Author: BRWC

Be Italian!

It’s a hard thing being tasked with reviewing Fellini’s 8 1/2. The finest minds that ever deemed it necessary to critique cinema have all thrown their two cents into the 8 1/2 well. It is a film frequently ranked among one of the best films ever made. Film courses are devoted entirely to unlock it’s teachings. Sight & Sound think it in the Top 10, even the Vatican think it’s awesome. The Vatican!

If you are unfamiliar with it though it’s basically a cheap B&W knock off of Rob Marshall’s wonderfully amazing Nine. But 8 1/2 suffers the issue of not having Fergie singing in it. Instead we have to make do with Claudia Cardinale. The plot remains the same. Renown director Guido (Marcello Mastroianni) is beginning production on his latest opus, a sci-fi epic. Unfortunately he’s suffering from writer’s block and a general indifference to the world around him. Instead his mind begins to wonder in to daydream fantasies and reminisces of his past, then Nicole Kidman turns up. Does she? No that was the other film. Dammit. One the surface Guido is a man who gives little away emotionally, what we learn of him comes through his fantasies. The dreamlike sequences are the moments that he really becomes a director. Particularly a segment where he runs his own internal brothel, meeting out punishments and rewards to his harem. It’s the only occasion in the film where we see him act as a director, for the rest of the film he walks impassively around leaving others to only guess at what their roles are.

The main question for anyone who’s not seen it though probably is; is it any good? And to answer this we must go back to the beginning of time. The big bang happened (or God clicked his fingers), then a series of events occurred, then Federico Fellini made 8 1/2. Actually that helped nothing. Apologies. Much like his later films Satyricon, Amacord and City of Women, 8 1/2 works essentially as a series of vignettes tied to together with the overall theme that Guido is trying to make a film without an idea. Depending on how you choose to read it. The fact he is a film director could be entirely inconsequential. He is merely a man hitting middle-age looking back on his sexual history. Or the fact that he is director, the man who should be in control of all aspects of his life can only function properly within his own daydreams. That’s a pretty simple reading I grant you.

Often with Fellini’s films the humour can be boardy and a little broad at times. There is no particular story to become emotional interested in. So we sit back and watch Guido’s life unfurl via protracted meetings and extended dream sequences. Patience maybe tested if you’re not in the mood for a film that can sometimes feel like it is going nowhere fast. If your mind wonders you may end not having the slightest clue why people are now dancing around a rocket launch site. You may also wonder why you should care? Look deep within though and you may find the most perfect realization of internal desperation and frustration. A suitable break-down and the most elegant of mid-life crisis. If I’m honest with you I’m still trying to decide where I stand on it after having seen it twice. Maybe I should look into one of these academic course?

The soundtrack for the Coen Brother’s Inside Llewyn Davis falls into a special sub-category of film soundtracks, the of the non-original soundtrack. The album produced by legendary producer T Bone Burnett as well as the Cohen brothers themselves is a beautiful mix of traditional and well known folk style songs re-arranged and newly recorded for the album by notable artists such as Bob Dylan, Justin Timberlake, Mumford and Sons and Carry Mulligan to name just a few.

The film narrates the week of a struggling folk singer in 1961 New York and the various trials and tribulations of his life. Soundtracks of rearranged existing music are not uncommon and can be done to create outstanding effect, Baz Luhrmann’s Moulin Rouge is the prime example of how this can be done, whereas Quentin Tarantino is the premier example of using existing music in its original form to add a new dimension to his films.

While this soundtrack does not quite match these pinnacle examples, it is a beautifully recorded and produced album which is really effective as a film soundtrack. What is superb is the album presents the full recorded tracks which are often chopped up in the film, so stands alone as an album that you canjust sit and listen to. Any readers of my previous reviews will know that in my opinion an excellent soundtrack is one you can listen to outside of the film.

In summary a beautifully recorded, produced and presented soundtrack to this Cohen Brother’s film, and a must listen if you enjoy a bit of folk or folk rock.

4/5

It’s just as interesting to read the online comments as watching the film.

Alex Gibney must now be in the running for our greatest current documentarian. The man seems to release films of high quality at an alarming rate, yet none feel rushed or that he hasn’t given anything but his full consideration. This summer saw the release of ‘We Steal Secrets: The Story of WikiLeaks’. With the recent release of Bill Condon’s ‘The Fifth Estate’ it seems the film world was champing at the bit to put the story of Julian Assange, Chelsea Manning (formerly Bradley) and the truth revealing enterprise up on screen. ‘We Steal Secrets’ (which incidentally is spoken by former Director of the CIA Michael Hayden) much like it’s feature drama counter-part shows the uprising of WikiLeaks, Assange and the principal leakage which brought them worldwide notoriety.

Reading up on the film online what has been just as fascinating as the film is to read into peoples interpretations of it. Some argue that Gibney has made an anti-Assange film, which also seeks to paint Chelsea Manning as a mentally incapable psychopath. Others have said the film is seeking to justify “crimes” which are tantamount to treason. I believe you take away from this film whatever your pre-conceived notions about the subject are. Assanage as a ‘character’ is described as a hero, a freedom fighter, justice seeker, a vagrant, manipulative and a rapist. Gibney tracks his rise, from the early days of hacking into NASA space program to his flight against rape charges. The film revels in his triumphs and downfalls. Toward the end Gibney describes his one and only meeting with Assange in which he asked for $1 million dollars for his participation. When Gibney declined Assange asked proposed that he would appear if the director were willing to pass on information given to him by other participants. His greatest crime seems to be that he has become the very thing he has also railed against, a secret-keeper. That and the fact he maybe a rapist.

It is really the story of Chelsea Manning though that gives ‘We Steal Secrets’ it’s emotional gut-punch. As interesting the story of Assange is there is only so much screen time you can take in the company of a man who clearly loves the smell of his own farts. In haunting re-telling’s of Manning’s correspondents to Adrian Lamo we see a person who is desperately at odds with the world around them, the system they find themselves and even they’re own body. It seems that Manning was already imprisoned within herself and the act of leaking of information not only acted as an act of bravery but even gave a fundamental purpose to her life (and yes that psychology 101 course is coming along nicely thank you). Again some have complained that ‘We Steal Secrets’ hold Manning up to be the great whistle-blower when he in fact endangered thousands of lives. Some see her representation to be a character assassination in order to discredit. I did not see either of these personally. That’s right I’m fence sitting again. I saw the presentation of correspondence that showed a deeply unhappy individual trying to decide what is wrong and what is right, yes music and colour give a sense that something dark is a-foot but hey there has to some filmic devices at work. Did she make the right decision? Time will be the ultimate tell on that front.

Which could be an argument against the film. The details of the film are so fresh that they have not been allowed to come to a resolution. The film leaves Mannings fate in the air when we now know of her 35 years sentence. Assange still remains holed up in London fighting the rape allegations which the film also discusses as a potential conspiracy. Maybe in a few years Gibney will gift us with ‘We Still Steal Secrets: This Time We’re More Secretive’ as a where-are-they-now follow up. You will take what you want away from the facts as Gibney presents but it can’t be denied that he has created something intriguing, disturbing, infuriating but ultimately very watchable.