Monday, February 25, 2013

Your Academy Awards Debrief


Well there we go people, the 85th Academy Awards have just wrapped up. The stars gave their all in a typical night of glitz, glamour and Jennifer Lawrence, and now we sift through the results and see where we as cinema-goers, nay our society, now stand.

I have a proclaimed soft spot for the Hollywood Babylon, KNEEL BEFORE YOUR GOD!

Rest assured, it is in a better place, and for that we have to thank JLaw. Jennifer Lawrence came, saw and conquered. She's our leader now.


Magnificent.

I'm feeling generous, have a GIF.

And another.

Anyhow, yesterday I posted my picks for the Oscars ceremony, and I'm pleased to say I did better than I have in recent years. I largely attribute this to the very odd nomination choices this year (insert rant here), which invariably led the Academy to thinly spread out their awards across the board. This is good to the extent that not many films were to go home empty handed, however in the end I felt that this left us without an indication of which film the Academy considered to be the best of the year. But I nitpick. 



So of the 13 categories I covered, I had 9 correct picks. Not bad if I say so myself, but there were some definite surprises! Ang Lee picking up the gong for Best Director, Christoph Waltz trumping Tommy Lee Jones and de Niro for Best Supporting Actor, it was curve ball city in Hollywood tonight. 



Ben Affleck's well received political thriller Argo took top honors with Best Picture, being one of only 4 films to have won the award without Best Director to match. That went to Ang Lee for Life of Pi, which in turn claimed the most wins of the night with 4 Oscars, though mainly in technical categories. Lincoln, who entered with a whopper 12 nominations, came out with only 2 including Best Actor for Daniel Day-Lewis. Christoph Waltz (Best Supporting Actor), Anne Hathaway (Best Supporting Actress) and Jennifer Lawrence (Best Actress) rounded out the acting awards and in a historic moment there was a tie (the first since 1968) for Sound Editing with the award going to Skyfall and Zero Dark Thirty.


In the end I can't say that I wasn't that pleased with the choice in awards, largely due to the less than stellar nominations, so they could only live up to my already low expectations. But that so many high quality films were snubbed also spoke to what a spectacular year we had in film, which is one of the strongest in recent memory. In fact I would go as far to say that this was the best year for American cinema in the new decade, and possibly since the millennium. Additionally, the actual ceremony was well done. Seth MacFarlane was quite funny, the speeches were earnest and heartfelt (mostly) and as I said Jennifer Lawrence owned the night. So until Cannes in a few months, 2013 has a tough act to follow!

Here is the full list of categories and winners.  

  • Best Picture: "Argo."
  • Actor: Daniel Day-Lewis, "Lincoln."
  • Actress: Jennifer Lawrence, "Silver Linings Playbook."
  • Supporting Actor: Christoph Waltz, "Django Unchained."
  • Supporting Actress: Anne Hathaway, "Les Miserables."
  • Directing: Ang Lee, "Life of Pi."
  • Foreign Language Film: "Amour."
  • Adapted Screenplay: Chris Terrio, "Argo."
  • Original Screenplay: Quentin Tarantino, "Django Unchained."
  • Animated Feature Film: "Brave."
  • Production Design: "Lincoln."
  • Cinematography: "Life of Pi."
  • Sound Mixing: "Les Miserables."
  • Sound Editing (tie): "Skyfall," ''Zero Dark Thirty."
  • Original Score: "Life of Pi," Mychael Danna.
  • Original Song: "Skyfall" from "Skyfall," Adele Adkins and Paul Epworth.
  • Costume: "Anna Karenina."
  • Documentary Feature: "Searching for Sugar Man."
  • Documentary (short subject): "Inocente."
  • Film Editing: "Argo."
  • Makeup and Hairstyling: "Les Miserables."
  • Animated Short Film: "Paperman."
  • Live Action Short Film: "Curfew."
  • Visual Effects: "Life of Pi."
Long live Jennifer Lawrence, and may the odds be ever in her favor.




Sunday, February 24, 2013

85th Academy Awards Picks


The time is upon us, once again the films billed as the best of the year (2012) will compete for honor and glory in the eyes of the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences. As we have yet to reach the time wherein nominees battle out for the prize in the Thunderdome (one day...), I have brought together my favorite categories and will give my predictions and comments on the 85th Academy Awards.

Soon.

Also props to me for seeing all the nominees for Best Picture before the ceremony for once.

The year of 2012 brought to audiences around the world perhaps one of the strongest slew of Oscar contenders for years. From auteurs returning to the plate once again (Wes Anderson, P.T. Anderson, Michel Haneke to name a few), to mega blockbusters breaking the box office (The Avengers blew my mind, and Skyfall I have since come to love. There will be no mention of The Dark Knight Rises in my house), to visionary adaptations (Life of Pi, Anna Karenina) and cinema achievements that we will revel in years to come (The Master is always on my mind!), this was a smashing year!

So it came as a shock to nobody that the Academy has made a terrible group of choices. There have been blaring omissions/snubs, The Master missing in many categories, Kathryn Bigelow and Ben Affleck, Moonrise Kingdom and Holy Motors to name some more. But c'est la vie, I'll work with what we have. And be sure to read on until my ULTIMATE wild card pick!

Best Picture
  • Amour
  • Argo
  • Beasts of the Southern Wild
  • Django Unchained
  • Les Misérables
  • Life of Pi
  • Lincoln
  • Silver Linings Playbook
  • Zero Dark Thirty
Who will win?


Argo

As I mentioned above, there are some truly unforgivable snubs here, and once again blatant Oscar baiting films such as Les Misérables have been awarded for their banality. However I think I am correct in my pick. Argo has had the momentum since it was named the most popular film from the Toronto Film Festival. A Golden Globe and PGA award have cemented its position as leading contender.

Who should win?


Amour

None of the nominees moved me greater than Amour. Close to home I know but I felt it deserving of the Golden Palm at Cannes and think it pertinent that it be equally received abroad.

Who should have been nominated?


The Master

 This was the greatest crime of the year, for the greatest 'cinema' film of the year to be denied acknowledgement by the industry as the best American film of the year. Truly a travesty, well at least the community agrees with me.

Wildcard - Zero Dark Thirty

Best Director
  • Michael Haneke - Amour
  • Ang Lee - Life of Pi
  • David O. Russell - Silver Linings Playbook
  • Steven Spielberg - Lincoln
  • Behn Zeitlin - Beasts of the Southern Wild
Who will win?


All hail Señor Spielbergo!!!


But seriously:



Steven Spielberg - Lincoln

Were this a fair year, Kathryn Bigelow or Ben Affleck would have been at least nominated, and I would have given it to the former. However I think as Argo will win Best Picture, the Academy will award industry favorite Steven Spielberg. Lincoln is a fantastic film, and whilst I don't believe it pushes boundaries, it doesn't tread on any toes either. 

Who should win?


Michael Haneke - Amour

Amour was a beautiful film, and one which exhibited Haneke's transcendent capabilities as director. He is well and truly deserving of his nomination and I would wish the Academy to do him the honor.

Wildcard - Behn Zeitlin

Best Actor
  • Bradley Cooper - Silver Linings Playbook
  • Daniel Day-Lewis - Lincoln
  • Hugh Jackman - Les Misérables 
  • Joaquin Phoenix - The Master
  • Denzel Washington - Flight
Who will win?


Daniel Day-Lewis - Lincoln

My god you could pick this from a mile away, a British method actor playing arguably the most celebrated American President in a Steven Spielberg period drama. They should have handed the Oscar to him as soon as he signed on. (Can you tell I have a vehement dislike of Daniel Day-Lewis?)

Who should win?


Joaquin Phoenix - The Master

Now this was acting. He didn't so much play the part as lived it. I was totally drawn to Joaquin's performance in The Master along with the rest of the cast. I guess a Volpi Cup is good enough for now.

Wildcard - Hugh Jackman

Best Actress
  • Jessica Chastain - Zero Dark Thirty
  • Jennifer Lawrence - Silver Linings Playbook
  • Emmanuelle Riva - Amour
  • Quvenzhané Wallis - Beasts of the Southern Wild
  • Naomi Watts - The Impossible
Who will win?

Hint: It's not Meryl Streep.

But like seriously, you're awesome.



Jennifer Lawrence - Silver Linings Playbook

Locked up by now, she was fantastic as Tiffany and I have no doubts that Hollywood's new 'it' girl will take home the gold (I have a massive crush on Jennifer Lawrence)

Who should win?


Jennifer Lawrence - Silver Linings Playbook

Phenomenal performance, whilst my love for Jessica Chastain knows no bounds I felt Jennifer had a stronger performance. God I love you.

Wildcard - Emmanuelle Riva

Best Supporting Actor
  • Alan Arkin - Argo
  • Robert De Niro - Silver Linings Playbook 
  • Philip Seymour Hoffman - The Master 
  • Tommy Lee Jones - Lincoln
  • Christoph Waltz - Django Unchained
Who will win?



Tommy Lee Jones - Lincoln

I have an incredible soft spot for Tommy Lee Jones, and as Lincoln will be denied Best Picture I am sure it will pick up in other categories (like a runners up prize).

Who should win?



Philip Seymour Hoffman - The Master

You can see where I'm going here, The Master was truly amazing largely due to the performances of its cast. Give the film and its actors their due!

Wildcard - Robert De Niro

Best Supporting Actress
  • Amy Adams - The Master 
  • Sally Field - Lincoln 
  • Anne Hathaway - Les Misérables 
  • Helen Hunt - The Sessions 
  • Jacki Weaver - Silver Linings Playbook
Who will win?



Anne Hathaway - Les Misérables

See my reasoning for Daniel Day-Lewis. It's gonna happen people.

Who should win?



Amy Adams - The Master

Amy Adams is, along with Jessica Chastain, one of America's most talented actresses. She was at full force in The Master.

Wildcard - Helen Hunt 

Other Categories and My Picks


Best Original Screenplay
  • Django Unchained
Best Adapted Screenplay
  • Lincoln 
Best Animated Feature
  • Wreck-It Ralph
Best Foreign Film
  • Amour
Best Original Song
  • Adele - Skyfall
Best Cinematography 
  • Life of Pi
Best Animated Short Film
  • Paperman

ULTIMATE WILDCARD THEORY

For my ultimate wildcard theory, basically a thought of what could really throw a spanner in the works at the ceremony, I look at Silver Linings Playbook. This film has achieved the rare feat of being nominated in all four acting categories, the first time since Reds in 1981, and also being nominated for the Big Five, the first time since Million Dollar Baby in 2004. Will this film make a surprise sweep and join the likes of One Flew Over the Cuckoos Nest and The Silence of the Lambs in winning Best Picture, Director, Actor, Actress and Screenplay? 

Well those are my picks, enjoy the show and remember that cinema is the greatest art form of our time, and should be respected as such.

Tuesday, February 19, 2013

Anna Karenina



Anna Karenina (2012) - dir. Joe Wright

Love, it is the feeling which no words can define, and no definition can capture its passion and beauty. Leo Tolstoy created a masterpiece with Anna Karenina, exploring the very core of love in an entrancing tale set against imperial Russia. Adapted over 20 times on the silver screen, 2012 saw director Joe Wright and Keira Knightley create a daring vision fit for the modern screen, though is bittersweet in its success.


Anna Karenina posits love as multi dimensional, as shown through the relationships in the film. The most notable of these being of course, that which embroils Anna. Keira Knightley brings to the stage her full talents as an actress, displaying all to which I held her character Anna to. Her performance is transcendent, showing a tragic beauty, passionate lover and empathetic soul that combine in a riveting display. Her character Anna forms the middle of a scandalous triangle. Wife to Alexei Karenin, a respected minister, and mistress to Count Vronsky, a dashing cavalry officer. Alexei is saintly in demeanor a doting husband and devoted father to her child. However their love is artificial, for as Anna mention's 'I was eighteen when I got married, but it was not love.' This construct comes to a halt upon meeting Vronsky, and this is where my attachment to Karenina's character diverges.


This is not love she experiences, but lust. From the brilliantly scripted ballroom dance, to each moment they share onwards, it is an attraction which reeks of sexuality. It is only when they are in a physical bond that Anna displays any true joy in their relationship. In fact much of the rest of their coupling is mired with Anna's incessant jealousy and selfishness towards Vronsky. This I believe to be validated through the film's portrayal of the relationship between Konstantin Levin and Kitty. Kitty begins much like Anna, courting Vronsky not out of love but again a lustful desire. However it is the sympathetic portrayal of Levin that wins her over, as he professes an altruistic love for her that triumphs over physical yearning. Anna throws away this true love that her husband genuinely provides, and subsequently all the things important to her, including the son to which she is closest of all. 


All the world's a stage, and we but players on it. That is the guiding vision for this film, with the majority of the film set within a theater, it's wings and backstage. The choice is an apt one, not only in service of a stylistically distinct film, but also thematically. For in 19th Century Russian aristocracy, we cannot act with impunity and discretion, a fact which comes to plague the titular character Anna. She carries out her scandalous affair that the audience is always there, watching. This in turn becomes suffocating, with the tight confines, though opulent, only serving to further emphasize the constraints of Russian society. However much like my eventual disdain for the character Anna, I came to see this staging as a poisoned chalice to the viewer. Whilst serving the plot nicely, functionally I saw this singular set as confusing. This was especially apparent in the many scene transitions, and there are plenty, which came across as jarring to the point I would struggle to know what exactly was happening.


Anna Karenina is daring to a T. The film is beautiful to behold in its set design, costuming and cinematography (which I hope the Academy will acknowledge). The performances should also be lauded, with Keira Knightley, Jude Law and Matthew Macfayden perfectly cast. Though not perfect in execution, I much prefer a flawed attempt over a stock standard period drama that we're used to. 7/10

Friday, February 15, 2013

Zero Dark Thirty



Zero Dark Thirty (2012) - dir. Kathryn Bigelow
After two amicable yet spirited debates over this film, I have decided to finally throw my hat into the ring and write my opinion on this film. I write this fully acknowledging the controversy surrounding it, to which I will try and address some of the finer arguments, and I hope to show why this is my pick for best film of 2012. 
We open to a black screen, the words September 11th, 2001 sprawled in front of us. We need not need further explanation, for this date has been burned into the minds and hearts of much of the world today. We hear screams, cries for help, crying. 11 years on the vividness of that day lives on as but a distant memory, yet the emotion and heartache still rings true. And now the film begins, not with a bang but a cry, as we the audience are subjected to a front row viewing to the darker side of Bush era foreign policy, torture. The film is gritty, real, and unrelenting in its gratuitous display of waterboarding and psychological humiliation. With the ever present memory of 9/11 lingering in our psyche, the cries and screams that ring in our minds, is this the price we must pay to get justice? Or revenge?  
For the subsequent 2 hours we follow the journey of CIA officer Maya as she tracks down the man whom the world placed as the face and embodiment of the evil that perpetrated the acts of terror in New York, London, Madrid and countless other cities. And on this journey we too bear witness to the evolution of her character, from the trembling greenhorn hiding behind a mask to a truly fearsome individual. Jessica Chastain bears the anger and blood lust of a nation as she doggedly pursues Osama bin laden, and comes to symbolize the transformation that my country the United States took during its embroilment in the war on terror. From leading proponent of liberty and human rights (just bear with me on this point) to a perpetrator of the most heinous of abuses. Just who is the evil here? Is our blind quest for revenge worth the principles we sacrifice on the way?
Maya is consumed with this singular goal to catch Osama bin Laden. We never see his face, yet his presence is constant. Much like in reality, he becomes more than a man and more of an idea. bin Laden becomes Moby Dick to Maya’s Ahab, a prize to which one will sacrifice the body and soul in grasping, dragging her principles down to that of the very enemy she fights. In the most intimate moment at the conclusion of the film, Maya sits alone on a cargo plane back to DC. She weeps, having experienced countless setbacks, pressure and loss, and herself committed many amoral acts, with that ever burning question, was it all worth it?
The film climaxes in what I believe to be one of the most well directed sequences in film history. Never since No Country For Old Men has a film kept me rapt in such anticipation and tension. We are thrust directly to the front lines of the compound raid, from insertion to that fateful shot, and we feel as though we were there. Bigelow employs gritty cinema vérité to emphasize this realism, with a careful pacing and minute precision that we hinge on every action on screen. Though we know the outcome, we are held in an involuntary suspension of belief that has us hanging on to every fateful moment.
Also SPOILER ALERT: bin Laden dies. Got it? Great we can continue.
Now I would be remiss if I did not address the primary controversy that has dogged this film, being the gratuitous display of torture as shown at the beginning of the film. This has two dimensions, the first being the factual basis for this scene, the second being to what purpose is it shown.
Firstly, and I put on my foreign policy cap here, this film is not based upon fact, and I say this in criticism of the director Kathryn Bigelow whom I greatly admire. The director touted this film as ‘journalistic’, with reference to scenes showing the use of enhanced interrogation methods in leading directly to bin Laden. This has been refuted not only by members of Congress but by the intelligence community and defence department. History tells us torture played a role, but not a key role, which is correctly shown in the film as I explain later. However at the end of the day this is a film, not a documentary. For the purpose of narrative and ultimately entertainment, film makers will often play fast and loose with the facts, with many Best Picture nominees this year such as Argo and Lincoln being guilty of the same charge. So whilst it should not have been marketed in the way it has been, it should not be faulted for being a fictional film, which is what it is at the end of the day, despite being based in a historical setting. 
The second criticism I find myself in defence of the film, that being the accusation that ZDT is pro torture. I highly disagree with this notion! The torture scene in question, and the information resulting from it, is supposedly posited to be the direct link to the final capture and slaying of bin Laden. This is just not the case at all. The scene itself shows the interrogators seeking information from al-Qaeda middle-man ‘Ammar’ in order to prevent an impending terrorist attack in Saudi Arabia. Despite their violent efforts, the subject proves uncooperative and we are shown the aforementioned attack being carried out in brutal detail. The torture ultimately proves futile and counter-productive, which is carried in the film’s script which ends the scene with “Once again, he’s learned nothing.” Here we see torture as a failed tactic, to which Maya then suggests a different approach, tricking the subject. This yields results and the hunt continues. This objective fact leads to my number one frustration with the criticism levied towards the film, which I find ultimately unfair. Torture, though amoral, was a widely used tactic during the Bush administration, and the film is accurate in portraying that fact. To criticize the film being pro torture I call lazy and irrespective of the facts. In other words, calling ZDT pro torture is the equivalent to calling A Clockwork Orange pro violence, in that you're missing the point completely. 
In further defense of this film, and at the sake of taking a slightly political tone, I also make note of what I see as an immense double standard in entertainment with regards to torture. Through the years torture has been employed as a popular narrative device in fiction, from films to television. Notable films including Man On Fire, James Bond on several occasions, the Bourne Series and Syriana have featured its use. And several television shows including 24 and most pointedly Homeland have employed torture as a central plot device. These narratives all show torture in what I can only describe as a positive light, an essential tool for the hero to catch the baddie and save the day. If we applied this same attitude to torture into policy, the results would be all but reprehensible. ZDT is the first film in a long while to show torture for what it is, a gratuitous, gruesome and immoral act, with not a scratch of heroism attached. So either society needs to seriously re-evaluate what it denotes torture, or take it for what it is, which is exactly what ZDT delivers. Serious buyer's remorse.
Zero Dark Thirty is a phenomenal  hands down. Not only is it thematically deep, but it is a stylishly directed and produced film, to which I find it disappointing that director Kathryn Bigelow was not nominated at this year’s Academy Awards for her efforts. Furthermore I see ZDT as an important film in its retelling of perhaps the most tumultuous period in American history. A friend compared it Bruce Springsteen’s song Born in the USA, a narration of a traumatic American experience. I delve further into this comparison. ZDT on its surface is a gung-ho ‘MERICA film, profiling the journey from national tragedy to an eventual triumph over global terrorism. However, if you read into the lyrics, at what the film is actually showing, it is anything but. And that is why Zero Dark Thirty is my best film of 2012. 9.5/10

Thursday, February 14, 2013

Cosmopolis



Cosmopolis (2012) - dir. David Cronenberg


David Cronenberg is one of cinema’s foremost auteurs, but sets himself apart from his peers with his daring projects and controversial subject matter. Now with Cosmopolis, Cronenberg finally enters the 21st century, and has made perhaps the most peculiar film I have seen in years. 
Cosmopolis sets its sights on the world wealth and capitalism, with Robert Pattison’s character Eric Michael Packer symbolizing for me the latest trend of neo-yuppies. Young, insanely rich, at 28 Eric has already reached the pinnacles of success. However rather than the usual pursuits one would associate with the young and rich, rather he seems to have transcended these and reached what Manchla Dargis describes as “a permanent state of Zen”. Indicative of this, Eric’s singular desire, despite all pleasures of the world within his grasp, is a haircut. So sets off an Odyssey across New York.
To be perfectly honest, it was here that the film lost me. From the moment Eric steps into his state of the art limo, he moves at a snails pace through the traffic jammed streets of New York City. Along the way he meets a series of advisers and friends, mistresses and on repeated occasion his wife, and with each has the most impermeable philosophical conversations I have been witness to. These deep and supposedly meaningful conversations were completely lost to me, largely as I did not feel at all the characters themselves believed nor understood what they were speaking of! 
However towards the end the film found me again. This was upon my realization that this was not the stoically self serious film I had assumed it to be, rather Cosmopolis is a sardonic parody of the world it presents, that of the 1%. Were this released during the height of the Occupy movement, this film probably would have had a greater impact. The film is brilliant in portraying the sheer absurdity behind the über rich, the paranoia and existentialist drama associated with the transition to the technologically run future, and even the desensitizing of society to sex and pleasure.  
Cosmopolis can be seen as the 21st Century retort to James Joyce’s Ulysses, being a piece of literature that one can spend decades trying to comprehend to little avail. However what I did see on the surface, from the recognizable Cronenberg traits (gore be praised!), to the superb visuals, and the interesting conversations had throughout (as long as you don’t take them too seriously!). This was admittedly not the film I had hoped for going in, but that’s not to say there wasn't much to enjoy. 7/10

The Dreamers


The Dreamers (2003) - dir. Bernardo Bertolucci


The Dreamers is, along with Mulholland Drive and The Fall, the film I hold closest to my heart. In short, The Dreamers perfectly captures what it is to be a cinephile, a child of the silver screen, one of the insatiables. This film is ultimately about me.
I digress. 1968, the world is in a state of radical change, where sex, politics and cinema collide. Matthew, a young American in Paris, spends his time in the smoky world of the Cinematheque. Matthew is a kindred spirit to me, naive, idealistic and obsessed with film. For us, Godard, Ray and Fuller hold as much reverence and importance as Kennedy, Johnson and Nixon. It is in this world that he becomes entwined with twins Isabelle and Théo. . 
Invited to their apartment for the summer, Matthew becomes drawn into something of fantasy. The trio quiz each other on classic film, recreating scenes from Blonde Venus, Queen Christina and Breathless.There is debate, Keaton vs Chaplin and Clapton vs Hendrix. There is politics, but through a film lens. Take life as being one giant film. For Théo, Mao a great director with a cast of millions. But for Matthew that entails that we would become extras with the same book in a film consisting entirely of extras. The twins share share a strong physical and emotional bond, to which Matthew sacrifices his innocence and roots to join. In effect, their apartment becomes a fantasy, an escape from the reality of a world burning outside from riots and uprisings. A fantasy that must ultimately be broken.
The Dreamers came to me at a time where I was transfixed by the glow of cinema, when I myself was a dreamer. I urge you to see this film, and feel this intractable pull the silver screens held on Isabelle, Théo and Matthew. Truly one of my favorites of all time. 10/10

Wednesday, February 13, 2013

Barry Lyndon



Barry Lyndon (1975) - dir. Stanley Kubrick
I begin by professing my utter adoration and admiration of director Stanley Kubrick. Long my favorite director since first viewing Spartacus at a young age, it is with my viewing of Barry Lyndon, to which some view as his meisterwerk, that I complete his oeuvre.
Barry Lyndon follows the roguish travels of Irishman Redmond Barry, as he waltzes through 18th Century Europe through love, conflict, fortune and loss. A picaresque account of a poor man’s aspirations for the luxuries in life, and as noted by the narrator, destined by fate to finish his life poor, lonely and childless. What strikes me most about the narrative is the complexity behind the relationship between the audience and Redmond. Kubrick presents us with an objective reality, through which it is up to us as to how we judge the character. At first I pitied him, for the heartbreak that sets him on his life of miscreant actions. Then I sympathized, after witnessing the brutalities of the Seven Years War, and his submission in the British and Prussian armies. However I then had to relent in my condemnation of Redman as he transcended the traditional bounds of anti-hero into a scoundrel of a man. 
Beyond the exquisite narrative, Barry Lyndon is perhaps the most beautiful film to be immortalized on film. This is testament to the technical prowess and direction of Stanley Kubrick for which he is renown. Each shot is intrinsically crafted. The sets are gorgeously crafted, with lush Georgian decor and European countryside crafting a beautiful historical landscape. Actors stand poised in prefection. And most notable is the cinematography, which brings these lavish images to their full force. Kubrick worked to create new camera lenses which allowed for him to film scenes lit only by candlelight. The sum of these parts can only be equated to a great work of art, with every frame one worthy to hang in the Louvre.
But don’t be fooled, for true to the works of Stanley Kubrick auteur-ism this film’s beauty belies a cold detachment. Even the most awe inspiring masterpiece, beyond the enamel is but a blank canvas. These beautiful creatures are no less human than subjects of a painting. Redman exhibits the coldest calculation in his rise to power, through confidence games, subterfuge and deception. None of which bring him true joy or emotion. The rest of the characters, though well acted, were in the words of Roger Ebert “clearly chosen for their faces [rather than] their personalities”. The graceful Lady Lyndon, play by Marisa Berenson, is a stoic beauty, who intentionally displays no passion. In a penultimate scene she signs a check to the man that nearly destroy her life and fortune, she barely pauses before signing the dotted line.
Kubrick I have long espoused as my primary influence, from the days in which I made short films myself, to the reviews I write now. His meticulous attention to detail, cold yet effective characterizations and breakthrough in technical and narrative achievement make Barry Lyndon an astounding film in its own merit. This comes highly recommended. 9.5/10