JUST SIT BACK AND FEEL THE FURY!

I don’t know why I do it to myself. No, I honestly do not. One has to admit that I have been a very, very good girl as far as keeping up to date with the releases of 2015. I guess it’s my journalistic duty. You’ve stuck by me. You’re growing in numbers. You deserve up to date film news. That’s sorta why I watched Fury – for you. And it would make a very good paragraph ending if I continued that with “so you didn’t have to” – but that would be only part of the truth. Yes, let’s get this bit out of the way, Fury is “yet another WW2 movie” – as opposed to being in possession of some kind of original insight or approach to it. Don’t get me wrong, between a talented cast, atmospheric cinematography and truly dramatic moments based by and large on the real life experiences of tank drivers during the Second World War it gives you quite a gripping and emotional ride. But from time to time, in fact all too often, Fury strays into the realm of the testosterone-laden Bollywood style overdramatic .

April 1945. The American army is advancing into German territory. Although the Americans are technically “winning the war”, they are very far from being  “out of the woods yet … The German Tiger tanks are superior to the American tanks and any soldiers or civilians resisting are resisting with that fanatical strength given by utter desperation… The war has been going on for far too long. The men are tired. The mental strain is unbearable and it takes someone with the experience and strength of character of Wardaddy (Brad Pitt) to truly be in command of a Sherman tank and the battle hardened crew who is sick of war and quickly approaching the end of their rope. In this inflammable situation a death of a crew member is nothing short of devastating. Especially if he is replaced with a complete rookie, Norman Ellison (Logan Lerman), who trained as a typist and clerk but has now found himself as the Bow Gunner in a Sherman Tank. Norman has only one option – to adapt to his new position, and fast. Because every time Norman stumbles, he could potentially cost multiple lives including his own, and Wardaddy seemingly has neither the time nor the mental strength to teach him the ropes…

Now, as I said in the intro, in a word, the film is exactly what you think it’s going to be. It is pretty much full of stock characters – though I was impressed with the presence of a token Latino as opposed to a token black soldier – and David Ayers (name behind many hard-hitting male-oriented films such as The Fast and the Furious 1 , Training Day S.W.A.T. etc.  in the capacity of writer and director) does pretty much what he does best. We easily recognize most of the crew, Wardaddy, the tough and legendary leader, Grady, the one who is “unhinged”, Gordo our token Latino (abely executed may I add, by Michael Pena). Shia LaBeouf’s Bible – making him so religious is a combo of an interesting choice and, I suspect, Ayer jumping at the chance of using this for dramatic effect – is the one character we haven’t seen that often before but still, not an entire novelty. Norman is the wide-eyed rookie who is fresh to the front much like us, we empathize with him, and all together we learn about the horrors of war. Norman gets transformed into  hardened crew member in a matter of days (as opposed to the rest of the crew for whom one would assume it took years) but right up to the end we never doubt he’s the true “good guy” – because he’s the one we’re empathizing with and that would never do. The actors do a very good job of executing the characters (original or not) and the direction is up to par if again, unremarkable.

I do get that it is a wonderful dramatic point to have a character fighting against impossible odds. To have a soul striving to achieve something no matter what the obstacles are and how hard it seems is basically the stuff drama is made of. I believe, as the film reaches its climax, is that we are so invested in Wardaddy as the heroic, legendary leader that we think that he might, just might , oh I don’t know – defeat an entire SS Batallion with four men, one broken down Sherman tank and a very limited amount of ammunition. Yes I am talking about the “final battle”. Now, if it were a Butch Kassidy and the Sundance Kid type ending, well and good, they go emotionally and heroically out into “death by Nazi”. But on top of all the male-centered clichés, the fact that our little tank (Fury) and its crew actually wipes out what looks like over half the battalion just… It… It’s not even a “raaah” moment. Maybe it is for a guy, but definitely not for me. Look, I’m no expert, but assuming that in real life all the men hadn’t run for their lives and all stayed with the tank, after the initial surprise surely the battalion would have used vehicles or heavy artillery to overcome the tank. Only not here, apparently.

I mean sure, if you just want to go, have a forgettable few hours ogling at Brad Pitt and then carry on with your life, sure, go watch Fury. Fans of war films will find much to amuse them as will WW2 enthusiasts. But if you’re on a quest for something a bit more deep and meaningful, something thought provoking and original, these definitely are not the droids you are looking for…

THE IMITATION GAME - BECAUSE LIFE IS STRANGER THAN FICTION

Biographies, extraordinary true stories, stories of overcoming adversity… All much beloveds of Hollywood and the awards season – and we did see quite a few extraordinary ones come out this year, that’s for sure… And although it ultimately only got he "little gold man" for Best Writing, the one that actually – in one way or another – had the most tongues wagging all over the world was The Imitation Game…

One of the pieces of headline news was the gay rights campaign Benedict Cumberbatch has started, aiming for the pardon of all the men, alive or deceased who were convicted “of homosexuality” like Alan Turing.  Another was the outburst Cumberbatch made concerning racial equality in the film industry, which in turn created a whole new discussion in its own right… And indeed, what is the point of art if it does not force us to think, to feel and to change… But before we get to all of that, let’s take a look at the man, his life and the film that was made about it – for indeed, the fear at this point is that we may well lose the film itself in the discussion surrounding it!

The story is, as we all know, that of Alan Turing. Nobody was sure what to make of Turing in school. To call him an odd duck was to understate the fact, nor was this simply a faze as his “Alan-ish” behaviour just gets more pronounced as he grows older… However, if he is odd, Alan is no fool as he shows an absolute genius for mathematics and a great personal interest in codes and cyphers. So naturally when, during the Second World War, the Germans come up with the seemingly undefeatable Enigma code, Alan turns up at the door of the Ministry of Defence and explains that he is probably the only person who can decode it. Alan is anti-social, infuriating in fact almost completely impossible to work with as far as his colleagues are concerned, but they quickly realise something else… He may also be right…

The rest, as they say, is history… Turing had, in actual fact, discovered the first “computer”. The very thing I am writing this review on right now. The thing you are very probably reading it on – be it a telephone or a laptop… One does wonder if, when he first “discovered” Christopher (the name of the first computer) Turing realised what a huge chunk of everyday life he had, in fact, shaped… (He had a truly extraordinary technical mind, so in actual fact he may well have done). I think it was quite well timed and quite appropriate in all, we do live in the internet generation and it’s not such a bad thing that we find out how it all began…

The thematics and the discussions it will start aside, you will get annoyed with bits of this film. Oh sure, Benedict Cumberbatch is absolutely brilliant from beginning to end, as is Keira Knightly who uses the characters warmth to play an absolutely lovely contrast to Turing who is, for lack of a better description, all odd corners and elbows sticking out… Looking back and reading descriptions of Turing, it is quite clear that he was very probably somewhere on the autistic spectrum. However the film does not fall into the trap of harping on the fact that he was some sort of autistic savant. This kind of diagnosis was quite rare at the time, so we are simply presented with the facts and left to draw our own conclusions. What the film does do however, with annoying Hollywoodiness, (yes it’s a word. I have just decided it’s a word, so it is a word. Henceforth) is repeat ad nauseum  the adage that “Sometimes it’s the people you think the least of who accomplish the most extraordinary things”. Once would have been more than enough. Twice if you guys really wanted to push it. You didn’t need a character saying the phrase every 20 minutes. The audience is not entirely stupid and we are quite capable of seeing that Turing is overcoming some truly spectacular demons and coming in, as the underdog, “winning the day”. Also, I didn’t “get” the cutaways to Turing running. I mean don’t get me wrong, Cumberbatch running and showing off his muscles is always a welcome sight to my sore eyes. I just didn’t get what they were doing in the story. Apart from clearly visualise Turing’s struggling. Only problem being that Benedict Cumberbatch is quite capable as an actor of showing this to us with no need to cutaways to him running but, you know…

Turing may well have won the day and (indirectly) the war, but his life was cut tragically short, when, after being condemned for “indecency” and forced to undergo chemical castration, he took his own life, aged 41. And it is very, very right that the film should be the starting point and a spearhead for the pardon of all the men that were condemned so unjustly and made to suffer in jail or by submitting to chemical castration and who didn’t have the advantage of being Alan Turing to ease their way to a pardon.

It is a sign of the great quality of the film that it overcomes all the “mainstreamisms” and “spoon feeding” in it to be the masterpiece it is. Part of it is the cast and the true show of talent and dedication we see from them. But it’s main saving grace is of course the strength of the story – a film can have whatever else it wants, if it has a weak story, it is doomed from the start. And it doesn’t get stronger or more unbelievable than Turing’s story…It is realism and the humanity of the whole affair, the fact that Joan Clarke (Keira Knightly’s character). Because not everyone will be able to completely sympathise with an a-social maths genius with autistic tendencies. But a man struggling with a society that doesn’t understand and his own personal demons to fulfil what he knows to be his destiny, now that – on some level – we can all relate to.  

BECAUSE REMEMBERANCE SHOULD NOT BE CONFINED TO JUST ONE WEEK... "SHOAH"

This post was originally meant for Holocaust remembrance week. God knows it would have suited the week infinitely better, subject-matter wise. But it took me a while to get through the watching stage for this one. And I don’t just mean because of the length. The subject matter means that you cannot actually sit down and watch the thing in a couple of large chunks. The “sessions” I watched this rather extraordinary documentary in left me drained, and in serious need of a drink and a good few episodes of some sort of sit-com to bring me back to the real world.

Shoah is a truly extraordinary documentary. If you decide to watch a single thing about the Holocaust, make it Shoah and you never need to watch anything again. Not just because it is a mind blowing 9,5 hours long, with no natural cut-off points or episodes. Because making a (very) long documentary is all well and good, but you can perfectly well manage to use that time to say very little. Director Claude Lanzmann uses the time to say virtually anything you can think of, and tell stories from the Holocaust that you may not have heard before.

Because yes, we hear the heart-rending and extraordinary stories of the survivors of the camps. But we also talk to the drivers of the trains that took them there. The villagers in the surrounding fields who were allowed to tend their crops as the prisoners were worked to death in the camp next door. The regular poles and Checks who joined the resistance after realising the true extent of the horrors taking place on their door steps. And last, but by no means least, the Nazi soldiers who oversaw the killing machines.

The one advantage this work has over modern works is the fact that since it was made in the early to mid-80s (the official date of the film is 1985 but it must have taken a good few years to assemble) a lot of the people who were involved in the Holocaust (be they victims, perpetrators or just witnesses from afar) were quite old, but still alive and able to tell their stories with clarity. Not a single, solitary frame of archive footage is used. Which makes sense, because I am sure that Shoah was meant as an archive- an archive of memories.

You have often heard me drone on about how difficult it is to make a film about a topic like the Second World War, simply because of the profusion of material about it. But Lanzmann, meticulous in his approach, manages to elicit stories and points of view that I have not seen before or since. I was especially touched by the testimony of the train driver who was responsible for driving the infamous cattle trains to Treblinka. It will not be a major plot spoiler to tell you that the only way the drivers of these trains could bear the job they were given was by making the journey almost blind drunk. For even above the roar of the train, it would seem that the lamentations of the people in the first few carriages were clearly audible from the locomotive…

Then of course there are the interviews with the ex- Nazis. Some of these interviews were actually filmed in secret as the Nazis had originally only agreed to do voice recordings. But the hidden camera imagery shows old men who could, for all intents and purposes be your own grandfather. “We may have to stop early” warns one old man “I have heart problems as you know and… I will let you know if feel I cannot go on.” And while this warning is a clear demonstration of emotions built up inside, the ex-soldier uses a meticulously drawn map and stick to explain the day to day workings of the camp (Auschwitz) and talks about the details of operating the death machine in a manner that is almost matter of fact. One cannot help but wonder at the extraordinary defence mechanisms the human soul throws up to combat stress and memories…

As a modern day film-viewer you will find Lanzmann’s style of filming hard to get into. It is slow moving, and seems to focus on the tiny details you may at first find irrelevant or unimportant. What Lanzmann is actually trying to do is to reconstruct the entire landscape of the Holocaust. The workaday details. The little and the large that made up the entire, horrendous death machine. The result is one of the most realistic portraits of the death camps, where your imagination can transport you there so much more efficiently than stock-footage of liberated camps ever could… Because that’s the tricky thing about archive footage… So much of it is from “after the event” as it were. The only real record of what actually happened in the camps are memories. And perhaps the only way of truly doing these memories justice is to record them in the most minute detail possible. To this end, Lanzmann does not even use voiceovers or subtitles for some of the interviewees who don’t speak a European language. We hear their story in their own voice, then through that of the interpreter. It maybe takes a little longer, but the emotion in the voices of the storytellers (for what else can I call them) is not lost.

This is a definite must watch. And not necessarily just for Holocaust remembrance week but for all times, for truly, remembrance of these horrors should not be confined to just one week…  Just set aside some time over a few days, and bear witness to these stories, so unbelievable and so horrifying that they could only ever be real… 

OUT OF THE MOUTHS OF INFANTS : "THE BOY IN THE STRIPED PIJAMAS"

I had heard SO much about this film. I guess you will have figured this out about me right now; I don’t do films that are “immensely popular”. If I feel a film is becoming a fad, I do have a certain tendency to steer clear from it. Not because I don’t trust public opinion, I just… I don’t know, it’s my inner artist or something “not wanting to follow the crowd” I guess. That’s one thing. The other thing is, I guess I’m a little wary around holocaust films. I mean, there are SO many of them. I’m not saying there shouldn’t be a lot, but the inevitable result of a large number of people crowding around a single topic is a lot of rather mediocre artwork. I mean , I’m sorry, but it’s true. Now, it has to be said that The Boy in the Striped Pijamas is not %100 original, in that all the themes it uses we actually have seen before. You might argue it was done better. But then again, this film takes it and uses it, adds on and adapts very, very well. And that is what artistry is largely about is it not? The adaptation and adding is just as important as coming up with an original story – especially in this world where truly original stories are becoming tougher and tougher to come by.

The Boy in the Striped Pijamas is the story of eight year-old Bruno (Asa Butterfield, who, it seems, is well on his way to becoming the acing phenomenon of the next generation. I didn't actually recoginse him at first but do the reasearch. He has been around. In a good way). He is the son of a high ranking SS official. He doesn’t quite understand what that means, but it seems that his father, along with other soldiers, is working hard to make the world they live in a better place. And that can’t be a bad thing. Bruno is very sad when his parents inform him that they will have to move out of Berlin. Bruno is very sad to leave his friends and his familiar routine behind, but the countryside soon begins to afford other occupations for him. One thing  that piques his interest more than anything is the “farm” they can see from the top bedroom windows. Some of the “farmers” who work there come to the house to run errands sometimes. Bruno thinks they’re a little odd, especially since they seem to wear pyjamas the whole time… His parents tell him he is strictly not allowed to talk to these people, but kids will be kids. Bruno strikes up friendship with a little boy his age called Shmuel. Bruno just wants a good friend to play with, and pass the time. Their friendship, however, will have consequences far beyond even his active imaginations wildest imaginings…

Of course you got the film I was talking about : Life is Beautiful. The classic that “made” Roberto Begnini. And my goodness, what a classic. It is so important to return to the innocence and sense of discovery innate in the soul of a child to take a fresh look at what we’re doing from time to time. Especially in the face of horror such as the Holocaust, not least because we are all pretty much in the face of something we have never seen before amazed and horrified. The thing about Bruno is though, his family do their level best to keep the evil from him. To prolong his and his sister Gretel’s innocence, they use every single trick they know but in the end, to no avail.

The film is touching in so many ways. It shows how the different family members do their best to cope with what is in effect a very stressful and upsetting situation. I mean even the father, who is the default “bad guy” by the end of the film can be understood. I honestly don’t know how I would react in his shoes either to be fair. But we should keep that discussion for after you have watched the film. The Boy in the Striped Pijamas is another striking testament to how miserable war really makes every single one of us. And that no matter how hard we try to escape it or block it out, it will come crawling through to our lives. The only way to stop it is to stop war completely, but well… That seems to be a lesson this planet isn’t quite ready to learn yet… 

IN MEMORIAM - AND "IN DARKNESS"

Yes, I know. Yet another Holocaust film. Now, I’m not dissing the Holocaust or anything commemorating it; but it is true that there are, well, rather a lot of films of the same genre floating around. It is normal considering the great and continuing trauma the horrific event caused in the collective memory of the world, but the profusion of material of the same ilk means that we become “desensitized” if you like to a certain breed of film. This is why I find director Agnieszka Holland particularly successful in this film. Firstly, she has taken an event that has been gone over with a fine-toothed comb and found an amazing true story that is unlike all the rest of the equally unbelievable WW2 stories, and secondly she has been made a film that, despite all the desensitization on the topic, touches one, to the core of one’s soul. In Darkness takes place in that Jewish Ghettos formed by the occupying Nazis in WW2 Lvov. Leopold Socha is a sanitation inspector – which basically means he works in sewers. He doesn’t like the Nazis particularly but is not really moved by the plight of the Jews enough to actually do something in the vein of resistance until runs into a group of escapee Jews in of all places, the sewers. The group comes from the ghettos and they have made a tunnel in an attempt to escape the oppression they live under. This tunnel comes in very handy when the Russian army starts advancing and the Nazis start ransacking the ghettos. A large group of men, women and children escape into the sewers and Leopold agrees to guide them to safety and procure supplies – all for a daily fee of course. Both his wife and his colleague tell him what he is doing is wrong and / or dangerous. But Leopold continues, first purely for economic reasons and then, when the money runs out, out of the goodness of his heart – for he is a kind man for all his bluster. The problem is, the war is evidently coming to an end and desperation is growing in the German camp. Will the little group living In Darkness make it to the end of the war? First of all, let me say this. If you actually make it to the end of this film without crying once, I’m pretty sure you’re made of stone. The darkness of the sewers and the direness of the group’s living conditions, forced to live like rats under the city streets is enough to upset one. But then there is the sheer “reality” of the film and the characters. In this kind of film one finds, to various degrees that the goodies are “saintly” while the baddies are “evil”. Not so here. Leopold is gruff, uneducated and has many faulty. I was quite annoyed by him at the beginning. But as time goes by, it is not so much that he changes that much, but we get to know him. In the same way, the Polish officer – Leopold’s friend – who actually collaborates with the Nazis, is evidently not a bad sort at heart. Leopold’s wife and young colleague / apprentice react very badly at Leopold’s plans at first but they are obviously not really bad people either. The Jews are also very real, with their flaws and their virtues. Thus we are able to thoroughly emphasize with the characters, all the characters, and that simply means an emotional rollercoaster from beginning to end. Basically, you are invested in the film from the word go, it’s a real challenge not to be touched by it. I think this is a good thing. After WW2, the world said “never again”, and yet the atrocities keep on coming thick and fast. Getting some emotions involved may be, in the long run, the only way of stopping them…

VALKYRIE

If you turn round and tell me that you are actually fed to the back teeth with WW2 films and that you do not want set eyes on another again, I would sympathize. I mean, I would find your reaction a tad excessive but I could see where you were coming from. Truth be told, tragic though the events of WW2 were, I feel that too many mediocre to bad films have been made on the topic. Thus people get the impression that if they’ve seen one they’ve pretty much seen them all. The good Allies vs. the evil Germans. Now this was no doubt true up to a point, but not completely. I mean, you can’t realistically claim that ALL Germans were evil / frightened / following the Nazi party without thinking. In fact, Valkyrie is the true story of a group of German officers who took on the Third Reich; if only to “show the world that not all of them were like him”.

The group is actually comprised of Nazi army officers. They, however, think that Hitler is destroying Germany. And they feel he must be stopped at all costs. Under the leadership of Colonel Von Stauffenberg (Tom Cruise) a daring plan is hatched. They will utilize the “Valkyrie” plans, plans to be used to maintain order in Germany if Hitler is killed or is cut off from the rest of the country. Stauffenberg himself will murder Hitler. The Valkyrie plans will in the meanwhile be re-written to exclude the SS and thus the “friendly forces” will act quickly, taking over all points of authority and taking over the country without shedding a single drop of blood (except Hitler’s). However as we all know, and as John Lennon very rightly put it, “Life is what happens while we are busy making plans”…

Now, you may have had prior knowledge of this coup. And for anyone who has basic knowledge of the WW2 history, the end of the film is pretty evident. The plot failed, the group was caught and as for the consequences… Well let’s just say they weren’t rapped on the knuckles and set free… But I still think you should watch it. Why? Well, first of all, my very short rendition above doesn’t even come close to doing justice to how complicated Operation Valkyrie actually was. It’s a very, VERY exciting story of strategy, resistance and a delight to watch for anyone who relishes that feeling of watching the “dominos fall” if you see what I mean. I have heard Tom Cruise’s performance being called a failure – honestly, I wouldn’t go that far. He’s not my favorite actor either but his performance isn’t really bad. Besides, I was personally very touched by the quote I stated in the first paragraph. The band knew only too well that their plan might well fail, spelling death to them all but desperately and above and beyond anything wanted to show the world that they were not all “like him.” Seeing that they died in the attempt, I feel we owe it to them to at least listen to their story…
(For those who want to learn more about this, check here for the Wikipedia page. Always a good place to start =)

WELCOME ON BOARD THE U-BOAT - IN ENEMY HANDS

Well, the modern movie go- er cannot survive on Indies alone; just occasionally some old-fashioned Hollywood makes are needed. And if you have reached that time in your movie schedule, allow me to offer you In Enemy Hands.
In Enemy Hands is a movie set during World War 2. Now now, don’t scoff, it may not be a classic but it is a GOOD movie set during World War 2. And the subject matter is well, not exactly fresh, but fresher than a lot of films out there. Allow me to run through the story-line first.
At the height of the u-boat wars during World War 2, a German u-boat and an American submarine come head to head. They battle it out, the Germans win an astounding victory destroying the American submarine and capturing the surviving crew members. However, the American p.o.w. s have brought an uninvited guest with them: Meningitis. Fatal and highly contagious, the disease spreads quickly throughout the u-boat and soon so many men have been lost that there is only one way for all to get home alive: forming a mixed crew of Germans and Americans to operate the u-boat…
The film is, needless to say, full of all the clichés you would expect it to be full of : The adoring beautiful ( read perfect) wife waiting back home, the rash young captain who refuses to listen to his more experienced officer and bringing disaster to all the crew, on the other side the subordinate who has been held back from becoming a captain by his own insecurity and who is of course pushed into making important decisions , a very balanced mix of “good” and “bad” Germans. I could actually go on but you get the picture. Still, the film has its moments. And although you probably can already guess how the movie ends, if you need some Saturday night entertainment without too much effort, give it a spin…

EICHMANN – THE SOLDIER. THE FATHER. THE MONSTER.

Ok, heads up, this is a Second World War film. Another one. Now I’m sure you have your own view on that statement; I am personally one of those who are not sick and tired of them. Not of the good ones at any rate. And Eichmann is definitely “a good one”.
My only criticism of the film would be that it pre-supposes a bit of general knowledge; in brief, the answers to the questions “Who was Adolf Eichmann, and what did he do?” (To be fair though, they are pretty easy to pick up as you go along)To those of us who do not know, he was a high ranking Nazi officer who was in charge of the “coordination” of concentration camps. He was responsible for every aspect, from the work to the transport. His coldness and cruelty were a thing of legend. In 1960, he was captured and brought to Israel. He was tried for war crimes and executed. Before his trial, he was interrogated by the military prosecutor Avner Less. The film is based on the transcripts of these interviews.
Thomas Kreschnann and Troy Garity (who play Eichmann and Less respectively) have pulled of quite a feat. Although flashbacks of Eichmann’s past and Less’s life outside the interrogation chamber play an important part, the two men’s dialogues constitute the backbone of the film and never once lose their sense of purpose…
As to the subject matter, what makes this film fresh to my eyes is that apart from showing the horrors of the Nazi regime, the film also tries to understand what went on in the minds of its administrators. And that, in my view, is a very good question indeed.
Take the case of Eichman. Before us we have a seemingly average army officer. Loving father of four. Womaniser with several mistresses. The single handed organizer of the death camps that took the lives of millions of human beings. And of course the defense is as easy to predict as the events are easy to research : “I was following orders.” “I was not responsible.” What we find out here, along with Avner Less, is how this defense was born. And how it is actually possible for the defendant to believe it in a way… I do not want to give away more of the film than I can help but let me put it this way. If you ever read something, no matter how brief, about the Nazi regime – or dictatorships anywhere – and wondered “what the hell they were thinking”, this a very good stab and an answer. Let me also add that the conclusion reached is hair-raisingly human…