Brooklyn

Brooklyn

This film plays more like a fairy tale than a drama. Ellis Lacey (Saoirse Ronan), the pretty young Irish girl sails to America on a ticket bought by her sister, stays at a nice boarding house and has a job waiting for her in a upper class department store (upper class for Brooklyn that is). To a real immigrant of that period these events would be fantastic.

The first hour of the movie is a bit slow and is used for plot set ups. Ellis manages to find her place in the boarding house with the other white Irish girls. At work she is mildly reprimanded by her superior for being too moppy since it depresses the customers. Her moppiness comes from homesickness. This is soon cured when she meets an Italian-American fella. At this point the film gets more interesting.

Things really get going when she returns to Ireland. Not to give too much away there are entanglements back home. Ellis’ has some difficult dilemmas straining her moral compass.

All the actors did a fine job. None of the roles were too demanding. Ronan had some emotional moments but no great tragedy. Domhnall Gleeson is infatuated with her. His most demanding scene was swimming in the Irish Sea. The Irish and Italian immigrants all get along (another fantasy). The movie had a brightness to it. Everything was clean, the streets, the cars, the immigrants, everything! The film literally glows.

This is a great date movie. The movie gets interesting when things go bad. Rather than being a victim of circumstance, Ellis’s injuries are self-inflicted. 

Spotlight

Spotlight

By now we are aware of the molestation of children by predator priests in Boston. So Spotlight has no new revelations, but still it is a powerful dramatic story of investigative journalism uncovering the dark secret of silence and abuse. The film is brilliant and captivating. It makes you wince when you hear the stories of the victims. The cover up and manipulation by the Church is repugnant.

This is a true story by the Spotlight investigatory team of the Boston Globe. The actors give powerful and impassioned performances. The two lead actors are Michael Keaton and Mark Ruffalo. Ruffalo is unrelenting and passionate to uncover the story. He is obsessed and manic. Keaton is the Spotlight editor. His performance is understated in contrast to Ruffalo. This dichotomy produces tension between Keaton and Ruffalo. These two actors propel the film.

Racheal McAdams is a reporter. As with her colleagues she is troubled and saddened by the abuse. She conveys this well in her performance. She does a fine job but I think short of an Oscar nomination. Levi Schreiber plays the new editor of the Boston Globe who initiates the investigation. It takes an outsider to see what others do not. He is low keyed, but singular in uncovering the abusers. Stanley Tucci is a lawyer defending victims who at first in uncooperative and cantankerous with the Spotlight reporters. Tucci gives a nuanced performance between an irritating lawyer and a crusader for children.

The film maintains strong tension. The abuses and cover ups build up throughout the film culminating in clashes between the establishment and the press. The conflict between the Church the victims and the reporters was well orchestrated.

All the actors give heartfelt and outstanding performances.  This movie is poignant for depicting the suffering of the victims and the callousness of the Church. See this movie, you will not be disappointed.

The Hateful Eight

The Hateful Eight

This film felt more like a play than a movie. It was divided in to five chapters and the first three chapters are as slow as molasses on a winter’s morning with lots of dialogue and little action. The film is set during a blizzard in post-civil war Wyoming in a stagecoach way-station. The majority of the action takes place in a one room cabin. Samuel L. Jackson is an ex-military officer turned bounty hunter transporting two dead frozen criminals. Kurt Russell is also a bounty hunter but his prisoner is alive and nasty, Jennifer Jason Leigh.

Tarantino has a distinctive approach to violence, academically it is referred to as the “aestheticization of violence”. I have no idea what the hell its means but after seeing this movie it must mean lots of crap. When the film revs up in the last two chapter’s blood and brains splatter all over the screen. It is violence for violence’s sake. Tarantino’s’ violence is predictable and at this point lacks imagination.

There is an excessive use of the “n” word in the movie. Tarantino is like some kid trying to see how often he can say a bad word before getting his ass kicked. It is offensive, dull and unimaginative. Hay Qunit, a location suggestion, the South Bronx.

This movie is humorless. Tarantino usually interjects some light comedy i.e. Pulp Fiction-Royal with cheese for a quarter pounder. The lack of humor makes the film grim.

The plot is not too complicated. It does not have the intricate twits of Pulp Fiction. It is more like Kill Bill with cowboy boots. It is an excuse for Tarantino to wallow in mayhem, guns, machetes, and poison as is his want.

The actors are his usual ensemble. Their acting is more cartoonish than dramatic. Jackson is more loquacious than the rest but completely bad ass.  Kurt Russell is almost unrecognizable behind his beard. Tim Roth, who is English, has a lousy British accent. Jennifer Jason Leigh gets dirtier and bloodier as the film progresses.

This film disappoints. I think it is just an ego film. Much has been said about the 70mm format of the film. Here size does not matter, but content does.

The Revenant

"The revenant," from the 19th century French verb revenant, meaning someone who returns from a long absence, or a person or thing reborn.”

This movie is about love, survival and revenge. For the first three fourths of the movie DiCaprio has little to no dialogue. What is better acting with dialogue or without? If done well both are effective. In this movie DiCaprio gives a tremendous physical performance with close ups framing his emotions. The physical demands of this performance are a tremendous challenge which DiCaprio meets.  When DiCaprio does speak it is a crescendo for all the tribulations he suffered.

In part this movie is based on the real life adventures of early 1800’s trapper Hugh Glass. Scenes in the movie are attributed to Glass’s story (DiCaprio’s character is named Glass). This movie is brutal.  The opening scene is an attack by Indians with carnage reminiscent of the opening scene in “Saving Private Ryan” for is visceral depiction of battle.  If you are uncomfortable with very realistic gore this is not your movie.

The movie is stark, almost minimalist. There are haunting vistas of snow covered forests and ice cold running rivers. This sets a somber mood reflective of Glass’ tortured journey. The cinematography is stunning and the vast emptiness of territory magnifies the harshness of Glass’s sojourn. The shoot must have been extremely difficult to make.

Tom Hardy plays his usual tough guy role. He has plenty of dialogue and mercifully the English accent dialed back. As Glass’s antagonist he did an excellent job. Domhnall Gleeson is becoming a staple in American cinema. He usually plays laid back characters, but here as the leader of the expedition he is more intense and challenged.. He does a fine job. Will Poulter plays Jim Bridger, the young trapper manipulated by Tom Hardy. For Poulter this is a dramatic shift from his early comedic role in “We are the Millers” where he plays a clueless nerd.

Native American Indians are prominent in this movie. They are brutalized and brutal themselves. With atrocities on both sides it is hard to see who is the savage. Then there are the French, they do not come off to well.

I saw the movie on a Tuesday afternoon, the theater was packed. This movie is getting a lot of Academy buzz. It may not be for everyone, but am glad that I saw it.