Monday, 17 March 2014

Tracks Review



They call her the ‘Camel Lady’ who, in 1977, was crazy enough to travel half way across Australia’s barren desert on foot just for the hell of it, with four camels and a faithful dog as her only companions. The trek, which spanned 1700 miles from Alice Springs to the west coast on the edge of the Indian Ocean, was practically a death wish for 27-year-old Robyn Davidson who had little previous experience in the wild despite two years of training feral camels. With but a radio and no other means of luxury, Davidson’s desire for solitude was a desperate measure for self-exploration. Having grown restless from the apathy of her generation and wanting to extend the limits of expectation, whenever she was faced with the question of why, she would simply answer “why not?” Her astonishing true story was first documented in an article for National Geographic and later in autobiographical long-form, bestselling book, Tracks.

Over the years, efforts have been made to adapt Tracks for the big screen with both Julia Roberts and Nicole Kidman being attached to the lead role. But until now, Davidson has been rather ambivalent towards having her personal story immortalised on film. With director John Curran at the helm, continually reminding us of the true spirit of adventure, it’s not too presumptuous to say her wait has been rewarded. The film is led by a stirring yet gentle performance by Mia Wasikowska whose likeness to Davidson is uncanny. It’s largely a one-woman show and she exquisitely infuses her character with a commendable balance of determination and anti-socialness. It’s no secret that the real Davidson was reluctant to seek sponsorship for her journey and was less than thrilled by the occasional presence of American photographer Rick Smolan, which she saw as an insensitive intrusion. Smolan, here amusingly incarnated by Girls star Adam Driver, is an eternally talkative and upbeat presence who rendezvous with Davidson at scattered points in her journey to take snapshots of her in her ‘element’. Initially she is resentful of his ‘perfectly nice’ company, but slowly warms to him and together they engage in an ‘on again, off again’ romance.

Wasikowska captures the sharp edges of Davidson’s brusque personality with ease. She is somewhat brittle in her dismissal of others and is hesitant to commit to anything but the unforgiving landscape that lies before her. Though she does her best to avoid excess companionship, she acknowledges the need for guidance from Aboriginal Elder Mr. Eddy (Roly Mintuma) who helps her bypass sacred sites. He elicits respect and punctures through her standoffishness to bring out a warm, otherwise unseen, spirit. Some viewers may become impatient with the unchanging environment and lack of melodrama but Wasikowska’s strength is unyielding. The dreaded possibility of failure, of going back on ones tracks, is what drives her forward. Not much else is given as to her underlying motivations, but the film does offer fragmented glimpses into her past with fleeting memories of grief surrounding her home life.

In many ways, Tracks is comparable to Chris McCandless' famed odyssey as imagined in Sean Penn's 2007 film Into the Wild. Discovering oneself by means of exile is a theme that runs through both stories. In a desperate search for adulthood and independence, both young adults remove themselves from materialism and conformity to engage with nature. Take Emile Hirsch’s Chris McCandless who was richly drawn, strong-willed and kindly. His upper middle class background and academic success were understandable instigators of his strong contempt for a conceited society. On the other hand, Robyn Davidson’s character isn’t quite as realized; her impulses remain vague, she isn’t as sympathetic and her walk scarcely sustains a feature length. She is undoubtedly an enigmatic heroine but her motivations are difficult to invest in. Once the camels are herded and the trek gets going, the narrative sinks distantly into the desert plains.

Its third act feels stretched and, at a total running time of 110 minutes, the film could have benefited from a tighter edit. That’s not to say the journey is a bore, for there is a lot to admire about the Australian Outback. Its painterly red dunes and sandy remote lands are expertly photographed with a fine eye for composition. Cinematographer Mandy Walker has beautifully brought to life a visual dreamscape that takes on an almost spiritual aura. Filmed in the South Australian deserts and in the Northern Territory, he revels in the details of dust, cracked skin and harsh terrain. As glorious as it is to look at, the camera indulges over these beautiful landscapes sometimes at the expense of the story particularly in the sluggish final quarter. Despite being longwinded, Davidson’s story is an extraordinary, unprecedented feat worthy of being told.

These days, with the advances of modern technology, exploration of even the most isolated areas is no longer such a lonely prospect. An element of risk has been lost since it is very hard to disappear under the radar with your IPhone or GPS in hand. Today at the age of 63, the traveller and author feels incredibly blessed to have ‘got in’ before the world became so ‘pathologically safe’. In a recent conversation with Fenella Kernebone for Art After Hours at The Art Gallery of NSW, Davidson was once again faced with the inevitable question of why she went on the journey in the first place. She said: “I’ve been trying to answer that question for thirty years and really I don’t think it has an answer”. Her inability to define her experience in terms of a solely specific purpose is perhaps why her story lives on today. Intrigued viewers and readers look to her passage to inspire and reflect upon their own independence and thirst for adventure.

Curran’s account provides as much insight into the ‘Camel Lady’ as possible without succumbing to fantasy or the usual tricks of manipulation. Pacing and scripting issues aside, he has presented a neatly packaged triumph; a character study wrapped up in a road movie. Technically, Tracks is excellent. And Davidson’s quest is certainly inspired.  Whether the emotion and humanity the film so keenly hopes to elicit shines through, is not so certain. 


Tuesday, 4 March 2014

Anna Karenina: Why it’s a Classic


At approximately 1000 pages, Leo Tolstoy’s Russian romance classic Anna Karenina is a beast of a book that, at first glance, seems an insurmountable task. Was it not for the fact it predominantly tops every classics list ever collated, I may have never picked it up out of fear of intimidation. Perhaps pretentiously, it was Tolstoy’s widespread critical reception as one of the greatest writers of all time that drew me to his tragic masterpiece of an aristocratic married woman’s descent into hysteria after she enters into an affair and is scorned by Russian society.

As impressionable as my tastes may be, it was the writer’s rich and dynamic prose that kept me reading and drove me to Anna’s stunning conclusion: a visceral stream of consciousness charting fragile neuroticism to her perilous inevitable downfall. I’m speaking literally and figuratively here. Never underestimate a woman scorned.  Anna is a complex creation, neither heroine, nor anti-heroine, she possesses all the qualities of humanity, both the virtuous and the depraved. All Tolstoy’s characters are undeniably flawed yet empathetic, showcasing his masterful ability to neither idolise, nor vilify their unyielding existential quest for love. From the cultural ins and outs of late 19th century aristocratic society to the peasant life of farmers, Tolstoy chronicles all facets of Russian day-to-day life in intimate human detail, which impressed even his most prestigious contemporaries. Literary neighbour and rival Fyodor Dostoyevsky declared Anna Karenina to be "flawless as a work of art". I’m inclined to agree with him for it is the most profound novel I have ever read. Not only is the story intoxicating, it also offers up big questions concerning human existence and contemplates the productive and destructive force of love in our lives.

The novel can be split into two main narratives: Anna Karenina’s spectacular struggle with the ethical and social consequences of committing adultery juxtaposed with Constantine Levin's search for purpose, whose trajectory towards a life of peace and contentment is the total opposite of Anna's slow personal decay. Tolstoy never judges his characters, instead letting their perspectives ethically and psychologically dominate the prose. He doesn’t explicitly condemn or praise Anna’s actions but subtlety sends a moral message: love that is purely carnal and impulsive only leads to tragedy. He acts as an omniscient, all-knowing third-person narrator who occasionally slips into the perspectives of several characters (all of which are richly drawn), even a dog for a couple of chapters. Their personal motivations and desires are portrayed brilliantly in all their contradictory, complex truth.

If Anna is the yin of the story, Levin must be the yang. He represents the voice of reason and spends the majority of his days scything grass and considering his purpose in the context of a wider universe. Levin’s a contemplative thinker, sometimes to his own detriment. After suffering a humiliating rejection from Princess Kitty, he succumbs to an angsty disposition and retreats to his country house to brood for a lengthy period. The problem with Levin is in his perpetual obsession for perfection, which he can never possibly attain. Like a latent adult growing into maturity, Levin’s introspective search for meaning and battle with spirituality reflects his coming of age. By the novel’s conclusion, Tolstoy reassures us it is enough to make ourselves the best that we can be without trying to control the world around us. This makes for one of the most moving passages in which Levin’s love for his family and faith in God is reaffirmed.

Anna Karenina is a bit like a soap opera in that it’s an exposition in love in all its many forms. The difference being it’s a damn good one that encompasses the full human spectrum of emotion. Like the entire classics catalogue, this is a book of its time, which means there are parts about Russian politics and society that don’t translate for a modern audience. (Call it a history lesson!) But Tolstoy’s meditations on hypocrisy, jealousy, faith, fidelity, family and marriage remain as powerful as they ever previously read. I never was one for self-help memoirs but something about this novel struck a chord in my spirit. Anna Karenina holds its characters up to readers like a reflective mirror; it’s almost impossible to judge their transgressions. If you can slog through pages of Levin scything grass and reflections upon agricultural reforms to sink your teeth into the more personal drama, perhaps you will learn something about yourself too.

Sunday, 2 March 2014

Oscar Predictions 2014




This Oscars eve, as hopeful first-time nominees draft their speeches, Tom Hanks and Emma Thompson mourn their snubs and Ellen DeGeneres inevitably practices her opening monologue over and over in the mirror, anticipation surrounding the eventual trophy winners is riding ever high. Whether or not you place regard upon the Academy’s winning picks, for many audiences they are an objective measure of the best Hollywood has to offer in cinema.

In recent years, more often than not, the Academy has overlooked great films (ie. Shame, The Descendants) to favour safer choices (ie. The Artist, Argo, The Hurt Locker) and the divide between critics and mainstream audiences has widened. But this year is unusually special given the strong frontrunners, notably 12 Years a Slave, Gravity and American Hustle, which offer a means of re-establishing Oscar with some prestige.


BEST PICTURE

12 Years a Slave
American Hustle

Captain Phillips

Dallas Buyers Club

Gravity
Her

Nebraska
Philomena

The Wolf of Wall Street

Will win: 12 Years a Slave
Should win: Gravity
Better not win: Dallas Buyer’s Club

It would be most prudent to place my bets on 12 Years a Slave to take out the main award. Steve McQueen’s film is ultimately too important and historically significant to approximate otherwise. Its marketing campaign has reminded voters that a Best Picture win for the slave-drama would go a long way in recognising the great sin in American history and bridging any lasting cultural barriers.

Undoubtedly, Gravity is going to win more statues (Visual Effects is almost a certain), so it’s safe to say this spot is reserved for 12 Years a Slave.

Unlikely, however possible, American Hustle could be the dark horse having already deservingly won Best Ensemble Cast at the SAG Awards.


BEST DIRECTOR

Alfonso Cuarón, Gravity

Steve McQueen, 12 Years a Slave

Alexander Payne, Nebraska

David O. Russell, American Hustle

Martin Scorsese, The Wolf of Wall Street


Will win: Alfonso CuarónGravity
Should win: Alfonso Cuarón, Gravity
Better not win: Anyone but Alfonso Cuarón

There is no doubt in my mind: Cuarón deserves gold. His genius cannot be understated when it comes to what he achieved technologically with Gravity. His skilled camera-movement and use of long shots gives the Mexican-British director a clear edge in this category. Not to mention he’s already taken home prizes from the Golden Globes and the BAFTA’s.
I am glad to see McQueen’s name included after his second feature Shame was shamefully overlooked, but will he win for 12 Years a Slave? Although a close threat, it seems this category is a no brainer.


BEST ACTOR

Christian Bale, American Hustle

Bruce Dern, Nebraska

Leonardo DiCaprio, The Wolf of Wall Street

Chiwetel Ejiofor, 12 Years a Slave

Matthew McConaughey, Dallas Buyers Club

Will win: Matthew McConaughey, Dallas Buyers Club
Should win: Tom Hanks, Captain Phillips

Better not win: All the actors are deserving in their own right

Did academy voters fall and bump their head, and then suffer from a terrible case of amnesia? Have they forgotten Tom Hank’s as Captain Phillips, or are they just heartless monsters? As grave a mistake this omission is, we should probably count our blessings that it is one of the very few the Academy made this year.

Matthew McConaughey has gained favour in recent years having reignited his career with a wealth of commendable performances (Killer Joe, Mud) and it is probable he will be rewarded for his turn as Ron Woodroof, a rodeo cowboy diagnosed with HIV in Dallas Buyers Club.

Chiwetel Ejiofor is a close contender in the role of Solomon Northup, a free man turned slave, as is Leonardo DiCaprio as the hedonistic stoke broker Jordan Belfort. Dern was once a favourite but has quickly fell from the spotlight. And as brilliant as Christian Bale is and while he sports an extraordinary comb over in American Hustle, there is little to no chance he will win.



BEST ACTRESS

Amy Adams, American Hustle

Cate Blanchett, Blue Jasmine


Sandra Bullock, Gravity


Judi Dench, Philomena

Meryl Streep, August: Osage County

Will win: Cate Blanchett, Blue Jasmine
Should win: Cate Blanchett, Blue Jasmine

Better not win: Meryl Streep, August: Osage County

And the winner is… Cate Blanchett. Cate Blanchett. Cate Blanchett. Her name has been echoed at every film award ceremony this season, clean sweeping every Best Actress award known to man. She is a master at work in Woody Allen’s Blue Jasmine, discarding all vanity in the role of a new-york socialite turned San-Francisco pauper, who gradually withdraws from reality down the rabbit hole of delusion, washing down her Xanaxes with cocktails of vodka.

I’d be willing to bet my house on this one.


BEST SUPPORTING ACTOR

Barkhad Abdi, Captain Phillips


Bradley Cooper, American Hustle

Michael Fassbender, 12 Years a Slave

Jonah Hill, The Wolf of Wall Street


Jared Leto, Dallas Buyers Club

Will win: Jared Leto, Dallas Buyers Club
Should win: Michael Fassbender, 12 Years a Slave


Better not win: Jonah Hill, The Wolf of Wall Street

On closer inspection, there are no clear-cut personal favorites to win. While I enjoyed Bradley Cooper’s performance in American Hustle, it pales in comparison to the bipolar Pat Solitano in Silver Linings Playbook last year. Similarly, Michael Fassbender brought to life a stunningly hateful and cruel slave owner in 12 Years a Slave, but it doesn’t quite surpass his act in Shame. Nevertheless, he deserves awards recognition on a commercial stage.

It is likely however that Jared Leto will win for his perfectly decent portrayal of a transgender woman, which is both sensitive and convincing. But perhaps long shot Barkhad Abdi, who won the BAFTA for Captain Phillips, may accumulate enough swing-votes to get him over the line.


BEST SUPPORTING ACTRESS


Sally Hawkins, Blue Jasmine

Jennifer Lawrence, American Hustle


Lupita Nyong’o, 12 Years a Slave


Julia Roberts, August: Osage County


June Squibb, Nebraska

Will win: Lupita Nyong’o, 12 Years a Slave
Should win: Lupita Nyong’o, 12 Years a Slave and Sally Hawkins, Blue Jasmine
 are equally deserving
Better not win: Jennifer Lawrence, American Hustle

As much as I love Jennifer Lawrence, as much as you love Jennifer Lawrence, as much as everyone loves Jennifer Lawrence, there is no one more deserving of this award than Lupita Nyong’o. Her remarkable debut as tortured slave Patsey in 12 Years a Slave burns an everlasting mark on your soul and towers over Lawrence’s limited screen presence in American Hustle.

Sally Hawkins is my second favourite, having greatly enjoyed her performance in Blue Jasmine, which proved to be just as significant to the success of Woody Allen’s script as Blanchett’s.