Keaton is Back!: Birdman

"Meta" is a prefix that seems to get thrown around a lot these days.  A simple dictionary term describes it's adjective use as pertaining to or noting a story, conversation, character, etc., that consciously references or comments upon its own subject or features, often in the form of parody.  This particular form has been popping up quite a lot in our entertainment art forms these days, each to varying degrees and with varying metaphorical contexts.  It's not the easiest thing to pull off, but when it's pulled off well it is damn near dazzling.  Although, "dazzling" is probably not the appropriate descriptor of Alejandro Gonzalez Iñárritu's Birdman, it still works given the subject matter.

The film is centered on Riggen Thomson, a washed up film actor trying to put on a play adapted from Raymond Carver.  Everything seems to be going against him, from a volatile co-star (Edward Norton), various stage accidents, a disaffected daughter (Emma Stone), and, did I forget to mention the voice in his head?  Spurred on by the desire to create something meaningful with his art form and to thereby give his own megalomaniacal ego the stroke that it needs, he plunges forth against all odds to get through previews and finally achieve true artistic success like a moth to a flame.

Nothing is quite what it seems in this story.  For one, Iñárritu masterfully uses his camerawork and editing to make the majority of the film look like one continuous shot, showing the fast and often frantic pace behind the scenes of a theater production, only to bring us to a dead halt on some of the most brutally worded and amazing monologues I've seen on screen in some time.  This is truly an actor's film, but with enough of the behind the scenes insanity thrown in that any industry type person will be in on a joke or two that flies straight overhead of anyone else.  That doesn't distract from the true intention of the story though.  The meat of the story is Riggen's desperate attempt to maintain what fragile control he has left.  Be it his mental state, his relationship with his daughter, or just trying to keep his production from imploding, all the while seemingly cursed by his own self-centered desire and the internal war of his dual personality, Birdman himself.

The "meta" comes into play in the character of Riggen himself.  Riggen, being a fading Hollywood star who's claim to fame is a series of films about a costumed super hero named Birdman, which he quit making in the 90s.  To get even closer to this whole "meta" thing, Riggen is played by Michael Keaton.  Those Batman bells ringing yet?  Keaton's own Hollywood career began to decline in the mid to late 90s, but that didn't stop the actor for making the occasional film or two while throwing himself into a long and warmly received Theater career.  On top of all of this, there is a sort of scathing view of the entire entertainment industry that almost bleeds out of the screen.

What makes the film so damn good is it's humanity.  There is such a human quality behind everything that motivates even the smallest side characters of the story.  Everyone seems to be unsure of their place in the world, whether it's about how they fit, what they want, or who they are in their heart of hearts.  Despite all the volatile personalities and the ups and downs everyone seems to come together to complete the performance, a very human characteristic.  It's this kind of film making that sets Iñárritu apart from most of his contemporaries.

It's still in theaters.  It's probably also on demand.  This film really has a little something for everyone.  Give it a good chance before shelling out all your money for the latest blockbuster schlock that is about to bombard us til the end of the year.

"No Speeches. You point the gun? You shoot the gun.": Blue Ruin

Revenge has always been a constant in the fictional world.  Be it in poetry or prose, theater or film, revenge seems to go back as far as humankind first began as harry apelike beasts evolving too fast for their own good.  There's a whole gamete of revenge films, but the type that seems to stick out are those with a sort of Shakespearean blood feud attached.  Throw in a bit of Greek tragic irony and a Jean-Pierre Melville style of deadpan lead acting, and you've got one hell of a film in Blue Ruin.

The premise is simple.  A young man, Dwight, learns that his parent's killer is about to be released from prison and goes after him in revenge.  Through a series of tense and suspenseful moments we learn that not only is there some seriously messed up southern style retribution coming, but that the nature of the killings are not so clear cut.  The story then becomes about family vs family, son killing son because of the transgressions of the fathers.

Through meditative cinematography and a consistent following of the primary character, the film manages to suck you into Dwight's incredibly conflicted state of mind.  His need to kill his father's killer regardless of his foresight that it can't end there is what makes it so deliciously tragic.  Pitched as a quasi Cohen Brothers style film, Blue Ruin utilizes the revenge story to analyze the bond of blood and bounds of reason.  When it comes to blood, reason tends to get thrown out the window, culminating in a deadly stand off of truly brutal proportions.

The film is remarkably well made and utilizes a cast of nearly complete unknowns and character actors, which forces us to look simply at the characters and story without the distractions that come with A-List casting.  Macon Blair's portrayal of the troubled lead is such a quiet intensity that you can practically see the fuse burning.  His pain reaches beyond the screen so viscerally that it's hard not to sympathize with Dwight's plight, but his conflict is a hugely internal one that he manages to externalize incredibly well.

You can catch this film on most streaming sources, or buy a blu ray.  Top notch indie film making!

"Do you believe that love is a continuous stream?": Love Streams

I'm a little late to the game where John Casavetes is concerned.  In fact, I'm pretty late to the game where a lot of American Cinema is concerned, having spent a great deal of my life absorbing foreign classics and contemporaries from Japan, France, Sweden, Germany, and Russia.  However, I've been slowly making my way through his films and I must admit, the man had a style unlike any other film maker I've seen.  As consummately unique and whole in vision as any of Woody Allen's films, Love Streams is no exception to this, but is indeed an exceptional piece of work in the auteur's canon.

Love Streams concerns the fucked up lives of two siblings, Robert and Sarah, played by Cassavetes and wife Gena Rowlands, in the late middle ages who can't seem to get it together and don't seem to be particularly perturbed by that fact either.  With an improvisational and cinema verite like spin we are given a glimpse into the lives of these two characters in a profoundly honest way.  He does not glamorize the two, instead, shows us their ugly sides as flagrantly as their good sides, although the darkness seems to loom ever so close to the surface, threatening to consume them at any given moment.

I would like to note that I caught this film at work after the projectionist made, what he thought was, a joke about how "...we should be serving Gin and Valiums for this utterly depressing shite of a film."  I laughed outwardly, but inside I felt myself glaring.  If there's one thing I despise, it's a callously derisive approach to films with no regard to another person's preferences or taste.  Having already seen Husbands and Minnie and Moskowitz I had made up my mind to see Love Streams regardless, but I couldn't get the damn statement out of my head.  Luckily, as with matters of taste, my own taste prevailed and I instead enjoyed the intense, funny, sometimes outrageously strange study of these two lonesome characters who can only seem to tolerate each other in a truly compassionate way.

The camera work in this film is top notch and it's subtly induced me to feel like I was almost watching a documentary a few times.  I would plunge into the lives of these people and then just as suddenly be transported to an elaborate and farcical dream sequence.  Rowlands plays neurosis in such a way in this film that I found myself staring wide eyed at some of the situations befalling the character.  It's this quality that defines her as such an amazing actress, her ability to take a character that is, basically, bat shit crazy and still make me love and worry for her.

Even with Cassavetes roguish and sometimes misogynistic portrayal as a man who seems to truly believe that "Well, love is dead." I couldn't help but to pity him.  It's part of his charm, this ability to simultaneously cause shock and adoration.  While not for everyone, it is impossible to deny the profound effect that Cassavetes had upon the women and men who would later rise up through the ranks as America's Independent Film Renaissance.  This is purportedly his truly final film, as his health began to decline in the coming years and he would be dead from cirrhosis of the liver five years after it's completion.  I saw a beautiful 35mm print, but you can also get it on Blu Ray from The Criterion Collection or watch it on their Hulu Plus Channel.

We're Not Policemen. We're Spys: A Most Wanted Man

Ever since 9/11, there has been an emphasis in the "Spy Thriller" genre to create a sort of gung-ho terrorist take down conclusion to further define the narrative as a good vs evil situation, similar to our news media.  Of course, anyone who chooses to educate themselves past High School knows that there is no such thing as good and even.  Rather, there are thousands of shades of gray to every angle of every story.  Few films convey this fact and when they do they're often not met with financial success.  A Most Wanted Man is one of these films and you should do yourself a favor and pay it some considerable attention.

Based on the 2008 John Le Carre novel of the same title, it centers around an intelligence organization that is shadowing two particular men to determine ties to Al Qaeda.  Caught up in the mess are a Banker and a grass roots civil rights Lawyer, but the central characters are Chechen, Issa, and German intelligence man, Gunther Bachmann (one of the final roles of late Philip Seymour Hoffman.)  Bachmann seems to not only have his mission at hand, but seems to continuously clash with an incredibly hawkish German security council and the CIA as well.

What this film does, exceptionally well, is provide multiple points of view.  From the Lawyer to the CIA official, the characters all seem to have a very clearly defined idea of what they stand for and what makes them who they are.  It is Bachmann alone who seems to be more concerned on the big picture, while the Security Council and CIA are more interested in taking down what they believe to be key players in the war on terror.  We start to wonder, who is really the Most Wanted Man (a potential play on words) as the story plays out.

Le Carre was inspired by the real life story of Murat Kurnaz who was kidnapped by the CIA, jailed and tortured in Afghanistan and Guantanamo Bay for five years under the Bush administration.  While Le Carre's obviously fictional story serves more as a soap box for dissent against many post 9/11 Policies that had sprung up world wide, it also serves as a huge "What If..." argument.  As it was proven that Kurnaz was not a military combatant, is it not possible, likely even, that there are many more people under similar treatment and scrutiny?  How do we justify actions taken before all the facts are in.  

It's no secret that to win popular opinion the only thing that matters is an immediate result.  This is the central theme of the film, the long term vs the short term.  There's also a crippling sense of the humanity one must set aside to attain the goals of the, so-called, greater good and "making the world a safer place."  I can think of no better cast to portray these themes than the one in this film.  Philip Seymour Hoffman's controlled performance is shattered in the stunning climax of the film, making Bachmann's story truly heart breaking.  Furthermore, I seem to find myself more and more surprised at how good Rachel McAdams can be, and when you've got stalwart's like Robin Wright and Willem Dafoe on top of your incredible international support cast, you cannot lose.

This film is a slow burn, make no mistake, and it is made in the same vein as previous Le Carre adaptation Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy.  Director Anton Corbijn makes use of wide shots so well in this film that it feels like it's from a different era entirely, adding to the unsettling nature of the subject matter.  A must see for fans of great cinema, but unfortunately this film will probably not keep the attention of the blockbuster junkie.