American Factory Analysis

American Factory (2019)

Directed and Produced by: Steven Bognar and Julia Reichert

Academy Award for Best Documentary Feature 2020

Available on Netflix.

American Factory is a documentary about a Chinese billionaire who opens a factory near Ohio and employs two thousand Americans and the film is about the setbacks the workforce face and essentially it is about the concerns raised for employment due to automation. It is the first film produced by Barack and Michelle Obama's production company, Higher Ground Productions. This documentary adapts a 'fly-on-the-wall' style of film making where they just shoot and observe like how a fly would about what's going on there and we don't see interviews of anyone. The editing of the film doesn't cut quick for the audience to be hooked because of the change in setting and imagery, for instance they hold static shots of the locations before slowly entering in. The pacing almost felt similar to the last year's Academy Award winning documentary Free Solo, although that was an edge of the seat experience because of the subject matter.

The film deals with themes like work life balance, cultural differences and about how people will find it difficult to find work because of automation in a decade. The best part about the documentary is that the film makers don't express their political view in the documentary but it is clear by the events they choose to show and the voices they choose to capture. This is a more subtle way of doing things by respecting the audience and is way better than doing a simple propaganda video. Ram Ke Naam by Anand Patwardhan was also a good example of this, the filmmaker's view and opinion is never explicitly spoken but it is clearly visible throughout. 

The main cultural conflict they face is the work-life balance, the Chinese people work for twelve hours a shift and take 2-3 days off a month whereas the Americans work for eight hours a day and take the weekends off. They say that in China they want people to work hard enough that they should feel that they deserve the salary and whereas in America there is minimum basic wages for everyone. The chairman motivates the Chinese people by saying things like we're born in China and we've Chinese blood and we're born from Chinese mother's, everything of what he said come from the ideas of nationalism, honor, pride and to an extent even masculinity. When the workers want to opt for a union, the chairman says that he'll shutdown if a union starts because of course they he can't rule them. The documentary also raises concerns on automation which will lead to the loss of many jobs, although it didn't explore much of it and it just briefly showed what possible consequences that can bring. 

Mumbai Police Analysis

Mumbai Police (2013)

Directed by: Rosshan Andrrews

Written by: Bobby-Sanjay

Available on Hotstar.

This film is a murder mystery cop film, but it distinguishes itself from the label of the genre by adding an interesting element which is, the cop loses memory after an accident and he has to solve it again from scratch. The writing and the treatment of the film isn't in a way where you are at the edge of your seat every moment, the film doesn't try to do that anyway. It is a murder mystery made in a pacing which is similar to any other mainstream Malayalam film, I love films with this pacing where you can just lay back and watch the story. Usually Netflix shows have this sort of pacing, I can recall the mini-series Unbelievable which had this sort of pacing. Films like Raatsasan, Kaithi, Kshanam, D-16 are brilliant thrillers, they all have cut-throat pacing but what I'm saying is that thrillers with slower pacing are also good, because a thriller per se gives the idea of you being thrilled by it constantly. David Fincher's films also have an interesting pacing, they don't rush the story but by the editing it feels like it is being told in a crisp way. Most of Martin Scorsese's films are long and yet the films keep moving dynamically. 

In this film, the fundamental flaw that I felt was the person before the accident and after the accident not only have a difference in memory but also difference in character which didn't make sense. The person before the accident does some mistakes, in a scene he manhandles a woman and the person after the accident feels guilty for it? The person before the accident is homosexual and the person after it is almost homophobic. Apart from this, the screenplay was well written by the writer duo Bobby-Sanjay. In a murder mystery, one of the most important things to have is misdirection and they do it well in this film. The crime scene analysis is well written and done, we as audience get to know the crime scene in so much detail that we feel participated in the storytelling which is also important in suspense dramas.

The making of the film is minimalist other than the small fight scenes we see here and there which do nothing for taking the story forward, they are just there to add more layers of suspense in the film which I think is a decent reason to have a fight scene; it is at least a better reason that to make money from the Hindi dubbing rights. I think in Malayalam cinema, the limitation of budget is a bliss because that makes them entirely rely on things which require human brain, hard work and creativity more than money like writing and performances instead of having songs, a ton of extras or extravagant action scenes. They can be helpful if used well, but most of the times they pollute the storytelling. Music is used more than foley in this film, they use music in almost every scene of the film; it works in reminding us of the emotional angle in the film. The Mumbai Police angle didn't work emotionally for me but it worked enough to give the film a proper closure.

Snowpiercer Analysis

Snowpiercer (2013)

Directed by: Bong Joon-ho

Starring: Chris Evans, Song Kang-ho
Available on Netflix.

Snowpiercer is a science-fiction action film, the rules of this world are gradually opened layer by layer as we keep going into the film. The immediate opening of the film is about, again the class divide that Bong Joon-ho masterfully explores. We see that the film is based in a train and there is a head section and the tail section and a person from the second in command in the train, played by Tilda Swinton comes and explains that everything has its own place in the world. She comes up with a devastating analogy that a shoe doesn't have any place on anybody's head. The premise of the film is, the tail section revolts against their oppression led by Curtis, played by Chris Evans and they call it 'The Great Curtis Revolution'. The craft in this film is unrecognizable for the most part, other than the lighting which they creatively use to show us the outside world indirectly.

The film essentially is a satire on nationalists like Adolf Hitler and countries like North Korea and maybe even a lot of other countries, where people are constantly brainwashed right from their childhood; as we see how children are taught in the train. That sequence is my favorite in the film, it explains us everything we need to know about the train and they do it with black comedy. The kids sing rhymes about how grateful they are, to be alive because of the train. Usually in sci-fi films the problem I find is, the characters' conviction in the rules of the world, they just talk like actors on Earth who are asked to act in the other world, but in this film every character speaks and behaves like they are living in this world for a long time now. The best part about Bong Joon-ho's later three films, Snowpiercer, Okja and Parasite are that they are so layered that there is interesting physical conflict with high stakes on the upper layer which even kids can enjoy and if you dig deeper he is saying a lot with his films.

Again, Song Kang-ho has such different physicality from his other roles to the extent that I couldn't even recognize that it is him. Some actors fit greatly in some roles and they don't fit well in other roles because of their body language and their certain qualities but Song Kang-ho is taking shape in any role he is playing. I'm eager to watch his other work. I wish there was more of Bong's black comedy in this film, although I could recall laughing when Mason says something and people in all languages around start translating what she is saying by cutting her on what she's about to say next. The climax is heavy on drama where there is a lot happening and the ending as well is interesting, but I didn't find it emotionally satisfying which I find strongly in Bong's other films like The Host, Okja and Parasite. 

Mardaani 2 Analysis

Mardaani 2

Written & Directed by: Gopi Puthran

Starring: Rani Mukherjee

Available on Amazon Prime Video

Mardaani 2 is a psycho thriller and it slowly turns into a cat and mouse game between the cop and the killer. The villain, played by a brilliant Vishal Jethwa is introduced to us in a different way; he breaks the fourth wall and often in a creepy way by talking to us about what he thinks of women, thus delving inside his psychology. As I read in Rahul Desai's review of the film, the rape statistics in the beginning and the ending have nothing to do with the film, it doesn't deal with any intricacies or the aftermath of rape in the larger scheme of things. It is just used like a click bait thumbnail on a YouTube video, where they just want you to take the film seriously.

The film clearly takes a lot of inspiration from the recent classic psycho killer Tamil movie, Raatsasan. The autopsy scene where the doctor describes what the victim went through in brutal detailing is an example, though in Raatsasan they rely only on sound to convey the horrors of what the victim went through and because of no graphic violence Raatsasan got an U/A. Here, we almost see graphic imagery of the victim; I'm not a huge fan. For me, showing graphic imagery to instill fear in the audience is equivalent to throwing a toy lizard on someone to scare them. That is not a film making tool, the audience can choose to see those graphic imagery else where; they don't come to watch films just for the film maker to remind them about this. In Raatsasan, the fear arises from our imagination, there is scope for the audience to participate in the storytelling. After the autopsy scene, we see shots of young school girls and we hear that music and we start imagining the worst.

The backstory of the villain was creatively used and revealed, instead of doing a flashback or by doing it explicitly. The time limit which they added in the film didn't add any sort of tension because the grammar of the film wasn't visibly affected in anyway by that time bound, it was just there for the sake of it. The way the villain picks women, it's horrifying and these scenes clearly ask our women to not trust strangers and to be more cynical and rude than to be in trouble. The villain's character and ideology is a reminder to some of our men that if your thoughts are even slightly inclined to how he's thinking, then you're in trouble. The craft is never recognizable in the film, they chose to let the crafts just help in keeping the audience in the world and not to help creating the world. Overall, it's a decently made thriller.

About Elly Analysis

About Elly

Written & Directed by: Asghar Farhadi

Silver Bear for Best Director at 59th Berlin International Film Festival

Asghar Farhadi's films if described in one line, will sound simple; the inciting incident sounds simple but the layers which he presents in that incident are so complex that by each layer and detail he adds to the incident, your senses of who is right and who is wrong will be lost. The best part about his films is that he doesn't judge his characters, he writes them from a neutral view and justifies every character's every action. This film's inciting incident comes at more than half an hour into the film, till then he establishes the world of the characters, the mood they are in. He doesn't use any music in this film as well like his other films, but here there is constant ambiance sound of the sea waves. His filmography fits into most of the guidelines of the film movement Dogme 95, as far as I can recall.

If you think you are good with judging who's right and who's wrong in a given situation, I wish you good luck before you watch Asghar Farhadi's films. In this film, the question is why did she come with them if she was engaged, since it is based in Iran we don't know the cultural context as much, but it is suggested that she dishonored her commitment to the engagement. But does she? This is what happens in real life, it is easy to label something which happened into a statement, which is what news/Inshorts does but what actually happened and more than everything if you were in the perpetrator's shoes what would you have done? Asghar Farhadi in an interview said that he writes a synopsis with his heart and then uses his mind to go about the detailing of the events, I think it is impossible to create that ambiguity in the film if not for the detailing where, every new information that gets added challenges your entire view of what's happened.

As I watched this after watching A Separation and The Salesman, it felt like a reunion of all the actors going back in time; mainly Shadab Hosseini and Peyman Moaadi. Although this film doesn't have as much tension going on, as A Separation did; I'm not complaining about this but here the event had more scope for tension than the other films. Also maybe since there are a lot of characters in this film, I couldn't differentiate much between them in terms of their behavior and mannerisms as much as I did in A Separation. It is not fair to compare this film with his later films, but I can't help but think of them because his films are so unique in terms of the setting, portraying the socio-cultural milieu and the craft. I used to look at David Fincher films in that way, all of his films are so different from other films that when I binge watched his work it was difficult for me to watch other work because I got used to the smooth pans and film making with such finesse. Similarly, with Asghar Farhadi's films the tension that he carries throughout, in this film after the inciting incident is something that even some action films don't achieve. 

The Woman Next Door Analysis

The Woman Next Door (1981)

Directed by: Francois Truffaut

Available on Mubi

Bernard and his wife have new neighbors, a couple who just move in; the only issue here is that the woman in the couple, Mathilde and Bernard were in a relationship before some years.

This film has a simple premise, but it opens up the scope for a lot of things to happen with this. It is safe to say that In The Mood for Love by Wong Kar Wai explores similar themes as this film. The tonality of this film is a mixture of both the styles: realism and formalism in film. I found it a little similar to Hitchcock's films, especially the usage of music and the fade to black cuts which I found to be a little distorting. I couldn't figure out the reason for this noticeable editing style. This film also has a sense of realism, especially the way people talk and all the other elements we see on screen including props, costumes, set and essentially mise-en-scene, which is how the film maker is credited in the film: Mise-en-scene by Francois Truffaut.

Truffaut was criticized for being in an autobiographical shell, for his five films based on the character Antoine Doinel, which is inspired from his own life. I don't get why people criticize films that come from a personal space, those films are intimate and those are the films you wouldn't get to see if that particular film maker won't make them. So films which are autobiographical are unique and authentic as well, because the film maker themselves is the accountability for the material. As long as these don't get self indulgent to an extent where they turn a blind eye to it's relevance to the audience, I'm all in for such films. 

This film also captures the socio-cultural milieu of the setting very well, we get an idea about how people were in general in that time period and location. The film uses dialogue as the primary way of storytelling, that's how we know the backstories of everyone. It is almost done in an expository way, where Mathilde asks Bernard if he remembers the first time he saw her and he tells her and essentially us how they met; but the old woman's backstory was done in an interesting way. The film opens with an old woman breaking the fourth wall by talking into the camera about how she's going to tell us a story now, she breaks the fourth wall further by asking the camera to go back to show her properly and it's an interesting tool to use.

I didn't expect the ending, but it didn't punch me in the gut either. It felt a little out of place but it felt justified after Madame Jouve says what line would best describe their relationship, they can't live together, they can't live apart. That line best describes the film.

The Host Analysis

The Host (2006)

Directed by: Bong Joon-ho

Available on Netflix

Starring: Song Kang-ho, a frequent collaborator with Bong Joon-ho

The French film magazine Cahiers du cinema ranked the film as 3rd place in its list of best films of the year 2006 and 4th for the 2000-2009 decade.

It is a monster film, the film goes about a monster which kidnaps a man's daughter and his attempts to rescue her. I now understand the power of a collaboration between an actor and a director after having watched some of the Scorsese-De Niro films and now the Bong Joon-ho and Song Kang-ho films. This worked well because in the three films that I watched of this combination, The Host, Memories of Murder and Parasite, I could clearly see the difference in the physicality of the three characters; in terms of body language. The Host has a lot of black comedy, and Bong uses it cleverly; there is a scene where the father of the protagonist, tells someone about how as a kid his son struggled a lot for food and how he was a bad father. That's a brilliant scene, here we understand the relationship between the father and the son and we also empathize with the protagonist, when we know that he has been through a lot. But, what Bong does next will blow your mind. He cuts to the people listening and they are dozing; this works as a joke and also as a back up where if the previous scene wouldn't be entertaining enough then this joke can be a pay off with the backstory being the setup for a joke. Bong gives this joke as an incentive for the audience while giving exposition/the backstory, which film makers have to do but most of them end up doing it in a boring way.

I love the ending of this film, and these kind of endings where an important character to the protagonist dies in the film but that character and the justice to that character is survived by the loved ones of the character. It makes the endings not tragic and yet make our hearts heavy and satisfied. In the novel, The Kite Runner by Khaled Hosseini; Amir wrongs Hassan and he dies without getting or seeing proper justice; this could be a heart wrenching tragedy if Amir doesn't save and adopt Hassan's son Sohrab and redeems himself. Similarly, in The Host, the daughter of the protagonist is killed by the creature and she is survived by the boy she saves dying as her father adopts him. This ending is a way more emotionally satisfying ending than the father saving his daughter and they being happy together ever after. The protagonist, Park Gang-du, is a clumsy guy throughout the film and he is the source of most of the black comedy in the film. However, he becomes a better person at the end when we see he serving food for him and his son, instead of giving alcohol as he gives to his daughter. Also, a brilliant and a simple visual way of showing that he is not that messy guy anymore, is the color of his hair which is yellow throughout the film; at the end it is black.

The editing of this film played a major role in holding tension, whenever the monster is introduced in a scene it is introduced after a shot of the reaction of someone in the crowd, this creates anticipation and this subconsciously increases the power of antagonism in the film. Bong uses rain as a tool to enhance drama, I can recall watching a rain sequence in almost every film of his. The CGI of the monster is done decently, I was in the story throughout and never felt an itch in the CGI except the last burning shot of the monster; somehow people struggle a lot with creating fire shots using CGI. I could sense an underlying political commentary throughout, at a scene the father of the protagonist says, 'What else do we do other than what the government asks us to?' and there were also other anti-American themes as I read about them, to the extent that North Korea lauded the film. This film was one of the highest grossing films of South Korea, and this film has all the qualities for everyone from a cave man to a philosophy major to watch, enjoy and to draw from.

Training Day Analysis

Training Day

Directed by: Antoine Fuqua

Written by: David Ayer

Available on Netflix

Oscar for Best Actor in a leading role, for Denzel Washington.

This film follows two LAPD officers, for a time span of 12 hours. In spite of it being in a span of just 12 hours, it is no less than a character study of Alfonzo Harris, played by a brilliant Denzel Washington. Alfonzo Harris is a corrupt cop, at the beginning he seems like a vigilante and that he knows what he is doing. Officer Jake Hoyt, played by Ethan Hawke, is recently out from the academy and has the right intentions, probably like Alfonzo when it was his first day. Alfonzo is such a dangerous character, that even if he betrays you twice he can get back your trust the third time by talking. He has that skill where he can make you give him the gun you point at him, any given day. He tells himself and makes others believe that everything that he does is for the greater good and if done in the limits of law, what he does won't be possible. I can't recall watching such a manipulative character, the best part is that we understand these many things about the character by just travelling with them for 12 hours. All the scenarios that are created, are used in some way or the other to explore the character further and no scene or character is useless; a brilliant script by David Ayer.

There are minimalist action pieces, fights between the two and the whole film at the end of the day feels like a drama between two people. The crafts: cinematography, editing are done in a way where we don't recognize any of them in solidarity except the color of the film, which tries to take us into a rustic noir world. Alfonzo Harris keeps saying Jake that he thought that he was man enough to take it; masculinity is related to being heartless in this context. I kept wondering if I should be putting my righteous millennial mind to judge these characters based in a movie made in the early 2000s. My answer to myself was; NO. They are humans, and they aren't participating in a reality show where they are their best versions and where they know that every word of what they say is bound to scrutiny. I'm not saying I didn't find Alfonzo uncomfortable, of course I did, I won't go like he's a toxic male, I'm not going to listen to whatever he is going to say or do now and this movie should be banned. If you do that you will miss the seductive, manipulative nature of him. I almost felt relieved when it was revealed that Alfonzo is a bad guy, because I was feeling so uncomfortable where I didn't know what to feel for him; such a complex character. In 2003, AFI named Alfonzo Harris the 50th greatest screen villain of all time in its list AFI's 100 Years... 100 Heroes & Villains; check out that list by the way.

Ocean's Eleven Analysis

Ocean's Eleven

Directed by: Steven Soderberg

Starring: George Clooney, Brad Pitt, Matt Damon

Availabe on Netflix.

I recently watched Oye Lucky! Lucky Oye! which I thought was a heist film, but now after watching this I feel that it wasn't a heist film. Ocean's Eleven, throws in so much of security jargon all over and it adds so many conflicts in the way during the heist, unlike Oye Lucky! where he gets away so easily everywhere. Here, the level of security or the power of antagonism is so high, that it raises the curiosity for us to see how they are going to pull this off. There is a screenwriting rule, which says that your characters can get into trouble because of chance but not out of it; this is followed religiously in this film. There is a better level of satisfaction when you see hard work go into something for anything that our characters get in a movie, if they get or get away with things easily it is difficult to empathize with them.

Here, the protagonists are on the wrong side of the law and there is not much reason for us to empathize with them; we just watch them to get amazed by how they can pull off something like that. But they add an element into the plot, which makes us root for the character a little bit; Tess, ex-wife of Danny Ocean. Ethically there's nothing wrong on the part of Benedict, but the film taps on our idea of heart break and jealousy which tries to make us feel that Danny should defeat Benedict. That subplot isn't much of a problem because it isn't focused much on. The twist in the ending works very well, because the misdirection leads to another possible ending and not to something which the audience won't buy would be an ending; which is when they expect a twist.

The crafts; editing, cinematography and sound design all are done in a way that they don't bring focus to themselves in solidarity and are just done in a way to keep you in the world of the story. There's not much you remember about the film after you watch it, but the film delivers what it sets out to and does that well.

A Time for Drunken Horses

A Time for Drunken Horses

Written, Directed & Produced by: Bahman Ghobadi

Camera d'Or at Cannes Film Festival 2000

Available on Mubi.

This film is about three orphaned Iranian Kurdish children: Amaneh (14), Ayoub (12) and Madi (15) and their struggles for livelihood. Madi is severely handicapped and he needs a surgery, which will let him live for just a few months more. What Amaneh and Ayoub go through for bare existence is heartbreaking to watch. The visual irony of this film is that, the location which the film is set in looks like a perfect location for an exotic Bollywood song and in reality the livelihood there is so messed up. This film reminded me of Majid Majidi's Children of Heaven and Nadine Labaki's Capernaum where the protagonists were children, I don't know how they manage to get these performances out of children. Hirokazu Kore-Eda's films still deal with children in situations where they don't have to do much, but in Iranian cinema the kids have to take the roles of adults and do things which even adults would find difficult to. Ayoub joins the adults who smuggle truck tires to Iraq through mules and the conditions are so bad that the mules are fed alcohol to keep going. The imagery in this film is strong because of its depiction of the socio-cultural milieu in a brutally honest way. 

The film has a realist approach to all crafts, everything is conceived in a documentary style. The film has its vision inspired from Italian Neorealism, just that here the struggles are even more intense. Ayoub slaps Amaneh in a scene and she gets upset over it, when Ayoub apologizes twice she is alright about it and gets back to being friends with him. This scene is conceived and performed in a way, where it almost tells us everything we need to know about the world of the characters; about their lives, about their love for each other, about their mentalities, humanity, etc. This is Bahman Ghobadi's debut and he shot it in his own village. Many debut films of film makers have this quality where they express themselves the strongest, maybe because they aren't sure if they'll get to make more films in the future. But whether it's Francois Truffaut's The 400 Blows, Jean Luc Godard's Breathless and many other indie film makers who had strong debuts; all these films are drawn to a certain extent from their own lives which adds to the individualistic nature of these films. Roger Ebert mentioned in his review that even if Bahman Ghobadi didn't intend to do so, this film speaks about the need of rights of ethnic minorities in Iran and everywhere. 

Oye Lucky! Lucky Oye! Analysis

Oye Lucky! Lucky Oye!

Directed by: Dibakar Banerjee

Starring: Abhay Deol, Paresh Rawal

National Award for Best Popular Film

It is a heist film, treated with a unique voice. The voice of the film maker is presented wildly through the music, the Punjabi music which I personally loved. It felt like the music was being overtly used, there were a lot of montage sequences and the music was what set the tone for the film; but then as it kept going I felt like this was a stylistic choice made for the film. When you depend on the edit and music that much, the film can take any shape in the post production, as Ranbir Kapoor once said about Anurag Basu's process. The film felt more like a sociocultural depiction than a narrative, which isn't a complaint but the film maker expressed a cynical, gloomy outlook towards the world. The irony is that almost every person in the film has other motivations than what they express other than the protagonist, who is a thief. 

I didn't get the reason behind the casting of Paresh Rawal in three roles, at some point I was a little confused if there's a Sixth Sense kind of a twist awaiting. I'm wondering if there was any subtext behind that casting choice which I didn't get. There are a lot of heist scenes where he gets away just because he's so casual about it that no one would suspect that he's doing something wrong. That's interesting to see, but when it repeats a lot of times it feels a little convenient. Abhay Deol was brilliant in this film, his performance in a lot of scenes made me wonder about how many different ways he could've performed this scene and why only this way defines the character and makes it consistent throughout. I'm now curious to watch his other films.

I was expecting more from the film as I saw that it won the National Award, but I think for then this film must've presented a unique voice.

Pain and Glory Analysis

Pain and Glory

Written & Directed by: Pedro Almodovar

Starring: Antonio Banderas

Nominated for Palme d'Or at Cannes 2019, Won Best Actor and Best Soundtrack at Cannes, Nominated for Best International Feature at Oscars 2020.

This film is about a film maker who introspects his past and the choices he made, the log line reminded me of Woody Allen's Stardust Memories. It was clear that it comes from a very personal space. Films like these, which are semi auto-biographical can be intimate and interesting. The film makers can either write how they'd have wanted their life to be, or they can write some alternate realities of their life if they'd have made different choices or they can write about their regrets and the deep pain to just let it out. It felt like Pain and Glory was all of the above. You can take films like Pelli Choopulu and Arjun Reddy, they also feel like they come from a personal space. With these films, I'm not sure if self indulgence can help to enhance authenticity as the film maker has already felt what he/she is writing or if it makes the film maker turn a blind eye to the relevance of the film to the audience.

The film has a non-linear narrative, he uses it to create emotional coherence. In the main plot, we see a film maker who is in pain, both mental and physical. His physical pain is demonstrated through digital graphics and voice over, explaining his ailments and his mental pain is explored throughout the film. The core conflict of the film is, Salvador played by an intense Antonio Banderas, not finding a purpose in life if he isn't able to make films. He doesn't want to write, if he can't film. I was reminded of the Iranian film maker Jafar Panahi who was banned by the Iranian government to write screenplays, direct films or to travel anywhere else in the world. It is practically death to a film maker. There are a lot of subplots, themes and characters explored in this film, through the reminiscence of Salvador's life. We can gauge how normal drug usage is in this world when we see that the characters know the difference between cocaine and heroin. Salvador tries heroin and whenever he snorts they cut to a scene from his past. The cut points feel so natural that it doesn't feel like a complex narrative, where you have to establish through text saying Salvador's childhood. This is also done well in both, Pelli Choopulu and Arjun Reddy.

The cinematographer Jose Luis Alcaine, is 81 and he was the first to use fluorescent tube as a source of key lighting. He's also been a long time collaborator with Pedro Almodovar. This film is visually aesthetic, they use strong colors in scenes either in the sets or props or costumes. The white in his childhood in the background, there was red in a lot of scenes and the visuals have a dream like quality to them. It is done in a recognizable way, it has the signature. I can recall of All About My Mother (1999) which also had these sensibilities in the visuals. The visuals are so strong that, the editor has a lot of freedom. The editor need not find a proper way to cut a close to a mid or a wide, the editor can cut a close on a close because the visuals are so vibrant and strong, the audience can easily subconsciously decipher the change in location and setting. Scenes with conversations are mostly shot on close ups/wide angle shots of each actor edited in a shot, reverse shot style; a technique used frequently by the Coen Brothers. They use it to create a sense of pacing and to make the characters look funny, even if they are in trouble or if they are bad people. They use it as a tool of creating black comedy. Here, they use it to enhance drama in the conversations and it can only be done if the actors are brilliant because even a slight movement gets captured.

I was curious about Antonio Banderas' performance after the Cannes Best Actor Award and the Academy Award nomination. The performance in solidarity didn't as much strike me, I think performances can be more appreciated if you watch the other works of an actor to see how they can play different people. I've seen some films where an actor was excellent in a film but in other films, the actor struggled to fit in. Some actors desperately try to show contrast by either over performing some parts or by doing films in entirely different settings. One actor whose performance struck me in two films was Shadab Hosseini's in A Separation and The Salesman; because he brought that contrast in characters through subtle nuances in his performance.

My take on Oscars 2020

Disclaimer: I haven't watched all films nominated in all categories, but I have watched all the films nominated for Best Picture. So my view might be limited to only these films.

I'm so happy that Parasite won the 4 prestigious awards of the night, I so badly wanted Parasite to win but I wasn't expecting the Academy would vote for it. The Academy is usually considered to give brownie points for films made on themes like war, racism and especially issues concerning America. I would've been utterly disappointed if 1917 won these awards. Now, I have respect for the Academy for supporting cinematic brilliance. I'll discuss some categories;

Best Original Screenplay: Bong Joon Ho and Han Jin Won for Parasite.
For me, a strong contender behind Parasite was Quentin Tarantino for Once Upon a Time in Hollywood. Quentin is known for writing unique dialogue and he writes movie screenplays like novels. His descriptions are solid, his screenplays are so interesting to read by themselves. But, screenplays aren't meant to be judged by how you feel reading them because the audience won't read screenplays, they'll just watch the film. The cast and crew of the film will read the screenplay and work on the movie. Screenplays can be judged on story and the structure of events and what they bring on the table in solidarity, which is where Once Upon a Time in Hollywood goes a step behind Parasite. In Parasite, most of the things you are in awe of about the movie can be found in the screenplay; the subtexts, the suspense, etc.

Best Director: Bong Joon Ho for Parasite.
The films nominated in this category other than 1917 and Joker, I think have strong directorial voices. You can't imagine someone else making these films; Bong Joon Ho, Martin Scorsese, Quentin Tarantino have their signature etched over in every frame of these films. They are auteurs. But, a director is not only about having his/her signature all over the film. Todd Phillips, what he did with Joker was path breaking, he brought together two different worlds, the world of Martin Scorsese and the world of comic book characters and created a masterpiece. But, the reason why Bong Joon Ho is my choice for this is he used every craft extensively to push storytelling; writing, editing, blocking and camera movements, production design, music, sound design. You can watch the film just to study one of these crafts individually and how it has been used in this film and you'll get to learn a lot from it. Parasite should be analysed and studied by film aspirants.

Best Actor in a leading role: Joaquin Phoenix for Joker.
This was obvious, although I haven't watched Pain and Glory yet. Some predictions had that performance over Joker, so that must have been something. It is not those scenes where there is a lot of physical energy involved, that is great acting but it is those scenes where you don't have much to do and all you have to do is absorb and react. Joaquin nailed both parts in Joker, he was passive in those scenes where he was bullied and he was brilliant in those scenes that when he is active and reacts it is so explosive. His character is dark, dangerous and yet feels empathetic which is why this film got such polarized views and carrying such performances, is not easy.

Best Cinematography: Roger Deakins for 1917.
This was obvious this year, but I have mixed feelings about this. The fact that the movie is conceived in a single take for a more fluid experience for the audience and for us to have a subjective view of the world around. When this is done for the first time in a mainstream film like Alejandro G. Innaritu did in Birdman, it can be appreciable but after that, only the fact that it is conceived in a single shot isn't enough for us to laud about the film or the cinematography. Apart from that, I haven't seen The Lighthouse and I found Joker to be visually strong in terms of the color palettes, lighting and the blocking.

Best Production Design: Barbara Ling and Nancy Haigh for Once Upon a Time in Hollywood.
My first choice was this for production design, although a strong contender was Parasite. Parasite used props, sets as storytelling devices; they visually establish the class divide that the whole films talks about. Production design was a crucial part in depicting the worlds of both the families. But, Once Upon a Time in Hollywood is the winner for this category because the whole film is about Hollywood back then and they recreate the life of LA back then, movie sets, movie theatres, scenes of TV shows and movies recreated and the whole vibe of the movie is carried by the production design and it is impossible for me to imagine the movie in a different setting.

Best Film Editing: Michael McCusker and Andrew Buckland for Ford vs Ferrari
My first choice was Thelma Schoonmaker for The Irishman; her ability to establish a world and play around in it by cutting back and forth seamlessly is so fascinating. I didn't even observe that she does this until I watched Goodfellas more than once. The impact of her editing in Martin Scorsese's films is immense especially because of the techniques she uses like freeze frames, voice over, breaking the fourth wall; they can make or break a film because these techniques can be played around so much in the edit table. I recently watched a video essay on YouTube by Thomas Flight, they explained how editing in Ford vs Ferrari shapes our viewing of racing and after watching that I was okay with Ford vs Ferrari winning the Oscar for Best Editing because the whole film depends on how you feel while watching the race sequences.

Best Sound Editing: Donald Sylvester for Ford vs Ferrari
This was my first pick as well, I watched this film in 7.1 surround sound and I felt the races throughout. The sound design in this film, is such a crucial element of the storytelling. It was such an immersive experience, since the film is about the racing spirit it is important for us to feel and see like them. 1917 was also a strong contender in this; it won for Best Sound Mixing.

I don't know much about some crafts like VFX, costumes, hair and makeup other than just if they are looking good or not. I'm not sure how they judge these crafts, I'm thinking they must be judging based on how these crafts have been used in these films to push storytelling.

Little Women Analysis

Little Women

Written for the screen & Directed by: Greta Gerwig

Nominated for Best Picture, Best Actress, Best Adapted Screenplay and more.

Little Women is a period drama, it tells the story of four sisters who have different goals and dreams in life. The film has a similar setting in terms of characters to Our Little Sister by Hirokazu Kore-eda, but there the dynamics between the sisters is different than what we see here. There it is a mix of mother and sister, especially with the elder sister whereas here everyone are like sisters or friends. The most impressive thing about Little Women, is the intimacy between the sisters. The way they celebrate things, the way they fight about things, the way they lend shoulders for each other to cry and the way they care about each other. The proximity that they have is visually evident. The women in this film feel like real women, they don't feel like someone's idea of women. The conflicts raised in the film are societal pressure to marriage, about how women aren't encouraged to have big dreams. These conflicts, I hope not and I don't think are relevant in first world countries but are totally relevant today in other parts of the world.

The argument that is presented by Jo March that, women are not just about love and heart, they are also about mind, talent and a lot other things, and yet she feels lonely; I think is the core argument of the film. The counter argument by Meg March that, she wants to do all that she wanted to but along with her husband and how she wants to marry and have kids. This is not exactly a counter argument, it just speaks about how different the lives of women can be, by the choices they make or get to make. The problem faced by Jo is that, she doesn't want to be pulled back by marriage but she also feels lonely and she craves love. The answer to that is, well-raised, non-patriarchal men. 

The movie is shot on film, the distortions work in favor of setting up the world; be it overexposed backgrounds or grainy footage at places. It is difficult to shoot on digital and deliberately add distortions in post, it doesn't look authentic. Saoirse Ronan was terrific as Jo, her indecisive and complex thought process, could have easily come across as being fickle minded and being as a weak character if not written and performed well. It just felt more human and empathetic. It made it easier for us to root for her. The portions where she writes her book, they were shot in a visually appealing way. The jump cuts of the candle getting shorter, she laying all her papers on the floor, the binding of the book; I couldn't imagine someone writing a book being this cinematic. Greta Gerwig has a strong voice, her debut Lady Bird was a character study and it felt like that film came from a very personal space and Little Women, although is far away in terms of setting, this film also has her voice etched all over.

An ode to Gowtam Tinnanuri's 'Malli Rava' and 'Jersey'

Of course, spoilers ahead!

As a film buff, I take films very seriously and when I'm watching a film so many thoughts run in my head. I'm following the story, the characters whom I would never get to know unless for the writer who's written them. I just witnessed a brilliant cut there, could I have pulled off something like that? Well, that music doesn't fit there. That SFX sync was perfect, but this ambiance feels fake. I'm not consciously doing all of this, but since I love cinema and make an effort to study all the crafts I end up deconstructing stuff while I'm watching films. But while watching some films, I become a kid who knows nothing and is all open with his heart. I blindly trust the film maker and I'm just there to enjoy the film. Both of Gowtam's films did that to me. In less than 10 minutes into both the films, I knew I was going to watch good films, what I didn't know was that they'd be great films.

Most of you must be wondering, I agree with Jersey being a great film, but Malli Rava? Before I justify what I'm saying, let's discuss these films. Let's start with some common qualities in both the protagonists, Arjun and Karthik. Both of them look like they're careless people, yet they are filled with immense perseverance and passion. Karthik is a back bench student, which is what is used to judge him throughout his life. But does that define him? No. At least not for us. For us, what defines him is the passion with which he loves Anjali. Arjun is a jobless guy, who watches cricket all day and probably chills with his gang. In Sara's words, it feels like Arjun has lost interest in almost everything in life. That's a dangerous zone to be in, if there wasn't Nani in his life I can't imagine how his life would've been. But, who is Arjun for us? He is someone who wants his son to be proud of. He doesn't want his son to think of him as well, my dad was just another regular guy.

Malli Rava, is about Karthik and Anjali in different phases of their lives. Are those three phases just to inter cut between time zones to keep the story interesting? No. Their childhood is shown for us to see what shaped them to the persons they are now and their childhood clearly drives the choices that they make now, when they are adults. Anjali denies to marry Karthik because she is reminded of her traumatic childhood and because she sees her parents' marriage struggle, Karthik is the guy who was robbed off of Anjali from his life due to external factors and that continues to happen to him and he's the same guy he was in his childhood, he just quietly absorbs things happening around him and accepts life and heartbreak the way it is. In Jersey, Arjun has given up on his dreams and has compromised to small joys of life, they can be watching cricket, playing with his son. He tries to suppress his pain, with these little things.

Anjali, played by a brilliant Aakanksha Singh was such a strong image in my mind that when I watched her in her next film, Devadasu I couldn't forget Anjali. This happens with strong characters performed well, it happened with Arjun Reddy, Jessie in Ye Maya Chesave where you are constantly reminded of another character even when something slightly resembles that. Some sequences in Malli Rava, like the scene where Anjali asks him to quit smoking, that scene is written, captured and edited with brilliant rhythm and pacing, also the scene in Jersey in the shop where Arjun couldn't buy his son a jersey and the shopkeeper gifts him a poster instead. That timing, isn't possible in real life. It is constructed in a way that things fall in place the way they did.

The tonality of Malli Rava is so uniquely built, it has a constant tone throughout the three time zones and any shift in tone is done across all the time zones. The whole film is built for the pay off in the last 30 mins, which I think is the core of the film. This is where we see why they aren't still together even now, this is where we see Karthik's pain at the maximum, this is where we go in awe of Karthik's patience and perseverance. I usually don't like a lot of background music in films, it somehow makes the world a little less grounded. I believe that you can create better drama without music, because the world is more grounded then like Asghar Farhadi's films. But in both these films, music helped tears come out of my eyes which I think would have stayed in otherwise. Although, crafts like editing and sound design have been used just to let the audience not get distracted from the world of the story and they haven't been used enough to push storytelling like Arjun Reddy did.

About Jersey's ending, why is Jersey a great ending? Usually endings can be of three types, one where you kind of know what the ending is as soon as the premise is presented and they deliver that ending, two where you can't decipher what possible ending this premise could give or you expect of something and the ending exceeds your expectations or is something different altogether but better than what you had thought. There can be great and bad films in both categories. In the first category, we can see Baahubali, Avengers: End Game, Bhajrangi Bhaijaan and a lot of other films. In these films, in spite of a few cliffhangers you would know what the ending would be. Does that make these films not great? Of course not. These films hooked us with a premise and delivered what they promised in a satisfying way which is why these are great films. In the second category, we have films like Little Miss Sunshine, Like Father Like Son, Se7en, Jersey and many more. In Little Miss Sunshine, a family go on a road trip with an 8 year old girl for her beauty pageant competition. Throughout the film, she is worried about how she doesn't want to be a loser. You'd expect that she'd probably win, but the ending is that she is made fun of at the pageant and the family embraces that and take a stance that beauty pageants are a joke. This is a more profound thought process, which is why you'd respect the writers of this ending because they were a step ahead of you. With Jersey, take the twist out and it is still a good film. It delivers all that the film promises. One of my friend, walked out of the theatre as he was in a hurry when Arjun lifts the bat and he told me that he liked the film. Had he watched the ending, he would've been raving about it. The ending of Jersey works because, the ending isn't all that the movie is built for and it just adds a perspective to the film, which blows your mind and keeps you thinking about the film until you watch it again and experience it in an even more emotional way.

While We're Young Analysis

While We're Young

Written & Directed by: Noah Baumbach

Available on Mubi

Starring: Ben Stiller, Naomi Watts, Adam Driver, Amanda Seyfried

This film follows the story of a couple in their 40s who struggle with finding that spark in their lives and how they don't want to be a 'boring old couple'. I think Noah Baumbach is the best in writing verbal battle, after Aaron Sorkin. There's a certain guilty pleasure that he taps in the audience while writing such scenes, it somehow feels good to see characters in their most vulnerable states. It makes us feel empathetic for the characters. The way Jamie keeps filming everything, that's a brilliant element that is added to create more conflict in scenes and it also speaks about Jamie.  Even in Marriage Story, that is what worked in favor of the film, the 11 minute fight scene between the characters which is the core of the film. I also liked the scene where he is seen as a purist by everyone, but we the audience get his point of view as to why he feels so sacrosanct about the craft.

The way exposition is done in this film is interesting, that scene where we get to know that Jamie is using his wife Darby's childhood story, Darby speaks about her childhood and then Josh asks her that even Jamie had the same childhood and then Darby makes a face and we get it. I think small elements like these, if done the right way where most of the audience get it and in a way that they can feel good about themselves can make even exposition interesting. There wasn't much for me to notice about the cinematography and lighting, it didn't obstruct the storytelling in anyway. The editing was brave at many instances, the scenes where a character says that there's no chance I'm doing that and it cuts to the character doing that, this has been done a lot of times and in this film it cuts even before you'd think they'd do this.

Adam Driver was brilliant in this film, I couldn't imagine he playing a character like this for the kind of poise he carries himself with and especially after watching him in Paterson it felt like he absorbs a lot in his performances but with this film he proved his diversity in his work. This film worked for me on some levels, but it didn't on most levels. The way this film deals with acceptance, in terms of accepting life the way it is, I thought that was a mature voice from the film maker to try to not be something you aren't and the way the film asks you to stop lying to yourself. But apart from these, there weren't much that made me think or even which kept me entirely hooked with the film.

Sillu Karupatti Analysis

Sillu Karupatti

Written & Directed by: Halitha Shameem

Available on Netflix

Watching anthologies is a different experience than watching films, they are not like watching a bunch of short films together either. When you are watching a film, in 20 minutes you know what you have signed up for and when you are watching a bunch of shorts, you never know what you are signing up for even when it's near the ending of the short. With anthologies, you kind of know what you've signed up for in terms of the theme and if it's the same film maker then the mood and the tone and yet you have new stories and setting within the film. With Wild Tales, there are 6 shorts in it, every short has a crisp and to the point opening because they don't want to bore you with establishing aerial shots in every short. It's the same here.

In the storytelling it's a weird balance that they figured out between, keeping the world grounded by having realistic situations, characters and depiction of daily lives but the extensive usage of background score romanticizes the world. The music is like a pat on the back to the sorrow of the lives of the characters. Yet, I couldn't figure out why they used so many jump cuts in the editing. It didn't complement the slow, laid back storytelling especially while portraying routine. I couldn't figure out what they wanted to convey with it, or if it was just used to crisp the duration further. I couldn't also get why they had to have cameos of characters from one short to another, that had no purpose in the storytelling other than the little joy of recognizing people. 

In the first segment, Pink Bag, the thing that bugs me most about the setting of this short is, most of the films ask us to feel sympathetic towards them. Parasite doesn't do that, the depiction of their lives is not done from a patronizing point of view. But, where this segment goes further in the film is so heartwarming and especially the ending of this short was so endearing that it makes us ready for the remaining films. In some characters, like the old lady in the third segment and the guy with testicular cancer it felt like the characters had interesting/dramatic things going on in their lives but the way they were written, it felt like someone's idea of those characters and not those characters. I didn't feel so while watching them but in retrospect when I think of the way they behaved I'm feeling that. The last segment was a more subtle way of exploring monotony in marriage, than what Sarjun KM did in his short Lakshmi. It had an interesting way of looking at things in this film, the armpit, the anklet and some more of this sorts.

Sudani from Nigeria Analysis

Sudani from Nigeria

Directed by: Zakariya

Starring: Soubin Shahir

Cinematography: Shyju Khalid

National Award for Best Feature Film Malayalam

In this consumerist, capitalist world where all that matters is money we need films like these which inspire us to love unconditionally. This story is about a Nigerian football player, Samuel, who joins a football club in Kerala managed by Majeed, played by Soubin Shahir. Soubin Shahir effortlessly fits in this character, Majeed. His diversity in acting is similar to Shadab Hosseini's in The Salesman and A Separation where the actor doesn't try hard to be different from their other performances and the diversity in their performance comes from the subtle nuances which we can't even point out consciously. This film is a journey of Majeed's character from being cold and an opportunist to being warm and accepting. He changes not because of one incident, but a sequence of he feeling angry, guilty, eventually understanding, to finally being accepting.

The title is derived from how people ignore the fact that he is from Nigeria and call him 'Sudani' and come to visit him like he is a tourist spot. The way people are portrayed in the film is what keeps the world of the film real and grounded. Language and the barrier of language is used as a tool of storytelling in this film. Majeed, speaks in Malayalam to Samuel when he wants to just vent and doesn't want him to understand what he is saying. Majeed's mother speaks in Malayalam with Samuel in spite of she knowing that he won't get it because she knows that emotions can be communicated and they clearly do. The way she cries in front of him, the way she sees him crying and the way she prays for him is all so endearing. Sometimes, we see that Samuel probably isn't getting what she is saying and he is just nodding his head. It makes these characters more human.

This film is shot and co-produced by Shyju Khalid, I checked his filmography and I'm shocked. How can a person have most of the best films coming out of the industry in his filmography? It has a realist approach in the look of the film. The songs and the background score, add to the theme of the film, whether it's the love for football, compassion towards people. The scene where they find the passport, it's so simple and surprising that you react exactly like the character who found it. The climax of the film is so heart warming, it felt like a warm hug and an ode to football, friendship and love. The last scene where Majid redeems himself, by accepting his step father works because of the body language of the actor who played the father.

Jojo Rabbit Analysis

Jojo Rabbit

Screenplay-Direction : Taika Watiti

Nominated for 6 Oscars including Best Picture and Best Adapted Screenplay

Based on a book by: Christine Leunens

Jojo Rabbit is a light-hearted satire on Nazis and war exploring themes like love and compassion. It's not easy, being able to pull off a comedy set in war and the Holocaust. The comedy is generated by the gap, the characters and the world they are in have. The characters are, a 10-year old Johannes "Jojo" Betzler as the protagonist and his second best friend Yorki. They are like kids next door, who are thrown in Nazi Germany and they try to fit in and want to impress Hitler, which is what generates fun. There is quirk and some Coen-brothers' style of comedy in some scenes, especially the repetitive Heil-Hitler joke and that scene where Yorki accidentally launches a missile.

The core conflict of the film is, Jojo discovering a Jewish girl Elsa in his house who is hid by his mother played by an outstanding Scarlett Johhanson. Her performance has been so fluid this year, in Marriage Story and in this film. It felt so effortless, the way she portrays these characters. The dynamics between Elsa and Jojo is so layered and interesting, at the beginning it is funnily that of a ghost and a victim, Jojo thinks that he is in control of the scene but adorably he isn't because he isn't that cruel. It slowly turns into a zone between an elder sister and a friend but Jojo falls in love with her. His performance in the scene where he tells her that Germany won the war, is brilliant. We see a sense of transformation in him, when he tells Hitler that she doesn't seem like a bad person. This moment is the heart of the film.

The storytelling is entirely from Jojo's perspective. I haven't watched the DOP Mihai Malaimare Jr.'s other films but this film is shot beautifully with vibrant colors in spite of it being set in war because it is from Jojo's perspective, it still has hope. Jojo isn't that Nazi he's trying to become yet. The editing is done in a certain way, where the tone suddenly changes from light to dark. They don't give us time for the transition, we see Jojo is talking to his mother and it has a light tone and they stop and we see some dead bodies hanging by their necks on the road. It punches us in the gut. This film eventually grew in me, I thought it was a good film when I watched it but when some scenes were flashing in my mind later I loved the film more.