Zero Dark Thirty

In posts long overdue I present to you Kathryn Bigelow's Zero Dark Thirty

This film came with a lot of hype, and considering its premise is based around the hunt for Osama Bin Laden that's not a surprise. The main complaint was the use of torture scenes in the film's first half hour. We see our protagonist Maya (Jessica Chastain) arrive at a detainee centre in Pakistan where she watches Dan (Jason Clarke) use waterboarding, depravation and humiliation in his interrogation of a detainee with ties to Saudi terrorists. Was it difficult to watch? Absolutely. Was it a shock to consider that the US used torture during their hunt for Bin Laden? Definitely not.

Bigelow, who is so far the first and only woman to win an Academy Award for best director (don't even get me started), returns from the high of The Hurt Locker with this dark, compelling story about Maya, a CIA agent who spent ten years focussed on tracking and killing Bin Laden. The film starts off on a dark note with torture, then takes it's time to slowly unravel the frustration, the lies, the losses and gains as Maya tracks America's most wanted man. There were a few scenes in the middle, particularly the ones featuring CIA agent Jennifer, that seemed a little unnecessary (I'm still not certain why she was baking a cake), but overall the film had a great pace and kept the focus where it needed to be, on Maya.

Chastain's performance is flawless. She incapsulates the pain, struggle and compromise necessary to do the job she does. The film depicts her as lonely but that never seems to bother her. I think for people who dedicate their lives to such tasks the true loneliness comes after their missions are completed. It was so refreshing to see a film about military conflict highlight a woman, and not in a sexually objectifying way like so many do. My main complaint after The Hurt Locker was that the film had been so male-driven. It's not that I think female filmmakers have to make 'women's' stories, but for a filmmaker as fearless as Bigelow is I was anticipating a film like Zero Dark Thirty.

This film is not for everyone. It's not a feel good, happy Hollywood tale. It's dark and gritty. People get tortured, people die. If you don't mind violent images and Hollywood taking liberties with war history then I highly recommend it. The last 30 minutes of the film are explosive with some of the best action sequences I've seen on screen. Performances are natural and compelling and it wont be a surprise if Chastain takes home an Oscar. The Academy have outdone themselves this year by robbing Bigelow of a Best Director nod in favour of five male directors (Although Ben Affleck is notably missing from the list too). I'm not worried though. As long as Bigelow keeps making films the way she does change is inevitable. She's redefining what it means to be a female in film, perhaps a position she's not comfortable with, but a necessary one nevertheless.

Silver Linings Playbook

I can't help but get a little personal with this review. I grew up with a bipolar parent and have intimate knowledge with the highs and lows of such a crippling disorder. So often depression is depicted in film as something 'hollywood', that is to say inaccurate. The thing is depression doesn't just affect the person suffering, it also affects those who love them. Silver Linings Playbook by director David O. Russell is a refreshing film, which depicts bipolar disorder for all it's colours.

The film follows Pat (Bradley Cooper) who at the opening of the film has spent 8 months in a mental institution. I don't want to give anything away, but let's just say his bipolar spoke for him when it shouldn't have. He moves back home to his parent's house and has one mission: get his wife back. Enter Tiffany (Jennifer Lawrence), a recent widow who's trying to work through her own crazy circumstances. The two are brought together, each with their own agenda, and something spectacular happens.

This film is inspiring and uplifting. The acting is incredible, each emotion played authentically. Robert DeNiro shines as Pat's bookie, OCD father, and Jacki Weaver brings heart to her role as Pat's mother, who's trying to keep her family in tact. I have to be honest in saying that before this film I never really enjoyed Bradley Cooper as an actor, he'd never before been given a chance to show his talent. This film has changed my view of him. He brings truth to his character, showing the different elements that make up bipolar disorder. His character reminded me of something I had long forgotten; even depression has it's highs. Jennifer Lawrence is stunning as a grieving, emotionally lost, yet strong young woman. I have enjoyed watching her career thus far and can't wait to see what else she brings to the screen. She's definitely one to watch for.

I recommend this film for various reasons. It's a smart screenplay under great directorial guidance. The acting is of the highest level. And most importantly, it brings to light the reality of a disorder that so many suffer under. It reminds us that we all deserve a second, or maybe even a third chance at happiness.

Argo: A Review

Fifteen years ago Ben Affleck burst onto the Hollywood scene with the 1997 film Good Will Hunting, which he co-wrote with childhood friend Matt Damon. Affleck and Damon went on to win an Academy Award for Best Original Screenplay. It seemed however that Affleck's acting career was quickly overshadowed by Damon as Hollywood played it's all time favourite game of comparison. In 2003 as Damon was riding the high of the successful The Bourne Identity (Dir. Doug Liman), Affleck was trying to get away from the negative publicity that swarmed his critically panned film Gigli (Dir. Martin Brest).

Affleck directs on the set of Argo

Affleck had a skill however that Hollywood had yet to see. In 2003 he directed a film he had written called Gone Baby Gone, an emotionally charged drama centered around the kidnapping of a little girl in Boston. He followed this with The Town in 2010, a critically acclaimed drama, set near Boston, in which he directed and starred. It seemed that Affleck had successfully stepped out of the shadow and into his very own spotlight. With two dramas under his direction, it wasn't a surprise to learn that his third film would also be a drama. It was a surprise however that he chose to take on a highly political subject like the 1979 American Embassy hostage crisis in Iran. 

Affleck's Mendez goes through the plan with the American fugitives 

Argo begins in the thick of it, the protests outside the American Embassy in Tehran. Flags are being burned, anti-American slogans are shouted passionately. Affleck doesn't just fly the camera through quickly and rush to the American point of view. His camera stays with the protestors, hearing their anger, letting them have their say. By the time you do get inside the embassy and meet the six fugitives to be you have an understanding that this is not a film about who is right and who is wrong. Politics, although always in the background, are never focussed on. 

Mendez and O'Donnell (Bryan Cranston) pitch the best bad idea they've got 

Just before the embassy is overrun six employees escape and are taken in by the Canadian Ambassador, Ken Taylor and his wife. There is a line in the film which states that the British and the Kiwis refused them help. This is factually incorrect. The British and the Kiwis helped get the fugitives to the Canadians, and Taylor and his wife played a much larger part in the rescue. This is a story where only one true hero can emerge however, and not surprisingly that hero has to be American.

John Chambers (John Goodman), Leister Siegal (Alan Arkin) and Mendez (Affleck) have one last toast before showtime

The film is emotionally powerful to say the least. It has you on the edge of your seat all the way through, allowing enough humour to break the tension, but never too much to distract from the gravity of the situation. The idea of sending Tony Mendez (Affleck) into Iran as a would-be filmmaker for the fictional film "Argo", and walking out with the six hostages posing as a film crew is ludicrous, yet as the film quotes "it's the best bad idea we've got". The first half of the film sets up the fake film. It needs to be real, so real that Hollywood buys it. Enter our producer Leister Siegal (Alan Arkin) and makeup artist John Chambers (John Goodman), the only two Hollywood players that know the truth of what the CIA is attempting to do. Arkin and Goodman supply much of the comic relief in the film and do it so brilliantly you eagerly anticipate their appearances on screen. Affleck's Mendez is sober, solemn and serious, the key player in showing the tension. As our protagonist his point of view becomes ours, where he goes we go, and where he goes is where no American would want to have gone in 1980. We have no reason to believe that he will be successful except for a short acknowledgement that he is the best and he's never left a man behind. However, we find ourselves daring to believe he'll be successful because the alternative is too tragic to consider.

The stakes are high as Mendez and the fugitives are questioned by security 

What follows is a suspense-ridden, high stakes game of cat and mouse where the only way to win is if the mice keep a step ahead of the cat at all times. The cinematography creates the illusion of it being shot in the early 1980s, lending a nostalgic, somewhat documentary feel, creating a sense of realism. Although Mendez is clearly the hero of the film there is still a sense of ensemble work from the supporting cast, including a great performance by Bryan Cranston as Mendez's CIA supervisor Jack O'Donnell. 

Affleck may never be able to fully shed the horror that was Gigli, but if that old Hollywood adage that you're only as good as your last film holds true then Affleck is going to be ok. 

Women at War

Last Friday I attended a screening of the documentary The Invisible War (Dir. Kirby Dick, 2012) at the Vancouver International Film Festival. Going in I knew it would be a difficult watch, with a subject matter that revolves around the rape of soldiers in the US military I anticipated that it would be a heavy film. I didn't anticipate however the strong reaction it would have with myself and the audience around me.

The documentary investigates what can only be described as an epidemic of sexual assault in the US military. The statistics tell us that 20% of female soldiers in the US military have been sexually abused. We know from statistics that 80% of sexual abuse victims do not report assaults, therefore the number would in fact be significantly higher. The film introduces us to a number of rape victims from a series of military outfits including the Navy, Marines and Coast Guard. It is nothing short of horrifying listening to their experiences, going from proud, dedicated soldiers to broken victims at the hands of not only the perpetrators, but also the US military.

Elle Helmer

Hearing their ordeals was difficult enough. The sobs of the audience members around me told me I wasn't alone in this. Where it gets really difficult however is when you find out what the US military did after the victims reported their assaults. That would be a whole lot of nothing. Due to the military's own form of justice the victims had to go through their chain of command to report the abuse. Those in positions of power however are not trained or equipped to deal with such matters, and as one interviewee noted it would be seen as a leadership failure if it got out that there had been an assault in their unit. Therefore the assaults are 'dealt' with by the military, and this usually means that the perpetrator walks off free.

Kori Cioca and her husband 

That unfortunately isn't the worst of it. The majority of  women who did report abuse ended up being investigated themselves. They were told that their accusations were false, or that they had bought it on themselves. One of the women we see, Kori Cioca received her papers and was discharged after she reported the rape. Her story is particularly tragic. Not only was she sexually violated, she was also physically abused by her attacker, so much so that it broke her jaw. When we see her in the film she has been on a soft diet for two years because of the injuries she received at the hands of the perpetrator. She has been waiting over 14 months for medical aid from the military, and near the end of the film we find out she has been denied. A variety of ridiculous reasons are given, one being that she was two months shy of the two years of service needed in order to be eligible for aid. She was two months short of two years because she was discharged for reporting her attacker. He is currently still working at the US Coast Guard.

The film brings to light the military sexual assault prevention and assault program, which basically consists of telling female soldiers to walk with a buddy, and reminding male soldiers to "ask her when she's sober". When they interview Kaye Whitely, the former director of the program she clearly has no expertise and no actual system in place for rape prevention. The whole program seems to be an attempt to appear as though prevention is in place when it is fact not.

I cannot recommend this film enough. Although the subject matter is heavy and the stories disturbing, it is vital that we bring such atrocities to light and ensure that this does not continue to happen to both men and women in the military. The film encourages us to share this story with friends and to sign this petition: http://www.change.org/petitions/support-military-sexual-assault-survivors, and I encourage you also. Please check out http://invisiblewarmovie.com/ for more information and make sure that you spread the word and ensure that the victims never have to feel invisible again.

There Should Have Only Been One

I'll never forget when I was 17 years old and was at the movies with my father. I can't recall the film we were watching but a trailer came on and my dad, who rarely gets excited about films, couldn't hold back his excitement. The trailer was for The Bourne Identity. My father had read the book and he spoke of it's intrigue and mystery so naturally I had to read it too. I ended up being the only one in the family to read the trilogy. I fell in love with the chaotic world of Bourne. I eagerly anticipated The Bourne Supremacy and was a little stunned to find that they had completely parted ways with the novels, however The Bourne Ultimatum was so much fun I didn't mind at all. The latter two films were directed by Paul Greengrass, a director who is able to keep a handle on the story whilst creating thrilling action scenes. All three Bourne films were written by Tony Gilroy, a very talented screenwriter. 

After hearing that Matt Damon didn't want to do another Bourne film I resigned myself to the fact that the films had come to an end. Hollywood however will never let a cash cow die. I was both excited and a little apprehensive when I found out that a new film entitled The Bourne Legacy was being made. When I saw that it was being written by Gilroy I realised that there was nothing to worry about, until I saw that Greengrass was not on board. Rather than replacing Greengrass with an equally skilled director producers handed the reigns to Gilroy, whose directing credits had only two films (Duplicity, Michael Clayton). But what is quantity when there is quality? Peter Jackson was relatively unknown when he took on Lord of the Rings, and look at him today. So I swallowed my doubt and went to watch the fourth Bourne film.

Although the film is called The Bourne Legacy this is not a film about Bourne. He is merely the tip of the iceberg as the film quotes. This installment follows Aaron Cross (Jeremy Renner), a soldier who is part of a program designed to create super soldiers. After the CIA failed to capture Bourne they go into disaster mode and decide to shut the program down, which basically consists of killing everyone involved. On that list is Cross and Dr. Marta Shearing (Rachel Weisz) a scientist who administers the medication to the soldiers. Cross and Shearing go on the run from the relentless Col. Eric Byer (Edward Norton) and his team who sit in the comfort of their office whilst tracking the two down. In the previous Bourne films Jason fought to catch up with the CIA, to find out the truth he desperately searched for. In this latest film it is the CIA who are trying to catch up, and they really aren't very good at it, Cross and Shearing are always two steps ahead.

Cross is not Bourne and the film takes great pains to remind us of that. The source of his super strength is from the medications he's been taking, whereas Bourne's skill set was purely from training. If this was Batman Cross would be Robin. Cross also has his memory, he knows his past, he figures out quickly what's going on and he is able to make decisions based on those facts. Shearing has a much more important part in the film than women in previous Bourne films. Cross would not have been able to survive without her. Both Renner and Weisz have great chemistry on screen. Although their characters are never shown to be physically involved there are more than enough glances and hand touching to get the point across.

Renner is a great upcoming actor who I believe has a long successful career ahead of him. With films like The Town, The Hurt Locker, Mission: Impossible - Ghost Protocol and The Avengers behind him he already has made a name for himself in tinseltown. He brings vulnerability and integrity to Cross and you really can't help but root for the guy. Perhaps if this was it's own film, without the Bourne name being attached to it then there would have been more opportunity to explore this character more. As it is however Cross seems as though he's always two steps ahead of the CIA but three feet deep in Bourne's shadow. Anything he can do Bourne can do better.

The main issue with this film is the directing. The marriage of Greengrass' direction and Gilroy's script in the previous two films meant that both story and visual were at their best. With Gilroy wearing both screenwriter and directing hats there was a loss in quality of both. The greatest flaw is the ending, or lack thereof.  There is a spectacular motorbike chase scene and then two minutes after that ends we hear that famous Moby song signaling the end of the film. It came on so abruptly that I felt there must have been a mistake. And there was. Gilroy forgot to write an ending. The hollywood demon must have sat on his shoulder all along because the film sets itself up for sequels. The problem however is that the film can't stand alone, whereas all three previous Bourne films could. So many questions are asked, very few answered. I have a feeling we may never get them answered.

My recommendation is that you go see this film knowing that you'll get great action scenes, talented actors playing underwritten roles, and an incomplete story. This is not a Bourne film, Jason Bourne jumped off that roof and perhaps we will never see him again...but remember, this is Hollywood and cash cows never die.

Why do we fall?

I was a good wife and waited for my husband's day off to go see The Dark Knight Rises, though truth be told it drove me crazy hearing all the wonderful things and having to wait. But good things come to those who wait, and I was rewarded for my patience.

The Dark Knight Rises is the best film I've seen all year, perhaps the best film I've seen in many years. It is the perfect finale to an already outstanding trilogy. This seems like quite the statement to make but I stand behind it. There are many factors that determine how great a film is: screenplay, directing, acting, cinematography and the score to name a few. Some films reach greatness on some of these levels but miss others. As we've come to learn with Chris Nolan's previous work he is a man who knows how to take us to levels we hadn't fathomed before (cough cough Inception cough). TDKR is no exception.

Let us begin with the acting. There are some outstanding performances in this film. I feel that I have to mention Sir Michael Caine as Alfred first. He doesn't have as much screen time as he did in the first and second installments but his performance packs an emotional punch. He brings heart and soul to the film, in many ways he is the voice of the many, he doesn't possess the physical strength of the heroes but he brings his vulnerability and love of Bruce to the point where he humanizes him, reminds him of his own limitations. The next actor I need to mention is Tom Hardy as the frightening Bane. His physical possession of the screen is intimidating enough, but he also brings a calm and destructive control. He's a villain you will love to hate, and will also come to understand.

Anne Hathaway is wonderful as Selina, she is sexy, sophisticated and strong. She isn't just there to be a pretty face and a nice body. Her character has purpose, a very important purpose and Anne shines in the role. Christian Bale is back again as the complex Wayne and heroic Batman. We get to see him as Wayne more in this film which was nice, I felt it gave more insight into the character. We also get to see more weakness in him which only adds more to the triumph of his rise from the (literal) hole he finds himself in. Joseph Gordon Levitt has a great performance as Blake. Like Alfred he shows the world of Gotham through a citizen's eyes. He proves himself to be a true hero without a mask. Morgan Freeman as Fox, Gary Oldman as Commissioner Gordan and Marion Coutillard as Miranda give nothing but the fine performances we have come to expect from them.

The screenplay is spectacular, I don't really know what else to say about it. There are so many great twists and turns, secrets are revealed, lives are lost, heroes rise. There is never a dull moment, nothing felt too long or too short. There is some foreshadowing, one in particular that made me know early on how it was going to end, but that didn't make it predictable, it made it feel complete. The ending is exactly as it should be. Both Chris Nolan and Jonathan Nolan wrote the screenplay and with brilliant minds like that at the helm it's easy to just let go and know that the story is in safe hands.

The cinematography by Wally Pfister is joyously moody. I know that's quite an oxymoron but it truly is. The lighting is dark, the ambiance tense, but there's a charge in the air, and as Selina says a storm coming. Throughout the film you feel that storm brewing purely through the lighting in the scenes. Batman has always excelled in the dark, it's his element, but perhaps this time the shadows will not be the allies he has found them to be previously.

Director of the year goes to Chris Nolan (sorry Joss Whedon, I truly do love you too). This man is unstoppable. Watching Memento years ago I knew that he would be one of the greats and he has not disappointed. I cannot begin to imagine the daunting task it would have been to direct a film of TDKR size. I have seen a few behind the scenes clips and it looks overwhelming. Hundreds of extras, enormous sets built, not to mention the constant hold he has on the story at all times. As an aspiring director I find myself in awe of such talent. What I wouldn't give to be able to shadow that man through the process of making one of his films. In an earlier post I saluted Joss Whedon, in this one I bow down to Nolan.

TDKR is one of those films that I found myself wanting to clap, gasp out loud, and at one point actually physically stopped myself from making a sound. It's a true hero film in that you really believe in Batman and you want to see him rise no matter how far he has to fall first. We've seen his beginning, we've seen him fall and now we get to watch him rise. It's okay to feel a little emotional about that.

Rise

Another senseless tragedy has occurred. Early this morning a theatre in Colorado was packed with fans watching the premiere of The Dark Knight Rises. Thirty minutes into the film a gunman walked in, threw gas and opened fire. Twelve people were killed, over 40 wounded, and countless affected.

I am not writing this to talk about what happened, because the media is covering those aspects. Here is the latest update from CNN if you're interested. I am not writing this to go into detail about the human psyche, ask questions about why or how this could have happened. These too will be answered over time, and by someone else. I want to focus this post on the where of it all.

One of the places I have always felt happiest is in a movie theatre. There is some comfort in those dark, cool cinemas where the real world turns off and an exciting new one replaces it for 120 minutes. But there has always been a nagging fear in the back of my mind, a what if? What if someone took advantage of this location? Here we all are, crowded together. Humans don't let each other get that close anymore, it's one of the last places in western society where we can sit close together, without concern of who's to the left or right of you. You're safe, surely, this is a place for entertainment and fun. Who would take advantage of that? But of course there are those that would, and have. A cinema is a black box with limited exits. There aren't many ways to get out in a hurry, especially if everyone is panicking.

My second home doesn't seem so safe when you look at it that way. After today's tragedy there are many who might fear that they will never feel safe in a cinema again. I cannot speak for those who have survived the tragedy or who survive the victims. But I will try speak for the rest of us. Fear has the potential to stay a long time after tragedy strikes. Ever since 9-11 the fear of flying has increased. I'm sure many people taking the London underground still struggle with the fear of "what if it happens again?". I'll never forget the day I was at Concordia University in Montreal and heard that a shooter had gone into the Cegep next to us and killed a student. It stops you in your tracks. Makes you wonder if you'll ever see the world the same again. Tragedies change everything, they shift us all in different ways.

This tragedy will leave it's mark, as all do. However this tragedy doesn't just impact the people involved. It happened in a movie theatre, during one of the most highly anticipated films of the year, on its release day. There is talk that Warner Bros. may cancel all DKR screenings across the US. This may seem extreme but think about it, they need to make the expected gross off of this film, much of which will come from the US, and many Americans will be afraid to go to the cinema to see that film so soon after this happened. I can understand that. But I feel the need to defend my second home. Because dammit, I won't let anyone take it from me. The suspect of this shooting could have done it anywhere else, a park, a mall, a school. They've been the locations of such tragedies before. I am not sure why he chose that cinema, and that film. I am sure there will be those who will try to link the film to the killings, just as they tried with gaming and the Columbine tragedy. But here's the thing, this had nothing to do with the film, it had to do with one sick man's wrong decision.

My heart goes out to all those grieving this pointless tragedy, I cannot begin to understand what such loss feels like. We live in a dark world with many clouded minds. Sometimes, and particularly on days like today, it's hard to imagine the world as anything but dark. It's on those days that I usually go to my second home and let a film remind me of what it's like to feel magic and wonder. No one will ever take that from me. I will not fear a movie theatre, and neither should you. The most safest places on this earth can become the most dangerous if the wrong people are there, but we cannot live in fear of 'what ifs?' When I go to see The Dark Knight Rises next week I will think of the victims of this tragedy, but I won't let fear stop me from escaping from this difficult world for 120 mins, and neither should you.

That man has taken too much all ready, I will not let him take the happiness I feel in my second home. I will rise above fear.