First Cow [SGIFF2020]

Kelly Reichardt directed and co-wrote First Cow, a surprisingly entertaining frontier Western based on an unlikely story idea that was simply and effective told. It was a story about friendship and hardship, and about survival and dreams. It never felt as long as its 121 minutes run time suggested as Reichardt's storytelling and pacing was precise, and its two leads, John Magaro and Orion Lee, were captivating. Especially Magaro who turned in a soulful and sensitive performance. Together, all three of them delivered an emotional heartfelt tale chronicling the American Dream. And by golly, that cow is pretty.

Reichardt's film started off by introducing the leads to us and to each other with very little exposition but mostly establishing their character through actions, behaviour and snippets of backstory. Her way of storytelling respects the audience with nary a moment of dumbed down expository rife in contemporary Hollywood blockbusters. As the kids say these day, IYKYK. 

The film ran through a gamut of emotions as it followed the two men as they eked out a living and chased their dreams. We experienced their anxieties and fears, and their hopes and delights. And through it all, Reichardt sprinkled the film with a light dusting of humour just to keep it all from being too bleak and dour. The frontier life was not always the brightest of places to be. 

Magaro, at times looking like Shia Labeouf, was a standout with his portrayal of an atypical frontier man. He was a protagonist that we were rooting for to succeed and hoping that the prologue did not foreshadow his fate. And therein also laid the strength of Reichardt's storytelling whereby she daftly maneuvered - manipulated? - us to consider what that enigmatic prologue could have meant. Furthermore, that fade-to-black ending with no definite resolution may not necessarily be as bleak as it seemed but could also be viewed as hopeful and optimistic.

First Cow was an unexpectedly original film that defied initial expectations. It was superbly directed by a confident storyteller and anchored by two interesting and charismatic leads resulting in a wholly entertaining and captivating adventure. 

Wife of a Spy (スパイの妻) [SGIFF2020]

This was a beautifully shot, slow-burn of a historical/romance crime thriller. Director Kiyoshi Kurosawa (黒沢 清) took his time to get into the story proper, using most of the first act to set the scene - gorgeous period setting showcasing Japan in the 40s - and establishing the main characters. Lead actors Yu Aoi (蒼井 優) and Issey Takahashi (高橋 一生) held court throughout the near-two hours stretch, especially with the former who had the most complete and tumultuous character arc. It is not common to see a Japanese film that openly criticised Japan's role during World War II and Kurosawa had done it so effortlessly while also daftly saving both an espionage thriller and love-triangle subplots. 

The plot really kicked into gear at the second act and surprisingly gave a left turn at the third act that led to an enigmatic and emotionally poignant denouement. Although the end credits did suggest this was a true story, but we cannot seem to be sure. 

Like a lot of Japanese dramas, the acting can be rather overly-dramatic at times. However, in this case, Kurosawa seemed to have found a great balance of Hitchcockian suspense with a Lynchian mystery and therefore, Aoi's reactions never really seemed out of place. Although the same cannot be said for the other supporting characters. 

Aoi was amazing to watch. Her transformations through the film from dutiful wife, childish compatriot, indignant lover, amateur sleuth, duplicitous femme fatale, spurned partner, fragile patient and criminal mastermind was a delight to observe. In the end, Kurosawa and Aoi presented an enigmatic and ambiguous epilogue that allowed for multiple possible interpretations.

A Silver Lion winner at the 77th Berlin International Film Festival, A Wife of a Spy was a beautiful period drama that paid dividends for its patient audience. 

The Truffle Hunters [SGIFF2020]

 A quaint and charming little Italian documentary that was beautifully shot and languidly presented as we followed the lives of these mostly eccentric, sometimes curmudgeon, Italian old men as they waxed - and sang - lyrically or sometimes frustratingly about their livelihood and passion of being a tartufaio. But most importantly, also about their dogs. Which then begged the question, who or what are the titular truffle hunters - the men or the dogs? Or is it the consumer?

There was some education within the documentary on the shady business of truffle-trading but it was rudimentary and obviously not within the primary scope of the film makers. It will help to set the background for those who came into the film with nary an idea of what the heck is the deal with truffles. It also gave the audience a pseudo-villain, a cad really, in the main truffle dealer, to root against. Thereby giving this otherwise immersive documentary a sort of narrative structure which may be easier to follow/accept.  

However, for those already attuned to the illicit economy behind that white gold, then the real gem of the storytelling is the glimpse into the lives of the truffle hunters. Unfortunately, therein also laid the main critique of this docu. We only get a glimpse into the current lives of these fascinating men with occasional reflections to the past. But what we did not get is an insight into their lives, histories, impetus and drive. 

Visually, this film was beautiful. A lot of stunning wide-angled landscapes through the seasons interspersed with elegantly composed shots that often suggested playfulness and intimacy, or hinted at dodgy shadiness. There was also a fantastic use of a "dog cam" - a GoPro? - that provided one of the best visual sequences so apt for this film. 

The Truffle Hunters was an enjoyable and utterly charming film. You will be fascinated by these men and grown attached to their dogs by the end of  its 84 minutes. Kudos to the film makers who managed to get these men to be so open and inviting. What an invaluable opportunity to be allowed into these men's lives. Meanwhile, you may also learn a thing or two about truffles. 

Ammonite [SGIFF 2020]

 

Francis Lee's follow-up to his underrated gem God's Own Country was not exactly a sophomore slump, but where the latter had humour,  passion and "wore its heart on its sleeve",  Ammonite was cold, frigid and devoid of much levity. There were moments of tenderness and one scene of genuine warmth and love, but it was too little and too brief to ignite the flames - or even the loins. The crux was the lack of chemistry between its two leads, Kate Winslet and Saoirse Ronan. It was difficult to envisage them as lovers. 

Winslet was great, as usual, giving much weight and meaning to each glance, pinched lips and drag of her cigarette (she really ought to be in a Wong Kar Wai film), and that was extremely useful in Lee's sparse script. Her character was sort of an enigma but not difficult to relate to. An introverted yet sensitive person who dislikes social engagements and outward expressions of emotions, but is deeply passionate and empathetic.  Such characters would be described as stoic or reserved if they were a man, but as a woman, she would be termed frigid or cold or emotionless. And that was the brilliance of Lee and Winslet's creation. But I am not sure how many people will really see it as that. Winslet portrayed her with layers of complexity and she was fascinating to watch and follow.

Ronan, on the other hand, was given less to do, and we know she is capable of doing so much more! But unfortunately, those four Oscar nominations did not translate to her being convincingly enthralled - or besotted - with Winslet. Her character lacked dimensions and she seemed to exist only to drive the plot the forward rather than as a co-lead in a romance drama. Perhaps, this film may have worked better had another actress been cast as Ronan's character and Lee given her more of agency than just a young neglected wife who suffered a personal tragedy. 

There were also other problems other than the casting. Mainly, Lee's screenplay. This was a lot clunkier than God's Own Country and the paucity of dialogue did not disguise the many cringe-worthy lines spilling out of the characters' lips. The best bits actually seemed to be Winslet's improv-ed utterances. Surely not all serious period pieces need to be so muted and so glum. Thankfully, Winslet was able to translate and transcend those silences with a crinkling of her eyes or a slight twinge of the corners of her lips. 

And we also have the directing. By gosh, Lee really lacked subtlety here what with all the heavy handed foreshadowing and dramatic ironies. One could appreciate the cold dreariness of the Dorset coast without having to be constantly enveloped and suffocated by it? And surely, there must be warm blood flowing through Winslet's stone-cold heart. 

That being said, the cinematography by Stephane Fontaine - for all the directorial choices - was beautiful. Music was sparse, and although beautiful was used mainly to hammer in the emotional beats which felt manipulative. The costuming were gorgeous, but Ronan's wig less so. 

Lastly, we have to talk about that epilogue. That was too long. It could have ended just before that and it would have been great. 

(Mild Spoilers Ahead) Throughout the film, Lee had not hinted that the lovers could have had any chance beyond the plotted inevitability, and also, their lack of chemistry did not encourage the audience to actively root for them. Therefore, it could have ended just right before the epilogue and it would have been fitting. (End Spoilers)

But instead, we had to deal with an addition ten to fifteen minutes and three or four unnecessary scenes before the film actually ended. Although thankfully, the proper ending itself was a highlight of the film. That vague ambiguity ignited more passion than all the much-touted sex scenes. It also showed that those aforementioned unnecessary epilogue scenes were clearly there so that the characters, and the director, could S-P-E-L-L out exactly what they were supposed to be thinking/feeling. That felt like a studio note rather than an auteur choice.

Ammonite was a good film. It just was not a great film. It was enjoyable and Winslet was mesmerising. She might even get an Oscar nomination given how the year is going. However, it felt as cold as it looked and Lee could really have injected more warmth into it. Not all "serious" shows have to be brooding.

The Trial of the Chicago 7 [Netflix]

 The Trial of the Chicago 7 was, without a doubt, an Aaron Sorkin production. From its unabashed democratic and liberal-leaning politicking, its mile-a-minute monologues and abundant witticisms, to its social topicality and relevance, Sorkin used his platform to highlight a true story set in the 60s that - - unfortunately - still resonates now almost 50 years later. A painful reminder that despite half-a-century of time, not much in the world has changed. 

Sorkin had assembled a top notched cast but the ones who really stole the show were: Sacha Baron Cohen, Mark Rylance, Jeremy Strong and the fantastic Frank Langella. The others definitely held their own but these four really sold their characters and gave life to Sorkin's writing, and are a shoo-in, hopefully, for some Oscar acting noms. 

Sorkin as a director was unexciting. Although he would be the best person to understand all the beats of his own writing and the unconventional narrative structure did help to keep the audience, especially those who are unaware of this story, on their feet. Of course, undeniably, poetic license and dramatisation has to occur in any fictional retelling of a true story, but at least in this case, Sorkin did not appear to have done anything too far-fetched or histrionic. Well, maybe except inserting Eddie Redmayne's Tom Hayden into one too many scenes.

Redmayne and Cohen were undoubtedly the lead actors in this film, but other than both their confusing and inconsistent attempts at maintaining their American accent, Cohen definitely outshone Redmayne. Cohen daftly embodied Abbie Hoffman and Sorkin did seem to have more fun writing for his character, allowing Cohen/Hoffman to sometimes take on the role of a narrator which he did with aplomb. 

Redmayne, on the other hand, was suitably cast as the student president of the SDS. He consistently exuded a Newt Scamander-esque vibe with his schoolboy charm and scarves, but his Hayden was written too flatly and uninteresting to effectively put those charms too good use. And even a third act boost failed to make Redmayne/Hayden any more urgent or active.

Rylance was phenomenal. His every action and body language conveyed layers and so much more than Sorkin's words, which in itself would be a challenge to most actors. He was paired mostly with Ben Shankman and the two played well with and against each other.

However, the most interesting actor was Langella. What a villainous character his Judge Hoffman (no relation with Abbie Hoffman...hah!) was. Langella was a villain everybody loved to hate and he was delectable. Langella was a masterclass in using his eyes and words to terrorise and belittle. Horrifying!

Strong was believable as a stoner and he got some of the best one-liners. Well, he and Noah Robbins and Daniel Flaherty.

Other big names included Joseph Gordon-Levitt (miscast in a role that seemed to require more gravitas and ability to manifest personal and professional conflict), Yahya Abdul-Mateen II (great presence with one fantastic scene that screamed nomination reel!) and Michael Keaton (always welcomed and did his scenes justice). The rest of the cast, in roles big and small, were all suitably cast.

Given the storyline, it was not surprising that the film lacked female and LGBTQ representation. 

The music was by Daniel Pemberton, and like Sorkin's direction, was unexciting. It was rousing when it needed to be and subdued at times of contemplation. However, the collaboration with Celeste for "Hear My Voice" over the closing credits was great, and has a real shot of a Best Original Song nomination. 

Cinematography was by Phedon Papamichael and there were some beautiful shots, especially the last court scene. 

Speaking of which, that final scene was, kudos to Sorkin, a befitting, rousing, and heroic choice to end the story. 

This film, in this limited Oscar race, will likely get a nomination for Best Original Screenplay and hopefully some acting nominations. A pity we did not get a chance to watch it on the big screen.

I'm Thinking of Ending Things [Netflix]

 

The best film of the year...thus far. A surreal fantasy masquerading as a tense psychological thriller, this was a quintessential and unabashed Charlie Kaufman film. It was bitingly smart and uncompromisingly intelligent (unlike, say, Tenet) but yet darkly funny, oppressingly tense/creepy and peppered with unexpected poignancy. But most of all, it was anchored by terrific performances from its two leads - Jessie Buckley and Jesse Plemons - and the scene-stealing Toni Collette and David Thewlis. If Wild Rose did not convince you that Buckley is a star, her superb, chameleonic performance here will; and Plemons has been underrated long enough! This was not a film for the casual viewer. It demands attention and it will reward you at the end, and stays with you even longer.

It is always a privilege to be able to glimpse into the mind of Kaufman, and no one else would have been able to translate his screenplay (from the book by Iain Reid) as well as he could. Kaufman's directing and writing was in sync and so capably transported the audience into this world. 

Similarly, kudos to the production design team, the cinematographer, Łukasz Żal, who also worked on the equally sumptuous Cold War, and the music composer Jay Wedley. The whole team had created a brilliant visual landscape and aural soundscape that enveloped the viewer. The confusion, the unease, the sense of dread, the fear, the longing, the sadness, the lost, the happiness, the acceptance, all these and more were heightened and enriched by Kaufman and team. 

Saying anything more about the plot will ruin the film, but safe to say, it was similar yet different from its source material, and really only something that Kaufman could have imagined. This was truly Kaufman's best work since Eternal Sunshine of a Spotless mind sixteen years ago (and Being John Malkovich was 21 years ago!).

Buckley remained astounding and it was a crime she was not nominated for an Oscar for Wild Rose last year (at least she got a BAFTA nomination; her Oscar nom likely went to Cynthia Erivo and perhaps either Saoirse Ronan or Charlize Theron should have given up their spot...just saying). Nonetheless, Buckley turned in a fearless performance here all while spouting Kaufman's long monologues that ranged a multitude of topic. Her face was a canvas for the myriad emotions that her character had to go through and never once did it ring false. As ostensibly the audience surrogate, we tracked her journey through this one surreal evening and we felt what she felt. We were seldom ahead of her and that feeling could be very confusing. 

Plemons needs to be recognised by the mainstream audience and be rewarded for his consistently good performances in all mediums. In television, he broke out in Breaking Bad and was great in the second season of Fargo and the USS Callister episode of Black Mirror; and in films, he had multiple small yet pivotal roles in Vice, The Irishman, Bridge of Spies, The Post, amongst many other award-winning films. He is such an underrated actor and perhaps that is his charm. His character appeared unassuming but yet we see flickers of a multi-faceted, complex human being. The layers of complexity that Plemons brought to this role was amazing.

Collette and Thewlis made a perfect pair. They seemed to be having so much fun in their scenes especially Collette. They are fascinating to watch, and the dinner scene with all four of them was easily one of the best scene in the film. The effortless transition showed all of their mastery in the craft.

This was easily, hands down, one of the best films in a long time. A smart, uncompromising film that delivered. An Oscar nomination for Best Adapted Screenplay and Cinematography will be likely, but given its high brow nature and esoteric storytelling, anything more will be a surprise, albeit a very welcomed one.

This film absolutely deserved repeat viewing - like all good Kaufman's films - and what else is there to do under lockdown in these unprecedented times? Stay through the credits and read them for some nuggets and easter eggs.

Tenet [IMAX]

 

Expectations were high for this film given the immense success that was Dunkirk and how it was the first major blockbuster to hit the cinema since COVID struck. But Christopher Nolan's time-travelling, heist-flick, action-thriller failed to lived up to those expectations. 

Granted, the timey-wimey concept was interesting. However, the execution was tedious and predictable, and for fans familiar with the sci-fi genre or time-travel trope, it felt unexciting and rote. Nolan never delivered upon the promise of the first act and the film never got more exciting than the prologue. The clunky dialogue and heavy-handed monologuing did not help. 

And to add salt to the wound, this was perhaps Nolan's most emotionally hollow and contrived film. There was absolutely no emotional weight or purpose in this whole 150 minutes. Perhaps he should have leaned more into the bromance and banter between John David Washington and Robert Pattinson who had good chemistry together, and ditch the saviour-complex, with a hint of romance, between Washington and Elizabeth Debicki. 

Washington was a standout in his breakout film BlacKkKlansman, but here, although he managed to hold his own, he seemed overwhelmed by the story and never really shone through as an individual. He was charismatic at times but dull more often. He really did not appear like he was having fun.

Pattinson, on the other hand, seemed to be enjoying his role. Pattinson is a much better actor than most people give him credit for and his performance here proved that his Batman could be something worth anticipating. 

As for Debicki she deserved so much more. She tried her best but the script and the directing failed her. Her character was so shallowly written and her motivations so contrived that she was essentially nothing more than a pretty face face masquerading as a plot device. At least she and Kenneth Branagh played well opposite each other. More than what we can say for her chemistry withWashington. Ever since she broke out in The Night Manager and The Kettering Incident, she seemed to have been typecast, i.e. the tall, fragile-looking blonde that had inner strength that was yet to be discovered. Hopefully, as the next Princess Diana she can once again shin. 

Nolan really has no idea how to write for women. Which could explain why his films always have so little women in them. And if they are there, they are either tropes or used to subvert expectations, e.g. Dimple Kapadia in this film. There really was no reason why Washington's or Pattinson's characters could not have been female.

Tenet absolutely failed the Bechdel Test. Also, other than Washington, there was also no other BIPOC character of note throughout the film.

Nolan might have to learn a few things from his brother and sister-in-law, Jonathan Nolan and Lisa Joy, the duo behind the HBO series Westworld, or even James Cameron, and consider allowing his ideas to be turned into a mini-series or a multi-part film franchise. With more time and breathing space, and better writing, Tenet could have been so much better. The concept could have been more richly explored and the characters deepened and their complexities fleshed out. Look at the Netflix series Dark. Similar concept, so much more better executed over three seasons.

And Nolan should also consider having a co-writer to help write better dialogue rather than the clunky and clanky pesudo-science, pop-philosophy and oblique references that peppered throughout the film.

Having said all that, there were things to like about the film. The cinematography by Hoyte van Hoytema was excellent. The IMAX-shot sequences were great and the final climax - for all its messiness - was amazingly shot. The editing by Jennifer Lame who did Hereditary was top notch. And of course the score by Ludwig Goransson really helped to drive the film forward and through the dull patches. There is a chance that they could get some awards recognition in these three categories and also for Special Effects and Sound Design. 

Watching this film in IMAX was great, especially for the prologue and some of the action sequences like the final climax. And the sound system in an IMAX theatre really helped with the bass-heavy score. However, given the 2.5 hours film length and mediocrity of the film, that extra cost may not have been so worth it. But at least it was fun to be back in a cinema, only wished it had been better.