PORTRAIT OF A LADY ON FIRE - MIFF 2019

The final day of this year's MIFF was a difficult one for me; in fact if I am being totally honest, I didn't enjoy it at all. Sleep deprived, and just flat out exhausted, I struggled the entire day. It was a day where I watched four films, all of them back to back, and due to my exhaustion, I found it very hard to concentrate fully on the films that I was watching. However, even in the state I found myself in on day 17 of this film festival, I knew that I had witnessed something special in my third film. The film was Celine Sciamma's “Portrait of a Lady on Fire”, and it was an exquisite piece of art.

Set on an isolated island in France during the eighteenth century, a young painter, Marianne, is commissioned to do a wedding portrait of Heloise. The catch is that she must do so without her knowledge, as Heloise is totally against the wedding arranged for her, and thus refuses to sit and pose for such a painting. The story behind the wedding is more tragic than initially thought, as Heloise's sister was originally meant to be the man's bride, but preferred to take her own life instead of being forced into marriage. Heloise herself was studying to be a nun, but upon her sister's death, she was removed from the convent to take her sister's place. As the sister took her own life by throwing herself over a nearby cliff, Heloise's mother comes up with a plan to disguise Marianne as a walking partner for the young woman; giving her a chance to be outdoors while giving her mother the piece of mind that she also will not be able to take her own life, as she will have someone looking out for her on their walks. However the true purpose of these day walks is for Marianne to closely study and examine Heloise's features, so when she returns to the house at night, she can paint the portrait from memory. Initially, these walks are almost in silence, but the women continually get closer as time progresses.

Immediately before this film, I was in a screening of Andrzej Wajda's 1977 film “Man of Marble”, which is a two and a half hour film, that is dense of historical Polish politics, and was something that I really struggled with. I felt totally burnt out, and then as the credits started rolling, I had to bolt from that cinema and straight into my screening of “Portrait of a Lady on Fire” which was due to start in around two minutes later. Being a sold out session, the cinema was packed, and I had to sit in the very front row, to the left of the screen. It was the most terrible spot to watch a film, and yet even from this vantage point and feeling burnt out to the extreme, I was still totally blown away by how great “Portrait of a Lady on Fire” was. Right from the opening frame, I was totally entranced, and my attention never wavered from the screen until the film finished some two hours later (which flew by too).

This is one of the most beautiful and heartbreaking romances I have ever seen in cinema. The first half is just sublime, with the two girls sharing time together but barely saying a word to one another. Everything is done in looks and observations. The subjective point of view shots are so perfect as the camera lingers over Heloise's facial features, her neck, her ears, and her hair. While initially these looks are innocent in nature, they soon change to looks of desire, and suddenly the film becomes very sensual and incredibly erotic, even though very little skin or actual sex is shown on screen. The voyeuristic act of studying someone so intently, to paint their visage, turns to a different kind of look where the recipient of that look desires it to turn into touch. Once the girls love is consummated, it becomes a powerful force between them, even though their love affair takes place over only a few days. The brevity of the affair is complimented by its intensity. It is the kind of love that changes a person, and one that will never be forgotten.

Whilst the main story is about these two girls, Marianne and Heloise, there is also a third female character that is prominent as well, and that is Sophie, Heloise's maid. She is the centre of a subplot to do with an unplanned pregnancy that shows a bond between the women, despite different levels of class. Her inclusion adds another extra layer to an already magnificent film. What is interesting about this film is that it is a romance from a female point of view. Most movie romances are shown via the male gaze but here it is the female gaze and it is a completely different feel. Men express love more in terms of sexuality, whereas women do so in terms of sensuality. The distinction isn't massive but it certainly changes the romantic dynamics which is why this film stands out so much. Even though all the characters in “Portrait of a Lady on Fire” are women, so too the writer/director, this isn't some on the nose feminist take on the story, rather it is a subtle but very human and truthful depiction of love from a woman's perspective.

I loved the performances by the two girls in the leads, as initially they start out very cold and separate from one another, but as the romance heats up, the actors begin to feed off one another to become one. Adele Haenel plays Heloise and at the beginning of the film she is totally detached and wary of Marianne. She borders on emotionless as she never smiles, but her eyes betray her sadness at being forced into a marriage she wants no part of. However, the performance changes as the girl's relationship does, and soon Haenel is very expressive with a beaming smile. Her outlook on the world has totally changed now with love in her heart. Noemie Merlant is excellent in the role of Marianne, and her performance is quite different from Haenel's. With Merlant's character being a painter, she appears more detail orientated. There is also a coldness too from her at the beginning, but due to the seriousness in how she takes her job as an artist. She is focused more on the surface details, but again, this begins to change as the story goes on, and she begins to let her emotions take hold and pour out of her when she starts to fall in love. Again, this creates a warmth in Marianne unseen prior.

Normally in my reviews, I always mention the visual style of a film because it is the element I respond to the most, and I must say that “Portrait of a Lady on Fire” is stunning to look at; it is truly a feast for the eyes. Cinematographer Claire Mathon does an amazing job of shooting the film using soft light that gives the film the look of a painting itself. Each character appears to be colour coded too with Marianne dressed in red and Heloise in green, which is a nice visual touch. However, while I could tell the film was beautifully shot, this was one aspect of the film where my seating in the cinema hampered me, as I really struggled with depth within a shot, so I actually believe the film is even more beautiful than I can report. Needless to say, the costumes all look amazing, and I loved the scene with the girls on the beach wearing scarves over their mouths due to the wild winds; its a stunning image.

Speaking of brilliant scenes, “Portrait of a Lady on Fire” has one of the most sublime scenes ever in it, when the three women head to the beach at night. Around a camp fire, a large group of women start singing a piece of classical music via acapella and it makes the hair on your neck stand tall. It starts with hums and clapping and before long the music is in full effect and......WOW!! The whole scene is also so emotional too; you cannot help but be moved by it all. This scene also then relates to the film's finale, which I have to say is just perfect; it is devastating, heart wrenching and packed to the gills with emotion, but it is perfect none the less. I think it is probably the best ending to a film since Christian Petzold's “Phoenix” from 2014. Another thing I really want to mention before wrapping this review up is that I also loved the way writer/director Celine Sciamma layered the Orpheus myth into the narrative with devastating effect. It adds a layer of poetry to this already brilliant film.

Overall, “Portrait of a Lady on Fire” is a stunning piece of cinema and one that I cannot recommend enough. I actually had a lot more I wanted to say about the film but decided to stop now and let everyone just experience this masterpiece for themselves. It was just announced as the winner of the audience award at this year's MIFF, and it did not surprise me at all. You could feel while in the cinema that everyone knew they were watching something special in that moment, and the first thing I heard from behind me when the credits began was a “wow” before the clapping started. The most amazing thing about it is that I watched this film in the worst spot possible, so there is a chance that on re-watch, my rating may go even higher. “Portrait of a Lady on Fire” is exquisite and a film you do not want to miss. It is intelligent, beautifully crafted, emotion packed, and absolutely devastating, but it is also sublime. DO NOT MISS IT!

4.5 Stars

THE DEAD DON'T DIE - MIFF 2019

Anyone familiar with this blog (and I know there are many, right?), would now that at the beginning of each year I write a list of my most anticipated features of the upcoming twelve months. When I heard that Jim Jarmusch was making a new film, it immediately made it onto this list just on the back of his two previous features, “Only Lovers Left Alive” and “Paterson”, which were both genius. Then word broke that the film Jarmusch was working on was actually a zombie comedy, which sounded an odd decision, as it seemed such a mainstream idea and already done to death. Most people immediately brought up the fact that Jarmusch had only recently struck gold with another overdone trope of horror; the vampire film. While this is true, zombies have nothing to them as they are rotting flesh reanimated, compared to the tragic figure of a vampire, and as such there isn't a huge amount you can do with them that is different, in terms of a narrative. So while I was still anticipating “The Dead Don't Die”, it is safe to say that I was a little worried about it too, but I believed enough in Jarmusch to think that he wouldn't be making the film if he didn't have a unique take on the subject. Then the trailer for the film came out, and all my worst fears appeared realised, as it looked terrible. My heart sank and my anticipation started to drop, but there was still the chance that the trailer was not representative of the film as a whole, and perhaps due to the Jarmusch quirkiness inside, that marketers found it hard to promote, thus the poor trailer. As you can see, I was clutching at straws whilst trying to stay optimistic, and then luckily it was announced for MIFF to give me a chance to see it for myself.

The plot of “The Dead Don't Die” is just like any other zombie film but here goes: After a slight variation in the Earth's axis starts to alter the normal fabric of day to day life (like the sun staying out much later than is usual, watches stopping, phone signals dying etc), the peaceful town of Centerville must fight for their lives when the undead become reanimated and start rising from their graves.

Man, oh man, this film was a bit of a disaster. The posters amusingly state that the film has “the greatest zombie cast ever disassembled” , and it is hard to argue with that. “The Dead Don't Die” has a fantastic cast, the majority of them Jarmusch regulars, and sadly they are all totally wasted. It is a total travesty to have such a cast and then do nothing with them. The majority of them end up only being in the film to be zombies or to be zombie fodder. The only ones tied to the actual plot are Bill Murray, Adam Driver and Chloe Sevigny, who all play police officers tasked with trying to first work out what is going on and then help the town of Centerville survive this zombie onslaught. Out of these three, only Sevigny can hold her head up high, with the other two being far too laconic in their performances. I understand that this style of acting was no doubt instructed by Jarmusch, and so he should take most of the blame here, but his usual deadpan style just does not work in a zombie movie as they need more immediacy to work proper. The rest of the cast are essentially glorified cameos although I must admit I did enjoy some of them. Steve Buscemi (working with Jarmusch for the first time since 1995's “Dead Man” where he had a tiny role) plays Farmer Frank Miller who is basically the redneck in the film wearing a “Making America White Again” hat; an obvious riff on the stereotypical Trump supporter. He has one good scene in the diner, but then is wasted after that. All of Rosie Perez's scenes take place on television screens as she plays a news reporter reporting the facts of the bizarre going ons. It is a small role, but I loved her name in the film which was “Posie Juarez”; it is a silly joke, but I must admit that it made me giggle every time she said it. Jarmusch attempts another little name joke with Tilda Swinton's character being named “Zelda Winston” but I didn't find that one funny at all. Of course Tom Waits has a role as a hermit living in the woods, and is the only character who actually seems to understand what is going on, and that the Earth is angry (the reason being that he lives on and respects the Earth). My favourite bit of casting though was the return of Eszter Balint who plays Fern, the owner of the local diner, and sadly is the inaugural victim of the zombies. Balint was one of the leads in Jarmusch's 1984 film “Stranger Than Paradise”, and they have not worked together since, until now with “The Dead Don't Die”. I absolutely loved her in the film and it was so good to see her again, and even though she is the first victim, I was happy that her role was bigger than I was expecting.

The problem with “The Dead Don't Die” is that it is so obvious in everything it does, and it has a real “been there, done that” feel to it all. It is obviously an attack on Trump's America with the main message being that the country is full of brain dead zombies following this despicable man. It also attacks those (like Trump) who deny the effects of climate change, and I guess the film is also a warning that if something is not done about it, it will end up affecting the human race in a bad way. It also attempts to highlight how people today have become like zombies, only concerned with accumulating more stuff. I have no problem with the social commentary contained within the film, but it is just done in such a bland and obvious way. It is like the “lowest hanging fruit” of comedy, with none of the jokes being very new or even original. Surprisingly coming from Jarmusch, the script is just not clever at all. Also for some unknown reason, he has added a whole “meta” quality to the film that just does not work on any level at all! I hated these moments with a passion, and they totally took me out of the film. In fact, worse than that, they made me angry with the film. The whole thing almost feels like a first draft of a script that has been thrust into production well before it has been polished and ready. Examples of this are the way nothing seems to gel together when it is not connected to the main plot, especially the subplot of the young kids, and the twenty somethings including Selena Gomez. Whilst I can make an argument that the younger kids are in the film to represent the future, and that we do still have a chance because of them, I can make no argument, however, as to why Selena Gomez and her friends are in the film because they impact nothing. They are totally pointless. I also did not understand Tilda Swinton's subplot at all, especially the way it ends; it felt ridiculous and so so silly.

The other aspect of “The Dead Don't Die” that I was surprised about was just how lacking it was artistically. Even during the past films of Jarmusch that I haven't connected fully with, such as “Stranger Than Paradise” or “The Limits of Control”, I have always been impressed with the photography, design and especially the music in these films. “The Dead Don't Die” feels like it could have been made by any hack filmmaker, as the images in the film are dull and the photography is as bland and vanilla as you could imagine. What makes this more surprising is the fact that the cinematographer was Frederick Elmes, who has worked with Jarmusch many times before on beautiful looking films such as “Night on Earth”, “Broken Flowers” and “Paterson” (not to mention David Lynch's “Blue Velvet”, “Wild at Heart” and “Eraserhead”). The only shot in the film that impressed me was the extended one of all the zombies rising from their graves, lit by the beautiful moonlight. The rest of the film was seriously disappointing from a visual perspective.

So was there anything I liked about “The Dead Don't Die”? Yes, there was, but no where near the amount I was hoping for. Some of the gags I admit did make me giggle (Adam Driver's car is hilarious), but what I loved the most was when the zombies expelled dirt or dust from their wounds when killed, as opposed to blood. It looked so good, and at least it was something a little different to the norm. The other thing I really enjoyed was the amount of goodwill and recognition shown to “Night of the Living Dead”. George Romero is name-checked during the film, a group of characters drive the same make and model car that is used at the beginning of the 1968 film, Pittsburgh is referenced multiple times, and even the original naked zombie makes an appearance in “The Dead Don't Die” (and I have just read that it was played by the same woman as in “Night of the Living Dead”).

Overall, I was extremely disappointed in “The Dead Don't Die” and actually consider it to be Jim Jarmusch's worst film yet. Coming off two of his greatest films prior to this, with “Only Lovers Left Alive” and “Paterson”, this actually came as a bit of a shock. I know that there are people that do love this film, but for me, it almost didn't work on any level. The jokes are stale, and the social commentary is obvious. For the life of me, I also cannot understand why this very talented director added the meta element to this film, because it was a decision that bordered on the disaster. “The Dead Don't Die” is a poor film that sadly thinks it is cutting edge and clever. The saddest aspect of the film though is that the whole point of it seems to be summed up in the final line of dialogue which is “What a fucked up world”; not very insightful at all.

2 Stars.

THE LODGE - MIFF 2019

Aidan and Mia's father, Richard, is on the verge of marrying his new girlfriend, and like most young kids of a broken marriage, they are not happy about it. They blame the girl, Grace, for their parent's break-up and hate the fact that she is “replacing” their mother. As such, Aidan and Mia totally rebel against Grace, refusing to talk to her, let alone trying to get to know her. However with Christmas approaching, their father has decided enough is enough. Grace is a part of his life and will need to be a part of theirs, and so he organises time away together at an isolated cabin at the snow. It gives Grace and the kids time to know each other better while she looks after them, before Richard returns to them all (he has to work in the lead up before Christmas) to celebrate Christmas together. To say the early times are rough would be an understatement to the fullest, but as time goes on, both Aidan and Mia start to realise that Grace isn't the ogre they have made her out to be, and eventually start to accept and interact with her. However, after finally thawing the ice between them, the three of them are forced into a situation where they must rely on one another, as some very strange things start happening at the lodge they are staying at.

This is the second feature film from writer/directors Severin Fiala and Veronika Franz, after their much loved and well regarded German language debut “Goodnight Mommy”. This time around though, whilst still sticking to their horror roots, “The Lodge” is an English language feature. While “Goodnight Mommy” is quite well liked by fans of the genre, personally it was an odd situation for me watching that film because literally within the first three minutes of the film, I had worked out its twist. I do not say this to brag or anything, but rather to highlight that I do not think I had the same experience as most while watching “Goodnight Mommy”. I missed out on being manipulated before the rug was pulled out from underneath my feet, so in that regard, I do not think I got to experience the best of Fiala and Franz, even though I could see that they had obvious talent within the genre. It was because of this talent that I was looking forward to seeing their new film, but I was seriously hoping that the same thing would not happen again with “The Lodge”, and thankfully it did not.

“The Lodge” is a film with a number of twists and turns and I plan on not ruining any of them. That said, it is filled with a lot of disparate horror elements (such as revenge story, religious cults, ghost story and psychological horror) that shouldn't really come together but surprisingly does in a fairly realistic way. It is a little hokey at times, but overall the story works. It is a slow burn horror film with the scares being more reliant on mood and atmosphere rather than basic jump scares, and the location where the majority of the film is set helps enormously in creating this uneasy atmosphere.

I am a big fan of horror movies set during winter or around the snow. The main reason I think is because these elements usually increase the feeling of isolation, which “The Lodge” certainly exploits. The other reason is from a purely aesthetic point of view; the snow on the trees, houses and objects, always looks great, as does the bright red on the pure white, when blood is inevitably spilled on it. Speaking of the film's visuals, Franz and Fiala have shot “The Lodge” in a very interesting fashion with everything very angular and long. There are very few curves in the film, with sharp corners preferred which is then accentuated by either vertical or horizontal lines, which gives off a feeling of extra length. Rooms feel more like hallways, and ceilings are often visible. I am assuming this has been done to create a sense of claustrophobia, or of the walls closing in the longer time passes. Whether or not this is the intention, I'm not sure, but it is certainly interesting and gives “The Lodge” a unique feel. The other thing worth mentioning is the lack of colour in the film. Naturally the snow covered landscapes of the film are perfect for this approach, but it almost plays like a black and white film, with the bare minimum of colour appearing from time to time.

Riley Keough is the star of “The Lodge” and plays Grace; a woman in charge of protecting a couple of children who want nothing to do with her. I felt that early on Keough was great in the film, as she (unsuccessfully) tries to bond with the kids, whilst not blind to the fact that it is a difficult transition for them both. She never plays Grace as the stereotypical evil stepmom, but as someone who genuinely wants to get to know Aidan and Mia, and to be a part of their lives. Grace is a woman who has her own demons from her childhood, and Keough does a good job of showing that even now she struggles with them at times. However it is when these demons start to take hold of Grace that I feel Keough's performance falters slightly. She becomes less believable in these moments, which is a shame as these moments are the most narratively rich. The highlight of “The Lodge” would be the wonderful performances from Jaeden Lieberher and Lia McHugh, who play Aidan and Mia respectively. They are both excellent and at times really come across as brats, but it is the brother/sister relationship that they make so convincing, that holds the film together. The love and care for each other feels so true, and the way Aidan protects his little sister at all times is beautiful and comes from an honest place. Franz and Fiala dealt extensively with family connections in “Goodnight Mommy” as well, so it is obvious one of the pair's strengths.

My misgivings in regards to “The Lodge” is that by the end of it, it feels very mean spirited. The film goes down a path that is quite messed up and equally as depressing. When the main secret is finally revealed, I agree that it is all very silly, but its the resultant implications and reactions to this silliness that is the true horror of “The Lodge” and what makes the film stand out. At the same time though, it also adds to the mean spiritedness of it all that I mentioned above. I understand that the above statement is vague at best, but I am attempting to keep the film's secrets just that. While definitely a horror film, “The Lodge” isn't very bloody. When violence occurs, it happens quick and has devastating results, just like in real life. There are no “fun” blood and gore gags here; rather you feel the violence being perpetrated.

Overall “The Lodge” turned out to be a pretty good horror flick. Franz and Fiala have paced the film deliberately to increase tension and atmosphere and have done a great job at portraying family relationships in a state of flux. Whilst the ultimate reveal borders on the silly, it is the resulting effects of the reveal that give the end its strength and that make the film so haunting. While certainly flawed, I enjoyed “The Lodge” a lot but imagine that it wont be a film for all horror fans.

3.5 Stars.

MIDSOMMAR

After impressing last year with his critical horror hit “Hereditary”, director Ari Aster quickly returns with his follow-up film “Midsommar”; a film that outwardly appears very different from its predecessor, but who actually shares similar themes to that film.

Dani and Christian are an unhappy couple who are on the brink of breaking up. Unbeknown to Dani, Christian has already started planning for life without her, booking a holiday with his mates to Sweden, where the plan is to take copious amounts of drugs and sleep with as many of the gorgeous locals as possible. However when Dani suffers a massive personal tragedy, Christian does the right thing and sticks by her, even inviting her to join them on their boys trip to Sweden (much to the chagrin of his mates). Soon the group takes off on their journey and head to one of the friend's rural community to join in on the nine day mid-summer celebrations taking place. While the white costumes, flowers and dancing, project fun and frivolity, it isn't long before the group realises that they are disguising a much more menacing nature to it all, but is it already too late for them?

It goes without saying that Ari Aster is a supremely talented filmmaker, as his two features so far have been, from a technical standpoint, stunning. Each shot has a level of perfection to it that you can tell it has been well thought out long before anyone has arrived on set. Production design is second to none and in “Midsommar” he has done a fantastic job of creating this world that is both believable (whilst still unusual) and scary. His attention to detail is so impressive, and this is shown in a brilliant overhead shot of the commune sitting down to eat. Every piece of cutlery or food is exactly in the right place, and when the group finally begin to eat, it creates a “Mexican wave” type movement across the table. It is a stunning moment, one of my favourites within the entire film, and a perfect example of Aster's razor sharp preparation. The problem with all of this, because everything feels so planned to the nth degree, it doesn't seem to give the actors a natural space to work in with their characters, as they constantly must service the shot, rather than their character or story. This gives the film a very cold and robotic feel to it, and it then loses immediacy and emotion, as everything feels forced to fit into what has already been pre-planned. I have felt this both with “Hereditary” and “Midsommar”; I am not blind to the fact of just how well put together they are, but at times they lose me due to the emotional coldness to them.

The big asset that “Midsommar” does have though is Florence Pugh who plays Dani. She is anything but cold in her emotions, as throughout the course of the film she is put totally through the wringer. Some of the guttural crying this poor girl does in the film just breaks your heart. Even the lead up work that Pugh does before she sobs uncontrollably is something to behold. This cannot have been an easy film to make for her, and I am guessing also totally exhausting. The character of Christian is the opposite in that he has emotionally checked out of this relationship already and admittedly Jack Reynor does a good job in his role, but appears to get lost next to the impressive theatrics of Pugh's performance.

Aster does a great job of creating this “paradise” world, but also makes it feel very surreal or like a bad drug trip. He makes brilliant use of the Swedish summer, a time when there is very little darkness/nighttime, and this ever-lasting sunshine creates a disorienting affect on both us, as an audience, and to the characters themselves. Waking up from a bad drug trip in the “night” to the blazing sun actually creates a fear in them because it just doesn't feel right or normal. Another thing you have to give Aster props for is creating a horror film that is set primarily during the day time. It is hard to create scares without the darkness, but in saying that, “Midsommar” is not a “boo!” type of scare film anyway. It is all about atmosphere and an increasing feeling of dread and doom. It is a feeling that continually grows and is quite unnerving. The first instance where this perceived idyllic paradise shows signs of horror is during an incredibly effective scene, that becomes quite graphic and bloody too (enough to warrant the “R” rating it earned over here in Australia).

As beautifully well made as “Midsommar” is, it does have a number of flaws, with the major one being its extended running time. This is a horror film that goes for two and a half hours, which is far too long. Each scene or moment seems to continue long after it has made its point and it ends up feeling like total self indulgence on the part of its director. Personally it lessened the experience for me and took me out of the moment as boredom set in, which in turn breaks the atmosphere that Aster has been building (and I should mention, that I am a fan of slow moving films too). The other main problem is that it is very predictable and you know exactly where the film is going to end up very early on. Maybe it is due to the familiarity of “The Wicker Man”, but there are no surprises when this paradise begins to turn on our characters. Speaking of the characters, it also irked me that two of the friends essentially disappeared from the film and quickly forgotten (although I have heard recently that their fates will be shown on the extended cut of the film purported to be included on the upcoming blu ray release). Finally, whilst not a flaw per se, the similarities in regards to rituals between the ending of “Hereditary” and “Midsommar”, may cause some to question if Ari Aster is a one trick pony.

Overall, “Midsommar” is a supremely well made film, there is no denying that. Superbly shot and designed, but at times it also felt quite mechanical and cold. It's inflated running time does it no favours, but director Ari Aster has created a disturbing and unnerving horror tale, that is also rather predictable. Despite all these, I enjoyed large parts of it and look forward to revisiting it in the future. I recommend “Midsommar” and look forward to what Aster does next.

3 Stars.

 

PAIN AND GLORY - MIFF 2019

Salvador Mallo is one of Spain's greatest living directors. Well known around the world, he is thought of as a national treasure. However, behind closed doors Salvador is a main struggling with many physical ailments, particularly back related, that find it hard for him to shoot films. It has been awhile since he last made a film, and since cinema is his life blood, this inability to do what he is most passionate about, has sent Salvador into a deep depression. Constantly medicated for the pain he suffers, Salvador sleepwalks through life, failing to find inspiration to write again. However, when he finds out that one of his old movies has been restored and is about to be presented by a local film festival, it causes him to search out the star of that film, Alberto Crispo. Mallo and Crispo have not seen each other for thirty two years due to a falling out that occurred during the very film that has been restored. However, with time, both men see differently to how they once did and the two reconnect quickly. Crispo introduces the famous director to the benefits of heroin, and whilst getting high, Mallo starts to remember key moments of his life and the people that meant so much to him and helped shape him into the man he became. Whilst his dabbles with heroin predictably send him further towards rock bottom, a chance encounter with an ex-lover may be just the thing to send Salvador Mallo onto the path of proper healing.

Pedro Almodovar's latest film, the perfectly titled “Pain and Glory”, is a thing of absolute beauty and one of his very best films. It is a much smaller film and less melodramatic than the films he is famous for, but it is filled to the brim with emotion. It is a film about coming to terms with the past, and reconnecting with it, so moving ahead into the future becomes easier. It looks at what it is like for someone used to the spotlight, or the “glory” if you will, and the pain they feel when that light is taken away from them and they are unable to do what they love to do most. Most of all though, “Pain and Glory” is about ageing and coming to terms with it. It is unlike anything previous that Almodovar has done, but everything about it is pure Almodovar; there is no doubt who made this film right from the opening frame.

What is interesting about this film is the fact that it is about a director, so immediately you have to wonder just how autobiographical this film actually is. There is no doubt that Almodovar has taken from his own life and experiences, but to what extent I am unsure. The whole thing feels very honest and personal though and if this is what Almodovar goes through between films, it certainly is an eye-opener and if I am being honest, quite unexpected. His deep love for his own mother is well known, and this is reflected in the film with Salvador's mother, Jacinta, being lovingly played by both Penelope Cruz (in the younger flashback scenes) and Julieta Serrano. You can feel the love for this character just from the way Almodovar shoots the scenes that she is in. The sadness in regards to the story if it is autobiographic is just what Almodovar seems to go through to get himself to make the next film. It certainly seems like this is someone aware of the fact that he has a limited number of films left in him, but at the same time, he appears to have come to terms with it.

Almodovar chose Antonio Banderas to play Salvador Mallo, and he has rarely been better. He is so good in this role that it is easy to see why he won the Best Actor award at the Cannes Film Festival this year. He is very understated in the role and he says so much just through his age weary eyes. It is such a mature performance that had me mesmerised from go to woe. This is the eighth time Banderas and Almodovar have worked together and I always have said that they each bring the very best out of one another. You forget just how great an actor Banderas is until you see him in an Almodovar picture. There are tiny little moments that I loved in this film by him that just felt so honest and real, like when his ex-lover leaves and Mallo thanks him for coming, but then follows it up with the word “seriously”, and it is just such a genuine moment and the most perfect line reading. Another moment is when he laughs while his mother is telling him a story that borders on the ridiculous while she is in hospital. Again, it is not a big bellowing gut laugh, it is a simple chuckle that felt so real, that it made me smile. Banderas's performance is filled with moments like these.

Besides Banderas's performance, “Pain and Glory” contains a number of scenes that are just gems, including one that arguably is the best scene I have seen in a film all year. The scene in question is when Mallo's ex-lover (and who appears to be the love of his life) Federico comes to visit him out of the blue. Oh my god! What a phenomenal scene, that is filled with so much emotion and love. You can see just how much these two men love each other, even though both have moved on and have new lives. What is also apparent is the enjoyment they both feel catching up again. Throughout the scene, Federico (wonderfully played by Leonardo Sbaraglia) is constantly beaming; you cannot wipe the smile off of his face, but it is not just because he and Salvador are together again. You can tell this is a man who is genuinely happy with his life and family and loves talking about both to a person he cares about. There is also a moment where Federico confronts the past and explains that he had no idea how hard he made it for Salvador (Federico was a heroin addict in the past), but again, it is not a confrontational scene in that there is no anger or anything like that. The two of them reflect on the past fondly. I cannot stress just how fantastic this scene is and it is also the catalyst for Salvador to attempt to improve his quality of life once more. Another great scene that I want to mention is a brief one at the beginning which really serves no narrative function other than to highlight Salvador's upbringing surrounded by women (like Almodovar's himself), but it is a lovely scene of the women, including Salvador's mother, washing the bed sheets in the river whilst singing a tune together. The way Penelope Cruz is shot in these scenes is proof just how much love there is for the mother character in this film.

As always, the filmmaking craft is second to none in “Pain and Glory” with Pedro Almodovar at the very top of his game. I cannot think of another director who uses colour so aggressively and boldly and yet it always feels perfect. This film explodes with colour and I loved Salvador's kitchen with its bright red cupboards and light blue splash back. Its just stunning, and then characters walk through the kitchen dressed in orange or green, and it just works. It is pure Almodovar. Jose Luis Alcaine, once again, returns as the director of photographer and gives the film a more intimate feel than is usual for his collaborations with Almodovar. “Pain and Glory” is a beautiful looking film, but is never flashy which is perfect for this quiet human drama. Almodovar's other greatest living collaborator, Alberto Iglesias, delivers yet another fantastic score, this time in quite a playful fashion.

One of the key themes of “Pain and Glory” is reconnecting with the past, and like a lot of Almodovar's recent films, he has once again cast an actor who used to be a regular in his films from the 80's. For the first time in thirty years, since 1989's “Tie Me Up! Tie Me Down!”, Pedro Almodovar and Julieta Serrano have worked together, with Serrano portraying the elderly version of Jacinta, Salvador's mother, and she is perfect in the role. At times goofy and aloof, while other times hurting her son with just a simple powerful sentence. It is good to have her back, and it is actually the third time Serrano and Banderas have played mother and son together, after Almodovar's “Matador” and “Women on the Verge of a Nervous Breakdown”.

Overall, I have barely scratched the surface of how great Pedro Almodovar's latest film is. Smaller in scope and scale than usual, “Pain and Glory” is an honest look at ageing and the feelings an artist goes through when, because of age and health, they are no longer able to do what they love to do. It is anchored by a brilliant, yet understated performance from Antonio Banderas, who has rarely been better, but he is just one of many who give outstanding performances in this film. The film looks great; bright and bursting with colour, and it is packed full of emotion. I also have to say that the ending of “Pain and Glory” is pure perfection, and I welled up with emotion when the credits began. This is Almodovar at the top of his game, and he once again proves why his is one of the greatest living directors working in cinema today. Do not miss this film.

4.5 Stars.

THE WILD GOOSE LAKE - MIFF 2019

When a turf war erupts within a gang of motorcycle thieves, the ensuing battles end with a policeman accidentally shot and killed. After losing one of their own, the cops have had enough and issue a 300,000 yuan reward for anyone who brings in Zenong Zhou, the perpetrator of the cop killing. Knowing he has no chance of escape, Zhou hides out at Wild Goose Lake, with the help of Shujun Yang, one of the lakes “bathing beauties” (a prostitute who perform their tasks on the water), until he can organise his estranged wife the opportunity to bring him in, to collect the hefty reward. However being worth so much money, Zhou becomes a target from enemies and friends alike, all looking to take advantage of the cash bounty on offer. What chance does Zhou have to survive when he is thrust into a world where he knows he can trust nobody?

So goes the story of Chinese director Diao Yi'nan's latest film: a thrilling, energetic and super cool neo-noir tale. “The Wild Goose Lake” turned out to be a fantastic surprise. Whilst I had seen and enjoyed his previous 2014 effort, “Black Coal, Thin Ice”, it didn't thrill me enough to pay attention to what Diao Yi'nan was making next. When I first heard about this new film, I was certainly intrigued, but I must say that there is a certain stiffness to Mainland Chinese films, even when they delve into genre films and tackle cool crime stories. I felt I knew exactly what I was about to walk into; an expertly made crime drama, but one that was stiff or boring in terms of style and content. I could not have been more wrong.

“The Wild Goose Lake” bursts with energy and as I said at the beginning of this review, it is so damn cool! I was entranced right from the opening, superbly choreographed shot, that takes place at a rain drenched train station, and introduces us to our two main characters. Like a lot of great noir, the story then begins in flashback with both Zenong Zhou and Shujun Yang explaining the events that led them to be where they are right now. Once we, the audience, are caught up on the story that has already taken place, the narrative then moves on in the present as Zenong Zhou must decide to trust Shujun Yang, a woman he does not know, to get him to Wild Goose Lake undetected by the authorities, so he can hide out until his wife is located. From here on, we are thrust deep into the dark and dangerous Chinese underworld, as all the familiar tropes of noir are laid out. From the unfortunate man stuck in the middle of a predicament he cannot control, the femme fatale, the double crossings, to the atmosphere of complete doom and hopelessness, “The Wild Goose Lake” has it all.

Where this film excels most though is in its stunning visuals; this thing is just a feast for the eyes, as Diao Yi'nan takes every opportunity possible to impress with his flamboyant visual styling. The world he has created is hyper-stylised bursting with colour, and Yi'nan uses every visual trick to maximise the impact of this dark crime story. His use of colour, wall shadows, the rain, and the reflections and refraction of light caused by the rain, collectively do an excellent job of building a world full of danger, suspense and intrigue. But the thing that I loved the most about the look of “The Wild Goose Lake” was the use of all the neon and fluorescent lights. There is something so visually exciting about a dark world accentuated by bursts of neon; it is just so cool (I know that is pretty shallow, but it impressed me that much that I'm gloating like a fanboy). The image of motorbikes speeding down streets as rain pelts down from above, lit by the neon covering the base of these vehicles, is something that that I will take away from this film and never forget. Another amusing moment in the film involving neon that I loved, was a scene of an outdoor dance thing where members of the public just join in for a communal dance. A large number of these dancers have shoes that light up as they move, but what is so funny about the scene is that it is the location of a stakeout being carried out by the police, and it is all of the policemen wearing those shoes. The comedy comes when these cops suddenly have to chase down a suspect in the streets whilst still wearing these shoes; it is one of the few moments of levity in this dark thriller of a film.

Aside from the visual style, I thought that director Diao Yi'nan did a great job of pacing his film and keeping the story's momentum moving, especially in the first half of the film. I will admit that towards the end, the story does briefly lose focus and some elements are a little confusing, particularly the scene set at the zoo. Still this is only a minor hiccup in this strong crime offering.

While I was impressed by both of the female performances in “The Wild Goose Lake”, I must say that I was disappointed in Ge Hu's lifeless portrayal of Zenong Zhou. He lacks energy which is very noticeable in a film that is packed full of it. I understand that his character is in a hopeless situation and thus justifies why he looks so sullen all the time, but he is also in the fight for his life, but forever looks like all he wants to do is take a nap.

While I would not necessarily call “The Wild Goose Lake” a violent film, it does have two fantastic scenes of stylised action within it and one of these scenes does end in quite a bloody fashion. Both scenes are very well choreographed, in terms of camerawork and action, but it is the second one that is punctuated with a visceral spray of blood, that will stick out in the memory of viewers long after the film is done. This scene will also change the way you look at umbrellas forever too.

Overall, “The Wild Goose Lake” was a fantastic surprise. Being a huge fan of film noir, I responded mightily to this Chinese update of the genre. It is hyper stylised packed with visual panache. While the story does lose a little focus towards the end, for the most part this is an exciting look at a dark world full of betrayal, double crossings and violence. I recommend the film wholeheartedly and look forward to been able to watch it again soon.

3.5 Stars.

 

THE NIGHTINGALE - MIFF 2019

Back in 2014, Australian director Jennifer Kent announced herself to the filmmaking world with her superior horror film “The Babadook”. The film was met with high praise from critics and it became quite the international hit. It is fair to say that Kent probably earned enough goodwill from “The Babadook” to be blessed with the opportunity to choose whatever she wanted as her follow up. No doubt Hollywood was calling, but instead Kent chose to stay in Australia to make “The Nightingale”, a much different kind of horror film than its predecessor.

Set in 1825, Clare, a young Irish convict woman, along with her Aboriginal tracker, chases a British officer through the rugged Tasmanian wilderness bent on revenge for a terrible act of violence he committed against her family.

“The Nightingale” premiered back in September of 2018 at the Venice Film Festival and was immediately thrust into controversy over the sheer brutality and unrelenting violence contained within the film. Calling the film divisive would be an understatement as some viewers, like the director herself, felt the violence was justified to be true to the climate of when the film is set and to Clare's experiences, whilst other people felt that Kent revelled in the violence and that after awhile it became gratuitous. Walk outs were a regular occurrence whenever “The Nightingale” screened, so going into seeing the film I knew that I was in for a harrowing and uncomfortable cinema experience, but off the back of her work on “The Babadook”, I trusted Kent to deliver. Once the film was over, I sat there stunned for a bit. It was the exhausting, harrowing experience I had heard, and while the film did have its good moments, what I was most surprised about was just how mediocre “The Nightingale” turned out to be.

The biggest flaw of the film is the characterisations of the villains which border on caricature. This is due to a combination of poor performances and average writing. The character of Hawkins, the British officer Clare is chasing, is terrible. He is the quintessential villain and never once comes across as a real person. There are no shades of grey to this guy, he is just bad; constantly scowling while abusing his power, and forever doing vile things to anyone who may cross his path. He wouldn't feel out of place as the villain in a bad James Bond knock off, which is bad enough, but when your film is meant to reflect a reality of the past, as opposed to a cinematic fantasy, it almost kills the film. Sam Calflin's performance in the role is not great, but upon reflection I feel like the poor guy hasn't been given a hell of a lot to work with, thanks to Kent's banal and stereotypical dialogue. Damon Herriman, who plays the secondary bad guy Ruse, fares just as poorly, which is a surprise because he is quite a good actor.

The other aspect of the film that I was really disappointed in was the visual style of the film. While I was not expecting a repeat of the stylised world of “The Babadook”, I feel that Kent actually struggled with the gritty “real world” aesthetics in her latest film. At times the images had a very amateur feel to them, almost a point and shoot type look, which was puzzling because at other times the images had an almost poetic feel to them. Also her decision to shoot the film in the square aspect ration was an odd one. I normally love it when directors go against the grain and compose their images for the 1:33 frame, but I just do not feel Kent did anything interesting or meaningful with it.

I guess it is now time to talk about my own opinions on the violence and brutality within “The Nightingale” and to be honest, I am a little on the fence with it, because once again, some of it works very well, whilst other times the violence has no weight to it at all. That is what makes this film so frustrating. I must admit that I did think that Jennifer Kent ended up going overboard with the unrelenting violence throughout the film and by the end, I was actually getting quite angry with it. Now I am not someone who is easily offended by anything in cinema, particularly violence but this is a film with at least four different rapes in it, and eventually you have to say enough is enough. We get it; times were tough on women and the Aboriginals. However, what is surprising is that the rape scenes themselves are not very graphic at all. What makes these scenes harrowing to sit through are the women's sobbing and screams throughout their ordeals. It is horrific and it is in these scenes that the walkouts start to begin. One incident that I think Kent handled perfectly though is the triggering event that initiates the plot. It is quick, brutal, as shocking as can be, but is never dwelled upon. The actual moment is also shot in a way that you never truly see anything but completely feel the impact of it. It knocks the air out of you, as you sit there stunned. It is a sickening moment but a great one for the film itself. So powerful is this moment that I heard people behind me crying. But is all the violence justified in the film? I am still asking myself this question and my answer is that it is justified in the fact that it is faithful to the times and the world presented within “The Nightingale” but the fact that it is so unrelenting with almost no moments of levity to give the audience a chance to breathe, the violence ends up losing its meaning and it actually does start to feel like Kent is beginning to revel in the pain and suffering of her characters, which is obviously problematic. One decision that I will commend Kent on is the fact that “The Nightingale” has no musical score, as having these violent altercations being punctuated by music would have been right on the nose.

Where the film does work wonderfully well is in its depiction of the colonisation of Australia and the harsh reality that the foundations of this beautiful country we love are built on. Kent does not shy away from the fact that this country was taken away from the indigenous people of the land in the most violent manners, raping and murdering the locals to make way for the incoming white folk. This is the second film I have seen at MIFF this year dealing with these issues (the other was the documentary “The Australian Dream”) and both films do so with complete care to the truth. Scenes like the chain gang of Aboriginal men or the hanging corpses from the trees are very powerful and an indictment on the treatment of the original custodians of this land. Kent is also successful at exposing the power dynamics created via class, gender or race during this time.

The other big asset this film has is Aisling Franciosi, who plays Clare, and her powerful performance that sees her begin the film as a sweet, innocent girl just wanting to be home with her husband in Ireland who then transforms into a powder keg of revenge who could at any moment explode. Whilst the transformation is quick, it is very believable and Franciosi becomes almost unrecognisable from the girl previous within seconds. She then has to keep this heightened emotion up for the entirety of the film and does so with ease. It is not only that that makes Franciosi's performance so impressive, she also has to speak and sing in multiple languages throughout the film, and does so beautifully. Kent has also confirmed that the singing voice heard in the film is indeed that of Franciosi, and the song she sings at the end of the film is heartbreakingly powerful. Until now I have barely mentioned the character of Billy, who is Clare's Aboriginal tracker. I actually have some misgivings about the character as he comes across as far too modern in the film. Mainly due to the clothes Billy wears, I never believe that he is from the 1800's, rather he is an actor from today plopped into a film set in those times. I also wasn't a huge fan of Baykali Ganambarr's performance in the role either, at least initially as by the end of the film I ended up liking it quite a bit. He has a fantastic moment when Billy breaks down crying “This is my home! This is my country”, bewildered by the way he is currently treated as a lesser person in his own backyard. I also liked the juxtapositions between the journeys both Billy and Clare take which also highlight the similarities the two have lived through.

Overall, while there are elements with “The Nightingale” that do work well, at the end of the day, it was quite the disappointment. The film is bound to be divisive due to the violence and never ending bleakness of the story. While I personally thought that the violence within the film ended up being problematic, Kent's honest depiction of the colonisation of Australia makes the film at least worth watching, but I still cannot help feeling that it is sadly a mediocre film. What cannot be denied though is that “The Nightingale” is an exhausting and harrowing cinema experience, so prepare for that before watching the film.

2.5 Stars.