Zack Snyder's Maybe Bigger, But del Toro Knows How To Use It

It's always a pissing contest when it comes to blockbusters. With hundreds of millions of dollars behind them, directors and writers must feel obliged to go 'bigger' to earn their keep. In the last year or so, the industry standard of 'bigger' seems to refer to the level of destruction you can bring to a city. Whether it be with gigantic robots or with superheroes who just don't give a shit - the box-office is overflowing with city-dwellers in constant fear for their lives. But as Man of Steel has shown, going big needs a human scale. Guillermo del Toro is one of the only directors of late to actually imbue his on-screen spectacle with a legitimate scale. Despite Pacific Rim's gleein shattering glass and crumbling buildings, it's somehow avoided the recent furore over blockbusters exploiting 9/11 imagery as a shortcut to scale. Writers from around the web have chastised Man of Steel for this sort of callous referential behaviour and its seeming inability to remove itself from the well-worn images of fleeing citizens covered in debris.

New Star Wars, A New Hope?

As fanboys/girls around the world have experienced repeatedly since 1983, a loving relationship with George Lucas is a heartbreaking experience. The Star Wars magnate had instigated, in spite of his most loyal fans, a tumultuous and violent affair with money and, like a beautiful lover with self-esteem issues, alienated those genuinely interested in him.

Argo within Argo within Reality.

While last year's Oscars buzz centred around films that celebrated fictional cinema, such as The Artist, Hugo or Midnight in Paris; this years fare is firmly steeped in the dramatic recreation of history. Lincoln and Django Unchained in its focus on slavery in 19th century America; Zero Dark Thirty on a post-9/11 climate and Argo, on the ploy to rescue Americans taken hostage in 1980's Iran. Where a considerable amount of scrutiny comes is in these films' adhesion to historical accuracy. The CIA and the Academy itself have slammed Zero Dark Thirty for its insistence on the outcomes of 'enhanced interrogation techniques', or 'torture', to the layman. Whether that's an indication of its legitimacy is unclear. The problematic element here is that these films constitute Americans being truthful about their past, which is in direct conflict with Hollywood's tendency towards propaganda as entertainment, rather than factual recreation. Zero Dark Thirty has avoided this in its deadpan delivery of its events, its resistance to playing up the dramatic and distancing itself from Hollywood.

JournalismSean SebastianMay 8, 2013Argo, Ben Affleck, Film, Review, Tony Mendez, Zero Dark Thirty, Blog

The Master vs. The Animal

Less an exploration of cultism and more of the animalism in human nature, Paul Thomas Anderson's The Master tackles such unanswerable questions beautifully, but incompletely. Joaquin Phoenix plays Freddie Quell, the instinctual, basest war veteran who meets Philip Seymour Hoffman's Lancaster Dodd, spiritual leader of The Cause and all-round egotistical maniac.

Warm Bodies: Over 15's Need Not Apply

Warm Bodies, the necrophilia-inciting love romp, suffers horribly from overdosing on the 'Twilight treatment'. It bulges with a hip soundtrack and an infuriating inability to leave anything to ambiguity. It's nice to imagine Jonathan Levine's satirical rom-zom-com was at one stage provocative, or aimed at an audience older than 15. After a Summit Entertainment marketing attack, however, the remains are simply scraps of a well-made film that wash over you imperceptibly. The complexity of the film starts at 'twisted adaptation of Romeo and Juliet', and ends with, 'but really, what if Romeo was a zombie?'. The film is littered with references to the overused Shakespearian love-conundrum, including its very own balcony scene as well as naming the main characters 'R' and 'Julie'. And therein lies Warm Bodies' mortal flaw: it batters you about the ears with uninteresting sentimentality and teen-angst humour, lacking any semblance of the subtle approach.

Oblivion: Sci-Fi Nerd Heartbreaker

I'm sorry sci-fi nerds - and I use the term lovingly - this is another fascinating fictional world marred by its big-budget aim on audiences other than yourselves. Based on the graphic novel of the same name and creator, Oblivion is a plausibly constructed sci-fi world, even if it lacks the intrigue it was aiming for. Jack Harper (Cruise) and his companion, Victoria (Andrea Riseborough), have been commissioned by the human race to defend energy generators from Scavengers: an alien race that have lost the war for Earth, but remain in covert pockets across the globe. Supposedly, Earth was rendered inhospitable for humans and the surviving population has taken refuge on a monumental space station. There are issues with the premise and the world Joseph Kosinski has crafted here. The film's dreary progression fuels your skepticism, instead of placating it. The final reveal does settle most logical qualms and leaves a comfortable amount of ambiguity, even if you've completely checked out halfway through.

Silver Linings Playbook, Or How To Write a Feel Good Film

David O Russell’s signature dissonant conversations have never been more suitable. A patchwork of complete human dysfunction gilded with a sweet sentimentality, Silver Linings Playbook is sharp. Most of the main characters have one mental disorder or another and all clash with each other in stream of consciousness rants or deliberate faux pas. Russell skilfully avoids any caricatures by rationalising erratic behaviour: Bradley Cooper's character, Pat Solatano, largely reacts the way he does because he's a man with a broken-heart, having stumbled upon his wife cheating on him in the shower; Jennifer Lawrence's character, Tiffany, lashes out at the world through sexual promiscuity because her husband died tragically. The supporting characters too are the catalysts for, under the circumstances, rational behaviour as they are constantly manipulating the fallibility of Pat's personality. It becomes an invaluable device as Russell quickly shifts the focus away from the draining detailing of abnormal psychological behaviour to the importance of love, luck and faith.

You're Older. Jurassic Park Isn't

Jurassic Park has hit cinemas again, bringing with it an eerie sense of déjà vu for 90’s kids around the country. Breaking box-office records in 1993, Jurassic Park is currently sitting snugly in fourth place in this week’s takings, beating out the likes of the puzzlingly popular Oz: The Great and Powerful. It’s evident Steven Spielberg still holds the throne in the kingdom of Hollywood, with his trident of Oscars and impressive beard, beating back younger competitors like the perpetually irritating Michael Bay. The film’s original audiences are now adults with dangerous levels of movie-cynicism in their blood, who scoff at the thought of a fourth Transformers film or another Die Hard.

Zero Dark Thirty and the Post 9/11 Self-Evaluation

The final shot lingers on Jessica Chastain's face as she sits alone in a military aircraft. The pilot asks her, "Where do you want to go?" She starts to cry, her face listless. She doesn't know. And either do we, suggests Kathryn Bigelow. With our elusive public enemy number one murdered, after more than a decade of hunting, what gives our tortured and violent post-9/11 lives meaning now? Interestingly, Bigelow and her Hurt Locker writer, Mark Boal, have used Zero Dark Thirty not only as the exploration of the hunt for bin Laden, but also to pose a potent question about life after his defeat. It has been crafted as a vehicle to perfectly encapsulate the post-9/11 psyche, but the extent to which it succeeds is questionable.

Literal and Metaphorical Pitch Perfection

There's no particular reason why this film should be good. In retrospect, it isn't. It's a mash-up of teeny angst coming of age, Glee themed cringeworthiness and run-of-the-mill college humour. But should a film be judged in retrospect? If it had succeeded in suspending your disbelief for its duration, should that not make it an enjoyable, and therefore, good film? I suppose it comes down to perspective, but if you're the kind of movie-goer who had cried openly at the swelling of strings in the Dark Knight soundtrack, or have had weak knees and your mouth agape as you stumbled out of The Raid: Redemption, then it's fairly safe to say you treat films as experience.

A Not So Premium Rush

Premium Rush is little more than overtly stylised pulp with an unabashed cartoon sensibility; and it's fun. Well, that's all it is, really. Young, sweating, sexually-charged hotties racing around NYC on their brakeless bikes as they outrun a crooked cop harbouring a debt to the Chinese mob; it actually plays out convincingly and nails the almost anarchistic bike messenger mentality. However, the film's distinct lack of substance does catch up with it about halfway through, and this degradation is only exacerbated by uncharacteristically hit-and-miss performances from the two leads: Joseph Gordon-Levitt and Michael Shannon.

End Of Watch/Femininity.

Director David Ayer's bad-ass cop dramas have somehow found an even grittier edge in the found-footage style of End of Watch, in which his penchant for masculine bravado strikes a more honest tone in the relationship between officers Brian Taylor (Jake Gyllenhaal) and Mike Zavala (Michael Pena).

Love of Looper

Ah Looper, how do I love thee? Let me count the ways. A time travel thriller set in a dystopian near-future, where a hitman-of-sorts (Joseph Gordon-Levitt) is tasked with murdering his future self (Bruce Willis), while simultaneously protecting a child the future self is trying to murder. Throw into the mix telekinetic mutations, a twisted love story and an Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind type memory warp, and you've got one hell of a sci-fi mess. Yet, helmed by cult hero Rian Johnson, the pieces of this misshapen puzzle are handled with such ease that it's only afterwards you realise he'd been juggling chainsaws, grenades and crying babies.