First Man (2018)

First Man advertises as the first film to show the iconic astronaut, Neil Armstrong's mission to the moon. Which to be honest, surprised me a little. The amount of space films we have we don't often have ones based on the truth. In fact, bar the recent Hidden Figures (2016) off the top of my head none immediately spring to mind. That's a big part within this film, to show us something we've seen countless times but for real, for the first time.

It's a space film, it's science-non-fiction. There are some things that are always going to be interesting to shoot but that doesn't mean the director can get lazy with his work. Linus Sandgren is the cinematographer as he was for Damien Chazelle's Oscar winning La La Land (2016). There's a strong focus on natural organic shots. With at least 70% of the film taking place on Earth it still has to be natural and first and foremost dated. It's the 60's it needs to looks as such and it does. Hair and costume were good as were the vintage space equipment and vessels.

The editing went well with crisp contracts of locations. The muted almost somewhat warm offices and homes to the cold mechanical insides of the space shuttle. The cinematography was subtle. Used various handheld shots to mimic news reports, then used the same technique just slightly different to replicate home movies. Tying the shots with stationary views or image binded to the shuttle works well with the tranquility of space. The score was obviously beautiful. As expected Justin Hurwitz, who did the original music for La La Land (2016) and Whiplash (2014) delivers again for this. A lot of which is gentle but as the film goes on the score becomes more prominent as the frequency of space and moon shots. The mission itself has its own theme. Beautiful yet somewhat evocative. Manages to embody the journey, the sacrifice mixed with the accomplishments. Also big nod to the sound mixing, can't imagine that won't be recognised as award winning. The stark contracts were poignant and fitting as well as the use of real sample interviews. 

Now the cast sold me. When back when, when we were just told Chazelle, Gosling, Armstrong, I was in. To be fair, there wasn't a great deal to add to that. Gosling was fantastic as expected, he's getting the opportunity to flex his acting chops a little more and he's getting taken more and more seriously. The difficulty he had with the role was that he was playing a real person. It's not a character. And though Armstong is a world wide name he's not a world wide character. I think a lot of people would struggle to pick him out of a line up let alone know what his personality is. So yes Gosling can act, he's tern and quiet but speaks up when needed. He shows intelligences and interest as well as awe. All of which whilst mourning. He doesn't let his feelings overpower him except when he does. I imagine he may get an Oscar nom. 

Claire Foy on the other hand may actually win. She maintains the poise and authority that she's mastered in The Crown. She's herself alongside a wife and mother. She has some real powerful scenes with Gosling and it really makes you think about the pressure this situation would put on any relationship. The final wordless scene between the two of them felt so intimate and strong though it was just a small interaction between them. With no comparison to the real people I personally found Foy to be a more believable person.

It was overall a beautiful film. Well constructed story of a mans life during a period in which he made history. I wanted to like this more. I'm a fan of so many elements but I'm not jump to rewatch this as I did Chazelle's previous filmography. It's long. Towards the end of the film it kinda feels like the end of a long haul flight home, everything up to this point has been nice but you know whats going to happen next so you're just kinda waiting for the landing. 

Meticulously made, and deserves to be appreciated. Just not my favourite thing to come from any of the cast or crew. 7/10 

CINEMATES - A

Blade Runner 2049 (2017)

Right, Blade Runner 2049. Here we go. Gorgeous film but it needs to settle before discussing. Young blade runner, K played by Ryan Gosling uncovers a secret that leads him down the path of Deckard, Harrision Ford's blade runner, who has been missing for 30 years. 

The thing I was most excited about when this film was announced was the crew. My man Roger Deakins back to his old tricks being 13 time Oscar nominated for his cinematography. Hans Zimmer and Benjamin Wallfisch there for original sound, edited by Joe Walker and of course directed by Denis Villeneuve. Taking Blade Runner (1982) out of the equation that's a pretty impressive line up for a sci fi film, half of which have worked together before on the likes of Arrival (2016) Prisoners (2013) and Sicario (2015). 

Those aspects do not let you down. The sound was naturally industrial. It's the only way to describe it, it feels organic alongside the environment. In general it rises, it's subtle and not overtly there but as it builds it becomes a vital part in many scenes. The editing is good but to be honest a second thought, but that doesn't make it bad. It's in no way distracting, it compliments the wide shots by giving them room to breath. Pacing matches the tone but on more than one occasion  I felt myself conscious of the run time. 

It is stunning. We knew that from Deakins name, let alone the trailers and posters. The world isn't just created it's maintained from the 1982 original. The bleak dystopian back drop has been done many times but the mixture between high tech and low nature is beautifully done. There's contrast between empty barren lands which once held life and the damp overrun cityscapes. There's a clever mix of dulled colours with neon and life. IMAX was a great choice, and I highly recommend it if you have the opportunity. Gorgeous wide shots which could have any frame a picture. And if you consider the amount of sfx that would have been added then you have an even higher admiration for those getting the base shots. 

Everything in the frame, every shot emphasises the themes. Visually water played a big part, you can read into this as much as you'd like. Reflection, ripples, memories being be lost in time like tears in rain. There's multiple shots through rain, through weather soaked windows, with light bouncing off moving water. It's calming and thinking about it is the most natural thing in the entire film, or I guess the world.

The other more commonly discussed theme from Ridley Scott's original is what defines humanity, what makes you human, can a replicant have a soul? Gosling's K, a Nexus 8, struggles with the idea of retiring (executing) something that has been born. He is then challenged with the idea that he himself may have been born. He's been told he does well even though he doesn't have a soul yet also been told that people forget that he isn't human. He has memories implanted in him that he knows aren't real but is also certain they are. He has feelings for Joi, a programmed hologram that says what you want to hear, but really how many steps above her is he, is it just the physicality that separates them? Gosling is fantastic, a great canvas to paint a replicant onto.

Joi, his love interest is played by captivating Ana de Armas, who is beautiful and loving. Her special effects are wonderfully done, her hologrammed nature is never overstated but it used to its full potential. A scene with K and natural Mackenzie Davis (who you might recognise from Black Mirror's Emmy Award Winning San Junipero episode) is so incredibly done I didn't want it to end. It's a very interesting scene and shows the individuality that Joi appears to have by trying a unique way of making K happy with Davis' character Mariette. Though unique to us that's only due to us not being accustom to the technology available. 

In general the cast were great. Robin Wright was great as expected as Lieutenant Joshi, one of the few humans we actually interact with. Dave Bautista was great though far more brief than I expected. Jared Leto was a bit weird as always, I think almost every scene he was in his voice echoed and reverberated back to us. I think we got an odd amount of the character, didn't get as much development that could have been interesting but also his on screen presence wasn't vital in every scene.

Though, I may be in the minority here, but I think the same about Harrison Ford. Without spoiling it, he didn't need to be in the movie. His on screenpresence was just not necessary. Yes he has a great scene with Leto and yes he seems to work with Gosling fine but at this point it's hard to see him as Deckard and not just Harrison Ford. Ford was arguably the weak spot, that doesn't make him bad just not as good as every other outstanding element. The direction is great, Villeneuve is killing it but it didn't feel like a one of his movies, it felt like a Blade Runner movie. For me his name is becoming a reason to watch a film so to forget that he did it after watching was not quite disappointing but odd. Shows his versatility. 

Must see for any Blade Runner fans, any Sci-fi fans, any Roger Deakins fans any fans of cinema really. Some will like more than others, and more than I did. 7.5/10 Will be Oscar nominated.

CINEMATES - A