Annihilation

Alex Garland’s “Annihilation” blends too many genres, themes and tones in this often entrancing, colorful, yet impenetrable sci-fi.

Annihilation PosterIn the sci-fi “Annihilation,” director Alex Garland has built a luminous, colorful playground with infinite possibilities. He takes us into a mysterious region called “The Shimmer,” a kaleidoscopic, morphing bubble. Light and technology are all scrambled and refracted inside this ever-expanding space, and the flora and fauna inside are rife with mutations and impossibilities. It’s a place where the rules of nature don’t apply and anything can be imagined.

Early on, “Annihilation” is entrancing, an endlessly fascinating trip in which Garland only begins to scratch the surface of the mysteries The Shimmer holds. But disappointingly, “Annihilation” starts to do all too much. All those wonders and possibilities that were frustratingly withheld become overwhelming. The movie becomes bloodier, weirder, more colorful and more esoteric, and as a result it’s less fun, less interesting, less profound and at times, even dumb. Continue reading “Annihilation”

Good Time

The Safdie Brothers’ “Good Time” is a neon-lit trip that’s hypnotically chaotic as though we’re seduced by Robert Pattinson’s tragic trial and error.

Good Time Poster“Don’t count your chickens before they hatch, do you know what that means?” A social worker in the Safdie Brothers’ “Good Time” asks that question to Nick (Benny Safdie), a dead-eyed man with a stony, gaping face and who is mentally challenged. The social worker asks a few more questions, and just as he’s making a breakthrough, with Nick even shedding a tear, his loving but unhinged brother Connie (Robert Pattinson) whisks him away.

Connie would’ve done well to hear that age-old proverb. That’s because “Good Time” is a carnival ride careening out of control, a neon-lit trip as one man’s desperate attempts to get his brother out of jail destroys the lives of everyone in his wake. It’s hypnotically chaotic and irresistibly surreal as though we’re seduced by the character’s tragic trial and error as things get worse and worse. Continue reading “Good Time”

The Hateful Eight

Quentin Tarantino’s 8th film is an overwritten slog.

HatefulEightPosterQuentin Tarantino, a truly favorite director of mine, can be called a lot of unsavory adjectives, but I never thought “boring” could be one of them.

“The Hateful Eight,” his eighth film as he proudly boasts, is an overwritten slog. At three hours and filmed in 70mm Panavision, Tarantino has the audacity to take those cinematic tools reserved for epics and apply them to a cozy, claustrophobic character drama set in a cabin in the woods. Tarantino bottles all his despicable characters and ideas about race and gender into a room and takes forever for them to explode, then even longer to clean up his mess.

The film involves bounty hunter John “Hangman” Ruth’s intentions to collect $10,000 reward by bringing in Daisy Domergue (Jennifer Jason Leigh) alive, a principle of his to personally see all his victims hang. Major Marquis Warren (Samuel L. Jackson) is a former black officer in the Union Army and now full-time bounty hunter who still enjoys killing white boys who would rather see him dead. Warren hitches a ride with Ruth and former marauder, now Sherriff, Chris Mannix (Walton Goggins) to a haberdashery where they’ll wait out a blizzard.

This set up consumes the film’s first of three hours, a drawn out procession of formalities and mistrust in on the nose period dialogue. It’s theatrical play-acting, and Tarantino still confines all their conversation to the two walls of a cramped stagecoach. Tarantino leaves very little to subtext, with Warren, Ruth and Mannix each speaking detailed personal histories despite how much they seem to know about each other already. This is conversation for the audience, a way for Tarantino to show these allies are still at odds with one another, Mannix just a little racist and Ruth very much on edge. The mystery is Domergue, who spends the stagecoach ride with a black eye and a streak of blood down her cheek from Ruth’s blow to the head. She’s a monster, not a lady, we’re told. How much of her abuse can we endure? Tarantino is goading us, and the movie has barely started.

Waiting for them are four other travelers, each an Old West stereotype more likely drawn from cinema than from reality, as is Tarantino’s penchant. Tim Roth plays Oswaldo Mobray, complete with a thick and eloquent British accent that suggests Christoph Waltz could’ve been in mind for the part, as could’ve “Unforgiven’s” English Bob. Demian Bichir as the Mexican keeper of the haberdashery is Bob, easily a surrogate of Eli Wallach in “The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly.” Bruce Dern is a grizzled and apathetic Confederate General made enraged by Warren’s taunting. And Michael Madsen is the reserved, anonymous cowboy Joe Gage, just off to visit his mother. Of course Tarantino takes the time to have Ruth and Warren reintroduce themselves to all four individually.

No one can be trusted, and Ruth warns that one or some of the remaining four could be in cahoots with Domergue. But to what degree are we invested in seeing whether this woman gets to the rope or not? We have more doubt as to whether they are innocent rather than whether they are guilty. It’s just a matter of how long Tarantino takes to arrive there, and how much we choose to tolerate along the journey. His cards are all on the table.

Or maybe not. Tarantino back tracks in a clunky, narrated aside to fill in the gaps that we didn’t see, rather than allow those twists to emerge through character or dialogue. It’s too contrived to not be exactly as Tarantino intended. We’re made to realize that this genre setting, this overly theatrical dramatizing, this will they/won’t they scenario is in service of how much he can get away with and how hateful he can make his eighth film.

Violence here serves as an exclamation point and punch line rather than a consequence or for stylish entertainment value. The Ennio Morricone score is fascinating, operatic and lovely but staged over extended sequences of Ruth’s driver walking out into the cold to use the bathroom. The N-word rankled some feathers when Tarantino used it as coloring in “Django Unchained,” but here it seems notably superfluous. And there’s not much more to be said for measured storytelling nuance when your characters start projectile vomiting blood onto a woman’s face.

“The Hateful Eight” isn’t just hateful, it’s depressing and a drag. Tarantino has used his time to say everything despicable and nothing in particular.

1 star

Rapid Response: The Hudsucker Proxy

It’s always fun to see how far the Coen Brothers have come. There was a time after “Blood Simple,” before “Fargo” and surrounding the time of their Cannes victory for “Barton Fink” that the Coens had a peculiar reputation in the critical community, not like today when they are practically revered beside Scorsese, and some of the few American directors people actually eagerly anticipate movies from.

Rather, they were seen as remarkable stylists so in love with the movies that the Coens established a cult following and cult hatred long before “The Big Lebowski.” Some of their movies, as critics argued, were all style over substance, exotic plunges into cinema itself with plots that were intentionally contrived or outrageous, dialogue that was purposefully literary and fantastical and characters that were not just aiming for parody but were steeped in it.

The other three movies they made in this time period were “Raising Arizona,” which is a cult classic comedy that I couldn’t even get through, “Miller’s Crossing,” which I haven’t seen and is probably one of their lesser known dramas, and “The Hudsucker Proxy,” which I watched last evening.

“The Hudsucker Proxy” so perfectly sums up the moment in cinema history that were these infuriating and revolutionary characters the Coens before they were the Coens. It is a film that was generally panned when released but today has a solid following for the strongest of Coen fans. The reason for it is that it was thought they had made a film so in love with their own cinema dissertation that even fans would not get past it, a film so intentionally cliche it was maddening.

Roger Ebert’s two star review wonderfully analyzes each school of thought in either reviling the film or hailing it as a masterpiece. “The problem with the movie is it’s all surface and no substance,” one side of his brain says, while the other chimes in that, “That’s the tired old rap against the Coens… How many movies do have heart these days?… One good reason to go to the movies is feast the eyes, even if the brain is left unchallenged.”

Except the movie does have mental challenges, just not for the moral side of the brain. How and why the Coens choose to recreate so many historical cinema cues without actually making them a parody is part of the film’s mystique. At times it undoubtedly is too excessive even in its excess, but it falls back on its own sense of quirk and charm even if you’re not familiar with all the references they drum up.

It also continued to prove to me why Paul Newman is one of my all time favorite actors. He along with Tim Robbins and especially Jennifer Jason Leigh channeling Rosalind Russell in “His Girl Friday” are terrific. I will say though that if the Coens made this movie today, they would have cast J.K. Simmons in the part of the newspaper editor.

So yes, maybe the origin story of the Hula Hoop is not the most riveting or heartening tale of the rat race and romance in the 1950s, but “The Hudsucker Proxy” deserves to be seen as a relic of film history, both past and present.