The Shape of Water

Tags

2010's, Doug Jones, Fantasy, Guillermo del Toro, Michael Shannon, Michael Stuhlbarg, Octavia Spencer, Richard Jenkins, Romance, Sally Hawkins, The Shape of Water

The winner of four Academy Awards, including Best Picture, The Shape of Water throughly merited this acclaim with its imaginative and universal story, beautifully haunting direction from Guillermo del Toro and top notch performances from an outstanding cast of actors. Plus, it stands as one of Guillermo del Toro’s finest films put to screen.

The year is 1962 and in a coastal area of Baltimore, Maryland, Elisa Esposito(Sally Hawkins)lives above a picture house that screens old movies to a pretty absent audience. She has been mute since childhood when she was found by the river with marking on her neck. An orphan who lives an ordered, almost ritualistic life, Elisa’s forms of companionship are closeted gay artist Giles(Richard Jenkins) and wise cracking and loyal co-worker Zelda Fuller(Octavia Spencer). Elisa and Zelda work in a government facility as cleaners, where they are expected to make things tidy and not ask any questions about the goings on within their workplace. One day, the facility has an arrival of a humanoid creature(Doug Jones) that comes courtesy of the finding of nasty government agent Colonel Strickland(Michael Shannon). He is head of the operation regarding investigating the creature, which mainly involves torturing it as he sees it as unholy, yet who himself is a self righteous hypocrite. Elisa becomes curious about the creature and begins to spend time with it. The creature responds to her and though it doesn’t talk either, they find a way to communicate with one another. Over time, a genuine love forms between them. This places her in danger as the people higher up than Strickland want to vivisect the creature and an enigmatic scientist by the name of Robert Hoffstetler (Michael Stuhlbarg) has his own motives for studying the humanoid. Elisa, feeling emboldened by her newfound love and understanding, decides to help the humanoid escape. Though this is not going to be an easy operation and Strickland has grown suspicious of her and the consequences could be deadly for Elisa if she does not succeed in saving her lover. 

From the moment The Shape of Water opens with a submerged dream sequence involving Elisa’s water filled apartment and with narration from Giles, you know it’s a film by the masterful Guillermo del Toro. His strong presence and boundless imagination are on full display, twinned with a sensitive story of acceptance, love across the boundaries and understanding of what is deemed different. He was rightly rewarded with an Oscar for his poetic direction of this dark yet endearing movie that pays homage to monster movies of the 50’s, old Hollywood and Cold War intrigue, all wrapped in the confines of his exceptional vision. The Shape of Water is many things that it can be difficult to classify it as it mixes intense thriller suspense, socially aware drama and budding romance. His script, co written with Vanessa Taylor, grounds fantasy in a historical prism, exploring prejudice within the narrative. The main players in the story are all deemed outsiders;Elisa is mute, Giles is having to conceal his sexuality and Zelda faces adversity due to her skin colour. By featuring this aspect, it seems wholly appropriate that Elisa would find solace in the arms of a humanoid creature, who himself is tortured for being different at the hands of the ignorance of others. The message of accepting everyone’s differences and uniqueness is rendered excellently into the fantasy realm with a very human touch that’s simply irresistible. The Shape of Water is a beautifully engaging and unusual fairy tale, that retains a sense of almost childlike curiosity and wonder but is definitely a fantasy for mature audiences owing to violence, brutality and sexuality displayed in the story. This is aided by amazing, award winning production design that captures a darkness of the 60’s in terms of historical context and the ravishing cinematography( blue, green and red feature heavily) that transport us into the distant past via a fantasy romance that’s not afraid to be strikingly adult or daring. Alexandre Desplat earned his second Oscar for his sublime score that captures a wistful, romantic longing and sense of dreamlike joy, coupled with darkness and action when events start to deepen and the stakes of the story increase. 

One of the strongest aspects of The Shape of Water is the sensationally talented cast it boasts. Front and centre is the talented Sally Hawkins, who never lets me down when it comes to convincing acting that feels so true. She’s required to not speak a word, but displays a silent symphony of feelings from quiet delight, aching sadness and growing, admirable bravery in an exquisite anchoring portrayal. You buy all of this because of just how darn good Sally Hawkins is in this part. Hawkins injects Elisa with a deep humanity and sense of authenticity that it stands as one of her finest performances that truly shines in this romantic fantasy. She’s the beating heart of The Shape of Water and it simply wouldn’t be the same without her layered performance of dazzling emotion and winning, hopeful clarity. Hawkins is supported delightfully by Richard Jenkins and Octavia Spencer as the two people closest to her. Jenkins, who has been one of the most reliable character actors in what seems like forever, gives life and pathos to his acting as the artist having to suppress his sexuality in a world of ignorance. He’s something special here it must be said with his notes of humour and sympathy splendidly telegraphed. Octavia Spencer also brings her A-game as the loquacious best friend with attitude and conviction. You feel the energy of Spencer and also her understanding of the part, which shows her as tough but deep down longing, hurting yet extremely loyal to those closest and willing to defend them until the end. All three actors were rightfully nominated for Oscars for their respective performances here and they were much deserved.

As the Amphibian creature, Doug Jones, although covered entirely in a scaly suit and make up, brings out a curiosity and sinuous movement in his role. It’s a credit to him that we see the soul of the misunderstood creature and that’s high praise indeed. Although the humanoid is seen as the monster in the story, that title actually the fits the part of the vicious Strickland, played by the incredibly reliable Michael Shannon. He’s excellent as the bible spouting, bullying government agent who always needs to be in control. Shannon is fine when giving voice to Strickland’s frustrations and nastiness, but it’s often when he is silent with emerging rage and intensity that he’s most riveting to watch. Not to say that he’s better at one than the other, he’s amazing at blending both but there’s just something about the way he uses body language and his face that really sells it. Michael Stuhlbarg displays his skills as a secretive scientist with more going on that it seems behind the appearance of studious investigation. He’s nicely understated with his subtle turn as a man who ends up conflicted on what to do with regards to the creature. 

A beguilingly unusual but very touching fantasy romance about acceptance, love and bravery, The Shape of Water is a different but enthralling film that knows how to move the audience with its story, compelling craftsmanship by Guillermo del Toro and simply stellar cast, headed by the sublime Sally Hawkins.

The Blue Lagoon

Tags

1980's, Adventure, Brooke Shields, Christopher Atkins, Drama, Leo McKern, Randal Kleiser, Romance, The Blue Lagoon

A romantic drama that is more remembered for the skin shown and hidden from young Brooke Shields and Christopher Atkins, The Blue Lagoon is hardly what you’d call intelligent viewing. It gained negative reviews on release but was a big money maker at the box office. The cinematography and music are the big highlights here, but The Blue Lagoon is the kind of movie you’d call something of a guilty pleasure though the flaws shown are noticeable.

In the Victorian era, young cousins Emmeline and Richard are on a boat. They are journeying across the ocean but a fire onboard soon interrupts it. The children are separated from Richard’s father and end up in a rescue boat with boozy cook Paddy( Leo McKern) . After days of drifting, they come across a desert island. Exploring, it appears they aren’t alone and that a tribe resides on the other side of the island. Paddy forbids both children to visit there, while teaching them survival skills in the process. They are left to fend for themselves after Paddy has a drunken binge and drowns. Years later, the two have grown into athletic, attractive teenagers( and are now played by Brooke Shields and Christopher Atkins). They’ve learned to be self-sufficient and have fashioned a hut to live in. Richard spends most of his days hunting fish for food and exploring, while Emmeline admires the beauty of her surroundings. With both not having much education and having been marooned from civilisation for a long duration, they often don’t understand what they are feeling in any shape or form. This is most prominent in terms of attraction to each other, as they don’t know how to deal with their raging hormones and changes in their bodies. Puberty is hitting for Emmeline and Richard, though they are not really aware of what entirely it is. Yet as their feelings grow into love and they discover the joys of sex, they aren’t prepared for pregnancy or even a chance of survival from the outside world.

Randal Kleiser, of Grease fame, is the director of The Blue Lagoon. He does a decent job, though his overall approach is uneven and choppy. I feel like big parts of the story have been cut out and that the adventure which was promised in pasts wasn’t there. The main point everyone mentions is the sexual content between Brooke Shields and Christopher Atkins. Shields was 14 at the time of filming and Atkins was 18. Atkins did his own nude scenes, while Shields had a body double and had her hair stuck to her chest to cover her modesty. While the sexualisation of the two is questionable and would certainly not be allowed today, it’s the fact that film wants to be a showing of natural love but is clearly peek a boo stuff involving young people that stands out. Sex in itself is something natural but The Blue Lagoon treats it in a way that’s on a pedestal yet attempting to seem to be classy . In actuality, The Blue Lagoon is not classy because of the film not having much in the way of realism or sense and is obviously wanting box office returns with the promise of revealing content. I don’t understand how it expected to be one thing when it’s actually the other, marketing might be to blame. The Blue Lagoon wants to be sexy and somehow chases and discovers it can’t be. It’s not difficult to see why the film raised eyebrows on release and is still spoken about now. I must say while there is nudity on show, large parts of it are obscured and films nowadays definitely display more than what is shown in The Blue Lagoon. But I can understand the stir of this film back in 1980, I doubt something like this would be made today.

The script is pretty risible, trying to almost be a sexier Swiss Family Robinson while promoting itself as being a natural and free expression of burgeoning desire. It leaves the stars uttering lines that raise laughter rather than sweetness or sexiness. Plus, certain plot points like the tribe that are on the other side of the island are practically all but forgotten and blink and you’ll miss it. It’s as if someone just cut out that part and thought it would help( in reality, it doesn’t). The best things in The Blue Lagoon are the cinematography and music, which actually provide some feeling of atmosphere. Néstor Almendros is the cinematographer and his use of natural lighting is inspired at capturing the romanticism of paradise and supplying us with an array of breathtaking vistas. He breathes life into the film and shows the set location of Fiji to beautiful effect. Aiding the cinematography and the film itself is the lush music that is simply gorgeous. It has such a sweeping and intoxicating aura to it that is better than the film it belongs too. That can be said of both aspects as you do have to admire them, but obviously wish the film had more to involve us.

The acting from Brooke Shields and Christopher Atkins was lambasted on release. Yet while neither is perfect or especially earth shattering, they aren’t horrendous and have some moments to shine. It’s the writing that doesn’t give them a lot to do, often making the characters sound unconvincing. I know they are supposed to be uneducated and unaware of things, but they come off as dim witted. Thankfully, Shields especially has enough charm and presence to compensate this. Not amazing by most standards, Shields, with her prominent eyebrows and dazzling eyes, at least suggests her character’s changing mindset and unsure feelings with some semblance of conviction, As I’ve said, Shields is hardly delivering Oscar worthy work here, but is decent enough and her face is made for the camera. Christopher Atkins comes off less well, mainly seeming overly petulant or over the top . I think both where cast for their attractiveness that is hard to deny, but they are stranded with a story that doesn’t allow much for them to work with. At least they are both watchable (Shields in particular) , considering the main focus of The Blue Lagoon is on them and they are mainly required to be attractive and lounge about in tropical surroundings. Both became stars, with Shields becoming a face of the 80’s and teen idol in the process. Leo McKern, in the time he’s seen in the film, has bluster and fear but most importantly he does move the often slow movie forward.

So thanks to delightfully arresting cinematography, gorgeous music and wonderful setting, The Blue Lagoon has at least three things going for it. Despite its dopey logic and wanting to have its cake and eat it, the film is at least watchable and has the handsome pairing of Brooke Shields and Christopher Atkins.

Yesterday

Tags

2010's, Comedy, Danny Boyle, Drama, Ed Sheeran, Himesh Patel, Joel Fry, Kate McKinnon, Lily James, Music, Richard Curtis, Romance, Yesterday

Danny Boyle directs this warmly engaging tribute to the Beatles and the journey of love in a film that’s inviting without being cloying. Yesterday is the definition of a feel good movie.

Jack Malik(Himesh Patel) is a struggling young man whose passion is singing but whose never had success. He’s beginning to see that it might be the end of the road in Lowestoft as he’s not amounted to much. His best friend and manager Ellie( Lily James) attempts to sway him into not forgoing his dreams as she believes in him. This is coupled with the fact that she is desperately in love with him, though Jack has never noticed it. He is on the verge of giving up when something unusual happens. He’s riding home on his bike one night when a global power cut ensues and coincides with him being hit by a bus. Thankfully, he lives and though injured will recover. But once he comes around, Jack notices one strange fact about the world around him: no one remembers The Beatles. At first, Jack things it’s a bit of a joke but a few searches online reveal that all knowledge of them has been wiped. This in turn has led to other things not being remembered but the big one is the iconic Beatles. Jack starts to sing their music as if it’s his own to bring it the attention it deserves. This backfires as people assume he has written these classic songs and he starts to become successful. Even Ed Sheeran is impressed and his manager Debra(Kate McKinnon), who worships at the altar of greed and business, snaps Jack up. Soon he’s famous for singing these songs, but struggling with his own feelings of guilt that started off  as him trying to be good. Yet just how much longer  can Jack live a lie? And what of his relationship with Ellie, who obviously loves him?

Though it isn’t the first film to come to mind when I think of Danny Boyle’s directing, Yesterday shows him in mellow but touching mood. His eye for detail is very much on show with canted angles to signify the world being upside down for Jack and some pretty groovy transitions. Thinking on it, of late the underdog story has featured in Boyle’s films, only this time there’s a lot more laughs that show the director having fun. It’s aided by a winning script by Richard Curtis that mixes sarcastic humour and life-affirming love. Curtis often features lovable losers in unusual circumstances or being tested and Jack is no exception. The observations of what might have been without The Beatles are both funny and reflective, particularly in the last third where things get somewhat poignant. There’s a what if angle to a lot of Yesterday that’s delightfully daffy yet retains an emotional impact. And there’s a neat little unexpected twist that is very intriguing not to mention surprising. But because I’m a good guy, I shall not spoil it. Yesterday is t perfect and some areas seem overly familiar, but from an overall viewpoint, it’s a very nice experience and one that will leave you smiling.  Hearing the music of The Beatles is always welcome to my ears and hearing them performed with zeal and resonance in Yesterday is splendid. And I can’t not mention the romance of this film, which is tentative at first but eventually blooms as Jack realises just how important and loyal Ellie is to him.

Himesh Patel, who is best known for starring in Eastenders, is superb in the lead role of sympathetic Jack. Though his actions get him in trouble, he’s a character who tries to do the best and Patel brings that out of the part with a combo of subtlety and comedy. I hope to see in more movies as he’s really got potential as an actor. And I can’t forget his singing, which is also worthy for praise. Alongside him is the luscious Lily James, who is steadily becoming a very reliable actress. Her quirky mannerisms, winning smile and downright adorable nature are on full display for a lovely performance. You can’t help but fall in love with Lily James here. Ed Sheeran shows he’s not afraid to parody himself with a tongue in cheek role as a version of himself. I must say he does elicit quite a few laughs. Speaking of laughs, Joel Fry contributes fine humour as Jack’s right hand man whose not the brightest person, but who’s goofy heart is very much in the right place. On the other scale of laughs is Kate McKinnon who is simultaneously a ruthless bitch after money and an unhinged hoot The balancing act is effectively walked by McKinnon who is obviously revelling in being devious.

Capitalising on a strange but impressive premise and directed with skill by Danny Boyle, Yesterday is a charming, thoroughly enjoyable film, enlivened by the music of the Beatles and work of Himesh Patel and Lily James.

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.

Pandora and the Flying Dutchman

Tags

1950's, Albert Lewin, Ava Gardner, Fantasy, Harold Warrender, James Mason, Mario Cabré, Nigel Patrick, Pandora and the Flying Dutchman, Romance

The quite amazing Maddy is doing a blogathon on the cinematic icon abs beauty that was Ava Gardner. I thought I’d join and give my thoughts on Pandora and the Flying Dutchman.

Director

Albert Lewin

Starring

• Ava Gardner as Pandora Reynolds
• James Mason as Hendrik van der Zee
• Harold Warrender as Geoffrey Fielding
• Nigel Patrick as Stephen Cameron
• Mario Cabré as Juan Montalvo

A ravishing and unusual romantic fantasy, Pandora and the Flying Dutchman relies on the sheer gorgeousness of its visuals and it’s two main stars for what is one arresting movie. It may not be every taste out there, but for the cinematic lover, it’s bound to make a mark with its tragic romanticism and mythical shout outs.

In the coastal Spanish town of Esperanza in the 1930’s, men flock to the beautiful but aloof nightclub singer Pandora Reynolds. She is unmoved by attempts to woo her, even when the results are dangerous. It’s not that she’s heartless, she’s just never found anyone who has elicited a deep love within in. To others, she seems very callous( and in some cases she is and she demands her admirers perform ) but there’s more than just allure to her. It seems her attitude stems from boredom and knowing the power she has over men.She finally meets her match in Hendrik van der Zee. He is a mysterious man who mans a ship that only he sails on. Something about him captivates her like no one before, but he’s curiously distant. Geoffrey Fielding, who is a translator of text and friend of Pandora’s, surmises that is The Flying Dutchman as he’s been studying a manuscript. is doomed to sail the seas after he was condemned to immortality for murdering his wife he thought was unfaithful in the 16th Century. He can only be freed if he finds a woman who is so in love with him that she’ll sacrifice herself. Pandora is currently engaged to race car driver Stephen Cameron , but is also pursued by arrogant matador Juan Montalvo. But it’s Hendrik who most gets her attention and takes her over. Though Pandora falls deeply and unexpectedly for him, Hendrik attempts to push her away as he cares so much about her. Yet is Pandora really willing to give up everything for the man she has finally fell in love with? Let’s just say, tragedy and eventfulness take form in this romantic and mythical fantasy.

Albert Lewin crams the film with multiple mythology references and literacy allusions. This is something I’m a sucker for this kind of thing, as both subjects interest me and put them a in a stylish movie with a folklore inspired undergone, and I’m going to like it. Not every idea of comes off, but an underlying emotion and melancholy brings some of the flights of fancy back down to Earth and is a feast for the eyes and ears. There’s a poetry to the script( which is written by Lewin and story of an impossible love and the sacrifice asked to restore it and the flowery language, mixing metaphors and similes that a wordsmith would be proud of. Lewin does himself proud with this exercise in gorgeous style and heightened emotions. The biggest asset is how the camera truly is in love with Ava Gardner. She glows with an otherworldly glamour and is remarkable to admire. And the cinematography by the outstanding Jack Cardiff, with Technicolor shot through with a moody blue tinge is simply gorgeous at referencing the romantic fatalism of the two main characters .There are a few parts that stretch credulity and become to out there for its own good(along with a running time that’s a tad excessive), but by and large it is a movie that’s heady appeal isn’t wasted on colourful fans of movies deemed as oddities. It’s an exotic, dreamy film with a sheer sense of atmosphere and visual poetry that’s hard to tear yourself away from. It’s far from flawless in a number of ways, but it’s unusual nature and devastatingly splendour are hypnotic. And the score has a really unusual, tragic and lushly romantic aura that covers Pandora and the Flying Dutchman all the way through.

Ava Gardner heads proceedings as the eponymous Pandora, who’s feeling of indifference melt as she falls for The Dutchman. Gardner was a breathtaking beauty who just entranced you from the first time you saw her. That lends itself well to the role of Pandora, as men flock to her everywhere. Yet despite being such a luscious lady, she was also a very good actress. This is sometimes overlooked because of her looks, which is quite unfortunate. Here as Pandora, she exudes an enigmatic charm and a genuinely growing set of feelings that come as a surprise to her as well as us. Gardner has sheer magnetism, both because of her beauty and talent. Her work here is mysteriously masked yet slowly revealing into someone letting their often disguised feelings of love come out. Pandora may act callously and flippantly at first, but once she meets her, she’s slowly transformed into someone very different.so please check it out and marvel at her command of the camera. James Mason adds pathos and weariness as the cursed sailor who is lonely and desolate, but caught in a conundrum once Pandora enters his life. Mason and his mellifluous voice wring depth and guilt ridden anguish from the part that stands as one of many wonderful performances by a fantastic actor. Mason shares an unusual and tentative chemistry with Gardner; both striking off the other with their collective uncertainty and bewilderment at their growing attraction. it really adds to the atmosphere and mythical mood of this film. Filling out the supporting roles are Harold Warrender, who wisely acts as narrator to events, show off beholder of Pandora’s hand Nigel Patrick and strutting Mario Cabré as the matador willing to kill for the love of the eponymous lady. All are great, but it is definitely James Mason and above all Ava Gardner who you’ll remember from this picture.

A most peculiar yet haunting movie that looks sublime in Technicolor, Pandora and the Flying Dutchman is the perfect love letter to the haunting Ava Gardner and shows clearly why she was made for cinema.

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.

Doctor Zhivago

Tags

1960's, Alec Guinness, David Lean, Doctor Zhivago, Drama, Epic, Geraldine Chaplin, Julie Christie, Omar Sharif, Rod Steiger, Romance, Tom Courtenay

The always sensational, lovely and talented Maddy is doing a blogathon that pays tribute to the great mastery of David Lean. I decided to review Doctor Zhivago.

Starring

• Omar Sharif as Yuri Zhivago
• Julie Christie as Lara Antipova
• Geraldine Chaplin as Tonya Gromeko
• Tom Courtenay as Pasha Antipov
• Rod Steiger as Victor Komarovsky
• Alec Guinness as Yevgraf Zhivago

A sweeping epic of romance set during the Russian Revolution and War, Doctor Zhivago is a classic of film making from the imagery to the acting. It’s an epic in nearly every sense of the word.

The movie begins with General Yevgraf Zhivago searching for what would be his niece. He finds a girl who he believes to be the one and narrates the story of his half-brother and lover. The story flashes back to Yuri losing his mother. He is taken in by the Gromeko family and moves to Moscow, where he is raised along with their daughter Tonya. He grows up to be a doctor and in his spare time, he writes poetry that reveals his romantic outlook on life. Meanwhile and nearby, Lara is a beautiful young woman who is in a relationship with passionate revolutionary Pasha, but is seduced by the much older and nastier Victor Komarovsky. Being naive and unsure of her feelings, she is used by him as he does with nearly everyone else. Yuri and Lara briefly meet when she shoots Komarovsky for his brutal treatment of her. Though it is brief, Zhivago is taken with the beautiful Lara. When World War I breaks out, Zhivago is drafted into service for his medical knowledge and Lara volunteers as a nurse. This is where their romance begins, though it is interrupted frequently by the upcoming Revolution and the chaos of events. Yuri marries Tonya but he still holds a flame for Lara, though he doesn’t act in his romantic feelings for her. Over the course of years, their love deepens as Zhivago flees from the rise of Communism  and they continue to meet but be separated. Though they pursue romance, fate and time has other ideas for the pair that aren’t going to run at all smoothly.

David Lean, whose movies are so full of majesty, is on dazzling form here. He spins the story of the star-crossed lovers in a changing world and though the film is epic and grand, manages to convey the intimacy of the love story among all the chaos. He’s a true artist of the form of movie making and his fingerprints which are extremely stylish and sensitive make Doctor Zhivago a treat. His immense eye for detail is on full show and the sheer scope of images that haunt the mind are too many to list. Aiding him is Freddie Young’s atmospheric and sublime cinematography and the iconic Maurice Jarre score, which features the lilting ‘Lara’s Theme’. Special mention must go to production designer for his sets which are striking in every way . With Lean at the helm with ever meticulous style, all these elements make Doctor Zhivago a visual masterpiece. Memorable scenes abound like the dragoon attack on peaceful protesters, a perilous train journey and Lara and Yuri’s getaway in an ice-covered dacha. Many have accused this movie of oversimplifying events during the Revolution and to some extent, it does do that. But it’s not to any detriment of the movie and as so much happened in the Revolution and War, it would be impossible to cover everything. Instead, we are at least given an understanding of a country changing rapidly and the impact it has on lives. Robert Bolt’s screenplay gets to the centre of upheaval and makes it accessible for the audience to follow in the films long running time. And what events they are as the Revolution and World War I alter the world irreversibly and the romance at the heart is tested at every turn. It’s not aiming to be a factual lesson, but it still has enough clout at capture the ups and downs of life at the time of World War I and the Russian Revolution. The starkness of the times is deeply felt as the world undergoes significant change. And it brings with it great emotion, especially in the thwarted and doomed romance of Zhivago and Lara. If you don’t feel at least moved by the movie, you must have a heart of ice.

Omar Sharif quietly conveys the longings and sensitive nature of the title character. Some may say he seems like a bystander in his own story, but Zhivago as played by Sharif is very much alive, especially when in the company of his beloved Lara. It’s all in his eyes and how they react to the world around him. The lovely Julie Christie supplies the inspiration and romance of the film with her turn as Lara. With her face(which my Grandfather said was made for cinema), you can witness the growth of a woman from vulnerable girl to passionate survivor over the course of the film. And she looks so beautiful in this movie; those blue eyes and prominent cheekbones complimenting her serene and soulful delivery of muse to. Understated passion is her biggest triumph that she contributes to events. Plus, her chemistry with Sharif is palpable and extremely convincing as the love story plays our against fate and time. Geraldine Chaplin has a radiant and almost motherly quality that she brings to the screen, while the excellent Tom Courtenay captures the anguish and loss of morality of a revolutionary forever altered by the brutality he encounters. Rod Steiger is a huge standout as the loathsome but not altogether evil Komarovsky. He’s a slime ball who sides with anyone he can in order to make his way, but Steiger discovers a certain level of humanity beneath the leering and vindictive face of the man. And rounding out the main players is the ever reliable Alec Guinness, who functions as narrator.

Passionate, full-blooded and breathtakingly beautiful, Doctor Zhivago has David Lean displaying all his talents and sense of epic vision.

The Key

Tags

1950's, Bernard Lee, Carol Reed, Drama, Romance, Sophia Loren, The Key, Trevor Howard, War, William Holden

I was recently asked to take part in a blogathon set up by the trio of Virginie, Michaela and Emily. To honour the star that was William Holden, I decided to review war romance-drama The Key.

Film Title

The Key

Director

Carol Reed

Starring

• William Holden as David Ross
• Sophia Loren as Stella
• Trevor Howard as Chris Ford
• Bernard Lee as Wadlow

A wartime drama with romance and something of a gloomy aura, The Key at least holds the attention thanks to the stars and direction. No masterpiece, but compelling enough and filled with good parts.

It’s the Second World War and Canadian tug boat captain David Ross arrives in Plymouth, England. He is assigned to salvage missions that entail picking up ships that have been attacked in conflict with the enemy. It’s an extremely dangerous job as the tug boats are ill-equipped to combat any form of onslaught, leaving them open to death every time they venture out. David meets with old friend Chris Ford who is a captain. Later after a number of missions, Chris takes David back to his lodgings, drawing particular attention to the key. It is here that David meets the beautiful Stella; an Italian-Swiss woman who rarely leaves the apartment. We learn that the key to the apartment is seen as an omen as many men have lived there and perished at sea. This has left Stella lonely(especially since the death of her first love), even though she constantly has company. With the life expectancy of these men low, Chris gives David the key to the apartment in case anything should happen to him. When Chris dies, David moves into the flat. At first, he and Stella are distant with each other as he is skeptical about the seemingly cursed nature of the key. But over time, the two fall in love. But the overreaching feeling of darkness from David’s job and Stella’s past experience with men threatens to ruin what is growing between them.

Carol Reed’s direction manages to balance drama and the scenes of war very well. It’s not Oscar-winning direction but it is passable and generates interest in what will happen next. A certain ghostly quality hangs over The Key. Something quite haunting and melancholy is in the air, especially when it comes to Stella who occupies a haunting presence throughout the story. The black and white cinematography aids the dark areas of the story and the possible love that may happen. The Key is good but far from high calibre movie making, marred by the long running time and occasional dreariness that undoes many of the fine things the movie does. At least it still retains attention thanks to the evolving relationship between Stella and David. The second section raises the film up as more momentum is introduced into the narrative. We see Stella emerge from her gloom and discover that love could be on the cards for her and David become less resistant to the idea that their union could be cursed. A highly dramatic score, with a certain haunting aura heard in many instances.

William Holden excellently conveys the tired and uncertainty of a man who has experience in battle, but is still secretly terrified of the prospect. Blended with movie star charm that is never far from view, Holden is endlessly watchable in his part. Sophia Loren is quietly melancholy and haunted as the woman at the centre of things. There’s real sadness and pathos to her work that comes through in her face, which craves love and companionship but knows of the bleak realities of life that have befallen her. Loren plays this lonely character who just wants some form of togetherness with real clarity and acting opposite the great William Holden is wonderfully convincing. They share a tentative chemistry that matures along with the movie. Trevor Howard makes the most of his role with a scene stealing turn as David’s friend and the one who sets in motion the relationship with Stella. He works well with both Holden and Loren when he appears. Also watch out for Bernard Lee in a supporting part of the head of the salvage unit.

Far from flawless but filled with something unusual and with a great cast, The Key is an entertaining way to spend your time.

To Catch a Thief

Tags

1950's, Alfred Hitchcock, Cary Grant, Grace Kelly, Jessie Royce Landis, John Williams, Romance, Thriller, To Catch a Thief

Film Title

To Catch a Thief

Director

Alfred Hitchcock

Starring

• Cary Grant as John Robie
• Grace Kelly as Frances Stevens
• Jessie Royce Landis as Jessie Stevens
• John Williams as Hughson

A witty, scintillating romantic thriller from the iconic Alfred Hitchcock, To Catch a Thief finds the master at his most playful and arch. This lush gem of a movie is super gorgeous to look at and soars to greatness thanks to the star pairing of Cary Grant and Grace Kelly.

John Robie is a retired jewel thief who lives in a villa just off the French Riviera. Once dubbed ‘The Cat’ and the best in the field of burglary, he has now turned his back on his old stomping ground. But he’s about to be dragged into it again thanks to a spate of high-profile thefts along the coast. All the cases involved the gorgeous and very expensive jewelry of the rich and well-known. Wanted by the police and with only a handful of old contacts trusting him, he attempts to evade capture and arrest for something he hasn’t done. Thanks to an insurance man Hughson, who has the knowledge of who owns the best gems, he comes into contact with the very beautiful Frances Stevens and her flouncy mother Jessie. Frances is a seemingly icy girl with boredom to contend with, but John discovers she lusts after something thrilling and even dangerous. Both begin a flirtation that ignites her curiosity over who he really is and what to do about it. Meanwhile, John sees the opportunity to bait the real thief with jewels belonging to the wealthy widow Jessie. But it’s not as easy to prove his innocence as thief is gearing up again and the dalliance with Frances is growing deeper.

To Catch a Thief has Alfred Hitchcock in relaxed and bubbly mode; teasing the audience in just who the real thief could be and whether John and France’s will become a couple. Hitchcock is having a whale of a time with the sexy interplay and mystery of the piece; utilising his bag of exceptional tricks to marvellously entertaining effect amid gorgeous scenery and attractive stars. His elegant hands are all over To Catch a Thief and it’s all the better for us that we have the master movie maker delivering the goods with customary high quality. Some may dismiss it as lightweight Hitchcock, but even if that is the case, it’s darn entertaining. I might not put it up there as one of Hitchcock’s classics, but any Hitchcock is better than most and that is something I stand by cinematically. A cracker of a script blends elements of caper, humour, seductiveness and thriller into a pretty and polished product that presents a lighter side to Hitch. And it’s amazing how much innuendo To Catch a Thief manages to pack into its frames. From Frances asking John whether he’d like a (chicken) breast or a leg to the memorable deduction that is inter cut with fireworks wildly exploding to signify passion, this movie is definitely not short on suggested naughtiness. This cheeky approach greatly benefits the movie and is impressive, especially considering how movies back when this was released where often at the mercy of the censors. Lush cinematography that deservedly garnered an Oscar and splendidly detailed costumes are a cherry on top of a finely made cake. And of course, the sweeping and romantic music is a big plus throughout To Catch a Thief’s running time.

Cary Grant, the King of suave, is on solid and fine ground as the former jewel thief trying to clear his name. His lightness of touch and twinkle in his eyes is just right for this movie and showcase him at his most charismatic. Complimenting Grant is the gorgeous Grace Kelly, who never looked more lovely or sensual as she did here. She spars nicely and seductively with Grant, by exhibiting a kittenish and sly demeanor that is very becoming as she plays with his feelings in a bid for thrills. And you can’t miss the sizzling chemistry shared between both stars that practically radiates whenever they’re in proximity of each other. It’s the kind of sexual tension you’d want to bottle up it’s that impressively shown. Jessie Royce Landis and John Williams both lend some fine support to proceedings too.

A gorgeous romance and thriller with oodles of style and sexy moments, To Catch a Thief presents Hitchcock at his most cheeky and in the mood to entertain. A breezy quality is very apparent, plus his numerous directorial stamps blending with sublime sights of the French Riviera.

Letters to Juliet

Tags

2010's, Amanda Seyfried, Christopher Egan, Drama, Gael García Bernal, Gary Winick, Letters to Juliet, Romance, Vanessa Redgrave

Film Title

Letters to Juliet

Director

Gary Winick

Starring

• Amanda Seyfried as Sophie
• Vanessa Redgrave as Claire
• Christopher Egan as Charlie
• Gael García Bernal as Victor

A gorgeously scenic and romantic movie, Letters to Juliet is a somewhat slight but nonetheless lovely film about a second chance of love and the adventure of it.

Sophie is a fact checker who wants to become a serious writer, but has always put it off due to one reason or another. She has a romantic getaway before her wedding planned for her and her husband to be Victor. He is a chef whose main priority is making time for his new business venture, leaving little in the way of time spent with Sophie. They go to Verona, where Victor is overly busy with things for his restaurant. This means that Sophie explores the romantic and historical place alone. On one such day, she encounters the Secretaries of Juliet; women who answer the lovelorn letters left at the fictional heroine’s house. Helping the ladies with their tasks in an attempt to inspire her own writing, Sophie discovers a hidden letter in a crack in the wall where many leave their questions. The letter is over fifty years old and was written by Englishwoman Claire, who poured her heart out about having to leave her beloved Lorenzo behind. She believes she must right back and does so, little suspecting anything will happen as a result. Which is why she gets the shock of her life when Claire, who is now older and widowed, turns up in Verona following Sophie’s advice. Her foppish and snobby grandson Charlie is also there and immediately berates Sophie for what he says as foolish actions. Claire on the other hand is a lot more understanding and grateful to Sophie and wishes to find her Lorenzo, all of these years later. She is hoping for a second chance with her soul mate, having left her romance with him in the back of her mind. Charlie is completely reluctant to do so, but is strong-armed into it by his Grandmother and begrudgingly, Sophie. In the course of all this searching in Italy, Claire’s journey causes Sophie to examine her own relationship with her soon to be husband and how it may not be quite what she expected. Potential romance may come in the form of Charlie , but it’s chalk and cheese at first for the mismatched pair.

Gary Winick’s direction is bright and bubbly, wrapping us in a whirl of rose-tinted romance and soul-searching. He does a commendable job and plays to the audiences expectations in a way that’s reassuring as we are fully aware of the outcome. The Italian surroundings and setting are simply put magnificent. With an old-fashioned golden sheen that is irresistible to the eye, faith in love and adventure set in ideally. You can’t help but feel romantic when watching Letters to Juliet. Don’t expect big surprises from Letters to Juliet as it’s doubtful you’ll find any. But that almost adds to the virtue of the film; it doesn’t make any pretence about what it is. It’s a gorgeous, almost fairy tale like story of romance and unlikely circumstance that will get even the most cynical to crack a grin. Plus, the feeling of familiarity is very comforting as you have a great idea of the luscious content of the movie. It’s the last half of Letters to Juliet that really drags on, though the parts before it are agreeable and make up for the overly long areas. The score is acceptable enough while being nothing too mind-blowing or original, which is to say it does the job in the expected way of romantic movies.

Amanda Seyfried heads the cast with plenty of winsome appeal and loveliness. Her fresh face and sincerity can’t be faulted as they are too inviting to resist. it’s not a stretch of a role, but one Seyfried plays well nonetheless. It is Vanessa Redgrave who truly comes alive and is one of the best things in Letters to Juliet. With her simply mesmerising voice and air of class, balanced by something fun-loving, it is a fine showcase from a special actress. With just a look, you can feel her desire, longing and quiet regret so beautifully. The film simply wouldn’t be the same without her clout and dignity. Christopher Egan has the handsomeness and posh demeanor that is right for the part of Charlie, whose snotty antics are subdued by Sophie in a gradual way, while Gael García Bernal is rightly self-absorbed as Sophie’s man whose interest in his own business seems to come before her.

While wholly predictable, the gorgeousness and the fact that it’s heart is in the right places ensures that Letters to Juliet is an enjoyable and light experience.