Movie on Monday: We Need to Talk About Kevin

*This was supposed to be a double book/movie review, but since I was busy last week I haven't' finished the book yet. But for your reading pleasure, here's Vjeko's review of the movie.*

jowskireviews.geekjuicemedia.com

We Need to Talk About Kevin

Directed by: Lynne Ramsey

Starring: Tilda Swinton, Ezra Miller, John C. Riley

Running time: 106 minutes

“We Need To Talk About Kevin” is most likely the most disturbing movie about motherhood ever made. It asks the question whether the parents' state of mind can in any way be responsible for the actions of the children. The movie offers frightening answers which will definitely polarize audiences.

Eva Khatchadourian (Tilda Swinton) is trying to piece together her life following the "incident". Once a successful travel writer, she is forced to take whatever job comes her way, which of late is as a clerk in a travel agency. She lives a solitary life as people who know about her situation openly shun her, even to the point of violent actions toward her. She, in turn, fosters that solitary life because of the incident, the aftermath of which has turned her into a meek and scared woman. That incident involved her son Kevin Khatchadourian (Ezra Miller), who is now approaching his eighteenth birthday. Eva and Kevin have always had a troubled relationship, even when he was an infant. Whatever troubles he saw, Franklin (John C. Riley), Eva's complacent husband, just attributed it to Kevin being a typical boy. The incident may be seen by both Kevin and Eva as his ultimate act in defiance against his mother.

“We Need to Talk about Kevin” is not a movie for all tastes. It asks the audience to take a lot of both physical and psychological on-screen abuse. It's a very disturbing, chilling movie, oozing anxiety. It’s a movie that proposes that it is possible that someone is actually born evil. Director Lynne Ramsey has an interesting way of using vivid color in order to emphasize Kevin’s malevolence and how he visualizes the world around him. It's an interesting stylistycal choice, although at times it can get a bit over indulgent.

Ezra Miller is fantastic in the role of Kevin. He really gives the theory that a person can be born evil credence. He creates one of the most memorable on-screen villains in recent years. We love to hate him and it's frustrating how completely clueless his father is when it comes to seeing right through Kevin.

And then there is Tilda Swinton… My god, Tilda Swinton.

In the role of Eva, Swinton gives arguably the best female performance in a long time. She has a difficult task of portraying a mother unsure of her feelings towards her son and if her lack of emotion is somehow the reason for the horror that is to come. And yet, somehow we fully sympathize with Eva, seeing just what a monster Kevin turned out to be. Only a truly great actress can make us feel that way. Eva is a woman forced to take a lot of abuse because of Kevin’s actions, giving way to the argument that not only do children pay for the sins of their parents, but very often it’s the other way around.

One more great strength of this movie is the depiction of a society after a tragic event. Everything changes, from the society to the general atmosphere. And this again is testament to Lynne Ramsey’s direction.

“We Need to Talk About Kevin” is a nearly great film. It’s the worst possible horror movie for any mother. Is it a caution tale or a straight thriller? Probably both. But the biggest virtue is the illumines Tilda Swinton. Seeing her playing Eva has been one of the biggest honors and pleasures in my movie watching life.

WATCH THE TRAILER:

About the Author

Vjekoslav Rosandić is a 26-year old movie critic who has already made a name for himself locally, contributing movie reviews for TV and various media outlets in print and online. As of recently he writes editorials for Around the Networks. Vjekoslav holds a Master's degree in English and Philosophy and is currently employed as university librarian. When he's not watching movies, he's reading or hanging out with his fabulous girlfriend.

Find Vjeko on Twitter. 

Movie on Monday: The Woman in Black

snitchsneeker.com

THE WOMAN IN BLACK

DIRECTED BY: James Wakins

Starring: Daniel Radcliffe, Ciaran Hinds, Janet McTeer

Running time: 95 minutes

“The Woman in Black” is a love letter to those old horror flicks from the 40’s, 50’s and 60’s when horror wasn’t so dependent on violence and gore, but much more on atmosphere, set design and suspense. Here we have a movie that uses these characteristics to great affect but is almost undone by one crucial flaw…

A young lawyer Arthur Kipps (Daniel Radcliffe), struggling with work after the death of his wife, is sent to a remote village to settle the estate of a deceased eccentric woman who owns an English manor. The village residents want him to leave as they are trying to conceal a deadly secret. But he refuses, and soon discovers that the house of his client is haunted by the vengeful ghost of a woman dressed in black. (Source: imdb)

First the good stuff: This movie is a feast for the senses. It’s almost brilliant in the way it uses the gorgeous English countryside to evoke the mood and terror of the story. Technically, everything works: It has some genuine scares and real tension. The cinematography makes the audience feel as if they were right in the middle of this haunted mansion. The very first scene made my blood freeze: Three little girls are having a tea party. Suddenly they all get up, walk to the window and jump, committing suicide. It’s a chilling, unforgettable moment that gives you a sense of what you’re in for. Did I mention the movie was PG-13? (I’m looking at you, Hunger Games!)

I also really liked the supporting players. Ciaran Hinds and Janet Mcteer play a middle aged couple still grieving for the son they lost in a drowning accident years ago. They try to help Arthur get to the bottom of the strange happenings in the village. Hinds is especially good in the way he bonds with Arthur, given that his late son would have been Arthur’s age.

In terms of the story there really isn’t much there, but then again, maybe there’s not supposed to be. This is all about the mood and atmosphere. The direction is the real star here, and it’s most impressive the way director James Watkins allows the scenes to breathe, letting the tension slowly creep in. I’m sure some people will get annoyed by the long scenes of Arthur simply walking through the mansion, but I appreciated the quietness of it.

Now for the near fatal flaw: Daniel Radcliffe.

I want to be absolutely clear: Radcliffe is a wonderful actor. And I’m not just talking about his performances as YOU-KNOW-WHO, but he has genuine range and talent. For example, if you get the chance, check out “My Boy Jack” where he played Rudyard Kipling’s son. In “The Woman in Black” he is unfortunately miscast. I’m sorry, but Radcliffe is simply too young to be believable as a lawyer/widower/single father of a 4 year-old boy. It’s not a bad performance, Radcliffe does what he can, but I found his youth to be distracting. This is a showcase of grief, and therefore calls for a more experienced actor, someone who actually looks like he’s experienced life, someone like James McAvoy or Michael Fassbender. This is a movie in which a lot depends on its protagonist, and Radcliffe just doesn't quite cut it here.

I’m also not too crazy about the ending. It’s relentlessly disturbing in its idea, but I didn’t like the way Watkins sugarcoated it in the very last moments of the movie, shoving in hope where despair was the way to go.

Ultimately, I have mixed feelings about this movie, but I am recommending it based upon the things it does really well, the technical aspect of it. It’s very scary in places and in today’s horror, that’s no small thing.

Watch the trailer:

About the Author

Vjekoslav Rosandić is a 26-year old movie critic who has already made a name for himself locally, contributing movie reviews for TV and various media outlets in print and online. As of recently he writes editorials for Around the Networks. Vjekoslav holds a Master's degree in English and Philosophy and is currently employed as university librarian. When he's not watching movies, he's reading or hanging out with his fabulous girlfriend.

Find Vjeko on Twitter

Movie on Monday: The Raven

tribute.ca

The Raven

Directed by: James McTeigue

Starring: John Cusack, Luke Evans, Alice Eve, Brendan Gleeson

Running time: 111 minutes

I have a love - hate relationship with biopics. On the one one hand, I'm seriously getting tired of the standard three act stuff in movies like “Ray” and “Walk the Line”: quick rise to fame, drugs, sex and alcohol and then the Pheonix- like rise from the ashes. It’s a tired formula, made distinct only by the performance of the actor who plays the subject. On the other hand there are movies like “The Queen” and “Invictus”, biopics that provide a portrait throough a specific historical event. This is a much more interesting way to go, allowing us to interpret the personalities through their actions and behavior in the given event. We interpret rather than have it told to us. “The Raven”… Oh hell, I don’t know where to put it…

The great author Edgar Allan Poe was found dead on the streets of Baltimore. Aside from being known as a literary genius, he was a notorious drunk and possibly drug addict. His final few days remain a mystery. Nobody knows what exactly caused his death or how he spent those last few days. Well, according to “The Raven”, Poe was in a “Saw” movie…

Intended as a dramatization of Poe’s final days, this movie suggests he was involved in an investigation of a serial killer who uses Poe’s stories as an inspiration for his “modus operandi.” It’s a movie that tries to do two things: dig deep into Poe’s psyche and his genius as a writer, and be a thrilling suspenseful mystery. It fails pretty badly on both accounts, and it also has one of the most inexplicably inept pieces of directing I have EVER seen (more on that in a moment).

John Cusack seemed like the perfect choice to play Poe. Not only is he one of the best actors we have, he’s also extremely articulate and intelligent, two qualities crucial to playing someone as complex as Poe. And while he does give a very good, inspired performance, he is unfortunately let down by the lame screenplay, more interested in portraying Poe as a drunk fool, making a mockery out of himself. And despite the movie's’ attempt to flash Poe’s brilliance through figuring the mystery, there’s no real insight here. There’s no looking ino his literary legacy or what made him tick. In all honesty, this could have any run-of-the mill Holmes-esque character we’ve seen so many times before. The only reason we really know it’s Poe, is because the movie tells us.

The mystery aspect of the movie is even worse. It exists only for cheap thrills and to gross us out with the elaborate ways the killer disposes of his victims. The filmmakers show zero attempt at creativity. The simple feel that copying „Saw“ would do it. We also have a completely bland Inspector in charge character (Luke Evans) who's only purpose is to bark orders when Poe figures out the clues. The resolution of the mystery is completely meaningless. The reaction I had was: „Who the hell is this?“ It has no emotional weight, and the reason why it isn't surprising is because the character is such a nobody.

And now… THE scene. At one point in the movie it’s revealed that the killer will strike at the ball organized by the rich guy whose daughter Poe is in love with. In one moment, Poe is dancing with the girl (Alice Eve), the scene cuts to killer storming in on a horse, there’s chaos, and then… Cut to Poe reading a note from the killer saying he kidnapped the girl. Where is the scene when that happened?! At one point they were dancing, five seconds later she’s already kidnapped?! WTF, movie?!!

Beside John Cusack’s great performance and a great look and atmosphere, “The Raven” is a dud, replacing a possibly cool psychological thriller for cheap theatrics, betraying one of the most important figures in literary history. It didn’t have to be an exact portrait or even factual. But it shouldn’t feel like they’ve taken the name Edgar Allan Poe and just dropped it into a dusty serial killer screenplay.

Poe deserves better, much, much better. So does John Cusack. 

Watch the Trailer: 

About the Author

Vjekoslav Rosandić is a 26-year old movie critic who has already made a name for himself locally, contributing movie reviews for TV and various media outlets in print and online. As of recently he writes editorials for Around the Networks. Vjekoslav holds a Master's degree in English and Philosophy and is currently employed as university librarian. When he's not watching movies, he's reading or hanging out with his fabulous girlfriend.

Find Vjeko on Twitter