Walter – Jon The Blogcentric

Oscars 2024 Best Picture Reviews: Part Four

24 February 202523 February 2025Jon The Blogcentric1 Comment

The thing about the Oscars is that each year, there are Best Picture nominees for films of subject matter that most people would normally not want to see. In some cases, films of unwatchable subject matter end up Best Picture nominees. A lot of these unwatchable things are based on people or events that actually happened, like these two films. For these next two films, I wouldn’t say they’re unwatchable but they do treat on dark subject matter. They’re far from the topics or themes that would draw crowds. Some scenes many would find too disturbing to watch. All I can say is you be your own judge:

**I’m Still Here (*Ainda Estou Aqui* )**

When one thinks of a Brazilian film, one would think of a film that may have scenes of the carnival, the festivities or the beaches. I’m Still Here is a very different film as it presents a dark side of Brazil’s history that they’re still troubled by today. Even the angle from which the film tells its story is unique. We have heard of people kidnapped during political regimes but we rarely hear about how it affects families. It’s through Eunice Paiva that we see how sometimes being married to an enemy to a regime could lead one to being imprisoned. Through Paiva we also see her as she struggles to keep her family together, struggles hiding the truth from her youngest children, struggles with her relationship with her youngest daughter and struggle to get the answers she needs of what happened to her husband. Eunice’s story of being the wife of a kidnapped man really tells a lot. It also shows how it would shape her to be the social justice warrior she became.

The film begins with a beach trip with the Paiva family. Everyone has fun, they all pose together for a photo and Marcelo found a stray dog they can make their own. It’s after that when everything changes. Soon the interrogation of Rubens, Eunice and their daughter, Eunice’s days of imprisonment and the years of aftermath not knowing whether her husband will return alive or if she will be kidnapped again. Then the long wait hoping Reubens will return and the fear of spies outside her door hoping to get her and imprison her again. It’s after the dog Pimpao is run over by the spies’ car that she lashes out at them and she’s had enough. Soon, her desire to leave Rio and start a new life for her and her family in Sao Paulo. The film moves forward to 1996 where Eunice has become a social justice advocate in Brazil, which had returned to democracy in 1989. She shows the death certificate of her husband she achieved. Her family has changed. Especially son Marcelo who became a successful author, despite being confined to a wheelchair. The film ends in 2014, years before Eunice would die of symptoms of Alzheimers. She is connected to a news story about the abductions and the continued pursuit of justice before a family photo.

Looking at it, the film is as much about family unity as it is about injustice in Brazil. Eunice had the nice orderly happy family life before the political abductions happened but that all changed after the imprisonment of the three. Trying to hide the truth of what happened to her father and deal with her older daughters’ knowledge of what happened is not an easy task. Trying to get the answers to what happened to her husband during a political regime that refuses to do so and trying to raise a family is a hard task. That’s one thing we rarely think about. We hear of political abductions in the news but we hardly ever hear of how families cope and try to keep themselves together. It’s through Eunice we see a personal strength we often ignore. You can understand why the family photo at the end of the film was so important. She succeeded in keeping the family ties together as much as she succeeded in achieving justice. The effect on children is also noticed in the film as her daughters fear the worst and are frequently arguing with Eunice. They’re the children with the most truth of what happened. Also the scene in 1996 when Marcelo and Maria, the two youngest, ask each other when they knew their father died, even as Eunice tried to hide the truth.

This is an excellent work from director Walter Salles. He’s one of the most acclaimed Brazilian directors with films like Central Station, The Motorcycle Diaries, Paris je t’aime and the adaptation of On The Road. This film is an excellent accomplishment of telling a dark story and making it a personal story. Even having it end on a positive note is an achievement. With the script written by Murilo Hauser and Heitor Lorega adapted from the novel written by Eunice’s son Marcelo, he takes the story and makes it relatable even though most of us will never experience something this terrible. He makes us connect with Eunice Paiva’s story and tells it so most of us who don’t know Brazil’s history know of the amazing woman Eunice Paiva was.

Making the film work is actress Fernanda Torres. She succeeds in telling Eunice’s story and makes us feel for Eunice and hope for the best. She did a great job, as did her mother Fernanda Montenegro who plays the dying Eunice at the end. Selton Mello was also great as the husband who still tries to live his life daily knowing he could be a political target any minute and eventually becomes one. The cinematography by Adrian Teijido added to the telling of Eunice’s story.

I’m Still Here is both the retelling of a dark era of Brazil’s history and the personal strength that came out of a kidnapped politician’s wife. It’s a sad story, but positive and hopeful.

Let’s face it. A film about a reform school that is infamous for its racism, physical and sexual abuse, and even murder of minors will not make one want to watch it. In fact, Nickel Academy is the pseudonym for the now-closed Dozier School For Boys in Florida where graves of those killed were discovered and survivors are now receiving their justice. Those that have learned of the ugly news of Dozier of recent years will want to avoid seeing Nickel Boys, but it does give people reason to see it.

When it comes down to it, what happened at Dozier School should serve as something that should never happen again. What happened there needs to be told, but how? How can you make a place of abuse and murder watchable? RaMell Ross succeeds in doing it with the character of Elwood Curtis. The film flashes frequently in between Elwood’s time at the school to the adult Elwood who just learns of the truths unraveled in 2003 as he’s a successful businessman with a stable relationship. The film tells Elwood’s story as it starts before Martin Luther King’s civil rights movement and Florida still having Jim Crow laws. The film shows how as we fast forward 40 years later, Elwood is overcome with hurt and trauma as the secrets are unraveled with the finding of mass graves. In the flashback, we see Elwood bond with one of the boys named Turner he’s with and the two plan an escape while Elwood documents all that has happened in a diary. The escape fails for Elwood as he’s shot dead while Turner succeeds in escaping around the time of the Civil Rights Movement. In the flash forward, Turner adopted Elwood’s name to thank him for all he taught him.

Elwood and Turner are fictional characters, but they could be representative of any of the boys at Dozier School. It’s through Elwood’s and Turner’s friendship at Nickel that we’re shown of the corruption, abuse of various kinds and the murders that happened there. Through Nickel Academy, Dozier School was as much about racism as it was about abuse. White students got better facilities and a better education while the black students got bad facilities, a bad education, the most hazardous jobs, and even harmful punishments like the sweatbox. African American students got it harder and their death rate at the school was way bigger than that of white students. Even black students who didn’t do what the white superintendent says, like fix a boxing match, could be executed and the superintendent would never get arrested. You can understand why the story has Turner’s escape around the time of the Civil Rights Movement. It would be the beginning of the end for Nickel/Dozier.

This is a great work from RaMell Ross. The story he directs is based upon a 2019 novel of the same title that is the telling of that fictional friendship. The story he co-adapts with Joslyn Barnes is very good and very revealing. He succeeds in making a film about the abuse that is watchable and gets one to think. It’s a reminder of the ghosts of the past and how even if we do well in the present, it will come back to haunt us. Even as the guilty people are slowly brought to justice, we’re reminded it can’t erase the hurt and trauma. He does a good job in making it as much a story about two friends as it is about exposing the truth. Excellent work. Also great is the acting of Ethan Herisse and Brandon Wilson. Their performance as the friends caught in the drama did as much storytelling about the place as it did about them. Daveed Diggs is also very good as the adult Elwood who tries to hide his hurts of the past, but they eventually come out. Also great is the performance of Aunjanue Ellis-Taylor playing the grandmother who is hoping for the best for Elwood and tries with every chance and opportunity, only for every white ‘helper’ to fail her. Her mix of optimism and heartbreak adds to the story.

Nickel Boys succeeds in making what could be a film of unwatchable subject matter be watchable. The mix of a story of a friendship around a school with a notorious past exposes truths of the school while maintaining a sense of hope.

And that does it for now. That’s my review of the latest two Best Picture nominees of review. The last two will be coming very shortly.

2022 Oscar Shorts Review: Animation and Live-Action

5 March 20236 March 2023Jon The Blogcentric1 Comment

Did you think with this being an Oscar year I would miss my chance to see the films nominated in the short films categories? The chance was there and I took it again. All the films had a unique style about them and all appeared worthy of their nominations. So here I go. Here are my reviews for the nominated films in the Animation and Live-Action categories.

BEST ANIMATED SHORT FILM

The Boy, The Mole, The Fox And The Horse (dirs. Charles Mackesy and Matthew Freund) –

A boy is lost in the winter snows. A mole finds him. He hopes the mole will lead him home, a home he’s never had before, and wants to grow up to be kind. The two hope the river they find will lead them there, but they’re encountered by a fox. The fox wants to hunt them both down, but finds himself in a trap. The mole frees him and the fox runs away. The next day the mole falls into the river, but is saved by the fox. The fox joins the mole and the boy on the journey to the boy’s home. Along the journey, they encounter a white horse who is an outcast. The three welcome the horse along the journey. Soon they discover the horse has a special trait. He can fly like Pegasus! Soon they come to the village where the boy’s home is. The three animals say their good-byes, but the boy makes a surprising decision.

It seems like every year, there has to be at least one animated short from the UK that’s nominated. This is this year’s nomination. This is an adaptation o f a 2019 children’s book from Charlie Mackesy, who co-directs this short film. This is a 2D short that has been on Apple TV starting this Christmas. It has a quiet soft tone that’s more touching than sentimental. It makes the right moves and is able to be soft without getting too mushy or manipulative. This is one charmer that I give both my Should Win and Will Win pick.

The Flying Sailor (dirs. Wendy Tilby and Amanda Forbis) – It’s the morning of December 6, 1917 along the coast in Halifax. Two ships collide within each other with one catching on fire. A sailor thinks nothing of it and lights a cigarette. Only the burning ship soon explodes. The sailor goes flying naked in an out-of-body experience. His life flashes before his eyes from childhood to his life at sea as Halifax is engulfed by the blast. The blast sends him out of earth and even out of the galaxy. Then all of a sudden, he’s brought back down into the galaxy, then earth, then back into Halifax into a body of water. Miraculously he’s still alive. He even stares a shocked fish in the eyes.

As I was watching this, I asked myself “Is this about the Halifax Explosion?” Yes, it was. In fact the film makers dedicate the film to a sailor who flew 2 kilometers in the explosion and lived to tell! This film from the National Film Board of Canada is one of of two animated features from The New Yorker Screening Room to be nominated. It’s a clever story that doesn’t need any dialogue for us to get the message. It lets the images and the moments tell the story of a man who’s near a sudden death contemplate his existence. A fast film, but entertaining and even humorous from start to finish.

Ice Merchants (dirs. Joao Gonzalez and Bruno Caetano) – A widowed father and son run an ice selling business. The ice comes from a box they fill with water, let freeze overnight, and break up to sell the next day. They get their freezing temperature by being up on the very mountain they have their house upon. The house is thousands of feet above the ground hanging from ropes and requires a system of pulleys and ropes to get to. They have to skydive down together into the town to sell their wares. The flight always causes their hats to fall off. They use the money from sales to buy new hats. Then one day, the son notices the water in the box didn’t freeze. The temperature is above freezing. The high temperature of the snow is causing an avalanche and the house’s ropes are breaking. The parachute falls from the house. The father makes the decision to jump with his son. Fortunately a female skydiver finds the two in the air, grabs hold of them, and opens her parachute. The two survive, but in a surprising way!

This film from a Portuguese animation company is another film from The New Yorker Screening Room. It’s a good 2D film that is as much about its art as it is about telling its story. It uses only a few colors at a time for each of its scenes. It has the visuals and the music tell the story without having any dialogue. It also does a very good job in showing the drama of the climax. It also ends on a happy and humorous note that works well with the story.

My Year Of Dicks (dirs. Sara Gunnarsdottir and Pamela Ribon) – It’s 1991 in Houston and Pam seeks to lose her virginity as she is approaching womanhood. She, however, is undecided which boy she wants to lose her virginity with. She constantly trusts the opinions of her best friend Sam, who is male. The first boy she tries to lose it with is David, a skateboarder who thinks he’s a vampire. She’s attracted to his mystique, but soon learns what a jerk he is and of the little game he had with his guy friends. The second boy is Wally, who’s a theatre usher. They try to do it in a broom closet during work hours, but it doesn’t work out. Third boy is Robert, whom she finds as nice. She soon learns he’s gay and was interested in Sam. Pam tries a party hosted by her friend Karina. She meets a boy named Joey who appears to be orderly. The party comes to a sudden halt and Pam learns Joey is a Nazi! The story ends with a surprise that Pam learns what she was searching for was there all along.

It’s a story with both intrigue and humor. The rotoscope animation adds to the story and adds to the comedic elements of the story. Pam brings an intriguing story and Sara Gunnarsdottir does a great job of animating and directing it.

An Ostrich Told Me The World Is Fake And I Think I Believe It (dir. Lachlan Pendragon) – Neil is a telemarketer trying to sell toasters. His boss confronts him of his poor performance and threatens to fire him. As he continues working, he hallucinates and notices things missing from his cubicle. He wakes up and he sees an ostrich. The ostrich can speak and tells him this world is a ‘sham’ and advises him to get a better look at his surroundings. Neil soon finds his way out of the animation world and into a prop box full of his own mouths. The following day, Neil is shocked to see all the furniture removed. A co-worker named Gaven tells him it’s a corporate decision, but Neil rips his mouth off. The creator tries to intervene, but Neil falls off the set. With Neil’s body all broken up, the creator puts him back together and on the set. The next day, Neil is confronted by his boos, and quits.

This Australian short is an amusing stop-motion animated film. It goes from the animated story to the world of the production studio. It’s funny how the film knows it’s stop-motion and knows how to joke around about that fact. That adds to the humor of the story. It’s a funny film that goes from the animated story to the real world and back to the animated story. It seems odd at first, but it’s very likeable.

BEST LIVE-ACTION SHORT FILM

An Irish Goodbye (dirs. Tom Berkely and Ross White) – Two brothers from Belfast, Turlough and Lorcan, have lost their mother. The priest gives the sons the ashes and attempts to give them their mother’s ‘bucket list,’ but Turlough thinks its useless. Turlough, who works in London, wants to sell the farm and have Lorcan, who has Down’s Syndrome, live with his aunt. Lorcan wants nothing to do with it. Lorcan says he has the bucket list and still believes they can fulfill his mother’s wishes with her urn. The two agree to try all 100. However it’s the 99th, skydiving, that her urn smashes. Turlough soon finds out the truth about Lorcan’s bucket list the priest. That leads to even bigger friction, but a resolution does occur after they proceed with the 100th item.

This Irish short film is a well-acted film that’s mixes both tragedy and comedy with the intensity of family drama. It also deals with the issue of Down’s Syndrome in a humorous manner that doesn’t tread on being insulting or having mockery. It’s a story you anticipate to be sad, but instead turns out to be humorous, enjoyable, and even heart-warming. It’s worth seeing.

Ivalu (dirs. Anders Walter and Rebecca Pruzan) – It’s morning in Greenland. The Queen of Denmark is to visit. Pipaluk is looking for her older sister Ivalu. Her father, who acts like he doesn’t care, says she ran away. Pipaluk tries looking for Ivalu. She sees a raven and thinks Ivalu’s spirit is in the bird. As she continues the search, she remembers the conversations she had with Ivalu. It’s then she faces the facts of a lot of ugly secrets about Ivalu and how her father treated her. Pipaluk feels she has to confront the awful truth. In the end Pipaluk wears Ivalu’s dress for the Queen’s visit.

This is a story that touches on a taboo rarely discussed but is well-known among indigenous peoples. Child sexual abuse is also very common in the Inuit populations of Canada. Although this is touchy subject matter, it does a good job in adapting a short story into a watchable film. The film has visuals that are both mystic and disturbing. It’s a sad story that does come as life-affirming at the end. Its imagery is the film’s best quality.

Le Pupille (dirs. Alive Rohrwacher and Alfonso Cuaron) – The story revolves around a Roman Catholic boarding school in Italy during World War II. The central character of the story is a girl names Serafina. She’s an outcast at the school and the nuns are strict to all the girls, including Serafina. Mother Superior Fioralba is the strictest of them all. Christmas is fast approaching and the girls are to put on a Nativity play. The people in the town see the girls as darlings, but Fioralba always finds something to scold them about like singing a romantic song on the radio, which Fioralba describes as ‘filthy.’ She’s angry Serafina won’t admit to singing the lyrics and tells her what a bad girl she is. On Christmas, a rich socialite, who’s frustrated by her cheating boyfriend, gives the nuns a big red cake for the girls. Fiorabla thinks the cake is a bad thing as soldiers are starving. At the Christmas dinner, the girls are about to have dessert of the cake, but Fioralba tries to convince them not to have it. Serafina, shamed by her scolding, is able to get a slice. Fioralba hoped to use the cake for the Bishop’s visit. In the end a chimney sweep is given the cake which, thanks to him falling, is enough for everyone from the schoolgirls to his chimney sweep friends to the alley-way pets to have some of the cake.

It’s a charming story. I didn’t think Cuaron would be the type to do a short film for Disney. And in Italian. At first, you think with subject matter like this, it would be a dark story. Instead it turns out to be humorous and also turns out to be a good lesson in charity the girls and the chimney sweeps end up teaching a stern but dishonest nun like Fioralba. It’s also a story that shows how freeing yourself can even triumph over in a strict religious boarding school. And during World War II in Italy to boot! That’s why I give this film my Will Win pick.

Night Ride (dirs. Elrik Tveiten and Gaute Lid Larssen) – In a town in Norway, a woman with dwarfism named Ebba is waiting for a tram on a cold night. A tram arrives, but the driver is taking a half-hour’s break. Impatiently, Ebba sneaks her way on the tram as he’s in the washroom. She plays along with the buttons in conductor’s controls and is able to get the tram moving. The conductor leaves the washroom shocked to find the tram moving, but Ebba moves on wit the runaway tram. Two rude males board the train along with a woman named Ariel. One of the males hits on Ariel, only to learn she’s trans. The two males get confrontational with Ariel, even threatening, but Ebba stops the tram to face up the men to stop. Even as the men are rude to her about her height, she doesn’t back down. She then tells the men to lead the tram and Ebba and Ariel get off. It’s just Ebba and Ariel on the bus bench as they watch a police car chase the runaway tram. They both laugh together.

It’s very rare that a film can take the topic of transphobia and make a comical situation. Here we have a case of a woman with dwarfism who steals the train and the trans woman whom the woman prevents from being attacked. It’s almost as if the runaway tram was a miracle for Ariel as it prevented physical abuse from happening. Not to mention the eventual comeuppance of the transphobes as both Ebba and Ariel see the police car chasing the tram on a bench. Both are cold, but they’re both safe, unlike the transphobes. And an unlikely friendship to boot!

The Red Suitcase (dir. Cyrus Neshvad) – Ariane, a young woman from Iran, has just arrived at the Luxembourg airport. She looks fearful. She has her red suitcase but refuses to leave past security. This causes suspicion among the guards and they check her suitcase. All that’s inside is clothes, pencil drawings. and art supplies. Nothing threatening. The true threat is past security. A middle-aged man her father arranged for her to marry. Her father even instructs her to approach the man through text message. Ariane has to escape and try to avoid catching his eye. She tries to get her money exchanged for Euros. It doesn’t exchange to much. She then tries to go out to look for an escape. She sees an airport bus and boards it, using her exchanged money to get on. Meanwhile the man is impatient as he has a big wedding planned that day. He received a message from Ariane’s father that her flight has arrived. He notices her money envelope so he knows she is outside. He searches in the bus area. He boards the very bus Ariane is on. Ariane finds an escape. He sees her suitcase but can’t find her. Ariane hides herself in the baggage area of the bus and won’t leave until it’s safe. Even a text from her father promising if she returns home, she can have anything won’t calm her. Then the bus drives off with the man on board and Ariane still at the airport.

The theme over here has to be the subject of arranged marriages. This is especially an important film as the Iranian feminist movement has been fighting for their freedoms since October. Those scenes where Ariane takes off her hijab and one where she cuts her hair are definitely part of the message. Even though the film is important because of its subject matter, the way the film plays out as we see one side of the subject matter and we learn more as it goes along is a creative element. Even the scenes of near-misses add to the intensity. We all wants Ariane to avoid being with the husband she doesn’t want, but we fear for her safety. We get the relief at the very end. Ariane is alone at the airport with all her money spent and without her suitcase, but she is free. It’s because of this that I designate this film as my Should Win pick.

And there you have it. That sums it up for the Animated and Live-Action short films nominated for this year’s Oscars. Those that aren’t normally film buffs, watching these shorts are more worth it than you think!

VIFF 2019 Review: Mr. Jones

6 November 201914 November 2019Jon The Blogcentric1 Comment

I was interested in seeing Mr. Jones at the VIFF as it’s based on a topic of my interest: the Holodomor or Ukrainian famine of 1932-1933. It’s an intriguing story with a relevant message for today’s world.

In 1933, Gareth Jones is a 28 year-old Welsh journalist who is very good at getting stories. He was the first foreign journalist to fly with Hitler and Goebbels at the start of Hitler’s regime while working as an advisor for British statesman Herman Lloyd George. During the time, he discovered of Hitler’s intentions to wage war. His story fell to deaf ears in the press and his job as advisor is dropped due to budget cuts. Despite being dropped, George gave Jones a letter of recommendation. He hopes to use it to go to the USSR to find an investigative journalist. Before he does, he gets a phone call from a friend named Paul Kleb in the USSR. He talks of how the economy is booming in Russia, but he is about to tell of something terrible happening in Ukraine… and then he gets disconnected.

Jones arrives in Moscow. His trip is regulated from start to finish: what he does, how long he stays and where he goes. That’s how things are in the USSR. In fact his job as a foreign journalist is under heavy scrutiny by national officials during his stay and no foreign journalist is allowed outside of Moscow. He arrives at the hotel in Moscow of New York Times bureau chief Walter Duranty. Duranty welcomes him and introduces him to his assistant Ada Brooks. Jones is expected to be in the USSR for seven days but he can only stay at the hotel for two days. Duranty offers Jones to stay and partake in the late-night partying. At the parties is all kinds of debauchery from prostitutes to heroin shooting to even homosexual advances. Jones wants none of this as he knows Paul Kleb was killed in Ukraine and has to find out why.

Jones finds a train headed to Eastern Ukraine. He breezes past security to stow away on it. When he arrives in Ukraine, he steps off to see the farmed grains loaded onto trucks by the Soviet army, but people dead in the snow and farmers starving. He tries to get answers. He goes to soldiers putting the bagged grain in a truck. He asks in English where it’s going, but is suspected as a spy. Soldiers go out chasing and shooting after him. Fortunately, Jones is able to evade the pursuit. He comes across some children who sing a haunting song to him of the death and starvation happening around him. He goes to a house which is in a photograph he holds, but sees the residents dead in their beds. Jones goes into a town where he sees the Soviet army take the dead bodies in the snow and pile them in a sled to be buried in a mass grave. They even take a baby that’s alive and still crying. Jones goes into a house where he is able to find living residents. They give him something to eat, which appears to be meat, and from Kolya. He soon learns they’re staying alive by cannibalism, and Kolya is a famine fatality.

Soon Jones is captured by Soviet forces. The Communist government commands him to be silent by using the lives of six British auto workers as hostages. Jones tries to plead with Walter Duranty to expose the truth of what’s happening, but Duranty is ‘in bed’ with the Soviet regime. Duranty has a habit of writing of the ‘Worker’s Revolution’ in the USSR like he romanticizing it. In fact Duranty has the reputation of being known as ‘Our Man In Moscow.’ Ada however is more supportive towards Jones and believes he has to get the story out. This can’t be hidden and knowing that Jones is to be sent back to the UK, she encourages him to make the truth known.

Back in the UK, Jones can’t get any British paper to buy into his revelations of a man-made famine. The government either doesn’t want to believe it, or fear it will jeopardize diplomatic relations with the USSR. This upsets Jones as he knows this must be stopped. The events upset him so much, he can’t stop himself from breaking down in tears in his hometown. However he has an opportunity to talk to William Randolph Hearst while at a newspaper office. Hearst, however is extremely busy and will only allow Jones thirty seconds to state his case. However when he mentions of the death of Paul Kleb, that grabs Hearst’s ear and makes Hearst want to hear everything Jones saw. Finally the story ‘Famine In Ukraine’ makes the front page of the New York Times. Jones is defamed. He is not allowed in the USSR again. Duranty is also defamed, but never had his Pulitzer Prize rescinded. Nevertheless George Orwell is caught in the intrigue of Jones’ pursuits and it inspires him to write ‘Animal Farm’ published ten years after Jones was shot to death.

I’ll admit any story about the Holodomor catches my interest. I’m of Ukrainian ancestry. My great-grandparents arrived in Canada around the 1890’s-early 1900’s. They came here long before World War I even started, before Ukrainian land was annexed as part of the USSR and before the Holodomor. This film showcases the Holodomor and is possibly one of the best cinematic depictions of it, but the Holodomor is not the biggest theme of the film. The biggest theme of the film is about censorship in the USSR at the time. All the censorship that happened in the film is an example of the censorship that happened in the USSR since it began after World War II until it broke down in the mid-80’s to when it dissolved in 1991. All news was censored. Nothing but good news was to be published in Soviet newspapers and whatever negative news could not hit either Soviet news nor news to the outside world. Phone wires were tapped and letters were opened and investigated by authorities before it reached the mailboxes of the citizens or outsiders. Even speaking negative words of the Communist government would get one a jail sentence. The Soviet media promoted propaganda to glorify itself and its Communist system and vilify the capitalist system in the United States.

As seen through Gareth, the Soviet system was also restrictive to outsiders. The system decided if a person from an outside country could visit, where they could go and stay and for how long. There were already six British autoworkers who were treated like hostages at the time and threatened with death to have the UK comply to their demands. You can understand just what Jones had to face in order to get the truth out.

Gareth had good reason to pursue the story. It’s not just trying to find out why Paul Kleb died, but Ukraine had personal interest to him as his mother taught English in Ukraine in the 1890’s. Gareth even had barriers in journalism to overcome once he had his story. He had top journalist Walter Duranty to deal with. Duranty had a big reputation at stake and kept insisting that the Holodomor isn’t happening. It isn’t until Jones meets with William Randolph Hearst that he finally gets a willing ear. The big feud between Duranty and Jones shows how even in what is supposed to be the ‘free world,’ there is still a lot of truths that are suppressed or even denied. Seeing all that goes on can make one wonder if this is happening today in what is supposed to be free countries. If we are really getting this freedom of speech or if we’re getting a lot of concocted stories.

This film is great in making a point about journalism and getting the truth out. There are a lot of truth even in today’s world that need to be exposed, but are covered up. The film does a good job in making a moment of past history, and the journalistic feuding surrounding it, make for a relevant message for today. Even the fact that Gareth was shot to death in 1935 while investigating a story in Chinese territory bordering Russia (which many consider to be a Soviet plot of revenge) reminds us of how many journalists risk their lives to uncover truths.

The film was very good at making its point. However the story didn’t seem to be heading on a straight path. There were times when moments that only deserved a certain time, like all the debauchery at Duranty’s hotel party, was slowed down and given more screen time than necessary. Even the moments of the journalistic feuding and political feuding appeared to take too long. The moments involving Jones witnessing the Holodomor in Ukraine were given the best screen time and the best on-screen depiction. It showed a lot of brutal honesty of the Holodomor, including that of cannibalism. It may have taken over less than half the screen-time, but it was done in excellent detail and gave the right haunting feel to this moment of tragedy.

Veteran director Agnieszka Holland teams up with emerging writer Andrea Chalupa to bring this story to the big screen. The story is one of great personal interest to Holland as she is well-knowledged of the Holodomor. Holland also has renown for her depictions of the Holocaust in some of her films. She does a very good job in directing the story, even if there are some moments of irrelevance or moments drawn out longer than they should be. James Norton does a good job in his portrayal of journalist Gareth Jones, but his part could have been developed more. Most of the parts didn’t have too much development and could have had more done with it. Nevertheless, Peter Saarsgard was able to make Walter Duranty hateable on the big screen. Vanessa Kirby was able to make her role of Ada gain more dimension over time.

Mr. Jones is about more than just about the Holodomor. It’s also about the topic of censorship that is just as relevant now with the ‘freedom of speech’ we’re led to believe we have in the ‘free world.’

Movie Review: Big Eyes

31 December 2014Jon The Blogcentric1 Comment

Amy Adams plays artist Margaret Keane in Big Eyes: a story of possibly the biggest art forgery of our time. — Amy Adams plays artist Margaret Keane in *Big Eyes*: a story of possibly the biggest art forgery of our time.

Remember those popular Big Eyes paintings from the 60’s? Did you know about the story of art forgery behind it? Some of you will first think that the film Big Eyes is about art. As true as that is, it’s also a drama about art forgery and the ones caught in the middle. This is especially of intrigue to those who remember the ‘big eyes’ paintings from the 60’s.

The film begins with Margaret Ulbrich arriving in San Francisco with her daughter. She has recently divorced her husband and is hoping to make it as an artist. Art is not only her best skill but it’s her one and only skill in terms of employability. At first she’s hired by a furniture factory to paint drawings on children’s furniture. She does drawings of caricatures in a San Francisco market to make extra change.

Soon she catches the attention of a successful ‘artist’ by the name of Walter Keane. He’s impressed with her ‘big eyes’ caricatures she draws. They’re based off the wide eyes of her daughter Jane and Margaret even says that children’s eyes are the windows to their souls. Walter promises Margaret that he can make her art famous. He’s a good salesman as he knows how to sell real estate and his own art: painting of Paris where he claims to have been inspired by the city even though spending a mere week in it. She agrees and the two marry.

This comes as a welcome relief for Margaret as she is threatened to lose custody of Jane because she can’t afford to care for her. This is also a relief for Walter as his paintings of Paris are declining in sales. Soon Walter promotes the big eyes paintings at restaurants. He’s even willing to create phony brawls to stimulate news hype. Whatever he does, it works and the big eyes painting are catching a ton of renown.

However the secret of the success is exposed to Margaret and it’s ugly. Walter is claiming the paintings as his own. As the paintings become more popular and Walter becomes more famous, they become more and more in demand. That leads Walter to keep Amy in a hidden room where she’s to paint all the portraits. She’s practically exiled away from everyone including friends and her own daughter. Further friction grows when Margaret learns the truth about the Paris paintings. They were actually painted by an artist going by S. Cenic. Somehow Walter is able to talk his way out of it.

The real turning point is when the giant painting of a crowd of big-eyed children to be displayed at a pavilion during Expo 1964 is dissed by art critic John Canaday as ‘appalling.’ Keane can’t take it. He tries to stab Canaday but fails. He tried locking Margaret and Jane in a closet and setting it ablaze. Fortunately they escape and find a new life for themselves in Hawaii. However it’s after a visit from two Jehovah’s Witnesses that Margaret is prompted to bring Walter to justice. The trial goes with Walter playing his own attorney and doing a big song and dance for the jury but there comes the moment of truth. The film ends rather conventionally but will leave the audience satisfied justice was done.

One thing we should not forget is that art forgery is nothing new. There have been imposters claiming paintings and other works of art in the past. However this makes for an intriguing story. There are many elements why one would consider this intriguing. One would be people who remember the big eyes painting and still like them to this day. Another would be because of the conniving nature of Walter who knows how to get his way until the score is finally settled. I’m sure there’s something many people can find intriguing with the film to want to see it.

However the film doesn’t make itself too clear about what it is primarily all about. I do give the film credit for showing a story of art forgery and both the artist and scammer. I do give credit for showcasing the thriving and influential San Francisco art scene form the 50’s and 60’s. I also give the film credit about showing just how much of a conniver Walter Keane was to the point he felt he could kill a critic and even connive a judge in the court of law. And I especially give the film credit for showing the mother-daughter relationship involved with the story. In fact that was one of my favorite parts of the film where after Margaret left Walter, Margaret became a typical mother again and Jane became a typical daughter again. However it does leave one to wonder if it was mostly to do about the art or to do about the forgery behind it? It’s very possible to balance those two elements out appropriately on film but I just wonder if it was balanced out right.

Amy Adams did a very good job of portraying Margaret Keane. However I’ve seen better acting performances from her in the past. Christoph Waltz was also very good as the conniving Walter Keane. He succeeds at making you hate Walter and get annoyed with him. However there are times in which I think his role of Walter is a bit too close to his Oscar-winning roles of Hans Landa and King Schultz. Danny Huston also did well in the role of Dick Nolan. However it does seem odd how the narrator of all that’s happening gets so little screen time. There were additional good performances in minor roles from Terence Stamp and Jason Schwartzman.

Tim Burton did a good job of directing a film that doesn’t seem too much like your typical Tim Burton film. Interesting fact is that Burton owns two of Keane’s paintings.

Scriptwriters Scott Alexander and Larry Karaszewski did a good job with the script even though it lacked consistency and focus. The set designers and costumers did a very good job in setting the scenes to the time of the film. And the score by Danny Elfman also fit the movie well.

Big Eyes is an intriguing look at the artist, the art and the forgery behind it. Even though the story was a bit off in terms of focus to its central theme, it does keep one interested.