Categories
Film/TV Film/TV/Etc. Blog

Mr. Robot

Mr. Robot, Season One (2015; various directors, including Sam Esmail, Jim McKay, Tricia Brock and Niels Arden Oplev)—Mass popularity and critical acclaim often ruin good television dramas. If a show is a hit, then it gets renewed for a year and the story goes on. However, if that show continues to be a hit, then it keeps getting renewed over and over and over again—and to hell with characterization, narrative arcs, plausibility, aging actors, you name it. Eventually the business side wins big while the show degenerates into a grotesque fan-service striptease that finally dies of exposure after standing naked and shivering and pathetic for years while every question is answered and every dark corner is disinfected by the light.

So imagine a world where the second season of USA Network’s critically acclaimed Mr. Robot never appears. It’s easy if you try. Let its billowy story threads dangle and twist unimpeded. Let its criminals, agitators and boardroom monsters roam the streets unpunished. Let the person or people behind that one apartment door remain unglimpsed.

Freed from the tyranny of narrative closure, the inaugural season of creator Sam Esmail’s volatile saga about Eliot Alderson (Rami Malek), a hyper-intelligent, highly unstable computer hacker, then becomes the only legitimate heir to the first season of David Lynch’s Twin Peaks and a companion piece to Lynch’s aborted TV pilot-turned-cinematic-masterpiece Mulholland Drive. Visually and thematically, Mr. Robot is about insignificance; its characters are fighting to be seen and heard. Eliot, his friend Angela (Portia Doubleday), and his fellow hackers Darlene (Carly Chaykin) and Mr. Robot himself (Christian Slater) are often shunted to the side in a given shot like forgotten or unfinished documents on a PC desktop. Other characters peep over the bottom edge of the frame like twentysomething Kilroys afraid they will be crushed by the collapse of a vast, visible conference-room ceiling or sucked into the yawning city streets behind them.

But insignificance doesn’t necessarily mean freedom. Most of the images look like they were secretly recorded by hidden cell phones, sleeping computer monitors or futuristic, microscopic surveillance devices hidden in a businessman’s lapel. These visual strategies manufacture a strong undercurrent of dread, fear and paranoia—part murky early David Fincher, part orgy-at-the-mansion-scene from Kubrick’s Eyes Wide Shut—that pools and eddies around even the most banal conversations, creating bizarre horror set pieces out of things like a young man talking to a new mom swaddling a baby on her shoulder. Or is she holding a baby at all?

Repeatedly, Mr. Robot asks what facing this kind of insignificance might do to a person. In Elliot’s case, being pushed aside might encourage them to save the world. Then again, it might lead them to furnish and dwell in worlds of his own making. Both options are simultaneously brave and dangerous.

For plenty of good reasons, I haven’t said much about Mr. Robot’s plot. But the series is rich enough that its numerous twists aren’t the only justifications for its existence. Its vision of computer culture and corporate culture is corrosive and distressing, yet Esmail and his team allow the bigwigs as well as the little guys moments of reflection, vulnerability, and doubt. Which, of course, makes their monstrous decisions and outbursts of callousness scarier still.

So to sum things up: If there’s a better new drama than Mr. Robot this year, I’ll eat my laptop.

Grade: A

Categories
Film/TV Film/TV/Etc. Blog

Anvil! The Story Of Anvil

Anvil! The Story of Anvil (2008; dir. Sacha Gervasi)—This not-so-distant relative of Chris Smith’s remarkable 1999 documentary American Movie is one part Metallica: Some Kind of Monster and one part This Is Spinal Tap; in fact, one scene in Anvil! takes place at Stonehenge, where the demons dwell. But what makes it less withering and more sincere than either of those great works—could you call them musicals?—is its working-class pride and DIY spirit. For whatever reason, Anvil was a pop metal band that missed its chance to ride the mid-1980s wave that washed Bon Jovi, Def Leppard, the Scorpions and others onto the shores of pop superstardom—and it’s not like they were that much worse (or better) than any of their better known peers. Maybe lead singer Steve “Lips” Kudlow wasn’t magnetic enough, although he comes off as both a true believer and a pretty decent guy throughout. What’s more likely is that, as Motörhead’s Lemmy Kilmister says, they were cursed with bad luck and bad timing.

Whatever the cause of their non-stardom, it’s clear that rock and roll has saved Lips’ life and sustained his lifelong friendship with band mate Robb Reiner (there’s that Spinal Tap connection again…). No matter what they encounter—inept foreign managers, shady club owners, indifferent record execs, dead-end day jobs—they show signs that they will endure if not necessarily prevail. Lips’ optimism is both touching and foolish in a world where one of his biggest fans shows his appreciation by getting his favorite frontman a job peddling sunglasses over the phone. Three cheers for the Asian heavy metal enthusiasts who eventually redeem Anvil’s struggles, and one more cheer for superfan filmmaker Gervasi, who chronicled his idols’ twilight (and subsequent semi-resurgence) with compassion and humor that’s almost never condescending or cheap.

Grade: A-

Categories
Film/TV Film/TV/Etc. Blog

Throwback August: Batman Begins

Christian Bale as Batman drops in.


Batman Begins
(2005; dir. Christopher Nolan)—Here’s a weird observation about one of the most well-known films by one of the most resolutely “cinematic” filmmakers working today: Batman Begins looks and plays better on television than it did in movie theaters. Its shallow, constricted neo-noir photography translates well to a smaller screen, and its numerous spatial and logical lapses—which range from mildly irksome to maddeningly distracting—aren’t as bothersome when broken up by ads for Rizzoli & Isles every fifteen minutes.

Although the image of Batman perched atop the spire of a building like a Kevlar gargoyle is both Pop Artsy and sly, Nolan’s dour, somber treatment of my favorite comic-book hero is mostly indifferent to or uninterested in humor and/or visual poetry. It is earnest, expository and ever-so-serious. But it is also unusually realistic in two key ways. First, it depicts Bruce Wayne/Batman as what he really (and unavoidably) is—a guilt-crazed borderline psychotic with an undiagnosed multiple-personality disorder who suffers from near-constant mental stress and physical pain. Christian Bale plays Wayne as a slightly less malevolent version of American Psycho’s Patrick Bateman, and love interest Rachel Dawes (Katie Holmes) unconsciously echoes that film’s final lines when she tells him, “Your real face is the one that criminals now fear. The man I loved, the man who vanished—he never came back at all.”

Lliam Neeson as Ras Al Gul

Second, Batman Begins offers the most detailed, nuts-and-bolts superhero-training sequences to date. It spends nearly an hour exploring Wayne’s training with the League of Shadows, reinforcing the importance of theatricality and deception in combat, and fetishizing Batarangs and black body armor. And, miraculously, it makes room for a lovely and honest-to-God fun moment when weapons techie Lucius Fox (Morgan Freeman) responds to Wayne’s question about a giant camouflage-colored APC/AFV sitting in the corner by saying bashfully, “Oh, the Tumbler? Oh, you wouldn’t be interested in that…” 

Katie Holms (reclining) as Rachel Dawes

Human-scale humanism is rare in this brutal, nearly blood-free PG-13 blockbuster, but the trio of paternal subordinates watching over and working with Batman—Fox, butler Alfred (Michael Caine), and inspector Jim Gordon (Gary Oldman)—provide much-needed emotional support and average-guy gravitas which balance the fight scenes and Machiavellian meditations on justice, revenge and symbolic power.

Michael Caine as Alfred

Batman Begins is strong enough to stand on its own, but as its final scene makes clear, it’s equally effective as the first part of a nine-hour epic that accrues considerable emotional power and thematic significance if you ever sit down and watch all three films back-to-back-to-back—a draining, highly enjoyable experience not unlike binge-watching a really good season of a really good TV show.

Grade: A-


Throwback August: Batman Begins

Categories
Film/TV Film/TV/Etc. Blog

Throwback August: Casino

Robert De Niro as Sam ‘Ace’ Rothstein

Casino (1995; dir. Martin Scorsese)—Heavily edited, poorly dubbed, grotesquely commercial-breaked TV versions of Casino sadden me. I’m happy that Scorsese’s best film continues to rumble across the basic cable landscape in various shapes and sizes at various times of day because exhibition and syndication play a major role in pop-cultural canon formation. But a sanitized version of Casino makes little sense because indiscretion and tastelessness are two of its cardinal virtues.

Trade secrets about the gaming industry and the workings of the Midwestern mob, violent confrontations involving power tools and baseball bats, an endless parade of pastel-colored custom suits so gaudy they threaten to burn out your rods and cones —there’s simply too much in this vulgar American epic to absorb in one sitting. Add in the dueling voiceover narrations, the hold-your-breath instances when the camera rushes at characters like an attack dog, and the car-bomb explosions of raunchy absurdist wit, and you’re likely to feel lost.

Sharon Stone as Ginger McKenna

The soundtrack does its best to disorient you, too; Casino’s nonstop music (62 songs are listed in its closing credits) is analogous to the constant electronic chatter of slots and video poker machines cluttering nearly every real casino floors. Given so many opportunities to choreograph miniature music videos within the frame of his story, Scorsese engineers perhaps his greatest pop epiphany—a long sequence where a pair of card cheats get taken down as Jeff Beck’s “I Ain’t Superstitious” wails in the background.

But give the movie the time and attention it needs and you’ll start to get it. Then you might start to love it. Casino is Scorsese’s Physical Graffiti, his 2666, his three-hour, thirty-course tasting menu that will set you back an entire paycheck if you add the beverage pairings, which you might as well because you’ve come this far. It is also a vision of craps-table capitalism unfolding in a multicultural American frontier where mobsters, bookies, cowboys, Italians, Jews, Arabs, Irishmen and anyone else who wants a piece of the pie can get in on the action if they’re willing to play.

Joe Pesci as Nicky Santoro

Although the three principal characters—gambler/casino boss Sam “Ace” Rothstein (Robert De Niro), mobster/hellspawn Nicky Santoro (Joe Pesci) and hustler/addict Ginger McKenna (Sharon Stone)—are assholes, their long, painful falls from grace matter because their bosses are much, much worse. Which is why Casino now plays as an apt and timeless statement about the apparently untouchable gangsters responsible for the current (and no doubt future) financial crises bilking us out of our money whether we like it or not. “It’s a pity in this state that we have such hypocrisy,” says Rothstein late in the film. “Some people can do whatever they want; other people have to pay through the nose. But such is life.”

Grade: A+

Throwback August: Casino

Categories
Film/TV Film/TV/Etc. Blog

Throwback August: Ran

Ran (1985; dir. Akira Kurosawa)—Kurosawa’s final samurai epic is a furious, inarticulate howl of anguish that builds for nearly three hours until its irrefutable argument is finally given voice by an angry soldier: “Men prefer sorrow over peace. They revel in pain and bloodshed. They celebrate murder.”

Such a truth would hardly be worth thinking about unless the world was worth saving. And it is; there is a great, severe beauty suffusing the hills, meadows and treeless plains where Kurosawa sets his version of King Lear. These serene visions of nature only heighten the tragedy that unfolds when elderly Lord Hidetoro (Tatsuya Nakadai) declares his wish to divide his kingdom and live out the rest of his days in peace. As one of Hidetoro’s sons points out, this dream is incompatible with the kingdom his father forged by spilling “measureless blood.” Yet Hidetoro continues to believe that his delusional dreams will become reality. He will live long enough to see the ramifications of his foolishness.

Nakadai’s barking, wildly expressionist performance as Hidetoro (who grows more gray and spectral as Ran death-marches on) is contrasted with Mieko Harada’s scarily erotic turn as the scheming Lady Kaede, who sees her father-in-law’s dotage as an opportunity to enact her long-simmering revenge. She drops into Ran like a hawk that finally catches its prey in an unguarded moment, yet the only instance of wit in the entire film comes when she squashes a moth during a fake crying jag.

Throwback August: Ran (2)

There are two major battles in Ran, and the first one is worth every fight scene in the Marvel Cinematic Universe and a dozen Fury Road sequels. As Hidetoro and his guards are ambushed by two of his three sons, the whirr of insects, the swish of robes and the thunder of horses’ hooves that have dappled the soundtrack so far are silenced. Toro Takemitsu’s score takes over; Kurosawa assembles a montage of blood, dismemberment and devastation punctuated by shots of the sun visible through an ocean of smoke. After nearly six minutes, the sounds of the real world return with a gunshot that uselessly takes another life.

I was fortunate enough to see the 25th anniversary revival of Ran when it played select theaters in 2010. But even if you could see it on a screen wider than the sky, you that are young shall never see so much, nor live so long.

Grade: A+

Throwback August: Ran

Categories
Film/TV Film/TV/Etc. Blog

Throwback August: Nashville


Nashville
(1975; dir. Robert Altman)—In an ironic twist that would probably delight Opal, Nashville’s clueless English journalist/groupie/hyperbole machine, BBC.com recently named Altman’s rambling network narrative about country music, hero worship, God, America, life, liberty and all the rest, one of the 25 greatest American films. But I’m not part of its fan club. I wouldn’t show it to anyone as evidence of Altman’s genius, either; I’d lead with something earlier (California Split, McCabe and Mrs. Miller) or later (Short Cuts, Gosford Park) to make my case. Like David Lynch’s Blue Velvet, Nashville is a beloved work from a major artist I respect and admire that leaves me wondering what I’m missing, no matter how many times I see it.

Forty years later, Nashville’s combination of triple-decker sound design and gliding, rubbernecking three- and four-way imagery remains stimulating and fun to roam around in. But an awful lot of fat and filler gunks up this cynical 160-minute pep rally, and the alleged viewer freedom offered by Altman’s roving zooms and overlapping dialogue is seldom as radical as its reputation. Plus, the country music that keeps the film a-goin’ is often just plain bad, particularly during a wheel-spinning 20-minute concert sequence at The Grand Ole Opry. Whatever topical humor folks chuckled at back then is out of date by now, although some of the most outlandish satirical touches have indeed turned into prophecy; the campaign speeches droning on from the Hal Phillip Walker-mobile sound Trump-like in their button-pushing iconoclasm and defiant claims to political-outsider legitimacy.

Ronee Blakely as Barbara Jean in Nashville

Notwithstanding key physical and emotional contributions from polyestered, pot-bellied presences like Alan Garfield and Ned Beatty (“I’m gonna hard-boil me a couple eggs”), a thrillingly brief Elliott Gould cameo wherein he smartasses his way through a log-cabin luncheon, and everything about the indomitable Lily Tomlin, the most affecting scenes involve men humiliating and embarrassing women. Several small moments—a singer (Christina Raines) chanting unreturned “I love you”s in a hotel bed while her bedmate and band member (Keith Carradine) snoozes next to her, or Barbara Harris lurking and peeping from the wings like the Phantom of The Opry as her pantyhose and dignity tear and fray—secretly prepare you for the big, unforgettable ones. Like the meandering monologue by troubled singer Barbara Jean (Ronee Blakely, who wrote this scene the night before shooting) that sabotages her riverboat concert. Or the off-key, mostly artificial and completely deluded Gwen Welles’ disastrous performance at a men-only Hal Phillip Walker benefit. When it comes to the women of Nashville, you may say they ain’t free. And it do worry me.
Grade: B


Throwback August: Nashville

Categories
Film/TV Film/TV/Etc. Blog

The Story Of Film

The Story of Film: An Odyssey (2011; dir. Mark Cousins)—Beat the heat this week by staying indoors and soaking up Mark Cousins’ 15-part history of cinematic innovation. Running 15 ½ hours and featuring nearly 1000 clips, Cousins’ massive monument to fair use and great movies from around the world is highly recommended to smart people like you who’ve figured out that the American cinema isn’t the only game in town but have no idea where to begin. Can you dig it? More importantly, can you set aside the free time to dig it?

Cousins is quietly enthusiastic without sounding pretentious or crazy, and his hard-earned, nicely skewed point of view only increases the charm of his soothing, hyperbolic voiceover. He hates The Lord of The Rings, loves Baz Luhrmann (“Not since interviewing Bernardo Bertolucci have I met a director who so understands their own work and, moreover, has a convincing theory of art” he writes in The Story of Film’s accompanying booklet) and says that the one movie you should see if you haven’t already is Nicolas Roeg and Donald Cammel’s 1970 freakout Performance, which contains Mick Jagger’s greatest role, one of the earliest music videos, and a point-of-view shot of a bullet travelling through a person’s brain.

Cousins is a curious and generous interviewer as well. Early on, we discover that Norman Lloyd, a.k.a. Colin Quinn’s buddy at the assisted-living facility in Trainwreck, is a human Rosetta stone who can tell first-hand stories about nearly all of the major American filmmakers from the first half of the 20th century. We also get Charles Burnett stammering about the “propaganda” of Hollywood characterization, Terence Davies professing his love for Vermeer, Stanley Donen angrily dismissing the idea of the “camera-stylo”, Youssef Chahine predicting the Arab Spring five years early, and Indian star Amitabh Bachchan (star of Sholay, ran for five years in Mumbai, how could you forget) dismissing his own charisma by insisting that appearing on camera is just a job.

Cousins’ informal numerology is also something to behold. He lists the eight challenges to the romantic cinema of the 1920s and ‘30s; the seven reasons Alfred Hitchcock is “the pre-eminent image-maker of the 20th century”; the six major US film genres emerging in the 1930s; the five kinds of identity crises in European film of the 1970s; the four European directors of the 1950s worth knowing well; the three kinds of films in the New American cinema of the 1960s and ‘70s, and the three key transgressive works of the New Korean Cinema of the ‘00s. Although his own images can’t compete with the ones he’s selected from film history—and really, how could they?—his most affecting footage juxtaposes clips and photos of key locations from old movies with the parking lots, apartment complexes and abandoned buildings they inevitably become.

The Story of Film is an excellent road map and, like the films of Yasujiro Ozu, it’s great to have on in the background if you plan on taking a snooze. If anything, it isn’t long enough.
Grade: A-

Categories
Film/TV Film/TV/Etc. Blog

The Apu Trilogy


Pather Panchali, Aparajito, and The World of Apu a.k.a. The Apu Trilogy
(1955-60; dir. Satyajit Ray) Damn you, Nashville! Why do you get to spend the week basking in the big-screen 4K restoration of the wisest trilogy in film history while movie-going Memphians are forced to choose from a bunch of dumbed-down fairy tales and CGI-“enhanced” lies about the way we live now?

It isn’t right and it isn’t fair, but as Satyajit Ray’s humble, profound series about the life and times of a sensitive Bengali boy repeatedly shows, that’s the way it goes sometimes. These movies are small yet huge: if Richard Linklater’s Boyhood blew your mind last year, then you ought to love Ray’s grander, richer humanist vision.

What makes the Apu trilogy so great and rewarding is also what prevented me from sitting down and actually watching them until last week: it stubbornly focuses on the stuff of everyday life instead of using that stuff to fuel the escapism most people (including me) seek when we go to the movies. Ray’s lambent meditations on common experiences (family, food, first love) common places (home, school, workplace) and common phenomena (weather, technological change, unexpected disillusionment) are attempts to understand the world rather than cut and paste its parts into predetermined narrative patterns. (Nevertheless, the films’ relevant symbols and organizing principles include roads, trains, Ravi Shankar’s music, water, and merciless sudden deaths.)

His characters are something else, too; as Pauline Kael put it, “The concept of humanity is so strong in Ray’s films that a man who functioned as a villain could only be a limitation of vision, a defect, an intrusion of melodrama into a work of art which seeks to illuminate experience and help us feel.” In other words, Ray sees the world clearly and correctly, and his vision grants him access to several previously inaccessible or overlooked regions of the movie world. I was nearly moved to tears by Ray’s handling of Apu’s reunion with his mother in Aparajito; you may feel similarly about Apu’s relationship with his older sister Durga in Pather Panchali or his unexpectedly tender marriage in The World of Apu. The films may be taxing and formless at times, but they are large and roomy enough for everyone.

Grade (overall): A+
(Pather Panchali (1955): A; Aparajito (1958): A+; The World of Apu (1960): A)

Categories
Film/TV Film/TV/Etc. Blog

The Overnight

The Overnight (2015; dir. Patrick Brice)—In the past 24 hours, I’ve seen Parks and Recreation alum Adam Scott’s fake penis twice. I was ready for it the first time because it appeared towards the end of the pilot episode of HBO’s sexually explicit, mostly forgotten 2007 series Tell Me You Love Me, in which Scott played a central role. But last night, midway through Patrick Brice’s unpredictable new chamber comedy about Alex and Emily (Scott and Taylor Schilling), a thirty-something couple who meet and eventually spend a long night partying at the huge home of fellow thirty-somethings Kurt and Charlotte (Jason Schwartzman and Judith Godrèche), a decidedly different prosthetic version of Scott’s joystick hove unexpectedly into view. In Tell Me You Love Me, Scott’s display of plastic nudity only added to the show’s clinical, curious, operating-table asexuality; in The Overnight, Scott’s decision to display his genitalia feels less exploitative and thrown-in: it’s simultaneously embarrassing, desperate and triumphant. The size of Scott’s merch on display is different, too, but that’s another story.

Scott’s poolside disrobing (and subsequent dance number) is one of many gangly, touching and quietly unsettling moments in Brice’s film, which continuously swerves and skirts the larger implications of the “swinger vibe” Emily notices once the kids are put to bed, the big glass bong comes out, and Kurt spirits Alex away to his art studio to show off his swirling paintings of buttholes—which Kurt calls “Portals” because of course he does. As Kurt plies Alex and Emily with whiskey and nice robes and breast-pump DVDs and says things like “Give me 20 minutes and I will give you parental bliss,” the visiting couple find themselves trying to both draw the line somewhere and accept their hosts’ eccentricities without judgment because hey, it’s hard for adults with kids to make new friends and meet new people. The film saves its biggest joke for the very end but is wise enough to return to earth briefly once the long night ends, making The Overnight shorter, truer and more fun than most of the blockbusters currently squatting in theaters.

Grade: B+ 

Categories
Film/TV Film/TV/Etc. Blog

Seconds


Seconds (1966; dir. John Frankenheimer)
—If this week’s Ryan Reynolds/Ben Kingsley thriller Self/Less can summon or siphon the same blend of visual and intellectual audacity that powered Seconds, then it will be well worth watching. But if Self/Less, well, sucks, then you can always stay up late some night, pour yourself a stiff drink or two, fill your head with comforting lies about the better life you could have led, and let John Frankenheimer’s second-best film bore its way into your brain like a drill.

Seconds is one of the creepier American parables about cheating mortality and getting what you wish for. It concerns a vaguely unhappy middle-aged businessman (John Randolph) who’s given the opportunity to abandon his current life and be “reborn” as a younger, more handsome, and completely unfettered free spirit (Rock Hudson, in one of his strongest, strangest performances). Yet as Saul Bass’ taffy-pull opening titles assert, exaggeration, distortion and elongation dominate the world of Seconds even when everything seems to be going fine. Like many films only much more so, Things Are Not What They Seem: walls, ceilings and floors bend and warp like weather-beaten wood, bedrooms and offices are as big as three-car garages, and every solicitous word of advice carries with it seeds of condescension that makes them sound like threats. But it’s all part of the plan; as Alec Baldwin notes in one of the film’s Criterion extras, “Some movies you gotta be in the mood for. Other movies, they put you in the mood. They take you hostage, in a way.”

Grade: A