Cannes Palme d’Or winner of 2019, “Parasite” offers unexpected twists and turns into what humans are capable to do to survive. I was truly amazed by the acting, I think everyone was superb in this film, especially Cho Yeo-jeong (Mrs.Park) and Jang Hye-jin (Mrs.Kim). Directing is also top-notch. Bong Joon-ho builds up on the experience from previous films and offers an engaging film that sucks you in from first second and doesn’t let go all the way till the end. Impressive cinematography, coupled with equally notable editing, creates almost majestic effect. And while pacing could have been a little more dynamic, overall it doesn’t hinder the experience.

What does tho is actual writing. All his life being called “Hollywood director,” Bong Joon-ho makes a complete U-turn and tries to rid himself of all Hollywood cliches. And while one might argue it is for a greater good, I would say that it actually strips the script from certain magic. There are multiple metaphors, but very minimal foreshadowing and almost no “Checkhov’s gun”. Which normally I would say is a plus, but taking into account multiple twists and turns the story takes, this leaves viewers not only shocked but also somewhat confused by progression of certain totally unexpected events. And as such it loses some poetic aspects that could have potentially made “Parasite” a definite masterpiece.

The post Parasite appeared first on Kino-AZ.

Story

Creed family has relocated to quiet, small town of Ludlow, Maine. They have grown tired of busy life in Boston and also new job at local college clinic promises that Louis can spend more time with his family. And while he is at work, his wife Rachel will look after their children – eight-year-old Ellie and two-year-old Gage. Family immediately falls in love with lush forests of Maine. But, they soon find out that their huge house lot also includes a pet cemetery (actually, spelled as Pet Sematary). Neighbor of Creed’s, old timer Jud explains that it has been a local tradition of Ludlow children to bury their beloved animals in that area. And soon Ellie’s cat, Church is killed by a car. Jud takes Louis to Pet Sematary to bury his cat. But noting that Louis doesn’t want to make her daughter sad, Jud instead asks Louis to follow him deeper into the woods. Because there the ground is sour…

Writing

Burial ground

I would really like to commend the screenwriter Jeff Buhler for doing an awesome job adapting the source material, which Stephen King has admitted is his most scariest book. Story tries to stay as close to the book as possible, while offering new elements and different ending. I expected this, as I knew that there were a lot of things in the book that were either not-filmable or would make little sense to concentrate on. Buhler masterfully evades these scenes, giving the film something new. And this new is what makes this film stand out, all while maintaining same nail-biting creepiness and overall darkness.

My only critique is that I wished they have included or elaborated on the character motivations. While it was all brilliantly described in the book, I predict some viewers would find some things annoyingly unexplained. Things like why exactly Jud did tell Louis about the burial grounds. Or why exactly Louis then did what he had to do. A little elaboration on the actions and motivations I think would have made “Pet Sematary” much more grounded.

Children burying beloved pets in Pet Sematary

Directing

“Pet Sematary” is genuinely pure horror. And we have to thank directors Kevin Kölsch and Dennis Widmyer for that. They masterfully build tension by using long shots, slow tracking cameras and extremely scary imagery. There are, of course, mandatory jump scares, but they are well spaced and used only in first section of the film. I really enjoyed the way directors handled the tension aspect of the film. While it is nowhere close to “Hereditary“, it still manages to deliver thrills by not only building it, but also delivering explosive action.

Another thing that I also noticed how directors managed to keep the dark tone. There are no cheesy dialogues, no campy weirdness or funny violence. It is not “Us” in any sense. “Pet Sematary” starts dark and it gets darker and darker with each minute.

Acting

Louis (Clarke) doesn’t believe his eyes

Interestingly, the best acting of last year came from horror films. Who knew that by making characters believable horror films can be taken to other level? But exactly this was proven by Toni Collette in “Hereditary“, Tilda Swinton in “Suspiria“, Emily Blunt in “A Quiet Place” and even last week’s Lupita Nyong’o in “Us“. And now “Pet Sematary” joins this list of horror films with exceptional cast. On one hand we have Jason Clarke play Louis. He surprised me a lot with his last year performance in “Chappaquiddick” and “First Man” and he continues to do so again. I am expecting big things from him. On the other hand we have veteran actor John Lithgow as neighbor Jud. While the genre is a little new for him, he brings all his craft to the table.

Supporting cast is awesome addition of young and brave Jeté Laurence and grieving Amy Seimetz. Both play their parts perfectly, especially young Laurence, without whom this film would have been a disaster.

Summary

“Pet Sematary” is a masterfully made “pure horror” film. It stays loyal to the source material, all while offering new and fresh ideas. Well written, directed and acted, this film will satisfy any horror fan and more.

The post Pet Sematary appeared first on Kino-AZ.

Story

You are Adelaide, you have a loving man-child husband, rebellious teenage daughter, and curious young son. You are going to vacation in your grandmother’s old cottage next to the beach. Except you are not excited about it. Especially about the beach. Because some thirty years ago, you briefly wondered off from you parents in the beach and ended up going into carnival mirror house where you “met” a girl in there. Experience shakes you up to the core, which you hide inside you for all this years. But when suddenly four people clad in red show up in front of your doors, all memories come back. Oh, yes, and this people are messed up version of you and your family.

Young Adelaide sees something she will want to forget

Directing

For a weird step out from my review formula, I have decided to write about directing first. “Us” proves that success that Jordan Peele had as a director of “Get Out” is not a mere surprise. He employs an arsenal of an established horror director, all while keeping the film entertained and somewhat away from regular horror clichés. He uses minimal jump scares, blood and violence. Instead he ramps up psychological intensity to create and nourish terror in us.

I really enjoyed the camera work and lighting. Peele masterfully uses the fact that dark skin reacts differently to lighting than light skin. This opens up a whole new avenue to create masterfully staged and lit scenes that elevate the experience further. So instead of usual yellow/orange palette that most horror films utilize, “Us” heavily uses blue/purple lights to create stunning response.

Red family is ready

Peele also uses backlighting to further affect the images. Red family is constantly in shadow. Their appearance doesn’t contrast the background, but gradually melts into it. Thus the only thing that stands out is whites of eyes and teeth. This had a tremendous effect on me in a way I didn’t actually expect.

At 116 minutes, film is unusually long for a horror film (though still shorter than “Suspiria”). But time is not of a concern, as Peele manages pacing beautifully with masterful editing. Editing is subtle and spot on. There are very minimal jump scares, and even they don’t feel like Peele is pushing them on us.

Writing

Wilsons are not ready at all

The problem I had with “Us” is the writing. And not really the plot progression, but the explanation and ending. Film starts with a promising setup. There is whole “is she or is she not mad” moment which then diverges into something completely different (not spoiling it). It is all nice and cool and somewhat believable until we get to the middle when film has to explain us what is happening.

And then film turns into another episode of “Black Mirror”. Except not a good episode, but weird, illogical and borderline boring “Black Mirror” episode. To the extent that I pretty much lost all suspense of disbelief in the end. I had so many questions starting with why, how and what for, that it almost killed the whole experience and satisfaction I was having from the film. And I am not even talking that storyline went from being fresh, to complete derivative of sci-fi clichés.

Another thing that was a killer for me was comic undertone. While it worked perfectly in “Get Out”, Jordan Peele has a lot of problems with it in “Us”. He tries to keep it all serious and “pure” horror, but he just can’t not diverge from making film funny. As such, some horror scenes become slapstick. I really wish Peele didn’t go there as it just downgrades the whole experience and destroys all built up tension of horror.

What is secret of Red?

Acting

Pretty much every actor played two roles as themselves and their “red” version. Lupita Nyong’o just kills it with her performance. She is extremely believable as troubled Adelaide and her psychotic counterpart. Winston Duke was a revelation in “Black Panther”, but in “Us” I didn’t like him much. He plays stereotypical American dad, who is still a child inside. I am not sure if he was written like that, but I think Duke failed to deliver a believable performance.

I enjoyed Shahadi Wright Joseph as a teenage daughter of Adelaide. She was very intense and spot on in her scenes. Evan Alex plays Adelaide’s younger son. He delivers the job, but unfortunately couldn’t convince me to be invested into his character as it was intended.

Elisabeth Moss and Tim Heidecker play supporting parts and I just hated them. They were extremely poorly written to begin with, but their performance was weird and ridiculous. Especially to see Moss, who is a very talented actress, to perform this way felt as a huge waste of talent.

Summary

In all, “Us” is a very well made film with mediocre screenplay. Peele masterfully creates and sustains tension for the whole film, supported by amazing cinematography, editing and acting, but effect is loss due to storyline diverging into weird clichés and comedy elements that ruin intensity with a slapstick.

The post Us appeared first on Kino-AZ.

Story

Seemingly delusional Patricia makes her way to office of psychologist Dr. Kemperer in West Berlin, 1977. She is dancer in Markos Dance Academy, but she claims that world famous company is actually a witch coven. In the meantime, amateur dancer Susie arrives to academy. She convinces academy teachers to allow her an audition and completely blows their minds away with her raw technique. She specifically attracts attention of lead choreographer, Madam Blanc, who senses mysterious force while Susie dances. Susie is immediately admitted to academy, to actually replace Patricia, who has just disappeared. But while Susie celebrates her immediate success with her new friends, all teachers of the academy discuss in private whether they have finally found that ONE girl they have been looking for all these years.

Writing

For the most part “Suspiria” is a very well written film. It has multiple characters that story centers on and screenwriters give each of them a proper time to develop and evolve. There are several narratives mostly concentrating on the events happening in the academy and a side story of Dr. Kemperer, who tries to find Patricia and reminiscences his past. However, there are minor things that have been added to the plot that didn’t honestly make much sense. I am talking about some random events that are happening in parallel to the main plot, like the whole story about terrorists or not so subtle feminist attributes, for example.

Despite having very long time (152 minutes), film never bores you. This is because the setup and story are really interesting and intriguing. Weird events that happen on screen very successfully induce suspense and dread through the first couple of hours. This I can not say at all about the resolution and ending of the film. Film wastes all suspense on a random solution that is neither satisfying nor interesting. As such, ending seems very out of place. Even cartoonish at some point. It overall managed to degrade my whole experience of watching “Suspiria” tremendously.

Directing

I was very adamant actually watching this film. Firstly, because of the 152 minutes of runtime. This is incredible amount of time for any film, let alone a horror film. I can’t honestly remember any horror film being this long. Secondly, director is Luca Guadagnino, best known for romantic drama films. I was really unsure how would he be able to handle psychological horror film. But what I found that my second concern actually solved my first one. Luca Guadagnino takes the film on another level, not letting you anyhow zone out of the film during its very long runtime. He masterfully builds, sustains and evolves tension throughout the whole film. Not a single time I was concerned about time while watching “Suspiria”.

Guadagnino uses several visual techniques through “Susperia” to further increase uneasiness. Some, like extremely quick cuts akin action movies, I did enjoy, though found kind of weird. He builds up West Berlin atmosphere masterfully, using washed out tones and colors. I didn’t see any bright or main colors throughout the whole duration of film. It’s a very known technique and horror directors usually use it with conjunction of very bright red color for blood to attenuate the visual horror. However, this is not the case with “Suspiria”. Color is toned down (very toned down) through the whole film without any cheap tricks with regard to visual clues.

Acting

“Suspiria” has an impressive cast of young actresses like Dakota Johnson, Mia Goth and Chloë Grace Moretz, but the one and only star in this film is undeniably Tilda Swinton. She is amazing actress in general, but “Suspiria” is just beyond any other work she has done. Her level of acting pushes envelope in all sense. Just like her character, who owes the dancefloor and dancers, she owes every scene she is in. She emanates force through the screen and this adds a very chilling effect to her already mystical character of Madam Blanc. This is by far the best performance by an actress I have seen in whole year.

Summary

Despite a long runtime, “Suspiria” never bores with masterfully built tension and truly fantastic work by Tilda Swinton, but has an ending that makes little sense and is cartoonish.

The post Suspiria appeared first on Kino-AZ.

Story

Billionaire Jack Morris arrives to groundbreaking research facility he paid for to meet scientist Dr. Minway Zhang. Morris has arrived right in the midst of lab’s biggest mission. Crew is diving into deepest section of Marianas trench to prove the theory that cloud of gases is masking real ocean floor. To everyone’s amusement that turns out to be true. But celebrations are short. Research vessel is almost immediately attacked by a gigantic creature. Damages of vessel prohibits it from raising and on surface everyone is scrambling for rescue operations. But there is only one person who can attempt such a daring act: ex-rescue diver Jonas Taylor. Despite his objections, Jonas is forced to join the mission when he learns that his ex-wife is one of the members of stranded crew. But his biggest fears will turn to be right when they will discover that the mystery creature is a megalodon!

Yes, they are trying to kill a giant shark with little cage…

Writing

There is literally nothing unique about the script of “The Meg”. It is riddled with cliché storylines, plot elements, character drivers and motivations, resolutions and outcome. From hero who no one believes to and his ex-wife being one of the victims, to main female hero in desperate need of a man in her life and father who never trusted his daughter. List is so big I can just spend whole night writing about it. In fact, the scrip it so unimaginative that characters themselves start making fun of sheer stupidity of some of the points. This self-irony somewhat saves the day, giving audience something to laugh at. That being said, film is not on the “Snake on the Plane” level of ridiculousness, so that’s somehow saves it.

Jonas (Statham) is expertly sizing up new opponent – a megalodon!

Directing

And what gives “The Meg” somehow good rap is directorial work of Jon Turtletaub. To my big relief, he didn’t make movie as a freaking big monster disaster movie (though the ending might seem like that), but as a horror/thriller. To that extent, “The Meg” tried to give more of “Jurassic Park” feeling than “Godzilla”. Side note – horror/thriller is a bit of a stretch, as a film is plagued by a financial decision to keep it PG-13 rated. Thus, violence is muted, however it was still pretty wild in some instances.

That pays off well. He uses subtle tension moments, combining with sudden jump scares and timely reveals. In that Turtletaub makes film at least enjoyable to watch. To the point that you might momentarily forget the shortcomings of the script. “The Meg” probably achieves same results as Dwayne Johnson’s “Rampage“. In both films, you just manage to shut down all logic and reason and just enjoy the spectacle.

Diversity rules!

Acting

Über-diverse cast of “The Meg” did actually surprise me. In fact, the only minority groups not represented were Hispanics and Arabs. Not because it is inconceivable to have so much diversity in a group of people, but the fact there was so much variation of nationality, race, age, sexual orientation, hair style, hell, even tattoo choices that it was quiet shocking. Not two members of characters carried same trait. And this diversity was so in your face, combined with stereotypical traits for each character, me, biggest proponent of realistic representation of diversity, was just appalled by how much “The Meg” overdid it.

However, I have to admit, cast did more than adequate job. Jason Statham as Jonas Taylor is very effective both as grumpy savior and funny romantic. Li Bingbing, though written cliché, proves she can stand her own ground. I did enjoy also Rainn Wilson‘s performance, who very nicely plays moneybag with ulterior motives.

Summary

“The Meg” may have a horribly cliché script, but combined with Turtletaub’s direction it actually turns out to be fun to watch. And while Jason Statham trying to kill monster shark will not go into history as a memorable film, at least it is enjoyable. Until next killer shark film arrives.

The post The Meg appeared first on Kino-AZ.

Story

But it doesn’t start that well for Ethan Hunt. After he receives mysterious package which informs him of his mission (should he choose to accept it) and self-destructs in five seconds, Ethan faces big dilemma. He needs to choose between life of his friend and lives of possibly billions of people. Ethan without much deliberation decides to save his buddy. In result, he now has to live with consequences of this choice which leads to his own government berating him and forcing to fix his mistakes. Now he and his team of IMF operatives and such have to race against the time. They travel to Paris to meet with mysterious arms dealer, White Widow, who might or might not be able to help Ethan with his problem. But it the world of spies, Ethan should remember that nothing is what it seems to be.

Writing

Christopher McQuarrie returns to write and direct “Mission: Impossible – Fallout”. And if you thought that previous installments were getting all “Fast and Furious”, “Mission: Impossible – Fallout” is “Fast and Furious” on steroids, but without any ridiculousness. I like how Ethan Hunt’s character is more tamed in this film. Yes, he still punches walls and survives all kind of transportation accidents, but all these are not as stupid as it was in previous films. Main selling point of “Mission: Impossible – Fallout” is, of course, relentless action sequences. But even without them film is satisfyingly good to watch. There is a coherent script, that seems more fluid than previous films. Screenplay no longer throws Ethan to random exotic locations just for the sake of it, just like in “Mission: Impossible – Ghost Protocol“.

Spy games

But there are several things I didn’t like about screenplay. Firstly, the whole film’s premise is built on Ethan’s decision to save his friend instead of saving millions of people. In the world of spies, secret agents and operatives it is so unbelievable and inconceivable that an operative as experienced as Ethan Hunt will choose to save his friend and risk deaths of millions. Film justifies this choice by painting Ethan as humane operative. And making everyone care and like Ethan more. Even his boss understands and commends him for his choice. It was so stupid, it almost ruined the whole movie, because I kept saying to myself “well, this is good BUT it wouldn’t have happened have Ethan made the correct choice”.

Then there is weirdly complex plot. I left theater thinking I understood everything, but when my father (whom I’ve seen this film with) asked me who is White Widow and what exactly she was doing there, I suddenly realized that I couldn’t give him a coherent answer. And for next fifteen minutes of drive home I was trying to remember what happened and who double-crossed whom and who is secret agent and who is bad guy and realized that I literally couldn’t make any sense of the plotline. It’s not that it is overly complicated, vice versa, it seems pretty straightforward but just then doesn’t make much sense.

Hunt (Cruise) hangs for his life

Directing

“Mission: Impossible – Fallout” hides all these shortcomings with over the top action scenes. And what action scenes are these! Beautifully staged, intricately choreographed, generously filmed and elegantly presented. In the era when CGI and green screens dominate the films, it is a miracle to see “Mission: Impossible – Fallout” which uses a lot of practical effects and rely on incredibly complicated stunts. The motorcycle chase through Paris and helicopter ride through Himalayas, I am sure will stay in memories for long time.

Besides crazy stunts, McQuarrie manages to get viewers on the edge of the seat and keep him there from first scene all the way to the end credits. “Mission: Impossible – Fallout” boasts 2.5 hours runtime, but it NEVER bores you. I have to compliment McQuarrie that even in the slower scenes he keeps everyone entertained.

Hunt (Cruise) and Walker (Cavill) trying to find White Widow

Acting

Unlike previous films I actually did enjoy Tom Cruise as Ethan Hunt. He doesn’t dominate the screen time as before and his portrayal is more down-to-Earth. Yes, he is still same James Bond, macho guy, but he feels like more matured, evolved version of himself. Cruise did his own stunts, as usual, and it only magnifies his performance. Hunt’s team members are Ving Rhames as Luther and Simon Pegg as Benji. Both of them bring nothing new, albeit serving as much needed relief from the Cruise. Rebecca Ferguson reprises her role as MI6 operative. But she looks SO much alike Michelle Monaghan, who returns as Ethan’s wife, Julia, that I honestly confused them several times during the film. Henry Cavill appears as CIA operative August Walker and he makes more believable agent than a Superman. Maybe he should stick to this kind of roles.

Summary

“Mission: Impossible – Fallout” is clearly not only the best film of the series, but also one of the best action films since “Mad Max: Fury Road”. It is amazingly well-made action film, that will keep you biting your nails through its long runtime. Intricate stunts that are masterfully filmed and edited are a wonder to watch and manage to mask out ridiculousness and complexity of the plot.

The post Mission: Impossible – Fallout appeared first on Kino-AZ.

Story

Drug trafficking is no longer a main source of income for Mexican cartels. People are. Indeed, you don’t need to cultivate, process or worry that you will lose your product during treacherous transport over the border. People are easier to handle, there is no shortage in demand to cross the border and importantly all money is upfront. But when border patrol confronts the group of illegals one of them turns out to be a Middle-Eastern terrorist, who blows himself up. Several days later four men walk into the store in Kansas City and detonate bombs. Government comes to conclusion that they have been smuggled to US through Mexican cartels and that essentially brancs cartels as terrorist organizations. But they have solution for that – they shall instigate a cartel war to wipe out everyone. And government orders CIA operative Matt Graver to fulfill this task. He in return turns to the best hit man in the world – mysterious ex-attorney Alejandro Gillick.

Graver (Brolin) is definitely man for this job

Writing

Author of first film, Taylor Sheridan returns to write “Sicario: Day of the Soldado”. However, this time he can’t really make it shine. The reason first film worked so well was how the narration was presented. Main hero was unassuming FBI agent Kate. She was dragged into an operation under false pretenses and was kept dark for the majority of film. In a way, viewers were Kate. We learned everything in the same time as Kate did. And that created a big tension, uneasiness about what is happening. We were surprised when she was, we were angry when she was angry. And also keeping narrative around Kate helped with multiple twists and turns along the film.

But not as much in “Sicario: Day of the Soldado”. Here the narrative centers around characters of Matt and Alejandro. Film devotes first thirty minutes on day to day operations of CIA operative and frankly loses all the charm of first film right then. When in the first film both Matt and Alejandro (especially Alejandro) were mysterious creatures with seemingly own agenda, in “Sicario: Day of the Soldado” it is no longer so. By putting them into spotlight, we lose that magic of anticipation and wonder. And frankly, without that it feels like just a day of life of your neighborhood CIA operative that you have seen a million of times in such hits like “Mission: Impossible“, “True Lies”, hell even “Burn Notice” (which coincidentally stars Jeffrey Donovan, who plays another CIA operative in “Sicario: Day of the Soldado”).

Then there is a plot. Film bounces back and forth between different scenarios and scenes that don’t fit that well with each other. Without spoiling much, in the beginning there is a terrorism subplot. This (somehow) turns into a hostage subplot which turns to cartel subplot which turns into something completely different. Don’t get me wrong, it is interesting to watch, but looking back at the whole film, it just doesn’t make that much sense.

Helicopters and cars

Directing

What Villeneuve also managed to give with “Sicario” was immense amount of tension. Yes, film also had brainless action sequences, but they were preceded by extremely intense and slow build ups. This, in turn, magnified the effect of said action scenes. Just think about the whole Juarez sequence in the first film. When we just follow a car full of operatives across the border, into the city and back to border and the whole ambush scene afterwards. How masterful was it! The whole movie lived on this fine balancing act.

Director of “Sicario: Day of the Soldado”, Stefano Sollima does try to give the same effect. And while he succeeds in some places, there are scenes he fails. The slow moments are immensely slow and there is no bite to the tension he offers. For example, the scene with sign language was compulsory for the plot and nicely done, but overall was so long it actually dragged the whole pace of the film down. Or the scenes with teenage smuggler.

To give credit where it is due, action scenes were extremely well choreographed and filmed. The scene with helicopters was intense and very well done. Also, every time Alejandro picks up a gun you won’t be able to turn your head, even though in most cases he will just unload that gun in a matter of seconds.

Alejandro (Del Toro) helps Isabela (Moner)

Acting

Since Matt and Alejandro are in the spotlight, screenplay makes them much bigger and more dimensional than first film. It is first time we see Josh Brolin as Matt Graver to give any emotions rather than smart smirk. This works very well, as Brolin has a natural stone face. We can see his emotional struggle under the weight of the circumstances and we can feel his pain even though he tries to hide it as much as he can. Overall Josh Brolin fits much better as this character than Cable or Thanos. Benicio Del Toro tries to stay as enigmatic and mysterious as in first film, but he can’t hide that. He also has to show his emotions. That especially shows up in the bus sequence. 16-year-old Isabela Moner plays drug cartel leader’s daughter and I actually was surprised by the depth this young actress has showed. Rest of the cast didn’t offer anything much and were just compulsory characters coming in and out of narrative.

Summary

While film does give us interesting characters Matt and Alejandro back, it misses some key points that made the first film stand out. Centering the narrative on them diminishes the intensity and mystery surrounding these characters. While film had very well executed action sequences, the slow moments between them dragged and almost killed the pace. In simple words, if “Sicario” was “Casino Royale,” then “Sicario: Day of the Soldado” is “Quantum of Solace”.

The post Sicario: Day of the Soldado appeared first on Kino-AZ.

Story

Brea is an investigative journalist. On the day of her birthday her boss fires her after confrontation that she is always pursuing something deeper instead of reporting on the cause. But she has her loving boyfriend, John, to comfort her. During dinner with their obnoxious friends, Brea finds out that John has planned a big getaway weekend with the goal to ask Brea to marry her. She is hesitant. John is a loving and caring man, but Brea is still not sure if she wants to commit. On the way to the gateway villa, John and Brea stop at a gas station. And while in the restroom Brea meets visible distressed woman, who whispers something like a code word to her. And thus, inadvertently, Brea and John are sucked into underground ring of sex trafficking.

Brea (Patton) and John (Epps) should probably run

Writing and Directing

Deon Taylor wrote and directed “Traffik”, so I am combining these sections. Traffik” devotes first thirty minutes just to setup Brea character. To show how resilient and unbending she can be. She is fired for literally working too hard. Then it all turns into Brea questioning herself whether she is worthy of adorable and loving John. Why waste time on all this? Well because what happens next is series of very stupid decisions by characters. By giving an explanation to Brea’s personality film tries to show that the stupidity is not by chance, but actually because that’s how Brea is.

Then film starts building a weird tension. “Traffik” is a thriller after all, but tension is so fake, so superficial, that it never is actually pushing it all the way. There is a scene with couple fighting and it all is done so randomly and is so out of place with the rest of the film, that the only explanation to why it was done was to have one character leave the house. This random writing devices to get plot rolling and fall into places is so sporadic that you start yawning by the middle of it.

Brea (Patton) has an encounter with distressed woman

Another issue is action scenes and the ending. This is supposed to be a thriller. I don’t want a megalomaniac villain, but the bad guys in the film are extremely ineffective. They are supposed to be running an extremely successful trafficking ring, but the level of amateurism they show makes you wonder how exactly they did achieve the heights in this business. The bad guys in “Traffik” are the dumbest bad guys I have seen in a very long time. In comparison to them “Rampage” bad guys feel like Joker (Nicholson’s and Ledger’s Joker, not messed up crap of Leto’s). Ending in so abrupt it makes you wonder if producers ran out of money. There is no climax, no big reveal, no twist-upon-twist revelation, no “did she or did she not?” and almost definitely zero suspense in the ending.

Then there is a deep, dark topic of “Traffik”. Sex trafficking might be (as film actually very cleverly notes) a flavorful name of modern day slavery, but make no mistake, it is an undeniable problem that still remains one of the biggest issues globally. The first shots of “Traffik” actually tried to address it by showing young and attractive girl dancing in the club and then getting lured into a van, where she is abducted. I thought, this film IS going somewhere. Unfortunately, there is very little regarding actual brutality and horrors of sex trafficking and the victims through the rest of film. These depictions usually consisted of images of malnourished, drugged and beaten women, and that is all.

John (Epps) tries to call the police. Right…

Acting

Paula Patton stars as Brea and she tries hard to deliver a believable character. I have to commend her, she is the only thing in this film that actually works, more or less. And she keeps film from falling apart. She is equally charming, beautiful, strong and vulnerable. Omar Epps plays her boyfriend John. He is a very good actor with wide spectrum, but he is really underutilized in “Traffik”. Rest of cast are very bland.

Summary

You might think that film that is called “Traffik” will deal more with the horrors and reaches of sex trafficking, but no. Apart from showing several drugged and abused women in chain, it doesn’t give us anything else. Film has poorly written screenplay and for a thriller, has mediocre suspense, cliché drama and ridiculously mild ending. The only positive factor is Paula Patton’s performance, which in turn is ruined by total under-utilization of the supporting cast.

The post Traffik appeared first on Kino-AZ.

Story

In year 1972, Mason Skiles is top U.S. diplomat stationed in Beirut, Lebanon. A rising star, Mason enjoys lavish life of top politician who (so he thinks) masterfully juggles between different factions that want to grab a piece of Lebanon – Sunni Muslims, Shia Muslims, Christians, Israel, Palestine, France, England, Iran, Syria, USSR. With increasing fear of an impending armed conflict increasing in Beirut, he has a lot on his plate. The intricate balance is challenged by the Palestinian refugees who are fleeing from Israel. But with refugees unfortunately also slips in criminal. That is why he is shocked when his colleague and best friend Cal informs him that the Palestinian refugee child Mason has adopted is actually a brother of biggest known terrorist, Raffik Abu Rajal. Mason doesn’t want to believe him, but suddenly Raffik attacks them to steal his brother. In the ensuing gun fight Mason’s wife gets mortally wounded.

Ten years later, Mason is an alcoholic who lives by negotiating labor contracts. He is totally broken. Then one day, he gets a visit from old acquaintance who informs him that U.S. needs his help again. Reluctant Mason agrees to fly to Beirut. But the city he loved so much has been torn apart from civil war. And arriving to the Embassy he finds out that the reason he is there is because a certain U.S. spy has been caught and that terrorists are requesting to speak to only one person – Mason.

Mason (Hamm) tries to figure the way out

Writing

Mason is probably unlike any recent heroes of spy movies. He is not made of metal, he doesn’t break anyone’s neck. For the majority of film everyone ignores him as an alcoholic burnout and tolerate him only because terrorists requested to speak to him and to him only. He is not very smart either, having hard time figuring out 1+1. He is constantly under pressure of his trauma and he doesn’t want to be a hero at all. Yet he has to, in order to figure the way out of the mess he has stepped into. Story itself tho is not anything out of ordinary. Mason needs to figure out how to help hostage and at the same time he understand that he can’t trust anyone. There are forces on both (or maybe more) sides that would not want the deal to happen. This constant back and forth, spy games a-la “follow me” or chasing each other using transmitters is in every spy movie ever done.

Film shows Beirut as a city in ruins. There is a very stark comparison of Beirut in 1972 and 1982. Literally every single character comments on that. Yet, apparently “life goes on.” What was annoying the hell out of me, was how the characters and film tried to present this destruction and desolation. They are blaming literally everyone in the demise of Beirut, but themselves. See, Beirut for 20 centuries was a cradle of religious and cultural battle. Christians and muslims and jews lived together, but then Palestinians came and ruined everything. And then Soviet came and put oil to the fire and then Israelis have Mossad who wants to revenge death of Israelis. Literally EVERYONE is at blame, but Americans, who actually created this whole mess. Just read the history books.

So in “Beirut” all U.S. diplomats are complaining about how things got bad in Beirut. And writers are not correcting them. Well, what exactly did you expect? You had a big melting pot that you kept adding fire to. Did you think everything will get resolved on it’s own? In film, U.S. forces in Beirut are saviors. And this is actually reiterated in the ending of the film when one of the characters says “well, everyone won by this resolution.” What the hell are you talking about? Literally NOBODY won anything, only Americans did! And by the end of the film, conflict between factions has been deepened worse than ever. Stupid, very stupid. Arrogant and stupid.

Directing

Because the film doesn’t have much cliche spy thriller things it is actually very interesting to watch. There are no long chase or fight scenes. Or cheating each other scenes. Film plays out more like a spy drama, which are usually slow. Pacing, however, is nice. Director Brad Anderson puts cameras far with close-ups for more intimate shots. I enjoyed exploration of personal demons of our main hero. Ruins of Beirut and destruction was shown well and was very powerful. I also would like to commend the terrorist attack scene, which was unexpected, loud and, well, carried a big deal of terror. Overall, I think, except some repetition and redundancy, director did a good job.

Mason (Hamm) and his new “friends” going to negotiation

Acting

Jon Hamm goes an extra mile with his character. As a person who is so separated and disgusted with all that is happening around him, he delivers a very solid performance. He is constantly trying to fight against forces that are trying to undermine him. Rosamund Pike plays CIA field agent Sandy that looks after Mason and also helps him. Her character is so incredibly dull and one-dimensional that I wanted to punch her just to get something out of her. Dean Norris (from Breaking Bad fame), Shea Whigham and Larry Pine play different U.S. State Department officials who are mostly just doing it for their own gain. They are also not very well written.

Summary

“Beirut” is an interesting addition to spy thriller genre, as it portrays main hero not as a deadly assassin like in “Atomic Blonde” or “Red Sparrow“. He is a troubled person who just tries to do best he can to save the hostage. A role that Jon Hamm really shines in. Unfortunately, very poorly written supporting characters and total ignorance of history downgrades otherwise enjoyable overall experience.

The post Beirut appeared first on Kino-AZ.

Story

Sawyer Valentini feels like she is getting mad. She has relocated to a new city, found a new house, job. All because she had issues with a man stalking her. Despite moving on, she lives in constant fear for her life. To cope with that she decides to visit a psychiatrist. She talks about insecurities and difficulties she is having and how she feels depressed. When psychiatrist asks her about possible suicidal tendencies, Sawyer confirms that she sometimes has them. When their session completes Sawyer wants to leave, but nursing staff stops her. They tell her to surrender all her possessions and follow her. Sawyer is dumbfounded, but they explain to her that among other things she was signing during “discharge” was an agreement to voluntarily stay in the mental institution. Psychiatrist made a conclusion that she might be danger to herself and others. And now she just can’t leave anymore.

Writing

Films of this genre like to play with the viewer. Usually for the entirety of such film we are left clueless. Is our hero really mad? Or is everyone playing the game to make person believe she is mad? Or maybe it’s all some kind of dream? “Unsane” starts just like that and film does toy with the viewers. The uneasiness of the situation being placed into mental institution voluntarily/involuntarily and immediate consequences of that do drag you emotionally down. But instead of keeping this intrigue, film gives it all somewhere right in the middle of second act.

Sawyer (Foy) doesn’t want to take pills

That first section of the film is truly well written. By limiting what is shown and what is said, film manages to create uneasiness and discomfort to viewer. We root for our hero, Sawyer. And this is despite the fact that she truly never shows anything worthy of a hero. Yes, she is apparently good at her job. But she is very rude to her clients and to her co-workers. And she has weird sexual fantasies in regards to her social life. She is manipulative, explosive, controlling and narcissistic. Whole first section of the film I was asking myself that maybe she indeed was just all mad. Or maybe every one was against her. This invoked a lot of sympathy, despite all negative aspects to Sawyer’s personality.

And then film shifts into another territory. No longer we have to worry if Sawyer is sane or “unsane”, film has a clear answer to that. And because there is still half of the film to go, we are no longer guessing what is going on. There is no reason to sit on the edge, at least from “sanity” perspective. Second half of the film instead ventures more into a “survival” territory. And suddenly we get to see more of Sawyer. There is a big shift in her personality. Since there is no pity aspect anymore, film needs to make hero sympathetic and it doesn’t do a good job at it. It just doesn’t feel natural.

Directing

Steven Soderbergh is a true master of his craft. You can see exactly why he chose the iPhone. Not because they are awesome, or good way to keep budget down. But to be able to give a true indie look to the film. From first shot this doesn’t feel like Hollywood movie at all. Or any other Soderbergh’s films (“Haywire“, “Logan Lucky“). Weird framing, unnecessary cuts, ultra-wide angles, or ridiculous close-ups. It feels like the film was actually done by a student filmmaker who tries to prove to the World that he is new Tarkovsky. Soderbergh gives us a look that you can see more on the screen of some D-rated independent film festival.

And this is where his genius comes in. The first half of the film, where we are not sure what is going on is full with these shots. Just because indie films like so much to toy with emotions of viewers. And in the second half of the movie, these weird shots are all gone and it feels like Hollywood production again. There is no need for them anymore. Regardless, Soderbergh manages to create and hold tension for the majority of the film. The ending seemed a little rushed and I think could have used a bigger resolution. Not sure what was the reasoning to end the film like that.

Violet (Temple) taunts sedated Sawyer (Foy)

Acting

Overall acting was enjoyable. Claire Foy plays our hero, Sawyer Valentini. She is extremely believable in all aspects. She is spot on with emotional roller-coaster her character experiences and we doubt Sawyer’s emotions very little during the film, both in first and second part. Juno Temple and Jay Pharoah play fellow patients. Both of them deliver solid performances. Pharoah plays Nate, the only person who (maybe) believes Sawyer and Temple unstable Violet.

Summary

Steven Soderbergh manages to make “Unsane” a very captivating thriller. Film juggles with viewers emotions, but never pushes them to the limit. From one point it is good, instead of having cliche endings and multiple twists, film sorts everything in the middle and leaves us guessing what will happen. On the other hand it reduced the whole engagement and investment into the movie and forced a transformation into main character to make her more sympathetic.

The post Unsane appeared first on Kino-AZ.