MOVIE REVIEW: Love (2015)

Love is a film that thinks it is being ambitious, but in the end just left the lingering taste of pretentiousness in the my mouth. I went into this film wanting to like it. I'd read very mixed reviews but suspected that I would be on the more positive end of the spectrum. Sadly it didn't turn out that way. This is a movie that should have been only half the length that it ended up being, and in my opinion, should have focussed its attention more on sex rather than love. It was the muddying of the waters between sex and love that had me constantly rolling my eyes, wishing the director would stop trying to be "deep" and would just have some fun.

Love interjects long, somewhat artful sex scenes with the 'tortured' story of Murphy and his long lost lover Electra, and the events that lead to their breakup. The sex scenes are hit and miss for me. Many of them are done really well, with a degree of taste but also sliminess that kept them entertaining. Having said that, by the end of the movie I was wishing they would stop. Director Gaspar Noé made a statement regarding Love, saying that he wanted to use iconography that pushed the bounds of cinema to rarely seen levels of sex and explicitness. The problem is, when the lead characters are so vapid and juvenile in their perception of what love is, the sex all seems very empty and I hate to say, mildly pornographic. It works for a little while, but when these scenes are being thrown at us for over 2 hours, it simply becomes a bore. Noé credits Stanley Kubrick's films as a great inspiration to him, and watching Love it is obvious that he was drawing heavily from films like Eyes Wide Shut. There is a scene in which Murphy and Electra visit a sex club that was particularly reminiscent of the secret society mansion scene is Eyes Wide Shut, without the masks and rituals of course. The score by Lawrence Schulz and John Carpenter was also very Kubrick-esque, and worked particularly well over the sex scenes. The music was definitely my favourite aspect of the film.

The film takes place in Paris, where Murphy is studying to be a film director and Electra is an aspiring artist (cliché much?) It is shot in the past and the present tense, with the present being filled with Murphy reflecting on and longing for his old life with Electra. We learn that due to his infidelity, he has gotten another woman pregnant. This woman is Omi, who engaged in a threesome with Murphy and Electra when they were together. At first I thought that Omi was going to be more of a main character, and that the story would veer in the direction of a love triangle, which could have been quite interesting. Instead, Noé used her more as a plot device to further Murphy's story arc, which I was never very invested in anyway.

The story of a tortured relationship, riddled with scandal, jealousy and infidelity is obviously a well trodden one, it has been done a million times. But nevertheless it is a good foundation for character building. In the case of Love, the predictable plot required one of two things, either really solid character development or a film that threw out the idea of meaning all together and focussed purely on exploitation and sensationalism. Instead, I feel like Noé tried too hard to walk the thin line between exploitation and a morally relevant story. The problem is, I saw both the central characters as immature, greedy, overly hedonistic and just not very interesting. Sure, their story is relatable. I think anyone who has been in a serious relationship understands the feelings of possession and jealously that come up frequently in Love. But just being relatable is not enough when the film also wants to be taken seriously or make some sort of moral statement about love. I've recently been reading a book which has changed my view on what love is, which might have impacted my views on this film. It basically convinced me that love is essentially a verb. It is something we do first, and feel second. Unconditional love to me is something that takes constant effort and attention in the face of difficulties and challenges. The kind of 'love' that is proposed in this film, and I guess the way many of us view it, is based more on feelings and desires. It is depicted as something that possesses us, makes us mean and neurotic, destined to end in crushing heartbreak. In Love we see this constantly. For instance when they are in the taxi after finding out they have both been cheating on each other. I actually like the way this scene was shot, it has great energy. Yet here we see how ugly this relationship has become, Murphy viciously spitting venomous insults at Electra and vice versa. In summation, I just didn't see any real depiction of love in Love, which is where it falls down for me. The film does a reasonable job of being emotive and intimate, but morally I find nothing to admire about the film or its characters. We see some regret in Murphy at the end of the film, but it still feels tinged by his selfishness and lust, rather than a realisation of what he did wrong.

In terms of cinematography, Love is just fine. The sex scenes contained by far the best shots visually, but lots of the other shots felt pretentious because of the content and dialogue that was being delivered within them. I enjoyed the long tracking shot following the two on their first meeting in a Paris park, but the dialogue between the two was so dreadful that I still ended up bored by the end of the scene. Overall I wasn't under or overwhelmed by Love visually. I certainly don't think it's boundary pushing, despite being slightly controversial upon release. The film premiered in 3D, which I guess might have enriched it somewhat, but to me it sounds more like a bit of a tack on to make up for the film's lack of originality. Personally I would have taken much, if not all of the dialogue out of Love. This might have made the emotion in it more powerful and clear-cut, as well as placed more emphasis on the music, but this is all hypothetical.

Love does not justify its 135 minute run-time. It is overly indulgent in almost every sense, with characters that failed to involve me in their story whatsoever. I think that Gaspar Noé should have focussed more on examining the dynamics of sex, rather than planting an undertone that suggests the film has something to say about true love, which frankly it doesn't in my mind. A small saving grace was the score, which wasn't  absolutely spectacular but complimented the sex scenes well. The fact that the movie took me three sittings to get through says it all for me. I wouldn't recommend Love unless you have a certain taste for this kind of softcore cinema or have a lot of free time on your hands. One thing's for sure, I will not be watching it again.

Acting: 25

Narrative: 20

Visuals: 55

Music: 65

Overall: 41/100

MOVIE REVIEW: Capitalism: A Love Story (2009)

I admire Micheal Moore. I think his heart is in the right place. I also think he is a pretty good film maker. I legitimately enjoyed Bowling For Columbine and learnt a lot of valuable and relevant information about gun laws in the U.S.

I don't know what it is though, perhaps the recent tsunami of PC culture, socialism and regressive leftism that has taken control of my generation, but I just can't get on board with Moore's attempt to condemn capitalism in such an aggressive way. Last time I checked, he was not an expert on economics, although granted he does know the basics. Neither am I, by the way. But the way Micheal talks about capitalism you would think he was the foremost expert the world has ever seen, maintaining a condescending and rather immature tone of voice for the whole of this 2 hour leftist circle jerk.

I am far from a pure capitalist, and I actually agree with most of the points Micheal brings up in this documentary. Crony capitalism has been a primary cause for much unnecessary suffering in the west over the last 40 years. But instead of tackling some very tough and complicated issues by analysing the mechanics of capitalism or the reasons for this extreme corruption, I feel as if Moore just tries to blame the principals of capitalism for everything through shocking case studies.

As a young person, it would easy for me to jump on the band wagon of these extremely left leaning ideologies, that by the way normally have much more of an agenda than right leaning ones. But as I grow, both in age and maturity, I am starting to realise just how naive it is to look at whole economic systems so simplistically. I believe capitalism without corruption can potentially create the most liberal and fair society on Earth. We don't have that at them moment, but my main values remain. I believe in self reliance, and the right of every person to make the best or worst of themselves. What I see happening all around me, especially in far left circles, is the reverse of this. More insulation, more desire for state control, less personal responsibility. Ultimately, less freedom. I am not saying Moore's documentary is full of falsehoods, or even that it endorses any of these socialist principles. I just think that he chooses an easy target in order to slate an entire system which can be both good and bad.

I think my dislike of Capitalism: A Love Story just comes down to its blatant agenda and Micheal's rather patronising commentary, which I'd had far too much of by the time the movie ended. It is not completely without merit and it does contain some interesting case studies that underline a real need for political change, but for me it just failed to hit the mark like some of his older films did.

Overall: 40/100

MOVIE REVIEW: A Single Man (2009)

I went into A Single Man with no real expectations. I didn't know anything about the film, not even that it was directed by Tom Ford. I actually spent the first 10 minutes thinking I was watching the Coen Brothers' 'A Serious Man', most probably a very different film to this one. Whoops! A quick Google search rectified my error and I settled into the experience of this stylish Tom Ford movie. It is adapted from Christopher Isherwood's novel of the same name and stars Colin Firth in the leading role, Julianne Moore and Nicholas Hoult.

I really enjoyed A Single Man, from the slick and stylish aesthetics, to the dialogue, to the deep sense of melancholy. Hey, I think we all need a bit of melancholy now and again. The story follows a middle aged British college professor living in L.A in the early 60's, George Falconer, who has recently lost his long time partner Jim in a car accident. From the start we learn of the immense trauma that this loss has caused him as we get reoccurring flashbacks of their times together. Simple moments, stored forever in George's memory. The first scene is of the highest order, a silent scene of George approaching Jim's dead body just after the accident. He lies with Jim, kissing him with defiant acceptance. This is all that was needed to set up the central premise for the film. George is grieving, yet realises that he must move on and rediscover some sense of himself. The first 20 minutes are used to explore George's mindset and how he views the world. The death of Jim has drained meaning from his day to day life and job, and as he himself exclaims very early on, he is just trying to "get through the goddamn day". The first act also introduces us to Julianne Moore's character, Charley, a very old friend of George. She was the first to console him after he received news of Jim's accident, portrayed in a very moving scene where George is quite literally breaking down in front of her. This establishes their firm bond, which is explored further later on.

One of the main themes of A Single Man is sexuality. Both sexual ambiguity and promiscuousness. I never got the sense that George was depicted as an exclusively gay man, although he probably is. He mentions to Jim in a flashback that he used to sleep with Charley before they met, to which Jim is surprised. Jim never slept with any women. George claims this to be a reason why he felt so deeply in love with Jim, because he was always so sure of himself. I see this as a very important moment in understanding the psychology of George and Jim's relationship. It seemed to me that George was not only in love with Jim, but deeply in awe of him. His outlook on life, his exuberant confidence, made George a better person. Without Jim, he is devoid of something essential to his happiness. This is further reiterated towards the end of the movie when Charley tries to imply that Jim was a substitute for real love, sending George from his mellow drunken state into a defensive rage. He insists that Jim was everything, and nothing can ever replace him. The theme of sexual ambiguity is a real one. Early on when George is teaching, he daydreams about the human form, both the male and the female, distracting his focus on the class he is trying to teach, eventually veering off topic as he riffs on the fact that "fear is destroying our world", blatantly self referencing when talking about the fear of being alone and insignificant. Through these early scenes, Ford develops the complex nature of this man and the cold reality of his heartbreak.

After the class, one student, Kenny, becomes particularly enamoured with George. He quickly makes advances on him, maybe detecting certain aspects of his nature and perhaps even his sexuality. George tries to quell these advances, but it only ends up adding to his conflicted torment and denial about Jim. One of my favourite scenes in the film occurs a little later on. George drives to a convenience store to pick up a bottle of gin for Charley, but as he is leaving it is knocked out of his hand by a young handsome Spanish man. His reaction is humbling and to my eyes displays the essence of human compassion. He manages to overcome his frustration and decides to treat the man with kindness instead of contempt, looking him in the eye and saying "its ok, it was my fault". He buys another bottle and shares a cigarette with the man, who is clearly also interested in George, either sexually or as a friend. It is this constant blurring of the lines between friendliness and sexual tension that really captured my attention throughout the film, being present with Charley, Kenny and the Spanish man. Sometimes we can confuse the two, or even overlook simple human decency and kindness because of sexual connotations. The man wants to go on a car journey with George, but he politely declines and the two part ways. This middle stanza was probably my favourite section of the film.

The next part of the movie focusses on George and Charley. They get drunk together and the whole atmosphere of the film becomes lighter and more fun. The two revel in each others company, laughing and dancing the night away. This was a fun scene to watch and was genuinely heart warming. You feel the visceral bond between them, as well as some unresolved sexual tension. By the end of the scene it is obvious that Charley has always wanted more than friendship with George, but the fact that it isn't reciprocated makes it hard for her to deal with her own life. After this encounter we get perhaps the most important flashback to when George and Jim met at a local sailors bar. The way these flashbacks are constructed paints George's past as richer, happier and more full of life. His nostalgia for this time in his life is so overpowering that it consumes his present. He ends up running back to the same bar, where he conviniently runs into Kenny. This final stanza is where we see George's redemption, he finally beats his nostalgia and fully realises his identity. Through Kenny and Charley, George finds his way back to the present, before finally succumbing to his heart condition. We then get a reverse shot of the opening scene, with George's dying body being kissed by Jim. It is a touching and fitting end to the film.

The acting in A Single Man was really impressive. I am a big Colin Firth fan, though I acknowledge he can be quite one-dimensional. I think he fit this role as well as anyone could have. His quiet, classy demeanour helped the serious scenes feel real, yet he displayed the range that was needed to give life to the character. Overall I felt he stole the show. Julianne Moore was really good as well, giving the character of Charley a sassy, eccentric spark. Her chemistry with Firth brought real depth to their ambitious relationship. Nicholas Hoult was passable, and he definitely worked for the role of Kenny. I would have liked to have seen some more adventurous dialogue written for him though. Aesthetically, A Single Man is simple but classy, as one would expect from a world renowned fashion designer like Tom Ford. Nothing about the visuals or music blew me away, but this is a very character focussed movie, it didn't need to be flashy.

A Single Man is a very serious film, so don't go into expecting a laugh a minute. Its humanistic qualities and themes of compassion, empathy, love and heartbreak are what made it such a satisfying experience for me. I have no real criticisms of it, and at only an hour and a half it is quite an easy watch. If anything, I would have liked it to have been a bit longer so that it could have explored some of the relationships in more detail, but that is just me splitting hairs. Overall I would highly recommend this stylish adaptation to anyone with a love of cinema, or a touch of melancholy.

Acting: 85
Narrative: 80
Visuals: 75
Music: 70

Overall: 78/100