Blade Runner

NB: This is a review of The Directors Cut originally released in 1992, the reason for this is that I have yet to see both the Original Cut or Final Cut.

Ridley Scott’s 1982(Original Cut) Sci-Fi masterpiece was released to average reviews, with some critics critising the pace, Sheila Benson of the LA Times refered to it as “Blade Crawler”. But with the release of the Directors Cut (1992), Blade Runner received considerably more positive reviews, and catapulted the film from being a cult film, up to a true classic.

Blade Runner’s main plot is fairly simple, it follows Rick Deckard (Harrison Ford) as he searches for five replicants (Androids, who look just like humans), after one of them killed another Blade Runner (The title for people who chase Replicants) during an interview. Deckard is then brought back , or forced back by his superior to  find these replicants and retire them, another of saying killing them.

Structure as far as Blade Runner goes is similar to the classic Three Act Structure, and without giving away major plot points they do come at the right time to keep the pace of the narrative moving. Despite some criticisms of it being slow, I personally find this to be inaccurate as not once did it feel as though the film was lagging or struggling to carry on. In fact the last 45 minutes of Blade Runner are very quick as the story begins to reach it’s memorable climax.

The whole story is told almost exclusively from the point of Rick Deckard, as is the style of film noir’s, which is essentially what Blade Runner is. Deckard plays the part of the detective perfectly, living alone concentrating on his work, whilst also having the classic brash and to the point personality that is synonimus with noir detectives.

Roy Batty (Rutger Hauer) is the films antagonist, if he was to be classified. However, in the second half of the film, Batty’s apparent obviousness as an antagonist starts to fail, as we realise that all he wants is to live beyond his predetermined four year life span, that all of his model of replicants have. So is his desire to live a “bad” thing, or is it just in the way that he is going about seeking out a longer length of time to live.

Blade Runners weaknesses, are that some viewers may find it to be slow, although crawling is undoubtedly harsh. Also, the conclusion and the paper unicron has left a number of people confused over whether Deckard could possibly by a Replicant also, maybe so much a weakness, but a big piece of the plot left open.

Score: *****(5/5)

Heat

Michael Mann’s 1995 epic Los Angeles crime drama Heat gives to the crime drama genre what The Godfather gave to the “gangster” film, a level that all films of the genre should aim for. It was another film overlooked by the Academy, in fact this film didn’t even garner a single nomination at all.  [1] But anyway, it all doesn’t come down to awards recognition.

The plot of Heat essentially involves a traditional “cops and robbers” story, where the police, lead by Vincent Hanna (Al Pacino) chases Neil McCauley (Robert Den Niro) as he plans and commits a number of crimes throughout the city. Which includes one of, if not the greatest bank heist sequence ever written, which culminates in a “warzone” like shoot-out the crowded streets of Los Angeles.

The structure of the Heat does follow the more traditional three act “Hollywood” structure, with important turning points appearing at well-placed points throughout the film. Following the three-act structure in this case helps Heat, especially with it’s 171 minute run time. As with the previously reviewed Magnolia, Heat does move around the various characters, which helps the pace of the narrative remain quick, and drives the film towards it’s memorable climax.

The two main characters of Heat are undoubtedly Hanna and McCauley, both played superbly by Pacino and De Niro. Yet they only share two scenes together throughout the film, one a stunning conversation in an LAX diner, where they discuss how similar they are, and that the only real difference between them is which side of the law they work on. The other characters don’t just fill out the time; they inhabit their roles and bring great depth to each of them, such as Lauren (Natalie Portman), Hanna’s stepdaughter who is marginalised by her mother and biological father. Heat is filled with flawed people who focus on their professional lives, and neglect their personal lives to often calamitous consequences.

Again, the long running time could stop a lot of people watching the film, but if you discount films that push the 3 hour mark then a lot of films will pass you buy. Along with the length some of the side stories and plots could come across as being indulgent, such as Laurens suicide story and Van Zant’s relevance to the plot, but without these the story wouldn’t be as layered or rewarding as it is.

Score: *****(5/5)

---

[1] Oscars nominations for Best Film 1996: Braveheart (winner), Apollo 13, Babe, Sense and Sensibility and Il Postino

Magnolia

The next film I will review is Magnolia Paul Thomas Anderson’s 1999 dramatic epic, snubbed by the academy in most areas and undeservedly not winning anything at that years ceremony.

The basic plot follows a group of around nine characters through a day in the life, which all happen to be rapidly spiraling out of control in one way or the other. An example of this is Linda (Julianne Moore), who after years of cheating on her elderly husband, has slowly fallen in love with him genuinely, and with him on his death she realizes that she can’t accept that he has left everything to him, and sets out to repeatedly try and commit suicide.

The structure of Magnolia is relatively simple for the most part, as it moves around the various characters in a sequence and we get to see the key parts of each characters story unfold before we move onto the next one, who is more often than not linked to the character we have just seen in some way.  Chronologically the film works in near linear fashion, with only the occasional manipulation of the timeline.

With Magnolia being a large “ensemble film” the number of characters and their qualities would take forever to get through, and then to discuss them in the detail that they deserve. So to highlight one, it would be Frank “TJ” Mackey (Tom Cruise), who did receive an Oscar nomination for it. Frank is a character that on the surface is someone who helps men to have sex with women, in theory lots of women thanks to his “Seduce and Destroy” technique. But it is when he is interviewed by Gwenovier (April Grace) that his supposed past is revealed to all be a lie, that his normally calm and confident character is broken. The performance itself is perfect, and shows what Tom Cruise is capable of when he is given the character and freedom to act.

The one aspect of the film which could discourage people from watching Magnolia is it’s run time, coming in at 188 minutes it is a film truly epic in scale. And if you were to cut anything from the film, it would suffer on a whole as each character need and deserves the time they are given on screen, so that Anderson is given time to get everything from each of the characters.

The final verdict of Magnolia is that if you are willing to give it you time and patience, then you will be rewarded with a great film story with a detailed and amazingly constructed narrative, that you won’t realize you have just spent over 3 hours watching it.

Score: *****(5/5)

Memento

As this is the first of my film reviews, I thought I should probably start with my favourite film, which is as you may have guessed, Christopher Nolan's 2001 neo-noir Memento.

Memento tells the story of former insurance investigator Leonard Shelby (played perfectly by Guy Pearce) as he searches for the man who raped and murdered his wife, and is responsible for Leonard suffering from anterograde memory loss. A form of short term memory loss, where Leonard is unable to remember anything for more than a few moments. 

Structurally, Memento plays in reverse chronological order, for the most part anyway. The colour sequences are primarily of Leonard searching for his wife's killer, whilst the black and white section has Leonard talking on the phone to an unknown person about his past, and how came to the situation he is in. To simplify, the colour sequences run "backwards", whilst the black and white run in correct chronological order.

The reason for the structure is clear, and in terms of the story, essential. Without the use of the structure we would witness the narrative unfold from an objective perspective, and would be more aware of what has happened than Leonard is. With it running backwards, we experience it from Leonard's perspective, which gives us a very subjective view of the story.

The lead character of Leonard, as previously mentioned played perfectly by Guy Pearce comes across as first being a one dimensional character who is simply out for vengeance, but as the film progresses we see pieces of his past and his actions that build this complicated character, who struggles on in the attempt to find his wife's killer with this major block in front of him at all times.

The two main supporting characters of Teddy (Joe Pantoliano), the man Leonard kills at the beginning (or the end, depending on how you view it) as he believes him to be the killer. As well as Natalie (Carrie-Ann Moss), a bar maid who helps Leonard track down Teddy. Are both played superbly, bringing out these characters that would just as soon help Leonard as they would plot and use him to their own ends.

Delivering a final verdict on this film is easy for me, as I would highly recommend it to anyone for a multitude of reasons, some of which have been discussed above. Quite simply it is a must see film.

Score: *****(5/5)