Enemy
Canadian director Dennis Villeneuve’s Enemy (2013) is a film that has gotten its fair share of love this year. In particular many have praised the mind bending thriller aspects of the film as well as Jake Gyllenhaal’s dual performance.
Going into the film, I was fully expecting to be befuddled. Those expectations were raised even further when the quote “chaos is order yet undeciphered” appears on the screen at the start. But to be honest, there was not all that much to be confused about (ok, except the spiders) as the narrative is really pretty simple. Or perhaps sparse is a better word. I love a lot of films with little narrative thrust, but for whatever reason this one just never managed to grab me. Part of that may well be because the visuals are equally sparse. Usually a film needs to be driven by visuals or narrative, but in being driven by neither, this one just seemed to meander. The film concerns two characters, both played by Gyllenhaal, who are doppelgangers. They meet up. One hounds the other and then they swap those roles. One pursues the other’s girlfriend. That’s about it. They occasionally realise how warped this situation is. On a couple of very brief occasions they try and work out what exactly the situation is. But really, from a plot perspective, there was not enough interrogating on the part of the characters into what was happening to them.
For all my issues with the film, it is definitely far from a write-off. Gyllenhaal is very good, his ability to imbue the two, physical exactly the same, characters he was playing with subtle differences to create two clearly identifiable characters is not at all easy to do. Sarah Gadot and Melanie Laurent are also really good in the few interesting moments they are both granted. But both of them could have done with a whole lot more to do. In addition to the solid performances, a number of interesting ideas come out of the slow, obliqueness. None of them are as fully formed as they could have been (or they were just not explained to me fully enough), but they were still what probably piqued my interest more than anything else that was going on. There is a definite likening of life in a contemporary western city to that under a dictatorship. The repetitive, controlling nature of day to day life – same day, same bus, same sex. Where I would have really loved some more thematic exploration was in relation to the nature of self and identity, which obviously come under attack in any doppelganger story. There are dashes of the crushing anxiety that having an actual doppelganger would have on a person’s state of mind, but the idea is discarded all too quickly. Also, those spiders. Feel free to sound off in the comments with a big spoiler warning if you have any idea what that was all about.
Verdict: Despite the interesting ideas and good performance from Gyllenhaal, Enemy never managed to grab on to me. There is nothing wrong with a film being slow. But for this to have had the intrigue it probably required, it needed to get whipping along at a snappier pace. Schooner of Carlton Draught
Related beermovie.net articles for you to check out: Trailer for your Weekend: Enemy and Computer Chess.
Like what you read? Then please like Beermovie.net on facebook here and follow me on twitter @beer_movie
Trailer for your Weekend: Cub
Shout-out to Ryan from Rhino’s Horror for this one. Have just been reading a few articles he has put up about Cub (2014), an indie horror I had not really heard about, but am now pretty keen for it. The film looks to be riffing on slasher conventions by having those in peril in the woods being young scouts rather than promiscuous teens. Having it be young kids in trouble always makes the stakes jump up a fair bit, so hopefully this delivers something gnarly. There is a whole lot of energy in the trailer that is hopefully also present in the final film. What do you guys think of this one?
Related beermovie.net articles for you to check out: Friday the 13th Part VII: The New Blood and Trailer for your Weekend: Dracula Untold.
Like what you read? Then please like Beermovie.net on facebook here and follow me on twitter @beer_movie
Worth Watching September 2014
Again, another far too quiet film watching month for me in September. The writing of Sydney Underground Film Festival reviews took up pretty much all of my time devoted to film. And Amy and I were married a week ago, so the planning and carrying out of that awesomeness took up most of the rest of my energy. Let me know your thoughts on these flicks though in the comments section below.
Worth Watching:
- Easy Virtue (1928), Alfred Hitchcock – This is the first of Hitch’s silent films I have seen. It almost looks like Kubrick shot it in parts. There is plenty of playful camerawork and creative POV shots. Based on a play, in terms of story, there is next to nothing going on. Though the family politics/machinations right at the end are of moderate interest. If you are a Hitch completist, this is a cool exhibition of his early style. Everyone else can probably afford to skip it though. You can check the whole thing out here:
- The Past (2013), Asghar Farhadi – I actually prefer this to A Separation (2011). There are dense layers of meaning and relationships. Which makes it sound like a slog, but it is so well written and acted that it breezes by. Ali Mosaffa brings Ahmad to life with a really nuanced performance and he is one of the best characters of recent memory. A very good, slow burn drama film.
- What We Do in the Shadows (2014), Jermaine Clement & Taika Waititi – What a stellar year for Kiwi comedy. This is a piss-funny film, both silly and smart. Actually one of the few recent films that drew genuine laughs pretty much non-stop from me. Jermaine Clement and the other stars are all really ggood with the characters helping to hold interest. The sharehouse familiarity, combined with vampire ludicrousness and mockumentary stylings help it to stand high above the average comedy.
Not Worth Watching:
- God’s Pocket (2014), John Slattery – The stellar cast – Philip Seymour Hoffman, Christina Hendricks, Eddie Marsan, Caleb Landry Hones Richard Jenkins and John Turturro – can’t save this poorly scripted effort. There is a reasonable sense of place, but no sense of character and story. There are just no stakes and the grime and dirt of the life that is supposedly being shown is just not there. No texture and some horribly misjudged characters make for a dull overall experience.
- The Maze Runner (2014), Wes Ball – A killer concept wrecked by appalling writing and performances. The latter coming from some people who I have seen do really good work, such as Will Poulter and Thomas Brodie Sangster. A pity as the cool sci-fi ideas are tops and the film encompasses some really dark and tense sequences. Plus it’s got a giant frickin maze. It’s an utter sausage fest for some reason too.
If you only have time to watch one What We Do in the Shadows
Avoid at all costs God’s Pocket
Related beermovie.net articles for you to check out: Worth Watching September 2013 and Worth Watching September 2011.
Like what you read? Then please like Beermovie.net on facebook here and follow me on twitter @beer_movie
SUFF 2014: Wetlands
Wetlands (2013) is a film that has garnered a fair bit of notoriety over the past twelve months or so. Mainly for the fact that it is prepared to show female sexuality in a way usually reserved for male – with humour, experimentation and gross out moments. The film has also provoked some feminist commentary and criticisms for the manner in which the male director has adapted the female written source novel.
The film starts as a kinetically plotted dark comedy following Carla Juri’s Helen throughout a range of teenage escapades. It works really well as a dark comedy as well I think and is also pretty original in its execution throughout this early period. A combination of bodily fluid obsessed gross out humour and insightful teenage awakening, mashed with flashbacks that initially feel too long and too serious, but over time are integrated relatively well into the film (note – I actually missed the big climactic payoff to all of the flashbacks toward the end, because someone had fainted in the screening). Following a shaving accident, Helen finds herself in hospital for a pretty extended period of time. There is more heart and more drawing out of the film’s themes here. Though her hospital stay does also contribute to the film going on too long and as a result losing some of the kinetic energy that was so apparent early on. And unfortunately for all the boldness through much of the film, I found the ending of Wetlands almost absurdly conventional in a way which deeply detracted from my overall satisfaction with the film.
Whether or not the depictions of sexuality in the film should confront or not, the bottom line is that they do. I found it a really interesting look at a sexual awakening. A storyline usually often told totally glibly, or if more uproariously, focused on the male experience. But this is a more frank look at a female sexual awakening. I think it is good that it is presented as straightforwardly and bluntly as it is. There was plenty of nervous laughter from the audience hiding the fact, but it is good that audiences have to re-examine their engrained opinions or expectations about these things and how they are showed on screen. Thematically, I think that the best realised and focal points of the film actually have little to do with sex or sexual liberation. Helen’s obsession with the ageing process and the progression of life carrying you away is the real core of much of the film. Bound up with this is the complexity of the central character, a child of divorce. And the fact that Helen is a child of divorce is not just plonked there and expected to provide ‘depth’. It actually affects and impacts on the entire film and every character in it. Helen is a wonderful central character and if you strip away much of what is ‘sensational’ about the film, it is this character that makes it really worthwhile and worth checking out.
Verdict: Wetlands is at times uncomfortable viewing. But it is also in many ways refreshing viewing as well, not shying from many things that so many films unnecessarily are too afraid to show. Despite the woeful ending, there is a bunch of complexity and sensitivity to go along with the more salacious aspects. Stubby of Reschs
Related beermovie.net articles for you to check out: SUFF 2014: Suburban Gothic and SUFF 2014: Why Don’t You Play in Hell
Like what you read? Then please like Beermovie.net on facebook here and follow me on twitter @beer_movie
Trailer for your Weekend: Horrible Bosses 2
Horrible Bosses 2 (2014) fits into that realm of film where even though I liked (well didn’t hate) the first film, I’m still not particularly fussed about their being a sequel. The first one felt like it had done just enough to be ok, assuming you were in the mood for it. But this trailer suggests they have gone for a The Hangover II (2011) style sequel where they change the bare minimum from the first film. Just enough to actually differentiate from the first film, but no more. Hey last time we did murder, this time it’s kidnapping! Not too much enthusiasm for this one over here.
Related beermovie.net articles for you to check out: Trailer for your Weekend: Hot Tub Time Machine 2 and Worth Watching October 2011 (includes a review of Horrible Bosses).
Like what you read? Then please like Beermovie.net on facebook here and follow me on twitter @beer_movie
SUFF 2014: Why Don’t You Play in Hell
Nothing can prepare you for the awesomeness that is Why Don’t You Play in Hell (2013). But hopefully this review can give you enough of a taste to realise how much you need to see this film.
The person who can break down what Why Don’t You Play in Hell is about in a couple of sentences is a far greater writer than I. Probably a far greater writer than just about anyone really. So in the absence of the ability to do the plot justice I’ll just say the following: it is kind of a gangster film; it is definitely a film about film; it is kind of a film about growing up; it is a film about the creative process; it is violent, at times cartoonishly so, at times more realistically and lastly it is utterly absurd. The film reminds me of one of those really absurd Japanese films that you are enraptured with initially, but then the shoddiness of it all overwhelms things. Dead Sushi (2012) springs to mind as a spot on example of that and this is that style of film done so, so right. But the reasons Why Don’t You Play in Hell is an exceptional film and quite how it manages to wrestle with this absurdism that should cause it to fail, but instead allows it to excel is beyond me. Though I do think that part of it is because it is one of the most creative films about film and the filmmaking process I have seen. And as a film buff, I loved that stuff so much. Also, the fact that the tone is not silly and absurd the whole way through I think makes those really over the top parts a little easier to enjoy, because they are snappier and there is some down time in between.
I feel pretty comfortable in saying that any real movie buff will love this film, because whilst it is many other things, it is as a film about film that succeeds best. More than simply being about the movies, this is also a homage or lament to film on actual film and an examination of what changing cinema technology means. Through a ‘kids making films’ subplot that smacks nicely of J.J. Abrams Super 8 (2011), the film also examines the struggle of an artistic life and the ultimate triumph of artistic success. There is a real kineticism to the energy of the film from the very get-go, especially in terms of plot and shooting style. There are quieter moments at times, but really the film does not let up. Same goes for the absurdism I have already mentioned. It is there right from the start, with absolute rivers of blood near the start and the strangest standing ovation you’ve ever seen right at the end. The acting is all really good and if nothing else, this is worth watching for the most brilliant Bruce Lee impersonator you are ever likely to see.
Verdict: Hopefully I have managed to convey a little of what makes Why Don’t You Play in Hell such a special cinema experience. Rare is a film that, like this one, is simultaneously a throwback but also something that feels utterly modern. It is one of my favourite films about film I have ever seen and also I think one of my favourite films of 2014 so far. As with Housebound (2014) see it, and see it with an audience to help you get swept up in the giddiness of it all. Longneck of Melbourne Bitter
Related beermovie.net articles for you to check out: SUFF 2014: Suburban Gothic and SUFF 2014: The Animal Condition.
Like what you read? Then please like Beermovie.net on facebook here and follow me on twitter @beer_movie
SUFF 2014: Suburban Gothic
Much of how you react to a film in a festival setting can depend on the synthesis of film and whereabouts in the festival program you are. I saw Suburban Gothic (2014) on the last afternoon of the festival, in no mood to think whatsoever or have my senses assaulted.
Thankfully then, the rather mild Suburban Gothic is a nice enough way to spend an afternoon. The film sees Raymond, played by Matthew Gray Gubler return to his small hometown after finishing up college and being unable to score a job. The film does a good job of magnifying that sense of feeling like you no longer belong where you grew up that I, and no doubt many more, have experienced. Once he returns home, Raymond falls in with Becca played by Kat Dennings, as he tries to avoid spending time with his parents at all costs. These two head off on some vaguely comedic and vaguely supernatural shenanigans, in a film that in the end could serve as the pilot for a pretty awesome TV show. There is not a whole lot of substance here. In fact there is barely any. There is however enough comedic style to make it watchable.
Oh yeah, this guy shows up at one point too.
The film initially was so glossy that it made my head hurt. There is a definite sheen to the film that jarred during an underground film fest. But as the film went along, it was not quite as noticeable and thankfully the film does not end up feeling like you are watching an ad for 90 mins, which is an experience some overly produced films can render. The script is well written and moderately amusing. But the main attribute of the script is that it allows the perfectly cast Dennings and Gray Gubler to light up the screen. Both of them give really good performances and without those two onscreen, you suspect the film would have been far less appealing. Overall the film is an example of one of those horror-comedies I mentioned in my review of Housebound (2014) the other day. This is really a comedy film with some horror elements thrown in. It doesn’t actually work as a horror film, which is fine, because I don’t think it is particularly trying to.
Verdict: If you are in the mood for a comedy film that you don’t need to think too much about, then you can do much worse than Suburban Gothic. It won’t blow your mind with its hilarity or style, but it will while away a little time in a pleasant enough way. Pretty good Sunday arvo festival fare basically. Stubby of Reschs
Related beermovie.net articles for you to check out: SUFF 2014: The Dog and SUFF 2014: The Animal Condition.
Like what you read? Then please like Beermovie.net on facebook here and follow me on twitter @beer_movie
SUFF 2014: The Animal Condition
“It’s an awful world to be born into an animal” – Interviewee in The Animal Condition
Straight off the bat, I think it needs to be said that The Animal Condition (2014) is a good film and as many Australians interested in food production should see it as possible. Local perspectives on these issues are hard to come by. It also needs to be said that, as many of you know, I am a vegan so much of my criticisms of the film come from that perspective. Though I would also add that I think the criticisms I make, about the lack of prodding and interrogation of sources, are true of all the participants in the film not just the industry personnel.
Recent years have seen a lot of documentary films made about animal agriculture, from health, environmental and animal rights perspectives. The most successful of these such as Forks over Knives (2011), Food Inc (2008) and Earthlings (2005) have sparked a lot of conversation and also led to in some cases large changes in personal behaviour. Unfortunately though, most of these films and associated writing as well, are very American focused. So it is great to see The Animal Condition come along, as for an Australian it gives a much more Australian focused perspective on animal agriculture. The film attempts to show all sides of the animal agriculture debate. The filmmakers travel with animal liberationists on welfare raids and talk to a lot of industry personnel. You know coming from my personal perspective it is at times kind of good to see industry figures given this platform to speak, as even when they are trying to gloss things over, they can’t help but let slip the insidious nature of it all. They talk about “control” of animals constantly, as if having absolute control over a living thing is a good thing. You have a farmer who supposedly loves his pigs refer to their odour as “the smell of money” gloatingly. Classy. It did jar a little bit for me some of the images and stories omitted from the film (though I do note that it is impossible to fit everything into a feature length examination of basically any subject). For example the film at one point ventures into an abattoir, showing the animals both pre and post slaughter. But tellingly no vision of the animals being slaughtered. Too thought provoking maybe? Similarly, the dairy industry and bobby calves are never discussed, nor the baby pigs taken from sows. Again, perhaps these potent parallels with the human experience were considered a little too touchy.
In the end, The Animal Condition plays a lot like fellow SUFF 2014 documentary American Arab (2013). There are plenty of interesting points made, but no real through line successfully binding it all together. Even more than American Arab though, I can’t help but fault the filmmakers a little more in this case. They seem to constantly flip flop from one side of the issue to the other. Grappling with major issues is understandable and makes for great cinema. Indeed to do anything else comes off as glib. But taking what every interest group (on all sides) says at face value does not make for great documentary filmmaking as it lacks the requisite interrogation of sources. There are too many opportunities for the participants to get in rehearsed sound bites without being challenged on what is being said. We have Australian industry figures telling us factory farming is a good thing because there are people starving in Africa. But they are never asked whether plant or animal based protein would be able to feed more of the world’s poor. Not to mention the fact they couldn’t give two shits about anyone except the Australians who buy their product. They don’t care about you if you are a starving African (they don’t about you if you are a starving Australian, cause you can’t afford their product). There are numerous instances such as this where more filmmaker intervention was required to actually get some depth into the discussion.
Verdict: Despite all my issues with the film The Animal Condition is still a relatively important one from an Australian perspective, as so much animal agriculture focused content is from an American context. It is a shame then that I feel too many parties in the film were allowed to get an unchallenged place to spread the ‘party’ line, without being pulled up on it. Without that challenging of what is being said, a lot of it does not ring true. Stubby of Reschs
Related beermovie.net articles for you to check out: SUFF 2014: The Dog and SUFF 2014: Housebound.
Like what you read? Then please like Beermovie.net on facebook here and follow me on twitter @beer_movie
SUFF 2014: The Dog
Sidney Lumet’s Dog Day Afternoon (1975) is generally considered a classic. As far as I can recall (and it has been a few years since I saw it, so I may just be forgetting), that film did not tell too much of the true story that inspired it. Documentary The Dog (2013) aims to fill that gap by telling the life story of John Wojtowicz, who was played by Al Pacino in the Lumet film.
The Dog tells of how Wojtowicz took the extreme step of robbing a bank so that he could pay for his wife’s sex change operation. Along the way it paints a broader picture of what it was like to be gay in that period and at times, provides an insight into Wojtowicz’s psyche. It also brings into more clarity some points that were either not clear or explained deeply in Lumet’s film, such as the shocking archival footage of the crowd yelling “queer” and “fag” at Wojtowicz during the robbery. So much for being on the side of this Robin Hoodish underdog, which is how I recall it being presented in the film. One of the strengths of the film also sort of highlights one of the weaknesses. The history of the Activist Alliance and broad history of the early gay rights struggle is really interesting and provides a lot of context. But it is also more interesting that the specific story of Wojtowicz and the bank robbery which is the main focus of the film. The film is very slick and professional looking. Not much more though, and the same is really true of all aspects of the film’s construction and look. All well done, but not overly creative.
One hurdle that many documentaries face is that they spend a lot of time in the company of deeply unlikeable characters. It is an issue that definitely impacts on enjoyment of The Dog as the hungry for attention Wojtowicz is a person who does not seem pleasant to be around. Given the reasons for his bank robbery, I was expecting something a little more romantic. The film, at least early on does give some interesting insight into the troubled aspects of Wojtowicz’s person. How he went to Vietnam and lost a whole lot of his friends. How that changed him from a staunch Republican to a “peacenik” (not suggesting that makes him troubled by the way). Periods in the second half though just feel like they are designed to give Wojtowicz a ranting platform rather than truly examining what he did and what has made him the person that he is. The best nuggets about his personality come early when he is not gloating about the robbery his sexual prowess. But when he is examining his early change and life, saying things like “anyone can be straight. It takes someone special to be gay.” Given he is so unlikeable, I would have perhaps liked the makers of this film to mix up their approach a little more. Even with more engaging or likeable people, it is difficulty to maintain interest at required levels when the film consists mostly of just a single talking head.
Verdict: There is plenty to hold your interest in The Dog, especially some of the broader history around the early gay rights struggles. If you are any fan of Lumet’s film, then this film helps to provide a lot more context for it as well. I would just have loved to see more people spoken to in order to mix it up a bit, or a little more creativity in the film. Stubby of Reschs
Related beermovie.net articles for you to check out: SUFF 2014: Housebound and SUFF 2014: The Immoral.
Like what you read? Then please like Beermovie.net on facebook here and follow me on twitter @beer_movie
SUFF 2014: Housebound
New Zealand horror-comedy Housebound (2014) was the opening night film for SUFF 2014. Unfortunately I was not able to be at the festival when it kicked off on the Thursday night. Thankfully though, the film played again on the Saturday night and the rapturous reception it had gotten on social media after the opening night screening had me very keen to take it in.
Right from the get-go, the festival crowd was totally into Housebound. Horror-comedy is a hard genre combo to nail. It is pretty rare for a film, even supposed classics of the genre, to actually elicit legitimate reactions to both the horror and comedy aspects of the film. Most attempts, even good ones, often end up being good comedies with smatterings of horror tropes. It is hard to maintain the stakes that are needed for a good horror film whilst keeping things light-hearted. This film though, had the crowd reacting with both huge laughs and literal screams of terror. The set-up for the film is one so fantastic, you wonder why it has taken for 2014 for someone to use it. Being stuck in a haunted house on house arrest is just so simple, yet has great potential as well, which the filmmakers mine all the way to a cracking film.
In the lead role Morgana O’Reilly as Kylie inhabits her under house arrest struggler with sass and a great screen presence. In fact all of the main performances, O’Reilly’s, Glen-Paul Waru as Amos the policeman who awesomely moonlights as a paranormal investigator and Rimi Te Wiata as Kylie’s mother make this so much more of a joy. That final character is so spot on and reminded me of my own mum and grandmother. She has the most frustrating aspects of both those generations amplified to hilariously frustrating levels – her refusal to shut up and horrendous casual racism. You can sense the infuriation Kylie feels at being confined to a house with her for six months, as if that may be the greatest horror of all. The characters and the narrative show really sharp, taut and clever writing from the filmmakers. The comedy is hilarious, being ludicrous without ever being so over the top that it’s distracting. And in terms of horror, there is plenty lot of really clever toying with and slight inversions of the genre’s cliché and foibles that will bring broad smiles to fans of the genre.
Verdict: Do your absolute best to see Housebound and you won’t regret it. If at all possible, see it with a rowdy, cinema loving festival crowd and get swept up in the reaction to both horror and hilarity that the film elicits. If I could really be fussed I could pick slight issues with the film. But simply, it’s probably the best comedy and the best horror film I have seen this year. Pint of Kilkenny
Related beermovie.net articles for you to check out: SUFF 2014: American Arab and SUFF 2014: The Immoral.
Like what you read? Then please like Beermovie.net on facebook here and follow me on twitter @beer_movie
Beermovie.net 