Showing posts with label Piper Perabo. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Piper Perabo. Show all posts

Saturday, December 26, 2020

The Prestige (2006) Review

rating: ****

the story: Rival magicians push each other to dangerous limits.

review: I’ve had, of all Christopher Nolan’s films, the most difficulty appreciating The Prestige. For me it’s the most desperate of his efforts.

Which is kind of the point.

Following Memento there was tremendous pressure to follow it up with something equally compelling. With his next two films, actually, next three films, including Batman Begins (but that’s another matter entirely), Nolan adapted the work of others rather than conjure his own magic. Insomnia adapted a Swedish film, The Prestige a book. Insomnia, in hindsight, seems to lack the typical Nolan ambition entirely. It is, rather, “merely” Nolan playing, for the first time, as a member of the Hollywood establishment, giving two well-known actors, Al Pacino and Robin Williams, roles that instantly defined that particular stage of their careers. It was atmospheric, but it was very much an actor’s showcase.

The Prestige is the bridge. It is both an actor’s showcase and an obvious return to Nolan’s own brand of magic. 

And deliberately so. I think he took the course he did to reach this point, and beyond it, quite deliberately. Nolan rose to prominence a few years after M. Night Shyamalan’s own breakthroughs. But Shyamalan was quickly, and all but permanently, dismissed as an obvious act, always, at least perceptually, relying on a twist ending to sell his concepts. Nolan didn’t want to be seen as a gimmick filmmaker. So he first stepped away, and then leaned heavily into it.

That’s the whole point of The Prestige, to put a big emphasis on the popular perception of his work.

The story of the movie revolves around rival magicians who very nearly stop at nothing to achieve their magic. In fact, terrible sacrifice, on both their behalves, are revealed as the story reaches its climax. And again, that’s the whole point, but then it’s also in the manner in which they do it, the lengths, and the contrasts between them, they are willing to go.

Which is to say, Nolan is using this film to convey to the audience that he knows what they expect of him, and he is not going to be what they think he is. At least until Inception, anyway, when he will weave his magic in an entirely different manner.

Christian Bale and Hugh Jackman couldn’t possibly do a better job representing all this. They are a new breed of actor, and this is the moment in which they cast off all doubt. They are surrounded by other remarkable performers: Michael Caine, Scarlett Johansson, Rebecca Hall, Piper Perabo, David Bowie, even Andy Serkis, back when he was still best known for motion-capture performances. It takes a bold director to build such a cast, which is itself part of the magic of this movie.

Watching Bale and Jackman duel, learning their awful secrets, Jackman’s final confession (“It was the look on their faces”), emphasizing all over again their contrasts, what motivated them, it’s like another parable, a message well beyond the magic: Is the sacrifice worth it? Or do you become, perhaps, a monster capable of rationalizing anything? 

So when Nolan is ready, four years later, to reveal his own brand of magic again, the stakes have been raised considerably. And he has been working out of that playbook ever since. That’s only possible if he’s willing to sacrifice what came before, that budding artist, the one everyone thought they had figured out. And, well, of course it’s sleight-of-hand.

So yeah, I dig it.

Saturday, May 26, 2018

Looper (2012)

rating: ****

the story: A mob hitman in the future is involved in a scheme involving time travel.

what it's all about: This is likely the movie that got Rian Johnson the Star Wars gig, and you can see The Last Jedi in that ending...!

Looper was originally known as the movie where Joseph Gordon-Levitt plays the younger Bruce Willis, or Bruce Willis plays the older Joseph Gordon-Levitt.  Either way, they play the same character.  It's a couple decades in the future.  But three decades after that, time travel is now possible.  But the only people who use it, because of all the regulations, are the mob.  And they use it mainly to dispose of bodies.  They have hitmen in the past who kill the victims.  "Looper" is the term given to these hitmen because eventually they "close the loop," kill their own future self, sent to the past with final payment.  So they live the next thirty years and then get sent back to the past, to be killed by themselves. 

Yeah.  But being the mob, it's not a good thing if you don't do it.  We get a dramatic example of this with Paul Dano.  Paul Dano is the kind of actor that if he's going full Paul Dano, it's best in small doses.  Most famously, he was the second lead of There Will Be Blood.  To my mind, this was the cause of the horrible unbalance in that movie, because there could only be so much Paul Dano.  He's got the same kind of part in Cowboys & Aliens, 12 Years a Slave...Really, he can never really do the Paul Dano thing and have a decent-size role.

Anyway, so there's not a lot of Paul Dano in it, and that's just as well.  This was supposed to be one of Gordon-Levitt's leading man mainstream establishing roles, but I think the idea of the movie was too complicated.  Besides the hitman looping thing, there's also a kid who grows up to be the guy who "closes all the loops," and he's got a wicked case of telekinesis.  For some people, more than one gimmick is one gimmick too many.  I'd suggest, in a world where time travel is possible, it's likely that the laws of nature have altered enough so that anything's possible.  Maybe a cleverer movie would've explained that, maybe even tied in the existence of telekinesis with time travel.  Maybe it's not really necessary.  Maybe explaining the concept of looping is enough explanation.  Audiences hate explanations more than they hate more than one gimmick.

But if you don't have a problem with any of that, the story is pretty simple, and it's about the cycle of violence, and how to end it.  That's what Gordon-Levitt's character ultimately has to do.  He and his future self, Bruce Willis, are at odds about how to solve the problem of the guy who "closes all the loops."  Because in Gordon-Levitt's time, the guy is just a kid, and his mom is Emily Blunt, and Gordon-Levitt kind of becomes...involved in this little family unit.  He's lost his objectivity.  He probably lost it the minute Bruce Willis showed up, honestly.  (It's okay that he struggled with it over Paul Dano.) 

Apparently Deadpool 2 has the same sort of dilemma, that paradox of essentially killing Hitler when he was a kid.  When you phrase it like that, the audience is always going to side with killing Hitler.  But they don't make movies about killing Hitler as a kid.  I guess that's why there's stuff like Inglourious Basterds.  Gordon-Levitt's solution is to open the loop.  He realizes Bruce Willis trying to kill the kid is what created the guy who "closes all the loops."  So he shoots himself and Bruce Willis no longer exists, and the kid doesn't become the guy who "closes all the loops."  History goes in another direction.

The Last Jedi is all about opting for different results.  This angered a lot of Star Wars fans, as they were pretty committed to the idea of Star Wars being recognizable (even while, paradoxically, complaining that these new movies keep revisiting old territory).  Saying that there is a different way to solve the galaxy's problems...Well, anyway, that's what Last Jedi is about, and that's the philosophy of Looper.  That's Rian Johnson.  He also gave us Brick, a different kind of noir mystery, set in high school.  Dude loves the unexpected.

Ah, also showing up in the movie are Piper Perabo (small role, mostly nude), Garrett Dillahunt (perennially underappreciated, likely because of his name), and Jeff Daniels, who gets to play the mob boss.  He doesn't need to do much mob business, onscreen, to be taken seriously.  That dude is seriously underappreciated.