Review: Snowpiercer

Written by Guest Contributor: Jefferey Pinkos If somehow I could psychically convey some demands to the emperors and caliphates, and if — suggesting an even more unrealistic hypothetical situation than psychic communication — they cared and listened and understood, I would propose the two following decrees.

1. To cast Tilda Swinton in everything they could, and
2. To never recreate The Wizard of Oz, especially through the use of a grim/gritty lens.

Fortunately, Ms. Tilda is at work again but at the cost of the second decree.  Snowpiercer — not a Hollywood picture in the slightest, except in distribution — is at its core Oz writ dark, desolate, and dystopian.  But it’s leagues better than any latter-day Tim Burton production could ever offer.  (Baseless swipes across the board here.  If I was something a pittance more redeemable than an online critic, I might worry about making enemies.  But since I’m not, I swipe away!)

Director Joon-ho Bong is a gift to mankind.  Once I heard someone laughing at the CGI monster in The Host and got really fucking mad.  It’s a little silly, of course.  The monster does look a little laughable, almost like the killer beast Gojira does.  The Host and Gojira both do something profound with their potentially laughable seeming creatures.  They are transformative creatures by their destruction.  Gojira gives us a city devastated.  The Host gives us a family devastated.  We deeply understand humanity with how it reacts to loss and fear.  It rises and fights back and protects its loved ones.

Snowpiercer is not like The Host.  Where The Host begins with a comfortable family, who becomes destabilized by an event, Snowpiercer arrives after the event.  A manmade ice age has lain waste to the world, and everything that’s left of us sit on a train circumnavigating the globe indefinitely.  The tail passengers — a long oppressed faction of underlings, with a wildly diverse cast of throwaways, Octavia Spencer, John Hurt, Ewen Bremner, lead by Chris Evans — lead a revolt to take over the train and question the man himself, the great engineer who pioneered the Snowpiercer train, Wilford.

It’s messy and mean and nasty stuff, revolution.  Armed with a drug addicted security expert, Kang-ho Song, and his daughter, Ah-sung Ko, they quickly unravel more and more terrors about their life and the lives of the other residents.  If anything, go see the meat train scene.  It is the most frightening and surreal scene I have seen in some time.

I don’t have anything to say more about it.  It is seething.  It is its scariest at its funniest.  Look at the school train scene (ran by the excellent Allison Pill) and the ecstatic Wilford song.  To the train passengers who stumbled into this Roald Dahl book by way of the early days of Rapture, it is a grim hero-worship a few degrees away from a cult religious experience.  It is not a stretch to go back to our elementary school days and find that history being taught is so much hero-worship, so much like indoctrination, it’s insane to find we love and idolize men who sought terror and reaped war.

If I were to complain about anything, is that its pacing gets wonky in the second act.  That cars fly by without comment.  Some like the opium den/orgy car — something not offered by the TRE — might do with some acknowledgement.  But I see its purpose.  To the people from the tail, the front end’s life is all triviality without consequence.  We see a lot of broad characterization in its cast — see for instance Wilford’s lieutenant Mason (the great and powerful Tilda).  But it’s so much less biting in passing.

It should be a huge hit.  If it’s in theaters still, see it with as many people as possible.  If it’s on VOD, invite friends over.

---

Score: 5/5

---

Director: Joon-ho Bong Writers: Joon-ho Bong and Kelly Masterson Studio: The Weinstein Company Run Time: 126 Min Release Date: 6/25/14

Review: Murderdrome

Written by guest contributor Brian Roe

Murderdrome, from director Daniel Armstrong, feels like going to a really kick-ass punk rock show with a bunch of close friends. It moves along quickly without getting reckless and keeps its fun and positive attitude even as the body count starts to get out of hand. It’s one of those really rare movies that blows the impacted cynicism straight out the back of your head and leaves you wanting more.

Derby jammer Cherry Skye (Amber Sajben) has a bit of a problem. Her new boyfriend Brad (Jake Brown) has given her a sweetheart pendant that he scored online. Unfortunately the pendant is also  connected to a demonic roller-lich called Momma Skate (Be-On The-Rocks) who wants to drag sweet little Skye right on down to “H-E-double hockey sticks”. Making Skye’s dilemma even more of a hassle is Brad’s ex-girlfriend Hell Grazer (Rachael Blackwood) who dumped Brad but then gets all evil once he starts making loveably dorky small talk with Skye. So our perky, snack obsessed rollergirl Skye is truly stuck between two Hells.

Luckily she has her devoted group of derby-girls to help her out. Trans Em (Kat Anderson) is the parental type, Daisy Duke Nuke ‘Em (Laura Soall) is a sex obsessed rockabilly girl, Thrusty P Elvis (Gerry Mahony) is the good natured one, and personal favorite Psychlone (Cyndi Lawbreaker) is the feisty punk-chick who’s always up for a fight or ready to drop a meandering and vulgar figure of speech. Together they skate on the derby team The Alamos, a name that contains more than a bit of foreshadowing.

One of the first things you notice about The Alamos is that although they don’t always get along, there isn’t the normal amount of backstabbing and pettiness that all Hollywood groups of friends seem to have. For the most part this group seems to like and actually care about each other and never resort to throwing another member under a bus to get what they want. They feel like actual people, even if they spend most of their time hanging out around a skating rink and never seem to remove their skates.

Murderdrome plays out in a nighttime world that seems to belong to Skye and her friends. We never really see anyone who isn’t a part of the skating world and this gives the film the feeling that the characters exist outside of normal reality in a place where skating down the street is routine and having ecstatic sex in a vintage Cadillac is just how things are done. And although the film was shot in Australia that fact isn’t constantly trotted out. Really the only thing that gives it away are the accents of the characters.

There’s a short segment of the film that let’s Cherry Skye just skate through the streets, pirouetting and enjoying the freedom that having wheels on your feet can give you. It’s a nice touch and feels dreamy and peaceful, a literal calm before the storm. Although the rest of the film moves along briskly it never feels rushed and the tone, timing, and intent is consistent and solid.

Special effects are a combination of good old splattery corn-syrup blood and latex and digital effects that are inventive and clever. Most CGI effects feel strange in the “uncanny valley” sort of way and Murderdrome embraces this feeling to show Skye’s surroundings becoming surreal and threatening. There’s a good mix of actual skating, which is impressive, character dialogue, and effects heavy sequences. It’s great to see a low budget film that contains all of the necessary parts of a well made film while also having the freedom independent film allows creators to have.

One of the most interesting elements of Murderdrome is that although it has a primarily female cast it doesn’t devolve into the standard tropes and cliches. This is a Bechdel Test passing movie that doesn’t have to try to hard to impress how feminist it is. Although the women are dressed in the pseudo-fetishistic regalia of roller derby they are not presented as mere objects, They are sexual without being sexist, and they always seem to be agents of their own will. Basically like real world women.

Get some friends together, crack open some beers and enjoy this brilliant little gem. If we’re lucky maybe Armstrong will accept his birthright as an Aussie filmmaker to give us a post-apocalyptic view of the Murderdrome world, Dead End Drive-In style. And of course it would be called Cherry Skye: Beyond Murderdrome.

Murderdrome will be released in The US on Sept 9th, 2014 and can be pre-ordered from Amazon.

---

Score: 5/5

---

Director: Daniel Armstrong Studio: Camp Motion Pictures Run Time: 71 mins

Review: Hide and Seek

Back in college it took me a while to get into Korean cinema. Unlike Hong Kong and Japanese films my exposure to Korean films was extremely limited. When I started buying and importing a lot of Asian cinema (that still makes up the bulk of my DVD collection) I began to notice more and more of my film selections were coming from Korea. In fact in my opinion their cinema has done something neither Japan nor Hong Kong have been able to do and that’s be its own industry. By that I mean that Korea doesn’t imitate (though there is always going to be some imitation, no country is excluded from that), but rather innovate. It doesn’t attempt to be Hollywood junior, but rather it is Korean cinema and Hide and Seek illustrates that perfectly. Creepy and terrifying are perhaps the only words that can describe Hide and Seek. It is a thriller with light moments of horror, but where it really excels is in its ability to terrify you. It is not a movie you watch by yourself when your significant other is out-of-town or the family is away for the night. And while it terrifies and creeps you out to the tenth fold, it also laces in a subtle amount of social commentary. It’s something you either pick up on or you don’t.

The story follows Sung-soo; he’s OCD to the max and is forced to take medication for it otherwise he can’t function in society. He owns a business, has a lovely wife and two perfect kids and in general has the perfect life in the city. That of course doesn’t last as he’s called by the landlord of his estranged brother. Well estranged isn’t quite right; his brother is part of the reason he’s OCD as he has a skin condition. Due to an event in their past they don’t talk and Sung-soo has intentionally not been in contact; mostly because his brother is in and out of jail for sexual assault. Out of guilt Sung-soo goes to find his brother who the landlord says is missing and behind on rent. This is where things get even stranger.

Upon arriving at the apartment Sung-soo begins looking into his brother’s things and finding women’s clothing that’s just not lining up with the info from the manager. He’s confused by this and wonders what the hell his brother is up to. Meanwhile his wife is winning mother of the year as she lets her kids play out in the street of an unsafe neighborhood. A man who looks a bit mentally handicapped begins waving at the wife and she freaks out about her kids. Lo-and-behold they’re gone. She frantically runs around looking for them and eventually comes back to her car to find them in the back seat and the strange man in the front seat pretending to drive. Another mother comes to her rescue and scares the man off. She lives in the same apartment complex as the brother and offers to host the family that is very rattled and out of their element.

Conversation begins, about the building and it’s likeliness of being torn down. The perfect children want nothing to do with the poor ladies kid and you can’t really blame them as she has her eye patched and lives in the slums, while they’re rich and always have been. Sung-soo yells at his daughter to allow the little girl to play with her doll and the first things she does is rub her patched eye on it. Like what the fuck.  Of course the subject of the brother comes up and the woman freaks out. She kicks them out and tells Sung-soo to tell his brother to stop watching them. He’s confused of course but she says that she can’t sleep at night because she’s up watching her daughter and protecting her from him.

Two major things happen at this moment as Sung-soo notices markings below each doorbell of the apartments. He figures out that it indicates who lives in side. One man, two kids, that kind of thing. He freaks out because it’s below every door bell. During the opening and after this scene we learn that there’s a rumor going around about squatters living inside of people’s homes without them knowing.

Sung-soo sends his wife home without him and stays behind to figure out where his brother is and what he’s up to. The wife is upset, but she heads home. Little does she know that she’s being followed. Eventually Sung-soo ends up back home only to discover the same markings below his doorbell and the doorbells of everyone else in his building.

I haven’t told you anything that’s not in the trailer and the reason being is that final element. To come from the slums of another city to your luxury apartment that has security cameras, 24/7 guards and is essentially a small fortress and yet… here are the markings indicating, with accuracy, who lives inside each apartment.

Creepy, yes. Terrifying, certainly.

Without a doubt the story is scary. The twist and turns of the mystery are rewarding and will leave you guessing about the outcome. The parts I want to talk about, the rewarding stuff at the end… I can’t. I don’t want to ruin the movie for anyone, but man-oh-man does this story get good.

The social commentary comes in to play about security first and foremost. That’s the easy one as it asks “how safe is anyone?” The answer of course is that safety is an illusion as this film demonstrates. Human beings will always find a way. Always. I mean homeless people living inside of your house without you seeing them… you might as well change your pants now.

The other commentary is more subtle and actually something that I doubt a lot of people will pick up on. A lot of the movie is about the “haves” and the “have nots” and with that possessions in general. It’s illustrated perfectly as the son wants the new DS. He needs it. He’s addicted to things. This even saves the kids at one point as they recognize something that belongs to their mother. Again though, possessions. They and their mother know what is theirs and what is not. To go into it more I would have to talk about the ending and so rather than do that I would encourage you to keep this commentary in mind while you watch it and you’ll see what I mean.

The film has been brought over the North America for a home release and if you like or love thrillers then for sure check this film out. It’s one of the best Korean films I’ve watched in a long time, you know what? Slated that it’s one of the best films I’ve watched in a long time.

---

Score: 5/5

---

Director/Writer: Huh Jung Distributor: Ram Releasing Run Time: 107 Min

Review: Her

Written by Guest Contributor: Jefferey Pinkos I do not like Her.  There.  Now I feel like I’ve kicked a puppy.

Of course there are many things to like about it.  1.  It’s a pretty picture.  Spike Jonze and cinematographer Hoyte van Hoytema have created a gorgeous cityscape of Future L.A., with its sumptuous pastel/citrus coloring.  2.  ScarJo is so damn charming, it’s insane.  Ms. Johansson has such a natural style and range as OS1/Samantha that Ray Kurzweil just plotzed.

But try as I might, I can’t un-kick that puppy.  I may as well explain my actions.

Theodore Twombly is the quintessential Sensitive Young Man.  Even his name is adorable.  Played with overweening heart by Joaquin Phoenix, he does everything a SYM does.  He bemoans the dissolution of his last relationship, a marriage by his critical ex Catherine (Rooney Mara).  He’s financially successful in a futuristic SYM trade, writing love notes for strangers.  It’s a meaningful career, not just in securing him a middle-class existence, but in becoming an empathetic cypher for his clients, the emotionally unavailable and fetishists of the really-not really homemade.  A commodity of intimacy.  Already, I hate him.  He’s a genius, he’s paid well, and he’s terribly, disastrously lonely.  IF ONLY SOMEONE OR SOMETHING COULD HELP.

In enters Samantha.  Samantha (Scarlett Johansson) is a personality part of the OS1 PA system.  It’s designed to organize your life, but it has feelings and a responsiveness that imitates humanity so well it’s nigh indistinguishable.  Samantha’s lively, flirty, and effective.  Immediately the both of them are smitten.  We get why he’s taken with her.  He’s the SYM, prone to love things that are lovely.  We love her immediately.  But, to paraphrase Joe Jackson here is she really that taken with him?

There’s some discomforting questions Her never resolves, nor intends to resolve.  A famous critic said that discomfort, which I will discuss further, is the discomfort we feel about computers nowadays.  All sci-fi is of-its-time.  With the NSA and Facebook forever altering human relationships and how we view privacy and technology, it’s an interesting if immaterial interpretation.  We never entertain the idea that Samantha has some ulterior motives.  Even as she rifles through your things, she employs discretion and sensitivity.  The movie doesn’t end with her selling off his private messages and credit card numbers.

The discomfort lies with Samantha.  Far be it from me to judge romance, but everything is crazy idealized.  Twombly lives well, and earns constant critical appraisal from everyone (except his ex).  His ego’s bruised and needs diagnostic and repair.  Samantha (created from a few set questions) is made for him, which reads so weird.  Samantha regularly makes choices; she even chooses the name Samantha.  So she chooses Twombly, but her design is fabricated strictly for him.  Is it a choice or a design?  Those questions are for deeper souls than mine.

A curious scene involves their relationship on the mend.  Catherine scolded Twombly on his choice of rebound partner, invoking the irreconcilable differences that landed their relationship in divorce, and now he’s critically reexamining the commodity/sentience he’s chosen to date.  Samantha is still going through a period of developing an identity for herself and in this relationship so she’s chosen a physical cypher to play-act as her.  It’s an uncomfortable scene that Twombly reluctantly agrees to.  It gets intimate.  Samantha tells Twombly to declare his love for her to this stranger, and he balks.  It’s possible to agree with him.  That professing your affection for a third-party is weird.  It is, but it feels like a half-truth.  When you have a woman without a body, it doesn’t eliminate the male gaze.  Her physicality is imagined.  How she acts and behaves and looks is presumed.  She in effect becomes every woman; but with an amenable displaceable personality.  It’s masturbation plus.

It’s possible I read too much into the scene.  “But did it move you?” Jonze will ask.  This isn’t a sci-fi film, rather a modern love story seen through a sci-fi lens.  I can’t say.  I look back at the romance story that did move me, and I felt was a strong and curious and human, and it’s the Before trilogy.  Jesse and Celine.  That could be seen as fantasy too, but both parties have an interplay that challenges and denies the other.  They argue.  They have differing opinions.  They have stories.  None of which you see here.  Here it’s a one-sided relationship.  As human as Samantha is, she has no experiences that shape her.  She has creation and definition.  Arguing isn’t a part of this relationship, and it suffers from that.  It feels too idealized, too perfect.  She does.

Another thing I reminded myself of watching Her.  The sci-fi bent is merely a backdrop.  There’s a brilliant episode of Black Mirror called “Be Right Back” in which something similar happens.  A woman gets an AI to replace her husband.  It works great until she realizes the commodity never replaces the human, then it becomes a heartless reminder.  Perhaps the sci-fi bent feels so trivial here in retrospect.

---

Score: 2/5

---

Director/Writer: Spike Jonze Studio: Warner Bros. Run Time: 126 Min.

Review: The Grand Budapest Hotel

The Grand Budapest Hotel is the culmination of every technique and signature style that director Wes Anderson has ever used. There are elements of everything including Fantastic Mr. Fox which is shown towards the end of the film with a chase down a mountain between Willem Dafoe’s character and Ralph Fiennes. Just before this though we see the classic looking over the lead character’s shoulder that has appeared in several Anderson film’s like The Royal Tenenbaums. I’m pointing this out first because it’s easy to write this film off as just another Wes Anderson film when it’s the furthest thing from it. It’s not that it’s unrecognizable, but Anderson has grown leaps and bounds from where he was when he directed Moonlight Kingdom. The story’s opening is actually full of deep meaning, but I’m sure most people were probably just confused or annoyed by the four scene opening. The film starts off with a young girl heading into a cemetery and placing a key on a statue labelled “The Writer.” The significance of the key is never explained, but as the girl sits down to read a book the film cuts to “The Writer” who is an older gentleman. He’s breaking the fourth wall as he records something, but is quickly interrupted by his child shooting a toy gun at him. He pushes through as he tells us a story that was told to him. At this point the story cuts to a third opening and we find the writer younger and played by Jude Law.

The writer is now staying at the Grand Budapest Hotel circa 1968. The hotel is not grand looking. What you see on the cover is not this hotel. It is the same make and size, but it lacks the color and luxury of what we see there. Here Law’s character meets the owner of the hotel Mr. Zero Moustafa. Moustafa played by F. Murrary Abraham is an older gentleman who is quite famous. Law’s character ends up having an encounter with him in the bathhouse and Moustafa invites him to dinner to tell him his story.

In our fourth opening we go to the truly grand, Grand Budapest Hotel. Here were’ introduced to the hotel concierge M. Gustave played by Ralph Fiennes. After his eccentric opening in which it becomes clear that he’s slept with a very elderly rich woman, played by Tilda Swinton, we’re introduced to young Zero played by Tony Revolori.

To recap we meet a young girl and cut to an old man; from there we meet his younger counter part who meets the older counterpart to the younger main character. That’s not just clever by the way; it’s actually establishing the history of the story. It’s establishing that this story has been passed down from generations through the novel, but even before that it traveled many years between from the people who lived the adventure. It’s a complex opening and I’m sure some people will watch it and think that Anderson is being clever and nothing more when in actuality he’s taking the viewer on a journey through time. Whether they suspect that its happening is on them, but he’s taking you there either way.

This story is really impossible to sum up in a way that does it justice. Part of it is about the war; part of it is about legacy, class, love, friendship and a sense of belonging. It has drama, comedy, dark comedy and an overall presence of humanity to it both good and bad.

Fiennes’ Gustave finds a kinship in Revolori’s Zero because they come from the same cut. Gustave started as a lobby boy the same way Zero did and neither one of them have a family. In the end and as it is in much of the film, they have each other.

What is significantly different about the story for this film compared to Anderson’s previous tales is the lack of a majestic ending. If you’ve seen a previous Anderson film then you know what I’m referring to, it’s that tremendous feeling that you’re left with after the film. It’s almost melancholy, but there’s enough laughter and joy that you just feel good. That’s not the case here. You don’t leave feeling sad per say, but Anderson’s goal is not to give you the majestic ending that several of his films are known for. All of the characters do not come together to do a long walking march and show that they grew and learned together after going through hell and came out stronger in the end. Instead the ending is based in reality, but one that most people should be able to relate to.

The visuals of course are beautiful and full of Anderson’s style. If there are any other visionaries making films today than they’re hiding their presences because Anderson is standing alone. His attention to detail is incredible and you can see that in just the opening as he cuts from four different eras none of them look anywhere near the other. He is a master at his craft and frankly no other filmmakers are near his level.

For the home release there are plenty of special features and ones that you’ll actually want to watch, but then this is another area in which Anderson always delivers.

If you’re a fan of Wes Anderson then you have already seen this movie, but if you’re not, if you haven’t checked his films out because they’re too different from the Hollywood machine then you’re missing out. The Grand Budapest Hotel in particular is the most accessible film that Anderson has made. It’s also his best and as some would say the most “Wes Andersony” of them all. How it manages to be all three things at once, accessible and yet unfamiliar while still being incredible… well that’s just Anderson’s style I guess.

---

Score: 5/5

---

Director: Wes Anderson Writers: Wes Anderson, Hugo Guinness, inspired by Stefan Zweig Studio: Fox Searchlight Pictures, Indian Paintbrush Run Time: 100 Min Release Date: 6/17/14

Review: The Jungle

Written by guest contributor Brian Roe

The third film in director Andrew Traucki’s “Trilogy of Terror”, The Jungle is a fast paced ride that at 84 minutes feels trim and to the point.

Rupert Reid plays Larry Black, a conservationist intent on finding evidence of the rare Javan Leopard. He enlists his brother Ben to film his expedition and they both head off to Indonesia, the camera rolling the whole time. There they meet Budi (Agoes Widjaya Soedjarwo) their Indonesian government contact and Adi (Igusti Budianthika) their tracker. There is a fast friction between Larry and Adi and it keeps even the day-to-day scenes tense.

After visiting a local shaman who gives them warnings that Larry willfully ignores the foursome head off into the vast jungle in search of their great cats. But of course they find much more than they bargained for.

Although Larry is a conservationist who really wants to save the leopard he is also a smug white guy who dismisses any native beliefs as nonsense and keeps pushing himself and his companions into situations that a more rational person would avoid. His ego manifests itself often and it’s this trait that threatens to doom him and his party.

I am one of those people who finds shaky-cam/found footage movies hard to watch. Often the camera movement is merely an excuse to cover up bad cinematography. That is not the case with The Jungle. The camera is controlled and is used to hide as much as it reveals. The constant shift between daylight to nighttime to night-vision view is used effectively. Along with some brilliant sound design the Indonesian jungle is made to feel humid, dangerous, and claustrophobic.

Another interesting technique is the use of Budi and Adi’s conversations in Indonesian to both give information and conceal it. Although Larry professes to know some of the language it is obvious that he can’t keep up with the rapid fire dialogue between his two native companions. Adi especially seems to be deliberately trying to turn the party back and seems to be equally warning and pleading with Budi and Larry to make the sane choice. But of course they won’t.

I was initially shocked by the rating of The Jungle being an “R” for Language. Really? I know that every PG-13 gets one “FUCK” only (say that in Connery’s voice) but honestly this movie doesn’t deserve an R even if the Aussie characters toss “fucks” around like sprinkles on a Homer Simpson donut.

It is frightening and tense but the bloodshed is really minimal and limited to the leftovers from various attacks. This is in no way detrimental to the effect of the movie and it’s actually fun to watch a film that isn’t trying to impress you with gore effects. Especially in an era of crappy CGI gore this was welcome. And the one truly creepy scene in this movie is truly worth the price of admission.

A lot of scenes that could have been drawn out to pointless lengths are trimmed to keep things moving and this results in a film that feels like a well executed commando raid. Get in, achieve the mission, and get out. And in a genre of film that can easily take itself way too seriously, The Jungle makes for a refreshing change.

---

Score: 4/5

Director: Andrew Traucki Studio: Lightning Entertaiment, Screen NSW, and Mysterious Light Run Time: 84 mins Price: $19.99 Release Date: 6/24/14