Thematic Wanderings: Interstellar (2014)

Few major studio filmmakers require viewers to unpack with a vengeance quite like Christopher Nolan.

As far back as Following(1998), it has been imperative that those who are witnesses to the stories he shares, make a more concerted effort than usual to ruminate and discuss what they have just witnessed. And while scrutiny often poses the occasional question of logic, it's always good to remember the goal, and not so much how the shooter made it. Especially considering the narrative gymnastics that a Nolan film often requires of his audience. Even when he and brother Jonathan do their damndest to paint in broad strokes, they are often in the service of inviting others to play more complex thematic games than many are accustomed to. It isn't always successful, but it never ceases to be ambitious. And this is why I suppose I keep going back to his works. They often work like puzzles, or very dense books just shotgunned into our brains over the course of several hours, only to leave us dizzy with the hows, when our eyes should be more poised toward the why.

So when audiences found themselves a little colder than usual (for Nolan films) with his latest, it became a little more crucial for me to mine it once home video became an option. In my review, I came after the film for failing to better deliver a successful dramatic punch than it seemed to so badly want. With a film that features Matthew McCounaghey at his most earnest as a most vulnerable hero, the performance feels at times hindered by the at-times daunting balancing act between working within hard science and the surprisingly warm proposal at the heart of the film. The balance doesn't always work in its favor, especially in the last hour. And yet, there is something happening here that for me, made the finale dovetail in ways that it really shouldn't have in other hands.

In the first reel, while we are given a hard-pedaled peek into the film's worries by way of envisioning a humanity that has become so panicked by the global blight, that they frown upon our history of space travel, as well as nurturing such interests. While it is a forced sentiment, it is a potent shorthand for a world that has turned its back on risky solutions in the name of maintaining all that remains on the ground. And this is a trend that is echoed throughout the film. This is also displayed largely later in the film when Cooper's grown son refuses to leave the farm despite the impending death of another child due to ever more desperate air quality. A reminder that we are often incapable of letting go of the present, no matter how bad it may look from a macro perspective.

The film even opens with Cooper and his kids, chasing a lost Indian drone that eventually downs itself.

Upon examining the abandoned machine, this exchange occurs:

                                                                        Murph

                                                  What are you going to do with it?

                                                                        Cooper
                                 I'm going to give it something socially responsible to do.

                                                                         Murph

                                       Can't we just let it go? It's not harming anyone.

                                                                         Cooper

                        This thing needs to learn how to adapt, Murph. Like the rest of us.

Right from the start, the philosophical divide between Cooper and Murph becomes the prime vessel for the film's main conflict. It's always important to keep in mind that the best premises are often stand-ins for more human dilemma, and in the case of Interstellar, it is largely focused on our will to understand others in a life trajectory that has largely been that of utility. It's complicated even further when in the face of shared undertaking, everyone has their own reasons to invest in changing the course of fate. When young Murph sees the fork in the road between her and her father, naturally she sees his leaving as something of a betrayal. With the linkage of her "ghost" further ingraining these feelings, which eventually must be reconciled with as light years separate them.

Taking humanity's last chance for salvation into the hands of a select group of scientists on a secret deep space mission to find a possible new home, already offers up a glimpse into the film's bigger concerns. Revelations are established early that the now-thought defunct NASA had at one point been asked to drop bombs onto thousands of poor and starving as blight overtook much of the planet. This was an answer until the government took to heart Dr. Brand, Sr.'s alternate plan based upon the discovery of a newly placed wormhole just outside of Saturn. A clandestine journey of several scientists through the hole, only to discover several potential planets for possible human inhabitation. This follow-up to the Lazarus Mission, with its implications of a newly risen humanity, turns out to largely be a terrifying bait and switch. Simply because its authors saw the human race as largely incapable of grasping the reality that despite the proposal of two plans, B was the only viable option. (Plan B, involving fertilized human embryos encased in a "population bomb"- as what remains of the human race dies out on Earth.) Upon reaching these planets, it becomes horrifically clear that chances of our kind to find a truly hospitable home for the rest of us, seems near to impossible. Giving truth to the hidden revelation that quite often in realms of discovery, the truth of any major undertaking is often engraved with caveats to human sentiment, rather than overtures to actual faith between beings.

So what ensues between the prospective planets, is a discussion regarding our inability to trust others with harsh truths, and what the heart has longed for since the first true human connection. These diverging aims are further illustrated by way of two vital scenes around the film's midpoint, when Brand Jr. (Anne Hathaway) admits to preferring to travel to the furthest planet because of her feelings for the Lazarus scientist, Edmunds, who she admits to being in love with.  In no uncertain (and perhaps far too blunt) terms, she defends her irrational feelings of loss and worry over one person overrides a more convenient stop at the Mann planet, which is much closer on the Endurance trajectory. The other scene follows her choice being overruled, and upon meeting the long admired pioneer, Mann, who confirms the terrible truth about the mission. The mission being based largely upon a lie in order to instill a sense of hope for the people of Earth, and in turn, to convince Cooper to leave the earthly nest in hopes of saving his family. The exploitation of human sentiment being the ultimate gambit for success.

So to take in the film's view of discovery under pressure, can be a distressing one to say the least. But it does feel far more honest than films of this scale tend to display. Such lies, and action under assumption has pretty much been a fundamental part of our culture for as long as a more masculine dominator society has been a primary axiom to live by. It is also not an accident, that the film sees the women of the film (most notably Murph & Brand Jr.) as misunderstood fibers in a larger societal fabric. Perhaps something that has been neglected to the point that it has come to a near complete apocalypse as a result. Rendering much of Interstellar to be a challenge to humanity, A pivot point where not only cooperation is required to avert disaster, but to consider the possibility that human empathy is indeed something science and rigor has yet to crack. The gap of faithlessness that often permeates any culture bereft of any clear answers. It's far easier for us to disqualify that which we do not understand, rather than see another viable equation worth exploring.

And while to some, this and the film's ultimate revelation may seem trite. But there is certainly something to ruminate upon as so many discoveries of the last several decades have begun to pierce the unseen with explorations of the quantum, and an unerring quest to understand what many once saw as mere abstractions not to long ago. And while Cooper's voyage indeed brings him face to face with his own assumptions about love and discovery, there is again an overture to faith in those closest to us  and beyond to continue the voyage. To be transparent in the face of adversity. And to allow for community based upon more balanced, pluralistic principles. Which has possibly been what we were always meant to be heading toward, but neglecting for generations too many.  

And while many can continue to debate over whether or not Nolan and company were successful in their shared mission, the notions explored in this film remain worthy of discussion. It remains an ambitious, grand, and humanly flawed dive into what our current and future concerns have been. It paints a painful, yet hopeful picture of what it is we are, and what we could be, no matter the legacy we have long worn on our shoulders - and that's worth talking about.

Thematic Wanderings: The Art Of Getting Away With It

Fellow co-conspirator and book creator E. Hsu, often questions the stuff we watch. Not always the hidden messages, but as a graphic artist herself, the approach. She recently called out the opening shot of Gone Girl, with the head of Rosamund Pike being caressed by an unseen, but clearly masculine hand as the words of Ben Affleck posit questions about his beloved - only to turn ugly in contrast to the hyper-stylized beauty before him.  And suddenly these reminders of what savvy visual storytellers do with their images to let us in came rushing to mind. That cinematic sleight of hand can be employed as a means of drawing in an audience who may not have considered a film's baggage otherwise. Especially considering our rapidly evolving media intake, there is a growing complexity to film that often plays it coy, to occasionally insincere degrees, playing the audience in order to implant conflicting thoughts. Considering the particular filmmaker in this case, it became quite clear that this was a deliberate attempt at playing viewers at their own game. While we have certainly over the past few years seen a few filmmakers over the years employ tactics on the level of a sledgehammer, the hidden, is often the most dynamic, and the style most effective in gathering years of heated controversy. The belief that post-film dialogue is far more constructive than a blunt-forced message (See- The Wachowskis. See- Snowpiercer.). After several discussions regarding the validity of hidden themes in mainstream cinema, the blog seemed to call out for a teensy bit of extra light on this often rocky topic.

Such a contradiction is classic Fincher, where he will often present an evocative visual, but use the soundtrack to offer up either sly humor, or an unreliable establishment to stir matters up. Among his most famous, is the final shot of Fight Club. The slowly pulling image of the narrator and Marla, hand-in-hand while the city's bank buildings topple one after another before them to the almost chorus-like sounds of Pixies' Where Is My Mind?, playing over the devastation. All we had seen up to this point, revealing the ultimate personal revelation of the narrator's journey, with the apocalypse of a confining banking system. Our so-called "villian", is gone, but his plan has gone off without a hitch. Our characters now reside within a new world. The film is asking pointedly about seeking new routes beyond the mundane & self-destructive to achieve our dreams. It's both giddy and harrowing, and ultimately feels emotionally resolved.We have reached thematic critical mass.

"Free yourself".

Chock it all up to your classic scene design and final construction. One can either use the field of vision to convey a clear-cut idea, or mix everything from costume, to set, to lighting, editing, and even music to occasionally blur certain thematic lines. One of the dicier things a filmmaker and crew can do to enhance, and often botch a scene, is with a risky mix and match. Happy music when something sad is occurring on screen, or perhaps a moody voice-over during the scene of a wedding, the means by which films can achieve a complex fabric of emotion is often infinite. But it can also lead to confusion among viewers not savvy to what is happening. And this is often where some critique can diverge between individuals. Mise-en-scène, remains something of a delicate art, and can work wonders depending upon its usage.

So when filmmakers take on more straightforward material, it's pretty easy for the casual viewer to miss elements that are uniquely them. Especially when they are often more adventurous in their projects. It's something that I have witnessed more than ever in recent years, which often leads to many an interesting discussion. Because certain scenes may mean different things to whoever is discussing it, the dialogue can occasionally break down - which can be anathema for some.

A classic recent example is the final montage of The Dark Knight, where a voice-over justifies a cover-up by our heroes, while we witness the fallout from the film's harrowing story. Everything leading up to this moment grants us a picture of an antagonist that has spiritually one-upped the city and it's defenders to the breaking point. And with the last bastion of hope to the community gone, and many dead in its wake, the need to lie to keep his legacy intact is played to the hilt with Batman defending his role as an outsider. What's thematically interesting about this scene, is the score which takes some recurring musical motifs that were introduced in Batman Begins, now take on broken form. They are now in a minor key, mixed with an almost triumphant wail, as if to say that everything we are seeing here is a compromise. Wayne's mission has taken a turn, and is now in an even more morally grey place than he was at the offset. The sweeping camera pans over Commissioner Gordon's speech, flag waving in the background, followed by his destroying of the Bat Signal, all imply that none of this is an ideal outcome. And yet, many a conservative pundit found this ending to be a condoning of certain tactics being used by private entities during the height of the Iraq War. They ultimately missed the part where all of this is proof of how the Joker actually prevailed on a philosophical level. The city will no longer be the same. Criminality may be on the run, but corruption can even ensnare the most well-meaning. It's a psychologically complex, and challenging way to end a blockbuster sequel, and yet it completely got away with positing an uncomfortable truism regarding western civilization.

So for every conceptual swerve a storyteller can dish out, there is always potential for involved dialogue. Which is pretty much a most exciting place to be as a spectator. To drink in the complex, and to have something new to share with another, even if it's a freshly formed idea, is one of the great virtues of art. Problems persist only when everything points to a simple answer. Sure, it can be great to hear something that aligns perfectly with your views, but to experience another's purview is equally as important, if not moreso. As we are consistently evolving creatures, it remains more crucial than ever to allow the exchange to create rivulets, and multicolored fibers. It's what helps us enrich ourselves and each other. But it's especially interesting when we think we are aware of what we are looking at, only to find ourselves stealthily implanted with a vital, impactful new discussion.

INTERSTELLAR (2014) Movie Thoughts

Ambition has it limits..

Echoing about in my mind as the final moments of Christopher Nolan's great attempt at a stylistic crossroads. Highly anticipated as a grand scale space drama set as the Earth seems set to close the curtain on humanity, INTERSTELLAR, is an epic fraught with balancing new frontiers of the celebrated director and the clearly human heartbeats intended for its original captain. Initially designed as a project for Steven Spielberg, what results from this much-touted hand-off, is a clear case of great talent/potentially wrong footwear. Despite all the technical mastery at work throughout the film's sprawling 169 minutes, it becomes easy to see the divide between the often sentimental Hollywood giant, and the cold, calculating new king.

Matthew McConaughey, is former expert pilot and engineer, Cooper, who discovers a secret mission to save humanity as unprecedented blight seeks to end all human life on Earth. In a time when corn is all that remains as a viable crop, and the Apollo moon landing is taught to have been a hoax, Cooper's dreams for the lives of his young son, and particularly curious and headstrong daughter, Murphy, are largely being rerouted toward agrarian lifestyles. So when the single father and kids run across clues leading to NASA's clandestine and clearly dangerous mission, Cooper is seen as the last viable candidate to pilot the long distance ship, the Endurance. The goal: to traverse the gap in spacetime in hopes of finding a habitable world for what remains of the quickly dying human race. Based upon the work of elder scientists, including old friend, Professor Brand (Michael Caine), the small crew which includes his daughter, Amelia Brand(Anne Hathaway), Romilly(David Gyasi), Doyle (Wes Bentley), and geometrically fascinating military robot, TARS (Bill Irwin) launch for one last gamble.

And while a great deal of the film offers up sumptuous and occasionally chilling detail regarding space travel, and alien environs, Nolan (and his brother/collaborator Jonathan) finds himself occasionally sidetracked by familiar fetishes. And while this can be expected of many great filmmakers, there are times when it simply doesn't gel with the larger whole. A problem that often dogged their last film, the obligatory, Dark Knight Rises (2012). Beginning with a mostly strong first third on Earth, the film soon hits rocky places once the often enticing talk of hard science runs headlong with the emotional core. As witnessed in past works like INCEPTION(2010), there is an almost reflexive queasiness that creeps in as the debate between theory and emotion are meant to collide. It seems to be the film's main thrust and yet both ends of the equation never seem to gather enough steam upon one another as equal combatants. Nolan's films are often meticulous exercises of conflicting ideas, and yet this time they seem unwilling to play ball as hard as previous films have displayed.

So when looking back at the film's initial existence as a Spielberg project, it's pretty easy to see where this could have all gone. But once it comes our way, the need for tangential storytelling rears its overwrought head, often sabotaging some truly graceful moments. There are stretches here that are simply daunting to contemplate being in the hands of just about any high grade auteur. From often jaw-pulling zero gravity sequences, to some utterly beautiful visions of alien worlds, there is much to behold in terms of cinematic majesty. However, this often comes apart at the hands of a script that seems hellbent on second-guessing itself. The most egregious example taking place in the final third of the film, where an uncredited starring role seeks to circumvent the mission, leading to an episode that feels completely under thought and unnecessary. It simply comes out of nowhere, almost taking the wind out of whatever sails the story was flying with.

As to whether or not this move is completely fatal to the piece may vary from one viewer to another. But considering the inspired finale, all that is left is a feeling like the waterworks have simply found themselves parched. There's no reason why this should have been the end result. And one cannot help but feel like the previous false note is largely to blame. If one is to play a film like a puzzle, every piece needs to count, and this mistake feels like a poorly cut centerpiece to an otherwise serviceable bastion of questions.

And it's a real shame too, because the cast truly brings their A-game to the proceedings. Especially McConaughey, who's gravely earnestness and vitality makes for a potent lead. Hathaway does exceptional work where she can, as does Jessica Chastain, who both feel underserved as actual characters and more like many Nolan females; as merely symbols. Also worthy of note, is Bill Irwin's voice performance as former marine robot, TARS, who is an occasionally strong counterpoint to classic spacefaring AI such as HAL 9000.

But where the film really fails to connect, is in how it maintains the core relationship between Cooper and his daughter. It's clearly something someone like Spielberg could do blindfolded, and yet Nolan breaks out the emotional big guns, and never seems to hit as hard as he does early on. The piece finds itself far more interested in debates regarding quantum theory, and openly discussing the theme rather than showing us the theme in action. While that might have worked in INCEPTION, it simply will not do with such a pared-down, more family-centric story. The fit between director and material never seems congruent, and it hurts more than hinders in sections. It's like a dancer sporting cleats, the end result is often a graceless affair.

So in all, INTERSTELLAR boasts sights and sounds never experienced in a grand space odyssey, but it rarely reaches beyond its own need to sidetrack or obsess. There are occasionally beautiful moments and ideas at play as we see and hear things we could only sum up in our wildest dreams. It's just too bad they often can't get past the pitching stage. Interstellar, for all it's yearning for the grand and intimate, intermittently sputters when it should soar.     

Transcendence(2014) : Pfister's Directorial Debut Is Lost At Sea

I cannot help but be curious about the origins of Wally Pfister's directorial debut, TRANSCENDENCE, and what mindset found the premise worth exploring. Outside of some truly regressive feelings on the nature of technology, versus humanity's inability to let go, there seems to be something both frightened, and sad happening here. If the film's inspirations lie within decades of technophobic cinema, then TRANSCENDENCE plays well as a bizarre spiritual throwback. And while Pfister's connections to major Hollywood (He has long been the Director of Photography for the films of Christopher Nolan) are impressive, they seem to be in the service of something both unsettling, and hopelessly "disconnected".


Five years before a technological apocalypse, computer research luminaries, Will and Evelyn Caster (a sleepy Johnny Depp and Rebecca Hall) are on the verge of a breakthrough in artificial intelligence with the hope of making the world a better place. But after an anti-tech terrorist attack leaves numbers in the computer development community dead, and Will poisoned by a radiation-tainted bullet, things seem grim. Until Evelyn considers the unthinkable. Based on a previous experiment involving a primate's uploaded consciousness into the Caster's incredible computer creation, PiNN, she considers doing the same with her ailing husband's mind. Upon agreement, and his inevitable passing, the computer rendition of Will is stunningly convincing. But this digital version of the AI genius seems far more ambitious than anyone (even Evelyn) could ever hope to control.


Without any further plot details, the film almost instantly falls apart once one considers the world that is established, and how these characters operate. While the Casters are one-noted, and hopelessly facile in their portrayals, the "luddite" terrorists that see this merging of flesh and machine to be feared, are laughably thin. Read back that last sentence for just a moment. The very idea that a faction that is against technology seems pretty comfortable in tracking and inevitably killing those who seem to empower them. An early line implies that these individuals are "ironic", and irrational feels like an attempt to justify their lack of depth. But it only leads to bigger questions regarding the theme of the piece. It doesn't help that the Caster's one close friend, scientist Max (Paul Bettany) , seems to espouse a more cautionary perspective regarding computation, and an inherent lack of a perfectly replicated soul. The argument ultimately whittles down to an almost old fashioned notion that decries the possibilities inherent in science. While Jack Paglen's script so badly wants to portray Max's perspective as a moral compass to the film's central questions, it cannot help but come off as shallow. Even Kate Mara's terrorist character seems primed to be a set of eyes to view the dilemma, but is undercut by having nearly nothing to do. A lot of underwritten characterization only serves to grant viewers no compass with which to work with, leaving the film in a confused fog.


But what truly burns about this whole debacle, is that as Pfister's debut film (not to mention an expensive one), this is one that reeks of an almost anti-futurist, but also anti-pluralist spirit. While the film wants to offer up good reasons for what takes place by the finale, there are also all the wet paper thin portrayals of both the terrorists and the common people that inhabit the story. Once the story takes us to a remote desert town, and Will's powers begin to fully manifest, there is a sinister air about the film that threatens to derail all that had come before. To make matters worse, the notion that technology empowers the poor in a way that is unbalanced is one that never feels any less creepy. While not stating it explicitly, there is a feeling throughout that such technological empowerment is akin to a zombie revolution; something also to be feared. And we haven't even covered the film's voice in who is to blame for all this. While technology is indeed an extension of who we are, the film seems more than comfortable in the blaming only two major things:


Both unchecked science & women.


And while the authorities inevitably swarm the burgeoning complex in the dust bowl, the film so vehemently wants us to question where our allegiances lie. Problems arise when it becomes clear that there is really noone here to identify with. And that becomes the largest thorn in TRANSCENDENCE's side. If the goal was to keep the perspective elusive until the very last minute, mission accomplished. With such one-dimensional characters and situations making the sound system rumble in the theater, the lack of focus never diminishes in annoyance. In a story regarding such heavy moral questions regarding existence and our evolving place in the scheme of life, an identification  figure is necessary. Sadly, Pfister and company never settle on one. Not one. And by the finale, hardly anything matters since caring has suddenly been removed from the art of filmmaking. The final product could not be more indifferent and illogical.


One cannot help but start wondering if Pfister did more second unit directing on The Dark Knight Rises than has been recorded. So much footage here echoes a lot of that film, and in the worst possible ways.

In the ever rapidly changing organic/tech landscape we are all living in, it is vital that our stories begin considering matters beyond fear. Jonze's Her, remains a shining example of this new philosophical direction. We live ever more connected to our devices than ever before. The world has begin to see incredible change. Not all positive, but nowhere near the melodramatic levels as displayed here. And the negative effects of this bold new realm cannot simply lie in the hands of the software itself. The heart of drama lies in our own failings, and in how we navigate life with ever new tools at our sides. TRANSCENDENCE implies our struggle to go beyond our limitations. And as a film that seems to rally against all the wondrous cultural, political, philosophical, and environmental changes that have come in the wake of the internet, it could not be a more misused title.

I hate this film.

Man Of Steel (2013) Movie Thoughts

During the final hours of the planet Krypton, the illegally born son of high delegate, Jor-El, is sent hurtling towards a future life as an earthling. And in the years to follow, he will continue to face the clear as day questions that befall the superhuman being he has grown to become. Even as he travels  the world, longing for answers to his origin, fates are bound to collide as a violent remnant from the past comes to earth in his quest to rebuild this once great world - even if it means destroying ours in the process. Comic book movie darling, Zack Snyder finds himself in more solemn waters than normal with his Christoper Nolan produced take on the Superman legend. And what results is something actually resembling a piece of film that takes the notions seriously, but might go down too lightly for what it implies. As a leaner, more sober rendition of the classic mythos, Snyder (with Batman Begins' David Goyer as head writer) hunkers down, and finds what while gravitas indeed possible, the road to earning it isn't quite so simple. Nor is it easy to make the character relevant in a world rife with distrust, surveillance, and an overall lack of faith.

Speedy confession time: while I had long known that the Superman character and mythology was set to be brought back to the screen, a part of me had initially seen the choice of Snyder as something to be a little twitchy about. Even as his take on Dr. Manhattan was one of the shining lights of his WATCHMEN adaptation, I wasn't sure if the material and the director were the most harmonic match. Most of Snyder's films have largely been visual affairs, often flirting with slightly denser-than-average graphic novel fare, with only middling results. It isn't that I find him to be a poor director, but rather less interested in the affairs of people as opposed to how they will look in almost stereoscopic fashion amongst opulent backgrounds, and questionable music cues. The tale of Clark Kent/Kal-El, as he struggles to retain his goodness whilst accepting himself as both Kryptonian and human is one of greater sensitivity alongside rousing bombast. For all the romanticism the character carries with him, there is also a bevy of human characters that shape and mold him. There is a greater need for these characters to inspire him, to challenge, and to help make him the legend he will inevitably become. And to varying degrees, this has been achieved more than once on film, but it is something that has since eluded Snyder for whatever reason - mostly that the works he has served duty on have often been moodier affairs that are often strewn in viscera of one manner or another. And even if filmmakers choose to go "dark" with the character and his world, it takes a certain amount of layering to make it work.

So does it?

Yes, and no. For all intents and purposes, this is easily the one Snyder film that doesn't make me renege on the few scenes he makes that actually leave an effect on me. Man Of Steel whizzes by at such a breakneck pace, and has enough gall to make even non-superhero fans quake in their seats. There are some truly breathtaking moments and images populating major sections throughout. And Henry Cavill (Clark/Kal-El/Superman) is boosted by some impressive supporting performances. Even his performance has shades of true charm as the conflicted alien, but like so many other things here, much of it is buried in that oh-so-familiar need for summer blockbusters to just gun headlong into the action, which in this film is jaw-dropping to say the least.

Right away, this is a film eager to establish its own identity upon the world with the reinvention of Krypton, and an expansion of how its civilization condemned itself into ultimate cataclysm. In an unexpectedly drawn out prologue, we are given full view of Jor-El & his wife, Lara's wish to alter course on a home that is already far gone, even as their comrades turn on one another. And with a presentation that evokes memories of even David Lynch's DUNE, there is plenty to enjoy on the artistic and conceptual level that it almost buys itself a pass. It's a sequence that in many ways encapsulates the film as a whole; visually arresting and packed with imaginative possibility, but distant in ways that are difficult to quantify. It is as if the film knows how personal it has to go, but will not, because feelings are perhaps a little too icky? I wish there were a more eloquent way of putting it, but there it is. What the film offers up as a new sheen, is at times very close to something that could be one worthy of endless re-examination, but as it is, it's happy to go about unrestrained, and often bereft of the emotional baggage a film like this perhaps needs at its core.

Even as it goes out of its way to re-introduce the characters, there is an air about the film that screams a wish to replicate previous success. From the arrival of Kal-El on Earth, to the rapid-fire flashes back & forth that is meant to fill us in on his life as a Kansas farm boy, and his subsequent journey of self-discovery, the whole is attempting to achieve the mostly terrific non-linear structure of one Batman Begins, but lacks any of that film's thematic focus. We are also introduced to a much more knowing and aggressive reporter, Lois Lane (Amy Adams) as she is obsessed with trailing the adventures of a special man with an unerring habit of saving those in need wherever he seems to stop. It is here that the structure problems make themselves the most apparent, as we are given almost unforgivably brief glimpses into Clark's younger days. And while we do luck out, and have some of the film's best quiet moments here between teen Clark (Dylan Sprayberry), and adopted father, Jonathan Kent (played by the much missed Kevin Costner), these scenes are never give a chance to breathe. And this is the core issue, if we are to take this bold new course with such a character, then it is essential for us to understand why this character feels the way he does about a people he will learn to have a unique relationship with. This section is an opportunity for us to bond with his yen for good, and while we get a general idea, we never feel the weight of it. One of Begins' biggest strengths lies in that film's need to establish why Bruce Wayne will not kill. And Nolan & Goyer do so by illustrating the coldness of a firearm, and the seductiveness it offers. Visually, the film never lets us forget what is at stake for young Bruce Wayne should he ever seek the easy solution. No such dilemma or examination is made in MoS, and it in many ways hurts any chance we get at connecting with him beyond the fact that he is Superman. So much of the groundwork is rendered perfunctory, and assumed, and that is a troubling trend I have witnessed quite a bit lately.

So when worlds finally (and literally) find themselves on a collision course, placing Clark into a wildly unsubtle end game against the driven and vicious General Zod (Michael Shannon, in a fantastic turn), we are forced to cast aside the thematic, and are witness to the expected action barrage. Cars are smashed, bullets ricochet, buildings collapse, and entire areas are laid waste, but the emotional foundation upon which all of this depends seems lost in the cacophony once the conflict hits Smallville, and inevitably threatens the world. (because what else could be threatened?) And even as the context is top light, there is much to enjoy here as Snyder does what he had long yet tried, which is apply filming in mostly open environs. Surroundings that actually allow the action to have a sense of gravity. It's a touch that never ceases to add that little extra something to a big production like this, and for what it is, it is deeply impression making.

So how about the relationships forged between Clark, his family, and his comrades. As mentioned before, they are mostly made on the move, and largely lacking the kind of intimacy needed to make the action matter. Most notably unexpected, was the connection between Clark and Lois. While one can almost imagine Nolan balking at the classic "mild-mannered reporter" claptrap, there is something altogether strange about forcing these two together now that they are not established early on as co-workers. The dichotomy of Kent as a good-natured weenie is eschewed completely, thereby making Superman a much larger part of the story, often to the point of being patently goofy. Especially considering how many people see him without his iconic glasses. It's to the point that the world must accept him as alien, full stop. It seems to be the film's singular driving force, and what we have in return, while interesting, seems light on the potential. We do get some sweet moments here and there, even with Diane Lane as Ma Kent, but again, we are never give the kind of coverage that is necessary to counterbalance all the plot obfuscation happening throughout. Clark begins as a ghost, and pretty much ends the film as one. So when we are meant to take all of this as prelude to the Superman we all know and apparently love, it becomes a little tough to buy.

And even as the film screams to be seen on a subtle level, there are far too many themes fighting for dominance to make any significant statement. Even as Snyder's team lays out large black text messages representing varying intentions on both the human and radical Kryptonian sides, so much focus is lost as the film seems to be victim of additional re-shoots up to the last second. Where the myth has long leaned toward Superman being an ultimate immigrant, a man pitted between two worlds, the film vacillates between being concerns of national security, and an overall need for a society to seek its long forgotten pluralistic roots. It becomes kind of difficult to suss out when a film cannot decide what to focus on, so we eventually just throw up our hands and rely on the spectacle to do the talking. 

Even when one wishes to just allow the tale to weave itself, and to envelope us as participants in the trials of our modern mythological deities, it does help to know that deep down, they truly are no different than us. So why is it so difficult to do this when your lead character is as simple as they come? Man Of Steel, while truly visceral in many respects, seems unwilling to level with its own background. While it so wishes to dole out some new wrinkles about the big blue boy scout, it should have done so with a little more faith in what makes him so special; his innate humanness.

Make no mistake, Man Of Steel is a massive achievement of movie wizardry. But it is in the small that such legends truly find themselves capable of flight.

Thematic Wanderings: The Dark Knight Rises

An all new feature of The Wandering Kaijyu, where we take a closer dig into a popular work (old or new), and do our best to decipher past the scaly skin. Beware: Spoilers Ahead!

Upon giving Christopher Nolan's hotly debated finale, and also taking in many of the net-o-sphere's discussions/reviews of the film. And even though I stand by many in that the epic concluding chapter in The Dark Knight Trilogy is a bit of a messy kitchen-sink of a film littered with far too many ideas, and nowhere near the time and care necessary to deliver it all. But upon sifting a little harder, one can to a certain degree see a set of core conceits and concerns that were definitely on the minds of the Nolan brothers during the writing and filmmaking process that should allow some curious viewers some additional thought.

But first, a little attempt at debunking..

There is definitely a point within the film where one could easily opine that all that is happening on screen in indeed a slight against the current "Occupy" movement, and thus, a pro 1% statement. But upon closer examination, there is at least an attempt to offer a counterargument. Now without pretending that the film actually succeeded in sending it all home, let's go into this bit by bit.

A. Upon the arrival of Bane, and the siege of Gotham is under way, the bulk of those suffering the wrath of this affront seem to be of the city's wealthy. A good chunk of this very much seems ready to defend those of privilege.

However - With the fate that befalls Bruce Wayne, we also see a man of privilege go through the early stages of a full arc that is at the center of the narrative. His prolonged absence from the public eye has included a complete inability to engage directly with not only the citizens, and fellow business minds at Wayne Enterprises, which has as a result fallen into disarray. A large part of what has been neglected in the eight years since the disappearance of the Batman, has been the loss of moneys that largely supported local charities such as the boys home that once housed John Blake.

And while this again may seem like a tear being shed for the poor, privileged protagonist, the film also goes to great lengths to remind Wayne that even as his business falters, he will remain secure with a large mansion, and a butler to serve him. With all his worries, there truly is nothing for him to truly fear at any real survival level. In no way is he seen as sympathetic, or even remotely prepared for what is is meant to face by the film's climax. Great lengths are made to see that Wayne is not an instantly sympathetic lead at this point in the series.

But this is a portent to what will become the crux of the film's second half.

Why the 1% argument falters: 

While we see Wayne, and eventually the rich suffer large in the first half of the film, the counterbalance is brought in not only in Bane and crew who clearly came from the depths of society, but by "street level" such as Blake and of course, Selina Kyle, who is who she is despite her rocky past. Strong, brutal, seductive and clever, she is a reminder of those left behind in the city. As is the young patrolman, Blake, who grew up and orphan, and has become a sympathetic and observant member of Gotham PD. It is these two, combined with the already grounded soul in Commissioner James Gordon who represent those less spoken for in the city.

 After Batman/Bruce Wayne has been dispatched into a faraway undisclosed prison, where he is sent by Bane to suffer and wallow in his ultimate defeat, it is Gordon and a number of police who weren't buried in explosion rubble. And it is in their ground level actions that set up the notion that Batman is no longer even considered in any plans to save the city. By using the most basic methods such as notes on strings, secret meetings, and minimal to no firepower, the struggle to undo Bane's island-wide stranglehold is as bare-bones as it gets. It is the complete antithesis of Bruce Wayne's dependence on Lucius Fox's inventions to even walk straight. (the knee-brace is almost instantly a reminder of the expensive, often unusual technological needs Wayne is often dependent on to do what he does - something the remaining cops of Gotham do not have - It is also a big reminder of just how ill-prepared he is for the coming struggle.)


B. The final melee between the freed army of Gotham Police and Bane's army is tasteless as it features the cops beating down on the city's disenfranchised.

Now this is where it is more a case of faulty information delivery by the filmmakers, because the final battle on the steps of Wall Street is clearly between those with nothing, and others who have been armed, most of which have merely been established as remnants of the army that had been around from the beginning section of the film, and many of the escaped from Black Gate Prison (not any manner of "disenfranchised"). This is clear due to one of my largest gripes of the final film - We never see any testimonials or asides from ordinary citizens. It is one of the more egregious mistakes that the film makes, skipping out on reactions from people on the streets, in their homes, anyone who's opinions/observations might have shed some light on the overall mood of Gotham City before, and during the citywide takeover. Many might remember that The Dark Knight often took the time to allow many ordinary people (and not merely police) to voice their concerns over the threat of both Batman and The Joker's costly street war. We get a few shots here and there of families and children, but no grounding to help Bane's cause gather steam. No angry words about the Mayor's run as the Dent Act has cleared the streets, possibly creating other side effects across the city. Worse yet, we never hear both sides of the argument over Bane's scapegoating against Gotham's most powerful and "corrupt". This is perhaps where a majority of that fallacy's origin comes from. Even as Nolan and Co. attempt to call upon all sides to cast aside their circumstances, there's never enough of the disconnect and/or coming to terms with this often black and white presentation.

But again, much of what is actually established in the film, is that the armed horde awaiting the wholly outgunned police are followers of Bane's ideology, or are merely armed criminals/mercenaries.

So now, as we take a cue from that last section, what is Bane, and what is he about?

Well for anyone paying attention to the film, this one is a freebie and a half. As the film's heavy, also of a difficult background growing up in a deep, dark hell of a prison, Bane is the spiritual opposite of Blake, Kyle, etc. in that he has spent his entire life conquering those whom he deems unworthy of their stature. His background is that of the League Of Shadows, who eventually ex-communicated him for being far too "extreme". And considering the League's draconian worldview, it's safe to say that his skewed rendition is of a higher contrast level of black and white. It is this warped perception that leads to his reign of terror over Gotham as he sits on a slowly decaying nuclear weapon. His poisonous words and notions are that of what could happen to a movement such as Occupy, if it were to be perverted by those with other agendas. His absolution is everything that Bruce/Batman has employed on a micro level turned outward and amplified. Bruce, while in prison, is forced to see the world he helped create should such narrowness infiltrate every level of the city. - It is totalitarianism. Communism no less.

So when the film's final third comes along, it culminates with Bruce Wayne directly facing a similar worldview as those he always claimed to be defending. Broken, and tossed into a deep and deadly pit, he is forced to crawl. In the prison, he is granted his first true taste of living with nothing. With only a rope as a reminder of the shackles/tethers that his life always came with. And it is in the final moments in this setting that he comes full circle by removing the rope, and acknowledging fear, that he is capable of meeting Bane on equal terms. (The lack of subtlety during those shots of the two fighting on the steps-of WALL STREET is staggering) It is also telling that in the epilogue, Wayne Mansion is turned into a grand scale boys home, again reinforcing the concerns at the beginning that implies that a better means of fighting crime lies in helping the community at its roots, rather than with the ever growing symptoms of poverty, and lack of engagement between all sectors.

Whether the film succeeded at all in getting these across is debatable. But it is there. Where it all goes wrong, is that there is nowhere near enough coverage on the city side to make any of it work in any cohesive fashion. (especially in lieu of the manner in which Wayne's arc is resolved). There are also the big moments delivered by the female cast members at the finale which again offers the film a pluralist bent. It's just too bad the film fails to hold these disparate elements together enough. 

The Dark Knight Rises (2012) Movie Review

Kind of hard to believe that it has actually been seven years since the so-called "comic book movie" took a sober hard left with Christopher Nolan's Batman Begins, a film that essentially took the more literate auteur into the ranks of the blockbuster elite. Having only done one major studio feature prior (Insomnia) with middling success, imagine my own personal reaction when his take on the Caped Crusader turned out to be one of my favorite translations from the printed panel to the screen. How little then did I consider the common thread that binds the majority of Nolan's works (tales of complex individuals, more often men, obsessed with correcting a great wrong, only to create an even deeper pit for themselves to fall into) that I failed to see why he was an ideal choice to flesh out the world of Gotham City, and wayward billionaire, Bruce Wayne's blinding obsession with forging a better future, one criminal beating at a time. So when we at last come to the grand, sprawling final chapter in The Dark Knight Rises, one cannot help but feel like fresh bread, pulled apart at every corner.


Seven years after the events of The Dark Knight, Gotham has gone for years without any sign of the now outlawed Batman, who had secretly colluded with a mutually tormented Commissioner James Gordon ( Gary Oldman) into taking the blame for the deadly actions of Harvey Dent/Two Face, thereby allowing the police force to usher in a flourishing era in action against criminals. But the cracks in the facade they have created are beginning to show, as Gordon's life has taken a turn, while Wayne has seen himself become a bit of a legendary recluse. Matters spiral toward the inevitable, upon Wayne's first chance encounter with the alluring, yet formidable Selina Kyle/Catwoman (Anne Hathaway), which signals the coming of Bane, a mysterious, hulking mercenary whose designs on the city threaten to not only destroy it and its inhabitants, but also the spirit of its once great defender. Easily the most dangerous opposition of the series, and easily a terrible reminder of all that had come before. Now torn between Batman as symbol, and perhaps even guilt-fueled self-sacrifice, Wayne must once again take up the cape and cowl, even if it does mean dying to protect all he holds dear.


As mentioned, the film catches up with the now clearly spiritually brow-beaten duo remaining of the triumvirate established in the previous. And it is made pretty clear that regardless of their mutually saving the city throughout the series, the choices of Bruce Wayne remain clearly and wholly selfish. Whatever good  that could ever have come out of his decisions to fight crime fists first more often than not carry with them consequences that have left all within his very orbit broken and deeply changed, including Wayne himself, who's loss of Rachel Dawes in the previous has led to a life parallel with being something of a living corpse, hiding within the walls of the now rebuilt Wayne Manor. And yet, all he remained close to throughout his one-man crusade against crime and corruption have either been taken away, or compromised. His entire life could have easily provided practical solutions like supporting local concerns, and stopping crime at its source, but opted to fight it out with the symptoms. Even so, his legend is still something on the minds of many young people of Gotham, including rookie cop, John Blake (Joseph Gordon Levitt) who perhaps knows a great deal more than most. And yet these terrible threads of fate may very well be the best hope the city has once Bane and his (literally) underground army are discovered.



As a conclusion, The Dark Knight Rises is of gargantuan scale. Even by most spectacle standards, it is a truly startling achievement in that place always remains first with real locations, incredible sets, some phenomenal outdoor shooting work (one again by the always wonderful Wally Pfister), and intense action. One can see every penny spent on the production, and feel the weight of what Nolan is attempting. The core problems lie largely in the structure, and in how much of it lacks the manner of build and impact of the previous. Where The Dark Knight took grand risks by ramping up the madness of the Joker's reign until the viewer is sent bouncing from one section of the city to another, The Dark Knight Rises begins with this in mind from the getgo, and never lets up throughout its running time of two hours and forty five minutes. And as such, the first act feels a little on the jarring side, lacking a manner of grounding that could have helped the narrative later. Possibly the film's biggest misstep happens within the first major action sequence which leads to a decision so forced, that it rings hollow for a certain new character which ultimately leaves him with very little meat to work with by the end. Another unexpected issue here is a decidedly jokier tone  that was quite unexpected considering the often grim countenance of the previous. In a film that is clearly about the end of life, and the  end result of a life of selfish acts, it in many ways takes away from what should be a tightened, more intense experience. Despite all the grandness on display, the end result is surprisingly restrained.


So once we reach the halfway point, and much of the story seems well in gear, a lot of it feels like a matter of course rather than an actual series of twists and revelations. This surprisingly, is also much closer in tone to Batman Begins, which had the distinction of dancing wildly between "realistic" and openly cartoonish, with matters reaching a fever pitch regarding an energy source, and yes, a Doomsday Weapon so that we may have a ticking clock in place for the finale. Which leads one to believe that this is the Nolan brothers' attempt at doing a Michael Bay-style extravaganza. (If suddenly, echoes of The Rock come to mind, it isn't merely you.) The feeling that there were dozens of disparate ideas in mind, and that they were determined to get as many in there as possible is very present to the point that it at times feels like two movies smashed together resulting in periods where one cannot help but feel exhausted when one should feel energized for the bigger moments.


Thankfully, the performances, and still present sincerity in much of the film grants it the momentum to see matters through, even as it truly feels like a world coming to a fiery end. The always welcome Michael Caine's Alfred is especially heartwrenching, as a man at last at a breaking point. He has supported Mr. Wayne long enough, and can no longer stand by and watch his equivalent to a son lose his life to his obsession. Oldman's Gordon remains a shining beacon of humanity, while Gordon-Levitt's Blake continues this thread as a truly likeable cop with razor-sharp instincts and a large heart. It is in his arc that the film's soul truly lives and dies. Being among the first of the "batman era" generation, we have a chance to see the potential of Wayne's legacy, as well as what it could mean for future Gothamites. Also worth mentioning the terrific work of Marion Cotillard, Morgan Freeman, and Matthew Modine as Foley, a veteran cop with much to prove. But the real standout newcomer work to this franchise belong to Anne Hathaway's Kyle, and Tom Hardy's Bane. Hathaway's take on Catwoman is potent, angry, and demands her own film. It's a performance that shoulders a great deal of the weight and power  of everyperson in the piece. Her lot, the complete opposite of Bruce's, by growing up without privilege or stability represents balance to his life lived with money-borne answers. It has shaped her into a bit of a hardened survivor, and a silent champion of those carrying the city's heaviest burdens. And Hardy's Bane is a classical, baroque monster. Single-minded in his own drive toward pain and terror, his reign over Gotham City (and perhaps even Batman/Bruce) is palpable and utterly frightening. He is living absolution, and is the harbinger of the worst possible end for all involved. Even as the story momentum seems to flag at times, it's these memorable characterizations (something of a Nolan trait by this point) that remain irresistible.

Possible Spoiler Time

Considering much of the film's almost prescient use of the divide between "rich and poor", one would think that this is the bare essence of what Christopher and Jonathan Nolan's script was centered on. But what seems to be of greater concern to them here lies back in the origins of the Bat mythos itself - Labels. Duty. Designation. Our place in society, and our inherently human need to break free of this with regularity despite our addiction toward a semblance of order and responsibility. "Structure becomes your shackles" as one character says in one of the least subtle moments of an already unsubtle film. Every character feels bound by their designation, eager to free the inner human, burning inside for redefinition. And yet, Bruce Wayne cannot walk away from the oncoming of what seems to be his self-contructed personal apocalypse. Caught in a terrible gravity , he is the variable, surrounded by those seeking well past their present selves, eager for freedom. And in this sense, Batman , and the villains themselves are locked irrevocably in this death dance, primed to burn an entire population to the ground. So once the true plot is revealed in the breathless final act, and the music has reached a crescendo, and the landscape is a smoky hell on earth, the question of the importance of symbols, and the yearning for a life beyond are illuminated regardless of all the noise. All the while, the existence of the Batman has brought this about, and the film (just as the whole series has) never lets Bruce Wayne off the hook. This is the world his decisions throughout the films have helped create, and it is a horrific one. All the more satisfying to see Christian Bale's final turn in the role played as a man, broken down to the point that even his own body seems ready to be parted with. It is the dilemma of the symbol versus the man that takes us to the final pass of our journey, leading to what could have been a more rousing finish if Nolan had stayed true to all that had been pointing in the same direction. One could argue that it's within the film's final moments that Nolan buckles under the weight he has helped cast throughout all three installments. And for the last minutes to be what they are isn't necessarily a crashing disappointment, but it does feel like something of an apology for the oppressive madness of The Dark Knight. (something one should never apologize for) One might also argue that this yearning for something more lies square on Nolan, who possibly just wants to move on. There are indeed stretches where it feels as such.



And yet despite all of these gripes and occasional story issues (It's a script that feels in need of at least one more rewrite) , The Dark Knight Rises works best as a thrilling, yet deeply flawed epilogue to Nolan's Batman saga. Even when it threatens to crumble under the weight of its own absurdity, the character drama continues to shine through. And even regardless of this perhaps being the weakest of the three films(and possibly of Nolan's work), the series remains a staggering accomplishment of myth weaving, human drama, and philosophical debate disguised as popcorn entertainment. It's that rarest of comic-book based tales, one packed with thoughtfulness and genuine care-mental exhaustion be damned. And as final chapters go, one could do so much worse.

Is INCEPTION Backlash-proof?

 Just had a thought this morning after a week of processing my own personal thoughts on INCEPTION. And I know, this has gone on for several posts now, but it still stands to trouble me that the current wave of backlash against the positive reviews of the film have been characterizing the film under expectations that are unbecoming of what the finished product seems intended.

The larger concerns over the film's flaws (upon certain restrictions do exist, just so there is no illusion implied on my part) as undermining hyperbolic views of the film as "too-intellectual", or "perfectly constructed" are more that these positive reviews are overlooking elements of a work that took nearly ten years to write, from a filmmaker who has been famous for meticulous, borderline obsessive in his storytelling technique. As if looking desperately to find a weakness in the armor like so many eternal malcontents, is more evidence of a viewing community out to head another Shymalan at the pass, as to avoid some kind of imagined betrayal that has yet to happen. In order to be spared the pain of another Phantom Menace? Are we still smarting from that one?

Never again, the connected public seems to want to say.

That said, I can see where some views see the film as less heady as Nolan's previous works. The film seems a lot less interested in following through on its own rules than MEMENTO, or even The Prestige. But as films that explore the fragility of rules, they are only pieces of a larger creative whole. To see INCEPTION on the same exact field of reason is (for me anyway) to miss out on what is Nolan's big moment to have a little fun with his craft thus far, to not play by the same elaborate design schemes he's so relied on before. While many "totems" of his past films are in full-force here (the dead love interest, guilt-ridden leads who make matters worse for themselves and others, etc), the films thrust is to blast through all prior concepts in a Greatest Hits fashion, whilst offering a conversation piece that is more introspective than many folks are considering.

From an authorship perspective, the piece is less a puzzle to be solved, and more a look into the process of filmmaking from the mind of someone enraptured by the possibilities inherent in audience participation. It's something that came to mind hours after viewing it, that Nolan's films seem by design to be interactive pieces.

To be led, invested, misdirected, and enthralled are his hopes with these works. Just as the participants in Cobb's group are meant to spin a fiction for us to inhabit for a brief time in order to inspire change within a single man, we are the larger fish filmmakers are after. They may not always attain the intended results, but it is in the collaborative attempt that these "jobs" fuel their fire. All one needs to do is to look at the cast, and recalibrate them as writers , art directors, stars, and executive producers, the film's intentions become alarmingly clear. And as Nolan had said once before, the heist film is that rare genre trope that allows for consistent exposition. It makes a perfect analog for the film creation, let alone any major creative endeavor.


Using this "through the looking glass" approach may seem overtly reductive (and for some, may even cheapen the end product), but it just stands to reason that after a short run of highly commercial successes with the Batman series, it felt time to do something personal. The only reason we see so much talk of summer blockbuster is merely because the year itself has proven itself to be a pretty bleak one for film. And when your only heavy hitter is a 200 million dollar art-house piece, you know things aren't well for the industry. That said, it is exciting to think of such a  film as commercially viable in an age where studios are tightening what is left of their belts, and are inches short of breaking out the barrels.


 To consider that they'd allow a labyrinth-minded explorer of the human condition the ability to run wild with his personal obsessions and inspirations, it's a surprise the film wasn't an unmitigated disaster.Thoughts not meant as a pass of immunity, but rather a reminder of intent over expectation. Had this been a film that was truly about a heist, then it'd be a different outcome for sure.


 On its own terms the film is more a means of entertaining what would otherwise come off as esoteric ideas, unfit for film. But for me, this is a massive part of what makes it so entertaining. To see these wild ideas through such a logic-leaning mind makes for an interesting paradox of art versus the literate. But the sum is larger than the whole, not too unlike works of auteurs of the past. It is a paean to the wonder & curiosity of storytelling, and a love letter to film in general.

Inception (2010) Review

Ideas have become far more important to us than action - ideas so cleverly expressed in books by the intellectuals in every field.  The more cunning, the more subtle, those ideas are the more we worship them and the books that contain them.  We are those books, we are those ideas, so heavily conditioned are we by them.  We are forever discussing ideas and ideals and dialectically offering opinions.  Every religion has its dogma, its formula, its own scaffold to reach the gods, and when inquiring into the beginning of thought we are questioning the importance of this whole edifice of ideas.  We have separated ideas from action because ideas are always of the past and action is always the present - that is, living is always the present.  We are afraid of living and therefore the past, as ideas, has become so important to us.  ~J. Krishnamurti


Praise Be To The Cinema...

To be able to sit here, and express about how a film such as Christopher Nolan's latest probably shouldn't exist in today's film world, and yet does is a testament to the fortitude, and dedication it took such an obsessive mind to unleash it upon the world. Several hour later, I'm still doing my damndest to keep all the best images & thoughts for myself, and possibly failing as human memory often does. Much in the way it has been suggested in his past films, memories often lead toward decisions not completely within absolute control. And the consequences of living a life through captured memories sans the essence of those memories as ripe as they were on the day of their occurrence. To be able to retain that feeling, that place that felt so aligned with everything on the exterior must be one of the greatest longings inherent in the human experience. But for them to fade, allowing room for new experiences to breathe lives of their own must be considered. And finding a way through these mazes we create for ourselves is at the heart of INCEPTION. Taking pages from some of the best in science fiction writing of the last thirty years, mixed in with some of that classic Nolan grit, and warping them into a wholly new hybrid form of cinematic achievement is something truly exciting indeed. There is simply no real way to merely review a film like this without looking at the other "I" word...Intent.

The stars were aligned at last for Nolan to finally tackle what is essentially a dream project. The film by which a director risks life and limb to earn an ability to construct. It has been known that he had in fact been conceiving this piece for well over ten years (even during his MEMENTO days), and after the monolithic success of his Batman reinvention, he has finally been allowed to share the tale of expert mind-diver, Dom Cobb (Leonardo DiCaprio), and his voyages into the framework of the human mind. Its also no secret that the director's films have often been derided as being either too meticulous, and emotionally distant to make any truly deep impression. And it can be said that this isn't far from the truth, as often we are made participants in his sometimes overtly clever mindgames , nothing could prepare the average moviegoer for the Herculean workout they are about to receive with this one. This is the kind of film that anime such as Ghost in The Shell has been hinting at from the horizon for over a decade now. And boy, is it a welcome entry into this rarely filmed mode of hard science fiction. And in the best examples of a volatile project of this nature, it is a resounding success.

Cobb (DiCaprio) is an exiled american working as a master of psychological corporate espionage, which is to simplify, a "dream thief", specializing in diving into the minds of a mark to retrieve data for paying interests worldwide. A haunted anti-hero figure, Cobb requires the assistance of several other experts in the hopes of earning his way back into the US due to laws forbidding him to do so. Hired by the mysterious & dedicated Saito (A wonderful Ken Watanabe), Cobb and his partner in crime, Arthur(Joseph Goron-Levitt) enlist a small team of experts, including fellow diver Eames (Tom Hardy), chemist Yusuf (Dileep Rao), and architectural prodigy Ariadne (Ellen Page), who can help enter the mind of powerful heir-to-be, Fischer (Cillian Murphy) in the hopes of doing the near-impossible...the implantation of an idea as opposed to extraction. Despite the precision, and ability this team can muster, there is no guarantee of success in the realm of the ever-unstable human psyche. Especially when the leader is as tormented by the past as he is. And it is this fly in the ointment that fuels a great deal of the film as Page's eager student longs to better understand the world of the dream, despite the terrible danger Cobb's past engenders for not only her, but the entire operation.

From the opening scenes, into the leaps in non-linear time, and ultimately the dream itself, the film is an intoxicating mix that may alienate some upon first viewing, but render many to return as there is just so much value in nearly every moment of it. From the scenes revealing the unstable, shifting world of the dream, the nature of dream invasion, and the interweaving of exterior logic within the confines of full REM sleep. (I often sleep with music playing subtly in my room, so this makes absolute sense) The mission unfolds, and nearly spirals out of control to a point to where the team is forced to go much deeper than initially planned which creates a dizzying effect not unlike the way real dreams take conventional logic, and sends it packing. The interlocking of dreams within dreams is an incomparable feat of writing and editing that must be experienced to be fully comprehended. And this is where Wally Pfister's visual wizardry is paramount in expressing the tale in a nature most comparable to the images of one MC Escher. A visualist perfectly cast into a story so entrenched within such a labyrinthian structure. Hans Zimmer's score evokes both his greatest strengths alongside the very best of John Barry in a truly rapturous accompaniment. And to see a film so realized in its vision that the sights and sounds are so aligned with the intelligence to match, it is perhaps no big concern that the emotional effect perhaps is best saved for a second, or third viewing. The mind is so busy working overtime, this is perfectly understandable. This is a definitive example of the kind of rare work that rewards multiple viewings with added volumes of thought.
                                                                                                                                         

                                      
 And this is where the cast keeps the film so well grounded. DiCaprio's performance is a perfect follow-up to his impressive leading turn in Shutter Island earlier this year. In many ways, Cobb is an extension of the same character. But this time, the pain is driving his every move and has worn heavy on his appearance. It's a startling transformation for him, and offers a lot more than one may expect. Also engaging & funny is Gordon-Levitt's Arthur, the kind of slick upstart that pays counterpoint to Cobb's troubled, determined demeanor. He's a natural sidekick who more than holds his own in some of the work's most thrilling action pieces. Its also great to see Watanabe in such a larger role than usual in a large scale feature. Hopelessly dedicated to his cause, and oddly charming, his Saito is a fun, toned-down twist on the Bond-villain that adds a cool touch to the whole caper. And I can't help but love Tom Hardy in the role of Eames, a man so clearly aligned with his inner Ian Fleming. Support by Murphy, Tom Berenger, Rao, and even Nolan regular, Michael Caine are equally welcome to the proceedings.

Now what I haven't mentioned thus far was the inclusion of the film's feminine element consisting of a figure of Cobb's past played by Marion Cotilliard, and his urgent present in the form of Ellen Page. In the role of Ariadne, Page is tasked with perhaps the least amount of characterization in the film, and yet is all-important to the overarching narrative. As the young, eager student, she is tasked with entering the mind of Cobb, but discovers his secret that threatens the operation, and yet she cannot help but be entranced by the need to know. To push further than anyone prior had done. Knowing that her task is to create a projected maze within this scape of existence, she cannot help but wonder what lies beneath, and is thus more in tune with what Cobb truly wants as opposed to what he hopes to avoid. And in this, it is clear that she is less a requisite character on a heist as the majority of the cast, but more of a conscience that Cobb has been neglecting to keep his memories locked within. She is the key to his salvation, even as memories of the being known as Mal (Cotilliard) threaten to keep him imprisoned forever. It is in this stroke of story that INCEPTION leaps beyond the surface of protean mechanism, place, and spirit to deliver a most complex, yet human of parables.


And speaking from looking at the film from an interior view, it is also very telling that multiple parallels indicate that this is in fact at least a partially autobiographical look into a director whom at least right now, has the moviegoing public in his hands. With the revelation that one of the lead character's children is played by his real-life son, it isn't far off to see DiCaprio's Cobb as a broken analog for the director himself. And filmed with a love for pop-cinema of England past(the Bond connections are blatant), the piece can also play as a mediation on the life of one who has sacrificed so much in order to weave tales for us. And while some may see this as something less than subtle, it is also a declaration of the necessity for ideas in all eras. A primal call to arms in an art world in danger of collapsing to mere co-opt, familiarity, and safety. With a wildly ambitious script, a supporting public, and a note-perfect cast, we are sharing his dream within a thousand dark rooms. And perhaps with a hope that souls young and old can remember what it is to remain truly inspired.


Never mind that cinema may never be the same after INCEPTION has its way with your mind upon exposure. Never mind that it is a heist caper in rank with the best of authors such as William Gibson, and has an interior logic all of its own, and not in the best interest of mass audiences(especially within the realm of that all-comfort-food world of the Summer Film). What we have to bear witness is a thriller that stands defiant in the face of an ever-deadening cinematic landscape, and declares ideas to be our greatest saviors if not greatest terrors.

Combo Attack!! Podcast is Live!

The conversation expands...The rest is up to you, the listener!

At long last, a once lofty subject of discussion between old friends finally takes on life in the form of an all-new, and hopefully revealing podcast experiment! Combo Attack!! is the brainchild of Alain Lecaro (of Alain's Comic Stop), Joel Tune, and myself which'll explore pop culture from 3 diverging, yet hopefully entertaining viewpoints.

Where did this all come from? Well the fact that Al grew up with mostly American supehero comics, Joel with Video and Tabletop gaming, and myself with film & anime, it only made sense that it'd be a great time to hop on and share these often engaging & fun chats of ours with fans all over. (and all in the name of proving that the three fandoms could co-exist sans-the fear of fire & vitriol that the internet can sometimes engender)

Check out the site (including the debut episode, featuring an epic discussion of Nolan's The Dark Knight!)

    

Just in time for INCEPTION this weekend!