Iñárritu’s Birdman Pushes the Envelope in Every Direction

In talking about Birdman, it’s hard to know where to start.  If you were to encounter a time traveler from the 18th Century, where would you begin describing the complexity of the modern world?  Such is the challenge this film presents.  It’s an almost excruciatingly intense journey through four days in a has-been actor’s life, culminating with the opening night of his Broadway play; probably his last chance to resurrect his career and find meaning in a squandered existence.

The assault on conventional filmmaking by Alejandro Gonzalez Iñárritu, who directed, co-wrote and co-produced Birdman, begins in the opening scene, where we encounter the protagonist, Riggan (played by Michael Keaton), levitating in a lotus pose in his dressing room at the Saint James Theatre.  Once he concludes his meditation, he begins a conversation with a menacing, bodiless voice while practicing telekinesis on objects in the room.  He’s then summoned to the stage for a rehearsal that is interrupted when a light falls from the overhead grid onto another actor’s head.  However, this is only a momentary respite as we start to realize that the camera never seems to cut and the drama never stops.

Things are complicated for Riggan, his family, the cast and crew of What We Talk About When We Talk About Love, the short story by Raymond Craver that Riggan has adapted into a play.  Relationships are messy.  Egos and insecurities are big and real.  Broadway is a tough place to make it, even if you were once a big-time movie star, whose heyday was 20 years ago playing a comic book character in a bird suit (thus the title of the film).

If we, the audience, were given a moment to contemplate any of the blistering scenes where these problems are offered up and contested, we might be able to find our feet in this narrative.  But that would seemingly work against Iñárritu’s plans for us.  He wants us to be on the roller coaster ride with Riggan as he tries to make it to opening night and hold his tattered life together.

It’s appropriate that this film is about a play and set in a theater because it probably had to be shot like a series of theatrical performances.  The takes are long, really long and the editing is clever enough to make the whole movie seem like one, continuous shot.  In order to pull this off, not only do the actors’ performances have to be spot on all the way through a scene but the ever-moving camera has to dance with the thespians while all the technical aspects of filmmaking (lighting, sound, focus, etc.) need to be right as well.

The supporting cast (Edward Norton, Naomi Watts, Andrea Riseborough, Emma Stone, Amy Ryan and Zach Galifianakis) are all strong in dealing with a script that strains credibility at times.  Director of Photography, Emmanuel Lubezki (Academy Award winner for last year’s Gravity), is sure to get consideration again come award season for the way he shot this film.

Leaving the theater after seeing Birdman, I struggled to know whether I’d liked the film or not.  Such was intensity of the viewing experience.  I knew I was impressed with Iñárritu’s skill, imagination and ambition in taking filmmaking in a new direction.  He also brought in elements of magical realism to the story as Riggan seemingly maintained the powers of his former Birdman persona.  Casting Keaton as a kind of parody of himself was also an artful way of taking a swipe at the movie industry and the films it churns out year after year.  Ultimately though I think Iñárritu is trying to say something profound about modern life:  In some way, we’re all Riggan.  We’re all performers trying to pull something off and hold things together in a 21st Century world where everything is instantaneous.  If that is what modern life is about then Inárritu is making it look easy.

Wes Anderson Sucked Me In Again At The Grand Budapest Hotel

Of all the directors currently working in Hollywood, there is perhaps no one who personifies the term “one trick pony” more than Wes Anderson.  His seven live-action features to date have all been remarkably similar.  At their center is a weird character or group of weird characters on some kind of fanciful quest.  They’re often portrayed by actors who you might consider too big to be playing such a role and yet there they are.  The look of these films is always kitschy, cutesy and detailed to the extreme.

I enjoyed Mr. Anderson’s earlier works (Rushmore, The Royal Tenenbaums and Bottle Rocket).  I was less impressed with some of his later efforts (The Darjeeling Limited and Moonrise Kingdom).  Yet I decided to give him another chance with The Grand Budapest Hotel.  I was glad I did.

The movie focuses on one M. Gustave, wonderfully portrayed by Ralph Fiennes, the concierge at the Grand Budapest Hotel.  The hotel is not located in Budapest, as the name might suggest, but in the fictional Republic of Zubrowka.  Zubrowka could be a stand in for Hungary or perhaps the Czech Republic except for the fact that everyone speaks English.

M. Gustave is very popular with the wealthy, elderly widows who frequent the Grand Budapest.  When one of these grande dames dies suddenly under suspicious circumstances, M. Gustave gets entangled in the distribution of her estate with her wicked heirs.  Assisting the suave concierge in these adventures is the dutiful lobby boy, Zero Moustafa, ably depicted by Tony Revolori.  The action plays out as the storm clouds of World War II are gathering.

Since all of Anderson’s films are so remarkably similar, it’s hard to say why this one falls into the category of “the ones that worked” rather than “the ones that didn’t”.  Ultimately, I believe it comes down to the central character.  Can they carry off the whimsical tale or can’t they?  Jason Schwartzman was able to do it in his acting debut as Max Fisher, the protagonist of Rushmore.  Gene Hackman also succeeded as the charlatan patriarch and title character of The Royal Tenebaums.

Ralph Fiennes prevails here with his energetic portrayal of a wonderfully contradictory and outmoded character.  M. Gustave personifies his hotel and the high standards it represents.  He lords over his domain with an iron hand but is still prone to flights of fancy and even immoral acts when they suit his needs.  Gustave is something of a Don Quixote as he struggles to preserve a rapidly disappearing world of style and civility that is about to be stamped out completely by the impending war.

There’s precious little new ground covered in this movie, aside from the evil specters of fascism and war always lurking on the edge of the frame.  However, if you’re a Wes Anderson fan, you’ll enjoy The Grand Budapest Hotel.  The director trots out many familiar faces as he always does.  The look of the film is also unmistakably Andersonesque.  So if you’re so inclined, go out and enjoy this latest peek into the mind of America’s most singular filmmaker.

Packing A Lot Into The Weekend; A Review Of Labor Day

If the emotional scars that people carry around with them were visible, many of us would be a mess.  Yet the fact that this damage isn’t apparent doesn’t make it any less real or debilitating.  We try our best to cope with it or treat ourselves to the extent that we’re able.  We continue through life with these wounds, telling ourselves and others that we’re alright.  Occasionally, there are times of healing, when real strides can be made toward recovery.

Labor Day, adapted for screen and directed by Jason Reitman, is the story of such a period of rehabilitation.  The film recounts a long weekend in the late summer of 1987 when the injuries of the past are undone to a greater or lesser extent for three damaged individuals.

Henry, portrayed by Gattlin Griffith, is the 12-year-old son of Adele (Kate Winslet).  He’s stayed with her and done as much as a kid can to help his mom after his father has left them for his secretary.  The two are limping through their isolated lives together in a small New England town when they come across an escaped convict named Frank (Josh Brodin) while out shopping.  He convinces them to take him back to their house so he can lay low until he has the chance to slip out of town.  Inevitably, Frank ends up staying longer than he’d initially planned and the time the three of them spend together is cathartic for everyone.

Reitman’s adaptation of Joyce Maynard’s novel has its strengths and weaknesses.  While the idea that people thrust together by fate can be a salvation from one another is appealing, the scenario where a mother, no matter how lonely or vulnerable, would give a ride to a strange man she’d just met in a dollar store strains credibility.  I found myself going along with this development and others, realizing that they were necessary to move the story along.  This brings up another flaw; the predictability of the narrative.  I kind of knew where things were headed and kept getting the feeling that I’d seen parts or variations of this tale before.  That being said, there were still enough positive aspects of the story to make it moderately enjoyable.

At the center of Labor Day are these three characters; Henry, Adele and Frank.  Their interactions and the development of their relationships are the interesting aspects of the film.  The boy is the protagonist and the story is recounted from his adult point of view.  He’s angry at his dad for leaving them and needs the reassurance a father provides.  Adele and Frank have suffered tragedy in their lives.  Their backstories come out sporadicly in flashbacks throughout the movie.  They relate to each other in a way that only those who’ve experienced great loss can.

Kate Winslet, Josh Brodin and Gattlin Griffith all give solid, understated performances.  Brodin’s Frank probably leaves the strongest impression with his assertiveness, physical presence and profound decency.  None of the secondary actors in the film really have a chance to shine as their roles are generally small and their characters one-dimensional.

I commend Jason Reitman for keeping things low-key.  Other directors might have felt that such a situation called for more drama and bigger performances.  Reitman seems to realize that characters nursing emotional wounds are more prone to muted discourse than spirited theatrics.

There’s nothing particularly eye-catching or memorable about Labor Day.  It hasn’t received a tremendous amount of critical acclaim or done a ton of business at the box office.  What I can say for this movie is that it makes a concerted effort at quiet, ernest sincerity.  The extent to which it achieves that will vary from viewer to viewer but I appreciate the attempt.  For certain individuals, who can identify with these characters, that might be enough.

Labor Day is rated PG-13 (Parents strongly cautioned) for brief violence and sexuality.

Imagination Lives in Hollywood in the Person of Spike Jonez; A Review of Her

How closely connected to machines will mankind become in the future?  What will that society, those relationships and the machines be like?  These are the questions that Spike Jonez takes on in his new film Her.  Jonez, his cast and crew investigate these questions with intelligence, compassion and, above all, imagination in what I think is the most original movie since Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind.

In a not so distant future, Theodore, wonderfully portrayed by Joaquin Phoenix, is a man whose marriage has recently fallen apart.  He’s living alone in Las Angeles and works for a company that writes personal correspondence on behalf of its clients.  His life is pretty lonely until he installs a new operating system on his computer.

The OS, voiced by Scarlett Johansson, calls herself Samantha and is a breakthrough in artificial intelligence (AI).  This AI allows Samantha to quickly develop a very close and intimate relationship with Theodore.  It’s fairly easy to understand how the human can be drawn in by the machine but what’s interesting is that the OS seems to need the human as well.

From here on, the film follows the arc of Theodore and Samantha’s relationship.  They go on dates, they travel, they have sex (scandal!).  Some friends approve of their relationship and support them.  Others are less enthusiastic.  And like most relationships, this one too comes to an end but I won’t go into the how and why here.

Other than being incredibly original, the thing I liked about Her is that it’s a film for adults.  It moves slowly and really makes one think.  In writing the screenplay, Spike Jonez had to imagine the computerized consciousness of a super-intelligence machine that doesn’t currently exist.  That’s no small feat and yet he pulls it off in a way that I found very convincing.

The dialogue scenes between Theodore and Samantha are the most interesting for me.  Normally, we’re accustomed to seeing a wide shot of the two participants at the beginning of such a scene, followed by single shots of each character speaking and sometimes reacting to what the other has said.  In Her there is only the physical presence of Theodore so the camera has to stay on him the whole time, usually tight on his face.  Watching his engagement and subtle reactions to their authentic dialogue is wonderfully insightful.

Ultimately I suppose Her could be viewed a precautionary tale of the dangers of relying too heavily on machines, especially for emotional support.  The film seems to be telling us to go forth and bravely interact with our fellow man.  Yet Her is more than this and I struggle to say exactly what.  I guess that’s the beauty of something truly original.  There isn’t already a category you can put it in.  What I can say is that the film has stayed with me, made me think and contemplate what it means to be human.

Inside Llewyn Davis: The Coen Brothers Come Up Empty

Toward the end of this movie, the protagonist is auditioning for a club owner who tells him that another artist is successful while he isn’t because the other guy connects with the audience.  Such a connection was missing for me while watching Inside Llewyn Davis.  There wasn’t enough of a story for me to follow and the title character, ably portrayed by Oscar Isaac, was too frustrating to identify with because he’s one of those people who just can’t get out of their own way.

Llewyn Davis is a folk singer in 1961 New York.  He was once half of a duo until his partner committed suicide.  Now Llewyn is struggling to make it on his own.  As the film begins, he’s couch surfing, broke and has a tendency to alienate most people he comes in contact with.  He tries to kick start his flagging career but poor decisions, his abrasive personality and plain old bad luck foil his efforts.  A cat at one of the apartments he crashes at regularly escapes and he feels compelled to care for it until he can bring it back.  A married friend, with whom he’s had a fling, is pregnant and he agrees to help her out despite the fact that she heaps all the blame and an ample helping of scorn upon him.  His manager is a well-meaning but incompetent old man, who’s unable to offer Llewyn much help.

Given these difficulties in the City, Llewyn decides to get out of town when he hears about a ride share heading for Chicago.  He hopes to get a regular gig at a folk club there but like everything else in his life, this aspiration also comes to nothing.  He returns to New York so disillusioned that he plans to go back to sea with the Merchant Marine but even this effort at capitulation is thwarted.  Finally he settles back into his old routine and the chain of unfortunate events that define his life starts anew. 

What is the viewer meant to take away from this little tale of futility?  Is it that some people are beyond help?  Are some of us destined for failure no matter how hard we try try to succeed?  I don’t know.  I’m a huge fan of Joel and Ethan Coen.  I know that they love to end their films with ambiguity and uncertainty.  If they get it right, I can leave the theater satisfied with not knowing exactly what happened in the end.  If they get it wrong, I go home feeling confused and uneasy.

I think what I needed from this film was backstory.  What was Llewyn’s life like before his partner’s tragic death?  His manager’s secretary gives him a box of the duet’s unsold records at one point so we know they weren’t a big, commercial success but was Llewyn a happier person when his partner was around?  Did he have a home?  Was he better liked by others or was his life just as sad and ineffectual?

We never find this out.  The movie is loosely based on the career of folk singer Dave Van Ronk but this fact doesn’t offer any real answers.  The bleak, desaturated look of the film enhances its mood and there are some good cameos by a strong supporting cast that includes Carey Mulligan, Justin Timberlake, F. Murray Abraham and, of course, John Goodman.  However, these elements do not make a complete film in my opinion.  If this is all that is to be found inside Llewyn Davis then I think his story is one that would have been better left untold.

American Hustle: Because Going to the Movies Is Supposed to Be Fun

I’m old enough to remember the late 1970s, the time period in which American Hustle is set.  I remember some of the crazy fashions and hairdos. I even have the yearbook photos to prove that I was not immune to the styles of the day.  I’ve also lived in New York, where the film is supposed to take place (it was actually shot in Boston).  For this reason, I recognize some of the arch-types depicted in the movie.  While knowing the when and where of this film helps, they’re by no means prerequisites for enjoying American Hustle.  That’s because the script, written by David O. Russell (who also directed) and Eric Singer, is so ridiculously funny and well-executed by Christian Bale, Amy Adams and the rest of the cast that anyone can enjoy it.

The movie tells the story of the FBI’s ABSCAM Sting and centers around a couple of con artists, Irving Rosenfeld & Sydney Prosser, portrayed by Bale and Adams, who get nabbed by an ambitious, young FBI Agent, played by Bradley Cooper.  Instead of prosecuting the pair, Special Agent Richie DiMaso decides to use them to catch bigger fish.  Irving and Sydney reluctantly agree to cooperate in order to get themselves off the hook.

As the operation plays out, it immediately becomes evident that there’s tension between these three characters.  Irving and Sydney are a couple but there’s chemistry between Sydney and Richie as well.  This causes Irving and Richie to butt heads.  Additionally, Irving is in a troubled marriage with a needy and unstable woman played by the always compelling Jennifer Lawrence.

The sting basically consists of catching politicians on camera taking bribes.  In order to do this, Irving, Sydney and Richie need a politician to make the introductions.  They find this person in the Mayor of Camden, New Jersey, Carmine Polito, who’s played by Jeremy Renner.

As always happens, things get complicated and it soon becomes hard to tell who’s conning who.  After a myriad of twists and turns, everything gets resolved but perhaps not in the way one might have expected.

Ultimately, the plot is not as important as the interaction between the characters.  Everyone in angling to get what they want and almost no one is completely on the level.  These conflicting motives, tactics and characteristics lead to some very funny situations.  Richie is crazy about Sydney and this clouds his judgement when dealing with the operation.  Irving wants to get out of his marriage so he can turn his attention to holding onto Sydney but his devotion to his adopted son prevent him from doing so.  Mayor Polito only wants to help the people of New Jersey but he can’t figure out how to bring the necessary investment to his state in a legal manner.

Hair, makeup and wardrobe are a huge part of what’s funny about American Hustle (did we really dress like that?).  The talented production professionals responsible for these iconic looks deserve a lot of credit.  Amy Adams probably wasn’t able to wear a bra for the entire movie because every dress, blouse and even leather jacket she wears have a neckline that plunges precipitously toward her navel.  Christian Bale, Bradley Cooper and Jeremy Renner all sport uniquely ridiculous hair.  Bale has an elaborate comb over that requires the augmentation of a hairpiece.  Cooper has a beautiful, curly perm that his character does himself at home.  Renner’s do is my favorite.  It’s basically a 1950s pompadour, which his character has amplified and updated so that it doesn’t look completely out of place in disco era.

All these elements come together wonderfully to make for a very entertaining film.  You’re not going to leave the theater with any great insight into the era or human nature.  American Hustle is simply an amusing stroll through a period of our past that’s starting to fade from our collective memory.  So take fond look back and chuckle not just at the times but if you’re old enough, at your younger self as well.

The Hunger Games: Catching a Rising Star, I Mean Fire

Someday in the future, someone might ask you what it was like going to the movie theater to see Jennifer Lawrence in her early roles.  I’m talking about twenty or thirty years from now when I believe we’ll think of Lawrence the way we think of Meryl Streep now; as the First Lady of the American Screen.  I hope people will still be going to movie theaters then but who knows?  What I do know is that people will always appreciate great acting and Jennifer Lawrence is becoming a great actor right now in front of our eyes.

Not that The Hunger Games: Catching Fire is the kind of serious film that defines an actor’s career.  It is however, the entertaining second installment of what is to be a four-part franchise based on the books by Suzanne Collins.  These movies require its protagonist, Katness Everdeen who’s portrayed by Lawrence, to react physically, mentally and emotionally to an often frenetic and harrowing chain of events.

And oh how she reacts!  The range and intensity of emotion Lawrence can convey with her face and eyes jump off the screen.  Her ability to share her character’s struggles with the audience draws you in.  She delivers her lines with perfect pitch.  Her physicality makes Lawrence utterly believable as the lethal archer from rural District Twelve, who survived the deadly Hunger Games.

It’s remarkable that Lawrence is able to stand out in a star-studded cast that includes Donald Sutherland, Stanley Tucci, Elizabeth Banks and Wood Harrelson.  All of them continue on from the first movie.  Add to that list Jeffrey Wright and Philip Seymour Hoffman, who’ve come on board for this second installment and it’s even more impressive.  And yet she does it by somehow allowing the viewer to feel what her character is feeling.  This is phenomenal when you consider the fact that Lawrence is still only 23 years old.

Part two of this story finds Katness back in her home district having survived the 74th edition of The Hunger Games.  These games require the Twelve Districts of Panem, perhaps a futuristic America, to send a young male and female tribute to fight to the death in a computer-controlled arena until a single survivor remains.  The Games, which are a wildly-popular, annual, viewing events in the capital city, are punishment enacted by the capital on the districts that rebelled against it.  Through a clever ploy, Katness was able to cheat the system and allow fellow District Twelver Peeta Mellwark, played by Josh Hutcherson, to survive as well.  This maneuver has endeared the two, who present themselves as star-crossed lovers, to the citizens of the capital.  However, it has also enraged their president, played by Donald Sutherland, who perceives their popularity as a threat to the capital’s tyrannical rule.

Katness is still severely shaken by the trauma that she and Peeta have just endured in the games but she has little time to deal with these emotions or the feelings she has for her boyfriend Gale, portrayed by Liam Hemsworth, as she and Peeta are sent out on a victory tour of the districts and the capital.  During the tour, Katness notices the signs of a rising insurrection.  Upon her return home, she learns that she’ll be forced to repeat the ordeal of the games but this time she’ll be facing a field of past victors rather than tributes, who are picked at random or volunteer.  There are twists, turns and turmoil as the victors journey to the capital and participate in the 75th installment of The Hunger Games, known as the Quarter Quell.  The action is intense and the end of the movie came too soon for me.  I was left wanting more but I guess that’s the point of the middle installment of a series of films.

I had a few small complaints with the movie; particularly the love triangle that develops between Katness, Gale and Peeta.  It’s reminiscent of the Twilight Saga, where Bella gets her head turned by Jacob despite confessing her love for Edward.  I guess such things are somewhat unavoidable in a film primarily targeted at a teen audience.

In the end though, it’s Jennifer Lawrence’s performance that shines through and makes this film worth watching.  At a time when women are on the ascendency in our culture, we now have a strong, female protagonist portrayed by this country’s most promising young actor.  So get out there and see Catching Fire before it’s relegated to DVD and Blue Ray.  That way in a couple of decades when some young person asks if you saw any of the early Jennifer Lawrence movies in the theaters you can answer knowingly “Yeah, I was there.”