L.A. Confidential Analysis

L.A. Confidential

Directed by: Curtis Hanson

Oscar for Best Adapted Screenplay, Nominated for Palme d'Or

It's a murder mystery where surprisingly a character has a character arc, usually in detective movies we see detectives having a flat arc. Usually investigative films run on how the investigation unfolds and for that the detectives are more clever than the audience, so they don't really have an arc most of the times. Even in films like Se7en where the character traits of the character of Brad Pitt, he being restless, is important in the ending, even there we see a flat arc, they don't change. In Sherlock or any other detective films, the case can be one hell of an experience for the protagonists but very rarely it happens that the case changes them as a person. The case can leave them physically damaged like in D-16, but it changing them as a person is very rare in films.

Guy Pearce, as Ed Exley is labelled a snitch by the entire department because of his honesty and his self righteousness. There is a reason for he being that righteous and that's planted in one dialogue, actually a phrase, when he says, 'I don't want to do it your way, or my father's'. His father would've been a bad cop and he wants to prove himself that he isn't like his father. Over the course of this case, when he sees how things unfold he too changes by the end and it's a corruption arc and it's for bad, that's the theme of the film that you can't sustain in this world with absolute honesty and this theme has been explored well in this film. The murder mystery part of this film, could've been better. I wasn't that blown by it, but since we see a dramatic character arc in the film as well that is forgivable.

A Man Escaped Analysis

A Man Escaped (1956)

Written & Directed by: Robert Bresson

Best Director at Cannes Film Festival 1957.

The film is set in German occupied France during the World War-II, the plot, the characters of the film are simple and minimalist. A man, Fontaine wants to escape from the prison and even though we have some characters around him, the movie is entirely centered on the protagonist. There is understandably extensive usage of voice over, because this film is about a man's psychology when he is in that state of mind, when he is even ready to kill people just to be able to get out. In spite of the simplistic plot and few characters, the film explores heavy themes. The subject matter of this film is relevant even till date. If you look at it from the perspective of, risking your life and getting killed in the worst case being better than just living for some more time. This is what differentiates him from the other characters, he is a non-conformist. The idea is, what are you risking anyway? A few more months of your miserable life?

Robert Bresson is known for using non-professional actors and draining them emotionally by doing extensive rehearsals to point that they can't emote anymore and then he captures them. For me, this film wouldn't have changed if he was caught and shot dead in the end, that would've also justified the title to me. I see this film as he escaping from the misery of life, it can either be salvation or finding redemption in death. This film is devoid of any poetic expressions and imagery. This film can be a provocation for people with revolutionary ideologies. I'm yet to watch Robert Bresson's Pickpocket.

Finding Nemo Analysis

Finding Nemo

Directed by: Andrew Stanton

A PIXAR film.

The writing of this film is extraordinary, the plot, character arcs and themes all of them are orchestrated beautifully to form a cohesive screenplay. This movie is a journey of a fish, Marlin, who loses his kid, Nemo and Marlin has to go and find the kid. This is the goal of Marlin, but what comes in way of the journey? Marlin's flaw, that is his fear. Now, Marlin has to either stay the way he is or else he has to change himself and overcome the fear by taking the journey. But, nobody is comfortable to change that easily, especially when we are asked to do something that is out of our characteristics. Marlin is forced to take this journey, because it is his son and probably the only purpose in his life. How do we feel empathetic towards Marlin? How do they create that? By the opening prologue of the film, we see the reason behind Marlin's flaw. Marlin loses his wife and all of their eggs and the only remaining egg is Nemo, so we find his flaw reasonable and we are rooting for him to overcome his flaw throughout the journey.

Marlin meets Dory, whose flaw is her short term memory and that is not necessarily a flaw, that is used as another plot device. How do we know that Marlin is overcoming his fear? When he saves himself out a situation and he goes back and risks his life again to go save Dory, that is when we he is overcoming his fear. There are a number of incidents in the film where we see that Marlin has tough choices to make, he has to let go and every time this happens it challenges his characteristic and when he sees good things happening because of that, he changes slowly. Finally, when we see Marlin and Nemo together, they have small setup and payoff  like Marlin's friends asking him to crack a joke and at the end he confidently tells them a joke without stuttering. Pixar's films are masterclasses for writers, especially on creating empathetic characters and creating coherent character arcs.

True Detective Season 1 Analysis

True Detective Season 1 

Created by: Nic Pizzolatto

Starring: Matthew McConaughey, Woody Harrelson

This show is an investigative thriller, where two cops Rust and Marty are investigating a murder case of a prostitute and it is shown beside Rust and Marty talking about these experiences several years later. They use this as an extra tool to reveal character, yet they don't do it in an expository way where for example Rust is saying that Marty is a brave man or such, but they narrate incidents and talk about them from their own present perspectives. There isn't much of a character arc in both of them, they are almost the same even after those many years and in spite of they getting challenged in a lot of aspects, they might have become more stronger mentally but the fundamental nature of their characters are same because they are strongly opinionated people.

It's interesting to see how an unsolved case can haunt a detective for years as much as it feels like it's his purpose in life to solve this case and he won't matter even if he loses his life in the process. People say that every cop has such a case in their career which they get attached to and it becomes difficult to look at things objectively. The show isn't made like a Netflix original that's made now where there is a tight screenplay and the show is compelling throughout, this show is more of a slow burn and in spite of events happening slowly, it slowly spikes our interest. I can recall at the end of the 6th episode, Rust and Marty decide to hang out and chat and it's not a very compelling event but for some reason I couldn't wait to see what happens next. It's because the characters of Rust and Marty are written in a way that doesn't shy away from the nuances of reality. 

When religion comes into play with such gruesome crimes, it is even more scarier because we know what kind of trace religion can take people in and what they can be capable of. I got recalled of Se7en, as there is also a video essay by LFTS analyzing Se7en and True Detective. I'd look at this as a drama more than as a thriller, because of the way the show is conceived and the pacing of the show.

The House That Jack Built Analysis

The House That Jack Built

Written & Directed by: Lars von Trier

Nominated for Palme d'Or at Cannes 2018

This film had around 100 walkouts during the screening for the violence, and yet it got a 10-minute standing ovation at Cannes.

This is a serial killer film, this is one of the most disturbing, dark films I've ever seen. This is a study of the extremes to which a human mind can go to. The film is 2 and half hours and I didn't like the ending 20 mins, but apart from that throughout the film my heart was beating fast and there was riveting tension throughout. The reason this film feels so violent is because it's conceived in a realistic way, it feels like what we're seeing is a footage shot on Handicam, the focus going in and out and the handheld feel to it. The eeriness is purely generated out of the way the film is shot more than the violence. The film is so casual about the violence it portrays, it's never sensational about it. We don't see heavy music behind when a murder takes place, the tension is created sheerly through the events that take place.

There is a conversation going on throughout the film as a voice over where Jack is talking to another person about why he kills and how he considers killing to be an art form and how pathetic human condition is and how hopeless life is. The entire duration of the film is a foray into his sick, disturbed mind and I've never been in a character's head this deeply for so long. It feels like he's passionate about killing people like how we're passionate about things. The performance by Matt Dillon is so convincing, his unpredictable nature in his acting as well as in the voiceover.

I'm yet to watch Lars von Trier's other films. He's of course the founder of the Danish Film Movement Dogme 95, along with Thomas Vinterberg. Lars von Trier is known for making films which are controversial, the two volumes of Nymphomaniac, Dancer in the Dark and Melancholia and some people say that every film of his feels like a dare.

Coffee and Cigarettes Analysis

Coffee and Cigarettes

Written & Directed by: Jim Jarmusch

This is an anthology of 11 shorts, where people talk over coffee and cigarettes. This started when Jim Jarmusch made a short with Roberto Beningni in 1986 and he eventually made more shorts and released it as a feature film after 18 years in 2004. My favorite among the shorts is 'Cousins?' which is a nuanced conversation, there is a lot to learn about writing conversations from this short. This short is about two actors who meet, one of whose career is happening and the other actor is trying to know him more, work with him and collaborate. The actor whose career is happening is hesitant and he looks down upon this person, until he gets to know that this person knows Spike Jonze. This happens a lot of times where one fact about another person, changes our whole view on them and we rethink the way we've been talking to them and we wish we could undo all of that. This shows how we as humans don't value people for who they are, and this makes sense too. You don't have a lot of time to spend with everyone, unless you think you'd learn something from them. It's a masterfully written and performed short.

The other shorts were quirky, slice of life and fun. One thing this anthology does well is, it captures the socio-cultural milieu well. It shows us how people talk, how people see things, how their lives are it mostly deals with artists talking over coffee and cigarettes. This is an experimental format, because having even 6 shorts like in Wild Tales will give you the length of 10-12 mins per short and you can have arcs, plot but some of these shorts are 5 mins and they are just a foray into their world and before we get to know more, it ends. I was wondering if Starbucks or some cafe should make a movie like this with anthology of shorts of just people talking in a cafe like how BMW did with The Hire, I'm yet to watch that movie though. 

Citizen Kane Analysis

Citizen Kane (1941)

Directed, Co-Written, Produced and Starring: Orson Welles

A film made in 1941, is often considered to be the greatest film ever made. But, how can a film made in 1941 still be relevant and how can it tell an interesting story? Guess what, it does. I haven't seen a film like this before, this film created a similar effect on me as 12 Angry Men did. I think this film should be one of the first films to do a character based movie telling a tale of corruption and Taxi Driver, Wolf of Wall Street, Joker are loosely based on this theme. 

The film is about Charles Foster Kane, a newspaper tycoon and the film opens with his death and some of his important life events are told in flashbacks through different characters in his life. There is a brilliant montage sequence with his first wife, I couldn't believe I was seeing that kind of a sequence in a 1940s film. Character study films are usually based on non-conformist, eccentric characters who stand out from the crowd and so is Charles Foster Kane. He says, 'There is only one person in this world to decide what I'll do. And that's me.' This line explains the arc of this character and the choices he'll make. I could see some similarities in the characters and the arcs of Charles Foster Kane and Mahanati, both powerful people and both succumb to their own actions, choices they make out of integrity. These films give an unusual moral message that, to be in this world you can't be purists and that you need to be manipulative.

This film is known for using the 'deep focus' technique where everyone in the foreground and the background are in focus, this technique is useful to take long shots with ensemble casting. You can capture the scene like a play to have the drama play in real time, unless if you have a multi cam setup which I doubt if they had back then. I could see this technique being used in Satyajit Ray's last films where there were dramas set in homes and I'm sure many other films even till date use this technique, especially filmmakers who do long takes. There's an essay in Andre Bazin's 'What is Cinema? - Vol 1' on the merits and demerits of montage. It talks about how by using montage we can't capture the objective reality of the scene, as he explains in the difference between a photograph and a painting in his other essay.

Orson Welles was 25 when this film was released and he was considered an autuer for this film. Years later, Pauline Kael, a film critic wrote a 50,000 word book length essay about how this film uses the unique talents of the screenwriter and the cinematographer and she bashes the Auteur theory.

The Maltese Falcon Analysis

The Maltese Falcon (1941)

Directed by: John Huston

Ranked #31 in AFI's list of 100 years... 100 Movies

This is a film noir where a private detective Sam Spade takes on a case that involves him with three eccentric criminals and their quest for a priceless statuette. The film dives straight into the story, it opens at the office of two detectives and a client comes to meet them. Thrillers and detective films are such that, it doesn't matter if the film is color or black and white. All that matters is the puzzles thrown at the protagonist and us and how we try to solve them. Also there is a danger posed to the protagonist, it is either done by revealing the murderer or by implying that the murderer will keep killing till he/she gets caught. In David Bordwell's essay 'Murder Culture: Adventures in 1940s Suspense' he says that the suspense story is centrally about a character who starts out a victim but who through brains and bravery can overcome the threat of death.

This film according to me definitely stands the test of time for the writing, although I'm not sure about the film making unless if we see it as a film made in 1940s. The guns that the characters point at each other seem like toys and the threat is not visual. Apart from this, everything works well although I wish the killer was objectively found by using clues rather how the killer confesses in the film. Noir films like this made in the 1940s are inspiring to indie filmmakers of today to explore the genre in a minimalist way.

The Handmaiden Analysis

The Handmaiden

Directed by: Park Chan-wook

Nominated for Palme d'Or in 2016, Won BAFTA for Best Film Not in the English Language.

The Handmaiden starts like a Kurosawa film, it has an epic vibe to it. It is set in Japanese-occupied Korea, where it feels like someone is being sacrificed from a village. Later we get to know that she is being sent as a maid to a Japanese heiress. Later we get to know that she is involved in a plan to cheat the heiress. The plot changes its course of direction with every scene, with every detail that is added and this is done throughout the film. These are not twists, these are turns where the story keeps changing its direction very fast. This quality was there in Anurag Kashyap's segment in Ghost Stories as well. The most interesting thing about this film is, this film is conceived like an epic where the storytelling is usually clean and strong but the screenplay of the film is twisted. The film never cheats us, they don't bank on what we'd assume because of the film making techniques and then hit us there with a twist.

It is conceived in 3 parts, the extended cut. Quentin Tarantino when asked about chapters, if he uses chapters to give the film a literature kind of a vibe, he agreed to it. I don't know the intention behind the usage of chapters here, it can be because of the change of perceived narrative in the film. The love story between the lady and the maid is conceived in an erotic way, unlike the love story in Portrait of a Lady on Fire. Here they fall in love after feeling sexual tension and discovering what they can do to each other, whereas in Portrait of a Lady on Fire, they feel companionship first and they fall in love and then the sexual tension starts between them. I'm yet to watch Blue is the Warmest Color, which is usually criticized for having a male gaze over a lesbian love story.

Nocturnal Animals Analysis

Nocturnal Animals

Directed by: Tom Ford

Starring: Amy Adams, Jake Gyllenhaal

This is a crazy film, about a woman who owns an art gallery, when she receives a manuscript of her ex-husband's new novel which he says that he has written it by getting inspired from her and what he writes is a dark story where his wife and daughter get raped and killed. It blew my mind when I was watching the film, I almost had a similar experience as the woman who's reading his manuscripts. Who would write such a dark story inspired by his ex-wife, does he wishes that happened to them or what is his idea behind writing it? Is this his revenge against her for not encouraging him when he used to write slice of life stories inspired from his own life? My only disappointment with this film with such aesthetic brilliance is that this film doesn't answer the questions it raises.

The opening sequence of this film, is something I've never seen before and I kept watching it in awe of the powerful imagery that I was seeing. This film too does my favorite mix of genres, art and crime. Art for me comes from within because I pursue it in some form or the other, so I have first hand experiences and crime is something that fascinates me and blending both can bring out a brilliant voice and a good example is Karthik Subbaraj. The narrative device of a story within a story confuses me, I can't feel for something when I know that it won't affect the characters I'm watching. This film had the scenes of the manuscript for about half of the film or even more, which was a little confusing in spite of those scenes being interesting. Because a story in a story, doesn't satisfy us unless we see a direct impact on the choices our characters make because of the story.

Tell No One Analysis

Tell No One

Directed by: Guillame Canet

It's a murder mystery. The puzzle that the film puts forward, the murder, the crime scene that we see, the suspects and what actually happened and the revelation of the mystery is brilliant in this film. As a whole, when you come to know of the one-liner, the twist works very well. But this film is treated like a drama more than a thriller, sure there are scenes which carry tension but we also see a big chase sequences with huge set pieces, that scene is more like an action thriller than a suspense thriller. With these films, I'd like to be thrilled by the writing and the film making can make it chilling but there are events in this film which hardly drive the plot forward. It happens to me with even other films that I like, there are some scenes which are memorable and sometimes I even forget a lot of plot details in the film later. The most memorable parts of this film for me, would be the opening premise and the end revelation, the second act all feels forgettable and they just feel like a tool for us to experience the end revelation better.

I like the idea that films like The Guilty, Bong Joon-ho's Mother, The Body, The Invisible Guest and this film can do brilliant plot twists with minimal number of characters. When it's a whodunnit drama and we see 10 members, then you can't feel the impact of plot twists there because the film in itself is a puzzle and plot twists are expected there whereas these films are treated like thrillers with minimal number of characters and in the few characters we know, if we get to see a twist, it really blows our minds.

Knives Out Analysis

Knives Out

Written & Directed by: Riah Johnson

Nominated for Academy Award for Best Original Screenplay

Knives Out is a brilliant whodunnit murder mystery.

SPOILERS!

We see a rich old man, having his throat slit in the opening of the movie and that's the premise, the movie is going to be about revealing who did it and why whoever did that, did it. The movie starts with some officers asking questions to family members and that's how we get to understand what happens in the family. 15 minutes, into the film they show us a conflict between the old man and his son and 10 minutes later, we figure out everyone has reasons to kill the old man. 40 minutes into the film, we know who killed him and what happened and I went nuts! I was wondering if the rest of the movie is going to be about how that person is going to get away with it. But then it wouldn't be a whodunnit movie as I've read about it. Then the plot is moving forward, when we get to know about the will and there is some drama happening in the film. This is a brilliant tool that they use, they make us feel that the mystery is already over, you subconsciously know that there must be more to it but it's a brilliant way to give twists to the audience in a way that they don't see coming.

The set pieces, their costumes and especially the music, it adds a new layer of character to the film. It felt like I was watching a fantasy film. Whodunnit movies mainly rely on the mystery and the puzzle of the story, you can make a whodunnit with 3 men sitting inside a room and talking among each others and you can also make a huge budget movie like this but it never felt that this movie didn't deserve the ensemble cast or the huge set pieces. It made justice to everything, it closes every arc and it answers every question it raises. Whodunnit movies can be really bad if the puzzle feels clumsy because there isn't much drama in the film anyway, so the only thing that can be banked on are the twists and turns of the plot. I hope Knives Out paves way to more modern whodunnit murder mysteries.

Money Heist Part 1 & 2 Analysis

Money Heist

Created by: Alex Pina

This show has a simple plot, you can figure that out from the name of the show. By the end of the first episode in the first season, I was wondering what the remaining episodes will be about. My imagination of the show told me that I was looking at it from a narrow perspective. What baffles me the most is, how the show manages to keep us hooked for that long when we get bored by even watching some films. I figured out what they did is, they keep increasing the stakes as we keep progressing and the stakes in the beginning are shown with tension so that the scenes with more stakes are effortlessly engaging. At the beginning, we think they go to rob the bank, then they say that they'll print money. The one plot point which kept the show going for so long, is that the robbers didn't want any hostages to die. If this plot point wasn't there it would've been so difficult for the show to be this engaging. We hardly see any twists in the show, what we see are turns, plot points and they are used as cliffhangers. The turns in the story are so interesting and there are many turns the story takes, it is super dense, there is a lot of story happening which is why it feels tight in spite of it being for that long. 

Arturo's character was so irritating to watch, it was similar to watching Skyler in Breaking Bad. These characters are well nuanced and brilliantly performed to make us feel strongly against them. I'd call these 'spoil-sport characters'. Both these shows are anti-hero shows, here the good guys/cops would be the villains. We don't hate the villains because it is their job to go against our heroes and stop them but we hate these characters because we the audience are supporting the anti-heroes whereas these characters in spite of it not being their job, they try to disrupt our anti-heroes which is why I'm calling them 'spoil-sport characters'. Spoil-sport characters are a brilliant tool to make the audience feel empathetic towards the hero, we hate the spoil-sport characters so much that we start rooting them to learn a lesson and then the writers make them meet our hero, so what happens? Bingo, we are rooting for our hero!

The Body Analysis

The Body

Written & Directed by: Oriol Paulo

This is the debut film of Oriol Paulo, who also made The Invisible Guest which is one of the best thrillers I've ever seen. This film follows a missing dead body and the mystery behind it. This film asks a lot of questions very soon. Who is the dead person? What's the story behind their death? Why is the dead body missing now? Why was the guard running in the beginning? Is she alive? We also get answers to some of these questions in the first act of the film. There is also a slight supernatural element to this film, this also adds another dimension to the thriller element of the film.

The one tool they used so well in this film is that they visually show us different possibilities of what could've happened and it makes it so much more interesting rather than someone just rambling out a certain possibility. We've seen this technique being used now in so many films, in 1-Nenokkadine, The Invisible Guest, D-16 and many other films. I used this technique in my short film 'Who' as well. By the time, we approach the end of the film, there are still so many more questions to be answered that I was wondering how will they do that, but they answer every single question we have had by just one scene and they close all open arcs. Another tool that Oriol used, both in this film and in The Invisible Guest is a character in disguise, this can be a brilliant tool even when the audience expect the twist because this added element is something that they won't see coming.

Panchayat Analysis

Panchayat

Created by: TVF

Starring: Jitendra Kumar, Raghuvir Yadav, Chandan Roy, Neena Gupta

This is a show which you can't not love. It is such a breezy slice of life, fun kind of a show which could've easily gotten boring if it wasn't done well and content like this is risky because if you are making a thriller or a high concept film, it has to suck really bad to get boring which content like this can easily lose your attention in these days of instant gratification through social media. This show takes you to a village and puts you there with these amazing people whom you'd otherwise not get to meet. 

Jitendra Kumar as Abhishek is so good in the role, he portrays the frustration of missing out a lot of things in life very well. My favorite moment from the show was when Abhishek lashes out at everyone about he feeling lonely and that night, they all turn up to party. This show follows a short arc format where you can actually shuffle the episodes and watch them too, but there are some relationships which develop over the course of time. But apart from that, they deal with an issue in every episode and close it there. I so badly wish, they did more number of episodes.

The world of TVF has some elements in them, they talk about competitive exams and people who struggle for them or about competition in general. They don't look at education as being nerdy, of course they don't support views of education being the only factor to judge people but they look at education from a different perspective than the other content creators, it can be because a lot of people in TVF have cracked competitive exams, what do you need more than a first hand experience to express your voice in a certain world.

The Farewell Analysis

The Farewell

Written and Directed by: Lulu Wang

This film is about Billi and her family who return to China under the guise of a fake wedding to just spend time with their grandmother who is about to die in a few weeks and she is the only one doesn't know about it. This film talks about a lot of things and it did well in doing so, it talks about facing and dealing with death, the difference between the individualism in the Western countries and the societal nature of life in the Eastern countries and themes like running in a race in life and such things.

This film portrays the socio-cultural milieu of China so well, that I felt that I stayed with this family for this wedding. I watch some foreign language films and even if I'm bored or even if don't understand anything that's going on, I just keep watching them. It is because of the portrayal of life there, I feel like I'm travelling and being with those people during the most happening events of their lives. This film has emotions which are global and it also manages captures the culture and life of China so well.

The film has the same conflict going on till the end, if they should tell her or not but they manage to find different scenarios where this conflict happens and as time progresses Billi understands why she is feeling the urge to tell her grandmother the try and probably why she shouldn't. This film presents a good dramatic argument and it changes our perspective, because we see the film from Billi's perspective and as she realizes, we also realize.

Rough Book Analysis

Rough Book

Written, Directed and Edited by: Anant Narayan Mahadevan

Starring: Tannishtha Chatterjee

This film is about the Indian education system and it deals with various sub themes in this like encouraging kids to pursue their passion, the style of teaching, etc. This film reminds of the Tony Kaye directed film Detachment, which deals with depression and such themes. Both these films don't shy away from telling their opinions and views on these issues explicitly, but the only difference was that in Detachment we see the interviews of characters and that's how we get to know their views. In this film, we have characters talking to others and speaking out their views.

This film, had a slice of life treatment to it which I kind of didn't mind while watching because I like watching slice of life content in general but it felt like the dramatic narrative would've been more impactful and satisfying if the conflicts were high and then probably I wouldn't mind the explicit messaging of the film. It surely is good and important propaganda, but it is still propaganda. The portrayal of the students didn't work for me, I could sense that this is an adult's idea of how college kids would be.

Tannishtha Chatterjee is brilliant in this film, I saw her as a real person and her resilience was visible, but again I'd have loved the character more if she had faced more troubles and problems in the film. I couldn't empathize with her as much, in spite of the prologue; she divorcing her husband when she finds out that he is corrupt. This quality is something that we'd respect in a person, but might not necessarily be something that we'd relate to. A film which did this brilliantly, was the Pixar movie Up where they have a 10-min prologue, without which I can't imagine empathizing with a grumpy old character.

The editing of the film is refreshing, we don't see conventional editing style of wide, long, mid, close, mid, long, wide in a scene. We see sudden cuts and they aren't jarring as well. I just wish this film was more abstract in it's narrative and the craft so that there'd have been something to look forward to other than the messaging of the film.

Trance Analysis

Trance

Directed and Produced by: Anwar Rasheed

Starring: Fahadh Faasil
Streaming on Amazon Prime Video

This is a film about religious dogmatism and the Trance it can take you in. Viju Prasad struggles with livelihood and his younger brother commits suicide because of his mental illness. Viju Prasad shifts to Mumbai and here, he gets offered a job by a corporate company where he can earn as much as he can and this job is that of a Christian pastor who'll give speeches to huge number of people, brainwash them and make money out it. Viju Prasad now becomes Pastor Joshua Carlton and he faces all the allegations and makes sure that his business keeps going on. Now, the arc of this movie is interesting, we have a hero who is on a morally grey path and he has troubles and hurdles in that path and he keeps crossing them and moves on. But by the ending of the film, he realizes that the path he has chosen in wrong and he takes a more righteous stand. But in this film, we expect that something like this would happen unless in an already grey genre of film like maybe a gangster movie.

Fahadh Faasil is an actor whose work needs to be studied by aspiring actors, the way he performs and the way he brings out a lot of things from within is wonderful. He is so convincing in even unrealistic scenes like the scene where he himself starts believing that he is god and he can change people and their lives. Write anything on paper, of course make it consistent with the character and the story and Fahadh will magically make it convincing with his performance. I'd love to see him like a serial killer because he brings out the truth in every character he plays and I'm curious to see how he finds the truth of a serial killer. The Malayalam film fraternity is so inspiring, people act, write and help in their peers' films. National Award Winner for Best Screenplay Dileesh Pothan is acting in this film in a supporting role. Amar Neerad, a filmmaker now worked as a cinematographer for this film. The sheer conviction of all these amazing artists for a project, when they all come together it brings in lot of positivity.

The Seventh Seal Analysis

The Seventh Seal

Written & Directed by: Ingmar Bergman

Special Jury Prize at Cannes 1957.

This film has some of the most interesting and quirky images I have seen, even till date. In the opening few minutes, we see a man playing chess with someone who is a personification of death at a beach. I can't recall watching such images even in a fantasy film these days. Films these days don't use such direct storytelling like they do in plays where death is personified, but back then when there was limited scope of VFX and other technical advances in cinema, they doing that is justified. But, maybe because of the unfamiliar socio-political context, I had a hard time trying to understand the film. It talks about death, feeling content with one's life and such themes which I could understand and I could figure out the plot too in a vague sense but there was a lot going on in the film, some of which even by reading later, I couldn't decipher. I'll keep this film for a revisit later sometime.

The cinematography was noticeably good, the usage of lighting and the compositions; especially I can recall a scene where in a conversation between people of different heights, they showed us each character from the point of view of the other person in terms of the height at which the camera is placed. Although it was a simple thing, it's interesting that they were this particular about even such minute details. This film has a making style similar to the silent films and the films of 30s and the 40s unlike the more modern films of the 60s. If I had to put this film in a film movement, I'd say German Expressionism. It is not really horror and the depictions weren't also that distorted in terms of lighting but it's the content matter of the scenes and the sinister vibes that the film carries throughout.

Fargo Season 2 Analysis

Fargo Season 2

Created by: Noah Hawley

The people and the world of Fargo has been created and portrayed so well, that it almost feels like a sub-genre in crime films like how you'd have noir, gangster, heist, psycho killer, slasher; you can also have a sub-genre called Fargo. The first season and the film Fargo gave me a certain idea of what this world is, we have insane violence going on by people who get stuck in a situation and try to come out of it and they end up going deeper into it, we have some honest cops trying to curb violence and it's mostly a conflict between them. With this season, they have pushed both of them; we have around ten characters who are trying to fix things or make things worse, everyone ends up doing what they want to do by resorting to crime and there is a huge web created where at the end what's happening is nothing but a rampage of killings. We have one incident which happens in the first episode, where a guy is sent to convince a judge about a case and the chain of events that follow, creates enough events for 10 episodes of about an hour each. The way the events have been created is remarkable, the one-liner of the show is super dense.

The cinematography is brilliant, we have beautiful landscapes and frames all over but the sinister world that is created gives a spooky vibe to these landscapes. The amount of characters, their motivations, their actions and the number of crimes that happen in this show gave me the feeling that the Coen Brothers' No Country for Old Men and Fargo Season 1 tried to give that they don't get why people are resorting to violence. I got that in that film and the first season as well, but here in this show I felt that and no character had to speak it out to remind me of it. In spite of this show being made for Netflix, we see the black blank screens in between which are usually left out for commercials when they are made for TV. I couldn't get their motivation for this choice, but I think the creators have a positive view on materialism and consumerism in general because they'd think people and families would be happy when they watch TV together, go out and spend time together instead of resorting to violence.

Barton Fink Analysis

Barton Fink

Written, Produced, Edited & Directed by: The Coen Brothers

Won Palme d'Or, Best Director and Best Actor at Cannes 1991.

The work of Coen Brothers can get overwhelming to watch at times because there is a lot of subtext thrown around everywhere and there is a lot to take, in spite of the slow pacing. It feels that they are trying to communicate something with every filmmaking choice they make, if the shot is lingering for a bit longer than it should or if the blocking seems a little weird and most of the times, the characters are quirky and unpredictable. Barton Fink is about a successful playwright, who goes to LA to write Hollywood films. He is asked to write a wresting picture and more than halfway through the film when he submits his draft to the producer, he says that people want to see some fights and action in a wresting movie, not he wrestling with his soul, that'd work a bit for the critics but this script stinks. This film does a lot of things, in terms of exploring different themes, it explores the mainstream way of making movies vs the artistic way of making movies theme, it also explores writing, writer's block and the anguish of an obsessed artist, the themes of a common man vs a rich man and a lot more.

The cinematography by Roger Deakins feels like a different layer added to the film, the stylistic choices made and especially the pacing is used to create uncomfortable, weird situations in conversations. The core conflict of the film changes midway through the film, it begins with Barton wanting to make a difference and then it suddenly changes to getting out of a bad situation which he suddenly falls into. This seems like an element which they added in the film after asking themselves the question, 'What's the most bonkers thing that can happen in our story?' and they did that. It goes all bonkers from there and yet everything stay in place in terms of character consistency and coherence. I'm yet to catch up on the other works of the Coen Brothers. 

Up Analysis

Up

Directed by: Pete Doctor

A Pixar film

This film takes hardly a few minutes to get us emotional and into the world of the characters. It shows us a small kid who doesn't talk much, who meets a girl who is excited to be with him. They end up getting married, they can't have kids and all they live for is each other and they get old and she dies. Now the film begins. What a way to start telling a story, we are already rooting for this person now in spite of he being a grumpy old man. He is Mr. Fredricksen as everyone calls him and when he hates his current life, he takes up a journey to fulfill the adventure dreams of his wife Ellie. The film is about finding a purpose in life through meeting new people or by doing anything at any point in our lives. Fredricksen wouldn't have much to look forward to, in his life after his wife dies. But he meets a kid named Russell and when Russell turns out to be something, he is the one who stands up for him. He finds his purpose through caring for people, caring for their problems, owning them and trying to solve them. If he doesn't care about anything else and stays a grumpy old man, there wouldn't be much purpose to his life. What the film is saying is so heart warming and profound. 

One of the writers of Inside Out, Meg LeFauve explained the process of writing at Pixar. They apparently have a writer's room called Braintrust and all the people work on all the projects together there. They do a lot of screening of films and they say that all of their films suck at the beginning and the work they do at Braintrust is to ensure that they don't. This process is inspiring because it indicates that hard work and trying can make things work, which resonate with a lot of films of Pixar and the way they write their characters as well. I read somewhere about Pixar's characters that, we don't love them because they win, we love them because they try.

I think one of the biggest problems with films is the age of the actors, that problem isn't there in animated films. They could effortlessly show a character growing up, getting married and getting old. These are the films that kids should be watching, these inspiring, heart warming stories. The parts in between where they meet different characters, weren't so engaging for me but as a whole it made a lot of sense and gave me a satisfactory feeling, especially when Carl lets go of their house. I'm amazed by how them make us feel things for their characters so effortlessly, of course a lot of effort must be going in there. I'm so curious to catch up on all of Pixar's work now.

Portrait of a Lady on Fire Analysis

Portrait of a Lady on Fire

Written & Directed by: Celine Sciamma

Cinematography by: Claire Mathon

Won the Best Screenplay at Cannes 2019 and Nominated for Palme d'Or.

The premise of this film is so interesting, it is set in the 18th century and it is about a forbidden affair between two women, an aristocrat and a painter commissioned to paint her portrait. This film is an example of how art house films need not be boring, this film has a lot of scope for art being explored in it. The premise of this film in itself is about a woman who wouldn't pose for painters because she doesn't want to get married and this painter is asked to talk to her and observe her everyday and paint her somehow. So the film is poetic in terms of the visuals, the landscapes, the costumes, the sound design but the film doesn't limit itself to being this. It is a heart breaking love story. The performances were brilliant by both the actors, Noemie Merlant and Adele Haenel. The paintings featured in the film were made by Helene Delmaire, which also deserve a lot of appreciation 

The cinematography of this film is the best I've seen in recent times. The imagery of both the characters is so strong, they use singles a lot of times or they have both of them in the frame at once, they hardly use OTS because then we feel like we are spying from behind. We are always in between them feeling the power of both the characters and feeling the intimacy. The conversations, the romantic scenes are shot and edited in a way that we feel the tension they feel towards each other. This film does a great job in making us empathize with the characters. This film never intends to titillate the audience with its romantic scenes unlike other films and I don't get such films where they have titillating scenes. What's the point? Tell me what kind of a love life they have, what kind of a sex life they have, but why do you try to get me aroused while they are making out or having sex? Maybe I'm yet to figure it out, but I feel strongly this way as of now. I'm eager to watch her remaining filmography.

The End of the F***ing World Season 1 Analysis

The End of the F***ing World Season 1

Written by: Charlie Covell

This show is about a 17-year old James, who believes himself to be a psychopath and Alyssa who meet and get along because they are bored by the monotony of the world. Both of them want to break the rules and they feel that they are at the wrong place around the wrong set of people. The arc of the show is that James discovers himself to not be a psychopath because he starts caring for Alyssa at some level and this angle is fleshed out very well. If James would've met you or me, he wouldn't even have bothered to have a conversation but since he met someone whom he could relate to, or someone who is even more risk taking than he is, the better side of him comes out. 

The performances in the show by the lead actors Alex Lawther and Jessica Barden is so convincing in their roles, especially because characters like these are not easy and the voice over is also challenging to pull off. The episodes are 20 mins each and I don't know why they made this choice instead of long and less number of episodes. Is that because they weren't confident that the material would be engaging for like 40-45 mins or is it because the episodes have a turning plot point every 20 mins? This could've also been a movie, the format and the structure is similar to a movie. We meet two characters, they decide to go on a road trip, we have a premise and they keep meeting people in the journey and finally they discover and know more about themselves. I'm unable to figure out the creative motivations behind the choice of the format of the show.

The first season had a good arc and this makes me curious as to what they've done in the second season, but usually it's very difficult to have an as good arc for the second season when there's this good closing for the first season and a good example for that would be 13 Reasons Why. What is the show about, entirely changes when they extend the show just because they're excited to explore more dynamics between the characters. You can't explore the romantic lives of two characters of a gangster show in the next season, so shows aren't about characters, they are about a certain aspect of their characters. But I'm curious to see what they've done in the 2nd season.

We Need to Talk About Kevin Analysis

We Need to Talk About Kevin

Directed by: Lynne Ramsay

Starring: Tilda Swinton

This film is about Kevin, a psychopath whom we see right from his birth till he commits a massacre and goes to jail. Although this film isn't conceived as a character study of Kevin, it does that strongly. The kids who played Kevin in the childhood in different ages, all of them were terrifying. Usually psychopaths are portrayed as unpredictable in a lot of films, in this film Kevin looks clearly dangerous right from he being 5 years old. I don't know why the parents couldn't see that.

There's a terrific scene where Kevin's mother takes him out for dinner and when she tries to talk to him about his life, he dodges her saying how she will ask her about irrelevant details of his life and how she will use this as an excuse to bond. He knows that he can't feel anything, he'd probably accept that he's a psychopath if you present him the definition but he doesn't feel guilty for it. He thinks that others are sentimental fools who are trying to bond with people by being kind to everyone and everything.

It's also interesting how Kevin points out that no one's interested in life events and how people would switch the channel if all he'd do was get good grades in geometry. He talks about how people are interested in sensational stories more. I felt that the only activity he liked doing was archery, but probably he had these intentions behind practising it. I was thinking that he could eventually develop a passion for the sport, but every part of his brain looks for destruction. It's not even his mistake, he's born like that and he needed help throughout and I wish the parents saw that and acknowledged it.

Barry Season 1 Analysis

Barry (Season 1)

Created by: Alec Berg and Bill Hader

Available on Hotstar.

This show is about Barry, who kills people for a living, who discovers the joy of acting that he wants to leave his old life behind. This is a bit similar to Karthik Subbaraj's Jigarthanda, and this is one of my favorite genres where you get to merge art and crime together. Art is a very grounded reality whereas crime is usually larger than life, to at least people who write and create shows and movies and that strikes a good balance. I was excited to watch this show, just when I read that logline. It has 8 episodes, each around 30 mins. 

I have mixed feelings about how they treated it, I extremely enjoyed the parts where it was about his transition from his old life to him meeting new people and he finding acting interesting. But I didn't enjoy the parts were he has to go and do a few more murders because they won't let you go so easily from that. The black comedy was working for me in the parts were Barry is out of place from the rest of the people in the theatre, but it wasn't much working with the funny gangsters. I wished they explored more of he discovering the craft and his dynamics with other people in the theatre, the crime part probably would've worked better had they treated it as drama more than comedy is what I felt. The detective track was interesting too and it was used well to give a closure to the season.

I can see that there's a lot of influence of Coen Brothers on this show, whether it's dealing with artists or with people into crime. The idea of he realising the consequences of his actions in his violent life through art, was so good and I thought that acting would be kind of a rehabilitation for him. I kept feeling that if they had conceived this show as a drama instead of a comedy, they could've explored more angles to the characters. I'm not as excited to see the next season now, but will watch it later sometime probably.