Birdman – A thing is a thing, not what is said of that thing

‘The Unexpected Virtue of Ignorance’ appears as an alternative title to ‘Birdman’. Walk into the theater having known nothing about the movie and the virtue of ignorance will dawn upon you as well when you walk out. Alejandro Gonzalez Inarritu and his merry men have crafted a movie of such supreme emotional impact that the end, if you are like me, it will leave you both dejected and elated. The fifth feature film to be directed by Inarritu is a layered dramedy dipping into the darkly comic nature of human ego and psyche, self deprecating, uplifting and sublime all around. The director shares writing credits with Nicolas Giacobone, Alexander Dineralis Jr and Armando Bo all of whom will end up being quizzed about its ending for quite some time to come.

In casting Michael Keaton as Riggan Thompson, a washed up post middle age actor who has not done anything of significance since playing titular comic hero in three movies, Inarritu stages his first coup. While Keaton assures us that his life is nothing like Riggans, people will make the unfortunate comparison and it does not help that there are numerous easter eggs pointing to little things that I am sure you will have fun identifying. But that does not make Birdman special, what does is a few unique things that Inarritu knew would make or break the movie. The treasure box cast, apart from Keaton, includes Ed Norton, Naomi Watts, Andrea Risenborough, Amy Ryan, Emma Stone and Zach Galifianakis. And no, it isn’t the simple fact that the cast is stellar. The almost magical quality of the movie comes from the delightful but painfully difficult process of combining extra long takes seamlessly to showcase the movie as one long continuously shot video. Cinematographer Emmanuel Lubezki(of Gravity fame) and Inarritu come up trumps in this department and score a fantastic win because of the way the comedy and the drama work in spite of the movie running like one long shot.

‘Birdman’ lampoons notions of blockbuster movie making and along the way a number of big names are dragged down into the satirical genius of the dialogue that goes on between the troubled actor, who is acting/directing/co-producting an adaptation of a Ray Carver’s plays, and his friends/crew. ‘Ambitious’ says Ed Norton to Keaton, spouting the first of many brash truisms while playing a method actor and probably pulling his own leg. A quick readup or a quick viewing of the many making-of featurettes available(though I don’t recommend this before you watch the movie) will give one an idea of the painstaking amount of choreography and rehearsal that has gone into achieving the end product. Delving into one characters reality while maintaining the reality of things taking place around that  character is difficult enough to achieve without having to keep the interaction between the other characters fresh. That is where the stellar quality of the cast really shines through. Most of the movie occurs within confined quarters(New York’s iconic St.James theater) with the climax alone leading us away from the square.

For a change(especially after Babel and Biutiful), Inarritu seems to have had a lot of fun with ‘Birdman’. Have I said enough about the movie being made to look like one continuous take? I can see your urgent nod and so I shall stop about that. He takes us through narrow corridors, backstage areas, make up rooms, theater balconies and Broadway rooftops on a journey of magical realism. And while he walks us through there is the punch of a fresh score by Antonio Sanchez that is mostly just drums and cymbals urging us on. Why the Academy of Motion Pictures thought it should be rejected is beyond me. Be it as it may that most of it is just classical music, putting music together for a movie like this is award worthy by itself. While Keaton gives us a forceful performance as Riggan with a moving and almost lacerating delivery of histrionics, Edward Norton (did I mention this before as well?) makes fun of himself while challenging Riggan and his quest. Naomi Watts’ character making her debut as a Broadway actress excels in a role which while neurotic has brilliant light and heavy themes. Zach is barely himself but still shows his acting chops in a character that seems to have been written for him(Scorcees you say, ah well maybe..). Emma Stone (incidentally the actor who according to Keaton and Norton messed up the most in the long takes) gives us another peek into her brilliant side playing Riggans troubled daughter with youthful ease.

When the end credits roll, and the last ‘fuck you’ has been directed by one indignant personality to another, the sense of exhilaration resulting from being a part of something unique is powerful. What is clear is that this is a movie that has come forth from a lot of hard work and maybe a greater amount of love. And when there is true labour of love, the end result is usually spectacular, only ‘Birdman’ is a little more than that. In making me consider that it might just surpass ‘The Grand Budapest Hotel’ this year in terms of its cinematic excellence, Birdman is pure unadulterated fun!

Five Stars.

Clint Eastwood is no stranger to war movies. His style of moviemaking though is something that all of us who’ve followed his efforts over time have come to be familiar with. With ‘American Sniper’, Eastwood departs a little from his usual style to present us with what looks like a normal cut and dried combat movie transitioning into a lot more within the span of its 133 minutes. The difficulty of a directing a war movie wherein the brutality of the story needs to be captured while placing the viewer in a position where the action is detailed and immersive but not overwhelming is converted into a skill by very few directors, Eastwood being one. Late in the movie a man describes the main character in the movie, Chris Kyle, to the latters’ son as a hero. The definition of heroism or the ambiguity of it forms the constant undercurrent that we are drawn to in ‘American Sniper’.

‘American Sniper’ revolves around the life of American Navy SEAL operative Chris Kyle portrayed on screen by Bradley Cooper. The flash backs to Kyles younger days show us a Texan cowboy inspired by a childhood principle that’s burnt into him to ‘protect his own’ leading him to joining his countrys defense forces specifically the SEAL’s. Deployed to Iraq and bearing the honor and pressure of being the sniper  ‘Legend’, as the troops in Iraq end up calling him because of his very special and eerily accurate sniping talent, the earnestness of Chris Kyle is brought out in what looks like a simple but would have been a tough job for Bradley Cooper given his usual self-assuredness . The very first shot shows us that its not the few ounces of pressure on the trigger of a long gun but the decision behind pulling the trigger that is the cause of trauma in the wars that are being waged.

Justifying his nomination for the best actor Academy, Bradley Cooper transforms himself into Chris Kyle by bulking up physically and aids Eastwood in providing the most direct perspective of Chris Kyles war – Kyles own point of view. Eastwood does not bother with justifications, ramifications or reasoning and instead puts us alongside Kyle. What starts off seeming like another clichéd approach to a war that was questioned more than any other in recent times, ‘American Sniper’ moves into more personal territory as we accompany Chris on his tours and his adjournments back home. Kyle who responds to a trainers question about a target with the reply that he is at his best when his target is breathing justifies to himself the taking of lives with the answer that each one he takes saves numerous others. The question never leaves him and Bradley Cooper’s brooding performance serves up his situation to us without any diluting. Eastwood and Cooper present us the side of the war that insists that violence is not being doled out because it is a quick means to an end but because it is necessary. Posing a dilemma on screen is not something that is simple but we are often posed with them during the course of the movie and therein lies the difference in Eastwood’s directing style. Interspersed with the gory results of Kyles impeccable aim are flag wrapped coffins being sent back home and there is no one answer to the question of morality in the time of war.

The rest of the cast composed of Sienna Miller and a diverse and varied set of people playing characters comprising Chris Kyle’s comrades at war, trainers at the Navy SEAL facility, veterans and of course the Iraqis, hold their own against Bradley Coopers defining performance. The editing is kept taut and to the point without unnecessarily burdening us with details while at the same time keeping information within its scope as deemed by scribe Jason Hall who has adapted it from the eponymous book.  The production design intrigued me with Humvees and actual sniping guns including the TAC 388A being used lending the movie the authentic point-of-view feel that it demands.

As reports would have it, Chris Kyle’s father seems to have met Clint Eastwood and Bradley Cooper(who co-produced) and after assuring them of his respect for them also assured them that he would unleash hell on them if his son’s story was not given the respect due to it. The subject matter being the cause of various international debates neither Eastwood not Cooper will be the subject of Mr.Kyle Sr’s threat given that they have managed to bring us a view from the other side of the looking glass. By the time we finish witnessing Kyle’s fourth tour we are of the state of mind where we tend to agree with his decision not to rush home but to first have a drink while waiting in a bar stateside. The scary nature of war where pressing the trigger has definitive results in terms of life and death, the reasoning behind the press of the trigger leading to more compunction than triumph is reason enough to respect the soldiers of war when their sole aim is to obey their orders and protect their brothers. What needs to be questioned is the necessity of war and violence which we will as part of my review of ‘The Imitation Game’.  Kyle’s story could have had a very Hollywood ending what with the effect of the war still apparent in him if not for his real life end. A different flavor of Clint Eastwood where he leaves the story behind the man to tell the tale.

Three and a half stars.

The Imitation Game review – Are you paying attention?

'The reason people like violence' – explains Turing in ‘The Imitation Game’ – 'is because it feels good and humans find it deeply satisfying. When the satisfaction is removed, violence and cruelty tend to become hollow'. Alan Turing, played by Benedict Cumberbatch, is shown trying to break the Enigma code, used by the Nazis during the Second World War to control and communicate with their troops across Europe, while facing the usual resentment that is faced by geniuses who more often than not end up being labelled odd. After an hour and a half of entertainment the movie leaves us  sad (for the second time in January) and critical of humanity and its unrelenting persecution of the majority perception of normality.

‘The Imitation Game’ is a movie that is not to be missed, if the obvious current form of Benedict Cumberbatch isn’t reason enough then there are quite a few reasons that assert said sentiment – Morten Tydlums direction, Graham Moore’s screenplay adapted from the book ‘Alan Turing – The Enigma’ and last but not least Alexandre Desplats haunting soundtrack. The single dialogue that I found annoying because of its repetition forms the core of the movie – Sometimes it is the people no one imagines anything of who do the things that no one imagines. As has been made obvious by the previews, the movie revolves around the small group of people, more specifically Alan Turing, who designed a code breaking machine as part of the British War effort and led to the ending of the Second World War. Without giving away any details the movie also deals with the delicate and deserved rights of homosexuals. Homosexuality as a behavioral pattern has been with us for ages and yet there are laws declaring it illegal(still) in parts of the world. One such (thankfully now obsolete) law cut short the life of Alan Turing, the man who pioneered digital computers  and ironically the winner of the Order of the British Empire for services rendered during the war. In showcasing the life of this unsung genius ‘The Imitation Game’ highlights the immensely ‘too little too late’ nature of the so called ‘Royal Pardon’ granted to Alan Turing by the Queen in 2013.

Benedict Cumberbatch is not new to playing iconic characters or dragons. As Sherlock, Khan Noonien Singh and as Smaug he gave us performances that brought joy to a viewer interested in the study of forceful personalities and their meticulous portrayal on screen. While it is excusable to initially be reminded of a more introverted Sherlock(if that is possible) when seeing Cumberbatch on screen as Turing, it is inexcusable if within the span of about 15 minutes, his nuanced and studied take cannot be appreciated. In the glassiness of his eyes, in the less flamboyant diction, in the dentures worn to take away the sharpness of his face and to influence his speech, Cumberbatch is at his best in conveying the genius behind his arrogant façade while still making the viewer sense his vulnerability and the melancholy within. The brilliant cast is augmented by Keira Knightleys intelligent portrayal of Joan Clarke, Turings partner during their work in Bletchley Park. Clarke is recruited by Turing after his elevation to head of the project and she works with him in breaking Enigma and more importantly in connecting him more with his project mates. The latter group has among them Matthew Goode playing the dashing Hugh Alexander and Allen Leech playing John Cairncross, all of them under the watchful beady eyes of the MI6 and its head Stewart Menzies played brilliantly by Mark Strong.

Turing is introduced to us as a calculatedly arrogant mathematical genius volunteering for work in Bletchley Park and reluctantly being allowed to join the group working on breaking Enigma by Commander Deniston(Charles Dance). What follows is history with a few dramatic overtones but largely a study of the nature of Alan Turing and his work. Given that his work and ideas have been kept secret for over 50 years and have been brought to the fore only recently the movie allows us to glance into the tense inner workings of the team that managed to solve what was regarded by the world as an unbreakable code. Morten Tydlum in his debut English feature makes sure the movie does not seem like a science lecture while including a decent amount of technical knowledge  for the enthusiasts (though I would have liked Keira Knightley to pronounce Euler the right way). The production values are excellent starting from the look and feel of Britain during the war, specifically during the Blitz down to the costumes of the cast and extras. Alexandre Desplat delivers yet another beautiful soundtrack with melodic flair conveying the tension underlying in the narrative while never missing the gravity of the situation.

In one of his best performances, Benedict Cumberbatch reduces us to tears in some of the sequences, the best of which he shares with Keira Knightley. As a genius mathematician who’s love has been shared ironically as a binary split between a man and a machine both of which have been transitory in his life, Cumberbatch conveys the loneliness that has been wrought upon him not only by himself but by society as a whole. As a subject of investigation by detectives who are brought to his doorstep after complaints of a break in, Turing’s dismissal of them only provokes them into searching for skeletons in his closet. He is seen remarking upon the toxic nature of cyanide which is now suspected as the means of his suicide at the young age of 41. The Turing test and Turing machines, both terms deserving of a google search and thorough read are but two of the massive advances in mathematical machines and science showcasing what could have been if only Turing were not the subject of societal castigation. In composing this review with automatic font setting and formatting and the easiness with which I am able to reach you, esteemed reader, we have both Turing’s immortal genius to thank.

Four Stars

Exodus : Gods and Kings - "There is only me here."

My one-liner : If you're looking for affirmation of your faith, give this a miss!

Man trying to contemplate the nature of the God(s) of the Egyptians, the God of the Hebrews, the God of the Old Testament and the God of the New Testament never really went archaic. The nature of religion and God are things that make echoing statements in every generation of humanity and is still making striking headlines from around the same area that Moses supposedly led his folk to freedom. What was recorded as the Exodus made a repeat only too often in history and twice as per record to the same section of humanity in cruel fashion. As a word, Exodus signifies the mass exit of a group of people, but as a saga the exodus of the Israelites to their homeland of Canaan has given rise to a lot of different interpretations. Ridley Scotts interpretation though epic, could have used a little bit of tempering which isn’t really a complaint because I enjoyed the movie thoroughly. While it has always been clear that he is an expert in the handling of epics, his handling of faith bordering on mania and in some scenes his own questions of faith paint a truly majestic picture, the only flaw in which might be the fact that it is slightly overlong.

The legend of Moses’ birth is an elaborate tale in itself and given it has had enough exposure, ‘Exodus : Gods and Kings’ spares us the preamble and places us in the company of the Pharaoh Seti, his son Rameses and the latter’s childhood compatriot Moses in consultation before handling an attack by the Hittites. Matching the spirit of the movie, prophecies are handled as vaguely as they are portended. But let me leave that to your viewing pleasure. Within that introductory room we meet the main players in this tale, Christian Bale playing Moses, a brilliant Joel Edgerton as Rameses, John Turturro as Seti, (I would not be playing fair if I did not mention the appearance of) Indira Verma as high priestess of the Pharaoh. The casting list is impeccable in itself with Sigourney Weaver, Ben Kingsley, Aaron Paul, the beautiful Maria Valverde and Golshifteh Farahani who joins Ridley Scotts cast after having appeared in Body of Lies contributing to a cast according to complaints on the internet does not have enough racial diversity or geographically faithful casting.

Biblical mythology and its roots in reality are often a question of faith and religion. Ridley Scott, a self-professed agnostic, takes a measured approach that does not deny either angle its due. The God of the Old Testament is present in all his/her/its fury. The objective of Gods interference in the lives of about four hundred thousand Hebrews lies in the fact that for four hundred years they have been slaves in the wretched and miserable building camps of the Egyptians. Why and how Moses takes the cause upon his shoulders is again the subject of Biblical study and nothing has been missed out from that particular episode. The way the story has been dealt with accounts for much of the viewing pleasure in Exodus : Gods and Kings. The script is the product of four minds - Adam Cooper, Bill Collage, Jeffrey Caine, Steven Zaillian, the latter having been nominated for more than one Academy Award. While the story keeps one engrossed, the narrative could have been kept slightly tighter especially towards the end where we meet multiple climaxes (pun not intended).

Yet again, it would be too much of a complaint if I kept highlighting narrative details, for the story is brought alive on screen by the restrained yet commanding presence of both the leads – Bale and Edgerton. While not much needs to be said about the acting prowess of Christian Bale, Jole Edgerton in the role of Rameses is a revelation proving yet again why he should not be restricted to brawler roles like Warrior(where he did display a subtle sense of how to portray drama). As the despotic and not slightly psychotic Pharaoh Rameses, the paranoia he conveys in both his frantic and measured histrionics are a delight to view. His faith in his brother figure and yet the abrupt change of feeling when he gives thought to the conflict that might result from him is another aspect the script rushes through but the point is conveyed as only Edgerton can. ‘What kind of fanatics worship such a God?’ he exclaims at one point and the poignancy strikes home. Exodus well might be the movie where he starts showcasing his innate genius. Bale plays Moses with studied and questioning calm. His journey of belief and faith, while forming the core of the movie also highlights his internal conflict. Ultimately it is his journey, his unrelenting faith in his actions and his determination to marshal his people to freedom that makes the movie’s length palatable albeit only slightly. Small roles they may be that have been handed out to Sigourney Weaver, Ben Kingsley and Aaron Paul but the gravitas lent by the former two and the gritty camaraderie between Bale and the latter add to the pithy highlights of Exodus.

An epic such as this already has visual grandeur written into the legend in the halls of the Pharaoh, in the desperation and poverty of the camps of the Hebrews, in burning bushes and parting seas. Also well known to everyone would be the curses the Egyptians were subjected to. In bringing these visuals to the screen, Ridley Scott and the visual effects crew apply as pragmatic an approach as possible always trying to balance out the nearly plausible with the possible intervention of something that might be divine.  While PVR cinemas in India needs to realize that running their projectors in economy mode for a 3D movie is not really a good idea, the grandeur of Egypt at its peak is conveyed beautifully. I will not give out spoilers here but rather leave it to the viewers to enjoy the rest of a visually well sculpted movie.

Exodus is not the first of movies where the deeply personal question of faith, belief and God plays a major role. What makes it an effectively thought provoking and enjoyable movie is the fact that everyone involved has their own questions and answers about faith. In echoing current scenarios of war and religious persecution Ridley Scott only affirms for the umpteenth time as others have done before him that what was once a practice that aimed at peace has only of recent times brought war and cruelty to the fore. In all the animals that ‘God’ might or might not have created the tendency to murder or torture as a means to an end is seen only in what has ironically been termed humanity. 

Exodus – Three stars and a half