We are in the middle of vampire craze in cinema. Ever since Twilight, there was a bit of a renaissance when it comes to vampire films - there seem to be at least three new big productions every year. From television shows like True Blood and The Vampire Diaries through European flicks like Livide and Let the Right One in to the big productions like Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter and Underworld series, vampires are everywhere these days.For me the best vampire film ever made is still Interview with the Vampire. It's almost 20 years old now but for me this is still the benchmark for this kind of films. Based on fantastic novel by Anne Rice the film is a very faithful adaptation and it truly captures the essence of vampire films - sensual, mysterious, fascinating. Now the director of the film, Neil Jordan, returns to vampire stories in Byzantium.
I didn't have high hopes for the movie - the release date kept being pushed back and that's never a good sign. Also even though Jordan is a fantastic director, he didn't make a movie that would be highly praised in years. The film surprised me, though. It's not anything to rave about but it kept my interest throughout and it had several quite unique things that I haven't seen in any other vampire film. The film follows two vampires - Clara and her daughter Eleanor. From the very beginning we see that they are very different - Clara is fierce, detached and ruthless while Eleanor is shy and very introvert. Clara is the provider - she works as a dancer in the club to earn money for the two of them. In the beginning of the film a mysterious man chases Clara and then she kills him in their apartment, which prompts the two to seek new hideout, again.
The two move to small coastal town where Clara seduces a man who lives in abandoned hotel called Byzantium, thus securing a shelter for her and Eleanor. Meanwhile Eleanor is struggling with her desire to tell someone the truth about who she and her mother really are and she bonds with the local boy who takes an interest in her.There isn't much story in Byzantium, but the events are presented in an interesting way - we start at one point and we go back through Eleanor's stories and memories and slowly everything falls into place. Usually I am a little annoyed with non-linear narrative, which is like a pandemic in recent movies, but here it worked because it made a so-so story a bit more mysterious, because as I watched the film I kept wondering why certain things were happening, only to have that answered later in the movie by the flashbacks.
Jordan is really amazing when doing this sort of thing - telling stories that are spread over vast periods of time and holding your interest throughout - Interview with the Vampire is a good example for that, another is Breakfast on Pluto. What Byzantium lacks in the story, Jordan makes up with his direction, but some of the flaws here are hard to ignore.My problem with this bold new approach to vampire movie genre is that some of the ideas people have to bring fresh feel to the well established myth of vampire are just fucking ridiculous. So we have those two beautiful women who are immortal. Also - they can walk in the sunlight, even though they are vampires. They've been around for circa 200 years. We know Eleanor can play piano masterfully because she had all that time to perfect the skill. But instead of capitalizing on that Clara chooses to whore herself out to get some money for the two of them? Even though it makes Eleanor resent her even more? Really?
In other words my point is - I just don't buy this whole idea where vampires have money problems. I bought it in Let the Right One in, where a vampire 1. couldn't go out in the daytime 2. was forever a child, but this? I'm fairly certain Gemma Arterton could easily seduce any rich and sophisticated guy and marry him for his cash and that's not even vampire Gemma Arterton, just you know, regular human Gemma Arterton, yet I watch this film and I see her character making out with low-life creeps for money. What the hell?Another thing is that I swear to God occasionally I watch those vampire films and some of it is just thrown in there for the sake of attracting people who will see any vampire film out there - Eleanor and Clara are immortal, drink blood and can't enter the house without invitation (very popular thing in vampire movies these days). That's it. That's not really much for vampire film, isn't? No heightened senses, no super strength, no flying. Seems to me that all of that fantastical angle is just a fog screen and they could have just as easily be fugitives, but the vampire thing was added to add some spark to this otherwise average tale.
Even with all those flaws, there are many great things in the story. The abandoned hotel is a fantastic setting, Eleanor writing her story and throwing the sheets of paper away, in the process telling it to strangers is a lovely idea as is the ritual that transforms people into vampires here. The material is really elevated by the execution and especially by the two main actresses.Gemma Arterton, despite talking in a rather annoying accent (I don't know if it is the way she talks or just something in the movie) is very good here playing a woman determined to survive and to protect her daughter. She is quite amoral in her actions and she doesn't care about anyone but Eleanor - but you have a feeling that it is simply because she never had a chance to trust anyone in her life.
But the best performance in the movie belongs to Saoirse Ronan. She really does wonders with material given to her and she gives Eleanor a heart and soul. Tormented soul burdened with everything she experienced over the years. I admire Ronan's dedication for the part too - apparently she has learned how to play the piano for the film and it's actually her we can hear playing in the movie.The film also has several actors, that are rather underused but manage to shine in their scenes, including Maria Doyle Kennedy and Sam Riley.Jonny Lee Miller and Tom Hollander are also in the cast but they have rather thankless roles. The worst in the cast are definitely Caleb Landry Jones, who managed to be creepy and off putting where role required the opposite of him and Uri Gavriel who played the main villain in the film and it was so fucking awful, as if he time traveled from the past and thought he was the bad guy in James Bond movie in the 80's. Stephen Rea, who usually appears in Jordan's films, would have done a much better job here.
The film is beautiful to look at, the scenery is lush and the scenes are wonderfully shot, in a very artistic way where all the details are carefully planned and everything looks almost like a painting There are a lot of close ups, particularly of Ronan's face, as well as the images of stark surroundings, which brought the cinematography of Hanna to my mind.
Byzantium is an interesting film, even though the story is far from being strong and free from plot holes. It's an enjoyable film but I think I can safely recommend it only to the fans of the main two ladies.
Byzantium (2012, 118 min)
Plot: Residents of a coastal town learn, with deathly consequences, the secret shared by the two mysterious women who have sought shelter at a local resort.
Director: Neil Jordan
Writers: Moira Buffini (play), Moira Buffini (teleplay)
Stars: Saoirse Ronan, Gemma Arterton, Caleb Landry Jones
RELATED POSTS:
The Counselor is one of my most anticipated movies this year. Having read the script I can tell you that it will either be amazing or it will be absolutely awful. The latest trailer doesn't really help me with determining which one of those it will be, but it looks like they kept some of the best parts of the script in the film.
RELATED POSTS: 
Let me just start by saying - I have absolutely no problem with porn. I think everyone should be able to do what they want, as long as it involves consensus between people. You wanna do something hardcore? You wanna film it? Go ahead. That said, I don't necessarily have to feel sympathy or any respect for the people involved in porn industry. 
Same goes for Linda Lovelace. Had she shot regular porn, even with 1000 men - that is one thing. But this is a person who shot bestiality flicks. With a dog. This is what essentially makes her dead to me.
While hanging out with her friend Patsy (Juno Temple) Linda meets Chuck Taynor (Peter Sarsgaard, doing his creepy guy thing yet again). She is taken with him and he seems to be a perfect gentleman. Soon the two marry and Linda gets involved with porn industry when Chuck's money problems worsen. This is how she ends up making the infamous Deep Throat.
The film is many things but the one thing is sure as shit is not is objective. Lovelace is shown as an innocent victim of all of this. If you just see the movie than you may buy it, but a quick venture into any Internet board going through the history of Lovelace's actions and court testimonies will show you that this is far from actual truth.
I think Seyfried is a very talented actress - I have yet to see bad performance from her and this here is her best work to date. She is so natural and likable as fun loving young woman who soon tastes misery and who will have to carry the burden of what she did through her entire life. It's a great shame the film is so uneven because Seyfried work here is award worthy.
All those actors show up and you can't help but feel that there was more - more scenes, more footage, but they are not in the movie for some reason. I really don't know why that is - ending credits aside, the whole film is 85 minutes long. Surely they could have added more things to it. While the first half of the film is fairly consistent, when we jump to Lovelace's side of the story the film is just all over the place.
Eric Roberts and Wes Bentley's parts were reduced to mere cameos. The three actors who don't have much to do but still managed to pull off good performances and add a lot of humour to the movie were Chris Noth, Hank Azaria and Bobby Cannavale as the three producers who seem to be delicate angels in comparison to Linda's abusive ass of a husband.
The film has great cinematography and lovely atmosphere - it really feels like it was shot in 70's with warm colors and all the colorful costumes. The music is not very memorable, though. One thing that I thought was overdone was make up - Seyfried looks absolutely horrible during polygraph scenes and the events taking place 6 years after Deep Throat and that wasn't realistic at all, considering she looked lovely in the first half of the film.
RELATED POSTS:
Baz Luhrmann's Great Gatsby is boring, stupid and messy but most of all - it is hilarious. The film has a terrific soundtrack and beautiful visual side, but it's a complete chore, filled with scenes that were so funny I actually roared with laughter. Even one of the scenes listed below should prevent everyone from taking this film seriously but all of those? Add to that about hundred of times Gatsby says the words 'old sport' and what you get is a laugh riot. Wicker Man remake kind of a riot. Only Wicker Man was entertaining and Gatsby is incredibly boring, unless ridiculous things are happening. And boy is there a lot of those:
2. Tobey McGuire acting like a 5 year old boy who saw Playboy magazine for the very first time.
3. Whatever the hell that moment was:
4. The first time we see Gatsby which is so ridiculously over the top I actually had to pause the film to laugh for several seconds.
5. This fucking scene / the fact DiCaprio had better romantic chemistry with McGuire than with Mulligan.
6. Ridiculous slow motion moments.
7. Gatsby contemplating. While looking at the trees. You know, because it's all so deep and not about some reprehensibly spineless chick. Oh wait. It is.
8. The tea scene which includes: 
8.2. McGuire holding cupcakes nobody gives a crap about.
8.3. This:
8.4. THIS:
8.5. The staredown between DiCaprio and the clock. The clock did something awful. It showed what time it was and it will pay for it.
8.6. It was too intense to take so Gatsby storms out to get all wet in the rain and returns after presumably staring at his friends. The trees.
8.7. McGuire instructing him to fix his hair, you know, because the hair is the problem here.
8.8. The epic showdown with the clock.
9. Gatsby fangirling over THE LIGHT.
12. Nick and Daisy dancing to ORGAN MUSIC..
13. Daisy mouthing "I love you" to Gatsby despite the fact her husband is few feet away and he can clearly hear them. Adding dumb to the list of qualities Daisy has.
14. The whole 'if you loved him for a day it means we can't be togther' deal. Fuck the war and 5 lost years THIS is really the issue we should be focusing on.
16. The accident scene. Let's run straight at the car and shout your lover's name. Surely nothing bad will happen. Adding dumber than Daisy to the list of qualities Daisy's husband insignificant lover character who becomes significant in the end oh my how exciting has.
17. The fact Baz Luhrmann used that moment to put in even more visual flare and heavy handed symbolism. Adding heartless to the qualities Baz Luhrmann has.
20. Gatsby taking his sweet time before he dies even though he was shot in the heart.
RELATED POSTS:
RELATED POSTS:
Ridley Scott's The Counselor is one of my most anticipated movies of the year. I read the script for this one, written by well known author Cormac McCarthy, a while back and recently I re-read it after seeing the film's latest, terrific trailer. The film definitely has potential to be among the best movies of the year and here are few reasons why I can't wait to see it:
It's always fun to see those three actors on screen so I'm definitely looking forward to their performances here, however brief they will be. It's still not clear who Visnjic is playing, perhaps a priest? That is a great scene and he would be excellent in the part.
Scott is a fantastic director and even if the script has problems he is able to make a wonderful movie. Here the script is one of the film's strongest points so I can't wait to see what he does with it.
As great as the script is, there are some problems there. The scenes including people other than main characters are hugely messy and some of the sequences go way too long, mainly the opening scene with Laura and Counselor in bed. I hope most of that was shortened for the sake of the movie. I also hope they made some things a bit clearer - I read that thing twice and I'm still not entirely sure what went down there. It's evident from the trailers changes were indeed made, mainly from the added scene between Malkina and Reiner (when the axe comes through the door, I'll already be gone).
The bolito is a device that decapitates a person and then self-destructs. It's a horrifying concept and I'm curious how they handled that on screen.
Cameron Diaz's character Malkina has two pet cheetahs that are often by her side. I hope they are featured prominently in the movie and that my favorite scene - when she sees one of them on the street and has tears in her eyes - made it to film.
The director of photography here is Dariusz Wolski, who did a terrific job in Prometheus, Sweeney Todd, The Mexican and The Rum Diary as well as in Pirates of the Caribbean films. It's already quite impressive looking movie just from the trailers - the dynamic shots of running cheetahs, focusing the camera on the faces of the actors and the infamous car scene which appears to be shot in a very frantic, scary way.
While there are many great characters which I'm sure the actors will raise to great performances, Bardem's Reiner is the most layered one. He tells awesome stories, he seems like a lot of fun and he is capable of feeling shock and fear, which in the film with so many tough, uncompromising characters is unique. Bardem has the most to play here in terms of range and it looks like he is doing an awesome job.
I read a lot of sick things but this one just blew my mind. The film received very hard R rating which probably means we will just see the beginning of the scene (any more and it's NC-17, unless the camera only shows the faces) and Reiner will tell us what happened in the story he tells to the Counselor. Still, this is messed up and if I read Diaz dropped out because she didn't want to do that scene, I'd understand. She went ahead and stayed and apparently shot at least a bit of it, so kudos to her for her courage.
This is the most emotional and possibly the darkest moment of the story and Fassbender completely kills it in trailer alone. This is going to be close to the magnitude of his breakdown in Shame, I can feel it.
Malkina is a fascinating character. She is a tech-savvy, VERY sexually adventurous sociopath. She is few steps ahead in the game and her own boyfriend fears her because she is capable of everything and he doesn't know "how much she knows". Malkina is seemingly lurking in the shadows but in the reality she has all the answers. In the script she was described as a sexy, dark-haired woman from Buenos Aires. Initially she was going to be played by Angelina Jolie - who fits the description better than Diaz - Jolie dropped out and I keep wondering if it wasn't because of the car moment. Anyways, Diaz sees to be doing a great job based on the trailers - she is mysterious, scary, controlling. The fact that she is an actress who is mostly known from comedy roles will make it even more effective because people won't suspect that she is capable of playing such a character. If the film has a shot at any major nominations it's definitely her and Bardem.
After a year or so of having literally 3 stills from the movie, we finally got the first teaser for Jonathan Glazer's (very loose) adaptation of Michel Faber's novel Under the Skin. The first thing that strikes you is how incredibly surreal it all looks - the cinematography looks excellent, as does Scarlett Johansson as a mysterious woman who picks up hitchhikers...and they are never seen or heard of again. 
RELATED POSTS:
There is a number of movies that genuinely infuriated me. Sometimes it's because they end up being disappointments when I wanted them to be great. Sometimes it's because they are a waste of my time. But there are actual great films that infuriate me so much, I'm angry just thinking about them weeks, months, years after seeing them. Those are the films that accurately show that the majority of human race is weak, contemptible and genuinely pathetic.
The Hunt follows a teacher named Lucas (Mads Mikkelsen, in the most powerful performance of the year so far). Lucas is an all around nice guy who has a lot of friends and who is adored by the children in the school. Unfortunately, his best friend's daughter Klara adores him a bit too much. When she gives him a small paper heart Lucas politely gives it back to her, explaining to Klara why it's not appropriate. In childish retaliation Klara tells a lie that leads the townsfolk to completely destroy Lucas's life.
Fortunately my frustration - and I can't remember the last time I was this frustrated while watching the movie - was unleashed on the adults whom I hated deeply and passionately whenever I saw their actions (with the exception of Klara's father). Children don't know the consequences, adults should. Children don't think what their actions may do to people, adults should.
But what cannot be excused when subject of such severe allegations arises is the incompetence. I can forgive people not wanting to listen to Lucas's side of the story at first. I can forgive Klara's parents who immediately assumed their daughter was telling the truth. What I can't forgive, though, are the employees in the school whose incompetence and blatant stupidity was close to making me physically sick.
The principal is another one - without properly investigating the case she assumed Klara was telling the truth and she gathered the parents and talked about Klara's lie not as if it was an allegation - she was presenting it as a fact. Those two people infuriated me so much that if this movie ended with the school catching on fire and them burning alive, it would still be an easy way out.
I can't even write about what happens to Lucas's adorable dog. I just can't.
But these people forgot about one thing decent human beings have - dignity. And Lucas doesn't let go of his dignity for a second during this story. It was so admirable, the peace and solemnity radiating from him while he was going through all of that, holding on to his innocence. Some might have been frustrated with Lucas not fighting back more decisively but I thought it was a reflection of his own good nature. Lucas just assumed that people will come to their senses. How can his friends think he is guilty, they can't do that, can they? They have known him all those years, they must know he didn't do this, don' t they? They must know he couldn't harm anyone? Unfortunately, Lucas was wrong when answering all those questions.
In what is the finest acted out scene I've seen probably since McQueen's Shame, Lucas gathers all his remaining strength and goes to the church where most of the townsfolk are gathered. Klara's father Theo who was Lucas's best friend before all of this happened is there. Theo remarked early in the movie that it is impossible for Lucas to lie. All you need to do to see the truth is to look into his eyes. And when he does so in the church, he sees the truth.
The viciousness of the attacks of people who used to be Lucas's friends is so overwhelming you just want to hold him and tell him it will be all right. But it's not going to be because no matter what, people will always wonder whether he was guilty or not, even if Klara's own father believes in Lucas's innocence.
The only reason why I'm not giving the movie more points is because I found some things here unrealistic. As hideous as the allegation was it seemed odd to me not one of Lucas's friends stood by him. It also seemed odd how little the police was involved - the whole thing played as if it was set in Middle Ages with lunatics running around lynching someone, basically only missing the torches.
links:
Let me just begin by saying Mud has the most heart I've seen in any movie this year. It's incredible that a story that is mostly based on characters talking and interacting, a story that unfolds so slowly and patiently on the screen, can be so gripping and affecting. But this is what Jeff Nichols does. His last film, Take Shelter, was also a slow-paced, very character driven tale. And while both films have many elements in common and I give a slight edge to Take Shelter, Mud is still among the best movies I've seen this year.
They climb the tree and into the boat only to find fresh bread and fresh footprints. Realizing that they are not the only ones who have discovered the treehouse boat, they decide to leave. When they reach the shore, they find the same footprint in their boat. And that's when they meet Mud (Matthew McConaughey).
The more pragmatic Neckbone is not impressed with Mud. But Ellis? Ellis' attitude toward Mud is a different story. Ellis is a romantic who believes that if you love someone, everything will always be perfect. He is such a romantic in fact, that not even his parents' collapsing marriage can make him feel differently about love. So when he hears Mud's story, Mud immediately becomes a hero and a role model in young boy's eyes and Ellis is prepared to do everything to help him.
He is basically a young version of Mud. He has a quick temper and when he sees a girl being disrespected he immediately punches the bully and rescues her. Even when Juniper is being threatened by a large, armed man, Ellis comes to her rescue despite not standing a chance in a fight. As admirable as him protecting the women is, temper like that will get you in trouble as Mud's story shows.
And that's another thing that makes the movie so brilliant - we have two characters, different ages, different circumstances, different girls that stole their heart. But in spite of all those differences they are also on the similar road, yet in the end they choose different paths. Ellis eventually finds out that love is not perfect but, as he did so in young age, he still has desire to look for it in the end.
I was very impressed by the way the film showed us all those characters. With the exception of immature May Pearl nobody was really a bad person here and May Pearl's stupidity and cruelty can be blamed on her age. The guys who are looking for Mud want justice for someone who was close to them and died and Juniper is so used to having Mud around to protect her, she doesn't know how to let go nor she can just escape with him to live in some Utopian dream.
Mud is a good guy and because his love for Juniper wasn't reciprocated, he was the one giving all the love, getting all the pain and not receiving the true love himself - the kind of love that makes you put someone's happiness first, over your own. Juniper was fond of him but she didn' give him that and she didn't give him happiness he was willing to give her. But can we really blame her? Love is not something you can control. And that is what makes it so special. We can't control when we are being born and we can't control who we love. Life and love are so amazing precisely because of that.
Mud also shows a very close group that lives near the river - everyone knows everyone in the small town and it's a very sheltered community. Trust is the most important thing there. I liked how instead of portraying those simple people like some sort of crazed red necks (I'm looking at you Beasts of the Southern Wild) Mud showed them in such a positive light.
I was very impressed with the cast of this one - everyone did an amazing job, even if their parts were small. It was so nice to see Sarah Paulson who is so excellent playing strong women with both of their feet firmly on the ground. And it was a real treat seeing Michael Shannon play a normal person, a real sweet guy too.
The film is beautifully shot and while watching it I truly felt as if I was right there, surrounded by nature, trees, sand, with the boys in the bar observing Juniper or in your typical motel, staring into the space. Everything is shot so beautifully, in such a detailed way it really makes you feel as if you were inside the world shown in the film. But the most praise belongs to composer David Wingo for yet again adding an overwhelming amount of beauty and rhythm to Nichols's picture with his outstanding soundtrack.
RELATED POSTS:
