Birdman (or the unexpected virtue of ignorance) Movie Review

Alejandro González Iñárritu , the first Mexican film director to be nominated for Oscars has created movies that have resulted in hit after hit with critics everywhere and his newest project is certainly capable of continuing that thread. His newest offering is Birdman, a film which proves that technical aspects can make just as big an impact on audiences as plot and characters can.

Birdman (or the unexpected virtue of ignorance) follows faded film star Riggan Thomson (Michael Keaton) who is directing and acting in an adaptation of "What We Talk About When We Talk About Love” on Broadway in New York. Despite his high position in the play however, Riggan’s profession is anything but enjoyable; he often argues with his colleagues, and his relationship with his daughter Sam (Emma Stone) is fragile at best. Riggan dreams of returning to Birdman, an eighties superhero series that made him famous and as we see, this dream has become an obsession, creeping into his mind at several moments to feed his ego for acting. The film mostly follows Riggan as he interacts with the other characters and makes preparations and rehearsals for the play’s opening night. The pacing is as tight as it gets for a drama; there are no slow scenes where little happens or any moments that take place a day or two later. The film stays on task with the plot it sets out to convey and as such, never loses the audience’s attention; you just can’t take your eyes off the film because there’s always something going on. The film’s only real problem is that towards the end, many of the characters who played sizeable roles and had strong interactions with Riggan don’t really receive any kind of payoff. Does Mike Shiner (Ed Norton) overcome his arrogant ways? Does Lesley (Naomi Watts) go on to something bigger on Broadway? None of these questions are answered as the film focuses its entire attention on concluding Riggan’s story. Whilst Birdman’s ending does leave a lot to be desired, the journey there is more than worth it, laced with a wide array of humorous and memorable moments.

Despite not getting the closure they deserve, Birdman’s characters are all very well rounded and interesting. Keaton is very intriguing and charismatic as Riggan Thomson, arguably one of the best roles he has had in years. Playing off both his obsession with Birdman and his management of the play, it makes for a highly unpredictable character arc; will he return to the series that made him famous or will he step back into the spotlight some other way? I found Riggan to be slightly similar to the character of Willy Loman from Arthur Miller’s Death of a Salesman in that he finds himself absorbed in his visions of Birdman; these scenes do a great job of emphasising just how much the Birdman character means to the protagonist. The other side characters played by Ed Norton, Emma Stone and Naomi Watts may not have as much focus as Keaton but they all bring their own talents to the film; Norton as the arrogant, full-of-himself Mike Shiner and Stone as Riggan’s recovering addict daughter in particular have some great chemistry on screen. All told, it’s clear the cast members of Birdman are working at their best to make the character’s presence felt throughout the film.

Birdman’s cinematography is simply a stroke of genius; outside of three other takes, the film is shot without any kind of normal transitions. The camera continuously and constantly follows the characters, transferring seamlessly between scenes as they move about the different rooms and areas of the theatre environment and when the action is confined to a static location, such as when the characters are rehearsing the play, the camera will rotate, giving a varied view of the proceedings. The film’s use of a single take means that we never leave the perspective of the characters and the film’s pacing is always moving forward, keeping the audience engaged. The interesting techniques don’t end here; there’s also an extensive use of mirrors during character conversations which places greater emphasis on the emotive side of the cast’s performances. Drums and other instruments enter the film to signify the more intense moments and a minimal use of computer generated imagery is present to put across Riggan’s wild imagination and desire to return to the titular superhero he was once renowned for. Overall Birdman’s presentation compliments the plot incredibly well, tying in with the hectic nature of putting on a play at the theatre.

Aside from a lack of closure in its ending, Birdman is nevertheless a very well-crafted movie; the cast all turn in brilliant performances, drawing you into the story and the film’s fascinating editing style is something that has to be seen to be believed.

Rating: 4.5/5 Stars

The Theory of Everything Movie Review

For over one hundred years the silver screen has been bringing us stories that chronicle the lives of well-known individuals; some choose to veer off the facts for a more entertaining viewing experience whilst others are often inspiring in their nature. The Theory of Everything is the newest addition to the long line of biographical films and it’s another moving example of why the genre has endured for so long.

The Theory of Everything (based on Travelling to Infinity: My Life with Stephen by Jane Hawking) follows the life and exploits of Professor Stephen Hawking (Eddie Redmayne) as he deals with the sudden onset and progression of motor neurone disease, the relationship with his wife Jane (Felicity Jones) and his studies and theories of astro-physics. Beginning in 1963, we are taken through the entirety of Stephen’s adult life and are given full witness to the pressures and struggles he and his wife endured over the years. Their bond is kept as a central focus at all times with Stephen’s family life and contributions to science running alongside, allowing the film’s emotional scenes to draw immense sympathy and even a hint of heartbreak from the audience. Yet just as Stephen feels intense frustration at first and then accepts and learns to transcend his condition, so too will audiences move beyond the sad nature of Hawking’s situation and be instilled with a feeling of hopefulness; the final scenes especially are filled to burst with emotional resonance, seamlessly putting across the film’s inspirational message. The film also integrates the theme of science verses religion at certain points, with the intellectual dialogue drawing the viewer in even more. Audiences will be endlessly drawn to Hawking’s tale; between the titular professor’s seemingly impassable constraints and ultimate overcoming of difficulties, The Theory of Everything is delightfully absorbing from start to finish.

Looking at the film’s production details reveals that Eddie Redmayne and Felicity Jones spent quite a bit of time learning their roles and the results are something to behold; with a combination of facial expressions, muffled speech and awkward movements, Redmayne comes as close as possible to the real Stephen Hawking, delivering an uncompromising and compelling performance all around. By contrast to Redmayne’s restricted expressions, Jones conveys a great range of emotions for Stephen’s wife; most notably her determined and resilient nature in being with Stephen and promising to beat his condition. But despite her steadfast dedication to Stephen, Jane isn’t a perfect individual; she does feel the frustration and pressure starting to mount and she does come to question just how long her marriage to Stephen will last. These are the kinds of performances which are both highly relatable and reinforce the film’s realistic portrayal of its source material. The side characters played by the likes of David Thewlis and Maxine Peake make good use of the material they’re given and never distract from the central chemistry between Redmayne and Jones. The cast members are every bit as engaging as the plot they inhabit and are most definitely the greatest aspect of the film.

Despite being a drama as opposed to a genre with rapid cuts and framing, The Theory of Everything also mixes in its own style of cinematography. To link in with the film’s scientific undertones, the camera often spins and homes in on circular objects to reflect Stephen’s theories of space and time, which transports the viewer into the inner workings of his mind. The music is a delicate blend of emotive undertones and hopeful rises, perfectly complimenting Stephen’s climb from frustration to overcoming the greatest of personal challenges. The make-up and costuming team also deserve high praise for their authentic designs and the very convincing way in which they show both Stephen and his wife aging and changing over 30 long years. Technical presentation isn’t really such a major component in dramas but The Theory of Everything takes pride in going the extra mile to engage the audience that much more.

The Theory of Everything has a heartfelt and emotional story, a symbolic cinematic style, and brilliant characters brought to life by the outstanding performances of Redmayne and Jones, culminating in the first big hit of 2015. As an inspiring biopic on an extraordinary individual, it has very few equals.

Rating: 5/5 Stars

Locke Movie Review

What does it take to come up with a new idea for a film? Innovation is quite the risk in any kind of entertainment as audiences may or may not be drawn to it or the film may suffer from poor direction and writing. It tends to be a relatively safe bet for filmmakers to make movies that appeal to as wide an audience as possible for the purpose of profits; so it’s all the more encouraging that director Steven Knight chose a different direction with Locke, one of the more unique and interesting ideas to come about in modern film.

Locke takes place almost entirely inside a BMW X5 and follows the titular character as he drives along the motorway. As Ivan (Tom Hardy) drives he calls (and receives calls) from several individuals including his wife (Kirsty Dillon) and co-workers Donal (Andrew Scott) and Gareth (Ben Daniels). It sounds like a really basic concept at first; a movie where very little happens but as Locke gets closer and closer to his undisclosed location an enormous amount of development take place. We learn about Locke’s attitude to his job as a building site supervisor and the people he knows; deeds that slowly wander out into the open and even elements of his own past. It all culminates in immense change, sending Locke’s life spiralling out of control in an expertly crafted amount of suspense. What pulls everything together is relatability; the film deals with a variety of pervasive and very real issues such as the pressures of business and withholding secrets from others whilst also emphasising the authenticity of the character’s relationships. You can constantly and consistently relate to Locke, particularly with the conversations he has with his incompetent co-worker, strict superior and loving wife.

As you’ve probably guessed by now, Locke is a very character driven film and the performances are all heartfelt and resonant. Tom Hardy gives a fantastic performance; we see a vast array of emotions and facial expressions conveyed through his character. We see frustration, anger, sadness and ever so brief moments of happiness, which heightens the film’s relatability even further. As things become more and more desperate for Locke, he grows more and more intense with his thinking, trying to remain composed when all kinds of undesirable events are being thrown at him. Although Locke is the only character we actually see, the other cast members including Ruth Wilson, Andrew Scott and Kirsty Dillon also project emotions purely through voice. The cast ultimately makes you feel as if you know these people personally and end up holding the same opinion of them as Locke does, quite an impressive feat considering how Tom Hardy holds the spotlight for the vast majority of the film’s runtime.

Despite the use of a single location Locke contains its fair share of good presentation techniques. The different camera angles both in and out of the car provide a strong stage for Hardy to show off his character’s emotions throughout the film. There’s a constant presence of fade in and fade out shots along with lens flares to show passage of time, emphasising the scale of Locke’s trip. The night time setting placed against the low key musical score creates a slow pace and gloomy atmosphere that mirrors the events that transpire against the main protagonist. Locke’s technical presentation is just as simplistic as its plot, but the minimalistic approach works to the film’s favour, allowing the actor’s performances to make the biggest impression.

Locke is a rare thing in modern cinema; the kind of film that can take a simple concept and turn it into something truly profound. It’s more than just a unique idea; it’s one of the best films of 2014.

Rating: 5/5 Stars

Unbroken Movie Review

When it comes to films made about World War Two, a question arises; will they be based in the battles of the European front or the more naval and air focused warfare of the Pacific? Following David Ayer’s tank based Fury in October 2014; director Angelina Jolie has turned her attention to the latter setting and one soldier’s desperate struggle for survival.

Unbroken (based on the novel by Laura Hillenbrand) follows Louis “Louie” Zamperini (Jack O’Connell) an Olympic runner who also served as a bombardier in the United States Army Air Forces. On a seemingly normal search and rescue mission, Zamperini’s B24 Liberator crashes into the ocean, leaving the survivors stranded for 47 long days. From here things go from bad to worse as Zamperini is captured by the Japanese and imprisoned in a POW camp run by the ruthless Mutsuhiro “Bird” Watanabe (Miyavi). The film’s plot unfolds across a predominately present tense where we see the main character’s struggle alongside the others prisoners he meets; but it also crosses parts of Zamperini’s past in it’s first act as well as we see how he became an Olympic runner. One of the interesting things Unbroken does is subtly weave key events into its narrative; rather than place text on screen to let the viewer know how time has passed, the prisoners are informed by their captors or the film projects certain images into the background, such as the Nazi flags present at the 1936 Olympics in Berlin. This ensures that the audience is engaged with Zamperini’s struggles and also highlights that the prisoners have indeed lost all sense of time over the course of their incarceration at the POW camps; it puts you in their perspective as the film goes on. While the film succeeds in absorption, it could have utilised the main character’s central trait better; after Zamperini’s appearance at the 1936 Olympic Games, his passion for running, the fuel which powers his determination is rarely mentioned again. This could have been woven into the narrative more coherently to give the audience a stronger understanding of what kept him going during his time in the camps.

With a setting as grim as the POW camps of World War Two, the performances give off just the right emotion you’d expect from a movie of this genre. Jack O’Connell gives a great performance as Louie; you really do feel the sheer desperation that grips his character as he is relentlessly beaten and worked in the camp. His performance is complimented by the extras surrounding him, who should all be commended for the looks of oppression and fear they convey throughout the film. Despite it being his first film, Miyavi makes for a really intimidating and sinister villain in “Bird”; he’s always intent on making the lives of his prisoners a living hell which keeps the viewer guessing as to what horrible deed he’ll commit next. On the other hand though, most of the side characters don’t have much depth, particularly Zamperini’s family. (Who with the exception of Louis’s brother are played by Italian actors) If they were given more screen-time to develop and show the bond they possess with Louis, it would have made audience that much more invested in seeing him come home.

The POW camps portrayed in Unbroken are exactly how you would expect them to be; dangerous, decisive and grotty in their nature. The bright sun enveloping the setting contrasts heavily against the prisoner’s hard labour, something which is clearly and vividly framed from a variety of camera angles. The film makes a minimal use of CGI, instead relying on real locations and sets to immerse the audience in the film. A lot of effort clearly went into make-up and injury effects, especially on the prisoners themselves; they become more and more ragged and tarnished throughout the film and by the end, they look like shells of their former selves, malnourished and weakened by the ordeals. The music composed by Alexandre Desplat is very strong, fitting the poignant and tragic nature of the prisoners and the situation they have no escape from. Like many other films of its kind. Unbroken does a fine job of conveying the harsh realities of war from beginning to end.

Unbroken is a rough, gritty yet engaging tale of one man’s utter resilience and determination to endure and survive. Not all of its moving parts come together fully but overall it’s another tale worthy of admission to the long standing war genre.

Rating: 4/5 Stars