Story

But story of Neil Armstrong becoming the person uttering iconic phrase while touching the surface of the Moon has been everything but easy. We find him in the cockpit of the X-15 rocket plane exiting atmosphere. But while returning to Earth his plane fails to enter. Armstrong makes a risky decision and manages to enter atmosphere with great danger to himself and plane. His bosses are not happy and he is grounded based on his dangerous behavior. But there is a reason for that. Armstrong’s 3-year-old daughter has a tumor. She passes away soon, leaving Neil totally broken and in despair. But being a person he is, instead of facing his emotions he decides just to turn the page. Right at this moment he notices that NASA is recruiting astronauts for Project Gemini, program that intends to put Americans to space. Neil doesn’t think twice before he signs up for it. After all what a better way is there to distract oneself than to sign up for potentially deadly task?

First Man on the Moon

Writing

Neil Armstrong has been a secretive, quiet person who didn’t like the spotlight that being the first man on Moon brought him. There was a reason he was selected as a first person to step on the Moon ahead of his much accomplished, decorated and esteemed fellow astronauts. It was that Neil Armstrong was humble, selfless, emotionless person. He earned respect for his ability to act cold-bloodedly under immense pressure. It was all these that made him make timely decisions in extremely dangerous conditions that lead to success of his missions.

Thus, filmmakers had to base a lot on deductions, interpretations and assumptions about his life. And while most of the stuff seem to fit right, there were some choices that didn’t. One of these choices is the emotional drive that Neil had. Without much spoiler, it is assumed that Armstrong’s biggest drive in his life was emotional attachment to his daughter Karen and her untimely death. That might not be a big stretch, but the way film exploits this idea paints Neil as a broken man who is constantly driven by his inability to save his daughter.

This could have worked with an imagined character, but in case of “First Man” it seems like filmmakers just wanted to instill empathy and tragedy, thus overdramatizing the real events. Chazelle again plays on viewer’s emotional state and tries to make Neil a relatable hero.

And while film concentrates on inner state of Neil, it completely misses opportunity to explore anyone but him. Supporting characters are very one-dimensional and raw. Even Janet (Neil’s wife) is not given much to do than just react to actions of Neil. What is surprising is that film is about her, just like it is about Neil. Instead, she is just an obedient wife who sits at home, smoking cigarettes and waiting for Neil to return. Sure.

Armstrong (Gosling) and Co. watching Saturn V take off

Directing

Damien Chazelle’s choice of cinematography and editing almost drove me nuts. I viewed this film in IMAX and it was one of the worst decisions I have made. Camera framing is impossible to bear, especially on a huge IMAX screen. Chazelle uses very extreme close-ups of main and supporting cast. There is literally very few establishing shots. Framing either consists of telescopic lenses or macro lenses.

And then there is constant camera shake and jitter. I understand, you have an emotionless character and you want to give some life into otherwise stale scenes, but why do we need camera shake through whole film is beyond my understanding.

Now, I have to admit this works amazing during rocket launch sequences, because it gives us point-of-view effect, concentrating on the feelings and emotions of Neil during takeoff instead of some glorious sequence of CGI rocket emitting CGI flames, taking off from CGI launchpad into CGI sky. That was all fine with me. This is exactly how it feels to take off with a bomb behind your back, but why use the technique to achieve same effect in the rest of film? Do we need to see insides of Neil’s nostrils or see pimples on his wife’s face?

Armstrong (Gosling) waits for launch

Editing also suffers greatly because of Chazelle’s decision to use shakes and framing. In some shots it is almost impossible to establish what is happening, especially in flight sequences, where everything turns into one big blur akin Transformers and you just don’t comprehend what is happening.

But there is one thing amazing about this film and that is soundtrack by Justin Hurwitz and Chazelle’s decision to use certain music in certain places. Soundtrack plays an extremely important role in understanding this film and elevates otherwise mundane scenes into another level. Soundtrack peaks during Moon flight and turns this section of “First Man” into an operatic masterpiece.

Unfortunately, it is only at the end of the film, and you will have to sit almost 2 hours of it before you see this epic ending.

Janet (Foy) has nothing else but to react to Neil’s actions

Acting

Ryan Gosling is not a stranger to quiet, emotionless roles. He is amazing in “Drive” where he portrays silent and enigmatic heist driver. It works in “Drive” because “Drive” is an arthouse film. His character can stare 5 seconds at his opponent before he answers, because we accept that just how it is. That is not real life. We accept it just like we accept that everybody is an assassin in John Wick. In “First Man” it feels fake, reused and not interesting.

Claire Foy plays Neil’s wife, Janet, but screenplay doesn’t give her anything much to do. So, she just concentrates on smoking cigarettes and waiting for Neil. Which is a shame because she was exceptional in “Unsane”. Same goes of greatly underutilized supporting cast including Jason Clarke, who shined in “Chappaquiddick”.

Summary

With one of the best rocket launch sequences ever to be filmed and invigorating soundtrack, “First Man” disappoints with overdramatization of events, long runtime and Chazelle’s extremely annoying decision with framing and camera shake.

The post First Man appeared first on Kino-AZ.

Story

In 1979 young Ron Stallworth is walking on the sidewalk when he notices a banner informing that Colorado Springs Police Department is looking for applicants, specifically from minorities. And while he knows that wearing big afro on his head and the fact that he will become first African-American to work for local police department will make a lot of people anxious, he still decides to take the risk. But soon he is fed up with bureaucratic work he has been assigned and urges his management to have him do undercover work. He is then reassigned to narcotics division as a detective. But instead Ron gets a brilliant idea – he will call up local Ku Klux Klan chapter, pose as aa racist white man and infiltrate the network. As ridiculous as it sounds, he is able to successfully establish contact. He can’t of course attend the meetings, so his fellow detective Flip Zimmerman will act as a stand in during meetings in person.

Stallworth (Washington) and Zimmerman (Driver) can’t believe their eyes

Writing

For what it is worth, the fact that this story is not a brain child of Tarantino but is what actually happened elevates “BlacKkKlansman” to next level. I mean how unbelievable it is that black detective can successfully fool Klan into believing he is a white person? And while it is not inconceivable that one might trick a person to anything over the phone, but level of sophistication that went into work of real Ron Stallworth is amazing. Not only he had to pose as a racist, homophobic, anti-Semitic person, he also had to become somebody he totally despises. Big help also arrives from the fact that he got support from his fellow detectives and his bosses. And how about Zimmerman, who had to stick out and pretend to be the fake person that Ron has created in his mind?

That being said film does feel like a lecture, unfortunately. Dialogues constantly use phrases and slogans that are too familiar with modern geopolitical events. There are direct parallels into what Klan members are saying and what modern politicians are pushing for. And these instances are not subtle. They are extremely direct and in-your-face (“Make America, umm… the Greatest” or “America First!”). Lee could have you used intricately sophisticated ways of delivering his message, but instead he goes to jugular and just screams that at you. And while, I am sure, this was his intent, not to have the subtlety, honestly, I felt that he was just preaching. I would have instead preferred to derive to the point myself.

David Duke (Grace) leads Klan meeting

This is especially a big issue for me since “BlacKkKlansman” has a lot of comedy. But unlike other two releases of last month dealing with racial issues, “Sorry to Bother You” and “Blindspotting” it fails to use comedy as a tool to get that message to audience. Then again, “BlacKkKlansman” uses situational comedy more in style of Tarantino than satirical tone of “Sorry to Bother You” or allegorical “Blindspotting”.

However, DESPITE this “BlacKkKlansman” actually does deliver a message. An extremely powerful, intimidating, strong and influential message. Lecture might bore you, but point that Lee wants to get across will get there and will stay there even after you leave the theater and you will understand that despite forty years passing since the events of “BlacKkKlansman”, nothing much has changed. And it surely will scare you.

Directing

From the lecture tone to the sheer ridiculousness of the situation, “BlacKkKlansman” could have gone so wrong so fast has it been in the hands of none other than Spike Lee. Instead, Lee offers something that very few directors could have brought to the project – extreme passion for the topic and unique directing craft. From swift camera angles to amazingly well-placed soundtrack, from intricate editing to intricate reveals, from steady pacing and building tension, “BlacKkKlansman” offers a viewing experience only Lee could deliver.

There are several instances where minor characters are delivering a speech/telling a story and the way Spike Lee presents and handles the crowd is just incredible. In first instance, he focuses on the individual faces listening to strong words of encouragement. In the second, he juxtaposes Klan members conducting ceremony on top of witness account of lynching. Both sequences are extremely powerful.

Then there is an ending. Ending and epilogue, actually. Initially I felt that ending was weak, but the way Spike Lee transitions to epilogue ties whole movie up and delivers punch so strong, so raw, so powerful and so profound and you will hear it reverberating the whole movie theater.

Stallworth (Washington) just received an interesting note

Acting

Despite John David Washington delivering strong performance as Ron Stallworth, I actually found him a little bit one-dimensional. Yes, there is a struggle in him to come up with terms of him being a police officer and at the same time having issues with his girlfriend, Patrice (played by Laura Harrier), who is civil rights activists, but I felt that it could have been written better. But that is hardly Washington’s fault. I did like how he portrayed “white” Ron and “black” Ron separately, both equally believable. Instead, Adam Driver‘s Flip Zimmerman offers much compelling glimpse into a Jewish detective, who despite never accepting being Jewish, has to become person who hates his own heritage to infiltrate Ku Klux Klan. This role and his portrayal in “Logan Lucky” makes him so much better than mediocre Kylo Ren in “The Last Jedi“.

I did also enjoy supporting cast of Laura Harrier as Patrice, Topher Grace as KKK leader David Duke, Jasper Pääkkönen as violent KKK member Felix and Ryan Eggold as KKK chapter leader Walter. All of them, especially Jasper Pääkkönen, deliver a very strong performances and create incredibly vivid characters.

Summary

Despite lecturing tone of “BlacKkKlansman”, Spike Lee is able to deliver across a very strong message. Combined with unique directorial work he is able to make “BlacKkKlansman” one of most powerful and important social and racial movies.

The post BlacKkKlansman 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.

This is not the case with “127 Hours”. As far as the story goes, it is pretty much a true story, just converted to the blue screen. In fact, as far as I know, its much closer to documentary than to a fiction. And yet, story feels really fictitious. I mean, what are the odds of this thing happening? But these stuff did really happen. And that what makes this film so interesting.

Aron Ralston (James Franco) is hardass mountain climber. You know the kind that doesn’t give a crap about anything. He thinks he is tough, he doesn’t need anything or anyone. And all he can think about is to find a shortcut to local guidebook hiking route. He likes creating artificial challenges and obstacles on his way, so that he can overcome them. He is a complete loner. And that’s why he takes off for Utah canyons without telling anyone where he is going. But this time, life has prepared a hard lesson for him. On his hike route he slips and his right hand gets trapped under a big boulder. There’s no way he can get his hand out, all he has is a dull pocket knife and a bottle of water. No one can hear him, no one will look for him. He knows how this story will end. He knows what he needs to do. And he will have 127 hours to get to that point.

The director of the film is Danny Boyle, you might know him as a man behind “Slumdog Millionaire”. The film puts a very unique challenge for the director and the crew. 90% of the time we spent in the small canyon with claustraphobically close walls and with a soft crack of sky on top. Its very difficult to keep consistency and limitation of camera angles that can be positively used – these are the technical aspects that laid in front of Danny Boyle. He solves this problem brilliantly – extremely wide lenses. Probably the one of the best usage of wide lenses in movies since Terry Gilliam‘s “Brazil“. Cinematography and editing look equally awesome (I can not find any other word to describe this).

James Franco delivers a solid performance showing all the levels of state of mind of Aron Ralston, during his stay in the canyon.

I enjoyed the film. And although you know how it will end, you still keep your eyes on the screen. Its definitely an incredible story done very professionally.

8/10

PS: Special nod goes to opening credits. Nicely done.

The post 127 Hours appeared first on Kino-AZ.