Wild Wild West
It seems that westerns are slowly but surely trying to make a comeback in today’s cinema landscape. They used to be constant big winners at the box office, but somewhere along the way, people lost interest in the cut-and-dry, good guys vs. bad guy aesthetic. I have to be honest and say that I am one of those who have drifted away from that type of storytelling so prevalent in the Westerns of yore. I’m not adverse to all of them, however, as The Assassination of Jesse James and Unforgiven are some of my all-time favorite films. I may not have total respect for the genre at hand, but I do have much respect for Joel and Ethan Coen. The combination of the two has provided yet another engaging film in their already impressive library.
The novel by Charles Portis has been made into a film once before, starring John Wayne in the only role to win him an Academy Award. This time, it’s reported that the Coens have chosen to more closely resemble the novel, although the story remains intact. Fourteen-year-old Mattie Ross (Hailee Steinfeld) is on the quest to find Tom Chaney (Josh Brolin), the man who brutally killed her her father, and bring him to justice. She hires ornery U.S. Marshall Rooster Cogburn (Jeff Bridges) to find the killer. Matt Damon tags along as LaBoeuf, a Texas Ranger also on the trail for Cheney for the murder of a Texas senator.
The Coens have been working long enough now to establish a certain beat and style to their work, and even though this film is one of their most conventional works, it still no doubt has that touch we expect from them. The drama carries a distinct power to it and feels genuine, while at the same time adhering to that off-beat sense of humor the Coens love to indulge in. They fill the film with clever characters and quirky bits that can punch through even the most serious of moments. It doesn’t translate to many false notes, and creates a breezy pace that includes all the right moves.
The is the second Jeff Bridges movie to be released in a matter of days from each other, and this is obviously the better film in which Bridges delivers the obviously better performance. He perfectly captures the essence of Cogburn without once playing on what Wayne produced more than forty years ago. It’s a pleasure to watch him on screen, always entertaining whether falling over in a drunken state or staring down harassing lawyers. Damon has a sly charm to his role, and he’s a fine addition to the cast as well. If it were not for the fact that Brolin and Barry Pepper have mere cameos as the villains, they would have had a greater impact in their roles as well.
The breakout role for Steinfeld here is really a revelation. She’s perfect, like Bridges, in capturing the rambunctious spirit of her original player while also executing the part in much better fashion. She manages to hold her own against all the big boys in the film, and carries every emotional beat flawlessly. It’s amazing to watch her play out her role to perfection.
I have not read the novel on which the film is based on, but I have seen the 1969 film that was the first adaptation, and with the exception of a few details and a darker/more realistic epilogue, it’s pretty faithful. The only difference being that it’s better: better directed, better acted, better written, better shot, better everything. I do think the film has a little trouble getting out of its first act, which feels a tad sloppy and rushed. However, once out of the gate, it’s a great ride, filled with fantastic performances and a scenic landscape so carefully crafted my master filmmakers. With their help, perhaps the Western can evade that sunset for a little bit longer.
A-
Science Diction
For many, and more specifically me, this remains one of the last big hurdles to jump before being completely immersed in the award season race. This film has the perfect pedigree to go the distance, and the prestige attached to the film is pitch perfect. There’s an Oscar friendly cast attached, an acclaimed director known for tackling such lofty subject matter, there’s the true story aspect to it, and an uplifting story about trying to overcome one’s personal obstacles. All of those are ingredients to make a flawless film. Put into practice, the results aren’t completely without fault, but it does indeed come together to make a truly wonderful film.
Colin Firth stars as King George VI, a royal figure who came into power shortly before the launch of World War II. He ascends to the role of king after his brother Edward (Guy Pearce) gives up the throne in order to marry a divorced American woman. However, George is reluctant to take the power because of a debilitating stutter that embarrasses and shames him to no end. He and his wife (Helena Bonham Carter) seek out a speech therapist Lionel Logue, brilliantly played by Geoffrey Rush, to help him with his problem. The two end up becoming friends along the way, with Logue helping the king with his first wartime speech.
Firth has been making the rounds lately as a viable candidate to be nominated for the Best Actor Oscar, and even possibly win it. It’s certainly a performance that earns that praise, and it is without a doubt one of the best performances of the year. Firth captures so much passion and emotion through this role, and never has a false note in the entire piece. His pain feels genuine, and he manages to sell an incredible amount of empathy. Firth has delivered two great performances in two back-to-back years, and that should be heavily applauded. The entire cast also delivers well, particularly Rush who not only does great with personal scenes for himself but also with the powerful mono e mono scenes with Firth, some of the films best moments. Carter is also good here in the typical supporting wife role, never stealing the show but always keeping her own in her space.
Tom Hooper has had some experience tackling fact based, epic storytelling, with his most notable efforts being the television miniseries Elizabeth I and John Adams. However, from a directorial standpoint, I’d say those television projects were better executed. Their scope was grand, but it felt like there was a steady hand there, carefully executing the story to at least maintain a narrow scope on the bare necessities of the story. Here, it feels like Hooper overcompensates in some areas, allowing the fish eye lenses and fluid camera moves to flood the frame as if to overcome a potentially stuffy film. It’s odd to see him stray away from a more simple way of directing television, and oddly enough, I think it could have suited this film more. Still, he does his job well enough, and along with David Seidler’s script, originally envisioned as a play, creates a smart, witty and emotionally engaging piece of work.
The film’s more eccentric directorial flares gets in the way of the emotions a bit, and I think the movie could be about ten or fifteen minutes shorter, but those are minor complaints against an otherwise great movie. The performances are what particularly sells it, featuring outstanding performances from nearly everyone, with the standouts being Firth and Rush. This will more than likely be qualified as a serious Oscar contender in the coming weeks, and one couldn’t ask for a better film to fit the typical profile.
A-
No comments:
Post a Comment