Oppenheimer (2023)

Oppenheimer (2023)

Written for the screen and Directed by: Christopher Nolan
Starring: Cillian Murphy

This film surprised me in so many levels - the main thing being Chris Nolan building on his voice as a filmmaker. There are so many new styles that Nolan explored in this film, which he wouldn't earlier. One was the occasional usage of montage and voice over - which is one of my favourite tools of filmmaking - and I didn't expect to see this in a Nolan's film. It's used in the introduction of Oppenheimer in his childhood and in the scene where they discuss different possibilities of explosion - there are sudden inserts of the reaction happening. Another thing was the visual portrayal of PTSD - it was masterfully done - and it reminded me of Darren Aronofsky's films (Black Swan, Requim for a Dream). Another aspect was how the film has straightforward storytelling. A complex subject like this, definitely calls for this. Even though it's not entirely straightforward, it definitely is by Nolan's standards. Because the film is a biopic and is told from the perspective of Oppenheimer - it feels intricately personal too and the anguish that he feels is beautifully captured. 

Nolan gives the story the largeness it deserves by shooting it the way he shoots any other epic film. And in spite of it being epic, it never loses its nuance. Post the film, it feels like the film didn't take a strong stand on the whole thing, but that's exactly the stand of the film. That it is extremely complex and nuanced. Proper representation of war onscreen is very important, because war in real life does not feel like an action film. It feels like a video that we can never get ourselves to watch. And though this film is the story of a man who invented the atom bomb, the film never forgets what it means in the larger scheme of things. And because of all these, I think that Oppenheimer is Nolan's most evolved work. This film is epic and intimate, geeky and emotional, inspiring and scornful. The conflict of this film is destructive, outside and within. And all of these beautifully come through the visuals, the sound and every craft involved. Oppenheimer has the tension of a Nolan film, the nuance of an Asghar Farhadi film, it captures PTSD like a Darren Aronofsky film and it uses montage like a Scorsese film - in spite of these it never doesn't feel like a Nolan film. This is a master director, evolving his own style.

Baby (2023)

Baby (2023)

Written and Directed by: Sai Rajesh

Starring: Anand Devarakonda, Vaishnavi Chaitanya, Viraj Ashwin

Spoilers ahead.

Firstly, I want to start by writing about what I felt about the trailer - what bugged me were the dialogues which generalise. Anand's dialogue goes: "prathi kashtam mundu devudu edho oka signal isthadu, nee lanti ammayi okalla jeevitham loki vachinappudu assal signal enduku ivvade?". Now instead of this, if the dialogue was: "prathi kashtam mundu devudu edho oka signal isthadu, kani nuvvu naa jeevitham loki vachinappudu assal signal enduku ivvaledhe?" - then it would have been personal to him. This is one big issue in the whole film. "Nee lanti ammayilu" instead of "nuvvu", "maa abbayilu" instead of "nenu". This generalising dialogue seems like it's for the film to hit everyone, but it ends up making the audience feel either defensive or attacking instead of feeling empathy for the characters. Instead if the film treated the exact same story as just their story and makes us see them as individuals and not representing a gender - it would still hit and it wouldn't make the audience polarized.

Keeping this aside for a second, the film has a beautiful, endearing opening - which captures first love, the adolescence around it so well - and especially the song which has a chorus of children making the whole thing so innocent and beautiful. At this point, you'd want them to be together (if you forget what happens in the trailer). But post the premise kicks in, the film gets into murky territories. The thing about theatre viewing experience is - it's very tricky to crack grey characters - because when we watch the film as a crowd - especially as a hyper-charged crowd in a single screen - we tend to drop our IQs. The audience isn't in a space to appreciate nuances. It's either black or white. Which is why whenever Vaishnavi makes certain choices, the crowd jumps into a space where they want her to be called names. Though there were some inconsistencies with her character, I could see her. Coming from a small background, when she finds herself in the 'big' world - all she wants is some validation and attention - which she never gets from Anand. Anand treats her like a controlling father. So though she knows that Anand is part of her life, she strays in the process of trying to find her identity amidst trying to fit in. She loses herself. And in the process, a lot of irreparable damage happens. 

Also, because of the way the plot progresses in the second half - them making a deal that she'll "date" him for a month and then he'll be okay & one of the biggest plot holes in the film - "I'll sleep with Viraj so that he'll finally let me go to Anand" - these plot points make this film less of an inter-personal relationship film and more of a conniving drama. How the film arrives at these points, didn't seem convincing to me - yes, the characters are naïve, but it's disturbing to watch naive characters make bad choices throughout the film. Apart from this, the film sets up the characters for them to face bad situations. But the way the film worsens the situations is a little convenient. Although, after all these conveniences it cracks creating one of the most disturbing sequences I've seen in a long time - Premisthunna song. 

Keeping aside all these issues, the film is in the Malcolm and Marie space - where you say the worst things possible you could say to each other. The film operates on people's worst fears - need not be boys - but anyone who's anxious within a relationship. The performances were beautiful - especially the way Anand's heartbreak and pain was portrayed. The mindset of a person who's been cheated on was also captured pretty well. And overall, it was quite an experience for me watching the film. Though there were some issues with the film, the film landed for me. 

Instant Family (2018)

Instant Family (2018)

Co-written and Directed by: Sean Anders

Starring: Rose Byrne, Mark Wahlberg
Spoilers ahead.

It's a beautiful, heart-warming film that moves you into tears every now and then. The film is about a couple who decide to adopt three siblings one of whom is a teenager. The film explores all the highs and lows that they go through in the process. The beauty of the film is that it manages to find sweet and heart-warming moments at every stage - right from the thought to adopt kids to the point where they finally do it. Another good thing about the film is it's written from personal experiences that Sean Anders himself went through - and because of this - the film feels extremely aware and authentic of the world it's exploring. For example, even small scenes where they talk about the 3R technique, the difficulties teenagers face to find foster parents - there are so many such beautiful elements in the film. And the best part about it is the narrative is properly structured in a way that these small scenes fit into the story properly - unlike making us feel like the film is just a string of anecdotes. 

Though I liked everything about the film, the only issue I had was with the ending. They established a solid conflict by the second half of the film - whereas the biological mother of the kids they decided to adopt wants her kids back because she got herself together. At this point, the film raises a beautiful question of preservation of a family. Here, as an audience, I was baffled. What could be done? There is perhaps nothing you could do to get out of this whole. By the end, the film convincingly takes the route where the biological mother relapsed again. I didn't feel satisfying because someone's life being ruined is resolving the conflict of the film in a convenient way. Although the ending is salvaged by the scene where the eldest daughter runs away from home and the parents go and convince her to stay with them. This scene made it a satisfying end. And the ending scene where they finally register the adoption, was so beautifully done. I loved how the film explores a world and creates a simple, heart-warming comedy out of it. 

Pinocchio (2022)

Guillermo del Toro's Pinocchio (2022)

Directed by: Guillermo del Toro, Mark Gustafson

Won the Oscar for Best Animated Feature Film.

Streaming on Netflix.

It's a stop-motion, animated film. This film has a fairy-tale-like narrative and storytelling. Fairy tale narratives being larger than life and epic and telling such a story through stop-motion animation - with inanimate objects - brings a beautiful sense of smallness and intimacy to the storytelling. The film opens with a terrific prologue - where a father loses his son in the war - the style of the prologue seems to be influenced by the opening of Pixar's Up. After the father loses the son, he gets depressed and he does countless prayers and keeps wishing his son comes back. Now, this is a point where we as the audience are rooting so badly for the father that we are ready to see even magic help this man. I'd call this point - a fantastical low point - which would lead us to hope even magic help the characters. I believe that this fantastical low point is the key to any good fantasy film. In Harry Potter - Harry's uncle not treating Harry well and burning all of Harry's letters is that fantastical low point. In Eega - Nani being unfairly killed for no mistake of his is that fantastical low point. Now, I was super excited after this fantastical low point - I was hoping that the son would be reincarnated into the puppet he makes. Although the film takes a slightly different turn. 

The film beautifully explores so many intense themes - it explores grief and the processing of it. Pinocchio symbolizes another child one has after losing one, a spouse from a remarriage and the film explores how tough it is for someone to not keep looking for the lost loved ones in the new person that has come into their life. And it is too harsh on the new person - in this case, a kid. The film talks about acceptance and getting past the expectations parents have on their kids. Though the film talks about all these in moments, a few things didn't work for me. One was how there is reincarnation possible for Pinocchio in the film - it just takes away the promised intensity of the stakes. Also, it caters to the tropes of an animated film to an extent - the physical comedy and chaos - some of it which I enjoyed. Overall, I really enjoyed seeing the film for how intimate and epic it was at the same time.

Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone (2001)

Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone (2001)

Directed by: Chris Columbus
Based on the novel by J. K. Rowling

Having read the first book and having watched the films as a kid - I wasn't impacted by Harry Potter as much as an average person was. Re-watching the film now was an interesting experience - I was blown away by the opening 40 minutes of the film. The way the world takes off, the worldbuilding - all of it was so good to the point where I was wondering how they'd pull off all this back then. Although I didn't enjoy the film as a whole that much. It's mostly because the narrative of the film is an adventure without impending stakes to the character. Harry discovers problems to solve and goes out of his way to solve them. So if Harry gets bored and decides to go back to his bed and sleep, nothing would change. So because of this, we also discover the world with Harry and his friends. A more compelling narrative would be if Harry didn't go out of his way - but that would be the only way for Harry. If not this, they could've at least established the stakes of what would happen if Harry didn't go more clearly. 

Also, the whole idea of Harry being the one to go on - over Ron and Hermione - didn't feel inspiring to me as an average person. I could feel like Hermione was the more sincere and perhaps even talented person - but all of them would say that Harry is the chosen one. Why? Because of his legacy. How is that inspiring? Baahubali is also the chosen one. But you badly root for him because he never gets what he rightfully deserves. The chosen one becomes the underdog. Here the chosen one stays the hero and stays there. Also, when Ron sacrifices himself - the film doesn't play on the stakes it tricks us into believing. That Ron might die. But he doesn't. Harry getting the power to burn Voldemort in the end - felt like terribly convenient writing - any power that a hero gets in the fight with a villain has to be established beforehand. In RRR, the interval sequence of NTR with the tigers works because it was established throughout. By introducing new powers to a hero in the moment of stakes - you put the audience in a spot where they subconsciously feel like 'they'll get out of this too' and you never let the audience feel the stakes to the full extent. Apart from these issues (which I elaborated in a lot of detail) - I was blown away by so many things in the film. 

No Hard Feelings

No Hard Feelings (2023)

Directed by: Gene Stupnitsky
Starring: Jennifer Lawrence, Andrew Barth Feldman 

Apart from the premise of the film, what interested me in the film was knowing that it's directed by one of the writers-producers of The Office. It's about a struggling 32-year-old woman, Maddie, who finds a listing for a weird job - to "date" a shy, introverted 19-year-old Percy - by his parents to get him out of his shell before he leaves for college soon. A large chunk of the film has funny, R-rated comedy - where Maddie is trying to have sex with Percy and get done with her job. But Percy, turns out to be a romantic. He wants to know her. And eventually, they become friends. What I loved about this film is, it has a tone that is a mix of an R-rated sex comedy, and an indie, mumblecore film. There is a montage after Percy can't have sex with Maddie - where both of them hangout and play games and I found the heart of the film right there. In spite of the whole facade that Maddie has put on, in spite of the reason she is doing it - she is forced to hang out with Percy and she ends up giving him a shot at knowing him and she actually finds him cool to hang out with. It beautifully explores how if people are given a fair shot instead of being judged for superficial things, they could actually be fun to be around.  

What I wish the film did slightly differently was - I wish it focused slightly less on the physical comedy - the sex-comedy bits and slightly more on their friendship. And also, I wish the film took its time to explore moments. Before we could even feel a moment, it cuts into the next scene. The third act felt very rushed. There were beautiful moments to be explored and they explored them too, but just not enough. I enjoyed how the reveal happens, how Percy reacts after the reveal and how even Maddie learns quite something after this whole experience and how it's a coming-of-age for the both of them. I just wish they didn't have sex. It would've been a beautiful friendship. Of course, it's still a beautiful friendship by the end of the film but I just wish they didn't have sex (if it counts though). Maddie felt like a figure Percy needed in his life. I really loved how in spite of the weirdest premise, the film has its heart in place. Though I wish, it dwelled on the drama a little more - I really enjoyed the movie. 

Gladiator (2000)

Gladiator (2000)

Directed by: Ridley Scott
Starring: Russell Crowe, Joaquin Phoenix 

Won the Best Picture at the Oscars.
Spoilers Ahead. 

Well known for being a classic, Gladiator is an epic historical film set in 180 AD, Rome. It's a classic good-versus-evil, revenge story. What I love about the film is - though it covers a short span of time from the beginning of the film to the end, it feels like a lot happens in the film - it feels like we've witnessed so many life altering events - and hence it feels like we've witnessed life in the most cruel forms. Which is why, it's an epic. We see Marcus Aurelius, being betrayed and killed by his own son, Commodus. We see Maximus being dethroned. We see Maimus' family being killed. We see Maximus being bought as a slave. We see Maximus slowly winning the audience's support and we eventually see what happens in the film. All of these are big, life-altering events which could each be movies by themselves and in spite of covering so much in the film - it never feels like the film is rushing. We feel every single beat in the film. We see through every character in the film and their backstories too. The film cracks a beautiful balance between exploring character and plot - to the point where you can't even distinguish the both. Every scene explores both plot and character. 

After reading about it, I learnt that in the earlier drafts of the script - Maximus' family wasn't killed. One of the later writers who joined, added that bit to increase stakes for Maximus and I feel like that one call changed the whole dimension of the film. Both the actors were so good - Joauqin Phoenix was oozing evil through his eyes and Russell Crowe, loyalty to his mission. The scene where Commodus tries to provocate Maximus by saying things about his family when they were being killed - felt like a classic Rajamouli scene. Also, the way crowd cheers for Maximus and boos for Commodus - Baahubali, Bhallaladeva vibes. Also, the way the crowd cheers after Maximus wins - reminded of the scene in Magadheera after Kaala Bhairava wins the race with Ranadev Billa and the way the crowd cheers. I could see the influence of this film on a few scenes of Rajamouli's films, but of course, Rajamouli elevates each moment to a much more exuberant level. Overall, I absolutely enjoyed this film - because it's a wonderful spectacle with brilliant writing and acting too.

The Raiders of the Lost Ark

The Raiders of the Lost Ark (1981)

Directed by: Steven Spielberg 

Streaming on Disney+Hotstar

Films which are considered to be classics, highly influential are said so because of two reasons. One is if the said film has achieved a tone or style for the first time, the derivations of which are still relevant. Two is if the said film by itself has stood the test of time and the film itself is relevant today. Apart from being influential for a huge number of films even till date, I think this film is partly relevant too. Mainly because of the way it carries tension - it does that beautifully in so many scenes. But apart from this tension, the film felt like a series of physical obstacles in different settings that the protagonist has to overcome. It felt like the film could end in 30 minutes or even go on till 4 hours. It wouldn't change a lot. And the way music was used felt a little heavy on the ears, especially the theme music of the film. It was used a little too repetitively. 

Although I was absolutely blown away by the staging and blocking in so many scenes - it was so smooth. The usage of the Spielberg Oner (famous amongst film geeks) - was so good. Although because the film is set in different countries and the hero goes on a journey to find something - the film makes you feel a sense of adventure for sure. After every set piece - you feel, hoof wasn't that something? Though that way the film was beautiful, I was perhaps hoping for a slightly more visceral experience.