THE DEATH OF STALIN (2018)

Review written by Raul De Leon

The Death of Stalin (2018)

Did you know Stalin pissed himself when he died? I didn’t. But Ianucci and his fellow writers made sure to point that out to us with drolling gags over the dictator’s unconscious body. Is it insensitive? Well one could argue, but if political humor gets under your skin then this British farce reel isn’t for you. The Death of Stalin makes contemplative points on the Soviet’s transition away from Stalin’s reign of terror, with laughs the entire way through.

If you need a brush up on your history, I’ll give you a quick recap: Josef Stalin was the leader of the Soviet Union from the mid-1920’s, through World War II, and up until his death in 1953. Even though he and the Soviet Union deserve much credit for defeating the evil Nazis, Stalin is pretty much unanimously perceived as another Hitler; a malicious and powerful politician who we have no remorse for. So just like it’s okay to see Hitler thrashed by a close range machine-gun in [Title of movie removed due to Spoilers], it’s also okay to watch politicians comically fuss while standing over Stalin’s lifeless body and brain-exposed head.

Stalin’s in the mood for a late-night screening of a cowboy picture, so his Central Committee members watch alongside him while they fall asleep in their chairs. They don’t want to be there but what can they do? If they don’t watch the movie, they might be shot. If Stalin suspects them as betrayers, they might be shot. If the doctors diagnose Stalin with an illness, they might be shot. If the guards outside Stalin’s room enter when they hear him fall from his stroke, they might be shot. Everyone, everyone, lives in fear of their lives, and it’s hilarious.

After Stalin’s death, the Central Committee of seven nervously reorganize and push the Soviet narrative forward, but they don’t know what one another’s agendas are, nor where each other stands. Nobody wants to be singled out, so they nervously follow each other’s lead to keep themselves under the radar and out of sight of the crosshairs.

Malenkov (Tambor) becomes the new Premier and First Secretary, but he’s weak and completely depends on his comrades, comically contradicting himself to adhere to their say. Beria (Beale) is a brute, disguising himself as a savior to the Soviet public in order to save his skin and control the state. Khrushchev (Buscemi ) is the hope out of autocracy but is belittled by his comrades. Vasily Stalin (Rupert Friend) frantically tries to rule like his father, but he receives not even an ounce of respect from the lowest Soviet guard. It’s laughable how powerless he is compared to his authoritarian father.

Paranoia feeds the committee’s indecisiveness, hesitancy, and concealment of their true feelings. These are the people that are supposed to be ruling a nation and they’re completely out of whack. Just like Kubrick with Dr. Strangelove, Ianucci makes total fun of very serious politics.

One scene in particular sums up the screwy spectacle that is, The Death of Stalin: A team of soldiers seize a government building and execute one person after another, including workers and guards. At the end of the seize, the military vehicles roll out, and a soldier turns his pistol on his comrade (who looked to be orchestrating the seize in the first place), and fires at his head. It’s absurdist humor used to reflect an equally absurd governing body.

I found myself laughing out loud at the ridiculous circumstances, just like Adrian McLoughlin (Stalin) laughs out loud in a thick British accent before he croaks. Ianucci is more than aware of how ludicrous his picture is and equally aware of how ludicrous some horrendous political rule on our planet has been. So my advice is; don’t be offended like Russia (who banned the film in their country), and let the wisecracks roll.

---

If you liked The Death of Stalin, you might also like; Dr. Strangelove or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb (1964), Wag the Dog (1997), In the Loop (2009), The Dictator (2012).

Check out the rest of my reviews on my website: Rauloncinema.com

VAZANTE (2018)

Review written by Raul De Leon

Vazante (2018)

I was attracted to Vazante because of the black and white photography and the unfamiliar subject matter, and that is most of what I enjoyed. Brazilian filmmaker Daniela Thomas follows her own intuition of idle drama, but it proves to be too restful to have a lasting impact on her audience.

So very few films are made on one of humanity’s most important historical topics; slavery. Thomas diligently takes hold of the reins to steer our attention to the reality of the abundantly dismal practice. Her main character, Antonio, is a wealthy cattle herder and slave master in 1820’s Brazil, who falls neck deep into depression when his wife and unborn child die during labor. Eventually he remarries to his wife’s adolescent niece, Beatriz, as an attempt to regain some happiness, but can any slave owner truly be happy?

“Nothing grows here”, Antonio says of his land. How can any life flourish in an organized hell? Slaves do their best with song, dance, and familial love but even they can’t all get along due to unmatched levels of fear and rebellion. Lider is the most rebellious serf who would rather die than to continue on, and Jeremias is an Uncle Tom farmer who strangely enforces master Antonio’s rule with an iron fist. There are many different personalities and positions but they all have been warped by poisonous living. Master Antonio spends most of his time despondently wading back and forth in a hammock, totally apathetic toward the death, attempted escapes, and chaos that surrounds him. A most veracious life-attestment lies in the love between Beatriz and a slave boy, but obviously in this habitat, it can only wither and die. Beatriz might as well be a slave herself, having to lie in bed with her own Uncle who’s three times her age. The surge that the film’s title, Vazante, refers to can only be an unfavorable one because all parties are smothered in gloom.

Vazante‘s unfocused plot sits and watches God’s wrath leisurely unfold among everyone at the estate. It’s not so much of a story as it is just things happening on and around the plantation. Thomas doesn’t exactly spell everything out either. Using minimal coverage, she sometimes leaves you with scenes that are unclear or rather frivolous. Arguably Thomas’ sterile drama enhances the psychological space of tragic characters, but for me it acts more like a dulling spray. Vazante doesn’t move at a moderate rate, it moves at a depressive one.

“Slow” is going to be the adjective used by those who dislike the film, along with “boring”. Vazante is completely lacking in any excitement other than a momentous ending. Those who attend a screening in the first place are probably accustomed to a slower-pace, and so Vazante ends up being a decent two hour watch that will likely be forgotten in the long run. Considering that this is a production from two nations in a short supply of film, and uses unknown actors, that’s not too bad.

---

If you liked Vazante, you might also like; 12 Years a Slave (2013), Embrace of the Serpent (2015), Amistad (1997), Roots (1977).

Check out the rest of my reviews on my website: Rauloncinema.com

THE SQUARE (2017)

The Square (2017)

Is the winner of the 2017 Palme d’Or and European Film Awards’ Best Film selection worthy of the acclaim? I think so. The Square is an outstanding unconventional display, concerning the world of modern art with a satirical self-reflexive approach that seriously touches the integrity of humankind.

The Square is the title of the newest art exhibit in a Stockholm art museum. Christian, the museum’s curator, describes The Square as “a sanctuary of trust and caring. [A place where] we all share equal rights and obligations”. Obviously this is the underlying matter of the film itself. The literal exhibit is never shown in its fullness because it is the thought that the film is centralized upon. Subsequently, the film is a semi-episodic one with several unconnecting, unpaid off scenes that arise from the exhibit’s theme.

It’s as if Christian, the overseer of all projects, the aesthetic-minded, is put to the test of his own exhibit. Do artists walk the line of integrity that they so mindfully impose upon their viewers or are they just as slumped as the norm, concurrently suffering from a priggish uprightness? Christian lives through two primary plot-lines; one revolves around his pick-pocketed belongings and the other is the development of the marketing campaign for The Square exhibit. The former explores intimate and personal morality and the latter regards public and social decency and obligation. Other supplemental bits scatter the script like Christian’s one-night stand with media journalist, Anne, and his parental role with his tussling daughters.

Rather than building scenes and sequences of drama to a final climactic point, writer/director Ostlund accentuates a palette of emotion for moments at a time. Christian’s ludicrous revenge on his muggers is a suspenseful thrill, where Christian’s excitation blinds him from his obvious misbehavior. Seeing his daughters fight, pout, and cry hurls the strenuous world of parenthood onto your lap, and it is so temporally close to the hilarity of Christian and Anne’s childish fling, as well as the outlandish marketing scheme by two young knucklehead professionals, that the film’s absence of build no longer matters. Our entertainment is held through accomplished fragmentary emotion-reversals. Hard sentiment returns and eclipses the laughter as Christian’s quarrel with a resilient young boy snowballs into a most uncomfortable situation that makes the boy look like the man of the altercation, tearing out all of our compassion for Christian.

Ostlund’s brilliance makes its’ mark from what I would consider the best standalone scene of the 2017 year, where Planet of the Apes star Terry Notary, plays Oleg – a man acting as an ape, among an upper-class group of men and women at a formal dinner. What is supposed to be a fun illustration of primal human nature takes a paralyzing dive into the bones of human survival, when Oleg takes his role literally and disrupts the dinner guests. Here are the artists, the educated, the sophisticated face-to-face with what they claim to understand. What do you do? Ostlund’s metaphor is a serious challenge to us all.

The Square is a prevailing work of introspection. Its ideas and its character are as smart as any film, and it only falls short of historical relevance due to limited technical talent. The art-house audience will eat this up, and the philistine might puke it out, but we should all at least try to develop our palates, right?

---

If you liked The Square, you might also like; The Disaster Artist (2017), The Meyerowitz Stories (2017), The Discreet Charm of the Bourgeoisie (1972), The Squid and the Whale (2005).

Check out the rest of my reviews on my website: Rauloncinema.com

FILM REVIEW – 1945 (2017)

1945

Being a Hungarian art-house film with a limited release, 1945 will not get many views this year. For the few that do get the opportunity at a ticket, they are in for a special treat. With captivating black and white photography and a powerful, simplistic story, 1945 firmly stands as one of the best art films of the 21^st century.

1945 is the year World War II came to an end. The Kingdom of Hungary fought alongside the Axis powers (Nazi Germany and Italy) up until the final years of the war. Hungarian born filmmaker Ferenc Torok takes a look back on his roots and composes a hammering allegory to his nation’s emotion during the tail-end of the ruinous war.

The plot is as simple as it needs to be; two Jewish strangers arrive in town, and the town’s citizens panic in fear of the worst. What the townspeople suspect is that the Jewish men are back to claim property that is rightfully theirs. As the two men peacefully continue through the village, it’s as if an emergency alarm has been set off; people break down, relations fall apart, and business nears its collapse.

What makes this such a brilliant watch is the town-wide reaction to such a non-occurrence. The Jewish men arrive casually and remain inactive, and it lights a scorching fire under the village seat. Consequently, we get an intimate look into a number of individual lives and family/friend relationships.

The primary lead, Istvan, is the town clerk whose overlook of local affairs is characterized by an amount of egotistic control. He carries himself as a confident, charismatic, upper-class leader, yet it is he who especially panics and aggravates a town-wide anxiety attack. His son, Arpad, is to marry in just a few hours, but the arrival of the Jewish strangers, is impeding on the ceremony. Andras is a fellow of the property scheme who claims he was forced to sign accusations, but he can’t put the bottle down since the Jews’ arrival.

A darkness looms over the heads of the Hungarian people that evokes their inner emotion. When face to face with the people who they have wronged, lives flip out of control. Fear, guilt, remorse, hatred, shame – the exact source of their excitability and woe cannot be pinpointed. Their interiors are lost in it all and their exteriors try to cope. And none of it offers reparations to the real victims of the situation.

The title, “1945“, frees a wide ground of exploration for the viewer to dig – “1945” is beyond Hungary; it’s a worldwide phenomenon. Torok paints such an open metaphor on such a quintessential time, that the interpretations induced, inevitably reside in the bosom of global consciousness. Just like all the best pieces of art, 1945 holds high value in its ambiguity. You’ll be stirred in the dramatics of the film, and then the end comes and your soul is swept. Thereafter, a repeated viewing will be needed to study 1945 with context.

---

If you liked 1945, you might also like; The White Ribbon (2009), Ida (2013), The Man From London (2007), The Tree of Wooden Clogs (1978).

Check out the rest of my reviews on my website: cerebralfilmreviews.com.

FILM REVIEW – LOVING VINCENT (2017)

Loving Vincent (2017)

You have never seen a film made like this before. Loving Vincent is the first ever fully painted animated feature film. Unsurprisingly it is an absolute marvel to look at.

What better story to tell for the first motion picture painting, then the story of Vincent Van Gogh, the iconic Dutch impressionist oil painter? Van Gogh sold only one painting in his lifetime, he was a tormented man who famously severed his own left ear, and committed suicide. The film covers these details of van Gogh and more in a post-death story of his life and passing.

What an accomplishment!; a true landmark in the history of both cinema and painting. I tip my hat to the filmmakers for stepping way outside the box and all 125 painters for their extraordinary talent and hard work. 65,000 frames were painted to make this film. The camera crew shot the movie using green screen, then painted in the frames on a canvas board to compile a total of 853 shots. Making Vincent was no easy task.

The characters and settings of the film are mostly taken straight from van Gogh’s paintings that depict actual people and places from van Gogh’s life in France. Armand Roulin (from the Portrait of Armand Roulin) is the protagonist who investigates van Gogh’s death after he hears that van Gogh committed suicide. Curious Roulin interviews the townspeople in search for context on van Gogh’s apparent suicide, and what he gets is a jumble of conflicting perspectives on the painter and his situations.

Loving Vincent is a study of a complex character told through interviews and flashbacks, a la Citizen Kane. In the present, we gape into the plush colored oil screen recreations and in flashback we’re treated to black-and-white original depictions of the artist’s past. Each type is a visual stunner, but I especially enjoyed watching the color shift and reshape with each passing frame. The conversations held will bring curiosity to your mind, as to whether van Gogh’s death was a suicide or not, and if so, why the sudden change in emotion – but that’s as far as that goes. Van Gogh was surely a mosaic of a man but the filmmakers cannot boast to having created a character up to the standard of the real man himself.

I often found myself fading away from the chit-chat and getting lost in the illustrations. I mean, that is why we came to see this movie right? Vincent would have been better off de-emphasizing dialogue and even story, for the sake of visual wonder. And this is a very dialogue heavy-film, mostly consisting of consultations. I would have advised the filmmakers to take van Gogh’s words more earnestly, “We cannot speak other than by our paintings”.

Van Gogh was greatly underappreciated during his lifetime and it certainly added to his madness. If only he could see the love and appreciation from his fans and this incredible tribute to his work, it would surely soothe his soul. Much applause to the team, Loving Vincent is a creative rarity not to be forgotten.

---

If you liked Loving Vincent (2017), you might also like; Persepolis (2007), Waltz With Bashir (2008), Vincent and Theo (1990), Van Gogh (1991).

Check out the rest of my reviews on my website: cerebralfilmreviews.com.

FILM REVIEW – THE KILLING OF A SACRED DEER (2017)

Review written by Raul De Leon

The Killing of a Sacred Deer (2017)

Being familiar with director Yorgos Lanthimos, I knew of the weirdness that I was getting myself into. What I was not expecting was an empty shell of a movie that gets off to its own peculiarity. The Killing of a Sacred Deer is an off-the-wall comedic horror film that tortures both its in-film characters and its audience.

The world of Deer is like a kooky Pleasantville, until terror strikes the Murphy family. Life becomes hell for Steven and family, when Steven’s teenage friend Martin seemingly takes revenge on the Murphy’s for killing his father. Martin’s father was a patient of Stephen’s who died from complications during heart surgery. Martin gets close to the family and develops a relationship with Steven’s daughter Kim, and then one by one, the Murphy family starts to perish in a paranormal manner that is somehow connected to Martin.

Life was hell for me as well as I sat in the theater, forcing my eyes open. Now I know what Alex in A Clockwork Orange felt like. Any escalation is undermined by Lanthimos’ decision to remain ridiculous. His peculiar stamp works against him, and I watched unterrified and uninterested. The film was dull for the large majority because of a lame story line, plain and redundant sets, an unchanging cinema-palette, and an ineffective, annoying ‘horror’ score. Lanthimos misfired on all rounds putting together a boring and inadequate scare.

Unlike The Lobster, the comedic and satirical weirdness here felt painfully forced and thoughtless. Most of it is situated in the way people talk to and act around one another. When Martin meets with the Murphy kids for the first time, he shows pre-pubescent Bob his armpit hair and Kim tells Martin that she started getting her period – not exactly considered normal by modern society’s standards. Additionally, everybody speaks with a lack of emotion and an overdone politeness. The other weirdness lies in the horror-trap that strikes the Murphy’s. They’re not chased by a psycho, or haunted by ghosts, or running from zombies. They just get sick, and it’s unexplainable how. It’s not the weird that blemishes the film but the lack of its depth.

Even though I strongly disliked the film, I refuse to believe that Deer is completely meaningless. In my review for The Lobster (2016), I talk about how Lanthimos raises questions about the nature of modern romantic relationships. Lanthimos’ voice is a lot less apparent with Deer than it is with Lobster. For the most part, the social oddity is to support an overall eeriness. Lanthimos wants his horror embedded in discomfort. But naturally we are still going to question the unexplained paranormal activity and the ambiguous title. “Sacred deer” implies mythology, religion, and/or indigenous culture. The plague that falls upon the Murphy family follows an aboriginal understanding of the world that only Martin comprehends. Which begs the question: Is Martin even doing anything to the Murphy’s or is nature just taking its course?

Although, there is room for thought, The Killing of a Sacred Deer is still rather shallow. Unfortunately it also completely fails as a horror film, unless Lanthimos meant to torture his audience by making a bad movie. If that’s the case then Deer is a huge success.

---

If you liked The Killing of a Sacred Deer, you might also like; Black Swan (2010), Antichrist (2009), The Village (2004), other films by Yorgos Lanthimos.

Check out the rest of my reviews on my website: cerebralfilmreviews.com.

FILM REVIEW – BLADE RUNNER 2049 (2017)

Review written by Raul De Leon

Blade Runner (2049)

Thirty-five years later, we get the unexpected sequel to the sci-fi classic Blade Runner (1982). Most fans of the original, like myself, were probably content without a series of films following the original, especially considering the direction Hollywood has taken this century, where every film has got a reboot, sequel, or spinoff that is more than often underwhelming. But with producer Ridley Scott, A-list director Dennis Villeneuve, thirteen time Oscar nominated cinematographer Roger Deakins, and respectable lead Ryan Gosling, who never chooses his roles for the money, this sequel gave us sci-fi and film aficionado’s an authentic hope for a beautiful continuation of the Android dream.

Since the first film was based off of existing material; Phillip K. Dick’s novel, Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?, screenwriters Fancher and Green would have to come up with a fresh narrative for the sequel. This time around, the film is set thirty years into the future and back in semi-dystopian cyber-punk Los Angeles. K (Ryan Gosling) is the new Blade Runner hunting down his own kind. His main mission is to find the child who was miraculously born from an android. As K searches for the android child, he struggles with his personal nature and existence, and the film blurs the lines of reality and artificiality.

It pleases me to say that 2049 expands the exploration of the original’s themes. There would be no other way to do Blade Runner justice and satisfy its fans. 2049 introduces novel ideas to continue challenging its viewers intellectually and emotionally on what it means to be human. Thanks to a fine vision and impeccable execution from the filmmakers, the soul-arousing script is fully brought to life.

2049 shines in every aspect of filmmaking. Master composer Hans Zimmer (The Lion King, Inception) and new Hollywood talent Banjamin Wallfisch (It, Dunkirk) design a reverberating score that is inspired by Vangelis’ genius original. It’s an eerie sci-fi sound that blares through your eardrums. The slick futuristic neon city-scape is its visual counterpart. Predictably Villeneuve and Deakins make every frame of 2049 gorgeous. LA’s barren outskirts is swamped with a ravishing permanent orange tinge that suggests post-apocalypse. My eyes were floored at the sight of the Tyrell corporation headquarters where glowing water reflections oscillated on the walls behind the deep-blue eyed android dean, Niander Wallace.

With Blade Runner, visuals are consistently compatible with significance and substance. K owns a popular household-HAL type computer that projects a holographic girlfriend. There is an impressive visual effects scene where the hologram woman attempts to sync with an android that K spends the night with. A massive Atari sign that K flies his ship through is one of the stand out super-giant advertisements that are an actual part of the city’s infrastructure. Another striking effect to stimulate your head-gears is the image of the creation and editing of memory implants. All of these visual innovations add layers to the philosophy of the series.

In 1982, Blade Runner bombed at the box office because there just wasn’t enough butter on the popcorn. 2049 is still mostly concerned with being its artistic self, but it comes as a mixed bag. The mystery elements that it has is its weakest point. Blade Runner is at its best when it lives as a sitting portrait to be contemplated by its viewers. When the story heads in the direction of ‘who is the android child?’ and ‘where is Deckard?’, our attention is pulled away from what really makes this series great, which is; the examination of the nature of human and android existence.

Due to a slight lean toward dramaturgy and a lesser overall atmosphere, I cannot say that this surpasses the original, but it absolutely does one heck of a job succeeding it. Blade Runner 2049 is what a sequel is supposed to be. It does not recycle its predecessor, it expands upon it.

---

If you liked Blade Runner 2049, you might also like; Blade Runner (1984), Dark City (1998), Minority Report (2002), Her (2013), Ex Machina (2014).

Check out the rest of my reviews on my website: cerebralfilmreviews.com.

FILM REVIEW – YOUR NAME (2016)

Review written by Raul De Leon

Your Name (2016)

Move over Miyazaki! Makoto Shinkai just made the highest grossing anime of all time! I must say that I am surprised. Your Name is a great film but I did not expect such an intellectually stimulating anime to be such a big hit!

Two high school strangers; small town-girl Mitsuha and city-boy Taki, find themselves in the most bizarre situation. Every night when they fall asleep, they become the other person in their dreams. The dreams that are acted out, actually take place in real life. Each one effects the other’s very livelihood. What ensues, is a brain-stirring, fantastical romance that flowers through an ingenious contemplation on the nature of dreams and time.

Shinkai produces a truly one-of-a-kind visionary experience. He throws puzzle pieces onto your lap and let’s you play with them. As you try to piece it together, your emotion towards Mitsuha and Taki overrules and you realize that maybe this puzzle isn’t meant to connect as one precise unified structure. The story is too beautiful to be jammed into a logic compressor, but it’s so sapient that you find your head rattling in a left-brain, right-brain battle.

Your Name relishes in an illogical dreamscape. Mitsuha and Taki swim in this formless waiting room as two lost souls longing for one another. It’s a painful irony, that they can get as close to each other as living in each other’s shoes but cannot experience the other’s physical touch. We yearn for their encounter as much as they do. Shinkai sets it up so that we unconsciously long for the completion of feminine-masculine, country-city, and emotion-rationale, so that the brain hemisphere battle can come to peace.

As many twists and turns the film takes, it runs surprisingly smooth. I found myself especially enjoying the early minutes of the film, lost and wondering as to what is happening along with the characters. The story kicks in motion when they get a grasp on their situation and steadily influence each other’s lives. Then it flows into the combination of wonder and steadiness when they undergo a type of dream amnesia that has something to do with the passing of a comet. Even though they love each other, they just cannot grasp who the other is, finding themselves repeatedly asking the question “what is your name?”.

Everything is fittingly nestled into a colorful vibrancy. The pink and blue twilight match the recurring pink and blue streaking comet that soars so beautifully over the city skyline and open countryside. The comet tails cross over one another, mirroring the film’s conveyance of non-linear time and Mitsuha’s red string of fate that she wears in her hair. The trees, the objects, the people, everything in every scene is glossy, clean, and crisp. Shinkai has made his personal stamp on the wonderful world of animation.

Your Name is a delight that will offer more upon repeated viewings. You may not understand everything that happens the first time around but that’s also part of the fun. Some confusion comes naturally with the film but it is seated into an abundance of love and controlled imagination, making Your Name a unique experience and one of the best films of the year.

---

If you liked Your Name, you might also like: A Silent Voice (2016), The Girl Who Leapt Through Time (2006), Paprika (2006), 2046 (2004), other films by Makoto Shinkai.

Check out the rest of my reviews on my website: cerebralfilmreviews.com.

FILM REVIEW – TANNA (2016)

Review written by Raul De Leon

Tanna (2016)

Who would have thought that a film shot by a two-man crew would be nominated for an Oscar? Martin Butler and Bentley Dean went down to Tanna (a small island of Vanuatu, east of Australia), took a camera and a microphone with them, and created one of the most beautiful and humane films of the year using real indigenous locals. Nobody in the Yakel tribe had ever acted in a film before, let alone even seen one. Their first experience would showcase their spiritual, primeval livelihood and recount an important story from their history that impacts their living today.

In Tanna, arranged marriage between two neighboring kastom tribes, the Yakel and the Imedin, is a strongly upheld tradition in order to keep the peace between the two. But Wawa and Dain are villagers of the same tribe (Yakel), in love, and they refuse to leave each other’s arms. The Yakel chief promises the bachelorette, Wawa, to the Imedin tribe so she can wed one of their young bachelors. Yakel and Imedin have a history of violence and this bridal offering is the only way to avoid war. So it’s bad news for everyone when Wawa runs away with Dain. Both tribes search the island; Imedin to kill Dain and bring Wawa back, and Yakel to bring Wawa back with no harm.

It’s a Romeo and Juliet story but it sets itself so far apart from the other love stories by providing such a true, soulful display of a rare homegrown culture. Tanna doesn’t spend its time playing on your emotions like most romances do. Instead, there is a honing in on lifestyle and beauty. Butler and Dean clearly have a real respect for the native way of life. There is a substantial amount of time spent on the ways of communication, the perspective of the people, the role of arts and crafts, the look and feel of the environment, the handling of politics, the importance of spirit and nature, and the cohesive longing for harmony.

In effect, Tanna effortlessly institutes itself as a documentary in disguise. There is so much to be learned from the way in which all of our ancestors lived at some point. The natives are students of life, just as we are. The incidents taking place within the film must be dealt with properly in order for the natives to continue living in peace. Replace buildings with trees, concrete with dirt, modern homes with huts and it becomes clear that their lives are no different from ours. Planting all aspects around a love-story allows this non-barrier to be evident.

I found my spirit relishing in the wondrous shots of nature. The island of Tanna makes for some of the Earth’s most breathtaking locations and the filmmakers take full advantage of that. When Wawa feels empty, she sits alone atop a tree branch, staring into the peaceful flow of a natural waterfall. The volcano, Mount Yasur, plays an important role to the people. It’s not just hot lava, it’s an entity of self-exploration where the Spirit Mother speaks to the very being of those who look for it. Rightly, the filmmakers let us mesmerize at the passionate red flames that pierce the night’s natural blackness.

Butler and Dean’s decision to emphasize feel and nature, enables authentic performances from the non-actors. There is no need for charades; the people of Tanna are allowed to just be themselves, so no experience is necessary. This approach mostly cancels the possibility of a Streep or a De Niro, but it works. I found Marie Wawa to be the one to excel beyond the realm of non-acting. Maybe she can be an indigenous Hollywood actor?!

At the least, Tanna is impressive and inspirational. Being nominated for an Oscar with with a micro-crew and zero-experience actors is unforeseeable. It’s difficult enough just to make a movie. Butler and Dean give us not just a movie but a gift; a genuine glimpse into a quality of humanity and the planet that goes much too unseen and unexplored.

---

If you liked Tanna, you might also like: Embrace of the Serpent (2015), Tsotsi (2005), Dances With Wolves (1990).

Check out the rest of my reviews on my website: cerebralfilmreviews.com.

FILM REVIEW – TASTE OF CHERRY (1997)

Review written by Raul De Leon

Taste of Cherry (1997)

For some reason, we rarely get films about suicide, and very rarely is it this good. Taste of Cherry is an honest, clear-sighted view on deep self-suffering that fully captures that terrible emotion and its components. With austerity, writer, director Abbas Kiarostami will unforcefully bring you closer to the realization of life as a beautiful miracle.

Low spirited, Mr. Badii drives round and round boundless, barren terrain in search for someone who is willing to bury him after he commits suicide. Even though he offers people a large sum of money for the job, most people refuse out of their respect for life. Badii’s Range Rover winds and winds for a good portion of the ninety-five movie minutes. With all the rejection and emphatic lectures from his offerees, a peaceful suicide proves to be no easy undertaking. If Badii is going to leave this world behind, the world is going to have one final say before it happens.

This single day journey stands for the journey of life itself, with the constant search for relinquishment, in a repetitious cycle that miraculously never really loses its wonder. Each individual that Badii interacts with offers another facet of life and death to the viewer. Over time, a humble lesson on living seeps into your pores, leaving your body at ease with its adverse past experiences.

With just one location, the monotonous earth becomes its own character; a land undoubtedly perceived from the eyes of a suicidal individual. Although lifeless, it is where Badii wants his body to remain. In the midst of his suicidal voyage, Badii takes some time to daze at the moving lumps of soil from the work trucks. Is this where life ends? Largely metaphorical, this landscape will stick in the viewer’s mind, more than any other aspect of the film.

Kiarostami keeps a bland tone to reflect the current state of Badii’s soul. The cinematography is so drab, the film almost looks like it was shot in sepia tone, and it remains so in an appropriate way. The all-around art direction goes unchanged from scene to scene. Life is full of color and variety. But, Badii’s life is over.

What makes Cherry work is that it delivers its contemplation in moderation. Kiarostami is not interested in drama, or grabbing you by the eyes and ears. He would much rather put you to sleep. Depression is that way; it’s weak and unexciting. Badii rides with a passenger and pleads for their burial assistance, then another passenger, and another, and another. Badii doesn’t get upset with their replies, or happy, or anything. He just remains as is like everything else in the film. Everything fits into the emotion of depression, with the possible exception of a rather abnormal ending that I may or may not understand.

What will you take from Taste of Cherry? Hopefully you don’t fall asleep because it does have a rather insipid tenor. Personally, I couldn’t even blink my eyes. The content and emotion is too real. The atmosphere sat me in Badii’s seat. Although character’s speak their part in full on the conditions of taking one’s life, the film never lectures. Instead we get an honest display of raw, unmoving emotion.

---

If you liked Taste of Cherry, you might also like: No Man’s Land (2001), Paris, Texas (1984), The Bicycle Thief (1948) and other films by Abbas Kiarostami.

Check out the rest of my reviews on my website: cerebralfilmreviews.com.