Review: 'They Came Together'
It would seem that Hollywood has packaged up and sold romantic comedies, what with the ridiculous casting of the two hunky romantic interests, impossibly unreal circumstances, and general overly-cutesy-ness, to within an inch of their life. So much so that the genre itself, edging ever closer to the young adult Nicolas Sparks-aimed audiences, has begun to feel like it's all one moment away from collapsing in on itself from the sheer weight of convention and cliche that is stuffed into each movie. So leave it to comedian absurdists David Wain and his comedy/producing partner Michael Showalter to send up the entire conflated genre in the duo's new merciless rom-com parody, They Came Together.
If you're already raising an eyebrow over this movie's title, wondering if you're perhaps reading it the right way, don't worry; you are. After involving himself with such straight-ahead and mildly amusing fare as 2008's Role Models and 2012's Wanderlust, director David Wain returns to his earliest, most personal, and strongest comedic roots, in drumming up this slapstick, self-referential spoof.
As in Wain's breakout film, the wonderfully off-the-wall Wet Hot American Summer, which gave many of Hollywood's most coveted leading comedians their first big break (including one closeted camp counselor played by Bradley Cooper), They Came Together is as much a hilariously dialed-in parody as it is a fantastically crafted absurdist comedy. The non-stop jokes that are churned out from start to finish here, from some of the funniest and most familiar faces working today, make this as rewarding a film as it easy easy to watch, making it one to watch at any time with laughs that deliver.
The non-stop jokes that are churned out from start to finish here, from some of the funniest and most familiar faces working today, make this as rewarding a film as it easy easy to watch, making it one to watch at any time with laughs that deliver.
Starring as our romantic leads, of which their characters flat out refer to themselves as in describing "the corny romantic comedy love story" that is 'the story of how they met' are Paul Rudd as Joel and Amy Poehler as Molly, two of America's most beloved funny people in roles here that, as actors who typically only play 'characters with quirk,' are able to run wild with the anything-goes format (as they did in the aforementioned Wet Hot American Summer). Rudd as Joel capitalizes on his aw-shucks everyman character, serving as the successful in business (he works at a corporate candy store) yet not-so-much with love (he gets his heart broken early on by ex Tiffany (Cobie Smulders) do-gooder, while Poehler punches up her lovably goofy and clumsy self to the fullest degree as looking-for-love independent candy store owner (go ahead and start connecting the dots of what the movie's main conflict will be) Molly, both of whom hit their marks and land the jokes as effortlessly as possible, as if the whole thing was shot in under a month with basically all of their friends. Oh, wait...
The plot here more or less takes the back seat in this whole charade, except for the times when the movie comments on how it's following its own cliche storyline (either the self-references here will urge you to keep watching, or you're going to get fed up very quickly). We see the story of single Joel and Molly being set up by their respective friends at a Halloween party (their coincidental arrival results in the belief that "they came together"), as well as their initial disgust with the other, which turns into their slowly falling in love, which leads to their finding out each others' threatening professions and their breaking up, followed by their getting back together, and there you have the basic framework of the movie. But this isn't where the filmmakers and actors are concerned in exploring- oh, no. Moments like Molly and Joel earnestly connecting for the first time over their shared love of "fiction books," a "Who's On Third?" styled bar-conversation that is milked to glory, and the continuous reference of how the city of New York "is like a character itself" in the whole movie (added treat if you stay throughout the closing credits, where the city is thanked and once again referenced 'like a character itself') are where the movie becomes the sum of its parts.
The jokes come fast and loose, as every scene, and nearly every line of dialogue is flipped for another knee-slapping and snare-shot moment- some more effective than others. While the film doubles down on its relentless joke-making, and while it certainly all feels at least consistent, this may not be everyone's style of humor. And it's not a stretch or hard to imagine that the cast might have phoned in some or more parts of the movie, what with everyone's demanding schedules with such important projects that the movie felt more like hanging out with friends rather than "The Next Paul-Rudd/Amy-Poehler Movie.) The distinction here in its "dumbness" is so fine a line that is being walked that it would take an experienced comedic veteran to really make the humor happen in shaping the project. Fortunately, Wain and Showalter, as co-writers and co-producers, display a finely trained eye and comedic sense to give this a legitimacy all its own, and the time spent with all of these talented individuals makes for truly worthwhile comedy.
With an impressive ensemble appearing here (not unlike Wet Hot American Summer), including Ed Helms, Jason Mantzoukas, Bill Hader, Ellie Kemper, and a hilarious Christopher Meloni as Joel's demanding boss Roland, the whole event feels like a fun, shared get-together with friends, which is exactly what it is. Everyone here rises to the occasion (or rather, appropriately settles into the slacker effort) and delivers with their "cliche" parts, including 'the scheming rival' Trevor (Michael Ian Black, who completes the comedy trio Stella, along with Wain and Showalter).
This may be a first in my review-writing career, but I will now end this review and simply tell you to go out and see this movie (or was I already at the review's most logical end? I'll never tell). If you're looking for a movie with non-stop laughs, however "dumb" and "low-brow" they may be, They Came Together is certainly the movie to see. Even despite its fast and loose, if not too fast and loose production, it still offers bounds upon bounds of laughs and an all around heir of fun that will satisfy Wain and co. fans to no end as well as audiences who might also have a shared love of "fiction books."
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TPzHRXUcUWU
'Snowpiercer' Combines Sci-Fi Expanse and Art House Intimacy
Even though it's summer, there are still places where the sun doesn't shine, and that sentiment extends to this graphic novel film adaptation, a wildly imaginative sci-fi romp with enough action and ambition to prove its place alongside summer's other theatrical offerings. Snowpiercer is a tour-de-force, uniquely-crafted powerhouse of a movie that, like the fast-paced train it's named after, charges ever-forward with such uncompromising force and vision that it leaves behind any semblance of what you might expect from a typical summer action flick.
Let me repeat: this is a very certain kind of film. It's strangely familiar and unfamiliar at the same time, as all of its cinematic stylings extend to showcase its own understanding of past cinema and the slowly-crystalizing ideas of new. It's imaginative in its world-building, inventive in its genre-mixing, and, certainly, ambitious in its movie-making. Even though the entirety of the film takes place inside the confines of a series of train cars, it's among one of the most dazzling and head-spinning experiences to be injected into the action genre, adding a politically conscious tone in its wider tragedy of moral questioning and class warfare. Yet the ever-odd filmic styles that are combined here only attempt to serve the groundbreaking vision of the source material which the movie is based on: the 1982 French graphic novel Le Transperceneige.
Snowpiercer's comic-styled origins reveal more of the specific style and artistic bend that's really fueling the movie's engine. Snowpiercer tells story of a failed global warming experiment (performed in the year 2014) that turns the planet into a frozen ice box. We are introduced to the last of the human race, the poorest of which eat gelatin-like "protein blocks" and live under guard by the utilitarian government-state in the back of the tank-like train, that has been making the same cyclical trip for the past seventeen years. Of course, this being the day that the lower class finally has had enough, they set in motion their plan: to charge through each car to make their way to the front of the train and free themselves from their enslavement.
Even though the entirety of the film takes place inside the confines of a series of train cars, it's among one of the most dazzling and head-spinning experiences injected into the action genre.
It would be easier if he had his superpowers to lead the uprising's mad dash, but here, Chris Evans, as man (and muscle) of the people, Curtis, swaps his Captain America boy scout bravado for a bearded rough and tumble civilian who leads his people in the fight to overcome their oppressors. Yet Evans' stone-faced, cool-headed pragmatism and butt-kicking seems to only remind us that the biggest advantage of being a graphic novel character is that sometimes the most powerful asset is to a story is deft and nuanced, which the comic book artists can nail down with the precision each moment needs. Here, though, the internal strife and emotional wear that Curtis and his fellow emaciated team suffer through only hangs on to the movie like the rest of the combusting engine parts do, and so the audience is deprived of any deeper emotional connection.
With a surrounding cast including Jamie Bell as fiery youngster Edgar, Octavia Spencer as single mother Tanya, and John Hurtas the wise Gilliam, excitable talent is present here and add real personality and warmth inside the cold prison of a set. Yet as we move ever forward through the train do we meet our most cracked-out characters, including the devilishly bizarre Tilda Swinton as police leader Mason. Also enlisted in Curtis' crusade are Kang-ho Song as the lock-picking loon Namgoong Misoo and Ah-sung Ko as his meek daughter, Yona, who mostly speak in Korean during their time onscreen. Throughout the perilous journey, and amidst military warfare, it is Curtis and the father-daughter of Namgoog and Yona who serve as the film's primary characters.
As our heroes advance through each stage, and the movie does have that laterally-moving narrative style, new worlds are unlocked, making for some of the movie's most worthwhile entertainment. Just as the world of auto-mechanic decor was finished being set up and accepted, we are immediately thrust into a new world of higher-class living, complete with cars featuring aquariums and terrariums that feed the socialites, as well as (in one of the movie's funniest scene-stealing moments) a hilariously fascist elementary school classroom, a restaurant, and night club. The worlds that continue to open up also add more and more information about how things came to be, which keeps us further captivated and invested in the story. However, clocking in at just over two hours, it's going to take a bit of patience in keeping up with the whole charade, but with such fun world-building in art and production design, the experience remains rich and wholly engrossing.
South Korean director Bong Joon Ho, making his first English-speaking feature film (after making 2009's Mother), brings with him a blazing imagination and commitment to bringing this story to the big screen, in all its glories and spoils. Snowpiercer's untraditional, stylized storytelling combines sci-fi expanse and art house intimacy, but without its more tender handling of the human spirit of Curtis and company, this train's most mettle will only entertain by making your head spin as it rockets past you.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bFpfJNiUDpY
Review: 'Hanna Ranch'
It is beyond proving that there are an infinite number of real stories that need to be told onscreen, and modern documentaries are embracing this at a rapid rate. One of these small stories is Hanna Ranch, a Colorado-produced documentary that will be most relevant to in-state audiences, but provides plenty of emotion and significance for others to enjoy.
The film bridges a gap between two forms of documentary: environmental cautionary tale and authentic family drama. In this setting, both conflicts are in the forefront of discussion. Ranching and raising cattle is one of the foundations for the state of Colorado and brought many of the earliest settlers into the land. It’s practice requires a good chunk land to properly graze cattle, but an even larger amount of land if the rancher strives for long-term success and environmental conservation.
The Hanna Ranch was founded under environmental practices that were sustainable long before saving the earth was a trendy hashtag. In fact, few cattle ranchers adopted these principles because they required more time and more deliberation. As a result, the Hanna Ranch has outlasted all of its neighbors through massive urban development, thanks to a handful of family members who have devoted their lives toward the property. Colorado Springs is no longer a quaint farm town but Colorado’s second largest city, and Hanna Ranch has taken desperate measures just to hang on.
Colorado Springs is no longer a quaint farm town but Colorado’s second largest city, and Hanna Ranch has taken desperate measures just to hang on.
Kirk Hanna, who group with six siblings on his father’s ranch in Colorado Springs, CO, attempted to save this ranch late into his life when everyone else seemed to be giving up on this old lifestyle. Featured in the book Fast Food Nation, his care for the environment dubbed him as “the eco-cowboy.” After his death, his wife and daughters continue to have to fight hard against pressure from external family members and the rapidly developing world around them to care for a piece of property with so much historical and agricultural significance. While everyone else in the family wanted to cash in and make a profit by covering the land with asphalt, the few who cared to hold onto it have managed to do so, but continue an uphill battle as ranching feels more like a figment of the past.
The film documents the history of the ranch from its inception in the 1940’s until the present day through a good amount of historical footage mixed with interviews of friends and family of the ranch. The best praise is that it covers both territory of environmental education and also shows all the sides of the family through their turmoil. But it may be a swan song for family ranching: what could have been amplified is ways that audience members can help the cause. Even if they are few they must exist beyond the documentary. Also, there are a few holes in the story, and missing elements that could have led to more intrigue but leave the audience just a little short of necessary information, the tell-tale sign that this is a micro-budget project. Even for a runtime of 75 minutes, the film moves rather slowly at times, retracing its steps just a few too many times. Overall, like any good documentary it exposes a world that would otherwise be missing from news coverage, and on a personal level I am happy to see movies being made and produced in my home state of Colorado.
Hanna Ranch has been screening in various cities and festivals across the US, and is now also available for purchase on iTunes.
http://youtu.be/qCNLdSyS-G0
Giveaway: 'The Sacrament' Bundle Pack
In support of director Ti West's recently released horror film, The Sacrament, presented by Eli Roth, Magnet Releasing will provide two lucky CINEMACY readers with a bundle pack giveaway that you don't want to miss out on! Included in this giveaway is (1) alternative poster designed by R.M. Guera signed by the cast, (1) official “Eden Parish” t-shirt, and (1) copy of both The ABC’s of Death and V/H/S on Blu-ray, for two lucky fans! 
Here's how to win: Follow us on twitter (@cinemacyspeaks) and retweet the following:
Follow @cinemacyspeaks and RT to Enter to win #TheSacrament Giveaway Bundle! Alt Poster, Blu-Ray DVDs, and more! http://wp.me/p43JbQ-Dc
Giveaway ends Friday, June 13th, at 5:00pm PST. Good luck! The Sacrament is Now in Theatres, on Demand and iTunes. Synopsis: From acclaimed writer/director Ti West (THE INNKEEPERS, THE HOUSE OF THE DEVIL) and master of horror Eli Roth(THE LAST EXORCISM, HOSTEL, CABIN FEVER) comes the story of two Vice Media correspondents on an adventure to document their friend's journey to reunite with his estranged sister (Amy Seimetz, UPSTREAM COLOR). They track her to an undisclosed location where they are welcomed into the remote world of "Eden Parish," a self-sustained rural utopia composed of nearly two hundred members and overseen by a mysterious leader known only as "Father". While they are initially inspired by the community, it soon becomes evident that something is rotten in paradise. As their one night in the parish turns to day, the visitors realize that Eden Parish harbors a twisted secret. What started as just another documentary shoot soon becomes a fight for escape and survival.
“There are plenty of fantastical villains in this year's summer movies. But in terms of horribly believable evil, IT WILL BE HARD TO TOP THE PERFORMANCE OF GENE JONES in 'TheSacrament'.” - CLARK COLLIS, ENTERTAINMENT WEEKLY
“'MASTERFULLY SUSTAINED SUSPENSE. A truly haunting piece of horror. Ti West's darkest, smartest and most gut-punch memorable film to date.” - SCOTT WEINBERG, FEARNET
“BONE CHILLING” - DAVID ROONEY, THE HOLLYWOOD REPORTER
“A gripping thriller, filled with tension, dread and genuine terror.” - PHIL NOBLE JR, BADASS DIGEST
“(Ti West's) best film to date.” - AIN'T IT COOL NEWS
“FRIGHTENING AND TERRIFIC” - GUY LODGE, VARIETY
OFFICIAL RULES NO PURCHASE NECESSARY TO ENTER OR WIN: THE SACRAMENT Giveaway Bundle. Contest is open to legal residents of the 50 U.S. states and Canada, age 18 or older at time of entry. Void outside the US and Canada where prohibited by law. Sweepstakes begins at 5:00 p.m. Pacific Standard Time (“PST”) on 6/10/2014 and ends at 5:00 p.m. (“PST”) on 6/13/2014. All entries must be made via the comments section on this page. Winners must respond with their mailing address within 72 hours of being notified or an alternate winner will be selected. All federal, state and local regulations apply.
Director Ti West & Cast on 'The Sacrament'
With his latest film, The Sacrament (presented by Eli Roth) director Ti West has once again offered audiences a rich slice of horror-on-a-budget cinema. Only this time, the terror comes in the form of real-life scares. Sidestepping any hint of supernatural-infused story, West crafts a docu-style film that takes its inspiration from the events of the Jonestown Massacre (including the infamous "drinking-of-the-Kool-Aid," by taking viewers into the heart of one of the scariest places seen on camera: Eden Parish, a remotely located compound who's society is led by the scarily manipulative "Father," (Gene Jones), leaving the audience to wonder, and witness, if there is anything scarier than atrocities performed in real life, by real people.
I had the chance to sit down with West, Jones, as well as the rest of the principle cast (and frequent collaborators) including Joe Swanberg, AJ Bowen, Amy Seimetz, and Kentucker Audley, at Hollywood's Magic Castle, an appropriately spooky destination to inquire about the film. Seated inside the Player's Club's mini-theatre, we settled in, to find out more about this wholly arresting movie. We begin:
HOW CLOSE TO THE EVENTS OF THE JONESTOWN MASSACRE IS THIS FILM BASED ON?
TI WEST: The framework for the story is based on the last forty-eight hours of what happened at Jonestown. I wanted to use the framework of a real event, and use a real brand to tell the story, because I think that, you know, trying to make a horror movie that doesn't have any supernatural elements, I wanted the sort of "horror" to be "horrific" and the violence to be confronting, and to be provocative, and to be socially relevant, to a certain degree. And I think a lot of the reasons that people joined People's Temple in the sixties and seventies are just as relevant today. History tends to repeat itself. And I think that this "new media" way that we're getting our news in this sort of embedded journalism is the way a story like this would come to us now. So all that stuff, to me was like, there's what happens in the movie and there's what the movie's about, and what the movie's about is far more interesting and terrifying to me. So, in trying to keep it steeped in realism, so that when you see this movie you have a visceral, scary experience watching the film, but then when you leave the theater, it stays with you because these themes are relevant, and these themes are scary, just generally. It's not like when you go see a vampire movie and it's scary for an hour and a half and then you go about your life. You know, hopefully the themes in this movie continue to make you think.
IN GENERAL, WHAT'S THE KEY TO CREATING SOMETHING REALLY SUSPENSEFUL WITHIN THAT DOCU-STYLE VISUAL AESTHETIC, AND HOW HARD WAS THAT FOR YOU TO EVOLVE CREATIVELY?
TW: The docu-style thing, it's a little thing to adjust to, but you adjust to that before you even start. So it's one of those things, a lot of times people ask me "What's the challenge of shooting movies that way?" And it's like, I don't remember because it was never not that, you know what I mean? But I think that, it's really just the same as any traditional thing. It's just about what you show and what you don't show, and that ratio, and that contrast of what's scary and what's not scary, and just sort of milking that. I kind of tell people it's like, you know, like you can tell a joke and all your friends laugh, and then your friend can tell the same joke and it just bombs and you're like, "What happened?" It's like, there's a sense of timing that you just intrinsically have in being able to read the situation, and I think that's just the same with this.
FOR THE ACTORS- WHAT WAS THE CHALLENGE OF GETTING INSIDE THE HEADS OF THESE CHARACTERS, AS YOU'RE ALL PLAYING ESSENTIALLY FICTITIOUSLY REAL PEOPLE IN THE DOCU-STYLE WORLD OF THE FILM?
GENE JONES: It's less than one day in Father's life, and it's not a typical day. So I didn't do any Jim Jones research about what he read and how he interacted with people on a daily basis. What I tried to do was be a guy who was so nice you would follow him out of your, you would leave your family and leave your country and go with this guy.
KENTUCKER AUDLEY: We had, those of us that played VICE reporters, we had a very good, dedicated source of material, because VICE-guided travels, at least what I started figuring out, and I had already watched some of them, but we really got into it before we started shooting, there's an aesthetic identity to the VICE brand that sort of transcends editing and photography. There's a brand of journalism and there's a brand of, I don't want to say personality, but there's very clearly, certain vibes. And so for me, I started noticing that there were seeming to be certain characters at other times. So the trick was humanizing, and being able to show that there's a transition, that this person's playing a character right now, and that he's sort of taking that hat off, and as the movie escalates, as the story escalates, we sort of see that stuff getting stripped away, and you're being left with this person that kind of loses an identity going down to this place.
"It's not like when you go see a vampire movie and it's scary for an hour and a half and then you go about your life. You know, hopefully the themes in this movie continue to make you think" -Ti West (Director)
JOE SWANBERG: Yeah, on the flip side of that, I mean think that my character remains detached. He's willing to put himself in these dangerous positions, but when things seem intimidating he's also the first one, I mean I think my character wants to live through this so he can keep making more, keep being a journalist. He's not excited about the prospect of dying at this place [Laughter]. And he's not getting emotionally involved, the line is much more clear-cut for my character than for AJ's character and I feel think that's an interesting dynamic that we were able to play off of where he's, probably because of what he's got going on at home where he's sort of at a point in his life where he's settling down, he's a lot quicker to get emotionally invested in this young woman who we meet there, and the kind of "journalistic blinders" are still up for me where I'm like, "Look, we're here to do a job," and also, part of that job is to keep ourselves safe. If we die, nobody gets to hear the story, so we have to get home in order to tell it.
AJ BOWEN: Yeah, I think there's an interesting thing with Joe and I's characters, specifically about our detachment and our, you know, what happens with the shift of like, it's a life and death situation, so like the "cool, above-it-all, we're just doing this and it's our job," very quickly shifts to like, "we're going on instinct, we're going on survival, we're going on this terror." So at that point it becomes very universal, it becomes very similar to how anybody would react in a life and death terrorized situation.
AMY SEIMETZ: Ti said this and I agree with this one hundred percent, no-one joins a cult, it happens over slow increments over time. And so what you're seeing, like Gene said, you're seeing a day in the life of, or a couple of nights in the life of a very acute period of time, where it's led to this point. And I guess, preparing for it, I was obsessed with cults for years, and sort of how people find themselves in this place. And they desperately want to believe in something bigger than them, and there's a very fine line between actually believing and desperately wanting to believe. And so with Caroline, in the beginning, there's a lot of like, putting up a front of, "I do really believe in this," but also genuinely believing in it because it has helped her build a life outside of the rougher life that she was living before of drug addiction, etcetera. So I don't think when she got involved with Father, that she was thinking, "I'm going to massacre people," or you know, create a horrible situation.
YOU'RE ALL SUCH GREAT ACTORS, AND MANY OF YOU- MOST OF YOU, ARE ALSO EXCELLENT FILMMAKERS IN YOUR OWN RIGHT. IS IT EVER HARD TO TURN THAT PART OF YOUR HEAD OFF, OR IS THERE ANY COLLABORATION FROM A FILMMAKING POINT OF VIEW?
AS: Me first? Well, being the best filmmaker here, I'll take this. [Laughter]
No I mean, we've all worked together in various capacities for, years now? And so I think, knowing what it's like to direct a movie, none of us step onto the other one's set and say, "I'm going to direct your movie-"
"CUT!"
AS: Yeah! I think there's an ease to how we work together, and how working together repetitively helps get deeper, and have a shorthand together as opposed to create a power dynamic, in a way.
KA: Having worked with all of these directors, it's just, you defer. You just trust the process of knowing the aesthetic that the individual director is going for and just trusting...you know, you look for ways to find your identity within it, you look for ways to insert your persona, or your being in some ways. But mostly it's just like, trying to give them what they want, and trusting that they're going to use it for the benefit of everybody involved.
JS: Yeah, I also think like, as an actor in somebody else's movie, you don't have the kind of whole picture that you usually have when you're directing your own thing, so you're not in every meeting about the visual look of the movie, you're not in the costume meetings, you're not having the conversations that a director's having with a producer about the logistical aspects of figuring out, you know? You're sort of only privy to the story and your character, so you're kind of already coming at it from a different kind of place. You're not trying to make the whole thing good, you're just trying to be in the service of it as best you can.
But I do think that, you know, when you get on set, you do have to turn the "director brain" off, because everybody has their own aesthetic and their own ideas about how things should go, and also everybody runs their sets differently. And so if you get on somebody else's set and you're getting annoyed that it's not moving at the speed your set moves, or there's too many people around, or some other thing like that, it's going to really get in the way of your ability to act, I think.
AB: Questions like that really are questions about ego, and one of the best benefits about collaborating with people over and over again is that you're getting to start of a very different place. Most movies that I'm on, where I haven't worked with people before, it starts off with everyone, in a well intentioned way, asserting their ego, their sense of identity, about, "Well this is what I'm bringing to the table." And usually by the time the shoot's done, you're ready to go and actually make the thing, because you can now communicate with the people. But the great thing about working with these people, and doing it again and again, is that you're starting at a place of trust and commitment, and there's a much more open dialogue, and a much more thorough sense of communication about what's going on.
So, as someone who has only acted in that capacity, it's great because I don't have to worry about so many things, like, "Is this movie going to, are we going to realize this script?" I don't have to think about that with any of these people, so it's really freeing.
Review: 'The Sacrament'
A sacrament, in Christian terms, is defined as a religious ceremony or act that is regarded as an outward and visible sign of inward and spiritual divine grace. Director Ti West takes this definition to its most extreme, in his latest film, The Sacrament.
As shown on Day 3 of AFI Fest, West (The Innkeepers) was on hand to introduce his arresting film, playing in the Midnight series of screenings, which definitely aided in providing a sort of charged energy amongst the audience while watching. That electricity of the night might have further helped how the film played, which operates on a more slow-burning pace, taking great patience until finally arriving to its intended payoffs of horror.
Staged as a documentary, a VICE video diary to be exact, we follow journalist Patrick (Kentucker Audley) as he sets out to reconnect with his estranged and once drug-addicted sister Caroline (Amy Seimitz), now living on a private-living compound in an African country. And of course, working as a videographer for VICE (of internet and blogosphere notoriety), an alternative news outlet documenting nonstandard cultural practices events, Patrick brings with him a video team comprised of reporter Sam (AJ Bowen) and videographer Jake (Joe Swanberg) to document the experience. Landing soon enough, by way of helicopter, the crew is jarringly met by armed guards, yielding automatic gunfire.
The evil that takes form in this film is one that stems from the darkest of motivations from the human condition.
The initial skepticism and hint of fear that the team feels then carries through the rest of their stay, as they are eventually, though with great hesitance, allowed to enter the private community and document the experience. Reconnecting with Caroline, with a now eerily positive energy and outlook on life, she informs Patrick and the crew of the community's efforts to attempt to remove themselves from the hypocrisies and evils of modern day living, leading the VICE team to grow even more suspicious, and wonder who is leading their new-age community. The answer, they find, is "Father" (Gene Jones), the leader of the compound, who the crew are intrigued to interview. Yet upon their meeting with Father, and with soft spoken voices of the community, they find that things are very much not as they seem, and that their outsider presence has just disrupted their way of living. From here, about halfway through the film's run time, the real payoffs start coming, and the horrors of cult mentality are fully materialized.
As West has stated, he wanted to make a film without "supernatural" elements or horrors, as his previous films have employed. And so, the evil that takes form in this film is one that stems from the darkest of motivations from the human condition. Taking inspiration from the real-life Jonestown Massacre of 1978, a horrific cult event which is remembered for its fateful "drinking of the Kool-Aid," Sacrament plays almost identically in plot. The real magic here is in its effective set up; we believe in these characters (a good choice to ground the characters as VICE journalists, a modern day magazine that could conceivably cover such an unorthodox story), and with its effective handheld camerawork. Though its detractors might spark from not-enough "happenings," or "story" to the film, its overall execution of what was intended to be captured and told is a harrowing first-person experience of the power, manipulation, and sacrifice that is found in faith, and fate. With its eventual upcoming distribution by Magnet Films, this film should be viewed and appreciated for its harrowing real-life depiction of evil, unlike any film I've seen before.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QqDZFMArLjI
Review: 'God's Pocket'
There's a certain charm to what first-time feature film director John Slattery (Mad Men's Roger Sterling) brings to this darkly comical inner-city drama, God's Pocket. Adapted from the novel of the same name, the film tells the story of the fragmented Scarpato couple losing their son Leon (Caleb Landry Jones) in a construction "accident." Though it features a truly all-star acting class, bringing veteran performances to try and really wrangle that specific tone down, the story manages to feel consistently untamed, and unsure of what it wants to leave its audiences with.
"God's Pocket" refers to the imaginary New York suburban city of which all the residents are like family- more specifically, like your equal parts overly-loving yet just as volatile family members whose unquestioned love stems from the years of shared familial history surviving in the Pocket. Slattery here gets to choose all of the tools and colors to paint the picture of what one off-the-wall life event might be like in this unkempt hole of a neighborhood, along with imagining all of the players to breathe life into the story.
The dry hi-jinks and bonkers provide the humor that, lensed through this serious subject matter, give the film its black comedy packaging.
God's Pocket features an incredible group of veteran film actors, giving the film a boost in prestige and intrigue right off the bat, and whose collective talents and work give end to being the film's biggest draw. Manning the wheel of this readily-stocked indie, and whose involvement may end up being, in the not too distant future, the film's most memorable trivia that audiences and film buffs remember as being "one of his last performances," is the late, great, Philip Seymour Hoffman, in a wholly reined in role as the gambler/drunk step-father of Leon, Mickey Scarpato. Christina Hendricks, Slattery's cable-TV buddy, assumes the role of dutiful home keeper and loving mother Jeanie Scarpato, whose breathy character gives the actress a fine role to play.
Also along for the ride are the incredible Richard Jenkins, having his own fun as a drunken newspaper writer Richard Shellburn, whose arrival and coverage of the death in the Pocket stirs the pot even further. Throw in some side supporting characters with a penchant for illegal activities and gambling, like John Turturro's Arthur 'Bird' Capezio, and you get a flavorful smattering of a day in the life of this tale of people, through self-induced problems and high-jinks fashion, continue to just carry on.
The dry hi-jinks and bonkers provide the humor that, lensed through the serious subject matter, give the film its black comedy packaging. Though these moments here stem from honest storytelling, like when Leon's funeral money makes its way to being gambled, or when his body is transported by way of a meat packing car, there is still a confused tone to how we the audience feel we should internalize them. Are they comic moments in the tragedy that is this dark opera of lower-class American life? Or is the story a humorous account of life's most bizarre happenings, rooted in classic familial woes? It's in these muddled curiosities that leave the film hanging in the balance- perhaps not perfect, but still loved and accepted by the faithful community that makes it up.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eMTdOwyrWzo
Review: 'Palo Alto'
Growing up never looked as cool as it does in the new James Franco starrer, Palo Alto. Which is a large reason for why the film feels less of a relatable young teen drama and more of a fashion film of tragically beautiful youngsters smoking cigarettes and getting into trouble. Where recent coming-of-age indies like The Perks of Being a Wallflower and The Spectacular Now succeeded for committing themselves to getting into the minds of these tormented and confused teens, relying on stylistic choices only to further that world story, the job here feels a little less personal, and like its characters, a little too cool for school.
Adapted from the James Franco-penned novel of the same name, a collection of autobiographical short stories about the multihyphenate's childhood growing up in the Californian back-town, this softly lit, pastel-hued film stretches out a full narrative following three rebellious high schoolers, as they mainly shuffle from one house party to the next. Lending the film her star power in the leading role is Emma Roberts, offering her moody shyness as April, the class virgin/school soccer player who draws the attention from both her close friend Teddy (Jack Kilmer, son of Val*) and her soccer coach, Mr. B (Franco) (a plot that may sound familiar from recent tabloids of Mr. Franco's conversation with an underage Instagram user).
The job here feels a little less personal, and like its characters, a little too cool for school.
Accompanying April are her guy pals, Teddy and Fred (Nat Wolff), equally rebellious friends who drunk drive and plow down trees with a chainsaw. The vices and behaviors that the threesome share (a dynamic not unlike Wallflower, with two friends crushing on each other while the third, eccentric one, spins his wheels) speak to the reality of how these kids go about searching for and getting their kicks. So although an honest representation of their worlds, their unaffected and detached attitudes deflate whatever it is that the film is trying to say about kids and their partying.
Making her feature film debut is yet another Coppola, this time, Gia (niece of Sofia and granddaughter of Francis Ford, for those keeping score at home). And here, the familial relationship makes sense: the cinematography and all around mood begs itself to look something similar to The Virgin Suicides. While the director is able to infiltrate these moments of young love and secrecy and maintain a small-scale intimacy to the whole thing, in the end, there isn't enough point of view for us to pull any statement from it. If the moral of the story is that young teens are non-impressed with the dullness and tragedy of life itself, then the tone poem movie gets it just right. Unfortunately, that non-impress extends itself into the audience, as we are left only to spectate as our young heroes wander aimlessly throughout the film, lost and confused, with the overall movie following in similar fashion.
*This may be the most Epic way of introducing a person that I have yet typed.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sTqMUu1iTIo
Review: 'Neighbors'
Out of control, glow in the dark party scenes? Check. Excessive psychedelic drug use? Check. Penis jokes? Check (in fact, this box is definitely checked off, thanks to both a certain yard sale sequence and a baby's finding of a latex item). In these respects, this comedy hits all of its low-brow marks and gets the passing grade as an entertaining frat movie for this generation's college-goers. But Neighbors, the new comedy directed by Nicholas Stoller (Get Him To The Greek), goes even further beyond the traditional wild frat partying cliché to make its mark, and impressively so. By enrolling Seth Rogen as the uncool newly husband and parent next-door, along with Zac Efron in a choice role that flaunts his most "bro-iest" of sides, the comedy makes for a laugh-out-loud time that is sure to bring those young tank-topped males running and hollering to the door.
Neighbors, also starring Rose Byrne, is the frat-comedy hangout movie that gets its yucks (comedically and disgustingly) by forcing its undergrads to confront their most formidable of opponents: grown ups. Though the "grown ups" in question here are hardly ones you'd call mature. When new parents/homeowners Mac (Rogen) and Kelly (Byrne) Radner, along with their newly infant daughter, move into a nice suburban home with dreams of starting an honest family life, they quickly find that plan disrupted by their new neighbors: keg-yielding fraternity members with a party mentality set to "self-destruct," led by a machismo-soaked and muscle milked Teddy Sanders (Efron).
After Mac and Kelly, worrying for the new environment of Skrillex-blasted music that they have to raise their daughter in, attempt a peace offering with the fraternity that goes south quick, the ensuing runtime is a series of one-ups and revenge pranks, each camp determined to get the other to leave. As winning a formula as it is, director Stoller manages to keep a level head above the college humor of it all, allowing real story to drive the manic trade-offs. And although no audience member will be going into it or even hoping for "real story," it's certainly the invisible engine operating behind the camera that makes the movie a worthwhile outing.
Efron, returning to the screen in a new, less Disney-fied role, is a welcomed casting choice, and perhaps the movie's secret weapon.
Formerly titled Townies, and then Bad Neighbors, the movie's fun certainly boils down to the winning chemistry shared between its cast, particularly that of Rogen and Efron. And while it might have been easy (or even initially conceived) to pit Rogen against some generic evil young meathead for the lumpy stoner to shine brighter against, the dynamic settles into something a little more real, and a little more satisfying. It's much more of a welcomed return on investment to see both sides' reasons for declaring war. For Mac and Kelly, nervous first-time parents who find themselves longing for their younger years, and Sigma Fi Psi president Teddy, whose party on M.O. hides his insecurities of living a shallow life, everyone finds themselves fighting out of their deepest desires. But let's not get bogged down by semantics: this is all achieved through dance-offs, exploding hidden airbags, and the film's grossest staging of Kelly's overly-inflated mammaries requiring a do-it-yourself milk pumping.
Efron, returning to the screen in a new, less Disney-fied role, is a welcomed casting choice, and perhaps the movie's secret weapon. The young leading man, here as the equivalent of the bully in The Karate Kid, gets to show off not only his six-packed body, but also a more vulnerable and human side, showing hurt when Rogen breaks his first "bro" promise and when Sigma Fi Co-president Pete (Dave Franco) reveals that he might not be as invested in the fraternity lifestyle as much as he is. The allowing of Efron's Teddy to show his hurt and insecurities gives the actor a worthwhile role and expands his range to impressive places.
Neighbors further impresses with its pulse on the college-kid party scene, with nearly every scene comprised of bass-bumping EDM and thirty drunk extras filling the frame. Though for all of its eye candy and scene filling props, the movie still feels like it was green-lit as a lower budgeted expense. It gets a slick treatment, but there's no big studio making sure that this will be the Hangover of its time. But even still, and as every college student knows, there are still creative ways to stretch your dollar, which usually end up making for some of the most fun stories to look back on.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KrAf5ALLxGI
John Slattery and Christina Hendricks on 'God's Pocket'
There are just some actors whose charisma and presence are so strong and unique, that it's no wonder as to how they've found their place and success in the world of acting. Two of these people, I had the great fortune to sit down with, which also provided a wholly unique and unexpected experience for me, the reporter. As I waited for our God's Pocket stars to roll in to the roundtable room, I thought to myself, "I think I'm actually nervous?" Or at the very least, filled to the brim with anticipation. Which was shortly followed by flooded relief, as the film's writer/director John Slattery entered the room, with the movie star-esque Christina Hendricks tailing just behind. Settling in, I couldn't help but feel that right in front of me, were Roger and Joan, of Mad Men fame. Their looks, so closely tied to their TV characters' (John, the Silver Fox, wore his hair and sideburns a bit longer, and Christina, with her singular red hair and wry smiles), put me both in and out of the interview experience (I was at both times an entertainment reporter in the twenty first century, as well as a budding Ad Man at a creative meeting in the 60's). Yet as we discussed their newest project, I only grew more aware of their talent as filmmakers and actors. And while I'll still inevitably watch and see them as their iconic 60's swinging selves in their future projects, it won't be without recognizing their talents and commitments to that whole world of acting, of which they've solidified their place. We begin:
WHEN DID YOU SHOOT THE FILM?
John Slattery: We shot it in the summer, June and July of last year.
HOW DID PHILIP SEYMOUR HOFFMAN LOOK AT THAT TIME?
JS: He looked like Mickey Scarpato, who is the center of the movie. He looked fantastic.
SO YOU HAD NO IDEA...
JS: He came in and did his job, and went home.
WHAT WAS THE EXCITING PART, FOR YOU, OF DIRECTING HIM? HE'S SUCH A FIERCE ACTOR, SO FOR YOU TO GET A CHANCE TO HELP HIM FIND THAT CHARACTER AND SHAPE THAT CHARACTER...
JS: Yeah, that was the fun part. Putting it together, and realizing that he liked it enough to want to do it in the first place...the fact that I had the good fortune to have the opportunity, and all that involved, which is, as you said, putting it together, deciding, "What should I look like? Why does this guy stay in this community where people are telling him he's an outsider? And what's this relationship like with my wife? And all the questions that you hope someone will ask you in trying to put a character together that you're going to then shoot. I mean, I couldn't feel luckier. And the finished product, I think, shows the complication emotionally and the vulnerability, and everything that he has. All that emotional and intellectual intelligence, combined with the technical wherewithal that that person, that actor had, is on that screen. So I feel very lucky.
CHRISTINA, YOUR LOOK IN THE MOVIE IS SUCH A DIFFERENT PHYSICAL COMPOSURE THEN WHAT WE'RE USED TO ON TV. WAS IT TOUGH OR EASY TO GET INTO THE MOLD OF IT?
CS: You know it's funny, when I read the script, I had a picture of Jeanie in my head-
JS: You sent me a picture of what the picture in your head was.
CS: Yeah I did. I sent you a picture of sort of, the idea of hair and make up feeling like the time period, and John was like,"That's kind of what I was thinking too." So we saw eye to eye on that. And John liked the idea that it was gonna be a very different look from the project that we'd been working on together, since it was going to be another project together, it's kind of nice to mix it up.
The costuming was very specific and kind of bizarre. Like, I'm in a weird terry cloth dress for three quarters of the movie that we kind of fell in love with and thought it was just strange enough and the kind of thing that you just throw on in your house. And yeah, I thought it was great, I thought those things represented the character very well.
AT THIS STAGE, BOTH OF YOUR PROFESSIONAL CAREERS ARE VERY MUCH INTERTWINED. DO YOU REMEMBER THE FIRST TIME THAT YOU MET EACH OTHER?
CS: We were wondering earlier, I mean, we must have met at the table read...we don't remember specifically. Cause I said, "Oh, remember, we all went out for dinner afterwards?" And he said, "I don't think I was at that dinner?"
JS: I don't think I was. I was doing a play, I think I was doing Rabbit Hole on Broadway, and I don't think I went to the read-through.
CS: Maybe that.
JS: I think it closed like a couple of days before...
CS: I remember our first day of work together.
JS: Yeah, I remember the first day we worked together, it was day one. We were in an office, and you were making that speech to a wall, you did a long walk through the bull pen, and then you did that thing with Peggy with, you know, go home, take a paper bag, put it over your head, cut the eyes out, now look at yourself objectively. And then Jon Hamm and I walk in at the end of it, and I remembered, you know, a lot of the day was spent on that scene.
CS: I mean, it's interesting, because it sort of established that day, a relationship between Roger and Joan, there's a line where they walk in as I'm talking to Peggy and I say, "Good morning Mr. Draper," and then I think I said, "Roger...". And I did it very flirtatiously, not knowing any future story line, but Matt (Weiner, Mad Men) said at the end of the day, "Oh, if this show goes, Joan and Roger will have a little something," and I was like, "Yeah!"
You would never know that (Christina Hendricks) had gotten through the whole day and she goes, "God I thought I was gonna have a heart attack." -John Slattery
AND YOU GUYS HAVE WORKED TOGETHER, NOT JUST AS ACTORS, BUT AS ACTOR AND DIRECTOR.
JS: Yeah.
DID YOU LEARN ANYTHING KIND OF FUN OR SURPRISING IN THIS PROJECT THAT YOU HADN'T PICKED UP ON FROM EACH OTHER BEFORE?
JS: You know, I don't know...I'll tell you one thing that I remember, was that Christina was claiming to have been nervous during some scene, and I thought, "You know, it doesn't show at all." And then Phil had sent me a text saying that he had always been an admirer of John Turturro, he did a week on the movie, and then when it was finished, Phil was remarking about how nervous he was working with John. And Richard Jenkins was telling me how nervous he was at the anticipation of working with Christina, who he was such a fan of. And none of these people showed it at all! You would never know that she had gotten through the whole day and she goes, "God I thought I was gonna have a heart attack,"-
CS: I thought I was going to throw up!
JS: And not even like, you know, I'm a pretty good, I know what to look for, and you couldn't tell at all. And I thought, "Well, that's acting I suppose."
CS: Survival instincts is what that is!
JS: Controlling your nerves, your know, you're pretending to be someone else, you're pretending to be someone who's not nervous. And I was, not surprised by it, but sort of astonished by it.
I HAVE TO COMMEND YOU FOR GIVING YOUR MOTHER-IN-LAW (JOYCE VAN PATTEN) SUCH A GREAT, JUICY, LITTLE ROLE-
JS: How 'bout that?
WAS THAT THE FIRST TIME THAT YOU HAD WORKED TOGETHER?
JS: Uhhh. Yeah!
WAS IT WEIRD TO DIRECT YOUR MOTHER-IN-LAW IN SUCH A CRAZY SCENE?
JS: [Laughs]. No, it wasn't. She was, you know, she knew it, she knew what was called upon.
CS: She was amazing.
JS: There was one technical scene, which, I don't want to give away what happens in the scene, but there was a lot of technical, there were a lot of things that could've gone wrong. And she's so ridiculously professional, she would mark it out, mark it out, talk about it, mark it out...and then in one take we got this really difficult set up. But in general, I mean,she's been acting a long time, and it shows.
She fell in with John and Phil in those scenes, and immediately had this, what looked like, lifelong history with John Turturro, and Phil, and how they were always hugging and kissing each other in the scene. So it made sense for the film that he (Mickey) gravitates towards those two people, who are the two people who look like they care about him genuinely the most. But yeah, that's Joyce. She just jumped in and did her thing.
CHRISTINA, WHAT WAS YOUR EXPERIENCE LIKE WORKING WITH PHIL? OBVIOUSLY AN ACTOR'S ACTOR, IN THOSE SCENES WITH HIM, WHAT WAS YOUR BIG TAKWAY?
CS: Just a real warmth, and a real sense of humor, on and off camera. A very giving actor, you know, obviously someone who's listening, and watching in such a way that you just drop into the scene and you just are immediately...a very similar feeling that I have when I work with John on Mad Men. As an actor, you're constantly striving to find these real moments, these moments where you actually feel like that just happened to you, and that's the best you can feel, that's the best you can do, and I always feel like that when I work with John. And I felt like that with Phil, and Richard Jenkins. Just about as much as you could ask for. It was a gift to work with Phil, and I was probably watching his every move, trying to take away some of his magic. Just being on set with him and watching him work, hopefully, I think you just sort of gain knowledge from him.
THE END OF 'MAD MEN,' HOW DO YOU FEEL ABOUT IT, AND HOW DO THE PRODUCERS ENSURE THAT NOBODY LEAKS SECRETS OF IT BEFORE ANYONE'S READY?
CS: They ensure secrecy by extreme threats. [Laughter]
JS: Kidnap one of your kids. [Laughter].
CS: You know, I think it's a testament to how much the people involved in the show respect the show. People have come and gone over seasons, there's some people who've moved on to other jobs, different things, and they even kept the secrets all along. You could say, "I'm not on the show anymore so it doesn't matter to me," but people really do respect it, and they know that that's exciting for the audience. So for us involved in it, it's sort of an easy thing for us to do. But I've been very impressed with people who have come and gone throughout the years, that they've been so respectful.
And how do I feel about it ending? I'm overwhelmed with all sorts of feelings about it. The most is sadness, and pride. I'll walk away from this feeling very very proud, and very possessive of Joan and that experience. But I'll hold it very close to me.
Review: 'Chef'
Chef, director Jon Favreau's (Iron Man) latest film in which he also assumes screenwriter and lead actor credits, is a purely enjoyable film that should delight audiences of all kinds. Taking a break from directing the Marvel blockbuster franchise, Favreau returns with an intimate family comedy about a chef, Carl Casper (Favreau), a struggling divorcee who finds himself juggling a fledgling cooking career along with his barely-there relationship with admiring son Percy (Emjay Anthony) and loving ex-wife Inez (Sofía Vergara). The result of all these ingredients, handled in a loose yet free and fun directorial style, makes Favreau’s film a successful and uniquely alive one.
Favreau, conceiving an original screenplay here, returns to the big screen in confident stride to tell this low-budget independent movie. His natural warmth and humor as a person comes through in full and charming spades, as he crafts a story that self-runs off of its own good spirits and nature. This story about a scatterbrained yet passionate and talented head chef who struggles to recognize Percy’s admirations for his largely absent self, along with the good intentions wished by Inez, rewards audiences with genuine and honest emotional returns. In setting up this fast and loose crowd-pleaser, the film retains a playfulness and spontaneity that keeps audiences happy to be along for the ride, literally, as Casper takes Percy with him when he shifts gears, leaving a restrictive restaurant residency for a self-owning Cuban food truck business that he embarks on.
Chef uses its fast and loose shooting style to achieve a real vitality, which is paralleled with the spicy soul food that Casper comes around to realize, timed with his newfound love for his family, gives him the most satisfaction in life.
Even if the story seems easy to figure out, it dresses itself up with a number of fun elements, including a running storyline of Casper’s new taking to social media (the many tweets and pictures animated and floating above the actors’ heads add a freshness and spark), along with a smattering of A-list Hollywood talent to cameo, including Dustin Hoffman as Casper’s controlling boss Riva, John Leguizamo as Casper’s quick-witted bud and fellow chef Martin, Scarlett Johansson as Casper’s quietly tattooed receptionist friend Molly, and Robert Downey Jr. as Inez’s brash and loony ex-husband Marvin- all of whom give their best favors to the director, delivering rich supporting performances to keep the party fresh.
And of course, no movie about people cooking food would be complete about the review of the food itself. Which is also what, funnily enough, serves as the main driving storyline- that of heralded food critic Ramsey Michel (Oliver Platt) bestowing a less than favorable review upon Casper’s food, which spurns the livid chef to hastily take to Twitter for the first time, calling out the critic and creating a social media firestorm which leads to consequences that force him to confront and reassess his life’s choices. This theme, of dealing with negative reception, along with reconnecting with family, are deeply personal dealings that one might assume were not unintentionally put into the movie by the writer/director/actor to comment on his own life’s work.
In fact, the similarities between the professions of both the chef and film director are seen as highly entwined here. High pressure and highly detailed work, employing a team to create that vision, all dealt with in a highly consuming manner that can sometimes fail to appreciate family, are but some of the shared drawbacks from both gigs. Which is why the movie scores; it’s heartfelt, honest, and entertaining. Chef uses its fast and loose shooting style to achieve a real vitality, which is paralleled with the spicy soul food that Casper comes around to realize, timed with his newfound love for his family, gives him the most satisfaction in life.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wgFws3AoIUY
Review: 'For No Good Reason'
You've definitely seen his work- now meet the man responsible for some of the most iconic caricatures and cartoons that helped define a generation at its most turbulent of time. Famed British artist Ralph Steadman, the man whose work and creative partnership with Gonzo journalist Hunter S. Thompson showcased his darkly perverse lensing of late 60's politics and culture, gets the documentary treatment here in For No Good Reason. Director Charlie Paul, along with the film's narrator and longtime Steadman friend/ally Johnny Depp, help tell this visionary's story of creating art that spoke to both the political unrest of the times as well as his own dark desires.
The film maintains a steady story of which to learn about this amazing artist.
Part interview of Depp with Steadman in his England-side studio, part biographical documentary of Steadman's upbringing and partnership with Thompson and beyond, the film maintains a steady story of which to learn about this amazing artist. Combine that with the dazzling black and white sprawled images and artwork, animated so as to give the cartoons an entire new life, the story is one that audiences should go to seek out, for all the right reasons.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QABS2MG8UOA
Review: 'Blue Ruin'
Coming off of its buzzy premiere and run from this year's Cannes Film Festival, Blue Ruin is making its U.S. debut at the 2013 AFI Film Festival, playing in the American Independent section of the festival.
The film's director, Jeremy Saulnier (Murder Party), is also credited with writing and cinematography, which resonates in the film's tightly woven and focused vision.
Ruin tells the story of sadly Dwight (cast perfectly in Macon Blair), seen at first as inconsequential and homeless, until he learns that the man convicted of his parents' slaying has just been released from prison, shifting him immediately into fourth gear for plans of claiming personal justice. What spurns is a revenge tale of feuding families, spun together with its slow-burning tone, intelligently devised stakes, healthy doses of relieving humor, and low-budget film-making resourcefulness.
Ruin, as stated by its director, drew influence from No Country For Old Men, noticeable in its mostly deadpan tone, and similarly strung as a procedural thriller.
Set in the director's Virginian hometown, Saulnier accomplishes the difficult task of creating an expansive world to set the familial drama in. As writer and cinematographer, the production benefits from its elaborate camerawork and changing of setups, making the camera feel like an active player in this odd-ball shoot-em-up. Ruin, as stated by its director, drew influence from No Country For Old Men, noticeable in its mostly deadpan tone, and similarly strung as a procedural thriller. Though where Country succeeded by the Coen Bros.' pure cinematic power, able to elicit emotions of fear or suspense by inferring, or subtext alone, Ruin falls-just-this-side-of-short-of drawing the audience into its self-imposed sense of downward spiral hopelessness. Yet it is to the film's utmost credit that it still fills every frame with aesthetically driven imagery (the shades of blue, whether of the jalopy Dwight drives, blue shadows off the television screen, or blue skies of the final act's storm, are prevalent throughout).
Further, and very refreshingly, tension-filled moments that might typically play to an explosive tipping point are deflated with perfectly executed moments of humor. Upon an emotional moment shared by Dwight and his estranged sister Sam (Amy Hargreaves) in a diner, an arrestingly tense moment pops by an interrupting stranger's asking for their table's ketchup. Like this scene, the film is an entertaining series of side steps, capped with moments of appropriate gross-outs and laughs, making for much more than an enjoyable festival submission. With its upcoming widespread release and distribution from The Weinstein Company, Ruin should find success for the director, star, and film, as a further presence of strength in the voice of modern-day American independent film.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N9z47Ji0qIk
Review: 'Fading Gigolo'
For a film about prostitution, writer/director John Turturro's latest sure is a touching, warm-hearted, good-natured film that earns its emotional and comedic beats. Fading Gigolo, in which the director stars himself as single and middle-aged Fioravante, a flower store worker turned private escort, has a palpable heartbeat to it, and becomes a film that one can intimately connect with.
What we have then, is an adult comedy about the woes of sex and love and death at middle age, through the story of a personal bedder. Turturro's restraint and subtlety in his character make Fioravante, seen at the beginning of the film defeatedly closing his bookstore and in search of cash, a man to instantly sympathize with. Which helps, because it's practically the next scene when Fioravante is proposed to become nightly company for an entire sub-culture of romantically interested middle-aged women by his old friend, Murray, played by Woody Allen. With that information alone you can probably already guess what that back and forth buddy pal dynamic would be, and why it makes the premise funnier, when Woody Allen the comedian is on hand to orchestrate the pimping business (whether that is true for Woody Allen the person, I'm not sure).
Fading Gigolo is an emotionally warm and comedically smart film that would certainly please fans of adult-skewing romantic comedies.
Woody as Murray is a joy to watch in his return to the big screen, a more rare event in which he acts in another director's film as seen here. And if you get the feeling that the whole show might even start to feel like it could be of Allen's own more serious adult comedies, you wouldn't be half-wrong, as Allen offered Turturro early script notes. In fact, Turturro's original vision was that the film play as a broader, more bawdy comedy. But when Woody Allen heard of the story from their shared barber, he was brought onboard, offering "brutal notes," which gives the film an entirely new, yet much more romantically charged and perhaps more honest DNA.
Director of photography Marco Pontecorvo also shoots Gigolo beautifully, casting a warm spell over the red tree'd New York neighborhoods. This romantic charge dresses up the whole event and makes for a rich place for the characters to explore their existential crises' of human existence in. In all actuality, the themes that are handled and explored here stem from very real, very grounded and honest, life experiences. Fioravante's navigation through the film introduces us to characters seeking love and connection in middle age, including his first client, married but neglected Dr. Parker (Sharon Stone), the sexy bombshell Selima (Sofía Vergara) and Avigal (a wonderful Vanessa Paradis), a lonely single Hasidic spouse, of whom, Fioravante develops a romantic interest for.
Fading Gigolo is an emotionally warm and comedically smart film that would certainly please fans of adult-skewing romantic comedies. Turturro's coloring and crafting of sophistication are a welcomed treat that could even offer you a little more than entertainment.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DuKoub-Sy9k
Contest: 'Fading Gigolo' Prize Pack
Congratulations to our FADING GIGOLO prize pack winner, Jasper Bernbaum! That DVD is really gonna tie the room together. Check your email for details!
You've seen him in a number of celebrated American indie movies, and now you can own a piece of that cinematic history. As writer/director John Turturro sets to release his latest feature film, Fading Gigolo, CINEMACY is offering you the chance to win a Fading Gigolo prize pack that includes a signed copy of one of Turturro's most beloved movies, The Big Lebowski, along with the Fading Gigolo original soundtrack! The Big Lebowski DVD, in which Turturro steals the show as the manic bowler Jesus, who "Nobody f***s with," is autographed by the actor, making for an incredible prize to entice movie fans of all kinds.
Here's how to enter:
In the comments section, answer the following question:
What is your favorite John Turturro character/movie, and why?
And as always, like CINEMACY on Facebook, and follow us on Twitter and Instagram for the latest news!
Contest ends Friday, April 18th, 2014 at 5:59 p.m. Good luck!
Synopsis: Fioravante (John Turturro) decides to become a professional Don Juan as a way of making money to help his cash-strapped friend, Murray (Woody Allen). With Murray acting as his "manager", the duo quickly finds themselves caught up in the crosscurrents of love and money.
Running time: 98 minutes
Rated: R
In theaters: Friday, April 18th, 2014.
OFFICIAL RULES
NO PURCHASE NECESSARY TO ENTER OR WIN: FADING GIGOLO Prize Package Giveaway. Contest is open to legal residents of the 50 U.S. states and Canada, age 18 or older at time of entry. Void outside the US and Canada where prohibited by law. Sweepstakes begins at 12:00 p.m. Pacific Standard Time (“PST”) on 4/14/2014 and ends at 5:59 p.m. (“PST”) on 4/18/2014. All entries must be made via the comments section on this page. Winners must respond with their mailing address within 72 hours of being notified or an alternate winner will be selected. All federal, state and local regulations apply.