THE BIGGEST LITTLE FARM (2018)

A couple are followed through their successes and failures as they work to develop a sustainable farm on 200 acres outside of Los Angeles. Over the years, the desolate they purchase begins to thrive and is transformed.

When studying science at university, environmental science is the subject that changed me from a man that cared only about how cheap food or products were, to caring how sustainably it was made. Learning about the effects of monocultures, tilling of soil, deforestation, pesticides and other chemical use, it opened my eyes to the dangers of the profit-driven model of capitalism. Since then, it has always been a long-term dream to own a property that provides its own water, electricity, and food.

The Biggest Little Farm is exciting because it looks at these subpar farming practices and seeks to improve them through natural means; by creating a circular ecosystem that is balanced enough to near enough control itself. Expertly edited through seven years of footage, John Chester takes us through the ups and downs of the establishment of his all-natural farm. 

It's a very emotional experience. Watching John and Molly taking the leap into this new endeavour with no knowledge or savings to fund it, this is the underdog story that the audience wants to succeed, as a symbol of hope in a world that has been exploited and ravaged by generations of poor management. We need it to succeed to prove that there is a way back from the brink of environmental destruction, to prove that it is also economically viable, and because of that, the audience is firmly linked with John and Molly, feeling the pain and frustrations of their struggles, the grief of their losses, and the joys and adulation of their successes.

John acts as not only the farmer, but also director, producer, and cinematographer of this biggest little feature, and it shows, through the very strong narrative direction. There are so many different elements that come into play throughout the runtime, but it never feels overwhelming. It shows the visible consequences of each imbalance in the ecosystem, showing the effects of every change that they make, and leaves enough time to pass before a solution is found to effectively convey the tension that occurs. The cinematography, in particular, is highly variable, varying from handheld footage, to drone photography and high definition close-ups, there are many moments in the film (particularly around the animals present in the farm) that would not be out of place in a David Attenborough BBC documentary.

The complexity of an ecological system can seem intimidating, but John and Molly Chester are able to focus your attention to one detail at a time, before pulling back slightly to find a solution within another problem. Gophers, for example, are great for aerating the soil, but in too high numbers, will eat the roots of your trees and kill them. Gophers are a pain for humans to control without traps and poison, but gophers also are not at the top of the food chain, and therein lies the solution.

There is a fair amount of death in this documentary, which some younger children may find slightly distressing. But death is a necessary component of the cycle of life, and it's great to see that they did not shy away from showing this part of the struggle. It has its ups and downs, but The Biggest Little Farm is uplifting and sows the seeds of hope for future generations. With some grounded humour, and protagonists that the audience can truly support and care about, this documentary is an important reminder that everything has a purpose.

The Biggest Little Farm is in cinemas from December 5, 2019

JUDY (2019)

Legendary performer Judy Garland arrives in London in the winter of 1968 to perform a series of sold-out concerts.

Before seeing this film, I actually had to look up the name Judy Garland to see who she was. Of course, she was Dorothy in the 1939 classic, The Wizard of Oz. Beyond that film, I had no knowledge of Garland's career, so I looked forward to rectifying that with this biopic, Judy, loosely based on the broadway play, End of the Rainbow. 

The main bulk of the film begins in the year of 1968 and is an interesting choice considering Garland passed away in 1969. Structurally, from a narrative standpoint, the film is mostly linear. It does utilise flashback sequences, but it does so for very short periods, and it relates directly to the next scenes back in the 1968 section of the timeline. These flashbacks are hardly subtle in their message, but they are well directed, and their content is the most emotionally stirring components of the narrative, thanks to a stellar performance from Darci Shaw as the young Judy Garland.

The flashbacks have a stronger engagement level with the audience because the mains storyline has no real direction at all. There is a plotline revolving around getting money to buy a house for her children, but it is rarely brought up. The pieces of her life portrayed on the screen are chaotic and haphazardly assembled through some peculiar editing choices, but there is no overarching purpose beyond a general atmosphere of "doing well" slowly giving way to "struggling". 

One could propose that Judy aims to vilify the film industry itself and its treatment of child actors, with events from Garland's childhood being directly associated with her substance abuse, as well as her physical and mental health issues. Unfortunately, like many of the other interesting questions that the film brings to mind, the topic is swiftly dropped and never referred to again. It is this jumping from scene to scene that prevents any development of character in the film, and as a result, Judy manages to feel both rushed, and slow.

On the other hand, Renée Zellweger gives the performance of her career. Her singing, dancing, and overall display are phenomenal. Despite a slow and disjointed narrative that achieves nothing in its 118-minute runtime, Zellweger manages to create an energy that gradually builds until the climax. It doesn't justify the lacklustre quality of the plot, but it helps bring some genuine enjoyment.

Visually, Judy is well displayed. The cinematography is astounding, with smooth tracking shots, a warm ambience thanks to the lighting and colours, and some very creative shots that logistically must have involved some significant CGI, but is high enough quality that it doesn't show any evidence of it.

An intriguing character-piece that doesn't really explore the character all that deeply, Judy has some high points and some exceptional acting from both young and old Judy Garland portrayals, but it lacks a strong sense of purpose to fully hook you in. Some beautiful musical numbers to be seen, but it isn't enough to keep this reviewer engaged in what is going on.

VITA AND VIRGINIA (BFF2019)

Virginia Woolf meets fellow author Vita Sackville-West in London in the 1920s. Despite both of them being married, they embark on an affair that later inspires one of Virginia's novels.

New Zealand film distributors are absolutely loving their lesbian period pieces at the moment, with Colette, Portrait of a Lady of Fire and Tell It To The Bees all hitting our screens in 2019. Vita & Virginia is another to add to that list, having limited screenings at the British Film Festival, it has been picked up for additional screenings from next week. 

Based on the real-life affair of writers Vita Sackville-West and Virginia Woolf, there are some similarities to Colette. Where Colette balanced the storyline of the creative and artistic output with the drama of the relationships, Vita & Virginia focuses solely on the evolution of the relationship, with the creative works being more of a byproduct of those interactions. This has the consequence of the tone of the film being based on a single storyline. Talk about putting all your eggs in one basket.

With minimal subplots (all of which are directly connected to the main arc) Vita & Virginia has a very straightforward and linear narrative.  In addition to this, the dialogue is stilted and overly formal thanks to the early 20th Century diction that is utilised and further exacerbated by the narrative direction that focuses on the love letters sent between the Woolf and Sackville-West. There is a pretentious manner that when delivered in an apathetic monologue, slows the movement and pacing of the film to a near-complete stop. 

It can certainly give an arthouse atmosphere to the film (especially with the CGI effects added in post-production to add variety to the repetitive visual framing), but it doesn't hide the fact that the relationship that transpires onscreen lacks passion and authenticity. Or at the very least, presents a dramatically one-sided affair. Whether an intentional choice in direction or a poor choice in casting, Gemma Arterton falls short of expectations, with a bland performance that never feels impassioned. Emotionless and fake, Arterton is unable to convince the audience of any legitimate chemistry between Woolf and Sackville-West. In fact, there is better chemistry between these polyamorous women and their emotionally estranged husbands.

That is to say that Arterton is the weakest link in the cast. Elizabeth Debicki (who portrays Virginia Woolf), on the other hand, is an absolute delight. Her performance as this less popular author, who has come to accept and utilise her own eccentricities, whilst dealing with bouts of depression and self-deprecation. Not just in her visual display which held some incredibly subtle, yet powerful, emotive expressions, but the way in which her character was written in the screenplay by Eileen Atkins and Chanya Button. There are several layers to the character as she attempts to balance her trauma and depression, with her creative passions, and her new fickle lover. 

What was an interesting touch, was the use of a modern electronic score. At first, sounding out of place in a film set in the 1920s, once you come to terms with the contradictory nature of it, the simplistic nature of the composition works well with the film's contents. 

Overall, this was an adequate film. Debicki's performance is fascinating to watch but isn't enough to maintain interest in a love story that is unable to properly convey those emotions onscreen. Sluggish pacing and a lack of side plots to expand and develop the characters, make this one of the more forgettable films of the year.

Vita & Virginia is in cinemas from December 5th, 2019

MRS LOWRY & SON (2019)

Mrs Lowry & Son depicts the relationship between L.S. Lowry, one of Britain’s most iconic artists, and his mother Elizabeth, with whom he lived until her death. Spall plays Lowry, and Redgrave, his over-bearing mother.

"I am a man who paints. Nothing more, nothing less". 

For those that are unaware of who L.S. Lowry is, this paraphrased quote from the man is an accurate summary of the film. Mrs Lowry & Son is based on a theatrical play, which is based on a radio drama, and as a consequence finds itself caught in the trappings of its earlier adaptations. For a biopic on one of Britain's most iconic painters, one would expect a deep exploration of his influences and the origins of his art. This is not quite the case.

As the title suggests the focus of the narrative is around the relationship between Lowry and his mother; more specifically, the emotionally abusive relationship between them. The mother is effectively bedridden and awaiting death, with no other tasks but to bemoan her unfulfilled dreams in life, and directs that bitterness and annoyance at her son. 

Vanessa Redgrave has the task of bringing the character of Elizabeth Lowry to life, antagonizing and berating with clear and targeted precision. Cruel and scathing, the extent of her control and manipulation is staggering as she consistently pushes her son to follow her "advice", treating any deviation from her plans as a slight against her. It is a performance that gets the blood boiling as you watch this creative individual--who simply loves to paint what he sees and feels--receiving blow after blow to his self-esteem from his own mother. From his choice of subjects in his art to his lack of a female companion, L.S. Lowry (portrayed by Timothy Spall) is attacked from any angle, with the quality of his character constantly being brought into question.

It is his ability to persevere through the waves and barrages of emotional attacks, that actually gives L.S. Lowry credibility. He continues to look after his mother, he continues to pay off his families debts, and through it all, he still manages to see the beauty in the world; a beauty in things that go against traditional ideas of beauty. His mother's antagonistic nature stems from her inability to accept her position in the social classes. Adamant that she is above those that work in the mill, everything that reminds her of that, feeds her anger. Living in the area that she does, her son painting the industrial landscapes only fans the flames further.

Due to the health of Mrs Lowry, the majority of the film takes place within her bedroom. Likely an element that was included in the source materials due to the difficulties in conveying new environments over radio audio, and budgetary restraints when building environments for theatrical plays. Being adapted for film, the opportunity to include additional scenes in visually exciting areas is there to be utilized, and there are certainly some great examples of that being done. The cinematography is great for the internal scenes, with many tight shots of Spall's face, highlighting the toll (or lack thereof) of the incessant emotional abuse. With dialogue-heavy scenes, limited to a single room, there needs to be strength and power in the conveyance of facial expressiveness. Where the film truly feels at home though, is in the limited external scenes. 

Those glimpses of L.S. Lowry when he is separated from his mother, are an absolute inversion of character traits. From quiet, obedient, and burdened, suddenly he is jovial, playful, and genuinely content with himself. Observing the sounds and sights of the industrial areas, cinematographer Josep M. Civit makes great use of wide shots in the external scenes, to not only create a contrast with the claustrophobic musty home scenes, but to create a focus on the framing, creating paintings in each brick-laden environment. Emphasising the structures, and the gradients, we see things in the more whimsical manner in which L.S. Lowry does. The whimsical nature is mirrored by Craig Armstrong's musical score. From the opening scenes, it is clear that the composition holds a significant place in the film, and it rises in volume and weight in the external scenes, receding away during internal conflicts. 

Mrs Lowry & Son is a definitely a slow-paced drama, that could have greatly benefitted from expanding the film to more visually expressive locations. As it stands though, the relatable nature of the parent/child relationship is the element that hooks the audience in. You can understand where both perspectives are coming from, but you definitely sympathise with one side over the other. It aches to see one being emotionally ravaged by a member of their own family because there are so many pieces of the dialogue that the audience will be more than slightly relatable. 

Mrs Lowry & Son is in cinemas from November 28, 2019

THE GOOD LIAR (2019)

Consummate con man Roy Courtnay has set his sights on his latest mark: the recently widowed Betty McLeish, worth millions. But this time, what should have been a simple swindle escalates into a cat-and-mouse game with the ultimate stakes.

This is yet another case of a trailer that--whether purposefully or not--gives an inaccurate representation of the film. The trailer would have you believe that The Good Liar is a romantic-comedy turned crime-thriller hybrid, but what we actually end up with, is something entirely darker and personal.

Directed by Bill Condon, who has previously directed such films as Disney's Beauty and the Beast remake, and Twilight Breaking Dawn: Part 1 & 2, Condon seems to be the perfect fit for a film based around the premise based on two people finding each other through online dating. Based on a novel by Nicholas Searle, the screenplay is adapted by Jeffrey Hatcher (The Duchess and 2005's Casanova), and the film stars veteran actors Sir Ian McKellen and Dame Helen Mirren. All of the pieces are there for a fascinating romantic story if that was indeed the direction that the film wished to follow.

That doesn't seem to be the case, however, with the direction of the narrative becoming ambiguous in the second act due to the inclusion of some specific back story to a character. This causes a shift in tone from what was an uplifting, adorable, and jovial vibe (comparable to that of Dirty Rotten Scoundrels or The Hustle)--for the most part, due to McKellen's cheerful disposition--into something with more sinister undertones. These undertones are provided without context, until the third act, where the final reveal occurs, alongside a mountain of exposition. 

The structure of the narrative and the pacing give away the fact that there is more than meets the eye, but apart from the odd little quirks to a character's expected behaviour, the big twists that occur in the film, transpire without any form of context or warning. This would likely come down to Searle's source material, but the purpose of showing us the history of our character is not overwhelmingly apparent, and in the end, spends far too much time and effort trying to explain and justify the misdirection. A less than ideal choice in direction, as it robs the audience of the opportunity to figure it out for themselves. Granted, it makes it all the less predictable, but it remains less satisfying than if there was a chance of being able to unravel the clues themselves. 

The cinematography looks great, with brilliant use of lighting, colour, and movement of the camera to strictly control the framing of each scene. Tight shots are often used when the characters are exhibiting strong expressions of emotion, with wider shots (but still centred on the face) when there is a drastic change. It all works well with the comedic timing of McKellen and Mirren who manage to get many a smile from the audience in the opening act.

The visual component of The Good Liar keeps things interesting when the tone is forever morphing as the film progresses. There is a lot of heavy content--of both sexual and violent nature--as well as some brief nudity and coarse language. Yet the trailer would have you believe it was something else entirely. There are some lazy choices made with the script, but the performances from McKellen and Mirren are exceptionally well-done, especially for such a darker and maturer genre of content.

The Good Lie is in cinemas from December 5th, 2019

Originally posted to: http://djin.nz/Kr8509

KNIVES OUT (2019)

A detective and a trooper travel to a lush estate to interview the quirky relatives of a patriarch who died during his 85th birthday celebration.

Knives Out has one heel of an ensemble cast. Chris Evans (Captain America in the Marvel Cinematic Universe), Daniel Craig (the latest James Bond), Jamie Lee Curtis (Halloween), Michael Shannon (Man of Steel), Toni Collette (Hereditary), Jaeden Martell (IT), Katherine Langford (13 Reasons Why), Lakeith Stanfield (Sorry to Bother You), Don Johnson (Miami Vice), Christopher Plummer (Cyrano), and Ana de Armas (Blade Runner 2049). With such an extensive cast, the biggest risk is that they don't all get their chance to shine in this 130-minute whodunnit.

To an extent, that is true. With so many characters, the cast of Knives Out does not all get equal attention. The majority of the focus goes towards Craig and de Armas who, as our main characters, consequentially have the most engaging performances. The remainder of the adult family are relegated to supporting characters, with the youngest characters barely getting any dialogue in the film at all, their roles largely summed up as the focal point of all "alt-right/racist" and "SJW/snowflake" commentary. 

Despite the majority of the cast only having minor parts to play, they ham it up well with a series of manipulative quirks that quickly fall away under pressure to reveal an obnoxious level of pretentious entitlement that was hidden beneath the friendly lovey-dovey exterior. There is an exaggerated manner in which everything around this family of characters occurs, which combined with the extremely selfish character traits, the very vibrant and bold colours onscreen, and drawling southern accents, create an altogether unreal framing to the film. It is surprisingly kooky at times, but what is the greater surprise, is the script.

The structure of the film is almost backwards to what you would traditionally expect from a murder mystery. Unlike other films where the audience is discovering the clues alongside the detective and we try to determine the culprit together, with Knives Out, director Rian Johnson has turned everything on its head showing the audience the true events that occur, through flashbacks. This creates a unique dynamic where the audience has more information than the detective, and we are waiting for him to catch up. 

At least that is what Johnson wants you to think. In reality, the script is well-written with every little detail and every piece of dialogue having a specific purpose. Every time the audience thinks they have the answer, if there is a detail that isn't explained or brought into play, you can guarantee that they do not have the true culprit. While it isn't overly layered, there are enough little details and players in the game to have enough loose threads to keep you engaged for the first two acts. 

Unfortunately, the third act isn't able to finish on a strong point, flipped the narrative structure back to a traditional whodunnit structure, which has fed the audience so much misdirection at this point, that events start to feel convoluted and inconceivable.

The cinematography is well done, with some great framing and camera angles to keep things moving, despite much of the film happening within the one house. The warm yet dark colour palette and the obscure set design and props in this rich family home create a significant contrast to the outside scenes that feel free of the claustrophobic trappings of wealth

De Armas is the most likeable character in the film and is the grounding element for the audience, being the one consistent character, no matter how much her moral compass is pushed. While Craig's accent is initially quite distracting, he manages to do so much in the role despite his stance as an observer. His complete and comprehensive attention to detail is the linchpin that makes this film work.

Overall, the final act doesn't manage to live up to the standard set up by the first two acts, but that is mostly due to the false summits written into the script, which greatly reduces the impact of the big reveal when the audience thought the film was meant to be over 15 minutes earlier. It drags Knives Out down from "brilliant" film status to a "pretty good" film. Still, the extent to which Johnson is able to wrap up all of the story elements is fascinating and impressive. Definitely still worth checking out.

READY OR NOT (2019)

A bride's wedding night takes a sinister turn when her eccentric new in-laws force her to take part in a terrifying game.

A dark comedy horror being released nearly a month after Halloween? It's an interesting decision, but it certainly didn't detract from the film at all. Ready or Not is a fun and energetic game of cat-and-mouse.

The success of this film comes mostly from it's leading lady Samara Weaving (the niece of The Matrix' Hugo Weaving). With bright blue eyes that can see through your soul and a very Margot Robbie vibe, Weaving plays Grace, the bride-to-be that finds herself fighting for her life. She puts forward a great performance, overcoming physical obstacles, and making (for the most part, at least) smart decisions. This is no Mary Sue scenario. This is a sassy, foul-mouthed, grounded woman, that makes an engaging strong female character.

That being said, apart from a couple of lines of dialogue, Weaving's character receives no character development and is trapped in a cycle of rinse-and-repeat situations throughout the 94-minute runtime. There was an opportunity to lift her character even further and turn the situation on its head, but the option was not considered. This is because of how her character was written, making her a passive character rolling with the punches, rather than an active participant directing the narrative. With brilliant comedic timing, an impressive emotional range on display, and great chemistry with her co-stars, Weaving is an actress to look out for in the future.

The remainder of the cast are entertaining but one-dimensional. The obsessive, the junkie, the golddigger, the alcoholic, their personality traits are played off for laughs and for the most part they work, but it does lead to situations later in the script where the characters have nothing left to add to the story, and just mill around waiting, with only one character really being active at a time. 

There is one other character that does get some sort of character development, and that is Daniel (portrayed by Adam Brody, a man I only remember from The OC). There is a trauma, a hidden heart of gold, and an outwardly apathetic nature that makes his character incredibly relatable.

From a visual perspective, the cinematography is quite well done. There are some handheld scenes that are incredibly distracting, but in general, the camera movement keeps the film moving, and the tight framing combined with the warm stylised orange/brown colour palette of the house really create a sense of claustrophobia (especially when compared to the wide shots and crisp, vibrant colours of the opening wedding scenes).

The humour works to the film's advantage. Of it had attempted to be straight-laced, this would not have worked at all, but the black comedy and gore are balanced wonderfully. Personally, I would have loved a bit more graphic gore, considering the weapons being utilised, especially with the R16 rating that the film ended up with. There are the odd comedic elements that are overplayed, but they are minimal.

Ready or Not has some intriguing supernatural lore that is not fully explored, even though much of the film focuses on the group of antagonists rather than our brilliant protagonist. The script does well with the premise it was given, but it does struggle to keep the tension alive, not quite being able to justify the presence of most of the cast, nor does it fully convince the audience that our protagonist can't find her way out. Much of it comes down to convenience, and that is the least satisfying way to drive a narrative. 

Nevertheless, for a comedy horror, Ready or Not is a fun flick that manages to hold your interest right to the end, thanks to some great performances from Weaving and Brody.

LADY AND THE TRAMP (2019)

An upper-middle-class American cocker spaniel named Lady and a street-smart, stray schnauzer called Tramp embark on many adventures.

Disney has finally released its streaming platform, Disney+, and with a new platform comes the need for new content to attract paying customers (because we all know it's only about the money). Enter the latest of Disney's live-action remakes, one that has skipped the theatrical release completely--effectively making it a TV movie--Lady and the Tramp.

In a sense, you have to question whether Disney learned anything from the critical hatred that The Lion King's live-action remake received because it did nothing but completely remake the same story with a different style of animation that ended up having a lower emotional connection because of its angle of realism. The Jungle Book at least expanded upon the story and lore in a way that made the film fresh and new. Lady and the Tramp has gone ahead and made little tweaks to the details, but this is the exact same story as the original animated film from 1955 (has it really been that long?!).

Little details change, like the ethnicity of the human couple, and introducing an interracial couple into an early 1900s period film is intriguing and would create an additional deep philosophical layer around classism, racism, and segregation, but alas that is not why an interracial couple was used. Judging by its complete lack of effect on the story whatsoever, it appears to have been a purely cosmetic "diversity hire" (it's a more appealing option than thinking Disney is purposefully trying to overwrite the history of racism and pretend that it never happened). But I digress.

While the story doesn't really change in any significant way, the use of animation has been significantly pulled back. This is done more due to budgetary constraints, but it does create a point of difference between it and The Lion King. Lady and the Tramp use real dogs for shooting the film and then utilises CGI in post-production to make it look like they are talking. The best thing about the production of this film is knowing that the studio trained shelter dogs for the actors in this film, and then ensured the dogs got forever homes after filming wrapped. That is the aspect that makes me feel good about the remake. That is really it. The CGI has such a low budget that these talking dogs look incredibly distracting, and there is a clear difference that is very noticeable between the "real" and the "altered" elements of the film.

As with the original, there are a few musical numbers thrown in, and they are well done. It does still look weird at times watching these realistic dogs with unnatural mouths, but the actual audio is great, and far more pleasing than that other remake that I've mentioned far too many times already.

The cinematography is adequate, the colour grading is warm, and the tone is consistent. The vehicles, set designs, and costumes are convincing for a period piece, but it does come across quite sterilised and too clean for the 1900s. 

Lady and the Tramp still has the issue where the emotion is not properly conveyed in these realistic animals. Attempts were made to bring a more animated look to the mouth and eyes, but the success is hit-or-miss. Despite another complete ripoff of the original story (which will mean the original writers will get no royalties for the use of the story), there is still some charm. It's nothing exceptional, but it is pleasant. 

So yes, Disney was right to make this a straight-to-streaming film, but is that the type of content to bring in more customers? That's debatable.