The Killing of a Sacred Deer

The Killing of a Sacred Deer (2017, UK/Ireland/USA, Yorgos Lanthimos)

There was constant murmur and whispers at many of the scenes during the first hour. Finally, a person behind me gave up the pretense and spoke loudly so that everyone in the cinema could hear: "I don't get this movie". You know what a lot of people don't get? The economy. So let's look at that.

Certain nations, including Greece, were negligent when it came to their economy. Some locals with no experience whispered that things would get bad but the experts and the men in power didn't listen. They continued to drink and make reckless decisions. Slowly, some parts of the economy became paralyzed. Different organs of society started to fail on a regular basis. The experts gathered in rooms, dressed in their suits, and discussed the problem. According to them, nothing was wrong and things would get better on their own. No one wanted to do open heart surgery. Nobody wanted to cut off the limbs, nobody want to start from scratch. So the experiment continued and still continues. It isn't only Greece but all across the world these financial experiments continue.

In a year of allegories in cinema, Yorgos Lanthimos has signed his entry.

Blade Runner 2049

Blade Runner 2049 (2017, Denis Villeneuve)

Few quick thoughts.

1. Similar to SICARIO, the landscape shots in Villeneuve's film are their own narrative. This time, Roger Deakins' camera explores landscape with the eye of Edward Burtynsky. As a result, the ruins echo an older communist era with the words of 'Ozymandias' hovering over it.

2. The entire work is also garnished with touches of Tarkovsky and K's journey is akin to going through the desolate Zone. The communist ruins connect the dots further.

3. Nicely illustrates limits of our technology, from glitches in transmission to problems syncing up. Connections fail, images can't be rendered fast enough, data stores can be wiped. The reference to paper surviving isn't a coincidence.

4. Memories. Real vs Implanted. Manages to draw a line towards the dreams in Philip K. Dick's original book.

Mother!

MOTHER! (2017,   Darren Aronofsky)

I looked at my watch and counted down the seconds because I knew what was coming. The TIFF press screening of Darren Aronofsky's MOTHER! was just over and I expected the usual tweets. Sure enough, right on cue, came tweets dismissing the film and calling it garbage. A few more angry tweets appeared. I waited and then as expected, a tweet praising the film. Less than 30 minutes later, a tweet came out referencing where the director called the movie about "climate change". Then another, "hey guys, there are Biblical references. Does that change things?".

In less than an hour, the whole range of reactions had taken place regarding the film. I smiled and headed off to my next screening. These reactions were normal for any Aronofsky movie and I was glad to see that nothing had changed.

The film references the Bible and even climate change but the scope is much bigger than that. The scope is the entire history of our planet, from creation to evolution to destruction, and then like a loop, starting all over again. The movie is about what we humans do to our planet, how we use religion to divide and fight, how wars take place, both world wars and civil ones, how organized gangs take out humans, how government organized disappearances take place, how we blindly believe in someone's words, how we end up consuming and destroying the very thing we claim to love.

Of course, such scope and the manner with which it is presented opens the door for plenty of ridicule and negative reaction. Yet, there are moments which make it hard to dismiss the work. For example, the segment of the unfolding of our planet's history is a roller coaster ride where the camera goes from room to room and documents all the horrors of our society in unflinching detail.

The film is all about allegories so here's another one.

A famous soccer player steps up to the penalty spot. The crowd is expecting a goal yet the player blasts the ball over the crossbar. Silence. Complete shock that how such a player could have blasted the ball so high and far from the goal. Years later, fans don't remember the goals that were scored but still talk about that one player who blasted the ball over. That miss ends up being more spectacular than the goals scored.

Cinema of Cool

Baby Driver (2017,  Edgar Wright)

Black Shades. Music. Fast cars. Heist. Cool gangsters. Smooth talkers. Attitude. More music. Extremely intelligent sounding dialogues. Money. A girl, always a girl. For a change, some coffee.

xXx: Return of Xander Cage (2017, D.J. Caruso)

Neymar. Cool stunt, all for a soccer game. Extremely intelligent sounding dialogues. More cool stunts. Money. Lots of weapons. Exotic locales. For a change, an international cast, featuring Deepika Padukone, Donnie Yen and Tony Jaa. Of course, the father of coolness, Mr. Samuel L. Jackson is there as well.

The Fate of the Furious (2017,  F. Gary Gray)

Bigger cast, increasing with each film. Of course, fast cars. Exotic locales. Weapons. Loud explosions. Women and Men with attitude. Like last few films, all about a family.

John Wick 2 (2017,  Chad Stahelski)

Quality suits. Tailored expensive fabric. Cool lighting. Atmosphere. Weapons. Bullets, lot of bullets. Blood. Attitude. Money. Expensive tastes. Characters made to appear extremely intelligent. For extreme coolness, the presence of Morpheus to exchange some witty dialogue with Neo. For a change, it is Neo who offers the choice to Morpheus.


Four completely different movies yet all united by their ability to claim ample room in a multiplex. Of course, these four have to pounce on whatever space remains after the Super hero movies have come and gone.

All four vary in their quality. Baby Driver is the most refined of this group and has the acclaim of many critics while John Wick has its fans. The Fast and Furious movies have their admirers as well.

Christopher Nolan’s Dunkirk is also a refined film, albeit a video game/war movie hybrid.

All these films drip with style yet are hollow in their core. Once the layers of style are removed, there isn't any substance.

This is cinema now. It sure ain’t dead but these movies are certainly trying very hard to kill it.

The rich strange doctor

Doctor Strange (2016,  Scott Derrickson)
 
An arrogant rich man lives selfishly and feels he is invincible. One day, his reckless driving causes him to get into an accident. This accident does not cause him to do any soul-searching. Instead, he blames everyone else around him for not helping him. He has enough money to pay for his treatment but when his money runs out, he blames the health system. Then, he learns that he can be cured by Asian medicine. So he travels to exotic Nepal. There, he finds others like him. He never associates with the locals, nor eats with them. He is cured and in turn he learns how to travel around the world for free. He learns how to travel without going through airport security or sitting in an airplane. He also learns how to steal books from libraries.

He is given a gift for being selfish. Then, he is given a chance at redemption, to erase his entire selfish life by one act of goodness. He saves the world and is made an instant hero.

How does he repay the world? Does he help the poor and needy? Does he start a company to offer health services to those who need it?

Of course not! He opens a private service to help rich privileged super heroes like himself. His first job is to act as a mediator in a family despite between Thor and his brother.

Dunkirk

Dunkirk (70 mm, of course): deserted town. No civilians. Just soldiers. Why? Because a war is being fought. Money and resources poured into saving the land from the other. And then, more money to get soldiers back home and to feed them.

The film is an immersive experience that places the viewer in the chaos and noise of war but there are some moments which quietly highlight the logistics around war that are not as apparent in other war movies. These moments are the best aspect of the film as they emphasize that when WWII took place, nations and cities shut down. Daily lives were disrupted and resources were diverted towards the all consuming war. Regular industries were converted into making gears for war. However, these quiet moments won’t be praised. Instead, the accolades will be directed at the thrill ride that has been made, complete with a video game perspective, a ticking clock embedded in the soundtrack with a few edits meant to heighten the experience. Real lives were lost but now it is entertainment. In the IMAX cinema screening, people stuffed their face with popcorn, drank pop and took it all in.

Have we learned anything from history? Of course, not. And on it goes. Real wars continue, more horrific than the past. War movies get made. Their technical qualities improve, their point of view gets refined but no one actually cares for the lessons that lay between the cuts. No large scale war has taken place since WWII but many small scale wars have taken place and are continuing to do so. The machines that were put in place in WWII were never shut down but grew into different segments.

Golaso

For the most part, it was a lackluster European season. There were limited moments of beautiful fluid football provided by players of Monaco and Dortmund. Then there was the emerging talent of Dybala who weaved around the pitch as if opponents didn't exist. With these exceptions, everything was as normal. Season after season, it has been all the same.

Then yesterday something extraordinary happened. Mario Mandžukić scored a goal for the ages. Not Ronaldo, not Messi. Mandžukić initially appeared to have blocked himself into a corner, with no angle to shoot at. Then he produced a moment of magic. His goal made it 1-1, opened the game up and led to a thrilling first half.

Mandžukić's goal is being called one of the greatest in the Champions League. It is being compared to that brilliant 2002 volley but it does fall short of that 2002 goal, which was scored by Zinedine Zidane. Yesterday, Zidane the manager, not the player, led Madrid to victory.

Not much is said about Zidane the manager. That is because he doesn't say much. He lets the players shine and quietly stands on the side. In a way, it is refreshing to see that from a soccer manager. Many other managers have made the game about themselves yet Zidane quietly leads his team to success.

Sid Lowe’s article sums up Zidane’s achievements nicely.