10.
PRISCILLA
Sofia
Coppola's films always seem like a breath of fresh air when compared
to the majority of what is released into cinemas these days; her
soft, feminine, quietly introspective examinations of whatever topic
or story she is exploring, seem a far cry from the bombastic, loud,
muscular cinema that is often the norm. Whilst I thought Coppola's
previous film, “On The Rocks”, was one of her lesser
achievements, she is back in top form with her bio-pic of Priscilla
Presley, whilst showing a different side of Elvis and their whirlwind
love affair. It is unashamably romantic in the opening half of the
film, as Elvis woos an underage Priscilla. We are witness to a young
girl falling in love, head over heels, with one of her idols who also
happens to be one of the most famous people in America. In that
sense, it is like a heightened first love story, as Priscilla gives
herself fully to Elvis, while also finding it unbelievable that out
of all the girls throwing themselves at him, he has chosen her. The
first half of the film has an excited energy to it, that mirrors
Priscilla's own excitement while falling in love. Coppola never
shies away from the fact that Priscilla was very young when they
first started dating, but counters this with a very respectful Elvis,
who is a total gentleman with Priscilla, including always being
upfront with her parents and asking their permission. It isn't until
Elvis convinces Priscilla to move to America and live with him at
Graceland, that the story takes a darker turn, with Priscilla
realising that the fantasy of being with someone so famous, is
completely different to the reality of it, as she often finds herself
alone, bored and forever waiting for him to return. “Priscilla”
is a delightful film that has been sumptuously made, and is stunning
to look at. There is a beautiful softness to Coppola's visuals,
thanks to the glorious production design which leans heavily on
pastel colours and fabrics. The way Philippe Le Sourd's camera
gracefully glides through Graceland, it exposes the wealth and beauty
on display, but also how lonely a space it is when not populated by
Elvis and his crew. In a way, Priscilla is trapped in a beautiful
prison, unable to leave on the off chance that Elvis may return, or
call and need her. While I think there is no doubt that there is
true love between Elvis and Priscilla, Coppola's film seems to say
that it was always on Elvis's terms; from what Priscilla did, to what
she was allowed to wear, even her hair colour. Cailee Spaeny is
wonderful in the title role which, like the film itself, relies on a
quiet intensity. We watch her grow from an excited child to
determined young woman, willing to give up on what on the outside
looks like a fairy tale love story, for a life of her own, not one
that is controlled by a man, even if that man is Elvis Presley. In
regards to Elvis himself, I wasn't as big a fan of Jacob Elordi's
performance as the King. I think he nails the voice, but lacks the
charisma of the legend. He seems to disappear in a room, when he
should always be big, front and centre. What is interesting and
something that you would think would work against “Priscilla” is
the lack of Elvis songs used, and yet you barely notice it. I think
it actually works for the film, like Coppola is saying “I know
Elvis is the King. I know you love him. But this is Priscilla's
story, and I will not be falling back on his music to tell her
story”, and Phoenix's score works so well within the story that you
do not miss the Elvis songs.
Nicolas
Cage makes so many average films that we often forget just how great
an actor he really is when he is committed and inspired by a project,
and “Dream Scenario” is the latest film to open our eyes and
remind us. Cage is so good in this film, playing just an everyday,
normal (some would say boring) professor, but he is so real, natural
and very, very funny. The story of “Dream Scenario” sees Cage
playing a college professor, Paul Matthews. who ends up in a very
weird phenomenon where random people start seeing him in their
dreams. He never does anything in the dreams, but is always there
just watching, but never interfering with whatever the person is
dreaming about. As the days go on, the amount of people who dream
about him grows until he becomes something of a celebrity with talk
shows wanting to interview him, and marketing managers trying to hire
him to advertise a number of products. For a man who is barely
noticed in his real life, this sudden celebrity is both something of
a shock for Paul, who is used to the quiet life, but also something
he embraces as he is suddenly “cool” to both his students and
kids at home. However when the dreams suddenly, and for no reason,
turn into nightmares where Paul is attacking or killing the dreamer,
his short lived celebrity is quickly and brutally torn apart by a
ruthless cancel culture, upturning Paul's real life in the process.
Director Kristoffer Borgli's “Dream Scenario” is a fantastic look
at the dark side of celebrity, as well as a condemnation of cancel
culture, particularly in regards to people who are affected when they
have done nothing to deserve it. Borgli had a particularly great
2023 as his previous film, the Norwegian-language “Sick of Myself”
(which also deals with celebrity too, but in a much different
fashion), was released to English language territories and received
quite well. I like both films a lot, but think “Dream Scenario”
is the stronger of the two, mainly due to the fantastic performance
from Nicolas Cage. In terms of other characters Cage has played in
his career, his Paul Matthews is a close cousin to his Charlie
Kaufman from “Adaptation”. We watch Cage as he suddenly has an
aura about him when the light is shining bright on him, to then see
him totally befuddled and devastated as he begins to lose it all,
without doing anything to garner either response. Borgli's handling
of the dream sequences are great too, with the early ones being
surreal and odd, filled with that bizarre dream logic, whilst the
nightmare scenes are truly like little, contained horror films; some
creepy, some terrifying, and some very bloody. We are never given a
reason for why Paul appears in everyone's dreams which I think is the
right move because trying to explain it would ruin it as it would no
doubt come across as silly. I have to point at that I love 95% of
“Dream Scenario”, but the final ten minutes, when Borgli adds a
completely new element to the film, just do not work and feel like
they are from a different film entirely. What comes before it though
is both brilliant, extremely funny, and very thought provoking.
Paul
Giamatti and director Alexander Payne once again have hit gold with
“The Holdovers” , their first collaboration together since
“Sideways” way back in 2004. This new film also sees Giamatti
play a dull professor, but unlike the one Nicolas Cage plays in
“Dream Scenario”, Giamatti's Paul Hunham is a cranky, sarcastic
beast, who seems more intent on belittling his students when they
fail, than take the time out to make sure they succeed. He is a
solitary man, living alone on campus, where his work is essentially
his life and vice versa. During the Christmas holidays, he draws the
short straw of the teacher to stay back and take care of the kids who
are unable to go home to their parents. Through a number of
circumstances that then takes place, Paul is left with one boy,
Angus, who along with the head-cook Mary, end up forming a little
family together. By spending one on one time with the boy, this sees
Paul cool in his snark as they both start to take an interest in each
other and begin to realise that they have more in common than they
first thought, and that there was more to the other than they
initially assumed. Over the next two weeks, the three of them end up
going on unsolicited adventures (written up as school excursions), in
an attempt to make the most out of a bad situation, where Paul starts
to come to terms with the failings of his past, and Angus learns he
has more control over his future than he once thought. This is a
fantastic film built around a truly brilliant script. There is a
truthfulness that reigns supreme over “The Holdovers”, in terms
of both the characters and situations they find themselves in. At
times the film is both funny and poignant, with a whole lot of heart.
Paul is such a wonderful character; hard to get along with at times,
sure and with an intense love of academia, but he is genuine to a
fault. He never sugar-coats anything, which can be a detrimental
quality at times, but at least you always know that what he tells you
is the truth. Giamatti gives 2023's second best performance by a
male actor in his characterisation of Paul, and Da'Vine Joy Randolph
is just as good as Mary. Actually I was blown away by Randolph who
is devastatingly good as the mother of a boy recently killed in
Vietnam; you can see the amount of pain she is in, but who refuses to
let life beat her. She still believes that life is worth living even
through the hardest times. While the film is set during the early
1970s, the film itself just screams “70's cinema”. From the
aesthetics of that decade to the way the film has been shot, with the
use of pans and zooms, it feels of that era, when we used to
regularly get challenging and rewarding cinema that did not pander to
the lowest common denominator. “The Holdovers” is a new
Christmas classic and a throw-back to an era of cinema lost.
Arguably
the best reviewed film of the year, Martin Scorsese's tale of the
brutal and systematic murders of the Osage people by the local white
community in an attempt to steal their oil out from under their feet,
is one of the master director's very best films. Huge in scope, with
a running time to match, “Killers of the Flower Moon” centres on
a dumb and easy-to-manipulate man, Ernest, who arrives in town to
find work with his uncle, William Hale. Working as a driver, Ernest
soon meets Mollie, and the two start a love affair which ultimately
ends up in marriage and children. However behind the scenes, Hale is
working on trying to secure Mollie's family land into Ernest's name
(so the wealth from the oil comes to them), by killing off her
siblings one-by-one, sometimes with the direct help of Ernest
himself. Everyone knows I am a huge Scorsese fan (he is one of my
three favourite directors) and all of his films are like events to
me, particularly now this late in his career. The man just
understands cinema and how to get the best out of any story, and yet,
there is something about “Killers of the Flower Moon” that also
feels new to any Scorsese film before it. There is a sadness to the
film, almost like an inevitability that the Osage will be wiped out,
and the whites will suffer nothing for the murder and destruction
they have caused. The violence is less celebrated here than usual,
and more condemned. I do not know how to explain it properly, but at
times it feels more like an apology or at least a document on
questioning how this was able to happen. Scorsese has garnered three
fantastic performances from Leonardo DiCaprio as Ernest, Robert
DeNiro as William Hale, and Lily Gladstone as Mollie. I think the
character of Ernest is a much more complex one than you initially
think because he does truly love Mollie, but is also complicit in
murdering her sisters, and yet he appears emotionally removed from
those crimes because he sees himself as a good husband to Mollie.
DeNiro is always at his best when working with Scorsese and it holds
true again here, as he is magnificent portraying William as the snake
he truly is. Charming and lovable when amongst the Osage, but behind
closed doors, he is terrifying in his efficiency at executing his
plans to steal their land via any means necessary. The heart and
soul of the film though belongs to Gladstone and her portrayal of
Mollie, the poor woman who loses so much during the story except the
love and trust of her husband, which leads to even more devastating
results. She has a moment when she lets out a blood chilling scream
at the bottom of a staircase that will haunt you for days after.
With a running time of close to four hours, the film feels half of
that, with a narrative that is always moving so that you never find
yourself bored for a second.
Once
again Christian Petzold has shown to the world just how great a
director he is with “Afire”. Right from the opening frame of the
film, his direction felt effortless; like always, I felt like I was
in the hands of a master filmmaker, as he is able to construct an
involving social drama, that is also very funny at times, while
having his film anchored with something that could be a death knell
to a lesser director, and that is a very unsympathetic lead
character. Leon is an utter douche bag; he is so self involved, so
self-important, totally inept in social situations, while also being
jealous of those who find these situations easier to be in then
himself, and he is nowhere near the talented writer he thinks he is.
Somehow Petzold actually gets you to care for the guy at the same
time you are rolling your eyes at him. So often you just want to slap
Leon and get him to wake up, get him to remove his head from his own
arse, so he could notice exactly what was happening in front of him,
and through all this, I still found myself caring for the douche and
worrying about the things he was going through. No doubt, actor
Thomas Schubert deserves a lot of the credit here in creating a
performance that exposes Leon's insecurities and flaws as a person,
but doesn't go too far over the edge where we hate the poor guy. It
probably also helps that the majority of his scenes are played
opposite Paula Beer, Petzold's current muse, who returns for her
third consecutive film with the director. She is outstanding in her
role as Nadja, so light, free and full of life, almost like the
opposite of Leon. She lives in the moment, finding enjoyment wherever
she can, but at the same time she is also a serious academic. The
relationship between Nadja and Leon is very complex, and essentially
the backbone of the film, as it is constantly evolving (and at times
devolving), but at all times you can see that Nadja only wants to
help Leon to become both a better writer and person, someone who can
actually live in the moment. As I mentioned above, Beer is so
naturalistic in her performance, that you cannot help but love her
character. The film drifts, building very slowly, that you could
almost be excused for thinking that the film is going nowhere, but
which could not be further from the truth, as it all wraps up in the
most brilliant ending that is particularly poignant due to everything
that has come before it. Unlike most modern filmmakers, Petzold is
fantastic at finding the perfect moment to end a film on and “Afire”
has yet another brilliant ending, with the image of some hands being
incredibly powerful. It is a sensational film filled with complex
characters and relationships, but breaking it down to its base
element, “Afire” is really about a man learning to live in the
moment, not taking himself too seriously and take notice of what is
in front of him, which if he begins to learn these lessons, will see
him become a better writer and human being in general. “Afire”
is another fantastic film from Christian Petzold, one of the best and
most consistent directors working in world cinema today. Click here to read my original review.
While
it is never stated in the film as such, the story of “May December”
is based on the real-life case of Mary Kay Letourneau, who was a
school teacher that was sent to prison for her part in the “romance”
between her and a twelve year old boy, in Washington. Without going
into too many details, the interesting thing about this case is that
Letourneau, while in prison (or waiting to be imprisoned), gave birth
to two children fathered by this boy. Further more, once Letourneau
was released from jail after doing her time, Letourneau and Vili
Fualaau (the boy, who now, was over the age of twenty) ended up
marrying each other, living together as husband and wife. None of
that is part of “May December” except in the background, as
Haynes briefly addresses the scandal of his characters via a quick
montage of newspaper articles and headlines detailing all of this, so
we understand why a Hollywood actress would want to take the time to
meet these people and then play them onscreen. As you can tell, all
of this is very heavy stuff, so you would think that it would
ultimately force Todd Haynes' film to be a serious drama to examine
all of this, but the most surprising aspect of “May December”,
and the biggest reason for why it is so great, is the gutsy, (and
very deliberate) campy tone that Haynes gives to his film. I was not
expecting “May December” to be a funny film at all, and yet at
times it is hilarious! “May December” is filled with wonderful
performances especially from the three lead characters. This is
Julianne Moore's fifth time working with Todd Haynes and I always
feel like magic is created when these two get together. Whilst I
doubt that they could ever top their masterpiece, “Far from Heaven”
(a rare five-star film for me), Moore once again creates a complex
character with Gracie. She plays her as a woman who still feels she
has nothing to apologise for, that she has done nothing wrong, nor is
she embarrassed or ashamed of it, and yet we can see through
interactions with both Joe and her own kids, just how manipulative
she can be through her words and tone. It is interesting watching
the power dynamics between her and Joe even now, as Gracie still
stands over him like he is a little kid even though he is now a fully
grown adult and much bigger in stature than her. Gracie is definitely
the dominant party in this marriage and gets angry when she doesn't
get her way, belittling Joe in the process. “May December” is
Natalie Portman's film though, hands down. Granted, she has the most
“showy” role in the film, but she does it so, so well. When she
first enters Gracie's house to meet the family, she comes across as
really down to earth and friendly, but as she asks more and more
personal questions, particularly to Joe involving the psychological
aspects of what happened, you can feel she isn't as genuine as she
wants to come across. She keeps saying that she only wants to be true
to the story, but her questions are loaded to the point that it feels
like Elizabeth has already come to town with her own opinion on
Gracie's story, so instead of actually listening to what both Gracie
and Joe are saying, she keeps trying to steer the conversations
towards the more controversial or salacious material of their story.
The more and more Elizabeth tries to embody Gracie and get under her
skin to understand her fully, the creepier Portman's performance
gets, where by the end she goes to quite a dark and controversial
place, all under the guise of capturing the “truth”. The other
performance of note in “May December” is that of Charles Melton,
who plays Joe. He is the most grounded and realistic of all the
characters in the film, mainly because he seems to be the only one
truly looking inside of himself, and trying to come to terms with
exactly what happened to him and what he has lost because of it. I
adored “May December”, and I got amusement out of a patron at
MIFF describing the film to another as “the best and most Todd
Haynes picture yet”. While I wouldn't go that far, I knew exactly
what she meant, as the film feels like it could have only been made
by this director. He is mining material and themes similar to that he
has done before, but it never feels derivative of anything else he
has made. It is a fantastically complex film, creepy at times and
always uncomfortable, told in a deliberately campy style and filled
to the brim with great performances. Click here to read my original review.
My
most anticipated film of 2023 was Aki Kaurismaki's “Fallen Leaves”,
and boy, it did not disappoint me one little bit. I like the way the
imdb describes the film so here it is: “In modern-day Helsinki, two
lonely souls in search of love meet by chance in a karaoke bar.
However, their path to happiness is beset by obstacles - from lost
phone numbers to mistaken addresses, alcoholism, and a charming stray
dog.” As you can see, the plot is simplicity itself, it is
essentially a romantic comedy but it has all been done in
Kaurismaki's trademark deadpan style. I absolutely fell in love with
the film right from the onset. It was everything I wanted it to be,
and so much more. It was one of those films where I knew I had a
big, ridiculous smile on my face the whole time I was watching it.
“Fallen Leaves” is the fourth film in his Proletariat Trilogy
(which is so funny, and so Kaurismaki, to have a fourth part in a
“trilogy”), and it fits nicely among these group of films, both
in its quality of filmmaking and in its themes explored. Like always,
Kaurismaki has teamed with cinematographer Timo Salminen, to give the
film a rich, textured and lived-in look. Bursting with colour and
fitted with retro-technology, as you would expect. Radios and
televisions all look like they have come from the 1950's, and while
surprisingly, mobile phones do make an appearance in “Fallen
Leaves”, they are the older, text-only versions from the 90's, that
the characters use. In fact, if it was not for the constant reports
on the radio about Russia's invasion of the Ukraine, you could swear
that the film was a period piece. Other Kaurismaki trademarks like
smoke filled pubs, live musical bands, and dead-pan comedy, mixed in
with tragedy, are all present in “Fallen Leaves”, so if you are a
fan of the director, I cannot see anyone not loving this. The film
has been put together expertly; brilliantly shot, and particularly,
edited, however the genius of the film comes down to its simplicity.
It is a small scale story, that packs an emotional punch. Too many
films these days are so overstuffed, in what appears to be just to
inflate their running time. The art of editing almost appears dead,
in terms of trimming unnecessary fat from a film. “Fallen Leaves”
has a running time of only 81 minutes, but every minute is worth it.
“Fallen Leaves” sees the introduction of two new actors to
Kaurismaki's world, with Alma Poysti and Jussi Vatanen playing Ansa
and Holappa respectively, and both are outstanding. They fit
seamlessly into Kaurismaki's Finland, as if they had been working
with the director all of their lives. I do wonder how different it
must feel for an actor to work in a Kaurismaki film, because he
obviously demands the actor to deliver performances in the most
stone-faced and dead-pan manner, with very limited dialogue, and yet
still find a way to express emotions within these restrictions.
Regardless of how hard they may have found it, both Poysti and
Vatanen do a wonderful job in their roles. The film is so funny,
because of the dead-pan nature in the way it is told and acted, and I
found myself laughing out loud regularly, with the karaoke scene
being a particular highlight. Aside from the comedy, “Fallen
Leaves” actually tackles some serious issues with depth,
particularly Holappa's alcoholism and the detrimental effect it is
having on his work life, and relationships, and looking at why he
depends on alcohol so much. The Russian invasion of the Ukraine is
also highlighted regularly, with reports on how many people have died
being a constant on the radio. It appears that as Aki Kaurismaki is
getting older, he is getting a little softer, because his earlier
films were all often quite downbeat; hilarious but downbeat. Whilst
“Fallen Leaves” does take a turn towards the tragic that I was
not expecting, it does also end on a note of optimism. There is a
golden moment near the end (my absolute favourite cinema moment of
2023), where Asna smiles and winks, that melted my heart. It is so
quick, maybe a second or less, and not something you would normally
see in a Kaurismaki film, but the moment is so perfect here; I just
loved it! Click here to read my original review.
The
rare animated feature to wind up on one of my list, “Spider-Man:
Across the Universe” wasn't even a film I was planning on seeing on
the big screen, despite how much I enjoyed the previous film.
Superhero films have gotten so bad in recent years, and I continually
feel like I am watching the same thing over and over again, that I
swore off watching any, and have stayed true to that. However, soon
after this new film's release I received a very passionate text
message from my brother (who is a massive fan of animation) telling
me just how fantastic it was, calling it the movie of the year so
far. On his recommendation I decided to see it in theatres and to
see if he was right, which he was. At that time of the year,
“Spider-Man: Across the Universe” was the best film of 2023.
This film has everything; it is dramatic, action packed, very funny,
and has so much heart! The animation is also to die for!! I have
never seen anything like it, and part of that is because the art
style regularly changes depending on which multi-verse the story is
taking place in, with my absolute favourite being the Spider-Gwen
world, as it had this water-colour painterly look to it. I know that
I wont be able to explain this properly, but when Miles Morales ends
up in the Spider-Man headquarters, the way the animation styles keep
changing in shot/in scene is totally insane and must have taken
forever to design and achieve, and as wild and crazy as it all looks,
it just works perfectly in the film and for this story. The film
sees Miles being taken through the multi-verse by the other
Spider-People to Spider-Headquarters to explain to him that in each
of their universes, some story lines are canon and must take place so
the entire multi-verse does not implode. One of these things is
having a loved one die, like Peter Parker does with Uncle Ben, and
Gwen Stacy does with her father. For Miles, it is indeed meant to be
his father that has to die, so in an attempt to let that happen in
his universe, the other Spider-People try to distract Miles long
enough so that his dad can be murdered by a new villain named Spot.
When Miles works out what is going on, he attempts an escape
determined to save both his dad and the multi-verse that will come
crashing down if he succeeds. For an animated film, “Spider-Man:
Across the Universe” has the very long running time of almost two
and a half hours, but you never feel the time once. The movie moves
at breakneck speed and is constantly in motion, that the whole thing
goes by in a blink. There is just no way you could ever find
yourself bored, as there is always something happening. Another
thing that I really loved about this film is the voice cast, who give
really genuine performances in their roles. Shameik Moore is
outstanding as Miles Morales, giving the kid the right amount of
spunk and energy, while imbuing him with a massive heart. Hailee
Steinfeld is wonderful as Gwen Stacy, who understands what Miles is
going through but has come to understand that what must happen must
happen, so there is a world-weariness to her performance. Oscar
Isaac is both brilliant and at times terrifying as Miguel O'Hara, the
vampire Spider-Man and leader of the group; he is just so commanding
and deserves your respect. Finally, Jason Schwartzman is hilarious
as the pathetic villain Spot, who after being embarrassed by
Spider-Man early in the film, develops his powers in such a way to
become the biggest threat to Miles' world. I love that the
filmmakers haven't gone down the road of using big name actors with
easily identifiable voices, as personally I find that takes me out of
the film when I recognise them. Here they give performances as good
as if they themselves were on camera too. Everything just works with
this film, including the fact that they had the very hard task of
coming up with an ending to this film that feels complete, and not
just the set up for the third film, as this is the middle part of a
trilogy. Amazingly, the filmmakers have done just that by coming up
with a very satisfying finale, and at the same time you just want to
barrel into the third film to see what happens next. I absolutely
loved “Spider-Man: Across the Spider-Verse”, and breathlessly
look forward to the concluding chapter later in 2024.
After
the rather middling Citizen Kane drama, “Mank”, director David
Fincher returns in a big way with “The Killer”, easily his best
film since 1999's “Fight Club”. The film, which is based on a
French comic book of the same title, is simplicity itself, as we are
witness to an unnamed assassin tracking down other assassins from his
own organisation, who were sent out to take care of him after he
uncharacteristically failed a job. When these other killers are
unable to locate our failed assassin, they rough up his girlfriend in
an attempt to gather information on his whereabouts, which infuriates
him and sets him out on a path of revenge, killing anyone in his way
that had anything to do with the injuries inflicted on his girl. It
is a simple revenge story, but told with so much style and class, as
we are regularly in the killer's head throughout the film. It is all
about the details and his personal mythos which he constantly recites
in his mind, that has seen him so successful. In fact, the
assassination attempt is the first he has ever failed, so what comes
next is all new to him. The film is told in six chapters (and an
epilogue), with the first chapter devoted to the assassination
attempt itself. We watch as the assassin plans everything to the nth
degree to ensure success, whilst also ensuring he isn't noticed. As
I said, it is all about the tiniest details, that he thinks about and
follows through with. I am a massive fan of Jean-Pierre Melville's
“Le Samourai”, which is a 1967 French film starring Alain Delon
as an assassin, who also succeeds due to his complete devotion to the
little details. “The Killer” feels like a modern updating of
“Le Samourai”, with today's technology, while never feeling
derivative of the earlier film. I think the opening chapter of “The
Killer” is just outstanding, as we watch the assassin prepare
himself and his weapons for the hit. Taking his time, slowing his
heart rate, stretching, making sure he is ready for that perfect
moment to strike.......only for it to come undone by an unplanned
person passing by as he takes the fatal shot. From that point on, it
is all action, as he makes his escape and heads for home, only to be
confronted by carnage when he returns, which then starts his revenge.
Michael Fassbinder plays the unnamed titular killer, and as usual,
he is outstanding. Interestingly since most of the film plays out on
him when he is alone, he cannot fall back on dialogue to help his
performance, rather he must give an internal performance, which also
hides what he is really feeling on the inside. He must always look
calm, when the opposite may be closer to the truth on the inside.
Whilst I say there is little dialogue, that is true, but Fassbinder
does narrate his thoughts right throughout the film, so we always now
what he is feeling. His line readings are almost robotic, but again
this is true of the assassin who has trained himself to follow his
rules to the letter, that he in turn becomes like a robot himself. I
do not want to say too much about the rest of the film because the
fun is in discovering it all, but I loved the differences in the two
meetings between the other assassins, with one being more cerebral,
the other downright brutal. In fact the chapter titled “The Brute”
is probably the greatest example of kinetic cinema that I saw in all
of 2023. It is outstanding, and you feel every punch and kick that
both men take. “The Killer” was made by Netflix, but thankfully
had a small theatrical window, which gave me the chance to see it on
the big screen, where it played wonderfully well. Of particular note
was just how amazing the sound design of the film was. I have since
re-watched the film on Netflix too and it holds up although I must
admit I preferred my cinema screening of it. I said to my brother
after watching it on Netflix, that it is the quickest two hours of
any film from this year; it just flies by. I wholeheartedly
recommend “The Killer” to all and sundry, as Fincher is back at
what he does best; making uber-stylised crime thrillers. Oh, I also
have to mention the opening titles too, which are actually rather
quick, but show our assassin killing people in a number of different
fashions. Great movie, with excellent re-watch value.
Here
we are, finally. My favourite film of 2023 was none other than
Christopher Nolan's sensational “Oppenheimer”; a film that dared
to tell a compelling adult story with respect for its audience, which
seems too few and far between these days. For those of you who are
rolling your eyes at this reveal of top film, please note that I am
not one of those on the Christopher Nolan bandwagon. While I have
indeed seen all of his films, I do not worship him as a cinematic
God, nor think he can do no wrong within the medium. This is proven
when his previous film, “Tenet”, showed up on my “worst-of”
list of that year, as I thought it was utter tripe. That said, he
has made some excellent films before this such as “The Dark
Knight”, “Inception” and “Memento”. I just take each film
on its own merits, and “Oppenheimer” may arguably be his best
film to date. It is just a fascinating story, told in the most
wonderful way. The race to build an atom bomb in an attempt to win
the war, and then the aftermath after creating a weapon with such
power, and how the American government turned on its creator once the
deed was done. I was riveted from start to finish of this nearly
three hour film. Nolan does not tell Oppenheimer's story in a linear
fashion, rather we gets snippets from different moments in his life
that may pertain to what he is doing in the present at that time.
While it may sound confusing, it never is because whilst these brief
edits may seem erratic, they help illustrate the base story as a
whole, which is still told in a linear format (if that makes sense).
Cillian Murphy gives the best performance of the year as Oppenheimer;
he is so intense in the role, not to mention all the weight he lost
in attempt to create the man's well known silhouette. You can just
tell that Murphy has given everything of himself for this role, and I
have no doubt come Oscar time that he will be awarded with the “Best
Actor” award for his performance here. But the film is littered
with excellent performances throughout, and it was wonderful to see
Robert Downey Jr. back doing real acting again because you forget
just how great an actor he really is. The suspense that you feel
throughout the whole of “Oppenheimer” is so full on, as it leads
to the moment of the testing of the actual atom bomb, which is one of
the film's best scenes. You can feel the tension; all that work,
over so many months, boils down to this one moment......and it is
exhilarating. Once the bomb has been created, and the war over, the
film changes tact as at first we are witness to the brief celebrity
Oppenheimer is awarded, to then almost immediately seeing him
becoming irrelevant in the US military's eyes now that he has done
what they needed from him. It then gets worse for Oppenheimer, as
they attempt to go after the man by trying to portray him as a
traitor to his country after being past friends with a communist.
Personally, I think the building of the bomb the more exciting half
of the film, but the government turning on Oppenheimer in the second
half is arguably the more interesting, as it is material less mined
and less known. It is during the interrogation of Oppenheimer that
two moments happen, one fantastic, the other the film's only flaw.
The former is Emily Blunt's big moment when she has her stand off
with Jason Clarke's character and the disgraceful treatment of her
husband by the government he gave up so much for to help. She is so
strong in this moment, as she takes down the arrogant Clarke via a
few clever answers to his questions. However, there is one of the
worst sex scenes I have ever seen during this interrogation, and what
I think is the only flaw in “Oppenheimer” and the only thing
stopping me from giving the film five stars. While I know what Nolan
is trying to do and say with this sex scene, it has been so badly
designed and handled, that it just does not work and really should
have been edited out, as he could have made the same point of
Oppenheimer having all his dirty laundry hung out to dry in front of
everyone, in a different, more subtle way. Other than that
(terrible) moment, I think that “Oppenheimer” is a perfect film.
Finally we get an adult story, told to us by a director who refuses
to talk down to his audience. This is the type of cinema we need
more of, and less of the superhero garbage. While I mentioned that I
am not on the Nolan bandwagon, I have always appreciated “how” he
tells his stories and his devotion to shooting his films on film,
relying on in-camera effects compared to CGI effects. Shooting on
film gives the movie such a rich look, which digital still cannot
compete with, and your eye just knows when it is watching something
tangible onscreen as opposed to something made in a computer. I am
rambling now, so I will just saw succinctly: CHRISTOPHER NOLAN'S
“OPPENHEIMER” WAS MY FAVOURITE FILM OF 2023.
Well
there you have it, that was my round-up of the year that
was 2023; hopefully you got some enjoyment out of it. Now before I
finish, lets have a brief look at the upcoming year and my most
anticipated films of 2024.
