Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy

I saw Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy a few days ago, and I'm frankly, shocked that this wasn't up for Best Picture or Cinematography.

Okay, okay, I promise from here on out I'll only talk about it on its own merit. Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy is incredibly dense and sometimes confusing, but it's definitely worth it to stick with it. The premise is simple: In the middle of the Cold War, George Smiley, a former spy, is pulled out of retirement to find a mole within the British Secret Intelligence Service, referred to as 'the Circus', after the chief dies. The story is, of course, much more complicated, with a web of coverups and secret plans and a failed operation that got an agent shot. We get glimpses of the other spies through flashbacks and impressions of other characters, and there's a point where you have a lot of pieces of the puzzle but no idea how they fit together. I remember getting restless around the 90 minute mark, but in the last half hour everything finally begins to come together.

Tinker Tailor requires careful attention from the viewer, but in return it presents a methodically constructed story. There is no scene without a purpose, no unnecessary shot, no useless line. One thing I noticed is that scenes often ended with a hanging question that is explained by the next scene, instead of a character responding with exposition. Not only does this streamline the dialogue, but it also mirrors a theme of the film; Smiley has been given an unanswered question to solve. There are also small details that may take more than one viewing to pick up on; I didn't realize that Smiley's glasses are different in flashbacks until it was pointed out to me, for instance. The cinematography is also wonderful; there is a scene where Smiley lays in wait for an enemy, and the camera switches to a first person view with the slight bob of each breath.

The last thing I must mention is the superb acting. Gary Oldman is getting the most recognition for his nuanced performance as Smiley, but I think the supporting cast deserves just as much attention. Benedict Cumberbatch and Tom Hardy are wonderful as younger spies, one who risks everything to catch the mole, and the other gone AWOL, but the real star is Mark Strong, whose last scene is perfectly heartbreaking. If you're up for a slow burning, tense film, Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy is a must see.

Top Whatevers of Whenever

I've only seen a pitiful 16 new releases in theaters this year, so I definitely can't do a top ten list. I also have several films I still have to see (and might not be able to see for a while unless money falls from the sky), and so this is probably not going to be a comprehensive list. But awards season has begun, and I want to highlight some films that I've really liked (even though I've already wrote about most of them).

A documentary I highly recommend: Into the Abyss
I just wrote about this, but I'm still flabbergasted that it kinda came and went without much fanfare. It was one of many documentaries snubbed by the Oscars shortlist, but that honestly seems to happen every single year. I think the grandeur and uniqueness of Herzog's other doc this year, Cave of Forgotten Dreams, simply overpowered the anticipation for another Herzog doc. The death penalty just can't beat out 3D and albino crocodiles (or was it alligators?), and it's a true shame. Not that I'm putting down Cave of Forgotten Dreams, which I also liked, but Into the Abyss had a deeper effect on me and a deeper meaning.

Other documentaries I saw include With Great Power: The Stan Lee Story, which was interesting, but didn't go into as much detail as I would have liked, Connected, which didn't go on the cliched 'everyone is overstimulated' road that I thought it would, but still didn't quite do it for me, and My Perestroika, a charming film about growing up near the end of the Soviet Union, which I wish got more attention. I have no idea if any of these films have or will come out on DVD, but I'd recommend Cave of Forgotten Dreams, and if you can find it, My Perestroika.

A Foreign Film: The Skin I Live In
Shame on me! This is the only foreign film I've seen this year! (Unless you count London River, I suppose, but I'm not sure it actually counts as one.) As I mentioned in earlier posts, I knew absolutely nothing about this film except 1) it starred Antonio Banderas, 2) it was directed by Pedro Almodovar, and 3) the trailer was fucking nuts. None of those things disappointed. Looking back on it, I can see why some other critics called it a mess; the film does have some subplots in the beginning that get pushed aside by the real meat of the story, but to be honest, I don't think it's that big of a deal. I'm sad that it isn't on the Oscar shortlist (I don't even think Spain submitted it), because there are great themes being discussed in a disturbing but effective way. Self-image, identity, the male gaze, and the awareness of the male gaze are themes set up from the beginning, and they're handled impressively.

Life / Death film of the year: Melancholia
Yeah, yeah, yeah, I know Tree of Life was beautiful and all, but Melancholia hit its notes much better than The Tree of Life. (Though I think it's a travesty that the Globes passed over both of them for Best Drama. Hey, they had a few American stars! Come on!) Melancholia is one of those films that I'm not sure if I'd watch again, but I'm very glad I saw it. It's easy to write off Justine's sequence as drawn out and boring, and argue that the message is that we all deserve to die, but that's not looking closely enough at it. Why is the planet (and film) named Melancholia? We have a depressed person and a potentially life-threatening planet named after it, and Von Trier has outright said this was his film about his struggle through depression. The wedding sequence is about depression viewed from the outside; Melancholia is a distant point in the sky, and Justine is isolated from the world, something which the other characters cannot understand. She has a family and a husband that loves her, but they either minimize her emotional problems ("Why can't you just be happy?") or shrug them off entirely. In the second half, Melancholia towers over the Earth, and suddenly the feelings of dread and doom that were incomprehensible are perfectly understandable, and Justine almost revels in the "I told you so". Depression is something that's hard to truly understand unless you've gone through it; it really does feel like some unstoppable force is crushing the life out of you, and von Trier is focusing on that feeling along with a proposed Apocalypse.

I mention The Tree of Life with this because I honestly found the film to have a pretty depressing message, and attempts a similarly stylized and cosmic scale as Melancholia. While Tree of Life really is visually stunning, it rung hollow for me in a way that sharply contrast with what I believe was its intended message, whereas Melancholia is intentionally playing into hollowness.

I'm almost positive this won't be at the Oscars; Von Trier's silly antics aside, it's only gotten three nominations and one win for Best Picture (the win being from the European Film Awards, which I don't think have a lot of weight in our corner of the awards races). And while The Tree of Life is a pretty divisive film, I'm pretty sure it was better loved by critics and Malick has more profundity cred than Von Trier. Maybe it could at least be nominated for cinematography?

I can't explain why I liked this but it was awesome: Drive
I'm not entirely sure why I can't articulate what I liked so much about Drive. Maybe because I saw it five months ago? Maybe because its strengths are its stylish hero, stylized world, and Albert Brooks taking a menacing but nuanced turn as a crime boss? I don't know. I can completely understand why it won't get nominated for Best Picture; it's slick genre with nuance, but it's still a genre movie at heart. But I really hope Albert Brooks continues to get recognized, though I'm pretty sure he'll lose to Christopher Plummer. Nicolas Winding Refn also might be a spoiler in Best Director which would be pretty interesting. He got the award over Terrence Malick in Cannes, and with how well Drive is put together, I can see why.


Yo dawg, I heard you like film: Hugo and The Artist
A critic I follow on twitter (I think someone from the AV Club, I can't remember) asked why everyone hates sentimental mush unless it's about film. To me, the answer is obvious: Hugo and The Artist both play with technical elements (3D cinematography and sound editing and aspect ratio) to both enhance the film experience. Hugo definitely has a few storytelling problems, and The Artist is a simple film at heart, but they're more whimsical than sentimental. If I had to place one over the other, The Artist is a better film, but both are worth seeing. I'll eventually write more about Hugo once I see it again in 3D.

As for awards, these two are definite frontrunners, and I think Hugo really deserves Best Cinematography.  And while I'd prefer Refn to get Best Director, come on. It's Marty! How could I say no to him?


Wait, I should mention this one too: Certified Copy
So...I kind of lied when I said The Skin I Live In was the only foreign film I had seen this year. For some reason I keep convincing myself I saw Certified Copy last year, and while it did release internationally last year, it didn't come here until 2011. I guess I also forgot to mention it because I'm not really sure I liked it; it's a very well done experiment playing with art and reality (it's all particularly meta), but while it's interesting, I'm not sure how much I enjoyed watching it. If you're looking for a film to make you think, I would still recommend it; I certainly don't regret spending money on it.

And now, because I am an inherently negative and jealous person (not going to even hide it), let's talk about some not so great films.

Director, I am disappoint: A Dangerous Method
Man, what the hell happened here? When it came out I wondered why it never went wide like I expected it to, but after seeing it, I can understand why. Cronenberg (and really, everyone involved) took the easy way out, and threw in some bad storytelling along with it. Viggo Mortenson wasn't bad as Freud, so I can't say that he most definitely did not deserve a supporting actor nomination at the Golden Globes, but it seemed more based on "it's a great actor playing a historical figure!" than anything novel in his performance.

Welp, you get what you pay for and I didn't pay a cent: Another Earth and London River
The cool thing about living in New York is that occasionally, something cool happens for free. The cool thing about being an IFC member is every month or so they kinda flit a secret screening at you. So I didn't pay anything to see Another Earth and London River, and I went in knowing little to nothing about them, which is probably for the best, because I wouldn't spend money on either. Another Earth wastes two good premises (the mirror Earth and a former student fresh out of jail for vehicular manslaughter) to tell something about relationships that you can see coming a mile away. London River tries to say something about terrorism and social tensions, but just ends up as yet another "White People Realize That Minorities Aren't That Different!" film, and we really should all be past that.

Aren't things great now that white people saved everyone else from racism: The Help
I don't want to reiterate my ire for this film, but I'm extremely disappointed that Octavia Spencer won Best Supporting Actress  at the Globes this past Sunday over Bernice Bejo. Can we move past the "I'd rather play a maid than be one" stage? I'm truly appalled that it apparently won Best Picture at the Black Film Critics' awards, and if Viola Davis actually wins an Oscar for this, I'm going to throw up in my mouth.
Okay, probably not literally but it really bothers me how much attention The Help is getting like it's deep and meaningful and oh my goooood people were soooo terrible back then good thing we're all best friends now! I feel like I have to go see Pariah or rent Malcolm X in penance or something.

I hope I can get a job or have money dropped on me so I can get a chance to catch up on films, but I may have a chance to see The Descendants soon, which has been getting tons of attention. It even seems like it might be the frontrunner for Best Picture, even above The Artist. Not really sure if I'm going to like it, but who knows? Instincts can be wrong. Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy is also coming soon; I can see that for pretty cheap and though it's been ignored for a lot of awards ceremonies lately, I think it's going to be important.

Why I like Amadeus despite deriding the costume drama genre

Alright, I am going to say this right now: I have a horrible bias against costume dramas. To me they’re all about repressed rich people opressed by societal norms and there’s always someone who must marry someone else even though they are in love with another person oh no! And there are affairs and shame and it’s all supposed to be super intruiging and maybe a war or some other historical event comes around and messes everything up or there’s some sultry affair and it’s all very dignified with British accents. I’m sure this is completely unfair and somewhat inaccurate, but I just see costume dramas as everyone falling in love with Poofy Dress Eras and assuming that’s a signifier of a Prestigous Movie with Pretigious British Actors, and I’m sick of it.

And yet, despite all this bitching, one of my favorite movies is an Oscar-winning costume drama. How could the person who just wrote that bullshit above have fallen in love with a two and a half hour Poofy Dress Film in middle school? There are two reasons I can think of.

The first being that Amadeus doesn’t have the classic elements of repression or restrictive society or even forbidden love at all. Sure, Salieri has his vow of chastity and unrequited love for his muse, but the entire point of the film is that society seems to bend over backwards for Mozart. The only obstacles caused by society are the ones that Salieri takes advantage of to bring down Mozart. Mozart supposedly has sultry affairs, but it’s not dwelled upon or treated as particularly scandalous for anyone but Salieri. And what’s presented as Serious Business isn’t as much political standing as the understandable and real feelings of Salieri.

And that brings me to the second reason: the actual themes of the film apply to any time and anyone. Amadeus is about two things: inferiority and jealousy. Who hasn’t met someone like Tom Hulce’s Mozart; someone who effortlessly beats you at whatever you do best, who seems to get all the luck and attention? There’s always that one person in school who aces the test everyone else bombed, the one person at work who doesn’t screw up a single thing, and the worst part is when they’re just so fucking nice about it. Salieri sees Mozart, this goofy looking lowbrow kid, and can’t believe that his best efforts pale in comparison to Mozart’s work. Why is he better than me, me who has made music my life’s work, he asks, and that’s something that people will always be asking. Why are things harder for me than for that guy? Why can’t I do as well as everyone else? When will I get my turn in the spotlight? No matter what the society, time, country, economic or social status, everyone has or will have those feelings at some point in their lives. I had felt it before when I was a fourth or fifth grader watching Amadeus in parts in music class, and it’s still relevant to me as a twenty-something.

Of course, there’s more to the film than just the themes. F. Murray Abraham delivers an amazing performance that lets us see ourselves in Salieri, and Tom Hulce is unforgettable as the perky, crude, obnoxious, and brilliant Mozart. The art direction and costumes are amazing; Mozart’s choice of wigs is a small touch with a surprising amount of meaning, and the cinematography is beautiful. Milos Forman borrowed a lens from Stanley Kubrick so he could shoot almost every scene without added light, which I can tell you is extremely impressive. The way the music is incorporated into the film is spot-on as well, and it all weaves together to create a truly great film.

I can’t imagine how any of the few people who read this wouldn’t have seen this film, but if you haven’t, it’s an absolute must. This clip is pretty late in the film, but it’s my favorite scene, and if this doesn’t impress you, I don’t know what will.

(I will note one thing: unfortunately, the version of Amadeus that’s easiest to get is the Director’s Cut, which is not actually Forman’s cut, but just the film with all the deleted scenes shoved back in. It’s still a great film, but it pads the runtime to about three hours, and the film is perfect without it. The theatrical version is only found on an old release that uses a double sided DVD, which is annoying.)

A Dangerous Method

I usually avoid trailers because of spoilers and/or trust in the director and actors, but maybe I should have this time, because A Dangerous Method was not what I expected it to be.

A film about the relationship of Sigmund Freud and Karl Jung seemed interesting enough to me; psychoanalysis completely turned the field of psychology upside down, and since has become the most well-known form of therapy in pop culture. We all know something about Freudian psychology, but Jung's work, especially post-Freud, is also interesting, and I was prepared for a film examining the depths of both men's work. The addition of Sabina Spielrein, Jung's first foray into psychoanalysis, seemed like a perfect way to bring the two together.

Unfortunately, Cronenberg takes the easiest route possible and solely focuses on the most rudimentary sexual elements of psychoanalysis, shoving the themes of sexual repression into the audience's face. There is little focus on the relationship between Freud and Jung, instead revolving around Jung and Spielrein's relationship. I don't think it's a spoiler to tell you that it turns sexual, or that the film's conflict is surrounding Jung's guilt over their affair clashing with psychoanalytic views of sex. The relationship between Freud and Jung is rushed through, and after Sabine recovers, any other applications of psychoanalysis are completely glossed over in favor of sex scenes. The dream analysis scenes between Freud and Jung only serve to tell the audience about what we already know is in Jung's head or to show that hey, Freud is all about sex, right guys? We also hear Freud rejected Jung's alternate ideas, but there's little explanation of what these are, because apparently Jung sleeping with his patient is much more interesting.

Even if you ignore the wasted potential of the premise, the film is still very disjointed; each scene seems like its own entity that doesn't quite link with the scenes before or after it. Early in the film Jung complains about having to serve in World War One, but by the next scene, he's already back and nothing significant has changed! It is necessary at points for the film to jump forward in time, but it's done sloppily, which makes the already uneven pacing even worse. Apparently it was adapted from a play, which might explain the odd choices in pacing, but it certainly doesn't excuse it by any means. And this is getting away from a review and going towards my pure opinion, but how many damn costume dramas have we seen that involve repression and scandalous sex? Perhaps none with S&M involved, but Cronenberg is still falling into well tread territory that I'm not afraid to admit completely bores me.

The performances as a whole are serviceable, but I have to mention Keira Knightley's contortions as an untreated Sabine as a particular low. Pulling off hysteric jerks without overdoing it is undoubtedly difficult, but jutting out your jaw to look like you're imitating a bulldog will never look good. It's been two weeks since I saw this film, and I'm still really disappointed in it. Cronenberg and everyone involved could have done so much better.

Into the Abyss

I'm still not entirely sure how to write about Into the Abyss, except to say that it's about so much more than the death penalty. Herzog has outright said that he opposes capital punishment, but Into the Abyss doesn't try to be political. He doesn't put the death penalty in a vacuum; the film details the triple homicide committed by the two prisoners Jason Burkett and Michael Perry from the actual crime scene all the way through the execution of Michael Perry. Into the Abyss is more about the consequences of crime and murder than simply an examination of the death penalty.

Herzog looks at all sides of the murder, from the victim's families to the prisoner's acquaintances to the poverty and crime in the area they grew up in, to the chaplain and officer that are involved in the execution ritual. He attempts to explain but not necessarily excuse why anyone would commit murder, and that leads to the most moving parts of the film, where he interviews Jason Burkett's father, who is also in jail and has been for most of Jason's life. I can't do justice to his scenes in print except to say that it left me in tears.

At least one critic has mentioned that the title of the film could be the title for a lot of Herzog films, and while that's definitely true, I think it does fit best here. The abyss isn't even necessarily death, but the grief of the victims' families, the regret from a father that wasn't there, the trap of poverty and delinquency, the weight of working in a place where you know the person you are looking at is going to die. Herzog's last documentary, Cave of Forgotten Dreams, has gotten more attention, but I truly believe that Into the Abyss is the more meaningful film.

film write-up round up

Okay, I’m putting off my Hugo review until after tomorrow, since I’m seeing it again in 3D. I’m also probably seeing Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy on the same day, and should be catching Shame pretty soon. That makes the future write-up list:

• Hugo (3D)
• A Dangerous Method
• Into the Abyss
• Tinker Tailor Solider Spy
• Shame

And if I can justify spending more money, I definitely want to see if I can check out some smaller / indie films in the next month or two:

• Pariah - I’ve heard wonderful things about it, and I really should start getting into more black filmmakers. Also, if it’s good I can recommend it to my mom, and if it’s not too sexual I might even see it with her! Always good.
• Martha Marcy May Marlene - Another film getting a lot of praise, in particular Elizabeth Olsen’s performance. One of those things that might not be my type of movie, but I think it’ll be interesting.
• Carnage - I’ve heard kind of mixed things about it, but I love Jodie Foster and Christoph Waltz, so come on. I have to. I’m also waiting for it to come out at the cheaper theater so I can pretend I am somewhat responsible about my money.
• We Need to Talk About Kevin - I actually would have seen this earlier, but it got pushed back to the end of January, so oh well.
• Rampart - A crime movie? A corrupt cop? Grittier than grits? Fuck yeah!
• Margin Call - I’ve heard this is extremely underrated, so I think I might try and catch it before it leaves theaters.

…man that looks like a ridiculous amount now that I think about it. I am trying to see more films though now that I can; I can’t decide if 16 new releases in 2011 is a big amount or still small…(Into the Abyss and A Dangerous Method don’t count because I saw them this week.)

The Help

I will admit, I had a feeling I wasn’t going to enjoy this film. So far I haven’t been able to articulate the genre of film that I tend to gravitate towards, but I can definitely say that this wasn’t it. But my mom was interested in it, so I had to give it a fair chance. After all, I always advocate going out of your comfort zone. Unfortunately for me, this time my gut instinct was correct. The Help has some serious problems.

This movie is supposed to be about the racism that the black maids experience in pre-civil rights Louisiana, with an interesting twist about these maids’ relationships with the children of their employers. The plot kicks off with Skeeter, played by Emma Stone, coming back from college and finding out that her family maid Constantine, who practically raised her, has mysteriously disappeared. An aspiring journalist, she is stirred to interview black maids about raising white children, starting with one of her friend’s maids, Aibileen (played by Viola Davis). Soon Aibileen’s friend Minny (played by Octavia Spencer), who has been fired for daring to use her family’s bathroom instead of the one for the help outside, becomes a part of Skeeter’s project as well.

But as much as the film tries to convince us that Aibileen is the main character by having her as the focus of the first and last scenes, it’s really about Skeeter, which is terribly disappointing. The beginnings of the civil rights movement are only shown through brief glimpses of TV news or in one scene where Aibileen is forced to get off a bus when it heads through a crime scene where a civil rights activist was shot, whereas we have to slog through Skeeter’s romantic life. This film falls right into the “White People To The Rescue” trope that really needs to die already.

The performances in this film have been lauded even by their detractors, and I agree to a certain extent. Viola Davis, Octavia Spencer, and Emma Stone are all wonderful, although Octavia Spencer does at some point have to play the Sassy “Mmm hmmm” Black Lady role. But who really stood out to me was Jessica Chastain, who plays my favorite character in the film, Celia. She takes on Minny after she is fired because she can’t cook and is afraid her husband might leave her otherwise, and she’s shunned by the rest of the community for being tacky and rumors that she stole somebody’s boyfriend. Her growing relationship with Minny feels genuine, sweet, and funny, but unfortunately is just a side story.

And that’s the big problem with this film. There’s too much Wise Black Servant and White Person With Radical Views For The Time and especially the Terrible White Villian, played by Bryce Dallas Howard, who seems like she should really be the leader of the popular girls in a high school comedy. Skeeter’s role as White Person With Radical Views is also frustrating, especially since I have heard she wasn’t so liberal in the book. But the stock stereotypes don’t stop; what convinces Aibileen to tell her story to Skeeter? A sermon about Courage and Standing Up For What Is Right, of course! The ending is especially annoying. After Skeeter gains success and escapes racist Louisiana for New York, the film tries to make us cry at the end by having a scene where three characters are crying, one of them an abandoned toddler. But it’s supposed to also be a happy cry, because Aibileen quits, escaping the most terrible white people, and walks off into the sunset knowing she is free. Roll credits.

And that’s the last we see of Aibileen, as if that’s enough closure for her. She lost her job and is (figuratively) walking off to who knows where, but her voiceover is liberated, so she’ll be okay, right? I was told the book gives her a much more definitive happy ending, but seriously?

The sad thing is, The Help is clearly trying to say something meaningful about having to raise kids that aren’t your own and women’s roles in society in general, but it really gets bogged down in sentimental and overdone bullshit.

Hmmm

I should have three new film posts coming up soon:

• The Help: I got this for my mom for Christmas and we watched it together. I really should write something in full, but to give a preview: I hated it. It’s baa manipulative tear jerker about a white woman who’s Not Racist Like THe Rest Of Them and how she helps some poor black people. I mean, the film tryies to say it’s about Abeline by bookending it with her voice over, but when she walks into the sunset, we don’t have any idea what is actually going to happen to her! But Skeeter got a happy ending, so it’s ok, right? 
• Hugo: I think I might see this again in 3D since I had to see it in 2D nd I just feel like it might be more impressive. I have to admit I took a while to get absorbed in the film; it starts off pretty average children’s movie. I didn’t love it the way I expected to, but it’s really sweet and I loved Chloe Mortez as Isabelle. 
• A Dangerous Method: I don’t really know what I was expecting from this film, but it was really disappointing. I might simply have been mistaken; I had assumed that the film was mostly going to be about Freud, Jung, and their theories, but really it was about sex, repression, and Keira Knightley. But even ignoring my disappointment in the plot, I felt this movie was really disjointed. There wasn’t enough connection between scenes or events, so everything got pretty flat. 

I’m also planning on seeing Shame and Into the Abyss soon, probably tomorrow. I also saw the trailer for Rampart and now I’m really interested in it.

I guess part of the reason I haven’t written anything is because I’ve felt a little blah about movies in the last week or so. I was definitely not in a good mood going into Hugo, and I might not have the money to see it again to get a new view. I had also sort of forgotten about A Dangerous Method a little, so I’m wondering ifmy mood is affecting my enjoyment of movies.

Then again, I’m totally stoked for Rampart, so maybe I’m just not doing well with brighter movies. Who knows, I just hope I get my shit together soon.