Showing posts with label Sandra Bullock. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Sandra Bullock. Show all posts

Friday, December 11, 2015

Our Brand Is Crisis (2015)














OUR BRAND IS CRISIS                 B                    
USA  (107 mi)  2015  d:  David Gordon Green            Official Movie Site

David Gordon Green uses Sandra Bullock in the social activist, Julia Roberts Best Actress role from ERIN BROCKOVICH (2000), transported to the mean streets of La Paz, Bolivia in this clever fictionalized remake of Rachel Boynton’s 2005 documentary film by the same name, where Bullock actually assumes the role of real-life Clinton political strategist James Carville who was improbably hired to resuscitate the flailing campaign of one of the political candidates in the 2002 Bolivian presidential election.  Brought out of retirement by an old friend Nell (Ann Dowd), who’s certain she’s the right person for the job, though she’s been living in near seclusion, “Calamity” Jane Bodine (Sandra Bullock) seems to have lost touch with the human race, initially showing no interest whatsoever in getting her feet back into the fire of another political campaign, then doing a complete reversal after discovering the opposition candidate, currently running away in the polls, is being managed by her professional nemesis Pat Candy (Billy Bob Thornton), a master of the dirty tricks campaign.  With that she tosses her hat into the ring, making a dubious arrival on her lengthy flight into the mountainous region of La Paz, stumbling down the stairs off the plane, immediately suffering from altitude sickness, surrounded on all sides by mountains, where the city elevation varies from 10,500 to 13,500 feet.  Something of a medical wreck for the first couple of days, she belongs in the infirmary, barely able to stand, much less run a campaign, keeping a low profile in order to observe just how objectionable and dysfunctional her candidate really is.  A former President, Pedro Castillo (Joaquim de Almeida) is behind in all the polls as he was literally loathed and despised when he “served” in office earlier, viewed as aloof and uncharismatic, developing a tin ear when it comes to listening or responding to the needs of others, but is known for being his own man, stubbornly set in his ways, wealthy and aristocratic, where money appears to be no object, which explains how Jane was literally plucked out of obscurity.  

Just when you think this film is going nowhere, as you quickly tire of Bullock’s continual sick gags, a return to the physical comedy of the silent era where she barely utters a word, all it takes is the slimy appearance of a snake-like Candy himself to get everyone’s blood boiling, as he’s a slick marketeer, where his lovable ads cover up the fact that he’s a completely unscrupulous human being that may as well be the devil incarnate, as the guy loves political trash talking, getting in your face and personal, all done with the arrogance and southern charm of moral duplicity, where he’d sell out his own mother in a nanosecond.  What’s perhaps most astonishing is that Jane has little regard for actual Bolivian politics herself and makes no attempt whatsoever to learn, running a campaign where it’s never about “issues,” but instead resorts to an all-out frontal assault, waging a war generating tabloid-style headlines, where winning is the only object.   When it becomes clear her candidate simply doesn’t have the charisma needed to win, she resorts to denigrating the other guys in the race, starting salacious rumors, planting false stories on TV and in the newspapers, effectively placing the other candidates on the defensive.  While much of this is played for laughs, as the degree of comic absurdity is remarkably clever, even for the lowest of gutter politics, but there’s also an underlying level of decency playing out throughout as well, as represented by Anthonie Mackie as Ben, one of the American consultants who is something of a straight shooter, providing an unshakable moral center throughout, but most significantly personified by a local kid named Eduardo (Reynaldo Pacheco), a decent guy and a true believer, even if he comes across with the innocence and naïveté of Daily Planet photographer and would-be cub reporter Jimmy Olsen.  Eduardo’s claim to fame is a photograph taken when he was a baby being held in the arms of President Castillo, symbolic for depicting Castillo as the father of the nation, making Eddie a steadfast supporter for life, though his views sadly change on Castillo’s first day in office.  While the film attempts to show democracy in action, with behind-the-scenes meetings, making use of polls and support groups, developing a candidate’s image in one breath while tarnishing the opposition in the next, going on the road for multiple campaign stops where literally anything can happen, the film is more obsessed by the cynical shenanigans of professional smear artists, the ones who willingly start false rumors or make outrageous accusations, at least planting the seed of doubt in the minds of the voters.
  
Of particular interest, there are repeated images of seemingly spontaneous grass roots demonstrations on the street drawing swelling crowds, beautifully captured by Green’s longtime cinematographer Tim Orr, as well as campaign visits to the more remote hinterlands, where Green’s eye for detail is remarkable.  The insight into the cultural diversity of this tiny nation is utterly captivating, though the film is mostly a comic portrayal of imported arrogance and betrayal, leaving behind a real-life horror show, where Castillo is based upon the exploits of Sánchez de Lozada who was twice elected President of Bolivia, spending his childhood years receiving an education in the United States, studying literature and philosophy at the University of Chicago, resulting in the fact he never developed a natural Spanish accent, leading many Bolivians to refer to him as El Gringo.  While the back and forth chemistry between Billy Bob Thornton and Sandra Bullock leads to hilarious overkill, amusingly rising to the level of contemptuous and personally hateful, the poison interjected into Bolivian politics is no joke considering the backwardness and poverty levels in Bolivia, which was the second poorest nation in the hemisphere after Haiti prior to World War II, though there is enormous mineral wealth almost exclusively mined by outside colonial interests prior to the nationalization of the industry following the 1952 revolution, where there were 14 coups d’états in the 20th century alone, with only China, Greece, Haiti, and Thailand with more throughout their entire histories.  Still to this day, 8% of landowners own more than 95% of the farmable land, or put in another way, 615 landowners own more than half the farmable land in the country, while hundreds and thousands of peasants are forced to serve them for little or no pay.  Nearly two-thirds of the population are indigenous people, the largest of any Latin American nation, where more than 90% of them are illiterate, while 80% speak no language other than their own, which means they can’t understand the official governmental language of Spanish.  While this is a unique demographic, to say the least, especially the incomprehensible and mostly illiterate rural vote (described at one point where winning them over would be like an American candidate having to sway 200 million Apaches), the cynicism asserted by the American politicos reduces legitimate social concerns to a Wild West shootout, winner take all, where the sad fact of the matter is the winner is no more experienced, trustworthy, or driven to promote healthy social changes than the guy they’re kicking out, as the election campaign doesn’t produce political messages or ideas but is all about mudslinging and annihilating the opposition’s credibility.  Ironically, the “loser” of this election, populist candidate Evo Morales, is currently the sitting President of the nation elected four years later in 2006.  Talk about long term consequences — a year after winning the 2002 election de Lozada resigned and fled back to America after being chased from office after a reported massacre by armed Bolivian troops at a public demonstration over the Bolivian gas conflict, where strikes and roadblocks brought the nation to a standstill, resulting in 67 deaths, largely protesters and bystanders, but also some soldiers and policemen, where de Lozada’s extradition request to stand trial in Bolivia is still under appeal more than a decade later. 

Thursday, December 12, 2013

Gravity – 3D














GRAVITY – 3D          B                     
USA  (91 mi)  2013  ‘Scope  d:  Alfonso Cuarón          Official site

As Hollywood special effects movies go, this one has several things going for it, not the least of which is the supposed improvement when seen in 3D and at IMAX, or anywhere that provides the best viewing experience possible, as this is another one of those state of the art movies that far surpass prior technological achievements.  The other is the editing sequence, as this is not an example of prolonged Hollywood overreach, usually trying to do too much, but is instead one of those rare instances where it’s an extremely concise movie, which means it’s a well-told story without using any fancy extras.  For a film that is all about the visuals, trying to immerse the audience in the environment of outer space, the film certainly succeeds, taking the audience on a rollercoaster thrill ride, but once the journey is over, there is little lasting effect, as there are few story complexities worth remembering.  That makes it an entertaining film, but not particularly challenging, where the worst characterization heard so far is that this is a space version of Tom Hanks in CAST AWAY (2000).  Films have been made about outer space disasters, including MAROONED (1969), STARFLIGHT:  THE PLANE THAT COULDN’T LAND (1983), SPACECAMP (1986), and APOLLO 13 (1995), a dramatization of a real-life NASA incident that took place in 1970, also the documentary APOLLO 13:  TO THE EDGE AND BACK (1994).  Perhaps the film this most resembles is Brian de Palma’s MISSION TO MARS (2000), where a specially assembled team attempts to save any remaining survivors from a disastrous mission on Mars, where a lone astronaut is left adrift on the planet surface.  This feeling of being stranded in space, where there’s little hope of any survival, is at the heart of the movie.

The story was actually sitting on the shelf for a number of years waiting for technology to catch up to the required needs of visually expressing the story, and while this is a 3D movie, it doesn’t attempt to over impress using the 3D effects, but instead utilizes the technology to create a naturalistic overall atmosphere of a gravity free zone, where objects float in midair inside space capsules, and where untethered bodies floating in space must struggle to grasp hold of something should disaster occur, as maneuvering around out there is laborious and terribly difficult.  While ostensibly a two-person story, with veteran astronaut Matt Kowalski (George Clooney) hamming it up while going for the record of the longest spacewalk, currently held by a Russian cosmonaut, while Dr. Ryan Stone (Sandra Bullock) is busily struggling with outdoor ship repairs, where her medical conditioning is questioned as computer glitches continually prevent the necessary readings from making its way successfully to earth, leaving her repairs in a state of limbo.  This delay is crucial, because she doesn’t budge, even after being ordered to stop and seek immediate shelter, as a nearby Russian satellite exploded with dangerous debris heading their way.  When the debris arrives sooner than expected, with no time to waste, Dr. Stone is still working on completing the finishing touches, causing Kowalski to have to remain nearby to transport her back to safety.  That option never occurs, as the flying debris causes plenty of damage to their ship, while Stone is terrifyingly thrown out into space, losing all control of her senses, as she can’t stop herself from spinning.  Kowalski can be heard on the radio transmitter attempting to calm her down and slow her breathing, as she’s in a state of panic literally draining her oxygen supply.

Cuarón is excellent at building and sustaining the drama, where his novel use of the camera from inside the space helmets adds a surprising intimacy, while also capturing the beauty of the elusive sunlight coming from behind the shadow of earth, but watching the spacecraft behind them continually get blasted to smithereens, often disintegrating in utter silence, evoking shock and terror, where the audience is witness to several hair-raising scenes, most revealing some degree of death-defying physicality, leaping into the void, where they are forced to play daredevil with their lives.  There are a few choice moments in the film where the silence can be deafening, also some spectacular rescue sequences (with sound added) along with even more near misses.  While many are lauding the performance of Sandra Bullock, who reprises a Sigourney Weaver-style role from ALIEN (1979), but it’s a fundamentally flawed decision, as Bullock actually over-acts, bringing up a traumatic emotional wound from her past that would immediately disqualify her for any space mission, as they want level-headed personnel who keep their cool in a storm, which is why NASA initially pooled from only the best military trained fighter pilots for astronauts, as they were used to putting themselves in dangerous situations.  Bullock is in crisis mode throughout, largely because she doesn’t appear properly trained for the mission, as she can’t even follow orders, and instead panics and gets overly emotional, where the audience can react to her sentiment and vulnerability on display.  This may work for movie audiences that enjoy being manipulated, like Spielberg melodramas, but it’s awfully contrived for a futuristic scientist in outer space.  If one thinks of any astronaut, vulnerability is not how you’d describe them.  Usually they’re pretty tight-lipped and reserved, showing little to no emotion, which translates to bravery under pressure.  So unfortunately, while the visual realism is superb, the emotional counterpart is all Hollywood.  While this doesn’t ruin the experience in the theater, which ramps up the suspense and tension any way it can, it diminishes the overall impact afterwards, as one realizes this isn’t remotely close to reality.