دسته: فیلم‌های آینده و شایعات

  • Superman | Pavements + Alex Ross Perry | Superman And The Mole Men (1951)


    Orange background with white text "TRUTH & MOVIES" above three film stills showing Superman, man with telephone, and black-and-white portrait.

    On Truth & Movies this week, we discuss James Gunn’s Superman reboot and talk to Alex Ross Perry about his experimental music documentary Pavements. Finally, for film club, we revisited Superman’s first on-screen appearance in 1951’s Superman And The Mole Men.

    Joining host Leila Latif are Lillian Crawford and A. A. Dowd.

     

    Truth & Movies is the podcast from the film experts at Little White Lies, where along with selected colleagues and friends, they discuss the latest movie releases. Truth & Movies has all your film needs covered, reviewing the latest releases big and small, talking to some of the most exciting filmmakers, keeping you across important industry news, and reassessing great films from days gone by with the Truth & Movies Film Club.

     

    Email: truthandmovies@tcolondon.com

    BlueSky and Instagram: @LWLies

     

    Produced by TCO



    Source link

  • The Other Way Around review – a new type of…



    You almost can’t quite believe that someone hadn’t had this idea before: a well-to-do creative couple living in a cosy Madrid apartment decide that they want to wrap-up their 15 year relationship. Instead of being embarrassed or even saddened by the decision, they instead chose to organise a big party, on the logic that everyone celebrates union and no-one celebrates separation. And that’s massively unfair on separation.

    Itsaso Arana is the comically unsentimental Ale, an independent filmmaker who refuses to let her guard down and spends the vast majority of the film with a scowl on her face as if to transmit her constant air of light annoyance at society and its antiquated precepts. Vito Sanz is Alex, her more neurotic partner who nonetheless is entirely all-in on this eccentric enterprise. The film consists of the couple individually disseminating the invite to friends and family while also fending off repeated accusations that the pair are entirely crazy for doing this. The repeated refrain is that they are wantonly destroying something beautiful.

    Get more Little White Lies

    And from an audience vantage, you’re inclined to agree, as from the intuitive and loving way in which they interact and make decisions together, they present as the model couple. The paradox of this decision is that no couple who truly despises one another, who feels the pressing need to pack up and move on, would be able to be so civilised when it comes to this amicable parting of ways. It’s never fully evident why the pair are breaking up; the inference also is that they too are making a choice as more of a rejection of social mores than as a pressing desire to be rid of one another.

    Writer-director Jonás Trueba – son of the Oscar-winning Spanish director Fernando Trueba, who co-stars here as Ale’s crestfallen father – draws on the template of classic Hollywood comedies in which a couple in the throes of a break-up eventually rediscovers the spark that set them off in the first place (The Awful Truth, The Philadelphia Story, His Girl Friday). Yet while those films tended to focus predominantly on the actions of the central couple, The Other Way Around offers a chorus of discourse and commentary and draws humour out of the fact that everyone thinks that Alex and Ale’s decision is an implicit criticism of their own bourgeois complacency.

    To add further to the meta-cinematic layering, Ale is also making a film on a similar subject, and though we never actually see it, there are scenes documenting the feedback process in which Trueba comically anticipates some of the criticisms that the audience might level at his own film, the main one being the repetitive structure of the various meetings. But things are kept light and funny enough for the momentum to keep rolling, even if the film does lose its way in the final stretch when the couple go through the domestic process of splitting up and a more straightforward will they/won’t they dynamic is introduced.

    Yet in the main this is a perceptive, self-analysing delight, and you can absolutely see this being remade in the English language by a filmmaker who will definitely sand all the edges down and pull back on everything that makes Trueba’s film so unique.





    Source link

  • Till Tech Do Us Part: Romance in the age of…



    I can feel when you’re watching me, I like it” is the first line uttered by Kathryn (Cate Blanchett) in a cool seductive tone to her loyal husband George (Michael Fassbender) in Stephen Soderbergh’s spy thriller, Black Bag. The couple are no strangers to surveillance as their vocation in MI5 requires it, but George’s gaze is welcomed due to the innate desire and loyalty within. However, as the film progresses and George’s investigation forces him to question whether his wife is the intelligence leak, his once intimate gaze begins to shift. With the help of Clarissa (Marisa Aribela), George uses satellite footage to watch Kathryn’s covert mission, and so the dynamic changes. Although George insists that their marriage works because he watches her and assumes she watches him, the frisson is no longer between the couple, but instead in the satellite control room between Clarissa and George. While feline seductress Clarissa purrs her words, George takes no pleasure from this task; there is no longer any thrill in being the watcher or the watched. 

    George and Kathryn’s marriage is not the only bond that strains under the weight of espionage. Every other agent – Clarissa, Freddie (Tom Burke), James (Regé-Jean Page) and even the agency-mandated therapist Zoe (Naomie Harris) – struggles to maintain healthy relationships. Soderbergh’s latest concerns itself with distrustful spies, with the ability to lie about every encounter, but it could easily be a portrait of the London dating scene. In a densely-populated city where everyone has access to dating apps, the possibilities are presumably endless. No one has to choose, and yet according to Moya Lothian-McLean’s detailed report, no one is having a good time.

    The feeling of being watched even falls to those who don’t partake in vocational voyeurism (like spy Caul or photographer Jeff). The students of Neo Sora’s Happyend are the subjects of surveillance rather than active participants, as their school has just installed a new CCTV system which identifies and automatically penalises students for breaking school rules. One poignant scene perfectly encapsulates the subconscious effects constant surveillance has on its students. After mopping the floor of the music room clean, Ming (Shina Peng) and Ata-Chan (Yuta Hayashi) find themselves stuck in the corner of the room, at least until the floor dries. They have washed away their past transgressions and are paralysed, afraid to leave footprints on the sanitised school floor, while another pair caught embracing in a stairwell are immediately chided by the camera. Much like today’s younger generations who have no memory of a dial-up modem, the students of Happyend are quickly learning to sacrifice sensual experiences for the value judgement of technology.

    Last loves are just as susceptible to surveillance’s lure as first crushes. In Cronenberg’s The Shrouds, no one is surprised that grief-stricken entrepreneur Karsh (Vincent Cassel) is striking out on dates since his wife Becca’s (Diane Kruger) death. Especially when he takes Myrna (Jennifer Dale) to a graveside restaurant and shows her his wife’s decaying corpse through the app he invented on his phone. Karsh has become so accustomed to his new normal, regularly checking on Becca’s decomposing body, that he can no longer comprehend other people’s discomfort around death. His morbid obsession soon takes him to paranoid heights, uncovering a betrayal in his last marriage and so Karsh, with all his tech and intelligence, is right back where Caul started: confirming his paranoias, even at the detriment of himself. Karsh does not end up alone, his money and status prevent that from happening, but even as he finds a new grave partner, this eternally binding contract is ultimately soulless, leaving the viewer hollow.

    Big tech’s encroachment into every corner of our lives has made surveillance so ubiquitous that we take on its invasive roles even when we don’t have to, inevitably leading to breakdowns of trust and intimacy in favour of widespread hypervigilance. These latest additions to surveillance cinema all share a sleek, cold touch in their depictions of surveillance technologies, with observation and objective truth prioritised over the messy, chaotic, nuanced human experience of love. From first crushes to grave encounters, this is how disruptive tech has become in our romantic lives. Our active participation in a culture which values information above all else makes us as detached as the algorithms that categorise us. Perhaps in order to find the love and connection many of us feel is missing from our lives, we need to recognise that all this information won’t bring us any closer. Then, we might even be able to kill the CCTV inside our head.





    Source link

  • Pavements review – a trailblazing docufiction…



    It’s been six years since indie darling Alex Ross Perry whet his band-movie palette with the odious ace Her Smell. Ever since, the writer/​director/​producer has kept almost exclusively to directing music videos. Or so it seemed. As it turns out, Perry has been hard at work on a sprawling, singular band-movie project – a major stylistic departure and a magnum opus to date for the once-post-mumblecore filmmaker – Pavements.

    For those that don’t know going in (like me), Pavement – or The Slacker Rolling Stones of the 90s” as a talking head describes them – are one of the great disrupters of rock music history, which is funny when you look at a picture of them and even funnier when you hear them talk. The scene-shattering, genre-forming band that held indie rock court from 1989 – 1999 (with subsequent reunions in the 21st century) couldn’t seem less revolutionary.

    Get more Little White Lies

    Equal parts Pavement band history, 2022 reunion rehearsal, career museum exhibit, ironic stage musical, 9‑figure biopic and behind-the-scenes mockumentary, Pavements is, above all, a trailblazing docufiction without borders. But what’s real and what isn’t?

    The archival footage and the 2022 reunion tour? Real. The big-budget biopic? Fake. The exhibit? Real – well, sort of. The jukebox musical in New York City? Real-fake (they did rehearse and have two workshops, but it was never going to run like the movie suggests). The mockumentary? Real…in that it is fake. This movie? We’ll see. There’s no guarantee that whatever we watched/​participated in at Venice isn’t simply the next pseudo-piece of the meta-pie. It wouldn’t be the first fake movie première of the project.

    The constant blurring of the lines makes for a fascinating, often hilarious, watch. The idea that something absurd might be real – say, like, an actor developing vocal fry to play frontman Stephen Malkmus in the fake movie only to not be able to shake it and regret taking the role altogether – is comical. But the idea that they wrote this ridiculous thing about themselves (Malkmus is credited for the screenplay alongside Perry) is hysterical, like the numerous direct comparisons to The Beatles, given there is no band less like The Beatles than Pavement.

    This is the latest collaboration between Perry and real-life wizard Robert Greene (Kate Plays Christine, Bisbee 17), who’s made an industry name for himself writing, directing, producing, and editing genre-bending blends of documentary and fiction, making him the perfect editor/​producer to understand, clarify and build upon Perry’s ambitious vision to chronicle the band.

    Joe Keery, Nat Wolff, Fred Hechinger, Tim Heidecker and Jason Schwartzman take roles in the faux-film, with Keery and Schwartzman proving particularly memorable. The former plays himself as a ditsy, overcommitted method actor sinking into the role of Malkmus for the upcoming biopic Range Life. Fake articles trumpet the anticipated grandeur of the Paragon Vantage”-produced project and its enormous budget. Schwartzman, on the other hand, is primarily seen in the Range Life dailies as the band’s scrappy manager, delivering over-heartening one-liners while For Your Consideration watermarks on and off screen over swelling music and his hokiest, most emphatic moments.

    To watch Pavements is to laugh with Pavement (all of whom were roaring during the première), to feel in on the joke, and nearly a part of the band. In that sense, it captures the artistry, ingenuity and humor of its subject better than an encyclopedic history ever could – a music doc for whom success, in the spirit of Pavement, looks very different.





    Source link

  • The Sensual Elegance of I Am Love



    This feature is the fourth in our summer series, La Dolce Vita: A Celebration of Italian Screen Style, in partnership with Disaronno.

    For all of the luxury it displays, the vitality in I Am Love comes from a more egalitarian source. Director Luca Guadagnino sets up a milieu where the ceilings are high and the catering costs are higher, where soup is served from silver tureens and the men are dressed by Fendi. Then, he spins the meaning of these aesthetic choices as the force of desire prompts his leading lady to take flight from it all.

    Get more Little White Lies

    Having developed the film with Guadagnino for 11 years, Tilda Swinton gives herself over to a sexual awakening that leaves her character, Emma, permanently unbuttoned from the costume of a previously well-worn life. Her erotic transformation takes place in a rural setting, amidst rolling hills, miles (literally and spiritually) from the lonely, opulent rooms that she usually occupies as a Recchio woman. 

    Emma is a Russian émigré who long ago sublimated her origins (and name) by marrying into an aristocratic Milanese family. As a wife and mother of three, Emma glides through her social and household responsibilities. She is a warm, self-possessed presence saying little during the dinners that mark one occasion after another. Visually she looks the part (dressed in Jil Sander by costume designer Antonella Cannarozzi) as she silently basks in her chief pleasure: food.

    Yorick Le Saux’s golden-hued cinematography cleaves to the sensual digressions happening in plain sight even if they go unnoticed by a family preoccupied by its matters of the day. At a lunch with her glamorous mother-in-law, Allegra (Marisa Berenson), the conversation turns to whether Emma’s son Edo will marry his girlfriend. Both Emma and the camera are overcome by the indecent pinkness of a plump prawn that has just been delivered to the table. Le Saux’s close-up on Emma as she eats is intimacy incarnate.This dish has been cooked by Antonio (Edoardo Gabbriellini), a friend of Edo’s. The two young men plan to open a restaurant together in San Remo on the Italian Riviera.

    From the moment that Emma sees Antonio – prepping tiny perfect morsels clad in chef’s whites – something within is shocked to life. Swinton performs a woman ground to a halt by a causal everyday encounter. Seconds later, Edo is there, missing the significance, missing the rupture, because his mother is a contained person whose interior revelations do not scan in an environment built for big statements. 

    Emma visits San Remo, full of unformed hopes, and ends up shoplifting a book called Atelier Simultane about another Russian émigré to France, the artist Sonia Delauney. This book, with its colour-splashed cover, is a talisman for all that she is about to experience. Cannarozzi’s costumes veer into a new palette, as oranges and reds clothe Emma’s lower half. Undressing is established as a motif. 

    Firstly, the camera spies on Antonio peeling off jeans in a hidden corner of a garden. Later, he disrobes Emma, tenderly undoing and setting aside jewellery before moving onto items of clothing. She will never dress the same way again and when they make love outside witnessed by flowers and insects, the only costuming is nature’s finery.

    To find out more about Disaronno’s 500-year anniversary* celebrations, visit dis​aron​no​.com

    *1525: The legend of Disaronno begins.





    Source link

  • Superman review – levity and humour win the day

    Superman review – levity and humour win the day



    There are many criticisms that could be rightfully levelled at James Gunn: that his humour is puerile; that his aesthetic is chaotic; and that he was a disaster on Twitter. But watching his new era of Superman come to the screen, it’s clear the man does know how to have fun. 

    Rather than a dour, trauma-based origin story, his Superman kicks off with the Man of Steel (played by David Corenswet) already an established figure, known and loved across the globe as one of many meta-humans” who populate this reality. His alter ego, Clark Kent, is scoring front pages at The Daily Planet, and he’s three months into a steamy romance with Lois Lane (Rachel Brosnahan).

    Get more Little White Lies

    But all is not well in the Kryptonian household, as Superman has just suffered his first defeat, thanks to the Lex Luthor (an almost-impressively awful Nicholas Hoult) led clan. He’s also in geopolitical hot water, having prevented Boravia from invading its neighbouring country, Jarhanpur, despite Boravia technically being a US ally. Corenswet is a more charismatic on-screen presence than predecessors Henry Cavill and Brandon Routh, and as such does better with the quippier dialogue than when being asked to deliver bilge about what it means to be human.

    Because just as this poptastic, colour-saturated, zinger- and needle drop-filled movie seeks to distinguish itself from the sepia-toned sociopathy of Zack Snyder’s reign, this Superman also distinguishes itself by fucking hating America.

    While Lois remarks that Superman sees the best in every person he meets, the film itself is spilling over with misanthropy. Gunn, evidently not having fully worked through his brief social media cancellation and subsequent firing and rehiring by Disney, fills the screen with corrupt politicians and journalists, internet trolls, his fellow superheroes are corporate sell outs and even the comic’s sweet Jimmy Olsen (Skyler Gisondo) is kind of a douche. 

    Aside from Lois and Hawkgirl (Isabela Merced), women are selfie-obsessed bimbos, idly gossiping or cast into hellish incarceration for the sin of being mean about men online. But most uncomfortable of all is the conflict between Boravia and Jarhanpur, where sweet brown children beg Superman to save them as soldiers prepare to gun them down. The official line is that this was all conceived of long ago, but needless to say, given the ongoing genocide in Palestine, it feels in woefully poor taste.

    While looking for nuance in Gunn’s insights into the state of the world at large is like asking a horse for directions, and unsurprisingly the silliest aspects of the film are its best. Robots having existential crises; a mischievous super-powered puppy; Nathan Fillion with a blonde bowl cut; and the film’s MVP, Edi Gathegi, as the perma non-plussed Mr Terrific. 

    A spiralling massacre taking place while Noah and the Whale’s Five Years Time drops feels like a retread to the Rocket Raccoon and Groot fight in Guardians, but to Gunn’s credit, sticking to what he’s good at is far more amusing than the inevitable CGI smash-fest these films are contractually obliged to descend into.

    There’s promise here. A broader cinematic universe that feels cohesive, filled with amusing cameos and, for the first time in years, a DCU that feels like it has a faint pulse are all very welcome. But whenever the film strains to address Big Ideas, it’s painful. Gunn may be keen to move out of Snyder’s shadow and the fascistic embodiment of American exceptionalism behind, but if this is the alternative, it might be time to look for salvation elsewhere.





    Source link

  • My Soapy IP Summer: Beach Read vs Airport Novel…



    This split follows the Academy Awards norm that only the most serious-presenting dramas are worthy of the highest prizes, regardless of source material or presentation. Airport novels seem to more consistently receive this prestige treatment resulting in box office wins, Oscar nominations, and more widespread respect for the work as opposed to their beach read counterparts. We can even make a prediction and check back on it in several years: Taylor Jenkins Reid’s historical romance The Seven Husbands of Evelyn Hugo grew in popularity on BookTok in 2021 and is set to receive an eagerly-awaited Netflix adaptation, announced in March 2022. By all accounts, the book falls firmly into the beach read category, and although it remains to be seen how the transformation from page to screen will take place, if we take the beach read/​airport novel split at face value, it will be hard to expect a full prestige treatment for the film.

    Existing IP seems to be a contributing factor to this false dichotomy, where works that have not been pre-assigned to a particular archetype are granted with more wiggle room. If there ever were to be a prestige beach read” this summer that defies these categories, it would be a hypothetical Materialists book – if it were to have been adapted from a novel in the first place. Here, romantic love triangles meet a star-studded cast, all with an Oscar-nominated writer-director backed by A24. But Celine Song’s story is an original one and not crafted from the dredges of a New York Times bestseller, placing it outside of this distorted Venn diagram. 

    Perhaps the divide is a festering symptom of a larger call to endlessly categorise, label, and over-digest, also built on a trend of using developing extant IP into marketable new works rather than original ideas. The expectation seems to be that, in order to capture the book’s audience, an adaptation must be made to replicate everything that came before, artificially forcing books into two camps and two distinct visual and narrative styles. Netflix executives reportedly asked screenwriters to have this character announce what they’re doing so that viewers who have this program on in the background can follow along”, and other turns to remove nuance and subtext in favour of telling viewers just how to watch their media.

    Branding and advertising for the small screen, in turn, becomes easier when the suggested” section is just a repetition of the same film in different fonts; this is the case for both stereotypical beach reads and airport novels. While beach read adaptations become the sprightly background noise for doing laundry, airport novels are instead metamorphosised into the newest high-brow must-watch, cast in deep hues of moody blue and grey. Take Alfonso Cuarón’s Cate Blanchett-led Disclaimer adaptation, for example, from Renée Knight’s 2015 psychological thriller of the same name, filled with the genre’s finest plot twists. The series even enjoyed a première at the 2024 Toronto International Film Festival before its official Apple TV+ release, cementing it as the series of the season brought directly to you by an auteur himself. And yet, like Conclave, many critics and viewers were sceptical of the prestige exterior it claimed to portray. Maybe pulp really can’t be hidden, after all.

    Justice for beach reads, which, regretfully, do not get to hide behind this façade of faux sparkle, even at the start. They sit out in all their glory, waiting for another unsuspecting performative Tolstoy reader (or maybe Tarkovsky obsessive) to taser them into submission, bound solely for the BookTok girlies and maybe even beset by celebrity scandal. There’s nothing like a good beach read film consumed with a wine spritz in hand, and they’d gleam further if we gave them the time to be taken as seriously as their airport novel counterparts. It’s time for this oeuvre to shine, where we can proudly claim to love the soapy wonders that it has to offer, on the page and in the cinema. 





    Source link

  • Inside The Arzner, the UK’s first dedicated…



    Walk­ing to Bermond­sey from Lon­don Bridge, you pass through a long tun­nel. Am I going the right way?” you might think to your­self, but you forge on, even­tu­al­ly emerg­ing from the dark­ness, out into the open. The same prin­ci­ple can be applied to your des­ti­na­tion at the oth­er end: The Arzn­er. As the UK’s first LGBTQ-focused cin­e­ma, The Arzn­er pro­vides a ded­i­cat­ed space for queer rep­re­sen­ta­tion on screen, a dark screen­ing room in which greater under­stand­ing of your­self and oth­ers can come to light.

    An invit­ing pres­ence in the cen­tre of Bermond­sey Square, The Arzn­er opened its doors in April. Through its floor-to-ceil­ing win­dows, a styl­ish, spa­cious and home­ly bar area can be seen, and it’s evi­dent at first glance that they’re proud to be so vis­i­ble. This build­ing has a long his­to­ry as a cin­e­ma space, and part of the site con­di­tions is that it remains one. I live around the cor­ner, and I used to come here when it was a cin­e­ma before” says co-founder Simon Burke, whose back­ground is in hos­pi­tal­i­ty. Piers Green­lees, the oth­er half of the equa­tion, comes from the film world. On the fes­ti­val cir­cuit over the years, he would see great LGBTQ+ films debut and res­onate with audi­ences, and yet they’d fail to fil­ter down to gen­er­al audi­ences. Queer films will always strug­gle to get onto the big screen, because stu­dios don’t believe that there’ll be an audi­ence for them,” reflects Green­lees. They’ve got to be packed with big names or mas­sive sto­ries – they can’t just be sim­ple, relat­able sto­ries that a lot of audi­ences can con­nect to”.

    Get more Lit­tle White Lies

    The pair’s first ven­ture – near­by queer-focused pub and events space The Ris­ing – opened last year to warm recep­tion. When the oppor­tu­ni­ty to do some­thing with the Bermond­sey Square cin­e­ma site came up, it was a no-brain­er. Film is a tough busi­ness, but the added focus on this being a cock­tail bar makes it a more com­mer­cial­ly viable space, which I think is what the pre­vi­ous man­age­ment strug­gled with.” says Burke. Along­side the expect­ed sta­ples, The Arzn­er serves up a for­mi­da­ble selec­tion of charm­ing­ly-themed cock­tails, each named after impor­tant fig­ures in LGBTQ+ cin­e­ma his­to­ry, rang­ing from Mar­lene Diet­rich to Wong Kar-wai.

    The Arzn­er – both the house cock­tail and the venue – are named after Dorothy Arzn­er, a sem­i­nal fig­ure who from 1927 to 1943 was the only female direc­tor in Hol­ly­wood. The deci­sion to chris­ten the venue after her came after a lot of thought and con­sid­er­a­tion. It was impor­tant for us to have a les­bian voice,” says Burke. No queer cin­e­ma is wide­ly dis­trib­uted enough, but les­bian films haven’t been as cel­e­brat­ed as those focus­ing on the gay male expe­ri­ence. Dorothy Arzn­er was pub­licly out for her entire career, and that was impor­tant to me, along with how much of an impact she had”.

    Green­lees and Burke haven’t come across a sim­i­lar­ly LGBTQ-ded­i­cat­ed cin­e­ma venue any­where in the UK, or even in the US, and no one that they’ve spo­ken to knows of an equiv­a­lent space either. In the same way as you have a ded­i­cat­ed French cin­e­ma in Lon­don in the Insti­tut Français, you have us for queer cin­e­ma” says Greenlees. 

    Col­lab­o­ra­tion and con­ver­sa­tion are at the core of what the Arzn­er team is build­ing, hav­ing already fos­tered strong rela­tion­ships with dis­trib­u­tors that focus on queer titles such as Pec­ca­dil­lo, Out­play, and TLA – and they’ve begun dia­logues with London’s coterie of queer cin­e­ma spe­cial­ists about future pos­si­bil­i­ties. The key to The Arzner’s dream, and the like­li­hood of their suc­cess, is that they don’t want to sup­plant what’s already been built in the cap­i­tal by film clubs such as Pink Palace, Bar Trash, and Funer­al Parade, but instead to pro­vide a home for queer cin­e­ma that exists year-round.





    Source link

  • In the mood for In The Mood For Love



    In hind­sight, it is not sur­pris­ing that the film’s nos­tal­gic ren­di­tion of 1962 Hong Kong left such an indeli­ble influ­ence on an entire gen­er­a­tion of cineast­es. In the 2000s, Wong’s for­mal and nar­ra­tive restraint set him apart from the increas­ing­ly grandiose cin­e­mat­ic ambi­tions of both Chi­nese and Hol­ly­wood stu­dios. Dur­ing this peri­od, his peers like Ang Lee and Zhang Yimou chore­o­graphed com­plex fight scenes on pic­turesque vis­tas, inter­spersed with charged moments of intense melo­dra­ma. Wong resist­ed any temp­ta­tions towards man­u­fac­tur­ing max­i­mal­ist spec­ta­cles. Even com­pared to oth­er works in his oeu­vre, In the Mood for Love is notice­ably lack­ing in kinet­ic fren­zies of vio­lence or bursts of pas­sion­ate inti­ma­cy. Instead, the film con­sists of long takes where char­ac­ters, no more than one or two at a time, appear in the shot: writ­ing, eat­ing or sit­ting in plumes of cig­a­rette smoke. In close-ups, yearn­ing stares and brief moments of phys­i­cal con­tact are in full focus. In the wide shot, lone­some fig­ures walk away into the distance. 

    Of course, the film’s last­ing lega­cy is more than just a mood board ref­er­ence. At the turn-of-the-cen­tu­ry, Wong’s mag­num opus exists in con­tra­dic­tion to the promis­es of a new age. As the inter­net instan­ta­neous­ly con­nect­ed bil­lions of users around the globe, In the Mood for Love real­ized an inter­per­son­al con­nec­tion that tran­scend­ed the frame­work of forums, chat rooms or video calls. For 25 years, gen­er­a­tions of view­ers raised in cyber­space con­tin­ue to res­onate with a decep­tive­ly sim­ple nar­ra­tive of a love affair that nev­er comes to fruition. In the wake of unfet­tered eco­nom­ic glob­al­iza­tion and the explo­sion of WiFi access around the world, Wong swam against the tides of dig­i­tal excess. Except for a few phone calls and a telegram, signs of mod­ern tech­nol­o­gy are absent from the film. By plac­ing us in the past, divorced from our con­nec­tions to the dis­trac­tions of the present moment, Wong mines for the raw essence of a feeling. 

    The pro­tag­o­nists nev­er get to unleash their desires on screen. In the hands of anoth­er film­mak­er, Leung and Che­ung would’ve like­ly been direct­ed to throw them­selves into each other’s arms, undress­ing in a steamy cli­max to relieve the 90 min­utes of sim­mer­ing sex­u­al ten­sion. Against all con­ven­tions and instincts, Wong instead pulls his two star-crossed lovers apart. There is no scan­dalous affair, just a fleet­ing slip into a fan­ta­sy that nev­er tru­ly plays out. With the film’s con­clu­sion in mind, all the instances of con­trolled affec­tion, the silent stares, the late-night writ­ing ses­sions and the tame re-enact­ments of adul­tery feel even more erot­ic. The cou­ple don’t end up rid­ing off into the sun­set togeth­er, but the time they shared as neigh­bors has left a seis­mic impact on their lives. Like ide­al­ized mem­o­ries that stray fur­ther from the truth each pass­ing day, each of Wong’s images rev­el in the sat­u­rat­ed shad­ows of a nos­tal­gic mirage. 

    In the Mood for Love clear­ly bears an impor­tant per­son­al mean­ing for its direc­tor. What was prob­a­bly intend­ed as a love let­ter to a bygone era of Hong Kong’s his­to­ry, a con­struc­tion of child­hood scenes where gos­sip­ing fam­i­ly mem­bers played Mahjong all night long, has now mutat­ed into a mourn­ful trea­tise to lux­u­ri­ate in fad­ing pasts. Whether it is a per­son, a place, or a mem­o­ry, every frame of Wong’s mas­ter­work allows view­ers to get lost in their own sink­hole of long­ing. Recent box office and crit­i­cal hits like the Daniels’ Every­thing Every­where All at Once or Celine Song’s Past Lives are evi­dence that Wong’s impulse for nos­tal­gia remains as wide­spread as ever. Though the for­mer is far more direct in its homage to Wong’s film, both grap­ple with visions of what could’ve been. A vivid recall of fond mem­o­ries and the inven­tion of alter­na­tive futures might be our best recourse in deal­ing with an over­stim­u­lat­ing, and over­bear­ing present. 

    In The Mood For Love + In the Mood for Love 2001 will screen at venues across New York and Lon­don this summer.





    Source link

  • Jurassic World: Rebirth review – struggles to…



    Rather than a tri­umphant replay of the old hits, Juras­sic World: Rebirth is a bit more like Mal­ibu Sta­cy with a new hat. It’s a repack­aged prod­uct with a cou­ple of super­fi­cial bells and whis­tles that its mak­ers believe audi­ences will want to see pure­ly to remain in the loop with all the dino-based shenanigans. 

    Its numer­ous flagged/un­der­scored/ex­cla­ma­tion-point­ed call-backs to the 90s orig­i­nals work dou­ble duty as balmy-eyed nos­tal­gia and a trag­ic reminder that this is a fran­chise that hasn’t been able to whisk up an orig­i­nal thought since the cred­its rolled on the Steven Spielberg’s OG mega hit over three decades ago. And you know things are bad when you’re watch­ing a sum­mer block­buster that’s part of the vaunt­ed Juras­sic Park IP and think­ing, Ho hum… I won­der what’s going on over at Skull Island right now…”.

    Get more Lit­tle White Lies

    Vet­er­an screen­writer David Koepp, who penned the first sequel, Juras­sic Park: The Lost World, in 1997, returns to the DNA-splic­ing fray, and this new film feels every bit the reject­ed pro­pos­al from those sal­ad days, a script whose dog-eared pages have been sal­vaged from the fil­ing cabinet/​waste bin of his old office. Often brac­ing­ly gener­ic in its char­ac­ter­i­sa­tions, its deploy­ment of expo­si­tion and the occa­sion­al slow beat where some­one will idly rem­i­nisce about the past, it’s baf­fling that some­one who has worked on all vari­eties of film and at every lev­el in the indus­try could deliv­er some­thing so utter­ly devoid of inter­est or originality.

    Aside from its shod­dy con­ceit, it’s a script that does the dirty on its cast, in par­tic­u­lar Maher­sha­la Ali as the mer­ce­nary-for-hire Dun­can who is giv­en the remit to be reck­less­ly impul­sive when it’s revealed that he’s suf­fer­ing from deep fam­i­ly-based trau­ma. Scar­lett Johans­son, mean­while, has a nice line in cocky smirk­ing as covert opps mae­stro Zora. She’s giv­en the absolute non-dillem­ma of whether she’ll toe the cor­po­rate line as strict­ly set out by linen-suit­ed weasel Krebs (Rupert Friend*), or score the win­ning goal for glob­al moral­i­ty and heed the wis­dom of dash­ing palaeon­tol­o­gist Dr Loomis (Jonathan Bailey).

    The plan here is that Krebs has offered Zora sil­ly mon­ey to cap­ture blood and tis­sue sam­ples from three live dinosaurs employ­ing tech­nol­o­gy cre­at­ed by Loomis. The snag is that their tar­gets – rep­re­sent­ing land, sea and air – all now thrive in a trop­i­cal micro­cli­mate along the equa­tor that also hap­pens to be the island that was used as a test­ing ground for dinosaur cross-breed­ing. We all know it’s not going to be the quick pop in, pop out” escapade that they all think it will be, and our gang also have to deal with the might­i­ly naffed off D‑Rex”, which is exact­ly like if a T‑Rex had been smashed in the face with the world’s largest fry­ing pan.

    The film strug­gles to find a jus­ti­fi­ca­tion for its exis­tence, and we’re told that the world has grown weary of the spec­ta­cle of dinosaurs. Which in itself is a com­plete­ly cyn­i­cal assump­tion in line with say­ing, say, that human­i­ty will one day grow tired and yearn for the extinc­tion of pan­thers. Krebs and his deep-pock­et­ed pay­mas­ters believe that this flash­point of col­lec­tive apa­thy is the time to make their play and do a lit­tle bit of under-the-radar dinosaur vivi­sec­tion in order to pro­duce a cure for heart dis­ease, which they can charge a small for­tune for once they have the patent. 

    The human inter­est” ele­ment to the sto­ry is bolt­ed on in the form of super­dad Reuben (Manuel Gar­cia-Rul­fo) and his two daugh­ters (Aud­ri­na Miran­da as pre-teen Isabel­la and Luna Blaise as late-teen Tere­sa) and Teresa’s charm­ing slack­er boyfriend Xavier (David Iacono) as they heed­less­ly attempt to sail through dino infest­ed waters in the name of fam­i­ly adven­ture. And this is two min­utes after being told repeat­ed­ly that this area is a human no-go zone as death will like­ly be immi­nent. So sym­pa­thy lev­els are a tad hard to come by, even if the lev­el of per­for­mance and char­ac­ter depth is a lit­tle bit higher/​deeper on this side of the play­ing field.

    What saves the film from the sum­mer dol­drums is the typ­i­cal­ly stel­lar work by direc­tor Gareth Edwards, who, despite the qual­i­ty of the mate­ri­als he’s been giv­en to work with, proves once more that he’s one of the most inter­est­ing and orig­i­nal artists in Hol­ly­wood when it comes to cre­at­ing CG set pieces. There’s one sequence at the film’s mid-point that push­es the tech­nol­o­gy to sat­is­fy­ing extremes by hav­ing dig­i­tal dinosaurs inter­sect­ing with human char­ac­ters while being flung down some riv­er rapids.

    Edwards’s involve­ment was the one thing keep­ing the can­dle aflame in terms of our hopes that this mori­bund, nev­er-end­ing fran­chise might have turned a cor­ner. Yet even work­ing at full pelt, there’s just too much that’s wrong and sil­ly and deriv­a­tive about this tired, tired run-out. The actors are com­pe­tent; there are a few tasty zingers; the effects are seam­less. But the whole enter­prise just feels like the same thing we’ve seen over and over again, and that the addi­tion of a new hat” has been deemed more of an irri­tant than a gift to cre­ate some­thing fresh.

    *I’d like to make read­ers aware of a per­ti­nent com­ment that was made on the LWLies pri­vate group chat by my esteemed col­league Han­nah Strong, who not­ed that, He was v much Rupert Foe in JW”. It felt right to include the obser­va­tion in this, our offi­cial review of the film. Thanks.





    Source link