Many of my favorite musicians fit the idea of the “tortured artist”: a person with a tumultuous past, who has never been quite right, who creates beautiful works of art because of their messed-up life. It seems that we all idolize and romanticize these sorts of people to an extent.
I would wager that every artist at some point has wished they were a long-suffering artist, to have an endless pool of inspiration born of misery and sorrow. This idolization and worship of the “tortured artist” is what gives Leonard Abrahamson’s brilliant film “Frank” its purpose.
It is difficult to articulate what makes this movie so great without taking away some of what makes this movie so great. You can know about the incredible music though. The music is phenomenal. The whole film is a trip through our perceptions of art and genius, and I do mean a trip.
The film moves quickly through scenes depicting the trials and tribulations of Jon Burroughs (Domnhall Gleeson), a wanna-be musician that gets thrown headlong into the Soronprfbs, an inexplicably named experimental band led by the enigmatic and seemingly genius Frank, played masterfully by Michael Fassbender.
Jon’s dweeby, mainstream-grounded personality clashes with all the other members of the band, especially the domineering, violent, humorless synthesizer/theremin player, Clara (Maggie Gyllenhaal).
These people, including the guitarist that speaks only French (François Civil) and a near completely silent drummer (Carla Azar) make “Frank” feel very much like a Wes Anderson film, if Wes Anderson decided to do an introspective, nuanced dark comedy.
“Frank” is very funny, but one still feels the pain and fears of the characters even through all the shenanigans, a credit to the direction and performances contained in the speedy 95-minute runtime. Every bit of violence is played for laughs right up until the dust settles and you realize what it means for the characters.
The film has a number of things to say about art and humanity, and says them all well. The clash of the hipster, artsy foundation of the band with the mainstream-minded Jon is a battle for the ages.
Jon’s obsession with Frank and desire to be a genius like him will be familiar to many an artist. “Frank” postulates that people are deeper than they might appear on the surface, and it is important to remember that though they might be a genius, there’s a real person under the hood.
On Monday, Comedy Central premiered their newest nightly comedy news program, “The Nightly Show with Larry Wilmore.” Filling the time slot after “The Daily Show with Jon Stewart,” that has for the past nine years been dominated by “The Colbert Report,” Larry Wilmore’s show tackles serious issues such as race, class, and social injustice, but in an expertly comedic way.
In just his first week, Wilmore has gone straight for the throat, addressing controversial topics such as the Bill Cosby rape allegations and the Ferguson riots.
While not as light in tone as “Colbert,” “Nightly Show” is still satirical and fun at heart (the first episode commented on “The Lego Movie’s” recent Academy Awards snub).
Wilmore previously appeared on “The Daily Show” under the moniker of the “Senior Black Correspondent.”
Will “The Nightly Show” draw the same immense viewership as “Colbert”? It’s too early to tell, but Wilmore is a terrific host, and hopefully he and his show are here to stay.
“The Nightly Show with Larry Wilmore” airs every weeknight at 11:30 p.m. after “The Daily Show.”
This past week at Western has been dedicated to the memory and accomplishments of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., and with Black History Month coming in February, memories of the Civil Rights movement are in the air.
For the last five years, Dr. Dean Braa, sociology professor, has presided over the Civil Rights Film Series: an open class dedicated to educating the greater community about the Civil Rights Movement through film.
“We were talking at one of our organizational meetings, and we were commenting on how most students know very little about Civil Rights, that social studies in high schools particularly are doing a very poor job,” Braa said.
“People hardly knew Dr. King, let alone the greater Civil Rights Movement.”
He suggested that showing Civil Rights-centric films would be great for providing “a very good general education through film about Civil Rights.” He offered to go further, suggesting a full class be developed around the film series to be offered during January and February when we celebrate the fight for Civil Rights. And thusly, SOC 407 was born.
The series always screens some of the 14 episodes of “Eyes on the Prize,” an Academy Award nominated documentary and personal favorite of Dr. Braa detailing the Civil Rights movement from 1954-1965, and then the struggles of a post-integration America from 1965-1985.
About three years ago, the series added several films about Native Americans and their own ongoing, oft-overlooked civil rights battle, dealing with issues like control of their land and treaty violations throughout the years that still impact their lives today, many years after the initial forced exodus of Native Americans.
The best part of this class is that it is available to everyone, regardless of whether or not they’re taking it as a class or are even a student.
The series runs every Wednesday until the end of winter term, showing a different film.
“Come as you are interested, enjoy some good films, bring some popcorn, bring your dinner, come and sit with us and watch a good movie,” Braa said. “Enlighten yourself!”
I went to see “Selma,” the recently released Martin Luther King Jr. biopic, assuming the horrific end to such a powerful man would be the main focus of the film, but I was wrong.
This movie is a breath of fresh air, in regards to the presentation of someone so prominent. It is beautifully written, teemed with a core of talented actors, and wonderfully carried out via unique cinematic photography.
Directed by Avery DuVernay, Selma is set in Alabama in 1965. The audience follows Martin Luther King Jr. (David Oyelowo, “Interstellar”) as he, his wife, Coretta (Carmen Ejogo, The Purge) and both the black and white communities fight for equal rights and, ultimately, the right to vote, focusing especially on the march from Selma to Montgomery, Alabama.
Oyelowo’s portrayal of King Jr. is spectacular; everything from the way he carries himself to his speech is a genuine and true depiction of who King was.
Ejogo is a wonderful supporting actress and introduced the audience to a small glimpse of what it felt like to be the wife of such a known, powerful and hated man – information not always talked – or thought about – when on the topic of Martin Luther King Jr.
The emotions in the film are penetrating and palpable, due to the unique and constant close up shots displayed throughout the movie. And even though the film is slow at times, I never felt bored. Each word seems to be precisely chosen, each scene deliberate.
The tension felt between political powers, such as the President, and King Jr. are also displayed, from which the audience can extrapolate how complicated, how nearly impossible, the fight for equality was.
There were some violent scenes, scenes that made me cringe. “Selma” does not shy away from demonstrating how it was back then, how violent and painful living in that time was. But that is how the whole movie went: a realistic depicture of America’s messy and violent history and the powerful men and women who fought hard to create peace.
Go see “Selma”. This film gave me a new appreciation for the legendary figure and those who fought beside him. It is intense, painful and sad. But it is also riveting and exciting. If those are not good enough reasons to see it, then, ultimately, it is an honorable dedication to Martin Luther King Jr. and what he stood for and what we can still stand for.
It’s awards season for Hollywood, and one of the most hotly anticipated ceremonies of the year -the 72nd Annual Golden Globes – aired on Sunday, Jan. 11, with some winners bringing little surprise and others coming seemingly out of nowhere. Here’s a brief rundown of the night’s winners and a look at whether or not this year’s Globes may have predicted the upcoming Academy Awards.
Best Actress in a Motion Picture, Drama
Julianne Moore (“Magnolia”, “Children of Men”) took home this award for her starring role in the film “Still Alice,” in which she plays Dr. Alice Howland, a university linguistics professor who’s diagnosed with early onset Alzheimer’s.
Best Actor in a Motion Picture, Drama-
This award went to relative newcomer Eddie Redmayne (“Les Miserables”) for his portrayal of theoretical physicist Stephen Hawking in “The Theory of Everything.” The film focuses on Hawking’s early life as a student at Cambridge, his marriage and his eventual diagnosis of motor neuron disease at the age of 21.
Best Actress in a Motion Picture, Comedy or Musical
Amy Adams won her award for the film “Big Eyes.” Directed by Tim Burton (“Big Fish,” “Beetlejuice”) and co-starring Christoph Waltz (“Django Unchained”), “Big Eyes” is based on the true story of artist Margaret Keane (Adams) and her husband Walter (Waltz), who took credit for her paintings in the 50s and 60s.
Best Actor in a Motion Picture, Comedy or Musical-
Considered by many in Hollywood to be past his prime, Michael Keaton’s comeback in last year’s mind-bending “Birdman” earned him a Golden Globe. Keaton stars as Riggan Thompson, a washed-up superhero actor attempting to mount a Broadway play as his big comeback. Keaton is one of the top contenders for the Oscar for Best Actor.
Best Screenplay,
Motion Picture
Alejandro González Iñárritu, Nicolás Giacobone, Alexander Dinelaris, Jr. and Armando Bo won this award for their screenplay for the aforementioned “Birdman,” which was also directed by Iñárritu and edited to appear as though the film was shot in one long, continuous take.
Best Director,
Motion Picture
Richard Linklater (“Dazed and Confused,” “Bernie”) beat out the competition to take home the coveted Best Director award for his film “Boyhood.” Shot over a period of twelve years and co-starring Ethan Hawke (“Before Midnight”), Patricia Arquette (“True Romance”) and Linklater’s daughter Lorelei, “Boyhood” shows the coming-of-age of a young boy named Mason, played by Ellar Coltrane.
Best Motion Picture, Drama-
“Boyhood” also earned the prized Best Picture, Drama award. Like “Birdman,” it was an immensely ambitious undertaking for Linklater and company, and there’s nothing else in the world quite like it. “Boyhood” is easily the top contender for this year’s Best Picture Oscar.
Best Motion Picture,
Comedy or Musical
Undoubtedly the biggest surprise of the evening was this award being given to the Wes Anderson (“Moonrise Kingdom”) comedy “The Grand Budapest Hotel.” Released way back in March, “Budapest” was considered by many to have little chance against the awards juggernaut that is “Birdman.” The 1930s set ensemble piece features Wes Anderson alumni Bill Murray, Jeff Goldblum and Owen Wilson, alongside stars Ralph Fiennes and Tony Revolori.
The Golden Globe Awards are typically seen as strong indicators for Oscar-winners, but surprises and snubs are nearly as common as correct predictions in the awards business. Will Best Actor go to Redmayne or Keaton? Or will Steve Carell steal the show for his haunting performance in “Foxcatcher”? And which film will find itself alongside the other historic Best Picture winners, such as “The Godfather” and “The Silence of the Lambs”? Predictions are running wild, but we’ll all have to wait for the 87th Academy Awards, airing Feb. 22, 2015.
Netflix’s “Marco Polo” released its first season in December 2014 to find it widely panned by critics; review aggregate site Rotten Tomatoes says a mere 27 percent of professional reviews were positive.
And yet, feedback from its audience tells a different story: the people watching it absolutely love it, with user ratings of 8.3/10 on IMDB, 8.7/10 on MetaCritic and 93 percent positivity on Rotten Tomatoes.
I believe this is a great — if harsh — summary of the show: it is imperfect and by no means high art, but, oh man, is it entertaining.
The show is a highly fictionalized account of famed explorer Marco Polo’s time spent in the court of Kublai Khan in the latter part of the 13th century. And boy, is it epic in every sense.
It’s bursting with court intrigue, martial arts mysticism, medieval brutality, challenges to honor, overly dramatic dialogue, beautifully rendered costumes, one extremely handsome Italian and more rarely justifiable female nudity than you can shake a scimitar at.
It has the makings of a wild roller coaster ride through medieval Asia, but instead moves at a satisfyingly tense slow burn, more of a feast-for-the-eyes boat ride with occasional thrilling bursts of speed.
While ostensibly about the adventures of the titular Italian played by Lorenzo Richelmy, they are hardly the best part of the show. Polo’s character arcs occasionally feel like an afterthought, as if the writers sometimes forget he’s in the show.
His romance is flat and his character goes from highly engaging to highly boring at random intervals, but he is fun when he gets a chance to be with just enough shine to him that I hope he gets further building in later seasons. He’s also very attractive. Just saying.
Despite the title, the truly exciting part of “Marco Polo” is the intrigue in the court of Kublai Khan. Betrayals, wars, disgraces, insults, beatings and a touch of gout all come together to create an ever-shifting map of favors and plans presided over by the Great Khan, masterfully portrayed by Benedict Wong.
He commands the attention and respect of the viewer in the way his character commands the same from his court. In an ensemble of actors of varying ability, Wong stands tall; I found myself glued to my screen absorbing every second of his screen time. Without exaggeration, the show is worth watching purely for his performance.
All said, “Marco Polo” puts into perspective my dislike for much entertainment criticism: it often neglects the spirit of the work. “Marco Polo” is not high art; it’s somewhat inconsistent and uses some pretty tired tropes.
But it’s always good with enough moments of brilliance to hold its own, and it is an epic adventure as entertaining and fun as anything I’ve seen.
That is the spirit of the show: a grand epic. No moral, no message, just epic.
I will certainly be revisiting the court of Kublai Khan upon the release of the second season. I hope you will join me there.
During the break, you likely caught wind of the strange and terrible saga that was the controversial Seth Rogen and James Franco comedy “The Interview.”
The timeline of events that lead to the film’s rollercoaster of a release week began back in June, when the North Korean Foreign Ministry released a statement saying the film, which — if you don’t already know — details a convoluted and comedic plot to assassinate Kim Jong-Un, was an “act of war.”
In the film, James Franco plays an extremely popular celebrity talk show host named Dave Skylark, who receives the opportunity of a lifetime when his producer, Aaron Rapaport (Rogen), books him an in-person interview with the leader of the militarized nation of North Korea.
The CIA approach Skylark and Rapaport, asking them to eliminate Kim Jong-Un. The CIA believes that Un’s death will lead to a successful uprising and revolution of the Korean people.
In their statement, the Ministry also asserted that the film, which, it should be reiterated, stars the two pot-head burnouts from “Freaks and Geeks,” was “reckless U.S. provocative insanity.”
Skip ahead to November, when another statement from North Korea threatened “catastrophic consequences” for the release of the comedy by the guys who brought you “This Is the End” and “Neighbors.”
One week later, during Thanksgiving week, employees at Sony Pictures Entertainment found their computers invaded by an image of a grinning skull and the message “this is just the beginning” on their screens.
Five Sony releases, which included “Fury” and “Annie,” were leaked online and downloaded by millions. It becomes clear to Sony that a huge amount of their company’s data has been compromised.
On Dec. 1, thousands of emails and other documents pertaining to Sony executives and employee’s salaries are leaked online, immediately leading to hundreds of media outlets to publish the stolen material.
That week, Sony employees receive emails from the hackers responsible, calling themselves the “Guardians of Peace.” The emails threaten the employee’s families if they don’t renounce their company.
North Korea is strongly suspected of being behind the cyber-attack, due to similarities between this hack and the hack on South Korean businesses, perpetrated by North Korea.
In a statement issued by the Foreign Ministry, North Korea denies involvement.
In the ensuing weeks, scripts are leaked, financial spreadsheets are deleted, and Sony’s stocks are plummeting.
On Dec. 16, the Guardians of Peace sent an email to various news outlets, stating “we will clearly show it to you at the very time and places The Interview be shown, including the premiere, how bitter fate those who seek fun in terror should be doomed to.
Soon all the world will see what an awful movie Sony Pictures Entertainment has made. The world will be full of fear. Remember the 11th of September 2001. We recommend you to keep yourself distant from the places at that time.”
The Sony hack, now a prime example of cyber-terrorism, suddenly became a matter of Homeland Security. North Korea becomes the number one suspect.
By Dec. 23, mainly due to nearly all major theatre chains refusing the show the film, Sony has scrapped all plans for a Christmas release of “The Interview,” a decision that is derided by many as an act of negotiating with terrorists and simply giving in to the demands of the hackers.
On Christmas Day, 2014, “The Interview” is made available online via YouTube Movies and Google Play for $5.99. In the first four days of its release, the film rakes in $15 million.
Despite being dropped by the large theater corporations, just over 300 independent movie theaters screen the film, bringing in a total of $5 million.
The budget for “The Interview”, according to IMDb. com, was $36 million, a figure that has very nearly been reached in box-office revenue.
Sony has almost made its money back, which is surprising, considering that just two weeks ago it appeared as though Sony had a catastrophe on their hands.
The hacking of Sony and the insanity that followed was unprecedented for Hollywood.
In terms of scope and lasting effect, it blows last year’s nude photo leak completely out of the water.
It’s made a farcical, screwball comedy into a successful art house film, a film that has broken records left and right when it comes to digital release revenue.
Yes, “The Interview” is stupid (and hilarious), and yes, Sony pulling the film from its initial release has set a disturbing precedent that we may not see the residual effects of for some time, but Hollywood, and the way those within Hollywood think about the way people want to see and consume films, has changed, to some extent for the better.
To be bold, it’s as though we’re now living in a “post-Interview” world; a world where the standards what can and can’t be controversial and revolutionary are set differently for all types of films, not just comedies. But isn’t the fact that those standards have been altered because of a comedy pretty cool? I think it is.
You should watch “The Interview,” though not simply because it’s a game-changer. You should watch it because it’s funny; it’s crass, it’s irreverent, it’s dumb, and you should watch it because there are people out there who don’t want you to.
