September 16, 2015
PAWN SACRIFICE
OVERALL GRADE = B (85%)
To say that the making of this film took a long time is an understatement. It took ten years to finally see Bobby Fischer on the screen and after watching the film - I can understand why. It was a complex topic that if not done correctly, could've gone otherwise. But fortunately the film tells the story of the chess champion in a way that makes us dislike the protagonist while at the same time root for him. It's a difficult task but one that Maguire manages to pull off by carefully teetering the line between psycho freak and American hero. Ultimately, the film's purpose was not to convince you to like Fischer or not - it was about making us understand Fischer and his behavior. Obviously, the man had the potential to be likable as he became somewhat of a celebrity in the early 70's, but those who knew him, knew the true Bobby Fischer and his own internal struggle. In the end, you can't help but root for Fischer like everyone else. Yet, the film leaves you with a bitter taste in your mouth, reminding one that although the hero did win - he did not win the more important battle: the fight for his sanity. In so doing, the tale becomes one of a tragic hero who ends up sacrificing himself for a greater purpose.
I wasn't around when this chess championship happened in 1972. But when mentioning it to my parents, they surprisingly knew who he was. It's surprising because my parents were in Peru at the time, which speaks to the immense international sensation Bobby Fischer was. It was a BIG deal only for the reason that the chess match represented something bigger: the war between America and Russia. People needed hope; they wanted a hero to fight for them - and that became Bobby Fischer - a poor, Jewish boy from Brooklyn, New York.
Looking back at Bobby's childhood, it's clear to see why he became a paranoid, mentally unstable man. As a youth, thoughts of German spies and communism were instilled in Bobby's mind through his mother. Whatever his mother was involved in, it wasn't clear but it gives us the impression that his mother wasn't stable herself. At a young age, he had a developed a fear of being watched, spied, and hunted by people against their family's views and beliefs. And chess became his escape from an otherwise stressful and unhealthy environment for a child.
As Bobby grows up, we see his passion for chess become an obsession, along with a need to be "the best." With that goal in mind, Bobby isolated himself from everyone and everything - making chess his sole focus. And while that determination and focus is admirable in a hero, it certainly causes us to question how much of himself he is willing to give up. Of course, his hard work does pay off because in the end - he does become the best. But it also comes with a cost. Early on, it was clear that Bobby needed help and if handled properly, perhaps Bobby could have been saved - but it never happened. We could easily blame this on Bobby himself - being a difficult person to have a relationship with - but in all honesty, Bobby was left to deal with his troubles on his own. Bobby had no one that he could talk to, no one to trust in, and no one to love him. With the lack of essential human relationships, it made it easier for Bobby to spiral down into a world of madness. The only character that truly cared for his well-being was his sister, although a little late. Besides the fact that Bobby had gone too far, his sister had her own family to take care of and thus couldn't take care of Bobby as much as she wanted to. And that's an interesting personal detail that the film highlights - Bobby's nonexistent personal life. The film touches on this with a humorous tone in the scenes with the prostitute. But it also looks at it in a deeper level when we see that everything Bobby does outside of the chess matches - is chess. He lives, thinks, and breathes it - enough to ignore life itself.
It's been a while since we've seen Maguire on the big screen. The last time we saw him was in The Great Gatsby as Nick Carraway. And although Maguire is known for playing characters like Nick Carraway, it's these eerily, off-kilter characters that prove Maguire's talent. While watching him play Fischer, I couldn't help but think of Maguire's performance in Brothers. Although the characters are strikingly different in both films, they share a similar journey where we watch them slowly unravel into anti-heroes. And it's this aspect of the modern anti-hero that is interesting in today's culture. Films now tend to like these characters that deconstruct the hero, making us question the term itself. And Maguire captures that deconstruction through his performance. There isn't one scene that I can signal out as being "the scene" because the performance is valued through the details - the nuances that make us see how unstable Fischer really is. And like I said before, Maguire is able to paint us a picture of Bobby - a controversial character that raises controversial topics - while keeping focus on the smaller picture within the bigger context. And in that sense, there is no one genre that the film falls into. It's a drama as much as it is a sports movie as much as it is a thriller. It's a complex portrait that the film depicts and the cast manages to pull off.
Do I see it as an awards contender?? Perhaps as Hollywood tends to like films about characters like Fischer. But there are many similar films out there this year and it brings the competition up a level. In conclusion, whether or not you were alive when this chess match happened, I recommend watching this film because it's not just about chess or politics or paranoia or being a genius - it's about the sacrifices we make to get something and the ramifications that come along with that. It puts the meaning of life in perspective for us and makes us really wonder: is the sacrifice worth it? In this tale, although there is a happy ending for the world, there is no happy ending for our hero.
To say that the making of this film took a long time is an understatement. It took ten years to finally see Bobby Fischer on the screen and after watching the film - I can understand why. It was a complex topic that if not done correctly, could've gone otherwise. But fortunately the film tells the story of the chess champion in a way that makes us dislike the protagonist while at the same time root for him. It's a difficult task but one that Maguire manages to pull off by carefully teetering the line between psycho freak and American hero. Ultimately, the film's purpose was not to convince you to like Fischer or not - it was about making us understand Fischer and his behavior. Obviously, the man had the potential to be likable as he became somewhat of a celebrity in the early 70's, but those who knew him, knew the true Bobby Fischer and his own internal struggle. In the end, you can't help but root for Fischer like everyone else. Yet, the film leaves you with a bitter taste in your mouth, reminding one that although the hero did win - he did not win the more important battle: the fight for his sanity. In so doing, the tale becomes one of a tragic hero who ends up sacrificing himself for a greater purpose.
I wasn't around when this chess championship happened in 1972. But when mentioning it to my parents, they surprisingly knew who he was. It's surprising because my parents were in Peru at the time, which speaks to the immense international sensation Bobby Fischer was. It was a BIG deal only for the reason that the chess match represented something bigger: the war between America and Russia. People needed hope; they wanted a hero to fight for them - and that became Bobby Fischer - a poor, Jewish boy from Brooklyn, New York.
Looking back at Bobby's childhood, it's clear to see why he became a paranoid, mentally unstable man. As a youth, thoughts of German spies and communism were instilled in Bobby's mind through his mother. Whatever his mother was involved in, it wasn't clear but it gives us the impression that his mother wasn't stable herself. At a young age, he had a developed a fear of being watched, spied, and hunted by people against their family's views and beliefs. And chess became his escape from an otherwise stressful and unhealthy environment for a child.
As Bobby grows up, we see his passion for chess become an obsession, along with a need to be "the best." With that goal in mind, Bobby isolated himself from everyone and everything - making chess his sole focus. And while that determination and focus is admirable in a hero, it certainly causes us to question how much of himself he is willing to give up. Of course, his hard work does pay off because in the end - he does become the best. But it also comes with a cost. Early on, it was clear that Bobby needed help and if handled properly, perhaps Bobby could have been saved - but it never happened. We could easily blame this on Bobby himself - being a difficult person to have a relationship with - but in all honesty, Bobby was left to deal with his troubles on his own. Bobby had no one that he could talk to, no one to trust in, and no one to love him. With the lack of essential human relationships, it made it easier for Bobby to spiral down into a world of madness. The only character that truly cared for his well-being was his sister, although a little late. Besides the fact that Bobby had gone too far, his sister had her own family to take care of and thus couldn't take care of Bobby as much as she wanted to. And that's an interesting personal detail that the film highlights - Bobby's nonexistent personal life. The film touches on this with a humorous tone in the scenes with the prostitute. But it also looks at it in a deeper level when we see that everything Bobby does outside of the chess matches - is chess. He lives, thinks, and breathes it - enough to ignore life itself.
It's been a while since we've seen Maguire on the big screen. The last time we saw him was in The Great Gatsby as Nick Carraway. And although Maguire is known for playing characters like Nick Carraway, it's these eerily, off-kilter characters that prove Maguire's talent. While watching him play Fischer, I couldn't help but think of Maguire's performance in Brothers. Although the characters are strikingly different in both films, they share a similar journey where we watch them slowly unravel into anti-heroes. And it's this aspect of the modern anti-hero that is interesting in today's culture. Films now tend to like these characters that deconstruct the hero, making us question the term itself. And Maguire captures that deconstruction through his performance. There isn't one scene that I can signal out as being "the scene" because the performance is valued through the details - the nuances that make us see how unstable Fischer really is. And like I said before, Maguire is able to paint us a picture of Bobby - a controversial character that raises controversial topics - while keeping focus on the smaller picture within the bigger context. And in that sense, there is no one genre that the film falls into. It's a drama as much as it is a sports movie as much as it is a thriller. It's a complex portrait that the film depicts and the cast manages to pull off.
Do I see it as an awards contender?? Perhaps as Hollywood tends to like films about characters like Fischer. But there are many similar films out there this year and it brings the competition up a level. In conclusion, whether or not you were alive when this chess match happened, I recommend watching this film because it's not just about chess or politics or paranoia or being a genius - it's about the sacrifices we make to get something and the ramifications that come along with that. It puts the meaning of life in perspective for us and makes us really wonder: is the sacrifice worth it? In this tale, although there is a happy ending for the world, there is no happy ending for our hero.
October 25th, 2015
SUFFRAGETTE
OVERALL GRADE = A (95%)
In a time where the advent of social media has made possible the awakening of social movements - providing an avenue for voices to be heard and creating an outlet for awareness - the timing of this film couldn't be any better. Thus, making the themes of Suffragette ring even louder for ears that are eager to hear and ears that are eager to "do something." Aside from the social context of the film's release, the power of the film also stems from the story - that was crafted around real people and real events - and the emotionally raw performances given particularly from Carey Mulligan who plays the titular character. And although Suffragette is a film whose cast and crew is predominantly female - it doesn't necessarily mean that the film's audience should reflect that demographic. Instead, there is something that everyone can take away from this film - no matter what gender you identify with, what country you come from, what religion you follow, etc. Suffragette appeals to audiences by connecting us through a unifying, human experience - as humans who are struggling for their rights. It's a movie made by women, about women - for everyone.
The film starts out in the streets of London, 1912 and we are immediately given a taste of the life in early industrial London and the unhealthy conditions that these women lived by. It's a gritty, depressing world - one where women had no freedom of choice. We are introduced to this world with a series of opening shots where we see, hear, and literally smell what it was like to live then. And thanks to the production design, costume, and make-up department, we are quick to understand the environment that the characters find themselves in. With their frizzy, unwashed hair matted to their foreheads, their palms peeling with scabs, their fingernails embedded in grime, and their clothes stained with city soot and the toil of their labor - I wanted to take a shower! With a story like this, capturing the right tone, mood, setting and atmosphere were important to appropriately reflect a day in the life of a woman of that era and place. It justifies why the women were so upset about their current living situation. I wouldn't be surprised if the production designer or art director get a nomination on this year's Oscar race.
Speaking of Oscars, one that is for sure going to get a nomination is Carey Mulligan. Carey Mulligan plays Maude Watts, a fictional character yes, but a character whose story is based off of the true stories recounted by several suffragettes - who were mostly working mothers. From the story, we understand that Maude started working at the laundry service at a very young age and has been working there ever since. It is also implied that she was physically and sexually abused by Mr. Taylor - the man who runs the laundry business. We are not given much backstory about Maude's character, but it is enough to conclude that Maude has always been rather compliant and passive with men - never standing up for herself. And when first introduced to the suffragette movement, Maude is hesitant to join. Yet, it took just a hint of curiosity to get her far more involved than she ever intended to. At first she is negligent to be identified as a "suffragette" but as events start to unravel through the course of the film, Maude has a moment of self-discovery where she realizes that she is indeed a suffragette after all - a proud one, at that. And we see the true testament of Maude's strength and commitment to her cause when she finds herself alone in the fight for women. Mulligan does a marvelous job portraying a character who seems obedient yet rebellious; hesitant yet determined; depicting Maude's inner conflict of being a loving mother and a relentless fighter - eventually causing her to sacrifice one for the other. It's a tough act to pull off but Mulligan manages to do so with standout performances that tug at your heart - feeling her pain when she loses her son, her fear when imprisoned, her doubts when attending her first suffragette meeting, and her joy when she witnesses Mrs. Pankhurst's motivational speech. And it all culminates into a transformational journey - one where the victim becomes the hero, the weak become the powerful, and the voiceless are finally heard - worldwide.
Films about history can go one way or the other in terms of accuracy and artistic embellishment, but the thing to keep in mind is the importance of hearing this story. And for that, we must ask a set of questions: What was the film's purpose? What was the filmmaker's intention? To educate? To remind people of an important event? To inspire? To stimulate a movement? To me, it seems like Suffragette does all of the above and you realize this at the very end: when the movie turns into real-life footage of the procession of Emily Davison's funeral in 1913. What's even more impactful is when the movie begins to list the years when each country gave women the right to vote. The last country to do so was Saudi Arabia - in 2015. That statement alone says everything. There is still much work to be done for women because inequality still exists.
In conclusion, you can always learn something from history. Look to the past to move forward in the future.
In a time where the advent of social media has made possible the awakening of social movements - providing an avenue for voices to be heard and creating an outlet for awareness - the timing of this film couldn't be any better. Thus, making the themes of Suffragette ring even louder for ears that are eager to hear and ears that are eager to "do something." Aside from the social context of the film's release, the power of the film also stems from the story - that was crafted around real people and real events - and the emotionally raw performances given particularly from Carey Mulligan who plays the titular character. And although Suffragette is a film whose cast and crew is predominantly female - it doesn't necessarily mean that the film's audience should reflect that demographic. Instead, there is something that everyone can take away from this film - no matter what gender you identify with, what country you come from, what religion you follow, etc. Suffragette appeals to audiences by connecting us through a unifying, human experience - as humans who are struggling for their rights. It's a movie made by women, about women - for everyone.
The film starts out in the streets of London, 1912 and we are immediately given a taste of the life in early industrial London and the unhealthy conditions that these women lived by. It's a gritty, depressing world - one where women had no freedom of choice. We are introduced to this world with a series of opening shots where we see, hear, and literally smell what it was like to live then. And thanks to the production design, costume, and make-up department, we are quick to understand the environment that the characters find themselves in. With their frizzy, unwashed hair matted to their foreheads, their palms peeling with scabs, their fingernails embedded in grime, and their clothes stained with city soot and the toil of their labor - I wanted to take a shower! With a story like this, capturing the right tone, mood, setting and atmosphere were important to appropriately reflect a day in the life of a woman of that era and place. It justifies why the women were so upset about their current living situation. I wouldn't be surprised if the production designer or art director get a nomination on this year's Oscar race.
Speaking of Oscars, one that is for sure going to get a nomination is Carey Mulligan. Carey Mulligan plays Maude Watts, a fictional character yes, but a character whose story is based off of the true stories recounted by several suffragettes - who were mostly working mothers. From the story, we understand that Maude started working at the laundry service at a very young age and has been working there ever since. It is also implied that she was physically and sexually abused by Mr. Taylor - the man who runs the laundry business. We are not given much backstory about Maude's character, but it is enough to conclude that Maude has always been rather compliant and passive with men - never standing up for herself. And when first introduced to the suffragette movement, Maude is hesitant to join. Yet, it took just a hint of curiosity to get her far more involved than she ever intended to. At first she is negligent to be identified as a "suffragette" but as events start to unravel through the course of the film, Maude has a moment of self-discovery where she realizes that she is indeed a suffragette after all - a proud one, at that. And we see the true testament of Maude's strength and commitment to her cause when she finds herself alone in the fight for women. Mulligan does a marvelous job portraying a character who seems obedient yet rebellious; hesitant yet determined; depicting Maude's inner conflict of being a loving mother and a relentless fighter - eventually causing her to sacrifice one for the other. It's a tough act to pull off but Mulligan manages to do so with standout performances that tug at your heart - feeling her pain when she loses her son, her fear when imprisoned, her doubts when attending her first suffragette meeting, and her joy when she witnesses Mrs. Pankhurst's motivational speech. And it all culminates into a transformational journey - one where the victim becomes the hero, the weak become the powerful, and the voiceless are finally heard - worldwide.
Films about history can go one way or the other in terms of accuracy and artistic embellishment, but the thing to keep in mind is the importance of hearing this story. And for that, we must ask a set of questions: What was the film's purpose? What was the filmmaker's intention? To educate? To remind people of an important event? To inspire? To stimulate a movement? To me, it seems like Suffragette does all of the above and you realize this at the very end: when the movie turns into real-life footage of the procession of Emily Davison's funeral in 1913. What's even more impactful is when the movie begins to list the years when each country gave women the right to vote. The last country to do so was Saudi Arabia - in 2015. That statement alone says everything. There is still much work to be done for women because inequality still exists.
In conclusion, you can always learn something from history. Look to the past to move forward in the future.
June 12, 2016
MIDNIGHT SPECIAL
OVERALL GRADE = A (96%)
Midnight Special is a unique film and one that certainly stands out from other science fiction films because it goes beyond the genre's myths and conventions. It is a film that would be classified as "modern science fiction" because of its humanization of the story and relatability of the characters. Alton Meyer isn't portrayed as an alien - he is simply portrayed as a gifted 8 year old boy who is trying to find his destiny and where he belongs. Anyone can relate to that. And that's what makes the journey engaging and the quest for truth that much more special.
I didn't realize how huge the cast was until I watched the film. Sam Shepard, Kirsten Dunst, Adam Driver, Joel Edgerton, etc. A diverse mix of talent for sure, but they do a superb job in portraying these characters that follow Alton on his quest for truth. For a small indie film that had a limited release, its quality is that of a film that deserves much more attention and praise.
The key element of the film that humanizes the story of an alien trying to find the rest of his kind is the relationship between father and son. The fact that a father has essentially put himself on the wrong side of the law to save his son is a noble act. And in the end, we know his future has been taken away from him. Jeff Nichols, the director and writer of the film, stated that his five-year old son was the inspiration for this film. And we certainly feel the emotional turmoil of a parent when they realize that they need to let go of their child. It's a moment that's heartbreaking when we watch Sarah understand that Alton needs to be with his kind and when she watches him vanish - she is torn.
The notion that our world is being watched - unbeknownst to us - by a superior species is a topic that has been explored in many other films. But the way this film handles the subject is enlightening (no pun intended). When we see the "light aliens" begin to appear, it was a touching moment. You weren't frightened - you were simply full of wonder. The way the film handles the subject of light thematically and visually is beautiful. There's no argument that you are in awe when you see the alien structures tower above our world.
Throughout the entire film, I was in suspense - not knowing who Alton was, not knowing what was so important about March 6th, not knowing why everyone was after Alton, not knowing what would happen to the family - and even the end of the film leaves some things unanswered. For instance, how did the boy acquire these powers? The film places you right in the middle of the action and doesn't spend a lot of time explaining the plot which keeps viewers constantly engaged. Even in the end, it's not quite entirely clear if Roy was placed in an asylum or how Sarah was never to be found. Was Roy an alien as well? Maybe it's just me, but there's a brief moment where Roy's eyes lighten and it makes me wonder if Roy had secrets of his own. But Jeff Nichols meant to leave things unexplained and to leave viewers wondering. His goal was to reach his audience emotionally - the characters and plot were secondary - and he certainly achieved that.
In sum, the film was a wondrous and refreshing work of art. For anyone seeking to find something uniquely different in terms of entertainment, I highly recommend this film. For a film that's about aliens and science fiction, it really is just a story about a family.
