Into the Grizzly Maze

Image credit: Prime Video

In our recent exploration into the realm of eco-horror we have tended to favour the aquatic terrors of sharks and crocodiles. I think the reason for this is because the underwater world is a frontier that is particularly scary because it’s harder to traverse and investigate and the predators that roam it are absolutely terrifying to behold. But Partner and I decided to give a different environment a go with Into the Grizzly Maze.

The film follows Rowan (James Marsden) who comes back to his hometown to track down a friend who has gone missing. Inevitably, his path crosses with that of his estranged brother Beckett (Thomas Jane), who is trying to trying to preserve the grizzly bear population, but has been tasked with hunting down a grizzly that has been attacking people. The two brothers find themselves, as well as Beckett’s girlfriend, and Rowan’s ex trapped in the labyrinthine Alaskan woodlands being stalked by the same formidable grizzly they are hunting.

Much more of a dramatic eco-horror rather than a rollicking rip-and-tear-until-the-last-man-standing, Into the Grizzly Maze takes the catalyst of a predator threat and uses it to drive the development of the characters and their stories. This is something that we constantly see in horror films: the civility and structure of society breaking down when surrounded by zombies, the calculating judgement of who can be saved and who should be sacrificed where the air’s running out of the submarine being circled by sharks, etc... But admittedly, it only really works if the characters and their backstories are interesting. The social structure under the microscope in this film is the institution of family and what circumstances can make that institution crumble. Rowan is an ex-con and his brother is the town’s local sheriff. Over the coarse of the film we learn the severity of Rowan’s crime as well as the circumstance that brought him there. But it’s very flimsily written, predictable, and doesn’t really inspire any hope for redemption.

The bear itself, like Jaws, is just a particularly large and aggressive bear and the real horror and suspense of the movie actually comes from the trials of the environment, in particular a number of gruesome injuries that (annoyingly but predictably) befall the two female characters.

The performances are all fine: admittedly I imagine it’s very hard to create an engaging character when the script is so lackluster.

Image credit: Disney Plus

Into the Grizzly Maze is a dramatic eco-horror that takes itself seriously and while there are a few intertwining plots that justify it being a tonally sombre movie ultimately, it’s a mediocre predator movie that fails to really get going.

Director: David Hackl, 2015

Cast: James Marsden, Thomas Jane, Piper Perabo, Michaela McManus, Scott Glenn, & Billy Bob Thornton

Greed

Image credit: Wikipedia

Greed and the pursuit of capital has been a villainous theme in storytelling for centuries, with the hubris of those afflicted delivering satisfying emotional payoff for audiences of all races, ages, and genders. Even though one can absolutely guess where characters are heading in a film entitled Greed, the craftmanship and artistic direction of Erich von Stroheim’s 1924 silent classic still holds shock and cringe value for the modern audience.

The film follows quack dentist, Mac McTeague (Gibson Gowland) who falls in love with an extraction patient, Trina (Zasu Pitts) despite his best friend Marcus (Jean Hersholt) already being sweet on her. As a sign of friendship, Marcus gives Mac his blessing to court Trina, but changes his attitude when, shortly after their marriage, she wins five thousand dollars in a lottery. The sudden fortune starts to put a strain on Mac and Trina’s relationship as Trina hoards her winnings, even when Marcus forces Mac out of business and the couple begins to starve.

An adaptation of the novel McTeague by Frank Norris, Greed is credited as the first film to be shot entirely on location. Showcasing 1920s San Francisco, the film is an epic psychological drama that depicts the poisonous and corrosive nature of addiction. Rather than showing a terrifying descent into madness due to alcohol or narcotics a la Blow or Days of Wine and Roses, Greed explores how the fundamental need for capital can become a cyst that can fester and grow to the point where it destroys even the strongest relationships. Alongside the terrible ends that meet our heroes-turned-villains, we lament the death of the wholesome and sweet tone that the film begins with before Stroheim begins to torment us with disturbing and borderline erotic scenes that include starved and elongated limbs caressing mounds of gold.

The performances are all incredible with Gowland and Pitts both starting the film as likeable and upstanding people and then plummeting into a free-fall of manipulation, gaslighting, drunkenness, and violence.

Image credit: Wikipeda

Considering that the original runtime was over nine hours, then cut down to four and, finally, to two, Stroheim manages to tell a very rich and disturbing story, mainly through his use of mise en scene and reflective metaphors. The shots of Mac’s pet birds that he presents as a wedding gift are particularly powerful in depicting the marital turmoil, beginning the second act as docile and loving creatures before shrieking and fighting some scenes later. We then have the increasing grubbiness of the costumes, set, and even the camera lens as the final scenes in the third act, set in Death Valley, take on a grainier and dustier look – aside from the shots of the bag of gold of course.

A film that claimed notoriety for its behind the scenes story as well as the one it enthrallingly tells on screen, Greed is captivatingly dramatic and disturbing.

Director: Erich von Stroheim, 1924

Cast: Gibson Gowland, Zasu Pitts, Jean Hersholt, Dale Fuller, Tempe Pigott, Sylvia Ashton, Chester Conklin, Franke Hayes & Joan Standing

Orphans of the Storm

Image credit: Rotten Tomatoes

It’s interesting to consider the vast history of cinema, specifically the fact that we have gone through the advent of sound and colour and computer-generated effects and still there are so many terrible films in the world. As a modern movie-watcher, it tickles me particularly that I can go back and watch a black and white silent movie and still have as good a cinematic experience as if I were watching a contemporary flick.

This morning, I was back into my 1001 project (which now is horrendously outdated, but I’m still going to do it) and watched another epic drama from D. W. Griffith: Orphans of the Storm.

A French aristocrat is forced to abandon her baby born from a commoner and leaves it on the steps of a church with a single note, ‘Her name is Louise. Love her.’ A poor man is about to leave his own daughter, named Henriette, on the same church steps to save her from starvation, but instead brings both babies home and raises them as sisters. After losing their parents to a plague Louise (Dorothy Gish) is left blind and Henriette (Lillian Gish) determines to travel with her to Paris to find a cure. Shortly after arriving the two sisters are separated, Henriette being abducted by a lavish aristocrat and Louise forced to beg for the crooked commoners who ‘charitably’ take her in. As revolution brews in the streets, Henriette tries desperately to escape from her captor and reunite with her sister.

Orphans of the Storm is the last of D. W. Griffiths great, historical melodramas that tells a beautiful story of love in times of turmoil. As extravagant as any of his other works, it's both a visual feast and a dramatic, narrative triumph. Despite being based on a play, Griffith wrote the screen during filming, which obviously gave rise to all sorts of complications. But nevertheless, the film rose to the challenge and even today, remains a masterpiece of stage direction, set and costume design, and dramatic performances.

Sticking to one historical time period unlike Intolerance, the film takes place during the French Revolution giving Griffith ample space to dazzle audiences with lavish and excessive costumes as well as incredible sets that really hammer home the social disconnect between the aristocracy and the working class. Elaborate dresses, and suits, and hats, and wigs put us in mind of the ballroom scene in Labyrinth or an Ultravox music video while you can practically feel the lice crawling over you when you watch the scenes set in the street or impoverished hovels of the commoners.

Image credit: United Artists

The Gish sisters deliver performances that have been praised as the best of their careers, absolutely shadowing the otherwise male-dominated cast.

Filled with drama, romance, action, and suspense, Orphans of the Storm is a classic from a bygone era that still stands up.

Director: D. W. Griffith, 1921

Cast: Lillian Gish, Dorothy Gish, Joseph Schildkraut, Franke Losee, Katherine Emmet, Morgan Wallace, Lucille La Verne, Sheldon Lewis, Frank Puglia, Creighton Hale, Leslie King, Monte Blue, Sidney Herbert, Lee Kohlmar & Marcia Harris

Intolerance

Image credit: Amazon

The cinematic masterpiece: what makes it so? We’ve had over a century of cinema and I don’t believe we have even come close to identifying a magic formula that makes a masterpiece. They just are or they become. The ones that later become celebrated thanks to the progression of time and the changing of cultural attitudes are the more interesting ones to consider. Films such as D.W Griffith’s Intolerance.

The film explores tragedy fuelled by intolerance and the struggles of love through the ages over the course of four stories. A selection of events from the life of Jesus, a tale from Babylon in which a king is betrayed by those against his rejection of sectarianism, the story of the St Bartholemew’s Day Massacre of French Protestants, and a modern melodrama in which a young man is wrongly convicted of murder.

While critically hailed as a masterpiece today, thanks to its epic scale and ahead-if-its-time editing, Intolerance is also considered an epic disaster and flop in Hollywood’s history; (ironically) thanks to its epic scale and ahead-if-its-time editing.

Riding high off the success of Birth of a Nation, it’s believed that Griffith made this epic doom-and-gloom saga of tragic love stories as something of a retort to the backlash he received regarding the racial politics in Birth. Indeed, he released a pamphlet entitled ‘The Rise and Fall of Free Speech in America’ to coincide with Intolerance’s release, arguing against film censorship. And it certainly is a film that forces audiences to look at some hard truths about human behaviour. Everything from conspiracy, to betrayal, to incredible violence, to jealousy, to a plethora of prejudices is depicted.

While the audience of the time struggled with the random time-jumping and crosscutting between stories, the modern audience – especially feminist- will cringe at the questionable ‘love’ stories, the rough treatment of women on screen, and the fact that none of the young heroines are given names.

Then there is the sheer size of the thing. The film is famous for having had a couple of million invested in it to make a lavish spectacle: the enormous sets for the Babylon sequences are monumental and very impressive, as well as the elaborate costumes for the both the Babylon story and the French period drama. Add to this a herd of elephants, camels, catapults, and what appears to be a flame-throwing Babylonian tank, it’s a very elaborate visual feast that sadly failed to make back its costs.

Image credit: Amazon

The performances are captivating, if you can keep track of who everyone is, and this is good because both original and contemporary audiences immediately baulk at the thought of sitting down for that long: the film’s runtime is 3 hours.  While the pacing of the first half of the film can stretch and feel doughy, the climactic final act proves to be quite nail-bitingly dramatic and exciting.

There are certainly a number of things about Intolerance that make it a landmark piece of Hollywood history, but I don’t think that the ‘genius’ of D. W. Griffith stands the test of time. Like Metropolis – another piece of extravagant cinema- you need to really psych yourself up to get through this endurance trial of a film.

Director: D. W. Griffith, 1916

Cast: Spottiswoode Aitken, Mary Alden, Frank Bennett, Barney Bernard, Monte Blue, Lucille Browne, Tod Browning, William H. Brown, Edmund Burns, William E. Cassidy, Elmer Clifton, Miriam Cooper, Jack Cosgrove, Josephine Crowell, Dore Davidson, Sam De Grasse, Edward Dillon, Pearl Elmore, Lillian Gish, Ruth Handforth, Robert Harron, Joseph Henabery, Chandler House, Lloyd Ingraham, W. E. Lawrence, Ralph Lewis, Vera Lewis, Elmo Lincoln, Walter Long, Mrs. Arthur Mackley, Tully Marhsall, Mae Marsh, Marguerite Marsh, John P. McCarthy, A.W. McClure, Seena Owen, Alfred Paget, Eugene Pallette, Georgia Pearce, Billy Quirk, Wallace Reid, Allan Sears, George Siegmann, Maxfield Stanley, Carl Stockdale, Madame Sul-Te-Wan, Constance Talmadge, F.A. Turner, W.S. Van Dyke, Guenther von Ritzau, Erich von Stroheim, George Walsh, Eleanor Washington, Margery Wilson, & Tom Wilson

The Holdovers

Image credit: IMDb

I don’t know about you, but I always find movies about teacher-student relationships fascinating and rather touching. As a child I was always scared of my teachers because they were big, looming, authoritative figures, and as a teenager I just got the impression that I was just a part of their job. I know there are people out there who hugged their teachers regularly or remained in touch with them into adulthood, but that’s never been a part of my reality.

Perhaps it’s knowing, even on some level when you’re very small, that teaching is one of the hardest and most underappreciated (and underfunded) jobs in the world that makes movies about teachers and their students the more compelling: the idea that someone could believe so much in their job and the good that it does for people that they overcome incredible challenges and change lives – Dead Poets Society, To Sir With Love, Sister Act 2. Films where the relationship works both ways are even more fascinating: what could the student teach their professor? The Holdovers, one of the Oscar-nominated films for Best Picture last year, did just this.

The film follows Paul Hunham (Paul Giamatti), a cranky history Professor who gets saddled with the task of remaining on campus at a New England boarding school to supervise the handful of students who are unable to go home for Christmas Break. Over the course of the break, he develops an unlikely relationship with a bright but audacious troublemaker (Dominic Sessa) and the head lunch lady (Da’Vine Joy Randolph) who has recently lost her son in the Vietnam War.

A modest and small film with heart, I think the major appeal of The Holdovers is the vintage, grainy filter that it uses to create the aesthetic of a small-budget British film from the ‘60s or ‘70s. Putting us in mind of films like To Sir With Love or Billy Elliot, the film tells a simple story in which the protagonists undergo an emotional transformation through witty and loaded dialogue. There is very little physical or external narrative action that drives it, rather it’s the compelling performances and gorgeously artistic yet down-to-earth script that makes the 2 hours fly by.

Image credit: Classic Cinema

Giamatti treads this incredibly fine line between cantankerous, Scrooge-esque dictator and cynic with a soft side, as he begins the film hating his privileged students and taking a fiendish delight in making them miserable (which is very funny to watch) and ends it being inspired by one of them. Sessa plays the bright, but troubled teenager very well, with something of the bravado of John Bender but more eloquent and self-assured. And Randolph, who walked away with the Oscar for Best Performance by an Actress in a Supporting Role, is sweet, sassy and reserved while delivering the hard truths in perfectly inflected one-liners.

The Holdovers is an unexpectedly touching film that explores the complexities of human relationships within the setting of one of the most important institutions in society. Armed with interesting characters, a great script, and brilliant performances, it’s a deceptively simple and compelling piece of work.

Director: Alexader Payne, 2023

Cast: Paul Giamatti, Dominic Sessa, Da’Vine Joy Randolph, Carrie Preston, Brady Hepner, Ian Dolley, Jim Kaplan, Michael Provost, & Andrew Garman

Good Luck To You, Leo Grande

Image credit: IMDb

While sex is something that certainly runs rampant in cinema, transcending every single genre, it’s funny how little conversation there is about it. Much like the real world, open conversations about sex are dangerously few – probably for a multitude of ridiculous reasons- and as a result there is so much ignorance regarding literally everything about it from the mechanics of the physical act to the social power dynamics that come with it.

As a medium that reaches so many people, cinema is the perfect megaphone through which to openly chat about sex and how it works (or sometimes doesn’t) and the nice thing about that is that the discussion does not have to be graphic or sexy. It can absolutely be tasteful and accessible, like the film that I curled up and watched this morning: Good Luck To You, Leo Grande.

Two years after the death of her husband, Nancy Stokes (Emma Thompson) decides to try and regain some excitement of her youth before a bland marriage and children shaped the larger part of her life. She hires a sex worker named Leo Grande (Daryl McCormack) in an attempt to find some adventure -and sex- but gets more than she imagined when the two start talking and she becomes a returning client, fascinated by Leo and his take on the social stigmas of sex, age, and beauty.

This is a lovely, bare-bones film that doesn’t rely on the bells and whistles of extravagant artistic design, special effects, or even long, drawn-out narratives. It’s an hour and a half of two people having conversations about subjects that are often hard to talk about. Over the course of four meetings, we learn about Nancy and Leo as characters, as well as hear important discussions and social commentary on the state of the world and the institutionalised, toxic methods of thinking that shape society. The film explores the social stigmas around the sex work industry, as well as sex in relation to age, gender, and what is socially acceptable as ‘sexy’.

The performances of both Thompson and McCormack are both wonderful: instantly intriguing and relatable. Nancy is an anxious and unhappy woman who transforms, through her curiosity and then fascination with Leo, into a satisfied and wider-minded person and Thompson superbly conveys a wealth of emotions with nothing more than quick, eloquent dialogue and long, unblinking glances. On the other side of the bed is Leo who is charming, patient, soothing, and very down-to-earth.

Image credit: Flicks

The one problem I did have with this movie was that it didn’t overtly discuss the sex work industry, which is a major plot point. While it certainly tries to refer to many of the struggles and problems that sex workers face both in their job and in society in general, it merely glosses over them and this hand-wavey attitude ends up becoming something of a problem when the dramatic incident of the third act comes into play. Without wanting to give too much away, there is a scene that depicts a breach of trust and social contract between the two. It’s committed innocently, with the guilty party not realising the potentially dangerous repercussions of their actions and what’s most annoying is that, rather than making the severity of the drama known, the film then turns it on to the injured party and goes in for a most awful cliché of social attitude towards sex workers. While there is some redemption within the last ten minutes, the way this dramatic turn was narratively handled really gave me the ick enough to lament that the film had been so good up until that point. While it’s a more accessible and less cliched depiction of sex workers, it’s not the most enlightening.

But aside from this one big stumble, which did kind of feel like a condom snapping midway through and killing the mood for a bit, Good Luck To You, Leo Grande is a sweet and engaging film that I really did enjoy.

Director: Sophie Hyde, 2022

Cast: Emma Thompson, Daryl McCormack, & Isabella Laughland

What About Sal?

Image credit: imdb.com

I was thinking recently about resilience and the cinema. Take a moment to think about all the changes that have happened within the last 5-10 years that could have really posed a threat to the medium. The rise of streaming services and constant accessible content, and of course, Covid, being the big heavy hitters. But despite both these things, the cinema has continued to lure people into its theatres and delight them with an enjoyable excursion away from the couch. And I’m really thankful for this because if cinema had crumpled and then disappeared completely after Covid, then beautiful little niche films that exist in small reservoirs outside of the mainstream, would go completely unnoticed.

Despite it being a very cold and rainy night on Saturday, I took myself into Newtown and caught up with a friend to support Australian cinema. We treated ourselves to a beautiful little film written, directed, and starring John Jarratt: What About Sal?

When his mother is diagnosed with lung cancer Sal (Gerard O’Dwyer), a 30-year-old retail assistant with Down Syndrome, goes on a quest to find his father – a singer in a rock band that his mother had a one-time stand with thirty years ago.

This is a really sweet and moving little film that proves that you don’t need all the bells and whistles of big-name actors, fast-paced action, and eye-exploding special effects to have a nice time at the movies. A simple story featuring a tiny cast and filmed on the streets of Sydney during Covid, What About Sal? celebrates the simplicity of the quest narrative, enlightens audiences with the plight of a marginalised minority, and inspires audiences to hope that things can get better.

In three acts the film establishes this beautiful world in which Sal, his mother, and their close friends exist, breaks it apart when the mother is hospitalised and Sal runs away to find his father, and then reknits itself as Sal achieves his goal and then starts on a new quest to help his father overcome his alcoholism. Sweetness and sparkling hope flares from the darkest and dingiest spaces in this film and it’s really moving to see the hero, with his unique way of thinking, persevering and then achieving the impossible.

Image credit: imdb.com

The performances are all impeccable, the cast breathing so much life and substance into such a small production.

It’s a film about love, redemption, and proving one’s invaluable worth in the world. It’s truly lovely.

Director: John Jarratt, 2023

Cast: Gerard O’Dwyer, John Jarratt, Kaarin Fairfax, Justin Banks, Lewis Fitz-Gerald, Pearl Herbert, Ric Herbert, Peter Hehir, Camilla Ah Kin, Joanne Samuel & Kurt Ramjan.

Nyad

Image credit: themoviedb.org

There is so much in this great, wide world. So much culture, history, facts, stories, jokes, relationships, people, places, and dreams. It’s impossible for one person to know it all, and it is impossible for one person to fathom, understand, and absorb it all. While we as a species have made some truly epic blunders, catastrophic mistakes, and unbelievable cockups over the course of our history, one thing we have done right is the telling, sharing, and recording of stories; true stories, fantasies, dreamed stories and everything in between. Literature and cinema are my two favourite things to come out of our species, aside from maybe food. And I just finished watching a movie that reminded me of this: Nyad.

Diana Nyad (Annette Bening) is a retired marathon swimmer whose life has lately been missing the drive, excitement, and adventure of yesteryear. Shortly after her 60^th birthday she decides to start training again so as to finally achieve her dream of swimming 110 miles from Cuba to Florida – a feat she attempted thirty years ago but was forced to abandon. With her best friend and coach Bonnie (Jodie Foster) by her side, Diana assembles a team as crazy and driven as she is, and she braves sharks, jellyfish, fierce currents, and physical and mental exhaustion to prove that you are never too old to achieve your dreams.

What an amazing story and it has been made into an amazing film. This feature debut from Elizabeth Chai Vasarhelyi and Jimmy Chin not only chronicles the life achievements of an amazing woman who used her indomitable spirit to combat the limitations of age, but it’s a beautiful and inspiring look into the importance of relationships at every stage of life and a reminder that the Aged still have voices that can and will be heard.

A biographical sports drama, the film flicks back and forth between the current narrative and the context of Nyad’s past. These contextual scenes use genuine footage and commentary from interviews and media broadcasts of Nyad’s achievements and, mixed in with some interpreted and reenacted scenes from Nyad’s childhood, does a magnificent job of show-don’t-tell, giving the audience all the dramatic context they need without having to spell it out and make a big scene out of it. It’s all very tasteful and it sets the rhythm of the film beautifully.

Image credit: popternative.com

Then we have the performances from Annette Bening and Jodie Foster; two incredible actresses who are the perfect cast choice for this film as they are both strong women achieving great things past a certain age, especially in an industry that makes it hard for women to do that. Bening leads the charge with command and charisma, but it’s Foster that really gives the film its beautiful and heartwarming edge. She’s so lovely and down-to-earth and yet so captivating in her depiction of unwavering and fierce loyalty and friendship; she is definitely the heart and soul of the film.

Filled with ambition, drama, loyalty, and love Nyad is a gorgeous film that tells an incredible story.

Director: Elizabeth Chai Vasarhelyi & Jimmy Chin (2023)

Cast: Annette Bening, Jodie Foster, Anna Marie Kempf, Johnny Solo, Eric T. Miller, Anna Harriette Pittman, Hanler Rodriguez, Carolyne McCormick & Rhys Ifans

The Iron Claw

Image credit: gatewayfilmcenter.org

It’s a really lovely experience to have an old fire of your character rekindled. Back when I was working at a Blockbuster (pause for marvel/lament at how long ago that was) I was all about movies. And as I grew up my love for cinema never really puttered out, but it certainly dimmed and for a while my absorption of new movies and writing my reviews waned. But my love for cinema and my ambition to go to the movies more has been rekindled with this new job, one of the perks of which is the occasional free ticket.

The delightful thing about a free ticket is that, even if it’s a film you don’t know much about or didn’t think you were that interested in seeing, it inspires you to go along because what have you got to lose? And then there is always the chance that you come out of the cinema in complete awe at the film you just watched. I had this experience over the weekend when I decided to make use of a free ticket and took myself to see The Iron Claw.

Based on a true story, the film follows the wrestling careers of the Von Erich family, a close-knit band of brothers who made history in the competitive world of wrestling in the 1980s. A love of each other and being in the ring together is what drives these four boys, but there is a dark side to their success. Pushed by their father who is driven by a fierce ambition, one by one the boys start to fall victim to the belief that their family is cursed and that their strong bond of brotherhood might not be enough to save them.

This is a fiercely provocative movie that tells a tragic story while simultaneously exploring the physical and mental strains and benefits of love, pack mentality, and the nuclear family. Against the super-charged toxic masculinity that is allowed to run rampant from scene to scene there is a beautiful depiction of male fragility and the need for camaraderie and brotherhood. Add the questionable relationships of the parents to their sons and this is a recipe for a compelling and heart-wrenching story.

The performances of the central cast are all incredible, each brother being endearing, flawed, and spiking our empathetic reflexes. Expertly devised shots give audiences enough time to anticipate what’s about to happen and thus be able to properly experience the shock and grief to come. Despite its sweaty, bulging, and gritty aesthetic, the various camera techniques as well as the general cinematography makes The Iron Claw quite possibly one the of most beautiful and strangely elegant films I’ve seen in a while. It has been a long time since I teared up in a cinema, but that drought has been broken thanks to this film.

Image credit: tvinsider.com

And then we can marvel at the fact that because this film is beautiful, compelling, and tastefully done, it inspires audiences to take a deep drive into a story that they may never had heard of. I am not a wrestling fan in the least, so I had no idea who these people were, but I am truly fascinated and compelled by their story.

If you are looking for a compelling, moving, and beautifully crafted film, I would recommend The Iron Claw.

Director: Sean Durkin, 2023

Cast: Zac Efron, Jeremy Allen White, Harris Dickinson, Maura Tierney, Hold McCallany, Scott Innes, Michael Harney, Stanley Simons, Ryan Nemeth, Cazzey Louis Cereghino, Lily James & Kevin Anton

Becoming Jane

Image credit: Posterazzi

 There is something so comforting and inspiring about a crisp, autumn morning. The warmth of summer has certainly left Sydney this Saturday morn, and when I woke up to the warm embraces of my partner, I was gripped with the desire for a scene: a picturesque, English country scene. And so I have just finished watching Becoming Jane. 

Based on the romantic portion of the life of one of my all-time favourite authors, the film follows young Jane Austen (Anne Hathaway), a penniless woman with an independent mind and a talent with the pen. Confined by social duties and norms concerning everything from family to fortune, Jane’s world gets turned upside down when she meets and falls for the handsome upcoming lawyer, Thomas LeFroy. A passionate romance ensues, but can love without fortune possibly be enough to ensure a prolonged life of happiness?

This film does not have the feel of a biopic, rather a biographic romantic comedy. The story itself is something straight out of one of Austen’s novels, and we can see characteristics recognisable in Austen’s famous characters in all the people involved. I suppose that the main purpose of the film is to illustrate a singular point that is brought up early on: that experience is needed to write great fiction, and the entire film is definitely a journey of identity.

The performances are all very good, though nothing particularly incredible. Indeed the strongest attraction for me was the beautiful cinematography: the breathtaking scenes of the English countryside. Rolling hills, pretty wildernesses, woods and rivers
abound with a crisp, cool air. 

Image credit: Hanway Films

While I adore Jane Austen, I am the type of fan who reads and revels in her novels, but does not extend myself to learn about the woman who wrote them. I should. Because if I did, then I would be better able to ascertain whether the narrative of this film was close or loose in relation to the truth. Regardless, as I mentioned before this film does not feel like a biopic and therefore I can’t label it as one. It’s a very pretty film nonetheless and I would recommend it to anyone who enjoys this sort of period piece. 

Director: Julian Jarrold, 2007

Cast: Anne Hathaway, James McAvoy, Julie Walters, James Cromwell, Anna Maxwell Martin, Lucy Cohu, Laurence Fox, Ian Richardson, Leo Bill, Joe Anderson, Jessica Ashworth & Maggie Smith

Wuthering Heights

 

Image credit: IMDb

Romantic tales, both tragic and uplifting, are a staple of cinema. While there are new rom-coms and dramas being written all the time, sometimes what you’re really after is a classic. And literature is full of them. It seems that I am now going on a bit of an iconic-literature-adaptation binge because this afternoon, to pass a few hours, I curled up with Robert Fuest’s 1970 adaptation of Emily Bronte’s gothic tragedy, Wuthering Heights.

Chronicling a love that begins when Cathy Earnshaw and adopted brother Heathcliff are but children, the film favours the romantic tragedy of the story as opposed to its more gothic nature. When Cathy comes back from a stay witch a rich family transformed into a lady, Heathcliff feels the sting of betrayal and while Cathy determines that all her choices are for the betterment of their relationship (including her marriage into the family who transformed her) disaster strikes again and again as the two grow further and further apart. 

Fuest’s adaptation focuses on the doomed relationship of the two lovers with money and social standing being the manipulative villain behind its demise. Both Cathy and Heathcliff (both of whom are horrible in the book, by my memory) are victims of the brutalities of society: their wild romance (depicted by their constant forays into the moors) being muzzled by money and the status that comes with it. While Cathy tries to manipulate this to their advantage, Heathcliff seeks to destroy it, which he does by gaining wealth himself and then reducing the family of Wuthering Heights to little more than beggars and savages. 

The film’s modest budget accommodates the power of the story and its allegorical aims perfectly with only costume, cinematography, and the cast’s performances to create the drama, romance, and despair. All of which is achieved incredibly.

Image credit: IMDb

Timothy Dalton and Anna Calder-Marshall as the freedom-seeking lovers work wonders together with each performance standing strong and toe-to-toe with the other. There is absolutely no weaker sex here, and indeed the battle between the genders ends equally well/tragically for both of them.

Filled with drama, remorse, despair, and occasionally hope, Wuthering Heights is a captivating adaptation of story that’s iconic for a reason. 

Director: Robert Fuest (1970)

Cast: Anna Calder-Marshall, Timothy Dalton, Harry Andrews, Pamela Brown, Judy Cornewell, James Cossins, Rosalie Crutchley, Hilary Heath, Julian Glover & Ian Ogilvy

The Birth of a Nation

Image credit: IMDb

It’s often enlightening and sometimes disturbing to watch a film from over a hundred years ago and realise that some things never change, and that aspects of modern culture continue to be influenced by it or follow in its shadow. For my afternoon it was disturbing, as I sat down to a film that is critically acclaimed for its innovations in cinema and socially disdained for its subject matter. Yep, I sat down and watched The Birth of a Nation.

Told in two parts the film follows two American families: the Northern Stonemans and the Southern Camerons. Part one follows them through the Civil War, beginning with the introduction of slavery to America and then jumping right in to the fighting, before ending on the assassination of Lincoln. Part two then follows the families through the Reconstruction era and the rise of the Ku Klux Klan.

Writer/director/producer D. W. Griffith makes a point of claiming his indifference to the racism of the subject material, the film being an adaptation of Thomas Dixon’s play The Clansman: An Historical Romance of the Ku Klux Klan, but that did not stop the film being absolutely reviled upon its release for its horrendous and disturbing depictions of the Ku Klux Klan as heroic saviours. It’s undoubtedly one of the most racist and shocking films ever made and yet it’s still studied to this very day. Why?

Here’s why. It was the first real cinematic epic, a film so artistically compelling that audiences would stay put for the entire three hours despite the shocking content. It was the birth of modern camera techniques with Griffith introducing dramatic close-ups and tracking shots amongst others as well as the birth of cinematic editing with the introduction of crosscutting, parallel action sequences, and more. A lot of modern cinema owes its very skeleton, consciously or not, to this film and while the artist did not agree with the message of his medium, he still put everything into making undeniable art. 

Image credit: Britannica

It just goes to show that the ‘don’t shoot the artists’ mentality in cinema has been around for over a century and debates are still surrounding this piece. 

The Birth of a Nation is probably one of the rarest films ever, being both morally condemned and artistically celebrated. However it’s a film for people who love film; I most certainly would not recommend it to those who enjoy watching moves, but aren’t so invested in the inner workings of the medium. 

Director: D. W. Griffith, 1915

Cast: Lillian Gish, Mae Marsh, Henry B. Walthall, Miriam Cooper, Mary Alden, Ralph Lewis, George Siegmann, Walter Long, Robert Harron, Wallace Reid, Joseph Henabery, Elmer Clifton, Josephine Crowell, Spottiswoode Aitken, & George Beranger

Jojo Rabbit

Image credit: Amazon

We know that film as an artform is a difficult trade. As art imitates life, there are a number of rules and taboos that it must adhere to. Simultaneously art is about pushing the boundaries and making us face the unfacable. A film that does both of these things is a rare and wondrous thing. One such film, recently made and gaining an Academy Award nomination for its tremendous efforts is Taika Waititi’s latest triumph: Jojo Rabbit.

The film tells the story of ten year-old German boy Jojo whose dream is to heroically serve the fatherland in times of war with his imaginary friend Hitler by his side. However, Jojo’s fanatical beliefs and patriotism take a battering when he discovers that his mother is hiding a Jewish girl in their house. Conflicted between love, curiosity, and the need to prove his worth, Jojo navigates his way through the war, one mishap at a time, learning valuable lessons about humanity along the way.

Who would have thought that a dramatic comedy set during in WW2 Germany could be such a charming and heart-warming thing? Taika uses everything at his disposal including his impeccable sense of timing, quirky casting choices, and confrontational historical themes to create something truly glorious and significant. 

At its heart Jojo Rabbit is a story about innocence, however misguided, and its strength. The harsh historical setting makes this message and the celebration of childlike innocence even stronger (like salt) and Taika’s witty and biting script just brings everything together, making something that appears iffy into something heart-warming and hysterical. 

A special shout-out must go to our leading man: Rowan Griffin Davis. He’s a pint-sized powerhouse of emotion and scene-stealing genius, going through a rollercoaster of feels as well as hilarious freak-outs and even some villainous moments. Seriously, words cannot describe how amazing this kids is. Watch the film!

Image credit: Daily Express

While the film’s quirky comedy, primarily stemming from quick-witted dialogue, is entirely unique, there’s another level of oddness that makes Jojo Rabbit stand out. The use of mise en scene is crisp and confronting, a little like Wes Anderson’s style, and it’s this that makes the movie a visual standout as well as a verbal one. This, plus it has a very interesting soundtrack!

I would absolutely recommend that everyone make watching this movie their next priority. Its brilliance is just so unexpected I can’t even write about it properly! 

Director: Taika Waititi, 2019

Cast: Rowan Griffin Davis, Scarlet Johannson, Sam Rockwell, Taika Waititi, Rebel Wilson, Alfie Allen, Stephen Merchant, Archie Yates & Thomasin McKenzie

Stachka (Strike)

Image credit: Amazon.co.uk

In a depressing start to a gloomy Wednesday morning, I just finished watching a silent masterpiece that brutally highlights the despicable and unfeeling side of humanity. Sergei Eisenstein’s Stachka (or Strike) might be a bit dated, but it really hammers home the idea that humans as a species have a diabolical dark side that tends to win out every time, especially in times of high stress. 

Strike depicts an uprising in a Russian factory, as a series of mistreatments mixed with the authorities’ greed and dishonesty goad the workers towards rebellion. Told in six parts, the film begins with a series of ripples, which then grow into the dramatic events of the following chapters, escalating to strike, starvation, counter rebellion, and finally a massacre. 

Intended to mark the beginning of a series of works about the rise of Marxist-Lenin rule, Strike never got its follow-ups thanks to Bolshevik censorship. However, the film does work as a stand-alone feature (indeed it was Eisenstein’s first and paved the way for other such masterpieces as The Battleship Potempkin [1925] and October [1927]). 

 Eisenstein explores various cinematic tricks and motifs that greatly exacerbate the central drama and carnage of the political messages, the most poignant being in the final chapter where depictions of the massacre are intercut with scenes of cows being slain in a slaughterhouse. This graphically horrific and metaphoric trick is enough to break one’s positive spirit and cause nightmares, even a seasoned mover-goer. 

Image credit: Silver in a Haystack

But of course, this is the point. Eisenstein’s fascination and appreciation of the film medium as a communication, cultural and political means of expression really comes across with this film and while his treatment of his audience is to emotionally hijack them and then continuously punch them in the face until their nose cave and their cheekbones splinter, it nevertheless gets the job done effectively. 

Director: Sergei M. Eisenstein, 1924 Cast: Grigori Aleksandrov, Aleksandr Antonov, Yudif Glizer, Mikhail Gomorov, I. Ivanov, Ivan Klyukvin, Anatoll Kuznetsov, Vladimir Uralsky, Vera Yanukova, & Boris Yurtsev

Foolish Wives

Image credit: Google Sites

Now that I’ve got my drive back for ‘project 1001’, it’s time to make a valiant effort to keep it that way, hence this afternoon I hunkered down with what is critically considered as Erich von Stroheim’s masterwork.

Foolish Wives stars Stroheim himself as the charismatic scam artist Count Karamzin who, along with the help of his ‘cousins’ Princesses Olga and Vera Petchnikoff, works to seduce the neglected wife an American diplomat recently arrived in Monte Carlo, stealing a small fortune in the process.

The 1920’s were a very experimental time for cinema, not merely with the tricks and magics that could be achieved with the camera and special effects, but with visual narrative as well.

After Foolish Wives, Stroheim was celebrated as cinema’s first great ironist, as the film turns all conventional film narratives cleanly upside down and inside out. The antihero and his costars are by far the more entertaining and engaging characters, a stark comparison to the heroes/victims: the boring, bland Americans. Glamorising Monte Carlo, tenderly referred to in the film as ‘Hell’s Paradise’, Stroheim enraptures his audience with mesmerising scenes of raucous gaiety, gambling, and scheming, without a moral or cautionary message appearing until the final shot. As such, your emotional attachments, bar perhaps one, are with the ‘villains’ throughout. This cynical feeling towards the neglected heroine is even mirrored in the judgmental inflection of the film’s title, which –ironically- is also the name of the book she reads in-film!

Image credit: Tumblr

But the film is not all garish fun and cynical breaking of hearts. A darker underline follows the narrative, beautifully expressed through the multiple ‘love stories’ that Karamzin stars in. No woman is safe regardless of wealth, nationality, or even mental competency, and the film’s drama, which gloriously rears its head in the third act, is a wonderfully poignant and satisfying narrative turn. Without spoiling anything, the final twenty minutes of the film are the most compelling, poetic, and narratively satisfying minutes you’ll spend staring at a screen!

Foolish Wives was truly a step forward for narrative in cinema, it could even be argued to be the silver screen’s first black comedy (loosely), and it’s definitely a film I would recommend to fellow cinephiles!

Director: Erich von Stroheim, 1923

Cast: Erich von Stroheim, Rudolph Christians, Miss DuPont, Maude George, Mae Busch, Dale Fuller, Al Edmudsen, Cesare gravina, Malvina Polo, Louis K. Webb, Mrs. Kent, C. J. Allen, & Edward Reinach

Northanger Abbey

Image credit: The Movie Database

Continuing on with my great Austen adventure, this evening was spent in the company of naïve sweethearts, flirtatious sociopaths, tyrannical patriarchs, and lustrous men… it could only be Northanger Abbey.

The film tells of the exciting adventures of young Catherine Morland (Felicity Jones) whom is requested to accompany rich family friends to Bath as their favoured companion. Excited and terrified to be introduced into society, Catherine’s innocence and naivety attract the attentions of two men, one of whom she finds herself holding a strong affection towards. But when her crush’s father invites her to stay with them at the infamous mansion of Northanger Abbey, Catherine’s overactive imagination, coupled a friend’s gossiping, and a passion for gothic romance novels, jeopardise Catherine’s already fragile footing in society.

I remember reading Northanger Abbey for my Gothic Literature course at university and absolutely falling love with it. Truth be told, I have a weakness for gothic romances, rather like the heroines in this film, which already earns this delightful adaptation a special place in my heart and film collection.

The novel itself stands aside from Austen’s other romantic dramas and comedies, as it dapples in the dream sequence and breaks up the narrative with tantalising bursts of adventure and active excitement. This film does the same, being just like any other period drama, but then broken up and made more exciting by the unexpected dream sequences of abduction, murder, rape, and patriarchal tyranny.

Image credit: Pinterest

Felicity Jones as Catherine is absolutely gorgeous, perfectly playing one of Austen’s more excitable and complicated heroines, as she is all smiles, sweetness, and gentility in society, but has fantasies of abduction and rape when alone at night. Jones is positively mesmerising from beginning to end and you cannot help but fall in love with her right from the start.

The debauched, degrading, and dark side of society is prominently displayed rather then merely alluded to, like some of the softer romantic comedies and, indeed, in more than one shot I was reminded of Hitchcock’s adaptation of Rebecca. It’s another classic Austen adaptation that I just adored!

Director: Jon Jones, 2007

Cast: Felicity Jones, Carey Mulligan, Sylvestra Le Touzel, Desmond Barrit, William Beck, J J Feild, Hugh O’Conor, Catherine Walker, and Liam Cunningham

Mansfield Park

Image credit: London By Gaslight

Just a quick forewarning, dear reader, that the next couple of reviews are going to be of the Austen variety, as I am currently feeling a little stressed and fragile from working in a consumer’s essential retail outlet during a pandemic; yesterday I treated myself and bought a triple pack of Jane Austen telemovies so be prepared for a bit of an Austen bender… starting with Mansfield Park.

Starring Austen’s favourite heroine, Mansfield Park tells the story of Fanny Price (Billie Piper), a sweet-natured and humble girl who is taken from her life of poverty and sent to Mansfield Park to be raised by her rich relatives. Growing up, her Uncle Bertram, Aunt Norris, and cousins always treated her as the outsider; her cousin Edmund (Blake Ritson) becoming her only ally. She soon falls in love with Edmund, but disaster strikes when the charismatic and stylish Crawfords come to Mansfield Park and wreak havoc on its inhabitants.

Having only recently read Mansfield Park for the first time, it quickly became a favourite of mine and I am glad that this adaptation is a faithful, albeit somewhat cheaply condensed, one. Opening on a perfectly dramatic tone with voice-over narration, it quickly gains some warmth and heart, which paves the way for the delicious scandal and drama that ensues.

Mansfield Park is one of Austen’s darker romances –in my personal opinion- and while there is a happy ending that leaves audiences warm and pleased, I do feel that it was a little saccharinely sweet in this movie, trying to be more like Sense & Sensibility or Pride & Prejudice: the most celebrated of Austen's romantic comedies. However, this is a tiny complaint against an otherwise lovely film to while away the afternoon with.

Every Woman Dreams

The cast is very intriguing with Billie Piper being quite an interesting Fanny, with her strong and determined features and presence somewhat contrasting with the genteel nature of the character. However, she does the role really well, with a gorgeous glow of innocence, humbleness, and decorum.

Playing against our sweet and gentle heroine is Hayley Atwell as the stylish, manipulative, and overtly frank ‘villainess’, Marianne Crawford. With her soft features and an endearing gentleness in her voice and manner, she is truly the human equivalent of the witch’s gingerbread house: all sweetness and pleasing to the eye, but completely soulless horror within. Atwell does the role beautifully.

Those audience feelings of warmth, engagement, and easiness that accompany any Austen adaptation are here in abundance, making this adaptation a perfect one to curl up with a cup of tea and enjoy. It’s classic British romance, a real treat.

Director: Iain B. MacDonald, 2007

Cast: Billie Piper, Maggie O’Neil, Douglas Hodge, Blake Ritson, James D’Arcy, Michelle Ryan, Rory Kinnear, Catherine Steadman, Hayley Atwell, Joseph Beattie, Joseph Morgan, and Jemma Redgrave

Cool Hand Luke

Image credit: Rotten Tomatoes

Cinema is the gift that keeps on giving. I find this more and more as I delve deeper into the golden history of one of man’s most popular mediums and keep coming across films that continue to thrive, shock, and empower even though they were made in a totally different time. Today’s gift was Cool Hand Luke.

For a modern audience, if you can imagine Rebel Without a Cause mixed with One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest set on a chain gang, then you’ve got Cool Hand Luke. Paul Newman in one of his most iconic roles stars as a wayward man incarcerated for destruction of municipal property and set to work on a chain gang where his charismatic loner personality butts heads with a whole new set of rules and regulations.

There is a distinct absence of any real story in this film, but honestly that’s part of its charm. Newman’s piercing stare and charismatic presence are quite literally enough to carry the film along, cobbling together a semi-engaging antiauthoritarian story that somehow winds up being an unfinished Christ allegory. Regardless, total support for Luke comes with reel one and escalates right until the film’s beautiful, but tragic ending. Newman's Oscar-nominated performance coupled with other memorable ones from George Kennedy (who won the Oscar for Best Supporting Actor) and Strother Martin who gave us that iconic line, "what we have here is failure to communicate", are what make this movie truly remarkable. 

Image credit: The Movie Bucket List

Director Stuart Rosenberg’s choice to film in impressive wide shots and extreme close-ups proves to still make eyes widen and hearts skip a beat and his favour towards harsh lighting and gritty, dusty, sweaty filters gives the film a wonderful authenticity, though this could also be due in part to co-author Donn Pearce’s own experiences on a chain gang. The script is punchy and poignant and one can see where other iconic works have borrowed from this masterpiece: The Shawshank Redemption and One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest for example.

While chain gang films are a genre that has more or less gone the way of the dodo, the magnificent thing about movies is that we can go back in time and revisit such interesting and important genre gems like this one, and I would recommend that people do!

Director: Stuart Rosenberg, 1967

Cast: Paul Newman, George Kennedy, J.D. Cannon, Lou Antonio, Robert Drivas, Strother Martin, Jo Van Fleet, Clifton James, Morgan Woodward, Luke Askew, Marc Cavell, Richard Davalos, Robert Donner, Warren Finnerty, Dennis Hopper, and Harry Dean Stanton