Exploring the Fabric of a Fashion Designer’s Mind

Daniel Day-Lewis and Vicky Krieps in "Phantom Thread"
Photo Credit: Imdb.com

Paul Thomas Anderson’s a writer and director who’s known for his films that are narratively ambitious, having complex stories that encourage discussions afterwards.  He’s done this with films like “Inherent Vice,” “The Master,” “There Will Be Blood,” “Magnolia,” and “Boogie Nights.”  These films are all memorable in their own way, each with a story that’s populated by distinctive characters.  He’s the kind of director where, whenever he releases a new movie, you know you’re in for something unique.

For his latest drama, “Phantom Thread,” he delves into the world of fashion.  And, sure enough, he finds a provocative story to tell, which is bolstered by a trio of masterful performances, including the supposed final film role for the legendary Daniel Day-Lewis.

Reynolds Woodcock (Day-Lewis) is a clothing designer in 1950s London, where he dresses the members of Britain’s high society, while his sister, Cyril (Leslie Manville), takes care of the day-to-day operations.  As Reynolds is on a getaway, he meets a young waitress named Alma Elson (Vicky Krieps), to whom he becomes attached.  He soon brings her back to his home/studio to be one of his models.  Soon, their relationship proves to be more mentally tasking than either one of them predicted.

Watching Daniel Day-Lewis is a rather bittersweet experience because he’s an absolute titan of the screen, but you know that you might not get to see him in another new project after this.  He’s very selective of his roles, usually having a gap of about five years in between movies, and since this is his second collaboration with Anderson, 10 years after teaming with him to give audiences the ferocity that’s “There Will Be Blood,” this duo brings wonders to the screen once again.  However, what’s great about his acting in this film is that, even though it might his last performance, he doesn't try to make it as grand as possible.  Instead, it’s subdued work, as he’s an artist who must keep his calm in order to concentrate on his craft.  In the scenes where he becomes irritated by some of Alma’s actions and traits, you can feel the annoyance that’s bubbling underneath his calm demeanor, but he knows he has to remain levelheaded in order to keep his ideas in order.  It’s a performance that’s perfect for Day-Lewis because just as he’s committed to getting his characters just right, his character is the same when trying to perfect his clothing designs.  Reynolds is a reflection of Day-Lewis and the commitment to his work, and that’s what makes this role the perfect (rumored) send-off for him.

Vicky Krieps gives a stunning performance as Reynolds’ new model and romantic partner.  I won’t give much away about her role, but it’s a character who becomes something you don’t think she will.  It’s a radical change that Alma undergoes, but with her character’s circumstances, as well as Krieps’ approach to the role, the drastic change is made believable.

Leslie Manville delivers terrific work as the quietly combative Cyril.  Her character is one who knows how her brother functions, and also has Alma’s best interests at heart.  With this, Manville displays a toughness in Cyril as her character works to keep Reynolds’ behavior in line, providing an ability to verbally spar with him while adding an occasional touch of humor to her directness, particularly in her “Don’t pick a fight with me” scene. 

Although it takes a while for the plot to kick in, Anderson’s screenplay soon begins to unravel the mounting psychological drama and suspense.  The more we see of Reynolds and Alma’s relationship, the more we see the toxicity that begins to fester underneath their seemingly idyllic world, making this a fascinating look of an artist and his muse whose relationship begins to strain them both.

One of the intriguing aspects about this story is how, because most of the other characters that appear throughout the film are minor, the narrative spends pretty much all of its focus on Reynolds, Alma, and Cyril, presenting palpable tension among the three of them as you begin to wonder where each of them will end up at the film’s conclusion.

When you’re watching the movie, it may seem as though Anderson has written Reynolds and Alma in such a way that renders them unsympathetic.  While you may feel like this is the case at first, their significant flaws make their troubled connection so compelling to witness because even though their actions are ill-judged, it makes sense narratively that these characters would commit such actions.

As a director, Anderson is accomplished at analyzing the distinct settings that his characters inhabit and finding compelling stories within said settings, be it the criminal underworld of Los Angeles in “Inherent Vice,” a religious cult in “The Master,” the twentieth-century oil business in “There Will Be Blood,” the deep, interconnected stories of San Fernando Valley in “Magnolia,” or the adult-film industry in “Boogie Nights.”  As you begin watching one of his movies, you know there’s going to be a lot going on, with a good deal of it being under the surface of the film’s events, and it all leaves you to ponder over the meaning behind the story.  Just like Anderson’s previous films, such is the case for “Phantom Thread.”  Besides the vivid stories and masterful acting his movies always offer, he’s also never one to skimp on the technical aspects, with the cinematography and music being two of the film’s highlights.  

Seeing as Anderson displays carefulness when crafting his films, as a clothing designer does with the carefulness of threading a needle, he continues to prove why he’s one of our best American directors working today.

Final grade: A-

Paddington Returns with Another Warm, Cinematic Bear Hug

Paddington (voiced by Ben Whishaw) in "Paddington 2"
Photo Credit: Imdb.com

Three years ago, director Paul King gave audiences a charming film adaptation of Michael Bond’s (who passed away in June 2017) beloved, literary creation, Paddington.  Following the story of a young bear who travels to England from the jungles of Peru, King’s “Paddington” stayed true to the spirit of the source material and created a movie that both children and adults enjoyed.

King now returns to bring us “Paddington 2,” a sequel that manages to top the wonderful original.  With a talented cast, skilled direction, a heartfelt story, and gorgeous visuals, King once again delivers a film that cherishes its titular hero’s legacy and realizes how much Paddington means to those who have fallen in love with his stories on the page.

After the events of the first film, Paddington (voiced by Ben Whishaw) is enjoying his life in England with Mr. and Mrs. Brown (Hugh Bonneville and Sally Hawkins), their children, Jonathan (Samuel Joslin) and Judy (Madeleine Harris), and their maid, Mrs. Bird (Julie Walters).  With his Aunt Lucy’s (voiced by Imelda Staunton) 100th birthday approaching, Paddington decides to get a job so he can raise enough money to buy a vintage pop-up book of London to send to his aunt in Peru.  When it’s stolen by a washed-up actor named Phoenix Buchanan (Hugh Grant), Paddington is thought to be the culprit and is sent to jail.  The Brown family then has to try to clear Paddington’s name and figure out Phoenix’s purpose for stealing the book.

Ben Whishaw provides splendid voice work for Paddington.  He gives Paddington a gentleness and warmth that makes you want to reach through the screen and embrace him.  His voice work is matched with beautiful visual effects for Paddington’s character, with the CGI being able to give him a range of emotions that help bring him to life and make him seem more than just computer-generated visuals.

What’s great about the Brown family in these films is how none of the family members are at odds with each other for clichéd and comedic purposes.  They’re still comedic, but it’s because of the situations in which they find themselves, all while keeping their strong, familial dynamic alive throughout the movie.  

Other than the cast members portraying the Brown family, “Paddington 2” also provides tremendous talent for its supporting characters, just like in the original.  Besides the return of Jim Broadbent as Mr. Gruber, the kind-hearted antique-shop owner, the film welcomes the new additions of Hugh Grant and Brendan Gleeson.  Grant looks as though he’s having a blast as the villainous, self-admiring actor, and Gleeson’s terrific as the prison’s gruff chef who takes Paddington under his wing.

The live-action cast is so superb that even in the scenes without Paddington, the movie never becomes dull, as there are many talented actors and actresses in the ensemble.  Even though this isn’t a blockbuster-sized children’s movie like the “Harry Potter” films, the cast members seem committed to giving Paddington the adaptation that he deserves, and their engagement to the material helps us become more involved with the story.

The screenplay by King and Simon Farnaby isn’t big in a narrative sense, but that’s not a flaw by any means because this is a story that doesn’t feel the need to use Paddington’s popularity to do anything overblown.  Instead, King and Farnaby decide to just have simple fun with him and place him in a low-stakes, yet endearing adventure.

As a director, King gives us a special, magical movie that’s strengthened by the accomplished acting, direction, screenplay, music, visual effects, and cinematography, all of which elevates this sequel from being a disposable children’s film.  As with the first movie, you can tell that “Paddington 2” wasn’t made with the purpose of making money by just coasting on the titular character’s name recognition, but was meant to give us a movie that puts so much dedication to getting everything right about Michael Bond’s timeless creation and capturing its essence.  He would be proud at the care and respect that went into making this film.

A couple of times in the movie, Paddington quotes his aunt by saying, “If we’re kind and polite, the world will be right.”  Well, I think that the world is now a little better with this film.

Final grade: A    

Writing to Expose Secrets and Lies

Tom Hanks and Meryl Streep in "The Post"
Photo Credit: Imdb.com

Over the years, we’ve had terrific films dealing with how the press handles breaking stories, be it with broadcast journalism in films like “Frost/Nixon” and “Good Night, and Good Luck,” or print journalism with “Spotlight” and “All the President’s Men.”  These movies dive deep into their characters’ missions to bring the truth to light, even if doing so might cause damage to themselves.

Director Steven Spielberg now makes his contribution to journalism cinema with “The Post,” an engaging look at the role that the news played during one of the nation’s toughest periods of national uncertainty.

In the early 1970s, military analyst Daniel Ellsberg (Matthew Rhys) releases the “Pentagon Papers” to “The New York Times,” documents that contain details about the Vietnam War that have been covered up for over 20 years.  After the “Times” is barred by a court injunction from publishing any more stories about the documents, Ben Bagdikian (Bob Odenkirk), assistant editor of “The Washington Post,” discovers Ellsberg as the source of the leak, who then provides Bagdikian with additional copies of the “Pentagon Papers.”  Soon, Katharine Graham (Meryl Streep), owner of the “Post,” must decide whether or not to publish stories about the documents, knowing that she and her team can face criminal charges from the Nixon administration if they do so.

Meryl Streep delivers a low-key, yet strong and empowering performance as Graham.  As someone who must make a decision that could impact many, Streep displays the carefulness that Graham must utilize when trying to contemplate the future of her newspaper and staff, while also showing Graham’s tremendous resilience as a titan in the media industry who must work as hard as she can to prove herself to her male colleagues.  Through one of the best shots in the movie, which is a shot that zooms in to a close-up of Streep, her character is in her final seconds of making a decision about whether to not to publish the story, and she does a superb job at showing the conflict running through her mind, making us feel every bit of tension as she does.  It’s a testament to her unrivaled strength as an actress that she can do all of that in just a few seconds of time.

While Tom Hanks delivers an adequate performance as the “Post”’s editor-in-chief, Ben Bradlee, you can’t help but think that’s he’s just coasting through in “Tom Hanks” mode.  Don’t get me wrong, he’s a great actor, but he needs material that can get him to do something different, such as what he accomplished in 2013 with “Captain Phillips.”  With Hanks being one of out most-celebrated actors working today, he has the ability to turn out wonderful performances when tackling roles like that, and I’m eager to see him tap into those corners of his talent once again.

Backing up Streep and Hanks is a stellar supporting cast, which includes standout performances from Rhys, Odenkirk, and Bruce Greenwood as Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara.

Although the narrative lacks subtly in some spots, the screenplay by Liz Hannah and Josh Singer, the latter of whom co-wrote “Spotlight” with Tom McCarthy, does well in exploring the many facets that went into the exposure of the “Pentagon Papers.”  Besides the core issue with Graham trying to figure out the best course of action for her publication, we’re also given in-depth views of other problems she faces, such as her strained, professional relationship with McNamara, a past tragedy in her family, and her battles with overcoming underestimation.  The narrative spends enough time with each of these plot points and makes us able to feel the weight that Graham is carrying throughout the movie, a weight that she refuses to let bring her down. 

One of the best aspects of the movie is how Spielberg plays up the political-thriller atmospherics of the film.  Between the staff attempting to obtain the documents, going through the legal issues, and trying to publish on time, you’re in suspense for a great deal of the movie, even though you know what’s going to happen, such is the power of Spielberg as a top filmmaker.  Between this and his 2015 historical-thriller, “Bridge of Spies,” Spielberg proves that he can provide terrific suspense in his more-dramatic movies just as well with his classic blockbusters, like “Jurassic Park” and “Raiders of the Lost Ark.”  He’s able to achieve this by working with composer John Williams, cinematographer Janusz Kamiński, and editors Michael Kahn and Sarah Broshar, all of whom are longtime collaborators of Spielberg’s.

While “The Post” doesn’t quite reach the heights of “Spotlight” and “All the President’s Men,” its relevancy to our current political climate makes the film an effective viewing experience, reinvigorating your hope that there will always be those out there who will fight to bring us the truth.  

Final grade: B+

A Business Built on a House of Cards

Jessica Chastain and Idris Elba in "Molly's Game"
Photo Credit: Imdb.com

Aaron Sorkin’s a screenwriter whose narratives thrive on the power of his words, immersing audiences in their dialogues and letting us experience his passion for the craft.  He’s proven himself to be one of the best in the business with such films as “Steve Jobs,” “Moneyball” (which he cowrote with Steve Zaillian), “The Social Network,” “The American President,” and “A Few Good Men.”  With these films, it’s impossible not to get swept up in his scripts, such is their intoxicating impact.

Sorkin now makes his directorial debut with the crime drama, “Molly’s Game,” which he’s also written.  While the film doesn’t quite reach the peaks of his previous films, this is nevertheless an absorbing, exciting, and detailed look into the world of underground poker.

Molly Bloom (Jessica Chastain) is a young woman who, upon moving to Los Angeles, begins hosting high-stakes poker games in a hotel suite and eventually brings her business to New York City.  For almost a decade, she makes a name for herself amongst her players, but is then arrested by the FBI.  She soon must work with her lawyer, Charlie Jaffey (Idris Elba), as she faces federal charges.

Jessica Chastain delivers a commanding and ferocious performance as a businesswoman taking charge of her new calling.  She’s an individual who displays a refusal to back down and works hard to secure the prosperity of her empire.  Behind all of that, she has a fierce loyalty to her clients, refusing to let go of evidence that could ruin their lives.  Although she has an abundance of business savvy when it comes to reaching the top, none of that gets in the way of Molly protecting her players, and Chastain exemplifies her character’s unwavering ethics as she becomes a new top player in her industry.

Idris Elba is wonderful in his role as Molly’s lawyer.  His character shows a commitment to understanding Molly and why she takes certain courses of action in her poker ring, eventually constructing a bond of professionalism with her, and this is strengthened by his and Chastain’s effortless on-screen chemistry.

Sorkin’s screenplay, which is based on Bloom’s memoir, “Molly's Game: From Hollywood’s Elite to Wall Street’s Billionaire Boys Club, My High-Stakes Adventure in the World of Underground Poker,” provides a vast amount of intrigue into the world of the game.  As someone who has never played poker in his life, I was fascinated by how these players dealt their hands and what their thought processes were as they decided what move they were going to make next. 

Despite the movie following a similar structure to that of “The Social Network,” where it transitions back and forth between the main character’s business endeavors in the past and her legal issues in the future, it still works because we’ll have one event taking place during Molly’s business venture, and then we’ll have the movie jump forward to Molly and Charlie discussing how that event will impact her court proceedings.

Although the film’s use of voiceover narration is useful in the scenes where Molly is explaining some of the intricacies of poker and the hands that her players deal, the use of it in many of the non-poker scenes could have been lessened.  Seeing as Sorkin’s previous screenplays don’t use any narration, I’m sure he could have found a way to avoid it for this film.

Sorkin’s direction is competent throughout, but he doesn’t make many creative choices with it.  Two of his latest screenplays, “Steve Jobs” and “The Social Network,” have distinct visual styles that make certain scenes memorable.  While there are many fascinating scenes in “Molly’s Game,” they would have been improved if the camerawork was a little more cinematic.

However, when it comes to Sorkin’s direction, I’ll say that he still manages to keep the exchanges between his characters rich and captivating.  It’s impossible to film a scene with a cast using Sorkin’s dialogue and make it boring, so at least the heart-pounding greatness of his words still comes through from scene to scene.

Despite “Molly’s Game” not quite being Sorkin’s top-tier screenplays, it still has that “Sorkin” feel to it, where you watch the movie and can detect how much dedication he put into learning about his subject and bringing her story to the screen.  And if he’s given the chance to direct another movie, I’m sure he will be able to develop his own unique style that’ll match the quality of his words.  Whatever his next project may be, whether as a writer, director, or both, I say deal me in. 

Final grade: B+

Finding Love and Heartache in the Beauty of Italy

Armie Hammer (left) and Timothée Chalamet in
"Call Me by Your Name"
Photo Credit: Imdb.com

One of the great joys of cinema is seeing a film where, once it’s over, you have such a wonderful experience, that you want to watch the movie again right away.  It’s a feeling that I wish I could have every time I went to the movies; but, at the same time, when it happens only every so often, it makes the viewing much more special.

I’m thankful to have felt this after seeing Luca Guadagnino’s coming-of-age drama, “Call Me by Your Name.”  He crafts something that wraps you up in its emotional journey, and with stunning performances, an engaging screenplay, and passionate direction, Guadagnino gives us the best movie of 2017.

During the summer of 1983, Elio Perlman (Timothée Chalamet) is living abroad with his family in Italy as his father (Michael Stuhlbarg), a professor of archeology, focuses on his academic work.  When a grad student, Oliver (Armie Hammer), arrives at their house to stay for a while and assist him, he and Elio begin a relationship that will change their lives forever.

Timothée Chalamet delivers the breakout performance of the year.  As a young man who’s trying to understand the emotions that he’s experiencing, Chalamet is able to make us feel that sense of longing to have his love reciprocated by Oliver.  He has an ability to transcend words in his quieter moments, whether he shows us a hint of jealousy, rejection, or something else, and all of this gives us an idea of what he's experiencing in any moment.  This is a performance that grips you all of the way through and brings an unshakable dramatic power.

Although Armie Hammer is a talented actor, he hasn’t had a memorable role since he came onto the scene in 2010’s “The Social Network.”  However, he’s now given a part where he can better display his abilities.  He perfects the cavalier, laid-back attitude that helps put you in Elio’s position, with him feeling as if Oliver isn’t as interested in him as Elio is interested in Oliver.  However, when it comes time for Oliver to open up to Elio about his feelings for him, Hammer’s soft-spoken nature of his character creates a welcoming persona as we feel relieved that he’s expressing his love for Elio.

One of the best things about Chalamet and Hammer’s performances is that they aren’t showy or overdramatic.  Instead, they’re understated and subtle in their roles, creating a relationship that’s as gentle and warm as the sun-kissed landscapes over which their love unfolds.

While Michael Stuhlbarg’s character might not seem like he’s of much importance throughout the movie, that all changes within the last 10 minutes of the film.  In these few minutes, he delivers a powerful monologue to his son that makes this scene one of the best and most heartfelt scenes of cinema this year.

The screenplay by James Ivory, which is based on André Aciman’s 2007 novel of the same name, may feel like a series of vignettes at times, but that’s because this type of story doesn't really need to operate within the confines of a traditional plot structure.  It’s about a love evolving over the summer, with the two main characters going out on daily trips and spending time together to get to know each other and understand their relationship.

The Italian countryside, gorgeously photographed by cinematographer Sayombhu Mukdeeprom, makes you feel as though you can feel the rays of the sun and the gentle summer breezes run across your skin.  The expansive views of the ocean, the mountains, the fields, and the towns transport you to this idyllic locale, providing a backdrop that’s as unforgettable as the central relationship will be to Elio and Oliver, a place to build lasting memories, whether they be joyous or painful.

With Guadagnino’s direction, he captures the deliberate unfolding of Elio and Oliver’s relationship, allowing for the slow pace to help us become immersed in their growing connection.  In each scene, he’s able to bring forth an abundance of romance and heartbreak, all of which creates a deep view of the connection between the two main characters.  This is done most memorably in the final shot, one that has you think about what has transpired between Elio and Oliver, as well us what could happen further down the road.  The shot lingers for a few minutes, and with all of the power held in this time, you’re unable to take your eyes off of it.

“Call Me by Your Name” is a film you can’t afford to miss.  There’s so much emotion pulsing through its frames, that being able to watch this on a big screen is one of the luckiest things that can happen to a moviegoer this season, making this an opportunity you must embrace.

Final grade: A