Search Results

(Release Info London schedule; January 30th, 2018, Institue of Contemporary Arts, 18:00) "Loveless" Zhenya (Maryana Spivak) and Boris (Aleksey Rosin) are going through a vicious divorce marked by resentment, frustration and recriminations. Already embarking on new lives, each with a new partner, they're impatient to start again, to turn the page, even if it means threatening to abandon their 12-year-old son Alyosha (Matvei Novikov). Until, after witnessing one of their fights, Alyosha disappears. Born in Novosibirsk. In 1990, Andrey Zvyagintsev graduated from the acting program at 'The Russian University Oof Theater Arts' (GITIS), under the tutelage of Evgeny Lazarev. He went on to take part in independent theater productions and had a few bit parts in TV shows and movies. In 2000, he made his debut as a director. In 2003, Zvyagintsev shot his first feature film, "The Return", which became one of the the cinema sensations of the year. A debut not only for the director but for the majority of the crew as well, it was accepted for the main competition at 'The Venice Film Festival', and won the top prize, the Lion. It also garnered the award for 'Best Debut', with the commendation; a sublime film about love, loss and coming of age. His second film, was presented at 'The 60th Cannes Film Festival', where the lead, Konstantin Lavronenko, became the first Russian actor ever to receive the festival’s award for 'Best Actor'. The international premiere of third film, place in 2011 at 'The 64th Cannes Film Festival', where it was awarded 'The Special Jury Prize' in 'The Un Certain Regard' competition program. His most recent film and, "Leviathan", screened in 'Ofcial Competition' at 'The 67th Cannes Film Festival' and won the award for 'Best Screenplay'. "Leviathan" also became the first Russian film since 1969 to win a 'Golden Globe Award' and was nominated for 'The Best Foreign Film Academy Award' Zvyagintsev draws parallels between "Loveless" and Ingmar Bergman’s Scenes from " A Marriage", transplanted to a diferent era and acted out by diferent characters; urbanites devoid of any real self-awareness or doubt, an average middle- class couple today. Sick of each other after many years of marriage, a man and a woman are going through a divorce. It’s an unremarkable situation. Only, both have new projects. They want to turn the page, begin a new chapter of their lives, with new partners and new emotions that will help them to feel complete and full of promise. Past experience has disheartened them a bit, but they remain confdent in the future. All that remains for them to do is to ofoad the burden that stands between them and happiness; their son, Alyosha, a stranger to both of them, who becomes a ragdoll that each throws vindictively into the other’s face. These are the thoughts of people who blame others for their fascos. In the end, the only thing you can really change is yourself. Only then will the world around you glow once more; perhaps only a terrible loss can allow this to happen. Our post-modern era is a post-industrial society inundated by a constant fow of information received by individuals with very little interest in other people as anything else than a means to an end. These days, it’s every man for himself. The only way out of this indiference is to devote oneself to others, even perfect strangers, like the volunteer search coordinator who combs the town looking for this vanished child, with no promise of reward, as if it's his life’s true purpose. This basic task imbues his every action with meaning. It's the only means of fghting dehumanization and the world’s disarray. Among the snowy high-rises of modern Moscow lives stocky salesman Bori and Zhenya, a youthful salon owner. Having migrated to shiny new partners, the couple's relationship is coming to a bitter end and the fate of their 12 year-old son Alyosha is the last thing on their minds. When Alyosha goes missing without a trace, his parents can barely grieve in unison. "Loveless" is a story about a heartless marriage on the verge of collapse faced with tragedy. It also illuminates multilayered dichotomies embedded in Russian society. Battles between old and new beliefs, public and private institutions, post-Soviet infrastructures and nouveau riche establishments linger throughout. is the master of crafting a drama with the cinematic tropes of a thriller. Moreover, he's an expert at exposing his world for what it has become. We watch as the director's countrymen ruthlessly step all over each other in order to claw to the top. As Vladimir Putin flexes his muscles and expands westward, "Loveless" may at first appear to be about a specifically Russian phenomenon, but it's not. "Loveless" is universal.

Taken 4, sorry, The Commuter, is Liam Neeson’s 2018 off the rails thriller. Former policeman Michael MacCauley (Neeson) is a family man with money troubles, and when a mystery woman offers him $1 million cash on his daily commuter train to find someone “who doesn’t belong”, he accepts. The film’s opening sequence sees MacCauley and his family in their day to day life. The various scenes fit together nicely and it is a clever approach to display the location of the movie, New York, by Jaume Collet-Serra. Various seasons pass by and the audience becomes familiar with the family: their son’s college dream, their interests, their troubles. As the narrative sets off in the city, viewers slowly lose their interest in Michael’s life and the dialogue lead scenes bore the action-seeking audience. It is no different to your everyday commute. Predictably, Michael is very recently unemployed, a patriarch with the view that he has been de-masculinised by losing his job. Stranger, Joanne (Vera Farmiga), plays on this fear, offering Michael money she knows he can’t refuse. Finally, the real story begins. Neeson’s performance in The Commuter is to the same low standard as in both the Taken sequels. Unfortunately, as per his previous performances, he isn’t ground breaking. This is partly because Neeson always plays the same role; as expected, he throws people about a lot and answers the phone a lot. Nothing new for Neeson. The character of Michael doesn’t do the actor any favours either as the audience grow tired of him. Michael goes out of his way to do the least logical things and to draw attention to himself, concerning other passengers on the train and then acting confused as to why they’re all looking at him. His excuse for his odd behaviour is that he is an ex-cop; he knows protocol. It’s Neeson, he always does. The majority of the action in the film takes place on the train as Michael searches for “Prynne”. In his search (WARNING: SPOLIERS) he benevolently saves the train’s passengers and, of course, survives being thrown from an exploding carriage. Granted, this is the type of action many audience members expect, however what they do not expect is a slow and confusing conclusion to the movie. Somehow Michael’s friend from one of the slow scenes at the start of the movie is in cahoots with whoever Joanne is working for, of course Neeson is no stranger to this sort of twist and understands the confusion perfectly. On the other hand, the audience are left one step behind the movie until concludes. Overall, The Commuter is a film you’ve seen before. There is nothing new or ground-breaking in the narrative, and the performances feel manufactured. Whilst mildly entertaining in the action scenes, the ending provides nothing but confusion for audience. The Commuter is a train wreck.

(Release Info London schedule; February 9th, 2018, Electric Cinema, 18:30) "The Mercy" This is the incredible true story of Donald Crowhurst (Colin Firth), an amateur sailor who competed in the 1968 'Sunday Times Golden Globe Race' in the hope of becoming the first person in history to single-handedly circumnavigate the globe without stopping. With an unfinished boat and his business and house on the line, Donald leaves his wife, Clare (Rachel Weisz) and their children James (Kit Connor) and Rachel (Eleanor Stagg) behind, hesitantly embarking on an adventure on his boat 'The Teignmouth Electron'. "The Mercy" is the story of Crowhurst's dangerous solo voyage and the struggles he confronted on the epic journey while his family awaited his return is one of the most enduring mysteries of recent times. Not long after his departure, it becomes apparent to Donald that he's drastically unprepared. His initial progress is slow, so Donald begins to fabricate his route. His sudden acceleration doesn’t go unnoticed and he soon emerges as a serious contender in the competition. Donald’s business partner, Stanley Best (Ken Stott)), had reminded him that he could pull out at any time, however, the consequences to his family from such a decision are unthinkable; Donald has given himself no other choice but to carry on. During his months at sea, Donald encounters bad weather, faulty equipment, structural damage and, the most difficult obstacle of all, solitude. One by one, his fellow competitors drop out until it's only Donald left to challenge Robin Knox-Johnston (Mark Gattis), who's first to complete the round trip. As the pressure from what awaits him back home increases, Donald faces his toughest challenge, maintaining his sanity. When he receives word from his press officer, Rodney Hallworth (David Thewlis), of the recognition and celebrations awaiting him upon his return, Donald’s mind finally breaks.'The Teignmouth Electron' is found abandoned off the coast of 'The Dominican Republic'. Donald’s scrawled logs are inside, filled with ramblings of truth, knowledge and cosmic beings. Back home, his wife Clare is left without a husband, his children without a father. Donald Crowhurst was born near Delhi in British colonial India in 1932 to John and Alice Crowhurst. At the age of eight he was sent to an Indian boarding school where he would spend nine months of the year. Two years later, his parents moved to 'Western Pakistan'. After 'The Second World War", aged fourteen, Donald was sent back to England to board at 'Loughborough College'. His parents returned to England in 1947 when India gained Independence from Britain and the Partition took place. His father ploughed all of his retirement savings into an ill-fated business deal in the new territory of Pakistan. The Crowhurst’s life in post-war England was a far cry from colonial life. The lack of funds forced Donald to leave 'Loughborough College' at the age of sixteen once he passed his 'School Certificate', and sadly his father died in March 1948. After starting as an apprentice in electronic engineering at 'The Royal Aircraft Establishment Technical College' in Farnborough, Donald went on to join 'The RAF' in 1953; he learned to fly and was commissioned. He enjoyed the life of a young officer and was described by many as charming, brave and a compulsive risk-taker who defied authority and possessed a madcap sense of humour. After he was asked to leave 'The RAF', he promptly enlisted in the army, was commissioned and took a course in electronic control equipment. He resigned from the army in 1956 and went on to carry out research work at 'Reading University' aged twenty-four. Crowhurst is remembered as being quite dashing and he caught the attention of his future wife Clare at a party in Reading in 1957. Clare was from Ireland and had been in England for 3 years. Apparently he told her that she would marry an impossible man. He said he would never leave her side and took her out the very next evening. Theirs was a romantic, whirlwind courtship that took place over the spring and summer of 1957. They married on 5th October and their first son, James was born the following year. It was at this time that Crowhurst began sailing seriously. He secured a job with an electronics firm called Mullards but left after a year and aged twenty-six, he became 'Chief Design Engineer' with another electronics company in Bridgwater, Somerset. His real dream was to invent his own electronic devices and he would spend hours of his spare time tinkering with wires and transistors creating gadgets. He also found solace in sailing his small, blue, 20-foot boat, 'Pot Of Gold'. Crowhurst designed 'The Navicator', a radio direction-finding device for yachting and set up his company 'Electron Utilisation' to manufacture and market the gadget. Donald and Clare’s family expanded with the arrival of Simon in 1960, Roger in 1961 and Rachel in 1962 and they lived happily in the Somerset countryside. When 'Electron Utilisation' hit financial difficulty, Crowhurst was introduced to Taunton businessman, Stanley Best, who agreed to back the company and Best eventually sponsored Crowhurst’s attempt to circumnavigate the world in the trimaran 'Teignmouth Electron'. With the Empire gone, in 1960s Britain there developed a phenomenon where men sought adventure, recognition and heroism. Sending men to the moon was something Britain couldn’t afford, so instead, heroes came in the form of people like Francis Chichester who was the first person to tackle a single-handed circumnavigation of the world, starting and finishing in England with one stop in Sydney. Upon his return in 1967, Chichester was knighted by Queen Elizabeth II and instantly became a national hero. Capitalising on this wave of interest in individual round the world voyages, 'The Sunday Times' sponsored 'The Golden Globe' race, a non-stop, single-handed round the world yacht race. No qualifications were required for entrants but the rule was that they had to depart between 1st June and 31st October 1968 in order to pass through 'The Southern Ocean' in summer. The trophy would be awarded to the first person to complete the race unassisted via the old clipper route, of the great Capes; 'Good Hope', 'Leeuwin' and 'Horn'. The newspaper also offered a cash prize of £5000 for the fastest single-handed navigation. Nine sailors started the race, four retired before leaving 'The Atlantic Ocean'. Chay Blyth who had no previous sailing experience, retired after passing 'The Cape Of Good Hope'. Nigel Tetley was leading the race but sank with 1,100 nautical miles to go. Frenchman Bernard Moitessier rejected the commercial nature of the race, so abandoned it but continued sailing, completing the circumnavigation and carried on half way around the globe again. Donald Crowhurst’s 'Teignmouth Electron' was discovered mid-Atlantic, 1,800 miles from England at 7.50am on 10th July 1969 by 'The Royal Mail Vessel', Picardy that was en route from London to the Caribbean. On inspection, the trimaran was deserted and a subsequent 'US Air Force' search for Crowhurst followed to no avail. British sailor Robin Knox-Johnston was the only entrant to complete the race. He was awarded both prizes and subsequently donated his £5000 prize money to Clare Crowhurst and the Crowhurst children. Donald, the head of the family is an amateur sailor, an inventor, a dreamer and a fantasist, so when he sees a competition in 'The Sunday Times' offering £5000 to the first man who circumnavigates the earth single-handedly, without stopping, he dreams that he could do this. Chichester had sailed around the world recently, stopping once and he was knighted upon his return and became a hero. It’s a story about how boys and men become fixated with becoming heroes. Donald has a lot of madcap ideas which often didn’t get carried out, so at first when Clare hears he’s going to enter this race, it’s such a preposterous idea to her, because he’s not a professional sailor, he’s just pottered around. She believes he would actually do it. Slowly but surely it dawns on her that he’s getting closer and closer to actually going and there’s a moment where she asks him, are you really going to go, and he says yes. The question is, could Clare Crowhurst have stopped her husband from embarking on this risky challenge? Perhaps he would have been stoppable, but from my viewpoint, it’s a portrait of a marriage and a relationship and what would have happened had she stopped him from going? Would he ever have forgiven her? In a relationship, can you stop the other from living out their dreams? In this case, it turns out to be tragic decision. In the moment, she didn’t feel like she has the right to. She's in an impossible situation. It sort of becomes two films, the one at sea, where Clare and the children are not there, and then there’s the family home, waiting for news of her husband and their father who's becoming a national hero whilst he’s at sea. Clare has to deal with the press, with long periods of silence and Christmas and birthdays without him. She also has to deal with having no money to buy food or heat the house without him because Clare depended on Donald for money. Clare is a very progressive thinker. Most people would be aghast at the prospect of their husband setting off on this kind of adventure, but Clare understood how fundamental it's to his being and that casts a really interesting light on their relationship. What makes it so romantic is the fact that they’re separated because that’s what old school romantic with a capital ‘R’ means, something that’s unattainable, unfulfilled and broken. That’s why it’s tragic because they're yearning for each other while they're separated. At that time in history, men were leaving their homes and crossing new frontiers, be it in outer space or circumnavigating the world. Rodney Hallworth is a larger than life character, a former crime reporter for 'Fhe Daily Mail', he ended up living in Teignmouth running a local news agency and acting as PR for 'Teignmouth Council'. He offers himself up as Donald Crowhurst’s press agent. The story takes quite a dark twist with Hallworth. With the role he plays in embellishing what’s going on. He’s not complicit with what Crowhurst is doing, he actually believes he’s going round the world but, he’s not receiving enough information from Crowhurst so he starts to get a little creative and exaggerates the speeds and the whereabouts of Crowhurst on the map. This doesn’t help the world understand the real story, it doesn’t help Crowhurst’s family and it doesn’t help Crowhurst because Hallworth is reporting it as a certainty that Crowhurst has rounded the tip of Africa. Crowhurst hadn’t and therefore this made it increasingly difficult for him to give up and turn back. Hallworth is the man who pushed Crowhurst when the boat wasn’t ready to go and he's the man who says, you’ve got to go, there’s too much to lose. Crowhurst cites Hallworth many times in his log as being the main person he would be letting down, as well as Stanley Best who was his sponsor. He feels that his wife Clare would be more understanding but Hallworth wouldn’t. Hallworth also exhibited dubious, Machiavellian traits, not least when he went aboard the 'Teignmouth Electron' in 'The Dominican Republic'. He entered the cabin and found the logs and discovered the truth. He discovered the rambling, the diaries and the insanity and a very high likelihood of suicide so he ripped out the final two pages of the log, then negotiated the sale of the logs to 'The Times Newspaper', without Clare Crowhurst’s permission. Whoever he's, that's not cool. We can forgive him for some of his part in the story, but not for what he did at the end. Hallworth isn't completely the villain of the piece. Everyone has their reasons for doing what they do and he exaggerates Don’s story as it’s being conveyed to him from the boat. He embellishes it and adds to the lie. He feels cheated and as a tabloid crime reporter, he feels he’s been had. So, his anger and indignation are personal but also professional. We can see where he's coming from at the end. Stanley Best is a shrewd, successful businessman who’d makes his money as a caravan dealer in the coastal town of Teignmouth, Devon. He's a very ordinary man of no distinction who grabs the opportunity to be part of something quite splendid. The relationship with Donald Crowhurst is friendly. Stanley likes him very much. It seems that Crowhurst is the kind of man anybody could like because he's charismatic. Stanley didn’t do anything just for the hell of it. He isn't a big risk taker. He likes things to be neatly sewn up. That contributed greatly to what could be considered a modern Greek tragedy in it's immensity. It would have been acceptable for Crowhurst to come home but Stanley Best put that pressure on him. Best blames himself in many ways but the family reassured him, that they didn’t hold him in any way responsible. The irony is the tragedy. Donald Crowhurst's story is an extraordinary and haunting tale of a man going to sea and the family he leaves behind. The film celebrates the beauty of being a dreamer, the beauty of thinking big, wanting great things and following one’s passion and one’s heart towards doing something incredible. Crowhurst’s is a real story, a true story, but it’s definitely a mythical story of the sea and it sort of seeped into the culture as an example of British amateur sailor over-reaching. The idea of hubris-nemesis is built into the story. It’s an absolutely fascinating and compelling narrative. A man has an ambition and ambition doesn’t end up ennobling him, it ends up corrupting him, and tragedy then ensues. It has a very interesting perspective on the unravelling of a human mind. It just gives you a sure foundation if people make these choices and you’ve to understand their story in a dramatic context. They’re real choices and you have to reckon with those and there’s something more persuasive about that than some fictional stories. There are always turning points that you look for in a true story as it gives you a larger insight into the human psychology and you can be constantly surprised by the choices people make. In our era, a true story seems to be one that people increasingly respond to. The film carries out painstaking research and delved deep into the heart and soul of what made Donald Crowhurst tick. Crowhurst has a series of failures, if you like, and he escaped the failure by rolling the dice bigger on the next adventure. He was a man of enormous energy and charm and that energy and charm led him into decisions like the ones he made in joining the race, for example. He had enormous self-belief as well, and people around him substantiated that. He managed to fund and build that boat, so there’s a danger of overlooking what he achieved in this story as well as what he didn’t achieve. He achieved enormous amounts. He was a fairly inexperienced sailor but he wasn’t as inexperienced as some people think he was. He hadn’t sailed the ocean properly, yet he built this very fast trimaran, but the boat wasn’t fully tested and finished. He made a pretty good go at sailing round the world; he stayed out in the ocean for the best part of seven months so all in all, he achieved much more than people ever thought he could, he just didn’t achieve what his objective was. It was a case of over-reach, it was hubris and that's what caused the tragedy of his demise. There are quite a few books out there and great raw materials that he left behind, his logbooks, his diaries and letters he wrote to his wife. He sings on the tapes, mostly sea shanties and he speculates about the state of the world, about politics, about his own life. It’s extraordinary really, some of that's a persona but some of it also is the truth. That’s the great joy of this kind of film, you get a chance to research and the more you know the more you want to know. The public persona Donald Crowhurst created through his tape recordings and the way he talks to his family and people on dry land were, increasingly divorced from what he was feeling and experiencing. In the film, he becomes primitive essentially. He’s stripped of civilisation and becomes much more elemental and that’s shown in his physicality, he loses weight, doesn’t wear as many clothes and starts to look like a vagabond on the boat. The mental journey is much more interesting than the physicality and the film brings that to the character. The sea is like a desert. It’s also mercurial, it has moods, it changes, and it threatens you. But, all you’re seeing is a horizon and a sky. The sea changes colour, it can be stormy and it has this sort of personality that can destroy you. The isolation is a huge part of what goes wrong in Crowhurst’s mind. Your brain chemistry changes when you don’t speak to people. When a real-life character is portrayed on screen, there comes a certain responsibility to the memory of the person and to the feelings of loved ones. "The Mercy" is a version of a story that we think has some truth to it. There’s no definitive version apart from the reality of what actually happened. You capture and distil it somehow into a dramatic form or a documentary form. There's a duty to respect that character and to be sympathetic. There’s a kind of Donald Crowhurst in all of us, we all dream of some kind of glory. In the culture we live in now, we’re encouraged to reach beyond our lot or our station. Crowhurst could have made it and it would be a very different story. It’s about somebody who is a dreamer and he gets caught up in a kind of white lie. Everybody exaggerates a little bit now and then to suit his or her story but obviously, this is a very extreme version of it, therefore it makes good drama. Donald Crowhurst is immensely human and relatable. He’s not a strange, un-understandable being. He’s very understandable. The essence of the film is celebrating him as a kind of romantic hero.

Los Angeles has had its fair share of both cinematic love letters and deconstructions down the years. For every ‘Singin’ in the Rain’ extolling the virtues of Hollywood and pursuing ones dreams, there is a ‘Mulholland Drive’ that pulls back the bedsheets to expose the dark underbelly of corruption. It’s rare to find a film that manages to portray the magic and hypocrisy of Hollywood simultaneously. But Damien Chazelle’s La La Land takes a wide aim at the movie business while still managing to show why so many flock to Tinseltown to chase their dreams – even if most of them end up writing think pieces in between their shifts at Starbucks. Mia (Emma Stone) is an aspiring actress looking for her big Hollywood break. Through a chance encounter on the highway she argues with Seb (Ryan Gosling) a jazz fanatic desperate to start his own club and reinvigorate the disappearing art he has devoted his life to. As they both struggle through tedious day jobs to pursue their dreams, a chance meeting at the bar Seb works at, and a later incident at a party convince the two that there are sparks between them. They begin dating, and their individual passions power their romance. But as each becomes more successful and closer to their dreams, the demands of success threaten to tear their relationship apart. Also there’s a lot of singing. Movies about moviemaking are regular fixtures on the Oscar-hype train. Many cases are incidents of Hollywood giving itself a nice, self-indulgent slap on the back over how wonderful, mysterious or difficult their lives are. With La La Land however there are quite clear reasons why awards will be heading its way. The film is stunningly directed, with some wonderful and original ideas in its presentation. It can be difficult to offer any innovative scenes in a city like LA, which has been covered head-to-toe in cinema leaving practically all corners a cliché. But every scene in La La Land is drenched in classic Hollywood style and mixed in with modern Hollywood vanity. It’s like existing in a present with a filter of the past covering everything you see. Colour bursts from the screen presenting the world as a land of opportunity at all the right times – when our characters meet and fall in love. This is later drained and unsaturated as reality kicks in, and issues between the characters arise. More impressively, this never becomes a distraction to the story. The subtle differences are what stand out, in lighting, wardrobe and shooting, which work to amplify the story we see played out. The plot itself is not anything particularly special, but the ways the story is told elevate it to greatness. Ryan Gosling and Emma Stone are both inspired choices for the leads. Stone’s Mia is a hopeful but frustrated dreamer. Her acting career is headed nowhere when we meet her, yet her creativity and spirit remains intact. As Seb enters her life things begin to look up, despite little progress being made. Stone then gets to bring out the characters true feelings of despair as her relationship begins to suffer, despite her creativity blossoming and eventually seeing some payoff. The role is filled with the typical boisterousness you would expect from Stone, and it’s easy to pull for her to achieve her dreams. Gosling’s Seb meanwhile is himself a dreamer, albeit a much more aloof one with a touch of arrogance. His passion for Jazz is the only driving force in his life, to the point where he is willing to join humiliating 80’s cover bands to fund it. Despite his reserved attitude, Gosling brings a warmth and maturity to the role that plays incredibly well off of Mia’s vulnerability. Despite being the standoffish type, it is Seb who is the one supporting the more outgoing Mia and pushing her to aim for the stars. She in turn opens his eyes to new opportunities and ways to make his love of Jazz more relatable to the people he is so desperate to attract. It’s very easy to root for the characters to be together because of these performances, whilst still seeing all the differences in them that make them strong individuals. It’s food for thought maybe that the next person you flip off on the motorway could be your soulmate, at the very least. La La Land’s strongest point is the theme of the film and the battle it tells through the story between chasing your dreams and dealing with reality. The whimsical musical numbers are often interjected with humorous quips regarding the actuality of life outside of the movies. The growing apart of the characters is facilitated not by typical Hollywood misunderstandings or coincidences but by fundamental issues in their relationship relating to the characters careers. Seb’s life on the road as a keyboard player for example and the stress a long distance relationship puts on Mia. These matters are what facilitates the drama of the movie and raise the questions over what we need to compromise on when two sides of a relationship have different goals and dreams. It is clear as these characters become closer that each side requires sacrifice from the other to fulfil their goals. Seb’s goals involve being on the road to earn enough to start his club, leaving Mia alone. Mia’s require Seb to be more present in the relationship where she can stay in LA to secure acting roles. And while both are at a crucial point in their careers, their demands of each other threaten their dreams. In an old Hollywood movie, they would each know exactly what to say and do to solve their issues, and live happily ever after with all their dreams come true. But that isn’t the world in which La La Land exists. It’s a world where people make mistakes. It’s a world where people don’t always know the perfect thing to say. And it’s where people have to give up some of the things that mean the most to them to find what they need to be happy. It’s hard to imagine that a film about an aspiring Hollywood actress and a Jazz sensation falling in love in the Hollywood hills can be applicable to most people on the planet – especially in today’s culture of anti-elitism and disdain for all things metropolitan. But despite all its whimsy, La La Land is one of the most realistic films of the year. Final Thoughts La La Land is no average LA love story. Much like Damien Chazelle’s previous film Whiplash, central to the film is the price that must be paid for success. It’s the story of two creative individuals with hopes and dreams and what they have to sacrifice in order to attain them. Whilst far more optimistic in its outlook than Whiplash was about doing what it takes to achieve greatness, La La Land isn’t afraid to ask questions about whether the pursuit of dreams will truly lead to happiness, and whether relationships can survive against the demands of a passion. Looking past the toe-tapping songs and excellent performances, and the richness of this modern day classic is on full display. If it sweeps the Oscar’s, it won’t be because of Hollywood’s need for self-indulgence (alright, not JUST because of that). It will be because no other film takes the same risks in telling an original story about love, commitment and creativity as La La Land has done. Now, if only J.K Simmons’ cameo appearance could have been changed to feature him screaming ‘NOT MY TEMPO!!!’ at Ryan Gosling, it would have Whiplash beat in every way.

Cast: #francesmcdormand #samrockwell #woodyharrelson Director: #martinmcdonagh Entering into a local advertising firm and negotiating the rental of a few billboards which have controversial messages on them directed at William Willoughby (Woody Harrelson), who's the town's chief of police. They accuse him of failing to properly investigate the rape and murder of her daughter. Directed by Martin McDonagh (#sevenpsychopaths, #inbruges), Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri has received critical acclaim across the board and won the People’s Choice Award at #torontointernationalfilmfestival. Oscar-winning actress Frances McDormand (Fargo) gives a stunning performance as the grieving mother with a fiery agenda, and Woody Harrelson (War for the Planet of the Apes) plays the conflicted police chief. MY FINAL THOUGHTS It's that time of year again when all of the most likely #Oscar contenders get released at the same time at your local cinemas. It's hilarious it reminds me of delayed public transport buses when one is behind schedule they end up arriving in a dozen. Talk about buses they have some fantastic advertising #Billboards at some bus shelters, with some eye-popping digital screens nowadays. Only thing missing now is for them to become touchscreen and us to be able to book your tickets on them. Overall I gave this emotionally roller-coaster movie a big thumbs up 5/5 Stars 🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟 This unromantic comedy deserves the hype surrounding it's success with the recent award ceremonies at the #GoldenGlobes and the recent #sagawards, I had to see it to believe it. I found this movie intriguing from start to finish this mouthwatering film has everything you could wish for. It has laughter, sadness and action and violence. #cinema #entertainmentnews #filmcritic #greatmusic #musicnews #music #soundtrack #composer #carterburwell #song 🎶Billboards On Fire 🔥#kamaras_reviews

The most charming aspect about Lady Bird is the idea that there is no great twist or typical structure to the movie, but instead is a catalogue of engaging moments. Greta Gerwig's directorial debut is a refreshing blend of her quirky, indie roots and commercial, mainstream familiarities which is roughly based on her own story. Yet Lady Bird is also a film that everyone can relate to and enjoy whether they are male or female and regardless of age. The brilliant Saoirse Ronan plays Christine "Lady Bird" McPherson, a teenager growing up in Sacramento in 2002. Throughout the movie we follow her journey through the late stages of a Catholic school, her first exploits with the opposite sex, and her general coming of age growing up in a family struggling financially. Most importantly though, we are introduced to the incredibly strained relationship with her mother (Laurie Metcalf), summed up in the opening scene of the movie. It is this relationship that is the backbone of the movie, and Metcalf is the perfect counter to Ronan's punchy character. It seems like it will be a shootout between Metcalf and Kristin Scott Thomas (Darkest Hour) for Best Supporting Actress. Special mention must also go to Tracy Metts who plays Lady Bird's gentle, depressed father. Gerwig tells this story so genuinely and honestly that it is so relatable for so many people who would have had similar struggles at that stage of their lives. Yet there is a quirky teenage charm to it all that is very much down to her and the movie's cast who are all on top form. Lady Bird guarantees laughs and tears, but will leave you with an overwhelming feeling of melancholic warmth. @SceneItMovie

(Release Info London schedule; February 23rd, 2018, Curzon Soho, 18:20) "A Fantastic Woman" Marina Vidal (Daniela Vega) and Orlando (Francisco Reyes) are in love and planning for the future. Marina is a young waitress and aspiring singer. Orlando is 20 years older than her, and owns a printing company. After celebrating Marina’s birthday one evening, Orlando falls seriously ill. Marina rushes him to the emergency room, but he passes away just after arriving at the hospital. Instead of being able to mourn her lover, suddenly Marina is treated with suspicion. The doctors and Orlando’s family don’t trust her. A woman detective investigates Marina to see if she was involved in his death. Orlando’s ex-wife forbids her from attending the funeral. And to make matters worse, Orlando’s son threatens to throw Marina out of the flat she shared with Orlando. Marina is a trans woman and for most of Orlando’s family, her sexual identity is an aberration, a perversion. So Marina struggles for the right to be herself. She battles the very same forces that she has spent a lifetime fighting just to become the woman she's now, a complex, strong, forthright and fantastic woman. Marina is a 27-year-old waitress and singer. She's Orlando’s partner, with whom she has an adult, loving, and committed relationship, in spite of their differences in age and social class. Marina, though far from being perfect, is a resilient woman who has quite an impressive level of compromise with her own life. She loves deeply, and this gives her the opportunity of loving herself and overcoming any adversity. She’s a brave fighter who doesn’t falter when the world puts her to the test. She has a vital force that's capable of carrying her through against all odds. Today, while all of us are somehow standing on the edge of a precipice, she doesn’t even look at it, and searches for beauty instead. She understands that even Orlando’s death, or what her being transgender means to everyone else, will not keep her from pushing forward. Orlando has broken away from his family. With the exception of his brother, who admires him greatly. He has neither his ex-wife’s nor his son’s comprehension, nor that of the rest of the family, whom after his death, unleash all of the violence provoked by ignorance and vulnerability before the unknown onto Marina. But this is not an issue for him, and he surrenders to his relationship without considering anybody’s opinion or stance. He doesn’t question himself over whether the person he loves is a man, a woman, or a transgender person, and this honest and authentic attitude surrounds him with a natural aura that prevents other people from interfering with him. There’s no intellectual or ideological defense of his relationship with Marina. His great defense is the authentic love that he feels for her. To Orlando, Marina is an inspiring being that gives him new wings with which to enjoy life, that connects him to his love for what's honest, and allows him to find peace, affection, and company in her. Although he appears to be a regular man, he possesses a great internal strength, freedom, and courage that allows him to see Marina and recognize her as an extraordinary and kind being. For her part, Marina, whose life is a constant struggle to live harmoniously within her social setting, recognizes in Orlando the simplicity and authenticity of this mature man, and discovers a refuge in him: a true and calm love. The two meet in their courage and in the conscious or unconscious search for what specific beautiful and authentic. It’s a story of true love; Marina and Orlando simply love each other, and after meeting, they've discovered a refuge in one another. To them, the differences in their ages and sexual cultures are not barriers. It’s inspiring to see how two beings whose intimacies are unknown to us, and whose lives we could prejudge maliciously, surrender themselves without hesitation, without fear, and without fuss, to a relationship in which judgments on good and evil, on what’s correct and what’s incorrect, what’s normal and abnormal, simply aren’t issues. Where a space for love is simply made evident and recognized. This film is about the way in which we understand relationships and affection, as well as the way in which we conceive love. The film, like Marina, it's central character, is not afraid of pleasure and, like her, has a striking and shiny surface. It tries to combine the narrative and the visual pleasure in games of appearances that want to captivate, a sort of 'Trojan Horse' loaded with humanity. So, regardless of his or her beliefs, values, or vision of the world, from watching her so much, the viewer ends up feeling like her, and from empathizing with her so much, the viewer wants to see her survive and prevail. The film invites us to feel like others, to experiment emotions that are often new to us, and these discoveries occur not within the film, but within the viewers themselves. The film prepares us for life and allows us to explore our spiritual elasticity. The film asks the viewer to surrender him or herself to a challenging journey, and to do so with wide-open arms. To feel that he or she has seen something beautiful, to feel that he or she was in contact with beauty. The film is a more complex construction than "Gloria", because it's several films at the same time. But in spite of the fact that "A Fantastic Woman" exists in a different cinematographic territory that operates far beyond realism, it has, just as with "Gloria", a higher inclination towards questions than towards answers. At the same time, it examines and exalts a powerful female character, yet for several reasons, "A Fantastic Woman" is much more than a film about a woman. "A Fantastic Woman" is a film of aesthetic splendor, narrative vigor, tension and emotion. Polytonal, multi- experiential, multi-emotional. It’s a film that's both a celebration and examination of it's main character, Marina Vidal. What will the viewers see when they see Marina? A woman, a man, or the sum of both? They will see a human being who constantly changes before their eyes, who flows, vibrates, and modifies herself. What they're seeing isn’t precisely what they're seeing, and this condition turns Marina into a vortex that attracts the viewer’s fantasy and desire, inviting them to explore the limits of their own empathy.

One thing is for sure. If you ever decide to go into the advertising billboard business don't plan on using Ebbing, Missouri as your launch pad. They make would-be advertisers use giant sized billboards on back roads where no one will see them and where eventually they will fall into disrepair. This is where Mildred, (Frances McDormand) comes in. A curmudgeonly and waspish woman, who is seeking action from the local police in finding her missing daughter and, we must assume, her daughter's eventual killer. Mildred decides to rent the billboards to grab police attention and advertise in oversized black text the lack of police commitment. The numerous preposterous situations in this film can be attributed to a lethal combination of a writer who feels ill at ease with story telling and then fatally treats his words as holy writ. He should have had a strong director with him to flag up the flimsy logic and horrid clichés. A director who wouldn't let him get away with it. Unfortunately, when the two of them got together, their admiration for each other's work was so intense and resilient, they just couldn't bring themselves to openly question the other's thought process. But they must have both had their suspicions about each other because tanker loads of midnight oil have been burnt beavering away on adding bits to get the plot to catch up and explain itself. Sadly, this film lacks that thread of logic that must exist for an audience to truly believe in the plot. Logic should be the cornerstone. Give an audience a logical story and they will follow. Toy Story, Superman, etc. all fantasy, but all fiercely logical. In any event, both the writer and the director finally gave up on logic and relied instead on three huge, sleight of hand performances to cover any inconvenient truths. For a start it has no sense of location. There are few stores in this town. There are no grocery stores or McDonalds or anything - or if there are we don't get to see them. We just don't know where we are - or even in what time zone. But hang on, I'm forgetting that's not necessary because it's in the title. It's Ebbing, Missouri. And it's about Three Billboards. And they're outside town. Now, just like the lack of stores in Ebbing, the townsfolk are sparse and a weird bunch too. There aren't that many of them but all have presumably been extras in Westerns for most of their lives and as a result stand around on Main Street watching meekly as one of Ebbing's finest, a twerpy, semi-literate cop (Sam Rockwell) inflicts violence on the aforementioned, mild mannered citizens. But no one notices. No one complains. It's as though a part of this town has been set aside to allow a manic theatre troupe to indulge in a sub-culture of idiocy of truly Truman Show proportions. There's the obligatory drunk police chief - no wait a minute, that's Sam Rockwell, he's the drunk but he's not the chief. The police chief is Woody Harrelson and he has a terminal illness but other than that, only the scantest of other clues to his character. We know he is married to a young Australian girl (Abbie Cornish). Who says Hollywood can no longer contemplate a ludicrous age gap? But the Cornish character was presumably on a doomed domestic flight from Sydney to somewhere when she found herself stranded in the twilight zone that is Ebbing. Harrelson and Cornish have two children who are cute and play a curious fishing game by themselves on the edge of a lake. This allows their parents to treat themselves to some off screen hanky-panky and because of this, their children's safety is rather secondary. Harrelson's quiet performance, in a wonderful white shirt, has echoes of Jeff Bridges in 'Hell or High Water'. Although that's where the comparison ends. He really exists only in the mind of the director or writer, or both of them, to compose three hand written letters that will get our director or the writer off a troublesome hook and make everything right for everybody. Then, finally there's Frances McDormand as Mildred , our Three Bill Boards girl. Now, anyone who has seen Ms. McDormand in previous productions will have fond memories of Fargo and Blood Simple and Olive Kitteridge and so on. But, and let's be clear about this, Frances McDormand could waltz through this sort of script while asleep. On a stretcher. In the dark. A ground breaking performance it is not. It's as though she planned to try something else but, and Pavlov was right on this, as soon as an actor sees a red light and hears a bell many of them just can't help but deliver their stock performance. In McDormand's case it's from her Sour and Harsh canon and regrettably she will not develop beyond this now as an actress. So what does all this strange little film add up to? Probably, just like La La Land, it proves you can fool all of the people some of the time - even an Oscar jury. My memory of Three Billboards will be the indulgent script and lack of editing and Sam Rockwell's strange haircut and Frances McDormand's relentless bandana and strange haircut and Clarke Peters flashing his cop's badge a little too early - so when an elderly 'Sidney Poitier' shows up in town our surprise is muted. Oddly, and this is a clue to how a film can mask the insubstantial talent of the writer and director, the minor roles here only serve to amplify the massive theatricality of the principal performances and the production as a whole. And so it will fade away and get an Oscar for something and the game can go on.

I had been been waiting months to see this and finally I did and I wasn't disappointed, not blown away, but a very good film. Didn't hit the emotional peaks like with Three Billboards Outside Ebbing Missouri, but had more consistent humour through-out. Any scene that involves a nun or a priest (Lois Smith and Stephen Henderson) be prepared for a hearty chortle, though with a little bit of guilt at the context. I had been been waiting months to see this and finally I did and I wasn't disappointed, not blown away, but a very good film. Didn't hit the emotional peaks like with Three Billboards Outside Ebbing Missouri, but had more consistent humour through-out. Any scene that involves a nun or a priest (Lois Smith and Stephen Henderson) be prepared for a hearty chortle, though with a little bit of guilt at the context.I had been been waiting months to see this and finally I did and I wasn't disappointed, not blown away, but a very good film. Didn't hit the emotional peaks like with Three Billboards Outside Ebbing Missouri, but had more consistent humour through-out. Any scene that involves a nun or a priest (Lois Smith and Stephen Henderson) be prepared for a hearty chortle, though with a little bit of guilt at the context. Christine, or ''Ladybird'' (Saoirse Ronan) as she likes to go by, plays a high school senior on the verge of going to college. We see her dealing with all too familiar and real elements from all our teenage years i.e. her battle to make the grades to get out of her town and go to a college in the big city, entering into her first relationships with boys and also dealing with the love/hate relationship with her mum Laurie Metcalf (aka Sheldon's mom) who gives a fantastic performance which for me almost steals the show. Watch out for up and coming star Lucas Hedge, who plays Ladybird's love interest who has a limited supporting role but gives depth to his and Saoise's characters. He is quickly becoming your film award nomination guarantee, recently also appearing in Three Billboards and Manchester by the Sea. I think this film is deserving of the plaudits it has been receiving, but I don't think gives us much new in an American coming-of-age film, but has a realistic grounding, think more Boyhood than Superbad. If you haven't considered going to see it, then you will find it a heart warming gem of a film and will not be disappointed. 4/5.

Regrettably, my journey to Wakanda was via Snoozeville. Never thought I'd be saying this but I couldn't get over how much this film reminded me of the god awful Star Wars Ep.1 the Phantom Menace. Slow pace scene after slow pace scene of people sitting around in circles talking, standing around...talking...with nothing interesting actually going on. Then to top it off, for the final battle to keep cutting away from the main protagonist's action to the supporting characters' generic, CGI shoot-em-up (a la Obi Wan and Qui-Gon vs Darth Insidious). Marvel needs to revamp their formula from quick quips then big punch em up as I think this is the point where we've had our fill. Don't get me wrong, this is not a bad movie. If it had came out a few years ago it could have been considered great and enjoyable. But we've been so beaten over the head with Marvel it is the straw that breaks the armoured plated rhino's back. A mediocre 2.5/5.

4.5/5- I saw this film last year but it has only recently come out on general release. This is an excellent film that revolves around a mum (Frances McDormand) who sets up three billboards that directly questions the local police chief (Woody Harrelson) as to why the killer of her daughter has not been brought to justice. The comedy is well toned but never overshines the dark subject matter. The film boasts a superb supporting cast of Sam Rockwell, Peter Dinklage and John Hawkes. You never know which way the story is going to go. You can get two or three judgements on each character once you see the situation from their point of view. This was one of my favourite films of last year. I urge you to go and see it.

Warmth. Wonder. Wishfullness. As each moment passed, the importance of family filled my heart. The spectacular story that rose Pixar back from the dead - Coco. Suitable for all ages, Coco conveys the appreciation for heritage, as it brings longing, joy, and moving music to the big screen. Coco tells the story of a young Mexican boy, Miguel, determined in becoming a successful musician, like his idol, Ernesto de la Cruz. However, due to his family's ban on music, Miguel finds himself having an adventure in the breathtaking Land of the Dead. Coco manages to make its audience question, "how long will it be before I am forgotten?" This was a powerful route for Disney Pixar to take, but it's not surprising that it worked. How often do they disappoint? Family is the most extraordinary bond on the planet; this is what Coco suceeded in proving to its audiences. However, they not only did that, but showed the world how huge of a role that music plays in our souls. This is clearly showed as 'Remember Me' won an Oscar for Best Original Song. 'Remember Me' conveys that love has no barriers, especially when it comes to distance. No matter how far away a loved one is, they will always be there in heart; this is a significant message within both the song, and the movie as a whole. The power of music is also conveyed in Coco, as we see it tear a family apart, however see an ambitious young boy use it to bring them back together. Coco continues to please audiences as it also ticks off the list for context. This magical masterpiece not only creates characters that are easy to sympathise for, but places them within the very real environment of Mexico. The culture is the very centre of the movie, as it is based around the events of Día de los Muertos (Day of the Dead), and Pixar clearly went to great lengths to ensure that Coco was culturally correct. Disney Pixar created vibrant visuals for their refreshing, comforting movie. Although Coco was familiar to other Pixar films surrounding the topic of family, Coco is undeniably one of their best! 4.5☆