Billy Lynn's Long Half Time Walk (2016)

Billy Lynn's Long Half Time Walk is an exploration of the way American culture fetishizes and mishandles veterans. Told from the point of view of young soldier who has returned home a hero, we witness the superficial way America pays tribute to him, juxtaposed with the battles he experienced for real. The film forces us to reckon with what it means to "support our troops" and the stranger in a strange land feeling many soldiers feel upon returning to the country they are supposedly fighting for.

There are two main reasons why I felt Billy Lynn didn't quite work. The first is the choice to film in a rapid frame rate. As far as I am aware this is the first major release since The Hobbit An Unexpected Journey to use a significantly higher number of frames per second than the average film. It has a jarring effect and there are times when it is used effectively here (more on that later). But generally it makes it seem like you are watching cardboard cut outs of actors layered two dimensionally on top of one another. This pared with director Ang Lee's choice to film most scenes in uncompromising close up makes the audience feel put off.

The second piece is the casting. For some reason (perhaps the film's frame rate) so much of the cast feels remarkably wooden. The choice to cast first timer Joe Alwyn in a role like this, one where the camera, in hyperHD, is focused so tightly on him, seems foolharder. He doesn't appear to be up to the task. His performance often feels forced, uninspired.  Under the grueling demands of a film shot like Billy Lynn Alwyn doesn't pull off a realistic role and since he's the centre of the film he pulls it all down. But it's not just him. I am not a fan of Kristen Stewart, Garret Hedlund, or Vin Diesel as actors (I know that puts me in the minority) and here I found all their performances wooden, lifeless, and generally unbelievable. All of this, in high def no less, makes the film feel emotionless and "performed."

However the film doesn't outright fail. There are its moments. The centrepiece of the movie, the Half Time Show where the soldiers are trotted out on stage like show ponies and exposed to the triggering effects of the commodification of their war experiences, is strikingly powerful. This is where Lee's choices make sense. We are on that stage. We are in the battles. We are exploited by our nation, just like these soldiers. It comes together. It makes sense. It is a stunning moment that needs to be seen on the big screen.

There is a personal moment which I feel the film did well. Billy Lynn's romance with a cheerleader he meets briefly crumbles predictably around him and he's wounded. In that moment, Not only does Alwyn redeem himself, the film does too. Our "love" of our vets isn't based on us placing value on their service, it's on our ideological desire to justify the horrors we participate in. It's in the cheerleaders face, a lack of ability to to truly humanize Billy.  She needs him to be something safely imaginary. Him as a person is far too much for her to invest in. Our soldiers as human beings are too hard for us to manage as we send them off to war.

Billy Lynn's Long Half Time Walk is a noble effort with moments of brilliance but it doesn't hold an audience's passion for long enough. While I appreciated what they were trying to do, they didn't quite make it have the emotional punch it needs to get its point across.

Billy Lynn's Long Half Time Walk
Starring: Joe Alwyn, Kristen Stewart, Garrett Hedlund, Vin Diesel
Director: Ang Lee
Writers: Jean-Christophe Castelli

The Handmaiden (2016)

The Handmaiden is a con about con artists. It's that fun sort of movie where everyone is playing everyone else. As the audience we follow their schemes, watch the back and forth, the lunges for upper hand. We also are struck by the incredible visuals laid out for us, the kind that balance being absolutely gorgeous and uncomfortably shocking. We are both seduced and anxious. We know not all is alright but are irresistibly drawn to what we are seeing. Park Chan-wook masters the art of beating us up while we love it. He plays us and it is lovely.

The film starts out one way, lulling us into a certain level of security. The film is lovely at this point, and its story is immediately engrossing. But it feels rather familiar and safe at first. Chan-wook pulls the wool over our eyes, not giving us a clue he is going to smack us upside the head with a story that goes beyond what we are expecting. When he gets there the film becomes something that you watch with your eyes wide open.

The Handmaiden, like other Chan-wook films, will take you on an extraordinary ride. It takes the grifter plot genre but makes it into something new. Not only is there his exciting, energetic story telling style, there is his embrace of an uncomfortable erotic esthetic which blends sex with violence, pain with pleasure, love with betrayal. He starts us off, just pushing things to a line, but soon he is far over it and the audience is just made to experience.

And he finds something completely lovely there. Min He Kim is a strong, incredible centre to this film. She opens up like a flower, revealing far more than we first see. The entire cast is strong but so much of the film is centred around Min He Kim and her robust performance. 

The eroticism in The Handmaiden is beautifully dangerous, subversive, and empowering all at once. Chan-wook doesn't shy away from showing it all, appreciating the darker and more nurturing elements of sexuality. His film is a bit triumphant, in fact, for love. I wasn't expecting that quite so much.

The Handmaiden is one of the strongest, most entertaining, most riveting films you'll see all year. It is not for the faint of heart, but the experience is a rich one for those who can take it on.

The Handmaiden
Starring: Min-Hee Kim, Kim Tae-Ri, Jung-Woo Ha
Director: Park Chan-wook
Writers: Park Chan-wook, Chung Seo-kyung

Manchester By The Sea (2016)

It's been a while between this film and writer/director Kenneth Lonergan's last hit You Can Count On Me. This may be a good time to use the expression "it was worth the wait." This solid piece of story telling is moving and enjoyable.

Lonergan's style is very laid back. He not only films his story in a subtle, restrained manner, he writes it that way too. He focuses on the mundane things. This is a story about loss, but most of the time we watch people carry on with their lives - run errands, microwave food, talk about nothing - while everything remains simmering under the surface. There are moments where things bust out, but never too much. It's a perfect tone for white people restraining themselves. And yet it's powerful.

A good example of this style, a moment of Lonergan's cleverness and quiet power, is we see a character pack up pictures of their dead children. We don't see the pictures, we don't see the emotion, we just know that's what's happening and what is happening for that character in that moment. It is remarkably effective.

Casey Affleck is a triumph here too. He plays the central character in the same manner and Lonergan directs him. He plays it all behind his eyes. There is always so much going on for him, and within him, and he communicates it all to us without any bravado. Even his few moments where it can't be held in any longer are painfully restrained. He connects with his fellow cast members but it is his solo scenes which are the most riveting.

Manchester by the Sea, like You Can Count On Me, is a film which just needs to play out. It isn't clear from the beginning where it's going to go or how it's going to end. In fact I would argue it doesn't end anywhere near where you think it's going to. But it never feels dishonest. It is completely satisfying. I hope Lonergan doesn't take so long before he makes another movie this good.

Manchester By The Sea
Starring: Casey Affleck, Michelle Williams, Kyle Chandler, Lucas Hedges
Director: Kenneth Lonergan
Writer: Kenneth Lonergan

Arrival (2016)

Arrival is one of those deceptive films that is not about what you think it is going to be about. It will likely come as no surprise that Arrival is not your average alien's arrive movie. It's not Independence Day or even a more cerebral take like The Day The Earth Stood Still or Contact. Arrival is about something else entirely. The film uses the idea of first contact with aliens to provide a key to unlocking a completely different story.

After seeing the film I believe most would fee the title Arrival doesn't even refer to the aliens at all, but about something else.

Arrival is about our choices, our free will. It is also about language and the way culture, words, politics, affect who we are. But mostly it is a profound, moving, brave, exploration of choice. As the film's mobius strip of a story began circling back on itself, the true emotional power of the film came into focus for me and it felt like a revelation. It would have been easy to play the climax for a gotcha moment but director Villeneuve doesn't go there. Instead he opts for a quiet awakening, letting the film's message flow over you.

Villeneuve's approach is lovely yet rather understated. He apes Terrance Malick a little letting his camera float freely in space around his characters while we hear their inner thoughts, but with a more restrained narrative. Sometimes his narrative is so tight it feels a bit rushed. There are developments which just seem to come from nowhere. Never does the movie feel that the humans learn the alien language in a believable way. We are just to accept that they do. I get that's not the point of the film, but it does feel a bit jarring, especially because Villeneuve spends so much time reveling in how beautifully the alien's communicate. I felt there was a disconnect between how well Arrival's "distraction" plot was handled and how well it's actual plot was.

Amy Adams is, as she often is, truly engaging. The film's whole story centres on her and the film requires an actor with her strength. She pulls off an amazing performance which cannot be over praised. She is the lynch pin that overcomes any narrative or pacing problems. She is placed in the awkward space between the film's various tones (the militaristic themes, the intimate domestic memories, the unearthly environments) and brings them all cohesively together. It is she who makes the story of the film come together.

Arrival is a quiet little treat which provides that delicious food for thought you'll be chewing on for a while afterward. This is the sort of film to see with friends and to plan after movie drinks/snacks for discussion. Arrival is for thinkers and dreamers and for those who don't mind feeling a little melancholy.

While not perfect, Arrival is beautiful, inspiring, and disquieting. It is biting off a lot more than we expect to be chewing so be ready. But in Villeneuve and Adams' hands, the film and its story become quite manageable, digestible, while remaining profound.

Arrival
Starring: Amy Adams, Jeremy Renner, Forrest Whitaker
Director: Denis Villeneuve
Writer: Eric Heisserer

Elle (2016)

Paul Verhoeven's films' reputation proceeds them. Robocop, Total Recall, Basic Instinct, and (yes, even) Showgirls, hold a certain fascination to many but his unsubtle, often insensitively gauche style left me more bored than "shocked." His idea of envelop pushing is usually less about exploring dark, complicated characters, and more about showing body parts. Therefore his newest film, which is everything a Verhoeven film should be but usually isn't, ends up being such a surprise.

Elle pushes the envelop in fascinating ways. I imagine it will be polarizing based on how unflinchingly it embraces its central character who refuses to be morally pure. It is like all those times Verhoeven crafted insultingly simplistic portraits of vengeful women, he was learning how complex and rich a female lead could actually be. He has manifested that in Elle, a shockingly intricate study of a woman who will neither be victim or hero.

As played by the exquisitely pitch perfect Isabelle Huppert, Michele is nothing binary. She is neither good nor evil, victim nor perpetrator, sympathetic nor reviled. Elle is 4 dimensional and I was never sure what she was going to do next. Huppert is up for the task of such a rich character, bringing her to unflinching life.

Elle wrestles with sexual assault and the ways it is destructive and often beyond the reach of justice. Verhoeven chooses not only to witness it (no surprise that he does not leave the attack off camera), but to relive it, experiencing different iterations of the violence. But this is where he convinced me of what he was doing. It was never exploitative, never eroticized. It was explicit yes but always clearly violent and not sexual. He captures the idea that rape is not about sex but about power. His transactions are clearly a battle. And Michele's choices are never the cliches of how victims react. She forges her own path, one with questionable motives. Elle has us struggle with what she does. She is not hero. She is not villain. She is a woman pursuing her path as she sees fit. For the man who crafted the problematic Catherine Tramell to produce such a richly drawn character as Michele, is a remarkable thing.

Elle is not going to be for everyone. It is going to be difficult for many to watch in terms of its graphic nature and its exploration of morality. When I say "graphic" I am not using the world to compare this film to the level of violence and sexuality we are seeing in many (often less complicated) films. I am referring to the raw and calculated way the film (and Michele herself) go through the assault and through the aftermath. The film doesn't endorse her but it does ask us to go along with her which will make many uncomfortable. It is also very fascinating whether we are comfortable or not.

Elle
Starring: Isabelle Huppert, Laurent Lafitte
Director: Paul Verhoeven
Writer: David Birke

Trolls (2016)

Oh the Irony. Dreamworks studios made the mark in the animated world with Shrek, a film which parodied the "fairytale" optimism of the dominant optimistic trends of western animation at that time. I never felt Shrek was very successful at that but it certainly cashed in at the box office. Well now they have come full circle with their latest animated epic, a film which unabashedly celebrates being "happy."

Trolls is what you would get if you made a movie out of all those meaninglessly inspiring memes, cat posters, and slogans about hangin' in there. It has the emotional depth of a greeting card, the originality of day time TV, and the soundtrack of radio stations with "lite" in their names. It will pretty much make it hard for you to keep you popcorn down.

And there is a part of me angry with the message that you just need to find happiness inside yourself. We all see those memes flying around that shame us for not feeling good enough. Ugh. This is that movie. And it's just not very entertaining. The jokes are obvious. The tunes vanilla. The story predictable and boring.

A lot of corporate media is about promoting products. There are those films which are based on properties with a real fan following, people who love the stories, characters, adventure. There are those which are really just about putting a piece of intellectual property in the minds of shoppers. A good comparison of that is The Lego Movie, a film which was really just about selling Lego but ended up being about so much more. Trolls is not The Lego Movie. Trolls is just about selling. Selling products and selling "happiness." Or at least selling a message that if you're not happy you're just not trying hard enough.

I wouldn't recommend bringing kids to Trolls. There is an audience for this, those who just want mindless escapism which bullies us into humming along with the happy song. Some just really want that. If that's your thing, I guess this is for you. For the rest of us, there are better films to see.

Trolls
Starring: Justin Timberlake, Anna Kendrick, Zooey Deschanel, Russel Brand, Gwen Stafani, James Cordon
Directors: Mike Mitchell, Walt Dohrn
Writers: Jonathan Aibel, Glenn Berger

Hacksaw Ridge (2016)

I have never touched a gun and I doubt I ever will. I was struck by the irony of a film maker like Mel Gibson making a film paying tribute to a pacifist and his convictions. This sentimentalized biography of Desmond T. Doss, a real life American soldier in World War II who, due to his faith, refused to touch guns or kill, but signed up to join the American Amry as a medic, is a sometimes overly fawning love letter to Doss and his bravery, but also to his strength as a pacifist.

The film celebrates his refusal to back down in the face of all kinds of aggression, from his comrades in the army to the violence on the battlefield, Doss is painted as a pillar or resistance to a violent world. His heroism is defined through the lives that he saves, not takes. How refreshing.

Gibson's film falls in to many of the traps that "based on true story" films fall into. Doss often seems to wonderful to have been real, his flaws never truly explored, his relationships all to perfect. It also focuses on Doss and his heroism without critiquing the violent world around him. So while he is praised, the violence he is opposed to isn't deconstructed. We are to admire him for his stand without having to embrace his principles. It has the overall effect of sapping some of the emotion that could have been there.

Gibson's treatment of the Japanese "enemy" is at best dismissive, at worst outright racist. In Gibson's world, the American army was made up of handsome young white men. Not only are the Japanese soldiers never humanized, their lives aren't valued. Doss saves a few only to have a fellow soldier almost brag that they "didn't make it."

Gibson's approach puts an almost fairytale feeling all over this story. Many scenes seem structured quite conveniently and don't reach a level where they feel authentic. For example, Doss' court martial scene seems completely contrived, despite it actually having happened.  Despite the graphic depictions of war violence the film remains somewhat aloof from reality. I honestly feel this has to do with Gibson's reluctance to critique the war itself. It is an odd balance to celebrate a man who refused to kill without coming down on the killing that's happening.

What Gibson does well is his depiction of the WWII battlefields. The battle scenes are vicious and visceral. I think this is how it should be. If you are going to depict war, you should depict it, not some sanitized version that gives us a pass on the lives that are lost.

So for me Hacksaw Ridge is a mixed bag. I appreciated the depiction of the cost of war and of the argument supporting Doss' non-violence. I struggled with the film's tacit acceptance of war and it's slaughter, especially towards America's "enemies." Another plus is Vince Vaughn's charming "Sarge," a performance definitely worth catching. 

Hacksaw Ridge 

Starring: Andrew Garfield, Vince Vaughn, Sam Worthington, Luke Bracey, Hugo Weaving, Ryan Corr, Teresa Palmer, Richard Pyros and Rachel Griffith

Director: Mel Gibson

Writers: Andrew Knight, Robert Schenkkan