Watership Down

Tags

1970's, Adventure, Animated, Denholm Elliott, Drama, Harry Andrews, John Hurt, Martin Rosen, Michael Graham Cox, Richard Briers, Watership Down, Zero Mostel

Director

Martin Rosen

Voice Cast

• John Hurt
• Richard Briers
• Michael Graham Cox
• Harry Andrews
• Denholm Elliott
• Zero Mostel

An animated tale of survival in nature that is surprisingly mature( and many would say traumatising), Watership Down is often referred to as a film that terrified a generation of kids who thought they were seeing a film about cute bunnies. Yet while brutality is certainly not shied away from here, it’s the soul and message of Watership Down that shines the brightest.

In a warren in the English countryside, a group of rabbits live with their own beliefs on creation and how life is supposed to be. It seems so peaceful, but it is about to be shaken to the core. One rabbit by the name of Fiver has a strange vision of the destruction of their warren and warns everyone to get out. His brother Hazel believes him but they are shunned by the chief rabbit. Along with a small band of other rabbits, they stealthily leave the warren at night, joined by one of the Owsla( or in human terms, person of authority and order) Bigwig, who was originally skeptical of Fiver’s vision. They encounter all manner of danger in their search for a new home, including vicious predators, the human world and the only doe being picked off by a bird. Now without a woman among their number, they have to find some in order to continue their species. Aided by a crazed but helpful gull named Kehaar, they may just find it. It’s when the group encounters the tyrannical General Woundwort , who rules over his warren of rabbits with supreme brutality, that things turn very dark and tense for everyone. For Woundwort is a brute who will kill anything as soon as look at them, if they disobey his regime. With Hazel at the helm, he mounts an attempt to free the does from the harsh control of Woundwort. But it definitely isn’t going to be easy to create this dream paradise for them all to live in once everything is over.

Martin Rosen beautifully captures the poignant emotion and red and tooth in claw depiction of nature in the Richard Adams’s novel. Though a bit more on the running time might have been in order, Watership Down is really hard to find fault with. The animation, which boasts the feeling of landscape, watercolour painting and a naturalistic colour palette, is second to none and partnered with some unusual dreamlike sequences that stand out for their terror and vision. I mean, when we see what became of the original warren it is some skin crawling stuff. The claustrophobia of rabbits squashed on top of each other, their red eyes glowing as they are gassed is freaky and nightmare inducing. And people thought this was a movie simply for young kids? Now sometimes it is hard to tell the difference between certain rabbits, but this is a minor hitch in what is otherwise an immensely moving and startlingly honest look at how nature works. The morals of sticking together and the dangers of oppressive tyranny are well observed, with obvious parallels to the Second World War. The thematic value of Watership Down is what has made it endure for so long. It doesn’t pander to the audience or patronise, and while there are those who criticise the violence and horror, they should remember that the overall message of the film is one of finding peace, even though life is a hard journey. But as violence and shock are big parts of the movie, they can’t be ignored. I must admit to still being surprised how visceral many of the scenes are that are featured here, they still hold up on gruesome and unflinching score. The fighting, blood and bleakly brutal vision of nature is never far from view and many scenes have a lot of palpable tension. But in a way, featuring genuine violence( albeit involving anthropomorphic bunnies), it presents something different in an animated movie. Many times we go in expecting something squarely aimed at children, but I’m certain many were surprised when they discovered the bleak overtones and poignancy of Watership Down. I have massive amounts of respect for Watership Down in retaining the novel’s unflinching examination of survival and not dumbing it Down one ounce for audience satisfaction. Sometimes films try to be just a little bit too kid friendly, to the point that the film is ridiculously cheery. Believe me when I say, that is most definitely not the case when it comes to Watership Down. And I can’t review this movie without mentioning the haunting addition of ‘Bright Eyes’ sung with conviction by Art Garfunkel. It’s bound to bring a tear to the eyes.

The talented voice cast, featuring John Hurt, Richard Briers and Michael Graham Cox are exemplary at giving life to their characters and finding heart there. With such a wide breadth of voice work( also including Harry Andrews as the terrifying Woundwort, Denholm Elliott as a rabbit whose as enigmatic as he is creepy and the comedy stylings of Zero Mostel as a bird that helps the main rabbits out), it’s hard to not appreciate the ability and skill that each of them brings to the table.

Visceral yet beautifully rendered and vividly thematic, Watership Down is a film to treasure, no matter how graphic some of it is. After all, you’ll probably never forget this movie once you’ve viewed it.

Advertisements

The Aftermath

Tags

2010's, Alexander Skarsgård, Drama, James Kent, Jason Clarke, Keira Knightley, Romance, The Aftermath, World War II

Director

James Kent

Starring

• Keira Knightley
• Alexander Skarsgård
• Jason Clarke

A melancholy and passionate story of Post-War desire and the long-lasting impacts of war itself, The Aftermath is not that original, but does she’d some light on the psyches of people learning to live after conflict. Plus, it’s complete with a handsome cast and is wonderful to look at.

It’s been five months since the Allied victory and the world is trying to move on from the destruction and darkness of the Second World War. Into the ruins of Hamburg comes Englishwoman Rachael Morgan(Keira Knightley). She is there to live with her estranged husband, Colonel Lewis Morgan(Jason Clarke) , who is closed off and reticent with emotion.  He is stationed in Hamburg and is one of those charged with rebuilding the city. There is an obvious distance between the couple, which we learn is a result of the harrowing death of their young son during the War. They move into a grand house, which until recently was occupied by widowed German architect Stefan Lubert(Alexander Skarsgård) and his teenaged daughter. After losing her son, Rachael is apprehensive and hostile towards Stefan and other Germans. Lewis seems to adopt a more diplomatic position, trying to not group innocent Germans into the stereotype of all being Nazi’s. A further wedge is driven between Rachael and Lewis when he reveals that he will let Stefan and his daughter stay in the house. He thinks it is wrong to simply kick them out of the house. Rachael is vehemently against the idea of letting them stay, but Lewis insists on it. While Lewis is busy and not communicating with his wife about what’s become of their marriage, Rachael struggles to cope with life and her own feelings of hurt and anger. Around this time, the tensions between Rachael and Stefan move into an intense and unexpected affair. Rachael discovers a strength and semblance of normality again, brought out by the wounded but sensitive Stefan, who lost his wife in the war. Their love intensifies once Lewis is away on duty. But their affair isn’t meant to last and will no doubt have harsh consequences if ever revealed.

James Kent, who previously directed another war drama in Testament of Youth, once more provides his efficiency and sensitivity to this emotive story. He’s got the right hand to steer what is a familiar tale and still keep it interesting. While it isn’t as deeply felt or tragic as the aforementioned Testament of Youth, Kent acquits himself admirably here. Familiar is a word many reviewers have applied to this film and I can see why. But familiar doesn’t mean bad in any way, just a tad repetitive in some areas. Where The Aftermath most succeeds is its ruminations on the difficulty of grief and how war is not always black and white. We examine how the War did damage on both sides and that the impact of it didn’t just leave people once the fighting ended. There was a whole world of sadness, regret and hardship among millions affected by the length of World War II and what it brought with it. The three principal characters are all hurting from loss and bottling it up, setting the stage for it to come out unexpectedly. There are some moments that occasionally ring a bit hollow and sometimes events play out in predictable fashion. The subplot of Stefan’s daughter falling in with a Nazi who still wants to fight for the cause is pretty boring and not at all well handled. There’s a lingering feeling that a bit more oomph may have benefited The Aftermath. But a few unexpected moments and the way it quietly yet perceptively examines hardship and the pain of war, makes The Aftermath have a certain emotional quality that overcomes a few flaws. In regards to how The Aftermath looks, it’s gorgeously shot with snowy vistas a plenty and a certain glow, as well as passion in the love scenes between Knightley and Skarsgård. Yet it doesn’t shy away from the destruction of war and the dark remnants of conflict hang with a gloomy air alongside splendid winters. Costumes and sets are also of a high quality, matching the period with immense detail and style. And the music, which is a big highlight, has a romantic longing and sweeping angle that is just right for The Aftermath. Plus, the lovely usage of ‘Clair de Lune’ is a nice touch and always a joy to my ears.

A handsome cast fleshes out their roles with emotion and clarity. Heading the lot is Keira Knightley, who has poise, sadness and the eventual emergence of hope down to a tee. Her face expresses so much of what Rachael is trying to hide and she reveals emotion slowly but effectively. Knightley is definitely the right person to embody unresolved anger, deep melancholy and bruised hardship in a period setting. Simply put, Keira Knightley is excellent in her role. Plus her chemistry with both Alexander Skarsgård and Jason Clarke is spot on in different ways. Alexander Skarsgård has the looks and quiet dignity for his role as romantic stranger sweeping Rachael up into an affair. But he’s no wolf, simply a man who is decent and also hurting from the impact of World War II. Just like Rachael, he is searching for someone to understand his grief with and Skarsgård plays that beautifully. Jason Clarke is often the most quiet character of the peace, being the utmost definition of the stiff upper lip. He’s a man whose feelings are coiled within and that he tries to keep in check. Clarke, who possesses a sad eyed demeanour and the feeling of internal strife, riveting at playing a man dedicated to his job which allows him to bury his troubles. But once they come spilling out, all the pain and bitterness is there plain to see. The two sides of the part are telegraphed wonderfully by the often underrated Jason Clarke. These three actors do their thing with admirable skill at delving into the damaged minds of each character and how they need to unravel.

So while it gets a bit clichéd in quarters, The Aftermath is still watchable as a stylish evocation of grief and the emotions pertaining to it. Handsomely shot and nicely performed, it’s far from a masterpiece, but still a movie with enough emotion to stir.

Donnie Darko

Tags

2000's, Beth Grant, Donnie Darko, Drama, Drew Barrymore, Holmes Osborne, Jake Gyllenhaal, Jena Malone, Katharine Ross, Maggie Gyllenhaal, Mary McDonnell, Noah Wyle, Patrick Swayze, Richard Kelly, Science Fiction, Seth Rogen

Director

Richard Kelly

Starring

• Jake Gyllenhaal
• Jena Malone
• Mary McDonnell
• Holmes Osborne
• Katharine Ross
• Beth Grant
• Patrick Swayze
• Drew Barrymore
• Noah Wyle
• Maggie Gyllenhaal
• Seth Rogen

A genuine cult film that defies being boxed into a specific genre, Donnie Darko is a mind bending film, that’s layered with thematic material, a biting edge and eerie ambience galore.

Donnie Darko(Jake Gyllenhaal) is a suburban teenager in the 1988 who is prone to sleepwalking and disturbing thoughts. He’s a charismatic, smart but troubled young man who seems to delight in challenging authority whenever he can. His parents ( Mary McDonnell and Holmes Osborne) and sisters (one being Gyllenhaal’s real sister Maggie) are confused by him and don’t know how to react to him. On medication to combat his anti-social behaviour towards others and what is seen as paranoid schizophrenia , he one night starts hearing a voice telling him to come outside. Once he gets there, he discovers the voice comes from a frightening looking, six-foot tall rabbit named Frank. He is informed that in twenty-eight days, six hours, forty-two minutes and twelve seconds, the world will end. After waking up far from his house, once he returns he finds that a jet engine crashed into his bedroom. This further highlights the weirdness in Donnie’s life and functions as another indicator of potential doom for everyone. Donnie starts to attend a psychotherapist(Katharine Ross), who tries to fathom what’s going on in Donnie’s mind, but has extreme difficulty opening it up. Most adults seem to act unusually around Donnie, which aids his further alienation from life. Some however seem to understand like the rebellious English teacher Karen Pomeroy (Drew Barrymore), her boyfriend/ fellow professor of science Kenneth Monnitoff( Noah Wyle)and new girl Gretchen( Jena Malone). But then there is the over zealous and devout gym teacher Kitty Farmer(Beth Grant) who is buttoned and wants everyone to follow her lead and slimy motivational speaker Jim Cunningham( Patrick Swayze). As Donnie’s doomsday visions become more frequent and he is driven to commit violent acts by the spooky rabbit, Frank’s mention of time travel sends his mind reeling about what the visions represent. Picking up a book from his professor on the subject, Donnie dives into discovering how he fits into this apocalyptic vision. Is the world really going to end? And if so, what is Donnie supposed to do to stop it?

Richard Kelly made his debut with this film and though his output since has been mixed( though I did like the often maligned and misunderstood The Box), at least he can be remembered for creating this iconic and complex movie. Kelly transports us into the strange world of teenage years and what was going on in the 80’s, but amps it up with the theme of time travel and cause and effect. You just know from the question raising opening that you’re in store for something very unusual and far from conventional. The script, written by Kelly,  is unnerving, caustically funny and highly imaginative, which is a bonus for someone who enjoys all those things when done right . It fleshes out a mystery in the film and creates a fine character in the form of the title anti-hero. He’s disturbed there’s no doubt about it, but he speaks quite a lot of sense when others won’t. And at first we aren’t sure whether what he sees are hallucinations or not, but you definitely know they point to something extremely ominous in the future for everyone. Coming of age is a big theme here and one can view the film as an analogy of puberty and adolescence, as it’s often a time associated with change and something pulling us in a specific direction. And the countdown motif telling us how many days until Armageddon is a real nerve shaker.

Believe me, you’ll find yourself thinking about Donnie Darko a lot after viewing it. The enigmatic story which has a lot of layers and ideas on its mind engages the brain, but refuses to give cheap, easy answers. It’s too smart for that and instead functions as ambiguous and challenging. Whichever angle you want to view the film from, there is something here for everyone to sink their teeth into and think of their interpretation of it all. You can see it as a biting satire in suburbia and conformity, with the disturbed Donnie being the one who fights back against it, coupled with social drama. Or as a sci-fi flick about time travel and how events play out differently because of change. I’d say the film is both of these things and that’s partly why I love it so much. It plays by its own rules and doesn’t try to be like everything else, something which I applaud. I mean you know a film is challenging and complex when there are thousands of websites dedicated to deciphering the many meanings of it. From a visual standpoint, Donnie Darko is extremely atmospheric and immersive thanks to creative camerawork such as slow zooming shots and a gloomy yet strangely majestic colour in cinematography, occasionally punctuated by brightness. Music plays a key role in Donnie Darko; exemplified by the 80’s heavy soundtrack( filled with Tears for Fears, Echo and the Bunnymen and Joy Division) and unusual, distorted thumping of the score that keeps going with alarming intention. One of the best uses of music is the cover of ‘Mad World’ which is stripped back and haunting as it plays over panning shots of all the people impacted by Donnie in a masterful sequence.

In the role that really announced him as a major acting talent, Jake Gyllenhaal is simply put excellent as the main protagonist. He has to go through so many changing emotions, often very quickly and he does it all without missing a beat. The sly, sardonic smile that reveals his disdain for others, the intense stare of alienation and disillusionment and a certain nuance to the mercurial mood swings are all embodied to a strangely charismatic height by the greatness of Gyllenhaal. It is the definition of a star-making role that Gyllenhaal made the most of and clearly shows him as one of the best actors of his generation. Jena Malone boasts a haunting quality as his love interest, who wrestles with her own demons during the course of the movie. Mary McDonnell and Holmes Osborne both make impressions as Donnie’s parents who are bewildered and bemused by his behaviour, as does Katharine Ross as his psychotherapist. A major standout is the scene-stealing Beth Grant. Playing someone whose vicious, unapologetic antagonism is disguised as righteousness is both a hoot and something alarming. She scolds, lectures but never seems to be able to understand others thanks to her bigoted ways and watching her come apart, especially as a result of Donnie, is a sight to behold. And also really standing out is Patrick Swayze; filtering his natural charm offensive into something more charlatan and far from what it first appears. It’s one of the most interesting and different roles Swayze ever took and it shows off his considerable talent. Drew Barrymore has the right rebellious but dedicated attitude for her part of a teacher, persecuted for trying to engage with her students in a way that contrasts with the conservative approach of others. Ably supporting that feeling of challenging conformity is Noah Wyle, who opens Donnie up to the idea of time travel. Maggie Gyllenhaal makes her present felt, with her sparring and jabs at her brother and especially in the later half in emotional fashion. Plus, look out for an early role from Seth Rogen.

A hypnotic, unusual and engaging story of creepy certainty and eerie atmosphere, twined with fine acting and ambiguity, Donnie Darko is simply a must see.

The Mule

Tags

2010's, Alison Eastwood, Andy Garcia, Based on a true story, Bradley Cooper, Clint Eastwood, Crime, Dianne Wiest, Drama, Laurence Fishburne, Michael Peña, Taissa Farmiga, The Mule

Director

Clint Eastwood

Starring

• Clint Eastwood as Earl Stone
• Dianne Wiest as Mary
• Bradley Cooper as Colin Bates
• Michael Peña as Trevino
• Laurence Fishburne as Head of DEA
• Taissa Farmiga as Ginny
• Alison Eastwood as Iris
• Andy Garcia as Laton

Clint Eastwood directs and steps in front of the camera once more with The Mule, which takes basis from a true story of an elderly man who was an unlikely drugs mule for a cartel. With it being Eastwood there is undoubtedly talent here and good spots. The trouble is The Mule stumbles in the mid section and I can’t help but feel it could have been better than it was.

Earl Stone is a 90-year-old horticulturist who has seen better days. He’s become bitter and out of sync with society. His business is approaching foreclosure and after being so neglectful of his family, most of them have shunned him and his wife Mary has divorced him. His granddaughter Ginny hasn’t turned her back on him and invites him to her engagement party. It’s at the party that someone gives Earl a tip-off of a job where all he needs to do is drive. Desperate, Earl accepts, little realising that he’s becoming a drugs mule. Even when he does discover what he’s transporting, he asks no questions as he is so in need of the cash. With the money he gets from each job, he tries to make amends with people he’s wronged in the past and attempts to build more bridges with his estranged family. This goes very well and his efficiency in the job earns him some respect in the cartel community, particularly the head honcho. But the DEA is trying to crack down on drug smuggling and a transportation in Illinois and as headed by the purposeful Colin Bates, they aren’t going to stop until they reach the source of the illegal acts. Earl keeps going with the job, slowly coming to see the darkness he has put himself in. Yet as the DEA closes in and the cartel start to fight amongst each other, Earl is stuck firmly in the middle of what could be a very dangerous situation.

Clint Eastwood brings his usual professional sheen to the film and focuses on characters, primarily Earl. Character development of the titular mule is what this film does well. I especially though there was poignancy to the fact that Earl feels so out-of-place in a technical, modern world that he doesn’t understand. That was one thing that came through loud and clear when watching The Mule. Not all of Eastwood’s decision behind the camera pay off, for starters the film runs too long and falters in the middle part. But his sophistication and handling of the main narrative is excellent and provides at least some emotional tie. If anything’s to blame for The Mule not being an overall excellent movie, it’s the script. Although it does bring out moments of dramatic worth, I need felt it all came together clearly or pleasingly enough. Having the other story of the DEA dragged a lot and didn’t feel not nearly as compelling as watching Earl slowly make attempts at redemption while he goes along on this dangerous ride . And though The Mule has its share of humour and lightness, the middle part where Earl sees the corrupt but intriguing wealth of drug dealers doesn’t quite sit right with the rest of the film. It only is really there to show what while he’s old, he’s still got some rascal about him with the ladies and can still have a good time. This isn’t to say that The Mule is a terrible movie( it’s actually quite good but flawed in execution), I just expected a bit more from it. I’m firmly on the fence with this offering from Eastwood, but his undeniable talent is still alive which I’m grateful for. Once seriousness kicks in, the last half of The Mule redeems quite a number of the foibles that so ruined the earlier parts. It’s here when we get the weight and emotional heft of a man coming to terms with what he’s done and these are the best moments. Eastwood’s love of jazz is prevalent too, using any opportunity he can to indulge us with melodies.

Clint Eastwood can do the grumpy, old guy act in his sleep and he portrays something akin to that here. But being Eastwood, it’s not just cut and dry. He inserts charm, humour and sadness into the character often with just a look or movement of eyes. The character is morally complex and flawed, which Eastwood is adept at bringing forth here and throughout his career. And credit to the guy, he’s 88 and still going strong, even if he’s made to look more frail and weathered here than he actually is. He’s one of the biggest assets going in The Mule and of the best things in it. In yer,s of acting, Eastwood is given the most to do. Dianne Wiest makes the most of her role as the ex-wife who still can’t shake him, despite vehement arguments that she is fine alone. Her scenes with Eastwood really have an emotional hook to them that both play beautifully. On the other hand Bradley Cooper, Michael Peña and Laurence Fishburne are all underused as DEA agents closing on the cartel. All three are great actors, but they aren’t provided with sufficient meat to savour on and make them memorable in this flick. Taissa Farmiga does what she can with her role as the only person who seems to see the good in her flawed Grandfather, while Alison Eastwood(Clint’s actual daughter) has her moments reconnecting with her estranged father that hit hard. In a brief part, Andy Garcia is highly entertaining as the cartel boss with flamboyant style.

Immensely uneven but definitely watchable, The Mule is a mixed offering from Clint Eastwood. I’m firmly in the middle in my opinion, but I can’t deny that Eastwood’s still got it, even when the work is minor and not quite a pitch on his more successful films.

No Man of Her Own

Tags

1950's, Barbara Stanwyck, Drama, Film Noir, Henry O'Neill, Jane Cowl, John Lund, Lyle Bettger, Mitchell Leisen, No Man of Her Own

I was asked by the lovely Maddy and amazing Crystal to take part in a blogathon honouring the one of a kind Barbara Stanwyck. Naturally I jumped at the chance to write about this powerhouse of an actress.

Director

Mitchell Leisen

Starring

• Barbara Stanwyck as Helen Ferguson/ Patrice Harkness
• John Lund as Bill Harkness
• Lyle Bettger as Steve Morley
• Jane Cowl as Mrs Harkness
• Henry O’Neill as Mr Harkness

A drama about a desperate mother taking on another identity, No Man of Her Own is tinged with a film noir style atmosphere which is largely beneficial. And even if the story has moments you have to take with a pinch of salt, Barbara Stanwyck and some nice, efficient direction are two major assets to the film and ones that aid it.

Helen Ferguson is pregnant by her louse of a man, Steve Morley. He cruelly discards her even though she barely has any money and will be left an unwed mother. All Steve does is give her a ticket from New York to San Francisco, which is Helen’s original home. With nowhere to turn, Helen who is eight months pregnant, boards to the train to an uncertain future. She is shown kindness on the train by recently married couple, Hugh and Patrice Harkness. Patrice is also pregnant and shows great mercy to the struggling Helen. While they are getting ready for the next stop, the train is involved in a catastrophic crash. Helen survives and is taken to hospital, where her baby is delivered. Patrice and Hugh die almost immediately after the train crashes. As she is wearing the wedding ring of Patrice(which she was minding while the real Patrice was washing) and is pregnant, Helen is mistaken for the dead woman. And as her affluent in-laws never met her, they assume that Helen is in fact their new daughter in law. Delirious, she tries to explain the truth, but everyone thinks she is still suffering from trauma and is not aware of what she is saying. Although she feels guilty and torn about taking her place in the family by lying, she’s so desperate that she can’t help but accept the open arms of the loving family. The mother and father are so very kind and Hugh’s brother Bill takes an almost immediate liking to her. As time goes on, life turns good for Helen as she assumes the place of Patrice and finally feels welcome somewhere, possibly for the first time in her life. But her happiness takes a turn when the twisted Steve shows up in her life again. He plots to blackmail her and asks for money to secure his silence. Helen is once more thrown into another predicament that could have terrible ramifications, just as her life was becoming comfortable and she was feeling accepted. Desperate times it seems call for even more desperate measures.

No Man of Her Own is  a combination of the woman’s picture and film noir. Though that may sound like a strange hybrid, with the deft hand of Mitchell Leisen at the helm, it largely coalesces well and has some fine atmosphere. From the opening of a peaceful middle class street, accompanied by the ominous voice over from Stanwyck, it captures the attention a lot as you aren’t sure which way No Man of Her Own will go. As darkness grows, a noir atmosphere of dread and desperation is never far behind Helen, with shadows and plays of light helping to show her in a very hard predicament. But you’re with her every step of the way and aligned with her attempts for a better life and to improve that of her child. Some leaps of faith need to be taken with some elements of the story and how neatly they fall in place. In the second half, the pace hits a bit of a lull but is thankfully rescued by watching Helen formulate a plan to rid herself of the loathsome. It’s only when the ending arrives that some of the greatness was supplanted as it feels a little too wrapped up and cheery for such a serious story. But despite these flaws, No Man of Her Own is immensely watchable in my eyes. A grand musical score compliments the atmosphere and emotion of the piece in that special way it seems only old movies can do.

Holding everything together is the powerful Barbara Stanwyck. Always someone who 100% to any role, No Man of Her Own is no exception. Exhibiting pain, relief, desperation and doubt, often within seconds of the other, Stanwyck is never short of compelling here. It’s all there in her face and we feel every ounce of emotion to it, and just how expressive it is. Even when the story stretches credulity, it is the determined Barbara Stanwyck that brings everything back together and worth watching. Stanwyck is a powerhouse no matter what she does. John Lund is a tad wooden as a possible suitor for Helen, but he gets better as the movie progresses. Exuding weasel tendencies and a nasty glimmer in his eye, Lyle Bettger is superbly cast as the main antagonist who could jeopardise what Helen has tried to do in order for a better life. Believe me, he’s one nasty piece of work. Rounding out things are Jane Cowl and Henry O’Neill as two lovely and welcoming in-laws.

Though it’s far from a perfect film, No Man of Her Own survives via the committed work of Barbara Stanwyck and the stylistic look of the film. These are elements that you will remember after viewing this movie.

Stan & Ollie

Tags

2010's, Biopic, Drama, John C. Reilly, Jon S. Baird, Laurel and Hardy, Nina Arianda, Shirley Henderson, Stan & Ollie, Steve Coogan

Director

Jon S. Baird

Starring

• Steve Coogan as Stan Laurel
• John C. Reilly as Oliver Hardy
• Shirley Henderson as Lucille Hardy
• Nina Arianda as Ida Kitaeva Laurel

A warmly bittersweet film about the last hurrah of legendary comedy duo Laurel and Hardy, Stan & Ollie is a film that invests you with the double act with just how involving, funny and poignant it is.

We begin in 1937 when Laurel and Hardy are at their peak, but even here they are still paid less than the other stars. Stan wants to get out of his contract with producer Hal Roach, as he doesn’t feel appreciated by him. Oliver wants to keep things as they are and not rock the boat anymore than it needs to be. This instance will be one that plays an important part later in the film. Fast forward to the 1950’s, neither man is at their height of fame anymore. But each has been persuaded to go on a music hall tour in the United Kingdom. Stan, who is the one behind the jokes and material of the routines, hopes what they ear in money can be used to finance a picture Stan wants to do. Oliver is in bad shape and not really a well man, but agrees to reform again. As they soon discover, it’s hard getting back out there because new talent has come along and captured the imagination of the public. The shows begin with not many people showing up in the audience, which doesn’t go unnoticed. Plus, various issues that have long remained dormant threaten to overshadow the tour and tear apart a friendship. But over time, the old magic comes back and the road looks set for a return to form, aided by the support of two sparring wives . Though spanners are thrown in the works, like Oliver’s failing health and with the history of the two, it could just be one last hurrah for the legends of comedy that are Laurel and Hardy.

Jon S.Baird is clearly crafting an affectionate but also revealing portrait of the legends and boy does he ever deliver. Along with the clever script that deftly mixes humour and pathos from Jeff Pope, Baird really dazzles with his warm-hearted but still bittersweet approach to behind the scenes of the lives of the beloved team. Of particular note is the virtuoso opening sequence in one shot of the team in their prime walking through the backlog of a studio, while they deliberate their contract with the slimy Hal Roach . Once the cameras roll, they are the Laurel and Hardy of legend, but there’s more going on behind the stage. The balance between the two elements of emotion and laughs is held neatly and makes the film flow amazingly. Nowhere is this more apparent than in the public argument between the duo which is filled with personal feelings of anger, but mistaken by onlookers as just part of their humorous act. In fact there are many instances of Stan and Ollie slipping into the public image that everyone knows in order to save face or escape from the harshness of life. The humour mingles with the melancholy and has you glued as Stan and Ollie realise that they need the other, despite buried grievances from the past. Credit must go to the staging, editing and make up, that make both lead actors the image of the great comedic duo. The recreation scenes from the movies of the stars is also a stroke of genius and is so precise and well realised. It leaves you smiling and with a lot of feeling, like all good movies should. A music score that is by turns deep and by others light, perfectly embodies what Stan & Ollie is going for in terms of audience feeling. I must admit in finding any fault with this movie as it was the definition of a fantastic cinema experience.

What really makes this movie soar is the lead work from Steve Coogan and John C. Reilly as Laurel and Hardy. Both get all the public mannerisms just right, like Hardy’s exasperated facial expressions and Laurel’s passive simpleton tics. It’s really uncanny as Coogan and Reilly have really done their homework and put their all into it. But it’s watching them reveal the behind the scenes nature of each. Coogan splendidly dives into the brains of Stan Laurel( which ironically go against the role of lovable idiot that he was in the public image) and the underlying sadness of someone wanting to succeed, but is also bitter by events of the past. It’s the fantastic mix of humour and emotion that also transfers to John C. Reilly, whose his equal as Oliver Hardy. Reilly has this sunny disposition that’s set against the alternating feeling of fatigue and hope.  The chemistry between the two works beautifully, much like the men they are portraying and paying tribute to. You never doubt for a minute that you’re witnessing two stellar performances that have great nuance. Sometimes with just a look, they say everything they need to. And while they form the centrepiece of Stan & Ollie, two other supporting members of the cast show they are no slouches either. They are Shirley Henderson and Nina Arianda. Both spark off the other as the spouses of the title characters, leading one person to say ‘two double acts for the price of one’. Both ladies are forceful, funny and entertaining in their own ways and they two contribute largely to the film as the supportive but firm wives.  It’s excellent casting all around for Stan & Ollie.

A wonderfully entertaining biopic that manages to sidestep the usual histrionics and over the top nature of the genre, Stan & Ollie weaves a warm picture that is bolstered by the spot on performances of Steve Coogan and John C. Reilly.

The Lobster

Tags

2010's, Angeliki Papoulia, Ariane Labed, Ashley Jensen, Ben Whishaw, Colin Farrell, Comedy, Drama, Jessica Barden, John C. Reilly, Léa Seydoux, Michael Smiley, Olivia Colman, Rachel Weisz, The Lobster, Yorgos Lanthimos

Director

Yorgos Lanthimos

Starring

• Colin Farrell as David
• Rachel Weisz as Short Sighted Woman
• Léa Seydoux as The Loner Leader
• Ariane Labed as The Maid
• Ben Whishaw as Limping Man
• John C. Reilly as Lisping Man
• Olivia Colman as Hotel Manager
• Jessica Barden a Nosebleed Woman
• Ashley Jensen as Biscuit Woman
• Angeliki Papoulia as Heartless Woman
• Michael Smiley as Loner Swimmer

A provocative and riveting satire on the societal pressures of being in a relationship, The Lobster has Yorgos Lanthimos at his most biting and weird with this drama, highlighted by very dark humour.

In a dystopian future, being in a romantic relationship is enforced. Those who are single are sent to a coastal hotel. David is one such person after his wife leaves him in the opening scenes. Sure enough, he is whisked off to the hotel. He is informed by the Hotel Manager that he must find a soul mate within 45 days. If he fails to meet this deadline, he will be turned into an animal of his choice( his being a lobster that gives the film its title.) Guests are expected to find someone who they share a certain characteristic with, no matter how small or seemingly insignificant. In this strange system, many rules must be obeyed and are punishable with force if one doesn’t submit to the way of thinking. David attempts to find a companion in this bizarre place, as he watches others go to unusual measures to ensure they aren’t transformed. The guests are given some chance at surviving as each night they are sent into the woods to tranquillize people known as The Loners. Each body tranquillised earns them an extra day to find a possible soul mate. After a brutal encounter with a heartless woman, David flees the hotel and into the woods. There he meets The Loner’s; headed by a steely female leader. She explains that The Loners don’t believe in or condone love. In fact, if anyone does fall in love while in their camp, they are buried in a shallow grave that they dug earlier and left to die. What was first an escape from what he thought was a nightmare, being in the company of The Loners is just as restrictive. But David can’t help but fall for a short-sighted woman, a connection that puts him and her in extreme jeopardy. Yet as he is caught between two evils, he must decide what must be done to survive and maybe experience love with the Short Sighted Woman.

Yorgos Lanthimos is on dark and typically idiosyncratic form in his direction of The Lobster. His penchant for wide-angle shots and those that cut out faces are apparent and coupled with a number of close-ups. The grim and evocative cinematography of Thimios Bakatakis, shows the oppressive thinking of most in the film and is like a constant gloomy spectre over them. The fact that a lot of it is natural lighting adds a lot of dimension to the harsh surroundings and creepy underbelly of it. Typical of his work, Lanthimos spins mordant and very black humour into The Lobster. It infuses the movie with a strange tightrope that it walks admirably between dystopian shock and stinging lampooning. Absurdist is the order of the day as shocking events take place but are often undercut with a nasty glee and deadpan delivery. Which brings me to the script, as envisioned by Yorgos Lanthimos and his regular collaborator Efthymis Filippou. The strange, clipped way of speaking that was witnessed in Dogtooth is here, with more bite and laughs thrown into the mix. As troubling happenings and the full nature of both systems David finds himself in unravel, we are left with an acidic critique of modern dating and the implications of it. Lunacy is equated with normalcy here as guests of the hotel and The Loners represent two extremes of opinion and enforcement. Conflict with characters arises as both ends of the spectrum clash. And with most characters rendered no name, only a certain quality, weirdness continues to flow through the veins of The Lobster. Be warned, The Lobster will make you laugh as much as it unsettles with a collection of startling scenes. Macabre is one word that comes to my mind when describing this skewering of partnership and the way we all in some way conform to what’s expected of us in regards to relationships. how snap second judgements are apparent in real world relationships is explored heavily and symbolically by the policy of having to find someone who shares a similarity. Though events are exaggerated to grotesque and horrifying heights, they still have something to say to us about the world. And we are also left to deliberate a lot of things, building an ambiguous current from start to bizarre end. The piercing and often mournful score is unusual and another representation of just how outlandish the premise is and how twisted it is when you think about it.

A stellar cast get in touch with the weirdness and deadpan nature of The Lobster and what Yorgos Lanthimos envisioned. Colin Farrell displays great comedic chops, of the physical and verbal variety. Looking curiously out of sorts( plus shape), with various, vacillating expressions and with a biting look at things, Farrell is a very excellent lead of the film. Rachel Weisz shows the most emotion in the film, having the amazing ability to use a monotone voice(typical of the tone of the work of Lanthimos and in narration here) and have a face that expresses so much, particularly happiness and sorrow. It’s a fine piece of work from the always interesting and talented Rachel Weisz. Léa Seydoux is searing and very chilling as the leader of the opposition, whose methods are just as cruel and unusual as the ones David ran from back at the hotel. If looks could kill, Seydoux would be slaying us all with just how vindictively convincing and brutal she is. Ariane Labed has mystery to her as a maid who you never know if you can trust her or not, as there is something sneaky about her. Ben Whishaw and John C. Reilly exude a certain naïveté about them as two men who ‘befriend’ and both want to avoid transforming no matter what. The two guys work well together and are collaborators who understand the ideas at play here. I liked their scenes with Farrell, where the shared awkwardness is purposefully palpable. Out the supporting cast, Olivia Colman is superb at portraying the cold, blunt and seemingly unfeeling Hotel Manager. Colman is a big standout in her screen time for her timing and delivery.  Jessica Barden, Ashley Jensen and Angeliki Papoulia all embrace the outlandish and creepiness of the piece, with only Michael Smiley being left in the cold with not much to do.

An absurdist story of conformity, dating and dystopia, The Lobster will not appeal to everyone out there. But for those who know of Yorgos Lanthimos and his trademark approach, you are in for a dark but strangely amusing treat that will linger in the mind.

Dogtooth

Tags

2000's, Angeliki Papoulia, Anna Kalaitzidou, Christos Passalis, Christos Stergioglou, Dogtooth, Drama, Foreign Language Film, Mary Tsoni, Michelle Valley, Yorgos Lanthimos

Director

Yorgos Lanthimos

Starring

• Christos Stergioglou as Father
• Michelle Valley as Mother
• Angeliki Papoulia as Eldest Daughter
• Christos Passalis as Son
• Mary Tsoni as Youngest Daughter
• Anna Kalaitzidou as Christina

Dogtooth marks my first introduction to the work of Yorgos Lanthimos and man is it one hell of an intro to this idiosyncratic film maker. Here he creates an unnerving and provocative portrait of parenting gone off the deep end and the weirdness of it all. You won’t be sitting in a comfortable position or thinking of pleasant things once Dogtooth has finished.

In a house in the Greek countryside that is sealed off like an army compound, a Father and Mother raise their three children, a boy and two girls who are never named. Yet the children( who are clearly nearing their 20’s) are treated like they are much younger and we are soon witness to their strange existence. Father and Mother have kept them inside the house their entire lives, with none of the children venturing outside into the big, wide world. They are taught the incorrect definitions of words. They believe they have a brother who lives on the other side of the high garden wall. They believe that cats are fierce man-eating beasts that lie in wait if they should exit their home. They are awarded stickers for good behaviour and violently berated if they don’t fall in line with the rules set up. They are told that they are only permitted to leave when a canine tooth falls out. To say it’s an extreme situation that the kids except as just normality is putting it mildly. The Father works at a factory and is the only one to ever leave the fortress he has made. The only contact with the outside world comes in the form of security worker Christina, who works in the same place as the Father. He enlists her to satisfy the raging hormones and sexual needs of the Son, but this introduction brings with it consequences. Once the other daughters meet her, the Eldest Daughter barters with Christina for first a headband and then video tapes in return for favours. These end up setting off a chain of events that threaten to tear apart the mendacious world the Father and Mother have created for their offspring.

Yorgos Lanthimos as director has this innate ability to make things seem surreal but with some semblance of reality, albeit one that has gone awry. It’s a strange but arresting gift to posses and Lanthimos sucks you in with how he presents such an unusual situation to the audience. It’s the type of place that looks at first idyllic, depending on your viewpoint, before smatterings of violence and graphic scenes appear unexpectedly. It might not be classified as a horror movie, but Dogtooth certainly has its fair share of shocks and squirms. And while Dogtooth is largely disquieting, there are slithers of jet black humour to be found here which is surprising to say the least. But that also gives Dogtooth another edge as you never know just how off kilter things will go. I mean how are you supposed to react when the Son finds flowers in the garden and exclaims “Mum, I’ve found two little zombies?”. I was between shock and giggles by this moment. As written by Lanthimos and fellow screenwriter Efthymis Filippou , Dogtooth is unusual in the extreme yet for all its weirdness, retains the attention with the eerie and often downright cryptic way the dialogue is presented. Even the most absurd moment is delivered with a deadpan seriousness that I wasn’t expecting in the least, but further fans the flames of an already head-scratching experience. Some will scoff at the story and say that there isn’t actually a lot of action, but that is to miss that Dogtooth is aiming to show us just how ordinary this strange world that the parents have made seems to their children. They have no knowledge of outside the house and the compound like structure they call a home, so they have literally been fed manipulative and oppressive lies. The activities they partake in are kooky and absolutely mind-boggling(not to them), but we can’t help but watch how stunted and sheltered they are.

It all crafts something particularly disturbing and like a stone in your shoe, it’s hard to get to the bottom of and shake once there. Which is mainly the point I think; ambiguity holds sway in the world that Lanthimos has presented us with leaving it up to us to decipher our various questions. We may wonder why the Father and Mother have raised their children this way? This is the most burning question of all but one that we ourselves must figure out and put our own meaning on. Dogtooth has that kind of power to make you think and not be spoon fed every single answer or have it tied up with a big, finishing bow. And from a visual standpoint, it’s a massive highlight of Dogtooth. Lanthimos chooses to shoot a lot of scenes with unusually, static wide angles that frequently cut people out of the frame with disorientating effect, further giving us cause to sit up and see where the film will journey to next. Cinematography as provided by Thimios Bakatakis has a harsh and brightly lit quality that bathes events in a sea of white, making the sudden bursts of violence just that little bit more shocking. It also serves as a bitter irony of how the world looks here and what is underneath and about to be thrown out of sync.

All the actors of the film are excellent at getting across the absolutely barmy and creepy nature of proceedings. Christos Stergioglou excels at showing stern and overbearing tendencies that are utterly horrifying from such a parental figure. He plays his role extremely well. The same goes for the rest of the cast who are exemplary, especially Angeliki Papoulia as the Eldest Daughter. She’s given the most to do and her reactions to the outside world creeping in are startling and revealing. What most helps is that they are clearly in tune with the direction of Lanthimos and his crazy, unpredictable vision of helicopter parenting.

A superb entry into the work of Yorgos Lanthimos, Dogtooth is not for all tastes but is horrifyingly compelling throughout. Believe me when I say, it’s got plenty of bite and shock to it and make no mistake about it.

Widows

Tags

2010's, Bryan Tyree Henry, Carrie Coon, Colin Farrell, Cynthia Erivo, Daniel Kaluuya, Drama, Elizabeth Debicki, Jacki Weaver, Liam Neeson, Michelle Rodriguez, Robert Duvall, Steve McQueen, Thriller, Viola Davis, Widows

Director

Steve McQueen

Starring

• Viola Davis as Veronica Rawlings
• Michelle Rodriguez as Linda
• Elizabeth Debicki as Alice
• Cynthia Erivo as Belle
• Bryan Tyree Henry as Jamal Manning
• Daniel Kaluuya as Jatemme Manning
• Colin Farrell as Jack Mulligan
• Robert Duvall as Tom Mulligan
• Jacki Weaver as Agnieska
• Liam Neeson as Harry Rawlings
• Carrie Coon as Amanda

A reinterpretation of a Lynda La Plante novel that was also a television series in the 80’s, Widows, as directed by Steve McQueen is an enthralling and character driven slow burn of a heist thriller and drama with superb acting.

In Chicago, a heist that was organised by Harry Rawlings goes horribly wrong and results in his and the other members of the criminal group being killed. Following this, Harry’s widow Veronica is threatened by mob boss Jamal Manning , who Harry stole from and who wants money back to finance his campaign to run for alderman. He warns her to get $2 million to pay him back soon or suffer the consequence, which will most likely come in the form of his terrifying brother Jatemme . His rival for his desired position  is Jack Mulligan, a slimy, spoilt politician who wants to step out of his father’s shadow who also will figure in a certain capacity of the story. After acquiring Harry’s notebook of plans for another heist, Veronica contacts the widows of the other dead men. Linda, who owns a dress shop is in a similar predicament as her husband sold her business without much thought for her and Alice is a battered young woman who is strapped for cash and harangued by a harridan of a mother. One widow isn’t interested in it, so Veronica enlists the help of the fierce Belle, who it just so happens to be Linda’s babysitter. She plans to relocate and could do with a chunk of money to help with this. The plans of the heist starts to form with the group, but various things throw up stumbling blocks and set in motion what could be deadly for the ladies if they don’t succeed.

Steve McQueen is already an established director who is on fire here, bringing his knack for looking at dramatic subject matter and blending it with some really tight tension. We get a plot that seems straightforward, but is actually very twisty and frequently takes you by surprise. We also get commentary on many themes such as racism, hypocrisy , sexism and crime, but thankfully they are given good rendering and not heavy-handed. McQueen clearly has something to say and his cinematic talents lend themselves well to his vision. One great example is Mulligan moving from an impoverished area to his plush house which is a minute away. The fact that the windows of his car are blacked out show how little he and sometimes others understand social divide. This is a heist thriller with a difference as the main characters are not professionals in the art of stealing and the heist itself is not the most important part of the film. Undoubtedly, it forms a ticking time bomb for the characters but it’s watching how these people react to the seemingly impossible task ahead that provides Widows with its biggest impact. We get to know these women and their lives and what ultimately brings them together. They don’t want to be friends or even know each other that well, but all are drawn into a certain sisterhood of unfortunate circumstance that leaves them with no choice but to resort to planning a heist. These are women who are realistic and not simply superheroes, a film like this is too good to go down that route to making it a matter of fluffy caper. There are real stakes here and ones dripping with double-crossing danger. Some may take issue with the gradual build up, but I thought it added more dimension to the film as we viewed growth within characters and their actions. McQueen should be commended for how he keeps all the stories and arcs spinning in tune and given time to breathe. It could have fell apart as there is sometimes a lot going on in Widows, but Steve McQueen and the screenplay from him and Gillian Flynn keep us firmly rooted and invested in the ways they link. The editing, which cuts back and forth in time at various intervals and can be choppy one minute and contemplative the next is something to admire. And set against a building and rumbling score from Hans Zimmer, Widows particularly soars.

A string in Widow’s ever impressive is the ensemble cast, which is simply to die for. Viola Davis heads proceedings with an intimidating and grim seriousness, that also allows for humanity and sadness emerging. Davis rocks the role of a woman who has lost everything and becomes an unlikely but indomitable presence in something she never thought she’d have to do. It’s when she doesn’t say anything that she truly comes alive; her face a canvas of subtle and nuanced emotion. It’s a very fine performance by an always impressive actress who it appears is incapable of disappointing. Michelle Rodriguez is a little softer here than the usual tough chick she plays and it works surprisingly well. I just wish she’d get more roles that blend her toughness with that something else like the one displayed here. Elizabeth Debicki is another standout as the often needy and almost childlike Alice, who it appears is incapable of having a relationship with anyone who won’t abuse or mistreat her. Debicki plays her like a broken down China doll, only later on she starts to harden herself and increasingly mature. Cynthia Erivo rounds out the main ladies with an abrasive attitude and no-nonsense visage that is palpable and strong from the moment we see her.

While it is the ladies of the ensemble who take the lion’s share of screen time, the men also show they are no slouches. Particularly of note is rising star Daniel Kaluuya who bristles with an unnerving swagger and alarming intensity. He puts you on edge throughout Widows and it’s a big credit to him that you feel that way. Bryan Tyree Henry also has an intimidating nature, but one that is tempered with shrewd smarts. Colin Farrell is really fleshed out as a conflicted politician who almost expects everything simply because of standing but also a desire to escape the way his father thinks. It’s a fine balancing act and one that is played well opposite the always watchable Robert Duvall. Liam Neeson, mostly seen in flashback, is like a spectre on proceedings as he is the one who instigated everything and has his fingers over all. Also here is Jacki Weaver, who plays in a short but memorable time the vile and suffocating mother of Alice, whose idea of trying to help is by attempting to coerce her into prostitution. Carrie Coon may be given the least amount of screen time but from what we see, her presence figures unexpectedly into things.

With a focus on characters and depth, Widows earns high points and is simply put, a very well made film with heart and tension. Steve McQueen crafts this engaging and twisty thriller drama that must be seen.

The Umbrellas of Cherbourg

Tags

1960's, Anne Vernon, Catherine Deneuve, Drama, Foreign Language Film, Jacques Demy, Marc Michel, Musical, Nino Castelnuovo, Romance, The Umbrellas of Cherbourg

Director

Jacques Demy

Starring

• Catherine Deneuve as Geneviève Emery
• Nino Castelnuovo as Guy Foucher
• Anne Vernon as Madame Emery
• Marc Michel as Roland Cassard

A colourful but also melancholy musical of love and circumstances changing it, The Umbrellas of Cherbourg is if nothing else an experience from beginning to end. This is largely down to the tribute to old musicals and the undercutting of it with an aching sadness not often seen in films of that nature.

In the French town of Cherbourg, 1957, where it seems to rain almost constantly, a passionate love is at play between 17-year-old Geneviève Emery and mechanic Guy Foucher. Geneviève works in her mother’s umbrella shop that is about to go into financial dire straits. The love shared between Geneviève and Guy is intense and idealistic with them hardly going a minute without thinking of the other. But, the mother of Geneviève disapproves of the relationship and wants her daughter to marry for security. Guy and Geneviève plan to marry and have a daughter, but fate has different plans. Around this time, Guy is drafted to serve in the Algerian War, meaning that he will be separated from his beloved for a long time. After a farewell of spending the night together and saying goodbye at the train station, Geneviève learns she is pregnant and is left in a predicament. Her mother has the idea to marry diamond merchant Roland Cassard, who is entranced by Geneviève. The marriage is to be one of convenience and after hearing only once from Guy, Geneviève makes her decision. Her decision in the end has far-reaching consequences and a different outcome than expected for her and Guy.

Jacques Demy was clearly a man with a vision to use certain tropes from classic Hollywood and mould them into something different and beguiling for us all. His eye for colours and unorthodox approach present his vision to us in a glorious way. His prowess crafts a story that’s enchanting as it is tragic and totally spellbinding. Moments really stick with you from this film. The collection of colourful umbrellas that cover the titles, the love shared between the lovers at the heart of things and a really tear inducing farewell at the train station. As the lovers are parted and the camera pulls away from their embrace, leaving Geneviève alone, the music swells to heavenly heights and shows the power of cinema over emotions .While a musical, The Umbrellas of Cherbourg is anything but traditional. For starters, every word is sung, no matter if it’s just something mundane. This brings with it a level of fantasy, that is counteracted by the seriousness of subject matter and the ultimate tragedy of it all. We really feel every word sung because of its intensity and sincerity on show. The colour design that really pops with candy and pastel shades in every lovingly rendered frame also acts as a juxtaposition to the sadness of the central love story and the way life doesn’t always work out for us. The main story is quite simple when you look at it, but it’s the telling of it that truly makes it the classic it is revered as. It’s a boy meets girl situation told with sophistication and something that alternates between nostalgic romance and heartfelt loss. It may look like the kind of Technicolor extravaganza that MGM where so good at making back in the day, but under the surface is a real feeling of something bittersweet. This adds to the beauty of the film as it isn’t part and parcel and here’s your happy ending, it goes down another path that I respect. Cherbourg is not afraid to defy convention in its own way. Now no mention of this film would be complete without mentioning the ever-present score from Michel Legrand. As every line of dialogue is sung, a nice rhythm is established in proceedings. The most haunting refrain that translates into English as ‘I Will Wait For You’ is the music you’ll remember the most for its romanticism and ambience. Believe me, it will take a while to shake.

This is the film that introduced the world to Catherine Deneuve and what an introduction. She gives a gentle, charming and melancholy performance that really touches you. It’s all in her angelic face and soulful eyes as she goes through the pain of love and circumstance. Nino Castelnuovo is equally as good, finding hopes and dreams in Guy’s face and his outlook, which eventually gets changed over the years. The two really sell the romance and idealism of the couple, which says a lot considering that they spend large stretches of the film apart. Their first interactions are gorgeously played, while there is a more serious tone when they meet years later. It’s the kind of chemistry many movies dream of having between a romantic pair. Anne Vernon and Marc Michel round out the cast, but it’s the romantic two at heart of the movie that you’ll remember.

An unusual but wholly engaging and moving undertaking by the talented Jacques Demy and his visual(not to mention musical team), The Umbrellas of Cherbourg is classic movie watching for all.