Archives for film review

Quik Flix Hit

Tribeca Film Festival

Son of Sofia (2017)

Unrated

Steficon SA

The little Russian boy is grief-stricken, seemingly abandoned, deceived and brought to a country whose language and people he doesn’t understand. It’s not surprising that he gradually retreats into fantasy, which is at first cute, then grows disturbing and possibly dangerous.

Writer-director Elina Psykou (The Eternal Return of Antonis Paraskevas, 2013) sets her sophomore film during the 2004 Olympic Games in Greece, a time of clashing cultures, and of civic pride and competition.

Misha (Viktor Khomut) arrives with the Russia Olympic team to Athens and reunites with his mother Sofia (Valery Tcheplanowa), who has been settled in Greece for more than two years. Details of their separation are vague, but involve the death of Misha’s father and his mother establishing residency to provide for herself and her son. It’s an awkward reunion. Sofia seems to be trying to muster up joy with forced affection and a ridiculously large stuffed animal in tow. Misha immediately regards her tightly rolled-up hairstyle as foreign. He tells her his mother wears her long, beautiful hair down.

READ MY INTERVIEW WITH DIRECTOR ELINA PSYKOU

Things get more awkward as 11-year-old Misha learns he shares his new home with an elderly Greek man, Mr. Nikos (Thanasis Papageorgiou), who Misha is lead to believe is in the care of his mother. Mr. Nikos doesn’t speak Russian and doesn’t want it spoken in the home. Quickly, of course, Sofia’s deception is foiled. Misha discovers her sleeping in the same bed as Mr. Nikos. By the time Sofia belatedly confesses to being married to the man, an irate Misha has sealed himself in the bathroom. To be sure, Sofia has also kept Mr. Nikos in the dark, leading her husband to believe Misha was informed of gaining a stepfather.

The entire film seems populated by characters trapped within themselves, despite being surrounded by colorful culture and an influx of immigrants and opportunities. It’s a sad, quiet tale of people unable to make connections beneath the surface, which inevitably reinforces fantasy and delusions. Misha, often cloaked in a bear costume, finds strength and aggression in his imaginary world filled with moving, growling stuffed animals; the self-important Mr. Nikos longs again for the magical era when he possessed fame; Sofia seems adrift in the space between a past happy life in Russia and this makeshift family in Greece. A quiet scene of the family eating together while watching television hints at a domesticity that will never be.

Psykou’s film is filled with characters you don’t know whether to like or dislike. Sofia seems disconnected as a mother, sneaky and deceptive in ways that seem unnecessary. She leaves Mr. Nikos to do much of the caretaking while she’s away working at a textile company, making stuffed animals. In addition to deceiving her son about being married, she also lies about watching a beloved TV series Misha intended to watch with her, and for good measure keeps a secret stash of candy hidden in the toilet tank. She seems unhappy at her job and in her roles as a parent and a wife.

Mr. Nikos, a former host of a once-popular children’s television show, initially seems controlling and lost in his arrogance. Portraits of himself adorn the walls of his home. His insistence on having only Greek spoken in a household where two-thirds of the occupants are Russian seems selfish, and yet understandable. While he is a man of pride, he also wants to leave a legacy. Late in the film, when he shares his secret room of memorabilia with Misha, Mr. Nikos comes alive and Psykou effectively captures the feel of a bygone time and place. Mr. Nikos becomes as much of a dreamer as Misha.

But the film exists in reality even when the characters don’t. Misha meets Victor, a sixteen-year-old emigre from Russia who immediately takes to the boy. At first Victor seems to be a welcomed friend for a boy whose mother is disengaged and whose stepfather is completely out of step with Misha. Victor takes the boy shopping, to the park and surrounds him with other youths. Unfortunately, Victor also shoplifts, offers lousy advice and engages in a highly disturbingly activity. Psykou presents Victor so matter-of-factly it shocks us when we get the full measure of the character.

Finally, there’s Misha. Wonderful portrayed by Khomut. We feel trapped with the boy thrown into a life he can’t bear, unable to find any external means—language, environment, friendship—to express himself so he turns inward. His actions late in the film, after Mr. Nikos suffers a setback, unnerves as we wonder if fantasy will save or corrupt the boy.

The film will challenge American audiences needing things tied up in a bow and directly spelled out. It’s a delicate balance that Psykou achieves: characters that intrigue us but we can’t say we like them, somber and raw scenes colliding with fantasy, an enticing mixture of Russia and Greek cultures. Her film is a sonic wonder, with animal sounds creeping onto the soundtrack in unexpected, subtle ways. Ands it often seems to be lit naturally, shot simply, harkening back to the Dogme 95 movement. Its deliberate pacing keeps us on edge, waiting for a shoe to drop, seemingly influenced by director Michael Haneke. Its denouement, a fusion of fairytale triumph and Olympic fanfare, is all her own.

The film debuts today at the Tribeca Film Festival.

 

 

| Marvin Brown’s Movie Review Archive

Quik Flix Hit

Video review

Indigo Children (2012)

Unrated

indigochildren

In an unremarkable small town that could be any unremarkable small town, a quiet boy is spied upon by a quiet girl. She’s drawn to him because, like her, he’s an Indigo child. This means, according to her, that they are special, different, better, though to the viewer they seem as ordinary and stoic as their town.

toonMarvinBlogWriter-director Eric Chaney’s debut film bows this month in digital format. Deliberately paced, Indigo Children strives to echo the rhythms of small-town pathos. Shots are held, given time to be seen and absorbed.

I say the town’s unremarkable, but the cinematography’s not. Fantastic aerial shots of lush-green fields, mighty trees and ancient railroad tracks are contrasted with a model-train diorama. Homes decayed and moss-covered are contrasted with upscale homes, and a big city on the horizon.

Story proper—young lovers Mark and Christina (Robert Olsen and Isabelle McNally) attempting to connect with themselves and each other—flows through laconic voiceovers, videotape confessions and clipped dialogue. The dialogue, at times, seems intentionally vague.

After the death of his absent father, Mark’s family is reduced to himself and his shattered mother; they move around each other like ghosts. Christina, with her wide eyes, cutoff shorts and forced confidence, launches a relationship with Mark. It’s as if inert Mark’s a potted plant and she’s cultivating a relationship around him.  Fond of binoculars, Christina’s new to town, supposedly staying with an uncle who’s never seen.

A second story involves lustful teen boy (Arturo Castro) trying to find a connection with his mother, who never speaks, and is seen each day methodically readying herself for a night out … somewhere, with someone.  This disconnection is a reoccurring theme in Chaney’s film. There are always circumstances separating kids from adults—disappearance, death, disillusionment, depression.

Several shots of big-city skyscrapers looming in the distance put a bigger (better?) life in sight, but out of reach.

Chaney, talented at finding emotion in mundane scenes, has an eye for detail and conveys confidence in pacing. The film evokes a strong sense of place; the director hints at personal connections. It’s hard, though, to imagine those beyond the art-house crowd investing in this short, enigmatic tone poem. Its structure is everything our attention-deficit movie-going society sidesteps. Artsy or not, Chaney’s a filmmaker to keep an eye on.

We are all Indigo children, I guess, yearning to be special and to get beyond our stations in life, but struggling to find a way to board a train that will take us there.

 

| Marvin Brown’s Movie Review Archive

Quik Flix Hit

Summer Movie Series

Terminator Genisys (2015)

Rated PG-13

terminator-genisys

Paramount Pictures

You know me, I’m a sucker for time-travel flicks. That fact, coupled with director James Cameron’s persuasive knack for depicting action—whether on a shoestring budget (like his original 1984 Terminator film) or a big-bucks bonanza (his standard-elevating 1991 sequel Terminator 2: Judgement Day)—bowled me over twice. Cameron’s certainly the key because despite his films remaining among my favorite sci-fi actioners, I didn’t cotton to the subsequent sequels (Terminator 3: Rise of the Machines, 2003, and Terminator Salvation, 2009) directed by others.

toonMarvinBlogThis latest effort, which basically ignores parts 3 and 4, attempts to follow-up the Cameron films. At first we’re wondering if we’re seeing the same films again, more a reboot than a direct sequel.

A future world-ravaging battle between humans and machines is in its last throes as the human resistance has finally beaten the sentient machines that launched the battle back in the ‘90s that left billions of humans dead. Leading this resistance is legendary warrior John Connor.

It’s discovered that in its final hours, the defeated machines have launched a Hail Mary operation using a “time-displacement” contraption to send one of its deadly “Terminator” cyborgs (Arnold Schwarzenegger) backward in time to kill John’s mother Sarah before she births him, thus taking out its enemy before he’s ever born. John counters this operation by sending his faithful human soldier Kyle Reese backward to protect Sarah and defeat the Terminator. This is basically the same plot as the original film. In the early-going, some scenes are shot-by-shot. In the original, Kyle not only helps save the day by sacrificing himself to destroy the robot, but in his spare time impregnates Sarah to create the franchise paradox of being the father of the leader who sent him to protect his mother. Now, stay with me. It transpires in the sequel (Terminator 2: Judgement Day) that this was all for naught because the machines send another, more advanced time-jumping Terminator (an incredible Robert Patrick) to strike at John himself, while John’s still a boy; the resistance, not to be outdone, sends a reprogrammed Terminator (Schwarzenegger again) as protector of young John.

This latest film twists itself in knots to entertain both these scenarios, trying to serve up the best of both films. To that end we get two different versions of Schwarzenegger’s T-101 Terminator; a variation on the advanced T-1000, the liquid-metal morphing Terminator from film 2; plus a hybrid of each of these machines, its identity and mission I’ll leave for you to discover. This time around Sarah is portrayed by Emilia Clarke (“Game of Thrones”). Her introduction heralds a plot deviation that final puts this film on its own course. She’s capable and tough, but Linda Hamilton’s waitress-cum-muscled machine killer remains the definitive Sarah Connor.

We’re dealing with multiple time jumps, the old standby alternate timelines and surprisingly effective pathos (if you’ve kept up with the franchise) wrung from Sarah plight of foretold doom, Reese’s plight of longing for his best friend’s mother and the T-101’s plight of protecting, learning from and loving humans. At points the film becomes more convoluted than necessary, trying too hard to lend gravity to its sci-fi confection, forgetting to have fun. But it’s closer in spirit to the franchise’s best efforts than its worst ones. Director Alan Taylor (Thor: The Dark World) present some decent action sequences. Taylor’s movie does effectively use stock footage and cutting-edge CGI to recreate Schwarzenegger’s ‘80s terminator, while incorporating an age-appropriate Schwarzenegger into the mix. The older, broken-down version of the Terminator saves the film from the preposterous idea of a 67-year-old Schwarzenegger as an action star.

To James Cameron’s credit, it must be said that nothing in this film outdoes the stunt work and then-groundbreaking f/x of his original films, which are decades removed from this film.

If you’ve long followed this series you’ll probably enjoy this as an improvement over films 3 and 4 with its attempt to again give story and characters equal weight to the action. If you’re fed up with this whole time-travel, Schwarzenegger action shoot-em-up, there’s not much here that’ll light your fire. The film’s good enough to leave me suspecting that had Cameron directed it he might well have pulled off a cinematic hat trick.

blog-see_it

 

 

 

More Summer Movie Reviews:

Inside Out

Jurassic World

Tomorrowland

Mad Max: Fury Road

Avengers: Age of Ultron

 

| Marvin Brown’s Movie Review Archive

Quik Flix Hit

The Rover (2014)
Rated R

The Rover (2013) l-r: GUY PEARCE AND ROBERT PATTINSON,

Porchlight Films

In some dystopian future, 10 years after the “collapse,” a man (Guy Pearce) sits in his car on a deserted Australian highway. As flies buzz around him and he stares into nothing as the sun beats down on his shaggy, haggard form, we notice the shot is held for quite a while. So long, in fact, we begin to wonder if the reel is stuck. The soundtrack punctuates the silence with atonal chords that seem louder than usual.

The BloghouseThese things—the lingering shot, the abrasive sound—establish not simply tone, but theme. You’re going to be subjected to both for the rest of the film.

Pearce eventually gets out of the car and walks across dusty, sun-scorched road and into some kind of makeshift store. Its proprietors are silent, worn men and boys who can hardly be bothered by  Pearce’s presence.

While he’s in the place, a carful of panicked thieves wreck nearby and steal Pearce’s car as a substitute. The rest of the film concerns Pearce’s pursuit of the thieves.

This is a strange, uncomfortable film that repeatedly uproots expectations. The more we learn about Pearce the less we like him; it’s probably for the best that he’s hardly defined. We know he’s handy with a gun and he doesn’t blink at shocking violence. He just wants his car back.

Aside from deliberately held shots and grating ambient score, David Michôd’s film builds a creepy undertone by presenting women as scarce, while shirtless boys hover in the corners of many scenes.

Pearce is united with the abandoned brother (Robert Pattinson of the Twilight series) of one of the thieves. He’s a “half wit” who can’t decide if he wants to reunite with his brother or kill him.

Pearce brings his dependable intensity to the proceedings. He’s so hard externally we don’t know what to make of his character when he sheds tears. Pattinson, nearly unrecognizable and intriguing with his mumbling accent and vacant stare,  with this film and Cosmopolis (2013) firmly establishes capabilities beyond playing a brooding, glistening vampire.

The film is bleak and humorless, offering a convincing pull into its atmosphere. There’s a powerful scene of Pearce detailing the fate of his wife. And another in which a young girl becomes a causal victim of violence.

But you’ll wonder how, despite so much violence, death and a short runtime that it still feels like you’ve lived hours drifting in this dusty, dirty, sweaty, sticky off-beat film. I wanted to take a shower afterward.

blog-see_it

 

 

 

| Marvin Brown’s Movie Review Archive