The Place Beyond the Pines (2013) – Review

Review: The Place Beyond the Pines is a moody character drama built on strong performances. The film is broken into three parts. The first deals with a motorcycle stunt rider (Luke) who turns to crime in order to try and provide for his family. Part two involves Avery, a rookie cop who is frustrated by the corruption in his department and his decision to do something about it. And, part three revolves around the children of Luke and Avery (Jason and AJ, respectively) and how their different backgrounds inform their present lives (taken place about fifteen years later) in the wake of the decisions their fathers’ made.

Writer-director Derek Cianfrance seems to want to tell an epic tale of America – as the dramatic scope of this film is quite immense in terms of how many character-centric stories he fits in. There are four different main characters, each with their own dramatic narrative. Yet, scale wise the film is very small. The narratives are all localized to Schenectady, NY, and they each focus on the emotional turmoil and journey of the characters. It has a timeless quality to it as well – and really could have been set at any point in American history.

The film specifically feels like an American tale because, in addition to taking place in a typical American small town, it deals with the aspirations of its characters to seek out a better life for themselves (at least in regards to Luke, Avery, and Jason). Each has a specific want, and they pursue it – Luke wants to have a family (though somewhat naively) and take care of them financially so he begins robbing banks to make money (because he does not know another way); Avery is ambitious and somewhat arrogant in his on self-righteous vanity so he turns to ratting out other cops (which is always deemed a negative, when in some regard he is doing the right thing) so that he can forward his career (not seeing another way); and, Jason wants to know about his father (something that he needs to feel complete).

The character of AJ however is different. There is maybe a spark of ambition in him at the end, but he seems to be a comment on or the embodiment of the new generation of American entitlement – those that think they just deserve respect, money, power, and etcetera just for existing, which is very contradictory to the classic ‘America Dream’ narrative, to which almost all the other characters (good or bad) seem to prescribe (though, certainly there is a bit of this in Avery’s story as well). He is content to just be an ignorant young man, thinking things will just fall into place for him (and they very well might – depending on what his father does for him). This also reflects on the fact that his father is physically and emotional absent from his life. He does not have a role model to help shape his ambition so he turns to pop culture (which for him seems to be hip hop culture) – a poor choice, because by nature it is superficial.

AJ’s character also allows Cianfrance to comment on the class system in America. While Jason and AJ both attend the same high school – economically their parents lead very different lives. Cianfrance seems to identify much more with Jason and his family (his parents having to struggle to lead a decent life), as there is a certain level of detachment and even distain for what AJ’s family has become. Neither parent wants to deal with him, so they just leave him alone in Avery’s big expensive house, causing his feeling of entitlement and reliance on poor role models (them included).

Luke’s story sets in motion Avery’s, and Avery is too busy to raise his son properly. But what makes the film particularly powerful and interesting is that Cianfrance brings the narrative full circle, so to speak. Jason, whose pain is created by growing up without his real father (something Avery plays a role in as a cop), is the force that brings Avery and his son together ultimately – showing them how important they actually are to each other. Jason on the search for his father (who his father was) gives AJ his father. Thus, this really is a story of fathers and sons, and redemption.

Cianfrance aesthetically creates the world of the narrative to feel incredibly organic and real. Everything is steeped in realism – particularly the performances. There is not much action (with really only Luke’s bank-robbing escapades serving as ‘action’ sequences), nor does the narrative involve any grand schemes. Cianfrance just wants to look at these characters, leading fairly average lives – what drives them, what their fears are, what their hopes and dream are. His camera stays with the characters, maintaining a very intimate feel. He also does not rely on any narrative temporal tricks (which are overly commonplace in today’s narrative langue). He instead allows his epic to play out linearly, with faith that the performances and dramatic components will engage the audience throughout.

While for the most part the film does work very well, and is at times quite beautiful and moving, it does feel long as well. Cianfrance wants the film to have a very atmospheric/moody quality, and thus to achieve this it is also slow moving (as the narrative is not efficient in its storytelling). This is not overly detrimental, but certainly will cause some viewers to lose interest. The third part also does not play nearly as well as the first two dramatically (as the revenge narrative feels a bit out of place and exaggerated).

The Place Beyond the Pines is frustrating in a sense, because in moments it is a brilliant character piece that emotional engages its audience, while in others it loses it connection due to its lumbering pace and fumbling drama of part three (though, most of it is very good). However, for those willing to commit to the narrative, it is a fulfilling journey that, when it is at its best, is mesmerizing.

Technical, aesthetic & acting achievements: Derek Cianfrance, a few feature films into his career, has shown a great visual eye and sense of grandiose storytelling (whether that is a good thing or not, is a matter of opinion). I look forward to seeing what he does next, as he seems to have the makings of a great talent in American cinema.

Mike Patton’s score for the film, consisting mostly of atmospheric tones, works quite well – but Cianfrance is also overly reliant on it to emphasize the film’s moody tone. Sean Bobbitt’s photography is top notch, and maybe the most impressive aspect of the film. The opening shot especially is fantastic. The visual look, while muted and gritty, imposes a feel of realism. Inbal Weinberg’s production design is not flashy at all, nor was it meant to be – rather, he as well contributes to the overall realistic feel and look of the film.

The performances are paramount to The Place Beyond the Pines working, because Cianfrance has stripped pretty much everything else away. Eva Mendes, Ray Liotta, Rose Byrne, and Ben Mendelsohn are all strong in supporting roles. Mendelsohn is however the standout performer (maybe of the whole film). Emory Cohen (playing AJ) is noticeably the weakest of the four characters that at different times take the lead, but he still is good enough to momentarily carry the film. Dane DeHaan (Jason) is good as he is able to show the internal pain that he has growing up without knowing his real father. Ryan Gosling is also very good as Luke. (While the performance does somewhat remind me of his work in Drive,) his work here is layered. He naively thinks that he can take care of his family, while also having this romantic view of his outlaw lifestyle (which again plays into this feeling like an American tale) – of course he is destined to be a tragic character. He feels emotionally childlike at times (screeching at bank tellers as he carries out a robbery). Bradley Cooper (building off his excellent work in Silver Linings Playbook) is wonderful in this as well playing Avery. He hits all the right emotional moments to make his character one that the audience can both root for and also kind of despise (it is hard to do that).

Summary & score: While The Place Beyond the Pines is flawed, its ambition and brilliant moments carry the day. 8/10

The Ides of March (2011) – Review

Review: The Ides of March is a good and very well-made political drama, performance and aesthetically speaking, but it lacks any real sense of emotional connect to the audience. It plays more as a drama, in terms of the audience watching it to find out what happens, than a thriller. Even though all the performances are very good, the audience does not care about the characters, and this is due to director (and co-writer) George Clooney’s inability to create characters that are relatable to the audience, or at least present them as such. As is, the film is presented much more as a tale to be followed, completely plot driven. While there are emotional scenes for the main character Stephen and great moments between characters, they all serve the plot and not the character(s). The viewer never feels invested in Stephen, and thus the drama and mild thriller aspects of the narrative do not engage the audience on a higher emotional level. However despite this shortcoming, Clooney (et al.) still makes a very good film (that could have been great). This is due to fantastic aesthetics, wonderfully written scenes and great performances. It sounds odd that a film can have great performances but not connect with the audience, but it is a matter of how the characters are presented to the audience – whether the viewer is merely supposed to follow them on their journey or actively participate (plot driven versus character driven). However, there are very good plot driven films that still have character moments that allow for a meaningful connection with the audience, so they can be invested, and this is simply lacking in The Ides of March (which I think would otherwise be a great film instead of just a good one). The film’s aesthetics are however quite brilliant and many of the scenes are among my favorites of the year (specifically one between Stephen and Tom Duffy near the end of the second act), elevating the film considerably. An aspect of the film that is also interesting is the portray of American politics as a soul-crushing profession that eats up virtue and spits out emptiness. The characters have goals of making the country better and on the outside seem to be honest, but once the film digs into the backchannels and behind the scenes of their campaigns there is something rotten at the center (and it sure seems like this is probably the case in real life as well). If there is any character drama in the film at all, it is the transition in Stephen’s expression and overall body language from the beginning to the end. All in all, The Ides of March has a lot to like about it (on one viewing, though I question how much it holds up on multiple viewings), but Clooney seems more interested in the style, performances and look of the film than its emotional core.

Technical, aesthetic & acting achievements: George Clooney has directed four features now, and The Ides of March is probably his best (though, many would argue Good Night, and Good Luck. is a better film – but I think it is vastly overrated). Each of his films show off his love for style and the aesthetics of filmmaking, and this is no different. The film is beautifully shot. Cinematographer Phedon Papamichael’s lighting is brilliant and among the best of the year, while Sharon Seymour’s production design and sets fit the tone and style of the film perfectly. As much as I liked Papmichael’s work, Alexandre Desplat’s score is maybe even more marvelous. The Ides of March also features really good acting throughout. Jeffrey Wright seems to be having some fun with his character, and it works well. Evan Rachel Wood, Paul Giamatti and Philip Seymour Hoffman are fantastic in their supporting roles, stealing most of the scenes they are in. Clooney is his typical stoic self, but with hints of cracks (but really this is the same type of performance he always gives). The lead Ryan Gosling is very good as well (with Crazy, Stupid, Love. and Drive, he might be having the best year of any actor), but his performance is slightly overshadowed by the lack of any connection with the audience – and thus we do not care about his character aside from wanting to see how things play out.

Summary & score: Otherwise very well made, The Ides of March is missing its soul, but even so is a good political drama. 8/10

Drive (2011) – Review

Review: Drive is not your typical Hollywood style crime drama (or action movie as some of the marketing might have you believe); rather it is a methodical character piece that plays out as a very good crime drama in the second half. Director (and for all intents and purposes writer, as he changed essentially all of the script) Nicolas Winding Refn is not so much interested in the action-heavy, cheesy dialog and mostly meaninglessness of Hollywood action fare. He has structured Drive to build slowly, allowing for the characters to exist in the space organically (and not defined by exposition and dialog). Then, he juxtaposes moments of action and graphic violence against the calm creating much more of an impact. These scenes are exhilarating for the audience. The action set pieces, though brief and little in number, are fantastic and play extremely well because Refn has set them up perfectly. However, this is a film that does not play well for all moviegoers (evidenced by the awkward reactions and nervous laughter from some viewers). The film is steeped in indie style, and is very similar to Refn’s last film Valhalla Rising in terms of pacing and overall narrative style (but with a bit more action). Those looking for a Hollywood style action crime drama (something like Fast Five) are probably going to be disappointed and bored through most of the beginning (as the pacing is slow). As good as the action set pieces are, Refn is much more focused on the overall aesthetic and mood of the piece. He is creating a cinematic piece of art, in a sense, and not just entertainment (not to say that it is not entertaining, because it is). He wants to derive meaning out of what is on the screen and his characters, and have it register with the viewer in a much more impactful way. However, do not fear, the film is far from avant-garde. Refn has characters that are relatable and also rife with genre conventions, as are many of the plot points and themes at play. Outside the style and pacing, this plays and feels very much like your typical crime drama – Refn has just made it his own (little dialog, not a lot of outward emotion shown, music playing a large role in translating character emotion to the audience, and brief moments of hyper-violence). It is Refn’s unique take on the genre that really makes this film special (in a world where many movies are the same thing rehashed over and over). The lead character, who is left unnamed, is also different than what we typically see in this genre. He is very soft-spoken, allowing his face and energy to emote rather than dialog. Yet, it is the contrast between his softness (and even awkwardness) with his love interest Irene and his competency as both a driver and badass that makes him a very compelling and interesting character, with almost no backstory. Drive above all feels fresh, and that may be its best quality.

Technical, aesthetic & acting achievements: Nicolas Winding Refn has inserted himself into the group of cool stylistic indie directors (probably most comparable to David Cronenberg, especially with the way he shoots violence). I cannot wait to see what he does next. Tonally and visually, Drive is fantastic (it is sort of a cross between Heat and Blade Runner). Cliff Martinez’s score, consisting of atmospheric tones, is brilliant and so perfect for the film (here is an example of the score), but is overshadowed by the found music (excellent stuff like Nightcall by Kavinsky, Under Your Spell by Desire and A Real Hero by College). Newton Thomas Sigel’s cinematography also fits Refn’s vision perfectly. The film looks very sleek and clean, juxtaposing the messiness of the situation the characters find themselves in. Beth Mickle’s production design also contrasts the lighting as the locations are rundown and unremarkable, and it works really well. The cast is fabulous. Oscar Isaac, Ron Perlman and Christina Hendricks (who has a great scene with Ryan Gosling) are very good in small supporting roles. Bryan Craston plays his tragic character well, and Albert Brooks plays a bit off-type for a great villain. Carey Mulligan is very important to the film’s narrative success. She does not have much dialog, but is able to get her emotions across nonverbally and is excellent. Gosling plays the odd lead character very well and differently from most similar types in the genre – he smiles.

Summary: Drive is not for everyone (it is far too stylistic for that), but its fresh take on the crime genre is remarkable and stunning. 9/10

Crazy, Stupid, Love. (2011) – Review

Review: Crazy, Stupid, Love. is heartfelt, poignant, funny and mostly on target as a good romantic comedy/drama. The first thing that stands out about the film is how directors Glenn Ficarra and John Requa structured the narrative. It is very atypical with multiple connected stories arcs and character arcs that start and stop outside the normal three act structure – though Cal’s arc very much follows the normal rom-com structure. This interesting structure across all the main characters arcs gives the film a real-life feel, which most films in the genre never even begin to approach. Ficarra and Requa have a very good handle on playing drama and comedy together. The drama in the film feels very real, but at the same time some of the moments are fairly devastating for the characters, making the ending feel very cheap and tacked on ultimately hurting the film a lot, as it does not fit. The pacing is also a bit funky due to different character arc starting and stopping at different times and not following the main narrative structure. It is a brave choice for the directors to make the film in this way, and it works for the most part, but not completely. Ficarra and Requa do great work with their characters too, but Emily feels very underdeveloped and sort of left out (as really with six main character stories going on, this was bound to happen to one of them). As for the comedy aspect of the film, the jokes are funny but the overall tone is fairly sad (as it opens with Cal’s family falling apart) and with all the major dramatic moments, it does not feel like a happy-ending type typical rom-com (which is good, but again makes the happy ending, while accustom to the genre, feel all the more fake). All in all, Crazy, Stupid, Love. works and is an interesting take on the rom-com genre, but it is too bad that the directors (whatever the reason may be) did not fully commit to their ‘real-life’ narrative and allow the film to take a more natural course. They allow, like most of this genre’s films, love to be overly idealized, which is fine in other cases but does not fit this narrative.

Technical, aesthetic & acting achievements: Directors Glenn Ficarra and John Requa were successful screenwriters, and now with two good comedy/dramas under their belts, they can be expected to make good films and be called good directors going forward. The music composed by Christophe Beck and Nick Urata goes well with the drama and comedy at play in the film, while Andrew Dunn’s cinematography is quite good for a rom-com. I really liked William Arnold’s production design, his set for the bar and especially the contrast between the characters’ homes and what that said about where they were at that stage of life. However, the film’s success is almost completely dependent on the performances of the actors – and they were very strong. Liza Lapira is very funny in her supporting role. Julianne Moore is a great actress, but is not really give too much to do in this film – though she is still good. Jonah Bobo and especially Analeigh Tipton are fantastic (Tipton giving a breakthrough performance). Emma Stone is funny, tough and sweet all at the same time. Ryan Gosling is really good playing his role as a typical douchebag guy but completely venerable. And Steve Carell, who is so great at playing a sad but comedic nice guy, is good yet again (he also served as a producer on the film, finding a good role for himself).

Summary & score: Crazy, Stupid, Love. could have been great, but does not quite get there. That said, it is still one of the best romantic comedies/dramas of the year. 7/10