So the local celebrity down in
Dannervike, New Zealand, Stevee Taylor @Cinematic Paradox, announced a neat, little blogathon last
week. Since the award season has already started with some of the critics
award, idea is - in her own words - "The subject is Making a Case for
Movies that Probably Won't Get Any Awards Recognition this year. Basically,
just think of the movies that won't figure highly in awards season, but you
think they should. Maybe you want The Dark Knight Rises or Skyfall to get Best
Picture. Or maybe you want to look at some performances, like maybe Matthew
McConaughey in Killer Joe or Emily Blunt in Looper. You could even look at
editing/cinematography/music alone. If you're doing a film, you're not limited
to one category to look at. Think creatively." I have been thinking about
this performance since the day I saw it and when I saw her description, the first thought that came into my
mind was - Rosemarie DeWitt for Your Sister's Sister(2012).
I will not say that I am a
big fan of Rosemarie DeWitt because honestly I am not. Not that I do not like
her but I haven't seen enough of her movies to say that. Probably like most of
us, I first saw her in Rachel Getting Married(2008) and even though Anne
Hathaway stole the show, I thought she was equally impressive in it as well. According to
IMDb, she was in Cinderella Man(2005) very early in her career which I have
seen quite a few times but I do not remember seeing her in it at all and even
though I have been meaning to, I still haven't seen Margaret(2011). So
practically, Your Sister's Sister(2012) was a second movie I have seen her in and hence it is safe to say that I am
not very well versed with her. Now, I am a big fan of Amy Adams. So if she
stands in a corner of a room for 2 and half hours and releases it as a movie,
there is a good chance that I will still call it great because a) She is Amy
Adams and she will find a way to make even standing in a corner look really
interesting and b) She is AMY ADAMS. She is freaking gorgeous!! So the point is
in case of Rosemarie DeWitt, it takes a really good performance from her for me
not only to take notice but to rave about her so much. And she apparently did
because when the Independent Spirit Award nominations were announced, people
were talking about all the nominations for Silver Linings Playbook(2012) and
Beasts of the Southern Wild(2012) or the lack of The Perks of beingWallflower(2012) or Matthew McConaughey getting nominated. Not that I don't
care about any of that, but the fact that made me most happy is her getting
nominated for Best supporting Actress.
I probably got a little ahead of myself. So let me take a step back and talk about the movie first. A year has passed since the death of Jack's brother but he still is in mourning. For some reason, it looks like he just does not want to let it go. To help him sort out his own emotions and probably find some catharsis in his own company, his brother Tom's ex and his very good friend Iris sends him on her family cabin on an island somewhere Northwest Pacific. When Jack reaches there, he finds someone Iris' sister Hannah already in the house. Hannah also has come to the cabin looking for a solitude since she just had a very serious brake up after a long time relationship. After they overcome the initial awkwardness and drain down the entire bottle of taquilla, they start to kind of bond but eventually end up in bed together. When they wake-up next morning, they find Iris knocking on their door. Even Iris has no idea of Hannah being at the cottage and hence gets a very happy surprize but for some reason Jack thinks it will be a good idea to keep the last night's proceedings a secret from Iris. It turns out that Jack and Iris have feeling for each other that they have never spoken about and even Hannah has a secret that she is keeping from them both. With all these secrets and feelings thrown into the mix, this place of solitariness where Jack and Hannah came hoping to find some answers of their own, creates further more questions for them. Apparently writer-director Lynn Shelton didn't have a traditional script ready for the actors, she never does. Lot of the dialogues spoken in movie were improvisations by the actors themselves, on multiple occasions what we see is the first hand reaction to the words spoken for the first time ever and 4 characters that have significant dialogues are all listed as creative consultants in the credits.
Rosemarie DeWitt plays Hannah. She is just out of seven-year relationship which has been her life for all that time. Now that she ended it, she is not really sure where she wants to go from there. Then she meets this guy and does something terribly selfish without even telling him. She is not a bad person, she probably just did something without thinking much about it or without knowing all the sides of the story in her emotional state. She is smart, she is maybe little smarmy sometimes but not in a harmful way and more importantly, she is a good and loving sister and person. Rosemarie DeWitt displays every single trait of this personality very distinctly in her acting, mainly through her body language. Her acting is very subtle but her face is so expressive that it talks volumes without saying a single word. Probably that was the reason she got Hannh's part but she uses that to perfection. This is probably most evident in scene on their very first night in cabin, alone where Jack comes to see her seating in a hall with a bottle of Vodka. She is kind of playfully curt with him, never giving herself away, constantly keeping him in check. It is like her way of telling him that I maybe vulnerable right now but I am not going to let you take advantage of me. However as it turns out, it's her taking advantage of him. And then after Iris comes and sneaks in her bed in night, we can see that they share a great bond with each other, love to be in each others company but at the same time this battle of the awkward sexual experience between her and Jack is constantly going on at the back of her mind. As I said what she does is extremely selfish and even morally wrong, but the reason I say she is not a bad person is because the earnestness she shows in hanging by Iris, continuously trying to patch up for what she did once Iris finds out.
Even though Emily Blunt hasn't made it big yet as she was expected after The Devil Wears Prada(2006), I can still watch a movie for her. Hopefully, Looper(2012) will provide her some boost. In case of Mark Duplass, this was my first encounter and I can certainly say that I am intrigued. However I will definitely remember Your Sister's Sister as Rosemarie DeWitt's movie. I realize that Supporting Actress pool is really strong this year but I still hope that by the end of
this award season, she does get some recognition for this role that she
thoroughly deserves. That will basically make this post void and might be the
last push I need to push me into the dark, bottomless pit of manic depression.
But I guess, I have to choose one or the other. Life isn't always fair, they
say.
In my previous post reviewing PTA's The Master(2012), I said that I don't always review new releases and I really don't. I definitely don't write back-to-back posts reviewing new releases, in fact this is the first time I am doing that in over a year. But, then again I also haven't seen two movies in theater on two consecutive weekend that are worth talking about in a long long time. I haven't seen movies in theater on two consecutive weekends in a long time. Period. This time I have. So, let me take this chance and get into Rian Johnson's Looper(2012) which incidentally was third time-travel movie I saw in last 10 days.
Set in the future, 2044 to be precise, where time
travel is not yet invented but it is invented in 2074, 30 years in the future.
In monologue opening the film, our protagonist Joe tells us about it. He is a
looper, hired by employers 30 years in the future, a special brand of people who
do very specific but important job - kill people sent back in time. As soon as
time travel is invented sometime in future, it was banned immediately. So, in
2074 mob had to use the time travel very secretly. What they do is send their
targets back in time where loopers like Joe are waiting for them. Loopers have
the time and place where there targets will appear. They go there and wait for
them. As soon as they arrive, blindfolded and hands tied behind their back,
Loopers kill them, collect the loot on them, pick up their money and enjoy the
rest of their life. Reason why they are sent back to be killed - apparently it
is very difficult to dispose off the bodies in future. However there is one
thing that all the loopers worry about - closing their loop. Since Loopers know
so much about this business and they also know about time-travel, some time in
the future they themselves need to be eliminated too. So, one day target in
front of them will be their own future self. Every time Looper gets rid of a
target, he gets silver bars as a reward. If your reward is Gold, that means you have
closed your loop. You collect your gold, come back, collect your money. Once
they close their loop, their contract as a Looper expires, they get to retire
from the business, enjoy the rest of 30 years of your life and then die. Usually it all runs pretty smooth but one day, one of Joe's colleagues Seth, faces ghastly consequences when he chickens out after seeing himself in front.
Joe is a little different from all other loopers. All
the loopers know that at some point or the other, they will close their
loop and will have only specific time to live after that but not many of
them think forward and plan for future - Joe Does. He thinks about how will he spent those last 30 years of life and is making provisions for it. He stores all his silver, he is teaching himself French so that he can go to France. After a while, inevitable happens with him as well. Joe faces himself but his older self doesn't appear blindfolded or with his hands tied behind. Because he isn't sent from future, he's come on his own with a specific purpose. Joe hesitates for a second and old Joe knocks him out and flees the spot. When he comes back to life, with the example of Seth fresh on his mind, he realizes what is at stake and he goes out looking for his older self. If there is one unforgivable sin for loopers, it is to let your target escape especially if that target is you. Since Joe has violated that one rule, his boss Abe has one of his men, Kid Blue looking for him. While Joe is trying to get hold of old Joe, kill him and get on with his present life, not to mention Old Joe has his own plan as well. While hiding from Kid Blue and figuring out what Old Joe's next move will be, Joe takes a refuge on a barn of Sara. Joe has a reason to believe that his old self has some unknown interest in something around Sara's barn. Joe's plan is to stay at her house and wait for Old Joe to come there, take him out and return to his old life. However, in this game of Cat and Mouse, nothing is as easy as it looks - Well, except the ending.
Even though I felt that the overall performance of the movie was little underwhelming, I will give it to you that there is a lot to like about in Looper especially with the cast. Joseph Gordan-Levitt is perfect in central role of Joe but that's hardly a news. This dude rarely disappoints. He is great in initial carefree, partying Joe but always with one eye on future. However, he is especially great later in the film as walls start to crumble around him. It's also great to see Bruce Willis in yet another action film and doing it convincingly. Put a gun in his hand and he gets into his own. Emily Blunt, though in a supporting role of Sara, probably was the best part of it mainly because I don't remember seeing her in any role remotely close to the one in this and also because of the perfect southern accent she picked up. Being a good actress helps too I guess. 10 year old Pierce Gagnon playing Cid also deserves a mention for doing freaky part really well. Rian Johnson's direction is commendable. His eye to the detail is very apparent, especially in creating the initial glimmering but still hollow world of Loopers. However just like his previous film Brick(2005), Looper falls just a little shy of greatness. The more I try and reason with myself, I get something more that works in its favour but I also think of something else that counteracts it. With the almost unanimous praise that I have seen it garner, I might not have my expectations in check but that doesn't hide the fact that it didn't feel up to the mark.
My basic problem is with the pacing. Though it never becomes boring or tedious and it does keep story moving with some kind of activity, it does not move uniformly. It keeps on going up and down a lot of times and I am blaming it for never getting me on the edge of the sit which with the story like this, I expect to be. I have also seen a lot of people talking about how it keeps all the scientific time traveling mumbo jumbo out and lets a viewer enjoy it as a movie. In my book, that's a dig against it, more so if you want to call it a time-travel movie. Simplicity isn't always Good. And then we have the ending. I will say that I actually liked the ending. It was easiest and also smartest way out of the situation and it did give me that WOW! felling for a minute but also with that ending, he walked right into the classic time-travel paradox that every time-travel movie probably should avoid. There are a couple of more things that didn't go down as well but they can be considered as minor spoilers and to keep this review spoiler-free, I won't mention them in detail here. All in all, once again movie worth watching for it's cast but one that falls a little short of its ambition.
Rating(out of 5):
