Story

Veronica is happily married to famous thief Henry Rawlings. She knows what he does and how they can afford live in luxurious apartment and have a chauffeur. She stays away from details of his job and accepts all risks coming from his profession, because in his thirty-year-old career Henry never made a mistake. He uses same experienced crew every time, meticulously planning his next heist. But something does go wrong. Henry and his team are assaulted by police during their latest heist and are killed in a fiery explosion. Veronica is in deep sorrow, but she has no time for grief as local crime boss Jamal Manning pays her a visit. Apparently Henry was stealing from him when he was killed. See, this was the money he set aside for his political campaign. And Veronica has just one month to return what Henry has stolen from him. Veronica realizes that her only chance to maybe survive all this is to gather a team and execute the next heist on Henry’s list. And she knows who to turn to – widows of Henry’s teammates.

Veronica (Davis) explaining her plan

Writing

Let me just stop you there. If you think that it turns into “Ocean’s 8” you are very deeply mistaken. In probably the only realistic way possible, “Widows” show these poor woman not as random professionals who have heist skills that complement each other as jigsaw puzzles, but as broken individuals who have to deal with aftermath and consequences of their husbands’ deaths. You will be surprised how well each of them is defined. Veronica is a teacher who is used to posh life Henry provided her with. Linda’s husband lost all his and her money on gambling and even pawned her clothing store. Alice was constantly beaten and abused by her husband. Amanda is left with 4-months-old baby to look after.

These women are against Veronica’s proposition. But they know that the won’t be able to survive on their own. Each and one of them are so intricately written that it is almost impossible not to feel for these women. And pretty soon we understand why they agree to execute the heist. Yet, they understand they know nothing and possess no skills. But unlike guys in “American Animals” they don’t sit and watch heist films to find out how to operate. Instead, they solve one problem at a time. Or try to solve.

Linda (Rodriguez) and Alice (Debicki) contemplating whether to join Veronica

Tensions gradually increase and reach peak at the final heist, which you also might expect to be a big bang deal. But you keep forgetting that heist is not the main plot of the movie. Heist is fast, brutal and feverish. Nothing like fun and intricate adventure of “Logan Lucky“. No sir, you will witness completely different action. After all it is all about characters.

Speaking of characters. There is so many characters, maybe the only movie that had bigger list would be “The Departed”. But unlike Scorsese’s masterpiece, “Widows” spends time with each of them, defining them, showing who they are, what motivates them and what they want. These characters are so colorful, so vivid and so dimensional that they will not leave your mind long after film ends.

Jack (Farrell) offering “help” to Veronica (Davis)

Directing

I am a little on the fence about Steve McQueen‘s direction. On one side, he does an impeccable job. Shots are well filmed, cinematography is amazing, editing precise, acting flawless. There were several shots in “Widows” that surprised me in intricacy and attention to detail. One shot is a continuous shot of Jack jumping into his car with his political aide and driving through town to his house. Other shot is a tracking crane shot that starts with a train on a railroad and then pans to the driving car. Both of them just made me want to stand up and applaud McQueen right there in the cinema. You can feel that he has total and complete control over the artistic aspects of the film.

And here is where I had some reservations. McQueen spends incredible amount of time on deliberations and problem of main heroes and exploration of secondary and tertiary characters. This drags overall pace of the film at times to total halt. Don’t get me wrong it works well, but you can feel that maybe he could have sped things up and get to the point faster. Sometimes even best directors need to have someone to oversee what they are doing.

Jamaal (Henry) scouting Veronica with Jatemme (Kaluuya)

Acting

Attention to each and every character implies that each actor portraying said characters need to perform on top level. And this what makes this film shine. Viola Davis is a national treasure and role of Veronica is just made for her. She steps into her shoes and never even once give an impression of falseness. It is so spot on that actually even gets creepy, to be honest. Supporting cast doesn’t fall behind from her. Elizabeth Debicki, who is usually reserved in her performances is almost unrecognizable as simple, but determined girl. On the other hand we have Michelle Rodriguez who seems to be eternally stuck in “Fast/Furious” franchise finally get a proper role to shine and does that brilliantly.

Then we have a supporting cast of such heavy-hitters like Colin Farrell, Robert Duvall, Liam Neeson, Daniel Kaluuya, Brian Tyree Henry, etc. This list goes on and on. And you might think are there just for sake of being there, but “Widows” gives each one of them something to do and showcase their acting range.

Summary

“Widows” is very well made heist film which redefines the whole concept of a heist film. With incredible attention to characters and surprising performance by whole cast, film captivate throughout but slow burn ultimately affects the overall pacing.

The post Widows appeared first on Kino-AZ.

Story

There is not a proper reason to describe the decision of two childhood friends Spencer and Warren to plot a heist. Disillusionment? Rebellion against parents? Boredom? Both real life Spencer and Warren claim in their interviews they did it to experience something they never have done before. But what kind of reason is that? After all they can’t even agree not only who first entertained the idea of heist but even when did it happen. Warren claims it was at a party. Spencer is sure it happened when they were driving to convenience store. Regardless, one thing is sure – Spencer tells Warren about an amazing collection of rare books in the library of Transylvania University. The pinnacle of the collection is John James Audubon’s “The Birds of America”, said to be worth millions. And the best thing is that it is being guarded by an old librarian. Simple enough, isn’t it?

Warren (Peters) going over the plan

Writing

“American Animals” is written and directed by Bart Layton. Film claims that it is not based on a true story but is actually a true story. For that it intermingles the fiction with documentary style interviews of people involved in the heist. With that not only we get to see what is happening, but also are given a narration to explain or question certain actions of the heroes. This helps the movie tremendously, because “American Animals” tries to get inside the heads of the main heroes. All to give us an explanation of why they did what they did.

And explanation is highly needed, because even for an untrained eye it is obvious that none of them know what they are doing. They have never participated in any serious criminal activity and possess absolutely minimal knowledge of forensics. Early in the film, Warren literally googles “how to organize a heist” and then they collectively binge watch heist and robbery movies. I mean, this is the level of sophistication the group uses when organizing what it seems to them as an infallible plan.

Group and their “ingenious” plan to dress as elderly

“American Animals” takes big deal to give us complete breakdown on every decision before the heist and it does so correctly. Just by looking at the weird and dangerous plan the group comes up first thing comes to mind is as what on Earth these idiots were thinking when concocting this mess. And something I enjoyed a lot is that film gives viewer a chance to figure it out himself. Unlike pure documentaries, where sometimes the bias starts coming pouring from all directions, film strays away from pushing any specific ideas. The interviews of the heroes are supposed to paint them in a good way. After all they were just kids, who didn’t know better, they keep saying. But viewers feel that whatever interviewees are telling is not necessarily true and is not what the filmmakers had in mind.

This effect is also heavily supported by “Rashomon” style narration. Witnesses can’t agree on a lot of basic stuff. Like who exactly Warren was talking to when trying to find a “fence” or who first came up with the idea of the heist. Or who decided that they needed to have extra people involved. At some point, even Spencer laments that he has taken some stuff that happened to Warren at a face value and questions whether whatever Warren has told him really happened or was just a figment of Warren’s imagination. This back-and-forth creates an extra dimension to narrative and makes film interesting even in dull moments.

Speaking of dull moments. The ending of the film, though I admit works well, felt long and preachy. Film very successfully builds up all the way to the heist, but the rest of the film after heist feels a little out of whack. Maybe, that is how it was intended. I am not sure.

The book.

Directing

To support this intriguing screenplay, Bart Layton provides us with a compelling directing. Here he does something experimental to independent cinema – all his directorial decisions are actually not artsy or experimental at all. There are no ultra-wide or super close-up shots. Very little shaky camera. Steady color scheme. No long takes. Carefully designed framing. Fluid editing. In fact the only thing that is worth mentioning here is director’s choice to use lenses with very shallow depth of field. This forces the heroes go out of focus really fast in some scenes.

And I am surprised it all works pretty well. His cuts complement fast nature of the film, constantly shifting perspective from interviews to dramatizations. Thus, film is very easy to watch and despite pretty long runtime (116 minutes) and subject material never bores you.

What I wanted to specifically compliment is the way Layton shows the heist itself. It is the moment of truth for our heroes, moment of understanding that their plan is not only bad but is also extremely stupid. Immediately concentrating on each of the heroes individually, Layton shows us the true raw reactions to realization what exactly they have done.

Moment (maybe) when the plan was actually made.

Acting

I have to commend acting as exceptional. Evan Peters steals the spotlight as Warren. He is extravagant, rebellious, narcissistic, practical. He is a natural leader. This all despite the fact that real-life Warren mentions multiple times that he is not and never was a “ring leader”. Peters’ performance begs to differ. Barry Keoghan plays Spencer and, in his portrayal, Spencer is a totally believable character. He is soft, enabling, lonely young man, who thinks he needs to life-altering experience to become a man. Blake Jenner and Jared Abrahamson play rest of the gang. Ann Dowd masterfully plays the librarian, Betty Jean. I was also surprised to see Udo Kier in a small role as an art dealer, but he is as charismatic and iconic as he has ever been. I really wished that he was used more.

Summary

“American Animals” is an excellent example of film that uses all advantages and tricks of independent cinema and turns it into something exemplary. Outstanding screenplay is complemented by wise directing choices and elevated by genuinely good acting. This film is highly recommended to watch.

The post American Animals appeared first on Kino-AZ.

Story

Because while incarcerated Debbie Ocean had nothing else to do but plan what to steal when she will be out. Some people just don’t learn on their mistakes. And, yes, she got into jail because she got framed. But, we will learn that was mostly her own fault. Regardless, parole committee approves her parole and as soon as Debbie steps out of the jail she cons her way into getting into hotel. Next, she tracks down her old “partner” – Lou. Debbie tells her that during her time in jail all she did was perfecting one single plan for a heist job. They will steal $150 million worth diamond necklace. There is the catch though. This necklace is being held in the vault, fifty feet underground. But Debbie has also devised a plan as to how to get the jewels out of vault. This plan includes crashing the most exclusive party in US – Met Gala. For that she will need a team of highly trained women (because “men attract more attention” apparently). And she will get her 8!

Debbie (Bullock) shows Lou (Blanchett) what she wants to rob

Writing

Debbie’s motivation is not the only issue I had with the screenplay. It is a heist movie. So the main plot is the heist itself. It is supposed to be intricate, ballsy, unexpected and unique. It is not. First of all, it is amazingly complicated. If you actually look back and think about it you will probably come up with at least three different much easier plans for the heist that don’t involve even half of effort that team puts. Second, although Debbie claims that during her prison stay she has revised all possible outcomes (just like Dr.Strange in “Avengers: Infinity War“), we will find out that so many things in her plan relied on pure coincidences. And when they don’t, they actually depend on dubiously low probability and high-risk scenarios. These probabilities add up to almost impossible perfect scenario. How good that plan can be?

Crew listens to presentation of heist plan

Third, the way heist movies work is that (just like Jimmy Logan explains in “Logan Lucky“) shit happens. This highly unexpected event triggers our characters to modify plan on fly and puts viewer into state of wonder whether the heist will succeed or no. In “Ocean’s 8” this shit event is so lame, boring and mundane you can’t even call it “shit” really. Maybe just a “fart”. So there is absolutely no tension and no wondering will they/won’t they drama.

Fourth, formula dictates there should be a twist. See, they haven’t shown us anything. There is much bigger picture in all heist movies. So not only the bad guys, but also viewer gets conned. Best examples are same “Logan Lucky” and “Thomas Crown Affair.” So naturally “Ocean’s 8” also has a twist. But you guess it, it was not only stupid, but also illogical and can’t even qualify for a twist. “Oh by the way…” effect. I could have easily lived without that twist. By the way, originally Debbie’s crew consists of 7 people including her. But movie’s name is “Ocean’s 8”. I wonder why…

Direction

Gary Ross may have directed “The Hunger Games” and what not, but he is not Steven Soderbergh by any means. Heist movies need to be fast, dynamic and lively. “Ocean’s 8” is neither. There are no fast cuts, no preparation montages, no split screen views. Nothing. It’s like you are watching a Hallmark movie about some heist attempt. There are some laughs here and there, but none of them will make you do anything more than just smile. I also had a problem the way he showed the Gala itself. According to the movie, Met Gala is the most sought event in whole country, with A-list celebrities. All “Ocean’s 8” offers are some random fashion, TV personas and Katie Holmes. Does it make it the biggest party? Such a letdown.

Daphne (Hathaway) doesn’t understand what is going on

Acting

“Ocean’s 8” stars an incredible cast including amazing actresses Sandra Bullock, Cate Blanchett, Anne Hathaway, Helena Bonham Carter, Mindy Kaling and (sure, why not?) Rihanna. Still movie manages to waste talents of most of them. Bullock and Blanchett get nothing else to do but just to smile mischievously. I mean seriously, these two have three Oscars between them and God knows how many nominations. Why would you give them such one dimensional characters? Of all the cast members only two are remotely acting – always fascinating Helena Bonham Carter and Anne Hathaway. Hathaway’s performance, by the way, is the only thing worth commending in the whole movie.

Summary

One of the worst heist movies of all times, “Ocean’s 8” literally doesn’t even try to be good. Hero who literally has no motivation, one-dimensional characters, heist plan that is based on multiple unlikely events or coincidences, boring dialogues, impotent twist, and as-a-matter-of-fact direction wastes the talents of so many brilliant actresses involved in this project.

The post Ocean’s 8 appeared first on Kino-AZ.

Story

Deep in West Virginia lives Jimmy Logan. At one point destined to be NFL star, he (per what his brother, Clyde, calls “Logan family curse”) is a broke machine operator in a construction company. Well, for at least first 5 minutes of the film. He is fired due to some bureaucracy. On top of that, Jimmy’s ex-wife announces that she is moving out of state with her husband and is taking away their daughter, Sadie with them. Jimmy is ready to face any kind of problem life throws at him, but losing Sadie is something he can not and will not afford. So he comes up with the plan to rob nothing less than Charlotte Motor Speedway vault. For that he, firstly, needs to convince his brother, Clyde, who was discharged from marines after losing his hand (“Logan family curse”). Second, he has to get into his team the only person who can infiltrate the vault – local safe guru Joe Bang. Problem is Joe Bang is serving time in jail. But, not even “family curse” can stop Jimmy now, can it?

Writing

Apparently no one ever heard about screenwriter Rebecca Blunt. Rumor has it she lives in UK. Or that’s actually a pseudonym of Soderbergh’s wife. Or maybe Soderbergh himself. After all he is a person who uses his parent’s names as his aliases as an Editor and Cinematographer roles. He doesn’t want his name to appear several times during credits. Nevertheless, whoever the screenwriter is, that person has written very engaging, unique and captivating screenplay. We have well defined characters, intricate heist plan, running gags and smart laughs, emotional slow parts, moral dilemma. This all is tied together with a fluid script.

Soderbergh is no stranger to heist movies. After all, he is the person who re-invented the whole genre in 2000’s with Ocean’s trilogy. But “Logan Lucky” is complete opposite of “Ocean’s”. There

Joe Bang tries to tell Logan brothers he is still in jail.

are no glamorous characters, no state of the art technology trinkets, no hackers, no break-dancing acrobats, no women in distress, no son-of-a-bitch enemy. Instead there are rednecks who can hardly spell their names, homemade explosive device made of gummy bears, refrigerator magnets to break doors and ingenious prison break plot. The best part, you don’t need to even have an enemy after all. You just have to show that every hero’s biggest enemy is no other but hero himself.

And how can I forget about the laughs. Film has a lot of funny moments, but one concerning Game of Thrones and G.R.R. Martin is probably the best one since Red Robin Wedding on South Park.

Direction

Soderbergh’s style jumps on you from the first frame. Very wide shots, set as close to the object as it is possible to not induce barrel distortion, with impeccable focus pulling, are magnified with the extremely saturated image. In contrast to his previous works, which use a lot of artificial interior light and bleached effect for dramatic presentation, “Lucky Logan” stands out as probably Soderbergh’s most colorful film. This compliments the relaxed tone of the film even more. The framing is incredible. Overall, I think, when it comes to framing, editing, staging and pacing “Logan Lucky” should be used and analyzed as a textbook material for years to follow. There was not a single element that didn’t fit in this film. Bravo!

Acting

What is more surprising is that Soderbergh uses only one actor whom he worked with before. I think maybe because Channing Tatum (who appeared in his “Haywire” and “Magic Mike”) is the

James Bond like you never saw him before

only one of his acting stable who can even remotely give a hillbilly look. And he delivers. He passes very good as a proud redneck, bypassing all stereotypes. Jimmy Logan is simple, but not dumb. Resourceful and not lazy. Caring father and not a bastard. He is probably the most positive country boy character depicted by a Hollywood movie.

What can not be said about “newcomer” Daniel Craig, who plays complete opposite – stereotypical redneck. But how he plays. Not only it is funny to see James Bond with dyed hair, but his Joe

Bang is an epitome of your neighborhood hillbilly. Funny, daring, engaging, with in-your-face personality and no-holds-barred attitude. Rest of the characters are also very meticulously cast. Adam Driver, as Clyde Logan, fits perfectly with his sad eyes and emotional stare. Unlike the role of Kylo Ren in Star Wars: The Last Jedi, he is able to show his acting skills.

Summary

Steven Soderbergh manages to take incredible screenplay of “Logan Lucky” and turn it into a fun film, full with action, laughs, heist and even deliver a very good moral resolution to the character. I hope this film will mark a permanent return of the director, who takes his art on a higher level with every single movie he does. Very rare you can see the director achieve this.

The post Logan Lucky appeared first on Kino-AZ.