Movie Review Lion

Lion (2016) 

Directed by Garth Davis 

Written by Luke Davies

Starring Dev Patel, Sunny Pawar, Nicole Kidman, Rooney Mara, David Wenham 

Release Date November 25th, 2016

Published November 24th, 2016 

Themes of identity, race, time and family are raised in the new drama “Lion” starring Dev Patel and Sunny Pawar as two versions of the same character, a boy and a man named Saroo. Based on a true story and a bestselling novel, “Lion” warmly and intelligently tackles large themes in a satisfyingly dramatic fashion that is at times too conventional but with enough emotional weight to make it work.

“Lion” tells the story of Saroo, who, at 5 years old, was separated from his older brother Guddu at a train station, ends up on a train, falls asleep and wakes up hundreds of miles away from his village. Now in Bengal, Saroo does not know the name of his village or his mother’s real name and has no way to get home. After a series of near misses with some very scary people, and a couple of lovely moments with some generous souls, Saroo finds himself in an English run orphanage where he is soon to be adopted by a couple from Australia.

The couple, John and Sue Brierly, (David Wenham and Academy Award winner Nicole Kidman) adopt Saroo and take him back to their home in Tasmania where he will grow up and eventually seem to forget his time in India. Soon Saroo has an adopted brother, another Indian boy named Mantosh, for whom the transition from India to Tasmania is much, much more difficult. The brothers never really connect with each other and their boiling resentment provides yet another metaphor for Saroo’s relationship to his past.

Some 20 years after Saroo’s adoption he is a college graduate and is beginning to pursue a career in Hotel management. It is here when Saroo meets Lucy (Rooney Mara) who will become his wife but not before a chance encounter with fellow Indian students convinces Saroo to try to find his family back in India.  Using some amateur detective skills, research, and math, Saroo hopes to find the train station where he was first lost and use that information to find his family.

“Lion” is based on a true story so I am not sure if discussing the ending of the film would be considered a “spoiler.” I am choosing to leave the ending for you to discover but even for those who know the story it does contain quite an emotional wallop. Dev Patel plays the grownup Saroo and the final scenes of “Lion” are some of the best work of his relatively young career.

 “Lion” was directed by Garth Davis who is best known in America for his work on the excellent mini-series “Top of the Lake.” Here Davis does a fine job of contrasting the grit and grime and danger of India with the crisp, clean, even sterile, setting of Tasmania and using this juxtaposition to underline the film’s themes of disconnection, longing, family and identity. Saroo feels resentment toward his family for maybe not looking hard enough for him but he also feels guilt about having enjoyed life in Tasmania while having left behind his family in poverty.

Saroo’s task in locating his family is incredibly daunting and the strain it puts on his relationship with his mother and his girlfriend is a strong driver of the second and third act of the film. I was very moved by Saroo’s scenes with his adoptive mother who attempts to hide her jealousy and hurt feelings over Saroo’s search but soon comes to terms with it out of love for her son. Lucy and Saroo meanwhile almost completely lose touch as his obsession with train speeds and stations grows and it is a strong testament to the performances of Patel and Mara that the strain feels real and threatening.

“Lion” is a tad too conventional but the performances and the emotional weight of the story make the simplicity of the plot easier to accept. Dev Patel has never been better and it is great to see good work from Nicole Kidman again as it feels like ages since she was turning in Oscar caliber work. Director Garth Davis needs to work more before we can begin passing judgment on his style and where he fits in the directorial landscape but from his work here, he has me excited to see what he does next.

Movie Review: Australia

Australia (2008) 

Directed by Baz Luhrmann

Written by Baz Luhrmann 

Starring Hugh Jackman, Nicole Kidman, David Wenham, Bryan Brown 

Release Date November 26th, 2008

Published November 25th, 2008 

The modern audience is often accused of having a short attention span. It's undeniable of course that with half hour television and now bite size internet videos, the modern audience has shown a taste for constant stimulation. But that fact does not mean that a movie of a good length cannot succeed. I point you to Paul Thomas Anderson's Magnolia which floats through 3 hours without ever loosing its grip on the audience.

If you have seen a double feature of Tarentino's Kill Bill, which clocks in at nearly 4 hours you know the power a great movie has to glue you to your seat. The modern attention span isn't the issue, it's the modern epic. The fact is, too often, these 'epics' are not lengthy with a purpose but lengthy due to directorial indulgence. That is most certainly the case with Baz Luhrmann's 'epic' Australia. An at times exceptional display of visual craftsmanship. Australia overstays its welcome with 3 different endings and dangling subplots.

Australia stars Nicole Kidman as Lady Sarah Ashley, a British aristocrat who comes to Australia to retrieve her husband who moved down under months earlier to make money in the cattle business. Convinced he has taken up with another woman, Lady Ashley plans on selling the cattle interest and taking her husband back to England.

Sadly, upon arriving at the ranch, called Faraway Downs, she finds her husband murdered, allegedly by an aboriginal mystic named King George. On the other hand she finds that the cattle biz is for real and with an evil land Barron named King Karney looking to steal her land for a quarter of what its worth, Lady Ashley decides to stay on and garner the profit herself.

To do so she will have to drive the cattle to the coastal town of Darwin. Thus she hires the rough and tumble Drover (Hugh Jackman) to lead the way. He needs help and doesn't have it. Aside from two aboriginal friends, there is a drunk accountant, two maids and Lady Ashley herself whose experience riding show horses is her only qualification.

Then there is Nullah. Half white, half black, 11 year old Nullah (Brandon Walters) lives in constant danger. The state has a policy of rounding up mixed race children so that they can 'breed the black out of them' and train them to be servants. Nullah has lived at Faraway Downs in secret for years after being born to a maid and a ranch hand named Fletcher (David Wenham).

Fletcher works for King Carney and cannot afford to have anyone know he fathered a mixed race child. All of this melodrama unfolds in the foreground as World War 2 emerges in the background. In newsreels and conversations we overhear Germany's march, Hitler's call for Japan to join the war and the attack on Pearl Harbor that will soon lead to attacks on the Australian mainland where Americans begin arriving for an assault on Japan.

It's a sprawling, ambitious story that director Baz Luhrmann no doubt loves. It's also a flabby, unkempt mess of competing plots that amount to three different movies forced together. The first movie, playing out as act 1, is a tribute to old Hollywood, just after the introduction of color. Luhrmann uses CGI to give Australia the coloring of a movie made in the 1930's. The effort may dazzle lovers of classic film. But, modern audiences are likely to mistake the look for bad CGI.

At the death of Lady Ashley's husband Australia becomes a gripping western. The cattle drive scenes are the movies best moments with Jackman looking quite the hero, Brandon Walters delivering the compelling drama and Kidman holding her own in the saddle. Had Australia stuck with the western aspect, with a tighter narrative focus, we could be talking about a pretty good movie.

Unfortunately, the western is merely the second act. The third act brings World War 2 and Australia's disturbing racial politics into to the forefront and begins to drift. Trained moviegoers know that the 3rd act requires the lovers to separate and for good to turn to bad so that it can be righted in the end and Australia delivers it all in rote, mind numbing fashion.

Oh, did I mention that the film ends THREE TIMES! There are two false endings. Two spots where director Luhrmann could have ended the movie with a minimum of consternation. But no. Two endings stall and start and stall again only to drive one to the point of walking out by starting up one more time. I get what the director was going for but by the second ending I was almost to the door of the theater.

Australia is likely a case of too many cooks in the kitchen. Four screenwriters contribute to a movie that feels like three movies in both length and structure. It is rumored that Luhrmann only completed the final edit of Australia 2 weeks prior to worldwide release. That might explain the rushed necessity of a 2 hour 45 minute cut of a story that can only sustain maybe 2 hours, at most.

Tedious, overlong, flabby, Australia has the look of an epic and the feeling of a butt numbing disaster.

Movie Review: 300

300 (2007) 

Directed by Zack Snyder

Written by Kurt Johnston 

Starring Gerard Butler, Lena Headey, David Wenham, Michael Fassbender

Release Date March 9th, 2007 

Published March 8th, 2007

Frank Miller is the pre-eminant graphic novelist of this short century and now that film technology has reached the ability to present his vision on screen we are being treated to some astonishing works. His Sin City, directed by Robert Rodriguez, was a mind blowing exercise in cool. Now comes 300 a historical novel that uses the graphic novel form to render history in a most visceral and modern fashion.

Directed by Zack Snyder (Dawn of the Dead), 300 is about bravery, manhood and desire. But more than anything, 300 is about style and rendering Frank Miller's vision on the screen in the most slavishly accurate ways imaginable, short of just making it straight animation.

The Persian army is spreading like a virus across continents; slaughtering millions and enslaving millions more. Now, standing on the doorstep of the Roman empire, the Persian king Xerxes looks to complete his world domination but first a small band of warriors stand in his way. The greatest warriors in the world, Spartans, stand in a small corridor between the Persians and the conquer of the Roman empire.

Leading the Spartans is their king Leonides (Gerard Butler) who refused to kneel to Xerxes when he was offered a truce. Xerxes is well aware of the reputation of Spartan soldiers as the greatest fighters in the world and had attempted negotiation. Leonides ended the negotiation by killing the messenger. However, before he could go to war he had to consult the gods.

The Ephors, mountain top dwelling cretins, are the conduit between Sparta and the gods. They deny his call for war leaving Leonides with one option. Taking 300 warriors, men with sons who could carry on their names after they die, Leonides heads toward the coasts, toward Thermopylae where he will stand against Xerxes army and hope that his bravery moves the gods enough to bring back-up and take war to the Persians.

Based on the novel by Frank Miller, 300 is a visually arresting force of nature. Director Zack Snyder stunningly recreates Frank Miller's graphic novel with every blood drop and sword whoosh in tact. It is in fact such a slavish recreation that its fair to criticize Snyder for not bringing something of himself to this epic movie.

Snyder's work is there. He was the one slaving over every shot making sure the actors were at home in their CGI environment and the melding is seemless. Zack Snyder's technical chops are unlimited it would seem but at times they can be a little much. Once you have seen one head spinning in slow motion as it disconnects from its body, you've seen it enough. That scene however, along with many others is repeated over and over throughout 300.

It's all visually impressive but once you become accustomed to the style the repetitive nature becomes mind numbing and tedious. It's no help that this film seems louder than most other films. I know for a fact that 300 is no louder than any other action blockbuster, but with it's raging hordes of Persians, elephants, rhinos and freaks it seems louder.

The films rousing, bombastic score from Tyler Bates is so amped up I was preparing for my face to melt ala the screaming demons of Indiana Jones. Bates' score asaults the ears and while it's not a bad score it's often so amped up you may have to cover your ears to make out the notes.

As happens with epic war movies in the era of Iraq; some critics are applying political allegory. Red staters could if they so choose see the Spartans as a small band of American soldiers standing against the hordes of Persians, read Arabs, with George W. Bush as Leonides. Blue staters see in the small band of spartans defending their homeland from hordes of invaders as an allegory for the Iraqis who are fighting the Goliath American army to protect their homeland.

Both are a great intellectual stretch. Not that Frank Miller's story doesn't have it's depth and metaphor but any relationship to Bush administration policy in Iraq is something you bring to the film on your own. 300 is a film that is about itself. This is a perpetuation of style, an exercise in aesthetic and reveling in technology.

The technology is quite breathtaking. From the computer generated elephants and rhinos to the exquisitely sensual rendering of the female form in slow motion, nearly nude, dance, nearly every scene in 300 is a remarkable visual. Some will compare it to a videogame and considering the advances in technology; that is not an unfair or even unflattering comparison.

Is it historically accurate that the Spartans fought battles wearing only leather panties and red capes? This seems an impractical and discomfiting choice of battle wear. They are right on the coast, the spray off the raging ocean alone must be a little uncomfortable. On the other hand, these outfits are perfect for showing off washboard abs and giant pumped up pecs. Whoever was lucky enough to open that Gold's Gym in Sparta must have been a very rich man.

The gay subtext of 300 I'm sure will be uncomfortable for some. But the fact is that with all of these pumped up bodies on display in all of their sweat soaked glory, it's clear that director Zack Snyder wanted some level of homosexual awareness in the picture. Either that or he is clueless and closeted. And there is nothing wrong with that. I admire the bravery of any filmmaker who so daringly displays the male form when the industry standard is to treat women as the eye candy

I liked 300 but I didn't love it. Maybe some of it was the hype or my own high expectations but I was slightly disappointed. From the trailer I expected a similar giddy thrill to what I experienced watching Frank Miller's Sin City. Instead I found myself, mildly thrilled and loving the work of Frank Miller but underwhelmed by the film made from it.

300 is an undeniable achievement in visual filmmaking and that alone is enough to recommend it. Just be sure to temper your expectations. The lower the better.