The Post (2017)

What do you get when you combine Steven Spielberg, Meryl Streep, Tom Hanks, a strong female character, a script cowritten by the screenwriter of Best Picture winner Spotlight, a score by John Williams and a story centered around journalistic freedom in the era of President Trump’s “fake news”? Any guesses?

The answer is The Post, a film practically walking into the Academy Awards with arms outstretched waiting to claim its winnings. Calibre aside, this film is an interesting glimpse at the inner workings of a newspaper (The Washington Post in this case) and the conflict between the government and the press.

The film is centered around the Pentagon Papers, a series of top secret government files that detailed the failings of multiple presidents in continuing to send troops to the futile Vietnam War. After these files are leaked and published by The New York Times, The Washington Post find themselves in possession of the files and grapple with the decision to publish – risking the future of their newspaper and facing possible criminal charges in the process. The Washington Post is owned by Katharine Graham (Meryl Streep) who acquires the newspaper after the deaths of her husband and father, and is continually the target of misogynistic board members. She has the most to lose by publishing the papers, and faces pressure from both sides of the argument – with her advisors and lawyers on one side and her journalistic staff on the other, led by editor Ben Bradlee (Tom Hanks).

This movie is incredibly well-made, and remains entertaining despite the lengthy dialogue and complicated politics that define the film. Steven Spielberg is a great director (duh) and so doesn’t dwell on the logistics of the subject matter, preferring to focus on the difficulty of Graham’s decision and the different dynamics at play at the newspaper. The only issue I had with the narrative aspect of the film was the tendency to gloss over some pretty interesting aspects of the Pentagon Papers scandal in favour of a focus on Graham. I understand that this was her story and the film has to end at some point, but I think that more of an exploration of the decision of The New York Times to publish would’ve added some necessary context and enhanced the film’s journalistic integrity aspect.

There are some brilliant acting performances in this film and, if we ignore the leads for a second, the film is incredibly successful as an ensemble piece – with Bob Odenkirk, Carrie Coon and Matthew Rhys standing out. However, the movie belongs to Streep and Hanks. Streep’s restraint here is effective for Graham, and she has some great moments to show some strength at the end of the film. Hanks has the opportunity to be far more brash and intense here than usual and does so wonderfully, to the point that you can tell he is having fun with the character. The experience of watching Streep and Hanks act together is well worth the price of admission and the two complement eachother perfectly, through both their characterisation and their acting styles. The only issue I had with casting two people who are, arguably, the greatest actors of this current era is the self-awareness this film has. The film exploits any interaction the two have and has a tendency to prolong their frequent conversations to an almost mundane level, as if to say look -it’s Tom Hanks and Meryl Streep and they’re *acting*! This can get a little bit tedious and there were plenty of other interesting events/characters that could have used that screen time to further the film.

Overall, The Post offers an interesting perspective on an oft-discussed area of history, and has relevance to today’s political climate – making it a worthy Best Picture nominee. I’m giving it four out of five popcorns.

The Big Sick (2017)

The Big Sick, directed by Michael Showalter, is a romantic comedy that depicts the love affair of its married screenwriters; Emily V. Gordon and Kumail Nanjiani. After a surprising snub at the Golden Globes, the film looks set to (hopefully!) garner some Oscar nominations and is up for the top prize at the Screen Actors Guild Awards.

This film follows Kumail (Kumail Nanjiani), a wannabe stand-up comedian from a Muslim family, who falls in love with Emily (Zoe Kazan). After a few months of dating and a sudden break-up, Emily gets struck down by a mystery illness and Kumail rushes to be by her side despite the reluctance of both sets of parents. As the relationship between Kumail and Emily’s parents evolves, the film explores the influence of family, race and religion in romantic relationships.

The Big Sick is a surprising revitalisation of the romantic comedy genre. This film shows that it is possible to make a film about genuine real love that can be hilarious, and avoids the pitfalls and the cliches that have defined the rom-com genre over the last few years. The authenticity of the dialogue makes this film as great as it is, and the movie certainly benefits from having the two (Gordon and Nanjiani), who actually experienced the narrative, be able to tell it with such charm. The story is able to stay exciting and engaging without emerging into absurdity, which is a rarity in comedy nowadays and shows the true talent of the screenwriters – who I’m hoping will get an Oscar nomination. The direction of the film is simple but effective, and allows the characters to be the movie’s central focus.

The acting in this film is superb and, despite many proclaiming Holly Hunter to be the ‘stand-out’ of the film, functions brilliantly as an ensemble piece. Kumail’s family and best friend (Adeel Akhtar) are hilarious throughout, with the frequent infusion of Kumail’s stand-up comedy buddies also adding some lighter moments. I knew of Kumail Nanjiani before The Big Sick but had never actually seen him in anything before, so it was a pleasant surprise to be able to see him play the romantic lead as well as he did – with equal parts humour and sincerity. Despite being in a coma for at least half of the film, the charm exuded by Zoe Kazan, who I first saw in the criminally underrated Ruby Sparks, resonates with the viewer and allows us to still care for the character despite her lack of involvement for a lot of the movie. Holly Hunter and Ray Romano are absolutely wonderful as Emily’s parents and both take their characters in interesting directions, allowing for the character growth displayed by each to be palpable.

The Big Sick was my biggest surprise of 2017 and I am delighted that it is still a major topic of conversation throughout the awards season, as it certainly deserves to be up there with the best of the best. I’m giving it five out of five popcorns.

 

 

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.

Call Me By Your Name (2017)

Call Me By Your Name, directed by Luca Guadagnino, is a stylish exploration of the blossoming of love between two men; based on Andre Aciman’s novel of the same name. The film follows Elio, a Jewish teen living in Northern Italy with his parents, who finds himself grappling with feelings for Oliver, his father’s graduate student who stays with the family for the summer. The movie, starring relative newcomer Timothée Chalamet and The Social Network’s Armie Hammer, has been a frontrunner for the Best Picture Oscar since its debut at Sundance – although recent award losses may have pushed the feature out of the running.

This is a beautifully directed film. The vibrancy of the colour palette and the focus on Italy’s natural scenery made me want to book a plane ticket immediately; with the intensity of the setting being the perfect accompaniment to the passionate love between the two men. This was the first Guadagnino movie I had seen and I was transfixed by his eye for style and just how breathtakingly stunning each shot was. He treated the narrative with such respect and created a great sense of intimacy between the actors and the audience through the film’s resolve to savour each moment, enhancing the movie’s emotionality. The last sequence of the film (SPOILER – where Elio cries for a helluva long time as the credits roll) is one of the most experimental things I have ever seen on screen and only succeeds due to the emotional investment that Guadagnino persuaded us viewers to have.

The story itself is also wonderful and SPOILERS (sorry!) I was pleasantly surprised by the warm acceptance of Elio’s love for Oliver by his father. Similar narratives have tended to exploit this Romeo and Juliet star-crossed lovers cliche to dramatise gay relationships, but I loved the way that this movie allowed the audience to appreciate their affair for what it was and to level the playing field between their romance and your typical boy-meets-girl relationship. The only complaint I have about this film is the overreliance on sexual intimacy, as the frequency of the sexual scenes between the two in the second half of the film slow the pace to an almost mundane level. While this should definitely have played a major role in the film, I think the film still should have been deepening their emotional connection throughout the second half rather than their physical one. The film strayed a little bit into too-long territory (before finishing with some truly brilliant scenes) as the excitement of the affair began to dwindle after the two actually got together.

The film would not work without the performances of the two leads. Chalamet’s charisma practically jumps off the screen and he plays Elio with such fearlessness and youth that it is impossible to not become drawn in by him. Hammer is an actor that I have found in the past to be a bit wooden (I’m sorry!) but he established Oliver as the strong and worldly older man that could act as the foil to Elio’s hyperactivity. The two also played the contradictory nuances of their characters phenomenally well, as Hammer was able to exude confidence and playfulness when necessary as Chalamet delve into Elio’s bursts of terror and insecurity. Michael Stuhlbarg and Amira Casar don’t get a whole lot to do in this movie as Elio’s parents, but Stuhlbarg’s monologue towards the film’s end is a heartwrenching moment that was deftly handled by the actor.

Overall, this film presents itself as a masterpiece and that is a title that I am happy to give it. The depth of the relationship between the two characters is palpable, with the direction and the performances making for one of cinema’s greatest love stories.

I’m giving this film 4.5/5 popcorns.