A Trip To The Movies: Review – “Love & Mercy” 9.2.15

The second film in two nights in a row that I decided to catch in the theater, was one that I knew little to next to nothing about other than that it was supposedly an autobiographical account of the life, work, and career of the Beach Boys’ Brian Wilson. Anybody who read my recent “The Gift” review, may have caught that the reason why I decided on seeing that film on the night that I did, was because another film was sold out. Well, that just happened to be this film. And not only was it sold out, there was a line around the block about 30 minutes or so before to see it when my friend and I arrived. Sometimes, as was the case with this one, certain films fall under my radar. And every so often, I’ll happen to be made aware of them simply because I see so many movies. And going along with that, I’m constantly aware of what other people are seeing. Now I don’t mean this in the commercial sense, as all I would have to do is look at weekend box office reports come Monday morning to see what the majority of people are seeing. What I mean is, especially when it comes to films that open in second run theaters such as this one did, I keep my eye out specifically for more indie-oriented films that stay running for multiple weeks. For the most part, what this means mainly is that they are doing exceptionally well with audiences. So, after being turned away from this film this past Saturday night, which admittedly very rarely happens, I made it a point to catch it at my first opportunity on an off night during the week.

The story itself is somewhat of a parallel one. In that it focuses on its main character, the legendary Beach Boys musician Brian Wilson, but depicts his life in two separate eras. The 1960’s era twenty-something Wilson (played by Paul Dano, who was just recently reminded of his talent as an actor having just seen “There Will Be Blood” (2007) ) and the middle-aged late fourty-something Wilson (played by John Cusack). The film opens in the latter of the two eras, with Cusack’s Wilson sitting in a Cadillac at a car dealership, where he meets his middle life love interest played by Elizabeth Banks. It becomes apparent straight from the get go that there’s something just slightly off about the older Wilson. But even so, Banks’ character takes a liking to him, mostly because of his celebrity (at first anyway). This is much to the chagrin of the older Wilson’s doctor/”caretaker” (played by Paul Giamatti). You see Giamatti’s got his hand and control in literally everything that the older Wilson does – to his inevitable purchase of the car, to the medications he takes, to where he goes and what he does, who he dates, even down to what he eats. As Cusack’s older Wilson is obviously haunted by some sort of mental illness that we’re unsure of. Then we flashback to the earlier days of Dano’s version of Wilson. A co-member of the one of the most successful bands in America at the time, the Beach Boys, and we get to see Wilson in his heyday – the multi-talented singer, songwriter, and composer, who it becomes clear is the brains and genius behind the group. We are given several glimpses into the creative processes in which Wilson penned some of the most better known, popular songs in the Beach Boys catalog. Though along with this process of his rise of becoming one of the most talented, better known musicians of his time, he is faced with adversity all around, most notably by his disapproving father – one of those “nothing is ever good enough” guys, his difficulties with the other members of the group, as well as the psychosis that seems to be developing as he gets more famous and more detached to what some may consider to be reality. The rest of the film then jumps both forward and back in time, with the two subplots involving the older Cusack’s Wilson’s love affair with Banks’ character, along with Dano’s Wilson’s mental dismantling as he tries to maintain his sanity and continue on with the group he made famous.

This wound up being a brilliant film that really dived into and gave you unprecedented access into the mind of one of the industry’s most talented artists in music history. Let me start with the performances – both Paul Dano and John Cusack are astounding in their respective roles as the early and middle-aged Wilson. And in my opinion, are so good and so convincing that they both deserve some awards attention come the end of the year. It’s Dano’s best performance since 2007’s “There Will Be Blood” and Cusack’s best role since 2000’s “High Fidelity”. Paul Giamatti is almost equally as good, although in a much smaller supporting role. He’s a detestable, lecherous character much like Wilson’s father, both whose main agendas seem to be to manipulate the “supposed” mental illness of Wilson (the film makes the argument that his illness was perpetuated by external circumstances) with the sole purpose of profiteering off of genius. Then come the technical components of the film – from the brilliant costume design and “look” from frequent Wes Anderson DP (director of photography) Robert Yeomen that captures the pastiche look of the 1960’s with the utmost authenticity. The script by Oren Moverman (the Oscar nominated “The Messenger” (2009)) is also top-notch and always seems to be trying to stay as true and genuine as possible to the real Wilson story. Then there’s the original music by Oscar-winning composer Atticus Ross (“The Social Network” (2010)) which plays as somewhat of an “underscore”, though undoubtedly well done, for the best scenes of the film. In which we’re given a fly on the wall access to the in-the-moment live creative process that would ultimately produce some of the Beach Boys greatest hits (which should please fans of both film and music aficionado’s alike) and had me sitting back with a big smile on my face as I tapped my feet to these songs that are forever etched in our memories. The film’s pacing goes along at a breathtaking speed, as the story engages and totally immerses the viewer into the world of Wilson and his many trials and tribulations he faces along his own life’s way. It’s a great testament to one of the most talented, yet mentally damaged artists in music history, that left both me and the rest of the audience glued to our seats, as the ending credits rolled and we are given the linear notes into Wilson’s rebirth, now in late adulthood, following the success of his most successful work as a solo artist – 2004’s “Smile” complete with a live performance of “Love & Mercy” sung by the real Wilson himself. And not one person stood up until the song was over even though the credits continued to roll. This is among the better of the films I’ve seen this year, and while although it’s not perfect, it’s sure to be universally likable and is done with the utmost sincerity and respect for the artist in which it depicts. A top 10 contender and one that should easily place a spot on my Honorable Mentions list come the end of this year, catch this film if you can, as I can assure you you won’t be disappointed.

[B+]

Advertisements

A Trip (Back) To The Movies: Review – “There Will Be Blood” (2007) 8.22.15

This marked my fourth weekend in a row taking a trip out to see yet another in a list of seven films that falls into the complete filmography of American writer/director Paul Thomas Anderson which is being shown as a retrospective at the Portland Art Museum. I love pretty much all of Anderson’s work to date. And as mentioned in a previous review, I would consider both “Boogie Nights” (1997) and “Magnolia” (1999) to both be 2 films that would take a spot in my top 10 favorite films of all time. And Anderson being the only director to have more than one film in my top 10. So with that said, of all of his films this was the one that I was the most interested in revisiting. Mostly because I remember being rather indifferent about it the first time I saw it on the big screen when I first moved to Portland over 8 years ago. Since then, my indifference has only grown. As I have refused to watch it on DVD or anything else other than the theater. And since it’s taken me this long to be able to do so. I have spent many years away from this film thinking of Anderson more in terms of his influence on me from the 2 other films that preceded it mentioned above. It’s almost as if my memory of seeing it that first time, it having been so long ago now, got shrouded and I could only remember certain key images and half scenes. So in walking into it today, with a chance to catch it in 35mm (the original print of how the director intended for you to see it – awfully rare now in the day of digital) I found myself both enthusiastic and also slightly not expecting of what I was going to find, several years later, with a fresh new set of eyes.

I won’t spend time divulging into the film’s plot as like with many of these “trips back to the movies” I’m imagining many people who are going to read this have already seen the film and know what it’s about. But what I will do in the paragraph that follows is give a more fleshed out review. Of what I thought about the film this time around being in that it was my first time seeing it since its 2007 release.

“There Will Be Blood” winds up being an excoriating study of greed, the constructive and destructive powers of competitiveness, and people’s ambition. It’s a vastly cinematic, darkly personal tale of one man seemingly without one single redemptive quality. There’s a vague nuance in the way it’s filmed, which became much more apparent to me when seeing it this time around. Anderson decides to concentrate on long, almost silent-like passages and huge, open panoramic shots (from long time Anderson DP Robert Elswit, who provides some tremendous cinematography (which he got an Oscar win for) ) in both size and scope. It delves to the most painful depths of a man who, by some standards could be looked at as a success or maybe even genius. But Anderson seems to want to probe much deeper and deliver us a story about how this success and genius could lead someone so far down a path, that they wind up being what psychologists would call a sociopath.

But really, all I’ve talked about here so far are merely the great underlying messages and technical achievements that are contained within the film. The true brunt of the film is in Daniel Day Lewis’ methodical performance as an anti-hero oilman Daniel Plainview. A man who is willing to turn all of nature’s vast number of resources and turn them into monetary bounty, regardless of the cost it has on him, or the rest of the world for that matter. Day Lewis’s character becomes the poster boy for what has and still continues to hurt America and the rest of the world: oil. The greed, violence, and aggression that come from it, the religious fervor, the paranoia behind its policies, and the betrayal of our own people because of its Capitalist ideologies. All are brilliantly mirrored through one man, Daniel Plainview, and we as a viewer get to see in first hand account the harsh impact of what all these things can do to a man. Similarly to Al Pacino in Brian DePalma’s “Scarface” (1983) but set around another boom-or-bust era, it looks at things from a different context but exposes the same universal truths. Both of these stories revolve around men who are so hungry, so lusting for wealth and power, that their quest in creating it for themselves makes monsters out of them. Day Lewis here was nothing short of memorizing in an almost “I want to look away but I can’t” scene stealing performance that I can honestly say, even having just seen the film, that it’s a career best one for the undeniably gifted actor. There were several moments throughout while watching it, in taking an intent look at his performance this time around, that allowed me to come to the conclusion that I did above. It’s an incredible feat from a still then young (32 years of age) writer/director in Anderson, who by this point had proven in less than a decade that he is one modern-day America’s true cinematic auteurs, while acting once again as a reminder to the true genius of Daniel Day Lewis, who eschews every frame and marches to the beat of Anderson’s drum in expert fashion. It’s a damn fine film and I can understand why people have and still do consider it to be Anderson’s masterpiece. However, I will take it one step further and call it not only Anderson’s but Daniel Day Lewis’ masterpiece too. Because well, this picture would only be half as great as it turned out being if it didn’t have one without the other.

[A]

Paul Thomas Anderson’s – There Will Be Blood – w/Daniel-Day Lewis and Paul Dano

Saturday, Aug 22, 2015, 4:00 PM

Whitsell Auditorium
1219 SW Park Avenue Portland, OR

2 Portland Film Enthusiasts Went

Another selection as part of The Portland Art Museum’s ongoing career retrospective of one of the greatest American directors in modern day cinema.Synopsis: Anderson’s features, while always sharpening their edges as they go, have never been hard-as-nails as this adaptation of Upton Sinclair’s novel OIL!. Academy Award winner for Best Actor Daniel…

Check out this Meetup →

Review: ‘The Rover’ 9.7.14

Writer/Director David Michod’s sophomore follow up to his electrifying debut – 2010’s “Animal Kingdom”, which burst on the scene with the type of energy that Quentin Tarantino did with 1992’s “Reservoir Dogs”. Except whereas Tarantino was sensationalizing the gangster lifestyle, Michod takes an opposite approach, showing them as beaten down souls riddled with paranoia who have backed themselves up into a corner where there’s no way out. There was nothing attractive or alluring about the lifestyle of the gangsters depicted in “Animal Kingdom”. But much like Tarantino did, Michod essentially came out of nowhere, and made one of the better (if not the best) modern day films about crime families. Which he in turn caught the eye of many on the film making landscape as one of the most promising new talents to watch (hence why he got a coveted slot at this year’s prestigious Cannes Film Festival lineup of 18).

Michod once again finds himself continuing to explore themes that he did in “Animal Kingdom”. Themes such as the nature of violence, where it derives from, and the moral complexities that lay behind it. The loose synopsis is that we are shown the aftermath of what appears to be a crime committed that went awry, and we follow the 3 men who get away. During a shoot out they crash, and hot wire a car owned by Guy Pearce’s troubled, elusive, and undeniably ruthless character.   They just messed with the wrong guy. Pearce follows them for no reason simply other than to get his car back. While in the process, he discovers one of the men who didn’t get away and was left behind for dead, played magnificently here by Robert Pattinson (anybody who still think’s this guy is just a pretty face has to look no further than here to prove themselves wrong). The Pearce character then takes the Pattinson character under his wing, and goes to seek revenge against those that left him behind.

This an incredibly dark, gritty film where the violence is unrestrained and very explosive. One of the film’s greatest strengths, and a nod to Michod as a film maker, is in its ability to show such levels of extreme violence but only at very intermittent times throughout the film. And unlike Tarantino, who’s violence can across as sensationalized and somewhat exciting, Michod is on the opposite plane. It’s what I’d call restrained yet very serious violence. When a gun shot or a round goes off you can almost feel it. I also thoroughly enjoyed the film’s score, which had an almost off-kilter sound, similar to recent scores from Radiohead’s Johnny Greenwood that he’s done with Paul Thomas Anderson’s films since 2007’s “There Will Be Blood”. I thought its obtuse use of sounds lended itself well to the story of characters who are on the brink of insanity. It’s also incredibly well shot, using the Australian outback as almost a second character, as all of this violence abrupts amongst a quiet rural topography. Again, another effective tool use by Michod. This turned out to be much like “Animal Kingdom” another brilliant film. And proved to us once again why writer/director David Michod is a force to be reckoned with. I’ve already cleared a spot for it on my list of honorable mentions (#’s 10-20) which depending on its resonant staying power, could even stand a chance at cracking my top 10 at year’s end.

Grade: B+