Film Review: Beasts of No Nation

Our guest blogger is hobbyist film and TV series reviewer and writer Harry Casey-Woodward. On th-ink.co.uk Harry will be writing a series of posts in which he will be sharing  his opinions on things he has watched. 

Beasts of No Nation, 2015, cert 15, dir Cary Joji Fukunaga, 4/5

nonation1

You could say this is an important film not just for its content but also because it’s the first feature-length movie produced by Netflix. I have mixed feelings for Netflix. It’s fun to use but I find its content rather geared to American mainstream movies. You still have to seek out international and cult/arty films on DVD. Not that I mind, because I prefer owning physical copies of films and music rather than having exhausting amounts of movies and songs online that don’t belong to me even if I pay a subscription fee.

I also disagree with the way Netflix have released their first movie. They pushed for cinematic release but a few cinema chains refused to show the film as Netflix released it on their channel at the same time. As representatives of these cinemas argued, why would people pay for cinema tickets when they could watch the movie at home?  Their fears appear justified, for although the movie has over three million views online it only made $50,000 back from the $12 million Netflix doled out to distribute it in cinemas.

These cinemas have furthered accused Netflix of pushing for cinematic release just so they can qualify for an Academy award. If this is so, it feels slightly cynical to use a film about child soldiers just to get an award.

nonation

Not that it doesn’t deserve one. Cinematic politics aside, this is an almighty film. Based on a 2005 novel by Nigerian-American Uzodinma Iweala, the story is set in an unnamed African country (possibly Nigeria) and revolves around a boy named Agu played by first-time Ghanaian actor Abraham Attah. He lives the typical life of a fun-loving cheeky kid, safe within the buffer zone of a war-torn country with his friends and family. That is, until government troops storm Agu’s village, declare the men rebel spies and execute them, including Agu’s father and brother.

Agu escapes into the bush where he is captured by the real rebel army, mostly comprised of boys his age. He is trained by the formidable Commandant (played by British star Idris Elba) to be a guerrilla fighter and is thrust into a nightmarish world of bullets, blood and black magic.

For a young actor in his first role, Abraham Attah is magnificent. He doesn’t use a great deal of dialogue or expression and even his poetic interior monologue is used sparsely (as monologues should be). Nevertheless, he convincingly portrays the fear and trauma his character suffers, and the emotional damage and ageing war inflicts on him. Everything he says and does feels real, raw and pure: an incredibly mature performance from someone so young.

nontaion2

All the acting in the film is good, so much so it’s more like watching a documentary than a work of fiction. But the show is almost stolen by Idris Elba, whose portrayal of a guerrilla warlord is electrifying. His very presence and energy commands the screen along with his troops, especially during the scenes when he’s giving dramatic speeches to whip his boys up for battle. It’s great to see an actor we’re used to seeing play heroic characters like DCI John Luther effectively portray a devious and conflicted character like the Commandant. He proclaims to be a new father figure for the lost boys he recruits and that he’s given them fresh purpose in life, yet he’s willing to let them kill or be killed for his own ideals while never actually committing any violence himself. Rather, he’s more effective at inciting others to violence, which is what makes him so menacing. Yet he appears to genuinely care for Agu and this little bit of humanity is enough to make the audience feel some sympathy and respect for such a disturbing character, a great achievement on the film’s part.

The style of the film itself is an unflinching tour de force. The audience is thrust headlong into gritty realism, savage tension and heartbreaking tragedy. Rather than being steeped in politics, the film is more intent on portraying the psychological and emotional impact of war on its human characters. If there are any issues with the film, it’s that sometimes its portrayal of such psychological trauma is rather simplistic and idealistic, i.e. a child soldier can only recover from his experiences if he lets himself become a child again. You could also argue this is clearly another ‘issues’ drama, where the film is spending all its effort to show you how bad something is, along with the overriding strength of the human spirit etc etc. However, the film’s message is very clear and very relevant. Even if I judge Netflix, I praise them on getting behind such a masterpiece.

nnnn

Film Review: A Girl Walks Home Alone At Night

Our guest blogger is hobbyist film and TV series reviewer and writer Harry Casey-Woodward

A Girl walks home alone at night, 2015, 18, dir Ana Lily Amirpour, 3/5

walks

I’m not a big fan of vampires movies, unless they’re done well. I dislike the way certain films and TV shows (cough cough Twilight cough) have portrayed vampires as surly, sparkling love interests. I’m more a fan of the old fashioned kill-them-first-shag-them-later variety. I also dislike the fact that vampires have been done to death. But I guess vampire films are like any other genre. Out of the majority of over-clichéd, over-sexed muck rises a few gems that dare to do things differently and show everybody else how it’s supposed to be done.

There was Swedish vampire film Let the Right One In  in 2008. I liked its original premise of a young girl vampire making friends with a human boy. However I don’t know if it was the film’s sparse, sombre tone or there was something wrong with me when I tried to watch it but I just found it a bit dull. This was certainly not the case with the subject of this review.

sss

This year’s vampire flick (now on DVD and blu-ray) is the most striking and unusual of its kind I’ve ever seen. For one thing, it’s set in Iran with dialogue faithfully in Farsi while remaining an American production. Elijah Wood is one of the executive producers and he features in the special feature interviews.

Watch these interviews and you will understand exactly how an Iranian vampire film came together. The director Ana Lily Amirpour has an Iranian background and comes across as a female version of Quentin Tarantino. She swears a lot and chatters enthusiastically about her favourite things, which include spaghetti westerns, pop music and vampires. She set out to write a screenplay that brought all these elements together. She had already shot a couple of shorts set in Iran and when she tried on a chador veil one of the extras was wearing, she knew her vampire had to be Iranian. Of course.

But she’s not just planted a vampire in Iran. She’s planted a vampire in a fictional desert town named Bad City , home to various social misfits including a prostitute, a pimp, a transvestite, an urchin, some spoilt kids, a junky and his son Arash (Arash Marandi) who dresses like James Dean and drives a hot vintage car. Even when his beloved ride gets taken as payment for his father’s drugs and he breaks his hand punching a wall in anger, he still looks cool with a cast and a bicycle.

walkkksss

While he’s trying to look after his father and cat, make money and keep on looking cool, the vampire simply named the Girl is prowling the streets at night, looking suitably menacing yet somehow cute in a black flowing chador as she preys on scummy men, terrorises children and steals their skateboards.

The actress Sheila Vand gives an astonishing performance. She never smiles and her lines are rare too, but she communicates so much menace and loneliness through her expressions you don’t know whether to be scared or feel sorry for her.

The sparse dialogue in this film is a merit. It’s clear that Amirpour has learnt a lot from her favourite Sergio Leone. Her movie runs on the less-is-more principle, relying on the actor’s expressions and actions to tell the story rather than dialogue. She also makes heavy use of atmosphere and suspense rather than gore in the horror scenes, which is refreshing regarding most blood-spattered horrors today. In fact for a vampire movie there is very little blood, except for one nasty scene and even then the film is in black and white.

It’s clear from the start that this is not a straightforward horror. Amirpour is more concerned with giving her audience a visual feast. She is also a big fan of David Lynch. With the film being black and white and featuring various long shots of industrial scenery, as well as being an urban nightmare populated by sad freaks, I couldn’t help being reminded of such Lynch films as Eraserhead and Blue Velvet.

walkkkkk

However, while the film is a banquet for the eyes and ears (the soundtrack consists of Iranian and Western pop mixed with spaghetti western-style music), perhaps the film is too concentrated on style and trying to be hip. For example, amidst all the culture references the plot boils down to a love story between Arash and the vampire. It’s the film’s presentation of romance which gets on my nerves. These two very good looking people meet, are instantly attracted to each other and their lovelorn talk consists mostly of comparing life to music: ‘don’t you wish you could live in a song?’ etc. I’m sorry but this fantasy does not match my past awkward, bumbling attempts at dating and thus I believe it encourages unrealistic romantic expectations. Then again the film is just that, a fantasy.

Nevertheless as cool and fun and imaginative the film is, I couldn’t help feeling a little underwhelmed at the end. The film bends over backwards to satisfy you superficially with stunning visuals. When it comes to the plot however, I feel the film could have gone for more emotional impact with the dramatic events it depicted. It’s cool that the film opted for a less-is-more approach concerning the dialogue and emotion depicted, but there’s never any real conflict between the characters. So as dark as the film gets, it doesn’t really pack a punch. Still, it’s worth seeing for the cat Masuka’s performance alone.

This is still the coolest and most genre-busting vampire movie you will ever see and I applaud Amirpour’s unique vision and cinematic enthusiasm. I’m looking forward to her next movie The Bad Batch, a love story set in a cannibal colony in a Texas wasteland. I hope she does a western.

Images from IMDB

Film Review: Fear and Desire

Our guest blogger is hobbyist film and TV series reviewer and writer Harry Casey-Woodward
Fear and Desire, 1953, dir Stanley Kubrick, cert 12, 3/5

Stanley Kubrick is one of my favourite directors, so I was rather excited when back in 2013 Eureka released his debut as part of their Masters of Cinema series on DVD. They even added, as special extras, three short documentaries Kubrick did, two of which are his earliest examples of film making. So you’ve got a nice little package of Kubrick gold if you’re a fan; the beginnings of a career that would span nearly fifty years. To be honest, we’re lucky to be able to watch Fear and Desire on DVD at all. Kubrick detested it so much he removed it from circulation in the 60s when he became more recognised, with only one print surviving in New York.

Fear

Fear and Desire

You can kind of see why. Kubrick referred to his first film as a ‘bumbling, amateur film exercise’ and to be honest that’s the impression I got before I even read that quote. The plot is a bit loose for a start. The film is set during an unknown war in an unknown country and focuses on four soldiers who are stranded behind enemy lines when their plane crashes. Their plan is to get to the river so they can raft it past the enemy and back to base. It sounds quite a straightforward plot, but Kubrick uses all his art cinema influences to give us a strange and striking one hour viewing experience.

As expected from Kubrick, the film is beautifully shot. It was filmed in a national park in California and Kubrick fully exploits the picturesque woodland and river scenery, even if it conflicts with his grim plot. Even though the film is black and white, it also boasts some impressive lighting, most of it natural. There is one scene in particular where the soldiers attack two sentries at their post at night. We get shots of half-lit angry men’s faces as they beat their foes to a pulp rapidly cut with close-ups of the enemies’ hands squeezing fragments of the bread and stew they were eating for supper. The result is an intense but bizarre and unrealistic fight scene which sums up the creative but naive ambition Kubrick applied for his first movie.

fearrr

Fear and Desire

So while we can agree that Fear and Desire is not as stylistically or literally coherent as Kubrick’s later masterpieces, it still packs a lot into such a short running time. On one hand it’s got a typical war action storyline of GIs busting through enemy lines and attacking an enemy base which they discover nearby. On the other, there are elements that foreshadow the styles of modern anti-war classics like Apocalypse Now and even Kubrick’s later films like Full Metal Jacket by several decades. For one thing, Kubrick used stylish film techniques like poetic interior monologues to death, which the 1998 equally dreamy war epic The Thin Red Line also did with its parade of military characters.

There is also an episode in Fear and Desire where the four soldiers capture a native girl, which is also the plot for the 1989 Vietnam war film Casualties of War, in which five American soldiers kidnap and rape a Vietnamese girl. While the men of Fear and Desire don’t go that far, they express their desire for their captive. One who actually goes mad through some extreme form of PTSD (in a typically Kubrickian over-the-top performance foreshadowing Jack Nicholson in The Shining) kisses and presses his body on her when she’s tied to a tree. This scene was used to sell the movie as a sexploitation, which were all the rage in underground 1950s cinema. Randy audiences must have been quite disappointed when subjected to Kubrick’s dream-like war allegory.

The attitude towards war exhibited in Fear and Desire (which is carried on in other Kubrick films) is strikingly modern and pessimistic regarding 1950s American cinema. All the four soldiers want to do is survive and when they do take some military action in attacking the enemy base, the results are bittersweet. All four men are damaged in some way by their experiences. Though the film is short and a little disorganised, it has a surprisingly deep and haunting message about war’s senseless brutality.

But does the film stand up on its own apart from being Stanley Kubrick’s first film? Almost. It’s certainly not as good or cohesive as Kubrick’s later works and there are much stronger and more noteworthy films that came out at the time. The other short films on the DVD are a little interesting and a little dull. It’s best to view all the films on the disc as a worthy director stretching his wings, and Fear and Desire as an experimental indulgence in metaphors and literary references. However there was enough plot, good acting and filmmaking to keep me gripped. It’s a strange but beautiful gem, a little rough on the edges but with enough of an intoxicating gleam to draw me back into this absurd dream on war. It’s also noteworthy for being the first wholly independent US movie, for it was financed by donations from Kubrick’s family and friends. I’m just glad that they had faith in him and this restoration finally got release in the UK. Plus it’s short so if you hate it you don’t have to hate it for long.

[Quotes and background information from ‘No other country but the mind’ by James Naremore, an essay included with the DVD.]

Five Best Tattooed Film Characters

Our guest blogger is hobbyist film and TV series reviewer and writer Harry Casey-Woodward

5 best film characters with tattoos

5) Name: Jack Sparrow (sorry, Captain Jack Sparrow)
Played by: Johnny Depp
In: Pirates of the Caribbean: The Curse of the Black Pearl, 2003
Tattoo: A sparrow on his wrist

Piratebrand
If you’re on the run (or sail rather) from the Royal Navy or the terrible clutches of the East India trading company, surely you wouldn’t get a certain avian tattoo on your forearm that would give a clue to your name?

4) Name: Leonard
Played by: Guy Pearce
In: Memento, 2000
Tattoo: Daily reminders all over his body

momento
Here’s proof to your disapproving elders that tattoos can be useful. In a more interesting movie by Christopher Nolan than his Dark Knight films, Guy Pearce plays a chap searching for his wife’s murderer while suffering from short term memory loss. To combat this, he  tattoos of all the things he needs to remember like clues, who he can trust and I guess daily reminders onto his body. However useful and painful the process, it’s best to keep those shopping lists short. I guess it’s quite impractical stripping off in a supermarket just to check you’ve got everything.

3) Name: Lisbeth Salander
Played by: Noomi Rapace
In: Män som hatar kvinnor or The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo, 2009
Tattoo: A dragon on her back, in case you were wondering.

dragon
Lisbeth’s huge tattoo on her delicate frame is a sign of the power and strength she felt she lacked as grew up watching her father beat her mother. She is a world class hacker and all round computer goddess, but she is a troubled heroine. She is ruled legally incompetent as a child and lives under the care of a legal guardian, initially the kind hearted Holger Palmgren. When Holger suffers a stroke, he is replaced by Nils Bjurman (Peter Andersson). Nils is a heinous man to say the least. He abuses his position to extort sexual favours from Lisbeth and eventually rapes her. She catches the entire incident on film and threatens to ruin him unless he gives her full control of her life – and uses a tattoo gun to write across his belly “Jag är ett sadistiskt svin och en våldtäktsman” – I am a sadistic pig and a rapist. Lisbeth has everything her tattoo embodies – triumph over adversity and strength from pain.

2) Name: Francis Dolarhyde aka the Tooth Fairy
Played by: Ralph Fiennes
In: Red Dragon, 2002
Tattoo: Also a dragon on his back.

Red Dragon
Probably one of the greatest tattoo identity crises. In this prequel to Silence of the Lambs, Ralph Fiennes (who has an arsenal of terrifying performances including a Nazi, a gangster and a psychotic megalomaniac wizard) portrays a serial killer who has a William Blake  Biblical dragon painting tattooed all over his back. This is not just because he likes it but because he wants to become it. In his most deluded scene, he displays his mighty sexy dragon body before a captured Philip Seymour Hoffman, who is clearly terrified at the amount of days, agony and expenditure that went into that ink.

1) Name: Harry Powell
Played by: Robert Mitchum
In: The Night of the Hunter, 1955
Tattoo: The words ‘love’ and ‘hate’ tattooed on his knuckles.

Hate
For marrying a widow to get her ex-husband’s money, killing her then stalking her runaway children across the country, this devilish preacher surely wins for being the creepiest inked character in this classic film noir. His most sinister feature besides his eerie singing are the striking tattoos on his hands. One hand bears the word ‘love’, the other ‘hate’. He uses these to physically represent the struggle between the two emotions in a one-man arm wrestle. What they may actually signify is the duality of his personality, a criminal masquerading as a Christian, and perhaps in conservative 1950s America a man with tattoos was surely disreputable? Whatever the meaning behind the tattoos (if there is any, for they might be his tenth and meaning stopped mattering a while ago) and even though they are basic compared to the other tattoos in this list, they are instantly iconic and a bizarre and original character trait for 1950s cinema.

All images from IMDB

Film Review: Berberian Sound Studio

Our guest blogger is hobbyist film and TV series reviewer and writer Harry Casey-Woodward. In this post he reviews Berberian Sound Studio directed by Peter Strickland released in 2012…

Sometimes, you’re sure that you’ve seen a good film, and the critics say it’s good.  You just can’t see why.

Toby Jones plays a British film sound technician named Gilderoy, who arrives in an Italian sound studio in 1976, where they’re recording the soundtrack for a horror. Tensions among the crew rise, and Gilderoy becomes increasingly alienated and disturbed, though he doesn’t show it, since Jones gives a great reserved performance, communicating isolation with as little emotion possible.

This film works best as a tribute to 70s Italian horror and as an exploration of the art of film sound effects. Watching the sounds of mutilation being provided by hacking up vegetables, and demonic screaming being produced by weirdly talented vocalists are the movie’s most fascinating elements. Technically, the film is impressive, with great lighting, sound, and shots, all creating suspenseful atmosphere.

Unfortunately, the film only offers suspense, which never builds up to much. It felt like an experimental indulgence in technology that shunned sense, confusing and excluding the average filmgoer. Some scenes questioned film violence and expectations of the horror genre. Overall, however, it tried to say something without saying it, which annoyed me.

Though original and inventive, it felt atmospheric and menacing just for the sake of it. As much as I applaud cinematic strangeness, a film is only threatening if it shows what it’s threatening you with. The fact that the film tried to say lots through the exclusive setting of a sound studio just felt (though I hate using this word) pretentious.

Image From Worn by Heroes and ICA