Some Thoughts on The 2023 Oscars

 I don't want to do too much pre-amble, so let's get to the categories

BEST PICTURE

I've found the last couple of Oscars pretty quiet in terms of the Best Picture line-up. The films nominated- while several of them great- haven't been the films I think general audiences were really interested in. We haven't had a Joker, Black Panther, Once Upon a Time in Hollywood or even Little Women or 1917. West Side Story didn't do well at the box office and Dune isn't really a crowd-pleaser. This year, I think that could change. If I was running the Oscar campaign for Paramount, I'd definitely being pushing Top Gun: Maverick for Best Picture, putting a emphasis on the "Movies are back" narrative and it being the biggest movie of the year. I'm wondering if Wakanda Forever and Avatar: The Way of Water- sequels to Best Picture nominees- could also get in. We usually don't have follow ups to Best Picture nominees but with sequels in general there's always the "Can you do it again?" challenge. If the Academy wants to go for the Indie blockbuster, then Everything, Everywhere, All at Once, is right there. I don't see the older members of the Academy taking to it but with the Oscars trying to be more adventurous in recent years there's a good chance it'll be there.

If they want to go safe, then Steven Spielberg's autobiographical The Fabelmans is right there. Sam Mendes' Empire of Light- about a romance taking place in old movie theatre- also seems a like safe choice. That one stars Olivia Coleman and Colin Firth

Darren Aronofsky's The Whale- starring Brendan Fraser and Andrew Dominick's Blonde- with Ana De Armas as Marilyn Monroe could get in but they may be more acting contenders than Best Picture ones. The Wonder (that other Florence Pugh movie), about an 1800s Irish village where a girl has supposedly not eaten for three months without perishing, is maybe taking the prestige period piece spot though that may also only be an acting play. It won't happen but it would be funny if Don't Worry Darling actually got a Best Picture nominee (and become fourth film to win the top five.) My Policeman (Starring Pugh's DWD co-star Harry Styles) has gotten mixed reviews so I'm not feeling it for Best Picture. 

I just saw The Woman King- a historical action film about the all-woman unit of warriors who protected an African Kingdom in the 1800s. It has the right blend of strong story and rousing action- think Gladiator or Braveheart- that could help get in.  

Then there's Elvis, one of the most popular films of the years about one of the 20th Century's most popular entertainments. I think it could be the Bohemian Rhapsody of the year- especially with Austin Butler being a frontrunner for Best Actor. Like Top Gun: Maverick, the "People are going back to the movies" narrative should be pushed. I don't know if Jordan Peele's Nope has much of a chance in Best Picture (I think it's hard to replicate the impact of Get Out) but it could if campaigned right.

The reviews for Alejandro Gonzalez Inarritu's 8 1/2 inspired  Bardo have been mixed but the Academy does like him so I think it could make it, especially since they T do love films about filmmaking. Florian Zeller's The Son is his follow-up to The Father and definitely has the credentials for a Best Picture nominee (a more traditional one compared to Zeller's previous film) though I have a feeling it's a more of a potential acting player.

Knives Out didn't get in for Best Picture but the reviews for its sequel Glass Onion are just as good or better than its predecessor and the good-will towards the original could push it in to the line-up.

BEST DIRECTOR

I already mentioned Spielberg, who may be looking at his third Best Director Oscar. Can you imagine if James Cameron gets in? That'd be quite the battle of titans. If Top Gun: Maverick gets in I don't see its director, Joseph Kosinki gets in. Ryan Coogler is due a nomination one of these days but I don't know if he's getting in either. Sam Mendes has a shot for Empire of Light seems but the reviews have been mixed- this could just end up being a showcase for the actors to get in.Darren Aronofsky hasn't gotten a nomination since Black Swan but I think The Whale has a strong possibility of bringing him his second nomination, though as I said earlier it may just be an acting contender, similar to Andrew Dominick's chances for Blonde. 

Sarah Polley could become only the eighth woman to be nominated for Best Director for Women Talking. Gina Prince-Bythewood could be the ninth if she gets in for The Woman King. It won't happen but Olivia Wilde for DWD would be an exciting inclusion

Previous Best Director winner Damian Chazelle (the youngest winner in history) is in contention for Babylon, which has been compared to The Wolf of Wall Street. Chazelle didn't get in for First Man, but he'll probably be back in the race for this one. The reviews for Glass Onion are looking good so does Rian Johnson (nominated for Best Original Screenplay for the first film) have a shot at it his first Best Director nomination? It definitely would make certain peoples' heads explode. 

BEST ACTRESS

Despite the weak reviews Florence Pugh has been praised for her performance in DWD. However, she probably has a better shot with The Wonder, though DWD seems like the showier role (and Pugh no doubt can be a showy, actorly and gimmicky performer). I did think it was Pugh's year earlier this year but I'm wondering if she gets left out this year. There's a risk of vote if both performances get plenty of votes. 

I've read that it's Cate Blanchett's Oscar to lose for Tar- Todd Fields' first film since 2006's Little Children, in which she plays a brilliant music conductor. Even without seeing the film, I get why people are saying that. Like Daniel Day-Lewis, Blanchett is unstoppable when she gets a role like this. However, Blanchett might have a challenger in Michelle Yeoh for EEATO. It'd be such a unique performance and performer to win. 

As I've been working on this piece something major happened, which is Michelle Williams going lead for The Fabelmans. I think she had a pretty easy win in Supporting Actress whereas Best Actress is perhaps too competitive. Katy Rich's article on the switch made a satient point that mom characters often get sidelined in to Supporting Actress and Williams going for Best Actress makes a statement that the mom can be a leading character. Whatever happens Williams going lead makes both Actress categories more interesting now. 

I'm hearing Blonde is a really rough watch, so I wonder if that'll hurt Ana De Armas' chances if academy voters switch it off before finishing it. She is the most consistently praised thing about the film and hopefully for her get in the top 5. 

Olivia Coleman is coming for fourth nomination (third in Best Actress) for Empire of Light. She's becoming a staple of the ceremony and one of our most reliably great actresses.  Amsterdam is getting very negative reviews, so Margot Robbie has a better shot with Babylon. I'm thinking The Woman King gets into Best Picture and if that's true than I have to predict Viola Davis will get in for Best Actress, 

Jennifer Lawrence may also be back in the race for Causeway, in which she plays a soldier with a brain injury attempting to incorporate back into civilian life. The reviews for her and Brian Tyree Henry have been strong, and it sounds like this may be one of Lawrence's more subtle and least affected performances. Then there's Women Talking's Rooney Mara, whom if she gets in, will be the second actor Sarah Polley has directed to an Oscar nomination- after Julie Christie in Away From Her. 

BEST ACTOR

This year definitely feels like it's between Brendan Fraser and Austin Butler for The Whale and Elvis, respectively. This could be Fraser's moment, but it also has the feeling of a Mickey Rourke/Michael Keaton situation where the comeback narrative gets derailed by an actor playing a real person (Sean Penn, Eddie Redmayne).

Colin Farrell is arguably one of our most due actors when it comes to Oscar, and he'll be getting his first nomination for Martin McDonagh's The Banshees of Inisheran. The other Colin, Firth, is also aiming for his third nomination for Empire of Light (he was nominated for A Single Man and The King's Speech back-to-back, winning for the latter.)

What could shake up the race is the inclusion of Tom Cruise for Top Gun: Maverick. Cruise may be the last movie star without an Oscar so, again, if I was running Paramount's Oscar campaign, I'd be pushing that narrative. I'm not certain he's getting in this year, but it'd be one of the year's most significant acting nominations since he hasn't been nominated since Magnolia.

I'm also not certain Hugh Jackman is getting in for The Son. same goes for Daniel Gimenez Cacho for Bardo- due to both films' polarizing reactions, though it's best to remember that the Academy aren't critics. I don't know if Daniel Craig is being pushed for Best Actor for Glass Onion or Supporting. Either way, I'd like to see him get in, Knives Out didn't get in any of the acting categories (though I think Craig was my Best Supporting Actor winner that year) so maybe that can change this time.

BEST SUPPORTING ACTRESS

As I discussed earlier, Michelle Williams is being campaigned for Lead, so it leaves this race open for someone else to win. I assumed Williams was going to do a Patricia Arquette/Laura Dern this year, winning for her career. 

Jessie Buckley will ride her nomination for Maggie Gyllenhaal's The Lost Daughter in to another one for Women Talking. Claire Foy had one of those "supposed to be nominated" performances for First Man). We also have Nina Hoss and Noemie Merlant in Tar. 

Sadie Sink will get the "Welcome to the club" nomination for playing Brendan Fraser's daughter in The Whale and possibly be the upset winner, as well as one of the youngest winners at 20. I'd love to see Stephanie Hsu in for EEATO, one of the more complicated villain roles in recent memory and arguably the film's heart. Her co-star in the film, Jamie Lee Curtis, is low in the rankings but that'd be an amazing first nomination for the legendary Curtis. 

Jaenelle Monae is said to be the standout in Glass Onion and has already starred in a Best Picture winner and nominee in the same year (Moonlight and Hidden Figures, respectively) so she already has some cred with the Academy. No one from Knives Out made it into the acting categories (though Craig was my supporting actor winner that year I believe) but that could change with its sequel. 

After seeing The Woman King, Viola Davis' co-star Thuso Mbedu is perhaps the film's standout performance. While she arguably belongs in lead, younger and newer actors typically campaign in the supporting categories 

I recently saw Ruben Ostalnd's Triangle of Sadness at The Atlantic Film Festival and Dolly De Leon as the cleaner of a luxury cruise that becomes shipwrecked- giving her the opportunity to become the leader- is a dark horse contender that I also want to happen. 

I'm surprised there isn't more buzz around Kila Lord Cassidy for The Wonder- the story is so much about Pugh's relationship to that girl. If Pugh is getting buzz, so should she. 

BEST SUPPORTING ACTOR

Ke Huy Quan is terrific in EEATO, and I want to see him win. Brendan Gleeseon, like Farrell, is getting his first career nomination for The Banshees of Inisheran. Gleason is a wonderful actor, so it'll be great to see him amongst the nominees. Paul Dano and Tobey Maguire are also possibly in contention for their nominations for The Fablemans and Babylon, respectively.  A Tobey Maguire comeback wouldn't be a surprise now after the latest Spider-Man movie. 

Speaking of The Fablemans, Judd Hirsch is pretty high in the predictions for the film. Hirsch is a beloved icon and was nominated in this category for Ordinary People over forty years ago. He could be the sentimental, career recognition winner this year. Brad Pitt won in this category in the last pre-Covid Oscars for Once Upon a Time in Hollywood could be back here for another Hollywood-themed film in Babylon.  

So, is Tom Hanks getting in for his oddball performance as a real-life oddball, "Colonel" Tom Parker in Elvis? Maybe so. It's one of those "Is this is good or bad" performances where the entertainment factor outweighs whatever actual quality there is to the work.

OTHER CATEGORIES

Original Screenplay- The Fablemans, Triangle of Sadness, Bardo, EEATO, The Banshees of Inisherin, Babylon, Amsterdam, Tar, Elvis 

Adapted Screenplay- Glass Onion, The Son, Blonde, The Whale, The Wonder, My Policeman, White Noise

Cinematography- Bardo, Avatar: The Way of Water, The Fabelmans, Blonde, Babylon, EEATO, The Whale 

Production Design: Wakanda Forever, Babylon, Don't Worry Darling, Elvis, Babylon, The Fabelmans,

Score: Don't Worry Darling, The Fabelmans, The Whale, Blonde, Avatar: The Way of Blonde

Make-Up: The Whale, Blonde, Elvis, EEATO

Editing: Blonde, Top Gun: Maverick, Elvis, The Fabelmans, EEATO 

So, what are your thoughts on this year's Oscar race? Do you even care? Comment and let me know.

The Oddities: "Legend" (1985)

   

I'd argue there's two Ridley Scotts. There's the Hollywood workhorse who has delivered crowd-pleasing fare like Thelma & Louise (1991), The Martian (2015) and Gladiator (2000). And then we have the avant-garde Ridley Scott, who made The Counselor (2013) Blade Runner (1982), and the film I'll be talking about here, 1985's dark fantasy, Legend. Legend was not a box-office or critical hit but became a cult classic over time, especially with its director's cut,  which is the only version I've seen and which will be my focus for this. Legend is a flawed but beautiful film, remarkable in its imagery and visual storytelling. It represents a completely approach to today's cinematic fantasy storytelling. It's timeless but also very much of the 1980s.   

Legend originated back when Scott was directing his first film, The Duellists (1977). It was the abandoned project Tristan and Isolde which inspired Scott's interest in directing a mythological story. But Scott knew that like The Duellists the film he envisioned wouldn't attract a huge audience. So instead he decided to direct a more sure-fire box office success, Alien, which made Scott's career. Scott then returned to the idea of making a fantasy film, reading many of the classic fairy tales. 

He decided that the film needed to be a original story, saying "It was far easier to design a story to fit the medium of cinema than bend the medium for an established story" (Cinefantastique Magazine, Vol 15, No. 5). Scott then discovered the books of William Hjortsberg, Upon meeting Hjortsberg Scott  showed him Jean Cocteau's Beauty and the Beast (1946) and their shared love of the film was the foundation for their collaboration. Before filming began on Blade Runner (1982) Scott and Hjortsberg worked out what the story was going to be. When the script was finished the story had gone through 15 revisions.

Befitting its fairy-tale foundation, Legend is very minimalist in its story, characters and setting. We're never told what the setting is. This could a entirely separate world or it could ours in some distant past. The villain is simply called The Lord of Darkness (Tim Curry\) and he wants to place the world in eternal, well, darkness. Darkness sends his goblin minion Blix (Alice Playton) kill the unicorns who protect the light and bring him their horns, ensuring there will never be another dawn.

Our protagonists are Princess Lili (Mia Sara) and her friend named Jack (Tom Cruise) who lives in the forest. When Jack shows Lili the unicorns, her desire to touch them allows a distraction for Blix to shoot one with a dart. When the unicorns flee Blix is able to take one of their horns. This brings a snow storm upon the world, with Lili and Jack ending up on separate journeys to make things right.

While I understand why so much of Legend is rooted in fairy-tale archetypes  I do wish Lili and Jack's relationship hit a little deeper. I think the problem is Sara and Cruise don't have great chemistry, though I love Sara in this film- she feels like an actual fairy-tale princess. While she's most associated with Ferris Bueller's Day Off (1986) this was her film debut and her performance reflects she understands what kind of movie this is. This was Cruise after he became famous in Risky Business (1983) but before his onscreen persona was solidified in Top Gun (directed by Scott's brother Tony) and The Color of Money (both released in 1986.) Cruise is a little bit lost here. He's known for his intense charisma but role needed a different kind of charisma. Sara was still only 16 when filming took place and Cruise was 22. I think a teenage actor would've matched better with Sara.   

In regard to casting Tim Curry is the standout for many people. Scott cast him because he believed he could be melodramatic while still threatening. Curry crafts something ominous through his voice and I love how we don't see him through most of the film, only his voice. At the film's beginning when Darkness is talking he feels like an entity rather a physical  being. He's almost god-like, paralleling the unicorn's god-like nature. When we finally see Darkness late in to the face his appearance invokes a devil-like creature with hoofs and horns. I'll add that Rob Bottin and Peter Robb-King's Oscar-nominated make-up still holds up. Curry is unrecognizable but is able to give an genuine performance through the make-up.  

So, we have the angelic unicorns and the devil. It's not subtle but its clear visual paralleling. The unicorns represent innocence. On the commentary Scott says while Lili is innocent, she is also manipulating Jack, which leads to him showing her the unicorns. Scott says she was originally supposed to turn in to a cat creature as a result of her manipulative nature, having even tempted Darkness. She also tempts one the unicorns, which Scott likens to tempting a god. I would say by engaging in these gods' worlds hell is brought upon the world as punishment.

Legend is best approached as a mood piece, similar to Blade Runner. Both have a dream-like, almost hypnotic quality to them, with an authentic strangeness permeating through the story. This is a film I'd argue you could watch this film on mute and still mostly understand the story. On an aesthetic level the world Legend genuinely feels like fairy tale/fantasy world. The film was all shot on soundstages, which Scott believed could end up looking fake. He hired production designer Assheton Gorton- whom he wanted to work on Alien and Blade Runner- because Gorton understood how to navigate these problems. Scott said, "We both knew that whatever we did would never look absolutely real, but would very quickly gain its own reality and dispense with any feeling of theatricality" (Cinefantastique).  

When it comes to theatricality there are certain scenes I feel have a Shakespearean quality. The opening scene, for example, with Darkness and Blix, feels reminiscent of the dynamic between a Shakespearean villain and his minion: 

Darkness: Ah, Blix come closer.

Blix: You summoned me, lordship.

Darkness: Are you not the most loathsome of my goblins?

Blix: Truly master

Darkness: And is your heart black, and full of hat

Blix: Black as midnight, black as pitch, blacker than the fouler witch."

And the first scene between Jack and the fairy creatures, led by Honeythorn Gump (David Bennent),  brings to mind something out of A Midsummer Night's Dream:

Jack: I must be dreaming.

Gump: If life is but a dream, better dread you the waking. That's Oona, she likes you.

Jack: (to Oona) Go away!

Gump: Does your blood run so cold Jack?  You'll be a corpse before your time.

Jack: How do you know my name?

Gump: How does a migrating swallow know the way south in winter. Or a falling salmon finds the very source of its birth from the cold black depths of the mysterious sea? I know everything Jack."

Scott mentions that Gump was inspired by Mickey Rooney's performance as Puck from Max Reinhardt's film version of A Midsummer Night's Dream (1935). Reinhardt's film is also akin to Legend in its striking art direction and un-Hollywood like atmosphere. Bennent is a Swiss actor and Scott really loved his accent. However, one of the executives at Universal felt Bennent sounded like a "Nazi." Bennent's voice was dubbed by Blix's actor, Alice Playton.    

Let's get  back to the film's theatrical aspects just briefly. I 'll say he dance waltz-Lili's dance with the black dress that then possesses her- is the film's most theatrical sequence. It's also It's my favourite part of the whole film. I find it truly mesmerizing and am stunned when I watch it. On the commentary Scott says it's like a ballet/opera, and it truly is. But it also feels cinematic. He wonders if the film could be put on stage and I'd say there are aspects which would work on stage, including the waltz. I also agree with Scott that the film takes on its own reality. The theatricality is an organic extension of the film's cinematic reality.  

I now want to talk about how Legend became to exist in different versions. Before Legend was released theatrically Scott cut down the film from 150 minutes to 94 due to poor test screenings with younger audiences who didn't take the film seriously. The American version was edited down even further at Universal Studio President Sid Sheinberg's request because he felt the European version wasn't appealing to younger audiences. Moreover, Jerry Goldsmith's score, which was retained for the European version, was replaced with the German new age band Tangerine Dream's synth score, another way in which to appeal to younger viewers (How the 1985 Fantasy Film 'Legend' Ended Up With 2 Soundtracks - Atlas Obscura)

The eventual DVD release of the film's director's cut (113 minutes) started with unofficial Legend historian Sean Murphy and his Legend FAQ site.  You can find plenty of information on the journey to finally getting the director's cut released here: History Of the LEGEND DVD by Sean Murphy (figmentfly.com)

I want to close this piece by saying I've come to appreciate this film more by writing about it. Despite the story and characters feeling too thin I feel there's real beauty to this film in its imagery and music. So, where does Legend rank amongst Ridley Scott's filmography for you? Which is your preferred version? Comment and let me know. 

Some Brief Thoughts on the "Shutter Island" and "Minority Report" TV Series.

I remember when a common trope in Hollywood was to adapt classic TV series for the big screen. Now it appears we’re entering a period where more movies will be adapted for TV. Just recently the adaptation of the Coen Brothers’ Fargo (which they executive produced) was met with critical acclaim. Just this past week two new movies inspired- TV series were announced; and both have the respective directors of those films as part of the series.

Steven Spielberg is developing a series based on his 2002 film Minority Report. The film starred Tom Cruise as a police officer in a distant future where people known as precogs can see murders before they happen.  Martin Scorsese is also set to direct a pilot for HBO based on his 2010 film Shutter Island, entitled Ashecliffe.  In the film Leonardo DiCaprio played a US Marshall in 1954 who is sent to investigate the disappearance of an inmate at Ashecliffe mental hospital . He then discovers not everything is what it seems and there may be a sinister conspiracy against him. The series will explore the origins of Ashecliffe in the early 20^th Century. The pilot will be scripted by Dennis Lehane, who authored the book upon which the film was based.

It’s not surprising we’re getting more films adapted in TV series.  We’re living in a second Golden Age of Television. TV is the now the place where talented artists experiment in dense and nuanced long form storytelling. Instead of a sequel or remake for the big screen, it’s now a option to explore of a film world’s mythology through TV.  

Full disclosure: I love Shutter Island and it’s actually a favourite film of mine. I also like Lehane’s original novel. The fact that both he and Scorsese are involved in this project lends it certain amount of legitimacy. I loved how Scorsese visualized that film so seeing him return to that world is a big deal for me. I’m intrigued by the idea of exploring how mental institutions were run in the early parts of the 20^th Century, when mental illness and how to treat it wasn’t completely understood. I think we’re looking at a potentially compelling psychological horror/period piece series.

However, I’m still scratching my head over how they’ll approach making Minority Report in to a series. I don’t think it can be a sequel to the film- since the film ended with the government not using precogs anymore- unless the series wanted to explore how Washington’s police force- the only  city where the “Pre-crime Unit” operated- went about adjusting to investigating murders and other crimes without the use of precogs. Maybe it’ll also go the prequel route- maybe they’ll recast the role of Chief John Anderton. They could also go the Prometheus route, with the series taking place in the same universe but telling a different kind of story. Spielberg’s involvement- similar to Scorsese and Lehane’s with Ashecliffe- does lend the project some legitimacy. And ideally, once we learn more details about the show’s premise, it'll make perfect sense how the film’s mythology will work as a TV series.

Both these projects, based on films I admire, are definitely ones which to look forward. The internal mythologies of both Minority Report and Shutter Island provide potential for intriguing science fiction and horror story telling. Count me in for both series.

This is as far as you go: "Edge of Tomorrow"

Edge of Tomorrow is the kind of action blockbuster of which I don’t feel we get enough. It’s a good film in the way that many modern day blockbusters aren’t. It has strong characters, one of which goes through a satisfying and clear character arc, a layered and involving story- and it doesn’t rely on easter eggs or teases for future films to make an impression. It simply tells a standalone story that’s smartly written and develops organically. Edge of Tomorrow is essentially the film people wish Hollywood would churn out on a regular basis.

As the film opens mankind has been fighting an alien race called the Mimics for several years. Tom Cruise plays Major William Cage, a spokesman for the United Defense Forces, which has created weapon/exoskeletons called jackets to win the war effort. General Brigham (Brendan Gleeson) summons Cage to London and orders him to cover the war effort from the frontlines in France. Cage attempts to blackmail the General to get out of being on the frontlines. When that doesn’t work Cage attempts to escape but is arrested and stripped of his rank. He is sent to Heathrow airport and later is dropped in to the war zone. The Mimics have anticipated the invasion and the soldiers are slaughtered. Cage kills a Mimic, resulting in him being covered in the Mimic's blood. He then wakes up back at the airport.

Cage begins to realize he is in a time loop and every time he dies he "resets" to the day before the invasion. On the battlefield he meets Rita Vrataski (Emily Blunt), the "Angel of Verdun," who won a major battle in the war against the Mimics. In one of Cage’s loops Vrataski discovers Cage has foreknowledge of the future. She tells him to find her when he resets. They’re both killed and Cage seeks out Vrataski before the invasion. He discovers that Mimics are part of a collective consciousness called the Omega. The Omega has the ability to control time, which is why they knew about the invasion in France; and being covered with the Mimics’ blood is what allows Cage to reset after he dies. Vrataski once had the same ability but lost it after a blood transfusion. With Vrataski’s help Cage trains to become a better soldier.

The film that comes to mind when talking about Edge of Tomorrow is the late Harold Ramis’ 1993 film Groundhogs Day. And while it’s an understandable comparison, Edge of Tomorrow exists as its own story. Groundhogs Day had a more spiritual and metaphorical reason behind its premise. In Edge of Tomorrow the time looping has a more specific, sci-fi indebted reason behind it. The explanation for Cage's situation isn’t forced; rather, it's an integral part of the film’s mythology and story. And while the film may become too exposition-y at times the internal logic never becomes too confusing or bogs down the film.

Part of the pleasure of the film is seeing Cage' growth throughout the film. He starts out as somewhat shallow man, never having been in combat nor understanding the sacrifice of men and women during war. He’s also a coward, which makes Cage a different kind of action role for Cruise. But as Cage keeps reliving the same events we see him become  more self-aware about things around him and how he can use foreknowledge of things to his advantage. Like a video game, Cage has to move further in the “level” in order to win. If you’re a gamer at all it’s hard to relate. I  love the bit where Cage attempts to roll under a truck to escape from the military base- and he gets crushed. In other action films the hero would do it right the first time but here Cage can’t immediately be a perfect action hero. The film emphasizes how exhausting it must be for Cage to constantly die over and over again, always getting a really rude wakeup call from a soldier. “On your feet maggot” is this film’s “I’ve got you babe.” Through his training and his relationship with Vrataski Cage not only becomes a better soldier but a better man as well. It’s a simple but satisfying character arc.

Cruise is one of the most polarizing figures in Hollywood but this film shows he can still be a convincing action hero. It’s fascinating to see Cruise go from the more cowardly Cage to a more recognizable Cruise action hero; and he's strong enough an actor and action star to sell both sides. This is one of his best recent performances.

Blunt is also really great here. I’d hate to use the phrase “strong female character” It’s a little condescending- “look at you being strong”- and it’s unfortunate that a well rounded female character has to feel like an anomaly rather than a something to be expected. But for lack of a better phrase, Rita Vrataski is a strong female character. She’s a no-nonsense badass who actually has more depth than Cage. She’s not merely Cage’s love interest nor the "damsel in distress." I also think it’s cool she’s already went through Cage’s ordeal and has to teach him the ropes. And despite Vrataski’s hardened exterior we get hints of her vulnerability and her pain at losing someone close to her. While Cage doesn’t get much of a back-story we feel there’s a lot of history in regards to Vrataski’s character.

Bill Paxton also has a lot of fun here as Master Sergeant Farell. It’s a great character actor parts that’s a highlight of the film, though I wish there was more of a payoff for the character. Gleeson is underutilized but is  good in the two scenes he has with Cruise. I like the J Squad that Cage joins and I wish they were developed a little more, particularly since they’re a huge part of the climax.

One of the trickiest aspects of the film director Doug Liman and screenwriters- notably Christopher MacQuarrie- had to face was how to develop Cage and Vrataski’s relationship when Vrataski is constantly meeting Cage for the first time. It’s through Cage’s growing affection for Vrataski and encountering a situation where he can’t save her no matter what he does – as well as the script giving bits her back-story over the course of the film- that allows the relationship to develop despite the restrictions of the film’s structure.

A film in which events keep repeating themselves runs the risk of seeming too gimmicky or rigid in its structure. But what’s impressive about the film is it has an ongoing story despite being stuck in a specific period of time . The film eventually expands outside of the battlefield and we’re able to see different locations and events. It’s also through the film’s editing- by James Herbert and Laura Jennings- which gives the story a rhythm that makes the structure not feel rigid. The film knows when to show things in full, as early on in the film, and when to use montage and quick editing.  We also don’t see every loop but through Cage’s dialogue we clue in to what events he’s been through, notably in a farmhouse scene which defines the emotions and themes of the film. 

Doug Liman isn’t name that sparks much passion in the hearts of cinephiles but he directed what’s my favourite Jason Bourne film, 2002’s underrated The Bourne Identity, as well as 2007’s Mr. & Mrs. Smith, which began the world’s fascination with the Brad Pitt/Angelina Jolie relationship. While Liman isn't considered an “auteur,” what links the aforementioned films and Edge of Tomorrow is all three have a high concept hook- an assassin who has amnesia, a married couple that doesn’t know each other is a spy, a sci-fi version of Groundhogs Day- but  are also very star driven and it’s the stars that make the concepts work. Matt Damon reinvented himself as an action hero for the Bourne series and Pitt and Jolie’s chemistry is what got people in seats for Mr. & Mrs. Smith. Edge of Tomorrow’s concept works because of Cruise and Blunt.

Liman stages several stellar action sequences and make the war between humans and Mimics feel like an authentic conflict. The first time Cage and J Squad are dropped in the war zone is positively thrilling and invokes the sense of dread before battle and the chaos of war. Liman balances heavy sci-fi ideas and bombastic action while allowing the human elements to breath and to develop smoothly over the film. While some of the climatic action felt dragged down the third act for me, it’s hard not to be impressed with this film's set pieces.

If there’s one wonky element of the film it’s the ending. It’s confusing  in relation to what was established earlier. There needed to be rules established beforehand that made the ending click in to place. The ending is also a little too neat but that element is forgivable considering how likable the protagonists are. And the final moment is kind of perfect.

Edge of Tomorrow is a wonderful piece of entertainment that despite its high concept feels like a throwback to the type of action blockbuster that’s become rare these days. It’s unfortunate it’s struggling at the box office. This is a film you should see and maybe even see again. Cruise is at his best, Blunt is awesome and Liman has arguably made his best film since The Bourne Identity. Like Bill Cage, Edge of Tomorrow will get more chances at life in the near future on DVD/Blu-ray, Netflix, or what have you, which is a very good thing. For sci-fi fans and for fans of good Hollywood films, Edge of Tomorrow deserves your time.  

Films of the Decade: "Collateral" (2004)

This is a series of writings where I'll talk about some of the most fascinating films of the last decade.

The last time I did one of these I was writing about Christopher Nolan's The Dark Knight. Now, I'm tackling a film from a director who has been a big influence on Nolan's work in the past, particularly in regards to The Dark Knight: Michael Mann. Someting I've noticed, in terms of Mann's crime films, is that he goess beyond the archetypes of good guy/bad guy, cop/criminal and finds the texture and humanity in his characters.

In his 1995 film Heat, Mann views Robert DeNiro's bank robber Neil McClusky and Al Pacino's detective Vincent Hanna as professionals above anything else, two men who do what they do. They learn to understand each other, which makes their dynamic more complex than cop/criminal. In his 2004 film, Collateral, it's easy to view Vincent (Tom Cruise), the hit man who forces cab driver Max (Jamie Foxx) to drive him around while he does his rounds, as the villain and Max as the protagonist. And the surface veneer of the film reinforces this. But it's a surface that is always on the verge of collapsing underneath these characters' and the audience's feet.

While the film begins with Vincent receiving the information he needs for the job via a briefcase exchange with Jason Statham (Yes, that Jason Statham), the character we first get to know is Max. Max has been a L.A. cabdriver for 12 years even though he calls it a "temporary" job. He wants to start his own limo service but makes up reasons why he can't start it up. He picks up Annie Farrell (Jada Pinkett-Smith), a prosecutor, and they have a lovely scene where we learn about Max's dreams and Annie's fears about her new case. When he drops her off, she gives him her number to which he's very surprised and happy.

I love that the film allows this small interlude. It really allows you to get to know Max and connect with him before Vincent enters his life. It also makes Max's descent in to Vincent's world feel more real because it shows Max's life before Vincent enters it-Max is stuck in a rut but meets a woman who makes his day-and then life throws him a curveball in the form of Vincent. We can imagine the same thing happening to us. Fate doesn't care about what path we're already on, it'll inevitably send you down another. What's intriguing about Vincent's plan is that Max was never supposed to know what he was up to. Vincent then shoots a man out of a window and he falls on Max's cab. This is when things get more complicated-not only for Max, but for Vincent as well. Vincent is an efficient and calculating man and he'd no doubt prefer if Max was none the wiser.

Collateral was shot on digital rather than film and Mann said in an interview he tried to make a look out of digital video rather than try to make it look like film. You can definitely tell it's shot digitally and while you wouldn't want every film to have this look, particularly with more films being shot digitally, it really works for this film because it captures what L.A. must really feel like at night.

My favourite scene in the film is the one at a jazz club where Vincent will kill a jazz player named Daniel Baker (Barry Shabaka Henley). Daniel sits down with Vincent and Max before he knows who Vincent really is. Daniel tells a story about meeting Miles Davis in the very same jazz club and playing with him. Daniel, like Vincent's other targets, is a witness for the prosecution in the case to indict drug lord Felix Reyes-Torrena (Javier Bardem). Daniel implies he made a deal to stay out of a prison and was never going back. While Daniel only plays a small part in this film, Henley's performance gives us the sense of an entire life in only a few short minutes, a man who never quite achieved his dreams but nevertheless was for one night able to feel alive. "I was born in 1945 but that night was the moment of my conception." Vincent offers Daniel the chance to answer a question about Davis. If he answers correctly he can walk away. "Where did Miles Davis learn music?" is the question. Daniel says it was Julliard  Vincent shoots him. Vincent then says Miles dropped out and was mentored by Charlie Parker. This scene simultaneously shows Vincent's cruelty as well as his appreciation for the arts. It's almost darkly comic that this small detail is how he decided Daniel's fate-though it's hard to believe Vincent would have let him live either way. Daniel was "born" in that jazz club- and that's where he died.

Collateral almost becomes a bizarre take on the buddy film  in instances where Vincent helps Max stand up to his boss as well as take him to visit Max's mother in the hospital. We realize Max isn't always the nicest guy since he hardly visits his mother. It's moments like this that shows Vincent does have some nobility despite his violent nature. Thanfully, the film never makes Vincent completely soft, which makes these flashes of humanity all the more tragic. We learn Vincent had an abusive father, which he may have killed, and we realize this is man who was always destined to be who he is. Despite his inherent humanity, he can't escape who he is. He's in much of a rut as Max except Max can change his own fate. If Max makes it through the night alive, he can end up like Daniel, a man who never achieved his dreams or he can start to get his limo service up and running. There's a scene near the end of the film where Max and Vincent deconstruct each other's lives in ways similar to what I've just described. It reveals the film as not only a crime thriller but an existential study about purpose in an often disconnected and cold universe. 

While there's this meme that actors like Cruise are too famous to completely disappear in to their roles, Cruise's performance is more convincing than even his heroic roles. The silver hair he sports is a great touch that does a lot for his transformation in to Vincent. Cruise does a fine job of conveying Vincent's cold-bloodedness while suggesting the deeper reservoirs of pain that made him who he is today. Foxx is really good as well, both charming but vulnerable- showing how out of his element Max is. His greatest moment in the film is when he has to pose as Vincent in a meeting with Felix in order to get the information about Vincent's last two targets. At first Max is scared of Felix but  he slowly regains his confidence and pursuades Felix to give him the information. In this scene Max, while pretending to be Vincent, reclaims the assertiveness and confidence we knew he had at the beginning of the film.

The finale of the film is where things do become a little too coincedential, with Annie being the prosecutor for the Felix case as well as Vincent's last target. But it works because Mann keeps the tension up instead of resorting to gunfights and explosions. The film ends with what on paper seems like a typical Hollywood ending: Max kills Vincent on a train and walks away with Annie in to the sunset (or in this case sunrise). But Mann ends the film on a melancholic and somber note. Vincent mentions the story he told Max when they first met about a man who died on a L.A. train and no one noticed for hours. Vincent wonders if anyone will notice him. In his final moments Vincent acknowledges that despite being a man who determined other peoples' fates even without knowing them, his death will ultimately be insignificent to everyone except the man who killed him. While Max killed Vincent in the heat of the moment, in the fight for survival, there's nothing triumphant about his victory. Max and Vincent weren't friends but they saw each other clearer than anyone ever did. And inspite of everything Vincent did to Max, in a cold and disconnected universe, that connection meant everything.