Cats and Geese on Summer Afternoon (2013/06/16)

They look a little more pleasant as enjoying summer afternoon…

Berberian Sound Studio (2012) ☆☆☆(3/4) : A sound engineer stuck in Giallo film

“Berberian Sound Studio” begins with one of miserably dreadful moments that can really happen in our mundane life. Its meek hero dislikes his new job, but he finds himself stuck in that purgatory, and he feels more alienated and isolated in his stark work environment. In such a circumstance like that, it is not surprising that his mental state becomes slowly deteriorated when it seems there is no end in his sight.

Toby Jones plays a British sound engineer named Gilderoy, who comes to Italy for working in the post-production of a fictional Italian horror film named “The Equestrian Vortex”. It is around the 1970s, and that was the era during which many infamous Italian horror films were made. As a matter of fact, “The Equestrian Vortex” is basically a rip-off of Dario Argento’s “Suspiria”(1977), one of famous ‘giallo films’ from that period.

While we are thrown along with Gilderoy to its red devilish main title sequence around the beginning, we do not see the rest of “The Equestrian Vortex”, which seems to be filled with lots of terrible moments throughout its running time. It is mainly Gilderoy’s job to record and mix the sound effects for these horrible scenes while assisted by a handful of crew members and ordered by his boss Francesco(Cosimo Fusco), and, though the sound studio looks pretty lousy even in the standard of the 1970s, Gilderoy works hard for getting his job done every day despite this poor condition. We frequently watch him working at the control booth, and we sometimes look at his long work chart full of the sound effect editing design over the film.

While showing him and others at work in languid pace, the movie intrigues us with the filmmaking techniques behind movie. Like Brian De Palma’s “Blow Out”(1981), which also features a sound effect technician hero working on a horror film, the movie induces us to be more conscious of the aural aspect of movie while looking around the daily work process of Gilderoy and others, and it is rather fun to watch how they create sound effects for their movie. They use various kinds of vegetables and fruits to generate the sound effects they want, and Gilderoy is served with a slice of watermelon on his first day when they have just finished their business with that poor fruit. I was particularly amused by how they used turnips for providing the plausible sound for a certain act of violence – do the sound effect guys still use that method?

We also see the dubbing process while their work continues. As some of you know, Italian films made at that time were all dubbed entirely during post-production process, so we see several actors and actresses come and go around the studio for recording the dialogues and the wordless human/inhuman sounds from their larynxes. The actresses are hired mainly for their scream – or what they can do for the director, who is an arrogant and careless prick who really seems to think he is making a horror masterpiece. At one point, an angered actress reminds us that the exploitative side of those cheap horror films is not only confined in the screen.

While all these things are happening around him, Gilderoy feels more loneliness and isolation as the time goes by. He misses his home in England, and the affectionate letters from his mother intensify his longing rather than alleviating it. His co-workers do not communicate with him much because of language barrier, and they are mostly unkind to him. He sleeps alone in his temporary residence, and, when the work time is over, he usually spends his solitary time with several sound recordings before going to bed.

And, above all, he feels increasingly disturbed by “The Equestrian Vortex”. It is not that the film has some supernatural evil force; even though he knows it is only a movie, its supposedly shocking violent scenes always tremble his vulnerable psyche whenever he works on them. He does not like horror films at all, but this is a job he is hired and demanded to do, and he is literally bullied by Francesco when he expresses his desire to quit the job. He realizes that he has no choice but to keep moving on in this hostile mood – and his reality starts getting crumbled along the work schedule.

The director/writer Peter Strickland makes a compelling psychological horror film focusing more on atmosphere than plot. It requires some patience around the beginning, but its disturbing undertone attracts our attention through its effective sound designs and a recurring red light sign for silence in the studio. We only encounter the horror movie in the film indirectly, but its horrific sounds are enough to stimulate our imagination, and its brooding force throws an ominous tone even on a plain sight of the corridor outside the studio, which comes to evoke that spooky claustrophobic quality we observed from the films like “The Tenant”(1976), “The Shining”(1980) and “Barton Fink”(1991).

The second half of the movie becomes more bizarre, more fearful, and more confusing as it goes into the territory of David Lynch films, and it helps that the movie is anchored by its lead performance to hold us on emotion level amid its accumulating confusion. Toby Jones, who has been one of the most distinctive British character actors in recent years, did a superb job of playing an unstable mind approaching to the possible collapse under his trapped situation, and you may feel lots of sympathy to his character if you have ever had a soul-crushing job experience.

Although I am not very familiar with those giallo films(as far as I remember, only giallo film I watched was Dario Argento’s “Deep Red”(1975)), I found “Berberian Sound Studio” is a well-made horror film with intriguing sights and some tense/scary moments while working well as a tribute to the genre it plays with. I paid attention to its creepy atmosphere, and I enjoyed some of its details, and I was actually terrified at times. How nice it is to see that familiar black glove again, by the way.

Hitchcock (2012) ☆☆☆(3/4) : Mr. & Mrs. Hitchcock – and “Psycho”

If you have some knowledge about Alfred Hitchcock, his life, and his chilling masterpiece “Psycho”(1960), “Hitchcock” will not surprise you. It mainly shows what we have known and heard about him and his personal life and his movies, and, while it is interesting to see how he struggled to keep his artistic vision intact during his small but daring attempt at that time, the movie mostly stays on the level of mild amusement as revealing nothing new or revelatory about what made Hitchcock tick. You may be disappointed because of that, but, seriously, what can you expect if the movie is about a great pervert director whose life and works have been constantly and thoroughly studied and analyzed by countless scholars and critics for more than 40 years?

After its darkly humorous introduction a la “Alfred Hitchcock Presents”, the movie, which is based on the book “Alfred Hitchcock and the Making of Psycho” written by Stephen Rebello, begins the story in 1959, when Alfred Hitchcock(Anthony Hopkins) was at the peak of his career. Although he has just had another big success with his latest thriller film “North by Northwest”(1959), Hitchcock feels an urge to do try something new because he seems to be stuck in his comfort zone despite his accomplishment, so he starts to search for anything suitable for his purpose.

On one day, he comes across Robert Bloch’s morbid novel “Psycho”, which was inspired by a notorious real-life serial killer Ed Gein(disturbing Michael Wincott). Not only the book itself but also the gruesome and macabre details of Gein’s serial killing attract Hitchcock’s interest, so he decides to make a movie based on that novel although the people around him, including his wife Alma Reville(Helen Mirren), are not that pleased about his decision.

While he and others are going through pre-production phase, we see how much sensational “Psycho” were to the people even before the shooting began. The Motion Picture Production Code, whose permission was necessary for theatrical release by major studios during that period, immediately shows a string of objections as soon as they read the adapted screenplay written by Joseph Stefano(Ralph Macchio). During Hitchcock’s meeting with Motion Picture Production Code people, you may be amused by the fact that showing toilet on the screen was a taboo at that time even though the toilet in “Psycho” was used for destroying an evidence rather than our daily biological need.

Hitchcock also faces the finance problem as the Paramount Studio is reluctant about financing the production although all he needs is a small budget around $800,000(“North by Northwest” was made with around 3 million dollars, by the way). He eventually finances his movie by mortgaging his house, and the production finally begins under absolutely secrecy(you have probably heard that Hitchcock bought almost all the copies of Robert Bloch’s novel in US for preventing spoilers).

His wife Alma, who has been dutiful as his professional partner as well as his personal partner, stands by him as usual, but their relationship starts being strained as Hitchcock pushes the production. In addition, when Alma seriously considers working with a screenplay writer Whitfield Cook(Danny Huston) on a non-Hitchcock project, Hitchcock becomes jealous and obsessive as his dark fantasy represented by Ed Gein hangs around his sight, and that throws shadow of disturbance on the set of “Psycho”.

It is not easy to accept Anthony Hopkins as an iconic director like Hitchcock despite Oscar-nominated make-up, but Hopkins is a good actor, and he wisely channels Hitchcock’s familiar mannerisms while not resorting to cheap mimicry. We are frequently aware of him playing Hitchcock on the screen, but, through his nice performance, we also see that dry, courteous, and talented British gentleman who sublimated his dark inner impulse into great thriller films.

Hopkin’s co-star Helen Mirren does not look like Alma Reville either, but she is also good as a no-nonsense woman who has endured lots of things while living with a great artist and does not hesitate at all to express her frustration when she thinks enough is enough. Like many great artists, Hitchcock is a difficult guy to live with for many reasons including his famous obsession with blond ladies, but Alma knows that her husband is indeed a great artist and, above all, he always needs her. When it seems “Psycho” is a total failure, she immediately assumes her role as his enabler, and we see how “Psycho” was reshaped into a great film we know.

The movie could have shown more about that, but the production process shown in the movie is still engaging to watch none the less, and the director Sacha Gervasi assembled good supporting actors for his recreation. Scarlett Johansson is Janet Leigh, who faces the dark side of the director she admires during the shooting of that infamous shower room scene. She is shocked but she is not so angry because she has already been warned by her co-star Vera Miles(Jessica Biel), who knows several things about Hitchcock as an actress previously working with him. Toni Collette is Hitchcock’s loyal assistant Peggy Robertson, and Michael Stuhlbarg is his hard-working agent Lew Wasserman, and James D’Arcy is convincing as Anthony Perkins, whose unstable persona makes Hitchcock convinced that he finds a right actor to play Norman Bates. The movie also shows several notable people behind “Psycho” including Joseph Stefano, Saul Bass, Bernard Herrmann, and George Tomasini, but they do no more than passing by the story briefly as minor characters.

“Hitchcock” sets its goal on a modest level, and it does as much as it intended. I did not get any new insight or information about Hitchcock and “Psycho” after watching it, but this small movie works as an enjoyable fiction about a great director who comes to recognize the value of his lifelong partner and their enduring relationship/partnership, and I did enjoy the recreation of the making of “Psycho” in the movie. As I said, it won’t surprise you, but I think Mr. & Mrs. Hitchcock would be amused by this little film about themselves.

Man of Steel (2013) ☆☆1/2(2.5/4) : He can fly – no surprise

 “Man of Steel” wants to look different from its famous senior which opened the door for all the subsequent superhero films, and I understand its intention. When several production logos were ominously introduced one by one at the start of the film, I was reminded of that moody and monochromatic tone of the main title scene of “Batman”(1989), and I immediately sensed its serious ambition to soar in a way different from that of “Superman”(1978) and its decent sequel “Superman II”(1980).

Too bad it does not soar as much as it intended or we wished. It is interesting to watch how “Man of Steel” tries to look and feel different while telling the origin story pretty familiar to many of us, but, to my disappointment, it does not have enough spirit to excite my heart. There are several nice visual moments to be enjoyed, and I cared about the story to some degrees, but almost everything in the movie is ultimately hurled into a big, overblown apocalyptic CGI climax which might have been transferred from Michael Bay’s abysmal Transformers sequels. Around that point, I lost most of my interest even though we can hope for better things to come when our mighty hero finally settles in Metropolis as a guy with two jobs in the end.

The movie begins in Planet Krypton which looks far, far different from its cold, abstract counterpart in the 1978 film. This alien world is bountifully decorated with exaggerated costumes and big production designs probably inspired by old pulpy SF fictions like “John Carter of Mars”, and I could not help but think of several video games when I saw those elaborate armors of its inhabitants. I am sure many of my high schoolmates who wasted their time on Starcraft will certainly be amused by the appearance of the high-tech military uniforms of Krypton.

Krypton’s lofty civilization is on the brink of its end due to its excessive advance through the reckless energy extraction from the planet core, and one of its scientist, Jor-El(Russell Crowe, who is less ponderous than Marlon Brando in the 1978 film and is as serious as he was in “Robin Hood”(2010)), knows it is already too late for them to avoid this catastrophe. He has a plan to preserve and reconstruct his race through his infant son Kal-El, who is naturally born by his wife Lara Lor-Van(Ayelet Zurer) in the opening scene, and he wants the official permission to proceed with his plan from the high officials of Krypton, but he quickly sees that he has to execute his plan by any means necessary when General Zod(Michael Shannon on a very, very, very volcanic mode) attempts a coup d’état with his surly band of soldiers. The movie usually switches to a hyperkinetic mode whenever there exists any slight amount of action on the screen, and I must say the inevitable destruction of Krypton feels like a weightless footnote compared to all the sound and fury coming before it.

A space pod loaded with Jor-El’s son and some device for reviving his race is safely shot to the space before this apocalypse, and the movie quickly moves its story to an adult Kal-El/Clark Kent(Henry Cavill) as soon as the pod crashes into the Earth. Although he has been hiding his super power from others as advised by his wise and generous Earth stepfather Jonathan Kent(Kevin Costner, who incidentally also played Robin Hood in “Robin Hood: Prince of the Thieves”(1991)), he is always to ready to use his power to save people, and he does not hesitate for a second when he encounters a desperate situation at a burning oil flatform.

As the movie frequently goes back to his past in Smallville through several flashbacks, the screenplay by David S. Goyer, who wrote the story for the recent Batman trilogy with the co-story writer/producer Christopher Nolan, handles the story as seriously and realistically as possible in spite of its inherent preposterousness. The movie has a gray tone seeping into everything in the story, and, like Bruce Wayne in Nolan’s Batman films, Clark Kent in this film has the issues to brood and agonize over – especially after he realizes he is a lot different from others. One scene involves his horror caused by the discovery of his ability to see through his teacher and classmates through his X-ray vision(isn’t it harmful to their health, by the way?), and I came to muse on how unexciting Superman’s daily life really is; seriously, it would be miserable to any human being to live with such overwhelming sensory overload every day.

Clark tries to remain unnoticed as much as he can, but it seems the time to reveal his power and identity in public is coming as his stepfather predicted. A big alien spaceship is found in the North Pole area, and, after he instinctively activates it, he learns about his origin and other things through the hologram image of his Kryptonian father, and now he is ready to wear that famous uniform and cape and then fly to the sky.

At the same time, he is coincidentally noticed by Lois Lane(Amy Adams), a young hotshot reporter of Daily Planet who happens to be around the site. Although nobody believes what she witnessed in the spaceship, our young feisty reporter is determined to find this mysterious guy, so she eagerly follows his trails for what may be the scoop of her lifetime.

But a far bigger scoop is approaching to her and everyone on the Earth. General Zod and his surly band of soldiers were released from their banishment when Krypton was destroyed, and they finally come to the Earth for finding Kal-El and, not so surprisingly, conquering the Earth. This is the point where the movie becomes far less interesting as many things are busily hurled, kicked, smashed, pulverized, and exploded on the screen with lots of sound effects and Hans Zimmer’s overpowering score. Its climax part is the massive destruction initiated at the center of Metropolis, and you will instantly think about 9/11 as watching the buildings collapsed and the people frantically running for safety on the street. The movie does not directly show it, but it is rather horrible to think about how many people die during this epic catastrophe.

The director Zack Snyder, who previously made “Watchmen”(2009) and “300”(2007), makes his movie look visually slick and polished. I liked the scene with a metallic mural painting style in which Jor-El tells about the long history of his perished civilization to his son, and the mental conversation scene between Kal-El and Zod has a striking shot when Kal-El faces the horrific aspect of Zod’s ruthless terraforming plan.

But, sadly, there is little fun or surprise in the process, and it gets more tedious and more sterile during its third act. What we get from its exhausting array of bloated actions during its last 50 minutes is your average CGI spectacle which goes only louder and bigger until it reaches to the finish line, and the story and characters are almost swept along with this mess. Superman and other Kryptonians are more or less than the CGI creatures which can do anything they want while not harmed much during their dizzy and frantic action scenes, and, to be frank with you, I do not know why the soldiers in the movie keep attacking Kryptonians even though it is pretty apparent that their bullets and rockets and other weapons are quite useless(but we can say they are as useful as, say, rubber bullets).

The best thing about the performances in the movie is that the actors acquit themselves well even when they are wasted and overshadowed by special effects. Henry Cavill wears the role nicely with a little more gravity; he looks good with his costume, and that is pretty enough for playing Superman, who is actually more of a symbol than a character. As his possible love interest, Amy Adams is charming as before; there is not much romantic interaction between her and Cavill mainly because too many things are happening around them, but I am curious about how their relationship will be developed in the possible sequel because, in this time, Lois Lane is a sharp girl who will not be fooled by Clark’s nerdy glasses(will it be a “don’t tell, don’t ask” romance, I wonder?).

While Kevin Costner and Diane Lane are appropriately cast as Superman’s humble Earth parents, Michael Shannon goes way over the top with admirable intensity as General Zod; he chews every scene of his so fanatically that you will believe a man can chew the Earth. Laurence Fishburne sternly holds his place on the ground as Perry White, the no-nonsense editor-in-chief of Daily Planet. His Perry White is less funny and colorful, but I guess we cannot possibly imagine a colorful and brash newspaperman working in the era of digital media.

“Man of Steel” is passable as a reboot film, but I am not sure about how much fun and excitement it will be able to draw from its darker and grittier approach a way different from the bright, optimistic, and innocent attitude of the 1978 film. As my friend Michael Mirasol once pointed out in his insightful essay “The Rise and Fall of Superhero”, Superman is its genre’s yang while Batman is its yin, and it is little awkward to see a simple superhero like Superman in a darker light which is more suitable to Batman and other more conflicted superheroes. It surely looks different, and I don’t mind about that, but are we really going to have a fun as promised in its ending? The movie surely swoops on us with all the power and resources it can amass – but it does not soar above its excess.

Everyday (2012) ☆☆☆1/2(3.5/4) : Life goes on as they wait for his release

As a movie observing how life goes on for its main characters over the period of five years, “Everyday” feels vivid and authentic. As watching one ordinary family dealing with a specific hardship imposed on them, you can feel the passage of time along with the small changes they go through, and the documentary-like approach of the movie adds another level of verisimilitude to their life story.

As a matter of fact, the movie was actually shot during a few weeks at a time from 2007 to 2012, and the resulting effect is not different from what we watched from Michael Apted’ great documentary Up series or Richard Linklater’s Before Trilogy. The actors in the screen become really older along with their characters as we watch their small episodes one by one, and we become amazed or amused by how some of them have been changed since we began to observe them at the beginning.

The movie revolves around the daily difficulties Ian(John Simm), Karen(Shirley Henderson), and their young children have been facing since Ian’s imprisonment. A crime Ian committed is not explained well in the movie, but it seems he has been incarcerated for some misdemeanor(according to IMDB and Wikipedia, he was charged with drug smuggling), and it looks like he will be released after few years. You may say it won’t be long, but it does feel long to Ian and his family, and they always feel moody whenever the visiting time is over.

The movie does not delve into the details of Ian’s crime or how he thinks about it, but, through its non-judgmental view, we come to find Ian is a nice man who could have been a better dad to his children. Although the incarceration is certainly hard for him everyday, he mostly keeps a cheery face in front of his loving kids as they spend their small precious time together at the visiting room of the penitentiary, and his easy rapport with them shows his better sides to us. Maybe they had some rough times in their past, but it is apparent that Ian and Karen miss each other a lot as a husband and a wife, and there is a tender moment when Karen slightly violates the regulations to satisfy her lonely husband’s certain need.

As the time goes by, we see things getting better step by step for Ian while he is transferred to other cells or other prisons. The mood of the family meeting becomes brighter with more comfortable conditions, and, probably because of his good behaviors, Ian is later permitted to get out of the prison temporarily and spend a short time with his family outside. Leaving their children in a public park for a while, he and Karen enjoy a brief but sweet private time together in a small place.

But it is still hard for not only Ian and but also Karen and their kids. Without her husband, Karen has to support the household by herself, and we see her working as a supermarket employee and then as a bartender. The circumstance is not entirely gloomy; she earns enough money for her and her four children, and there is also some help from the people near her including a friend named Eddie(Darren Tighe).

Days and months and years pass as they move on, but they feel Ian’s absence everyday even though his release date is being closer to them. Elder son Robert(Robert Kirk) looks more sullen and more rebellious than before, and his younger brother Shaun(Shaun Kirk) fights with one of his schoolmates just because of what his schoolmate said about his father. Karen silently struggles with her accumulating loneliness, and we are not so surprised to see Eddie being around her and her children.

The director Michael Winterbottom, who wrote the screenplay with Laurence Coriat, did a very good job of capturing the glimpses of personal feelings inside his characters amid the mundane but realistic environment, and his performers hold our attention with their earnest performances. Shirley Henderson and John Simm convincingly immerse themselves into their respective characters, and we can always sense what they feel or think through their gestures and facial expressions. With her ever-haggard face, Henderson is well-cast as a struggling wife and mother who is both vulnerable and determined, and Simm is her equal counterpart as a likable guy who happened to do a wrong thing and is dearly paying for that.

As their four kids, Shaun Kirk, Robert Kirk, Katrina Kirk, and Stephanie Kirk, who are siblings in real life, remind me of how kids frequently marvel us through their growth. Shaun Kirk, the youngest one, is especially notable because of his considerable changes in appearance observed over five years; he is a cute little kid with round eyes when we meet him for the first time, and then we see him gradually resembling his older brother Robert as he grows up, and then he eventually becomes old enough to talk with his brother about the physical difference between male and female. These four young actors bring their natural bond between them to their characters, and they also look very believable with Simm and Hendersen as a family coping with problems.

Michael Winterbottom has been impressing me and others with the diverse attempts in his diligent filmography. While he made a disturbing film noir drama “Killer Inside Me”(2010), he also made a humorous road trip movie “The Trip”(2010), which has a funny conversation scene between its lead actors Steve Coogan and Rob Brydon on how to imitate Michael Caine’s voice, and these two contrasting works of his were quickly followed by “Trishna”(2011), a modern retelling of Thomas Hardy’s novel “Tess of the d’Urbervilles” which is set in India.

“Everyday” is his another interesting attempt, and it is an experiment which is successful as well as interesting. Supported well by engaging performances, the movie sometimes becomes a little more relaxed and optimistic as accompanied with several beautiful outdoor interlude shots, and Michael Nyman’s score effectively conveys the sense of passing time along with a tentative sign of hope and optimism. This small movie eventually grows on us as an intimate and touching family drama in the end, and we are satisfied with several small slices of life served to us one by one – while hoping the best for them.

A cat and dogs (2013/06/09)

It was hot, but they all had a good time during Sunday afternoon.

Geese and a cat on a summer day (2013/06/09)

Everybody is resting under shade…