Review: "Saving Mr. Banks"

Director: John Lee Hancock
Runtime: 125 minutes

Saving Mr. Banks begins and ends with shots of the clouds, which is just as well, seeing as the film seems to have been written and created with its head up among them. A sugar-coated, albeit never treacly, slice of Disney history, the film goes down easy, though it can't help but leave a sour taste in light of how events actually panned out. Emma Thompson is as effective and effortlessly watchable as ever as the film's lead, but even her work isn't enough to raise the material above (largely harmless) mediocrity.

Right off of the bat, it's clear that writer P.L. Travers (Thompson) isn't terribly enthusiastic about Walt Disney's (Tom Hanks) desire to turn her beloved Mary Poppins novels into a film. The stories, Travers insists, don't lend themselves to a feature film, especially if said film is to include musical numbers and, even worse, animated sequences. From the moment Travers sets foot on her flight from London to LA, she's standoffish with everyone from flight attendants to hotel bell boys. Her cheery hired Disney driver (Paul Giamatti) tells her that the sun has come out to greet her. Travers responds by remarking that the City of Angels smells like chlorine and sweat.

Travers' mood doesn't improve after meeting Disney, or the team of writers and songwriters who have been tasked with the adaptation (Bradley Whitford, B.J. Novak, and Jason Schwartzman). Hardly a line in the script goes by without a correction or objection from the protective author, who shoots down everything from set designs to the eventually famous lyric "supercalifragilisticexpialidocious." If there are parts of Saving Mr. Banks that are legitimately entertaining and informative, it's the early butting of heads between the Disney creatives and the author. Thompson's no nonsense, almost school marm-ish delivery is a highlight, and lends some contentious spark to an otherwise adequate film. 

Less sure are the flashbacks detailing Travers' childhood in Australia, the experiences of which inspired the Poppins books. When Thompson is on screen, there's a level of restraint in both the writing and in Hancock's direction. With Thompson gone, however, the flashbacks often come off as a touch hoakey, despite events that lend a darker shading to the narrative. Instead of being anchored around Thompson, the trips into the past are shouldered on Colin Farrell as Travers' troubled, alcoholic father. Farrell has proven himself a talented actor, especially in dark comedies, but he seems miscast here. The overeager image he projects - in general or around his young children - tends to ring false. Moments between father and daughter that should charm are, instead, bland and hammy. More effective is Ruth Wilson as Travers' troubled mother, despite her performance largely consisting of reactions to her husband's actions. 

Oddly, the most effective secondary thread has nothing to do with Mr. Disney or the Travers family's Outback melodrama. Though their scenes rarely build outside of a few quips, Thompson and Giamatti's slow-building friendship leads to a lovely conclusion that feels more in line with who Travers was, and what she stood for. The movie eventually has her won over by the 1964 Julie Andrews/Dick Van Dyke film, which undercuts the author's resilience and regret over the enterprise. On the other hand, Travers' relationship with her happy-go-lucky driver, however embellished or invented, have a mark of truth to them that transcends the otherwise pedestrian material, albeit only by a hair's breadth. 

The rest of the film is a handsome, though uninspired, technical package, nicely capturing the period without doing anything to truly stand out. From the costumes to the generic Thomas Newman score, it all looks and sounds right, even though none of the techs leave an impression. In many ways, Saving Mr. Banks resembles last year's Hitchcock, another film about creative battles behind iconic Hollywood products. It gets the job done and provides a few moments of enjoyment, but it's ultimately little more than a sanitized take on a story that has thornier complexities  that deserved to be unpacked and explored. 

Grade: C+

Cannes '12 Review(s): "Cosmopolis" and "Mud"

 Cosmopolis dir. David Cronenberg [Competition]
A strong match of director and material, David Cronenberg's Cosmopolis, an adaptation of Don Delilo's novel, is an odd, icy film that remains compelling despite some intentionally brittle performances. Set over the course of a single day, we follows Eric Packer (Robert Pattinson), a 28 year old executive who wants to travel across town to get a haircut. For various reasons, the trip is delayed, and over the course of the day, Packer's life undergoes enormous personal and financial changes.


From the outset, Cosmopolis seems to be split in two. One half, the atmosphere, is quietly compelling, drawing you in even as the other half, the performances, seem designed to keep us at bay. The dialogue feels rigid, and the performers generally go along with the withdrawn oddity of the general tone. Trapped mostly in Packer's luxurious limousine, this is a surprisingly quiet film, one that mimics the protagonist's state of mind. Packer is part of the 1%, a man so dedicated to empty pleasure and wealth, that he pays almost no attention when he sees riots going on just outside of his car. The same is true of those who visit him, whether it's friend with benefits/art collector Didi (Juliette Binoche), or financial philosopher Vija (Samantha Morton). It's starts off oddly distancing, yet as it progresses, Cosmopolis' tone comes to the foreground, and the performances, appropriately, warm up. The non-1% characters, played by Mathieu Amalric and Paul Giamatti liven the film up considerably, knocking both Eric and the audience out of the stifling stillness of the limo. 


Pattinson, known mostly for the Twilight films, finally has his moment to prove himself, and he acquits himself adequately. At times he seems too hindered by the tone at the start, yet he really does improve as the character gets drawn out of his catatonic state. The show, however, belongs to Giamatti, who delivers a lived-in performance as a man filled with bitterness and philosophical resentment. Just as the movie starts to flag, Giamatti comes in and helps drive Cosmopolis through to its finish. Bolstered by Howard Shore's subtly mixed-in electronic score, there remains a quiet, pulsating energy throughout, although I suspect many will be left completely turned off by the chilliness of the entire enterprise. For those with whom the film actually connects, however, there exists a very good, perhaps not quite great deconstruction of the financial elite, as only David Cronenberg could present it.


Grade: B/B+

Mud dir. Jeff Nichols [Competition]
Thought it feels decidedly broader and more commercial than the incredible Take Shelter (2011), Jeff Nichols' Mud is a touching and effective coming-of-age story that should open the talented director up to a wider art house (and possible mainstream) audience. Set in Mississippi, two young friends, Ellis (Tye Sheridan of The Tree of Life) and Neckbone (Jacob Lofland), discover a fugitive named Mud (Matthew McConaughey) living in their favorite secret hangout. 


The hangout in question is a small boat that has, somehow, wound up lodged in a tree, and the image brings to mind the whimsy of films like Tim Burton's Big Fish, as well as classic stories like "The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn." This is a film predominantly focused on one boy's experiences with love and betrayal, and all of the right ingredients are there on paper. What Mud is lacking, however, is a sense of surprise. Nichols feels comfortable with the material, but it doesn't feel like he's really pushing himself. It's good to know he can write this sort of indie crowd pleaser, but also disappointing in terms of how unremarkable (and occasionally repetitive) the plotting is. At 130 minutes, the film certainly isn't dull, but there are times when the nature of the story keeps it from being as taut or compelling as it could be. Then there's the climax, which, though handled well on its own, starts a little too abruptly, and borders on deus ex machina. 


That doesn't mean that there isn't a lot to like about Mud, because there really is. From the opening shots, including some lovely overhead shots of the Mississippi River, the nostalgic (but never sappy) tone comes through beautifully, thanks to Adam Stone's richly textured cinematography and David Wingo's lush, ambient score. The performances also help drive the story. McConaughey turns in his best performance in quite some time, devoid of his usual acting tics. He brings the sort of charming (but not smug) quality to Mud that makes you understand why people would be drawn to him, even if he might have ulterior motives. Reese Witherspoon is solid as well in a small role as the love interest Mud is hoping to reconnect with. Ray McKinnon and Sarah Paulson deliver strong turns as Ellis' parents, even though some of their material is among the weakest (one big fight scene turns uncomfortably on the nose). 


The standout, however, is young Mr. Sheridan, who really carries the film with his presence. He's an inherently watchable, likable screen presence, and Nichols extracts a performance from him that doesn't feel overly mannered or coached. When he finally gets his big moment, an outburst at Mud, he brings it home, cementing himself as a powerhouse. He captures Ellis' journey through romantic and idealistic disappointment with such naturalism, that I think it must be one of the best child performances to grace the screen in some time. For all its imperfections that keep it from greatness, Sheridan is excellent and, above all else, the best reason to stick through Mud all the way through its predictable, yet still touching finale.


Grade: B

Review: "The Ides of March"

Ryan Gosling has, along with Bryce Dallas Howard and break-out star Jessica Chastain, had something of a banner year, first with Crazy, Stupid Love, and then Drive, one of my favorite films of the year thus far. An immensely talented actor (best of his generation?), 2011 was the year that Gosling finally embraced his leading man/star potential, and it's paid off quite well. His final offering for 2011, George Clooney's political drama The Ides of March previously tipped for Oscar consideration, seemed like a bang-up way to close out the year. But even though it's a solid entry on the actor's (and everyone involved) filmography, Ides is a curiously limited film, one that is intriguing enough through its run time, but perhaps not good enough to linger long in one's thoughts.

Adapted from Beau Willimon's play "Farragut North," (itself said to be loosely based on the '08 campaign of Howard Dean), Ides centers on Stephen Myers, an expert media strategist working for Democratic hopeful Mike Morris (Clooney) during the critical Ohio primary. Myers is seen as one of the best media minds in the country, and an invaluable asset to any campaign he works for. But as its Shakespearean title suggests, however, something is rotten in the state of Ohio. As Myers navigates the shark-infested waters of the campaign, he gets a crash course in dirty politics that leaves him a profoundly changed man.

Starting off on a weak note, The Ides of March does improve from its somewhat tepid opening sequences. The characters and their relationships aren't as engaging, charming, or witty as the film would like us to believe, and it makes the introductory act the least cinematically pleasing of the lot. When the story finally hits its central conflict, however, it's generally all up hill from there. Clooney may not have much of an eye for compelling images (hand this story off to Polanski, and you'll come back with an elegant, sleek cousin to The Ghost Writer), but he certainly tells the basic story well, even though he cuts a crucial scene short just so another character can explain it to another later. Some may not be too enthused by the film's politics (the left-leaning ideals are worn proudly on the film's sleeve), but at least they're contextualized in the form of press conferences, debates, and town hall meetings.

Unfortunately, as the film progresses and the story gets stronger, the characters get weaker. Despite its all star cast, The Ides of March doesn't necessarily use them well, nor does the screenplay give them much to work with. Gosling is reliable, as always, and has some strong moments in the final act, but in spots he seems to either coast, or verge into bug-eyed territory. He can at least be thankful, though, that his character has enough that's meaningful to do and say. Phillip Seymour Hoffman and Paul Giamatti, two of our greatest character actors, give solid turns in opposing supporting roles (Giamatti's being given a bit more to work with). Unfortunately, the script doesn't take their characters far enough. I'd heard beforehand that each of their characters had a "big moment" that could lead to a place in the upcoming awards season. Having seen the performances, I'm wondering what on earth those moments were, because neither actor makes a lasting impression. As far as women are concerned, Marisa Tomei is given a key role, but not an interesting character, though she certainly fairs better than poor Jennifer Ehle (can we please stop giving this woman thankless roles?). Surprisingly, the film's best performance comes from Evan Rachel Wood as a young intern on the Morris campaign, who mixes ambition and vulnerability to create the film's most sympathetic character. Clooney, in front of the camera, is absent from screen for surprisingly long portions, but in his one major scene he nails it, and the tension he and Gosling create is fantastic, albeit fleeting.

On the technical side, its a solid film, though there's nothing extraordinary about aspects like costumes or set design. Cinematography, by Phedon Papamichael, is merely adequte, barring the excellent final shot. The standout, a surprise in this sort of film, is Alexandre Desplat's score, a low-key blend of beats and strings that adds a subtle touch of intrigue and danger to the film's atmosphere. Unfortunately, the use (or misuse) of the characters comes back to bite the film. The feeling of betrayal is never made as compelling to the audience as it is to the characters, most of whom fall into one-note territory. The script also falls victim to two obvious pieces of foreshadowing, one which feels contrived, and one that feels like a last-minute attempt to show that the story has been brought full-circle. The Ides of March is like candidate Mike Morris in many ways; it has undeniable strengths that should make it a force to be reckoned with. Unfortunately, those strengths are undercut by flaws that diminish its impact. Is this an intelligent, adult-oriented film? Yes. Is it anything remarkable, or will it be remembered in the years to come? Probably not.

Grade: B-