, Gal Gadot
– Movie Review: Mirai (42:58) Director: Mamoru Hosoda Writer: Mamoru Hosoda Stars: Haru Kuroki, Moka Kamishiraishi, Gen Hoshino
We try to make this the best movie podcast we possibly can and we hope you enjoy them. Subscribe today on iTunes, Spotfiy or Stitcher, and please leave us a review on iTunes. You can also find us on Soundcloud, PlayerFM and TuneIn Radio as well. We really appreciate all your support of the InSession Film Podcast.
To hear this Extra Film episode and everything else we do, download our apps on the Amazon Market for Android and the Podcast Box app on IOS devices. The mobile app covers all of our main shows, bonus podcast’s and everything else relating to the InSession Film Podcast. Thanks for your wonderful support and listening to our show. It means the world to us!
Film noir is a genre that had the aesthetics in the years before the 1940s when a swarm of crime dramas came out that in natural black-and-white, focused on the cynical nature of humans, and the common desire for money with a side of a gorgeous woman. We know about the American classics and they are truly among the greatest of this period: The Maltese Falcon, Double Indemnity, The Big Sleep, In A Lonely Place, and Touch of Evil among others. It is a genre that features masculinity, innocent people going down the wrong path, women of interest, and the common criminal who goes out there doing what he knows best – stealing and backstabbing others. The words “film noir,” are French, so no surprise the French have a solid list of films of that genre, but there are others along with the French that defines the genre extremely well.
Stray Dog (1949)
Akira Kurosawa may be known for his samurai films, but he made his first impression with contemporary stories on the streets of Tokyo. The legendary Toshiro Mifune plays the rookie cop whose gun is stolen and used in a murder. He and a veteran cop, played by Takashi Shimura, go on the hunt during a heatwave that also defined the early years of post-war Japan of early disenchantment. It is also a buddy cop picture within the police procedure genre that takes us slowly to the underworld (which he would visit again in High & Low) where criminality is survival that raises the heat on the screen. His previous film, Drunken Angel, is another noir film that should be looked at.
Rififi (1955)
Jules Dassin made great crime dramas back in the United States with Brute Force and The Naked City. He was then blacklisted during the Red Scare and exiled himself to France. His budget was low, there were no major stars, and he wasn’t totally fond of the source material, but he directed what is a masterful work on a group of thieves who plan and execute a very difficult heist, only to backfire by each others’ greed. It wasn’t the first French noir film (Touchez Pas Au Grisbi by Jacques Becker is considered the starter), but it can be argued as certainly the best. The thirty-minute heist sequence shot in almost complete silence as Dassin lays out the details of the heist as well as the conscience of the characters as everything falls from under.
Elevator to the Gallows (1958)
Louis Malle’s debut film features two lovers whose plan to kill the husband but goes haywire when the man is trapped in the elevator after the elevator is switched off. Another couple on the run steal the man’s car and his gun, which is then used later to kill a visiting German couple. It is a four-way of lovers on the run with one couple failing to kill and a frolicking couple doing the killing and the mistaken identity factor that crosses over between the couples. The finale is the meaning of the title – a bitter irony to the events that lead up to the climax. On top of everything, the jazzy score comes courtesy of Miles Davis.
Le Cercle Rouge (1970)
Jean-Pierre Melville had a knack for the genre as most of his works dealt with criminals and loyalty being tested with Bob le Flambeur and Le Samouri. Here, two ex-cons and a former cop collaborate to rob a prestigious jewelry store but find early trouble when they muscle a rival gangster and kill some of his men. Melville had never made heist film abut desired to do so after seeing John Huston’s The Asphalt Jungle and Dassin’s Rififi. The three criminals come from different paths and are meeting to do this risky job and equally test out who is honorable and not willing to turn heel on each other. It is about individual success and wanting to cash out rich instead of staying in the realm of failure.
The American Friend (1977)
This and Le Cercle Rouge are neo-noirs, the more modernized version of film noir. Still, Wim Wender’s adaptation of a Patricia Highsmith novel starring Bruno Ganz and Dennis Hopper is still simplistically crazy at the core. The tri-lingual story features Tom Ripley befriending a terminally ill man and gets him to play a hitman. The man gets seduced by Ripley’s con-man ways of thinking he can now get away with murder on Ripley’s behalf. The mood and violence say noir but the relationship between the two gentlemen don’t seem like it. As Wenders said about Highsmith’s writing, “Her novels are really all about truth, in a more existential way than just ‘right or wrong.’” The story carries with layer upon layer being placed on top as the story reaches its climax.
Film noir is not constrained to the 40s and 50s and it is certainly not just an American genre. It is something relatable and featuring certain characteristics that provide the mood regardless of country. The film noir is thrilling and has its own procedure in falling a crime in progress and how individuals think they are smart enough to go forward with a plan that mostly goes wrong. Camera work and hard-boiled pulp writing fill in the scenario. Murder goes along with the story quite well. It is a genre that is universal.
Director: Luca Guadagnino Writers: David Kajganich, Dario Argento (characters), Daria Nicolodi (characters) Stars: Dakota Johnson, Tilda Swinton, Mia Goth, Chloë Grace Moretz, Elena Fokina
Synopsis: A darkness swirls at the center of a world-renowned dance company, one that will engulf the artistic director, an ambitious young dancer, and a grieving psychotherapist. Some will succumb to the nightmare. Others will finally wake up.
[/info]
“Love and manipulation, they share houses very often. They are frequent bedfellows.” – Dr. Josef Klemperer
In this case, that house could be the Markos Dance Academy itself, or even all of 1977 Berlin, which saw the events of the German Autumn and the kidnappings by the Red Army Faction (RAF). These acts were carried out due to anti-imperialist beliefs, and those notions challenging colonialism run through Luca Guadagnino’s Suspiria. This is barely a remake, and despite dancing around the bare bones of Dario Argento’s 1977 giallo classic (with a nice historical tribute to Argento’s film setting this one during that same year), Guadagnino has made a different film with a different agenda, from gothic horror to social nightmare. It’ll also make you squirm, whether you like it or not.
Like Argento’s film, Suspiria follows one Susie Bannion (this time played by the always commanding Dakota Johnson), now running from her Mennonite family in Ohio to join to a mysterious dance academy run by Tilda Swinton’s Madame Blanc (one of at least three characters she portrays here). Ballet takes on two forms here, artistic expression and (of all things) witchcraft, and it’s clear that this academy would be more accurately defined as a coven. This coven suggests its own imperialistic battle between the women who govern it, challenging each other over who should maintain control; a horrific curse against one such opposition (Olga, played by Elena Fokina) leads to a bone-crushing ballet sequence that’ll make the queasiest of people pass out, an agonizing example of the film’s glorious aesthetics.
The social and political parallels may be quite clear, but are nonetheless felt. Susie is perhaps running from her own history of religious colonialism and abuse, or maybe that’s just how she perceives it to be. Perhaps a similar history can be shared among the women of this coven, leading them to act out in the ways that they do. With this in mind, it’s no coincidence that Suspiria is a female dominated film, depicting those who feel the need to offer strength and protection amongst each other, and rightfully so, given our current social climate; a through-line within the film asks people to “believe women”, openly enforcing the film’s notions on femininity. This is further explored through the film’s only prominent male character, Dr. Josef Klemperer (Tilda Swinton again), who attempts to intervene for those seeking outside help; he is driven by guilt due to the tragic political history involving his late wife, and Swinton’s performance provides a pathos that lingers from the film’s opening scene to its concluding epilogue. I think we can finally acknowledge that Tilda Swinton is in fact a chameleon.
Films with this much ambition are easily respected and appreciated, but not always perfect; thankfully Suspiria works much more than it doesn’t. It does, however, stumble in some of its editing choices, particularly during Act One, where it seems clear that Guadagnino had initially shot a much longer film and was pressed for keeping things within a reasonable running time; an initial conversation between Klemperer and Patricia (Chloë Grace Moretz), for instance, seems constantly interrupted by insert shots in order to shorten the actual conversation, and it can feel distracting. The final act as well (Act Six) also wraps up many of the film’s central themes with a revelation that narratively seems to come out of nowhere, even when it is surrounded by a most over-the-top climax that could have veered dangerously close to self-parody. But somehow Guadagnino makes it work emotionally; Suspiria is once again a very sensory experience (with nightmare sequences that sear to the brain), and his use of music (courtesy of the great Thom Yorke) mysteriously gives that final act dramatic validity that would have seemed impossible on paper (the song “Unmade” in particular is hauntingly gorgeous).
As an interconnected tale of imperialism, emotional manipulation, and femininity, Luca Guadagnino’s Suspiria is one social nightmare of a movie, one that marries 1977 Berlin with witchcraft as a means of granting one their free will. Perhaps these witches were once victims of abuse in their own respective ways, only to now become inadvertent culprits of those same colonial and dominating ways within their own coven; and how ironic that it’s a certain “goddess of death” that intervenes and grants these women the freedom to govern themselves.
Director: Phil Johnston, Rich Moore Writers: Rich Moore, Phil Johnston, Jim Reardon, Pamela Ribon, Josie Trinidad Stars: John C. Reilly, Sarah Silverman, Gal Gadot
Synopsis: Six years after the events of “Wreck-It Ralph,” Ralph and Vanellope, now friends, discover a wi-fi router in their arcade, leading them into a new adventure.
[/info]
Disney has been recently acquiring the rights to entertainment companies like Marvel, Lucasfilm, and soon Fox. This monopoly over a mass amount of pop culture and beloved fandoms has had a lot of people worried what Disney is going to do with them. Ralph Breaks the Internet is a fantastic example of what good came come of it.
This movie is packed full of references and easter eggs for all ages. I saw all my favorite Disney princesses, lolcats, Jason Mantzoukas, and references to video games I’d completely forgotten I had as a kid (Twisted Metal). I need to watch it at home, 5 feet from my tv, pressing pause every two seconds to find everything Disney threw in there. It follows our heroes from the first film, Ralph (John C. Reilly) and Vanellope (Sarah Silverman), as they explore the internet to save Vanellope’s game from being unplugged for good. During their adventures they encounter Ebay, Oh My Disney, Google, YouTube, Pinterest, ClickBait, Spam, and everything else you can imagine is on the internet and is appropriate for children.
The film includes many of the same characters from the first film and adds a handful of new ones. My favorites being Taraji P. Henson as Yesss the algorithm and Alan Tudyk as the search engine KnowsMore. Gal Gadot also makes an appearance as Shank – a character that reminds me of her role in the Fast and the Furious series. Most of the cameo roles are also voiced by their original actors. I loved how they managed to include so many well-known characters and pop culture references and the film was sill coherent and watchable. This movie could have easily turned into a gigantic, confusing, Disney mess.
Another positive for me were the messages embedded in the film. They managed to slip in tips on good internet behavior / etiquette while explaining about trolls and bullies. The overall theme was about being a good friend, feeling insecure, and how to not let that hold each other back. It was cute and well done. The animation techniques continue to amaze me. I watched the first movie about two hours before seeing the sequel and love the transition between retro and modern art styles. They continue that back and forth in this film with the added challenge of Pixar, classic Disney, and Marvel characters.
I can’t think of any negatives for this movie. The mass amount of advertisements, product placement, and references to other Disney characters might be a bit much for some. But that aspect of the film is made very clear in the trailers, so if you don’t like that sort of thing, then this movie probably isn’t for you… My stepdad who can’t stand animated movies, and has a specific distaste for Disney, actually saw this with me and laughed out loud many times. I don’t think he’ll admit to “liking” the movie but he will say it’s “not bad”.
Overall I think Ralph Breaks the Internet is a great film for kids and adults. It has a positive message, a wide array of nerd references to look for, and is genuinely fun to watch. It’s definitely another contender for Best Animated Feature so it will be interesting to see how that plays out this awards season. Until then, I will probably go see it again. If you choose to see it in theaters please, please stay until the very end of the credits.
Over the Thanksgiving weekend, we saw the release of Creed II in theaters. We’ll be discussing the film in full on Episode 302 this coming weekend, and we are using as inspiration for our poll this week. Specifically, we are focusing on the sequels in the Rocky franchise. There is one caveat however; we are not including Ryan Coogler’s Creed. Whether it be objective quality or recency bias, we think that film would run away with the poll so we opted to exclude it from contention.
Director: Steve McQueen Writers: Gillian Flynn, Steve McQueen; Lynda La Plante (based on) Stars: Viola Davis, Elizabeth Debicki, Michelle Rodriguez, Cynthia Erivo, Colin Farrell, Brian Tyree Henry, Daniel Kaluuya, Carrie Coon
Synopsis: Set in contemporary Chicago, amid a time of turmoil, four women with nothing in common except a debt left behind by their dead husbands’ criminal activities, take fate into their own hands, and conspire to forge a future on their own terms.
[/info]
When the widows come knocking — masked and armed — the right thing to do is to roll out the carpet that leads to the safe.
Simply put, Widows is a ride. The film is your favorite theme park’s “deceitful attraction,” one that abandons its minimal-in-thrills guise the moment it’s in motion. Imagine boarding one of those teacups and then discovering there are boosters on the sides — that is how it is going to be from minute one. As for accompanying music? It will be commentaries both potent and pointed (and give merit to the argument that 20th Century Fox has mistimed this film’s release i.e. after midterms).
This Widows is a feature-film, Chicago-set version of the 1983 British series, and on a similar no it asks you to cross out all the husbands from the get-go. After some hurried morning embraces and equally so breakfasts, the four men are off to procure cash, illegally and with artillery, not knowing that today will be their last time. Melancholy promptly comes knocking on the wives’ door, of course, and for one of them — Veronica Rawlings (Viola Davis) — there is that plus politically tinged menace in the form of Jamal Manning (a masterfully intimidating Brian Tyree Henry) and his hitman brother Jatemme (a freaky Daniel Kaluuya). Per Jamal’s telling, the heist that Veronica’s husband (Liam Neeson) led was supposed to add $2 million to his campaign coffers, which should give him an edge over a legacy politician (Colin Farrell, properly weaselly), and since the cash isn’t here it’s now her job. With that much danger and threat, she won’t do it alone…
The four leads — Davis, Michelle Rodriguez, Elizabeth Debicki and Cynthia Erivo — are living winds, brewing affecting storms when the stacked script from Gillian Flynn and director Steve McQueen approaches chaotic beats or jolting gusts in calmer times. That said, it’s easy (yet wonderful!) to not sure which is which when the surprises arrive, which are gasp-inducing by design but — true to McQueen’s style — are delivered without any fluff. Davis and Debicki are the definite highlights in the cast here; as Veronica, the former capable of discreetly turning others’ underestimation into a power source and make that hoping of reaping what’s sown into a surety. Regarding Debicki, there is much engrossment to be found in seeing her Alice evolving from a frail heron — she is abused by both her mother (Jacki Weaver, rechanneling her Animal Kingdom days) and her husband (Jon Bernthal) — to one who can use that image to conquer the opposition.
Through that, however, the commentaries shine. Widows is a “heist film,” true, but during the planning it has the means to prove that it’s more; certain beats replicate first-page headlines and, in the bigger picture, an increasingly devastating transactional culture. In moments addressing these McQueen displays more ease and elegance. Brief flashbacks shock. What begins as a one-take that’s semi-confounding from a technical standpoint ends as a potent visual thesis on the ripples of corrupted power plays. Not that the grander set pieces aren’t affecting — credit to McQueen’s upfront style — but in this area the signs of unfamiliarity are seen. They’re fleeting, thankfully, since backing the director are Joel Walker and his smart editing plus Sean Bobbitt who dips every frame in contemporary grit.
Though worlds apart, Widows is in the same neighborhood with First Man (which our writer, Ryan McQuade, loved) as a quality show that is struggling at the box office. How odd, seeing there is no flag-in-absentia incident or anything of the sort to scream at? Whatever the case, the film’s current performance reflects a willingness to let anything coming for your wallet instead of those who, like these widows, will do that through thrilling movements and edifying conversations.
This week on the InSession Film Podcast, Ryan and Jay join us on the Main Show to review the Coen brothers’ latest film The Ballad of Buster Scruggs and we celebrate 300 episodes by having a fun discussion about the films that have shaped us as cinephiles.
Big thanks to Ryan and Jay for jumping on this week to help us celebrate this milestone. It made for a longer show than normal, but when starting this venture, 300 episodes felt like it was impossible. So we wanted to do something interesting and unique to really soak in the moment, and we hope the conversation gave you some insight into why we love movies so much. Cheers!
On that note, check out this week’s show and let us know what you think in the comment section. Thanks for listening and for supporting the InSession Film Podcast!
– Movie Review: The Ballad of Buster Scruggs (6:05) Director: Ethan Coen, Joel Coen Writers: Ethan Coen, Joel Coen Stars: Tim Blake Nelson, James Franco, Tom Waits, Liam Neeson, Zoe Kazan
– Notes (59:22)
Nothing crazy this week in terms of notes or extra discussion. We review our latest Extra Film and preview what’s coming next week (which you can see below).
– 300th Celebration Shenanigans (1:05:18)
We were not able to celebrate last week since we had too much on the slate, so we thought this week would be perfect. We talk about our backgrounds as cinephiles, what films have shaped us over the years and which one’s stand out as the best of all-time. It was a lot of fun and we hope you enjoy it as much as we did!
If you want to help support us, there are several ways you can help us and we’d absolutely appreciate it. Every penny goes directly back into supporting the show and we are truly honored and grateful. Thanks for your support and for listening to the InSession Film Podcast!
Director: Peter Farrelly Writers: Nick Vallelonga, Brian Hayes Currie Stars: Viggo Mortensen, Mahershala Ali, Linda Cardellini
Synopsis: A working-class Italian-American bouncer becomes the driver of an African-American classical pianist on a tour of venues through the 1960s American South.
[/info]
The word crowd-pleaser is used almost every single Oscar season to describe films that work more with audiences than critics and thus could become a contender on word of mouth, box office, and audiences falling in love with a movie “moving story. Films like Darkest Hour, Hidden Figures, The Help are examples of films from this modern era along with films like Forrest Gump and Driving Ms. Daisy being examples of films that were mainly crowd-pleasers that went on to win Best Picture. And since its win of the Audience Award at the Toronto International Film Festival, Peter Farrelly’s Green Book has become that crowd-pleaser in the awards seasons for being a light, entertaining film that takes its audience back not only to a different time on screen but a different time in film history when films like Green Book were made. Now some may find crowd-pleasers or lighter films to be enjoyable and fun and I do too but they also have to serve a purpose. And while there is a hand full of moments in Green Book that I enjoyed, there are a lot of things with this film that made me question in 2018 how it made the final script, let alone the final cut.
The film, set in the 1960’s, follows Tony Vallelonga (Viggo Mortensen), an Italian-American who lives with his family in New York City as a bouncer for various nightclubs in the city. When the nightclub he is working at closes for repairs, he inquiries about taking a job being a driver for a world renowned classical pianist Doctor Don Shirley (Mahershala Ali) while he is embarking on a concert tour through the Deep South. Tony is given the job but the only reason Shirley hires Tony is because of the word of mouth that he hears about him around town. But Shirley doesn’t trust him because Tony is, much like most of his friends and family in their life, is a prejudice man and does have a problem with African Americans. So, as you can expect, they are opposites at the beginning of the film, with each can’t standing each other and thus leads me to wonder why Doc Shirley didn’t hire someone else to drive him. And as the films plays on, and the deeper they go into the South, the more they become closer as human beings and by the end become friends.
Green Books problems do not lie on the performances of Mortensen and Ali, who give charming and engaging performances within a weak script. Mortensen’s Tony is not a likeable guy and doesn’t say likeable things throughout the film but there are moments throughout the film where he does show moments of true care for Ali’s Shirley and we can see somewhat of a change within his character, though it comes and go because doesn’t understand how to actually build up a friendship. And while his accent is a thick over the top, stereotypical Italian accent and takes some adjusting to get used to it, it starts to grow on you just like he grows on Shirley. But while Viggo is good, it is Ali that gives the best performance of the film as Shirley, whose shell is cracked open by Tony and he lets this unlikeable character into his life. Shirley has problems with loneliness, perfectionism and drinking that are vaguely explained throughout the film, but what we can gather is that he is someone that doesn’t know where he belongs, and Ali is able to take all of those emotions and things that aren’t given to him by Farrelly and the other writers and makes this character sympathetic and lovable at the same time. The only other performance that is in this film that makes true impact is Linda Cardellini, who plays Tony’s wife Dolores but we only ever see her at the beginning for a short amount of time and then in flashbacks of the letters that Shirley helps Tony right throughout the film to send back home, which are charming scenes.
But beyond the performances, the rest of the film is a bit of a mess. The direction of Peter Farrelly is safe and sophomoric at times, with scenes looking nice at times to Hallmark movie of the week at other times. The editing and tone of the film is all over the place, and the film can’t seem to figure out whether it wants to be a film about race in America or about these two men and their friendship. What we are given is a half-ass attempt of both and neither are fully examined thoroughly enough, leaving the actors to have to carry a lot of the burden of filling in wholes and bringing charm to characters that are thinly written and directed. The script by Farrelly, Nick Vallelonga (Tony’s son) and Brian Hayes Currie feels like a script that could have used a significant rewrite, and tried to give more of balanced look at these two men, giving Doc Shirley the same amount of respect in tell his like they did with telling Tony’s story. Doc Shirley is the more interesting character but we are given very little into his story at times that its hard to tell just how famous or how much of a genius he is given that this film is devoted to Tony’s perspective of their memorable trip.
The score and editing are not memorable at all, with some scenes just feeling out of place, and a soundtrack that feels too on the nose at times. Like said before, Mortensen and Ali carry this film heavily but that is not surprising considering that they are veteran actors that I like a lot and have carried films much better than this before. But two solid performances can’t save a film that is messy, unfocused, one sided and doesn’t really know what it wants to say about anything.
This week on the InSession Film Podcast: Extra Film segment, Jay and Ryan talk about the winner of the People’s Choice Award at the 2018 Toronto International Film Festival, Green Book. Unexpectedly, Peter Farrelly finds himself in the Oscar conversation, but is the film worthy of such praise? Let’s just say that Ryan and Jay have some different opinions.
In the second half of the show, Brendan joins Ryan to discuss A Private War, the Rosamund Pike showcase that has whispers of Oscar, in its own right. Pike has probably been one of the more underused actresses in the business since her breakout role in Gone Girl, and it is great to see her headlining an acclaimed film, again. Can the rest of the film live up to the performance of its lead?
Listen to the show and let us know what you think about both films in the comment section below. Thanks for listening!
– Movie Review: Green Book (4:46) Director: Peter Farrelly Writer: Peter Farrelly, Brian Hayes Currie, Nick Vallelonga Stars: Viggo Mortensen, Mahershala Ali, Linda Cardellini
– Movie Review: A Private War (39:50) Director: Matthew Heineman Writer: Arash Amel (Based on the article by Marie Brenner) Stars: Rosamund Pike, Jamie Dornan, Tom Hollander, Stanley Tucci
We try to make this the best movie podcast we possibly can and we hope you enjoy them. Subscribe today on iTunes, Spotfiy or Stitcher, and please leave us a review on iTunes. You can also find us on Soundcloud, PlayerFM and TuneIn Radio as well. We really appreciate all your support of the InSession Film Podcast.
To hear this Extra Film episode and everything else we do, download our apps on the Amazon Market for Android and the Podcast Box app on IOS devices. The mobile app covers all of our main shows, bonus podcast’s and everything else relating to the InSession Film Podcast. Thanks for your wonderful support and listening to our show. It means the world to us!
Director: Steven Caple Jr. Writers: Cheo Hodari Coker (story by), Sascha Penn (story by), Sylvester Stallone (screenplay by), Juel Taylor (screenplay by) Stars: Michael B. Jordan, Sylvester Stallone, Tessa Thompson
Synopsis: Under the tutelage of Rocky Balboa, light heavyweight contender Adonis Creed faces off against Viktor Drago, son of Ivan Drago.
[/info]
Creed II, a herculean task brilliantly and masterfully crafted by Steven Caple Jr. and an incredible cast, is as much a sequel to Creed as it is to Rocky IV. The difficulty here is not the alienation of Creed fans, although Ryan Coogler’s surprise 2015 hit left a new generation wanting and expecting the same heart, soul, and fight; the real challenge comes when trying to satisfy entrenched Rocky franchise fans. Not only must the filmmakers add to Adonis Johnson’s (Michael B. Jordan) own legacy as set forth in Creed, they also decided to bear the weight of one of the most popular installments of the Rocky series, Rocky IV. This compounds the drama and increases the stakes as personal and professional adversity stalks every character that graces the screen. How will it all play out? The answer is blatantly obvious, as this is after all a Rocky-styled formula. However, Mr. Caple Jr. manages to sneak in a few surprises that hit the audience in all the soft spots, thus creating a deeper, more intriguing look into the hearts and souls of characters both young and old.
Adonis Johnson has embraced the Creed name. He has accepted his father, the late Apollo Creed’s, legacy and is hellbent on igniting his own. After a brief but defining fight, Adonis becomes the new Light-Heavyweight Champion of the World and does so on his own terms. However, a new opponent emerges, the raw and stoic Viktor Drago (Florian Munteanu) who is trained by his father, Ivan Drago (Dolph Lundgren). The name Drago should instill both nostalgia and fear in the minds of Rocky fans, as Ivan Drago is responsible for the death of Adonis’ father, Apollo, as seen in Rocky IV. So, caught between continuing his own story and fighting for his father’s legacy, Adonis steps into the ring with Viktor and the results are catastrophic. His journey back is littered with ups and downs that try his soul and push him to be a better person, not just a better man. Aiding him along the way is his mentor, Rocky Balboa (Sylvester Stallone), whose character continues to grow, despite being introduced over forty years ago. Rocky, speaking from experience and tragedy, pleads with Adonis not to take the bait and fight Viktor. Having held Apollo in his arms as he passed has always been a burden of guilt that Rocky has had to carry for decades. Creed II delicately pulls the curtain back on the events that followed the over-the-top 80s-era Rocky IV. We see the broken man that Ivan Drago has become and understand that his loss was greater than the results of a boxing match three decades ago. Having seen that fight through star-spangled glasses, American audiences were treated to a perceived winning of the cold war, but in the fictional filmic world of the Rocky franchise, Ivan Drago lost everything. Now, his son is the heir-apparent to Russian boxing, and Ivan selfishly sees Viktor as his ticket back to the table.
Adonis, newly engaged to Bianca (Tessa Thompson) as well as being a new father, must step out of the shadow of his own father and decide how he wants his legacy to play out. With the help of Rocky, his mother, and Bianca can he summon the heart, soul, and fight required to vanquish his enemy? Well, if you’ve seen a Rocky movie before, I assume you know the answer. And herein lies the trouble with Creed II. We’ve seen this story play out numerous times. If you are a fan of this franchise, you expect certain results. I believe that the filmmakers gleefully play with this assumption. This allows them a bit of slack when molding the characters and building on their development. Granted, on the surface Creed II is another boxing film where the title character must face his own adversity to win in the ring. But I would argue that Creed II is slightly more than that. It is a film about legacy and redemption. It is a film about fathers and sons. It is a film about soul and spirit overcoming hate and revenge. Adonis’ decisions become his own, whereas Viktor’s decisions are those of his father. The dynamic between the two father and son duos mirror one another. Apollo’s hubris is what got him killed, and if Adonis does not wish to follow his father to the grave, he must fight for himself and not his father’s legacy. On the other side, Viktor must realize that his father is using him to regain his own legacy, even if it means Viktor might have his legacy ended before it begins. This leads the audience to a third father-son relationship, that of Rocky and his son Robert. As Rocky witnesses the power struggle between fathers and sons in the film, he steps back and wonders what he can do to repair his relationship with his estranged son.
Yes, Creed II is a boxing film. Yes, it is a story that we have seen played out at least seven previous times. But there is so much more under the surface, and that is where Creed II shines. It shines in the brilliant development of flawed characters. It shines in the performances of talented actors (Jordan and Thompson are immensely charismatic). It shines a light into that which is dark and exposes these characters as human beings who struggle with the challenges set forth before them. Overall, Creed II is a more than adequate follow-up to 2015’s Creed, but even more than that it works extremely well as a compendium to Rocky IV. Navigating the nostalgia and reverence for Rocky IV, Creed II walks the tightrope and rarely falters.
On Episode 4 of Chasing the Gold, Ryan is joined by Matt Neglia from Next Best Picture and Ian Boolocklock to discuss the 34th Independent Spirit Awards nominations that came out last week. The guys also discuss who they would like to see host this year’s Oscars.
This was a really fun show. Matt and Ian were great guests who added some great insight into the Independent Spirit Awards and what this year’s nominations mean for the Oscars.
On that note, have fun with this week’s Chasing the Gold and let us know what you think in the comment section below. Thanks for listening!
We try to make this the best movie podcast we possibly can and we hope you enjoy them. Subscribe today on iTunes, Spotfiy or Stitcher, and please leave us a review on iTunes. You can also find us on Soundcloud, PlayerFM and TuneIn Radio as well. We really appreciate all your support of the InSession Film Podcast.
To hear this Extra Film episode and everything else we do, download our apps on the Amazon Market for Android and the Podcast Box app on IOS devices. The mobile app covers all of our main shows, bonus podcast’s and everything else relating to the InSession Film Podcast. Thanks for your wonderful support and listening to our show. It means the world to us!
[divider]
Help Support The InSession Film Podcast
If you want to help support us, we would greatly appreciate it! For more info, CLICK HERE.
Happy Coen brothers week everyone! If don’t know already, we are big fans of the Coen brothers and their latest film, The Ballad of Buster Scruggs, hit Netflix over the weekend. So, we are excited and we’ll be diving into that film on Episode 301 before we get into our celebration shenanigans. If you’ve seen the film, you’ll know that it’s not your typical narrative feature, but rather an anthology made up of six different segments.
Using that as inspiration for our poll this week, which segment is your favorite? Vote now!
This week for our Episode 300 Bonus Content, JD and Brendan offer their thoughts on Orson Welles’ The Other Side of the Wind after missing out on Extra Film this last week.
[divider]
HELP SUPPORT THE SHOW
We offer our bonus content for free, but we do encourage and appreciate a small donation of $0.99 as a way to help support the show. Click on the PayPal button below to donate and thanks so much for your support. You can also hear all of our Bonus Content via our mobile apps. See the information at the bottom of the post for more details.
[divider]
Mobile Apps!
Listen to all of our bonus content on our apps for just a one-time fee! Whether you have an iPhone, Android or Windows phone, our apps are available in many different ways that is convenient for you. With our mobile app, not only can you listen to all of our bonus content, but our main shows and our Extra Film podcasts as well. Click here for more info!
If you don’t want to purchase our bonus content, but still want to support us, there are other you can help us out. Click here for more info.
Director: Ethan Coen, Joel Coen Writers: Ethan Coen, Joel Coen Stars: Tim Blake Nelson, James Franco, Tom Waits, Liam Neeson, Zoe Kazan
Synopsis: An anthology film comprised of six stories, each dealing with a different aspect of life in the Old West.
[/info]
Life is uncertain. Bad things happen that cannot be explained. Our lives are not always fair. In fact, they rarely ever are.
These are pillars of the Coen Brothers’ artistic expressions and they have found the perfect canvas in the new film from the dynamic duo on Netflix, The Ballad of Buster Scruggs.
That’s not to say that this is the best Coen Brothers film or even in their top tier. Their filmography is so legendary that they’ve made it hard on themselves to even crack their own Top Ten. I ultimately think it will hold up quite well, but now is not the time to argue on where this film lands compared to their others. Now is the time to relish in the fact that this film even exists.
There have been some broad conversations on Film Twitter and among cinephiles lately about the rightful place that Netflix holds. On the one hand, the streaming giant is putting out films (like Buster Scruggs) that might never have seen the light of day otherwise. On the other hand, these films are routinely given just a token theatrical release, meaning that most fans will never see them on the big screen.
While I will agree with the notion that the theatrical experience is premium and should be protected and preserved, I also understand that not everyone is able to go to the theater to see every movie that comes out. For that reason, I’m thankful that Netflix is releasing films like Buster Scruggs so that they will at least be seen.
And this is certainly a film that demands to be seen.
The Coens are famous for their ability to create memorable characters. In fact, I think they are the best writer/directors we have working today in that regard (sorry, Quentin Tarantino). They find ingenious ways to infuse their dialogue with folksy wisdom and quotable proverbs. It makes their particular brand of moviemaking the perfect companion for an anthology film such as this – one that invites character after character before quickly dispatching them.
There are six stories within this film – a singing sharpshooter, a thief, an impresario and his young artist, a prospector, a young woman traveling with a group on the Oregon Trail, and five members of varying societal classes in a stagecoach. Each story is told through a storybook with the title The Ballad of Buster Scruggs and Other Tales of the American Frontier. We see a hand turning the pages of the book and opening up to each section with a color plate illustration of the story we are about to watch.
Each story shows a different side of the American western frontier. The Coens have routinely turned to The West for their yarns and tall tales, and they have had great success doing so. Maybe that is because The Wild West offers the necessary expanse of opportunity to match their seemingly endless amounts of creativity.
While the film’s writing is certainly at the level of excellence you’d expect from Joel and Ethan Coen (it won the Golden Osella Award for Best Screenplay at the Venice Film Festival where it premiered), its other technical elements are not far behind, if at all. This is a beautiful film, with gorgeous vistas of the American Frontier. Bruno Delbonnel (who worked with the Coens on Inside Llewyn Davis) worked as the DP on the film, and he finds striking ways to visually support the narratives that the Coens weave in and out of.
Each one of the six stories in this anthology collection has its own merits. I was struck in various ways by each of them. If I had to choose a favorite, I would probably go with the film’s final story, The Mortal Remains, which puts us in a stagecoach with five people from different classes and backgrounds. There are others that I found very nearly as good (All Gold Canyon and The Gal Who Got Rattled are close behind). First off, this is basically a writer’s dream – put a group of people together in a small space and have them captivate the audience with their words and actions. They’re all bunched together in a stagecoach. They can’t go anywhere. Yet their conversations are riveting and filled with the folksy wisdom we’ve come to love from the Coens. It also contains a quote that will go in the annals of Coen Brothers history right up there with “The Dude abides.” and all the “Darn tootin’s” from Fargo. One character repeatedly exclaims that “People are like ferrets!” and I knew the Coens had me wrapped around their fingers once more.
With each movie they release, the Coens continue to show their incredible gift for entertaining and conveying truth at the same time. Their characters are darkly funny and remind us of ourselves even if we’ve never been within 1,000 miles of Fort Laramie. We all know what it’s like to feel that life has given us a raw deal – that we’ve worked hard for nothing. We all know what it’s like to feel pain and regret. And we all know what it’s like to have doubts in the face of life’s cruel uncertainties. The Coens continually find new ways to unearth these universal truths through their wonderful characters. The Ballad of Buster Scruggs is a great example of this, and I look forward to watching it many more times.
This week on the InSession Film Podcast, comedian Brent Allen joins us to discuss Steve McQueen’s Widows and the latest installment from the Wizarding World in Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald!
Big thanks to Brent for joining on the show once again. He’s one of our favorite guests and it’s always a pleasure to talk to him about movies. He’s especially a big Harry Potter fan, so this week’s show was particularly interesting for Brent to be here with us. Also note that we were supposed to review The Other Side of the Wind on this episode as well, but stay tuned for Bonus Content this week where we talk about that movie.
On that note, check out this week’s show and let us know what you think in the comment section. Thanks for listening and for supporting the InSession Film Podcast!
– Movie Review: Widows (6:33) Director: Steve McQueen Writer: Gillian Flynn, Steve McQueen Stars: Viola Davis, Michelle Rodriguez, Elizabeth Debicki, Liam Neeson
– Notes / The Other Side of the Wind (1:01:56)
As mentioned above, we had planned to discuss Orson Welles’ The Other Side of the Wind, but given the length of our two featured reviews this week, we needed to push it back to Bonus Content. So be on the lookout for that soon. We also mention here that we’ll be celebrating 300 episodes on Episode 301 next week, as there was just too much to get into this week.
– Movie Review: Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald (1:09:16) Director: David Yates Writer: J.K. Rowling Stars: Eddie Redmayne, Katherine Waterston, Dan Fogler, Johnny Depp, Jude Law
Main Review: The Ballad of Buster Scruggs
Top 3: Best Films of All-Time
[divider]
Help Support The InSession Film Podcast
If you want to help support us, there are several ways you can help us and we’d absolutely appreciate it. Every penny goes directly back into supporting the show and we are truly honored and grateful. Thanks for your support and for listening to the InSession Film Podcast!
Director: David Yates Writers: J.K. Rowling Stars: Eddie Redmayne, Katherine Waterston, Dan Fogler, Johnny Depp
Synopsis: The second installment of the “Fantastic Beasts” series set in J.K. Rowling’s Wizarding World featuring the adventures of magizoologist Newt Scamander.
[/info]
J.K. Rowling has been entertaining millions with her magical world of books and movies for twenty years. Her newest addition, The Fantastic Beasts series, is a more mature and widespread counterpart to the original Harry Potter stories, something that the first film established very well. I’ve always liked the Harry Potter universe but prefer this prequel and its characters more than the first series. I think it does a good job keeping the adult fans, who grew up with Harry Potter, enthralled with the wizarding world.
There’s so much to say about this movie that I don’t know where to begin. It picks up a few months after the end of the first one, set in Europe, lots of new adorable creatures, it’s less of a family film, J.K. Rowling changed things up a bit (probably to make you angry), and it may take a few viewings before you fully understand what’s going on.
The main antagonist, known from the first film, is Gellert Grindelwald (Johnny Depp). I thought Depp was amazing in this film. He doesn’t play an outright villain in a lot of films so I was interested to see what he’d do with Grindelwald’s character. He did not disappoint. He was charismatic and creepy and a perfect bad guy. Depp’s recent “current events” only add to his character’s creep factor, so I’m happy he wasn’t recast.
The returning characters were mostly good. Newt (Eddie Redmayne) is still his loveable, awkward self, and Joshua Shea is a perfect young Newt. It took me a few minutes to realize it was a different actor and not a CG’d younger Eddie Redmayne. Ezra Miller (Credence Barebone) is one of my new favorite actors. I’m very excited to see the combination of Miller and Depp in future films. (They have a total of five planned). I also loved the casting choice of Jude Law, who portrayed an excellent “Youngledore”. The rest of the cast was okay, I was disappointed at the lack of development with Tina, Jacob, and Queenie, and the plethora of random, confusing side characters.
The feel of the movie is dark and foreboding and that is solidified within the first two minutes of the film. The rise of Grindelwald’s character is eerily similar to historical events. The movie has its comedic relief moments (mostly Kowalski) but that dark cloud is always there. Also, I don’t know what version of Ancestry.com J.K. Rowling uses to keep these characters and family histories straight, someone with an advanced degree in genealogy must be involved. This film also includes subtle (and not so subtle) nods to things from the Harry Potter series, so be on the lookout for those.
Side note: Can we talk about how fabulous James Newton Howard’s score is? He took advantage of the addition of Dumbledore and Hogwarts to weave in hints of John Williams score from the original Harry Potter films. Colleen Atwood also does an awesome job with the costumes (I need ALL the shoes), but she has been dressing Johnny Depp for about 30 years so this probably wasn’t a challenge for her.
The movie isn’t perfect. It does throw a ton of information at you in a short time span. It took me an hour or two of deliberation to fully grasp what had happened in the movie. It’s also NOT A KIDS MOVIE. It drives me nuts to see five or six year olds in movies with mature themes or copious amounts of murder. It also had lots of fan-pandering (baby nifflers, I’m not mad) and obvious “meant for 3D” moments. I don’t like it when films have scenes that are awkward unless you’re seeing them in 3D, not everyone likes to see 3D movies. There’s also a huge moment at the end that is upsetting many die hard Potter fans. I won’t give it away, but I am among the people who are not happy about this plot development. I am hoping J.K. Rowling fixes this in later films.
Overall, Fantastic Beasts: Crimes of Grindelwald is a decent addition to J.K. Rowling’s universe. I think I still like the first one more. It’s obviously a bit of a filler film, which some people may not like, but I don’t have a problem with. Definitely will see it again and I’m excited to see how this series plays out and will be impatiently waiting for film number three. I suggest seeing it soon, I don’t know how long the internet can keep its mouth shut on some bombshell spoilers
This week on the InSession Film Podcast: Extra Film segment, Jay and Ryan talk about a 2018 release that started filming in the 1970’s from a director who died almost 35 years ago. That’s right, Netflix has given us a new film from acclaimed auteur Orson Welles! His film, The Other Side of the Wind, is an experimental look at the world of Hollywood. The film’s accompanying documentary, They’ll Love Me When I’m Dead (from director Morgan Neville), is also discussed, as it shines a light on Welles and the intentions of The Other Side of the Wind. Jay and Ryan’s opinions on the film differ, but the conversation brings out some interesting points about the film, itself, and what the film means to the film world, at large.
The guys then discuss Joel Edgerton’s Boy Erased, one of the major players leading up to the awards season. Do Jay and Ryan believe it deserves to be in the running for the big awards this year? Listen to the show and let us know what you htink about both films in the comment section below. Thanks for listening!
– Movie Review: The Other Side of the Wind () Director: Orson Welles Writer: Orson Welles, Oja Kodar Stars: John Huston, Oja Kodar, Peter Bogdanovich, Susan Strasberg
– Movie Review: Boy Erased () Director: Joel Edgerton Writer: Joel Edgerton (Based on the memoir by Garrard Conley) Stars: Lucas Hedges, Nicole Kidman, Russell Crowe, Joel Edgerton, Flea
We try to make this the best movie podcast we possibly can and we hope you enjoy them. Subscribe today on iTunes, Spotfiy or Stitcher, and please leave us a review on iTunes. You can also find us on Soundcloud, PlayerFM and TuneIn Radio as well. We really appreciate all your support of the InSession Film Podcast.
To hear this Extra Film episode and everything else we do, download our apps on the Amazon Market for Android and the Podcast Box app on IOS devices. The mobile app covers all of our main shows, bonus podcast’s and everything else relating to the InSession Film Podcast. Thanks for your wonderful support and listening to our show. It means the world to us!
Director: Julius Avery Writers: Billy Ray, Mark L. Smith Stars: Jovan Adepo, Wyatt Russell, Mathilde Ollivier
Synopsis: A small group of American soldiers find horror behind enemy lines on the eve of D-Day.
[/info]
When I first heard rumors about Overlord, a new film from Julius Avery and produced by JJ Abrams, I was fairly excited. The film was initially rumored as a new piece to the Cloverfield universe which gave it a lot of attention. However, later a statement was released quelling those rumors and confirming that Overlord would indeed be a standalone film in no way be connected to Cloverfield. But by then the film had already captured my interest and I was still looking forward to a late night viewing. Mid-2018 the first trailer released and like most others, it heightened my excitement. The trailer looked like a wild chaotic ride of horror and fast-paced action. Unfortunately, though the film failed to capture the adrenaline rush I felt the trailer promised.
Overlord jumps off just how I imagined, a build-up of pulse-pounding tension that just explodes off the screen. It was a great start and I buckled up for the next 90 minutes. But immediately after this fast-paced opening, the film comes to a crawl and pretty much remains this way until the last 20 minutes. There is still some tension but very little action. This is my biggest gripe with Overlord, the pacing. Again referencing back to the trailer I had an expectation that this movie would be go-go-go with a lull here and there but instead, we got the opposite. This wouldn’t be a bad thing as there are plenty of great films that fit this profile, however, what Overlord doesn’t do well is fill in the gaps where the action is now void. If we are going to spend a lot more time alone with the characters I would expect a certain amount of backstory and character development. But aside from a few exceptions, we are given very little in regards to who these people are.
Don’t get me wrong, Overlord is not a bad film, the story is interesting and it will keep you engaged. The film does a good job of creating connections between the characters, there is an adorable bond between Tibbet (John Magaro) and a young boy Paul (Gianny Taufer), and enough is given for us to make sense of their actions. And outside of the science fiction aspect nothing in the film feels far-fetched, there are no “Why is he/she doing that?” moments that we find all too often in horror films. As a warning, there is a short scene involving a sexual assault that felt awkward and misplaced in the film. I felt like the scene could have been omitted or handled differently, as its only purpose is to move the story along and create tension between our heroes and the main antagonist. Aside from this though the film is an enjoyable experience with some decent performances.
I wasn’t familiar with any of Jovan Adepo’s work prior to Overlord but I found his performance as Boyce, the main character and audience surrogate, very satisfying however it is Mathilde Ollivier stole the spotlight. Her war-hardened no bullshit taking Chloe was a pleasure to watch and was the only character to really pop on-screen. In a film where character outlines really remained as sketches, Chloe is the only one we truly get a real feel for. We get a quick 30-second monologue from Boyce about his life prior to the war but that’s it, the remaining bulk of his time is spent scrambling about and appearing lost in the chaos going on around him. With Chloe through storytelling and some of her actions, we learn a little more about what is important to her and her place in the war. As a side note, Ollivier’s face seemed incredibly familiar but I couldn’t place from where and when. I browsed through her IMDB and was surprised to find Overlord was only her second full-length film. However, there are three other pending projects one titled “Untitled Female Driven WW II Spy Thriller” which just sounds exhilarating and I am looking forward to seeing more from her.
Overlord is a good movie but had potential to be much better and definitely more fun. If the film had better-implemented action and more monsters/mutants I would have probably been able to see past its shortcomings and just enjoy it as a popcorn flick. However, with the approach taken, we should have seen more in-depth characters and a stronger script. The final act although containing most of the meat also veered off towards campy sci-fi with a tacky and quite predictable villain. Overall ‘predictable’ is the best description for Overlord. Although it kept me entertained there was no point in time where the film really wowed me. The film is too safe in its execution and I feel like it could have really brought something to the screen we hadn’t seen in a long time. Instead, I spent the hour and a half just watching everything play out and by the time the credits were rolling I thought, “Cool.” and then left the theater. The film is worth the price of admission but if you can catch it at matinée pricing that would be ideal, just be sure to ignore the tone of the trailer going in or you might find yourself a little disappointed.
In honor of Steve McQueen’s upcoming Widows, his first feature since his Best Picture-winning 12 Years A Slave, it is time I’d write something a little more contemporary. It has been 10 years since he debuted his first full-length feature and, despite the power and brutality of his last two films, his first one, Hunger, is what struck me the hardest in terms of him as a visual filmmaker. The same goes for his lead actor, Michael Fassbinder, his editor, Joe Walker (Sicario, Arrival), and director of photography, Sean Bobbit (The Place Beyond The Pines, On Chesil Beach). What striking power we saw in his last two and we can expect in Widows all started 10 years ago and even beyond there.
Background
Hunger is set around the 1981 H-Block Maze Prison dirty protest, where members of the Irish Republican Army (IRA) imprisoned began a no-wash protest, refusing to bathe and shave, wear no clothes rather than prison clothes, and smeared the entire cells with their own human waste. They demand to get back their status as a political prisoner which was revoked five years earlier and new UK Prime Minister, Margret Thatcher, took the hardline against the IRA. (“Crime is crime is crime, it is not political,” she said.) Bobby Sands, serving prison time for possession of firearms, was the commanding IRA officer in H-Block and decided to lead a hunger strike, willing to even die for his cause.
For the British and Irish, it is an event that is always remembered, mainly by those who were alive and haunted by images of the protest and reactions, as McQueen was. It made reverberations even in the US with the Irish-American population and murals of the protesters (spoiler alert: 10, including Sands, died; Thatcher responded by saying, “He chose to take his own life. It was a choice that his organization did not allow to many of its victims.”) It also started a push for the nationalist Sinn Fein party to rely on elections rather than have their paramilitary faction take over.
The Image Of A Shithole
McQueen came from a visual art background, mainly using still photography and avant-garde short films in his work. The techniques he utilized transferred over into his full movie making, keeping dialogue at a minimum, with the exception of the turning point in the second half where Sands decides to go on the fateful hunger strike. First, you see the extent of the resistance by the strikers and how harshly the guards and riot police go in to break it up. When a new prisoner enters his cell naked and with only a blanket to cover himself, he sees his cellmate already smearing the walls with his shit. Later, when everyone is taken out so the cells can be cleaned, one cleaner is bemused to see on the wall a rendition of a maze, making a symbolic path to how the prisoners need to escape but can’t find their way out.
The brutality of the guards is obvious. Nothing is said; they grab them one-by-one, hold them down in a tub while cleaning and shaving them. Later, McQueen goes 360 with his camera as the prisoners are beaten and probed grotesquely without cutting away. But the shots are not always making the guards vicious and barbarous in their sadist ways; one guard leaves and starts crying from the constant roughs of the job and another is seen at the very start exiting his home and looking under his car for a possible bomb, reinforcing the viewers of the paranoia the British faced by the IRA at the time this was happening. (The Troubles, as it was called, lasted from 1968 to 1998, ending with the signing of the Good Friday Agreement.)
Philosophy Of Dying
The IRA was a predominately Catholic group fighting against the authoritarianism of a distrustful Protestant-based government. Murdering is not moral, but it is the only way they could make a statement in resisting the pressure by the British military. Killing one’s self is also not permitted, but when the backs are against the wall and one dares to challenge an authority like the new Prime Minister, the “Iron Lady,” as she was nicknamed, martyrdom by any means is the answer. The leads us to the most powerful, direct, and most talkative scene in the film. It is also one where nothing moves, yet it is the hardest scene a director could possibly film and challenges how long a take can be. With visual exposition comes Sands and a Catholic priest (played by Liam Cunningham) discussing, like a scene from an existential play, the value of human life.
It is 17 minutes long to be exact on a medium-shot of Sands and the priest talking at a table smoking cigarettes and building up to the most highly political moment in the film. It only breaks when Sands gives a fable of a story from his childhood to justify his decision to gamble his entire life for the sake of a free, united Ireland. The discussion of what life means is as strong as any of Robert Bresson’s fables, or the monologue by Michael Stuhlberg to his son in Call Me By Your Name, and even the deeply philosophical voiceovers said in The Thin Red Line. The pain Fassbinder has to physically show then courtesy of a 900 calorie diet he followed for months to get to same malnourished state as Sands in his last two months is explicit on the screen. Naked, weak, and covered with body sores, it becomes an excruciating reminder that this was a true story and that, as rough as political protests may get, this form is among the harshest in such a dismal chapter of The Troubles.
A Cinematic Portrait Of A Consequential History
This is McQueen’s masterful stroke of work of what he’s done so far and I can hope to see again this November with Widows. Moving from the biographically graphic to the suspenseful is quite the transition, but I suspect McQueen, based on the trailer has already invoked the dark, ominous tone that has been present from Hunger. It is more dialogue-based, but McQueen has not strayed away from the visually rich he prides himself in doing with long takes. Having seen Hunger at least half a dozen times, it is impossible not to notice how McQueen makes every inch of the frame his own canvas in coloring the bleakness of the cells and the violence that ripped thousands of citizens in the conflict. The pain feels real and the final shots, the final breaths of someone was willing to take, drive in Hunger and the meaning of it all.
Director: Paul Dano Writers: Paul Dano, Zoe Kazan Stars: Jake Gyllenhaal, Carey Mulligan, Ed Oxenbould
Synopsis: A teenage boy must deal with his mother’s complicated responses after his father temporarily abandons them to take a menial and dangerous job.
[/info]
Paul Dano’s Wildlife is one of the most confident and efficiently told directorial debuts of the last few years. His craftsmanship is robustly perspicacious and intuitive, demonstrating just how much he learned from working with the likes of Paul Thomas Anderson, Denis Villeneuve, Steve McQueen and other notable directors in his career as an actor. He paces Wildlife deliberately, and perhaps that slow burn approach will be too serene for some, but everything as its place. Every line of dialogue, every edit, every frame, every camera movement has a specific purpose and it makes for a concise experience that never lacks in dramatic tension. At every turn, whether it be the conversations, the ambiguity of the performances, or even the film’s cinematography, every scene is essential to the story of this film and their unraveling. Wildlife may have all the bearings of a 1950’s melodrama, but thanks to Dano’s incisive control over every component, it’s anything but melodramatic.
Jerry (Jake Gyllenhall) and Jeanette (Carey Mulligan) live with their son Joe (Ed Exenbould) in Montana, after having just moved from Idaho. Jerry works at a Golf Club as an assistant. Jeanette doesn’t work at all despite being qualified for a few jobs. However, one day Jerry loses his job and it ignites a feud between the two as to what they were going to do next. Eventually Jerry finds a job working with the local firefighters to help stifle burning wildfires that pose a threat to their hometown. This does not go over well with Jeanette or Joe. Jerry feels, though, that this is something he needs to do and leaves until “winter” arrives.
Working in parallel with Dano’s direction is an understated, but powerful, script written by Dano and Zoe Kazan. It heavily leans into subtlety while also providing great detail and insight into the decisions made by these characters. In particular, there is a lot of nuance poured into Jerry and Jeanette’s actions as it relates to pride and the heavy consequences that come about when you’re unable to control it. This is especially pertinent because their marriage isn’t consumed with riches or materialism, in many ways their dignity is all that they have. Their home is modest, they don’t have a well-functioning TV, just an old-timey radio they listen to in the evenings after dinner, even their car is old-fashioned by 1960s standards (which is when this story takes place). So when their pride, especially Jerry’s, comes into question after he loses his gig at the Golf Club, he becomes distant and longs for something better, even if that takes him to dangerous places. “Why didn’t dad take his job back?” Joe asks at one point. Jeanette’s response? “Well, maybe his pride got hurt, that happens sometimes.” Dano and Kazan’s script has much to say about the uncertainty of masculine pride and its (perhaps unintended) consequences. Jeanette was an unassuming wife who did what her husband asked of her. She didn’t have a job despite being qualified, she made dinner, cleaned up while the boys listened to the radio, and supported Jerry when he lost his job. Jerry’s decision to leave forced her into a compromising circumstance, compelling her to make questionable choices in order to take care of her son. In the end, both of them do things that are arguably immoral, but Dano and Kazan do a great job of making them empathetic. There are affable reasons behind the dubiousness of their actions.
It’s in those ideas where the performances of this film shine. Jake Gyllenhaal does a great job of rendering a man whose pride is at stake. If he doesn’t do something extreme, he may lose his family, something Gyllenaal taps into that very well. Carey Mulligan is next level though. Her performance here may be the best of her career. Jeanette becomes a side effect of masculine pride and her detour into selfishness is poignant despite being questionable, something Mulligan emulates with diligent care and credence. For those same reasons, the sudden shift in mood in Jeanette is believable after Jerry leaves them. Ed Oxenbould is the concrete that stables everything though. He’s reserved through most of the film, but it’s mesmerizing how he quietly reverberates a vulnerable adolescent who simply longs for famliial togetherness. The tenderness of that final shot is evocative and very affecting, a moment that thrives on the shoulders of Oxenbould’s warm presence in the film.
That moment also works because of Dano’s direction. What’s perhaps the most striking about Wildlife is how he uses the camera to tell this story and elevate the themes underneath. For as much as he relies those captivating performances and subtle ambiguity, the visual storytelling within Diego Garcia’s cinematography beautifully compliments the work of his actors. The bus stop scene, the moment where Joe learns the truth about his mother, the stationary shot outside the Brinson’s home, the hillside view of the wildfires – all great scenes that use visual imagery to voice the concerns of our characters and develop the boiling emotions surrounding the story of this family. As far as directorial debuts go, this is up there with Bo Burnham, Trey Edward Shultz, Alex Garland, Greta Gerwig, Jordan Peele, and Robert Eggers as one of the best we’ve seen in recent years.
Wildlife may not be for everyone due to its patient approach, but if you’re willing to embrace its energy, it’s a rich experience that heartbreakingly looks at the costs of pride, the lengths parents are willing to go for financial stability and ultimately the longing for familial togetherness from the perspective of adolescence.
