That Laura Poitras' Edward Snowden documentary CitizenFour feels like it has been gestating for a long time testifies to the hyper-speed at which the news cycle churns. Major media operations long ago lost interest in the story, even though it is barely more than a year old, more revelations have trickled out, and it just happens to be one of the most important stories of the century so far. But, hey, who cares about domestic spying when there is ebola to hyperventilate about?
As with many documentaries on what once was a hot news story, those that have been following the story closely may find some elements of CitizenFour a little slow-moving or even too rudimentary. Yet it testifies to Poitras' skills as a filmmaker that she is able to churn through a lot of material without dumbing the story down, without cheating, and while still able to throw in a few surprises for even story veterans. More importantly, although Snowden has given some interviews and had some public appearances since the story broke, we have never truly had the opportunity to get to know him this well or to understand what he was thinking when he blew the whistle and leaked documents.
Poitras is able to flesh out Snowden as a human being without ever becoming bogged down into a piece for the Biography Channel. In the moments when Snowden first reveals his secrets to his chosen media members, we are given a portrait both harrowing and humorous. Snowden, as many "if you only knew what I knew" types might tend to be, is paranoid, but he acknowledges how silly his paranoia can seem. We are able to see him launch into speeches about why he's doing what he's doing, then to pause and choke up a moment later when he thinks about what might happen to his loved ones back home because of the choice he has made. As the story breaks and the stress sets in, Poitras goes to close-up and you can see Snowden's face starting to dry out and show the beginnings of a rash. Later, he frets maybe a bit too long over having put too much gel in his hair. He's not a superhero or a super-spy (as some have claimed with zero evidence) - just Ed.
Aside from humanizing Snowden and exploring his motivations, Poitras does an excellent job of hitting on the issues and creates a very effective and accessible understanding of what is at stake and why it matters. Some of the people I watched it with confessed after the film to having previously bought into the "you don't have anything to worry about if you haven't done anything wrong" fallacy, but having come to understand after watching the film that privacy and protection from government intrusion is about more than just hiding crimes - it's about basic freedom, self-control, self-realization, and even democracy itself.
Poitras' documentary is tight and it is effective. It never comes off as preachy. Even when it shows the audience a couple examples of blatant lying from government officials, Poitras lets the lying speak for itself and wisely refrains from piling on. Without it ever coming across as a polemic, Poitras has crafted a very, very strong argument. Definitely worth seeing. Screened in the theater.
We're the Millers might be worth study if you are trying to decide what might be the laziest, most paint-by-the-numbers movie made in the last decade. There are only a few modestly decent gags, and the script is almost admirable for how it clings to a formula without any deviation or even modest attempts to be a little dangerous. Had the performers given their best, the film might have been elevated to at least decent trash. But here many of the actors seem to be on auto-pilot. Jennifer Aniston in particular banks on nothing but being Jennifer Aniston and makes almost no effort to dive in or to challenge herself or her persona. The advertising campaign was built heavily on an Aniston strip-tease (a big glaring sign that there wasn't much comedy to sell), which is so tame that you have basically already seen the entire thing on the TV ads. I can get why it would frustrate female actors that the parts they have to play are too often strippers and prostitutes. Nonetheless, it is tough to make a film like this work if the woman playing the stripper is so obviously inhibited and uncomfortable with the role she has selected. Were Aniston even remotely trying to seem believable as a 40-year old washed up stripper, it might have been made a little interesting or had some edge, but she's not trying. Nor is anyone else involved. Screened on HBO.
A couple weeks ago I discussed Gone Girl as a commentary on the hell of marriage. A film that came out in late summer that also has a few thoughts on failing marriages is The One I Love, directed by Charlie McDowell. The premise and execution is best summed up as a pretty solid episode of the Twilight Zone. The film explores marital angst and the feeling that your spouse will never quite live up to what you want your spouse to be or how you idealized him or her at the start of your relationship. The film, however, eschews dark cynicism in favor of a lighter touch and a slightly sci-fi premise. The film is definitely worth seeing, and will likely fit well on a smaller screen. Worth checking out from whichever streaming service you prefer. Screened in the theater.
I wanted to love Kill the Messenger, because the story of Gary Webb, CIA abuse, and journalistic fealty to power is an important one. If you're unfamiliar with Webb's story, this might work decently as an overview. The problem is that, while it crams the entire story into the movie, it is never able to develop as a character study and never really develops any suspense. The filmmakers more or less just tried to cover too much ground. This results in giving short shrift to all aspects of the story. We don't get enough of the story about the CIA's role in drug-running during the 1980s. Then the film asks us to believe that Webb's reporting of the story was fraught with danger and drama, but that's mostly done with sinister music and sinister looks (and a few forced "Oh my god, this is huge" moments), rather than actually building the drama organically. Then, finally, we do not quite understand well enough the story of how and why Webb was pilloried by a press that was both jealous and protective of their friends and sources in the government. This part of the story is left too much as an isolated misdeed by the press, and does not serve as an effective critique of something much bigger and more problematic at play. There are three movies here and they've been squeezed into one. The result is there just isn't enough here to truly get invested or to truly feel affected at the end. It is too much docu- and not enough -drama. I can modestly recommend it to those completely unfamiliar with the Webb story, but for everyone else, it just is not good enough. Screened in the theater.
Few horror sub-genres are as hot as the Haunted House category, and to that effect we get the Irish film The Canal. The film is decent at times, but there really isn't much to figure out here and too many of the scares are generic and cliched. There also is not a coherent set of rules that helps to set up the foundation for the horror. It feels like there was a little too much time spent on brainstorming moments that might be creepy, and not enough effort on crafting a complete story that helps to build the tension and horror from a character-based or even situation-based place. The acting overall is fine and I'd note some interesting side work from Antonia Campbell-Hughes, but the character she plays isn't as properly integrated throughout as she should be (so we do not care enough when she is in danger - or really when anyone is, for that matter). If you're looking for a scary movie on a fall night, you could do far worse. It's worth a watch if you like this kind of movie and want something you have not seen before. Unfortunately, it is not good enough to justify going out of your way. Screened in the theater.
No comments:
Post a Comment