Review - Nocturnal Animals (2016)

Revenge redefined.

Tom Ford's Nocturnal Animals is a peculiar, yet a beautiful film. It reflects on a heavily overused theme - revenge - and yet, its unique treatment makes it entirely fresh and deeply relevant. In his second outing as a film director, Ford's skill to develop a film as an art form has honed immensely, and also as a writer, he did a remarkable job of adapting a notoriously complex book (Tony and Susan, Austin Wright) with all its layers and twists. He certainly does have a retirement plan after his lucrative career in fashion designing.

Susan (Amy Adams) is forty-something uptown art gallery owner in Los Angeles. She is unhappily married to Hutton Morrow (Armie Hammer), a failing businessman who  is cheating on her. One day, she receives a manuscript of a novel called Nocturnal Animals, written by her estranged ex-husband Edward Sheffield (Jake Gyllenhaal). Susan dated Edward during graduate school, and her marriage to Edward was short-lived and turbulent. Surprised by the unanticipated contact and equally unexpected dedication, Susan starts reading the novel as her lonely despondent life carries on.

In the novel (we see the novel unfolding onscreen), Tony Hastings (Jake Gyllenhaal) embarks on a midnight trip through West Texas with his wife and teenage daughter. En-route, they stumble across a car driven by hooligans. An unfortunate accident takes place which leads to a disturbing turn of events - Tony is brutally beaten up and his wife and daughter are raped and murdered. Deeply shaken, he becomes depressed because he was unable to act in the moment and protect his family. Police gets involved and no-nonsense detective Bobby Andes (Michael Shannon) starts working on the case as Tony plans his revenge.

Nocturnal Animals plays out as a film within a film. In the first half, the secondary plot of Tony Hastings sometimes feels off and out of tone with primary story-line of Susan, but by the second half, both the plots deeply echo each other and the finale makes a brilliant thematic intersection between them. Although on surface, both may feel different, but deep down they are perfectly coherent. Tony embodies Edward - that's obviously clear - but what's even more interesting, is that at many times during the film, both Susan and Tony seem to be in same state of mind. Ford has intricately written his film which brings out the interconnections between the both factual and fictional characters, which is outstanding.

Technically and aesthetically, Nocturnal Animals is beautifully realized. The sets, the locations, the costumes - are all beautiful but everything is in accordance with the script (even Aaron-Taylor Johnson's ruffian look is realistic). Unlike A Single Man, Tom Ford's previous cinematic venture which was heavily stylized, this film is a lot more grounded, even if it is set in art background. A quick mention must be given to Abel Korzeniowski, whose score channels Bernard Hermann's classical compositions which brings a certain eeriness to the film.

"When you love someone you have to be careful with it, you might never get it again." The essence of Nocturnal Animals can be summed up with these two lines - your choices in your relationships are extremely crucial. One wrong step, you'll regret it for your entire life. Who knows, at a certain point in future, you might feel that you have made a mistake, that you want to back track and get it again. But you never get it back. Nocturnal Animals' final act puts a new twist in the idea of revenge, a revenge which inflicts no physical harm but an everlasting bruise on your soul.

3.5/5

Review - La La Land (2016)

An ode to the dreams

La La Land though disappoints with its plot, is brilliantly executed and charming cinematic piece.

Confession - I am not into musicals. I don't hate them, but thanks to Bollywood, my appetite for them is pretty scarce. I have liked some musicals, but I feel they don't work well with English movies. Still, when Damien Chazelle (his Whiplash (2014) floored me completely) announced that he was going to make a musical, I was thoroughly excited. As it is evident from Whiplash, his ear for music is extremely nuanced. What is better than a musical to exercise his music faculties? Now I would take the liberty of saying this - if Whiplash was a rehearsal, then La La Land is a full-house concert. The film, at least from music point of view, is a masterpiece. Also, this is Chazelle at his best - his effective way of weaving music within the story, his brilliant choice of shots, and his visual play of light and shadows - they are all present, in their flourishing glory and dazzling execution. But unfortunately, there is an issue - the trouble is, Chazelle's own script has failed him.

Mia and Sebastian are struggling artists in contemporary Los Angeles - the former an actress and the later a jazz pianist. They meet, they fight, they fall in love. They separate. They reunite. It's something which you have seen hundred of times. It is an old fashioned plot-line and you expect something new, fresh and unique from Chazelle. Even though a brilliant director, he is not a very good writer. His script suffers from predictability, expanded conversations, clichés and filler scenes. 

But where the story falters, the concept prevails. La La Land deeply connects with you on many façades, making up for shortcomings of the script. The plot for the film may be overly simplistic, but the themes are ever resounding. Have you ever felt disappointed when you've failed at something which you really want to attain? Have you felt the heartache when you've looked back in your life and absence of someone special had made every success trivial? Have you cried when you just grow apart with someone with no apparent reason? Life never gives everyone everything. We all have an empty space in our hearts which was once occupied by someone dear, but now there is only a void, an unfillable void which will be there forever.

Talking about the leads,  Emma Stone and Ryan Gosling are outstanding. They are both are immensely attractive, but the best part about them is their charm. Their amiable screen presence leads to a strong connection between them and the viewers, so when the emotions hit hard, you can see yourself snuffling and wiping a drop of tear rolling down your eyes. That's the effect of Stone/Gosling pair, their chemistry, physics and biology. Though both are equally good, Stone walks away with this film with her deeply realized portrayal of Mia. Her moments in the film will leave you in awe and wonder, and with some meaty scenes enqueue,  she has become a bit closer to the Oscar statue. Gosling has also played his part beautifully, without being overshadowed by Stone's prowess. 

Apart from the actors and the director, La La Land belongs to composer Justin Hurwitz, whose music is the soul of the film. Every single song of the film is carefully structured and beautifully rendered. City of Stars is a tribute to Los Angeles with a soothing feel to it, and its second reprisal by both Gosling and Stone is a lot more upbeat and playful. Auditions (Fools Who Dream) is another marvel backed up by flawless singing by Stone (and equally good acting). The piano melody for Mia and Sebastian is a haunting, touching composition which instills a sense of longing in your heart.

La La Land's  languid first half is extremely stretched, but the second half makes you almost forget (and forgive) that the first half was a slog. And even with its way too simplistic story-line, the film works - because of its execution, its masterful direction, its lovable pair and its unforgettable music. La La Land is all about dreams which are achieved and yet never fulfilled; an old forgotten love which brings joy and yet sadness.

3.5/5

Review - Elle (2016)

Outrageous, offensive crap

Huppert is the sole reason to watch this highly offensive thriller/drama

In the opening shots, we hear a woman moaning and crying in agony, while the camera is on her pet cat, who looks over the scene with a curious expression. It is clear that she is being raped and beaten up by her assaulter. The next scene - that same woman is calm and composed, cleaning up the broken china scattered across her sumptuous living room. Afterwords, she takes a bubble bath, her countenance free from anything but curiosity. She takes a mandatory STD checkup, and after a day or two, she announces during a dinner with her friends that she had been raped. Too much composure for a rape victim, that's for sure.

And that's just the beginning - Elle, directed by Dutch director Paul Verhoeven, gets even crazier over the duration of the film. Michèle Leblanc (played by Isabelle Huppert) is middle aged uptown Parisian businesswoman who lives alone in her luxurious apartment. She runs a video-game company with her friend. Her relationships with family and friends are ever swinging and swaying to extremes - she has a cold relationship with her gaudy, flamboyant mother; her son is doing nothing with his life except for trailing his pregnant girlfriend like a puppy. She is also having an affair with her friend's husband and she has a thing for her neighbor too. Much worse is her troubled past - her father was a mass-shooter who is in jail, serving his life sentence, and she has vowed to never see him again.

Since Michèle does not want to involve with police (she has her reasons), so she decides to track her assaulter by her own means. But things get out of her control, she gets a lewd message on her phone from unknown number and one day, a faux-animation of her being raped by a gaming creature is broadcasted throughout her office. Trying to manage the entire chain of events, she asks her employee to hack into personal accounts of everyone working for her, so that she can discover the real culprit who has created the obscene video. Then within some days or so and without any leads, she forgets, and her life goes on with its complications. But it happens again - not only once, but twice, rape is played as a plot device. The second time however, the assaulter is unmasked by Michèle after she stabs his hand with a scissor - and then follows a third act with complete turn of events which will unsettle even the most liberal of viewers.

What a crazy, deluded and absurd the third act is. Without spoiling much, I can only say that involves a sadomasochistic relationship, which is primarily meant to offend you or at least shock you in some level. Offensive it definitely is, shocking not much, given the history of Verhoeven's affinity for sensationalism. There is nothing in the film which justifies why Michèle behaves the way she behaves - no, not even the equally implausible sub-plot regarding a violent, traumatic childhood event. The script plays out in an uneven tone, ranging from farcical comedy to tragic drama, which only adds to the film's issues.

But what keeps Elle from being a completely disgusting piece of pretentious art house cinema is the bold and reckless performance by Isabelle Huppert. For most of its two hours, Huppert is the center of focus in the story and not even once you lose the interest in her character, irrespective of how questionable Michèle's decisions are. Huppert portrays her with a unique flair and a powerful allure, stacking on layers of fascinating shades. She is Elle.

The film holds your attention with its twists and turns, satirical situations and charming views of Paris. But nothing can sugar-coat the horrible rape plot-device. Verhoeven has said that the film is a fantasy - so I take it as one. But issue is, Elle is neither believable enough for a realistic drama nor engrossing enough for a fantasy. It is a misogynist propaganda masquerading as a pseudo-liberal feminism. If you want to watch this film, watch it for Huppert, who has given a performance which will be remembered and talked for a very long time.

2/5