Search Results

Any Marvel movie that has to follow Infinity War is unfairly going to be compared to the grandeur of that film and while Ant-Man and the Wasp was never meant to be as grand in scale or serious as that film, it just about manages to succeed in being a light-hearted, low stakes affair much like the 2015 original. Not everything here works though and I’d say that it’s the weakest MCU film this year and probably in Phase 3 so far. That doesn’t mean it’s bad, it’s just a little lacking to me. For those confused about the film’s place in the timeline, it takes place before Avengers: Infinity War (2018) and syncs up with those events come the end. The story revolves around two major plot lines, the first being that of Hope (Evangeline Lilly) and Hank’s (Michael Douglas) mission to rescue her mother/his wife from the Quantum Realm, while the second involves the threat posed by The Ghost (Hannah John-Kamen) to them and Scott Lang (Paul Rudd). While I found neither of these plot lines all that investing, it’s the chemistry between the three main leads that holds everything together. Rudd, Lilly and Douglas continue to shine as these characters. Giving Lilly the chance to suit up and become The Wasp for this film was an exciting prospect and she does great in all her action scenes, but there are times where Hope should clearly have been given more input in a scene, but sometimes Scott and Hank will steal the moment from her. Despite this, I felt the character really came more into her own here. Scott Lang continues to be the earnest and underdog hero of the MCU. For me the moments that he has with his daughter are the moments where he’s the real hero and Rudd really sells these scenes. The supporting cast of Michael Peña, Tip Harris and David Dastmalchian are usually the comedic highlights of the film, just as they were in the original, although I was disappointed we didn’t get more of Luis’ (Peña) signature stories. The weakest characters of the film though really fall of the villain side of things. John-Kamen as Ava/The Ghost doesn’t get much to do in the role and the actress doesn’t give a particularly memorable performance either. Her motivations are clear, but understandable meaning she isn’t really much of a villain in the end. This means the only straight-up villain of the film is Sonny Burch (Walton Goggins), a black market dealer and he’s too one dimensional and not very threatening either. Overall, the villains of the picture were easily the weakest of Phase 3 which is a shame because Phase 3 has had some pretty strong villains. What’s unique about Ant-Man’s world is the shrinking and growing perspective that adds an often comical and surreal experience to many scenes. The action scenes in particular inventively use the shrinking/growing aspects to create some fun set-pieces. The climax is where a lot of this used; unfortunately a lot of it is shown in the trailer. Actually a lot of this movie was shown in the trailer, including the post-credit scene. However, the technical filmmaking is an all-around improvement over the original with the direction feeling more confident and the actors more settled into their characters. It’s just the story seems to go in circles sometimes throwing off the pace. Director Peyton Reed delivered on everything audiences came to like about the original Ant-Man, but this sequel fails to always be interesting or exciting. It’s many moments of comedy don’t always work and the villains are too bland to feel menacing. It’s certainly a fun distraction while we wait for the next Avengers, but it won’t go down as one of the MCU’s best.

(Release Info London schedule; June 14th, 2919, Cineworld Greenwich, The O2, Peninsula Square, London SE10 0DX, United Kingdom, 21:10pm) "The Hummingbird Project" From director Kim Nguyen comes a modern-day 'David & Goliath' story that is equal parts financial thriller and human drama, excavating the pitfalls and perils of two men who risk everything in order to have it all. Cousins from New York, Vincent Zaleski (Jesse Eisenberg) and Anton Zaleski (Alexander Skarsgård) are players in the high-stakes game of 'High Frequency Trading', where winning is measured in milliseconds. Their dream? To build a fiber-optic cable straight line between Kansas and New Jersey, making them millions. But nothing is straightforward for this flawed pair. Anton is the brains, Vincent is the hustler, and together they push each other and everyone around them to breaking point on their quixotic adventure. Constantly breathing down their necks is their old boss Eva Torres (Salma Hayek) a powerful, intoxicating and manipulative trader who will stop at nothing to come between them and beat them at their own game. No matter what the cost, Vincent and Anton are determined to cut through America, only to find redemption at the end of their line, not through money, but through family and reconnecting to the land. Cousins from New York, Vincent and Anton are players in the high-stakes game of high frequency trading, where winning is measured in milliseconds. Vincent is the hustler and Anton is the brains; together they push each other and everyone around them in their quixotic quest to attain 'The Ultimate American Dream'. Embarking on 'The Herculean' task of installing a fiber-optic cable in a straight line between Kansas and New Jersey, so they can yield faster trades and greater riches, the cousins clash with their rapacious former boss, Eva Torres, a hedge-fund manager who tries to beat them at their own game using a rival technology. Racing against time, navigating heavy machinery, stubborn landowners, and the elements, Vincent and Anton move mountains to cut through America and get rich faster, only to find redemption and renewal at the end of the line. The film exposes the ruthless edge of our increasingly digital world.   "The Hummingbird Project" speaks to the ridiculousness of our monetary pursuits; and the humanity behind getting rich quick. The film takes this massive, real-world concept of high frequency trading and placed two unique and unusual people in the middle of it. The story centers on high-frequency trader cousins Vincent and Anton, second-generation 'Eastern European New Yorkers' who leave their 'Wall Street' trading-floor jobs to construct a fiber-optic line stretching from 'The Midwest' to 'The East Coast', guaranteeing faster trades. The film's title suggests an inconceivable task, laying a cable in the earth that can transfer data from Kansas to New York in the time it takes a hummingbird to flap it's wings. Much of "​The Hummingbird Project​'s" story plays out on the open road, with Vincent and his hired crew of diggers and drillers troubleshooting the line as it stretches across the American heartland. With Vincent in the field wheeling and dealing over land rights, boring through granite mountains to keep the project heading in a straight line, his cousin Anton barricades himself in hotel rooms around the country, writing algorithmic code to outpace Eva Torres microwave-tower technology. It's also an immigrant's tale set in the digital age, telling the story of second-generation cousins of 'Eastern European' descent who are trying to attain 'The American Dream' after successful careers on 'Wall Street'. After burning it all down on the trading floor, Vincent and Anton strive for an event greater net worth. Vincent and Anton Zaleski have risen through the ranks of the financial sector as trader and quant, respectively. At the story's outset, they find themselves frustrated not only with their jobs but also their positions in life. Fast-talking and entrepreneurial, Vincent wants to get rich quick and take down his competition, including his former boss Eva Torres, who will stop at nothing in her own right to implement and patent the technology for faster trades. Vincent is a salesman who wins arguments by talking around his opponent, if he pauses to think, he could be vulnerable to counter-argument. He spends most of the movie living in the delusion that his project will be flawless, as he tries to convince people to invest in his vision. He literally can't afford to take a breath. Anton, in contrast, is an introverted quant more comfortable crunching numbers at a computer terminal, quietly longing for a simple country life far from the madness of the financial sector. In an early scene, after finding an investor to fund their fiber-optic scheme, Vincent and Anton quit their jobs in Eva's firm and brazenly embark on the adventure of a lifetime; trying to beat the very system that shaped them. Vincent rents drilling machinery and negotiates land rights while Anton perfects the algorithm that will hopefully yield them untold riches. Vincent is the salesman of the operation who's more ambitious than he's thoughtful. He doesn't just want to succeed in the financial system, he wants to beat it by going around the establishment. He's interested in winning regardless of the consequences to him or the world around him, and while he's a smart guy, he doesn't always think before he speaks. Without his cousin Anton, he would probably be selling fake 'Gucci' handbags on the streets of New York City. Skittish and reserved in the face of Vincent's brash, live-wire determination, Anton is a balding husband and father who happens to be a math genius, capable of seeing order in the chaotic flow of numbers and data that course across his computer terminal in a given second. He's socially awkward and probably on 'The Spectrum'. His goal in life is to be around the people he can tolerate, and there's not that many, basically his wife and kids, and Vincent, who's his best friend and cousin, as well as Anton's connection to the outside world. He can shelter Anton in a way that allows him to focus strictly on writing code and coming up with new algorithms. At it's heart a 'David & Goliath' story, Vincent and Anton are the underdogs who come up against a much stronger adversary in the form of their one-time employer Eva Torres. Symbolizing rapacious capitalism at it's most extreme, the flashy, foul-mouthed Eva will stop at nothing to gain the competitive edge over her former underlings. 'The Hummingbird Project' reaches it's apotheosis when Vincent, suffering from a serious illness, finds himself negotiating drilling rights with an obstinate Amish farmer who won't yield his land, giving Eva the advantage in their race for speedier trades. By pushing himself to the extreme, and finding himself pitted against a 'Luddite', Vincent discovers that his relentless pursuit of financial gain is an untenable and even unhealthy pursuit. Vincent begins the story with what he believes is his purpose in life but his journey of discovery switches course at a certain point and becomes more about realigning his priorities. The stakes of the journey are resolved but they're completely different than when his journey started. At ​'The Hummingbird Projec​t's' conclusion, Vincent and Anton discover that the object of their pursuit, whether money in specific or 'The American Dream' in general, isn't exactly what they thought it was when they set out on their epic journey. As Vincent and Anton come to learn, sometimes we're blown off course from what we're truly meant to achieve in life. The cousins also realize they're inconspicuous in the face of rapid-fire change, this week's hot technology will be irrelevant before the next big thing comes along, whether neutrino messaging, microwave drones, or something as yet undiscovered. But does it really matter in the grand scheme of things? By 2010.financial companies were spending $2.2 billion on trading infrastructure, the high-speed servers that process trades and the fiber-optic cables that link them in a globe spanning network. One company specializing in trading infrastructure is 'Spread Networks', founded in 2010 with the mission of providing Internet connectivity between Chicago and New York City at close to the speed of light, using so-called dark fiber, or optical fibers, to make faster trades. The first fiber-optic line planted by 'Spread Networks' ran 827 miles, from 'The Chicago Mercantile Exchange', where futures and options are traded, to 'The Nasdaq Data Center' in Carteret, New Jersey, costing $300 million to construct. By October 2012, 'Spread' announced improvements to their line, decreasing the round-trip time from 13.1 milliseconds to 12.98 milliseconds, giving Spread traders a slight advantage over the average round-trip of 14.5 milliseconds. Because glass has a higher refractive index than air, the round-trip time for fiber-optic transmission is 50 percent faster than microwave towers, the technology used by 'The Hummingbird Project​'s' Eva Torres in her battle to outwit and out-earn 'The Zaleskis'. The result became 'IEX', or 'Investors Exchange', a transparent stock exchange that has gone on to trade 229.2 million shares at a collective value of nearly $11 billion. It's a story about the ​people behind trading algorithms and fiber-optic lines, the speed demons who take an unethical approach to high frequency trading, discovering in their pursuit of vast wealth that their lives are not made richer in the process. A cautionary tale for our cutting-edge times, the project positions two scheming underdogs up against the behemoth of global capitalism, symbolized by the ruthless and merciless hedge fund manager Eva Torres. She's the most unique person in the business. She wants to get to places before anyone else and break new ground in technology so she can stay ahead of the game. It's not just about the money for her, this is a movie about obsessions, and Eva's obsession is devouring and co-opting genius. Playing out like a high-stakes thriller that substitutes the trading floor for 'The American Terrain', ​'The Hummingbird Project' becomes a glorified arms race across the country, over hills, rivers, highways, and private farmland, to implement the new technology before Eva can erect her own. She's a woman who's very content in her life, not some robot. You can see the passion in what she does. When things get dangerous, there are tantrums. But she's also heavily focused on strategy, she doesn't take a lot of time to indulge in drama. Eva wants to be intimidating toward people but she dresses simply, in a way that's not distracting. So many women her age are afraid of getting old, but Eva embraces it and even owns it, making a statement of her power through her hair. She's smart, she's fearless, she's a woman, and she's Latina, so she has to be tougher than everyone else. The film includes a voice of sanity and reason in the form of chief engineer Mark Vega (Michael Mando), the project manager of Vincent's vision, who maneuvers and operates the heavy equipment in the field. If Vincent is the mouth of the operation and Anton is the brains, Mark is the heart of the project in that he has to make sure as chief engineer that everything is steady and stable; including Vincent. They're digging this elaborate straight line across the country and someone has to stay level-headed, that responsibility falls on Mark. He joins Vincent's team because he sees this as an opportunity to create something bigger than himself. A kind of bromance develops along the way between Mark and Vincent; at the end of the movie Mark discovers his true purpose, more than finishing the fiber-optic line, is to save Vincent's life. A good portion of ​'The Hummingbird Project' involves heavy machinery, in particular the directional-drilling equipment Vincent must track down and place in the hands of Mark Vega in order to facilitate his dream of laying a 1,000-mile cable between Kansas and New Jersey. Mark Vega has a profound bond with Vincent Zaleski; even when the wheeling and dealing character is at his lowest ebb, Vega sees a human being, working tirelessly to get the job done while at the same time helping to keep his cousin going. Mark is drawn to the humanity in Vincent, he understands his desire to want to leave his mark on the earth, but there's also an underdog quality that Mark relates to, and wants to see through. This film is based on the 2012 ​'Wired' article 'Raging Bulls: How Wall Street Got Addicted To Light-Speed Trading'. One such consultants help make the project more comprehensible to a general audience, including a high-frequency trading expert accustomed to dealing with billion-dollar money flows on a daily basis in his former career as a 'Wall Street' options trader, is ​Haim Bodek, a former 'Goldman Sachs' trader. After working at 'Goldman Sachs' in the late '90s, where he was a successful options trader, and 'UBS', where he was the global head of volatility trading, Bodek formed his own high frequency company called 'Trading Machines', which at the height of it's success in the early 2000s accounted for half a percentage of all 'U.S.' options trading, a huge number for such a small firm. When 'Trading Machines' began losing money, Bodek set about reverse-engineering his own algorithms in an effort to find out why he was hemorrhaging cash. What he discovered alarmed him: traders were rigging the game by manipulating the order in which trades were placed electronically, an especially shrewd trader could effectively jump the line and profit in the millions without anyone knowing. Bodek tipped off 'The Securities And Exchange Commission' on the practice, outfoxing his corrupt rivals by exposing what became known as the largest heist in 'Wall Street History'. Nicknamed 'The Edward Snowden Of Finance' by 'The Russians', Bodek was quickly blackballed by the industry for blowing the whistle on high frequency trading. Bodek is instrumental in helping shape the characters of Vincent and Anton Zaleski, having known and worked with traders and quants for much of his 'Wall Street' career. Vincent and Anton are two individuals who think they can beat the system. What's so interesting about this movie is through it's characters you realize this way of living is not designed for human beings, who are plugged into lunar and sun cycles. Those cycles are slow; 29 days, 24 hours. Like Vincent Zaleski discovers, our obsession with milliseconds is bound to make people sick. Sometimes it's better to slow down; you'll get more mileage out of life when you do. While ambitious in scope and a powerful commentary on the absurdity of our financial institutions, at it's core ​"The Hummingbird Project" is character-driven. This is the rare story about something timely and important in which the characters propel the plot. 'Wall Street' is a zero-sum game. There are winners and losers, and if you're a loser, you've no one to blame but yourself, you simply aren't good enough. Someone else is smarter, faster. At once a high-stakes financial thriller with a gripping cautionary tale on the perils of rapacious greed, and thoughtful human drama about reclaiming life's essentials, "The Hummingbird Project" is a story for our up-to-the-minute times; where a millisecond can determine fortune or failure, and the next big technological advancement could wipe out today's way of doing things almost instantly. This film is about the amazing premise of people digging thousand-mile long tunnels to try and shave a couple of milliseconds off of the time it took to make their stock market trades. We've this haunting image in our head of stock market hustlers struggling to walk through swamps and muddy forests in their expensive suits, putting their sanity on the line all for the good old dollar. It's about quantum physics experts, fiber optic physicists, highly specialized tunnel digging experts who dig hundred-mile-long, four-inch-wide tunnels for a living. High frequency trading experts dealing with billion dollar  money flows on a daily basis. Boy, what a ride. In retrospect, there's something about bringing forward what seems to be a metaphoric world, when in fact most of what's in the script is, in some way, true to life. "The Hummingbird Project" builds on a growing body of work that's global in scope and scale yet intimate in its examination of ordinary people living in extraordinary times, often at the mercy of nature, who connect and conspire amid hurdles ranging from technology, time and distance to warfare and climate. The film is fascinated by the idea of finance professionals digging thousand-mile-long tunnels to try and eliminate milliseconds from their stock-market trades. This is a relatable and very human struggle; one that's rooted as much in the natural world as the digital realm. It's about speed-obsessed quants, the physicists, engineers and mathematicians-turned-financiers who generate more than half of all 'U.S.' stock trading. In the pursuit of market-beating returns, sending a signal at faster than light speed provides the ultimate edge; a way to make trades in the past, the financial equivalent of betting on a horse after it has been run. One of the underlying themes of the film is the elasticity of time, similar to the way Einstein explains 'Relativity'. There's something about our experience of time that's so different depending on our emotional status. Things are becoming so fast-paced that we're losing our sense of reality, and we feel it.

(Release Info London/U.K. schedule; October 19th, 2018, Empire Cinemas) "Hunter Killer" Deep under 'The Arctic Ocean', American submarine Captain Joe Glass (Gerard Butler) is on the hunt for a U.S. sub in distress when he discovers a secret Russian coup is in the offing, threatening to dismantle the world order. With crew and country on the line, Captain Glass must now assemble an elite group of 'Navy SEALS' to rescue the kidnapped Russian president Zakarin (Alexander Diachenko) and sneak through enemy waters to stop 'WWIII'. This is the relentlessly tense situation audiences are plunged into in "Hunter Killer", aptly named for the sleek attack subs created to boldly approach the enemy without detection. It all begins as a Russian sub sinks in 'The Arctic Ocean'. Soon after, 'The U.S.' sub ghosting it also mysteriously vanishes. In the midst of investigating these unsettling events, military brass in 'Washington D.C.' are sent scrambling when they discover a rogue Russian admiral is attempting to carry out a bloodthirsty coup at a naval base in Russia. The only hope to halt a war of the superpowers lies in the efforts of two secret crews. First, a clandestine 'Black Ops' team of 'Ex-SEALs' must try to sneak into Russian territory to intercept the kidnapping of 'The Russian President'. Simultaneously, in the sea, Captain Joe Glass and the young crew of 'The USS Arkansas' are under orders to head towards the enemy. As a hunter-killer captain, Glass has mastered the rules of the cat-and-mouse game but will now have to courageously break them, as he realizes that this time the cat and the mouse may have to join forces. As the steely Captain Glass comes face-to-face with his stoic Russian counterpart, Captain Andropov (Michael Nyqvist), it becomes clear that the wary, distrustful bond between them may be all that stands between the world and nuclear catastrophe. Captain Joe Glass reveals a very different side to heroism as the fiercely intelligent and quietly bold Captain of 'The USS Arkansas' He’s an action guy who makes it all happen, but he does it from a position of authority rather than being the guy out there pulling the trigger. Glass knows that trust is the only sinew that can hold together a young and anxious submarine crew with so little contact with the outside world. But he has to forge that trust on his boat one savvy move at a time. At first nobody quite trusts Glass because he seems a little nuts. But you see him carefully build his bond with the crew as they begin to realize how serious their mission is. They start out as young men and women who are mostly playing at their roles and then you get to watch as they become incredibly honed warriors daring to attempt the impossible. The trust issues get far more complicated when 'The USS Arkansas' takes aboard a group of rescued Russians who, though ostensibly the enemy, may actually be the key to everyone’s survival. Glass is more about daring strategy than physical derring-do, which further boosted the development. What’s fascinating about Glass to is that he has to make decisions that will affect the world for hundreds of years because we’re talking about the immediate possibility of sparking an all-out 'World War III'. So he’s up against the highest stakes imaginable, and the way things unfold for him is both really suspenseful and surprisingly believable in today’s geopolitical circumstances. When 'The USS Arkansas' rescues the surviving Russian crew aboard a crippled sub, Captain Glass comes face-to-face with his alter-ego, a man who under other circumstances might be his most feared enemy, but who reflects a mirror image of himself. This is Captain Andropov, and both men will come to take enormous risks as they wrestle with how much to trust the other. He's a patriot in an 'Old School' way. What happens to him is a betrayal by his own country and he finds it unbelievable and that's very relatable. They’re enemies. But as individuals, they each have the ability to do things differently than anybody else would; they both can see above and beyond the normal rules of conflict and engagement. Andropov is an old salty dog of a warrior while Glass is a hard-nosed, blue-collar Navy man. Glass and Andropov trust each other as sailors and at the end of the day, these two captains find they're in the same situation. They have to help each other and that becomes a key theme of the story; trust. Yet they both have respect for the other and their almost silent relationship drives the outcome of the story. While Captain Glass wrestles with the right moves in the deep blue, the military brass in 'Washington D.C.' race to figure out the best response to the imminent global crisis for 'The United States'. The man leading the charge towards military action in 'The War Room is the resolute Admiral Charles Donnegan (Gary Oldman). He thinks that, sort of like a magician’s sleight of hand, that while 'The U.S.' is preoccupied with preventing a nuclear war, he’ll pull off his coup without resistance. But Donnegan feels his job is to respond to any threat with strength and intent. Opposing Donnegan in 'The War Room' with a more cautious 'POV' is Rear Admiral John Fisk (Common). He has to make decisions that are complex and have huge consequences in the world. He knows that the information he provides to his Commander-in-Chief can start or stop a war and he has to take every moment of his job very, very seriously. Donnegan is quick to believe that 'World War III' is already in motion. He has a certain way of thinking about conflict that Fisk sees as rooted in the past. Fisk is from a generation that's more open-minded and about seeking peace. So they represent opposite strategies at 'The Pentagon'. This film is based on the novel 'Firing Point', written by George Wallace, the highly experienced, retired commander of the nuclear attack submarine 'The USS Houston', along with author Don Keith. The book’s action-packed plot, based on Wallace’s extensive knowledge, twisted and turned through a Russian nationalist coup, a 'Black Ops Navy SEAL' mission and an attack submarine captain faced with decisions that could halt, or instantly ignite, 'WWIII'. Complex as it's, the story is so teeth-grittingly plausible it keeps readers up late at night. Even more than the thrills, readers are transported into life on a nuclear sub, immersed into the cramped, sun-deprived, nerve-shredding ambience where steadiness and honor are the only bedrock to be found. Indeed, the submarine movie has been a popular genre since the earliest days of commercial motion pictures. From the silent 'Secret Of The Submarine' in 1915 to a flood of nerve-wracking 'WWII' sub movies to the groundbreakingly visceral German film "Das Boot" to the adaptations of Tom Clancy’s "The Hunt For Red October" and "Crimson Tide" in the 1990s, the tightly-contained space inside a sub full of soldiers facing extremes of confinement, anxiety and danger has been rife with the stuff of drama. But in the wake of vast changes in submarine technology, and in the world, in the new millennium, no film had yet submersed itself into life on a '21st Century' naval submarine. 'Hunter Killer' is a naval vessel, especially a submarine, equipped to locate and destroy enemy vessels, especially other submarines. Deep beneath 'The Icy Surface' of 'fhe Arctic Circle', 'Fhe Cold War' never really ended. Here, at extreme depths invisible to the world, U.S. and Russian submarines continue to play ultra-high-stakes rounds of hide-and- seek through harrowingly narrow passages, as a constant reminder to one another of the unthinkable costs of sudden aggression. Peril has only mounted amid heightened tensions as a new generation of highly sophisticated nuclear attack subs prowl the murky depths, persistently trailing and shadowing one another as if a full-blown battle is about to break out. But what if these charged war games suddenly stopped being a game at all? What if, as chaos erupts on land, there's only one shot to pull the world back from the brink of 'WWIII' and unthinkable nuclear conflicty? The film takes the classic submarine thriller, with all it's nail-biting tension, claustrophobia, physical and psychological pressure, into 'The Post-Cold War Era' when flash coups and counter-reactions can alter the balance of world power overnight. “Hunter Killer is about a fictional event, but it could easily occur in today’s world. There have been many recent news articles about how Russian and American submarines are chasing each other under water in dangerous ways. Yet, because it’s happening under the ocean, the public never knows what's going on. Two submarines ghosting each other through the ocean; resulting in an incident that quickly escalates to the brink of war. These are people who drill and drill and drill so that when things hit the fan, they can make the right moves, like it’s in their sleep. Everything has to be automatic because when you've got freezing cold water coming in, the carbon dioxide is building, there's a fire going on, the place is full of smoke and you know your sub is to go down, you need to be able to act in half a second. Learning about that was very, very enlightening. You see that it takes certain kind of individual to be able to lead in this very hazardous narrow tube. The film’s action moves from deep sea to land and back again. But most of all, "Hunter Killer", captures 'The 21st Century' world of the so-called 'Silent Service', the men and women who serve by patrolling the deep, while their boldest exploits often go unheard and unseen. It’s a classic story with a heck of a lot of great action, a heck of an intricate plot and a whole cast of fantastic characters who are heroes from different walks of life. It feels like an exciting way to revive the submarine thriller for these times. The film takes the audience into the world of submarine culture in a way that's contemporary to our times. You've all the claustrophobia and contained anxiety of being on the sub and then you've the 'Black Ops' team operating amid gunfire in these big, wide-open spaces. That combination keeps things really interesting. "Hunter Killer" is chance for audiences to experience a lot of military action but you also will get a chance to see another core part of Navy life; honor, courage and commitment being demonstrated against all odds. We live in a time now in which a lot of people are afraid, but maybe we can trust more and we can talk to each other more. If you don’t believe in your prejudice and your fears, we might have a better world.

A re-watch was a very long time coming. I barely remember being that annoying kid at Age 3 constantly bothering my parents to put that VCR in the player. The video cassette got lost sometime in the 90s. A year ago, I 'discovered'' it once again. It was as good as I remembered. As a 26 year old, I appreciated the darker, more adult content I did not understand. 'Sorry, wrong pocket' as Carey accidentally whips out a used condom. The Mask was a light hearted, cartoonish view of what can happen when nobody, Ipkiss, gets his hands on a mask that transforms him into a man he always wished he was... confident, suave and popular. If only we could all find something similar! 1994 was definitely the year for Carey with Ace Ventura and Dumb and Dumber. Breakout star indeed. He plays Stanley Ipkiss and his 'alter ego' so well in The Mask. Fantastic film which will always remind me of my youth.

(Release Info London schedule; January 15th, 2020, Curzon Home Cinema) https://www.curzonhomecinema.com/film/watch-stardust-film-online "Stardust" Meet David before Bowie. One of the greatest icons in music history. But who was the young man behind the many faces? In 1971, a 24-year-old David Bowie (Johnny Flynn) embarks on his first road trip to America with 'Mercury Records' publicist Ron Oberman (Marc Maron), only to be met with a world not yet ready for him. "Stardust" offers a glimpse behind the curtain of the moments that inspired the creation of Bowie’s first and most memorable alter ego, 'Ziggy Stardust', capturing the turning point that cemented his career as one of the world’s greatest cultural icons. At the time the film is set in 1971, David Bowie is performing a lot of covers, including work by 'The Velvet Underground', 'Jacques Brel', 'Cream', 'The Who' and 'The Yardbirds'. In the film he performs work by 'Brel' and 'The Yardbirds', as well as 'Good Ol Jane'. The script centers on a particular moment in David’s life, as a young artist starting out before he’s really famous, before 'The Ziggy Stardust' years. That's always a really interesting time in Bowie’s life because he's trying really hard and kind of failing a lot. Looking at that point in somebody’s life who goes on to become such an iconic voice and personality in our times. As an artist who influences so many people, where's he before that moment when he brakes through? It’s really clever the way the story focuses on a few months in his life, on his trip to America, which is so important to him. It’s where you see him gather the references and influences that go into 'Ziggy Stardust' that's basically his breakthrough moment as an artist. The David Bowie who arrives in America for the first time in January 1971 is not a star. He's an ambitious but insecure young man, with just one hit under his belt that most of the music business had dismissed as a novelty record. And he also has a deep fear that he would soon suffer the same fate as the man who practically raised him; his half-brother, Terry Burns (Derek Moran). Born ten years before David, Terry gives his younger brother a musical education, takes him to his first ever gig, buy him his first record. David’s maternal aunts and grandmother had all suffered bouts of mental illness and in 1967, when David was just 20, Terry had a complete mental breakdown and was sent to an asylum. David’s fear that he too could be struck down by schizophrenia is very present on 'The Man Who Sold the World'. Singing about his fractured inner life probably helps him to stay in one piece. But it didn’t bring him the fame and recognition he craved. Very little has been written about that first trip he made to America. In some respects, it's a disaster, without a visa or musician’s union paperwork, he couldn’t even perform the songs he's there to promote. But instead he finds some of the ideas and influences that he would meld together to create his alter ego, 'Ziggy Stardust'. Ziggy is the culmination of David’s struggle to experience madness in a safe way. It's a means to develop multiple personalities without becoming a case of multiple personality disorder. It converts the potential delusion that he's to be a world famous rock star into a reality. But above all, it's born out of his family dynamic. The film is very much grounded in fact; but it’s also a work of speculative fiction. The film has a slightly heightened, playful tone, but it's true to the spirit of where David is at around that point in his life. Finding a musician who could connect with that experience of an artist starting out, figuring out his identity as a performer, is far more important than physical resemblance. To be a young guy in America, before the Internet and before that sort of constant commercial integration between 'European' culture and 'American' culture, it's such a separate universe. America is huge. The steam coming up from the subway and the yellow taxis. It’s just so intense. The first time you travel so far from home is so exciting and inspiring and that’s what we’re telling in this story. For David to go to America at this time, in 1971, when it’s even more American, not cross-pollinated with any other culture, is just so staunchly American. This is the era of 'The Vietnam War' and it’s an interesting time when Americans have just been through social change at the end of the '60s'. It’s probably quite a divided country where there’s a lot of what still looks like the '50s'. David goes there and he sees diner culture and all that, and he walks up wearing a dress. He goes to 'The Factory' and meet Andy Warhol; all these massive American cultural references kind of just seeps into him. He mixes 'French' chanson with 'American' garage rock. He really put on a character and slowly reinvents himself over the years. He's a sponge for different musical styles. There are pictures of him at these parties playing little sets in a dress and long hair, which the film replicates. It becomes something completely new and exciting through his own interpretation. How can you play Bowie in a sensitive way that doesn’t betray his legacy and him as an artist?” David Bowie had many different faces and almost looked completely different at various stages throughout his life. There probably are great David Bowie impersonators but that’s not what it’s about. Regardless of whether it’s David Bowie or not, it has to be a truthful character. It's a pretty real set of circumstances that we know he went through, so it feels good. It flows really beautifully and the relationships that are portrayed provide a kind of dynamism and intention. It's a film about what makes someone become an artist; what actually drives them to make their art. That someone is David Bowie, a man we’re used to thinking about as the star he became, or as one of his alter egos; 'Ziggy Stardust'; 'Aladdin Zane'; 'The Thin White Duke'. Someone we only ever saw at a great distance, behind a mask; a godlike, alien presence. Even in his perfectly choreographed death, he didn’t seem like a regular human being. Rather than make a biopic, or a spin through his greatest hits, the idea is a film about what we’ve not seen; the interior journey David Bowie might have taken to become that artist. We've been fascinated by Bowie ever since we'rema kid. We bought every record, read every interview, every biography. What surprised us is how little most people seemed to know about his family background, about his life before that first real flush of fame. Besides music from the period, the soundtrack also includes work from contemporaries like 'Marika Hackman' and 'The Wave Pictures', who are all life-long Bowie fans.  

(Release Info London schedule; Februar 5th, 2021, Curzon Home Cinema) https://www.curzonhomecinema.com/film/watch-simple-passion-film-online "Simple Passion" The story of a 'simple passion', that of Hélène August's (Laetitia Dosch) passion for Alexandre Svitsin (Sergei Poluniv), a young Russian diplomat, whom she barely knows, whom she nevertheless sees with the same intensity each time they meet. Since last September she waits for him to call her and come to her place. Everything about him is so precious to her, his eyes, his mouth, his childhood memories, his voice. The character of Hélène seems to be astonished by this state of siege, at once sweet and insidious. Pure dopamine. A drug, really. Hélène is an unfettered, free-spirited, woman. A mature, self-assured woman. Ultimately, she's a woman who submits herself out of love. But it's her decision. This is how we've to see the story of 'Passion Simple'; from a voluntary, not a victim’s viewpoint. Alexandre represents a free man, with a complex and elusive personality. He's the objectified man in the film. It's a complex vision of woman, the character is not a model of independence, because she's completely addicted to this man. And she's a bright woman, on top of that, who raises her son alone, who teaches literature at 'The Sorbonne', and yet she says that for a whole year, the only thing that mattered to her is this man. The protagonist waits for her lover anywhere, not only at home, thanks to today’s new technologies, to cell phones. So that she can wait for him anywhere in the world, even though the world is shrinking around her because all she ever does is wait for him. Yet she's always active and wanting, even if she submits herself to that man’s desire. To be an object of desire, to desire, to wait, to fantasise, isn't it the antithesis of an independent woman? It's a sexual film. Filming bodies is a way to glamorize characters. Characters who are comfortable with their own bodies. In the film, the evolution of their passion follows that of the choreography of their bodies. The film is based on Annie Ernaux’s 90s' bookseller 'Passion Simple'. It established a perfect and precise picture of passionate love. It inspires you with a lot of courage. Her words make you want to be honest without being ashamed. They give you the energy to be precise, sincere, not sappy. You've to dig really deep into your own neuroses to understand Annie Ernaux to the full extent. And when these neuroses are looked by a filmmaker who infuses passion with some radiant energy, then it's pure bliss. The ultimate power of the book is that it doesn’t try to explain things. Passion probably involves a will to submit yourself to the other person, either a man or a woman, and to put your whole self into it. Moral judgement has nothing to do with it. It's really brave to explore so meticulously female desire, passion, that place where there's freedom but at the same time a total dependence on the other person. It's scary. We've to understand where it’s coming from. We don’t judge her. It's a story about how lucky you're when you fall in love. About the emotional rollercoaster it actually is. The absolute loss of control when you meet someone, when you idealize that person. The film sparks off a debate around the issue of feminism. With today’s 'MeToo' climate, of course, But it's a precious thing that there are so many different visions of woman in films, that some might arouse controversy, or bring out tensions. The worse thing would be to have women who are all similar, to have everybody agreeing, it would mean that we've left a norm only to confine ourselves to another. We do not want to see only models of flawless independent women. The situation is interesting because it's vertiginous. Beyond morality, neither black nor white.

(Release Info London schedule: Saturday 27 April 11.00 am - Canterbury | Knutsford | Richmond | Ripon | Soho Sunday 28 April 11.00 am - Colchester | Mayfair | Oxford | Sheffield | Victoria | Wimbledon) "Vox Lux" "Vox Lux" follows the rise of Celeste (Natalie Portman) from the ashes of a major national tragedy to pop superstardom. The film spans 18 years and traces important cultural moments through her eyes, starting in 1999 and concluding in 2017. Beginning in 1999 with a violent mass tragedy, a teenaged Celeste (Raffey Cassidy) is rushed to the hospital, barely surviving a harrowing encounter. With her loyal sister Eleanor (Stacy Martin) by her side, she recovers. After singing at a memorial service, Celeste transforms into a burgeoning pop star with the help of her songwriter sister. The duo puts their grief to song, composing a memorable ballad sung by Celeste that becomes an anthem to an ailing nation. Her parents hire a scrupulous manager (Jude Law) to take her under his wing. Under his tutelage, her career skyrockets to superstardom, with all the vice that comes along. Celeste's meteoric rise to fame and concurrent loss of innocence dovetails with a shattering terrorist attack on the nation, elevating the young powerhouse to a new kind of celebrity; American icon, secular deity, global superstar. As the film enters it's second phase set in 2017, Celeste has grown into her early 30s. She's mounting a comeback after a scandalous incident that derailed her career. Though praised by legions of fans, her private life has been plagued by scandals and addiction, a strained relationship with her sister, and a teenage daughter of her own that she neglected to raise. As the launch of her grand opus looms, she must confront another act of violence. Touring in support of her sixth album, a compendium of sci-fi anthems entitled 'Vox Lux', the indomitable, foul-mouthed pop savior must overcome her personal and familial struggles to navigate motherhood, madness and monolithic fame in 'The Age Of Terror'. The film incisives a character study with a mature sense of style all his own. It's protagonist is a pop star called Celeste and it chronicles key events and cultural patterns that have so far defined the early '21st century' via her gaze. Celeste becomes a symbol of 'The Cult Of Celebrity' and 'The Media Machine' in all it's guts, grit and glory. Her music is a great luxury. But there's a difference in the sort of eco-system that comes, that grows around a pop star. Or if they had been present, in the case of a memoir, has her memory of past experiences not betrayed her? The character feels attacked. So, she lashes out at absolutely everybody. In the scene with her and 'The Journalist' (Christopher Abbott) both have extremely valid perspectives and points of view and she’s mostly in the wrong, in fact. In that moment, the most important thing is not when she says to the journalist, 'You’ve got nothing to be proud of. I don’t share that sentiment remotely'. The most important thing is when she goes, 'You’re right, you’re right', and that’s the reason that moment appears in the film, because she’s consoling herself by basking in a lie, to try to comfort herself. The character of course has a few of those moments where she’s a bit 'Trumpy’ and that’s one of them. And also, this character is suffering with 'PDST'. She’s not really designed to be a monster at all. She’s as much a victim of the era as she's a leader of the era. The film is very much about the fact that 'The 20th Century' was marked by the turn of the banality of people and 'The 21st century' will be defined by the pageantry of people. The film’s themes and the character are intrinsically linked, and so, she’s not a monster. It's about the questions around the psychology of what violence does to individuals and to mass psychology, to group psychology; certainly because of being from a place where people have encountered it for so long. But, unfortunately, it’s been a phenomenon now that, in 'The United States', we experience regularly with the school shootings, which are a type of civil war that we've in 'The US', and of terror in 'The US'. And the psychological impact of what that means for every kid going to school every day, of every parent dropping their kid off every day, and how small acts of violence can create wide-spread psychological torment. There’s a great moment in the film where she says, 'Let’s make it we'. So, her trauma becomes a collective trauma. "Vox Lux" is based on Robert Musil’s book 'The Man Without Qualities', which is about a character whose sort of on the periphery of major events, during the fall of 'The Astro-Hungarian Empire'. There’s an omniscient narrator (William Dafoe) that’s sort of sardonic and the film applies this Robert Musil-style and tone to something contemporary. The film is the continuation of "The Childhood Af A Leader", but on the other side of the century; an historical melodrama set in America between 1999 and 2017. The film connects the life of the protagonist to some major historic events. 1999 was 'Columbine', then we see 'The Twin Towers' in 2001. But this film definitely represents a more corporate brand of fascism. But yeah, we've to see them as being linked in a way for structural reasons and the fact that they're both fables that are sort of defining moments of an era. One in the early part of 'The 20th Century' and this one in the early part of 'The 21st century'. "Vox Lux" demonstrates a more transparent contract with the reader than the traditional historical biography because one is able to access the past without questioning the author about how they could provide such a detailed account of an event without having been present for the event themselves. Featuring original songs by Sia, "Vox Lux" is an origin story about the forces that shape us, as individuals, nations, and gods. The film guides into fearless places in the name of art, finding beauty in the ugliness of the world and daring us to pay attention. It’s a piece of art that's really more of a portrait, and more of a reflection of our society; the intersection of pop culture and violence, and the spectacle that we equate between the two. It's a statement or send an important message to 'The US' about their gun control policies. It makes people feel things that they recognise and that they can see some of things that we’re facing in our society right now. "Vox Lux" chronicles moments that defined 'The 20th century', the last twenty years. We’re all been through a lot. But the truth is, it’s quite a difficult film to speak about because it isn't an attempt to create.anything which is too didactic. It's something that's supposed to be a sort of fable or a poetic rumination of what we’ve all been through for the last twenty years. We live in an age of anxiety. We feel like we’re having more sleepless nights than ever. The film is sort of born of that. It's designed to be where we could all come together and think about it together collectively.

(Glasgow Film Festival: Film At Home; Wed 24 Feb to Sat 27 Feb) https://glasgowfilm.org/glasgow-film-festival/shows/minari-n-c-15 "Minari" It’s 'The 1980s', and David (Alan S. Kim), a seven-year-old 'Korean American' boy, is faced with new surroundings and a different way of life when his father, Jacob (Steven Yeun), moves their family from 'The West Coast' to rural 'Arkansas' in search of their own 'American Dream'. David and his sister Anne (Noel Cho) have mixed feelings about this move; at first excited by their new mobile home, they soon grow bored being in a backwater. His wife, Monica (Yeri Han), is aghast that they live in a mobile home in the middle of nowhere, and naughty little David and Anne are bored and aimless. When his sly, equally mischievous grandmother Soonja (Youn Yuh-jung) arrives from 'Korea' to live with them, her unfamiliar ways arouse David’s curiosity. The arrival of their foul-mouthed, but incredibly loving grandmother brings new energy to the family dynamic, but Jacob’s determination to make it as a successful farmer throws the family’s finances, and it's relationships Meanwhile, Jacob, hell-bent on creating a farm on untapped soil, throws their finances, his marriage, and the stability of the family into jeopardy. Amidst the instability and challenges of this new life in the rugged 'Ozarks', "Minari" shows the undeniable resilience of family and what really makes a home. It all begins as recent 'Korean' arrival Jacob whisks his family from 'California' to 'Arkansas', determined to carve out the rugged independence of farm life, even if it's one on shaky ground in 'The US' of 'The 1980s'. While Jacob sees Arkansas as a land of opportunity, the rest of his clan is flummoxed by their unforeseen move to a new life on a pint-sized piece of land in the far-flung 'Ozarks'. But it's two unlikely family members at opposite ends of the spectrum, wide-eyed, unruly seven-year-old David; and his equally defiant, just-off- the-plane-from-'Korea' grandma Soonja, who start to forge the family’s new path. In the midst of profound change, they clash at first, but soon discover the imperfect but magical bonds that root the family to their past as they reach towards the future. Jacob takes deep pride in his self-reliance while his wife Monica pragmatically tries to keep family life intact amid the chaos Jacob has whipped up with the move. Oldest sister Anne rapidly gains savvy and responsibility as she's handed big, unasked-for responsibilities, while David mischievously tries to repel his newly arrived grandmother Soonja, who upends the fragile peace with her foul-mouthed but perceptive commentary. Then there’s the humor and humanity of Jacob’s employee Paul (Will Patton), a fervent 'Pentecostal' in a perpetual state of repentance. He has a more unusual vision for his life. You root for Jacob because he’s doing this terribly risky thing, taking his family to this crazy place without even consulting them and putting them on the edge of disaster. You could easily despise this guy and not trust him at all. We've to understand of what it’s like to be Jacob, to be thirtysomething and to have kids relying on you but also have this fire to pursue your own ideas of success and happiness. Jacob holds firm to the idea that ultimately David and Anne will benefit from his dream, once the dust settles. But while Jacob’s wife Monica admires his aspirations, that doesn’t mean she can easily embrace life in an 'Arkansas' trailer in the middle of nowhere. She’s anxious about the family’s isolation, and about where her own life and marriage goes from here; even as she transforms their trailer into a place that increasingly feels like home. As "Minari" builds, David witnesses his father’s dream waver on the edge of absurdity, then near catastrophe as it seems the family’s future might literally go up in smoke. David offers an impish, joyful way into complicated memories, but he also offered something else, that open, awed-by-it-all spirit that can illuminate the beautiful strangeness of life. With his lack of language for what it means to be an immigrant, David becomes a conduit for the feeling of an entire unmoored family trying to find their bearings. Conjuring David’s boyish exuberance, angst, and cheekiness is a particular revelation, merging the child and parent within him. There’s a dance going on where David is a creation of two opposing things; out inner memories of being scared, excited, and curious as a kid. An important part of Anne’s character is that she’s serious about caring for the people she loves, There are so many little moments, like when Jacob’s digging the well and David’s sits there looking bored. The film’s momentum completely opens up when Soonja arrives. She’s vulgar and has a wicked sense of humor, but what we find interesting is that quite often salvation comes from someone like that. Somehow, she might embody ideals of tolerance and love more than anyone. For all the tumultuous changes in David’s life, nothing sets off more sparks than the arrival of Soonja, who, much to David’s abject horror, moves into his bedroom, making them instant rivals. To David, Soonja can’t possibly be a real grandmother. She certainly doesn’t bake cookies or tenderly dote. She smells weird, gets a kick out of teasing him, and is as foul-mouthed as anyone he’s met. Nevertheless, in ways David cannot immediately see, he and Soonja share much in common; both are spirited rebels, both are physically vulnerable, and both are linchpins of the family, with Soonja connecting them to where they’ve come from just as David points to an unseen future. And when David pulls a boyish prank on Soonja, hoping that will make her go away, it instead binds them closer as David realizes Soonja understands him better than he could have known. Salvation is more directly sought by the family’s invaluable neighbor, who lends Jacob the help he needs to tend to his crops. This is Paul, a completely committed 'Pentecostal$ who speaks in tongues but doesn’t say much about the reasons he's driven to make so many amends. Even as the ferocity of Paul’s faith is a mystery and at times an affront to Jacob, no one in David’s family can quite shake the strange, poignant beauty of Paul’s kindness to them. The film uses the intensity of Paul’s belief as a means to reveal who he's as a person. Paul is always an important character. The companionship he finds with Jacob speaks to how two people can come from entirely different backgrounds, yet find a closeness rooted simply in shared work. Like Jacob, Paul’s a man living in the gaps. He's alone, misunderstood, and burdened. Jacob relates to that intrinsically, even if he sees himself as a man who believes only in science and hard work. They both have their beliefs, but at core, they’re just two lonely dudes trying to do their thing, which is their connection. Jacob and Paul discover they can simply be themselves. As 'The Arkansas Dream' threatens to dry up and upend each member of the family, the film explores how a family navigates not only the very specific dilemmas of assimilating into rural America but also broader questions of elemental humanity, the gaps we all wrestle with between family ties and independence, faith and skepticism, feeling like an outsider and yearning to belong. Though each character has their own comic plight, there's no judgement or satire. Too often you see people in American films speaking English who would not in their real lives. But the more authentically a film depicts the details of how people really live, the more meaningful it's. There’s a dissonance to speaking 'Korean' at home that you can’t get at any other way. Two human beings trying to exist together is difficult enough, but when you add the pressure that they’re under there are going to be cracks. Just as working his own patch of land is the lure for David’s father to head for Arkansas, so too is the power of the land woven throughout "Minari". This family might speak 'Korean', but their fates are as tied to the potential and peril in 'The American' soil as the characters in John Ford’s "Grapes Of Wrath", George Stevens’ "Giant", William Wyler’s "Big Country", or Terrence Malick’s "Days Of Heaven". There’s a constant level of risk in farming that so few movies let you feel. Named for a peppery 'Korean' herb that thrives best in it's second season, "Minari" is a tender, funny, evocative ode to how one generation of a family risks everything to plant the dreams of the next. The film unspools with all the vividness of a lived memory. While in it's basic outlines "Minari" might seem to be a story we know; a tale of immigrants making a go at their own vision of 'The American Dream; the film brings a fresh and illuminating take. For within the film’s at once playful, powerful, and candidly detailed family remembrances comes a larger story: the impact of the journey on a new generation of young 'Americans'. It's a deeply personal immersion into reconciling two worlds, with boundless affection for both. There’s so much more drawing us together as human beings than the superficial categories we have created. For some, "Minari" might be a chance to see a 'Korean American' finally telling the story, but we've find these characters mean just as much to people from 'Arkansas', or from 'New York', or anywhere. Loving people is a lot of work, and things will go awry at times, but at the end of the day you have that love and it’s real and so meaningful. All people have their masks, all people have their triumphs and their failings.

(Release Info U.K. schedule; February 26th, 2019, Everyman Mailbox Birmingham, 116 Wharfside Street, The Mailbox, Birmingham, West Midlands, B1 1RF, 19:00 PM) "Serenity" The tranquil cerulean waters of a tropical island are known as a vacationer’s paradise, but not to Baker Dill (Matthew McConaughey), a scarred fishing boat captain who earns a living by taking obnoxious tourists game-fishing aboard his twin-engine boat christened ‘Serenity'. To make it worse, 'Serenity' docks in a beachside village called 'Plymouth' whose residents relish a little too much in staying on top of everyone else’s business; an annoyance to someone like Dill who makes it a habit to keep to himself. Dill’s only true companion is his first-mate Duke (Djimon Hounsou), an islander with an ingrained sense of responsibility that's only cultivated with age and hard-work. The two men could make a profitable living if it wasn’t for Dill neglecting his customers due to his obsession with catching a blue fin tuna that continuously eludes his grasp. After another vacationer’s excursion goes awry, Duke reminds Dill that if he intends to salvage their business, he has to give up on his blind obsession of capturing an elusive tuna and give the customers what they want; an escape from the realities and stresses of life. Dill refuses to listen to his friend’s wise advice and instead drowns his sorrows in booze at the local bar or in the arms of Constance (Diane Lane), who offers him solace as well as cash when he can’t quite make ends meet. One day, out of the blue, Dill’s ex-wife Karen Zariakas (Anne Hathaway), who abandoned him years earlier for a wealthy man with suspicious business practices, appears on the island. She reveals that her life has not been idyllic and that their teenage son Patrick (Rafael Sayegh) has become withdrawn, spending all his time playing video games. On top of that, her husband Frank (Jason Clarke) physically abuses her, and she's worried about Patrick’s safety. She wants Dill to take Frank fishing, get him drunk, and push him overboard for the sharks to feed on his corpse. In return, she will pay him ten million dollars. Dill balks at her proposition and refuses to agree. But as visions of his son begin to haunt him and Frank displays his true colors to Dill, Dill starts to re-think Karen’s proposal, despite Duke pressing him not to give in to temptation. What complicates things even more is the appearance of an odd traveling salesman named Reid Miller (Jeremy Strong) and the eerie feeling that the locals know more about Karen and her scheme than they should. While Dill weighs Karen’s unseemly proposal, he slowly begins to realize that things are not all they seem; and uncovering the mystery will determine what he decides to do next. 'Fishermen' are quite obsessive about catching fish, and this film is about someone who’s obsessed about catching a particular fish. Baker Dill is slightly heightened, larger than life, he's a sort of character that doesn’t give off himself too readily, someone who’s closed in. Dill is a guy who has had a life, he was in the army, and he’s washed up on this amazing paradise island, but we need to feel that this is a guy who has really lived a life. He’s not trying to hide from what has gone on in his life, but he certainly wants to protect other people from what was within him. Dill believes that he’s making the choices, and then slowly begins to wonder, ‘Am I actually making these choices or are these choices being imposed upon me'? On the surface it’s about a man who's obsessed with catching a fish, but underneath this storyline are themes of how our realities are created and the power we've in the choices we make. For the character of Dill, the film is inspired by ideas of classic masculinity going all the way back to Bogart or Brando. It's really about playing with the level of truth and grit and masculinity and a refined sensibility. But as the story progresses you realize might be a very truthful reflection of the life that he’s living. Karen is a mother who on the surface seems very gentle and meek, but who underneath is very much a warrior. She's defined by the love for her child and that every decision she makes is for his wellbeing. She presents a lot of questions in how she presents herself, always elegantly, always meticulously. There's a very serious question throughout the movie as to who Karen is. With that audiences would be looking towards Karen’s clothes for answers as to who she really is and what her motives really are. One of the most fun parts of the job is figuring out when to provide clues and figuring out when to make sure that there were no clues. Frank is a character that we hear a lot about before meeting him, so the audience’s expectations are going to be pretty high. By the time we meet him, as a designer, get to sort of play into the audience's expectations of who this man is, and it turns out that he’s quite a snappy dresser. Frank is always impeccably put together, and his costumes are essential to helping audience understand him as a character, the world that he comes from, and the world that he expects to always play around him. The character of Duke is actually based on a real person. He's the first mate on the boat. Duke is the emotional, spiritual core of the movie. He's a man whose entire appearance has to convey his humility and his simplicity, but also to play with color in a way that makes Duke one of more vibrant figures in "Serenity". He's really saturated. Duke is an incredibly important counterbalance to the kind of washed out world that the movie creates. "Serenity" is set somewhere in the tropics on a fictional island called 'Plymouth'. 'Mauritius' is sort of undiscovered in terms of movie making because it has only recently opened up it's doors. In other words, 'Mauritius' could be 'India', 'The Caribbean', 'Africa', or it could be 'France' depending on where you're and in terms of the ethnic make up of the people. Everyone is here, everyone is mixed and everyone seems to rub along together nicely. Being in 'Mauritius' is a huge factor in understanding the looks of 'Plymouth'. The characters are on a tropical island in the middle of 'The Indian Ocean'. It’s incredibly beautiful, the ocean is crystal blue, the weather is heavenly and the sand is powdery white sand. The people of 'Mauritius' are very specific. They're incredibly generous and peaceful. In seeing the way they dress, living a true island life, has definitely informed my understanding of how life might be on 'Plymouth'. The film incorporates 'Mauritius' and the understanding of some of the character’s attitudes, relaxing things a little bit and dialing back any contemporary references. When you’re here, you realize that on an island you’re living in your own world. Shooting on a boat is very difficult, as it's very slow and expensive, and there are issues with weather and inconsistencies in the light as well as the water. The unique advantage of shooting in 'Mauritius' is that it’s a volcanic island surrounded by a reef. However, because Mauritius reef gives a lagoon effect that's only two meters deep, it almost entirely mimics the physical characteristics of a tank Effectively, you've this gigantic tank and the reef acts as the line between the still water and the ocean water, which is exactly how you shoot in a tank. We're in a fictitious tropical location, and we don’t know where that place is narratively, but the film uses 'Mauritius' and all it's physical attributes to build that world. It’s an intriguing mélange of the actual appearance, what you can see on the screen. There's the real level and there's the subconscious level and there the deep level. Mauritius offered up a lot of opportunities because of the isolation of the island. It means that it has got a lot of intensity, from the mountains you see behind the rivers, to the coastline, and then the beautiful cities and shorelines, and the fishing. The film works with bold colors, but to control it so it isn't garish. The sunlight is very strong and the film deals with a lot of primary colors. Overall, it’s about retaining some of the beautiful primary aspect to the island, but just taking the edge off that so it’s not an oversaturation. While not a traditional noir thriller, "Serenity" certainly pays homage to classic films of the genre as well as literature. In terms of dialogue and setting and mood, it's a conscious nod to Ernest Hemingway and Graham Greene, absolutely. It also references to some of the classic movies of the ‘40s and ‘50s. What's really fun about designing consumes for "Serenity" is that there's a duality to all the characters, to their stories, to their world and their understanding of their predicaments. The film approaches it from the truth that the characters found themselves in and also the archetypes that would have informed the way the characters like these may have been seen in movies of the past, including especially the classic noir movies. It's really using the classic noir movies, Humphrey Bogart and Lauren Bacall, and asking how they might be translated into a contemporary esthetic. At first glance "Serenity" is the story of a fisherman’s obsession with catching a fish, but the film wants audiences to see it on a deeper level; people can choose to view it as a conventional thriller or they can choose to view it as something else. The film is interested, on various levels, in good people doing bad things for a good reason, which is what happens in this film. It's also about the idea of choice and free will, it’s impossible to resolve whether we've them. Because once you’ve made a choice, that’s it and that choice, is it always going to be there or did you choose it? You know, a fable has a moral to the end of the tale and the film deals with the game of life, and the long-term view of what it's to win and connections that go beyond life and death, love and the end of love.

(Release Info London schedule; September 26th, 2018, Gate Theatre, 18:30) "The Wife" After nearly forty years of marriage, Joan Castleman (Glenn Close) and Joe Castleman (Jonathan Pryce) are complements. Where Joe is brash, Joan is shy. Where Joe is casual, Joan is elegant. Where Joe is vain, Joan is self-effacing. And where Joe enjoys his very public role as 'Great American Novelist', Joan pours her considerable intellect, grace, charm, and diplomacy into the private role of 'Great Man’s Wife', keeping the household running smoothly, the adult children in close contact, and Joe’s pills dispensed on schedule. At times, a restless discontentment can be glimpsed beneath Joan’s smoothly decorous surface, but her natural dignity and keen sense of humor carry her through the rough spots. It’s 1993, and Joe is about to be awarded 'The Nobel Prize' for his acclaimed and prolific body of work. Joe’s literary star has blazed since he and Joan first met in the late 1950s, when she was a demure Smith student and he, her married creative writing teacher. From 1960 to 1993 to our present vantage point of 2018, we observe Joan and Joe Castleman in the context of their times, and ours. En route to Stockholm for 'The Nobel Prize' ceremonies, Joan and Joe are accompanied by their son David (Max Irons), an aspiring writer in his twenties who feels that Joe belittles his work. Sulky and resentful, David wears his wounded heart on his sleeve. There’s another man on board who also wants something from Joe; Nathaniel Bone (Christian Slater), a journalist who plans to write the definitive biography of Joseph Castleman, authorized or not. To crusty, arrogant Joe, Nathaniel’s just a pest to be brushed off, but to Joan, making an enemy of Nathaniel is a risky matter. As always, she’s the conciliator between Joe and David, Joe and Nathaniel. Amid the nonstop round of ceremonial festivities in Stockholm, Joan and Joe are swept into familiar, long-worn roles; Joe is flattered and schmoozed, while Joan stands by his side wearing her quiet smile and flinching only slightly at 'no, Joan’s not a writer. As we see in flashback to Joan and Joe’s early days in the late ‘50s, Joan not only had her own writing aspirations, she had the talent and the looks to capture the attention of her teacher, Joe. A caustic encounter with Elaine Mozell (Elizabeth McGovern), an embittered novelist, gives Joan a warning preview of the obscurity awaiting the lady writer, no matter how talented. As Joan and Joe embark on a love affair, it fits a certain literary template of the time; she’s the well- bred WASP-y daughter of bland privilege, he’s the scrappy Jewish striver with the Brooklyn accent and the edgy stories to tell. With Joe’s first marriage busted up, they live the bohemian life in a 'Greenwich Village' walk-up. Joan gets a job at a publishing house, encountering enough casual sexism to squelch her own ambitions but spotting a chance to forward Joe’s career as the next hot young discovery. Thus is established the self-sacrificing partnership that continues right up to the Nobel gathering decades later. Another familiar, long-worn dynamic plays out in Stockholm as Joe is trailed by an attractive young woman photographer assigned to document Joe’s every public moment. Joan recognizes the predictable progression of flirtation and indiscretion that she has stoically overlooked through so many years of Joe’s serial infidelities. This time, Joan’s had enough. Serving Joe notice that she wants no place on a pedestal as his passive muse; matching wits with a prying Nathaniel Bone; letting her own grievances flare, for once, instead of smoothing over everyone else’s problems; Joan finally reaches for self-determination. The Castleman marriage and literary legend will never be the same. What are the compromises that we make in a marriage and a great partnership? Are there secrets that we keep as a couple that are legitimate? As a husband, how do you respect and love your wife? "The Wife" examines forty years of give and take between literary lion Joe Castleman, and the person who knows him best, supports him steadfastly, resents him deeply, and possibly loves him anyway; his wife Joan. The character of Joan Castleman is a deeply contained, elegant and shy woman who has taken the back seat to her brilliant husband. Joe’s anger and narcissism and infidelities are driven by inadequacy and insecurity and feeling emasculated. Through different times and different mores; from the 1950s and ‘60s of the Castlemans’ youth, to the 1990s of their mature relationship and it's high-profile crisis moment at 'The Nobel Prize' award ceremony, and up to our current-day perspective, we observe two talented and ambitious lifelong partners reckoning with power dynamics between men and women that continue to bedevil us today. It’s a timeless but also very timely subject. Could we possibly sustain the kind of bargain that Joe and Joan Castleman sustained for forty years? Whatever our contemporary take may be on the sexual politics at work in the Castleman marriage, it’s all about the grey areas. This isn’t an easy black-and-white story. Ultimately, it’s about power, the power that Joan gives up and finally reclaims. It's hard for us to imagine what it's like to be in that world where women weren't expected to achieve high things the way men were. Joan may be part of the generation of our mothers and grandmothers, but her struggles with creativity, motherhood, and fulfillment ring out clearly to us today. She has the soul of an artist, the curiosity, the focus, the wildly fertile imagination. But her lack of confidence is part of the cultural climate. "The Wife" is adapted by Jane Anderson from the Meg Wolitzer novel of the same name. Meg’s novel tells a story that's so subversive about what it means to be a female writer. Our industry is now willing to embrace films that are driven by a female protagonist. "The Wife" interweaves the midcentury story of the couple’s youthful passion and ambition with a portrait of a marriage, thirty-plus years later, a lifetime’s shared compromises, secrets, betrayals, and genuine, mutual love. It's the story of a long, complicated marriage affords great actors the chance to reflect all the knots and nuances of their brainy, funny, perplexing, deeply compromised, but deeply compelling characters. This film is like music; two instruments playing a duet. The story unfolds in various timelines, often in flashback, and in three different locales. You've a puzzle to solve, how much are you influenced by reality and the recreation of a period, and how much can you explore it, and then make it your own. At times we’ve tried to absolutely replicate certain things, and other times we’ve just taken it as a guide, then we've gone off and done what we want. So much talent marshalled to tell a story about so much talent has yielded a film to admire. The film conveys the dance of marriage, the compromises made, the agonies lived through, and the familiarity of two people who've known each other intimately for a very long time, but they also address some fundamental, pressing questions about men, women and power.

(London Film Festival, October 11th, 2019, Vue West End, 3 Cranbourn St, Leicester Square, London WC2H 7AL, United Kingdom, 18:00 pm) https://whatson.bfi.org.uk/lff/Online/default.asp?BOparam::WScontent::loadArticle::permalink=givemeliberty&BOparam::WScontent::loadArticle::context_id= "Give Me Liberty" Victor (Chris Galust), a hapless young 'Russian American', drives a handicapped transport in Milwaukee. He shares an appartement with his grandfather Steve (Steve Wolski). Already late on a day when street protests break out, Vic reluctantly agrees to ferry his grandfather and a dozen elderly Russians to a funeral, but they’re distressed when he stops first in a predominantly 'African American' neighborhood to pick up Tracy (Lauren Spencer), a black woman with 'ALS'. On the verge of being fired, Vic’s day goes from bad to worse. The central character is a driver in Milwaukee who would be driving around a number of people with disabilities or people from just different walks of life. The medical transport driver job has a lot of hilarious, touching, wonderful, moving stories. And that's the starting point of the story. A wild slew of hilarious characters, combining comedy and investigation; almost like a detective story and love story and road movie with the main character driving the van, but some revisions later it became a day-in-the-life of this character Vic. He possesses this animal charisma that translates into any culture. He's formidable physically. Dima (Max Stoianov) is basically a fighter with a one-million-dollar smile, who walks into the room and just charms everyone. He has the physique of a boxer, boxer charisma, all the qualities of a person who would charm every member of the audience within five minutes. And being from a Russian, or 'Soviet', background. We just didn’t know where to turn. All of a sudden, we're receiving headshots of metrosexuals from New York who just want to look tough with a three-day stubble but nothing else to show for themselves other than clearly going to the gym every day and mixing it with yoga. We just didn’t imagine at the time how we would gather the right professional talent from all over the nation, given our resources and given our task. It’s probably easier to write characters than to find them sometimes. Set in Milwaukee, with locally cast non-actors, the film creates a genuine atmosphere of chaos without having the entire production fall apart. A group of non-English-speaking octogenarians, people with disabilities, a multi-ethnic local non-professional cast, and a few Russian-based actors. Let’s top that off with a 'VAN', the film’s main location, crammed with cast and crew location that doesn’t stop cruising at 40-75mph through America’s most-segregated city. To sum it up, in order to create the right sense of chaos in film, a form of controlled chaos needed to be invented; the kind that would allow us to be blessed with the spontaneous and the sublime. It’s refreshing to set a movie in an American city that isn’t Atlanta or Louisiana, or whichever state is currently offering the best tax incentives. The city of Milwaukee is very inspiring. People outside of Milwaukee can't wrap their heads around Milwaukee either. But it's an interesting city in many respects. It’s the backbone of America. It’s a historical American city. It’s a segregated city with a lot of ethnic history that retains it's authenticity in 2018, which can’t be said for a lot of cities in America. It has it's own character, it's own mood. It's seasonal changes. There’s a quiet beauty to it, which is not as obvious as, say, New York, for instance. A raw, inventive 'Day In The Life Story' about marginalized characters encountering literal and figurative roadblocks. A charming, comedic look at ordinary people and a rigged system, "Give Me Liberty" has a flavor of 'The Czech New Wave', using a supremely light touch, wry dissent, nonprofessional actors, and unscripted moments. It's heart and soul rests in wonderful moments of impromptu interaction that are so genuine and contain a universe of compassion and understanding. "Give Me Liberty" deals with the concept of 'The American Dream". Those who are really happy to announce the death of 'The American Dream' fundamentally don’t care about it and do not understand it. Certain political issues are touched upon without being touched upon. We're talking about things without talking about them. And this is great that this question is there. 'The American Dream' is not something that's here waiting for you. 'The American Dream' is something that people who come to America must bring with them. 'That’s 'The American Dream'. So if you come here and say 'The American Dream' is gone, well then you didn’t bring it with you. Because 'The American Dream' is only dead if it’s dead within you. It’s not out there, it’s not sitting there waiting to be grabbed. In this sense, we're all idealists. We really believe in this country, as imperfect as it may be, as every country is. Certain things we strongly dislike, certain things we admire. It’s a wonderful place. 'The American Dream' is a big part of the foundation upon which the house of 'Give Me Liberty' is built. It's this concern for the idealism, the fading of which we lament in America. And it comes through in a subtle way, that this is part of the palette of America today; we've people from different walks of life, of different colors, of different ages, of different desires, in this small van, shuttling through one of the most segregated places in America, through a turbulent time of an extreme liberal and conservative divide, and yet none of it's there on that shuttle. What we've on that shuttle is just a motley crew of humanity! A motley crew of humanity who finds their common denominator. Whether it’s at the cemetery, you know, they’ve gotta go to the cemetery, they’ve gotta go to 'The Eisenhower Center', they’ve gotta go to all these places, but they end up sitting at the same table celebrating life and embracing it as it's. Because at the end of the day, as pathetic as it may seem, as infused with pathos as it may sound, it’s about honoring people in the frame, people who are trying to the best of their ability to live their lives with dignity. But what we've today is nothing short of destiny. We need to be practical, but we also cannot negate the spiritual side of this profession. We respect it a lot. We understand that things like inspiration, the metaphysical tissue of the matter, they’re important! To deny it, to not acknowledge that, would be foolish.

(London Film Festival, October 13th, 2018/Picturehouse Central, 20:45) (Release Info London schedule; November 6th, 2018/Picturehouse Central, 18:30) "Wildlife" Fourteen-year-old Joe (Ed Oxenbould), is the only child of Jeanette (Carey Mulligan) and Jerry Brinson (Jake Gyllenhaal), a housewife and a golf pro, in a small town in 1960s Montana. Nearby, an uncontrolled forest fire rages close to the Canadian border, and when Jerry loses his job, and his sense of purpose, he decides to join the cause of fighting the fire, leaving his wife and son to fend for themselves. Suddenly forced into the role of an adult, Joe witnesses his mother’s struggle as she tries to keep her head above water. But Jerry can't deal with his new, secondary role. He takes on a badly paid job fighting fires in the neighbouring hills, which fuels the conflict at home. Joe can only watch helplessly as his family seems set to self-destruct. Awakening her fiery spirit and charm, Jeannette convinces the local 'YMCA' to give her a job as a swimming instructor. Joe, for his part, lands a gig at a local photography studio. Too prideful to look for work in town, Jerry instead joins in fighting the nearby wildfires. Alone for the first time in years, Jeannette finds herself with more independence than she can deal with. When she's befriended by one of her students, she begins to question her circumstances and her choices. Cautious and curious, Joe must learn how to navigate the complex dynamics of adult relationships and decide what to make of the woman who used to just be Mom. As simmering tensions begin to boil, the Brinsons must decide if their family is worth saving. "Wildlife" is elegantly adapted from Richard Ford’s novel of the same name. Actor Paul Dano makes an impressive debut as a filmmaker and Carey Mulligan delivers one of her finest performances to date as Jeanette, a complex woman whose self-determination and self-involvement disrupts the values and expectations of a 1960s nuclear family. It's about a kid seeing his parents change and their marriage break, and through his parent's failures, having to grow up. It's a coming of age story for all three: mother, father, and son. While it's about struggle and heartbreak and disillusionment, it's a film guided by love. It's a family portrait as a means of acceptance, and of letting go. With precise details and textures of it's specific time and place, "Wildlife" commits to the viewpoint of a teenage boy observing the gradual dissolution of his parent's marriage. This is a film about family. There's an extraordinary amount of love. There's also incredible turbulence. "Willlife" opens a window to that duality. It's an uncanny feeling of sharing an inner life with this book. Establish your own values, means, goal; leave the book behind so it doesn’t get in the way, and where it’s safest. The film explores feelings, ask questions about family and parents. To explore a loss of hope, a family unraveling, and then finally surviving. How even when the worst thing happens, we can still survive. We can still be family. We may never be the same, but we still have love. And we still have our lives to live. Cinematographer Diego Garcia's clean aesthetic, the film's authentic period design and Dano's precise, mannered direction ground the film in time and place, bringing focus to the characters. Dano chooses for his version a coming-of-age story, set in the postwar 'American Midwest', told through a feminist lens. The film strikes the meaning and the cost of 'The American Dream'. "Wildlife" paints a portrait of a family and an America ready to explode. "Wildlife" is made with a sensitivity and at a level of craft that are increasingly rare in movies.