Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 30 January 2016

It’s not often we see two biopics about the same individual within the space of 3 years.  Released in mid-2013, Jobs starred Ashton Kutcher and chronicled the life of the famed technology entrepreneur up until the launch of the iPod in 2001.  The film was panned by critics (scoring just 27% on Rotten Tomatoes) and struggled to perform at the box office. 

Undeterred, Sony Pictures pushed ahead with their own movie.  They bought the rights to Steve Jobs’ autobiography and assembled a heavyweight cast and crew.  Oscar winner Aaron Sorkin (The Social Network) penned the screenplay.  Oscar winner Danny Boyle (Slumdog Millionaire) sat in the director’s chair.  Oscar nominated Michael Fassbender (12 Years A Slave) took the title role.

Sorkin has structured the film as a three act play.  It follows Jobs as he prepares for the public launch of three products – the Apple Macintosh in 1984, the NeXT Computer in 1988, and the iMac in 1998.  Roughly 40 minutes is spent on each segment.  There’s nothing in between except for a few odd flashbacks.

By taking this approach, Sorkin has created something that feels staged and unrealistic.  It’s as if every key person in Steve Jobs’ life wants to complain in the half-hour leading up to each launch.  His close associate (Rogen) is unhappy that he won’t acknowledge important employees in his speech.  His former girlfriend (Waterson) is pleading for financial support to care for their daughter.  His boss (Daniels) is worried about sales figures and the future of the company.  His loyal marketing guru (Winslet) is struggling to keep him focused on what is important.

The film’s repetitive message (at least from my perspective) is that Steve Jobs was a selfish control freak and an asshole.  The version we see of him in 1984 isn’t all that different from 1998.  He was obsessed with his own perception and took little interest in the well-being of others.  Not everyone agrees with this portrayal however.  Former Apple CEO John Sculley and long-time journalist Walt Mossberg (amongst others) have spoken publicly about a friendlier side to Jobs that isn’t shown in the movie.

Michael Fassbender is one of the best actors in the business and he does a first-rate job in replicating his character’s demeanour and mannerisms.  Helping shape his performance were numerous meetings with colleagues who knew Jobs closely.  It’s a shame the dialogue isn’t as authentic.  Boyle has shot the movie like a fast-paced, behind-the-scenes documentary but every character appears to have spent an hour choosing the perfect words before opening their mouths.

It’s not all bad.  There are a few good one-liners.  At the unveiling of the Macintosh, Jobs says “we blow this and IBM will own the next 50 years like a Batman villain.”  There’s another important moment where he compares himself to an orchestra conductor.

In a curious twist of fate, Steve Jobs also underperformed financially when released in the United States back in October.  Perhaps the marketing strategy didn’t work.  Then again, perhaps people aren’t interested in the story of an egocentric billionaire, despite the mark he has made on the world.

Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 24 January 2016

In January 2002, the Boston Globe published a series of articles exposing a major cover up within the Catholic archdiocese of Boston.  Priests had been abusing children for decades.  Instead of confessing their sins, the Catholic Church had used their wealth and power to keep it hidden from the public.  The newspaper won the Pulitzer Prize for Public Service in recognition of their efforts in bringing the issue to the world’s attention.

Writer-director Tom McCarthy (The Station Agent, The Visitor) has brought this engrossing tale to the screen in Spotlight.  As we see during the opening scenes, the spark that lit the fire was Marty Baron (Schreiber), a shrewd journalist who took on the chief editor role at the Boston Globe in July 2001.  Intrigued by a small story about a convicted priest, he asked his newspaper’s four-person investigative unit, Spotlight, to dig deeper.  Was this an isolated incident or something much bigger?

The Catholic Church has a lot to answer for.  There’s no doubt about that.  Spotlight goes a step further though and also points the finger at the “enablers” who allowed child abuse to occur for so long.  Lawyers for the Church asked victims to sign confidentiality agreements to keep things quiet.  Journalists failed to grasp the magnitude of the problem when reporting on isolated cases.  Parishioners were unwilling to question the religious institution that was so critical to their lives.  It’s as if everyone knew but no one wanted to say anything.

McCarthy spent months researching the subject to ensure the film was as factually accurate as possible.  He enlisted co-writer Josh Singer (The West Wing, The Fifth Estate) to help out given the breadth of material.  They have included a daringly large number of subplots but each has been given sufficient attention.  McCarthy and Singer used creative licence and have met the challenge of condensing such a wide story into a mere two hours.

Their script highlights the tough challenges that all investigative journalists face.  For example, there’s a moment where a Spotlight journalist (Ruffalo) tries to coax valuable information from a frazzled lawyer representing abuse victims (Tucci).  It’s clear the lawyer has something he wants to get off his chest but his obligations to his clients and his profession put him in a tough moral space.  You can sense the trust that is slowly growing between these two characters as the narrative progresses.

This is clearly one of the year's best films and the performances of the cast cannot be faulted.  Rachel McAdams is superb as a journalist who delicately speaks with several victims of child abuse and encourages them to go public with their stories.  Mark Ruffalo is equally impressive as a reporter struggling to keep his emotions in check while going after key legal documents.  Liev Schreiber is terrific as the boss who, despite his emotionless disposition, says the right things to keep his staff on track.  Michael Keaton is picking up early awards season buzz with his portrayal as a journalist putting pressure on old friends to confirm critical sources.

During the filmmaking process, someone mentioned to McCarthy that “it’s a great time to be part of local corruption.”  He was referring to staff cuts within newspapers and the dwindling of resources put into high-quality investigative journalism.  On top of all the other thought-provoking themes in Spotlight, it makes you wonder what stories are slipping through the cracks today.

Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 30 January 2016

If you’re an adult going along to see an animated movie, it’s more than likely that you’ll be taking your kids along too.  That’s because the overwhelming majority of animated features are pitched at family audiences.  They’re light, they offer plenty of humour, and they include an array of cute, loveable characters.

Charlie Kaufman is no ordinary filmmaker and it’s no surprise that his foray into the animated genre doesn’t follow the aforementioned rules.  He’s the man behind some of cinema’s most creative screenplays – Being John Malkovich, Adaptation and Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind.  The later won him an Academy Award in 2005.

Anomalisa began its life as a “sound play” back in 2005.  Kaufman teamed up with music composer Carter Burwell to create a different theatrical experience.  Performed in front of live audiences, the actors sat on stage and simply read their scripts.  There were no sets, no costumes, and no character movements.  Burwell wanted patrons to simply close their eyes and picture the story in their own way.  Recordings were later released online for wider audiences to enjoy.

It wasn’t until several years later that Kaufman met director Duke Johnson and they began work on a movie version using stop-motion animation.  Let be clear that this isn’t a movie for kids.  It is a layered drama centred around 24 hours in the life of Michael Stone (Thewlis), an acclaimed writer who is attending a conference in Cincinnati to promote his latest book on customer service.  Michael is a big deal.  There’s a brief scene where guests stop, stare and whisper as he walks through the lobby of his hotel.

Michael’s success has done little for his dwindling self-confidence.  The word is never used but a strong argument could be made that he’s suffering from depression.  Nothing seems to make him happy.  He calls his wife and son to say that he’s arrived safely at the hotel but you can tell from the sound of his voice that it feels like an unnecessary chore.  He’s just as disinterested when making small talk with an inquisitive taxi driver.

His evening is given an unexpected jolt when he meets Lisa (Leigh), an adoring fan who is staying at the hotel.  They have a few too many drinks and wind up back at his room for a romantic encounter.  I’m not sure I’ve seen a stop-motion sex scene before so it’s another thing to tick off my cinema bucket list.  It also explains the film’s MA rating in Australia.  The Classification Board must have given it a little extra thought compared to your average movie.

A curious touch to Anomalisa is that aside from the two leads, every other character has the same face and the same voice (Noonan).  It’s an interesting creative choice but it helps us get inside Michael’s head – he sees the world has a tired, disappointing place where everything feels the same and nothing provides him with satisfaction.  That’s my interpretation anyway.  Kaufman has been deliberately coy while on the interview circuit.  He’ll talk about the production process but wants audiences to reach their own conclusions about these characters and the film’s messages.

It’s a simple story on paper but Anomalisa is a great conversation generator.  I’m still reflecting on its style and themes.  It took home the Grand Jury Prize from the Venice Film Festival and recently earned an Academy Award nomination for best animated feature.  As one of the year’s most original movies, you can add my name to its growing list of fans.

Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 17 January 2016

Set in the late 1920s, there’s a moment early in The Danish Girl where Gerda (Vikander) needs help while painting an important portrait.  Her female subject isn’t available to come into the studio and so she asks her husband, Einar (Redmayne), to stand in her place.  She slips stockings on his legs and gets him to wear a beautiful ball gown.  When Gerda’s friend (Heard) unexpectedly drops by and sees Einar in the gown, they all joke and laugh about the unusual situation

It’s an important scene in the film as it’s designed to show that Einar is having doubts about his gender.  He rubs his hands along the dress and you can tell he is enjoying the situation.  Gerda innocently thinks this is part of her husband’s “kinky” side and encourages his behaviour.  He wears a chemise as part of some bedroom roleplay.  He puts on a red wig and accompanies her to a charity ball as her fictitious cousin, Lili.  It’s all intended to be a little bit of fun.

The obvious disconnect in the mindset of Einar and Gerda soon comes to the surface and the film develops into a more serious drama.  Gerda becomes the more interesting character.  She’s a liberal thinker who wants to be supportive of Einar’s choices but knows this could come at a great personal cost.  If he were to become a woman, their reputation within the conservative community would suffer and work would be difficult to find.  More importantly, she would lose the husband she has loved for many years.

That’s not to say that Einar isn’t struggling.  He harnesses the courage to speak to several psychiatrists but they look at him with distain and want to see him institutionalised.  He develops a close friendship with another man (Whishaw) but is unsure about the new feelings that come with it.  Einar seems most comfortable when he’s alone.  Highlighted by a sequence where he tries on dresses at the local playhouse, Einar can be himself without fear of judgement.

This “based on actual events” tale is close to a century old but is still of relevance today.  The media circus that has enveloped Caitlyn Jenner shows that many are still confused and/or unaccepting of transgender people.  It’s a subject that isn’t often explored in mainstream cinema and so hopefully this film makes, at the very least, a small difference.

Some criticism has been levied on director Tom Hooper (The King’s Speech, Les Misérables) for not casting a transgender actor in the lead role.  He admits that he considered men, women and trans actors before settling on recent Oscar winner Eddie Redmayne (The Theory Of Everything).  He was drawn to Redmayne because of his talent and his “relationship to his feminine side”.  Redmayne played a woman in his first professional acting role – a stage adaptation of Shakespeare’s Twelfth Night in 2002 (directed by Mark Rylance from Bridge of Spies).

It’s tough to illustrate the “inner anguish” of their respective characters on screen but Redmayne and co-star Alicia Vikander (Ex Machina) do their best by using a lot of tears and a lot of blubbering.  It’s hard not to feel empathy for their situation.  Matthias Schoenaerts (Far From The Madding Crowd) makes less of an impact as an influential art dealer offering support.

Featuring exquisite production design and a score from composer Alexandre Desplat (The Grand Budapest Hotel), The Danish Girl is a story worth telling.

You can read/listen to my chat with director Tom Hooper by clicking here.

Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 25 January 2016

When trying to describe this storyline to a friend, the first adjective that came to mind was “unimaginable”.  That doesn’t really fit though.  The fact that audiences can “imagine” themselves in the same situation is what makes it so terrifying.  It is a work of fiction based on the novel by Emma Donoghue but we know that such events have occurred before.

The first half of the film is set entirely in a soundproof room that is roughly 3 metres by 3 metres.  It’s where Joy Newsome (Larson) has spent the last 7 years of her life.  She was kidnapped as a 17-year-old and has been held captive by a man who has never revealed his name (Nick).  He provides her with meagre amounts of food and rapes her on a daily basis.

It’s obvious from her body language that Joy is a defeated woman.  She’s given up hope of rescue and her feeble escape plans have amounted to nothing.  The only thing that keeps her going is her 5-year-old son, Jack (Tremblay).  He was born in the tiny room and has no idea of the expansive world that exists outside its walls.

It’s hard to envisage any child turning out “normal” from such an ordeal but the catch is that Jack doesn’t know any different.  For years, his mother has told him that “room” is all that exists in the world.  The dogs and squirrels they see in shows on their rundown television are all make believe.  Joy has fed these stories to her curious son to help protect him.  He’s not yet ready to deal with the reality of their situation.

The trailer gives it away and so I’m not revealing too much when I say they eventually make it outside of their room.  The escape offers the film’s most intense sequence.  What follows are their troubled attempts to adjust to a completely new life.  Jack has few social skills and has been taken completely out of his comfort zone.  Joy is still traumatised and is struggling to fit back into a world that believed she was dead.

Winner of the coveted People’s Choice Award at the 2015 Toronto Film Festival, Room is both horrifying and inspiring.  It shows us the best and worst of the human condition.  In their respective leading roles, Brie Larson (Short Term 12) and newcomer Jacob Tremblay have created a powerful, credible bond.  Larson is the short priced favourite to win the best actress Oscar next month and you’ll feel a huge amount of empathy for both characters.

My only problem with the film was that it’s told largely from the perspective of Jack.  He provides the narration and it’s through his downward looking eyes that we see events unfold.  This works within the room but in the outside world, it feels limiting.  Joy’s continual disintegration becomes the more interesting subplot but she slips from view in the later stages.  A moment where she is interrogated by a television reporter never rings true.

Nominated for 4 Academy Awards including best picture and best director, Room hits most of its marks.