Lea

Oscars 2024 Best Picture Reviews: Part Three

Jon The Blogcentric1 Comment

At first I intended for my Best Picture blogs to be three in total. When it became clear how much writing I did for the first two films, I decided dividing them into blogs of two reviews each is more worth it.  So in the meantime, here’s the third of my five Best Picture review blogs:

Dune: Part Two

The reboot of the Dune series has been so far the biggest movie action of the 2020’s. The re-adaptation of the Frank Herbert novel was a highly anticipated event in 2021 and hoped to get people back into the movie theatres after the relaxing of the strictest COVID precautions in history. It worked. Dune made over $400 million at the box office, was nominated for ten Academy Awards and won six. It was like what David Lynch got wrong, Denis Villeneuve got right. Originally, Villeneuve planned to divide the story into two films. This is what led to Dune: Part Two to be made.

The second Dune film continues with the drama left behind from the first. The second makes the stories of the dehumanizing Water Of Life, the installation of the young sadistic nephew of Arrakis as the ruler and heir to House Harkonnen, Paul’s romance interest to soldier Chani, the threat of holy war from Fremen fundamentalists, a spice trade at risk of smugglers, Paul’s consumption of the Water Of Life much to the disappointment of Chani, his dealing with his mother, his duel to battle the throne of the Harkonnen kingdom, his ascendancy to the role of king upon winning and the rejection of all as leader, including Chani. The drama continues, the excitement and thrills increase and the ending leaves the audience in suspense and the anticipation of what will follow in the sequel Dune: Messiah, set for release in the spring or summer of 2026.

Every year, there seems to be at least one ‘popcorn movie’ that seems to rack up enough buzz to eventually become a Best Picture nominee. Not only did Dune: Part Two get nominated for Best Picture, but the Dune franchise joins the Godfather, Lord Of The Rings, Going My Way and the Avatar franchise as the only five movie franchises to have two or more of its films nominated for Best Picture. It’s deserving of it because it succeeds in doing what a science fiction film should do. It takes people into another world. It creates an intense complex drama of the threat of the order of humanity and how it rests in the hands of one young man. It delivers in the action people go to expect form a film like Dune. On top of it, it succeeds in being the opposite of your typical movie sequel that ends up being a repeat of the first. Instead, we get a continuation of the chronologic drama and ends with the anticipation of the third and final part. Deserving of its Best Picture nomionation. And to think it was released back in March 2024. Talk about endurance!

Once again, top respect goes to Denis Villeneuve. You can trust Villeneuve to deliver in a sci-fi film. Both in his direction and his co-adaptation of the story with Jon Spaihts, he continues the excitement of the story well by keeping in the right parts, delivering on the action needed and making the smart decision to make his adaptation of Dune a three-film series instead of the two-film series he originally hoped for. He did things right and in winning fashion. Like most sci-fi films, the story is more focused on the special effects and action moments, but the film doesn’t stray away from its focus on the story and the characters. It is still there and still consistent. Even though Timothy Chalamet’s performance as Paul wasn’t too deep of a role, it is still consistent to the story and very believable. Zendaya’s performance as Chani added to the story. In the first Dune movie, Chani was a minor supporting role. Here, she’s the lead female protagonist and Zendaya does an excellent job in making her a key part of this chapter. There were also good performances of minor roles like Josh Brolin as Paul’s trainee and mentor, Rebecca Ferguson as Paul’s mother with whom Paul harbors resentment, Austin Butler as Paul’s fierce deadly rival to the throne and Christopher Walken as the emperor.

As is common with great science fiction films, the standout achievements are in the technical areas. You need it for a sci-fi film to excel and Dune: Part Two had some of the best of the year. Its top achievements are in the cinematography by Greig Fraser, the production design by Patrice Vermette and Shane Viau, the costuming by Jacqueline West, the editing by Joe Walker, the special effects by the film’s effects team, and the music from Hans Zimmer. All of it was successful in taking the audience into Dune’s futuristic world and enhancing the film’s action.

Dune: Part Two succeeds in keeping alive the drama, intensity and excitement of the first film and sets the audience up for anticipation of the third and final chapter. It succeeds in having the best qualities of a sci-fi film without the common watering down or cheapening of the quality.

Emilia Perez

Now this film has been the subject of a lot of discussion, for better or for worse. In watching it, one would be shocked how a musical is made out of subject matter that would be the last themes and elements thought of as subject matter for a musical. Nevertheless, the mix of a musical with modern-day dark drama works as a film from start to finish. Despite that, this film is not for everybody. If you’re a person who welcomes experimentation in film like I do, then you will like it or respect it as a film. If you want to be entertained, that’s taking chances as a lot of people will be unhappy with a film like this. Trust me. A transsexual druglord and all the corruption in Mexico and the missing people that come with it does not make for an entertaining film. Making a musical out of it would seem quite the oddity.

From the start, it looked like the type of film that would get a lot of Oscar buzz. It had great acting, an eyebrow-raising story and quite the unconventional way of making a film. The film would achieve thirteen Oscar nominations and then the hate began. First, there are the complaints from the transsexual communities complaining of the transsexual character being a murderous drug lord before the operation. Then came complaints from the people of Mexico of how Mexico was depicted as a place of rabid crime. Additionally, it came to light past social media messages from Karla Sofia Gascon. Exposed in her messages were tweets that were Islamophobic, racist and even critical of her own co-stars. This only came to light just after all the nominations were revealed. I know there’s always at least one Best Picture contender that starts a load of controversy. Best Picture nominees often start some controversy or debate but there’s always one that stands out the most. This will have to be the biggest of the ten.

I’m not normally one to trash a film unless it’s really horrendous or really terrible either in quality or in its subject matter. While the film is definitely one of uncomfortable subject matter, I do give it credit for its experimentation. We should know that this film is originally a stage opera created by Jacques Audiard who adapted it from a chapter in a French book Ecoute. I will give Audiard credit for trying to make a musical out of out-of-the-ordinary subject matter. Watching it will make you question if the musical elements of the film work or not but there are many parts that stand out as great and will even blow you away. Don’t forget this isn’t a story about a transition from man to woman. It’s also a transition of personality going from leader of a drug cartel to a humanitarian. Also I feel the acting in the story works well. It’s the acting from the three main stars of the film that help make the film work on the screen and work as an unexpected musical. The funny thing is after you’ve finished watching, you will ask yourself if you liked it or not. Or if this worked or not. Despite its imperfections, I consider it a brave attempt.

Responsible for this film is French director Jacques Audiard. Audiard has had a decades-long reputation as a filmmaker in France and has directed many films outside the French language. This film, which was a Palme d’Or nominee at Cannes 2024, should be seen as an accomplishment in retrospect. A flawed accomplishment, a provocative accomplishment but an accomplishment nevertheless. It’s not just this being an unlikely musical but also adapting a stage opera to the big screen. As if adapting a musical isn’t hard enough. Despite its flaws, I give Audiard credit for that.

Also excellent is the performance of lead Karla Sofia Gascon. A transsexual woman herself, Gascon does a great job in both the male role of Manitas and the female role of Emilia Perez. It’s two different conflicting personalities of the same character and it needed to be done well, and Gascon succeeds in doing it. Also excellent is Zoe Saldana as the lawyer caught in the middle of it all. When watching the film, you wonder if the lead is Emilia or if the lead is Rita Castro. Zoe does a great job in making the film as much hers as it is Emilia’s. Selena Gomez’ performance was not all there. Nevertheless she did have some great moments and was believable in most scenes. Adriana Paz is also great in playing Emilia’s lover. I give top technical acclaim to Paul Guilhaume in the cinematography, the hair and makeup team for the convincing work on the pre-transition Manitas, and the collaboration of Clement Ducol and Camille on the standout music.

Emilia Perez is not everyone’s cup of tea. It gives a lot of reasons for you to hate it and a lot of reasons for you to like it. I consider it a film for myself to like and admire, despite its obvious flaws.

And there you go. This is my look at two more contenders for the Best Picture Oscar. With ten films, boy do you get a lot of different films.

VIFF 2023 Review: Last Summer (L’Été Dernier)

Jon The BlogcentricLeave a comment
Samuel Kircher and Lea Drucker play stepson and stepmother that goes too far in the French film Last Summer.

For those that attend film festivals, there are many patrons who hope to catch a film with a bizarre storyline that looks good. One film that attempts to do it is the France film Last Summer. It’s a bizarre story that comes with unexpected twists.

Anne is an attorney in family law. She knows the system well and what works and what doesn’t in the Corts, but she will fight for her clients. Especially children. Anne is well-respected with how she works with rape cases, especially those involving minors. Anne is married to Pierre and has two adopted daughters from China. She does a very good job of balancing family life with her career.

Things change when Theo enters the picture. Theo is the 17 year-old son of Pierre’s from his first marriage. Theo is a troubled boy frequently getting in and out of trouble. Pierre is hoping a summer stay at his house will help improve him and improve his relationship with his son. In fact Pierre picks Theo up after his release from a detention centre. Anne is hoping to have this time to establish a mother-son relationship with her stepson.

Over time, Theo has no problem with being one of the family. He comes to family occasions well. He’s able to be a fun brother to his step-sisters. Anne has also found Theo to be a lot of fun to be around. It seems like they’ve developed a good relationship…or it’s something more. Anne is attracted to Theo and lets him know it. Theo is attracted to Anne in turn. Their closeness becomes more. A lot more.

Only problem is secrets don’t stay secret for long. The first exposure comes at a family birthday party. Anne’s sister catches them too close. She is disgusted and hurls an insult. Soon Pierre hears the news from Theo. Anne insists it’s all a lie. Whenever Pierre tries to bring it up, Anne knows of the right thing to say. When Theo confronts her in her office, she levels with him. She reminds him of his bad reputation and that no one will believe him. As time passes, Anne has successfully convinced Pierre and her sister that what they thought all along isn’t true. Soon Anne has one last encounter with Theo, which shocks everyone in the end.

Now this film is something. Very rarely do we have a film about incest created. And rightly so. Incest is a topic that almost all of us find disturbing and still churns a lot of people’s stomachs. This is a bizarre case. Theo is the stepson of Anne. Even if you get yourself questioning your morality as he’s not a blood relative of hers, he’s still the son of Pierre. Theo is a boy Anne is not to be attracted to in more ways than one. Seeing how the romance that is not to be unravel itself is enough to shock the pants out of the audients.

The funny thing about this film is that this film appears be about an incident of incest but if you look closer, you’ll see the film looks to be about Anne. Anne is a lawyer and an advocate: a respected woman who appears to champion the causes of exploited children. Soon she finds herself in a ‘tangle’ with Theo — a tangle that would lead anyone in the hottest of hot water — but she’s able to state her innocence and successfully convince those closest to her that it’s all a lie. We often forget that is the profession of lawyers and politicians: the power of the talk. Talk that wins cases, talk that wins minds, talk that can even trump proven truths. Anne has that ability to deliver that type of talk power and we see it throughout. She has the talk to win cases for young girls in family court, talk that can convince her husband and even her sister who catches her in the act that there’s no incest, and talk to convince Theo he won’t win his case against her. Usually a film about such an incident would be a film consisting of the incident, arrest, trial, conviction and any aftermath. I think that theme of Anne and the power of her talk may be the reason why the film ended in the way it did.

This is an incredible film by Catherine Breillat. Breillat is not well known outside of France. Her films in France have been known for decades to do about sexuality and family conflict. Her most notable works are 2001’s Fat Girl and 2007’s The Last Mistress. This film which she directed and co-wrote with Pascal Bonitzer is her first release in ten years and is actually an adaptation of a 2019’s Danish film Queen Of Hearts. Breillat does a great job in capturing the intensities of moments and having only us the viewer knowing the truth of the story. She knows how to capture what’s at stake should Anne be found guilty and expose a power play between the accuser and the accused.

The thing to make a film like this work is the acting. Lea Drucker was excellent as Anne, the one calling the shots. She knew how to make Anne the imposing figure that she is with the ability to be convincing to everyone even if we know it’s all a lie. Olivier Rabourdin was great as the husband who’s struggling to make sense of the whole situation of whether this really happened, what type of father he is. He was excellent at playing the man caught in the middle. Also great is newcomer Samuel Kircher. He gives Theo his recklessness, his innocence and his vulnerability without missing a beat. Very well done for a first performance.

Let’s just say Last Summer is a film of intrigue. It’s a film that features of an unspeakable happening and it comes with a lot of surprises including an ending nobody anticipated to happen. It’s a film that will get you thinking of what you saw over and over again!

VIFF 2023 Review: Apolonia, Apolonia

Jon The BlogcentricLeave a comment
French painter Apolonia Sokol and her attempt to make a career as an artist is the subject of the documentary Apolonia, Apolonia.

Those of you who are into the new artists may or may not know who French painter Apolonia Sokol is. The documentary Apolonia, Apolonia appears to be a documentary about Sokol, but becomes a lot more.

The film starts in 2013 as Apolonia gets herself ready for her art exhibit. The film then flashes back to 2009 when Danish film maker Lea Glob first meet the young Apolonia after just graduating from the Ecole National Superior de Beaux-Arts de Paris. She talks of her childhood of just growing up, the daughter of two actors, with her mother in an artist’s flat owned by a Parisian theatre company. She also reveals she had cancer as a child and was not expected to survive but the nuns prayed over her and she made it. As Apolonia has graduated, she decides she wants to be a professional artist. She feels it’s in her. She’s grown up her whole life around the artistic friends. Her artistic influence throughout her life is inseparable from her. Though it comes right after her professor tells her that her paintings are less interesting than her personality.

Undaunted, she starts her first works in Paris. She decides with her first paintings what her art will be about. They won’t simply be portraits of people, mostly women. She aims to get to know the subjects she paints more intimately and wants that reflected in her paintings. For painting women, she has a goal of redefining the modern woman through her paintings. She sets up her works in her flat which she continues to hold parties with many artistic types. Soon the theatre building she’s lived in her whole life is repossessed and her mother has to find a new apartment. One woman she meets from a party, a Ukrainian woman named Oksana, soon becomes Apolonia’s girlfriend and she starts living in her apartment with the mother. Oksana, who formed a feminist activist group at her college called Femen, is very understanding of Apolonia’s artistic goals, unlike Apolonia’s recent ex-boyfriend. Early in her pursuits, she has many art exhibitions in Paris and various cities in France. Apolonia continues her works just as both Oksana and her mother are living in the apartment and it makes things cramped.

It’s only a matter of time until Apolonia captures the eye of someone big in the arts world. His name is Stefan Simchowitz and he is famous for being a renowned art collector. Simchowitz sees promise in Apolonia’s works and he offers her a ‘big break’ where she can have her art viewed in Los Angeles by some of the biggest names in the art world. There is one catch; the deal includes a minimum number of paintings to create. This becomes a case of both ambition and frustration for Apolonia. She struggles with that demand with the number of paintings she tries to do simultaneously, with the expense of her flat in Los Angeles, with the expense of her painting materials, and her loved ones being thousands of miles away. When the works are finally launched on display, her works get a lot of good reviews. She also gets some critiques including one critic saying that her works look more forced than inspired.

Over time, Apolonia continues to paint and continues to showcase her works around the world in France, Denmark, other American cities, Argentina and Turkey. As her exposure grows, things become more difficult for her. She questions her artistry and if it should even submit to commercial pressures. Things also stand in the way with the relations with people closest to her. The relationship with Oksana ends and her new love is a man. She’s still insistent on not being a mother, and even has an abortion. Then in 2018 while doing an exhibit in another country, Oksana commits suicide. It breaks Apolonia’s heart, but she paints her memory in her next paintings. Then suddenly, the filmmaker herself becomes hospitalized after giving birth. Lea, the director, is not supposed to make it, but she recovers. Flashing forward to the 2020’s, Apolonia has been honored for her works by the artistic board of the French government. She reflects on all it took for her to make it to this level.

This is a telling documentary. It is very rare for a documentary to showcase an artist and their attempt to make it in the arts work from their very start to when they finally make it. As we follow the artist’s path, we can easily see why Apolonia would want to be an artist. She was surrounded by the arts and artistic people throughout her life. It eventually becomes her turn to express herself. We get a look at all the works she creates and why she paints she does. We see all the difficulties Apolonia goes through to achieve her renown such as her first exhibitions, her first contract, the cost of creating the many works expected of her, the critics she has to deal with, the sexism in the arts world, the loss of her former girlfriend. Even family situations as her father wants her to become a mother but her grandmother is fine if she doesn’t have children. It’s a long 13 year struggle that comes with the triumph in the end. Anyone who’s interested in making it as an artist should see this. It will show them a lot and remind others familiar with the arts world it’s still hard to make it as an artist. Always was.

Those who watch this documentary will also see it’s not just about Apolonia Sokol. The film is also about the documentarian herself. As she continues to film Apolonia and her life, she grows as a human. Apolonia’s emergence as a great in the world of art coincides with Lea’s emergence as a documentarian and also as she grows as a person. In a bizarre twist of fate, Lea also cheats death as she was given a low chance of surviving after her child’s birth. Just like Apolonia was given a low chance of surviving her childhood bout with cancer. Sometimes it seems the two were fated to be together.

This documentary is unique that it mixes three different stories into one and somehow pieces it together well. It first comes as a film that follows a young emerging artist as she works to establish herself. It shows the works she does, her inspiration, her free personality and the sexist hurdles she tries to overcome. It also shows her in her personal life. It shows her as she tries to establish herself as an adult and faces the pressures from family and others to find someone she can commit herself to or even the pressure to become a mother. It also shows her relationships: first with a Ukrainian woman named Oksana, then with a French man. There’s also dealing with Oksana’s suicide which hurts Apolonia to this day. Finally there’s the filmmaker herself Lea Glob. Just as Lea helps make Apolonia in her film, it becomes a case where Apolonia makes Lea. Definitely a documentary that goes beyond its original mission.

Top accolades belong to Lea Glob. From first meeting Apolonia in 2009 to constantly coming back to her to tracing her career’s biggest moments, she captures an artist in the making. She captures an artist’s soul with a fierce feminist attitude that she includes in her works. She captures the difficulties Apolonia faces to make it as an artist, especially sexism and capitalism. She captures Apolonia’s relationships with the people around her and some of the heartbreak she experiences. She also captures her own unity with Apolonia as she is also an against-all-odds survivor story too. One could joke the two may be long lost sisters!

This film has already won many a documentary award at film festivals. Among them, wins in documentary categories at the Amsterdam International Documentary Festival, Hong Kong Film Festival, the CPH: DOX Festival, the Goteberg Film Fest and the One World International Human Rights film Festival

Apolonia, Apolonia is a documentary intended to track the growth and progress of a rising artist, but it also tracks the growth and progress of the film maker herself. It’s rare to see and it captures your intrigue too.

VIFF 2022: The Word (Slovo)

Jon The Blogcentric1 Comment
The Word is the story of a Czech couple played by Gabriela Mikulkova (far left) and Marin Finger (far right) trying to keep their lives and family together after intense political change.

The first feature-length live-action film I saw during the VIFF was the Czech film The Word. This is a historical drama that tells of a story quite personal to the director.

Vaclav Vojir is a successful lawyer in Czechoslovakia in 1968. It’s not made clear where he works but he lives in a small town with his wife and two children. Vojir is good in his work and he deals with his clients in a humane way. One day in the summer of 1968, he meets with two men whom he didn’t have an appointment. They are men from the Czechoslovakian Communist Party. They dictate to him of how he is to do his profession. Ever since the Prague Spring earlier that year, the Communist Party has a heavier hand than before. They also noticed that Vojir was one person who signed a manifesto for more freedom that year. They threaten him with possible imprisonment in the future if he doesn’t sign an agreement with them.

Soon after, he meets with his wife Vera Vojirova and his children Ales and Emicka. He tells her of what happened and how he fears for the future. It comes at a tough time as summer is approaching. The family go on vacation at the beach, but Vaclav can’t forget what could happen to him. He tries to hide it from his children and wife and try to be a family man, but he can’t let it out of his head. Vera is in close contact with her sisters and tells them of all that’s happening. Word soon gets out over town.

Soon the pressures of being under the thumb of the Communist government bear down on Vaclav. He has a mental breakdown. His mental health has deteriorated so much, he has rendered himself bedridden. Soon Vaclav has to be institutionalized. The sisters feel it’s best off that Vera divorce him. They know she loves Vaclav, but the Communist government is a menacing force on the entire nation. Vera gets the nerve to visit Vaclav in the hospital. She has food for him and she reminds him that she still loves him and will do everything to keep the family unit intact.

As Spring 1969 approaches, Vaclav is now feeling better and he’s fit to be released from the hospital. He returns to a home that’s happy to see him again. However as he returns to his job, he is reminded that the pressures from the Communist government to do as he is told have not left him. He’s still under their thumb. Vaclav will stand by his word, but he knows he could face dire consequences. He could avoid them, but he can’t risk another relapse of his mental health. In the summer of 1969, Vaclav then makes the decision for him and his family to move. They’re going to leave the pressures of his job and the talk of the town behind to start a new life in another town. It’s unclear in terms of his career, but it’s known for the sake of his marriage and family.

This film is a reminder of the Cold War. Those 40 and over will remember it. It was the Communist world and the non-Communist world constantly threatening each other or trying to look menacing to each other. In the Communist world, the government were like a big brother to you and your daily life. For Czechoslovakia, things were definitely at their hardest after the Prague Spring of 1968. The government became harder on the people and those who were part of the movement for freedom faced threats of imprisonment. today, the Cold War and the Communist regimes are a thing of the past most Eastern Europeans. The nations did make the move to freedom starting in 1989. Some nations even dismantled themselves, like Czechoslovakia becoming Czechia and Slovakia. However ugly reminders still remain.

This is a story that happened just as the Soviet tanks had just come in and crushed Czechoslovakia’s move to freedom. People who participated in any activities leading to freedom were either punished or threatened. That especially meant people in their jobs like Vaclav Vojir. He was a lawyer who strongly believed in integrity and the power of staying to one’s word. However political pressure was menacing. It became a point where it affected his mental health. It was as much of a frustrating situation for his wife Vera. She too believed in the importance of staying married to Vaclav. She too was one who was willing to fight to keep the family unit together. Even if people advised her to divorce for the sake of the situation, she would not budge. I think the whole theme of the film is of how life under Communist rule really put people’s values to the test. Even though the Vojir family is miles away from the biggest hostility of the Prague Spring, it doesn’t mean they won’t feel it.

The story does a good job of telling of how the Communist government caused a lot of friction in people’s lives, especially in many family units. What’s unique about it is it does a good job of showing it over a one-year period. It starts in the summer of 1968 and it moves over time progressing as it goes from season to season. Each scene is an average of ten-minutes long and takes place in a single location or single area. Holidays are also important as they show the time change and also the occasions where families got together. The vacations and family time are also important as they showcase the relation between the Vojir’s and how much the family means to them. It’s a case where the surroundings are as important at telling the story as the actual dialogue and events. Also the additional element as the end of each scene of showing three photographs of the people involved, especially since no camera is shown, adds to the uniqueness of the storytelling.

This film is an excellent work from Czech filmmaker Beata Parkanova. Parkanova is relatively unknown outside of Europe. She wrote her first feature-length screenplay in 2015 and directed her first film Chvilky in 2018. This film is a different story for her as it is a retelling of a situation that happened in her grandparents’ family. She doesn’t go for big action in this story. The biggest most brutal action of the revolt happened around this time. Instead it’s a story low on action and more intense on the situation. Parkanova helps us keep our intrigue with the story and watch as the time progresses.

Actor Martin Finger does an excellent job of acting as he portrays Vaclav Vojir. He’s one of Czechia’s more renowned actors in recent years. Here he does a very good job in his portrayal of a man who will try to stay strong, but is prone to being under pressure. Also excellent is the acting of Gabriela Mikulkova. Her portrayal of the wife and the one who will most do whatever it takes to keep the family together is worthy of admiration. One could argue it’s her who best carries the film. The additional characters in the film like the Vojir children and Vera’s sisters add to the element of storytelling. At the Karlovy Very Film festival, the film was a nominee for the Crystal Globe for Best Film and Parkanova won the Best Director Ward and Finger Best Actor. The film continues to do the film festival circuit and was a nominee for Best Debut Film at the Haifa Film Festival.

The Word is an impressive melodrama that sends a message of how political change can impact individuals and families. The story isn’t told in intense fashion, but its story does give a lot of impact.

VIFF 2015 Review: The Lobster

Jon The Blogcentric3 Comments

XColin Farrell, right, has bizarre experiences with being single, mating and being in love in The Lobster.
Colin Farrell, right, has bizarre experiences with being single, mating and being in love in The Lobster.

Once you see The Lobster, I’m sure it will make you think twice about going to one of those matchmaker hotels. Okay, maybe not but the whole scenario of matchmaking and the single life depicted in the film is downright bizarre.

The film is set in a dystopian future where single people are brought to a hotel in accordance to the rules of The City. The hotel gives people forty-five days to find a match. If they succeed, the couple is given a month to develop their relationship in a special section of the facility. After which, they are freed. If anyone fails in any which way, they are killed and reincarnated as an animal of their choice and sent into The Woods. People can extend their stay with The Hunt: people from The Hotel shoot tranquilizer darts at any of the ‘loners.’ One ‘loner’ capture gives one an extra day.

A man named David arrives at The Hotel. He brings with him a dog whom we learn to be his brother as he too was subject to The Hotel and failed to find a match in due time. David tries to get used to the hotel and its methods. He chooses to be a lobster if he does not succeed in finding a new woman. He even participates in The Hunt. He learns of the other leisurely activities at The Hotel. One awkward rule is masturbation is banned by painful punishment but stimulation from the maid is a requirement.

David first makes friends with The Limping Man and The Lisping Man. The Lisping Man would have to stick his hand in a toaster for masturbating one night. The Limping Man hopes to find a woman with a limp like him. Instead he’s attracted to a woman who has frequent nosebleeds. He fakes nosebleeds to win the love of The Nosebleed Woman.

David is inspired by this and first attempts to win the love of a woman whom everyone knows to have no heart. He’s impressed by her hunting skills and he’s attracted to her as she’s choking to death. He attempts to start a relationship with her but it turns out to be a disaster even to the point she kills the dog: David’s brother. He’s able to tranquilize her and bring her to the transformation room so she’ll be an animal forever.

It then gets to the point David can’t handle it anymore and escapes. He finds himself with the ‘loners:’ they live a wild life catching rabbits and hiding from the hunt. The rules are not as hard but they don’t permit any flirting or entanglement as they will punish it badly. David wins the affection of a short-sighted woman. This helps since he is short-sighted too. The loners give the two missions to go to The City and pose as a couple but it causes them to become more affectionate.

The loners go on a rampage where they try and split up the couples in The Hotel. David even goes as far as trying to split up The Limping Man and The Nosebleed Woman and others going as far as pulling a stunt with the Hotel Manager. Meanwhile the leader of the loners learns that David and the Shortsighted Woman are in love and blinds the woman. They attempt an escape. This leads to an ending as bizarre and unpredictable as the whole story.

It’s hard to see if this film was trying to make a point about dating life, being single and marrying. This is a very bizarre scenario from start to finish. Plus I would find it hard that such a situation would be for single people with our current human rights. Keep in mind this is set in the future. Hey, depictions of the future like that in The Hunger Games don’t paint a pretty picture. It’s interesting how the army of loners raid the Hotel. Makes you wonder if their mutiny is a form of rebellion or of personal anger.

I will have to say this is the most bizarre romantic movie I’ve seen since Eternal Sunshine Of The Spotless Mind. That movie was what you’d call the ‘romance of the absurd.’ I do feel it is about love and surrounding human emotions magnified 100 times. The time limit put on those at the hotel to find love could be seen as the personal time limits one puts on one’s self to find love. The case of the leader of the loners trying to split all the couples up could be a case of one’s unhappiness and how one could try to impose it on others. Even those that end up in the hotel like the limping man, lisping man, heartless woman, nosebleed woman and the short-sighted woman may reflect on people’s insecurities. Meanwhile David is in the centre of it all. He starts out as possibly the most normal of the bunch but it isn’t until the end that he resorts to eccentric extremes of his own for the sake of love.

This is the brainchild of Greek director Yorgos Lanthimos. He has accomplished a lot in his directing career. His film Dogtooth was nominated for an Oscar five years ago. This is his first English-language film. In directing and co-writing the story with Efthimis Filippou, he creates a set of worlds that could easily look ridiculous on screen but worked with careful writing and careful directing. I see many cases with the hunt, the transformation room, the mutiny and even the character of the Heartless Woman that could have easily come across as dumb but was done right and was sensibly done.

Colin Farrell did a good job of playing this bizarrely comedic role well that’s completely different from any of his blockbuster roles of the past. He had to portray a man who treats this bizarre situation as something sane and normal. Even going from the sanest person in the film to committing an insane act for love at the right moment. He does it very well and gives the comedy the right tone. Although Farrell owned the film, Rachel Weisz as the Shortsighted Woman and Lea Seydoux as the Loner Leader were the strongest supporting performers. Some of the other minor characters were also very good such as Ben Whitshaw as the Limping Man, Angeliki Papoulia as the Heartless Woman and Jessica Barden as the Nosebleed Woman.

The Lobster is a film collaboration of five nations:  UK, Greece, Ireland, Netherlands and France. It won the Jury Prize at the Cannes Film Festival and was a nominee for the Palme d’Or. It has also won top film awards at the Rotterdam and Ghent Film Festivals.

The Lobster is both bizarre and amusing in its depiction of a futuristic world and its ways of dealing with dating. It’s both bizarre and charming at the same time.

VIFF 2013 Review: Blue Is The Warmest Color (La Vie d’Adèle)

Jon The Blogcentric6 Comments

Blue Is The Warmest Color is a French lesbian love story that tells more than just a story.
Blue Is The Warmest Color is a French lesbian love story that tells more than just a story.

One of the biggest attractions at this year’s Vancouver Film Festival is the French film Blue Is The Warmest Color. The win at the Palme d’Or at the Cannes Film festival will make it an attraction, no doubt. There are some that already know what it’s about and others that don’t. The question is will the crowds be satisfied?

The story starts with Adèle, a young high school student from Paris nearing adulthood and trying to decide what she wants to do with her life especially in times when Europe is going through economic troubles. She’s very involved with her job at day care, but lost in thought during school and unhappy in her relationship with Thomas. She soon leans of her lesbian attractions and starts trying to get as better understanding of it. She even breaks up with Thomas in the process.

Her gay friends from high school introduce her to Paris’ gay scene. She’s exposed to gay culture at one gay bar then visits a lesbian bar for the first time where she meet a tomboy woman with blue hair named Emma. Emma not only introduces Adèle to the lesbian scene but also to her work as an artist. Adèle’s high school friends are surprised with her relationship with Emma but over time the relationship goes from being simply Adèle being the subject of Emma’s art to a full intimate relationship. They share everything. Both are also good with each other’s parents. Both are also supportive as Emma helps with Adèle’s 18th birthday and Adèle cooks for Emma’s art party.

Things mark a turning point at Emma’s art party as Adèle senses something between Emma and Lise, her artistic colleague. Adèle also senses the advances of her boss from the daycare she works at. Eventually she does engage with her boss only for Emma to find out. Emma breaks up with Adèle in a rage leaving Adele frustrated and heartbroken. Months pass and Adèle is now a first grade schoolteacher. Emma is soon to have her first art exhibit opening. They meet again in a café to try and resolve what they can only for Adèle to learn a hard new truth. Adèle goes to the exhibit opening only to leave heartbroken but older and wiser.

The surprising thing about this is how this film tries to portray a relationship between two young girls. Its biggest quality was its truthfulness. It showed a girl-meets-girl scenario that’s often the common way two meet. It shows the relationship and how the two share so much with each other that almost mirrors other relationships. It also shows the friction in relationships with being attracted to another person, infidelity, break-up and aftermath that you will notice in other relationships. I believe that’s the biggest thing about this film. This is not a film that aims for heavy intense dramatic story but rather a film of a lesbian relationship between two young girls that mirrors most relationships people have or have had, possibly even one of your own.

It’s not only about the relationship in the film but also as much about the two main characters too. Adèle is turning 18 and in the midst of deciding what she wants to do with the rest of her life, eventually setting on teaching elementary school. Emma is an older art student and she’s disinterested in conforming to the expectations of the world nor to the art business. Adèle has just recently learned of her same-sex attraction. She slowly tries to learn about it and welcomes it when Emma comes into her life, but questions if she still has attractions and feeling to men. Emma on the other hand knew of her lesbian attraction at 14 and became very comfortable with it. The personality traits of both adds to the story of the relationship as it shows that opposites can attract. It also shows how the two personalities cause friction as Adèle has the common immaturities with an 18 year-old and Emma is a free person but with a fierce attitude.

One of the things of the movie is that it also brings up certain forms of thought. It should not be surprising because Adèle is a student just learning and it’s the student years where one tries to expand their mind. Emma makes mention of Sartre and him creating a intellectual revolution in saying we are ‘condemned to be free.’ Another time we’re in one of Adèle’s science classes seeing a lesson in gravity and one student talks of unavoidable vices and how the Catholic Church tells us that vices should be avoided. There’s also the division of the arts world and the business world that’s also present in the film. Adèle embraces the arts greatly in her own way but wants a career that’s stable especially since the future of the young of France looks uncertain and chooses teaching. Emma on the other hand wants to do what she wants to do and paint what she wants to paint and resists offers to ‘market’ her talent. That pressure of the dilemma of doing what one is born to do vs. doing what pays the rent is a common pressure in the minds of a lot of young people during those years. I remember it was even a pressure for me when I was a college student.

Without a doubt, the biggest thing that got me thinking were the graphic lesbian sex scenes. I know that sex scenes are choreographed but I was still surprised in seeing it’s explicitness. Even though I learned just now that fake genitalia were used, there’s no question that there will be many who will label it ‘pornography.’ In fact the producers refused to edit the film for release in the US and that got it an NC-17 rating.

In all frankness, I did find this a very revealing and intimate look at a lesbian couple but nevertheless I found this film to be too long. I believe if a film is going to be 3 hours long, it should justify its purpose. I really question whether 179 minutes is really necessary for that film because it didn’t appear to justify its length of time. I’m sure the film could’ve done as good a job of telling the story of the relationship if it was even two hours. There are even times when I question if that heavy-duty sexual activity, especially the impulsive activity in the café near the end, really added to the story or was included for shock value. That’s the problem with over-the-top sex scenes in movies: it may be intended for the story but could be taken the wrong way with the public. In fact there were times my ‘inner teenager’ felt like saying: “Owww! Get down!”

The best quality was the acting. Adèle Exarchopoulos did a very good job not just of portraying a young lesbian but also of a young teenage girl on the verge of womanhood. Her mix of a character who’s on the verge of adulthood trying to be more responsible but also dealing with her own immaturities, both behavioral and sexual, made Adèle very believable as a young woman. Lea Seydoux did a great job of playing Emma, the older freer one who’s in control. For those who didn’t notice, Lea is the one who won Owen Wilson’s heart in Midnight In Paris. It’s surprising how she’s completely unrecognizable here. She did a very good job of character transformation. Director/writer Abdelatif Kechiche was really daring in his subject matter and his adaptation of the story. I checked his Wikipedia profile and there’s no mention of himself being gay. Nevertheless He did an excellent job of taking the relationship and making it look so relatable.

The question will remain will Blue Is The Warmest Color go well with the movie-going public? Marketing gay-themes movies to the general public is not an easy task especially with the predominantly heterosexual crowd. Yes there have been films of gay characters and gay relationships that have scored well like Philadelphia, The Hours, Brokeback Mountain and Milk, but it’s still a chancy thing that’s still hit-and-miss with no proven consistent results. Even this being a French-language film may cause some difficulties. I even question if a film like this will score well with the LGBT populations in North America. We should also take in mind that living as a gay man or lesbian in Europe is a lot different that living as a gay man or lesbian in North America. Two different continents with two different social attitudes. Something I question.

Blue Is The Warmest Color is a unique film in its portrayal of a lesbian couple. It has a lot of good qualities that make it worth watching for some but not for others. It all boils down to the individual audient and their tastes and tolerances to decide if this is the right film for them or not.