The Grand Budapest Hotel

The Grand Budapest Hotel is Wes Anderson’s eight feature film, following up on from 2012’s Moonrise Kingdom, but also it is my first experience of a Wes Anderson film, bar trailers and clips of his previous works. So I wasn’t sure how his unique filmmaking style would go down, as just from watching a few seconds of the trailer, it’s clear that it is a style almost completely unlike anything else out there.

The plot for Budapest is simultaneously, complicated and simple at the same time. The basic plot follows the concierge of The Grand Budapest Hotel Gustave (Ralph Fiennes) in his job of running the luxury hotel. Tending to his elderly female guests in a very caring and “hands on” approach. One particular elderly woman is scared to leave the hotel this time as she fears it will be the last time they see each other. Gustave brushes it off and manages to get her out of the hotel.

A few days later she is found dead and with his new lobby boy, Zero, Gustave sets out to pay his respects. During the reading of the will Gustave is left a priceless painting, much to the anger of the family. Deciding not to wait, Gustave and Zero steal the painting and start a mad dash to avoid the law and the family.

Mixed in with this, is a love story, the start of a war and the running of the hotel while Gustave is away. Which is more important to Gustave is up for you to decide.

Ralph Fiennes, in his first Anderson role, is magnificent in the role of Gustave. He glides through the hotel with the air of a flamboyant and sympathetic dictator. He barks instructions at his staff while schmoozing with his guests in the lobby. Fiennes brings a flair to the foul language that Anderson’s script uses almost as punctuation marks in the dialogue scenes. The cast is staggering, with big names popping up to fill small roles, the film is held together by Fiennes, in which everything else rotates around.

As I mentioned briefly, Anderson’s style and look of the film is very unique. Visually, Budapest at times looks like a slightly better funded version of a Monty Python film, particularly the mountain scenes and the external shots of the hotel and the local town. I’m sure there are other styles and film makers that have influenced him, but for me, this was what came to me first and has stuck with me.

Anderson, considering that the film operates in three different time periods, has used the aspect ratio of that time (more of less) to differentiate between them. Although, it is the grander settings of the 30’s section that receives the most restricted and box like ratio, whereas the 60’s and 80’s period get a larger and more recognisable ratio, but for nothing more than a lot of conversations in an empty hotel. (sentence too long)

The rest of the cast, bar Tony Revolori (Zero) and Saoirse Ronan (Agatha) have only a few scenes and cut through the journey of Gustave and Zero at random. Harvey Keitel as a New York accented jail breaker is a particular treat.

But it’s Revolori who, bar Fiennes, is the stand out in this film. He manages to keep his cool despite the problems that he is faced with, Gustave's over the top personality and his love of Agatha. Most of his lines are delivered with a dead pan edge of that talks down to whoever he is conversing with, which gives him an equally powerful and weak standing amongst the characters.

The Grand Budapest Hotel will, I’m sure be quite divisive, if you don’t get it within the first ten to fifteen minutes, then it’s extremely likely that it may not be for you. It has a very unique look and with it a unique voice when it deals with some of it’s weightier issues. A run of the mill comedic drama this certainly isn’t.

I certainly enjoyed my visit to The Grand Budapest Hotel. Who wouldn’t?

Director: Wes Anderson

Writer: Wes Anderson (screenplay and story) and Hugo Guinness (story)

The Top Five Films of 2013.

It’s that time of the year again, the Globes, BAFTA’s and Oscars have passed by and at last it’s come to big one. The Stu-ies. It’s the same deal as last year. Any film released in the UK in the last twelve months or if they became eligible for the Oscars were all in the mix to be on this most exclusive of lists.

5. The Place Beyond The Pines

Derek Cianfrance’s generational crime drama, was one of the biggest surprises of the year for me. Initially when I saw the first few images from it, I was less than enthused about seeing seeking it out. For a film that shows the damage a parent, or lack of one can do to a child, it also entertained from start to finish. Yes, the films chapters get stronger as the film progresses, but no chapter drags and each presents a fully formed film, at the mercy of what came before and affecting what follows.

Director: Derek Cianfrance

Writers: Derek Cianfrance, Ben Coccio and Darius Marder.

4. The Hunt

How would you react if someone you had known all your life was accused by your young daughter of exposing himself to her? Would you believe your best friend? Or your young daughter? Within that premise and those questions is the truly horrible scenario we see primary school teacher Lucas forced into. Ostracised and instantly hated, his life is torn apart, not by the truth or his own actions but the fear of those around him.

Mads Mikkelsen, should have quite honestly been nominated for every single Lead Male acting category this year. Few got close to the level of performance he gave us this year. But no doubt due it not being in English, it counted against him, Thomas Vinterberg and the film as a whole. Expect an English language remake in the next two to three years.

Director: Thomas Vinterberg.

Writers: Thomas Vinterberg and Tobias Lindholm.

3. The Wolf of Wall Street

Let’s be honest, the trailer for this film was better than a lot of what came out this year. It shut people up in the cinema, it actually got their attention and you could people saying “I want to see that” after it finished.

For, me the third in a loose trilogy with Goodfella’s and Casino, Wolf is the funniest Scorcese film in a long time and arguably his best film since Casino. It’s sprawling but also closely focused on this one man who climbed so high and became so powerful that he could almost do anything he wanted, have anything he wanted and get away with it…almost.

Did anyone write a better script than Terence Winter this year? No. He made a took an unlikeable man who took advantage of countless people to make himself stupidly rich and didn’t make him that likeable. He made him and his group of followers interesting, funny, depraved, stupid but never likeable. This, right here, is the secret of the films success and it’s greatest strength.

Director: Martin Scorcese.

Writer: Terence Winter.

2. Captain Phillips

I could quite easily have put this joint first place. It was that close. Both films in which life on the water plays an integral part to the story.

I could only vaguely remember the events as they played out a few years ago and as a result wasn’t sure what happened or how the hostage situation ultimately came to an end.  So I was relatively blank when this film started and let it carry me along. Like Paul Greengrass’s other work, after about five minutes you hooked and in Phillips you are only introduced to both Phillips and Muse. By the time the two meet, you are in deep as the tension starts to crank.

A lot of people talk about stakes when it comes to films. Here the stakes are, as far as action films go, relatively low, just one man. Although what that one man signifies is a lot bigger. As you see from America’s response. It’s by this time, roughly half way through, that you’ll know if you’re in. As tensions become almost unbearable in the lifeboat and the SEALs wait for instructions from their commanders before the lifeboat reaches the Somali coast.

How Tom Hanks was overlooked by the Academy is quite frankly, farcical. There wasn’t a better two or three minutes of acting than at the very end of this film.

Director: Paul Greengrass.

Writer: Billy Ray.

1.Mud

Jeff Nichols third feature film, his best so far and the best film of the year. Captain Phillips pushed it close, but for me this never dropped from my top spot from when I say it back in October. A mix between a modern western and Huckleberry Finn, Nichols created a whole world and filled it with messed men, women and children (Two of the best child performances you’ll see anywhere).

Considering that Matthew McConaughey has just one an Oscar for Dallas Buyers Club, I am actually surprised that he didn’t get anything for Mud, as for me he gives a much more interesting and engaging performance here.

I could go on and on about Mud, but the best advice I could give to you is to go and buy it and watch it for yourself and see a film that has been tragically overlooked by the academy and hasn’t received the worldwide recognition it deserves.

I eagerly await Jeff Nichols next film.

Director: Jeff Nichols.

Writer: Jeff Nichols.

Her

Spike Jonze fourth feature film is Her and the last of real awards films to be released this year and his first as both writer and director, having previously worked twice with the brilliant Charlie Kauffman on Being John Malkovich and Adaptation.

Her follows Theodore (Joaquin Phoenix), a letter writer for a large company, who is still suffering from the breakdown of his marriage. He lives alone and only has a few friends, both seemingly as awkward and unhappy as he is. But with the introduction of a new Operating System, Samantha (Scarlett Johansson) arrives in his life. From here on we watch as their relationship grows from of friendship to lovers.

As with last years The Master Phoenix has taken on a role with a man who he has characterised so easily with his posture. Freddie Quell in The Master was a twisted and hunched degenerate. Theodore often walks with his arms crossed, or his jacket pulled closed, protecting himself from everything around him. It’s only when he is with Samantha that his body relaxes. The best examples are the scenes with Amy (Amy Adams), especially the first time, as comes across as carefree and even happy for a few seconds.

For large parts of Her it is just Theodore on his own, talking to another voice. Even the technology that Samantha inhabits is tiny and barely visible. But Phoenix keeps it small, not trying to fill the quiet or static moments; he could have gone big, to try and create a sense of urgency or heightened drama. But both he and Spike Jonze slow things down and let the material play out at a much more natural pace.

The version of the future we see in Her is relatively subdued compared to other futuristic imaginings, specifically of Los Angeles. It does draw comparison to the more optimistic Sci-Fi of the seventies, when everything would turn out clean and white, generally a decent place to live, unlike the post Blade Runner futures.

The technology we see, bar for the advance nature of the OS, isn’t far fetched, everything runs quicker and is smaller, those are the only real “stretches” we see bar the borderline frightening speed at which the OS can develop and evolve.

Scarlett Johansson gives one of her best performances, and it is purely vocal…or audio. She grows Samantha slowly at first, cautiously integrating herself into Theodore’s life, helping to plan and arrange his day at first before she begins to think for herself and begins to “see” Theodore differently. It’s when Samantha and Theodore take that next step when we Johansson really comes into her own, at times confused and unsure of the nature of her feelings for Theodore, or his terror when she is away from him, that make it a believable and very human portrayal of an OS.

On of Her’s greatest strengths is the wit that Jonze instils in it, some of it obviously funny, but others have tinge of sadness to them. One example of each, the later first, is a group of people who are drawn to couples between people and OS’s and offer to be a surrogate sexual partner, remaining completely silent the entirety of the night/date.

The more conventionally witty/funny part of the film is the video game that Theodore plays, it falls somewhere between a Wii and virtual reality, but when that gives abuse back to you if you swear at it. Something to think about next to you scream at screen when you are playing Call of Duty, FIFA, etc.

Her does feel a bit long, but it’s hard to feel where exactly it drags, as no one scene is indulgent or there for the sake of some monologue or unnecessary visual pay off. If it had been five or ten minutes shorter, I think it would have been marginally stronger for it. But like with Dallas Buyers Club, I am picking at straws.

Spike Jonze and his cast and crew have created one the greatest films about love and the craziness/insanity it forces on all of us, all the while giving us a thoroughly possible and believable future.

Director: Spike Jonze

Writer: Spike Jonze

Dallas Buyers Club

Dallas Buyers Club tells the story of Ron Woodroof, an electrician and rodeo rider, who after being hurt in a work based accident, is told that he has HIV. At first angry and constantly denying the facts and possibility that he does have it, he begins to research the drug he is being given, AZT. But as controversy begins to build over the drug, Ron sets up his own clinic, where people can treat themselves with seemingly better medication.

Matthew McConaughey continues his resurgence of the last few years here with another stand out performance. The most noticeable thing part of his performance is the weight that he lost for this role, losing a lot of the muscle that we come to expect of him, reducing himself to gangly and frail looking man.

But beyond the physical transformation, as with Christian Bale in American Hustle, there is a lot to take from the character. We start with the hyper masculine Texan who looks down and jokes about homosexuals, to a man who through his work comes into contact and gets to know countless gay men, one of which becomes in a way his best friend.

It is a performance centred on change, but more than the usual predictable arc, we see Ron physically change for the worse, but becomes more understanding and caring in his personality. From a forgettable rodeo and womanizer to a man who did everything he could to improve the lives of many strangers.

Playing a character like Rayon, a transvestite/transsexual male hooker, it would be very easy to swing for the fences and go really big. But it shows Jared Leto’s restraint and understanding of the character that he plays it small and restrained. We can physically see the pain and confusion that he suffers in the way he moves and his actions. Leto tries to keep the characters pain hidden with his drug use and humour, but with every joke or line the character continues to unravel.

One of the most interesting parts of the film is Ron’s battle with the FDA, who have made a deal with manufacturers of AZT to push it as the sole cure/treatment for HIV. The FDA confiscates or bans the import or use of drugs that are proven to help sufferers in other countries. More of this subplot would have been interesting to me anyway and I would have loved to see it explained further, although it would have threatened to overshadow Ron’s personal story and we may have ended up with something like Traffic

If I have one criticism of Dallas Buyers Club, which in itself if a stretch, it’s that I feel it could have done to have been five minutes shorter, especially in it’s final act. No, I don’t know what scenes or shots should have been cut, but being a bit leaner would have certainly helped the film for me.

It may not getting the praise as a film, but for the two main performances it’s quality is undeniable and real rollercoaster of a story about man who did what he could for himself and complete strangers a like.

Director: Jean-Marc Vallee
Writer: Craig Borten Melisa Wallack

The Cavalry is just over the Horizon: Manchester United

Please note: I have no inside information.

Let’s be honest, so far it hasn’t been the best of seasons for Manchester United. There was always going to be a lot of attention on the club in the first season since Alex Ferguson left. Which players would leave? Which ones would come in? Would tactics change? The answer to three of those have been disappointing, ranging from a shrug of the shoulders that no one left to flat out disbelief at who came in.

The summer transfer window was, to put it lightly, a god awful mess. The only first team squad player that came in was Marouane Fellaini and that was on deadline, after a number of failed attempts and “something” that happened with Athletico Bilbao and Ander Herrera.

With it looking like Juan Mata will join the club and add to the attacking options at the club, specifically centrally, questions will be raised about who could be on their way out, but also who will joining next. As at the very least, this kind of signing shows that Moyes is capable of bringing in world class players, even if the stars did align somewhat beneficially.

Future signings will be more of a challenge, but have to be made if this team is going to dragged, kicking and screaming back into top four contention and the hope of winning the Champions League.

So let’s speculate, or dream about who we could (hopefully) see pulling on the red shirt. Just before we start, I’m not saying all should be signed, just that a few of these could certainly help.

Arturo Vidal:

Long rumoured to a be a target of Moyes, but even without knowing that, this is kind of player that the midfield has needed for the best few years. A strong powerful box to box midfielder, equally capable of breaking up attacks as he is at scoring, as proved by his recent hat trick at Copenhagen in the Champions League.

Self proclaiming himself as the best player in the world in his position, it is hard to argue with his statement, there aren’t many who offer so much and dominate games with such regularity as Vidal. The biggest problem with United’s midfield is the lack of forward runs and goals, they are capable of stifling attacks, but when it comes to surging attacks and driving forward, that is very often left to the forwards or the wingers. Killing attacks, should the ball break free on the edge of the box.

Marco Reus:

Rated by Bloomberg as the fourth best footballer in the world, he would bring United a player comfortable playing anywhere across the attacking midfield line. Has two feet, close control, technique, confidence and is a pretty handy dead ball specialist.

United have long struggled with the quality and effectiveness of their wingers (Januzaj being the exception this year), but still rely mainly on advancing and attacking mainly from the wings. Each one often has one particular strength and will stick to it, Valencia being a prime example (head down, get to touchline, smash the ball across the box).

Reus would change this, capable of swapping wings and even playing capably in the congested middle. He would help to vary the attacks, often someone like Kagawa or Rooney have the ball about 25 yards and are practically begging for a run, an intelligent run that will open up the defence. This is another strength Reus has, the speed and intelligence to get into those situations and the ability to finish those chances.

This season he has scored a similar number of goals to the entirety of United’s midfield.

Luke Shaw:

Please, please forget about Leighton Baines, he is clearly happy at Everton and is 29. So you have to ask, just how many seasons are you going to get out of him at his current level.

Shaw offers a younger option, he isn’t as capable from a dead ball situation, but offers a more direct replacement for Evra, someone who can do the job of a winger and overlap or offer that outside run if the build up play becomes quite narrow.

Shaw, for a young full back is more competent than a lot of his contemporaries and the reserve left backs that United currently have. Financially, the money Everton want for Baines, and what Southampton may accept for Shaw wouldn’t too far apart. Especially if The Saints change their manager in the summer and players decide to move on.

But as mentioned before, the biggest advantage would be the fluid transition it would offer should Evra decide to move on. The main obstacle could be Shaw wanting to hold for a move to Chelsea, the team he is a fan of.

Luka Modric:

Maybe a bit of a stretch considering how prominent he is at Madrid, but as an all round midfielder, he is someone that could fit into the 4-2-3-1 formation that Moyes looks like he is adopting, playing as one of the central two.

There isn’t much to really to say about the man who was one of the best midfielders in the Premier League in each of the seasons he played for Tottenham. The easiest way to describe him would be if you took the qualities of Carrick and Fletcher, put them into one person and doubled it.

His age would be somewhat of a factor, but right now immediate quality is more important and critical.

Toni Kroos

The first thing I need to point out is that this would be the new Kroos, who plays in a slighter deeper role as more of an orchestrator, albeit attacking and mobile. In the recent friendly against England, Kroos dominated the game, playing the game at his pace and dictating the flow of his teams play.

Kroos would need a fairly, although not too much, disciplined central midfield partner, or at least a player clever enough to realise when is the right time for one of them to make that forward run.

Are all these going happy? Definitely not.

Could some of these come through? I hope so.

As long as David Moyes and the club have a clear plan, then it will be hard to argue if he goes out and gets the people that he thinks will improve the club.

 

The Wolf of Wall Street

It’s not that often that too big award seasons films come out in the same year that are so similar, but  this year it happened with American Hustle and The Wolf of Wall Street, both heavily feature the American Dream, although both taken from the criminal side of that dream. While there were significant differences between the two films, nothing was so significantly different as to the gulf in quality between those two films.

The basic plot follows Jordan Belfort (Leonardo Di Caprio) when he joins a stockbrockers a short period before the wall street crash that occurred in the mid 1980’s. Following that he sets up his own firm, selling penny shares to regular people. Needless to say some of the firms actions aren’t legal, something that attracts the eagle eyes attention of the FBI.

The film revolves around Di Caprio’s Belfort, a man who is self admittedly obsessed with money and classes it as his biggest addiction, when you see just how badly he is addicted to other substances you realise just how big of statement this is. How much he changes or evolves throughout the film is hard to say, as he is driven by greed mainly and is much more interested in having as good a time as is physically possible. There are points that stand out as some of Di Caprio’s best work, more often than not, these are comic moments. The highlight being the quaalude scene toward the end of the film, which combines great physical comedy and perfectly delivered voice over. It’s hard to make cerebral palsy funny, but they pull it off here.

Belfort is never played sympathetically, as he has numerous chances to do the right thing, but instead decides to continue his course of money, sex and drugs. Di Caprio, Scorcese and Terence Winter deserve credit for trying to make him interesting and charismatic as opposed to immediately likeable, as a result the film benefits from this.

The film is excessive, a hard eighteen, which had to be cut to make that rating. With a film this explicit, you have to ask if it’s justified and needed. While they could have done without some of the shots, it would have lessened the world and the characters, as we wouldn’t see them acting how they truly are, no matter how crazed and out of control they are. More out of control than the actions, is the language, which ranges from mildly offensive to machine gun like speed of four letter word insults. The line that demonstrates this is when one of the brokers sees an attractive woman and comments, “I’d let her give me AIDS”. I think that sums up the kind of language you should expect.

The film is three hours long, but unlike recent films that clock up that kind of run time, this one doesn’t feels its length. The final half hour slows down as the severity of the situation begins to tell on Belfort and the rest of the characters. But by then you are so engrossed and involved in these people that another hour would have flown past.

Scorcese and Winter here have combined to create a truly great film and possibly Scorcese’s best in the last decade. It takes a very serious subject and makes it different to what it would have been in  the hands of a lesser calibre of writer/director team. To put it into context, this film could easily form a loose kind of trilogy with Casino and Goodfellas, albeit with different enterpretations of the American dream and organized crime, with The Wolf of Wall Street using Wall Street as the criminals instead of mobsters.

Don’t be put off by the length or the apparent seriousness of the subject matter. Go and experience one of the funniest (albeit darkly comic) and best made films of the year.

Director: Martin Scorcese

Writer(s): Terence Winter (screenplay) and Jordan Belfort (book).

Twelve Years A Slave

As I right this, Twelve Years A Slave has this past week won the Golden Globe for the Best Picture in the drama category. This will no doubt be the first of many awards that are bestowed upon this film. Some said before it came out, that this was a clear case of Oscar bait, based on a true story, a difficult subject and one that is constantly a hot topic whenever it comes up.

Like last years Django Unchained, which looked at slavery and racism a well but through Tarantino’s stylistic sensibilities, it too raised a discussion and pushed it to the front of people’s minds.

Twelve Years A Slave is Steve McQueen’s third film, following Hunger and Shame, two films about the suffering, although in those two it was mainly about the suffering of men. But here, the suffering is spread out equally, both men and woman suffer and at the hands of fellow human beings.

The film follows the story of Solomon Northup, a free man in New York, who is tricked and then sold into slavery. Taken to an auction and then to two very different plantations and two very different owners/masters. The plot is relatively straight forward, but gives us enough to keep the plot going, as Solomon tries to free himself. This film is more interested on the characters and rightly so.

Chiwetel Ejiofor as Solomon Northup is a powerhouse of righteousness and strength, his battle to get back to his family is one of the key focuses of the film, but the real central story, that Ejiofor gets spot on, is the internal battle to never give up, but to survive and then live again. He is regularly beaten and humiliated, but it is his unflinching need to be free that keeps him going. For all the role could have been, it is played very subtly, never becoming over the top or too loud. His pain and suffering is internal and kept to himself, something we see when hope appears out of reach or is lost.

Steve McQueen’s direction gives the film a very classical, almost western like to the film. Giving us long shots of the world the characters live in, mixed with the brutality of the lives of those trapped. One particular scene, probably the scene that will stay with you long after the film ends, is a botched lynching.

John Ridley’s script, based on the book of the same name by Northup himself is a real triumph and gives everyone plenty to do. Expertly filling out the supporting cast and bringing them to life, while the world and time of the film would disagree, in the script, everyone is important.

A slave is hung from a tree, but can still just touch the floor with his feet and is forced to keep himself elevated for hours. The shot is well over a minute, but it isn’t the lynching that is the worse part of the shot. More it is the reaction to the other slaves, who simply go on with their lives. It is something that has happened before and will happen again. Its just part of the world they are in now. That could be said to be the true horror of the film.

It is a horrible subject and features some truly terrible scenes of what people were and still are capable of doing to each other. But it is made with such skill and restraint that it is hard to look away and miss a second of this great film.

Director: Steve McQueen.

Writer: John Ridley (screenplay), Solomon Horthup (book).