Four year old Saroo is separated from his brother and finds himself lost amongst the millions in Kolkata. When an orphanage fails to deduct his town of origin, he’s adopted out to a family in Tasmania, where he starts a very different life. Years later, he becomes obsessed with returning to his family, but the name of his home town doesn’t appear on any maps. So begins an obsession that will threaten to tear his life apart.

Lion is a story without a clear antagonist. In fact, Saroo is his own antagonist. Simple without being simplistic, the story presents us with no villains; the drama here is about people killing each other with kindness. Adult Saroo (Dev Patel) is terrified of letting his adoptive parents (Nicole Kidman and David Wenham) know about his search, lest they think him ungrateful. His girlfriend, Lucy (Rooney Mara) wants to be supportive but can’t get sucked into his single-minded obsession and self-pity. Meanwhile, Saroo’s parents are having difficulties with their second adopted son, Mantosh (Divian Ladwa) whose struggles with alcoholism and post-traumatic stress present their own issues.

The film starts out slowly, and spends a lot more time with young Saroo than I expected. It frustrated me at the time, but it was totally worth it for the emotional payoff that is the third act. Patel’s Aussie accent is brilliant. I completely forgot that it wasn’t his native accent. He’s proven more than once that he can carry a film, and it’s no different here. He is focussed and driven, yet never so single-minded as to get the audience offside. Mara (another actress is who is excellent no matter how poor the film) is so good in a supporting role that I was desperate to see more of her. Kidman and Wenham are solid also, but this is really Mara and Patel’s film.

The narrative dynamics in this film are stunning. We are frequently subjected to ten minute blocks of drama without a single spoken line, whilst other scenes crackle with sharply written dialogue. At 118 minutes it isn’t an overlong film, but it is emotionally exhausting in a life-affirming way.

A fantastic beginning to 2017, Lion is a must-see Australian film.

The post Lion appeared first on hoopla.nu.

Vera (Vikander) is desperate to go to Oxford but her father (and, quite frankly, most of society) won’t have a bar of it. Her brother, Edward (Taron Egerton, unrecognisable from his character in Kingsman: The Secret Service) is the only one on her side, but she’s barely succeeded in her goal when the Great War breaks out. We follow Vera from her Oxford days to her time serving as a nurse close to enemy lines.

In case you hadn’t guessed, this isn’t a happy film. It doesn’t actually show any of the fighting going on just outside of Vera’s experience, but like her, we see the results as she tends to the wounded and dying. This is the first feature film adaptation of Brittain’s 1933 book, and it’s surprising that it’s taken this long to appear. Being written from the perspective of a young woman, it’s a refreshing take on the war film genre.

Words cannot describe just how incredible Vikander is in the lead role. The film takes the time to stick close to Vera during her solitary moments, and really lets us see inside her head. Whether she’s remembering the briefest of gentle touches from the object of her affection, Roland (Kit Harington), or imagining what’s going on behind enemy lines, director James Kent keeps the focus on her. Vikander is such an amazingly expressive performer that even the quietest moment is filled with feeling.

It’s also important to note that this is a much better film than Seventh Son, which also featured Vikander and Harington. Even better news is that five minutes after Harington’s appearance, I forgot that I was watching Jon Snow. The same couldn’t be said for the fleeting appearances from Dominic West, however, as it was hard to shake the idea that McNulty had been dropped into ‘Downton Abbey’. Hayley Atwell also popped up in a blink-and-you’ll-miss-it moment.

The only real flaw with Testament of Youth is that the film’s strongest moments are all over a good 20 minutes before the credits roll. Nevertheless, this is a powerful film that deserves to be seen. Vikander’s presence is going to be felt on the big screen in a big way in 2015 (IMDb has six 2015 films to her name), so we’re all in for a treat.

The post Testament of Youth appeared first on hoopla.nu.

A highly fictionalised account of the life and work of Jiro Horikoshi (Hideaki Anno), and adapted from Miyazaki’s own manga, The Wind Rises is a period drama that has everything you want in a Studio Ghibli film. We have wonderfully quiet moments, colourful vistas, fantastical sequences and an unerring ability to find beauty in the mundane.

Jiro is an engineer who dreams of creating the perfect flying machines. The problem is that he knows his aircraft will be used for war. Set in the years leading up to World War II, there’s a sense that something horrid lies in wait in the near future, and Jiro is conflicted about his creations. At the same time, he falls in love with Naoko Satomi (Miori Takimoto), a young woman whom he meets during the Great Kanto Earthquake of 1923.

I only recently saw Ponyo (Gake no ue no Ponyo) for the first time, and I found it to be an absolute mess. Very little of that film worked for me, so I was nervous that perhaps Miyazaki’s final film would similarly disappoint. I needn’t have worried. The Wind Rises is a touching film. It has a steady, graceful pace, and whilst it probably could have done with 20 minutes chopped out of the 126 minute runtime, I was never bored.

There really is a good case to be made that this is Miyazaki’s masterpiece. It feels like his most mature film, and the effortless way it manages to hold back, avoiding melodrama whenever it can, is impressive. The backdrop of war, and the Japanese aircraft manufacturer’s uneasy relationship with Germany is hinted at, but never truly becomes the focus.

The Blu-ray presentation is excellent, and also features a picture-in-picture function where you can watch the film alongside the complete storyboards. There’s a 90 minute press conference with Miyazaki and other important figures from the film (something for which I don’t have the patience) as well as a ten minute featurette with the American voice cast.

If you’re a fan of Studio Ghibli, then you’ve probably seen this film already, but if you haven’t, The Wind Rises is a real treat. If Miyazaki really has retired, then he’s done so on an amazingly high note.

The post The Wind Rises appeared first on hoopla.nu.

As many may know, during World War II, the British were working hard to break the German Enigma code. An elite team of codebreakers worked in secrecy at Bletchley Park, and the story of their efforts was only revealed to the public 50 or so years after the end of the war.

The father of computer science, Alan Turing, is played deftly by he of the oh-so-easily-made-fun-of-surname, Benedict Cumberbatch. Whilst it isn’t worlds apart from that of the other famous genius who lacks any kind of social skills, Cumberbatch’s finely tuned performance is distinct from his most famous role. He plays Turing as if he is constantly computing (heh) on a higher level. Even when he’s having an in-depth conversation, his mind is elsewhere, either because of his obsession with creating his machine, or because of the secrets he’s being asked to keep.

He’s ably assisted by the likes of Matthew Goode (brilliant as ever), Allen Leech and Matthew Beard, whilst Charles Dance is almost as unlikeable as the TV role we all love to hate him in. Keira Knightley plays Joan Clarke, a gifted numismatologist who becomes closer to Alan than the rest of the codebreaking team.

The screenplay is fantastic, and it only slips up once or twice, when it goes for the tried and true cliché of having a significant phrase repeated throughout the story, so as to give Alan’s life a neat narrative arc. For some reason this kind of thing always takes me out of a biopic; it may be no one else is in the least bit bothered. What’s most incredible, however, is the fact that the film isn’t horrendously depressing. Anyone who’s read about Turing knows that he was met with injustice despite his achievements, yet the film is at times humorous, tense and thoughtful, and it changes tone effortlessly.

The film looks fantastic. The scenes of war, there to remind us what’s going on outside the confines of Bletchley Park, are a mixture of modern visual effects and stock footage. There’s nary a wasted moment either. I didn’t like the scenes from Turing’s childhood as much as the rest of the film, but it must be said that Alex Lawther’s performance as the young Turing perfectly complements Cumberbatch’s.

An excellent period drama and enlightening biopic, The Imitation Game is the first great film of 2015.

The post The Imitation Game appeared first on hoopla.nu.

Otto plays Elizabeth, the terminally shy young woman who is apprehensive about coming out as a poet, not to mention lesbian. When she goes to stay with her friend from college, Mary (Tracy Middendorf), she’s taken aback by Mary’s lover, Lota. A coolly confident woman, she takes an initial dislike to Elizabeth, whom she sees as a bit of a wallflower. However, a bond forms between the two of them and romance soon follows.

Set in Brazil in the 1950s, Reaching for the Moon moves at a languid pace, but never becomes boring. Its greatest assets are the central three actresses. Their personalities contrast, clash and complement each other perfectly. Otto proves yet again that she should have the lead role in more feature films, whilst Pires’ approach to Lota seems so gloriously effortless. Finally, there is Middendorf, whose character unfortunately gets sidelined for the second half of the film. The best moments are those when all three are onscreen, so it’s disappointing that we see less and less of her as the film goes on. Finally, we have the inexorable Treat Williams, who has to be one of hardest working actors ever.

The location scenes are gorgeous, and Soares’ retreat in what looks to be the middle of the Brazilian jungle is beautiful. The film obviously didn’t have too much money to throw around, but the visual effects successfully take us back in time.

The film overstays its welcome somewhat, and is a little heavy-handed when it comes to symbolism. I do, however, appreciate it for the fact that it tells the type of story we don’t often see on the big screen, and it would certainly pass the Bechdel Test with flying colours.

I generally don’t enjoy biopics, but Reaching for the Moon worked for me. Whilst is alludes to Elizabeth’s childhood, it doesn’t fall into the trap of following her life story from beginning to end. The familiar beats of the genre are here, however, including the childhood episode that would shape the woman she’d become. The references to the political situation in Brazil at the time tended to go over my head, but they’re not so important as to side-track the narrative.

A solid piece of filmmaking with three fantastic actresses, Reaching for the Moon is a quiet achiever.

The post Reaching for the Moon appeared first on hoopla.nu.

Flush from his success with North By Northwest, Hitch (Anthony Hopkins) wants to make a different movie, something that isn’t ‘a man wrongfully accused trying to clear his name’. He comes across Robert Bloch’s book, Psycho, which in turn took inspiration from the real life murders committed by serial killer Ed Gein, and decides that this will be his next picture. No one thinks this is a good idea, not even his wife Alma Reville (Helen Mirren). A rift has already begun to form in their marriage, and Hitch’s obsessions begin to clash with his paranoia as work on the film begins.

Surprisingly, Hitchcock isn’t as straight-faced as most biopics. The film is injected with a sense of silliness that many will recognise from the man’s appearances in trailers for his own movies. (If you don’t know what I mean, check out the trailer for Marnie, in which he makes fun of some of the most serious moments in his own film.) Thus, Hitchcock occasionally addresses us, the audience, directly, and the film features numerous sequences that present his creative processes as a kind of film within a film.

It will astonish no one to learn that Hopkins is fantastic in the central role. Crucially, he also undergoes quite a transformation in order to match Hitchcock’s larger than life appearance. His outrageous vocal delivery takes a while to get used to, but it is spot on when compared with the recordings of the director that have survived. Mirren is good in the supporting role, whilst Toni Collette is fantastic as Peggy Robertson, Hitch’s assistant. Scarlett Johansson is radiant as Janet Leigh, one of the few actresses who managed to relate to the great director as an equal. The versatile Jessica Biel plays Vera Miles with aplomb, one of many actresses that had fallen from grace with Hitch. Michael Wincott also makes an appearance as well, playing a bad guy yet again, none other than Ed Gein himself.

The film isn’t without its flaws. Several of the scenes come off as particularly awkward – one such moment unfortunately coming right towards the end – and the film is so concerned about Hitch’s personal life that we don’t get to see him working much of his magic on the film set. Crucially, the film is pitched as an underdog story, and whilst the man did indeed face battles with studios and censors, its hard to believe that this really is a story of the ‘little guy achieving greatness in the face of adversity’, even if the likes of Vertigo weren’t appreciated until years later.

For Hitchcock buffs such as myself, there’s a lot to like about this feature. The man’s black sense of humour is front and centre, and the film takes a lot of risks. It mightn’t be the kind of dull-as-dishwater biopic that frequently gets made, but it’s also less than perfect.

The post Hitchcock appeared first on hoopla.nu.

This is not a sumptuously realised period piece – the setting of Mozart’s Sister is drab and under-lit. Whilst the historical buildings may be impressive, there’s certainly nothing to feast one’s eyes upon. It feels like the filmmakers chose only to use natural lighting, and thus the nighttime scenes are almost entirely indiscernible. The camera itself never does anything exciting, either. There are lots of handheld close-ups, but that’s about it. It’s almost as if they simply did away with the storyboarding process.

So all that’s left is the story and the performances. Marie Féret is very good in the lead role (and the spitting image of her portrait), however it takes a while to get use to the stiff delivery of the entire cast. This is to accentuate the prim and proper behaviour of the privileged, I guess, but it feels awkward. Fouin gives a passionate performance as Le Dauphine, yet I was forever at a loss as to the nature of his motives. This flaw would lie with the script rather than Fouin, however it’s a stumbling block that was rather perturbing.

Mozart’s Sister is a dry film that’s never in any hurry, but it is somewhat enjoyable. It’s an interesting tale of the historical suppression of women, and like all good films of this nature, it delves into some cross-dressing shenanigans. That being said, this plot element doesn’t lend itself to humour in the way that say, Mulan or She’s the Man would. The film won’t be for everyone, and I sincerely hope that the secondary school teachers of the world don’t decide this is a good film to include in the syllabus, but it is entertaining in its own dry, historical manner.

The post Mozart’s Sister appeared first on hoopla.nu.

Jesse Eisenberg gives one of the performances of the year as wunderkind Mark Zuckerberg, and whilst Time’s magazine’s classification of the real life Zuckerberg as person of the year was a particularly spineless move, Eisenberg is the person holding this film together. His portrayal of Zuckerberg is incredible – his brilliance is tempered only by his arrogance and complete inability to examine his own actions.

Eisenberg is surrounded by a wonderful cast, not the least of which is Rooney Mara. It’s not hard to understand why Fincher has her lined up to be the next Girl with the Dragon Tattoo – indeed, she was the only real reason that this year’s A Nightmare on Elm Street remake was watchable. Andrew Garfield plays Eduardo Saverin, possibly the only nice guy in the entire film, though he would have to be the least interesting character on show. Justin Timberlake is Sean Parker (he of Napster fame) and proves that his great turns in Black Snake Moan and Alpha Dog weren’t a fluke.

David Fincher is in fine form here, and The Social Network is a welcome return to brilliance after his rather pointless last feature, The Curious Case of Benjamin Button. As with all his flicks, the picture is beautiful – I don’t know how he does it, but all of Fincher’s films are dark yet at the same time beautifully colourful. Cinematographer Jeff Cronenweth, who also worked on The Game and Se7en, manages to make two hours of talking heads somehow interesting also.

The Social Network is an absolute gabfest. The opening scene, featuring rapid-fire dialogue between Zuckerberg and Erica Albright (Mara) is but a taste of things to come – honestly, this script must have resembled a phonebook. Aaron Sorkin (of ‘The West Wing’ fame) has written an astoundingly entrancing screenplay about a bunch of very unlikeable young men. It’s to his credit that such a ridiculous idea for a film succeeds.

So why won’t this make my top ten? The thing is, when it all comes down to it, this is still a movie about Facebook. There’s only so much you can achieve from such a starting point. I’ll be curious to see how this film fares in the long run, as it’s impossible to say just how significant the social networking site will be in a decade or two. Imagine if a Myspace film had been made – copies of the DVD would be clogging up the bargain bins right about now…

The post The Social Network appeared first on hoopla.nu.

During the course of the film, we get the unenviable task of watching the self involved though somehow entrancing Sagan squander not only millions of dollars but also any chance at happiness also. She keeps a veritable harem of men and women around her, sometimes marrying one or the other but never really committing to anyone. A bunch of bored bourgeoisie, none of her friends ever take a stand against her constant spending sprees or her refusal to conform to any sense of day to day life that most of us do without even thinking.

Sagan is an interesting film. The lead character, brilliantly played by Sylvie Testud, is quite abhorrent at times, yet one cannot resist watching her stumble through life seemingly without a care for anyone around her – and this is before she gets addicted to cocaine and prescription drugs. Incredibly, however, by the time we get to the end of her life, I found myself feeling sorry for her. This is no small feat when you consider that I was subjected to close to two hours of her selfish, spur of the moment behaviour.

This is a theatrical version of the French miniseries, and is thus cut from the original three hours to 117 minutes. The edited film does seem to jump forward in time quite often, though I never found it disorienting. The television budget, however, was a little jarring. It looked like it was shot on digital, and it was strange to see a biopic of a well known author to not be given the typically lavish budget we’re used to.

The miniseries to feature conversion phenomenon is rather worrying. It happened with The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo (Män som hatar kvinnor) also, though in that case was rather successful. Simply compressing a narrative designed for a miniseries to half its length is rarely going to work, however, and perhaps Sagan would have been more compelling viewed in its original serial form or alternatively made as a feature.

This is a well performed if rather depressing film. It is a must for those with an interest in Sagan and her work, though many others will likely gain very little from it.

The post Sagan appeared first on hoopla.nu.

The film has a stunningly personal focus, as we see the conflicting elements in Darwin’s life. Here’s a man who had no time for the concept of a man created by God, yet understood just how important the role of the Church was in modern society. Here’s a man who swore by hydrotherapy yet seemed to scoff at modern psychiatric concepts that are today taken for granted. This conflict beautifully illustrates how a theory doesn’t exist in isolation – both its roots and its ramifications are widespread.

Paul Bettany is stunning as Darwin. As a man tormented by loss and torn between science and notions of faith, he cuts a tragic figure. The fact that such a significant discovery is told in such a personal manner is incredibly touching. Jennifer Connelly is equally matched as his wife, Emma, whose strict religious beliefs lead her to believe that his work will be damning his immortal soul.

This could have quite easily been a film about Darwin versus the world or Darwin versus the Church, but instead it’s Darwin versus himself. Never mind the fact that he turned the scientific and religious world upside down, this was a man tormented by his own discoveries.

Jon Amiel’s film is beautifully constructed and flawlessly integrates other techniques (documentary footage, time lapse photography, CGI effects) into what feels like a traditional period piece. Christopher Young’s score is beautiful and the overall running time is perfect at 108 minutes.

I really can’t imagine how Creation could be any better. This film isn’t just a puff piece, written to make us feel thankful for his genius; it’s an incredibly emotive study of a man in conflict with himself. The performances of Bettany (I still maintain he should have played the title role in Constantine, instead of Keanu) and Connelly are top notch, and I dare anyone to not be affected by this beautiful, tragic, yet ultimately uplifting tale.

The post Creation appeared first on hoopla.nu.