The Walk (2015)

This movie is very cleverly narrated by a charming Joseph Gordon Levitt as Philippe Petit in part French, part French-accented English. He sounds really good and he apparently learned to speak fluently for the role. I really liked the narration. It is direct and intimate with the viewer and it allows the viewer special insight into what anyone else would deem suicidal. In fact, the film opens with him staring directly down the lens of the camera. And from the beginning, you are welcomed into a surreal world as the camera zooms out to show Petit in the torch of the Statue of Liberty overlooking the Twin Towers. And then we are transported to France through a bit of globe magic for a sequence in black-and-white. And all of these little intricacies make the first hour interesting in what is an otherwise uninteresting setup before we get to the titular walk. But anticipation and excitement grows.

The walk itself is really well done. The visual effects and dizzying camerawork make you really feel like you're up there with him a hundred stories up. Throughout the film, the visual effects, though sometimes small, are really cool. And we delight in seeing the crazy joy sweep across his face when he is out on his wire despite our fear of falling that is not present in the man that is actually at risk. 

The Revenant (2015)

This is a monstrosity of a movie. Grueling, uncompromising, and incredibly painful--to film and to watch. We feel their pain too. It is a visionary achievement in film making with breathtaking nature shots and violence galore. The characters are crazy and the filmmakers are a little crazy too for being so ambitious. This movie is two and a half hours of agony and torture but you can't look away because it is beautiful and visually stunning. Though the run time is way too long. I could have done without the Powaqa subplot. I think the subplot tries to give motivation for all the killing but at the same time I got the sense that the film uses the wild west as an excuse for the violence.

Let's start with the opening battle. Inarritu and Lubezki have already proved that they are masters at the tracking shot (see Birdman) and this super complex battle scene looks like one long bloody take. The shot moves fluidly between the forest and the river, even dipping in and out of the water. I happened to notice some really intricate sound mixing as well. The ambient score sort of just waits in the background, and all of sudden maybe a few minutes before the end of the scene, the music overcomes the dialogue and the sound effects and this music is the epitome of the sound of bloodshed. And then the music fades back. Throughout the film, the music enhances the atmosphere of doom and the untame wildnerness. And there is an excellent balance between the music and the dialogue and the sounds of nature, each alternating their turn in the limelight. The strict use of natural light and colors enhances the outdoors-y wildnerness aura. You see Leo's warm breath in the cold air fog up the camera lens

Then there is the bear scene we have all heard so much about. It is excruciatingly painful to watch. And Leonardo DiCaprio wails and screams like there was a real bear mauling him (it is so lifelike and he is tossed around so violently that you really think twice about this bear). This scene is devoid of music. You hear just the natural surroundings. You feel like you are in the scene, being attacked by a grizzly bear. And if there is any mistaking the audience being entrenched in the action, in the final shot Leo stares right into the camera, and we hear his familiar labored breathing.

Leo is a man unmistakably dedicated to his craft. For much of the movie he acts without words, just enduring pain in his eyes. He went through hell and back, rising from the dead to portray this character. He ate the raw livers and slept in the dead carcasses. He suffered for his role visibly. And the whole cast and crew suffered great pains to make this vision a reality, to fulfill Inarritu's insane and indeed monstrous vision. 

Gun Crazy (1950)

This is a uniquely American film with its gun-obsessed protagonists and wild cowboy-outfit wearing female lead. But the setting is the dead giveaway. Gun Crazy differs from the other noir films we've seen because the setting is not in the city. The genre typically favors urban settings for the grittiness of the streets. In contrast, Gun Crazy takes place on the road between small towns between the Great Plains and the west coast. The one similarity in the setting is the climactic scene at the meat processing plant, which represents industry more associated with the city. The neat rows of endless carcasses represents the order that they seek to disrupt. But the unclean carcasses are symbolic of the untame nature of the west.

There is a significant scene at the carnival where Laurie and Bart (the original Bonnie and Clyde!) meet.  The carnival is the most exciting thing that happens to a small town in America. And carnivals are stereotypically seedy, which is sort of a noir-ish quality. Notably only the opening scene has the giveaway night and rain combo. But the closing scene attempts to replicate that atmosphere. In the California wilderness, Laurie and Bart stumble through a swamp. They get soaked, recreating the wet and dark feeling. And the fog is very doom-and-gloom.

The road represents a journey and the car takes the protagonists to the end of the proverbial road. Once Laurie and Bart meet, Bart is doomed to a certain fate. Laurie lacks the conscience that it was made clear that Bart possessed. But she slowly chips away at his conscience until he finally ultimately shoots to kill for the first time. And though they meet a tragic end, I think it is actually an ironically triumphant ending for Bart. His single kill allows him to reclaim his masculinity by overpowering the dangerous woman that made him change. He gains a handle on his own fate. There was no chance they would escape alive, and I think they both knew that, but he at least went out on his own terms.  

Trumbo (2015)

Bryan Cranston proves that he is a master of acting in all mediums. After his unforgettable turn as Walter White in Breaking Bad and a run on Broadway in 2014, he takes on a leading role in a film. I love the scenes when Cranston is in full screenwriting mode at his typewriter, or in the tub literally cutting and taping together lines. In a way, Trumbo is similar to Walter White. Like Walter, Trumbo has to innovate, adapt to survive in a world that is working against him.  Helen Mirren is also fabulous as Hedda Hopper, who is intimidating to even the most powerful men in Hollywood. Louis CK was pleasantly surprising in a role that I wouldn't have pegged him for.

The story is well done, if a bit cliched at times. Sometimes the speeches are a bit too soapbox-y about American ideals and what not. But I do like movies about movies, especially in the classic Hollywood era. And it is a smart movie. The Hollywood Ten were undoubtedly smart, trying to pull one over the House Un-American Activities Committee and subsequently defeating the blacklist. 

Scarlet Street (1945)

What makes a woman a femme fatale--or more specifically what makes Kitty March a femme fatale? The word fatal implies that death is involved. But the evil female does not directly kill the man. Her evil is more sinister than that. She leaves Chris Cross tormented and haunted by the climactic murder. Why is he so tortured by this event? Because it is so out of the ordinary for his character.  Femme fatales are so dangerous because they drive you to do things you otherwise would not do. It is not simply a matter of seducing you to get what they want but about fundamentally changing the man. I think this is what makes Kitty a crueler femme fatale than Phyllis Dietrichson from Double Indemnity and it is what makes the ending all the more devastating. Chris is the loyal, simple and rather plain company man. He is vulnerable, in a loveless marriage and has lost his youth (and perhaps missed out on his youth). He is perfectly ordinary with a safe and respectable job and a normal hobby. But Kitty takes this man and changes him. You get the sense that it is not all her doing at first, because Johnny really pushes her to go through with the plan. After all, the plot is set off by a meeting in a bar in which both sides wildly (and almost implausibly) misunderstand each other. But in the murder scene in which she maniacally laughs, you see her true colors.

Compare to Neff in Double Indemnity. He is reluctant to take part in murder at first, but he soon devises his own intricate plan and he gets really into it early on in the movie. It does not seem like Phyllis created evil in him, rather she awakened a dormant evil. But good old reliable Chris would never kill--moreover, he would never steal from his employer who has trusted him for decades.  And I think this is reinforced when he almost takes money from the safe the first time, but then he decides against it. At this point, he still had a grasp on his true self.

The Johnny-Kitty dynamic is interesting too. Dan Duryea plans a devilis bad guy. And Kitty acts more naturally when she is with Johnny. But when she is with Chris, she is acting. She over exaggerates her speech and her motions. Joan Bennett is acting as a woman who is acting. And though that is obvious to the viewer, Chris is blinded by her appeal. And though Johnny is the source of the evil, Kitty is the face of the evil and she is the most sinister because it is she who manipulates Chris into losing his former good-natured self.

Predicting the 2016 Oscar Nominations

The Oscar nominations will be revealed tomorrow. And here's the thing that makes this year interesting: there is no clear front runner. It is a wide open game. Looking forward to some surprises. These are my predictions in the major categories (Things I've already seen in bold). I filled out my full predictions on Gold Derby, and the result would be a pack-leading 10 nominations for Mad Max: Fury Road, and 9 each for The Martian and Carol.

Best Picture- up to 10 nominees
1. Spotlight
2. The Revenant
3. The Martian
4. The Big Short
5. Carol
6. Room
7. Brooklyn
8. Mad Max: Fury Road
9. Bridge of Spies
10. Straight Outta Compton

Best Director
1. Ridley Scott - The Martian
2. Tom McCarthy - Spotlight
3. Alejandro Gonzalez Inarritu- The Revenant
4. Todd Haynes - Carol
5. George Miller - Mad Max: Fury Road

Best Actor
1. Leonardo DiCaprio - The Revenant
2. Eddie Redmayne - The Danish Girl
3. Michael Fassbender - Steve Jobs
4. Matt Damon - The Martian
5. Bryan Cranston - Trumbo

Best Actress
1. Brie Larson - Room
2. Saoirse Ronan - Brooklyn
3. Cate Blanchett - Carol
4. Jennifer Lawrence - Joy
5. Alicia Vikander - The Danish Girl

Best Supporting Actor
1. Mark Rylance - Bridge of Spies
2. Mark Ruffalo - Spotlight
3. Sylvester Stallone - Creed
4. Idris Elba - Beasts of No Nation
5. Jacob Tremblay - Room

Best Supporting Actress
1. Kate Winslet - Steve Jobs
2. Rooney Mara - Carol
3. Rachel McAdams - Spotlight
4. Helen Mirren - Trumbo
5. Jane Fonda - Youth

Best Original Screenplay
1. Inside Out
2. The Hateful Eight
3. Spotlight
4. Ex Machina
5. Bridge of Spies

Best Adapted Screenplay
1. Steve Jobs
2. Carol
3. The Martian
4. Brooklyn
5. The Big Short

Update: I scored 8/8 in Best Picture, though I technically had Carol over Bridge of Spies. 3/5 in Best Director (cause Lenny Abrahamson for Room over Ridley Scott for The Martian was a big surprise).  5/5 in Best Actor, 4/5 in Best Actress (though Alicia Vikander did get a nomination for The Danish Girl, just in the supporting category), 3/5 in Best Supporting Actor, 3/5 in Supporting Actress, 4/5 in Original Screenplay (surprised they didn't go for Tarantino cause they usually do), and 4/5 in Adapted Screenplay (I am devastated that Aaron Sorkin didn't get nominated for his brilliant screenplay). Just 67% overall in all categories.

Double Indemnity (1944)

A prime example of film noir, Double Indemnity does a lot of interesting things with light. Film noir is often characterized by a dimly lit visual style. This fosters a claustrophobic atmosphere. And this claustrophobia is represented by Phyllis Dietrichson, who talks about being trapped in her marriage by her husband. She is visually trapped by the shadows cast by the venetian blinds. The shadows are reminiscent of prison bars, appropriate for a pair of criminals like Phyllis and Neff. The venetian blind shadows cleverly allow the viewer to see half of the frame in light, while mysteriously obscuring the other half.

The scenes are sometimes so dark that it is sometimes hard to make out the figures. At the same time, it is so dark that when there is a small ray of light, the contrast is highly accentuated. When Neff enters Phyllis’s dark house (she just turned off all the lamps), you see his shadow come through the door before you see him. You see an ominous cutout of a man in a hat. It is a classic conservative look for a respectable company man. Compare Neff to the femme fatale. In Phyllis’s first scene, there is a bright aura about her—from her platinum blonde hair to her white towel and her fair skin, she glows beneath the dark archway. Perhaps the lighting is deceptive. Neff is struck by her beauty and her light, permitting her to seduce Neff into a compromising situation.

            

The film has a feel of doom-and-gloom, thanks to the dark lighting and the unbalanced composition. This tone of the film contributes to the fatalistic attitude of the characters, whose fates are predetermined. The metaphorical trolley is headed towards the cemetery and Phyllis and Neff cannot escape this fate. In a brilliant directorial decision, Neff narrates the story in a series of confessional flashbacks. These events already happened and there is no changing the past. The story begins at the edge of the cemetery and it is already too late to turn back because the damage is done.