Mills (Brad Pitt) and Somerset (Morgan Freeman)'s detective skills are put to the ultimate test in Se7en, when a serial killer seemingly targets random victims, torturing them and playing with their deaths. It is not until after several murders that the detectives realise the killer is murdering people for the sins they commit. Keen on enlightening the detectives, and anyone who will listen to him, of people around the city every day committing some of the seven deadly sins, the serial killer (an uncredited Kevin Spacey) feels he is doing no wrong in forcing death upon these sinners. It takes all that the detectives have, and playing by his rules, to catch up to the murderer who appears to be constantly one step ahead of them, and when they do catch up to him, with two sinners left to complete a murder for each on the list, an unexpected twist presents itself to Mills and Somerset.
David Fincher has proved himself able to produce brilliant thrillers with the likes of Fight Club and Zodiac, however before both of these films came Se7en. Se7en shows Fincher becoming comfortable in directing a film with an ever-twisting plot, which would become key when directing the likes of Fight Club. With it being only his second ever feature film, the raw talent of Fincher is evident, it seems he has mastered dramatic tension and capturing the emotion of a character just two films in to his career. The film features one of my favourite chase scenes of all time, between John Doe and Mills, from the initial shot of John Doe's gun to the final blow of his crow bar, the chase is fast paced, the gun shots are many and a feeling of genuine excitement consumes viewers. The 'thriller' genre has never been so literal, with just the right amount of drama and just the right amount of action, we are engaged on an emotional level with the characters, yet still get to see them go about their business, dealing with the murdered and the murderer.
A constant uneasiness surrounds the character of John Doe, the murderer, his unpredictable actions and seemingly unstable mind puts genuine fear in the audience and where the two detectives mask their discomfort, the viewer finds it hard to, with Spacey's absolutely outstanding performance, his smug look, high intelligence and distorted morals make it hard for us to identify as the same species as him. Spacey proves himself to be a chameleon actor, able to take on the shape and persona of any character thrown at him, and his performance in Se7en is no exception.
The relationship between Mills and Somerset comes across so natural that you would think Brad Pitt and Morgan Freeman were both stubborn work colleagues outside of the film. The build up of tension and little remarks given off by the characters are done with such ease that the relationship is easy to believe and invest in.
Se7en is a film that is hard to write about. The pure brilliance of the seamless overall film leaves even the most attentive viewer too deeply involved in the characters and the plot to make many mental notes regarding criticism of the film. The plot is thick, the acting is brilliant and David Fincher's sophomore film is still one of his best to date. Se7en is a truly exciting film and climbs itself straight to the top end of films in the thriller genre.
Showing posts with label thriller. Show all posts
Showing posts with label thriller. Show all posts
Saturday, 10 August 2013
Wednesday, 7 August 2013
Only God Forgives - Review
After his brother dies, Julian (Gosling) a drug dealer, is confronted by his mother, Crystal (Kristin Scott Thomas), and pushed to seek revenge on his brother's murderer. Choosing not to go ahead with the revenge initially, we see a divide in the family, with Crystal confident that she can find someone else to do the job. However, when countless murders happen and Crystal realises she is alone without protection, she chooses to beg one last time for her son's protection and an end to the trouble.
There was, and still is, a lot of controversy around the latest feature from Danish director Nicolas Winding Refn, with reports that the film was booed at Cannes along with many other negative comments made, it seemed like fans of Refn were expecting a sequel to Drive, his last collaboration with Ryan Gosling, who stars in Only God Forgives, and what viewers got was anything but that.
The film is influenced by avant garde cinema, but too much so to be considered a masterpiece by violence and action fans, yet is also too violent and linear to be considered avant garde, leaving the film in a limbo between genres, and the limbo where it resides is where I feel people's discomfort and dislike of the film comes from. Rather than take the film for what it is, which, in my opinion, is a piece of work that transcends genre boundaries all together, people want a defined piece of work, they want to be told what they are watching and what other films it is similar to, they want comparisons, one word descriptions and a star-rated system, the fact that Refn gives his audience ambiguity in all corners of the film shows the respect he holds for the intelligence of the viewers. The film is set in the East and the majority of viewers are from the West, the underground world of Bangkok in which we are viewing is meant to seem alien to us, this unfamiliarity of culture is mirrored in the unfamiliarity of the film's style, the differences from films set in Westernised countries is meant to detach us from the location, making it seem that bit more dangerous and unknown. It is with this that the film has been misunderstood, people had expectations for the film as opposed to an open mind and their ability to pass judgement on the film as a stand alone piece is tainted by the hauntings of Drive, two years after it was released.
The film's pacing is a little slow, shots are held for long periods of time in order to build tension, with the action and violence not taking up too much screen time, but being memorable when it does for the sheer brutality of it. Along with the pacing not being at super-speed like most thrillers, dialogue is not heavy at all, either, with Refn taking the approach of quality, not quantity. Gosling's character speaks a mere 22 lines throughout the whole 90 minute film. As said previously, the film does not spoon feed information, it requires a close eye and presents the majority of information visually, which is a real pleasure to watch in a time when I feel most director's take for granted the actual ability that a camera has.
Nicolas Winding Refn has definitely proved himself as a force to be reckoned with in the world of indie cinema, with his next feature set for release in 2015, we can only wait and see the direction that the director will take. With Only God Forgives, he has presented himself as one of the top young directors of our generation, making the films that other director's are too afraid to risk making and pushing the limits of cinema as an art form.
There was, and still is, a lot of controversy around the latest feature from Danish director Nicolas Winding Refn, with reports that the film was booed at Cannes along with many other negative comments made, it seemed like fans of Refn were expecting a sequel to Drive, his last collaboration with Ryan Gosling, who stars in Only God Forgives, and what viewers got was anything but that.
The film is influenced by avant garde cinema, but too much so to be considered a masterpiece by violence and action fans, yet is also too violent and linear to be considered avant garde, leaving the film in a limbo between genres, and the limbo where it resides is where I feel people's discomfort and dislike of the film comes from. Rather than take the film for what it is, which, in my opinion, is a piece of work that transcends genre boundaries all together, people want a defined piece of work, they want to be told what they are watching and what other films it is similar to, they want comparisons, one word descriptions and a star-rated system, the fact that Refn gives his audience ambiguity in all corners of the film shows the respect he holds for the intelligence of the viewers. The film is set in the East and the majority of viewers are from the West, the underground world of Bangkok in which we are viewing is meant to seem alien to us, this unfamiliarity of culture is mirrored in the unfamiliarity of the film's style, the differences from films set in Westernised countries is meant to detach us from the location, making it seem that bit more dangerous and unknown. It is with this that the film has been misunderstood, people had expectations for the film as opposed to an open mind and their ability to pass judgement on the film as a stand alone piece is tainted by the hauntings of Drive, two years after it was released.
Every single shot of the film looks like it could be framed and put in an art museum, the amount of beauty in each frame is breathtaking, the line "Time to meet the Devil" is spoken at the beginning of the film, making us aware of the nightmare journey we are about to embark on, but slow motion effects are used, making the film seem a lot softer than most dark films, it is a nightmare shot in the style of a dream.
The film's pacing is a little slow, shots are held for long periods of time in order to build tension, with the action and violence not taking up too much screen time, but being memorable when it does for the sheer brutality of it. Along with the pacing not being at super-speed like most thrillers, dialogue is not heavy at all, either, with Refn taking the approach of quality, not quantity. Gosling's character speaks a mere 22 lines throughout the whole 90 minute film. As said previously, the film does not spoon feed information, it requires a close eye and presents the majority of information visually, which is a real pleasure to watch in a time when I feel most director's take for granted the actual ability that a camera has.
Nicolas Winding Refn has definitely proved himself as a force to be reckoned with in the world of indie cinema, with his next feature set for release in 2015, we can only wait and see the direction that the director will take. With Only God Forgives, he has presented himself as one of the top young directors of our generation, making the films that other director's are too afraid to risk making and pushing the limits of cinema as an art form.
Monday, 4 March 2013
STOKER: AND UNEXPECTEDLY AMAZING FILM:
Last night I went to the cinema on a whim with a university friend. We had no idea what we wanted to go and watch and came to the decision to go and watch Stoker, a film by Chan-wook Park (director of Oldboy). With reasonably low expectations mainly due to the (let's be honest) reasonably bad trailer and my feeling that all of the characters were going to be revealed as vampires (Stoker.. c'mon), as soon as the film ended, me and my friend looked at each other with exactly the same expressions "wow".
With the huge advertisements all over the London tubes making this film seem like a (as said previously) vampiric period drama, I can't help but feel that this film is going to be sold short, and not receive the recognition it deserves.
The film starts of immediately living up to its name of a psychological thriller. A mysterious man, later to be found out as India Stoker's uncle Charlie, turns up at her fathers wake. India has never heard of him, therefore instantly not trusting him, and as an audience, as we have seen through India's eyes for the most part at this time in the film, we put our faith in her, suspecting Charlie of something at once. This suspicion that the audience has of Charlie builds up constantly throughout the film, however his character is not a straightforward one. I could never put my finger on his motives, and I guess that is the point. The characters in this film, though only three major ones, make it what it is, constantly putting questions and doubts in the audiences head.
The film did seem a little 'Twilight-y' at some points, unfortunately, however I feel that may be the permanent scars which that unfortunate quintology left in my head. Charlie turning up at places constantly, and 'saving' India on occasion made for a slightly unrealistic characteristic, however, it was never too much and was all made clear at the end (don't worry, I won't give (m)any spoilers).
The part of the film that stands out most for me, however, was around the middle of the film when India and Charlie played a beautiful duet on the piano. This piano piece, starting as a solo from India represents the constant struggle that India has with Charlie. As Charlie joins in, we see both fighting for dominance in the tune of the piano, and eventually see Charlie succeed in playing the most dominant part.
This was a beautiful musical metaphor for the struggle going on in India's head. She doesn't want to let Charlie in, however she is intrigued by him, she doesn't let any infatuation with him show for a lot of the film, keeping it all inside, once again, playing with the audience's minds over characters and their motives, however she is intrigued and eventually inspired by him, showing this outwardly (especially the intrigued part.. awkward incestual kiss that nearly happened.. remember?).
The cinematography in this film was really, really good also. In the parts of the film where the plot was not as strong, the beautiful camera work mixed with wonderful editing and a lovely soundtrack made the viewing experience extremely pleasurable. One piece of camerawork in particular that was great was (possible spoiler alert!) when India had dragged the body out of her house and the camera followed the trail of blood, speeding up the footage and showing how little relevance the blood stains would be, almost that in India's world, she doesn't have to worry about the police, easily outsmarting them when they questioned her.
This blogpost was quick and easy (much like the film) as I'm writing it in between university classes, and I apologise for that, however expect posts more frequently as I've recently become a member of Cineworld Unlimited, a service that allows you to watch unlimited films in cinemas. I'm going to see Cloud Atlas tonight, so i'll possibly post on that sometime in the week if I find anything relevant to say about it (I've heard many good things).
I'll leave you with a tweet that sums up this post in seven words:
With the huge advertisements all over the London tubes making this film seem like a (as said previously) vampiric period drama, I can't help but feel that this film is going to be sold short, and not receive the recognition it deserves.
The film starts of immediately living up to its name of a psychological thriller. A mysterious man, later to be found out as India Stoker's uncle Charlie, turns up at her fathers wake. India has never heard of him, therefore instantly not trusting him, and as an audience, as we have seen through India's eyes for the most part at this time in the film, we put our faith in her, suspecting Charlie of something at once. This suspicion that the audience has of Charlie builds up constantly throughout the film, however his character is not a straightforward one. I could never put my finger on his motives, and I guess that is the point. The characters in this film, though only three major ones, make it what it is, constantly putting questions and doubts in the audiences head.
The film did seem a little 'Twilight-y' at some points, unfortunately, however I feel that may be the permanent scars which that unfortunate quintology left in my head. Charlie turning up at places constantly, and 'saving' India on occasion made for a slightly unrealistic characteristic, however, it was never too much and was all made clear at the end (don't worry, I won't give (m)any spoilers).
The part of the film that stands out most for me, however, was around the middle of the film when India and Charlie played a beautiful duet on the piano. This piano piece, starting as a solo from India represents the constant struggle that India has with Charlie. As Charlie joins in, we see both fighting for dominance in the tune of the piano, and eventually see Charlie succeed in playing the most dominant part.
This was a beautiful musical metaphor for the struggle going on in India's head. She doesn't want to let Charlie in, however she is intrigued by him, she doesn't let any infatuation with him show for a lot of the film, keeping it all inside, once again, playing with the audience's minds over characters and their motives, however she is intrigued and eventually inspired by him, showing this outwardly (especially the intrigued part.. awkward incestual kiss that nearly happened.. remember?).
The cinematography in this film was really, really good also. In the parts of the film where the plot was not as strong, the beautiful camera work mixed with wonderful editing and a lovely soundtrack made the viewing experience extremely pleasurable. One piece of camerawork in particular that was great was (possible spoiler alert!) when India had dragged the body out of her house and the camera followed the trail of blood, speeding up the footage and showing how little relevance the blood stains would be, almost that in India's world, she doesn't have to worry about the police, easily outsmarting them when they questioned her.
This blogpost was quick and easy (much like the film) as I'm writing it in between university classes, and I apologise for that, however expect posts more frequently as I've recently become a member of Cineworld Unlimited, a service that allows you to watch unlimited films in cinemas. I'm going to see Cloud Atlas tonight, so i'll possibly post on that sometime in the week if I find anything relevant to say about it (I've heard many good things).
I'll leave you with a tweet that sums up this post in seven words:
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
.jpeg)





