The Shape Of Water (2017)

This is just going to be a quick review of the film as I wrote a whole wordy draft and then it disappeared (yay) but I still wanted to talk about this film on here.

The Shape of Water is a fantasy thriller by Mexican directior Guillermo Del Toro, famed for his monster-centric fairytales – perhaps the most well-known of which being Pan’s Labyrinth. The film is considered to be a frontrunner for Best Picture at the Oscars and has recently taken the top prizes for film and directing at the Critic’s Choice Awards, and nabbed the directing award at the Golden Globes.

The film follows Eliza (Sally Hawkins), a mute janitor who works in a top-secret government facility that has recently captured an ‘asset’ – an amphibian-style creature that the Americans believe can give them the edge over the Russians in the Space Race (the film is set in 1962 during the Cold War). Eliza falls in love with this creature and hatches an elaborate escape plan after its life is threatened, with the help of her co-worker Zelda (Octavia Spencer), friend Giles (Richard Jenkins) and scientist Robert (Michael Stuhlbarg). However, her plan is soon compromised by the legitimately menacing Colonel Strickland, played by the ever-brilliant Michael Shannon.

Despite the traditionalist nature of the forbidden love story at the film’s heart, Del Toro (along with cinematographer Dan Laustsen) created a visually stunning world here that is wholly unique. The individuality of this film can be jarring at first, and I spent the early moments of the film struggling to empathise with the characters or narrative. However, as the film progresses it develops warmth and a sense of excitement that is impossible to not be charmed by, and the viewer is reminded of the emotion at the movie’s core. This is reflected visually by the evolution of Laustsen’s cinematography, which transitions from cooler blue tones to rich golden colours as Eliza’s feelings for the creature develop. Alexandre Desplat’s score is also a highlight of the film, as it is equal parts playful as it is romantic, and transitions well to enhance suspense during the film’s more action-packed sequences. Del Toro’s films have always had a childlike wonder and fairy-tale sensibility to them and The Shape of Water is no exception, but there are also some heavy themes here that allow to film to appeal to a wider audience.

The acting in this film is also terrific, with Sally Hawkins’s ability to portray such a range of emotion without the use of her voice astounding. She approached the role with a fascinating blend of fragility and fearlessness that would make her an entirely worthy Oscar winner if she can edge out Frances McDormand. Michael Shannon, to me, was the other star of this film and it is a shame that he is going largely unrecognised for this role. His ability to play such a genuinely terrifying villain that is also innately human is insane, and I genuinely enjoyed watching his performance. Spencer and Jenkins also function well here as Eliza’s sidekicks, with both bringing necessary comic relief and comfort to an otherwise intense film, and I hope to see their names come the Oscar nominations on January 23rd.

Overall, this film is a visual spectacule that benefits from a talented cast and an enthusiastic director, even if the narrative is fairly simplistic. I’m giving this film 4 out of 5 popcorns.

Okja (2017)

Hello! Long time no review I know, have been watching movies constantly but this is the first time I’ve loved a movie so much that I couldn’t not review it. Quick disclaimer – this will just be a quick review as it’s 1am and I’ve literally just finished watching it but bear with me and I hope you enjoy (and watch the film!!!).

Okja is the second English-language feature (behind the thrillingly bizarre cult phenomenon Snowpiercer) from South Korean director Bong Joon-ho, and has not been without its fair share of controversy. It screened in competition at the Cannes Film Festival but, as a product of the streaming giant Netflix, was criticised by the  judges for encouraging the demise of traditional cinema. Sorry to wade into a hotly debated area but to be honest I have to agree with Joon-ho and Netflix on this one, as Joon-ho had complete freedom to create a film about a controversial topic that would only have been diluted by big-budget film corporations, and the film industry needs to adapt to the current technological climate to an extent.

The film centres around Okja, an edible ‘super pig’ designed by the Mirando Corporation for profit, and Mija (Ahn Seo-hyun), the granddaughter of the farmer appointed to raise her. Eventually, the time comes for Okja to be taken to New York and used as an advertising ploy for the company, who are masking a torrent of animal abuse behind the guise of competition, environmental sustainability and charisma, largely through the company’s CEO (played by the ever-wonderful Tilda Swinton) and a desperate, fame-hungry TV zoologist (Jake Gyllenhaal at his wackiest and most brilliant, is he having a bit of a moment currently or am I just that desperate for him to get an Oscar soon?). All is not lost for Okja’s life however, as the Animal Liberation Front (led by the fantastic Paul Dano) intervene in the proceedings.

Okja is a truly wonderful film. It is immensely heartfelt and has a few clear messages about exploitation and the terror of big business (what really goes on behind closed doors?), but places humour directly at its core. The film is visually stunning and well-directed, with the pace never lagging but still having the stability to savour key moments and further our emotional investment. The linguistic blend of South Korean and English was also refreshing to see in a film and could, potentially, pave the way for a greater acceptance of multilingualism in cinema – which can only be a good thing. The acting in this feature is phenomenal, with each actor playing up to a caricature (specifically Swinton as an unhinged heiress and Dano as an over-righteous activist) but the film never descends into pantomime territory, with each actor bringing just enough warmth and heart to humanise their characters. Seo-hyun too is a great source of emotional entanglement and the supporting actors appear to understand the wackiness of Joon-ho’s filmmaking but have enough appreciation for the story at hand to keep the slapstick to a minimum.

Okja is a wholly unique film, with only vague vibes of the Japanese animated classic My Neighbour Totoro, and is an exciting foray into a new generation of filmmaking that takes advantage of new media platforms to explore taboo subjects. I would recommend this film to anybody, for different reasons, and I believe there is something in this film that will enthrall anyone – be it the story, cinematography, acting, peculiarity or various plot twists and turns.

I’m going to give Okja a five out of five popcorns! Apologies if this review was fairly one-sided, I did try to find faults in it but honestly its exactly the kind of bizarre movie I love and I was enchanted from the moment I turned it on. I genuinely had no interest in watching it before it popped up on my Netflix tonight, but I couldn’t turn it off from literally the second it began.

Thank you for reading!

(Photo via JoBlo.com)

Golden Globes Predictions – Acting (Comedy or Musical)

The great thing about the Golden Globes lie its recognition of comedy films, so the likes of Melissa McCarthy and Amy Schumer can breathe some life into the often melodramatic awards season. But who will win?

Best Performance by an Actress in a Motion Picture – Comedy or Musical:

Melissa McCarthy (Spy) – a true master at comedy, McCarthy was hilarious in the side-splitting James Bond parody film. Though Spy was a hit with audiences, it is unlikely that McCarthy’s exuberant performance will win over the more acclaimed in this category.

Jennifer Lawrence (Joy) – it’s a tough call between Lawrence and Schumer for this award, but (having seen both films) I’m giving it to Lawrence. Though the reviews for Joy have been polarised in two very different directions, critics have been unanimous on one count – Lawrence’s dazzling yet subdued turn as the titular inventive protagonist.

Amy Schumer (Trainwreck) – Hollywood’s newest comedic genius would be an incredibly popular, and fitting, choice for this award. Her brass performance has had many pleading for an Oscar nomination for the star, with the role also displaying enough heart that makes her terrifying competition for Lawrence.

Maggie Smith (The Lady in the Van) – a seasoned actress, Smith’s nomination in this category didn’t come as a surprise. However, it is unlikely that her role in the quirky comedy will traction enough attention to win her this award.

Lily Tomlin (Grandma) – Tomlin has never won a Golden Globe, so this nomination in a slightly unstable category could see voters swaying towards the veteran. It would be a surprise, but a welcome one.

Best Performance by an Actor in a Motion Picture – Comedy or Musical – 

Christian Bale (The Big Short) – everyone knows Bale can act, and he applies his effective method acting technique to this film. He’s also no stranger to awards and is certainly deserving for his latest role, but he might just fall ever-so-slightly short of the win.

Al Pacino (Danny Collins) – this little-known film garnered praise for Pacino’s entertaining performance, but its lack of success could play against him here. It is unlikely that he can beat the front-runner this time around.

Matt Damon (The Martian) – when you are stranded on Mars, there’s plenty of room for a brillant acting performance. Damon completely embraced this opportunity, exuding charm and giving the film its emotionality and heart. Audiences and critics want to see Damon win, and so he should.

Steve Carrell (The Big Short) – a seasoned comedic performer, Carrell’s transition into leading man has been a successful one. Despite bringing emotion and laughter into a film about finance, it is unlikely he will win this one.

Mark Ruffalo (Infinitely Polar Bear) – this nomination was a bit of a shock, but there’s no doubt that Ruffalo can act. There’s very little chance he could win for this small film.

Thank you for reading!

Rear Window (1954)

Hello!

So, I recently bought a box set of four Alfred Hitchcock films (money well spent!) to expose myself to the classic pieces of  cinema he produced.

Rear Window was one of these films, and with a 100% rating on Rotten Tomatoes I thought it to be the perfect place to start.

 

The 1954 feature starring  James Stewart and Grace Kelly, two pinnacles of the Hitchcock era, follows an injured photographer (Stewart) as he is bedridden – with only the escapades unfolding before his window to entertain him. His inability to participate in the adrenaline-inducing assignments he finds through his career leads to him taking an obsessive interest in the actions of his potentially murderous neighbour across the street. Aided by his stunning socialite girlfriend (Kelly) he investigates  the man – resulting in a thrilling mystery high in suspense, as per Hitchcock’s speciality genre.

This film was wonderful and was remarkably effective in creating an atmosphere that completely captivated the viewer. Despite the fact that the entire film took place in one room with a small view of the surrounding residences, it felt as if you were exposed to a whole society – through the revealing dialogue and the in-depth characterisation that teased more intricate details about each character as the film unfolded.

Though the film was extremely slow-paced and didn’t have a multitude of action, this all contributed to a surprising crescendo that capped off the film beautifully. The humour presented in the film was also fitting and amusing, providing an essential contrast to the almost unbearable suspense that Hitchcock crafted. The acting in the film was also sublime, with Stewart, Kelly and Thelma Ritter predominately guiding the film for its 115 minutes. Stewart was understated, giving off the impression of a debonair working male but subtly showing the character’s volatile unravelling as the intensity of the mystery grew. Kelly was whimsical and a delight to watch, whilst also asserting her stereotypical socialite as an unlikely source of strength and reason.

The camera work was minimal to enhance the steady pace of the film, but used specifically to guide the audience’s attention to the small yet significant aspects to the mystery. Hitchcock’s use of colour was masterful, with the colouration used to both create a certain mood (red as evidence of looming danger) and to signify the presence of a certain character.

What I admired most about this film was its ability to fill a lengthy timeslot with one story, an intertwined common goal for each character to work toward. In today’s era (61 years after the film’s release), there is a clear focus on the ‘entertainment’ factor of films – with explosions rife and fascinating dialogue difficult to find in the highest grossing blockbusters. Thus, this film was a welcome change, making up for the lack of ‘wow’ moments through a narrative emphasis and a terrific level of suspense. What more could you expect from a Hitchcock film?

I think I’ve used enough complimentary adjectives now, so I’ll end with my rating of five out of five popcorns. Thank you for reading!

 

(Photo courtesy of IMDb)