becbec-reviewsfilms - Tumblr blog

[becbec-reviewsfilms]

[becbec-reviewsfilms]

‘The King’s Speech’

★★★★★

2010 – Dir. Tom Hooper

A period drama that focuses more on the characters than the time period itself, and that takes liberties with how that time period is represented on screen is unusual. ‘The King’s Speech’ directs the audience towards its characters and their story as the main focus on the film. There are no beautiful shots of architecture, no large gatherings of people in fancy clothes. It is simply a story that happens to be set in that time.

‘The King’s Speech’ tells the true story of King George VI (Colin Firth), who goes to Lionel Logue (Geoffrey Rush) for help in overcoming his stammer. Although the film shortens the events to just a few years, it covers a significant period in British monarchy, but the true focus is the friendship that develops between the two men during this struggle.

What should be extremely commended is Firth’s dedication to the replication of the stammer, and how neither Firth or Hooper wanted to tone it down for the audience. The acting is simply stunning, truly conveying the struggles he undergoes and grounding this high-ranking individual firmly in real life, helping the audience to find a common connection. Indeed, the friendship is a complicated issue that takes many twists and turns before settling down, making this a truly heart-warming story.

Indeed, Hooper’s use of wider lenses creates a claustrophobic atmosphere, one where the King’s emotions can be fully explored, and that creates the same feeling in the audiences. In addition, the cinematography uses lighting more reminiscent of a modern setting, creating a feeling of unease at the two contrasting time periods colliding. These two features lead to some spectacular shots, and the use of oblong corridors and smaller rooms only helps to further these feelings.

My only criticism of this film is that it creates too many antagonists. George V and the Archbishop are definitively presented as trying to stop the treatments, but upon a closer inspection, they tried to help in their own way, neither of them fully understanding what the best method of help was. In reality, the only true antagonist is the speech deficit, and so when it is overcome there is truly a time for celebration.

‘The King’s Speech’ is an emotional period drama that doesn’t try to hide anything. Everything is laid out for the audience to see and it is the strength of the characters that make this a great film. It is easy to see the praise heaped upon it, and to see that it is well deserved.

[becbec-reviewsfilms]

‘The Breakfast Club’

★★★★

1985 – Dir. John Hughes

The quintessential film of the 80s, John Hughes’ ‘The Breakfast Club’ is a character study at its heart, bringing together different high school stereotypes and showing that these people exist beyond it, that they are similar in ways they could not have seen and, when those stereotypes are stripped away, are just people, struggling with life. Hughes brings together “a brain, and an athlete, and a basket case, a princess, and a criminal” and creates a believable dynamic between them, binding them in a friendship forged in Saturday detention. Uniting them against the ‘villain’, Assistant Principal Vernon, Hughes showcases the real, everyday struggles that high schoolers face – struggles which are just as relevant today.

The five characters each represent a single high-school stereotype, but underneath that lies problems that they eventually open up and admit to. Allison Reynolds (Ally Sheedy), the outcast, is a compulsive liar. Andrew Clark (Emilio Estevez), the jock, struggles to think for himself. John Bender (Judd Nelson), the criminal, comes from an abusive household. Brian Johnson (Anthony Michael Hall), the brain, was considering suicide due to being unable to cope with a bad grade. Claire Standish (Molly Ringwald), the beauty, struggled with the pressure put upon her by her peers. Through opening up to their problems, the group become tightly knitted, and form a lasting friendship, even if they will not see each other again outside of this Saturday detention.

At first, it seems unbelievable that these characters could even be friends. But the singular enemy of Vernon gives them something to bond over, and through this the story starts to evolve. I certainly did not believe that they could all become friends, but the development which they underwent during the film showed a natural and believable route to their eventual friendships. The acting should also be commended, for being able to bring these stereotypes to life and then destroy them, to convincingly portray the struggles each student went through.

‘The Breakfast Club’ is most certainly a character study, but it a comedy as well, and there are plenty laugh out loud moments. Each character has a certain rhythm that bounces off another, creating a harmony as they begin to interact more and more. What is nothing more than a discordant whistle at the start turns into a harmonised symphony by the end, it is overflowing with emotion and characterisation.

Hughes created a film that has continued to be culturally relevant, even after over 30 years. The struggles these students faced are real struggles that are still faced by students, all of whom can easily relate to the film and its characters. It is amazing that after all this time, this film is still so relevant, and I think that it truly highlights the problems with modern society and its attitude towards teenagers.

[becbec-reviewsfilms]

‘Battle for Sevastopol’

★★★★★

2015 – Dir. Sergey Mokritskyiy

Lyudmila Pavlichenko is something of an inspiration to me, ever since I discovered her remarkable story, and as soon as I found there was a film about her I had to see it. ‘Battle for Sevastopol’ far surpassed my expectations, even though I am wary about bio-pics. I find that in order to create a better story they sometimes exaggerate events too much, but I didn’t have to be worried. Aside from some side characters and slight changes to better accommodate her story in the film, Lyudmila’s story remains mostly unchanged.

Lyudmila Pavlichenko (Yulia Peresild) is perhaps the most successful Russian female sniper. With 309 confirmed kills, she had a major role in WWII, and perhaps most well-known is her close friendship with Eleanor Roosevelt (Joan Blackham) which started during a tour to the United States to boost propaganda. Lyudmila’s story is told through flashbacks as Eleanor Roosevelt remarks fondly upon her time with Lyudmila and the reasons behind their close friendship.

What this film remarkably tackles is the sexism of the times. When greeting the foreign visitors, Eleanor Roosevelt almost passes over the young and small Lyudmila, until she interrupts the process. In addition, through the tour Lyudmila is asked sexist questions about the length of her skirt, and how she applies make-up in the field. She is put out by this – in Russia she is a respected soldier, but in the USA she is nothing more than a gimmick – ‘Lady Death’. It is through this that Lyudmila and Eleanor bond and is the start of their close friendship.

Another main component of the film is Lyudmila’s love interests. From what I know of her life, only one of these men truly existed, but the others serve well as vessels for us to see Lyudmila’s trauma through, that otherwise would be difficult to tell in a film format. Her first love, Makarov (Oleg Vasilkov), shares with her his trauma after the death of his wife and child during the German invasion, and together they struggle to survive the hardship of those first few months of war. Makarov is eventually killed, and Lyudmila begins to show her trauma, wounding enemies cruelly before firing the fatal shot in order to draw out rescuers, whom she also killed. Her spotting partner, Leonid (Yevgeny Tsyganov), puts an end to this and together they started a deep and heartfelt relationship. Although it in not confirmed in the film, Lyudmila and Leonid were married, until his death around 1942. After this, Lyudmila is under the care of Boris (Nikita Tarasov), a doctor, who courted her not long before the war began. At the evacuation of high ranking officers from the falling Sevastopol begins, Boris sacrifices his own ticket to get Lyudmila away from the fighting and to safety. Both Boris and her childhood friend, Masha, die in the resulting fall of Sevastopol.

Lyudmila’s trauma is very real and put front and centre of the film. When Eleanor Roosevelt drops a pan with a long clang, Lyudmila feels she is back on the front line, crouching behind cover and clutching a knife in her hand, ready to attack at a moment’s notice. She appears very cold compared to the lively Eleanor, but it is through this repression of emotions that we begin to fully understand Lyudmila as a person, and how her experiences have shaped her. The film is a touching tribute to her remarkable life and service in WWII, and Mokritskyiy sensitively handles material that could overshadow the entire film, managing to find moments of light and happiness among the gravitas of the events that hang like a deadly shadow over the tale.

It is perhaps telling that I have few notes made on this film, as I was so absorbed in what I was seeing onscreen that I forgot to write anything down. The sorrowful tale of Lyudmila’s life has been in my thoughts ever since I saw the film, and I’ve no doubt it will continue to haunt me. It is a touching, but heartful story, and the happy ending may be unlike what we expected going into the film, but it stays true to Lyudmila’s life and brings the audience as sense of relief after the hard-hitting events of WWII. Fantastically done, and with a fantastic cast, this film deserved more recognition than it gets.

[becbec-reviewsfilms]

‘Dunkirk’

★★★★★

2017 - Dir. Christopher Nolan

Visually stunning and hard-hitting, ‘Dunkirk’ is a survival story at its heart, focusing more on the point of views of its characters rather than the characters themselves, reminiscing on the era of silent films. However, its very far from silent and the noise of warfare is amplified to really transport the viewer into the film.

[becbec-reviewsfilms]

‘Spider-man Homecoming’

★★★★★

2017 - Dir. Jon Watts

Great characters, great story. ‘Spider-man Homecoming’ manages to nail Peter Parker and his alter-ego, and has a diverse and refreshing range of characters to boot. Extremely enjoyable and a great addition to the MCU.

[becbec-reviewsfilms]

Masterpost

Ratings

★★★★★ Outstanding

★★★★ Great

★★★ Okay

★★ Not Great

★ Terrible

Film Reviews

Regular length film reviews, sorted by stars and in alphabetical order.

★★★★★

‘Battle for Sevastopol’

‘Hidden Figures’

‘Pan’s Labyrinth’

‘The King’s Speech’

‘The Shawshank Redemption’

★★★★

‘Forrest Gump’

‘The Breakfast Club’

★★★

‘Groundhog Day’

★★

‘Airplane!’

Short Reviews

Short reviews of films seen recently in cinemas.

★★★★★

‘Dunkirk’

‘Spider-man: Homecoming’

Film of the Month

My film of the month, accompanied by my review.

June: ‘Hidden Figures’

July: ‘Battle for Sevastopol’

[becbec-reviewsfilms]

‘Groundhog Day’

★★★

1993 – Dir. Harold Ramis

Reliving a day of your life can sound appealing, especially if it’s a day full of great memories that you want to relive over and over again. However, if you’re stuck somewhere you hate, in the middle of a celebration you hate, with people you maybe don’t get along with, it can sound like hell. That’s exactly the premise of ‘Groundhog Day’. Weatherman Phil Collins (Bill Murray) is, like every year, reporting on Groundhog Day in Punxsutawney. He is accompanied by cameraman Larry (Chris Elliot) and new producer Rita Hanson (Andie MacDowell). When he finds himself reliving the same day over and over again, he must find a way to break the cycle but instead finds himself falling more and more in love with Rita. In doing so, he becomes a better person, moving away from the egotistical person he was.

‘Groundhog Day’ has a good premise and manages its time travel element well. Whilst it’s never explained why Phil found himself repeating this day, the audience can assume it was because he was, quite frankly, mean and horrible to everyone. A bit of karma was needed to make him buck up his act.

The film has a story to tell, and it does that well, alongside a helping and funny jokes and gags that brighten up this possibly depressing tale. The eventual romance between Phil and Rita is sweet and well built, so it is more than believable. All the characters have their own unique characteristics and the actors have a great dynamic between them, so whether it’s a sad or funny scene, they all shine together.

Divine retribution is a fine idea that makes its way into many films nowadays, but ‘Groundhog Day’ does it well, even though we don’t know how it happens. Phil is made to understand how much of a jerk he is and to really change his ways – after all, there’s no escaping if he doesn’t.

I enjoyed ‘Groundhog Day’. It wasn’t a stand-out film for me, but it was certainly well-written, acted and directed. It’s more than understandable why it is a classic and why it will continue to be. For all the laughs it brings, it also conveys its more serious message, that is, to be nice to people. A bit of kindness here and there can do the world of good, and that’s exactly what we need, right now.

[becbec-reviewsfilms]

‘Airplane!’

★★

1980 – Dir. Jim Abrahams, David Zucker, Jerry Zucker

A satirical take on disaster movies, ‘Airplane!’ is full of jokes and gags that poke fun at the generally serious genre whilst attempting to form a plot of its own. Its cast of characters are cliched and stereotypical to the point where you can no longer be angry but almost hysterical, as it takes its own plot and character development as seriously as most mainstream films take casting a lead female character – that is, to say, they give it no consideration at all.

Ex-fighter pilot Ted Striker (Robert Hayes) is attempting to fix his relationship with long-time girlfriend Elaine Dickinson (Julie Hagerty), and in doing so he boards the plane she currently works as a flight attendant on – a Boeing 707 to Chicago. When several of the passengers fall ill – including the pilot and co-pilot – Striker must overcome his past trauma to land the plane safely.

The first half hour of this film was wildly entertaining. The use of the ‘Jaws’ theme at the beginning was genius. I particularly loved the ongoing debate between the two announcers over the ‘red and ‘white’ zones – using this at the beginning of the film set the viewers straight that, no, this film wasn’t going to take itself seriously, and so the audience shouldn’t either. However, after the scene where the young couple wave goodbye as if at a train station, it was almost like they had run out of decent gags and jokes. Sure, there’s the ‘don’t call me Shirley’ line, and the inflatable auto-pilot, but most of the comedy veers into ridiculousness, and you spend the rest of the film wondering why it’s such a hit.

What also makes an impact is the jokes. Some of the jokes, in today’s world, are inappropriate to an extortionate degree. Yes, it should be considered that this film was made at a time when these jokes were acceptable, however today it is hard to overlook these things, and it makes it harder to enjoy the film as it should be.

Another thing that contributes to what I think are the failings of the film is that there are few running gags. Striker tells his story to many people, all whom commit suicide because they can’t bear to listen any longer. The ‘red’ and white’ argument continues onto the phones but after ten minutes it over with. ‘I picked a bad week to quit ‘X’’, well maybe I picked a bad week to watch this film. There are very few well-executed running gags in the film that was full of potential.

One viewing, fine. Two viewings or more? Pushing it. My enjoyment of the film doesn’t stretch further than the first viewing, and even then, it struggles to get that far. What seems like a harmless parody of the films we know and love is outrageous and convoluted, and its plot, even though it is a parody, makes less sense then some of the jokes.

I can understand why it was successful – it was different, it broke boundaries, it had memorable lines and jokes, but for me, it just doesn’t appeal. However, I would happily take more of the ‘red’ and ‘white’ argument because that, for me, was one of the best parts of the film.

I wonder if that poor guy is still waiting in the taxi? He’d probably give that service the same rating I give this film.

[becbec-reviewsfilms]

‘Pan’s Labyrinth’

★★★★★

2006 – Dir. Guillermo del Toro

A dark fairy-tale with the epic backdrop of a war movie doesn’t sound like the perfect mix. But Guillermo del Toro’s ‘Pan’s Labyrinth’ does exactly that in spectacular form. The film opens with the building of the comforting, yet terrifying score – a motif that the entire score is built around brings a sense of unity to the film, and helps to highlight one of the main themes, the idea of reality and fantasy blurring together.

Ofelia (Ivana Baquero) and her pregnant mother, Carmen (Ariadna Gil) are moving to live with Carmen’s new husband – the evil Captain Vidal (Sergi López). Ofelia finds herself sucked into a fairy-tale similar to those which she enjoys reading about, whilst housekeeper Mercedes (Maribel Verdú) works to keep her affiliation with republican rebels a secret.

The idea of reality and fantasy blurring together is a popular theme in tragedy, and del Toro utilises it to a great extent in the film. Images of the faun are incorporated into the architecture of the house and labyrinth to create the effect of fantasy blending into reality. In addition, Ofelia represents fantasy whilst Captain Vidal represents reality. Del Toro uses dark tones in lighting and scenery around Captain Vidal – not only to implicate his cruel nature but to show the harshness of reality. By comparison, warm colours generally surround Ofelia, as is to imply that fantasy is an escape from the horrors of reality. As the film continues, these colours begin to blur together until the final scenes, where they become separate entities again. Ofelia dies in darkness and is reborn in light, signifying her transition from the real world to one of fantasy.

Whilst del Toro believes that Ofelia’s fantasy world is real, I think that it is up to the viewer’s interpretation. The way that Ofelia’s final scenes are framed suggests that what she believes is her kingdom could actually be a representation of heaven. However, the world that she believes in could also be just another of her fairy-tales. In order to cope with the atrocious events that happen around her, it is possible that Ofelia’s unconscious has tricked her into believing in this world in order to distance herself from the traumatic events happening. This would be a more realistic interpretation of the kingdom she believes in.

The character of Captain Vidal is interesting to me, because he wants so much to live up to his father’s reputation. He fixes his father’s broken watch to counteract the stories of his bravery in death, and yet the cracked face of the watch haunts him at his every move. He seems almost cowardly, yet psychopathic – fearless to face the enemy but terrified to understand his own feelings and mental state. This creates an unhinged character who grows increasing more violent as the film draws on – especially after Mercedes injures him (insert obligatory ‘you wanna know how I got these scars’ joke here).

The effects work on ‘Pan’s Labyrinth’ is simply stunning – especially the prosthetics of the faun and the pale man. I loved the faun’s intricate design, the way it looked as if it was made from wood and moss and leaves, the creaking and groaning as the faun moved unsteadily. He looked welcoming and frightful at the same time – another recurring theme throughout the film as del Toro seemingly asks the audience which is more frightening – a fantastical creature who could not possible exist or the monsters that live amongst us, who look like us. However, the pale man is as terrifying as it gets, as he lurches towards Ofelia with deadly certainty – but really, how hard is it not to eat something?

Overall, I loved ‘Pan’s Labyrinth’. Del Toro creates a terrifying tale of fantasy and war working against and with each other, and rewards the view with an ultimately tragic ending, even though there is certain victory, Ofelia’s uncertain fate is enough to leave any viewer wanting answers, and yet, strangely, also not wanting any, for fear it will ruin the sublime fairytale that del Toro creates. It is a character study, a fairytale, and a rebellion all in one, and the cyclic structure starts and ends with the tale of Princess Moanna – Ofelia – as if comforting the viewer whilst at the same time, warning them of the monsters that lie within each and every one of us.

[becbec-reviewsfilms]

‘The Shawshank Redemption’

★★★★★

1994 – Dir. Frank Darabont

Innocent or guilty? ‘The Shawshank Redemption’ introduces this question during the first few minutes, and it is this question that drives the film’s overarching narrative. Incarcerated for the murder of his wife and her lover, banker Andy Dufresne (Tim Robbins) is serving a double life sentence at Shawshank State Penitentiary. He becomes close friends with contraband smuggled Ellis ‘Red’ Redding (Morgan Freeman), and their relationship is central to the film’s narrative development.

The first thing that struck me about this film was the gritty, realistic tone it set. Nowadays, many films aspire to set this tone, but ultimately fall short and interpret it wrongly. Their interpretation is of little character development, unrealistic plotlines and dark overtones. The Shawshank redemption creates a believable atmosphere by focusing mainly on the characters. Indeed, Andy’s transformation from a vulnerable banker to perhaps the only person to ever escape from Shawshank, exposing the greedy Warden (Bob Gunton) at the same time elevates him to legendary status amongst his fellow inmates. I especially admired Robbins’ acting when Andy was first incarcerated. He keeps his face blank, to hide emotion, but there are small flashes of fear and shock at the brutal conditions of the prison. He’s been thrown into this unfamiliar and dangerous environment, and trying to stay unnoticed is obviously his main priority, but those small flashes of emotion truly give us an insight into Andy’s character, even if at times he feels a bit cold.

The prison environment is a truly horrific one. Despite being a correctional facility, there was crime rampant within – from both inmates and guards. It is a degrading experience from which one loses all sense of identity, they must adapt and form a new one, prepared to deal with the horrors that lie within. However, within the inmates there forms a sense of brotherhood and camaraderie, and this brings about some of the lighter moments within the film.

Andy’s relationship with Red is formed by a long 19 years imprisoned together. The two get on well together – both intelligent men who don’t quite deserve the punishment they have been given. Although we know that Red is guilty of his crime (a crime that we do not know), we find he feels remorse for what he did. However, like Brooks, the old librarian, after so many years in prison he has become institutionalised and struggles to adapt to life on the outside. Brooks letter back to the prison after he is released shows the devastation that prison life can have on one’s ability to adapt – their sense of identity was destroyed and they feel afraid to be in the outside world. It’s something that Red struggles with too, until Andy throws him a lifeline, in a subversion of the earlier part of the film. Red helped Andy to adapt to prison life, and so, almost as a favour, Andy helps Red to adapt to the outside again.

The film shows moments from Andy’s 19-year imprisonment, and I was impressed by the subtle effects to age the actors. Andy begins to develop grey hairs, and the style of reading glasses they give him helps to create a sense of him being older. However, when Red finds Andy in Mexico at the end of the film, all those are gone, leaving him looking, and no doubt feeling, like his younger self again.

Although the main plotline of ‘The Shawshank Redemption’ is Andy’s quest to prove his innocence, eventually escaping when he realises it is hopeless, I think that the true story lies in the friendship between Andy and Red. It is the driving force of the narrative, the unconditional bond between the two men that provides the emotional input for the audience, and which manifests itself in, not a tragic ending, but a happy one. The ending overcomes the horrors they experienced within Shawshank, and offers them a chance to start anew. The film is truly about finding oneself, about the chance to start afresh, about hope, and it delivers its message in a realistic and enjoyable way. It is no wonder that ‘The Shawshank Redemption’ is a classic, and it fully deserves all the praise it gets.

[becbec-reviewsfilms]

‘Forrest Gump’

★★★★

1994 – Dir. Robert Zemeckis

The drifting white feather and enchanting soundtrack immediately draw you into this heartfelt tale. Despite the film having been released over 20 years ago, it can still easily hold its own against most modern films. It’s a story that reminiscences on the most important events of the late 20th century all which are impacted by one man who only wants to try his best.

Forrest Gump (Tom Hanks) is a kind and well-doing man. Despite having a low IQ, his mother is determined he will have the same opportunities as everyone else. This leads him to a remarkable life – playing American football, fighting in Vietnam, meeting the President several times, starting a world-famous organisation, playing ping pong for his country, but perhaps most importantly, it intertwines him with Jenny (Robin Wright), his childhood friend and later love.

It was my impression that Forrest Gump was autistic. He struggles to sometimes understand social behaviour and situations, as well as having a low IQ. This leads to discrimination against him in the public-school system – effectively showing the persecution of those deemed ‘abnormal’ in that they do not conform to society’s norms. However, it is through this that he makes friends with Jenny, originally described as an ‘angel’, yet in a way it is Forrest who actual becomes her angel throughout the play, perhaps foreshadowed by that one white feather floating at the start and end of the film.

Forrest is born with a crooked back, meaning that he must wear braces on his legs in order to walk. However, when he is being chased by bullies, Jenny calls on him to ‘Run Forrest, run!’, and in slow motion he begins to run properly and the braces break away from his legs, symbolising his new-found freedom. As it turns out, Forrest is good at running. So good, in fact, that he earns a college scholarship to play football – in which there is an amusing scene where Forrest continues to run off the pitch. His ability to run also helps him when he is in Vietnam, as he not only escapes the ambush but rescues part of his squad as well. Finally, running is obviously something that helps him to think and to cope, as when Jenny leaves him he runs across America for 3 and a half years – an impressive feat for anyone.

When Forrest graduates, he is immediately taken in by the army and meets Bubba (Mykelti Williamson). Bubba also appears to have autism like Forrest and the two get along very well. Bubba dreams of being a shrimp farmer, and when he sadly doesn’t make it back from Vietnam Forrest takes up that dream along with Lieutenant Dan (Gary Sinise) – their superior officer who lost both legs in the ambush, and whom Forrest saves from his depressive and suicidal life. Forrest and Bubba’s last conversation is heart-breaking, as Forrest recollects that he regrets not being able to say more but in the moment, he just couldn’t find the words. It’s tremendously well-acted, like the whole film really, but it is certainly a crushing moment.

Throughout the film we see flashes of Jenny’s life in the moments before and during her interactions with Forrest. Beginning with her abusive father, Jenny’s life takes many downhill turns. She loses her place at college after explicit photos of her are published and ends up working in a strip club. Then, rescued by Forrest, she hitchhikes her way across the country, eventually falling in with the hippie culture, but yet again ending up with an abusive boyfriend. He reunion with Forrest in Washington D.C. is quite frankly adorable, as they wade through the water to each other whilst cheered on by the crowds around them. It’s supremely sweet and works so well after the darkness of the Vietnam war. We also see that Jenny falls in with the drug culture of the 70s and her life becomes so miserable that she contemplates committing suicide. However, she manages to make her way back to Forrest. It is a recurring theme that Forrest is actually Jenny’s guardian angel, the person whom she always finds when she is in trouble. They share a sweet and tender love, but when Forrest asks Jenny to marry him to it too much for her. She has been through much in her life and the proposal seems to come too soon for her to accept it. She does what she believes she needs to do to show Forrest that she loves him, and then leaves the next morning.

In the ‘almost’ modern day setting, the beginning of the film, we see various people sitting by Forrest on the bench waiting for their buses. He recounts his life to them, strangers who show either disinterest or disbelief, but he carries on. There is one, the last one, an old woman who clearly believes his story, and who even misses her bus, saying that ‘there’ll be another one’. This ties in with the film’s theme of life being a mix of destiny and luck – it’s like ‘a box of chocolates’, Forrest’s mum repeats. Life is what you make of it – not just what others make for you. For a film with a disabled protagonist – in fact several disabled characters – it is such an important message. Don’t let society hold you back – go forth, be great, live life.

Forrest and Jenny finally reunite when he finishes his story, and he discovers that he has a son. However, this is a moment that should be wonderful for him, but instead he panics, and repeatedly asks Jenny if Forrest Jr. is ‘smart’. It’s such a heart-breaking moment, Jenny reassures him that Forrest Jr. is the smartest in his class, and a huge look of relief washes over Forrest’s face. He may not fully understand social behaviour, but he understands that he is different to everyone else, and that he was bullied mercilessly and discriminated against for that. Forrest may not have a high IQ, but he is smart in practical ways, able to build a shrimp company and handle machines quickly and effectively. It’s almost crazy that after everything he has been through, his biggest fear is that his son will have the same disability as him, because he does not want that life for his son.

Of course, after everything, there is that one final heart-breaking scene. Forrest stood by Jenny’s, his wife’s, grave. I cried a lot at this scene. Forrest isn’t an overly emotional character, but is the subtleties of Hanks’ acting that give the emotion and feeling to the scene. It’s a bittersweet ending for Jenny, and their love, but it is made happier by the blossoming relationship between Forrest and his son. And of course, parallel to the start of Forrest’s story, the film ends with Forrest Jr. boarding the school bus for the first time, and that white feather drifting free once more, flying high into the sky.

My one problem with this film is both scenes where Jenny expresses sexual interest towards Forrest. To me, it seems that these are the only times when Forrest appears ‘normal’. I think that this sort of representation could be damaging to those who have autism, who struggle with social behaviour. Whilst part of Forrest’s ‘normalised’ reaction could be due to his world-learning, it feels out of place with the rest of his character and behaviour. It annoys me, because other than that it is a brilliant film, but I cannot shake off this one annoyance.

‘Forrest Gump’ is a beautiful film, although it sometimes feels like a glorification of American historical events at that time, but it also deals with them in a realistic and hard-hitting way. The survivors guilt and PTSD of Lieutenant Dan felt very real and very shocking; the discrimination against Forrest for his mental disability; the objectification of Jenny. It is historically accurate and tells a charming story at the same time (maybe Forrest wasn’t real, but all those large events were).

It makes you laugh, it makes you cry. Zemeckis has created a wonderful film that is still a classic, even now. The light-heartedness to the story feels alien from this modern era of dark and gritty films, and whilst it may appear to be light on substance, it is packed with hard-hitting and relevant stories. It’s easy to see why this film is so beloved, and why it will continue to be a favourite for a long, long time.

[becbec-reviewsfilms]

‘Hidden Figures’

★★★★★

2016 – Dir. Theodore Melfi

Hollywood is well-known for its lack of diversity in films, and ‘Hidden Figures’ may have been looked down upon for its primary cast being black women. However, the film stunned viewers and critics,band outdid many of its competitors, firmly placing it as one of the best films of 2016. Its subject content is just as relevant today as it was years ago, and it sensitively handles the social issues of that time and how many boundaries were pushed and broken in order to achieve social change. Taraji P.Henson, Octavia Spencer, and Janelle Monae deliver stupendous performances to bring this true story to life on the screen, surrounded by an outstanding supporting cast. 

‘Hidden Figures’ follows three African-American female mathematicians working at NASA during the Space Race, and their impact on launching astronaut John Glenn into space. All three work as ‘computers’, performing hundreds of calculations each day while faced with inequality in a society that claims to give equal rights. Katherine’s temporary promotion to the Space Task Force, Mary’s re-assignment to engineering, and Dorothy’s persistence in ensuring their future at NASA help to push forward the Space Race and achieve the impossible. Each of their journeys is very different, but each is just as meaningful and powerful in the overarching story.

The relationship between the three leading women feels very natural and the actresses work extremely well with each other. Taraji P.Henson’s Katherine Johnson is grounded in reality – a welcome change from a stereotype that intelligent people have little social skills or meaningful stories beyond that of their academic work. Katherine’s journey in the movie from just another computer to an essential part of the Space Program is not an easy path, but her rise in status is coupled with her blossoming relationship with Jim Johnson (Mahershala Ali). The chemistry between the two actors is perhaps not so evident at first but it is a subtle and sweet relationship that comes together. The scene in which the two first dance feels intimate yet caring, and shows that there is a softer chemistry between the actors. A true stand out moment for Taraji P. Henson is when Katherine is outraged at the inequality at NASA which means she has to make a mile round trip just to use the bathroom. Drenched, cold, and angry, she makes a stand to her boss who all but accuses her of being negligent of her job. It is one of many powerful scenes, but perhaps the most powerful because it is when others truly begin to understand the discrimination she and others face. It is immediately followed by Harrison (Kevin Costner) destroying the ‘Coloured Bathroom’ sign. The two separate groups stood on either side of the hallway facing each other highlight the great divide between white and black – and yet it is a divide finally being breached as Harrison destroys just one of the many barriers between them.

Contrastingly, Octavia Spencer’s Dorothy Vaughan takes a more subtle approach to her handling of the inequality of the world, coyly teaching herself and ‘her girls’ FORTRAN so they can program the new IBM machines. She is by no means timid, but realises that not all problems can be tackled head on and finds her own way around the barriers in place. Her sensitive support of both Katherine and Mary is instrumental in their success, yet I feel the movie slightly pushes her aside in favour of the younger Katherine and Mary. Dorothy Vaughan has been working at NASA for 10 years when the movie starts – something which should not be overlooked at all. Indeed, she is a powerful character, and this is wonderfully shown when she leads her girls away from the confines of the West Computing Room. The image of this large group of smart, intelligent, black women marching with pride through NASA feels just as relevant today as it was then, and the rising soundtrack in the background simply completes this moment of victory.

It is the small victories that count in this story, as Janelle Monae brings Mary Jackson’s struggle to be an engineer to life. Being the youngest of the three friends, Mary ultimately has that extreme spark, that extra bit of fight in her, and it is this that pushes her towards truly achieving her dream of being an engineer. Her speech to the judge is relevant throughout the entire movie – the idea of being first. The prevailing view of this is the Space Race, being the first in space, the first to land on the moon, the first everything. But by breaking it down into smaller pieces, it is about the civil rights movements at the time as well. The first to attend an all-white school, the first to have a degree, the first to hold a position of power. Monae brings a youthful energy to Mary Jackson, a spice of optimism that could easily be lost in the dark, dreary world, but which grows ever stronger as equality does.

What really makes this movie work, however, is the little moments that hold as much importance as the big ones. The ‘coloured’ coffee pot, the difference between the standards of the West and East Computing rooms, being unable to borrow a book from the library. It is these mundane moments that really let the story and actors shine through. For instance, we do not see much of Katherine and her children, but in the few short scenes they feature in we can see that there is a loving and caring relationship between them which really has an impact. It is also important that as the movie moves on, these mundane moments change for the better. The relationship between Katherine and her co-workers improves to the point that, at the end of the movie, her rival Paul Stafford (Jim Parsons) is bringing her coffee. It is a small exchange, but the implication of it is so important. No longer is she an ‘underdog’ or a ‘nuisance’, but an equal, and she is finally treated as one.

It is so easy to talk about what was good in this movie that it is hard to find anything that is bad. I certainly struggled to pick on anything major that was problematic for the movie. Whilst I think they built the relationship between Katherine and Jim well, I feel that it was perhaps slightly rushed because they had so much story to fit into one movie. However, the scenes they did use worked extremely well with the story as a whole, mainly used as moments of happiness that were suddenly contrasted by another step backwards. In addition, there was a small sub-plot where Mary Jackson’s husband had more radical views after being inspired by Martin Luther King Jr, and this is resolved rather too quickly by the end of the movie. Aside from that, these are only small nit-picks for a movie that was relatively tightly plotted and had compelling characters that could be related to by anyone.

Hidden Figures is a movie about breaking boundaries, about pushing the rules and fighting for what is right, even if it is only a small victories. Whilst there are many big victories in the film, it is the small victories that count the most and that evoke the most emotion in those watching. The soundtrack is soft and emotional, perfectly reflecting the character’s emotions throughout. It certainly deserves every bit of praise it gets and more. I’m so glad that Hidden Figures did so well because it means that more films like this, featuring more diverse casts and more relevant storytelling, will hopefully be fruitful and successful in the future and beyond.

I laughed, I cried, I cheered. Hidden Figures firmly deserves full marks for its sheer brilliance and sensitive tackling of relevant issues – both then and now.

Some other brilliant moments that wouldn’t fit: 

When the police cruiser pulls up alongside their broken down car and all three are already stood beside it, IDs ready for inspection to ensure that the officer knows they are not causing trouble. To me, it is so reflective of the current situation where police are openly discriminating against black people, and it is so relevant in today’s society – much more than it should be.

The cinematography on the Russians as they make their first launch into space. It’s dark and mysterious, perfectly conveying the possible threat the American’s believed they posed to their country and safety.

John Glenn (Glen Powell) makes sure to greet everyone when he first arrives at NASA. It seems like such a small gesture but it has a large impact in showing the social divide between the two computer groups and the black women in general. Indeed, it is evident in almost every scene when Katherine works in the Space Task Group – she is the only black women in a room filled with white men.

There is a parallel when the assistant runs from the control centre over to the West Computing room to have Katherine check the numbers. It is a route that Katherine has run many times in order to use the bathroom, and yet it is now paralleled by one man running it to fetch her to save the launch. Subtle, but powerful, it is an important scene.

Finally, when Dorothy turns off the lights in the West Computing room for what seems like the last time, it is entirely symbolic that the divide between white and black is coming to a close. It is the small, subtle moments that make this movie, and this is certainly one of them.