REVIEW: Get Out

Is it racist when people have simplistic, fond thoughts on people of a certain skin colour based on stereotypes?  Heck yes, it is.  In Get Out, writer and director Jordan Peele highlights what may seem like a different kind of racism, a more kind racism, but really it is just as ignorant as its meaner sibling.  It is a fascinating concept to look at, and Peele delivers a film that is primed for starting discussions.

The story is based around the relationship between Rose Armitage (Allison Williams) and her black boyfriend, Chris (Daniel Kaluuya) as they head off to her whiter than white parent's house for the weekend.  This is the first time Chris will meet the parents, and he is curious about what their reaction will be to his skin colour.    The parents Missy (Catherine Keener), and Dean (Bradley Whitford... hey, isn't this the second time this week we're talking about him?) are charming, and Dean seems to do anything possible to show Chris that he's not racist.  The interesting aspect about this is the basic fact that, even without mean or alienating intentions, Dean is treating Chris differently because of his skin.  The racism that is looked at in Get Out is much different than what we normally see.

It is clear that Chris is used to being treated differently.  On their way to Rose's parent's house, she hits a deer.  This incident will actually lead to some interesting points about Chris' life and his survival.  Anywho, a police officer is called.  After talking to Rose, he nonchalantly asks Chris to see his identification.  Rose immediately gets upset, but Kaluuya's expression is that this is just a daily occurrence for him.  It is quite sad to see that at this point in the film, he is resigned to this sort of experience.

As the Armitage's throw a big party, Chris begins to really encounter some very odd white folk.  It seems as though everyone wants to comment on the fact that he's black.  This, to me, feels like it is looking at white privilege.  Caucasians feeling that because they aren't talking negatively that they can give insight to the minority, before being able to turn away and carry on conversations with others while Chris would be left with what was said.  Jordan Peele takes white privilege to absurd heights in this film, but I'm afraid I cannot tell you how that happens.

The concept and the conversation that Peele brings with Get Out is indeed quite fascinating.  After numerous viewings, I always seem to walk away from the movie believing that the point of the film was something other than what I had previously thought.  This is the true power of the film.  Because there can be many different ways to interpret it, there are a great number of conversations that could be started after the movie is over.

Daniel Kaluuya is strong as Chris.  This is a character who is inserted into so many different awkward situations and conversations, and Kaluuya sells it all brilliantly.  There is a determination in him that says he will not allow race to be an issue in his relationship with Rose, but it is tested often.  As the film travels on, there are many more different sides of Chris that we see.  Overall, the acting in Get Out is top notch, and the different characters are developed and coloured in with complexities.  The most joyous character in the film is Chris' friend Rod (Lil Rel Howery), a caring person that is committed to the friendship.  Rod brings the comedy to the film.  There isn't too much of it, and there isn't too little of it.  Coming from a comedy background, it is very evident that Jordan Peele knows how to use it in moderation to add flavour to a film.

Of course, because this is a horror, there needs to be some scares.  This is a movie that works at a simmering slow build instead of trying to constantly dive-bomb the audience like many horrors.  There are small scary occurrences in the first two acts of the film, but it is in the third that it really gets crazy.  I think Peele offers enough enticing moments that it doesn't feel like the audience is waiting forever to get to the horror part of the film.

Throw into the equation some otherworldly pacing and editing, and this film flies by.  Four times viewed for me, and there still isn't a scene where I look at the time and maybe run to grab a soda from the fridge.  There is a really good reason why this movie got Oscar nominations.  It is smooth in its flow, with scenes just melding into each other, bridged by smart dialogue and fantastic acting.

I really hope that the Academy never includes a 'popular film' award.  Yes, that sort of thing will give much more mainstream films recognition, but the negative effect that it will have is much worse.  People who make genre movies that are usually considered children's table material will never be considered for the 'legit' best picture award.  If the popular category was around a few years ago, Mad Max: Furry Road wouldn't have gotten the best picture nom, and the same would have happened with Get Out.  What I'm getting at here is that because horror is a pushed aside genre, truly great material needs its chance to get recognized as on par with the typical dramatic Oscar bait.  We already had films like The Witch and The Babadook get nary a closer look, and the fact that Get Out earned four nominations with one win changes the way that the market looks at this product.  Smarter horrors have now proved to be currently financially viable.  The more acclaim for these films, the more interesting ideas will get green-lit.

Rating - 3.5 out of 4 stars

REVIEW: The Cabin in the Woods

In April of 2012 a movie entered theatres without me really knowing much about it, but it didn't take long to understand that there was an incredible buzz surrounding it after its opening weekend.  I overheard many a conversation about The Cabin in the Woods, with people signing high praise.  I didn't see it, and then forgot all about it until a friend intervened in my life and set me straight by getting me to view this film.

The movie follows five college students who head out for a weekend excursion to the new vacation home of a cousin.  Their destination turns out to be a very run down and old cabin in the woods (hey, isn't that the title?).  It doesn't take long before everything to turn into a mess as they find themselves trying to have to survive against ghoulish creatures.  However, it turns out there is much more to the equation.

I cannot say much more about the plot.  It is incredibly unique, and brings an entirely new premise to what would be an over-done story.  While it would be an enjoyable film for almost who would watch such a movie, it is true horror fans that will get the most from The Cabin in the Woods.  Script writers Joss Whedon and Drew Godard (who also directed it) insert so many brilliant easter eggs as they play on dozens of tropes of the genre.  The greater your knowledge of horror and its history, the more you will get out of this film.  This is something that is made by fans for fans, while taking genre staples to new levels.

The casting of the film is really well done, with everyone involved hitting every note they need to.  Dana is out main character, played by Kristen Connolly who would most likely be known for being in television shows As The World Turns and House of Cards.  Anna Hutchinson plays Dana's friend Jules, with her boyfriend Curt played by Chris Hemsworth (an actor who doesn't seem to get enough recognition for his diverse talents).  New to the group is Holden (Jessie Williams from Grey's Anatomy), who is a possible hook-up for Dana.  And, of course, there is a stoner.  Marty is played by Fran Kranz, a character that enjoys spending time with a bong.  A pot head is used in many horror movies, and that is the reason for this character.  The fun part of the film is that it plays with the other four from the group to hit on the other character types that seem to be in ninety five percent of slashers.

Humour is abundant, with the character of Marty doing most of the heavy lifting.  I can't say what their roles in the film is, but the brilliant duo of Hadley (Bradley Whitford) and Sitterson (Richard Jenkins) bring continuous entertainment and joy to the viewer.  You may not be familiar with their names, but if you saw either of these incredible actors I'm sure you would recognize them.  They are both on fire each scene they are in, and, after seeing this, I can't help but wish they were both in mainstream stuff more often.

Because this is a horror film, be it even a self aware and comical film (it takes the self awareness from movies like Scream to an entirely new level), there are villains, kills, and blood.  Drew Goddard may not be able to get the same sort of suspense that a straightforward horror could mine, but that doesn't stop him from making intense scenes that are well paced and entertaining.  I should warn people that there is some gore in here and more blood than I could think possible.

Apparently, Goddard and Whedon wrote this script in just a few days and part of the purpose was to make a commentary on the rising sub-genre referred to as 'torture porn.'  Director Eli Roth's film Hostel was one of the early examples, followed by Saw (which is viewed as torture porn, but the original film had very little of that in it).  Many people have disdain for torture porn, as in many cases the only reason for these movies is to show people getting subjected to brutal acts.  When the full concept of the film is revealed, it is quite interesting just how Goddard and Whedon addressed the issue.

With a rumoured budget of $30 million, The Cabin in the Woods didn't set the box office on fire, as it only took in $66 million world wide.  When it comes to classic movies, however, financials seldom tell the true story of their impact.  With The Cabin in the Woods there is a film that absolutely tickled the fancies of critics (it is at 91% on Rotten Tomatoes) and genre fans alike.  With certain types of film, especially genres like horror and science fiction, there are movies that fans will hold on tightly to, even if they are forgotten by the world a year after their release.  The Cabin in the Woods is a movie that will be continually making the rounds in horror circles for years, and probably decades, to come.  It may be a horror without legitimate scares, but it is the smarts behind it, as well as the execution, that solidify The Cabin in the Woods as a horror classic.

Rating - 3.5 out of 4 stars

REVIEW: Get Out

A normal and happy birthday for me are the simple things in life.  Getting up, having a coffee, and at some point in the day indulging in pop and chips.  This year it was a great birthday.  I got my coffee.  I got a massive plate of nachos.  I got my pop.  All wonderful stuff for a guy who enjoys such things. On top of all of that, my podcast co-host and good friend, Christopher Spicer, got me Get Out.  As a fan of horror films, I was greatly anticipating seeing this film that I had missed out on, and the present was a perfect fit for me and my likings.

Horror movies have seen a creative resurgence in recent years.  It was films like It Follows and The Babadook that made waves in the independent scene.  It seemed to spark something that caught on.  Last year, on the mainstream level, we had solid entrances in The Shallows, Lights Out, and Don't Breathe.  I am sure I am missing some in there.  Oh yes, the Ouija sequel.  I would hate to leave that one off the list.

One of the champions of this horror resurgence is Blumhouse Productions.  It allows, on a micro-budget, film makers to bring their high concept ideas and see them fulfilled without having to worry about studio meddling.  It is from this company that we receive Get Out, a film that is written and directed by Jordan Peele.  People would be right not to immediately think of horror when they hear the name of this comedian, but he shows through the film that this is something that he has a very good sense of creating and executing.

The story focuses on Chris (Daniel Kaluuya) who is going to be spending the weekend meeting his girlfriend Rose's (Allison Williams) family.  There is some tension around this because he is black and she is white, and he doesn't know how the family will respond to the situation.  As it turns out, they are rather welcoming of him.  Her father Dean (Bradley Whitford) and mother Missy (Catherine Keener) welcome him into their home.  He is part of the family, and yet there is something that isn't sitting quite right.

That feeling of something being off follows him around, as all of the other black people he meets are acting rather strangely.  Peele makes it very obvious that something isn't right.  He plays with the subtle sense of racism without ever completely making the film about it.  The situation is obvious to Chris, but not to those around him, who act as though there is nothing out of the ordinary.

Get Out is most certainly a slow building horror film.  It takes a while for things to start happening, but that does not mean that it is stale and un-entertaining.  There are a few minor jump scares thrown in during the build, and I must admit that they got me.  This is because everything in the first act of the film is subtle.  There was no ominous music, no stranger harbingers that are met along the way, or any of the other numerous tropes in horror that are used to keep the viewers interested and engaged.  Peele is able to keep the audience engaged through solid script writing and a cast that are more than up to the challenge of their roles.

The casting may very well be one of the strongest points of the movie.  Everyone is natural in their roles and delivers their lines with a natural air that makes the dialogue flow freely in a way that would in real life.  Whitford and Keener are perfect as the parents.  They are two talents that I always get excited about seeing, and for some reason they are never in nearly enough roles.  They show why that should not be the case in Get Out.  Kaluuya is wonderful in his portrayal of Chris.  It is so easy to become invested in his caring and easy going nature.  It would be great if this was a 'star making' performance for him.  He shows on the screen that he is capable of a number of emotions without ever looking out of place or robotic.

Perhaps what I liked the most about Get Out is that it was just a really well told tale.  There are some horrors that I enjoy that aren't nearly as well told.  It is the ones that are crafted like a good camp fire story that endure.  They may have their faults and may not be classics, but they are entertaining from beginning to end.  A person who is really good at that is Mike Flanagan, and Get Out fits that same feel and mould.

Of course, coming along with Jordan Peele is guaranteed to be comedy.  It is perfectly woven into the movie, and never feels jarring and doesn't take us so far out of the moment that it is difficult to get us back into it.  Lil Rel Howery brings the majority of the laughs.  He plays Rod, the best friend of Chris.  Howery is just another example of the perfect casting of this film.  The funny parts are never outlandish.  That can be the downfall of some films that try to use humour to bridge moments of emotion and tension.  Peele's script shows a fine-tuned knowledge of what to use, when to use it, and how much of it should be used.

I am not going to be arguing that this film is an all time classic.  I don't think it is, but that doesn't mean that it is any less special or significant.  What it is is a balanced, hand crafted piece of art that entertains for the entire run time and brings the audience into the experience.  Really, can anything more be asked of a movie?  There are so many films that entertain, but that don't accept the audience fully in on the journey.  Get Out is strong in this manner, as I was rooting for the protagonist from first introduction to final scene.  The run time flew by.  I had some jumps, I had some laughs, and I was glued to the screen.  Who cares if it won't be remembered alongside films like The Exorcist?  Get Out is horror escapism done with a knowledgeable hand, and for that reason I am sure that I will be seeing it time and time again.

Rating - 3.5 out of 4 stars

Saving Mr. Banks

For many people, myself included, Mary Poppins is a film that has created many wondrous memories as a tale of life, imagination, and hope.  What lies behind the scenes of that movie is a yarn that Disney has worked into a docudrama called Saving Mr. Banks, a movie that shows the attempts of Walt Disney  (played by Tom Hanks) to get the rights to the book from author P.L. Travers (played by Emma Thompson).

While it is a very interesting story to be sure, it is easy to become a little bit weary when a studio is making a film that includes both their namesake as well as one of their flagship movies.  Fears that I had before the movie were that Disney would be portrayed in an overly immaculate light due to the fact that Disney executives would want to create nothing less as the film is undeniably linked to their brand.  As it turned out, that fear was well founded, with few faults showing through in Hank’s character.  The film did reference the fact that he was a smoker, but did so with extreme care.  He at times becomes frustrated and short, but never in a way that would allow for him to have to redeem himself to audiences.  In a way, he was almost a movie industry deity who could do no absolute wrong, striving relentlessly with good intention to honour what was good and decent about movies.

In my description of Disney, I hope that it does not come off that I was completely insulted by the portrayal, but more than it was sadly what one could expect from this film.  I need to state that Tom Hanks delivered a great performance of the movie mogul, and that Thompson was phenomenal as his opposite.  Travers was depicted as a character with uncompromising stances, and capable of instantly alienating anyone who dared come within a twenty foot radius of her.

While perhaps Disney was portrayed in too positive a light, it felt like Travers was portrayed in an overly negative tone.  She was the main character, who also turned into the antagonist in the movie as the smiling faces from the Disney Studios had to deal with her absurd requests.  Ultimately, the film did work towards a redemption of character for Travers, and used flash backs throughout the entire film to lead to us getting a full understanding of her character and how she acts.  It was these flashbacks that I found very hard to endure, as they had an entirely different complex to them than the rest of the film and continually created a tonal battle for the audience.  The major emotional elements were to spring from these flashbacks, but instead of connecting more to the Travers character, I felt like I was held down in my theatre chair and was being force fed emotions.

I may not sound too positive towards this film thus far, but that is where it will end.  While I found the use of the flashbacks eye rolling at times, it was the segments that were set in the ‘present’ that were bringing the entertainment and personality of the film.  A lot of the fun that I found with this movie was from scenes within the rehearsal room where Travers battled with Disney employees over how the movie would unfold.  There was some fun dialogue in here, and the performances of the supporting cast were what took it over the top (in a good way).  We had Bradley Whitford playing screenwriter Don DaGradi, who was constantly trying to keep his composure while working with Travers.  As the music composer brothers Richard and Robert Sherman we had Jason Schwartzman and B.J. Novak who had their jobs cut out for them as Travers was insistent that the movie not be a musical.  Ferrying the stubborn author around from work to hotel and back was her limo driver played by Paul Giamatti, who always brings a strong performance.  The casting of these actors lead to a great chemistry in many scenes and carried with it the bulk of entertainment that the movie held.

After watching the film, I found myself wondering over what the movie could have possibly been.  If it focused completely on the situation of obtaining the rights and the creation of the movie it would have allowed us more time with Travers and the Disney employees.  If perhaps Travers was shown to be relatable without relying on flashbacks and was given the chance to be the true protagonist.  With Disney being the company behind this movie, such an event would be impossible as it would mean that Walt would have to take up the mantle of antagonist, something that I know they would never do.  Perhaps that is what really held this movie back.  We needed more humanity and fault from the side of the big company as it battled the author, something that would have allowed more connection to the story and not left me with a feeling like I had just watched pre-Oscar propaganda for a Best Motion Picture nomination.

Rating – 2.5 out of 4 stars