Savages (2012)

Oliver Stone’s 22^nd film “Savages” is a brutal and relentless tale about the torn and tattered excesses of modern Americana where a heart of darkness frames the end days of youthful idealism with the butchery of pop culture criminality.  Driven by Stone’s familiar frenetic camera and articulate editing techniques, his signature bravado fuels a rich mix of enchanted career criminals featuring actors new to the genre (Salma Hayek) and others that have made a nice career of being bad (Benicio Del Toro), lavish vacation set locations and serious (i.e. bloody as hell) confrontations while navigating a world that shares a striking similarity to our own troubled seas.  It does suffer from time to time because of Stone’s impulsiveness for splashy action sequences and drawn out plot contrivances, but he also elevates what could have easily become just another tedious crime drama touting good will and clichés – just say no to drugs.  Based on the wildly popular novel of the same name by Don Winslow, with a script co-collaborated between Stone, Winslow and Shane Salerno, the film is rapid fire tongues and razor wire wit governed by Stone’s obsession with the collateral damage of good and evil.

Pitting So-Cal hipster pot merchants in opposing roles of right and wrong (corrupt cops mingling with righteous criminal conspirators) Stone sets in motion a series unraveling uncertainties that scores the film with a definite sense of the moral ambiguities of our times.  “Savages” feels like the perfect vehicle for Stone to crack the whip on the lazy and the uninspired who watch in idle fascination as media and technology washes the consequences of violence over them.  Stone returns to themes of investigation and in particular the voyeuristic journalism he used to full effect in Natural Born Killers.  This time new media and social networking becomes an intricate part of his commentary on what he views as a complicit culture of techno-savvy anarchists and social deviants uninterested with the consequences of their malaise.  When distant threats take root in Southern California, in the backyard of the dreams of cops and robbers, drug dealers and new business dealings all erupt in a cacophony of flames as the most vicious and vile Mexican drug cartel goes after their piece of the American Dream.

“Savages” is not a film I would recommend to everyone.  At the same time, it would be impossible to judge it entirely without experiencing it for yourself.  On the one hand it is a crime drama riddled with action sequences and bloody violence.  Get it watch it enjoy it and move on.  On the other it is more, a an intricate web of stylish action and specific characterization that employs violence as a means of getting at preconceived notions and simple solutions.  People are strange, as the song goes, and complicated, messy; there are no absolutes in life or an Oliver Stone film.  Even the bad guys wear nice clothes and shiny bright smiles, crack jokes and have arguments about family life, intimacy and divorce.  ”Savages” is also an ultra-violent thrill ride composed of necessary brutality to shock the viewer out of his/her comfort zone, to question our complacency and willingness to accept devastation because we see it and read about it in our everyday lives.  While I stand by a “see it” recommendation I would have to offer one caveat: once blood is shed you have to accept it as a frequent color of the volatility of wounded people and the inescapable color of fragility – or walk away.  In a film about the wounded and the wounding, I applaud Mr. Stone for respecting us enough to avoid the MPAA‘s sanitized PG13 rating.  It would have been disastrous to undermine the specificity of Don Winslow’s violence for the sake of wider audience appeal and box office receipts.  Some stories cannot be curtailed for mass consumption on the premise that bloodless violence and sexless sensuality is salient and salable substitute for the messy realities of the living and the dead.  “Savages” wraps us in the bandages of this generations great depression and often conflicted personal and social sense of connectedness.  The characters are forced to confront their own feelings of abandoned idealism and political dissension in a world where small time criminals and international drug lords want the same thing – to believe happiness exists and the beautiful future of their dreams is possible even if getting there is almost always five feet away of obtainable.

Oliver Stone is a cartographer of ordinary and a craftsman of the indefinable perpetuity of the human spirit longing for identity, warmth, food and shelter.  He leads expeditions to and from uncharted territories of the soul, finds approachable self-destruction a necessary means to an uncertain end.  His stories are compounded with polar opposites of extreme differences, light and dark, good and evil, right and wrong.  His characters are heroic and cowardly, bright, bold and enlightened but wrought with imperfections and poor choices.  He manufactures them from thin air and carves them out of the granite of damned identities and we are interested in them because they bleed just like we do.  Believable but extraordinary people.  He removes their halos and pretty gossamer wings, clips the barbed tails and disarms their pitched forks for they multi-faceted, stubborn, driven to acts of kindness for moments at a time before inspired to violence.  Oliver Stone fashions the perfect composition to frame exquisite wreckage, follows simple moments in time in order to surprise and convince us to trust his apparitions   His characters are always mirrors of the emotions we carry with us in our everyday lives, the familiars and strangers we know or knew that inform where we’ve been and where we hope to travel.  In this way he engages us on many levels and despite our reaction to his stories we find something about them that intrigues us, challenges our view of things, rewards us with fanciful and magical adventures.  Like us his characters mis-speak, stammer, stumble and fall.  They navigate his films through rough-hewed dreams about familiar places that remind us we are connected to emotional and spiritual landscapes.  We find them in his films because we find them in our lives.

“Savages” is an exploration of surface observations about good and evil and the distinctions we make about acceptable crime and unforgivable brutality.  Stone wants us to understand that savagery lives in our actions and our perceptions rather than in good and bad people, actions of crime and behavior of lawfulness.  He sets out to burn our expectations in the effigy of pop culture excesses and boredom, in consumerism, in deceit and fraud, promises and lies.  He treats situational violence like the icing on every failed suburban birthday cake party gone awry and every chain link fence dream come true interrupted by homicide, infanticide and other unsavory consequences to the modern decay of the American dream.  For the unprepared or ill-equipped it is almost always too much for any one film to handle with any amount of balance or social responsibility.  Yet Stone reminds us that in order to get at the ferocity of our desires he has to push beyond the breaking point, he has to stab the viewer where he/she hurts the most, in the jugular of their safely protected sensibilities.  It is there that he finds our inherent blood lust, our flaws and perfection and there that he leaves us to reflect on good and evil and there that we bleed out on the rancid dirt floors of falling down cinema screens in the back ways and dead ends of Desolation Street set to the perfect music of dreams.

If “Savages” fails to affect you or perhaps it affects you too much, I believe Oliver Stone has accomplished his goal.  If it disturbs while it entertains, if it offends while it defends your urge to cheer for criminals and hope for happy endings in some fashion or another, I believe Stone’s accomplished his goal.  If it pushed you away in your thoughts to make of it what you will later, this confirms that both sides of any story contains jagged edges and mixed possibilities.  Stone creates chaos to full effect, marrying what is often perceived as harmless hippies selling a little grass in this country against the knowable horrors of ruthless drug cartels across the border.  This foggy region between the warring factions is where the story inevitably leads us to an understanding of the distinction between behavior and identity.  When the smoke and haze finally clears and the gunfire echoes fade away, when presented with questions without answers we can access things or just leave them be.  Caught up in the melee for so long and with such graphic consequences you’re almost required to take a long walk, shake off what you’ve seen and heard and come back later or perhaps what Oliver Stone is really saying is that to be entertained one should also be taken out of their comfort zone so that for every action there is a personal reaction all your own for you to figure out and make of it what you will.

Related articles

• Pick the Real Quotes from Savages (popculturehasaids.wordpress.com)
• Savages DVD Review (thepeoplesmovies.com)
• Oliver Stone: The drug trade is a savage business (metro.co.uk)
• FrontRowGeek 2012 Review RoundUp – Savages (frontrowgeek.com)

Female Directors - Above and beyond a call to duty

Reblogged from Above the Line:

• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 

A question posed on Facebook led me on my way to this article about the top female directors in recent memory.  While there is no particular order and no interest in writing yet another list of top this or that, my intention is to collect thoughts on the unsung heroes of the underrepresented minority of female directors in Hollywood.  Every time someone sits down to compose a list like this there seems to be some news worthy moment of moments to illuminate the subject but it too fades as the conversation goes, one highlight in an otherwise unfortunate dark room matter of facts - there simply aren't enough women working behind the camera, especially in the director's chair.  

Read more… 1,704 more words

In honor of the 85th Academy Awards show today, February 24th, 2013 I wanted to take a moment and highlight the accomplishments of women in the entertainment industry that are frequently under-represented at awards shows. I wrote this article for Above The Line:Practical Movie Reviews in celebrating the work of several very important female directors "Above and Beyond a Call to Duty". In light of better representation of women in film and a lack of representation at this years awards show, I think it is important that we reflect on the incredible number of talented, driven women in an industry that routinely overlooks their many great contributions. If not now then when should the injustices of alienating these diverse and eclectic storytellers be acknowledged and rectified not with airy speeches and pompous promises to change but with a wide spread effort to do away with the practice of male dominated leaders in a field that has such an impact on our life and times. Here's to change and a salute these important women in film.

Related articles

• Gallery: Final preparations ahead of Oscars 2013 ceremony (metro.co.uk)
• Oscars 2013: The 85th Academy Awards (janiceadore.com)

Brave (2012)

Brenda Chapman‘s “Brave” stands strong.

It’s not every day that you get a feature-length animated film about a spirited princess fighting to find herself in a male dominated medieval Scottish kingdom, or said film with a female director, but Pixar’s 13^th film is just that and their 1^st with said director.  “Brave” is beautiful to get lost in and quickly makes the story of a female hero less about the newness as the familiar, side-stepping the kitschy of a forward moving woman on a male dominated hero’s journey.  We find ourselves in a land of fairy tale landscapes and wild animal foes long extinct, to the bright and lush greenery of ancient times where strong male heroes defined and broke the rules to keep traditions and embolden the law of the land.  Even as the central character Merida challenges these preconceived boundaries on-screen, co-writer and director Brenda Chapman would inevitably be curtailed by the same real world prescriptions.  I suppose this is Merida’s story after all and her adventures breaking away from the cultural norms and expectations of her clan.  It is this pursuit of independence and identity of strong womanhood that is the most refreshing and engaging and by example, telling.  Pixar’s lovingly realized animation is impeccable, hardly better anywhere.  Perhaps you just have to sort of divorce the fact that Brenda Chapman was replaced during production with a male director.

Brenda Chapman might not be a household name just yet but her nomination for an Academy Award for directing Pixar’s animated feature film “Brave” at least suggests someone was paying attention – even as the house that toys built messed the whole thing up.  What should have been a fully triumphant moment for female filmmakers in Hollywood and everywhere else for that matter got all hamstringed when the infinitely wise gave the go ahead to replace her for what we now know as “creative differences”.  Despite this fact the film itself succeeds as a strong testament to female empowerment and self actualized girl-aspirations, even if only on the screen.  It’s hard not to choke on the irony as thick as bruised and contused taffeta.  I suppose the important thing is that the story of a brazen and driven tom-girl resisting the charmed fairy tales of indentured womanhood or second fiddle in a male dominated medieval Scottish kingdom will survive – even while Chapman’s place as Pixar has ended. 

Pixar’s 13^th film continues their tradition of cutting edge animation with a clear, articulate story and engaging pop culture approach-ability  something other animation studios and filmmakers have been slowly picking up on.  Though some have criticized the film for not taking chances or striving to break newer new ground, it’s a little ridiculous to poke holes in a film for not being the greatest.  When did great go wrong?  ”Brave” makes no effort to be as such and sticks to solid storytelling and a good script with incredible voice talents that instill in their animations an emotional presence that is not always evident in the genre.  These days it would seem you have to reinvent the wheel a couple of times a year to please everyone, despite the bloody hell that happens all too often when overzealous visionaries throw caution to the wind and forget the craft of character based narratives.  ”Brave” succeeds despite the groans of those who seem to consider traditional marriage aspirations a let down, or that resisting the norm only to embrace the merits of familiar through experience is sentimentalism.  Somehow wanting one aspect of many possible outcomes of love and marriage is less for being less than different?  It’s a shame too as “Brave” is much more than such trivialities.  Sure, some might find the road familiar and the outcomes a little predictable but when did fruition and fathered good times in the face of growing cynicism grounds for dismissal as merely OK?  Seeing a temperamental female lead in a land of fairies and princesses, kings and queens, dragons and romantic love doesn’t mean the road frequently traveled is one to be trounced on.  There’s much more and aptly recognized here, even celebratory to the audience that allows themselves to slip silently into the tide of escapist cinema and relax.

“Brave” tells the story of a different sort of Disney princess, a sort of tom-boy independent girl with her eyes set on her own way of things, about as far off the prince-to-save-me-ever-after story as you might find in the Magic Kingdom.  Head strong and fiery, referring to her hair and her disposition, Scottish princess Merida (Kelly Macdonald) – which means “one who has achieved a high place of honor – receives an archery bow for her birthday and sets in motion a story of growing up different and coming to terms with traditional adolescence.  The fact the Merida’s father (Billy Connolly) loses his leg and therefore a sense of his male prowess, strength and control is subtle and perhaps explains how some reviews miss the clue.  Merida’s governing mother Elinor (Emma Thomson) is the real overseer and parent figure, the point of rebellion usually afforded the father, and also the channel by which the laws of the clans have the young princess all but married off one of the top three suitors of the land.  They are anything but her idea of match and matrimony, the second part of the foundation of the narrative – that being Merida’s call to adventure and coming into her own sense of identity, place and role in what feels very familiar – that is the man’s world of power and the powerful that dictates who succeeds and who does not.   Merida comes to embody this place of tradition and transitional and in revealing the mysticism of the feminine spirit the laws of the land open to the warmth of nurtured possibility.

In an interview with Comic Riff, Brenda Chapman described “Brave” as a “love letter” to her daughter and I can’t think of a better way of embracing a film about growing up and away, about coming into your own and being better for having lived the struggle.  This is about knowing yourself in everything you perceive as different and the realization that the heart is as delicate as it is resilient to the wounding of experience – what the soul already knows – that neither masculine nor feminine governs us, rather an understanding and emotionally rich union of the two is at the heart of the universe.

The Academy of Arts & Sciences announced January 10^th that Pixar’s 13^th film and 1^st film to be directed by a female director “Brave” was nominated for Best Animated Feature Film.  While “creative differences” were cited as the reason, Brenda Chapman was replaced by Mark Andrews (The Incredibles and Ratatouille) and both share the nomination.  Personally, and maybe it’s naïve, someone should have fought for her.

Related articles

• Watch: Inside Disney Pixar, Home of the ‘Brave’ (abcnews.go.com)
• Oscars 2013: Richard Corliss’ Picks – Best Animated Feature (entertainment.time.com)
• Disney Goes Bad (acvoice.com)

"CONTAGION" - 4 1/2 STARS

Reblogged from :

• 
• 

Whether it be “Twelve Monkeys”, “Virus”, “Outbreak” or the new Steven Soderbergh project “Contagion”, I’ve always had an affection for end of the world, deadly virus movies. In “Contagion”, Soderbergh takes a much different approach than most of these types of films, choosing to give it a more realistic and clinical feel. I’ve heard it described as a “medical thriller” and that’s pretty accurate.

Read more… 695 more words

Steven Soderbergh's movie Contagion as reviewed by Keith and the Movies and Above the Line:Practical Movie Reviews Two very different takes on a killer bug movie. I think this is my first 're-blog' or if not one of a few.  As I've written elsewhere, I find some of the most entertaining conversations about films involves the ones we disagree with the most - like night and day, you loved it and I hated it or vice versa or both at the same time. Movies are entirely subjective experiences that involve a myriad of sensations and reactions, favorite flavors and personal tastes that inform your decision to be there in the first place - maybe your favorite director is taking you on a long overdue voyage to trip the light fantastic or the actor you've been watching since he/she made that no budget character study back in the decade before that has you curious and excited. Some films seem to come out of nowhere but all the critics talk about them as the 'writing on the movie theater bathroom wall' that a star was on the rise and that's enough to sell plenty of tickets. Sometimes we just need an escape and the best rocket ship we know is at the movies for two hours at a time of senseless mayhem and extraordinary situations with laughs, tears, chills and fears. And then there are movies like Contagion that hold a different place for different folks, the science of the science of it, the combined effect of so many talented actors working with a celebrated director who very often shoots, writes, directs, produces, edits, and has a hand in almost every aspect of the production, and all these things line up in the celestial heavens of Hollywood and there you have it - Contagion. I'm a recent visitor of Keith & The Movies but I was impressed with his writing and style. I stumbled across his review of Contagion and quickly realized we came up with not just different opinions but diametrically opposed reactions to this film. I mean we're not only in different ball parks in different towns but we're in different hemispheres on different planets in galaxies far, far away. I'm not suggesting he's right or wrong any more than I'd claim my review is better or worse for having such harsh brass tacks hatred for this film. Well, maybe hatred is too strong a word. Disappointment? Lack of enthusiasm or perhaps I've seen enough ensemble films that employ the adage more is more because it's more-better with more big stars in the story and I'm tired of the gimmick. I'd rather spend more time with fewer characters. That's just me. What I think is the most interesting about this little exercise of comparisons is how we come to explore the film and the story with a lot in common - we both appreciate story driven narratives, good acting and structured filmmaking except we like the same things differently. We arrive at different places for similar reasons. Get it? Keith was impressed with the cast and this carried him into the film whereby I found the actors didn't have enough to do or their characters were given menial tasks and little in the way of specificity. He notes this as well, especially with John Hawkes character. I mean I don't want to give anything away but lets just say several of the biggest stars have very small horizons. Where Keith appreciates the medical jargon and quick paced lingo I felt like it was lifted from any number of serialized television shows and just when I was looking for warmth and nuanced performances I got stuck with a lot of technology heavy plot mechanics. Maybe I'm still recovering from Marion Cotillard's brittle dead wife performance in Inception (my take on that film in general here and again here  which too might be coloring me undeserving against Ms. Cotillard.  I do agree with Keith that Fishburne (who was quite memorable in King of New York, I recently reviewed) is notable here as well if only that he is convincingly cold and authoritarian. It just makes me want to see more of him post Matrix. He's got a lot more acting to do. I also agree with Keith that Soderbergh knows his way around shot composition and pacing but disagree that he achieves them to full effect here. Jude Law is just a good actor in just about anything he does. So like I said, this really is my first time reblogging comparative movie reviews and I'll just have to see how it goes. My take on Contagion on the one hand and Keith's take on the film on the other sounds like it could be an interesting experience for all of us. This post is just a starting place that I hope invites you into the conversation, presents two thorough, detailed and well written assessments of this film and I hope you read each of them and then return here and discuss your thoughts and reactions. Of course be sure to leave some thoughts at both of the original threads to show your love and respect of all the hard work that goes into writing movie reviews. Just remember movie reviews are not about whose right or wrong but about the potential for movies to excite and reward the imagination and bring us all together to share the revelry of the cinematic experience whether we agree with one another or simply find ourselves challenged enough to care. For more reading on the subject of this movie, the films and filmmakers referenced and the Bloggers involved in these articles, please visit: Rory Dean on Christopher Nolan Keith on Contagion Rory on Contagion

Related articles

• Could the 'Contagion' Sequel Mutate into a Television Series? (slashfilm.com)

At The Movies

At the movies, I have to remind myself to be calm, to take a breath and let go as the courtesy bulbs pop and the exit signs come up after another bad movie.  I sit there locked in silence, teeth too tight against one another, eyes darting through the credit scroll looking for the one person I know or knew from film school, the imagined and the imaginary, someone I can say hey – what’s up with that?  I imagine myself stopping at the concession stand before the octagon where kids and the usual wandering elder work in huddled indifference, tired of pushing brooms through other people’s entertainment aftermath, and ask for my money back.  Sometimes it matters but mostly it doesn’t, it’s strangers passing one another to and from Los Angeles‘ hopscotch tosses, the failed elevator pitch before the next elbow room dueling match with the movie execs’ exec too busy to look up from their stupor of movie script sameitude.  And that’s when I realize it’s happened again, I let my trusty guards down as soon as the fade in – that I’ve drowned in possibility at another lost chance at greatness that’s not even close to pretty goodness.  I gather my thoughts and my wits about me, piece together what went right then predictably wrong, how much seemed so OK until it wasn’t or ever isn’t.  But I have to get to the car first, I have to stand and shake off my popcorn kernels and the popcorn kernels of others that have formed a bib of tiny indentations in my clothes and on my arms and pant legs.  I stand too quickly again, and wobble like others off kilter on squeaky tennis shoes, popcorn buckets and soda cup rockets toppling over, gurgling, elbows batting one another nestled together in our blameless orgy of contemptible escapism.

It’s only after the second battery of clear-the-way-for-the-next-unsuspecting-movie-theater-patron-lights come on that I really feel the air of disappointment, the sting and then the weight of critical reasoning coming back on strong after having been engulfed in hopeful romanticism – stymied, again by our gullible love of movie escapism.

Related articles

• Commentary on Movies, History and Perspective (rorydean.wordpress.com)
• Historic movie theater escapes the end of an era (ktvb.com)
• Five things we’ve learned from a record year at Cineplex (theglobeandmail.com)