REVIEW: Life of Pi

Life of Pi (2012): Dir. Ang Lee. Written by David Magee. Based on the novel by Yann Martel. Starring: Suraj Sharma, Irrfan Khan, Tabu, Adil Hussain and Rafe Spall. Rated PG (Animal violence). Running time: 127 minutes.

2 stars (out of four)

A lot of people worked very hard on Life of Pi, most of them computer animators, and their impressive level of craftsmanship is on full display in the gorgeous, digital spaces visited in the film. I wish I could say my appreciation of the movie runs deeper than that. Whether because of the film’s infatuation with artificial wonder or some internal limitation within myself, I was always kept at a distance from the story. That’s a shame because the story promises something rather special: belief in God. Unfortunately, there is no money-back guarantee on that promise but I suppose little in the world of faith offers that.

A struggling novelist (Rafe Spall) visits an Indian man named Piscine Patel (Irrfan Khan) in Montreal. He has been told that Piscine has an incredible story, a story that proves God’s existence and may well provide inspiration for the author’s next work. Piscine, a warm and thoughtful man, confirms that this is true and agrees to tell his tale.

He begins by describing his childhood in India where his father (Adil Hussain) owned and ran a zoo. As a boy, Piscine (played by Ayush Tandon in the initial flashbacks and Suraj Sharma as a young adult), or Pi as he nicknames himself after some unfortunate teasing in school, has an unusual relationship with religion. He was raised a Hindu but his father is a man of science who advises his two sons to seek answers to their questions in hard, observable facts. Pi’s mother (Tabu) on the other hand is more open-minded, encouraging Pi to explore his spirituality.

Pi discovers Christianity and is at first perplexed, then fascinated, by the story of Christ. Next he encounters Islam, finding solace in the religion’s prayer rituals. Seeing no reason to choose between the faiths, Pi becomes a follower of all three. Each religion in conjunction with the others, he feels, enriches his relationship with God in a way no single one can.

His faith is tested several years later, when the bulk of the film takes place. The family is selling the zoo and moving to Canada. Setting sail aboard a Japanese cargo ship, they cross the Pacific Ocean with a few dozen exotic animals that will be sold to another zoo upon their arrival in Canada. Roughly halfway through their journey, however, something goes awry and the ship sinks in the midst of a brutal storm. Separated from his family, Pi manages to jump onto a lifeboat where several companions soon join him: an injured zebra, a hyena, an orangutan and a Bengal tiger named (thanks to a clerical error) Richard Parker.

The days and weeks pass on this apparent ark. Natural selection by way of the tiger’s appetite soon whittles down the boat’s population to two: Pi and Richard Parker.

What follows is as much a survival story as it is a study in animal behavior. Not only must Pi contend with his own hunger and thirst but Richard Parker’s as well. He must train the tiger to see him as its master and not a tasty snack.

Though the majority of the film’s scenes are set on the vast expanse of the Pacific, director Ang Lee breaks up the potential visual monotony with all sorts of vibrant colors and fantastical sights. A reflection on the water’s surface of a golden sunset stretches out to the horizon. Hundreds of luminous fish brighten the dark depths of the ocean at night. And in a dream sequence, the camera plunges into those same black waters and through a series of pseudo-psychedelic images that, in a different context, would make a hell of a screensaver.

But for all its digitized splendor, Life of Pi fails to connect on an emotional level. The visuals only serve to distract from the main action of the plot. What was alive on the page is oddly dull here. This is largely due to the script, a pedestrian adaptation by David Magee, which saps the tension from the story’s midsection and fails to convey the isolation and desperation of a person trapped at sea.

The script also blindly replicates from the book the frame story with the Canadian author. This framing was a sly, self-referential wink in French-Canadian Yann Martel’s novel but feels extraneous and forced here.

And as for affirming the existence of God, Ang Lee’s movie comes up as empty-handed as Mr. Martel’s book. The movie puts some interesting ideas into play – the role religion plays in knowing God, the harsh cruelties of nature – but there is nothing that reaches the story’s unrealistically lofty aims. Life of Pi is beautiful, yes, but far from transcendent. 

- Steve Avigliano, 11/26/12

REVIEW: Lincoln

Lincoln (2012): Dir. Steven Spielberg. Written by: Tony Kushner. Based on the book Team of Rivals: The Political Genius of Abraham Lincoln by Doris Kearns Goodwin. Starring: Daniel Day-Lewis, Sally Field, David Strathairn, Tommy Lee Jones, Joseph Gordon-Levitt, James Spader, John Hawkes, Tim Blake Nelson and Lee Pace. Rated PG-13 (Bribery, slander, demagoguery. Politics as usual). Running time: 150 minutes.

4 stars (out of four)

The first great sigh of relief in Lincoln comes early in the film. The former president reclines in an armchair, his feet propped up, while he idly describes a dream to his wife. The sight is likely not the image of the famous leader most have in their minds. I suppose my mental image of Abraham Lincoln, culled from a sketch in some grade school textbook or another, is of him standing behind a podium, gesticulating forcefully as he gives a speech. (Fear not, there is plenty of that in this movie too.) Yet there is a hint of familiarity in seeing Lincoln in this relaxed state, speaking freely. He feels like a real person.

Coming into this movie, you may have your reservations. You may presume it has a certain amount of stuffiness that is reasonable to expect from a historical biography of Abraham Lincoln directed by Steven Spielberg (one of the few living directors who may end up getting his own biopic one day). But the air is soon cleared of most of that.

You may be relieved to find that Lincoln is not the story of a heroic figure, a demigod who ended the Civil War, freed the slaves and renewed the American Dream for millions. Lincoln instead tells the story of a man – the most unsavory kind of man too! a politician! – who worked hard to do all of the above long before the gloss of history transformed him into something greater than a man.

Abraham Lincoln, compassionately played here by Daniel Day-Lewis, is a sensitive man. He is intelligent, well read and well spoken. He has a gift for orating and bringing crowds of onlookers cheering to their feet. But his skills as a speaker are not limited to grand arenas where his voice rises in thrilling crescendos. He is just as capable performing for a smaller audience – and seems even to prefer it – quietly sharing amusing anecdotes with his cabinet, with soldiers, with whoever is there to listen.

He is humble but, being a man of great conviction, does not wear the power afforded him by his prestigious position lightly. He sees it as his responsibility and his sworn duty to fight for what he believes no matter how seemingly insurmountable the obstacles are that stand in his way.

And here I go hyperbolizing, no better than my old textbooks. Lincoln, however, offers something more interesting than blind hero worship.

This is a remarkably well-researched film, elegantly adapted by playwright Tony Kushner from the nonfiction book, Team of Rivals: The Political Genius of Abraham Lincoln by Doris Kearns Goodwin. Mr. Kushner’s script, marked by a persistent love of facts over melodramatic interpretations, will no doubt be adored by history buffs. But the film’s emphasis on the nuanced mechanisms of American politics serves a greater purpose. Lincoln depicts the president as a hard working politician who knew how to use the system to achieve his goals.

It is January 1865 and, two months after his reelection, Lincoln is in a position of considerable political power. The Civil War is winding down and his popularity in the Union ensures public support of just about any legislation he seeks to push through Congress. Against the better judgment of his cabinet, however, Lincoln sees a window of opportunity to fight for something riskier. Now is the time, he believes, to pass a thirteenth amendment to the Constitution, one that will abolish slavery.

The ambitiousness of this amendment is soon apparent when we meet the divided and bitterly partisan House of Representatives. The House chamber roils like the Colosseum as members of the Democratic opposition take to the floor for a series of vitriolic speeches condemning the amendment. Among the most vocal of them is Representative Fernando Wood (a fine Lee Pace), the de facto leader of the Democrats whose entertaining sermons paint Lincoln as a power-hungry tyrant who must be stopped at all costs.

Even Republicans in Lincoln’s own party are wary of fighting for the amendment now, when the end of the Civil War is so near. But if the Lincoln administration waits until after the War, the legality of the president’s Emancipation Proclamation, a temporary measure made possible by Lincoln’s war powers, may be called into question, and the fate of so many freed slaves would be uncertain.

So Lincoln must rely on unanimous support from Republicans in addition to flipping a few crucial votes of Democrats if he hopes pass the amendment. The fervent abolitionist and curmudgeonly old-timer (Tommy Lee Jones, who else?) Representative Thaddeus Stevens proves to be a useful ally. His sometimes crude and insult-laden tirades on the House floor help corral Republicans behind the cause.

Meanwhile, Secretary of State William Seward (David Strathairn) recruits a band of lobbyists (John Hawkes, Tim Blake Nelson and James Spader) to convert vulnerable Democrats by offering them cushy jobs in exchange for votes. Their attempts to do so, chronicled throughout the film in a series of farcical scenes, expose a much less romantic but no less important side to American politics. A vote procured through bribery is still a vote.

Though the nitty-gritty of the political process takes up the bulk of the film, Lincoln also reveals the president’s human side. Lincoln’s wife, Mary Todd (Sally Field), tormented by life in the White House, struggles to support her husband publicly though their marriage is in decline. Lincoln also tries to protect his son, Robert (Joseph Gordon-Levitt), from the horrors of the War but the boy insists on enlisting, refusing to remain on the sidelines of history.

Captured in the sepia-tinged soft glow of Janusz Kamiński’s photography and accompanied by the strains of a typically powerful John Williams score, Lincoln has the look and feel of a film aiming for a level of prestige worthy of its subject. But the film’s excellence is not superficial. This beautifully crafted movie does not just recount history but pulls an absorbing story out of it and illuminates the past in vibrant, living detail. The final scenes drag on too long and give us more than we need but I'll forgive Mr. Spielberg a few grace notes following such a masterful symphony.

Anchored by a fully realized and wholly compelling performance, Lincoln presents not only a man who led according to the morals and convictions he held so deeply but a man who appreciated the imperfect system that allows an individual to fight for those morals. Watching the relentless feuding and mudslinging of the congressmen in this film, you may dismally conclude that though the contents of the debates have changed between 1865 and today, the tenor of Washington has not. But Lincoln is an ode to that messy and often frustrating democratic process and a tribute to one man who understood better than perhaps anyone how to achieve greatness with it.

- Steven Avigliano, 11/23/12

REVIEW: Skyfall

Skyfall (2012): Dir. Sam Mendes. Written by: Neal Purvis, Robert Wade and John Logan. Based on the character created by Ian Fleming. Starring: Daniel Craig, Judi Dench, Javier Bardem, Ralph Fiennes, Naomie Harris, Bérénice Lim Marlohe, Albert Finney and Ben Whishaw. Rated PG-13 (Guns and girls). Running time: 143 minutes.

3 stars (out of four)

James Bond was having a bit of an identity crisis. Where does the suave secret agent fit into the movie landscape of 2012? And do we even need him anymore? If Tom Cruise’s Mission Impossible movies have a firm grip on over-the-top, cartoonish action, and the Bourne franchise continues to hold the mantle of gritty realism, what can 007 offer that his American competitors cannot?

2006’s Casino Royale, the first film to feature Daniel Craig in the role, reinvented Bond as a stoic hero. Mr. Craig’s rugged face and understated performance gave the character a noir edge that nicely offset Bond’s more charming side. For my taste, 2008’s Quantum of Solace took the character too far in that direction – too brooding, too moody – and risked encroaching on the well-worn territory of other franchise reboots that adopted a darker tone, namely Christopher Nolan’s Dark Knight movies.

Skyfall, Mr. Craig’s third Bond movie and the twenty-third overall in the series, strives for balance. There are moments of sheer ridiculousness (as when a construction excavator is driven while atop a speeding train), plenty of breakneck chases and a few brutal fistfights. Daniel Craig is as intensely focused as ever but there are hints of a smile hiding behind the rim of his martini glass. And as for my question posed above, Skyfall answers that too.

Elegance is the special ingredient that makes Bond distinct from his peers and keeps the series a worthwhile entertainment. Skyfall is a classy action picture, evenly paced and in no great rush (though at 143 minutes, it is too long). Director Sam Mendes soaks in the film’s international locales and shoots them in rich, frequently gorgeous wide shots. The movie hops from the rainy streets of London to the neon-streaked skyscrapers of Shanghai and ends at a stately abandoned manor in the Scottish countryside.

Mr. Mendes also indulges himself at the right times. The big explosion that punctuates the film’s climax has to be one of the biggest, and certainly one of the most thorough and satisfying, movie explosions in recent years. And in the opening scene he spends what would surely be the whole budget of other movies on a chase that begins on foot, blasts through a Turkish marketplace with cars and motorcycles, and ends on the aforementioned train.

So, yes, this is a good Bond film. I would probably rank Casino Royale a little higher, but I’m hardly a Bond scholar, so take that for what it’s worth. I’ll admit there were a few moments when the movie lost me and I had no clue what was happening or why but I was never bored.

How could I be with Javier Bardem strutting around as Raoul Silva, the blond-haired, flamboyant villain of the film? Mr. Bardem, clearly enjoying himself, delivers his monologues with no shortage of flair. His laugh is a sinister little laugh but he means to do great harm to Bond’s employer, MI6. A disgruntled former agent, Silva has major beef with M (Judi Dench), the agency’s head, and will not be satisfied until she is dead.

Meanwhile, MI6 faces scrutiny from government bureaucrats who question the spy agency’s ability to function effectively after a list of undercover agents is stolen and leaked to the public. Leading the investigation is a government higher-up played with subtle menace by Ralph Fiennes.

It is up to James Bond to protect M and preserve the agency’s future. Naturally, while saving the day, he also finds time to tangle with a lovely named Sévérine (Bérénice Lim Marlohe) as well as fellow field agent Eve (Naomie Harris). The always great Albert Finney makes an appearance late in the film too as a wily, old groundskeeper.

Skyfall is marked by a back-to-basics approach that works well. When a brainy kid shows up as Q (Ben Whishaw), MI6’s technology developer, he gives Bond a sleek and simple gun and nothing else. “Exploding pens and the like,” he says. “We don’t do that anymore.” There are probably a few too many winks and nudges like this in the film, as though the filmmakers were trying to defend the franchise’s relevance with coy in-jokes, but I appreciate the movie’s straightforwardness.

Even the theme song by Adele, the first actually decent Bond theme in years if not decades, has the feel of a series reinvigorated. Skyfall is not another revamp of the franchise but rather an affirmation of its continued quality. There is still a place for Bond at the movies and he didn’t even need to change up his style to prove it.

- Steve Avigliano, 11/12/12