Beasts In A Southern Child

The shortest of the Oscar nominated films at just over an hour and a half, today's film is the film that you may not have heard of because it was so small. There is one most years. See Winter's Bone in 2011. So will this have the same success? This is Beasts Of The Southern Wild.

Hushpuppy (Quvenzhané Wallis), a six year old girl, lives with her father, Wink (Dwight Henry), in a forgotten little slum known as The Bathtub. She lives under a different roof to her father and fends for herself. But when a storm threatens to flood The Bathtub and a mysterious illness begins to affect Wink's health, the smart residents of the settlement run for higher land but Hushpuppy stays with her father to fight out the weather. The rest of the film looks at the remaining few Bathtub locals and their reaction to the storm and the government that forgot them. Above all though, Beasts of the Southern Wild is a tale about Hushpuppy and her strength, power, and independence.

Without a TV, Wink cheers over literal fantasy football.

They say never work with children or animals. Some of the other Oscar nominated films have severely ignored the latter (see Life of Pi) but Beasts of the Southern Wild completely disregards the first, and never has a better decision been made. It would be insulting to put Quvenzhané Wallis under the term of child acting because good child acting suggests, 'Aw, didn't they do well for their age.' Wallis did not do well for her age, she did well, period. Rightly nominated alongside the likes of Chastain, Watts, and Lawrence because, simply put, she is completely legitimate competition for them. Aged 5 when she auditioned for the film, she manages to carry the whole movie on her back better than some actresses who have been in the game for years. Sadly, her co-star, Dwight Henry, was not recognised by the Academy and it is almost unbelievable. Wink, being the deep and complex character that he is, is portrayed incredibly, and in some respects, beautifully, by Henry, a small town baker who turned down the opportunity to audition because he wanted to focus on his baking. Wink is a strong character, but there is a great deal of veiled love for Hushpuppy hidden behind his rough exterior. A truly brilliant performance.

'Hello? Is this the number to talk to hot chicks?'

Benh Zeitlin's direction does more than tell Hushpuppy's story. It opens the audience eyes to a whole way of living that we often forget. A community forgotten and left to their own devices and how, as a western world, we can neglect them and only think for ourselves. That we try to help those who want no help. It takes our world and turns it into a gritty, yet realistic, fantasy tale. The natural world and the human world colliding in a beautiful story that tugs on every single heart string possible. Assisted with some terrific camera work and a hauntingly atmospheric score, Beasts of the Southern Wild is an emotional roller coaster that is a wonder to watch and will keep you engaged and captivated from the start.

For some of the finest acting I have ever seen, let alone from a 6-7 year old, Beasts of the Southern Wild is a must see. Bring a box of tissues and be ready to go on a journey.

Best Bit? Hushpuppy and Wink's attitudes towards the storm are so captivating, you can't help but want to know everything about them.

Movies Save Lives

A film about the American secret services normally rings bells of high speed car chases, an attractive male roughly shooting his way to the bad guy, and several high budget explosions. Not today's film. Today we look at a film that looks behind the scenes of one of the CIA's most adventurous rescue missions, which mostly involves people sitting behind desks. And yet, it has incredible reviews across the boards. How? Let's check it out. This is Argo.

The year is 1979. The American Embassy in Iran is overrun by Iranian revolutionaries and several hostages are taken. However six Americans manage to escape and find refuge in the Canadian Ambassador's house, complete with handy trap doors to hide beneath. Back in the CIA offices in America, there is demand to work out a way to get these six out of Iran safely, but all plots seem a bit difficult or flawed. However, Tony Mendez (Ben Affleck), with the help of Jack O'Donnell (Bryan Cranston), put together a scheme that seems completely ridiculous but just might work: put together a fake film and get the six trapped men and women to pose as a Canadian production team on a location scout. Wrangling together John Chambers (John Goodman) and Lester Siegel (Alan Arkin) to be his producers and men in the office, he sets out to begin creating Argo - the film that never will be. But complications begin to arise over time limits, believability  and the White House doubting how strong the plan really is. A true story to make you bite your nails to the bone.

The two of them need to sort out this meth... I mean, mess.

An excellently cast film. Ben Affleck, as well as directing the film, holds the action together with a solid, dedicated performance. The calm CIA persona is constantly juxtaposed with the nerves of a real man; a man whose career, life, and six others' lives depend on his plan going right. Affleck really shows that stress in his acting, sometimes explicitly, other times it is all in his eyes. Bryan Cranston, as always, is fantastic. O'Donnell is the man who aims to play it by the book, and in Cranston's performance, we see the pain that that causes; the stress of balancing doing things right or doing things the way he is meant to. A constant internal conflict. Goodman and Arkin are delightful additions to the cast and provide a lot of the comic relief - or lighter areas of the film. They are captivating to watch, causing not only laughter, but also creating some of the most suspenseful moments of the film. A really solid ensemble that work fantastically together to build up suspense and make an atmosphere that remains tense the entire run time.

A pat on the head for your good ideas, Tony.

At two hours long, Argo is the second shortest of the nominated films. And what a solid two hours. Affleck is just as powerful behind the camera as he is in front of it. He takes Tony Mendez's story and transforms it into a real nail biter. How Affleck manages to create such tension from a lot of people talking and only a small bit of action is beyond me. The classiest race against the clock that cinema has offered in a long time. With a wonderfully atmospheric score and camera work that truly captures the intensity of situation on screen, Argo makes what could be a slow paced 'important men talking around a table' film into a constantly dramatic and engaging thriller that rockets forward with strength and power. Pushing the audience to the edge of their seat, especially in the second half.

A brilliant, brilliant example of how to create a dramatic thriller based around the secret services without needing lots of high action sequences. Timing, dialogue, and solid performing create a heart pounding and adrenaline raising piece of cinema which is dripping with constant excitement. A fantastic film.

Best Bit? The ending. Powerfully tense and but loaded with spoiler. Watch the film. 

Life Of 3.14159265359......

Based on a multi-award winning and bestselling book, today's film has it all. Water, water, water, water, er... water, and a tiger. It's nominated for 11 Oscars (Just behind Lincoln with 12) and Obama described the book as,  "an elegant proof of God, and the power of storytelling." [x] On a personal note, I adored the book and would recommend it to anyone who enjoys reading - or anyone who can read. It is truly a fantastic read. This is Life Of Pi.

The story of Piscine Molitor Patel, otherwise known as Pi after he was called 'Pissing' for years. As a young boy, Pi took up some strange interests such as swimming and finding out as much as he could about different religions until he is a practising Hindu, Muslim, and Christian. Pi's family own a zoo in Pondicherry, India, but as times get harder, the Patel family decide they have to give up the zoo, sell the animals to other establishments around the world, and move to Canada. But disaster literally strikes when a storm causes the boat that the whole family and half the zoo animals are on to sink. Pi is lucky enough (some may argue) to be thrown into a life boat, which is soon invaded by a zebra and a handful of other animals. The ship sinks to the bottom of the ocean and Pi fearfully clings to the side of the lifeboat; a horrible way to start 227 days at sea. Pi prays that his faith, knowledge of animals, and intelligence will bring him to safety.

'I believe I can fly' was always Pi's favourite song.

Being, essentially, a one man film - minus small scenes with the family and the future Pi - the whole film hangs on one actor: Suraj Sharma. Not only does the entire movie rest on his shoulders, it is his debut. This is his first appearance in any form of filmed media and it is impossible to tell. His performance is ridiculously solid and unfaltering. Acting to nothing for the majority of the film - his only companions being the sea and a CGI tiger - he takes 2 hours of what should surely be dull and dragging and makes it completely engaging. And since there is very little else to talk about in terms of acting, let us look at the special effects of Pi's pals. Watch the film and try and tell the computer generated tiger from the real one. You will be wrong most of the time. The special effects on the animals is absolutely outstanding. Richard Parker, the tiger, in particular, is a piece of technical wizardry. 

Pi starts his own Mexican wave.

But the animals are not the only special effects that are worthy of mention. The film, as a whole, is a collectio of some of the best visual creations in film to date. Think Avatar, but rather than creating a new world, it perfectly, and breathtakingly, captures our own. Thousands of fish flying over and around the boat, whales soaring out of the water, glowing sea dwelling creatures galore, Life Of Pi, simply astounds in every visual aspect it possibly can. Ang Lee has solidified the title of master behind the camera as he presents one of the most visually astounding and captivating films of recent years. Better yet, he did it with a premise that was described as unfilmable. All this combined with an emotionally developed script and heart wrenching score creates a beautifully moving piece of cinema that captures the themes of the book to a tee: faith, miracles, and strength in human determination. Some damn fine editing brings everything together perfectly.

 An incredibly shot film. Not just a masterful story, but also one that touches on the important things in life. And on top of that, it is simply beautiful. Fans of the book may be slightly disappointed due to missing scenes and the extent of Pi's suffering, but the film is wonderful in its own right.

Best Bit? Two breathtaking moments are the second storm and the arrival of the flying fish. Both will leave you speechless. Incredible film making.

Again, on a more personal note, read the book. The book is seven times as good as the film. It's incredible. Don't worry about seeing the film after the book or vice versa, just read the book at some point.

Slaves, Death, And Other Happy Topics

Westerns. The word that makes most people think of grainy movies made in the sixties and seventies somewhere in Europe and dubbed in American; probably starring John Wayne, Clint Eastwood, or Henry Fonda. We think ponchos, ten gallon hats, Native Americans, saloons, bank robberies, Mexican stand offs, the quick draw. We rarely think Germans and shiny blue suits. Well today’s film might change that. This is Django Unchained.

German bounty hunter, Dr Schultz (Christolph Waltz), frees young slave Django (Jamie Foxx) to help him be his temporary partner in order to track down the Brittle brothers, three men who had previously been in charge if Django and his wife, Broomhilda (Kerry Washington). The two bounty hunters form a bond as Schultz teaches Django how to present himself in public and be a master with a gun. Django, with only natural talent for the job to offer in return, becomes Schultz full time partner over winter, and they plan how to free Broomhilda from plantation owner, Calvin Candie (Leonardo DiCaprio). Candie is famous for breeding 'Mandingos', slaves who fight one another to the death with just their hands for the owner's amusement and betting purposes. Schultz and Django pose as traders of Mandingos looking for a slave to take back and fight in Europe. Their plan is to purchase one of Candie's best Mandingos and also Broomhilda, seeing as she is just a meaningless slave, so that she may be reunited with Django again. But Stephen (Samuel L. Jackson), Candie's loyal house slave and foreman trustee, does not trust Django for one second; something about a black man on a horse tickles him the wrong way and he is determined to find the bounty hunters' plot.

Candie was such a successful plantation owner
because he was always ahead of the competition.

There is a possibility that Tarantino has a supernatural gift in terms of his ability to perfectly cast a film, except  one character - but we will come to that. Despite Django being specifically written for Will Smith, Jamie Foxx adapts to the role without even a shadow of a doubt. He is effortlessly cool and he portrays Django's range of emotions, sometimes without saying a word. In his eyes you see the pain, the sadness, occasionally the happiness that Django would feel. DiCaprio's first outing as the antagonist is one of his most succesful to date. How he did not get nominated for an Oscar is beyond me. Acting so well to the extent that when he actually cuts his hand in a scene, he carries on to the horror of his cast mates. Incredible. Tarantino describes it as 'mesmerizing.' Christoph Waltz, needless to say, is outstanding. Nominated, rightly, for an Oscar, his second one under the direction of Tarantino. This is a team that works together. The comic relief of the film, but also the plot driving centre, along with Django. His character is complex but Waltz makes it seem effortless. Another brilliant performance. But the real stand out is Samuel L. Jackson. Not an Oscar performance, but the character that induced the most reaction from the audience. The reaction of hatred. Stephen is such a slimy character with a superiority complex that just makes him detestable. Superbly portrayed by Jackson. Horridly enjoyable.

The newest Django meets the oldest Django in a quick cameo.

On to the man behind the camera. Quentin Tarantino. This is a man who turns out hit after hit and Django is no different. Incredible shot, as all westerns are, with a soundtrack to die for. Funny and heartbreaking. Fitting action that suits all adrenalin needs. It is clever, it is strong, it is slightly controversial. It is simply all encompassing. That being said, the film is not flawless. It is just a tiny bit too long. Only minor cuts need to be made, just to take out the smallest sensation of, 'we have aaagggeesss left,' or, 'this film is soooo long.' It's only a slight feeling of 'too long' but it's there all the same. Not a huge issue, but an issue nonetheless. Secondly, and more irritatingly, is Tarantino's own appearance in the film. Normally a welcome addition to his films, but here, in his peculiar attempt at an Australian accent, something just is not right. He is next to impossible to understand and it completely jars with the rest of the film entirely, considering the rest is so well acted. Again, a small mistake that just takes something away from the film. But apart from these two small, irritating issues, Tarantino is in full stride.

A great film. Pretty much exactly what you would expect from Tarantino, Django Unchained is hilarious, action packed, touching, and down right cool. Some fantastic performances and a killer soundtrack, combined with some amazing cinematography pushes Django above the competition. Not Tarantino's best, but it is up there.

Best Bit? The scene with the early KKK complaining about their bag-masks will keep you laughing for ages after the film has finished. Plus, a great little cameo from Jonah Hill.

The Miserable

With a couple of Golden Globes and Oscar nominations under its belt, today’s film already seems to be one that the higher powers in film seem to be enjoying. Why? Why not? It is a film about miserable people singing. What more could one want? It has been a while since a musical was so successful in the awards season so what makes this one so different? This is Les Misérables.

Jean Valjean (Hugh Jackman) has been imprisoned, a slave to the law, for nineteen years; five years because he stole a loaf of bread, the rest because he tried to run. He has been under the watchful eye of Inspector Javert (Russell Crowe) but finally, he gets his parole. Javert insists he is a dangerous man but Valjean soon finds a bishop who makes him an honest man. Jump forward 8 years. Valjean is now Monsieur Madeleine and is the mayor of a small town. One of his workers, Fantine (Anne Hathaway), gets fired and becomes a prostitute after selling her hair and some teeth. After attacking a man, Javert demands for his arrest but Valjean insists she goes to a hospital. He swears to take care of her child, Cosette (Isabelle Allen), who is being cared for by the Thénardiers (Sacha Baron Cohen and Helena Bonham Carter), a couple who run an inn with their daughter Éponine (Natalya Wallace). Valjean takes Cosette away. Jump forward nine years. Students, Marius (Eddie Redmayne) and Enjolras (Aaron Tveit), along with street urchin Gavroche (Daniel Huddlestone), plan for revolution. Cosette (Amanda Seyfried) and Éponine (Samantha Barks) are now young ladies and have eyes for Marius, Javert is still completely law driven, Valjean – with Cosette – still lives in hiding, and France is on the verge of civil war. All the characters’ lives start intertwining as they get closer and closer to the day when battle starts, but how will things turn out.

And people wondered why Valjean had a damp personality. 

There is really only one negative casting choice so we will start by looking at that. Amanda Seyfried’s voice is terribly irritating. When she sings, for some reason, she cannot hold a note without trilling and wavering. It might not be such an issue if she was not a high soprano, which, with the wavering, makes her sound like an alarm bell. As irritating as Cosette is as a character, it does not mean she has to sound annoying. Apart from this, the cast was nigh to perfect. Hugh Jackman, nominated for Best Leading Actor at the Oscars, is a powerful protagonist and gives a really touching performance that shows his care and love for the people around him. A truly reformed man after nineteen years in prison. Crowe, as Javert, has possibly been had the most divided reviews. Why? It is unclear. He was fantastic as Javert. He nails the internal conflict that Javert struggles from; there is only good and bad in his mind, anything in between causes serious issues. He makes an ideal opposite to Jackman’s Valjean – see the Confrontation song for proof of this. Hathaway, nominated for Best Supporting Actress at the Oscars, is on screen for only a short period of time but she dominates every scene she is in. ‘I Dreamed a Dream’ will send shivers town your spine and tingle your soul. A hauntingly beautiful song. *Breathes for a moment. Lot of cast to get through here.*

When English students rioted, there was a lot of damage.
When French Students rioted, there was singing. 

Eddie Redmayne has a beautiful voice. Whilst his love may never seem genuine, his heartbreak certainly is. ‘Empty Chairs and Empty Tables’ will rip at your heart; get the tissues ready. Despite his slightly odd singing face, the voice that accompanies it is stunning and most of Marius’ emotions are echoed in song rather than his physical actions. Aaron Tveit as Enjolras is the strongest of the students. He’s driven by revolution and his tough persona, arguably, is the main thing that keeps the men’s spirits up. Again, his voice is spot on for the character; it is strong and powerful. He just emits swag. Samantha Barks, the beautiful Éponine, having played the part on stage, is simply incredible. Her voice is so captivating, ‘On My Own,’ becomes so engaging even though it is just a girl standing in the rain. Hopefully, she will push further for a career in film so we will see more of her.Bonham Carter and Baron Cohen are the comedy relief in the film and thank God for them. The film is so soul destroying, some comedy is completely needed. ‘Master of the House’ sums them up completely as you watch them smoothly steal from people’s pockets, heads, and even eye sockets. They are a treat in the sad times. Finally, the child actors are wonderful, particularly Daniel Huddlestone. Gavroche is possibly the strongest willed character in the French revolution and is so cool you just wish you could hang around with him. Maybe give him a couple of years to grow up first though. Phew.

Look out for Éponine's book:Friendzoning - A First Hand Experience. 

So now to the man who brought it all together. A man who already holds an Oscar for his direction of The Kings Speech two years ago, Tom Hooper. Despite having a face that never fails to seem smug (Google image his name), he has done wonders here. His decision to sing live on set is not much short of genius. You can see how it affects the performance of every single actor and actress. One cannot help but think that perhaps the film would be completely different if it had been done like a conventional musical, with the soundtrack filmed before the shooting starts. Obviously, the music is incredible. What else would one expect from a world renown musical? The set, too, is so visually astounding. From giant elephant sculptures to giant barricades, the whole film captures your eye and your interest. It makes it hard to look away. And there's something very interesting in the way certain bits are shot. They are particularly noticable in Javert's moments. For example, when singing 'Stars', we see him on a roof singing out to France with possible the most open shot of the film, but rarely does the film feel more intimate. There are often moments like this which are hard to explain how they work, but they just do.

A simply brilliant piece of cinema. The only really negative, as already stated, is Amanda Seyfried's singing. The rest of the songs will be stuck in your head for days, maybe weeks. There is something about it that just makes you want to watch it again and again. This humble blogger has seen it four times already (three times to indulge other people who wanted to see it, admittedly). A great watch, but do not forget the tissues. It is a weepy one.

Best Bit? The choreography in 'Confrontation' between Javert and Valjean is simply incredibly captivating and, along with what is one of the best songs in the musical, it just is an unforgettable moment.

Oscar Time!

It's that time again. The Oscars. I'll have my first couple of reviews up soon but first, let's have a look at the nominations. (You can find a break down of them over at Empire)

Firstly, I want to address the elephant that will be in the Kodak Theatre next month, only nine Best Picture nominations. This is two years in a row that this has been the case and the question is raised, why not use that final slot? There are plenty of films that fit the category. Here's but a few:

• The Dark Knight Rises
• Skyfall
• The Hobbit
• Seven Psychopaths
• Looper
• Brave (nominated for best ANIMATED picture, but it's as good, if not better, than some Best Picture nominees)

So why not use that slot? Even if it won't win, might as well give it the chance. My vote would be for Skyfall-nominated for five other Oscars- but really worthy of a place on the Best Picture list. 

What else has been horribly overlooked? Ah yes, Looper and Seven Psychopaths no where to be seen AT ALL. Both easily could be nominated for screenplay and Looper had some fairly impressive make up. (But then, see The Iron Lady's win over Harry Potter last year for how ridiculous that category is.)

On the bright side, most things that are nominated are worthy of their nods. More an issue of people NOT being nominated than the wrong people being nominated. I will update on this after watching more of the nominations. 

I have seven of the Best Picture nominations to get through and those don't include The Master and The Impossible so that's my aim for the month. See you in a bit.

Small People On A Quest

Almost ten years ago, a film was released that dominated the Oscars. It was the third instalment of an already extremely high profile film and won every Oscar it was nominated for; eleven separate Academy Awards. It is, of course, The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King. Since then, fans of the Lord of the Rings trilogy have been sitting around waiting for something interesting to happen. So when The Hobbit was announced, there was rejoicing around the world - though there was scepticism when it was reported that the book would be split into three films. However, the first part is now out: The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey.

Bilbo Baggins (Martin Freeman), a small creature called a Hobbit, is a quiet man who lives in the shire, content with his mundane existence. One day, Gandalf the Grey (Ian Mckellen), a wizard, turns up on his doorstep and invites him on an adventure. Bilbo rejects the offer and goes back to his boring life, whilst Gandalf invites thirteen dwarves to meet at Bilbo's anyway. The dwarves, led by warrior Thorin Oakenshield (Richard Armitage), want to reclaim the Dwarf Kingdom of Erebor, which is fiercely guarded by a dragon called Smaug. The dwarves set off on their adventure leaving a tingle of temptation on Bilbo who eventually runs off to join the dwarven mob and wizard guide on their quest. With plenty of obstacles along the way, including orcs, goblins, trolls, giant rock men, and Gollum (Andy Serkis) - only life threatening things - the group fight together with bravery, strength, and commonly, stupidity. Gandalf occasionally leaves them for other matters involving a necromancer (Benedict Cumberbatch) and his fellow wizards, but always finds his way back to count the dwarves like an exasperated teacher on a school trip. Will Bilbo find the adventure he longs for (and more than he planned) or will he realise it is not his scene and head back to his comfy Hobbit hole?

Bilbo surrounds himself with Dwarves to seem tall...
Sneaky Hobbit.

There is no way to avoid the obvious truth. Martin Freeman was a perfect choice to play the role of Bilbo Baggins. It is clear why he was Peter Jackson's first and foremost choice. Jackson even arranged the shooting schedule to fit around Freeman. He's perfectly sceptical of everything the dwarves and Gandalf do, and of the entire adventure, and it is balanced excellently with the temptation to do more and experience life. He is witty but so easy to relate to, he becomes an ideal protagonist for the film. Comic relief is provided, mostly, by all of the dwarves - too many to name individually - but especially Aidan Turner's Kili and Dean O'Gorman's Fili. Possibly the thickest of the dwarves but always deadly serious and trying to help, despite causing more problems than they stop. ('You don't want to eat them, they're infected!' 'We're not infected!') The more serious aspects are provided the dwarven leader, Thorin, who, through Armitage's portrayal, jumps around from being a harsh and tough leader to a character that will have you on the edge  as he faces death. Also, Sir Ian McKellen, reprising his role of Gandalf, takes a far lighter tone in The Hobbit. Constantly sighing and counting the dwarves as they get separated and forever being the optimist.

The first meeting of the Long Haired Club was a huge success

Technicality, as with the other Lord of the Rings films, is where this film prevails most. Not just in terms of technology, which is outstanding - just look at how even Gollum is of a higher standard - but also how incredibly shot the action is. Swirling cameras and long pans may not be to everyone's taste, but it really brings the audience into the film and convey's the chaos of fights. The soundtrack, of course, is fantastic and should be listened to whilst doing mundane activities to make everything seem awesome. The film only really suffers from one flaw, and unfortunately, it is a massive one. The pacing of the film is dreadful. The first half of the film drags and drags whereas the second half is incredible. Sure, the narrative in the first half is important, but the entire film could easily be cut down by an hour with no major loss. Even half an hour from the first half would make the majority of the film exciting and well paced rather than only half of it. Also, people in Middle Earth are made of something tough. The amount of deadly falls characters experience with a simple brushing off of the dust afterwards is ridiculous.

Apart from the pacing issues, The Hobbit is a well made film. Major fans of The Lord of the Rings will love it regardless as they get a fresh glimpse of Middle Earth and lesser fans will thoroughly enjoy the second half at least. Plus there's plenty of laughs for all the family. An enjoyable, if not long, watch. Bring on the trilogy.

Best Bit? Gollum and Bilbo's intense riddle battle. Not an action scene or anything similar, but an example of how the latter half of the film handles talking-based scenes with tension and dramatic suspense and makes it incredible watch-able, unlike the first half.