squarest4 Reviews

The Newsroom (1996–2005)

Thank you CBC!!

[13 January 2004]

Let me be the first to say: The Newsroom is BACK, and darker than ever!

I've only seen the first episode, so I won't say much, but this premiere felt darker than all but the last few episodes of the original series. The original series was always black, but had a playfulness to it, and a certain charmingness about the characters; this new reinvention of the show carries most of the same issues and style, but is more unrelenting and comically depressing (and recasts all of the 'fun', 'quirky' characters). yes, I would even say they have taken it so far that it is no longer comedy, it's pure pain---but it in a good way! The Newsroom at its best achieved a kind of satire that made you fearful of seeing the characters as real people, and yet being forced into moments where we saw their saddest and honest humanity coming out (in the most crushing and embarassing and despicable ways); this entire first episode hit me with it again and again, at its most painful when Jim calls George Findlay practically in tears, and George could care less ...this is satire that dares you not to keep the safe comical distance (that even great satire usually makes use of), this is a *personal* satire that makes you bleed from the ears. I can't wait to see how far Finkleman takes this.

This said, I would be much more interested in seeing a totally new series from Finkleman, in a more open and more blatently surreal style.

Also, check out the insane and chaotic new series "This is Wonderland". I'm not sure if they can sustain it, but the pilot was ...different (and is one of the most de-centralized, self-destructive, frantic, infuriating narratives I've ever seen! almost every plot point collapsed in on itself and our heroine achieved essentially NOTHING!). It indeed manages to turn a court comedy/drama environment into a fairy tale world, and is about as unconventional and offbeat as it is possible for a court show to be these days. By way of comparison, the pilot would be best described as Ally McBeal on acid AND speed.

With this and an unexpectedly brilliant season of Da Vinci's Inquest (i was not such a fan in the past, but this season is something else), I'd say that CBC seems to have an almost violent level of energy this season!

(Schedule-- The Newsroom 8:30 Monday; Wonderland 9 Monday; Da Vinci 9 Sunday)

The Scent of Green Papaya (1993)

pure expression of personal peace and the nature of film

[10/10 · 20 April 2003]

One of the purest films ever made, this movie captures a sense of utter peace and spirituality, drawn from the main character's constant sense of wonder, awareness of her surroundings, and the pleasure she is able to take in simple daily tasks. It is also an expression of the true nature of the medium, since there is no forced tension or plot points, and the camera explores its world in perfect freedom, and with perfect curiosity (to suit the main character, who is filled with curiosity for the world around her, often taking time to simply stare at the objects around her, as an ideal camera should). Some say that the "problem" with this film is that it lacks tension, which to me seems to be an odd attitude--why should a movie "require" forced dilemmas in order to be considered good? (particularly when film is such a good medium for expressing both every-day reality AND for expressing states of mind--in this case, the filmaker wanted to express a sense of quietude, which is perfectly legitimate, very real, and is well suited to the medium). In fact, if this film has a tiny fault, it is in the few moments where there does exists some tension, which take away from the pure sense of personal peace and wholeness that the film so perfectly expresses. And it goes without saying that this is a perfectly constructed "poem" paying tribute a particular feeling and state of being (a state of being which is tied to the true nature of the camera medium), and that its plot is not the focus (nor should it be, in a film attempting to simply portray reality and express ideas/emotions in a way that is suited to the medium). Also needless to say, every shot is beautiful, carefully framed, and the flow of the movie (in editing, acting, and music) is natural, expressive, musical, and in a word, "perfect".

We should all seek to be more like this main character, and this camera, in our awareness of the world around us and our ability to find peace with the reality of everyday life. One of the greatest things film can do for us is to make us reconsider the basic nature of the reality that surrounds us, and allow us to consider different ways of viewing it, allow us appreciate its inherent texture. This film does this.

It is a shame that there are so few films made with this purity--that most films attempt to force meaningless tension and artificial dilemmas on us for no greater purpose than to distract our minds, and in the process they clash against the medium's natural tendencies and potentials. (note: I'm not claiming that tension is inherently bad, or that great films can't be made that way, but in most films the tension and dilemmas are forced, and in most films they goes against the camera's natural "state of being", and in many films this tension has no artistic purpose, even in films that are actually trying to say or express something).

Regarding this filmaker's other film, "The vertical ray of the sun": visually it is even more beautiful than this film, and in parts it expresses an even purer sense of peace... however, it does contain some overly strong moments of tension and dilemma that seem totally out of place within its calm style; also, although I have downplayed story and character in the above discussion, Green Papaya does have a well drawn and beautiful story that even has some mythic resonance (or more importantly, the main character has these things). "vertical ray" on the other hand, does not have such resonant characters or plot points, though admitedly it is more beautiful in some ways. However, i have seen each film only once, so I may change my mind about "vertical ray"--and regardless of any slight misgivings I have currently, I do recommend it as an important film experience.

The Nature of Nicholas (2002)

one of the few masterpieces of the medium

[10/10 · 20 March 2003]

Quite near to being the greatest work of art I've seen in the film medium.

One of the users here complained about cardboard characters, which is absurd--would you complain that the characters in a ballet or a symphony are too simple? This film flows like only the greatest works of art do, and its characters serve as part of the complex texture and intent of the film as a whole, rather than being "creations in themselves" (this is a surreal and stylized film, and its also one of the few genuine mythic works that has been brought to the screen--the characters are exactly as they need to be to pull this off, and to pull of the thematic intent of the film). Each performance is also breathtaking in its ability to capture the awkwardness of the moment--an essential feature of reality that few movies achieve; this is particularly important to the period of adolescence that this film captures (and does so better than anything I've seen); the awkwardness of sexual awakening is a painful and mythic thing, and this film has insight to offer on the true nature of that time in our lives, a time that it is difficult to perceive or remember objectively (and certainly difficult to express--nearly impossible i would say, if I hadn't seen this film with my own eyes!). This film is indeed a surreal and mythic expression of the "true nature" of that time. Some have focused on the homosexual element, but I think in the film it only served to highlight the transgressive sense of one's first sexual feelings (which is also expressed by the decay and monster metaphors that crop up), and on the idea that we are sexually connected to everyone, be it our best friends or mothers (which is something we eventually move beyond in order to grow up); this film was definitely not trying to make a *point* out of the gay element--it was just there naturally, and as a part of the confused friendship of the two boys, both discovering and fearing their sexuality (whether it is a straight or gay sexuality--it is almost irrelevant).

Regarding the sense of the awkward silence and the uncertain space between people who have trouble relating, the filmaker is clearly influenced by the rest of Canadian cinema (which has always had a particularly realistic sense of people interactions), and specifically by David Cronenberg (in more ways than one!)... and yet he has already transcended his influences to arrive at a completely new and higher style (despite the fact that this is his first film!). Cronenberg has never achieved anything quite so pure in intent or as mythic in story (some have called this a fable), or as "perfectly constructed" in structure and execution (in terms of the pacing of the acting, perfectly framed shots, and the sense that every tiny element of the film is chosen so to expresses the film's central ideas--it is a powerfully coherent work, in a way that most film is scattered and messy, usually without being aware of its own clumsiness). A final point about this awkward space between people--the film takes it to a stylized extreme that is a delight to watch (there is no doubt the film is one of the most stylized things i've seen--which is a GOOD thing, of course, and makes for fascinating performances--but in doing so it actually captures the emotional reality of what it depicts better than any "realistic" portrayal could have--in this way it is similar to a surprising television show called "Buffy the vampire slayer"). There is this incredible pacing in the awkward silences, dialogue withholding about as long as it possibly could, but then breaking the tension at the exact moment where it feels like it should; this is where the film flows like music, as all great films should--you can feel and almost see the tension flowing through the scenes; it made me smile through almost the entire movie, how well they captured the difficulting in reaching out to other people, to very degrees and for various reasons (the awkwardness that exists between the main character and the other characters has a different flavour in each case, and a different cause--his awkwardness with his best friend is the most fascinating, of course, and the most human, since his best friend is the only person, other than his dead father, that could hope to understand him--and yet he fears he may not be able to relate to his friend after all).

A final point about the characters--the only character that needs to be truly fleshed out, in order for this work of art to capture what it intends to, is the young boy, for this is HIS world, and his mind that we enter (his mother and most other characters are of course frighteningly distant from what this young boy is going through, and are thus acted that way--the side performances are brilliantly formal, I might say, again thinking of the ballet or music analogy, to think of the perfection of choreography in the gestures and tones of voice, especially on the part of the mother). And the young boy is indeed fleshed out! I have never seen so sensitive and delicate a performance (or so sensitive a film as a whole, for that matter); this young actor easily replaces Haley Joel Osmand, in my books, as the best child actor who has ever been (though of course we must see if he can pull this off consistently).

Much more can be said, but I must stop for now. But one final comment--this is the sort of film that creates a whole other universe of reality, completely consistent unto itself, right down to the impressive art design of the furniture, the colour schemes, the glowing cinematography. The place it takes you to is completely unique, and is quite far outside the look and feel of any style or genre we are familiar with; this is a new place, my friends--the world has found a rare new filmaker who does not simply re-arrange the old, or flash fancy tricks at us--this is filmaker with old world mastery combined with a completely fresh vision.

Note: As a comparison, here are my other top 10 films of 2002: Atanarjuat (aka "The Fast Runner"), Heaven (by Tykwer + Kieslowski), Full Frontal (Steven Soderbergh), Happy Times (Zhang Yimou), Thirteen Conversations About One Thing, Ararat, Road to Perdition, Human Nature, and *possibly* The Hours. NONE of those films has the extreme sensitivity or "perfect" sense of flow that Nicholas achieves (which doesn't *necessarily* make it better, but it's one of many reasons why it is at the top of my list).

My list of the best works of 2001 included: Yi Yi ("one and two"), In the Mood for Love, Waking Life, Memento, Mulholland Drive, The Man Who Wasn't There, and Amores Perros. "Nicholas" is on the same level as the best of these (when films get to that level, I don't like rating them against eachother, so I'll restrict myself to saying that it's "on the same level"). 10 / 10