Invictus (2009)

Clint Eastwood’s latest film, Invictus, tells a dual story about an early point in Nelson Mandela’s presidency and the 1995 Rugby World Cup in South Africa. The film is an adaptation of the novel Playing the Enemy: Nelson Mandela and the Game That Changed a Nation by John Carlin. Morgan Freeman plays Nelson Mandela as if the role was meant only for him. He captures the man perfectly, bringing forth his charisma and leadership qualities as well as nailing the accent. The first half of the film mostly follows Mandela as he takes office and just begins to run the country. There is an ongoing subplot with his black and white bodyguards, but aside from showing a connection between two peoples who recently considered themselves enemies, there’s not really a lot of weight to it. Mandela makes a controversial decision to keep the country’s rugby team exactly as it has been, even though most black people in the country see it as a representation of the apartheid system. He chooses to do so as an attempt to prevent isolating the white minority who also controls the economy and other important facets of the government. His initial connection to the game is strictly political, but as his interest in the game grows, so does the viewer's.

It is at this point when we are introduced to the team; they suck. Hated by the majority of the people in their country and consistently losing games, they have no chance at winning the world cup. The team’s Captain Francois Pienaar, played by Matt Damon, is invited to meet Mandela and is basically asked to do this seemingly impossible task. The team is shown to improve not only in their skills, but in the eyes of their fans. Mandela sees to it they must tour the country and gives lessons to the children. Everything leads up to the world cup match between South Africa and New Zealand. There is a lot of build up to this and the weight of the game becomes incredible both politically and emotionally. Clint Eastwood makes sure that the audience feels the weight of the match. It’s a very exciting finale and makes Invictus a very good Rugby film.

Invictus is an interesting mix between a sports movie and a political one. Combined with Mandela’s own personal triumphs and the nature of the underdog sports team, Invictus proves to be very emotional and uplifting. It’s a shame that this is the Nelson Mandela film that Morgan Freeman will play him in because his skill in portraying the man leaves you wanting more. That aside, the sport’s aspect of the movie is still very good, if a little corny towards the end with the heavy use of slow motion as that comes to be expected in the finale of any sports film. Matt Damon is likeable and also convincing as a rugby player. He clearly bulked up for the role. Invictus is the name of a poem by William Ernest Henley that Mandela tells Francois he read in prison to keep his spirits up. It’s a touching sentiment and a very good poem. There is a scene where the entire rugby team gets to visit the prison where Mandela was kept. Francois enters his claustrophobic cell and envisions what it must have been like not only for Mandela to spend nearly 30 years living in, but being able to leave and forgive the people who put him there. It’s a powerful scene and more than any other shows that Nelson Mandela deserves a good bio-pic. For what it is, Invictus is a very uplifting and moving story that will actually make you care about the winner of a rugby match. For those who are unfamiliar with the game, that alone is quite an accomplishment.

Avatar (2009)

I was skeptical about seeing Avatar. This film couldn’t be more over hyped than it is. It’s compared to seeing Star Wars for the first time, it’s been called James Cameron’s masterpiece (and he made Titanic), and it supposedly revolutionizes film. How could any movie possibly live up to this? The commercials and trailers didn’t really do anything for me. I thought the blue aliens looked silly at best. Well, to my surprise it does live up to the hype. There is no film quite like this one to date.

The story follows a handicapped marine named Jake Sulley (Sam Worthington) who takes a job on a moon called Pandora because he matches his now-deceased brother’s DNA and it will earn him a bonus that will allow him to afford the medical bills that will come with fixing his spine. In this future, health coverage isn’t that great either. The job consists of him linking to a man-made version of the local aliens, called the Na’vi, and using the body as his avatar so that he can infiltrate their village and convince them to relocate so that the military can mine their home for a special type of rock that is really valuable. How and why are these rocks so important? Doesn’t really matter, they just are. The military in this film isn’t exactly belonging to any particular government; instead they are described as and much more closely resemble hired guns that work for a corporation (run by Giovanni Ribisi), much like Blackwater. Jake works with scientists who are more interested in understanding the Na’vi and learning about them than they are in the rocks. So the story begins with a pretty clear line drawn: aliens & scientists = good, military and corporations = bad. The story really takes off when Jake is stranded in the jungle. He meets Neytiri (played by the beautiful Zoë Saldana) and she leads him back to her people. They reluctantly accept him and allow him to learn of their culture. Eventually Jake finds that he must choose between the aliens and his own people.

Almost everything concerning the plot and the characters are secondary to what this film really is. In fact, the story itself borrows plot elements from several other film including Dances with Wolves, The Matrix, and even Ferngully. But again, the story isn't nearly as important as the technical side of this film. The way this film is made is simply incredible. 90% of what you see on-screen is animated; the jungle, the aliens, the creatures, everything. Yet it never really feels like it is. This is practically an animated movie; clearly it’s animated, but it’s not filmed this way. Theirs is no other way to describe it. There are no practical effects and there is a staggering amount of CG, but it doesn’t seem like it. This is part of what made this film so expensive: James Cameron invented a new type of stereoscopic camera that can simulate human sight in the animation sequences (and they really work). The visuals draw you in and you become apart of the world presented to you. The only use of motion capture on the blue aliens is in their faces and this makes the actors recognizable through the animation (almost too much so with Sigourney Weaver’s character. That one was a little creepy). With the performances literally coming through the visuals and the way that it’s filmed preventing association with an animated movie, the CG just disappears. You’ll accept everything you see as what it is. Jake is a good representative for the audience as his curiosity towards everything on Pandora is mirrored in the viewer; we share his fascination and discover everything as he does. Pandora at night is a memorable sight as (for whatever reason), everything glows and lights up the jungle. It is beautiful, exotic, and incredibly imaginative. Pandora is shown in its near entirety as we see everything from the floating mountains (which are completely impossible) and the gigantic trees to the deepest parts of the jungle. The scenes where the Na’vi are shown flying on their dragon-like banshees are amazing. The situation between the humans and the Na’vi is comparable to the diamond mining in Africa and what happened to the Native Americans. The Na’vi themselves are reminiscent of the Native Americans in their tribal society.

The acting is generally good, though I’m not sure what type of accent Jake is supposed to have (maybe it’s a repressed Australian accent?), but the performance that stands out the most is from Zoë Saldana (previously seen in Star Trek). She is never seen outside of her blue alien character and she is so convincing and fleshed out as the princess of the Na’vi; by far the most intriguing character in the film. Sigourney Weaver is good but the rest of the scientists are pretty forgettable. There is another performance worth mentioning and it is by Stephen Lang who plays Colonel Miles Quaritch, the leader of the mercenaries. Basically he is the villain of the film but I’m not sure why. There is never any explanation as to why he hates the Na’vi so much or has such a vendetta against Jake (maybe Jake killed his parents?). With his scars that he wears on his face like a tattoo, he ends up being every clichéd military bad guy rolled into one. This guy doesn’t even seem to mind being on fire or the fact that he can’t breath on Pandora. I guess he just likes blowing things up. Him aside, there is nothing that really hurts this film. It is a visual masterpiece that may literally re-invent the way that science fiction and fantasy films are made. James Cameron may have worked on this film for 15 years, but amazingly, it was well worth the wait.

Tokyo Godfathers (2003)

From the mind of writer and director Satoshi Kon (Millennium Actress, Perfect Blue), Tokyo Godfathers is a truly original film with genuine heart and character. The story follows three of the most unlikely characters as they attempt to bring an infant home to its parents. I cannot stress the “unlikely” in these heroes, especially in an animated film of this nature. You would never see characters like these in a Disney film or even a Miyazaki film for that matter. The three “Godfathers” are homeless people consisting of Gin, a bum, Miyuki, a runaway teenager, and Hana, a transvestite. The three characters clash greatly with Hana (voiced brilliantly by Yoshiaki Umegaki) being the hopeless optimist while Gin (Toru Emori) and Miyuki (Aya Okamoto) are much more cynical. While the basic premise of the story sounds simple enough, because of the nature of the protagonists, it is darkly comical and could only have been thought up by a mind like Kon’s.

It is essentially a Christmas film as the three unlikely heroes find the infant on Christmas Eve and everything that follows on their quest is tied to the “magic” of the child, presented in the form of coincidence and fate. Their quest leads them all over Tokyo from the central part of the city to the slums to even a yakuza wedding (the circumstances of this are particularly amusing). The city itself is as much a part of their story as the characters. The baby is found in a garbage pile and everything that follows is funny, suspenseful, and often touching. This is a major credit to the characters. Each one of them is complex and has their own history and reasoning explaining their actions and thoughts, and though the characters might seem exaggerated in the way that they move and yell at each other, the way they interact is not. By the end they have all evolved over the course of their adventure experiencing and learning of trust, love, and above all, redemption.

The animation is stunning and the characters are very detailed, but never too much so as they are often displaying an exaggerated sense of emotion, particularly Hana. This contrast between the more serious way the characters and situations are written and the comical and more lighthearted art style prevents the film’s tone from falling too far in one direction. Instead it maintains a perfect balance of dark humor. There is a great scene where Hana reveals the way he feels about his relationship with Gin and how he is aware of how it will end. After retelling a bittersweet fable about sacrifice to Mizuki, she asks him what happens to him when everything is over. Instead of a response there is a close-up shot from behind of him staring off into the distance, but only for a moment. The film doesn’t dwell on it and make the scene sappy, but instead you are left with an image of loneliness in a character that for the majority of the film is the most optimistic and upbeat, essentially driving the plot forward.

There are plenty of quiet moments like these that make the characters easy to care about and sympathize with. The voice acting is perfect for each character, and again I need to mention Hana here because this character could have easily been annoying with the wrong voice. Instead Yoshiaki Umegaki keeps the character funny and without being too much to the point where the character dominates every scene. With Tokyo Godfathers, Satoshi Kon proves once again that he knows how to weave a fascinating and beautiful story, bringing it to life in the way that only he knows how.

Up in the Air (2009)

Adapted and updated (to suit the present economic situation) from Walter Kirn’s 2001 novel of the same name, Up in the Air follows a man named Ryan Bingham (George Clooney) whose job consists of him traveling to cities all over the United States and firing people for bosses who are too scared to do it themselves. He then supplies them with a packet that will supposedly get them back on track to finding new career opportunities. This job has him traveling so often that he sacrifices his home life and even his relationship with his family. A sacrifice he makes gladly. In fact, he even gives motivational seminars discussing the benefits of living a life that is detached from the usual things that way one down (homes, possessions, friends, family and all the baggage that goes along with it). At the company he works for a young new employee is hired that comes up with a more modern and cost-efficient method of doing his job over the internet via a program like skype. Since this will all but annihilate his lifestyle, he resists the idea and is then assigned taking her under his wing and showing her how he does his job while the company prepares to convert their business into the newer method.

To begin, George Clooney plays the role that was meant for him as it fully utilizes his star persona. He’s charming, independent, and in control of everything around him. He fits so well into this role that everything he does on screen feels genuine. This is especially true on some of the scenes where things don’t go as he planned or hoped. There’s never really a big breakdown or anything too exaggerated for the character. Instead what happens is that you can see the sadness in his face; the kind of sadness that comes from sheer disappointment. All the acting in this film is notable; Vera Farmiga as Alex Goran, who is basically Ryan in a woman’s body, is likable and plays off Clooney really well. Anna Kendrick, who plays Natalie Keener, is particularly good as the young and inexperienced new employee. Her interactions with Ryan are often humorous and she never comes of as too much or even too condescending and this again has to do with George Clooney’s performance. The way he handles or brushes off a lot of harsh criticisms from Natalie keep her from becoming annoying. This, combined with her being a fleshed out character, makes for a memorable performance. There are also some great small parts featuring strong performances from actors like Zack Galifianakis, Jason Bateman, Danny McBride, J.K. Simmons, and Sam Elliot; each of these actors only adds to their respective scenes.

The idea that this film is a time capsule for today’s current economic situation is pretty obvious from the start. Due to Ryan’s job, we are given a look at much of the United States during the current recession. Ryan and Alex’s obsession with high status and elite privileges contrast pretty sharply with the miserable and crying faces of the people who they have to fire. The way Ryan attempts to justify his position may well be the only way he can live like he does. The montages of people being fired bookend this film and much of the tone is affected by it. Even though the film is often funny and Jason Reitman and Sheldon Turner’s script is really well written, the tone throughout the film has a consistent hint of sadness. Ryan’s views of the world and the way he lives in it are a bit shaken as the plot unfolds, but never to the point where Natalie, who often clashes with him on his way of living, somehow enlightens him or even that he learns some big answer to a major question by the end. It’s much more ambiguous than that and leaves you thinking, not only about the character, but about your own life. Up in the Air is the best film so far from director Jason Reitman (Juno, Thank You for Smoking), and one that should be seen not only for it’s relevance, but because its one of the best films of 2009.

Franklyn (2008)

From relatively new and unknown director Gerald McMorrow, Franklyn is an ambitious film that follows four main characters and four main plots. By the end they should all converge in a way that makes sense. Do they? For the most part.

The main story among the main stories is that of Jonathan Preest (played by Ryan Phillippe): an atheist detective in a bizarre parallel universe called Meanwhile City (ha ha, very clever). It is important to note that he is an atheist as the city is dominated by religion; religion of any kind, including worshiping washing machines. This abundance of religion is a means of controlling the populace and it is a law that every citizen must belong to a religion, however mundane. Preest lives in a science fiction film noir and is out to kill a man who sacrificed a young girl in a religious ceremony. While this is happening there are three other stories that take place in modern London. One is of a man (played by Bernard Hill) looking for his son, another is of a woman named Emilia Bryant (Eva Green) who is continuously faking and recording her own suicide attempts for a project (though each suicide attempt brings her closer and closer to the real thing), and finally of a man named Milo (Sam Riley) who just cancelled his wedding and is looking for his childhood sweetheart. Each story is told simultaneously and all lead towards one inevitable conclusion. The stories are all tied together with themes such as loss, faith, fantasy, and love.

To start off, there are a few things that work incredibly well in this film. One of them is the look, especially considering the budget. Meanwhile City is an impressing setting and convincing in its depiction. It’s dark, foggy, grimy, and ugly, sporting colorful inhabitants who easily suit the location. Preest wears a mask that consists of two gaping black eyes and while the world he lives in is a strange one filled with people wearing costumes and masks, his still manages to stand out due to his blank and emotionless features. This also fits his views and separates him both physically and psychologically from the world around him without making him stand out to the point where he doesn’t belong. The scenes in this world are shot in a realistic manner using a lot of handheld cameras, while the real world of London is shot in a way that more emphasizes the fantastic nature of the film. It’s a strange contrast that fits well into the film’s tone. For all outward appearances, the film simply looks good.

Where the film doesn’t work so well is in tying together the four stories. In the end they all run together, but they don’t all seem to connect as well as they should and there are a few things that are never fully explained. The father and the Preest storyline converge perfectly and makes the most sense at the end. The Emilia storyline feels pretty detached from the Preest and father storyline, though the climax puts her into a very interesting situation given her story. The Milo one on the other hand feels mostly unnecessary, even at the end. While he shares certain thematic elements with the other stories, it doesn’t connect as well to the Preest storyline at all, which has the most screen time and serves as the driving force of the narrative.

There is also a janitor character that may have some kind of mystical or spiritual purpose, but it is never fully concluded or even given a satisfactory explanation. There is one scene where the father gives the man a picture of his son and asks him if he’s seen him. The janitor looks like he doesn’t recognize the man in the picture and begins to give it back but suddenly looks again and it seems he’s beginning to recognize him…but he doesn’t. It turns out that he doesn’t know the father’s son. This never comes up again and these two characters never share another moment on screen making this entire exchange pointless.

The suicide scenes of Emilia often don’t seem to even belong in the film while most of the Milo storyline seems pointless. This is a film that is about half great, and half tangled. Certain elements work perfectly and the film looks amazing, particularly in Meanwhile City, a setting that is as bizarre and fascinating as the city of Marc Caro and Jean-Pierre Jeunet’s The City of Lost Children. Unfortunately, Franklyn is ultimately bogged down by unnecessary scenes and strands of the plot that are left entirely in the dark.