Showing posts with label Carey Mulligan. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Carey Mulligan. Show all posts

Friday, May 17, 2013

The Not-So-Great Gatsby

If you went to high school in the United States, chances are you had to read F. Scott Fitzgerald's classic novel 'The Great Gatsby.' And if you did, you likely realize that better perhaps than any other work of fiction, Fitzgerald captured the essence and spirit of what we call the "Roaring Twenties", with the freely available liquor and cares hidden so far below the surface they're practically unrecognizable. It was the party after allied victory in The Great War, and before we would realize the devastation that was the Great Depression. On the cinematic front, there are now five adaptations of Gatsby, ranging from Herbert Brenon's original 1926 entry to the classic 1974 film scripted by Francis Ford Coppola and starring Robert Redford and Sam Waterston. But Baz Lurhmann's latest rendition of Fitzgerald's seminal work looks to change the entire look and feel we've been accustomed to in 2013's The Great Gatsby. For one thing, it's Baz frickin' Lerhmann, the man whose modernist film adaptation of Romeo + Juliet has become easily the most popular cinematic version of Shakespeare's most famous play. This is a man who has become known for his visual splendor, a la Moulin Rouge and Australia. Even if you're not a fan of his work, you have to admit that he takes an artistic effort to make his movies as visually arresting as possible. Looking at the early trailers for his Gatsby, it's easy to see how his ocular voluminosity could work wonders with the age of excess that was the 1920's.
When the bowtie was king.
For those of you who still haven't read 'Gatsby' (or if you're like me and have forgotten most of it), it's the story of nouveau riche millionaire Jay Gatsby (Leonardo DiCaprio), a man known for his extravagant all-night parties and his mysterious anonymity. He takes interest in young neighbor Nick Carraway (Tobey Maguire), and pines after the love of his life, Daisy Buchanan (Carey Mulligan). But Daisy is married to philandering Tom Buchanan (Joel Edgerton), and until now didn't even realize that Gatsby was still alive. In the chaos that follows, friendships are tried and tested, and in the end, we learn just who the cryptic Jay Gatsby really is.
Wish I could see what was so interesting.
The good news is that Luhrmann's vision of the world Fitzgerald originally created is largely fitting. Gatsby's parties are full of pomp and circumstance, and the showy decorations, ginormous and elaborate mansions and the outrageous dresses looking both perfectly modern and eminently appropriate for the time. The director also has a flair for cinematography, capturing shots beautiful to the naked eye. The special effects work is unfortunately hit-or-miss; while his shots of the majestic (but still under construction) New York City are gorgeous, some of his more action-oriented visuals - most notably Gatsby driving his gold-tinted car though the city - have enough twinges of falsity to their animation that it's unfortunately noticeable. A few other visuals don't exactly work (makeup effects create some very cartoonish characters, for instance), but for the most part Luhrmann's efforts are successful. Far more likable is the soundtrack, compiled by Jay-Z, which includes the hip-hot artist alongside pop artists Lana Del Ray, Florence and the Machines and a host of others current-day performers. While the soundtrack is very much modern, Jay-Z's talents combined with Lurhmann's modernist touches never lets the anachronistic soundtrack feel out of place in the ninety year-old setting.
Daisy could use these flowers as camouflage.
The Great Gatsby is also another step on the great career that is Leonardo DiCaprio stardom. For the longest time DiCaprio was the epitome of unfulfilled potential, often performing well enough but not at the level of excellence many had predicted for him (and in the case of Titanic, sometimes less than that). That abruptly changed in 2004 with The Aviator, with such a mature performance that rose above almost everything else that year. He proved that year was no fluke by following it up by great performance after great performance, starring in The Departed, Revolutionary Road, Shutter Island, Inception, J. Edgar, and Django Unchained. In Gatsby, he once again puts forth a dominating effort, perhaps the greatest characterization of the suave and emotional Jay Gatsby to date. One of the rumors for why this film was pushed back was so that DiCaprio would not have to lobby for two award nominations at once (along with Django, which sadly saw him left off the Oscar ballot), and if true his showing here definitely gives the theory some merit. Still, it's not entirely his show, and Luhrmann does a decent job surrounding him with great actors like Mulligan, Edgerton, Isla Fisher, Jason Clarke and Australian newcomer Elizabeth Debicki, all of whom meld into their characters and provide their much-appreciated talents.
One of the bigger talents in the movie. No, I don't mean Tobey.
Sadly, the acting is also largely where Gatsby goes wrong, most decisively with Tobey Maguire, who trounces everybody's combined good efforts with a performance worthy of the Razzies. Maguire is so completely miscast for the role that it almost seems silly to criticize his performance, but since he was the man Luhrmann chose to narrate his tale, I'm going to do so anyway. Maguire varies between trite, boring voice-overs and overly emotive dialogue, and never succeeds at drawing any interest from his audience. It's bad enough that Nick Carraway is a boring side character in the life of Jay Gatsby, but as we're supposed to be seeing all of the action through Nick's perspective, it would have been nice to actually want to give a damn about him. Instead we're forced to suffer through some of the worst dramatic acting this year, and all because Luhrmann wouldn't realize that Maguire had been regressing talent-wise since he peaked almost a decade ago. Nick Carraway CAN be interesting (Watterston did it in the seventies!), but Maguire absolutely sinks any good his character might have achieved.
"A toast to forget the last two hours."
Maguire is not the lone problem with Gatsby (how did Luhrmann not learn how to cut and edit a film by now?), but he is the most obvious and offensive flaw within it. While it's visually splendid, does have a few good moments and is largely well-acted, this Great Gatsby is a drab, soulless, BORING recitation that almost put me to sleep on more than one occasion. There's just nothing going on behind the scenes, and the director does little to make Fitzgerald's creation relevant beyond his cosmetic touch-ups. Luhrmann's work is all sound and fury, and while he definitely makes the film all his own, it remains one of the more disappointing of the year, and perhaps will even be remembered as one of the year's worst. Fans of the director and Fitzgerald fanatics might get what they want out of this, but everybody else should stay far, far away.

Friday, December 16, 2011

Shames Me Not

Quick, what NC-17-rated film has had the highest financial gross since the creation of the rating in 1990? If you guessed the 1995 Paul Verhoeven title Showgirls, give yourself a pat on the back. It doesn't hurt that this particular title was been the only one with that NC-17 rating to get itself a wide release, as often filmmakers whose work get that rating will edit and change their films to try and appeal for a reduction to an R rating instead. R-rated films get to see wide release, more and better advertising and by those means a much larger potential audience, whereas one hampered by an NC-17 rating are often depicted as "niche" titles and play in New York and Los Angeles almost exclusively, with a little indie theatrical action around the country as it prepares for the upcoming awards shows. We're a long way away from 1969, when Midnight Cowboy became the only X-rated (before the porn industry stole that term) film to win the Academy Award for Best Picture. These days, anything rated higher than R is considered too big a deal, and many millions of dollars end up being spent in the mad dash to appeal for that relatively more acceptable ceiling. This is why it's so refreshing to see that Shame did not undergo this same process, proudly (and perhaps a little foolhardily) wearing the adult-only patch as what director Steve McQueen called "a badge of honor, not a scarlet letter." Instead of going for leniency from a sometimes shockingly prudish ratings board in an attempt to make a film focused on sex addiction more marketable, McQueen and his crew stood by the content they had produced, confident that their storytelling methods were the only way to properly depict the issues within.

Are scarves for real? Are they a "thing" now?
Shame follows New York businessman Brandon (Michael Fassbender) as he goes through his everyday motions in New York City. From the very beginning we see that Brandon lives his life a little differently than most: between sex with random women, furious masturbation, a truly epic porn collection and even the hiring of prostitutes, Brandon seems to fill every open moment in his life with sexual fervor, and not entirely of his own volition. Obviously not comfortable with his situation, he generally avoids personal contact with others, with only married wannabe-womanizing boss David (James Badge Dale) the closest thing he has to a friend. He also ignores repeated attempts by his sister (Carey Mulligan) to make contact, not wanting to allow family back into his life. When she instead appears on his doorstep and having nowhere else to go, Brandon feels his already fragile life slipping past, and the dirty little secrets he's tried to keep hidden begin to make themselves more present and uncomfortable than they've ever been before.

One of many uncomfortable scenes in this film
Now, admit it: when you read the words "sex addiction" earlier, you chuckled a little bit, even if just on the inside. Today it seems like the word "addiction" is tossed around on a whim, but the truth is that as we learn more and more about how the human brain is wired, sex addiction is just another form of mental instability no different than alcoholism, compulsive overeating or drug addiction. When someone becomes addicted to alcohol, drugs or food (or anything, for that matter), the overriding drive behind them is the search for pleasure. Indulging in these habits causes the brain to feel so good that when those things are NOT in the system, it can cause depression and sadness, causing the afflicted to search out that great feeling once more. However, while people seem more understanding when it comes to alcohol or drug abuse (they probably know someone who suffers from those issues), sex addiction doesn't get the same respect in most circles as an actual illness. It's really no different however, as the human orgasm is among the most pleasurable feelings a person can obtain. It's no less reasonable to be infatuated with that as your emotional high as with other means, but the truth is that the idea just hasn't been around as long as other concepts. For that reason it may still be some time before sex addicts are treated on the same level as other sufferers.

"Cream in your coffee" of course takes on a whole new meaning
My whole reason behind that unexpected sociological ramble was that I was impressed how seriously Shame takes its subject matter. While the film is at times difficult to watch, it's obvious that McQueen and crew took their time making sure every detail was exactly what they wanted to portray, and accurate at that. Sex addiction is no joke, and there is very little to suggest that the cast and crew wished to do anything besides treat this problem as a real and valid issue that people face today. While there are some moments that feel a little forced (Brandon having sex with a woman in an alley underneath where someone has scrawled "fuck" on the wall, for instance), McQueen doesn't do anything without a reason. This has both positives and negatives, especially when he has Mulligan sing a painfully slow rendition of "New York, New York" that successfully transmits to the audience its intention but suffers from forcing the fake audience for whom she's performing to act like it was the greatest thing they had ever seen. There are moments throughout in which the story is a little TOO on point with its message, but thankfully these moments are few and are even balanced by truly great sequences, for instance a single-shot of Brandon running through the streets of New York just to blow off some steam.

This film likely won't get a Best Costume nomination...
If there's one more thing Shame does well, it's cementing Fassbender as one of the industry's rising stars. Fassbender has been around for a while, making his television debut in the HBO miniseries Band of Brothers, and running through innocuous smaller roles in 300, Inglourious Basterds and Jonah Hex before truly breaking out this year. Teaming up with McQueen for the first time since his acclaimed performance in 2008's Hunger, Fassbender forces himself into discussions as an obvious front runner for the Best Actor award in any award show going forward. Brandon walks that line between normal life and crippling addiction so finely, and I can't imagine any actor besides Fassbender being able to pull off the level of required subtlety to make that believable, let alone the arguably best performance by a male actor this year. Mulligan is perhaps not as inspired, but I believe that is because there wasn't enough of her. Some of the best scenes in the film feature interaction between Mulligan and Fassbender's siblings, but there could have been a few more scenes of that like to flesh out their past relationship. Her character, Cissy, is an emotionally juvenile free-spirit who is going through some issues of her own, not the least of which is an obvious codependency on others. Mulligan carries this nicely, and as I've never seen An Education this is the first instance in which I get why people appreciate her as an actress. While I do think there could have been more connecting these two interesting characters, that they have an obvious history which is not necessarily being shared is acceptable at least.

Proof that frowns are not a pretty thing
There are a few scenes in the film's late stages in which you might wonder as to how far Brandon's descent will take him, and there's one explicit and extensive sex scene which doesn't FEEL like it's faked. What results is more of the discomfort that you've felt for much of the film's run time, and it's unlikely that the great performances will ever tempt you to revisit this title anytime in the future. Still, Shame keeps hold on its credibility thanks mostly to the level of acting brought to the table by the film's exceptionally talented leads. Perhaps not destined to be one of the year's best, Shame still manages to propel itself near the top, debuting as the #9 film of 2011, just ahead of Fassbender's other 2011 titles X-Men: First Class and Jane Eyre. Michael Fassbender deserves to be a star. Thanks to this body of work on his resume, future years might see just that.

Monday, September 26, 2011

Driving Force

What a mess last weekend was, huh? With three brand new cinema releases vying to make a big payday, none of the big three managed to take the crown. In fact, the film that ended up at number one in the country wasn't even a film initially released THIS YEAR. With the 3D release of popular Disney film The Lion King cleaning house and flexing it's still-potent drawing power, it cut a swath through the latest pretenders, including a remake of an obscure Dustin Hoffman film and a stunted attempt to reignite Sarah Jessica Parker's acting career. But the biggest tragedy of that September weekend is that Drive, a special highlight of the 2011 Cannes Film Festival, suffered somewhat at the hands of an elderly animated carnivore. Granted, Drive and Lion King have different audiences. But for a movie that has so far garnered much praise from critics and screening audiences to finish second at the box office to a title that was first released in June of 1994 is never a good thing, and already interest in this Internet-hyped title has begun to dwindle. This is yet another speed bump in the recent push of actor Ryan Gosling's career, following an Academy Award snub for his lower-class romantic in Blue Valentine (granted, it was a packed field, but I would have at least nominated him). Put together by Danish director Nicolas Winding Refn, Drive only recently appeared on my radar, but quickly became one of my more anticipated September releases thanks to its amazing visuals, unique and talented cast, and its not-so-subtle portrayal of Gosling as the nouveau Steve McQueen.

At least he's not driving angry...
Based on the 2005 James Sallis novel, Drive centers around an unnamed protagonist (Gosling) who works as a mechanic and Hollywood stunt driver by day and moonlights as a freelance getaway driver after the sun goes down. His boss Shannon (Bryan Cranston) wants to expand into stock car racing, and approaches underworld Don Bernie Ross (Albert Brooks) for an investment, convincing him that he has the best driver available. Meanwhile, the driver's potential romance with neighbor and single mother Irene (Carey Mulligan) is cut short when Standard (Oscar Isaac), her husband and the father of her child, returns home from prison. Agreeing to help Standard settle prison debts, our hero is the victim of a deal gone bad, and a life of relative anonymity collapses as he finds himself with many enemies and precious few friends while he tries to right the wrongs that have been committed.

Let's see: guy with the shotgun vs. the big name actor? As if there's any doubt
While the story itself isn't much to speak of, the way it is told is almost masterful. You likely haven't heard of Refn, whose films haven't made much of a name for themselves on this side of the Atlantic. Arguably his biggest film, Bronson, isn't much known outside of breaking in future Hollywood "It" performer Tom Hardy, and that made more impact on DVD than it had in the theater. It must have caught the eye of Gosling however, who was given the chance to name Drive's director when he joined the film. Even early on, you can tell that Refn is a visually-talented director, with many of his camera shots eloquent and beautiful in their execution. He makes every shot perfect, whether framing wide to see an entire scene play out, or closing in on someone's face at the PERFECT angle, not unlike the 2010 Anton Corbijn film The American. While he does some very close shots during car chase scenes, it never serves to confuse the audience as to what is happening on screen, and that is important because I've never seen a director who take that level of responsibility and handle it so smoothly.

Okay, she even LOOKS a little like Michelle Williams...
Refn's talent is such that when he suddenly turns into something of a European Robert Rodriguez, it is so surprising. With a first half of a film that is almost violence free, you don't expect it when the whole thing turns unabashedly bloody. All of the sudden we're subjected to shotgun blasts, exploding heads, stabbings, drownings, crushed skulls, sliced wrists, and just about anything remotely uncomfortable to watch in one setting. I mean, I knew there had to be a reason for the film's R rating, but for the film to take such a turn was so completely unpredictable and speaks to the director's tact and balance. That Refn even makes the violence watchable (albeit through the gaps in your fingers) is stellar, as it is not detracting at all from his amazing camerawork.

Despite his preparation, he never saw Simba coming.
Once again we have another stellar lead role for Gosling, who is destined to become the next big thing in Hollywood, even if audiences aren't completely behind him. Definitely composing an old-school vibe that's  reminiscent of McQueen while still very much being his own artist, Gosling is a force from beginning to end, as he threads those narrow routes from icy emotionless driver to reluctantly warm human being and back again. He is the best part of Drive by a good margin, and continues to be a joy to watch in any medium. It can't be long before he becomes the favorite in a Best Actor race, and who knows, he might just win. Sadly, Carey Mulligan is a mere victim/love interest, although she is at least believable as such. While it may not be as dull as he role in the Wall Street sequel, she's still a far way away from showing the initiative that made her breakout role in 2009's An Education such a novelty. There are some brave casting choices here, but picking Albert Brooks as the film's heavy was one of pure genius. More known for his comedies, Brooks manages to actually steal some of Gosling's limelight (not too much, mind you) with his smarmy crime lord. Bryan Cranston continues to do great work in small roles, a nice side gig to his successful television career. There are some very good smaller parts on the menu, with talented actors taking their share. Between Ron Perlman's menacing gangster and Christina Hendricks as an icy stick-up artist Refn seems to choose the perfect embodiment of his characters. And that doesn't even account for Oscar Isaac, who we should hate because he was in prison and rivals the Driver for Irene's affections but is really a pretty good guy. Most of the film roles aren't cliches, and even those that are get some extra credit from the viability of those playing them, a rare sight indeed.

He's just about ready for his Oscar, America
In this age of 3D shark-jumping, plot-less scripts, and billion dollar motion pictures, a beautifully-shot and remarkably intelligent film is difficult enough to immediately find, let alone one that is successful. While the film sometimes slows down to a point where you could call it more patient than its audience, Drive overcomes this by making even these slow moments worth watching with enough eye-candy to make it one of the most visually appealing movies of the year. Opulence alone would be enough to place it among the year's best, but the excellent direction and amazing acting propel it to the top of my Top 10 list, square at #1. When you put this much talent together, good things can happen. And when that talent successfully puts something together with out-of-the-box thinking, it can only get better.