Michael Fassbender

Alien: Covenant

First Hit:  This version was laughable if compared this with the engagement, thrills and horror of the first film, ‘Alien’.

The opening sequence has Peter Weyland (Guy Pierce) activating his latest humanoid robot David (Michael Fassbender), who is named after Michelangelo’s statue. After a short discussion about Peter being David’s creator,  the question David asks is, who was Peter’s creator? Peter looks at him and says, he doesn't know but that they will search for mankind’s creator together. This dialogue tells the audience that this question is important to the film.

Then we switch to the spaceship Covenant, which is now just seven years away from landing on a planet they believe is perfect to colonize with ship's the crew, two thousand colonists and a thousand embryos that are all stored on the ship.

Minding the ship as it sails along through space is Walter (Michael Fassbender) who looks like a replica of David. At first I was confused because I thought it was David and that he had been re-named. This is an initial flaw in the film but makes obvious that the two characters, David and Walter, will be the drivers of what happens in the film and the film doesn’t disappoint with this thought as a plot device.

The crew led by Captain Jacob “Jake” Branson (James Franco) who dies immediately because of a neutrino burst that hits the ship. This happens just a few minutes into the movie and starts the story’s spiral into trouble for the ship and crew.

The newly awakened crew is thrust into action to fix the ship’s issues from the neutrino burst and while managing the repairs they receive a transmission from an unknown planet that sounds vaguely familiar to Tennessee (Danny McBride). What he discovers is that it sounds like the song “Country Roads” by John Denver.

Jake’s wife, Daniels (Katherine Waterson), helps the next in command, Orem (Billy Crudup), figure out their next steps to fix the ship and what he needs to do to take charge. The side story that the crew doesn’t respect him plays no aspect in the film’s story and is a waste of dialogue.

Following the signal, they find a planet that appears to have everything they need for colonization and it is only a week away. Although the audience knows, as do some of the crew members suspect, the choice to explore this “new” planet will be the wrong choice but they do it anyway. Not much in the way of suspense.

One rule about thrillers is that to be thrilled one must be surprised and given a full dose of suspense or it won’t work well. And from here on the film dives into wasted energy. We are not surprised, nor is there suspense. They land, they discover it isn’t a friendly place, the immensely strong aliens are back and we discover that here, ‘David’ is the creator of life. A few of the crew get away. But remember my third paragraph where I stated that the look alike humanoids David and Walter will be the dark story, it is true.

Fassbender is strong in both roles, David and Walter, but the film doesn’t do much justice to his abilities. Waterson is very good and is a highlight as first the grieving widow. She is strong as the clear headed person who really needs to be in-charge. McBride is funny and very good as Tennessee, the guy who is homey and smart. Crudup is wasted in his minimal role and doesn’t show strength. Dan O’Bannon wrote a mediocre script and screenplay that showed its hand way too early and really lacked suspense. Ridley Scott appears to have been in this for the money because the film is simply uninteresting and is at times, a joke (meaning people laughed out loud and the preposterousness).

Overall:  Don’t waste your time on this poorly conceived story.

Song to Song

First Hit:  Although I’m generally a fan of Director Terrence Malik’s work, especially the visualizations, this film felt lifeless and unmoving all the way through. A Malik film like Knight of Cups, touched me deeply and at that moment, I think I’m aligned with Malik’s vision. However, other films he does I might end up liking the pictures and the theme is lost on me.

In this film, few of the pictures were good and I wondered what the point was. Could it have been that if one takes a bite of the apple (signed to a music record deal) then the world opens up. However it only seemed to opened up with increased opportunities for sexual encounters? If so, then I was left thinking; so what. If the point of the film was viewing how the music life in Austin (Malik went to school in Austin) exists and the people in it are just intimately experimenting with others, and they seem to live in a Song to Song way, then so what. I didn't get the point of the film.

Ryan Gosling plays BV who is a musician who gets signed to a record label run by Cook (Michael Fassbender) who is living the big life, filled with things, women, and connections with bands and rock stars. He's pulling the strings, at least around Austin. One of the women he’s linked with is Faye (Rooney Mara).

Faye meets BV at one of Cook’s parties and they begin to have a relationship. However, because they don’t tell each other the truth and they mostly live through their sexuality and what they can feel, the relationship gets convoluted. Faye still has sex with Cook and BV spends time with his old girlfriends Lykke (Lykke Li) and Amanda (Cate Blanchett).

Cook marries Rhonda (Natalie Portman) but has sex with Faye and Faye has sex with Zoey (Berenice Marlohe). There is a lot more of this that goes on in the film, but because it is a Malik film, it is very stylized, virtually no conversational dialogue, and it jumps from place and scene to a different place and scene frequently.

The pictures around Austin were nice and, to me, better than the actual place as I found it more Texan than shown here.

Gosling was good in many sections but the lack of story direction seemed to make him more lost than usual. Mara was one the better parts of this film. Her face and looks are so filled with questions, depth, and searching energy that it fit well in this film. Fassbender was good as the guy who liked money, power, and the things it allowed him to do. Portman was interesting as her intelligence and darkness shined through her scenes. Marlohe was OK as the attractive woman who seduced Faye. Blanchett was OK as this role didn’t really take advantage of her conversational abilities. Holly Hunter as Rhonda’s mom was intense. Malik did the screenplay and it would be interesting to see what it was and how he scripted the scenes. His direction was muddied if what he wanted was the audience to feel something.

Overall:  This film just didn’t work well for me and I found myself sitting there wondering when it would be over.

The Light Between Oceans

First Hit:  Strong acting by Alicia Vikander and Michael Fassbender had me feeling the intended pain and joy of their characters.

Doing the right thing to find inner peace in his life, Tom Sherbourne (Fassbender) has come to this small Australian town to serve as a solitary lighthouse keeper. The lighthouse is on Janus Rock, a remote island several miles from shore. He’s traumatized from his experience in WWI having seen and caused many deaths. He’s looking to repair his soul.

One of the men who helps to hire the lighthouse keeper has a daughter named Isabel Graysmark (Vikander). She is full of energy, life and is intrigued by the quiet somewhat brooding polite Sherbourne. On one of his trips onto shore, he has a picnic with her and their connection is sealed.

The chemistry on the screen is palpable and watching them together is curiously engaging. They marry and live in solitude on the island. They attempt to have children but Isabel miscarries and the pain of these scenes are a strong set up to what happens when they find a dingy washing up on the island with a small baby girl and a dead man inside. Tom wants to find the mother, but Isabel wants to keep the baby and bonds with it immediately.

Filling the hole inside her from her miscarriages drives her to convince Sherbourne to not take steps to find the birth mother. Some years later the birth mother is discovered and she lives in the same town.

Hannah Roenfeldt (Rachel Weisz) is mourning the loss of her husband and baby and Tom fights himself and Isabel to set the record straight.

There are some wonderfully staged scenes in this film including; when Isabel shaves off Tom’s moustache. The happiness of their first dance after the wedding. Tom’s speech about the Lighthouse where Hannah is present and he is lost at what to say and how to say it. The scene when Hannah and Isabel meet up in the fabric store and Lucy-Grace (Florence Clery) runs to Isabel’s arms. And finally when the adult Lucy-Grace (Caren Pistorius) visits Tom. This film was meant to pull on the audience’s heart strings and it does this really well.

Fassbender was amazing as the restrained and constrained man filled with a tough emotional past and learning how love could release him. His controlled words and actions, as provided for in the script, were powerfully shown and shared with the audience. Vikander shows why she won an Academy Award last year. She made Isabel frightfully real in so many ways, displaying the ability to move from one emotion to another in a way that was integrated. She was outstanding. Weisz was powerfully controlled in her role as the mother who lost her child, found her child and having to re-establish her role as mother when the child, rightfully, believed someone else was her mother. Wonderful performance. Derek Cianfrance wrote and directed this film. His ability to create the agonizingly beautiful and powerful scenes in this film, show his ability to get what he wanted.

Overall:  This film is heart touchingly aimed to bring a tear or two, and it does.

X-Men: Apocalypse

First Hit:  Much better than the other Marvel (Comic) film “Captain America…” but it felt worn and reaching.

The beginning is a set up based on some past historical idea about a demonic force called En Sabah Nur/Apocalypse (Oscar Isaac) wanting to finish his evolvement which will give him total world domination. But to complete this task he has to usurp the powers owned and inherent in Professor Charles Xavier (James McAvoy), the leader of the X-Men (and women). By obtaining this power he can rule the world.

The film fails to make this important task engaging enough thereby making the film uninteresting, let alone believable by any stretch of the imagination. The other story is that Erik Lehnsherr/Magneto (Michael Fassbender) has distanced himself from the other X-Men(women) and Professor Xavier.

In this distancing, Magneto has joined with Apocalypse and will execute his commands to rearrange the planet by removing the metal structures of the earth thereby making earth’s inhabitants helpless. The interplay between the X-Men is good and does make this film interesting in ways that has some depth.

The most fun part of the film has to do with Quicksilver/Peter Maximoff (Evan Peters) because his scenes are lighthearted, well-conceived, and simply fun to watch. He brings a humorous element to the whole film and when he’s on the screen, I was engaged.

What seemed pressed were scenes with Raven/Mystique (Jennifer Lawrence) as it seemed she really didn’t want to be in this role and is done with the X-Men series of films. I’d be surprised to see her in another, unless she needs the money.

Isaac created a good enough demonic Apocalypse character, and the makeup helped a lot. Fassbender was OK as the aloof, isolated Magneto. McAvoy was strong as Professor Xavier. Peters was fantastic and the best part of the film. His tongue-in-cheek and cavalier representation of the character was appropriately in-line with my view of what Marvel Comics were originally about. The rest of it has become too serious and seems only there to extract more money out of the public. Lawrence seemed done with the whole thing and her performance and character lacked inspiration. Simon Kinberg wrote the sometimes witty and sometimes labored screen play. Bryan Singer brought some interesting visual scenes to the screen but the attempt to make this story real falls on deaf eyes (yes I mean deaf eyes).

Overall:  Although fun enough, this franchise has to make more and more unrealistic set-ups to attempt to make the stories continue to work into the future.

Academy Awards - The Oscars

OK, here we are again celebrating another year of film going. Some strong films this year, films that broke box office records, and films that failed. Here are my choices for the following awards and some thoughts around some of them.

  • Best Actor - Nominees are:  Bryan Cranston (Trumbo), Matt Damon (The Martin), Leonardo DiCaprio (The Revenant), Michael Fassbender (Steve Jobs) and Eddie Redmayne (The Danish Girl). This is not as strong a field as it was last year. The obvious missing actors are Tom Hanks (Bridge of Spies) maybe because he made it look so easy, and Steve Carell who was so quirky and interesting you just wanted to see what he was going to do next. Both of these were strong performances, yet not in my top two of this listing. Although Cranston's  performance was good, I didn't like the character nor the interpretation. Fassbender was very good, however this role had been done too many times in the last two years. I did not see The Danish Girl therefore I don't have an opinion. However, Damon and DiCapiro's performances were fantastic - beyond amazing. I loved each of them. My guess is that DiCaprio will win the Oscar.
  • Best Actress  - Nominees are:  Cate Blanchett (Carol), Brie Larson (Room), Jennifer Lawrence (Joy), Charlotte Rampling (45 Years), and Saoirse Ronan (Brooklyn). This is a strong category although I didn't see 45 Years, the others were great. I also see a missing person from this list and that would be Rooney Mara in Carol as well. Between Cate and Rooney I would have picked Mara because I felt as though her evolution through the film was a more powerful statement. However, she is in the Supporting Actress listing. Out of the nominated list, it comes down to two outstanding performances: Ronan and Blanchett. Lawrence's performance was really good and I was fully engaged with her character, however it did not have the power of Ronan or Blanchett's. Larson was also very strong, however so much of her performance is linked to Jacob Tremblay the young boy that it took away from her own performance. For me I'd like Ronan to get this Oscar in an amazing performance in a  wonderful film.
  • Best Supporting Actress  - Nominees are:  Jennifer Jason Leigh (The Hateful Eight), Rooney Mara (Carol), Rachel McAdams (Spotlight), Alicia Vikander (The Danish Girl), and Kate Winslet (Steve Jobs). As I mentioned earlier I think Mara's performance belongs in the Best Actress category. I didn't see The Danish Girl so I'm making my pick without full knowledge of the selections. However, without Mara I think the most interesting and performance is Leigh's. It was so hidden and yet over the top that I was mesmerized each time she opened her mouth and/or the camera focused on her. These are the top two and in my view either probably deserves the Oscar.
  • Best Supporting Actor  - Nominees are:  Christian Bale (The Big Short), Tom Hardy (The Revenant), Mark Ruffalo (Spotlight), Mark Rylance (Bridge of Spies), and Sylvester Stallone (Creed). The missing performance is Jacob Tremblay's in Room. He was phenomenal. But this is probably one of the strongest fields in years, so someone had to be left off the list. They were all great and my favorites out of this list are Rylance and Stallone. Rylance had such a small role yet it was so much impact on the film that it was unforgettable. However Stallone will get it for both this performance and his body of work as Rocky Balboa.
  • Best Cinematography  - Nominees are:  Ed Lachman (Carol), Robert Richardson (The Hateful Eight), John Seale (Mad Max: Fury Road), Emmaual Lubezki (The Revenant), and Roger Deakins (Sicario). Although Mad Max: Fury Road was big it did not grab me because I thought the film was more on the mindless side. Carol was elegantly shot and fully deserves the nomination. However, The Hateful Eight and The Revenant are over the top amazingly beautiful and powerful. The Hateful Eight deserves a lot of credit for doing so much in one room, while The Revenant wins this award for how shots were made and the perspective by which they were made. The winner - pick.
  • Best Adapted Screenplay  - Nominees are:  Charles Randolph and Adam McKay (The Big Short), Nick Hornby (Brooklyn), Phyllis Nagy (Carol), Drew Goddard (The Martian), and Emma Donoghue (Room). Wow, what a list. All great picks. Any one of these could win in any given year. However, my final two would be Randolf and McKay for The Big Short and Hornby for Brooklyn. In the end I'm picking Nick Hornby for Brooklyn because it was a great screenplay and a wonderful film to watch.   
  • Best Original Screenplay  - Nominees are:  Matt Charman and Ethan & Joel Coen (Bridge of Spies), Alex Garland (Ex Machina), Pete Docter, Meg LeFauve, and Josh Cooley (Inside Out), Josh Singer and Tom McCarthy (Spotlight), and Jonathan Herman and Andrea Berloff (Straight Outta Compton). Another strong set of contenders. All very different films. In the end I think I like Ex Machina and Spotlight as powerful screen plays for very different reasons. One reflects a horrible set of acts by Catholic Priests and the other about the obsessiveness and controlling nature of technology. In the end I select Josh Singer and Tom McCarthy for Spotlight.
  • Best Director  - Nominees are:  Adam McKay (The Big Short), George Miller (Mad Max: Fury Road), Alejandro Gonzalez Inarritu (The Revenant), Lenny Abrahamson (Room), and Tom McCarthy (Spotlight). Missing are:  Ridley Scott (The Martian), J.J. Abrams (Star Wars: The Force Awakens), Todd Haynes (Carol), Quentin Tarantino (The Hateful Eight) and John Crowley (Brooklyn). To me this is the most messed up nominee listing. How is Max: Fury Road better directed than all my exceptions? It isn't and doesn't hold a candle to them. Also given my exceptions, I think Abrahamson's delivery is not quite there. Anyway, from the nominee list, I would say it is between McKay, Inarritu, and McCarthy. In the end I'd select McKay (with McCarthy a very close second) because he did the most to keep the film on track. Inarritu had too many long wistful shots. However this listing of nominees is really flawed.
  • Best Picture  - Nominees are:   The Big Short, Bridge of Spies, Brooklyn, Mad Max: Fury Road, The Martian, The Revenant, Room, and Spotlight. Missing here is Carol and The Hateful Eight. Mad Max: Fury Road is nowhere in the league as these other nominees and, in my opinion, doesn't deserve to be listed. I simply was board stiff by the one long chase film filled with foolish philosophy. It is hard for me to pick as I loved "Brooklyn" as being a wonderfully executed nostalgic story. I thought "The Big Short" told a compelling story of how our economy tanked. "The Martian" was beautifully delivered and Damon made it happen. "Bridge of Spies" and "Spotlight" are both amazing stories about something that really happened. I was totally engaged and felt they delivered in all ways; education and story. The only thing I didn't like about "The Revenant" was that there were too many long scenic only shots which took away from the story.  In the end, of the listed I'd like to see "The Martian" win but can also see the others winning except Mad Max.

Some other thoughts about films this year:

  • "Star Wars: The Force Awakens" was amazingly edited.
  • "Ex Machina's" visual effects were very strong and so were scenes in "The Revenant".
  • "Anomalisa" and "Inside Out" were both amazing Animated Feature films.
  • "Carol" had perfectly detailed costumes and overall set design.
  • "Writings on the Wall" the song for "Spectre" was dreadful.

Note: I'll be England sitting in silence for 30 days starting late next week. I may be able to see one more film before I go, but otherwise I won't be seeing any films or posting any reviews until the first week of March.

Thank you for viewing my site.

googleaa391b326d7dfe4f.html