Thursday 30 November 2017

Suburbicon (2017)



I honestly don’t know where this review is going to go, because I am just so confused. You know when you head into a film screening, having read the synopsis beforehand… but come out even more curious and clueless that you were to begin with? Suburbicon is one of those films.

Before going in, I was sure this was a film – BASED ON WHAT THE INTERNET DESCRIPTIONS SAID, about a family who had to deal with a lot, due to difficulties arising in Suburbicon, and Matt Damon played a ‘Liam Neeson in Taken-esque’, super-dad that kicked ass. I HAVE NEVER BEEN MORE WRONG.

I honestly can’t say that this was a bad surprise though, because I can’t think of a film that I have experienced, which is anything like this. I’m going to try and keep this review as generic as possible because of the fact that the synopsis seems to do the same (This film can be spoiled in a second, so I am going to attempt to skip detail where I can).

Suburbicon is the story of an all-white American town/community living situation, in which everything is very calm, and running like clockwork. Nothing bad happens in Suburbicon. Everyone lives in perfect little houses, with a white picket fence, a back porch, a decent sized garden - you get the drift. Then suddenly, things begin to go downhill in the town, and the Lodge family are the ones that are suffering because of this.



The thing that I took away from this film was the awfully random, ill-fitting, unexplained part of the story involving a black American family moving into the town. It was a story about a town of racists in parts. I understand that due to the era this film was meant to be set in, and it being an all-white living area, it makes sense that the event of a black family moving in, will cause conflict. Yes, you can assume that the reason the horrific events that occur, supposedly (from the point of view of the citizens) occurs as a direct result of 3 black people suddenly moving in to the area. But this is just such a disjointed part of the plot, and honestly brings nothing to the story whatsoever, and in fact just confused the plot. As well as it confusing the story, it’s just such a bad depiction of such an event. We have tonnes of films incorporated this theme, and doing something creative with it. The creativity that seemed to be attempted was a giant flop.

The story itself, obviously ignoring this part was gripping. I liked the theme that was chosen, I like how dark it was, and I liked the (possibly) unintentional comedy. Matt Damon plays an awkward Psycho, and his performance surprised me, as it was one that I enjoyed. 


The progression of the story was quick, which was both good and bad. It was good, because it meant it was well paced, overall. I didn’t feel like the film was too long, or too short. It certainly lacked detail, but it was still fine to watch. The setting, at the start of the film, reminded me of the beginning of Edward Scissorhands, so at that point made me feel a bit worried, because that setting can be used badly. In this case, I think it was used well, and it complimented the story… Especially as I thought I was going in to see a TOTALLY different film. But it gradually started to impress me.

The greatest fault that this film has, besides the story, is the script. The script in this film was boring. It was not ‘meaty’, for lack of a better word. I would have written this film off had it not been for the cast, who - on the whole, did the job. This was also the case for the score. Although the score is DEFINITELY not noteworthy, there was one, and it worked with what we were seeing on screen.

Suburbicon is a film that starts off incredibly slowly, and then increasingly becomes more tense, more gritty, and more worth the watch.



5.5/10

CINEMATES - S 

Thursday 16 November 2017

The Florida Project (2017)


I went into this as an Odeon screen unseen, I had never heard of it at this point. Going in completely blind. The opening was bright and sunny and had natural seeming kids running around. The first thing I noticed was how often the name Sean Baker came up on screen. I do preemptively judge a film if I see that one person has an unmatched level of involvement. As many independent filmmakers, Baker directed, produced, wrote and edited The Florida Project. He also did the same for Tangerine (2015) a film that made a mark due to being shot entirely with iPhones. I believe this can affect the showing of a story sometimes, like tunnel vision, having a secondary opinion can make a difference.

This for the most part was ignored until the end. The 'story' if you want to call it that, follows Moonee a 6 year old girl who lives in a motel room with her mum and runs around over summer making friends and causing trouble. The film doesn't have much of a narrative, more a social commentary of Florida's lower class residents. It plays like a memory or a diary of someone who grow up in those conditions. Because I think you do find yourself wondering not just how it will end but when. It's hard to pace something that isn't necessarily going anywhere.


The cast was great, the only big recognisable face was Wilem Dafoe, the motel owner, and father to the building. I have always thought he's a wonderful actor and he does make a point of choosing quite dissimilar roles. He has the fine balance of being at wits end with the children and protecting them dearly. Moonee is played by young Brooklyn Prince, sweet and annoying in equal measure just like a normal 6 year old. She sporadically uses language and attitude as if shes in her twenties, a clear notation of how much time she's spent with her mother, who treats her like a friend more than her daughter. Bria Vinaite, the mother, Halley, is again a natural. Being her first feature length and first film in general its easier to see her as the character as we don't know anything else. It seemed so genuine that I would struggle to see her in any other way with any other accent. The rest of the cast are similar, the children young and real but still showing the traits of their respective parental figure.


The cinematography was gorgeous. Natural lighting was apparent from the get go, lots of sunrises and sunsets colouring the frame with warm reds and orange evenings. The motel was a giant purple building, a man made backdrop to a lot of scenes. Moonee and her friend Jancey have free reign of outside but inside we only have a few rooms as motels do. The few locations mimic their lives of having a bedroom and a bathroom and nothing else. The sound does the same, no score or music in the film until the final scene. Everything gives a raw documentary feel to it.

My only beef was the end of the film. And I'm sure many others feel the same. People in the cinema laughed out loud then asked amongst themselves, is that gonna be the end? Then when the credits rolled there was audible groans. It's the first piece of music we have from the film and its a dampened down version of Cool and the Gang's 'Celebration'. No spoilers but the film ends in Disney World and you can tell this not just due to the iconic castle but due to Baker obviously not wanting to pay for consent to film professionally. The footage goes from smooth wonderfully coloured shots to jagged phone footage. It's abrupt and kind of undercuts the visual world that had been created.


Subtle social commentary on the poor people living so close to the money making Disney World and it's ever coming tourists. A definite eyeopener to the status that some people live though somewhat disappointing ending. If you're open minded and like your artsy films, a solid 7/10 otherwise you might find the lack of conclusion frustrating.

CINEMATES - A

Wednesday 15 November 2017

Sunday 12 November 2017

Call Me by Your Name (2017)




From the first time I saw this trailer, I was genuinely excited about this release. I feel there hasn’t been a decent looking feel good film for a while, and Call Me by Your Name seemed to be one with a refreshing story to get me even more excited.

Call Me by Your Name is a film set in 1983 about the Perlman family, who every year have doctoral student stay with them every year. This year, Oliver comes to stay with them and work with the Father of our main character, Elio – a seventeen-year-old boy. Over the time they spend together all summer, they discover a mutual passion which is seemingly something new for Elio.

First things first, this film is beautiful. It’s such a great film to look at, Guadagnino has certainly realised the ticket to this film’s success and taken full advantage of it. There is so much focus on the beauty of the Italian buildings, the relaxing family breakfasts, the views out in the countryside when Elio and Oliver are out on a bike ride, the lunchtime banquets in the garden, the massive group games of volleyball – you get the picture, it was summer, and it is what makes this a feel good film. There’s something about seeing these kinds of scenes on the big screen that taps into so many different emotions for me.

The score was beautiful, it was probably one of my favourite aspects because it tied in so perfectly with the different things the characters were going through, and the events that you were watching. It really connected all the events on screen together. The only way I can describe this feeling, is by saying that it felt like I was part of the experience with Elio. It perfectly helped the transition between scenes, and I do not think this is a feature that was overused.


There really was attention to detail in this film, and the script in part was surprising. It was filled with comedy, sadness and drama. Conversely, there are a great deal of silences – some of these filled with the great pieces of music, but some that are just truly chilling. For this to work an excellent cast is needed, and that is definitely what this film has. Excluding Hammer, I was clueless about the rest of the cast, but went home desperate to find out what else I might see Chamalet in.


This is definitely a must see film. Not in the sense of – ‘I couldn’t keep my eyes off the screen, so much is happening’, but the opposite. It’s easy, it’s pleasant, it’s an extremely emotional story that will make you feel all kinds of things. I will be seeing this again, and encourage others to do so too.

7/10.

CINEMATES - S

The Death of Stalin (2017)

The Death of Stalin is quite simply, a political comedy… if there even is such a thing. The story walks us through Stalin’s last moments alive, and the challenges the rest of his cabinet faced after his death, with a nice dose of comedy.

Image result for the death of stalinWe caught the Death of Stalin before its release at an Oden Screen Unseen, and it has taken me until now to face writing this review. This isn’t because it was a bad film, it was enjoyable – but it was a bit of something and nothing at the same time. So, I can already tell it’s going to be a short review.

I really think this film will be appealing to certain audiences, while others may find this if not boring, perhaps offensive, but this genuinely depends on your sense of humour. This film takes a serious event, and basically takes the piss out it, which comes with strengths and weaknesses. The film jumps straight in and sets the scene, which is perfect because it’s something people shouldn’t really need much of a back story for. Which is emphasised right at the beginning when we see characters who seem to be incredibly paranoid that they are at risk and are being watched. If you are going into this film blind, not knowing anything about Stalin, you get the idea that there are some bad things going on…

The cast in this film were the redeeming quality. The performance of Steve Buscemi was probably the most noteworthy. This was the only person I distinctly remember being in this film. His character really brought across the fact that while we are dealing with something very dark, there is still room for a little chuckle. 

While I don’t want to comment on the historical accuracy of this film, it is obvious in certain scenes that events are painfully dramatized, and I do remember sighing because I got bored of the cheap satire. The only way I can describe some of the comedy, is by calling it ‘Dad comedy’.
There is nothing unbelievable about the tools used in this film, the lighting in this film was consistently dull, which suited the atmosphere that was being displayed, which was great. The score… I know there was one, but it’s nothing to write home about. Honestly, the production was fairly average.


All I can really say is that this film is entertaining. It is definitely funny, but also serious. It uses classic British comedy to lighten a difficult subject, and that is something I enjoy.

However, I don’t think it’s everyone’s cup of tea, and I doubt I’d ever watch it again.

5.5/10