Darkly Done Dark

Now I haven't seen all the nominated films for the 85th Oscar Awards but I did get to see Argo the winning film for Best Picture and I wonder how did Zero Dark Thirty lose it to Argo. Nothing seriously or gravely wrong about it, I enjoyed myself thoroughly with Argo as well, but I did come out having the feeling that Zero Dark Thirty is indeed a superior film. But again that might be subject to personal interpretation and choice, as for me I would have given it to Zero Dark Thirty for the sheer genius that the film is, going completely by the art of film making and adding or subtracting nothing from that.

Her previous film The Hurt Locker hurts you real bad at the end of the film when our hero is just so taken by what he does that he goes back. Here again Bigelow shows us a side of life that we very carefully ignore. We are all given by end and games, addicted to what we do and moving away from it leaves so much of a void. At the end when the character Maya (Jessica Chastain) enters her ride back home, the personnel on the plane asks her where she's off to and also remarks that she must be a very important person because the government has sent her a plane all for herself to go anywhere she wants to. She breaks down. Its been a long struggle for her for over a decade to get to her task. Drained and task completed she suddenly doesn't know where to go and she is important. Here is some who is dealing with conflicts within, on screen (talking about Bigelow here.) Something that I was torn to endorse and chose merely to ignore is the graphic depiction of torture in the film. But what it also does during the sequences is to show real characters, human characters. The tortures seems on your face and brutal but both the person who is getting tortured and the person torturing seems to be unbelievably real. And its not with the usual cliches of one person disgusted by the torture turns away and eludes on morality and righteousness. Its work and needs to be done and yet she lets us know that it is not endorsed. A deep insight into humans and especially humans in conflict areas. That's what I see Bigelow doing. And she's done it in her previous film as well.

The character Maya is a fictitious character and yet she embodies every human emotion during the search of Bin Laden. She plays every emotion that perhaps any human would have portrayed during that grueling period. Its a celebration of the feminity in a man's world and yet does not even once threaten the existence of male chauvinism and neither does it glorify feminism. What it does is portray them equal. Every human goes through a motion between masculine and feminine and that event is characterized in Maya. It delves in the darkest times of our lives, the darkest of emotions and darkest character that we all have. The film is also an insight into that dark side of each of us. Bigelow keeps it that way. We could have had a brutal torture or body parts all over after an explosion but she doesn't over do it. She plays with that dark side of us viewers to show us the torture and explosion and yet not repulse us with the graphic nature. That dark side which wants to see how a torture reveals results and what happens during an operation. We even have the navy seals involved in the final attack on Bin Laden calling out the names of the people they kill. Not only that the climax is shot in complete darkness. The previous film I remember which had such a sequence with the same kind of effect (the one that makes you cringe in excitement and fear and yet enough to engage you to want to see what happens next) was Silence of the Lambs (again the night vision effect).

The film making is reminiscent of her previous film - The Hurt Locker. Engaging, racy, suspense and graphic. Again she employs silence and a low frequency reverb as a background score for the film. This makes us completely engrossed by the journey that she leads us. The shot taking does not in anyway enthrall us away from the story (which I felt Life of Pi suffered from) and the editing is invisible. The dialogues are quick and clear but also requires one to be constantly attentive. Missing out on some dialogues will leave you incomplete when a sequence later in the film happens which requires one to reference to the dialogues before. You will find yourself constantly asking what next, why did that happen and your friend will tell you what you missed in the previous scene. And that would happen vice versa when your friend would ask you something and you would have to reply. but it does not irritate or leave you looking dumb and stupid. The film unlike Argo accepts the mistakes of the government and does not unrealistically portray the heroism of CIA operatives but makes them human.

All in all a great watch. Its a dark film, a very dark film, literally and figuratively. Yet it keeps true to entertaining you and the characters are real. They come out of the screen and you feel empathetic towards Maya. Almost like in the end you would feel like giving her a hug and console her that everything is alright and you did a great job when she breaks down in her ride home. The film is factual and doesn't move away even once from the subject, there was that much for us to see and for Bigelow to show. Watch the film for the small details that Bigelow feeds into the film, characteristics in her actors and actions that are so real. She has gone a long way from The Hurt Locker and Point Break. No wonder she is the first woman director to win the best Director award at the Oscars. Cannot wait for her next product. What a lady!

Scripting impossible

The first time it ever struck me that I could work in films and that its not much of rocket science or Greek was when I was in the sunny Kerala city Trivandrum attending an international film festival when actually I should have been in college. It just so happened that I hear one of Kerala's greatest directors speak to us, the audience, about the intricacies of film making and especially about Hitchcock.

It has been an eventful journey for me so far and though I did end up studying to becoming a film professional I found my calling in documentaries. But well I must say that too didn't come my way and just to make ends meet have worked in different capacities all across, from corporate films to animation. So much of difference that when I did go and try my luck in getting a job at a studio, because in the end one needs to have a stable income sometime in life, they tell me they are not sure if  I'd stick around. Don't blame them, my CV shows me all over.

I started writing this blog to put down my views on films, and though I vowed never to negatively criticize a film simply because I understand the pain it takes to make one, I think sometimes its ok to point out the errors or what one thinks are errors in a film. Unless the director is able to prove otherwise that it was a thought out decision to do so.

Right now I find myself scripting my own stories and spinning my own webs. And only time will tell if it will hold water at all. I never thought I could script so much or as much think up stories, given that I am more inclined to think in terms of documentaries, I find myself today being able to concoct stories right left and centre. And I know for a fact that I have never worked in feature films, its going to be a hard long road to getting my stories into films. I wonder today do I go ahead and see if I can make it to a good film or just continue with trying to live life. What with the experience I got and yes I am married and we might look to start a family once our finances are secure. Which I think is going to be a long way from now.

Just wanted to vent out these feelings of helplessness of getting no where in life at the age of 31 and pushing hard everyday to god knows where. I got wonderful scripts and I write stories but what the hell. Where do I begin? Why does it seem impossible from where I stand today??!!

Psychopathic and Insanely mad

A horribly boring day is how I might have seen it starting. Just the same things to do today as yesterday. I have been jobless now for a bit and thought a good old film might just do the trick in making it all that bad to pass the hot summer day out. Rummaged through what the options were and set my eyes on SEVEN PSYCHOPATHS.

Wasn't too sure about the film and hadn't checked IMDB about it... infact I always thought it a terrible idea to be reading IMDB before seeing a film. So here I was on a hot Sunday afternoon watching Seven Psychopaths.

The info - it stars Colin Farrell, Sam Rockwell, Woody Harrelson and Christopher Walken. It's been directed by Martin McDonagh, the same guy who directed In Bruges... And yeah that is the most I can give you about the info, you can google the rest and I know you will. I would suggest if you were to google the film it would still do no justice to the experience of watching the film.

The film is a dark British humour film and one cannot take away from the way the Brits love their dialogues. The imagery of British dialogues can only be demonstrated by a line quite earlier in the film. When Billy played by Sam Rockwell tells Marty played by Collin Farrell - "I wasn't trying to break his nose. His nose was just in the middle of what I was punching."

The film has a lot of dialogues but also has quite a bit of action to back the dialogues. Whats most interesting is that it kept me asking what is going to happen next. And inspite of the terrible Chennai summer heat and really nothing much to do I caught myself being transported into a world where they spoke English with an Irish and American accents, with British humour and set in LA. Whats best is the parallel plots that don't confuse as much as keep you guessing through out whats going to happen next. Whats also really cool is the way they use film imagery to describe sequences in Marty's film. At the end Marty has a film but that does not put an end to his troubles, but what happens is a transformation in Marty's life.

And that is what the film is about transformation, in between everything else that happens. On the surface it explains as to why its called Seven Psychopaths but when you look longer and deeper its actually about transformation. In fact the psychopaths seemed to have a very strong sense of conviction and integrity in the film which makes me wonder that the psychopath is in everyone of us. In different times and different situations I guess we all end up like psychopaths.

Watch the film. I would recommend it. Though I haven't seen In Bruges, now I definitely would like to see the film.

Big Big Big

The other day I just rummaged through my film collection wondering what to see. Its been quite sometime trying to figure my own scripts and funding, my tummy not really helping with the situation, i decide the best way to go about it is return to the basics... Watch a film. That's how I end up scanning the films I have and I get my hands on 12 Angry Men.
Reginald Rose originally wrote this as a play for the television but was also made into a film starring Henry Fonda in 1957. A courtroom drama, actually a jury room drama. And when I say that one will notice that is what it actually is. I am not going to tell you the story if you haven't seen it, but would rather suggest one goes and gets it. But I will mention so much - the film starts at a court with the judge asking the jury to leave and decide the fate of a later established 18 year old boy who is accused of murdering his father.
Now technically that is a straight forward script or thats the way I look at it. There are just about so many ways to take forward the film, but still I wanted to see how do they actually go about it. The other thing that didn't help was that I had already read the book as a 12 year old visiting my grandmum's place. But that just made the watch even more fun in the end.
I started by thinking about a way to keep me glued to the screen knowing too well that a 30 year onld watching a conversation based film is like asking a kid to read amartya sen (though he happens to be one of my favourites, it can be ascertained that he never meant to write those books for kids.)
But what will hit you immediately is that Rose does not wait for too many introductions and all but goes straight to the jury room and start the drama... the basics of introductions are done via dialogues that each of them speak. Even the characterisation comes out through the dialogues.
As a person who really would want to be later writing films I think this is just the film to watch. All you need is 12 actors and a room. watch