Search Results

It’s a satellite phone. How did this get in my purse? While looking at the film poster, the first thing I thought was: “Wow, Halle Berry has a thing for films about kidnapping”. First, there was “The Call“. And then at the beginning of the year, I saw “Kidnap“. And now it’s a film about human trafficking. In particular, the kidnapping of young women who then end up in a network of prostitution and terrible abuse. But soon I realized I was completely wrong. The woman in question wasn’t Halle Berry. But damn, she looks disturbingly a lot like Halle. Now, I didn’t like “Kidnap” very much. To be honest I thought it was outright irritating at times. This film is, despite another protagonist (Paula Patton), of the same level. That surprise weekend will become a fiasco. The acting in itself wasn’t that bad at all. Perhaps a bit simplistic and predictable, but certainly not annoying. Only some stupid decisions were made again. But that’s typical for these kinds of films, I suppose. Lovebirds Brea (Paula Patton) and John (Omar Epps) are both nice looking persons and form a beautiful couple. When John arrives one day with a classic car as a birthday present and takes Brea on a surprise weekend, you already know this very peaceful scene is doomed to turn into a fiasco. Where’s this phone coming from?. First, they are being harassed by a motor gang in a gas station. Next, their fantastic weekend full of love and eroticism is ruined the moment super-jerk Darren (Laz Alonso), someone with an ego problem and an agent for sports stars, shows up. And as icing on the cake, there’s a satellite phone, with a series of disturbing pictures of abused young women, inexplicably ending up in Brea’s handbag. I’m not impressed. If only they’d stuck to the idea of making a disconcerting film about sex trafficking, it might have been interesting. But turning it into some kind of Hollywood spectacle, with story twists you could see coming from half a world away and an improbable denouement, wasn’t such a hot idea. Human trafficking is a deadly serious subject and a despicable type of crime that needs to be tackled seriously. The fact they try to make people aware of this widespread problem, I can accept. But in the end, this was nothing more than a cheap B-movie about the abuse and exploitation of women in networks. “You were not really here” also brings up this issue, but there it concerns networks with minors. And that message was loud and clear. “Traffik” just uses the cheap solution of showing statistics about the number of women abducted in the US. In other words, I wasn’t really impressed by this film. My rating 4/10 Links: IMDB More reviews here

Scott Pilgram Vs The World is a Edgar Wright cult classic starring Michael Cera as Scott Pilgrim, a loser who plays base for a band started in a living room with some friends. Now off the cuff nothing really special about what I’ve just described right? Wrong, upon first view, the opening credits hints at exactly what type of movie you are about to watch. We are introduced to Scott (24 yrs) via a highly inappropriate romantic relationship with 17 year old school girl Knives Chau (Ellen Wong). She seems to adore Scott and his friends comment of his decision to date a high school girl following his previous failed relationship, we’ll speak on that later. As the opening scene introduces us to his band (Sex Bob-omb) we witness the stylistic choice Edgar Wright chooses to use for this film. Based off a comic of the same name by Bryan Lee O’Malley, Wright emphasises on comic style imagery, scene transitions and character direction to make it feel as if you were reading a comic book rather than watching a film. As mentioned earlier, the opening opening scene transitions from sex bob-omg simply rehearsing one of their songs into it being the theme song for the opening credits. I am a big fan of Wright’s direction style with his filmography including some of my all time favourite movies (Cornetto Trilogy, Attack the Block), but on this occasion I truly believe he was able to find a perfect balance of comedy with total insanity. The premise of this movie is Scott who is currently in a relationship with Knives meets Ramona Flowers, a delivery girl with a weird taste in hair dye, he becomes infatuated with her and ultimately woo’s her with his strange ways. Unbeknown to him, Ramona has 7 exes, and in order for Scott to truly be with her, he must overcome them, via combat. As Scott encounters all 7 exes, he is faced with having to dig deep and find something within himself to overcome each obstacle. The film follows the narrative in from the comics, with Scott having to fight both male and female exes, and the fight scenes are styled as if you were playing a fighting game like Tekken or Street Fighter, with Scott earning points for combos, there being a consistent trend of someone shouting ‘Fight’ prior to the beginning off every bout and Scott earning a reward if when he defeats each opponent. Wright is able to fuse the comical elements, expertly delivered by Cera, with the dramatic plot of Scott’s fascinations with Ramona, the first fight includes a sing and dance number, something that would seem preposterous on paper but turned out great and fitted with the narrative of the insane world Scott has been thrown into. At first all that is happening seems to confuse Scott and he shows no seriousness towards what is happening, but as he begins to understand that in order for him to get his girl, this is what he must do, we begin to see a shift in Scott from a goofy character to one determined to win at all costs. The film starts to slow a little bit towards the middle of the second act , in which Scott has to fight a movie star, a lesbian ex lover, a super hero vegan, twins who happen to be DJ’s and the final ex Gideon Graves (Jason Schwartzman). Some would ask what exactly it is about Ramona that makes Scott willing to go so far to get her, and from their on screen chemistry, it doesn’t exactly scream comparable. Ramona is often very introverted, mild mannered and quiet, the contrast of Knives, not Scott’s ex, who is outspoken, animated and naive to say the least. This decision to have both women in Scott’s life be the antithesis of each other is a ploy used by the screenwriter to explore Scott’s mental state, dos he want to stay a child, living a stone’s throw away from his childhood home, sharing a mattress with his best friend or does he want to ‘grow up’ an repeated rhetoric lambasted at him by his sister and close friends? This film examines at what point we all must develop an inner monologue about who we are and set standards for ourselves as we look to grow and develop as individuals. By the end of the movie, Scott is tasked with facing the final ex and the ‘Boss Villian’ in gaming terms, Gideon Graves. Graves has somehow been able to manipulate Ramona into dumping Scott and and returning to him, along with signing Sex Bob-Omb (minus Scott) to play for him. It seems like Scott is lower than ever, but the third act delivers Scott’s redemption as he able to harness not the power of ‘Love’ (He tried that and had to restart the level, another game reference), but the power of ‘Self respect’. At the end of the movie and comics Scott ends up with none other than Knives, as he comes to understand that although their relationship may have seemed inappropriate on first glance (Age difference), Scott was enjoyed being with her, he enjoyed quoting obscure facts nobody cared about, he enjoyed playing video games with her and he loved the fact she cared so much about his ambitions to be part of a great band. Whereas, with Ramona it was just an obsession with a girl he had no real connection or compatibility with. Scott Pilgram Vs The World poses that same question to the viewer, are you someone willing to stick with something that might seem inconvenient to you at the time or are you willing to sacrifice your happiness for what you would perceive as a more overtly satisfying relationship in which compatibility is out of the question? The witty dialogue and comedic moments shine at the hands of Edgar Wright and for me its no surprise this film in the last 7 years has build a massive cult following. Although not a smash in the domestic box office, racking in just over $31M from a $85M budget, it has since garnered the acclaim it rightly deserves with many praising Wright for his forward thinking and stylistic decisions. I would suggest giving this movie a watch with some friends and can guarantee a laugh, if not a cheer for our nerdy protagonist. Check out the trailer for Scott Pilgrim Vs the World below.

Maybe it’s time for someone like me… to come over there and wipe that smug grin off your face. You know what’s fun sometimes? Haphazardly starting a film without knowing what it is about and afterward admitting you were pleasantly surprised. That’s my experience with this film. A film with a bit of suspense and tension. And thanks to the short playing time you don’t have the feeling it was a waste of time. Even though it isn’t a blockbuster. It’s also the first time that I didn’t feel sorry for the two teenagers Sam (Gregg Sulkin) and Brady (Garrett Clayton). In this movie, these two spoiled, annoying brats reap what they have sown. And the whole time I was expecting the rest of the gang to pop up suddenly and announce it was all one big joke. Extremeprank calls. Like many others, I found the two main actors irritating. But then you have to admit their acting was masterful. Because wasn’t that the whole point? After all, they are two obnoxious young boys who pull pranks on others. They make extreme prank calls. The only thing I couldn’t believe was the fact that those pranks were watched so massively after posting them online. Is that a reflection of what our society is evolving into? A society where gloating is self-evident? A mid-level psychological horror. “Don’t hang up” is a low-budget film. That’s noticeable. Everything takes place mainly in the parental home of Sam. The camera work is uncomplicated but to-the-point. Besides a camera moving through the set in a penetrating way, it generally looks mediocre. It gets bloody in this film, but the used “practical effects” don’t look spectacular either. And yet this film was worth a watch and can easily be added to a whole series of other films from the same mid-level. Yes, I have gloated. Because of the short playing time, the pace is swift in this movie and you don’t have to wait long before the unwanted caller turns up. And still despite the pace, one manages to increase the tension gradually. The sinister caller has a rather frightening voice (a Jigsaw-like tone), which in turn makes it extra creepy. His technological omnipotence was slightly exaggerated though. And despite the fact that it’s about pretty arrogant and unsympathetic youth, I found the friendship and expression of sacrifice commendable. But all in all, I couldn’t avoid to gloat and a convincing inner “Yes!” resounded at the end. My rating 6/10 More reviews here

(Curzon Home Cinema, Available 24 September) "Gagarine" Youri (Alséni Bathily), 16, has lived all his life in 'Gagarine Cité', a vast red brick housing project on the outskirts of 'Paris'. From the heights of his apartment, he dreams of becoming an astronaut. But the plans to demolish his community’s home are leaked, Youri joins the resistance. With his friends Diana (Lyna Khoudri) and Houssam (Jamil McCraven), he embarks on a mission to save 'Gagarine', transforming the estate into his own starship; before it disappears into space forever. The huge, red-brick 'Cité Gagarine' housing project, boasting 370 apartments, was built in the early sixties in 'Ivry-sur-Seine', one of the communist municipalities that formed a red belt around 'Paris'. At the time, highrise buildings were shooting up in order to clear the slums on the outskirts of 'The French Capital'. In June 1963, Yuri Gagarin, the first man in space, came to inaugurate 'The Cité' that bore his name. Within decades, however, these collective utopias had become neighborhoods that were often stigmatized and slated for sweeping urban renovation. In 2014, the decision was made to demolish 'Cité Gagarine'. The inhabitants were gradually rehoused, leaving 'Cité Gagarine' as an empty shell. The families left, taking their stories of lives of toil, migration, hope and disappointment with them. On August 31, 2019, the demolition machines moved in, watched by the former inhabitants. The film was shot on the cusp of the actual demolition of 'The Cité Gagarine' housing project in collaboration with it's residents in 'Ivry-sur-Seine'. One day Yuri Gagarin came to inaugurate the project in the sixties. A completely surrealist scene, with the first man in space returning from his mission and winding up in a housing project on the outskirts of Paris. You see the new inhabitants eyes, their outsize hopes of this place and this man. The cosmonaut and the building are symbols of hope and progress. That footage opens the film. The film.wants Youri to be impregnated by that, steeped in that heroic past, so that his space dream is born out of his home. Symbolically, the building is his mother’s belly, which he refuses to leave. It feels like there are two main characters in the film; a teenager and a building. Youri, the teen, and 'Gagarine', the building, are in a non-stop dialogue with one another. His parents Gérard (Denis Lavant) and Marie (Meta Mutela) moving into the housing project before his birth. Youri was raised there and developed an imagination the equal of the massive highrise. The prospect of it's disappearance means, for him, the death of his childhood memories and dreams. It also means losing his beloved community. The film gives a positive vision of a place and generation that are often caricatured. Youri loves his neighborhood. For him, 'Gagarine Cité' is not an outdated utopia, it’s his present, and the soil of his future. Leaving means losing everything: abandoning his family and his imaginary world. So he takes up resistance to alter the perception of the place and people, it’s as if you chose duality. Everything about Youri has another side, loner but always connected to people, attached to the past, but steeped in hyper-modernity. Youri is balanced. Roots in the housing project, but head in the stars, constantly navigating between dream and reality, between the place’s past and present. Like when a love affair comes to an end, as the prospect of demolition loomed ahead, there's a spurt of activity throughout the project. The film witnesses the inhabitants unfurling their wings. We discover a deep-rooted sense of community that the film infuses into the protagonist. It’s Youri’s family, it’s Houssam, his best friend, it’s Fari (Farida Rahouadj), a neighborhood activist who looks out for tenants around her, and it’s lots of people from one window to the next, who are connected, and whose lives echo up to Youri on the roof through the chimneys. He's full of very restrained love for them. What Youri is experiencing is tough. He symbolizes excluded youth, hurt by that abandonment, and withdrawing in on itself. Part of Youri’s struggle with growing up comes from his circumstances sapping his confidence. Youri sees his home as a spaceship. It's not.too sterile or clinical, but alive, grimy, and organic, because Youri builds the capsule with found objects. He goes through deserted apartments, collecting things the tenants left behind, anything that might come in handy. Each object is repurposed to become part of the capsule. It’s riffing on this idea of Youri walking a high wire between celestial bum and astronaut. Once again, life informed art. Despite the building’s scheduled demise, he tries to keep it alive at all costs. When he gives up, other forms of life step up. In the capsule, there are all kinds of plants. The vegetable world takes over. Through them, the visual and aural universe evolves into something more aquatic. A lot of noise disappears, replaced by sounds that are transformed, becoming increasingly strange until they disappear. Sound does not travel in space. The idea is to follow a trajectory that starts with roiling reality and moves toward silence. Telling a story of life up to the ultimate moment of Youri’s ejection from his building into the cosmos. There, in the vacuum, there's no sound. Symbolically, a journey in sound from life to death. Youri is a loner but not alone. Women play an important role in the film, and a very different role than the one usually accorded them. Through them, Youri accesses technology. The example of Diana springs to mind. Like Youri, Diana wants to understand how things work. That guides her. Compared to him, however, she has a very practical and concrete vision of things. She’s a mechanic. She can fix anything. The character of Diana comes out of something that struck us very forcefully. At the foot of 'The Gagarine Tower' blocks, there are Roma camps stretching out. Vertical and horizontal planes that never intersected. There are no points of crossover between those two worlds. The film witnesses an encounter between two people from those two places. Two characters rejected by society, who nonetheless affirm themselves by fabricating their own world and their own tools. 'Gagarine Cité' has now been demolished. It exists only in the film. The film is also a tool of remembrance, bearing witness to the architectural vision of the period, and above all to the people who brought the place alive. They're everywhere in the film, in visual and sound archives, on screen and behind the camera. The film shows that the building is important but in the end what’s left is the people. Their relationship to the place endures whatever happens. That’s what the film.captures and convey. Holding out a mirror that reflects the beauty and complexity of those lives. Politically, it’s urgent to revisit how people see this bountiful and diverse younger generation, which is often portrayed with negative images, as having no future. Those clichés do a lot of damage. They must be torn down! Grandparents, their children and grandchildren; three generations and multiple views on life and a single location. When you demolish a place, you destroy family histories. Magical realism is everywhere in France. The tempo of the directing is driven by that balance between realism and oneirism. The magical dimension allows the film to approach reality and it's violence from another angle. Introducing a form of magical realism facilitated the creation of a back-and-forth between the real and the imaginary, and navigation between the collapse of the character and the building and zero-gravity. We believe in the power of images to sway people’s visions of themselves. It’s what opens up imaginations.

The German doctor, he believes the tar in the ground has some kind of a power. He calls it his science. But it’s just an excuse to kill us. When I watched the movie “Trench 11” at the end of last year, I already said this might be the cheaper version of “Overlord“. The starting point was identical. In “Trench 11” it’s a group of soldiers who had to search an abandoned bunker of the Germans. There were rumors the Germans conducted experiments there. The Germans tried to fabricate a chemical product so they could create invincible storm troops and thus conquer the rest of the non-German-Friendly world. The biggest difference between “Overlord” and “Trench 11” is the choice of world war. In “Trench 11” they were wallowing in the trenches during World War I. “Overlord” takes place during the 2nd World War. That means a lot of raised hands and loud clacking of heels. But the rest is actually similar. A film that shows the madness of a filthy war and mixes this with non-human creatures with the madness flowing through their veins. It’s D-Day all over again. Operation Overlord was the code name for the invasion by the Allies in German-occupied Western Europe. Obviously, that’s where the film got its title from. And that’s also where this film begins. A swarm of flying fortresses on their way to France to drop a load of paratroopers. It seemed as if I was watching “The Longest Day” back again. Even the ritual with the agreed code words “Flash” and “Thunder” is used in this movie (I missed the clicking though). The opening scene is still impressive and reminds you of legendary WWII films such as “Saving Privat Ryan” (although the first 15 minutes of the latter were obviously more impressive). First, it’s a genuine war-movie The first part is therefore entirely devoted to the mission of a few American paratroopers. The task they need to complete is disabling a radio tower somewhere in a French village. An extremely important assignment, it seems, It sounds far-fetched but the success of the entire invasion depends on it apparently. From the group of soldiers Boyce (Jovan Adepo), Ford (Wyatt Russell, son of) and Tibbet (John Magaro) take center stage. Boyce is the wimp. An inexperienced soldier who’s regarded by the others as useless. Ford is the leading officer who has to make sure the operation succeeds. A gut-eater avant la lettre. And Tibbet is the bigmouth of them all who brags about his sniper qualities. Something that he wants to put into practice in Berlin. He’ll put a bullet through Hitler’s head and thus end this world war rapidly. And then the horror kicks in. Their path crosses that of Chloe (Mathilde Olivier), a French resistance fighter who wants to take revenge on the German occupiers of her village. Understandable, since those Germans systematically use the inhabitants of the village as test animals. Including Chloe’s parents. From here, the film gradually transforms into a horror/zombie film. Not that it’s all so scary or nerve-racking. In my opinion “Overlord” is nothing more than a typical war film in which a commando, with a specific mission, not only battles German troops but also non-human opponents. So be prepared for lots of veined bloodthirsty creatures, blown away or crushed body parts and gallons of blood. Pulp War/Horror Movie. I wasn’t really impressed by this film. For me, it’s just a more expensive, slick version of “Trench 11“. Maybe I was misled by the trailer. The trailer suggested it would be a blood-curdling zombie movie. Ultimately, the film shows the horror of this world war in a proper way. And there are also a bunch of crazy Nazi doctors who try to create an Übermensch. Something similar as when General Ludendorff sniffs some kind of chemical stuff in “Wonder Woman“, after which he suddenly has superhuman powers. In short, “Overlord” is a pulp war/horror movie. It’s great material to create some kind of videogame from. It isn’t very original and certainly disappointing for the seasoned horror fanatic. But this much I can say. It isn’t boring. On the contrary. It’s entertaining enough. And it’s been expertly put together. It’s worth a look for sure. My rating 6/10 Links: IMDB

Since early December 2017, you couldn’t escape the empowering anthem, This Is Me from the soundtrack to 2017’s, The Greatest Showman. From radio stations to supermarkets, the song was inescapable, as was other forms of marketing for the upcoming film release. And after initially passing it off as another desperate Oscar baiting film, I sat down at the start of 2018, and was immediately enthralled with the toe tapping songs and sublime cinematography, just like many fans of the film did. But that’s not to say this is the perfect film. If you’re looking for a 100% accurate retelling of P.T. Barnum’s (Hugh Jackman) life, you may not find this as enjoyable. Throughout the film, Barnum is often written in a way that doesn’t justify why he starts what many people of the time would call “a freak show”, but it instead gives you an insight into why Barnum sees this as a good idea. Lines like “they’re already laughing kid, might as well get paid for it” can makes sense to some people, and back then, it could’ve been seen as justification. We also have to appreciate that while doing something like this in 2018 would be morally wrong, back when Barnum started the circus, it was socially acceptable to go to a show like this, and laugh at the “oddities” on display. There’s also the two romantic subplots that didn’t really happen. There’s the added romantic tension between Barnum and Jenny Lind, (Rebecca Ferguson) which was the only narrative element that I didn’t care for. There wasn’t a big impact on the plot apart from one argument with Barnum’s wife, Charity. (Michelle Williams) It also felt like it was forced in for a contrived attempt at drama. The other romantic subplot between Zac Efron’s Phillip Carlyle, and Zendaya’s Anne Wheeler. This one had much better chemistry and tension between the fictional couple, primarily because of the prejudice of the time period. Efron and Zendaya create a real sense of restricted love, where the characters are desperate to be together, but feel restrained by the world around them. Highlights include their tender interaction at Lind’s opening night, and the big expression of their love, and the chains that hold them back during Rewrite The Stars. But forgetting all the historical inaccuracies for just a moment, the film still others a lot for the modern audience to enjoy. Seamus McGarvey’s cinematography is beautifully handled, with sharp and clear use of colour through each frame of the film. From the silhouettes of Barnum at the start, to the shots of yesteryear America, as Barnum and Charity start their lives together, each image comes alive with beautiful imagery. But it never takes away from the first class performances by the entire cast, with a particular highlight coming from Keala Settle as Lettie, (The Bearded Lady) who stole the show whenever she took the spotlight. She’ll make you laugh and cry at each perfect point. And when it comes to the songs, it’s some of the best examples of film songs in recent memory. With the minds behind City Of Stars from 2016’s La La Land responsible for all the lyrics this time, each song fills the listener with empowering messages and thrilling imagery, while bringing the film to life in a whole other way. Just like the opening to La La Land, many audience members will be won over by the end of the first song! So, is The Greatest Showman the most accurate telling of Barnum’s life, not by any stretch of the imagination, but if you can look past that, and be sucked into this interpretation of history, then many are bound to be enthralled with the show stopping tunes, fantastic performances across the board, and some stellar imagery. Having spoken to many viewers of the film, it’s done exactly that to them, with some saying they’ve felt the urge to join in the songs every-time they heard them. All I can say is, no wonder it did so well. Musical fans, you’ll love it! Historians… maybe look somewhere else. 4.5 Stars Out Of 5

(Release info London schedule; April 20th, 2018, Empire Cinemas, Leicester Square) "Every Day" Based on David Levithan’s 'New York Times' bestseller, "Every Day" tells the story of Rhiannon (Angourie Rice), a 16-year old girl who falls in love with a mysterious soul named 'A' (Justice Smith) who inhabits a different body every day. Feeling an unmatched connection, Rhiannon and 'A' work each day to find each other, not knowing what or who the next day will bring. The more the two fall in love, the more the realities of loving someone who's a different person every 24 hours takes a toll, leaving Rhiannon and 'A' to face the hardest decision either has ever had to make. Rhiannon is a good 16-year old, she helps out at home, doesn’t cause trouble, and does well at school. However, her family has been struggling, her father Nick (Jake Robards) had a nervous breakdown and stopped working leaving her mother Lindsey (Maria Bello) the pressure of being the sole breadwinner. While her sister Jolene (Debby Ryan) is the wild child who acts out, Rhiannon just wants to help keep her family together. At school things are little better, Rhiannon’s boyfriend Justin (Justin Smith) is the popular athlete, however, he’s also self-centered and takes Rhiannon for granted. That's, until one day when Justin shows up at school acting differently. Suddenly, he’s attentive and curious and sweet. Taken aback and enamoured, Rhiannon suggests they play hooky and steal away to Baltimore. The two take off in Justin’s car, listen to music and sing along, share stories they’ve never shared before, and play at the beach. Rhiannon is surprised to see a softer side of Justin, one that’s playful and unselfconscious. It's a day like they’ve never had before: perfect. Yet the next morning at school, Justin seems back to normal and he barely remembers what they talked about or the day they spent together. Rhiannon is perturbed, but tries to shake it off. By that weekend, though, it’s clear that the Justin who Rhiannon played hooky with isn’t coming back. She tries to recapture that day by playing the song they sang along to at a party, but Justin seems uninterested. It does get the attention of a boy Rhiannon doesn’t know named Nathan (Lucas Zumann), however, who starts dancing wildly and putting on a show to make Rhiannon laugh. Rhiannon joins him on the dance floor and something suddenly seems familiar, but she doesn’t know what. Justin shows up and chases Nathan away and Rhiannon is left with a lingering feeling of 'déjà vu'. A few days later she's contacted by Nathan who says he wants to meet and talk. They arrange a date at a bookstore, but when Rhiannon shows up Nathan isn’t there. Instead, she meets Megan (Katie Douglas), who says she's there on Nathan’s behalf. Yet when Rhiannon and Megan begin to talk, Megan explains that she in fact is someone named 'A'. That weekend at the party 'A' was Nathan, and the day at the beach 'A' was Justin, because 'A' is a bodiless spirit who wakes up inhabiting a different person every day, for just twenty-four hours. Always someone 'A’s' age, always someone close to the last, never the same person twice. Rhiannon is naturally disbelieving at first, until 'A' manages to make contact with her a few more times over the next few days and eventually proves they are telling the truth. What follows is an extraordinary love story that transcends external appearances and physical limitations. A love story about loving someone truly and completely for who they're in their heart and soul, regardless of what's on the outside. The Rhiannon who we meet at the beginning of the film is living a fairly conventional life, albeit being the rock of her destabilized family. A nice girl, a good friend, a solid student, Rhiannon is dating the popular boy at school, though she doesn’t feel very connected to him or much appreciated. She’s playing all the parts she feels she should play at the expense of her own self-discovery. Especially when we’re young we tend to be defined by our relationships. In the beginning of the story, Rhiannon is Nick’s daughter, Jolene’s sister, Justin’s girlfriend. As a result of her father’s breakdown, the whole family is in stasis. Their family has been fractured and they haven’t figured out how to move past it. These things are standing in the way of her freedom to grow. And what we see in the movie is that her interactions with 'A' broaden her perspective and give her space to find herself. She and everyone around her are all seeing each other not for who they're, but for who they think they should be, which is pretty common. Another important part of Rhiannon’s journey is learning to see and accept those around her, and she then shares that perspective with her family. In the beginning of the film we’re introduced to Rhiannon’s boyfriend Justin. Justin is the popular athlete at school and he takes Rhiannon for granted. He's kind of oblivious to other people’s feelings though. He thinks a lot about himself and his own needs and when he doesn’t get those needs met, he gets frustrated and easily irritated. But one day Justin wakes up, promptly examines his hands, takes his bearings and heads off to school. On this day Justin is not himself, he has been inhabited by 'A'. Rhiannon can tell something’s off with Justin, yet soon suggests they play hooky and head off for adventure. What follows is 'A" and Rhiannon’s first date, driving and listening to music, hanging at the beach, and talking and sharing more than Justin and Rhiannon ever have. 'A' falls for Rhiannon that afternoon and, without knowing it, Rhiannon falls for 'A', too. The next day at school, Justin doesn’t seem to really remember this day that was so special to Rhiannon. We've this character 'A' who's an entity who inhabits a different body every day for 24 hours and so in the film is portrayed by fifteen different actors. Several of the actors who play 'A' in the story play a character in Rhiannon’s life as well, so each actor has to both differentiate between when they're their main character versus when they're inhabited by 'A', as well as supporting a single, clear character for 'A'. It’s quite complex. In motion pictures, you've twenty-four still frames in a second and when they’re run together your brain compensates and creates the fluid motion connecting the frames. There's an intermittent motion effect happening in this movie in which the film asks the audience to bridge the gaps and perceive 'A' as a fluid and consistent character. That maturity and depth coming from the eyes becomes a big part of the throughline for 'A' and makes the character feel whole. Jolene’s pretty sassy and sarcastic. But her relationship to Rhiannon is really important to both of them. They’re cut from opposite cloth and they've responded to the family situation really differently, Rhiannon by trying to hold everyone together, Jolene by going a bit off the rails. She’s tough and aggressive but she has good intentions. And she's one of the few people in Rhiannon’s world who's pushing her to demand more for herself. In 2012, young adult author David Levithan published a book that pushed him to new creative heights. It resonated so deeply with his readers that it spent months on 'The New York Times' bestseller list and spawned online chat groups, fan art and writing. That book was 'Every Day'. Ask any teenager or parent of a teenager if they’ve heard of 'Every Day', and not only will they know it, they’ll most likely have read it and passed it on to a friend. The story of a teenage entity named only 'A', who wakes up every day in a different body. "Every Day" deals with the challenges faced when 'A' falls head over heels in love with Rhiannon, a girl unlike anyone they’ve ever met. Can you've a relationship with a soul who inhabits a different body every day, sometimes boy, sometimes girl, sometimes the school quarterback, sometimes the outcast? Who are you removed of your body, your race, your clothes, your family? The story is the actualization of the old adage that we should love someone for who they're on the inside, all the more powerful because it's set during the teenage years when we customarily try on and experiment with myriad external identities in an effort to figure out we're. Levithan’s book explores all these themes, but fundamentally it’s a story about true love, growing up, and the lengths we’ll go for those we care about. This is about not being defined by your body, or externally imposed ideas of who you're, but by who you really are. What does it really mean to love the inner person devoid of the external? The book is a juggernaut, clearly resonating with young people the world over, and taking Levithan on tours to visit high school and college students across North America. There’s a freedom in what 'A' is that’s really interesting to explore, and that’s creates a lot of great side conversations about gender and race and the binaries that society is built on, but that we can choose to step out of if we want. The book challenges gender presumptions in a way that's as entertaining as it's unexpected and, perhaps most important, that's relatable to teens who may not think they need sensitivity training when it comes to sexual orientation and the nature of true love. His name is 'A'. Every day he wakes up in a different body. Always someone his age, never too far from the last person, never the same person twice. He has no control over any of it. He doesn't know why it happens, or how. He knows what makes each person different and what makes everyone the same. He has seen the same color blue look fifty different ways with fifty different pairs of eyes. Every day of his life, he wakes up and just try to live that day, for that person. Make no mark, leave no trace. In the film, we've 15 actors playing 'A' and the film unites those characters in one coherent arc. By making Rhiannon the protagonist and following her journey as she meets 'A' and learns about who 'A' is, the audience gets grounded in her experience, and projects into her relationship with 'A', which gives us an entry point into the more fantastical and magical idea in the story. To fill out Rhiannon’s world, the film gives her a family backstory that didn’t exist in the novel. Rhiannon’s father is recovering from a nervous breakdown and not working, her mother is the sole breadwinner, her sister Jolene is a bit of a wild child, and Rhiannon is the rock trying to hold everything together. When we meet Rhiannon she has a real desire for normalcy but she's also somewhat stuck and unable to fully discover herself because her focus is on supporting her family. This is the foundation from which she takes off on this incredible journey. A great love story is timeless and remains one of the most satisfying cinematic genres. On the one hand the book very simple, the embodiment of loving someone for who they really are, while also being very complex in how it addresses a lot of issues in the lives of young people today. The results something really extraordinary about manifesting that in a character who literally has to walk in someone else’s shoes every single day. The profoundness of that and the magic of that just grabs people and inspires awe. Beyond exploring the most universal themes of true love, identity and coming of age, "Every Day" also reflects very contemporary ideas about acceptance and the freedom to be whoever you're, a particularly resonant idea for young people right now who increasingly reject categorization. It's such a commonplace and simple piece of advice, that you should appreciate someone for what's on the inside, and not judge them by external appearances. Yet it's also true that what seems simplest on the surface can often end up being the hardest thing. In the end, the question of who we're at the core, without body, gender, any external identifiers that all, is not so simple to answer. Equally, at first look "Every Day" is a charming, funny, and smart coming-of-age story about the ups and downs of true love and growing up. But dig a little deeper and there’s more. This movie is a love story, but there's so much more, it's a coming-of-age story, it's a story about family love, it's a story about loving someone so much that you choose to do the difficult thing, and it’s a magical story. It's a total swoon. This story will have resonance at this amazing time we're in where a generation seems to be turning away from black and white definitions around identity, which is such an exciting thing.

(Release Info London schedule; Curzon Victoria, 58 Victoria Street Westminster, London SW1E 6QW, The Courier, Fri 13 AUG, 11:00 15:30 21:00) https://we-love-cinema.com/cinemas/386-curzon-victoria/ "The Courier" "The Courier" is a true-life spy thriller, the story of an unassuming 'British' businessman Greville Wynne (Benedict Cumberbatch) recruited into one of the greatest international conflicts in history. At the behest of 'The UK's MI-6' and Emily Donovan (Rachel Brosnahan), a 'CIA' operative, he forms a covert, dangerous partnership with 'Soviet' officer Oleg Penkovsky (Merab Ninidze) in an effort to provide crucial intelligence needed to prevent a nuclear confrontation and defuse 'The Cuban Missile Crisis'. On 16, October 1962, President John F Kennedy is handed high-altitude photographs taken from 'U-2' planes flying over Cuba that shows 'Soviet' soldiers setting up nuclear-armed missiles on the island. 'The United States' have been tipped-off that 'The Soviet Union' is putting nuclear warheads on 'The Caribbean Island'. 'The Cuban Missile Crisis' sees the world on the brink of nuclear war. Greville Wynne has a sense of humour, doggedness, and an unexpected strength. This guy goes on an extraordinary journey. From being an ordinary businessman, one who's quite severely dyslexic, almost to the point of illiteracy, to being a conduit for 'The West' to get the most important bit of secret information during 'The Cold War' and 'The Cuban Missile Crisis'. It's about an everyday guy in the centre of that world with all these thrilling elements and this massive global political backdrop while it’s about him and his family, and he ends up trying to save the world. Wynne’s mission is to make contact with a 'Soviet' military intelligence colonel named Oleg Penkovsky. They strike up a significant friendship. Penkovsky likes him and trusts him. And Penkovsky sees that loyalty returned when Wynne tries to help him escape. Wynne returns to Moscow even after being warned that he would put himself in peril by doing so. Wynne decides that he has to help his friend Penkovsky escape. 'The KGB' catches Wynne trying to help his friend, and he's arrested on 11 May 1963, and subsequently is sentenced to 8 years in jail. And then we get the tragedy of this very ordinary man being stretched to the limits of his endurance, physically and mentally in a 'Russian Gulag'. What he endures is all the more incredible considering he isn't a trained spook and he has no background or inclination to do the work he's asked to do. He's released from jail in exchange for the spy Gordon Lonsdale (Jonathan Harden) in 1964. The prison experience changed Wynne. He falls into a state where his mental health is challenged. He becomes an alcoholic and leaves his wife. He lost his business income and so, needed money. Then there's the secrecy that's part and parcel of espionage so 'MI6' never acknowledge his work even after he's released. 'The British' government never publicly acknowledged anything he did or thanked him for what he has done. "The Courier" culminates with Wynne shaven-headed and alone in prison. The film hints that even when he's released all will not be well. He's a broken man no longer at peace with himself. Oleg Penkovsky is a legendary source that 'The Americans' have in 'The Soviet Union'. Penkovsky, codenamed 'Hero', is a 'Soviet' military intelligence colonel during the 1950s and early 1960s. Born in Vladikavkaz in 1919, his father died fighting as an officer in 'The White Army' during 'The Russian Civil War'. He has to hide parts of his past because he's related to a man who's the enemy of 'The Communists'. He has to carry this on his back. Penkovsky is able to detract attention from his family history by proving his belief in the cause by joining 'The Soviet' army. He's very well respected in the military world but after the war, no one cared about this anymore. He has all of these medals, but he's just a high-ranking bureaucrat. This guy is fearless, narcissistic and self-obsessed. He’s like a forgotten actor who wants to have a big comeback. His ego is also what make Penkovsky think he could get away with being a whistle-blower. He's convinced that this would never happen to him because he thinks he's too smart and by the time 'The Soviets' would find out, he would already be living in Montana, in 'The United States'. The friendship with Wynne blossoms so quickly because they've shared experiences. They understand how much they both risked. There's a need to give each other support. It's quite interesting the idea that if you've someone and you do have a family and it matters to you, how do you manage when a big chunk of your life is off-limits. One of the things that push Penkovsky and Wynne together in the film is that they both share this problem. Sheila (Jessie Buckley) is Wynne's wife. There's hardly any information about Sheila at all. Sheila has to constantly keep a lid on her emotions. There are a lot of suppressed emotions in the sixties, especially a housewife who's unhappy and unfulfilled in life. Everything is smoke screens and smiles behind pained eyes. Basically, lots of quiet moments which are interrupted with sharp sips of martinis. Emily, 'The CIA' operative comes up with the idea of using Wynne to get information out of Moscow. She's a composite of a few of the real-life 'CIA' officers who worked the Wynne and Penkovsky operation. Emily is fictional, in the sense that at the time, the officers who worked on this operation are all men. Being a woman operating in a very patriarchal world, Emily has to be very strategic and clever to get her own way. Emily needs to use plenty of wiles to manipulate the men around her. Her male superiors need to believe that they're calling the shots even when they're implementing plans conjured up by Emily. Is it patriotism alone? Is it a desire to prove her worth in a male-dominated world, or even a male-dominated profession? Did she have a personal connection to this war that drove her? To get what she wants, Emily must appear non-threatening. That’s largely a period thing, but also a battle that women still fight today. Emily believes that she’s the smartest person in the room or at the very least, she has something valuable to This film is about the history of 'Russian American' espionage. There’s a long history of successful great 'Cold War' thrillers, the difference here's that rather than being about inscrutable people with inscrutable motives it has a clear emotional heart, and it's essentially about a relationship between two men who did something extraordinary. In October 1962, 'Soviet' ballistic missiles were being deployed in Cuba. President Kennedy demanded their removal. When Khruschev refused, both sides began preparations for a nuclear war. For 13 days, a policy of brinksmanship saw the world facing the threat of nuclear war. The world was going to end. People crowding into churches who had never been to church. This sent many around the world into a state of panic. The world sort of held its breath, it’s not just a fight between two countries, it’s every country in between them that would be affected. The film incorporates the crisis into the screenplay. Just trying to get a sense of that fear and helplessness that people felt that the world might end and there's not a 'God' damn thing we can do about it. You had ships sailing to Cuba with missiles, you had 'The Americans armed and ready and you had everybody hovering over buttons and codes. It only takes a few hotheads in charge of the codes, a few polarised opinions and people shutting off and not having a dialogue for catastrophe to happen. A generation had passed since the end of 'The Second World War', and new functional architecture had been appearing around the globe. The clothes were changing, but the swinging sixties had yet to arrive. The film shows the competition between 'The Soviet Union' and 'The United States'. Both superpowers were pursuing initiatives trying to demonstrate that their way of doing things created a better life for their citizens and more advanced technology. There's this big epic feeling of the architecture during that time because of the competition between the two countries, particularly in the sixties with 'Brutalist' architecture and 'Soviet' architecture. There was no nuclear war that such a scenario was not only feasibl but that many feared it would be inevitable. "The Courier" seems to be part of our history. The drama feels immediate and visceral. In the past four years, with Korea, Trump, China, and the pulling up all the old nuclear treaties between Russia and America, "The Courier" feels a little bit urgent in a rather scary way.

● (Release Info London schedule; February 28th, 2020, Empire, 5-6, Leicester Square, London WC2H 7NA, United Kingdom, 11:20 · 14:20 · 17:20 · 20:20) ● (Release Info London schedule; February 28th, 2020, Picturehouse Central, Piccadilly Circus, Corner of Great Windmill Street and, Shaftesbury Ave, London W1D 7DH, United Kingdom, 15:20 · 18:30 · 21:25) "Dark Waters" "Dark Waters" tells the shocking and heroic story of Rob Bilott (Mark Ruffalo), an attorney who risks his career and family to uncover a dark secret hidden by one of the world’s largest corporations and to bring justice to a community dangerously exposed for decades to deadly chemicals. Corporate environmental defense attorney Rob Billot has just made partner at his prestigious Cincinnati law firm in large part due to his work defending 'Big Chem' companies. He finds himself conflicted after he’s contacted by Wilbur Tennant (Bill Camp) and his brother Jim (Jim Azelvandre) ,two 'West Virginia' farmers, who believe that the local 'DuPont' plant is dumping toxic waste in the area landfill that is destroying their fields and killing their cattle. Hoping to learn the truth about just what's happening, Bilott, with help from his supervising partner in the firm, Tom Terp (Tim Robbins), files a complaint that marks the beginning of an epic 15-year fight; one that will not only test his relationship with his wife, Sarah (Anne Hathaway) but also his reputation, his health and his livelihood. Based on 'The New York Times Magazine' article, 'The Lawyer Who Became DuPont’s Worst Nightmare', by Nathaniel Rich, "Dark Waters" chronicles the one-man crusade that sought justice for a community exposed for decades to toxins in it's own backyard. Defense attorney Rob Bilott has just made partner at his prestigious Cincinnati firm in large part due to his work defending some of the biggest names in 'Big Chem'. When two small-town 'West Virginia' farmers ask for his help investigating the local chemical plant for purportedly killing their livestock, he balks, explaining that he represents chemical companies, not plaintiffs. Yet, something about their story stays with Rob, especially when he realizes one of his fondest summers as a boy was spent at a neighboring farm. During a drive to the area, Rob’s observations don’t quite align with his memories; there's something beneath the surface of this corner of 'Hill Country'. He also realizes that nearly everyone in the community owes much to the local chemical plant in Parkersburg, operated by 'DuPont'. 'The Tennants' believe that whatever 'DuPont' is dumping in their landfill is polluting their creek and has wiped out their herd of nearly 200 cattle. Still, many of their neighbors cling to the idea that the company continues to look out for them, as it has seemingly done for years. Supported by his supervising partner in the firm, Tom Terp, Bilott uses his intimate understanding of how chemical companies work. He files a complaint, undertaking a targeted suit that will uncover just what's happening in Parkersburg. Thousands of personnel hours and years later, Bilott finds that his obsession to ferret out the truth has not only jeopardized his family, particularly his relationship with his wife, Sarah but also his reputation, his health and his livelihood. Just how much is he, and by association, those around him, prepared to lose to bring the truth to light? What's the price for justice? "Dark Waters" tells the unbelievable 'David vs. Goliath' story of an attorney with unwavering conviction who fought for decades to obtain justice for a community victimized by a corporation driven by greed. It all begins on January 6th, 2016, when 'The New York Times Magazine' published Nathaniel Rich’s riveting chronicle of the work of Cincinnati attorney Rob Bilott. Employed at the law firm of 'Taft Stettinius & Hollister LLP', Bilott becomes an unlikely crusader who bravely uncovered the dangers of a chemical that had been contaminating for years; and to punish one corporate giant responsible for marketing it's uses. 'The Tennants', a family who had farmed the same sprawling property for generations, begin losing their cattle in startling ways. The animals, once docile like pets, turned ugly and aggressive. Lesions covered their hides, their eyes are rimmed with red, white slime dripped from their mouths, their teeth blackened. When one black calf died, it's eye is electric blue. Convinced that the cause is toxic runoff from the nearby 'Dry Run Landfill', where 'The Washington Works' factory, owned by 'DuPont', disposed of it's waste, Wilbur Tennant sought answers for years to no avail. Desperate, he finally turns to Bilott, who had spent time as a child near 'The Tennants' farm in 'Parkersburg, West Virginia'. Bilott helps figure out what should be going into the landfill and look at the permits; he finds out what chemicals are actually going in and what might be exceeding their limits. After nearly a year, Bilott discoverers just what they're dealing with; an unregulated chemical that didn’t fit into that word. The substance in question is perfluorooctanoic acid or 'PFOA', which dates to 1951, almost two decades before 'The Environmental Protection Agency' was established in 1970. Unfortunately, a lot of the federal rules and statutes that started coming out in the 1970s were primarily focused on new chemicals, things that were being produced and generated after that point in time. By 1990, the company had dumped 7,100 tons of 'PFOA' sludge into 'Dry Run Landfill'. From that point on, Bilott makes it his mission to secure justice not just for 'The Tennants', but also for anyone who had been exposed to 'PFOA; or forever chemicals as they’re called, since they don’t break down and stay in the subject’s system. In "Dark Waters" it's all anchored in the character of Rob Bilott, the unlikely hero par excellence, whose presumptions about corporate practices are turned on their head in his discoveries about 'DuPont". Mistrustful, unpartisan and constitutionally guarded by nature, Rob Bilott, like most classic whistleblowers, is already a solitary figure when the story begins. He’s a man caught between two worlds; he has roots in small-town 'West Virginia', where he spent portions of his childhood, but he’s also an attorney at one of Cincinnati’s most high-profile corporate law films charged with defending clients from lawsuits, not filing suits against them. He's living in a class that's's above the one he grew up in, and there are class clashes going on within his family. All of this makes for a balancing act; he's straddling this echelon of lawyers who are all really well-bred and well-schooled, and he's not really a part of that. And then there’s this schism of plaintiff/defense attorney. All these dichotomies is why Rob Bilott is able to bring down one of the biggest corporations in the world. The more you can layer in those complexities, just the better story it's, and the greater achievement it's when our hero does what he set out to do. At the outset, Rob really believes that corporations are people and in the concept of their self-governance. He reasons that this must be some simple oversight. What ends up happening is he uncovers this contamination and cover-up, perpetrated by 'DuPont' and spanning 40 years. Wilbur Tennant is tough. Even when Rob has completely put his job and reputation and family and mental health on the line to take on this case, Wilbur isn't content to just get a settlement from 'DuPont'. He wants the truth to get out. He wants this to be known to the world. Wilbur has a very simple life and a very strong moral understanding and balance of what’s right and what’s wrong. He’s passionate and fiery. There’s a simplicity to that; it’s foundational to his and the overall story. He has a natural human reaction to being lied to, to being wronged. His life has been completely upended, if not destroyed, by the corruption of this company. He sees this wrong done not just to him, but an entire community and the natural world. His only response is to take on this entity more powerful than himself. And true to form, the events that unfold only further that isolation. That this isolation, this stigma, is mirrored in the story’s precipitating force, Wilbur Tennant, and can be seen spreading across the network of interdependent players, crossing class differences, afflicting public life, family life, church life in it's wake, describes it’s unique insidious contagion. Despite these bonds, taking on powerful interests will shrink your world and rattle your faculties. Sarah is a very specific. She understands that her husband’s passion and commitment to this case is important to support, but it takes a great toll on the family. Sarah is vivacious, powerful. She has so much strength, and she’s full of contradictions. You can’t tell everything about her just by one aspect of her. Rob finds an unexpected source of support for his quest in his supervising partner at 'Taft Stettinius & Hollister, LLP', Tom Terp. Although the two weren’t necessarily close friends, Terp admired Bilott’s work ethic, and his initial reluctance over Bilott taking 'The Tennants’ case gave way when he was presented with evidence of wrong-doing. As Rob’s boss, he conveys what’s at stake for Rob. This is nothing less than his standing as a partner. He also very subtly provides a moral compass when he permits Rob to take on the case. You get the sense that what’s central for 'Taft' is the law. The law needs to be respected, and if that starts to get messed with, as lawyers, even corporate defense attorneys, they’re not going to stand for it. So, in very economical strokes, Tom represents those two possibly opposing forces. Tom Terp is the exception to the rule in corporate culture, which tends to protect itself. People don’t usually cross lines, generally. They tend to remain silent or willfully ignorant of information that might challenge their worldview and their power structure. Tom is someone that dared to go against that. He isn't a knight in shining armor. He's a man faced with an illegality that was undeniable, and he chose to go against his company’s culture to hold 'DuPont' accountable, not an easy thing to do. Phil Donnelly (Victor Garber) is a company man, in thrall to his own conviction. Other attorneys enter the picture, including plaintiff’s attorney Harry Deitzler (Bill Pullman). Harry is a bit brash, he’s a big personality. But he's a strategist with tactics. Harry is a version of an ambulance chaser, personal injury lawyer. Harry had been on 'The Parkersburg City Council' for 12 years. He has the ability to bring people together from all sides; that makes him a perfect candidate to be on the legal team. Darlene Kiger (Mare Winningham) served as lead plaintiffs in a 2001 class-action lawsuit against 'DuPont' over dangerously high levels of 'PFOA', also known as 'C8', in 'The Parkersburg' region’s drinking water supplies. She brings her grounded wisdom, warmth and gravitas to the character. She's very brave, to take this stand amidst gossip, stares and comments, in a community indebted to 'DuPont'. James (William Jackson Harper) is a junior associate at Bilott’s firm who believes the attorney’s work should cease. He's someone trying to climb the ladder in this corporate defense world that's now suddenly in ethically murky waters, we’re looking to prosecute the very people we serve. James role is to actually push to shut the case down. He thinks it’s a dangerous violation of their ethics to pursue this. It becomes divisive for the character, and for some others within the firm. This is the late ’90s, early 2000s. It’s still a really ambiguous time period that we all kind of remember but have forgotten at the same time. Who had what technology, like which cellphones? Televisions? What would be on desks in lawyers’ offices? It’s also interesting because 'Taft', as with other big firms, were beginning to brand themselves, advertising for legal services. So even they're switching tradition. There’s a lens we view society through, which picks up people’s differences within class structures, but we want to concentrate on the humanity that runs through everyone. We’ve been watching the environmental mandates for water, air, endangered species, and of course climate change be systematically unraveled, and so everything is at stake right now. The ultimate message is that we need each other. No one else is going to do it for us. No one else is going to make the world a better place. It's us together. And this story about water transcends all political divides, ideological beliefs, sex, race, religion. The film tells a gripping story based on the explosive exposé that uncovered an urgent public health crisis and corruption at the highest levels. We all know inherently how important it's for us to have clean water, and it's by framing these massive problems in these kinds of ways that we will see real positive change in the world. It’s a tremendous opportunity to be able to make people understand the nature and extent of this public health threat. But not only that; how does something like this happen in 'The United States'? In what we should be thinking of as the most sophisticated country on earth, how could a massive worldwide contamination problem like this not only occur, but originate here in 'The United States'? This film can convey to people in an understandable way that not only is this happening, but how it happens. Like most people we're astonished and outraged by the story Rob Bilott, the tenacious corporate defense attorney, unwittingly uncovers; the story of 'DuPont' and 'Teflon'. It clearly describes a recent, ongoing saga of corporate abuse with searing cultural and political relevance. Certainly, abuses of power, threats and cover-up, whether corporate, industrial or governmental, will be revealed. In fact they're the narrative expectation, often looming offscreen in advance of the stories. But the whistleblower film’s true focus is on the little guy, his process, and the peril, psychic, emotional, if not mortal, faced by that individual who stands up to the truth. This specificity of time and place can be feel in a visual language in which a cool observational style links the contrasting locations in an attempt to underscore their interdependence. What emerges is a complex, at times contradictory American landscape, though one in which the lines of economic power are clearly drawn; even as they're confronted with their limits. It's often as a result of these contradictions, or improbabilities, that 'The Wilbur Tennant Case' and the historic class action that followed could ever have been waged. The unlikelihood of a corporate defense attorney working for the chemical industry reversing his sites and taking on a corporate behemoth like 'DuPont' is precisely what provided Rob with the kind of time and resources required to succeed. So without the medical monitoring ruling in 'West Virginia', or the dual-state strategy linking Ohio law with 'West Virginia', it’s hard to imagine any of these remarkable outcomes; or the world ever learning about the dangers of forever chemicals like 'PFOA', lurking in every corner of our lives. Rather than concluding with the rewards of a win, it depicts the act of fighting as on ongoing condition, a primer for living imperfectly between knowledge and despair. In "Dark Waters", what begins as a regional and national contamination of air and water systems results in a global contamination of human bloodstreams, in effect, materializing our interconnectivity as residents of the planet, if not the unelected victims of capitalist and ideological systems. But in the massiveness of this manmade catastrophe we're invariably linked, and our knowledge and awareness are what connect us to one another, in what's both an unending struggle for justice and a fight for our lives.

(Release Info London schedule; June 18th, 2020, Curzon Home Cinema) https://homecinema.curzon.com/film/it-must-be-heaven/ "It Must Be Heaven" Elia Suleiman escapes from 'Palestine' seeking an alternative homeland, only to find that 'Palestine' is trailing behind him. The promise of a new life turns into a comedy of errors; however far he travels, from Paris to New York, something always reminds him of home. Born in Nazareth on July 28th, 1960, Elia Suleiman lived in New York between 1981 and 1993. During this period, he directed his two first short films, 'Introduction To The End Of An Argument' and 'Homage By Assassination', which won him numerous prizes. In 1994, he moved to Jerusalem where 'The European Commission' charged him with establishing a 'Cinema' and 'Media' department at 'Birzeit University'. His feature debut, "Chronicle Of A Disappearance", won 'The Best First Film Award' at 'The 1996 Venice Film Festival'. In 2002, "Divine Intervention" won 'The Jury Prize' at 'The Cannes Film Festival' and 'The Best Foreign Film' prize at 'The European Awards' in Rome. His feature, "The Time That Remains", screened In 'Competition' at 'The 2009 Cannes film Festival'. In 2012, Elia Suleiman directed the short film 'Diary Of A Beginner', part of the portmanteau feature "7 Days In Havana", which screened that year in 'Un Certain Regard' at "The Cannes Film Festival'. The man who finds his homeland sweet is still a tender beginner; he to whom every soil is as his native one is already strong; but he's perfect to whom the entire world is a foreign land. The tender soul has fixed his love on one spot in the world; the strong man has extended his love to all places; the perfect man has extinguished his. Where do the birds fly after the last sky?” The film presents 'Palestine' as a microcosm of the world. "It Must Be Heaven" shows shows ordinary everyday situations of people across the world living in a climate of geopolitical global tension. And the violence erupting in one place is similar to the violence erupting in another. Images and sounds containing this violence or tension are being felt in all the world centers and not, as in the past, just somewhere in the far corners of the world. There are checkpoints in each country at airports and in shopping malls. Police sirens and security alarms are no longer intermittent but constant. Rather than focus on the larger picture constantly bombarded by the mass media, always generalized, masked and falsified, "It Must Be Heaven" depicts the moment in the margin, the trivial, or that which is usually out of focus. Consequently, it approaches what's intimate, tender and touching. It’s the personal and human stories that are based on identification which raise questions and raise hope. There's little dialogue; what's spoken is more like monologue to infuse rhythm and musicality. Otherwise the narrative of the film is knitted from a subliminal montage; scenes that are composed from choreographic movements; burlesque drawn from the world of the absurd; images that open up to the poetry of silence, which is at the heart of cinematic language. "It Must Be Heaven" is a comic saga exploring identity, nationality and belonging, in which Suleiman asks the fundamental question; where is the place we can truly call home? A modern Jacques Tati figure sips wine and witnesses an oddball scene; someone is stealing fruit from his neighbor, taking permission for granted. Yet every day he encroaches a little more, as if he’s actually the owner. Elia Suleiman embodies another silent version of himself, coming up with new subtle and elusive ways to portray Palestinian ghettoization. This time, his alter ego distances himself from his aching homeland, in search of homeliness; yet, Paris and New York will prove hostile and hollow. When faced against the inherent chaos of life, what else is there to do but sit back and stare in bemusement?

(Release Info London schedule; March 25th, 2018, Picturehouse Central, 30 Orange Street, 17:00) "Isle Of Dogs" "Isle Of Dogs",tells the story of Atari Kobayashi (Koyu Rankin), 12-year-old ward to corrupt Mayor Kobayashi (Kunichi Nomura). When, by 'Executive Decree', all the canine pets of 'Megasaki City' are exiled to a vast garbage-dump, Atari sets off alone in a miniature Junior-Turbo Prop and flies to 'Trash Island' in search of his bodyguard-dog, Spots. There, with the assistance of a pack of newly-found mongrel friends, he begins an epic journey that will decide the fate and future of 'The Entire Prefecture'.   'Canine-Saturation' has reached epidemic proportions. An outbreak of 'Snout-Fever' rips through the city of Megasaki. 'Dog-Flu' threatens to cross the species threshold and enter the human disease pool. Mayor Kobayashi of 'Uni Prefecture' calls for a hasty quarantine; the expulsion and containment of all breeds, both stray and domesticated. By official decree, 'Trash Island' becomes an exile colony, 'The Isle Of Dogs'. Six months later, a tiny, single-engine, miniature airplane crash-lands onto the teeming waste-land. A pack of five starving but fierce abandoned dogs scrambles to the wreckage and discovers a twelve-year-old pilot staggering from the burning fuselage. Atari, orphan-ward to Mayor Kobayashi. With the assistance of his new canine friends, Atari begins a search for his lost dog, Spots (Liev Schreiber), and, in the process, exposes a conspiracy that threatens to destroy all the dogs of 'Megasaki City' forever.   Atari is a heartbroken Japanese boy who makes a heroic flight to search for his lost dog. Mayor Kobayashi is the authoritarian who outlaws dogs from 'Megasaki City', though the consequences hit closer to home than he ever imagined. His greatest nemesis proves to be Tracy Walker (Greta Gerwig), a feisty young foreign exchange student and editor of 'The Megasaki Senior High Daily Manifesto'. It's a paper that stands for transparency and truth. And Tracy believes that’s what all newspapers and news outlets should stand for. Even though it’s a student publication, they hold themselves to a very high, rigorous standard. That standard pushes her to discover the truth about the dog virus and Atari’s trip to 'Trash Island', and perhaps also the first hints of a crush. Tracy just admires Atari’s bravery. And she thinks he has a nice face. He’s the only person standing up to the madness that’s going on in 'Megasaki City'. And he’s doing it on his own for the love of his dog, which she thinks is noble. Each member of the conversationally gifted 'Trash Island" pack has a well-worn canine name suggesting they're once beloved as top dogs, which only serves to remind them of how much they miss their former human homes. Rex (Edward Norton) is a wiry, wire-haired mutt with spiky, mottled coat and the eyes of an Arctic sled-dog. His ribs stick out like a cast-iron radiator. He's a sleeping on a lamb’s wool beanbag next to an electric space heater. So, he’s not some rich man’s dog. He was probably comfortably middle-class, maybe upper middle-class. But he has a work ethic. He’s scrappy, willing to be resourceful and to fight for what he needs. At the same time, he has had a certain baseline of comfort and so psychologically 'Trash Island' is difficult for him. He can only take so much. King (Bob Balanon) is a graceful, red-haired mutt with a sable snout and a handlebar moustache. He's dappled with scabs, scars, scuffs, and scratches. Boss (Bill Murray) is a stout, liver-spotted mutt with black paws and a tail like a stubbed-out cigar. He wears a soiled, grimy, unraveling, striped, woolen dog-sweater with embroidered baseballs and the word Dragons scrolled across it in cursive. When there's the chance of a great success, you need a mascot, someone that’s going to be with you when things get tough, but someone that you’re really going to want to be there when things go well.  That’s Boss.   Duke (Jeff Goldblum) is a bohemian mountain-dog. Slender face, sleek ears, and a ballet-dancer’s overly-nimble gait. He has seven missing teeth and a consumptive dry-cough. Chief (Bryan Cranston) is a coal-black hound with long legs, black nose, a boxer’s jaw, and floppy, black ears with white spots all over them. He has the sturdy frame of a middleweight, but the starved mass of a long distance-runner. Chief is the odd one out, but he also has a great nobility. He represents the idea that with hope can come second chances. Spots is a 'Short-Haired Oceanic Speckle-Eared Sport Hound', who was once the beloved assigned bodyguard to the Mayoral ward Atari, but is now lost to the winds on 'Trash Island'.  He's highly trained, highly sophisticated animal who's not only the constant companion to Atari but also protects him.  In many ways Spots embodies the ideals of loyalty, duty and honor. Spots also finds romance amid the ruins with the steadfast survivor Peppermint (Kara Hayward). Peppermint has been terribly mistreated and Spots goes from feeling bad for her to falling in love with her. He’s really a dog who cares about other dogs.   Among the most enigmatic of 'Trash Island’s' dogs is Nutmeg (Scarlett Johansson), the coquettish show dog with her femme fatale persona and curiously spotless coat of fur. Nutmeg is incredibly resourceful. She keeps her fur clean by collecting garbage ash in an old coffee bean can. The she works the ash through her fur from root to tip. That’s a very important part of the process. You've to work the ash through from root to tip. And then she shakes off the remaining ash and collects it in the found coffee bean can. Which she then stores for next time. She knows what it’s like to lose something and come back stronger. She might be more civilized than Chief, but she recognizes in him a fighting spirit and a leadership quality she admires.  Plus, he has just the right amount of bite; and who doesn’t like a guy with bite? Jupiter (F. Murray Abraham) has chosen to live his life as though he’s given himself over to a Zen existence. He has a barrel of spirits around his neck. It's very wise because you never know when you might need a little shot, or when you’ll run into someone who could use one. And it’s a communal, convivial thing; we’re all going to drink from the same barrel; we’re all going to enjoy this together; and we’re going to find a way out of this mess. We would sure use Jupiter right about now in this poor old world of ours. "Isle Of Dogs" is a grand adventure set in a near-future Japan in the grips of a canine crisis and mass anti-dog hysteria. Here, in a far-flung floating junktopia known only as 'Trash Island', a scrappy pack of exiled dogs who’ve banded together to survive makes an amazing discovery, the crash-landing of a little human pilot who will take them on a life-changing journey. The resulting journey is packed with humor, action and friendship. But on it's trek, it also pays homage to the epic scope and beauty of Japanese cinema, to the noble loyalty of canine companions, to the hopeful heroism of the small and the overlooked, to the rejection of intolerance and most of all to the unbreakable boy-dog bond that has launched countless escapades. The film is inspired by Japanese movies. It's a story with chatty canines, furred femmes fatales, a boy aviator, an intrepid school reporter, mutant viruses, mythical isle and step-by-step unraveling of a big human mistake. In fact, "Isle Of Dogs" may owe as much to the storytelling legacy of Akira Kurosawa as the history of stop-motion animation. The story’s invention expanded from a dreamlike spark to the spectacularly detailed creation of 'Megasaki City', the rubbish-geography of 'Trash Island', and a cast of misfit but hopeful characters, both fur-bearing and human. An outsider (the little pilot) arriving in a new land (Trash Island), and an analogue of the timeless tale of, well, in this case literal underdogs striving against blinded oppressors. But the magic of it all sprang out of the details, from the charm and texture of each dog’s story, from the cluttered but artful architecture of 'Trash Island', from the idea that a child searching for his faithful pet might set off a world-altering chain of events. It just seemed the matching form for emotionally fluent, if down-and-out, dogs and a Japanese island lined with society’s strange, funny and downright calamitous discards. It’s a movie about talking dogs. Yet, it’s not a cartoon, it’s a movie. It pushes the boundary in terms of what people think can be done in this medium. In fact, stop motion animation’s century-long evolution has long been more creative than technical. Little has changed in the fundamentals. Though digital cameras and computers have smoothed the process, it’s still a matter of shooting the infinitesimally small movements of 3D objects frame-by-frame, in a painstaking process that nevertheless generates palpable life. So the biggest changes in the form have come in the content, in the kinds of stories one might tell, in pressing the limits of imagination.   "Isle Of Dogs" is a worldbuilding story that by it's very nature breaks animation norms and brings together all the themes, shots, emotional intricacy and adventures. From the intricate puppets and micro-sets arises this living, breathing realm of cold-nosed questers whose plight is intimately relatable.  The feel is of a whimsical legend but the grounding is in the real concerns, big and small, of modern life; friendship, family, humanity’s future and coming together to clean up our messes. It's a story of disenfranchised dogs, but that's also a very real experience for human beings in every country and walk of life. The main characters might be dogs, but they exist in a zone between animals and humans. They've all the dog behaviors we know and recognize but we connect to them through their very human emotions, through their excitement, sadness, anger, hope and their love for one another and their friends. There are disenfranchised people, the throwaways. And the demagoguery of fear, the kind that leads all the dogs of 'Megasaki City' to be put on an island to fend for themselves, is something humans are dealing with as well. It's a very timely theme. The music becomes another layer of a film that, not unlike 'Trash Island', is piled high with bits and pieces that, when combined, seem to alchemically forge a world that feels lived-in and alive in it's fantasia. If any single word seems to define the movie that word might be scale, both for the tiny scale of the intricate stop-motion work and the enormous scale of the story of how the 'Trash Island' pack unites in their trek towards freedom and to discover the potential in themselves. While the sheer number of individual moving pieces, physical and thematic, that make up "Isle Of Dogs" might be staggering, the paradox is that the prevailing core of the film is one of the most timelessly simple relationships on earth.   The animation is wild and the amount of detail packed into every frame is astonishing. It's a beautiful fable that takes you into a world of it's own, a world no one else could have imagined. With it's semi-fictional Japanese setting, it's construction out of comic book-like chapters and it's intercut themes of nature, heroism, technology, rescue and honor, perhaps it's only natural that the film is also reverberate with echoes of Japanese pop culture and some of Japan’s greatest film directors, from Yasujiro Ozu to Kurosawa to Seijun Suzuki, as well as the Japanese monster films of the 50s and 60s, with their climactic disasters. It's as referring to a whole range of Japanese filmmakers and Japanese culture, but Kurosawa is the main movie influence. It’s hard to even quantify Kurosawa’s impact on cinema because he arced so gracefully through a huge pendulum of genres from noir, to Samurai, to Shakespeare, to melodrama. Each seems to transcend the dark side of the modern world with characters of the utmost honesty and humanity. And seen in each is the legendary Toshiro Mifune, whose expressive countenance inspires the look of Mayor Kobayashi. Another branch of inspiration came from two 19th Century, Edo-period woodblock print masters; Hiroshige and Hokusai, whose emphasis on color and line deeply influenced European Impressionists. Their ukyio- artworks capture fleeting moments of pleasure focusing on natural landscapes, far-flung travels, flora and fauna, geishas and kabuki actors. The film collects a wide swath of woodblock print images and the storyboard artists trawled through the extensive collections at 'The Victoria And Albert Museum' in London. Then, by osmosis, the folkloric Japanese style began to merge with the tactile, handmade feel of stop-motion. The world of "Isle Of Dogs" is kind of an alternative reality. It looks and feels like Japan, but it's a slightly dreamier version. That's the beauty of setting the film in a make-up city, in a make-up time; you get a certain amount of artistic license. The blending of old and new is very common in Japan. There are scenes in the film that are very minimalist and wabi-sabi; but then you switch over to the city, which is maximalist and very intense. The film is a scope of Samurai movies and adventure. It's a big movie in every way, but with simple basic themes that anyone can relate to. 

"Border" Tina (Eva Melander) is a border guard who has the ability to smell human emotions and catch smugglers. When she comes across a mysterious man with a smell that confounds her detection, she's forced to confront hugely disturbing insights about herself and humankind. At a ferry-port customs checkpoint, Tina is one of many polyester-uniformed guards standing watch. Short, with her features broadened and by a congenital genetic condition, and one of many in her polyester uniform, she blends into near invisibility, a cog in the system. During the day, she keeps a close eye on travelers; off the job, she has a small place surrounded by primal forest and a normal life of family, friends and work right down to her ailing dad (Sten Ljunggren) and her indifferent boyfriend Roland (Jörgen Thorsson), a dog-trainer. The only thing exceptional about Tina's work is how exceptional she's at it; in a way even she can't quite explain, Tina can literally smell guilt, fear and fury seeping off of some travelers, and her results speak for themselves. Mostly she detects booze-smugglers and other minor transgressors, but two separate travelers give off clouds of strange scent that give her reason to look closer. One is a suit-clad smoothie found to be carrying a cache of child pornography, the other is a smiling, swaggering rambler named Vore (Eero Milonoff) whose silent ways and familiar-strange features pull Tina closer. Her search for belonging crystallises when Vore passes through customs. As Tina's strange skill and determination see her helping the police work up the chain of sex criminals she caught a small link of at the terminal, she has to go to the grey city streets and perfect 'IKEA' apartments of her suspects. Back at her home, in the woods, wild and waters, she and Vore talk and grow intertwined, as he reveals more and more secrets about his life even as he confounds and confuses her. He has many of the same scars as her, knows more about her past in some ways than she does, and soon Tina has to decide just how much of her life she's willing to upend in the name of belonging. Almost instantly, she can tell something is off about him but for the first time she can’t quite put her finger on what it's. Strangely attracted, Tina strikes up a friendship that soon blossoms into romance as she gradually learns uncomfortable truths. When the true nature of the case Tina's working and the lies about her childhood past she's uncovering lead towards friends and family, Tina will discover, for herself, who she truly is. This film is based on the short novel 'Let The Right One In' by John Lindqvist. His way of writing and his universe is very specific, and he doesn't write 'feel-good' literature. He works in fantasy genres, or subgenres, but it always has a twist. The way he treats his characters, he uses a lot of space and effort in describing their inner conflict, and their feelings, and their emotions, and their thoughts, which is the kind of thing that you would kind of expect from 'serious literature'. Even if he's known as a fantasy writer, underneath there's always something unsettling, and something very serious, and other conflicts going on, which makes it hard to just see it as 'fantasy literature'. "Border" is about being an outsider, but when you think about where the story comes from, John is a white guy that's totally adapted to his society, and as for being an outsider, that's not why he wrote. The experience of being outsider is not exclusive to if you're brown in a white society, or if you're a woman in a man-dominated society. You can be perfectly fit for the society you live in, but still experience. You end up in a job you don't like, or you end up in a marriage you don't. Every person has experienced how it feels to be an outsider, and that's why, in a strange way, everybody is an outsider. Or at least they know how it feels. There are always groups and places that exclude you. This story is stylized, it's not realism; there are other elements, and it's elevated. The film stylizes shots or framing that kind of signals something special is going on. It's a kind of anchors the realism. Because it isn't real, you probably wouldn't care about Tina. We've this theme through the whole film, nature versus nurture, or nature versus civilization, or whatever you want call it. The society and the socio- economic situation is really important. It's easy to justify how Tina is more human than Vore is. Tina has the context to develop empathy, which is the most critical part of being human. The film creates a contrast between the ferry terminal and the forest, and again, as for the realism of it, that place in reality does sit exactly like that. The ferry terminal is kind of like a piece of concrete landed at the shore, just a slab on the edge of a forest. And you go inland to the forest, and then there are some small communities of houses, and the film is what the surrounding community looks like. And then there's a city an hour's drive from there. The set design is not that far from reality, and of course, the film choses more shades. The idea of monster is very connected to the idea of human being. Because monsters are always defined as; you don't call a fox a monster. The idea of monsters has always been where there's enough humanity, or elements of humanity, so that we can relate to it as some kind of human-like creature. But it's also far away enough from us so that we know that it's not human. That space is how you define a monster. The film is interested in the psychology of nature versus nurture, of what happens when you're at the limit of humanity. And what's it that defines humanity, which is a very relevant question. It isn't just an artistic or existential question like it maybe was in the eighteenth century. Not anymore. Because soon, we're going to have legal, ethical, and technical questions to answer about humanity. And one of the core questions of the movie is, what does it take to be a human being?' It's about how nature versus nurture and similar thinking underlies a difference between Democrats and Republicans. Generally speaking, Republicans put an emphasis on nature. If you don't have a job it's because you're lazy, if you're a crack addict it's because you like drugs, if you're a criminal, it's because you've a bad nature. And generally speaking Democrats put an emphasis on nurture. If you're poor maybe it's because of the socio-economic situation, or your context, or our society. And of course, it's neither 100% this or that. To say more would spoil many of the film’s surprising revelations, but the ease with which the film infuses a social dimension with 'Scandinavian' folklore without ever losing his footing, in reality, is nothing short of breathtaking. "Border" is one of the most original and unique films of recent years. The film weaves folklore, tragic romance, and existential questions into a highly affective cinematic tale.