Review - Prisoners (2013)

A thematically hefty thriller which almost falls apart of its own weight

"I'm angry all the time!"

 

Canadian director Denis Villeneuve has a strong penchant for criticism of religious doctrines and reflection of cyclic nature of violence. His internationally acclaimed work Incendies, reflected upon these themes with bold and broad stokes. Even though the plot of the film was very contrived, it created a deep impact and left viewers in shock and awe. With his Hollywood debut, Villeneuve has created the same effective atmosphere and laid out his narrative in a precise manner, but he couldn't really pull-off an Incendies.

As the title suggests, many of the film's characters are prisoners of some sort. Some are prisoners of violence, some of avengement, some of fear and some others of literal confinement. Like any other Villeneuve work, it does not functions alone as an abduction film, even on surface it appears to be. Starring Hugh Jackman and Jake Gyllenhaal, the film explores a multitude of themes, ranging from moral ambiguity of violence to the absurdity of religious faith, all interwoven in an intriguing whodunit story. 

Somewhere in a Pennsylvanian town, Keller Dover (Jackman) and Franklin Birch's (Terrence Howard) daughters are abducted after Thanksgiving dinner. Dover's son has previously spotted an RV near their premises where the girls were playing. After much expedient search around the neighborhood,  the police is involved and Detective Loki (Gyllenhaal) is assigned the task to find the girls. The RV is tracked and the person driving it, Alex Jones (Paul Dano), is brought under custody. On prima facie, Jones, a man with seemingly low IQ, has nothing to do with abductions. Much to the ire of the parents of the girls, Jones is released after thorough questioning, and already furious Dover decides to take the matter into his own hands. He takes Jones as his prisoner and goes third degree on him, completely convinced that he is the miscreant.

From this point onwards, things complicate a bit. Aaron Guzikowski's script becomes increasingly convoluted as more and more subplots are introduced. Dectective Loki, in particular, finds two more leads - one, a pedophile priest and the other, a creepy bloke who appeared on a vigil. During all this, Dover brings Franklin along, to extract truth from Jones. Scenes involving Jones' torture are particularly hard to watch - Villeneuve, with his unflinching vision as witnessed in Incendies, keeps the horrors of torture intact and yet never goes overboard. In some way, the film starts to portray the main protagonist in a grey shade even though his actions are somewhat justified in the context of the situation he is facing. In the second half, many incidents end up just being a red-herring (a fault that thrillers cannot do without), but thanks to skifull grim visual style, you never escape the film's brooding bleak atmosphere (which in literal terms, is predominantly rainy and very cold). Roger Deakins has created some beautiful frames which are composed in such a way that the characters always appear "imprisoned" - let it be within the car windows, glass panes or doors. 

The film belongs to Hugh Jackman. Even though he's surrounded by exceptionally talented cast members like Jake Gyllenhaal, Viola Davis and Melissa Leo, he outshines every one of them. His performance is a perfect amalgamation of fear, anger and distrust; his aggression leaps out of his stature in the ripples of violence. There is one particular scene involving a hand and a hammer which will definitely remain in your memories for a long time. Apart from him, Melissa Leo brilliantly portrays a major character in the film, which I don't dare to spoil it for you. Jake Gyllenhaal is stoic and sullen in early scenes, and highly emotive near the end, which perfectly suits his character arc.

Prisoners tries too hard to underline its themes. It succeeds in justifying some and failing in the others. An abduction plot with a typical thriller treatment bodes well with the theme of moral ambiguity and cyclic nature of violence, but does not bode well with the criticism of religious faith, lacking strong arguments against it. Still, Prisoners' biggest strength is its atmosphere. It sucks you in from the moment it starts, which only proves that Villeneuve is a director to watch out for.

3.5/5

Review - Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them (2016)

Beginning of another magical adventure

Stuart Craig once again creates outstanding sets for the Potter franchise

In 2013, Warner Bros. announced that a film series is under production, first one called "Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them", based on a wee-textbook written by J.K. Rowling. This book, about some assorted magical creatures, had only 128 pages - and the planned series was to roll out in five installments. No doubt, even the most non-skeptical muggle saw it as a cash-grab opportunity - another prequel/spinoff to just milk dollars from a famous, successful franchise. 

Cash grab it is, and by extension, every film made over 100 million dollars is a cash grab. What bifurcates a good film from a mere cash grab is the intention. And J.K. Rowling's intention is clear and simple - she wants to cast a spell, give us a thrill ride in her wondrous world and at the same time, enlighten us with real-world parallels. To put in retrospect, many of the attempts to revive or recreate a franchise have fallen flat. The prime example being The Hobbit film series, where Peter Jackson's overindulgence lead to production of second-rate works. He over-expanded it, laid way too many references with the original series and even played with Tolkein's canon. But with Fantastic Beasts, the things have been laid out with much care and balance, you immediately know that this series will work. Best part is, the film stands on its own with minimal references to the main series.

This time our hero is not a boy-under-the-stairs, but a shy, reclusive man called Newt Scamander (apt Eddie Redmayne), who travels to New York City in 1920s, with a case full of magic beasts. His suitcase gets swapped with a non-magical (no-maj) guy called Jacob (outstanding Dan Fogler) - his beasts escape and mayhem ensues. In the mean time, a mysterious dark force sweeps across the New York, killing no-majs and destroying buildings. The blame is put on Newt, so he must recapture all his beasts, with the help from a no-nonsense ex-auror Tina, along with her charming, mind reading sister Queenie, and Jacob.

Along with this main plot, there is another thread about the wizarding society in the New York, how the wizards keep a low profile and avoid being seen. One another thread is about Mary Barebone (outstanding Samantha Morton), a wizard hating woman, and her adopted kids (one of them played by brilliant Ezra Miller). And there is another one, something dealing with a newspaper mogul and his son's political campaign. That's indeed way too many things to cram into one film. But Rowling gets away with all her lose threads by a nifty climax, which though conveniently but effectively, ties up them with a conclusive narrative arc. Her first screenplay suffers from way too much of meandering subplots, which generally work with novels but not with films as the film is a much strict format with constraints. However, it is full of her trademark imagination, vivid detailing and lovable characters which keep the things moving on. The titular beasts too, are wondrous to behold and brimming with personalities. I'm sure many of you would love to have a pet Niffler.

The film is meticulously staged, the production designer Stuart Craig has worked wonders with creation of 1920s New York and with the design of Newt's remarkable suitcase. The special effects team have surpassed their works on Potter too, there is not even a single false-note in terms of CGI. And what's icing on the cake, the film looks the best 3D I have seen this year.

Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them is not with its flaws - the crammed screenplay, disjointed tones (overly dark moments intercut with whimsical beasts), loose editing and a disappointing score by James Newton Howard. But the film works, because the many moments are so powerful and moving that these flaws become an after-note. The film is exciting, funny, wondrous, and yes, magical. And when the next film's focus will shift towards Grindelwald and Dumbledore, who wouldn't call it fantastic? 

4/5

Review - Doctor Strange (2016)

Dimension bending fun

Cumberbatch and Swinton are outstanding in portraying their respective characters

Marvel Cinematic Universe (MCU) has gone a long way from the very first Iron Man in 2008. Particularly with the Avengers (2012), the studio played a big role in increasing the audience's appetite for funny, highly entertaining, city-destroying popcorn cinema. So, many more studios started churning out numerous unsuccessful films, in which the big American heroes saved the world with their supernatural powers, while the baddies were hell bent on destroying American cities. It seemed like most of the villains hated America - too much of ISIS ideology I presume.

Now since this entire genre has certainly reached its saturation point with recent disasters like Suicide Squad, Marvel has played safe by inducting an unlikely hero in its universe - Doctor Stephen Strange (Benedict Cumberbatch), a narcissist, egoistic neurosurgeon, who becomes a sorcerer and saves the day by fighting evil sorcerer/demon and his goons. He saves, if my count is right, Kathmandu, London, New York and Hong Kong. Thankfully, its not just America this time.

Before that, of course, there is an exposition heavy first half, in which Dr. Strange meets a car crash and ends up semi-paralytic. When every medical solution defeats him, he visits Kathmandu, to a place called Kamar-Taj - a rumored monastery where a mystical group cures patients who are medically untreatable. There, he meets Ancient One (Tilda Swinton), a bald woman with psychic and magical powers who helps him to find his inner psychic strength. She also reveals the hidden knowledge of multi-dimensional  universe and invisible energies to him. We have two more named characters residing and practicing in Kamar-Taj, one is played by Chiwetel Ejiofor and other by Benedict Wong. The former is more of a filler character and the later fulfills the comic needs (in a good way). The main human villain Kaecilius is played by Madds Mikkelsen. He, apart from being bad, wears quite a fancy eye makeup. And yes, we have a Rachel McAdams sleepwalking, showing up here and there during the entire run time.

The most wondrous parts of Doctor Strange are those in which he learns and Ancient One practices the art of sorcery. It is an immense fun to see skeptical Cumberbatch brow-beaten and utterly wowed with the dimension-bending and world-twirling kaleidoscopic magic which Swinton conjures. He gasps, becomes breathless and wide-eyed - and we, the audience do the same by marveling at the phenomenal display of technical wizardry. Another highlight of the film is Inception-esque set piece where New York is literally turned upside down - the buildings are flipped to 180 degrees, floors become ceilings and vice-verse, the gravity starts to shift dynamically; the entire sequence, although lacking novelty, is a standout in terms of visual effects and action choreography.

Doctor Strange, however, suffers from an utterly conventional script and thinly developed characters. With possible exception of Strange himself and Swinton's magical sorceress, most of them are just there to fill empty portion in the script and perhaps to increase runtime. And some don't even do that. The logical explanation of how stuff works in Doctor Strange is murky and much of it is without any clarity. The film's climax, with all of its infrastructure demolishing buildup, is uniquely strange and even funny- "Dormammu, I have come for a bargain."

The film is indeed funny. Many of the dialogues and situations are highly comical; director Scott Dirreckson has kept the tone of the film light and fluffy. The good thing about MCU films is that they never are too grim - even though every standing structure of the city is taken down to the ground, nobody loses a limb. Deaths, if they ever occur, are pretty toned down and everyone ends up happy. Doctor Strange follows the same route - it is light, funny, enjoyable and visually arresting. Only if the script was a bit more powerful than the VFX sparks produced by Doctor Strange's weapon. 

3/5, 0.5 for visual effects
3.5/5