ONE OF THE SCARIEST THRILLERS THIS SEASON - "NIGHTCRAWLER"

As we all know, Hollywood loves films about itself. And it doesn’t necessarily need to be Hollywood per se, if it involves filmmaking on any level and you have some idea of what you are doing, well, you’re pretty much guaranteed a warm welcome to the table. The length of your stay there will of course largely depend on what you have to offer.

In this context, we have to admit Nightcrawler has A LOT to offer. Not only is it a piercing look at our hunger for information – more specifically the gory details – it is, through the analysis of this obsession a very, very powerful thriller… And when you add talent like Jake Gylenhaal to the mix… Well… Let’s say you’re in for one heck of a ride.

Lou Bloom (Jake Gylenhaal) is unemployed. He is a high school graduate and largely self-taught but he doesn’t let that stop him – he is on the lookout, actively seeking out his next chance and ready to grip it with both hands when it comes along… And come along in does, quite literally in a blaze of smoke and fire : Lou witnesses a traffic accident purely by chance and as he is idly watching the goings on – as one does – he notices the two men with cameras jumping out of another car. They film the event and dash off again. And lo and behold, next day their footage is in the news. Lou likes this idea. He likes it a lot. And he quickly sets about setting up his own business… At first, no one takes him very seriously. True, the news director of KWLA, a local tv channel (Rene Rousso) tells him that he has a good eye but apart from that, as far as anyone is concerned, Lou is small fry… But there is something about Lou… Something people dismiss as just being “a little odd”. They have no idea what truly lies below Lou’s witticisms memorised from the internet… It is blind ambition and determination, at a level that goes way, way beyond the average entrepreneur…

I have said this before. I will say it again. Lou Bloom is categorically one of the most frightening heroes I have ever seen on film. We learn quite early on in the film that Lou is self-taught. He talks a little too much, his sentences are just a little bit too long and he parrots generic phrases that he has clearly read off just about every job-hunting website on the net. The front is both ill-fitting and a little too perfect. And try as Lou might to “be like everyone else”, the effort is obvious – which is why, we feel quite clearly, he fails to find work at first. But suddenly, it turns out, Lou has a “good eye” for news footage – the gory kind, just the kind KWLA needs to lead stories with – and the rest is history… Thing is no one – including us – wonders how come Lou is so at his ease around blood and gore. (SpOILER ALERT – skip to next paragraph) And the grim realisation comes two thirds through the film when Lou turns to his unfortunate associate Rick (who will be the very first to clock the fact that something is very wrong with Lou) and calmly asks “What if my problem wasn’t that I don’t understand people but that I don’t like them ?” Yes ladies and gents, Jake Gylenhaal actually portrays one of the most terrifying psychopaths I have seen portrayed on film. The entire first half of his performance is beautifully balanced; we go through it feeling very clearly that there is something “not quite right”- it is not until the big reveal that we realise how “not right” things are inside his head… Gylenhaal – and of course writer/director Dan Gilroy- have us exactly where they want us throughout; I honestly think the film – and more specifically Gylenhaal -  deserved every honour it got bestowed on it this awards season.

But apart from being a very impressive thriller, Nightcrawler also clearly contains criticism and allegory. We are officially living in the digital age, we are hungry for constant information, constant thrills, we are being bombarded by multiple channels vying for our attention, each with bigger, better, more shocking, more interesting wares… And if Lou is the villain in this story, he is only able to become so because the news director Nina (Rene Rousso’s character) enables him. Nina is worried about her ratings, her position and – of course – her job. And as their relationship evolves, Lou brings her better and better stuff and she becomes so dependent on his gory wares that ethics and the “how”s and the “is this ethically right”s fall to the wayside one by one until she becomes the very embodiment of the capitalist media monster that we accuse of doing things like killing princess Diana. There is a clear indictment of a greedy information and technology driven society, too preoccupied with its own thrills and not in the least worried about potential consequences for others…

Technically the film gives a nice balance of contrasting fast paced segments, car chases and gory accidents shown in the style of the news it criticises with moments of stillness that adds to the underlying eeriness the story has built up and brings no peace. I guarantee you, you will be on the edge of your seat from the beginning of the show to the end… Definitely one of my favourite films this season… 

FROM GAME TO REALITY (SORT OF) : "PRINCE OF PERSIA – THE SANDS OF TIME"

Now, admittedly, this is going to mean a lot more to those of you who actually play video games. I have an announcement. I don’t play video games. No, not one bit. In short, I honestly have no idea how it compares to the game, what the overlaps are, etc. I should actually ask a friend who does this regularly. I may do that still. But actually, no. I mean, these films shouldn’t, from a business perspective, cater ONLY to gamers, right? I reckon not. So here’s a non-gamer’s perspective on this little number. And she happens to be smiling on the movie.

Destan (the rather yummy Jake Gylenhaal) is the adopted son of the King of Persia. He and his two brothers and their uncle, the brother of the king(Ben Kingsley) are out on a mission of conquest and they happen upon the holy city of Alamut. Recent intelligence from the spies says that this historically neutral city of great historical importance is actually supplying weapons to their enemies. The Persians invade the city. Destan is among the most successful warriors there. However, he very quickly finds out that the story about spy intelligence is all a decoy. There is a villain in their midst. And he is after a mythical magic dagger that would allow him to reverse time, putting himself in power. Destan, along with Tamina, the princess of Alamut and the keeper of the sacred dagger, must form an uneasy alliance to stop him. The fate of the entire world may well be at stake.

Ok so basically, you know what this is? It is a road movie, where too initially completely dissimilar protagonists learn to love each other, bond and fight for a common cause on the way. That coupled with the type of romantic comedy that is as old as Shakespeare (I’m thinking Taming of the Shrew). You know, sassy girl gets “tamed” into femininity by the wit and courage of a truly good man. Ladle on a good dollop of special effects (come on, it is based on a video game at the end of the day) and voila. Prince of Persia. Now, I know that thus far I have not  exactly waxed lyrical about the topic. This is precisely why I rarely review Hollywood films, unless they are massive “event” films that is, these days. I am slightly sick of the (in my view) regurgitated storylines. The independent works, the European cinema, the more experimental directors actually have the capacity to offer you something you cannot “foresee”.  Things that really catch you short and make you think. I mean, Aeon Flux, that I reviewed the other day, has elements of this. I did not mention it much in the review because if I did a massive spoiler and the end of the film would come crumbling down but it is there. This film does not have that though. Sorry.

Ok rant over. This being said, why on EARTH did I put it in the blog then? Well, because, credit where it’s due, it is good at what it does. It is an action film. It stars Jake Gylenhaal and has a massive amount of him doing fighting scenes (eye candy alert!). I pretty much like Ben Kingsley in every single thing he does. It is classic Hollywood amusement. Ideal to watch with your mates of an evening. I enjoyed it. It just virtually contributed nothing to my film culture thingy. Not every film needs to…  

THE TIMES ARE GOING TOO FAST - TRUE STORY - "JARHEAD"

Ok, I think I told you a couple of weeks back that I was doing my dissertation on war films. And that said war films would crop up on the blog from time to time. Honestly, Jarhead was kinda scheduled right from the start; Sam Mendes is one of my favourite directors of all times. I think his great success lies in his ability to portray very dramatic emotions with honesty, in all their brutality and drama but without exaggeration. This is why, when you watch one of his films, you will very probably be turned on your head – metaphorically. But you can’t take refuge in the excuse that “oh that’s not realistic at all”. Combine this quality with war; you get something quite extraordinary and unforgettable. Jarhead is a beautiful commentary on modern warfare and all the different tragic stories it entails. “Swoff” (Jake Gyllenhaal) is a jarhead. A jarhead is slang for a U.S. marine. He goes through boot camp, trains as a sniper and then… War breaks out. The first Gulf War. Swoff and his fellow snipers are among the first to land in Iraq, trained to the teeth, ready for anything. They are quick to discover that all their classical army training has not prepared them for the realities of war, especially the First Gulf War. The main enemies the soldiers have to fight is heat, boredom and the constant suspense provided by the threat of actual warfare. Just when they have adapted to this set of conditions however, war breaks out. And the snipers have to face the realities of war, a reality that they could not have imagined, no, not even in their worst nightmares. Now, you know that there are one heck of a lot of “war is hell” type films about. You also know that I have a bit of a soft spot for them. This, ladies and gents, is not one of those films. The film is set in war and is about war, this much is true. But if you dig a little way under the face value of the whole affair, you will find there are greater philosophical concerns. This film is largely about the fast changing world today. Technology, modern life, you will have noticed everything changes. Everything changes very, very quickly. It is about the sense of disorientation you get face to face with the computers dominating our lives today; and I’m not talking about your grandmother’s generation trying to make sense of a tablet computer. I’m talking about all the computers, in areas you never even thought they were. The marines, Swoff and his friends have their ideals, their dreams, yet the life they have built is already mutating by itself, passing them by. It is interesting, philosophical and in a sense tragic. But most impressive of all is the very understated “based on the book by anthony swofford” nestled among the credits. Yes people, scarily enough, it’s a true story. About stuff that is really happening / has happened”. All told in Mendes’s hard-hitting, emotional style. It will give you a lot to think about. It will grab you by the heartstrings and not let go for a good, long while. Please don’t miss it…

TRUE STORY OF THE WEEK : "ZODIAC"

Ok, we seem to have got off to a nice little start with Jamie Oliver. Cooking, nice and homely, warm kitchens… Fancy a change of tone? How about a serial killer? A real one of course…

Those of you who have been following me for longer, (if you’re out there, I’m kinda hurt no one ever writes comments on this dang page but oh well…) anyway, those of you who have been reading this blog for longer must have spotted my penchant for true stories. Those of you who are into the genre (or know about it) may have suspected I am also into true crime. Well, I have news for you: I am; BIG TIME. It’s sort of ghoulish but well… I just can’t help it. And the Zodiac murders are now officially stuff of legend – not least because the identity of the killer is still unknown… Celebrated Hollywood director David Fincher was a child in the San Francisco area just around the time the killer was active – so was able to experience the terror that gripped the city first hand. Having then gone on to direct such dark yet wonderful classics as Seven, The Game and Fight Club, I personally think there was no one better qualified to take on telling the story of the Zodiac. And with big time names like Jake Gyllenhaal and Mark Ruffalo on the “roll call” who could resist this film… I mean, be honest…

Ok now for those of you who either were not alive at the time or do not share my interest in true crime, here is a “what the film is all about”: Between December 1968 and October 1969, the San Francisco bay area was terrorized by a hooded killer. Apparently picking his victims at random, pretty much the way a hunter would, he claimed the lives of five people (experts can agree on a total of seven victims, two of these survived. There are also numerous suspected victims). He also wrote letters to the press to be printed – namely the San Francisco Chronicle sometimes in code (very good code at that) sometimes not, making various threats the most famous being ambushing a school bus, causing much alarm among parents. The fact that the Zodiac (for thus he signed himself) claimed to have murdered 37 people and the fact that he was never actually identified only made him more feared. Authorities continued receiving communication from the Zodiac until the late seventies. Although a prime suspect exists officially no one can prove or say who the Zodiac killer actually was. The film centers round two characters Robert Graysmith who worked in the Chronicle at the time and David Tosci – one of the detectives assigned to the case…

So, what do I make of it? Well, rest assured, the film lives up to its big names. Both Jake Gyllenhaal – as Robert Graysmith who became completely obsessed with the case, and then the leading expert on the Zodiac murders and Mark Ruffalo as David Tosci who was dragged above and beyond the line of duty thanks to Graysmith are in a word superb. And David Fincher is as usual, a master of creating atmospheres. The killings are present, naturally, but not overpowering – this is not a gore flick. It is the suspense, the growing yet fruitless hunt, the taunting letters and the fear gripping the hearts of the public that dominate the film. We watch with baited breath as Graysmith makes breakthrough after breakthrough, struggle with him as he tries desperately to make Tosci and the rest of the police take him seriously and yet, of course common sense dictates that he will fail – to this day the identity of the Zodiac killer is not known for sure…

I can understand if you feel the idea of watching a movie on real live murders is a little too much for you. But frankly, look at it this way, we watch a lot of war films do we not? And are a lot of said war films based on true stories – true wars? What about the news? Death and carnage surround us and there we don’t even have the comfort of being faced with Oscar nominee actors, there the events are REALLY real. Taken in that context, to my way of thinking, Zodiac is no gorier than any other cop-flick you have ever watched. It just has an added “brrr” factor when you stop and think about it… And believe me you will think about it. Mr Fincher, my congratulations sir, you have done it again =)