Anomalisa

Charlie Kaufman’s films are definitely an acquired taste. Kaufman’s scripts for Being John Malkovich, Adaptation and Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind certainly have both rabid fans as well as critics, despite a couple of them approaching cult-film status. His directorial debut Synecdoche, New York is also an immensely polarising film. In comparison, Kaufman’s latest film Anomalisa is less ambiguous and is his first foray into animation. 

A black screen, hundreds of voices (Tom Noonan) growing in volume. An Englishman, Michael Stone (David Thewlis) sits in a plane full of the same people, and no, they’re not all John Malkovich. He lands in Cincinnati, the Taxi driver recommends the Zoo. He arrives at the hotel, the bellboy takes his luggage. He calls home. He pours a drink. He rings an old flame. He smokes a cigarette. Life offers nothing new for Michael, that is at least, until he meets Lisa (Jennifer Jason Leigh). 

Anomalisa’s funding began on Kickstarter, promising a unique short-film that couldn’t be made as-is under the studio system. After raising nearly half a million on the platform, the film secured additional funding to be stretched out to near feature length. I should start by saying this film features some of the most extraordinary animation yet seen, incredibly lifelike and backed up with astounding cinematography. There are long-continuous shots where the camera follows the characters through doorways and around corridors, all of which would have required months of preparation and complex animation. The result is a surreal world that could only really exist in a Kaufman film. 

As I mentioned earlier, it’s probably the least unusual of his films. Having said that, Kaufman and co-director Duke Johnson use the animation as part of the psychological disconnect that Michael has with his world, and thematically, Anomalisa touches on the correlations between the mundanity of life and the male ego. In essence, it’s about a man going through a mid-life crisis, who turns to adultery. Not an easy premise to sell to an audience, but Kaufman & Johnson are able to find empathy in Michael’s situation, where all the other inhabitants of his world look and sound the same, even his wife and child. Lisa, is the only other person like Michael and becomes his only hope of salvation.

These themes and their embodiments are executed as a darkly comedic look at older life in a bland face-value world, and there were many laugh out loud moments amongst the consistently giggle-worthy script. This is essentially Charlie Kaufman’s version of Lost in Translation. About half way through there is a rather intimate, realistic sex scene which I suppose verges on the side of soft-core porn - I mean, they’re only made of plastic at the end of the day - and that saw about ten people walk out of my screening. However I’d put that down to the cinema I saw it at, which in my experience attracts a pretentious type of audience that only seek out the oxymoronic concept of “safe” art-house films. It’s a rare occasion where I’m the most mature person in a room of pensioners. Also, if you’re going to walk-out of a film, don’t sit there chatting for about ten minutes before leaving, just go. Apologies if this has turned into a rant on cinema etiquette.

I have to give credit to Tom Noonan for playing handfuls and handfuls of different characters; somehow making them distinct, whilst still the same (that’s the best way that I can describe it). Jennifer Jason Leigh’s shy, soft-spoken Lisa is a far cry from her wicked Daisy Domergue in The Hateful Eight, and the immensely talented David Thewlis gives a dejected lead performance as Michael. The three actors carry the film immensely well, with some challenging scenes that just about always manage to strike the perfect balance between dark comedy and self-reflection. 

Anomalisa is a tragically-funny film that wants us to talk about the secret fear we all have of losing hope, losing interest, slipping into a mundane life where everybody melds into one. A significant portion of the film is devoted to developing this concept, and it ends abruptly just as you’re hankering for more. I’m not even sure if that’s a complaint, but as with any great Kaufman film, it’s likely you’ll leave in an introspective mood. This definitely deserves multiple viewings. 

Legend

It seems amazing that we still get a kick out of a single actor playing two separate characters. All the things superheroes and action stars can do seem pretty normal, but put two Tom Hardys on the same screen at the same time and everyone is baffled. Make them fight and we all lose our collective shits. But apart from this novelty value, is Legend offering us much?

In late 1950s London, the Kray twins, Ronald and Reginald (Tom Hardy) are gangsters on the rise. Reggie is seen as the brother that is more level headed, whereas Ronnie is an unrestrained psychopath, having been released from a psychiatric ward at the beginning of the film. They have a stranglehold on the East End of London and are looking to expand across the river, but are hampered by rival gangster Charlie Richardson (Paul Bettany). Meanwhile, Reggie is courting young Frances Shea (Emily Browning), with whom he is enamoured with greatly. In the background, Ronnie and Reggie are trying to snare a deal with the mafia that will put them on top.

That's the problem with this film, the main action that the film should focus on is relegated to the back seat. This movie should be a violent portrayal of how the Krays came to rule London instead of a twisted romance between Reggie and Frances. There is a missed opportunity as well in not delving into the police investigation that brought the Krays down. One thing I will give the film credit for is its frank and honest portrayal of Ronnie's homosexuality. It makes no bones about Ronnie's admission of it either.

Tom Hardy has had an interesting career path. If this film had come after 2008's Bronson and RocknRolla, I would have thought that he was setting himself up as a British gangster actor and that would have made sense. But in this post-Fury Road world where he is being set up as superstar of tomorrow, doing a film like this doesn't make much sense to me. Although I say that, his performance (or performances) do dominate, and he is incredibly charming in both roles. The best thing I could say is that there is a definite difference in the way he plays them, right down to their difference in physicality.

The other performances in this movie fail, not because the acting is bad, but because the characters aren't very interesting. Emily Browning's Frances just seemed like a flat and boring person and that made her scenes hard to watch. The Krays' business partner is played by veteran actor David Thewlis, but just serves to explain exposition. Christopher Eccleston could have done better if he was given more to do, but he floated in and out too rarely for me. Taron Egerton was a shining light in all this as Ronnie's lover and is present in nearly every scene he was in. I didn't even know Paul Bettany was in it until I had to write this review.

Look, this movie is a bit of a disappointment if you're going to watch it with expectations. If you're watching it for Tom Hardy, you might like it.

Macbeth

Shakespeare has been a fixture of adaptation since the birth of cinema. Whilst there have been many attempts to modernise his works, the best adaptations have come when they make a straight adaptation (two great examples that come to mind are Oliver Parker's Othello and Ralph Fiennes Coriolanus). Australian director Justin Kurzel's latest film Macbeth follows this strong tradition.

In the closing battle of a bloody civil war in Scotland, Macbeth (Michael Fassbender) proves his loyalty to King Duncan (David Thewlis) by killing the treacherous MacDonwald (Hilton McRae). After the battle, Macbeth and his friend Banquo (Paddy Considine) come across three witches who tell Macbeth that he will be king and that Banquo's children will be kings. Macbeth is lured into killing Duncan by his wife Lady Macbeth (Marion Cotillard) so that he can become king, but only after Duncan's son Malcolm (Jack Reynor) flees to England. Once Macbeth becomes king, Duncan's closest ally Macduff (Sean Harris) begins to suspect Macbeth's involvement in the old king's death. At the same time, Macbeth is haunted by what he has done and descends into madness.

It is very hard to fault one of these adaptations on its story. There is little you can do to make the story better than what has been written. So therefore they must be judged on the performances and technical aspects. Luckily this film excels in both areas and that is largely due to the fantastic direction of Justin Kurzel.

The most important part of this film is its performances. You really need to be able to cast the right actors for the roles because people know the characters so well. Choosing Michael Fassbender was a genius move. He has the physicality to carry the battle scenes as well as the vulnerability for the madness scenes to be genuine. Marion Cotillard was good, but I felt as though she didn't have enough of a villainous attitude. Sean Harris is amazingly scary and brutal as Macduff. While both Paddy Considine and David Thewlis have rather short roles they both have a great screen presence. Elizabeth Debicki does a great job with her small role as Lady Macduff and Jack Reynor does the same. The problem that a lot of people are going to have getting into this movie is the thickness of the Scottish accents. This combined with the language of Shakespeare can make for some tough viewing.

Technically, this film is a masterpiece. The locations chosen in the Scottish Highlands are beautiful as is Bamburgh Castle on Northumberland coast. Kurzel employs a lot of frame rate experimentation with this movie as well, which gives it an almost ethereal quality. The battle sequences are all shot in super slow motion which heightens not only the tension and action, but also visceral emotion in the scenes. He also uses time lapse in a great scene when Macbeth is descending into madness, wandering around his chambers.

Even if you're not a fan or unfamiliar with the works of Shakespeare this is a great entry point, despite the fact that it can be a little difficult to follow at times. It's an even better if you do like the play, but it's not at all a prerequisite.

The Theory of Everything

With the Oscars fast approaching, we've seen plenty of biopics attempt to grasp the attention of the Academy. The latest to be released, James Marsh's The Theory of Everything, is up for Best Picture and depicts the life of Professor Stephen Hawking from his time in college, his struggles with his debilitating disease, and his relationship with his supportive first wife Jane.

At a Cambridge party in 1963, astrophysics student Stephen Hawking (Eddie Redmayne) meets Jane Wilde (Felicity Jones), an Arts student studying the Romance languages, with the two hitting it off straight away. Hawking is shy yet highly intelligent and witty, Jane is also somewhat introverted but sensitive to Stephen's intricacies. Hawking is still unsure what to complete his thesis on, which is worrying his Professor, Dennis Sciama (David Thewlis). After showing an interest in black holes and the creation of the universe, Stephen decides on his topic: time. 

Hawking is making great strides with his academia and his relationship with Jane, but soon he realises that he is having difficulty walking. After visiting a doctor, it's discovered that Stephen is suffering from motor neurone disease, which will slowly paralyse him. He's given approximately two years to live. Stephen tries to hide from Jane but she won't give up on him, resulting in one of the most emotional games of croquet ever played on screen. Jane wants to have as much time as they can together, no matter how difficult that may be.

One worry I had about The Theory of Everything was that it would focus entirely on the relationship between Jane and Stephen, and turn the film into too much of a Hollywood romance. However, this is not at all the case. Marsh has managed to strike a perfect balance between their relationship, Hawking's work and how his disease would affect both. Based on Jane Wilde Hawking's book Travelling to Infinity – My Life with Stephen, the film provides what seems to be an honest depiction of the support that Jane gave him and how it broke her down in many ways. Time is used thematically throughout as reference to Hawking's field and research, however its woven through very subtly and is much more effective that way. My only criticism of the script is that it drags in a few places and at points it creates too many divisions between different eras to flow well. However those concerns seem minute amongst the many captivating moments that The Theory of Everything has to offer.

Eddie Redmayne's performance absolutely dominates the screen, and is testament to his incredible abilities as an actor. Early on, he forms the image of a shy yet passionate student whose intelligence towers over all his colleagues. Then as the motor neurone disease starts to take its toll, Redmayne transforms his body to match Hawking's. The devil is in the details here, with his loss of dexterity, slurring of voice, curling of lips and eventual paralysis all handled sensitively. Felicity Jones embodies a sensitive, yet at times frustrated Jane and a refreshingly strong female character. Whilst some of the supporting actors are underused, such as Emily Watson, others provide magnificent performances, with David Thewlis a standout as always.

After the recent rush of biopics, I thought that I wouldn't be able to stand another, but The Theory of Everything proved me wrong. Marsh has formed a well-constructed appreciation of both Hawking and the woman who supported him, with an astounding performance from Redmayne.