notesomi-blog

[notesomi-blog]

‘mother!’: The Most Ambitious Movie of the Year

mother! | 2017 | Director: Darren Aronofsky | Country: US

Warning: Full Spoiler Review

I’ve been eagerly anticipating this latest Darren Aronofsky’s movie called “mother!” ever since I saw its first poster. It shows Jennifer Lawrence’s character in a white dress holding her bleeding heart (literally). I was transfixed by its aura of beauty meets horror. This poster alone can be interpreted in some ways. Then months later, the official trailer finally arrived. I watched it with sheer delight because the tone of this movie―from the confused female character to some of the surreal imagery―reminded me a bit of “Black Swan”, Aronofsky’s much lauded psychological horror movie. I also got some “Rosemary’s Baby” vibe from it. So I was excited to find out that some of the promo posters look like some homage to “Black Swan” and “Rosemary’s Baby”. By then, I thought I had figured out what this movie is about. Man, how wrong I was.

The story of “mother!” revolves around a couple who lives in a secluded house. The husband, who’s much older than his wife, is a poet facing writer’s block and in need of greater inspiration. His house was destroyed by fire and he had lost almost everything until he met his wife. His wife was the one who helped restoring his house from scratch. “We spend all our time here... I want to make it paradise,” she said. Their seemingly serene life was disturbed when an old man suddenly came to their house one night. This stranger’s arrival was only the beginning of stranger things to come.

From its promo materials, I was pretty sure that the story of “mother!” would be revolved around some cult or satanic theme, hence the “Rosemary’s Baby” vibe I felt. As I said before, I was wrong. I still can feel the similar atmosphere though, mainly through the perspective of the paranoid main female character. But this movie as a whole is more than just a paranoia-filled offering. The whole concept is so ambitious that I needed some time to wrap my head around it after the movie ended.

First, let’s talk about the title. It uses exclamation point after the word “mother” and I feel some aggressiveness from it. There are, indeed, a lot of aggressive acts against the mother character throughout the movie. Who does mother refer to anyway? Yes, mother is the main character played by Jennifer Lawrence. Now, the mother in this movie isn’t supposed to be seen from the maternal context, because this character is actually the personification of... mother earth? At least that was what I can assume after finished watching this goddamn movie. My expectation was destroyed. This is not a psychological horror a la “Black Swan” or paranoia-filled horror a la “Rosemary’s Baby” as the promo materials suggest. Those promo materials were deceptions, guys. But hell, I was sure glad that this movie turned out to be something entirely different.

There were some moments throughout the movie where I uttered to myself, “Is this thing actually about the...? Hmmm... never mind... let’s keep watching.” And the other time, I was like, “Holy fucking shit, what is this?” My mind was going places and I felt like I need to replay some of the scenes immediately. By the end of this movie, I was thinking that maybe it is about the birth and death of planet earth, going in circle. I also have suspicion about the role of some of the characters and realized that they don’t have an actual name. So I started to pay attention to the credit title. Then realization dawned on me and I thought to myself, “Is this true? It’s actually about the Bible? OH MY GOD yes I think it is.” In the credit title, the character of Javier Bardem is written as Him, with capital H, whereas the other characters are written all in lowercase. My suspicion is true. He is the personification of God. That’s why the title, “mother!”, is also written all in lowercase. Goddammit! Then my mind replayed some of the scenes and started to connect the dots. So Ed Harris and Michelle Pfeiffer’s characters are Adam and Eve, and their two sons are Abel and Cain? Are the frog and the spray of blood some cues for the ten plagues? Okay, I won’t go far from this scenario because I think that’s not my place and I just don’t have the knowledge for it. I don’t know if Aronofsky has actually crammed all of his interpretation of the Bible into a two-hour giant metaphor... I mean, movie. If that is the case, it means that he has made a movie adaptation of the Bible. That is one big ambition, sir.

Despite that metaphor thing, Aronofsky also infuses some criticisms into “mother!”. One of them is about the violent human behaviour towards environment, or should we call it mother earth? As I mentioned before, Jennifer Lawrence’s character can be interpreted as the personification of mother earth and there are various aggressive acts against her by almost all of the characters throughout the movie. Those acts were some of the reasons why this movie was quite uncomfortable to sit through.

For me, the casting of Jennifer Lawrence is spot on. I felt that her physical appearance here is accentuated, from the choice of her outfits to the way the camera frames her figure. Before calling it objectifying, note that it’s in line with the concept of the character. Mother earth is supposed to appear attractive, almost bare so everyone can see her whole beauty. I think Lawrence fully embodied this character. Most of the time, the camera frames her face in close-up, so we can see her facial expression clearly. She appears innocent at first and becomes more bewildered when random people start to flood into her house. Her face says it all. I’ve been a fan of her since I saw she her breakthrough role in “Winter’s Bone” and I think mother is her bravest role yet.

Another criticism that is infused by Aronofsky into this movie is about an artist’s obsession and relationship with his art. He also depicts how fame and idolatry can be destructive. All of them are presented in such extremity, particularly during the last half of the movie. It becomes more and more fucked-up towards the end.

All that aside, there is one particular plot point that struck me the most: the intrusion of personal space. I can relate so much to the mother character when she feels disturbed by the arrival of strangers into her house. As an introvert, I highly value my personal space and I can be extremely uncomfortable when some people invade it without invitation. I feel you, mother earth. I guess “Intruders!” could be a more appropriate title for this movie, no?

In the end, I think I understand the polarizing nature of “mother!”. This movie surely has potential to offend some people. For the other people, may they be amazed by its big ambition and bold narrative. I, myself, fall into the latter spectrum. I believe that this movie will spark some conversations and it deserves to be talked about for years to come.

Let’s give props to Darren Aronofsky and all the team involved who have pushed the boundaries and presented one of the most ambitious movies of the year. They prove that Hollywood’s major studio still has some guts to bring interesting “left field” concept to life. Cinema has limitless possibilities and a lot of potential to be explored after all.

[notesomi-blog]

‘Dunkirk’ Is a Spectacle Not to Be Missed

Dunkirk | 2017 | Director: Christopher Nolan | Country: UK, Netherlands, France, USA

War is horrible. It pits human being against each other, no matter what label each party carries. And no matter what the end result is, both the prevailing one and the defeated one has actually lost in some ways. There’s no triumph in it. The destruction and casualties it caused are part of a great tragedy of humanity. Countless people has lost their precious ones in it. Maybe some of those who involved in the battle didn’t even know why they were there or what they were actually sacrificing for. I, myself, have never been in a literal war situation, so I can’t describe the actual feel of being in one. The closest I can get to feel the horror of being in a war is through books or movies. And through this movie, “Dunkirk”, I could once again get that kind of experience.

“Dunkirk” is the latest movie from director Christopher Nolan—the one name whose popularity among the movie lovers’ circle is undeniably high. With this movie, he tries to delve into something that I believe he hasn’t touched before—a war epic movie. It was based on a real life event during World War II. This is a story about surviving in the midst of uncontrollable situation. About risking one’s life for the sake of others’ safety. About those who are waiting and wanting to get to the comfort of that place they call home. About those who are taking action and bring that comfort to the ones who wait. For it is the heart of this movie. “When 400,000 men couldn’t get home, home came for them”. This is a filmmaking full of ambition. And once again, Nolan and his team delivered an excellent work.

From the very first frame, “Dunkirk” had already grabbed me with its vividness. The picture was so clear and realistic looking. Even though I didn’t watch it on IMAX—the format which my friends and a lot of people highly recommended to watch this movie on—the experience was still incredible. I love the color palette that was so easy on the eyes. The calming hues were quite a contrast to the intense and suspenseful atmosphere, mostly created by the staging and sound effect. They blended in harmony throughout the movie. I can see why people urged the others to watch it on IMAX screen. Because this movie demands to be seen on the biggest screen possible with high quality sound systems.

This movie really is a technical marvel. Hoyte van Hoytema as the cinematographer and Hans Zimmer as the score composer are two of the key players in creating the mood. They’d collaborated with Nolan on his previous work, “Interstellar”, and the result was remarkable. They continued their collaboration with this one, and the result was no less remarkable, if not superior. Nolan’s vision in creating a tale of survival brimmed with horror was brought to life with expertise. He and his team utilized the three main settings—land, sea, and air—to the maximum effect for building the atmosphere. From the bombardment of the beach to the Spitfire’s aerial shot, the tension hardly lets up. The score, along with the sound effect, accompanied the visual perfectly. The sound of firing bullets or passing aircraft was so terrifying. I lost count of how many times I was jumped out of my seat. And I’m sure that I kept hearing that sound of ticking clock even in the quieter scenes. It really made me uneasy the whole time.

“Dunkirk” tells one of the most remarkable events in history. In terms of story, this movie is rather simplistic but effective. It’s about the evacuation of hundreds of thousands of people from Dunkirk to their homeland. It puts the audiences right into the middle of that event to make them feel the anxiety and uncertain fate of those people on screen. It’s also rather simplistic when it comes to characterization. There’s no single character in this movie to really invested our emotions into. Everybody was just trying to survive and saved one another. This approach of not creating more depth for the characters may put some people off. But for me, it works just fine because this movie is all about the event. Just like in real life, when a tragedy strikes and makes people suffer, we feel empathy and care about their fate even though they are complete strangers to us. This movie took me into the heart of a tragic event to witness how people fell and react to it. No matter who that person is, or who’s waiting for this person back at home, everybody is equal. They are trying to survive this event no matter what. And this, my friend, is a one of a kind experience to be had.

Some of my friends said that “Dunkirk” is a Nolan movie that is so not Nolan. Maybe it has to do with the lack of dialogue in this one, unlike his other works that usually heavy with exposition. Whatever that is, I kinda disagree with them, because I still can see the traces of Nolan’s style here. He divided the narrative into three parts and each part took place in different locations, which are the land, sea, and air. And along the way, I’ve come to realize that this storytelling approach also deals with time perception or maybe time scramble to be exact. This “messing with time” narrative approach can be found in Nolan’s previous works through various structures and contexts. And that is one of the elements that makes Nolan’s works intriguing for me.

For all of its strong aspects, after watching this movie, I felt that it is likely to be polarizing. I could see that in months ahead, there will be more people who call this movie overrated, moreover if it gets recognition from the Academy members come Oscar time. It is very much like, let’s say, Alfonso Cuarón’s “Gravity”. These two movies can be seen as more of a spectacle. Though “Gravity” is centered around one protagonist with fairly strong character arc, the technical prowess—3D presentation, cinematography, sound design, etc—is what really make that movie soared. And there’s nothing wrong with being more of a spectacle. Especially when it offers a one of a kind experience like “Dunkirk”. It’s a cinematic experience you should not be missed.

[notesomi-blog]

No Fifth Time’s a Charm For ‘Pirates of the Caribbean’

Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Men Tell No Tales | 2017 | Director: Joachim Rønning, Espen Sandberg | Country: USA I honestly won't see this movie if only my buddy didn't drag me to the theater. My interest for this franchise has already dissipated a long time ago. The first "Pirates of the Caribbean" movie was like a breath of fresh air, because that kind of movie was quite rare at that time. The movie was also actually funny and exciting with great ensemble cast, particularly Johnny Depp as the iconic Captain Jack Sparrow. But much like Michael Bay's "Transformers", the successful attempt of the first one didn't translate well to its series of sequel. What was once exciting became tiring. The first sequel to the "Pirates" universe still has its crazy fun moments, but it also showed the sign of staleness, not to mention its bloated running time. So I wasn't even bothered to watch the fourth installment. Just when I thought this franchise is over—because I didn't aware that the last installment belongs to the billion-dollar club—then this new sequel suddenly arrived. Well, okay. Most of the old cast are back, and they added some new faces too. And as much as I tried to ignore this one, I eventually watched it. For the story itself, there is not much to tell. Jack Sparrow and his crew have stumbled across unexpected guy and girl and eventually embarked on an adventure to find a mystical object while also been chased by some villain from the past. The guy just happened to be Will Turner's (one of the main characters from the previous movies) son, and the girl also has some connection to one of the characters here (her background's reveal was quite surprising though). And they, along with Sparrow, "accidentally" met in the "right" place at the "right" time. How convenient.

The "Pirates" franchise, despite its bunch of various characters, has always been about Jack Sparrow. It relies on Johnny Depp's charisma and Jack Sparrow's unique character traits. And unfortunately, his presence here has become tiring and rather boring. Depp is actually a great actor, but this character didn't have that much appeal to me anymore, despite his performance. One of the standout aspects from this franchise—which also tightly ties with Jack Sparrow's character—is the humor. There were some gags that still working here, but overall the humor has become more and more stale, as also the action scenes. As I was writing this, I already forgot a handful of scenes from this movie. What I remember most is the ending, as it filled me with nostalgia. It gave a glimmer of hope to the future of this franchise, if it even has one. Yes, I said the future of this franchise, as if I anticipated another one in the future. But, whatever. I guess someone has to drag me again if that actually happens.

P.S. I’ve posted this review on my instagram account @jar_ibrahim a month ago.

[notesomi-blog]

I Killed My ‘Mommy’

Mommy | 2014 | Director: Xavier Dolan | Country: Canada Have you ever watched a film so resonates with you that you feel the director really knew you and made that movie exclusively for you? Then you sought after the director's filmography and end up being a total admirer because almost if not all of his/her films gave you the same feeling? It's not necessarily that his/her films were like a reflection of your life. It's just that the films connect with you on a deeper level, and sometimes you just cannot explain why. There are several directors who I admire so much because of that, and one of them is Xavier Dolan. I watched his first film, "I Killed My Mother", roughly two years ago, and I was completely blown away by it. How he composed the scenes, the way he put the accompanying music on those scenes, his ability to direct himself and all of the actors, etc, etc. It was highly affecting. And what the hell... he is a guy my age! What did I do with my life all this time? Anyway, let's talk about this film called "Mommy". This is my second viewing and I still got the same feeling like when I watched it for the first time. It is very much in the same vein as "I Killed My Mother". It explores the complicated relationship between a mother and a son. While Dolan's first film feels kinda raw, this one feels more refined, but the emotion is still the same. Not to mention that the main actress, Anne Dorval, plays the mother role in both films. So it was like revisiting that first film but it came with quite different package. Beside Dorval, there's also Suzanne Clément in the cast. She was super rad in "Laurence Anyways"—my most favorite Dolan's film—and continuing her great work here. Her chemistry with Dorval was effortless. And of course, don't forget Antoine-Olivier Pilon. He was really a force to be reckoned with. He can be funny and childlike at one time, then turned menacing and chaotic at next so convincingly. Together with Dorval and Clément, he showed a powerhouse performance and they made a really powerful acting trio.

Like in his other films, Dolan's sensibility for background music was also impeccable here. His song choices, from Oasis to Lana Del Rey were so on point. And he also experimented with unconventional if not downright weird aspect ratio for this film. He used perfectly square 1:1 aspect ratio here. Just like he said, maybe some people will call it pretentious, but you know what? It actually works for me. This unusual presentation was used to support the whole story, emotion, and mood throughout. You should see it for yourself to prove that. I was in awe, seriously. All in all, "Mommy" is only one proof about how talented Xavier Dolan is. He already has another upcoming project to be anticipated, and I cannot wait to witness the result.

P.S. I’ve posted this review on my instagram account @jar_ibrahim a month ago.

[notesomi-blog]

Red Is the Bleakest Color in ‘Don’t Look Now’

Don't Look Now | 1973 | Director: Nicolas Roeg | Country: UK, Italy So I was in the mood for watching a horror movie on some Thursday night, but wasn't sure about which one I should watch. Then I chose the safe route, which means rewatching a horror movie I adore. And after some thoughts, I chose to give this one a rewatch. "Don't Look Now" revolves around a couple trying to cope with the death of their daughter. They temporarily left their English country home and stay in Venice due to the husband's job of restoring an ancient church. One day, the wife met two elderly sisters, whom one of them is blind and claims to be a clairvoyant. This elderly woman said that the couple's dead daughter has appeared to warned them that the husband's life is in danger if they keep staying in Venice. Added to the fact that some killer is on the loose. It's been a while since I watched this movie for the first time. So there's not much I could recall from this one other than some interesting editing choices, the terrifying reveal, and of course *ahem* the lenghty sex scene. And after the rewatch last night, I could finally see why I adore it in the first place. First, the editing is unbelievably spot on. Right from the prologue, I could sense that I was in for a special treat. The way those different scenes were put together back and forth to the effective usage of slow motion, all of them were employed to heighten the tension and uneasiness. And this example of brilliant technique wasn't stop there. It was employed to great effect 'til the very end. Secondly, the location is also... you guess it... yes, spot on. The majority of the movie was set in Venice, and I couldn't think of the better place to set this story in. I always imagine Venice as a romantic place surrounded by water and serene aura. But in this one, it appears very menacing, with dangers seem lurking in every shadowy alley, and the water doesn't seem calming at all. The water, along with red color, are two recurring motifs throughout the movie. They linked the past tragedy with present and the future unknown. They seriously made me uneasy.

And then, we have the two incredible main actors here. Donald Sutherland and Julie Christie were so lovely it's not hard to root for them. And the actresses who played the sisters were also good. They were effectively used as an important element to the story as well as a possible red herring. Okay, I won't say any more of it.

The main superstar was of course the director, Nicolas Roeg. He has made a movie that was so well put together and memorable. I appreciate this movie more after this repeat viewing. Very well done, sir.

P.S. I’ve posted this review on my instagram account @jar_ibrahim a month ago.

[notesomi-blog]

‘The Devil’s Dolls’: An Effective Little Horror Movie

The Devil's Dolls | 2016 | Director: Padraig Reynolds | Country: USA When it comes to movie watching, I could say that I'm not a picky one. I'm willing to watch anything, no matter what the genre is, or in what era that movie was initially released. But if you already know me, you know that I always have a soft spot for horror movies. No matter how bad it looks, I tend to gravitate towards them. And this one—a little horror movie called "The Devil's Dolls"—is the latest horror movie I went into without a second thought. I gotta admit that this one looks bad, and received relatively poor reviews. So I went into it with no expectation at all. And yes, this one has that cheapo aura, like when you were watching a Syfy channel movie or some low-budget tv movie. Maybe it's because the way it was shot, or the bad acting from its cast. But the funny thing is, those things turned out to be fascinating. And the best thing about this movie is the way it presented itself from start to finish—just goes along with the simple story without taking itself too seriously, and ends it with cliché yet satisfying conclusion. Some splattering of blood helps too. It clocks in at under 90 minutes, so it was a fairly lean movie watching. "The Devil's Dolls" offers nothing new to the table, but it is still worth my time. I was entertained throughout, and maybe you will be too.

P.S. I’ve posted this review on my instagram account @jar_ibrahim a month ago.

[notesomi-blog]

Kesunyian Penuh Arti Dalam ‘Ziarah’

Ziarah | 2016 | Sutradara: B.W. Purba Negara | Negara: Indonesia

Catatan: ulasan di bawah sedikit menyinggung akhir film, walau tak kentara.

Mbah Sri hanya ingin dikuburkan di samping makam suaminya kelak. Makam yang keberadaannya pun tak jelas ada di mana. Tak disangka, secercah harapan tiba dan membawanya pada sebuah perjalanan. Perjalanan untuk mencari sepetak tanah. Untuk menyelam ke masa silam. Untuk menemukan jawaban.

Sang cucu ingin minta restu. Restu untuk meminang gadis pujaan hatinya. Gadis yang ia ajak mengukur petak-petak tanah. Tanah yang akan menemani mereka dalam sebuah perjalanan. Perjalanan menuju masa depan. Menuju kebahagiaan yang diidam-idamkan.

Nenek dan cucu sama-sama melakukan sebuah perjalanan dengan tujuan masing-masing. Yang satu ingin mencari jawaban atas masa lalunya. Yang lain ingin meminta jawaban untuk masa depannya.

Perjalanan, atau ziarah, yang masing-masing dilakukan Mbah Sri serta cucunya, saling berkelindan di sepanjang film. Fokus yang kerap berpindah ini memberi perspektif lain dalam penceritaannya, terutama pada salah satu kejadian yang disaksikan sang cucu di sekitar paruh akhir film. Kejadian tersebut memberi kontras terhadap momen yang melibatkan Mbah Sri di akhir film.

Akhir film ini cukup mengejutkan dan merupakan momen paling kuat bagi saya pribadi. Di sepanjang film, kita disuguhi kesunyian yang merangkak pelan dan pada akhirnya dibayar dengan kesunyian pula. Namun ini adalah kesunyian yang menyayat dan menghantam. Sayatan yang mendalam, walau hanya berupa gesekan sapu lidi di ubin. Hantaman yang menyesakkan, walau hanya berupa taburan bunga di atas nisan. Saya rasa Mbah Sri adalah sosok yang jauh lebih tegar dibanding saya.

Ziarah adalah sebuah film yang sederhana (secara premis) sekaligus kompleks (secara muatan). Harap segera ditonton jika ada kesempatan. Karena pengalaman menonton kesunyian tidak kalah mengesankannya dibanding menonton keriaan dan keramaian visual. Mereka punya pesonanya masing-masing.

P.S. Tulisan ini pernah dimuat di akun instagram pribadi saya @jar_ibrahim