Author: BRWC

Horizon: An American Saga – Chapter 1 – Review. By Daniel Rester.  

Kevin Costner returns to the director’s chair for the first time in two decades for Horizon: An American Saga – Chapter 1. It’s the first entry of a planned four-part Western that Costner has been envisioning since the late ‘80s. He’s gathered a huge cast and spent much of his own money to bring the belated passion project to the big screen. But were the years of development hell worth it?

Horizon begins in 1859 and focuses on multiple characters as they make their way west in America due to different circumstances. The plot feels episodic at times as it moves between the various characters’ lives. Chapter 1 is very much an establishment of pieces rather than operating as its own film. Costner himself is top-billed and presumably playing the main character, yet even he doesn’t enter the picture until an hour in due to all of the narrative threads. 

One storyline finds widow Frances (Sienna Miller) and her daughter joining a group of soldiers, with her connecting with a lieutenant named Trent (Sam Worthington). Another storyline follows a boy named Russell (Etienne Kellici) as he goes with a group of bounty hunters as they hunt Apache warriors. Costner plays rustler Hayes, who assists hooker Marigold (Abbey Lee) in saving an infant. A fourth storyline sees a wagon train on the Santa Fe Trail, led by Matthew (Luke Wilson) as he deals with an ignorant British couple. Finally, there’s Pionsenay (Owen Crow Shoe), an Apache who struggles with how to deal with settlers entering his tribe’s territory. 

It’s difficult to keep track of all of the players at times in this sprawling Western. Some of the storylines are also more interesting than others as the focus shifts around. Costner and Lee have the best dynamic as two unlikely heroes thrown together. Jamie Campbell Bower steals a couple of scenes as Caleb, a colorful antagonist searching for the baby Marigold is watching over. Miller is also very good here, though the inevitable romance storyline of Frances and Trent is a tad dull. The stacked cast also includes the not-yet-mentioned Michael Rooker, Danny Huston, Jena Malone, Tom Payne, Jeff Fahey, Will Patton, and Dale Dickey. 

Cinematographer J. Michael Muro and composer John Debney help Costner capture the feel of epic and old-fashioned Westerns. The beautiful Utah locations used bring to mind the films John Ford and John Wayne collaborated on as well. Costner never fully romanticizes the West here though, but Horizon never fully commits to being revisionist either. Thankfully, Pionsenay and others do provide a human connection for the Apache at least as Costner doesn’t just paint them as “savages.” 

The finest scene in Chapter 1 comes early as Costner depicts a raid on a settlement. The attack on Frances’ house is harrowing and reminds audiences that Costner can cook up intense moments as a director. Some of the later action sequences are effective too (including a duel on a hill), but its this raid that works best. 

Horizon: An American Saga – Chapter 1 is all setup and little payoff as it lays the groundwork for further chapters. It can be tedious at times during its three-hour runtime. Costner establishes enough of interest here though to look forward to where it all goes next. 

Rating: 6.5/10

Kalki 2898 AD: Review. By Samhith Ankam.

Kind of insane???? For Tollywood standards, this is such a successful reskin of conventional sci-fi without any real “take-me-outs” in relation to the budget. It looks “good”, and copious amounts of grain in the frame (digitally shot so it’s added digitally) makes it feel more cinematic even down to the obviously cartoonish de-aging for Amitabh Bachan. 

Kalki: 2898 AD is very obviously a Part 1 out of who knows how many ever parts, but lots of moving parts are working *mostly* in harmony here. Very classically about a money-hungry anti-hero trying to climb up the social ladder. Prabhas becomes a vessel of this world’s appeal from a sci-fi genre perspective. He’s fun enough as a lens to view this dystopia for all its promises. Although it’s working with the Star-Lord from the Guardians of the Galaxy archetype, it’s still successful in its own right. 

You kind of risk comparison when you wear your influence on your sleeve, not that it’s a bad thing per sè. Like kind of an icky way on my end to talk about sci-fi coming from a film industry that hasn’t had the years of experience to fully hone in on style, metaphor evoked through narrative, and, as a result, needs to work in pastiche. Nag Ashwin’s take on reincarnating the story of the Mahabharata in 2898AD is still enough to feel new however, and his idea goes down easy almost entirely down to how he maybe curates the best Prabhas for the screen in years.

Salaar was utilizing Prabhas’ introverted energy for good, taking his build and matching that with macho stoicism which is charming in its own way. A palette cleanser after the very obvious shift in his look post-Bahubali where the insistence to play him as a clean heartthrob — a 6”5’ finance bro who frequents the gym — only really led to disastrous results. Nag Ashwin showcases Prabhas like he’s our very own Jason Momoa – his beard isn’t lined up, his hair is clean only in the sense that it is tied up, and he’s bracingly huge. They’re having so much fun with the goofiness of it all.

This is all really only like 40% of the movie; this is moreso a movie about the rebels trying to destroy the social order in 2898AD — it’s more like The Handmaid’s Tale crossed with Blade Runner. It’s not seamlessly trying to chart Prabhas as he sees the world for what it is, but constantly switching characters to open up the injustices. One being Deepika Padukone’s character, Sum-80, who’s harboring “the chosen one” in her belly while stuck in the abortion ring in the Complex (the movie’s Citadel). A staggeringly sad performance from Deepika using the innocence of her character. And also, Amitabh Bachan plays Ashwathamma, who’s banished and immortal — withering away like a mummy in a cave without his “power source” until he’s given the chance to fight again, and right his wrongs. Feels very episodic more than a hodgepodge; Less crosscutting and more extended scenes that destroy momentum but allow for cohesion.

It can feel like not much happens because you’re learning at a snail’s pace to soak up rather derivative details of this world. This is a movie of plot; people doing stuff and telling what they’re gonna do without getting to the friction between the characters quick. The parallels to the Mahabharata are really interesting to talk about, but it feels like dots not lines, if that makes sense. Again my navieté regarding the Mahabharata keeps me at arm’s length to be that interested in the parallel here, but you’d wish the parallel itself is being tackled.

It does what I’m about to say with the credits sequence, keep in mind, but given that it’s a reincarnation of the story of sorts, compare the commoners’ injustices between now and then! Compare how the woman as a vessel for a man’s youth manifested in different ways between now and then! If not compare, then find despair in making the parallel existing itself! If not that, then intersect the characters sooner and see how the characters being aware of their Mahabharata origins guides their actions! — this last one essentially happens within the last 15 minutes before ending on a cliffhanger, which is annoying in its own way.

What keeps this feeling less special than it could, as well, is the choreographing of the action. It’s very amiss in terms of energy, which is a bug of the sci-fi genre in general. Technology streamlines action, guns create very clear lines of sight, and superheroic strength turns the environment into levels like a video game to keep it dynamic. But, dynamacism is not dynamic if it’s curated. It has to be organic you know? Not that masala movies don’t choreograph themselves into oblivion but it feels like bodies are the environment in those. With how people fly from punches without an ounce of blood, it’s weirdly floaty here even when many others do the same. Kalki is a fun watch, no doubt, but a movie that’s really just doing groundwork, so your commitment to the rest of the universe is paramount to your enjoyment. 

2.5/5

Aloners: Review. By Joe Muldoon.

Some films adopt such an incisive realism that they resemble fly-on-the-wall documentary filmmaking more than cinema itself – first-timer Hong Sung-eun’s Aloners presents itself as such, similarly to Ken Loach’s 2016 drama I, Daniel Blake. A miserably Sisyphean existence, call centre worker Jina (Gong Seung-yeon) robotically puts her time in, cigarette breaks serving as the only variation in her days. Eat, smoke, work, repeat, ad infinitum.

Struggling to fully come to terms with her late mother’s recent passing, her relationship with her newly-religious father (Park Jeong-hak) is patchy; she infrequently answers his calls but secretly watches over him via a hidden camera in his home. When bubbly new-hire Soo-jin (Jung Da-eun) joins the call centre, Jina begrudgingly finds herself put in charge of her shadowing and training.

The teen doesn’t take to the job easily, unable to adapt to the cold self-robotisation expected of her by the company – or, more specifically, by the ridiculous targets set for employees. And naturally, the customer callers are all but understanding towards her audacity to be anything but an uber-efficient shell, her gall to not have years of work experience and to stand up to their rudeness. Jung’s excellent performance brings a deep warmth to an otherwise chilly film.

Aloners makes for a frankly depressing viewing experience, but this is never to the film’s detriment – to its credit, alas. Hong’s writing not only highlights the dehumanisation of the modern work grind, but also our need for genuine human connection. There’s a great melancholy underlying the monotony of Jina’s life; her lifestyle isn’t due to any desire to continue in an underpaid customer service position, but rather a resignation to her fatalism and inability to make the interpersonal connections for which she yearns.

Jina’s isolation is arguably brought upon by herself; her father wants to keep more consistent contact, her new neighbour Seong-hun (Seo Hyun-woo) has every attempt to initiate conversation shot down, and she could seek a different career path. But could she feasibly break free from this cycle? In her city, she’s but another faceless body in a sea of individuals, as is conductive to our current system.

With strong, well-developed writing from Hong (who also edited the film) and an impressive performance from Gong –for which she deservedly won two acting awards– Aloners is an astute meditation on loneliness, work, and modernity. Through showing flashes of hope, Hong offers us enough to suggest that there’s some cause for optimism. That, despite Jina’s current position, there’s the possibility for her to find happiness, if only she opens herself up to it and knocks down the walls she’s built around her. And by extension, perhaps we can spare ourselves from joining the community of aloners.

By Joe Muldoon

Land Of Mine: Review. By Joe Muldoon.

Exploring a world ravaged by conflict, Martin Zandvliet’s Oscar-nominated 2015 postwar drama Land Of Mine (a fantastic pun in itself) is a deeply moving exercise in humanity. Set in Denmark immediately following the end of WWII, a group of German teenage POWs are forced to clear thousands of landmines left hidden on a beach by their older compatriots.

Under the stern, watchful eye of Sergeant Carl Rasmussen (played by the incredible Roland Møller), the boys are taught how to defuse the mines and thrown into the task without any regard for their safety. With the promise that they’ll be home in a short matter of months if they can consistently defuse six mines an hour, the lads are cautiously optimistic despite their predicament.

Left without proper food or sanitation, malnourishment and sickness soon sweep the troupe, the young Ernst (Emil Belton) going so far as to befriend a local girl (Zoe Zandvliet) so he can steal her bread to share with his twin, Werner (Oskar Belton). Between poor health and several boys tragically losing their lives whilst defusing the mines, their plight quickly becomes a scramble for survival.

As he spends more time with those under his charge, Rasmussen softens towards the teens and sees them for what they are: kids. Kids unwillingly swept up into a war they neither wanted nor created. This development of warmth is perhaps predictable, but Zandvliet executes it in a way that feels plausible, never becoming unbelievable or uninteresting.

As the film draws to a close, we’re left with a sobering statistic: ‘After the war more than 2,000 German POWs were forced to remove over 1.5 million landmines from the west coast of Denmark. Almost half of them died or were severely injured.’ In violation of Article 32 of the Geneva Convention, these instances have rightly been condemned as war crimes in retrospect, and the picture serves as a reminder of the viciousness of the conflict even in its quivering embers.

World War II is perhaps the most well-trodden ground for historical cinema, yet Zandvliet (who also authored its astonishing screenplay) manages to find largely ungrazed pastures for the story: that of adolescent strife, the forced loss of innocence of POWs who are ‘clueless’ to the situation, as the Sergeant puts it. Amidst the bloodshed and brutality, there’s camaraderie, forgiveness, understanding – above all, humanity in times largely devoid of it. And in spite of the looming air of despair, there’s room left for hope. Land Of Mine is anti-war cinema at its most powerful.

By Joe Muldoon.

Get You Better: Review. By Christopher Patterson.

A Personal, Heartfelt, Short That Is One of the Best This Year

I was able to see a short film titled Get You Better, which has become a kind of fascination for me. You ever watch something and spend hours wondering how they could’ve done it. How could they do something so impressive? Are short films usually like this? Director Danica Jensen has led me to ask all these questions, as her short here is nothing short of one of, if not the, most marvelous short films out there right now, and for a variety of reasons, some of which I would hate to fully give away. Firstly, the bite of the script here is near flawless. No character talks in the cringe-worthy, realistic, but usually flawed way most shorts fall prey to of characters talking like they are being recorded on an old iPhone and background noises through the roof.

Here, the delivery and sound feel studio-reviewed and meticulous to an extreme degree. Even more, the feeling of a vision for this short shows up in every avenue, as Jensen’s direction and style are specific and well handled, comparable to an Ozu film in its intention and simple, yet poignant, execution of that said goal. It never jumps the shark or shifts in plot like some other shorts, where they sometimes take boldness over making a good film. If I sound repetitious, I should, as Jensen here writes like an essay. She has a starting point and an ending point, and they nicely connect. One might say I am pointing to this short film being “not like other shorts,” which is exactly what I am and not saying in the best possible way. It is like other shorts in how you would expect a nice short film to go, but unlike most shorts in how it delivers on that said goal. Even better is the personality and individuality Jensen brings to her script, which gives her direction a specific style. Simply put, she does what the best directors do. They are all over it in that when you see her style, it’s hard not to forget you are watching Jensen-directed work. Get You Better is a film that, overall, gets better with each passing rewatch, as it is a film that simply provides a good short to watch and nothing less.

Get You Better has kinetic energy in its direction that feels best summed up as “professional.” The sound is probably the best instance for discussing this. In most short films, you are usually stuck with awkward silence, cringe-worthy delivery, and dialogue that feels like it was made by some 10-year-old who discovered what a camera is. And also the fact that more shorts are, well, shockingly short, which makes the experience feel like either a rushed and bland TikTok video that only serves its purpose to fill in the algorithm or a slow, well written narrative that is, almost ironically, butchered in the final half with a rushed ending comparable to a series trying to end after cancellation. Well, no more, as Danica Jensen not only kills it in her performance but also as a writer and creative.

Acting-wise Danica Jensen really stings with a fast and quick-centered prowess that makes Get You Better worth a rewatch. While she is quick-willed and steadfast, there is a complexity that is well paced and shown in such quick succession that reveals layers to a more wholesome and natural side of her that feels documentary-like in its biting effect.

Get You Better is about sobriety, and within its short time span, Jensen powerfully handles it with some nice biting commentary. Most shorts on this topic would probably have the scene set in one place so as not to have to spread creativity and rely on generic, overly witty and embarrassing conversations to bring false realism. Jensen, on the other hand, provides a short film that flows like a actual film with how much characters move around and, while there are clear limitations likely due to budget and location, Jensen uses that to great affect in telling a short but ever engrossing story that never makes you ask when it is over.

Get You Better is a short film that demonstrates the power of strong creative execution. It is a representation that you don’t have to make a short with: the belief of pretentious innovation that doesn’t work well at all, action scenes that work better as a parody. Instead it has, for instance, quiet fun moments that aren’t quiet for the sake of being quiet but instead for telling a heartfelt narrative. Something missing from many short films. Never does Get You Better fall into exploitation of its themes or excessively in its story, but rather handles its topics elegantly and so precisely.

Designing and showing the world isn’t easy. In most shorts, you are hit with boring lightning and ugly design where, to put it simply, “nothing stands out.” It feels as though no consideration is given in many short films for things, like, for instance, “a red shirt might look better than a blue one with consideration to the background and other characters’ attire.” It is, you could say, a continual issue plaguing short films. Get You Better’s creatives, wonderfully, feel like stylists themselves, with the world here and the designs popping and always eye-catching. Never does a shot look boring and rather like one you would see on the most nicely shot and designed short film’s list from some list maker magazine. 

A nice little thing about Get You Better is the inspiration. The reason why the direction by Jensen works so well is how she wears her inspirations so majestically, in that almost every shot tells you a million words as to not just the intention but also the wide-ranging and varied influences she continues to display. The writing feels unquestionable and ever-running, to the point where you can draw on dozens of directors for small, specific scenes that might seem, at first, like simple-shot scenes, but film itself is a medium of influence. I live by the truth that we are a sum of our influences, and the world shapes us. Jensen’s direction embodies that belief clearly and flawlessly.

One of the greatest aspects of Get You Better is that it feels as though it can work as a feature film and as a short film. It is executed so well and nested up that it works brilliantly for both mediums, and hopefully we will see a film version of it one day, as it is quite spectacular.

If I had to describe Get You Better, it is a short film that takes notice of its time to tell an honest and relatable story that fits its constraints and feels wrapped in a bow in its effectiveness. Even the slight bits of comedy are effective throughout and feel well planned. 

VERDICT

Get You Better is a short film that, from the first couple minutes, makes its plot and intention clear and never lets one forget. If I had to pinpoint the power and energy behind this short, it is how precise the filmmaking is here. The plot is solid and tells an emotional and to-the-point story that recognizes its length and uses it effectively, but what grabs me about this short is how just, honestly, wonderful it is. Most shorts don’t sound like they are made with a Hollywood production in regards to sound and acting ability, but here, Jensen shows off her talent on and off screen as a tour de force. I see Get You Better as not just solid work that stands head to head with some truly great shorts, but also as a piece of ability. While Jensen’s ability here feels devoted to the short narrative, what’s key and what’s important about many short films is the illustration of potential more than execution.

That is even why most short films fall so short. The demonstration of potential rather than ever just doing it. There is a line Jensen has of showing both a marvelous short story and making one constantly curious as to where her career could go. In short, Get You Better is a fantastic display of a possible force to be reckoned with, hopefully, coming to Hollywood, and a simple display of a film that respects its limitations and follows through neatly on its concept. I would compare it to that one student back in school who seemed to always understand the assignment and follow through so neatly that even if you don’t like them, you almost had an undeniable respect for them. Get You Better is a triumph. And a real good one.

4.5/5