THE KIDS ARE ALL RIGHT

Written by Lisa Cholodenko and Stuart Blumberg

Directed by Lisa Cholodenko

Starring Annette Bening, Julianne Moore, Mia Wasikowska, Josh Hutcherson and Mark Ruffalo

Joni: Each of my mom’s used your sperm.

Paul: As in two? As in both of them?

Joni: Uh-huh, as in gay.

I don’t know if anyone has told you this already but family can be fairly complicated. Take Nic and Jules (Annette Bening and Julianne Moore) for example. They’ve been together for about 20 years and have two teenage children, one of which (Mia Wasikowska) is about to head off to college. The other (Josh Hutcherson) is somewhat aimless in his adolescent life and decides he needs to know more about where he came from. More specifically, he wants to meet the man who supplied the sperm that made both him and his sister possible. Enter Mark Ruffalo and along with him a disaster of familial proportion.

THE KIDS ARE ALL RIGHT is the fourth film by Lisa Cholodenko, who has regularly explored the nature of complicated relationships and what happens to them when those involved make mistakes they know could crumble their foundations. Deciding to meet sperm donor, Paul (Ruffalo), is not that mistake. His introduction into this family’s life though certainly seems to have given all its members free reign to act out. Naturally, his emergence puts Nic and Jules into a tailspin and how they each approach the situation exposes some of the couple’s deeper issues. Bening and Moore play the couple so perfectly, you can feel a palpable sense of unbalance in the way they treat each other and an urgency to survive. It’s as though years of experiences, both great and harrowing, have been worked into their collective performances.

While Nic and Jules struggle with feelings of inadequacy and replacement, their kids, Joni and Laser (Wasikowska and Hutcherson) try hard to see themselves in Paul. When all three sit to talk for the first time, it is apparent that both nature and nurture played a part in the two kids’ growth. The delicate nature of the introduction is almost lost on the kids because they simply don’t know better. They don’t know that you can go from relating to feeling completely alien in a matter of seconds and that when that happens with the father you never met, the damage can be severe. In their innocence, they thought they wanted something but could never have truly prepared for what they got. And the same can be said for Paul. The potential of family woos him into thinking his life is empty and it isn’t long before he tries any way he can to latch on. Ruffalo is the consummate boy pretending he can be a real man.

Cholodenko has learned to breathe in the six years since her last feature. THE KIDS ARE ALL RIGHT is like a breeze with a bit of a bite on the back end. As awkward and troubling as all these interactions are, they pass by smoothly and make for a refreshing film – one where a fantastic cast portray real people with equally real problems that deal with them like a good family should, with sensitivity, solidarity and a little humour to keep the mood light. Yes, the kids are all right but the movie is even better.

SHUTTER ISLAND

Written by Laeta Kalogridis
Directed by Martin Scorcese
Starring Leonardo DiCaprio, Mark Ruffalo, Michelle Williams, Emily Mortimer and Ben Kingsley


Warden: If I were to sink my teeth into your eye right now, would you be able to stop me before going blind?

From the moment this ominous ferry emerges from the thick fog to bring Federal Marshalls, Teddy Daniels and Chuck Aule (Leonardo DiCaprio and Mark Ruffalo) to Shutter Island in the opening shots of legendary director, Martin Scorcese’s SHUTTER ISLAND, you know you’re about to watch a masterful movie made by a mindful man. It is instantly and unavoidably intriguing and it isn’t long after the boat docks that you realize you have as little chance of getting off this island as everyone else there, at least not with your wits about you.


Teddy and Chuck are on assignment to investigate a missing prisoner, I mean, patient, on Shutter Island. The mistake and the correction are made a number of times in the film as it is simply never really clear whether Shutter Island is a correctional facility or a mental facility. Whether there even should be a distinction for these particular prisoner-patients is up for debate just like the intentions of every character we meet on this island. Scorcese makes it so every man on the island is out for himself; even Teddy and Chuck just met as new partners on the ferry over. Subsequently, paranoia and mistrust run rampant in everyone’s mind and each day becomes a balancing act with each person’s personal sanity walking a very tight rope.


SHUTTER ISLAND takes place in 1954, when applied psychology was at a distinct crossroads between older, more barbaric means of treatment and more modern prescription methods to dealing with madness. One of the head doctors on Shutter Island, Dr. Cawley (Ben Kingsley) claims to not subscribe to either school of thought in favour of a more sympathetic approach that relies on the belief that it is actually possible to get through to the mind of a mad man. Despite this, he will not allow Teddy and Chuck to enter the heavily-guarded Ward C, where only the most dangerous, uh, patients are housed. This lack of full disclosure makes it hard to imagine that everything happening on this island is happening according to protocol. Perhaps it is but then what is the established island protocol anyway?


It becomes clear to Teddy that his time on Shutter Island is not meant to be limited to just this investigation. A case is being built against him to show him as just as crazy as every other patient there, effectively silencing any evidence he uncovers in his investigation. But while it may be clear to Teddy, it becomes pretty clear to the audience that nothing on Shutter Island is as it seems. What is the truth and who is actually telling it? Better yet, will we even believe it when we hear it? The answers do come and they are as unsettling as every other moment in this tight two and a half hour production.


As it is put forth a few times in SHUTTER ISLAND, to accuse someone of being insane is truly all you need to do to make it a fact. All protest made by the accused will be seen as logical dismissal of the accusation but not a valid argument against it. Scorcese knows the same rational will apply to the way the viewer will see the film, making visiting SHUTTER ISLAND such a deliberate and delicate mind trip. You may even wonder in fact whether you too don’t belong there by the end. This is what makes Scorcese the undisputed winner of his own elaborately designed game.

Director Series: FERNANDO MEIRELLES

Brazilian director, Fernando Meirelles has been sharpening his skills for quite some time now, literally. His 2003 international debut, CIDADE DE DEUS (CITY OF GOD) opens with quiet titles against a black backdrop and is suddenly interrupted by quick, bright inserts of a blade being sharpened. In the context of the film, the knife is to be used by a bunch of street punks to kill a chicken. As far as we’re concerned though, that knife is being sharpened to rip us apart because that is exactly what happens when you watch Meirelles work his magic on screen. The chicken, seemingly aware of her fate, escapes to see another day but escape is not so easy for those of us at home. Once Meirelles has you, there is no escape.


CITY OF GOD made people around the world stand up and take notice of this 53-year-old director. It was a stylistic revelation, both gritty and smooth. The blaring sunshine glistening against the soft Brazilian skin tones and bare sandy beaches is mesmerizing while watching street kids make all the wrong choices as though they had no others to make is nauseatingly disturbing. His ability to create a space that was both exquisite and exhilarating while still sparse and hollowing earned him international acclaim but it was his seamless blending of story and reality that earned him an unexpected but well-deserved Oscar nomination for Best Director (and a Mouton d'Or in the same category). The story itself exposes the slum known as the City of God and the difficult struggle against a destiny of drugs and crime for every child that comes from there. Kids acting like gangsters is hard enough to deal with but even harder when some are not even acting. Meirelles cast actual street kids in some of the roles and found a way to use the experiences they survived to infuse performances from inexperienced players. The result is so real at times that you forget you’re watching a narrative film.


CITY OF GOD earned a total of four Academy Award nominations and once that had happened, Meirelles could choose any project he wanted. He chose the John Le Carre adaptation, THE CONSTANT GARDENER. Going from the slums of Brazil to A.I.D.S.-stricken villages in Africa seemed risky but promising. It was not so much Meirelles’ opportunity to solidify his position as a potential master director but rather a necessity that everyone wanted to see successfully met. Within moments, any doubt that he would be able to meet the challenge is washed away. THE CONSTANT GARDENER confirmed Meirelles’ uncanny ability to tell a story in a harsh environment while making it seem as though the action itself was unraveling amidst that environment, even with the inclusion of Hollywood actors like Ralph Fiennes and Rachel Weisz (who went on to win the Oscar for Best Supporting Actress). It is also a brave account of government involvement in drug testing on what they consider to be the disposable population of Africa. As bleak as it sounds though, Meirelles weaves multiple levels of love and humanity into this complicated conspiracy thriller and gives value to lives that have been devalued and ignored for far too long.


His third project, BLINDNESS, seems like a natural enough progression. It is yet another critique on how horribly human beings can disregard the value of another person. The major difference is that Meirelles leaves his signature ability to recreate reality to tell a story that is entirely unreal. Based on Jose Saramago’s Portuguese novel, BLINDNESS imagines what the world would be like if humanity suddenly lost the ability to see. It is unexplained, incurable and downright unnerving. It is also unfortunately lacking compared to his previous efforts. Obvious plot holes lead to gaping questions that never go answered and for the first time, it feels as though Meirelles is making concessions instead of making a masterpiece. BLINDNESS stars Julianne Moore, Mark Ruffalo and Gael Garcia Bernal and follows them as they are all quarantined and cut off from the rest of the world. What happens in the quarantine is ugly and dirty and sadly not so far fetched. The style is still tops and the performances are unfaltering but it’s the loose ends that become BLINDNESS’s ultimate undoing. What is going on outside of the quarantine? Has blindness only affected this particular American city or is this a world wide epidemic? Why is it that if Moore’s character is unaffected that scientists are not studying her? While BLINDNESS is still well worth seeing, its lack of cohesive emotional impact makes you wish Meirelles had stayed with what he knows, how to be real and harsh while still staying true to hope. Instead, he turns a blind eye to what he knows isn’t working and we see right through it.


Despite a minor slip, there is no denying Meirelles’s calculated talent, unique vision and passion for humanity. Given his proximity to genius, if I were that chicken, I would have let him cut me up. No doubt I would have ended up as something infinitely more meaningful and served amidst chaos with the intent of bringing balance and peace to the table.

Black Sheep Previews: BLINDNESS

In 2002, Brazilian director, Fernando Meirelles burst on to the world cinema scene with his international sensation CITY OF GOD. His direction and approach were hailed as brave and striking. The film garnered four unexpected Oscar nominations, including one for the director himself.

In 2005, he returned with his first English language film, THE CONSTANT GARDENER, based on the John le Carre novel. Ralph Fiennes starred as a widower determind to get to the bottom of his wife's murder, no matter how deeply he became involved in the bowels of corporate secrecy. Another four Oscar nominations followed, including a win for supporting actress, Rachel Weisz.

Now that another three years has passed, Meireilles hopes for a third success with his most ambitious project to date, BLINDNESS. The film opened this year's Cannes film festival and is finally making its way into North American theatres this September. The radiant Julianne Moore plays the wife of a doctor who is mysteriously unaffected by a plague of white blindness that has spread across the globe and crippled humanity. From the looks of the trailer, Meirelles has created a frightened and panicked tone that echoes throughout every element of the film, from the performances to the washed out visual aesthetic. The cast is rounded out by Mark Ruffalo, Gael Garcia Bernal and Sandra Oh and the screenplay was written by Tony Award winner, Don McKellar (THE RED VIOLIN), adapted from Nobel prize winner, Jose Saramago's contemporary classic. With all this talent behind the project, BLINDNESS is almost certain to bring Meirelles another handful of Oscar nominations to add to his collection. At the risk of sounding incredibly lame, I would say that BLINDNESS definitely looks worth seeing.

Click on the title anywhere in this article for more on BLINDNESS.

Also, be sure to check back tomorrow for part one of Black Sheep's official fall film preview.

ZODIAC

Written by James Vanderbilt
Directed by David Fincher


Melanie: Why do you need to do this?
Robert: Because nobody else will.

Who doesn’t like to play games? You face the other players dead on and you struggle to retain control over the board, keeping everyone else guessing as to what your next move will be. In the 1960’s and 70’s, one such game player, who called himself the Zodiac, decided all by himself that he would start his own game. He would decide who the players would be and he would make up all the rules. The stakes in his game though were a slight bit higher than your average game of Risk. Drawing his inspiration from a 1932 film entitled “The Most Dangerous Game”, where a man hunts other humans because he feels them to be the most dangerous animal of all, the Zodiac began a series of senseless killings that terrorized the people of San Francisco. And this was just the start for this game. The Zodiac sent letters to several prominent San Francisco media outlets, demanding that they print his confessions and their accompanying ciphers on their front page. Fearing that the Zodiac would make good on the threats his letters contained if they didn’t, the messages ran and the public went into a state of mass paranoia and fear. As the killings and messages went on for years, the Zodiac baffled the police and the public with a mystery that remains inconclusively unsolved.


Another man who clearly enjoys his game play is director David Fincher. In SE7EN, he toyed with our morals; in FIGHT CLUB, he split personalities and teased our collective subconscious; and in PANIC ROOM, he locked us in a tiny space and made us feel like we couldn’t breathe. He even made a movie entitled THE GAME at one point. For his first film in five years, Fincher plays with our basic need to understand and to make sense of something. ZODIAC bounces back and forth between an exhausting police investigation that spreads across numerous jurisdictions, the frightening killings themselves and the life of a cartoonist who develops a fascination with the Zodiac that eventually becomes a crippling obsession. Jake Gyllenhaal plays Robert Graysmith, the real life man who went from drawing satirical cartoons for the San Francisco Chronicle to writing the definitive book on the Zodiac killings. Graysmith is a natural when it comes to solving puzzles so when he is exposed through his position at the SF Chronicle to private information regarding the killings, he needs to piece this one together too. It is the mother of all puzzles and there is no way he can let it go unsolved.


Subsequently, we too need to figure this whole mess out. Fincher makes it so Graysmith’s obsession becomes ours as well by allowing us to have only certain pieces of the puzzle at certain times. The sheer vastness of how far the Zodiac’s murders were spread out meant that many clues went undeveloped because they needed others to be brought to light. Fittingly, ZODIAC is one of the darkest films I’ve seen. Yes, I meant that to suggest that it is twisted and sick like any serial killer film should be but I was referring more to Harris Savides’s stark use of lighting throughout. Light tends more to showcase than fill which keeps the viewer just as in the dark as the police and the San Francisco public. Even the humour is dark. James Vanderbilt’s script is dizzying as it travels back and forth between the vast number of lives affected by the Zodiac but he still manages to find laughs amidst a mass murder investigation. The laughs may feel awkward but ZODIAC is meant to be uncomfortable and, like any harrowing and consuming experience, it would be impossible to make it through it if we didn’t laugh every once in a while.


Captions constantly remind the viewer that time is passing by at a rapid rate yet at no point does the film feel long. While the passage of time reflects the reality of the events that took place, it also ensures the viewer knows how frustrating the entire investigation was. All involved went years without coming to any substantiated conclusions. With the central focus of their lives not making any sense, it became impossible to connect with the rest of their surroundings. ZODIAC is an intensely involving mystery that is both chilling and infuriating in all the right ways. It is itself its own puzzle remaining to be solved. Without understanding, there is no security or certainty. Just like a game of checkers or going out on a first date, success depends on figuring out the other player as much as it involves understanding yourself. The same applies to the investigation of the Zodiac killings. You will need to know how and why it happened but you will not really want to, considering to fully understand this mystery means staring into the eyes of a murderer who kills for sport. Good game, Mr. Fincher.