The Dastardly Dissenter returns as CJ teams with Bernard to bring you this week’s show, in which they discuss their favorite “directorial left turns,” which also happens to be the subject of this month’s Way Too Indie staff feature.

Also, incomparable film essayist and filmmaker Mark Rappaport joins the show to talk about his filmography, which you can find right now EXCLUSIVELY on Fandor! Mark’s two latest videos, Debra Paget, For Example and Max, James & Danielle, are available to stream as of TODAY via our friends at Fandor, so don’t waste another second! Subscribe to Fandor now and discover one of the most singular, fascinating filmmakers working today.

Topics

• Indie Picks (3:50)
• Directorial Left Turns (15:23)
• Mark Rappaport (1:07:49)

Articles Referenced

• The Battery Capsule Review
• Altman Review
• Our Favorite Directorial Left Turns

Subscribe to the Way Too Indiecast

• Subscribe to our podcast on iTunes
• Subscribe on Stitcher

On March 18th, Jeff Nichols’ Midnight Special hits theaters. The film, which follows a boy with supernatural abilities getting hunted down by various groups eager to study or exploit him, is a major departure from the rest of Nichols’ filmography. With Shotgun Stories, Take Shelter, and Mud, Nichols showed an interest in small, modest-scaled dramas about internal (Take Shelter) and external (Shotgun Stories) battles in the Southern United States. Now, Nichols has elevated himself to a different, bigger stage: Midnight Special is a full-on, big-budget (compared to his earlier films, that is) sci-fi that has already received comparisons to Steven Spielberg’s work.

Nichols is far from the first director to make a film outside their perceived wheelhouse, and in anticipation of Midnight Special’s release, we decided to come up with our favorite examples of directors who made a successful shift into new, exciting territory. Read our eleven picks below, and let us know if you agree, disagree, or think we’re missing any directors who deserve to be on this list.

Favorite Directorial Left Turns

Babe: Pig in the City (George Miller)

Although respectable, George Miller’s post-Mad Max fare—such as The Witches of Eastwick and Lorenzo’s Oil—hardly built on the promise of his influential post-apocalyptic trilogy. In the mid-nineties, Miller’s career took an abrupt change of direction, co-writing and producing the surprise Best Picture nominee Babe (losing out to the far inferior Braveheart). The talking pig was a huge success, and a few years later Miller directed the sequel.

Babe: Pig in the City is far darker in tone than the cozy, bucolic original. Miller pulls out all the stops, creating a trippy atmosphere for his menagerie of chatty creatures, including mice, chimps, pelicans and Mickey Rooney. Ostensibly a family film, it has the bug-eyed intensity of his Nightmare at 20,000 Feet segment in Twilight Zone: The Movie and the baroque imagination of Mad Max: Fury Road. Miller’s lengthy excursion into family film continued with the hit Happy Feet and its sequel, featuring CGI dancing penguins. And just when the scorched landscape of “Mad” Max Rockatansky seemed a distant memory, Miller took another turn onto Fury Road. [Lee]

Bernie (Richard Linklater)

Richard Linklater has always been partial to his home state of Texas, but in his 2011 flick, Bernie, Linklater embraced the east Texas legend of Marjorie “Marge” Nugent’s murder. Linklater’s career is marked with a variety of genres from relatable dramas such as Boyhood and the Before Trilogy to airy comedies like Dazed and Confused, but Bernie served as his only venture into a crime-driven black comedy. Yet, Linklater’s expertise in the understanding of the human condition is manifested in his sympathetic portrayal of Bernie and the often insufferable Marge. Bernie combines many of the elements that make Linklater’s films so beloved, but the presentation is wildly unique. The film combines mockumentary with documentary and comedy with drama in a way that is coherent and captivating. And while Bernie stands out from the rest of Linklater’s work, the quirks present in Bernie are exaggerations of quirks from the rest of Linklater’s filmography, and that is what makes the film such a treat. It’s a departure from the Linklater status quo, but it also represents an artistic evolution and a love letter to rural Texas. [Tanner]

The Big Short (Adam McKay)

The ’60s had the Rat Pack, the ’80s had the Brat Pack, and the ’00s have the Frat Pack, with the likes of Will Ferrell, Vince Vaughn, and Steve Carell in its ranks. One of the key architects of the Frat Pack oeuvre is Adam McKay, writer/director of the Anchorman films, Step Brothers, Talladega Nights: The Ballad of Ricky Bobby, and The Other Guys. You see the pattern. Going off this previous directorial resume, McKay’s doesn’t suggest very much depth. But with his latest effort, The Big Short, he detours from the usual big-laughs-from-little-substance path and takes on material as dense as one can get for a major motion picture: the bursting of the US housing market bubble, and subsequent global economic crisis, that occurred in the mid-2000s. It’s dry, complicated stuff that is plagued by its own jargon-riddled language. McKay (who also co-wrote) presents his smartest humor to date, but also makes the material easy to understand, keeping the film moving at a brisk pace and making brilliant creative decisions—such as fourth wall-breaking and pop-up tutorials conducted by surprise celebrity cameos. The Big Short earned the accolades it received during awards season, and McKay has earned a spot on the list of directors to pay attention to for more than just silly comedies. [Michael]

Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban (Alfonso Cuarón)

Alfonso Cuarón wasn’t necessarily a stranger to children’s film when he took on the third Harry Potter franchise film, nor to Warner Brothers. He’d directed 1995’s A Little Princess, also a darker toned tale of a child orphan making their way in the world. So while Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban may not have felt like a left turn for him, for those who think of Y Tu Mamá También when they hear his name, the jump from a horny coming-of-age road trip film to a beloved magical series was jolting. But it isn’t really if one thinks about it. Picking up where Chris Columbus left off in the first two films, Cuarón picked the perfect film of the series to take on. This is where Harry’s journey gets remarkably dark, with his family’s past and secrets he was formerly too young to grasp finally get revealed. He has to choose to face the threats that heretofore came looking for him, AND turn 13. Scary stuff. Cuarón gave the film much needed relevancy, having characters wear modern clothing and letting them interact more with the non-magical world. He gave the Harry Potter series the backbone it lacked and a magic that felt more enticing, simultaneously pleasing book fans and pulling in those who’d previously written the series off as kid stuff. Cuarón knows how to get hearts pumping (Gravity) and feelings flowing (Children of Men), and his approach was a huge success for what is now among the top five film franchises in history. [Ananda]

Hugo (Martin Scorsese)

Roger Ebert opened his review of Martin Scorsese’s 2011 film with the line, “Hugo is unlike any other film Martin Scorsese has ever made.” As a director who’s known for his gritty gangster films (Goodfellas, The Departed, Gangs of New York), Scorsese threw a curveball at audiences by making a big-budget family film. In his extensive filmography, the director has only made a handful of PG-rated films, and none (that I can recall) featuring young children as lead characters. But the main reason why Hugo marked such a huge departure for Scorsese was that it was filmed in 3D, a medium often thought to be gimmicky, especially for a filmmaker who is such a strong advocate for preserving traditional film. But it’s easy to see why he made Hugo considering it’s a love letter to cinema, featuring storylines involving early pioneers of film like Georges Melies and the Lumiere brothers. Scorsese shows how those directors experimented with special effects during the early years of film, and it suddenly dawns on you why he decided to make Hugo in 3D. And to top it off, he adds a great message about the importance of preserving film. It’s rare that a filmmaker can make a film like this; one that’s so close to their heart, so much different than their previous work, and yet be easily accessible to every age group. Hugo is that film. [Dustin]

Li’l Quinquin (Bruno Dumont)

Early on in his career, Bruno Dumont was labelled as an enfant terrible for several reasons: showing unsimulated sex scenes in his films, using sudden, brutal violence, a rigid form that can drive people mad or put them to sleep, and an ability to generate provocative questions about hot button issues like religion and spirituality. Since 2011, after his underrated Hors Satan flopped with critics and audiences, he underwent a bit of a change. His follow-up, Camille Claudel 1915, starred Juliette Binoche, a surprise given his preference to work with unprofessional actors. But it wasn’t until 2014 that Dumont would make his biggest shift yet with Li’l Quinquin, a TV miniseries about detectives trying to find a serial killer in the French countryside. The series marks Dumont’s first attempt at making an outright comedy, and it works like gangbusters (some sequences in here are so unhinged it’s impossible not to choke from laughter). But the biggest surprise of all was that Li’l Quinquin turned out to be Dumont’s biggest success to date, smashing TV rating records in France and getting renewed for a second season. While it’s a definitely left turn for the director, it’s the furthest thing from a compromise, and Quinquin will hopefully mark the beginning of a new, more exciting phase in Dumont’s career. [C.J.]

Spring Breakers (Harmony Korine)

Before the release of the star-studded and fluidly structured Spring Breakers, Harmony Korine wasn’t well-known to general audiences. His filmography had been comprised of works like the deeply strange Gummo, the minimalist but bigger-budgeted Mr. Lonely and the chaotic, dadaist Trash Humpers. Korine wouldn’t go on to direct another film until almost half a decade later, and when he would, he wouldn’t be returning to execute Spring Breakers with the deceptively simple formal qualities of his previous three features. Instead, he hired Benoit Debie (primarily known for his collaborations with Gaspar Noé) as his cinematographer, gathered composer Cliff Martinez and popular dubstep artist Skrillex to work on the score, and cast household celebrities such as James Franco, Selena Gomez, Vanessa Hudgens & Ashley Benson to co-star alongside his wife, Rachel Korine. The end result is a pure sensory overload, constituted by a rich color palette, a free-flowing camera and editing style, and some of the sharpest social commentary to emerge from the American film scene in years, if not decades. [Eli]

The Straight Story (David Lynch)

David Lynch has cemented himself as one of the most idiosyncratic filmmakers of our time, tainting our eyeballs with visions of severed ears in the grass, people-sized rabbits doing chores, and Dennis Hopper spitting and spluttering like a loon. Lynch’s films are about as weird as they come, but when asked, the director called his G-rated 1999 heartland drama The Straight Story his “most experimental film.” While it sounds strange at first listen, in the context of the nightmarish sprawl that is his larger oeuvre, the assertation rings loud and true. Nearly every aspect of the film is antithetic to the core concepts of his other works: instead of smashing Americana to pieces, he celebrates it; rather than delivering shocks of violence and sex, the movie is squeaky clean and has no artsy tricks up its sleeve. Richard Farnsworth, in his Oscar-nominated final performance, plays Alvin Straight, an aging man who travels 320 miles from Iowa to Wisconsin on his John Deere (only in Lynchian context is this part bit considered “not weird”) to see his dying brother. Lynch’s broodiness is eschewed here, his visual flair instead working in support of a sweeping road story of love and devotion set along the cornfields and foothills of the good ol’ U.S. of A. Surprisingly, the film has Lynch’s fingerprints all over it despite the conventional tone and narrative. For a one-time affair, the wavy-haired madman plays it straight, and it works astonishingly well. [Bernard]

The Wind Rises (Hayao Miyazaki)

Hayao Miyazaki, the creator of films such as Spirited Away and My Neighbour Totoro, is best known for his beautiful depictions of fantasy and ability to bring imaginary worlds to life on screen. Therefore, The Wind Rises comes as an unusual project from the Japanese animator, acting as a realistic piece of fiction whilst enfolding historical events into its narrative. It’s a fictional biography of Jiro Horikoshi, the designer of the Japanese Zero fighter plane in World War II, and yet it focuses mostly on Jiro’s dreams of flying, rather than the grim realities of his creations. From its terrifying rendering of the Great Kanto earthquake in 1923 to its frequent references to Japan’s involvement in the Second World War, the film is never unaware of its exact place in history. However, The Wind Rises never allows this history to overshadow its message about inventions and possibilities. All the more interesting is the film’s place as Miyazaki’s final feature film, inevitably creating a parallel between himself and the young Jiro, both of whom are artists at their core; men with creative aspirations, but whose works are bound to be consumed in ways they did not intend. Reviews suggest that The Wind Rises is not critical enough of a man who designed machines for war, and yet Miyazaki’s films—often considered children’s tales—have always had a moral message. It seems his final film is a reminder that, once a creation leaves its author’s hands, its fate is as much our responsibility as it is theirs. [Pavi]

The Wrestler (Darren Aronofsky)

Prior to 2008, Darren Aronofsky had established a consistently heady, kaleidoscopic aesthetic in his work. From the Lynchian surrealism of Pi to the hyperkinetic chaos and visceral impact of Requiem for a Dream to the ambitious, centuries-spanning spiritual epic that was The Fountain, one might’ve thought they had him pegged down as a filmmaker. However, while The Wrestler certainly carries a few subtle hallmarks of Aronofsky’s style and thematic interests, it’s a more stripped-down, genuinely gritty picture than anything the director has attempted before (or since).

A tale of has-beens and former glory is concentrated in the figure of Randy “the Ram” Robinson, a once-famous professional wrestler who has fallen into obscurity. He lives in a trailer, works a menial, unfulfilling job and only finds consolation in his small-time weekend wrestling gigs or in the sympathetic arms of a similarly broken-down stripper. Such a familiar type of story is imbued with refreshing nuance by Mickey Rourke’s unflinching, honest performance and Aronofsky’s neorealist approach. If there was any doubt that the director could make a film expressing unglamorous realities and raw human truths without the stimulation of technical dazzle and flamboyant flourishes, this movie surely puts those concerns to rest. Despite it being a bit of an anomaly in Aronofsky’s career, The Wrestler might just be his greatest work to date. [Byron]

X-Men (Bryan Singer)

Since Jeff Nichols’ latest studio venture has inspired this feature, I’ve chosen another all-American director, who was also in his mid-30s when he made the quantum leap from small scales and modest budgets by hitting the sci-fi switch. Bryan Singer’s big break came with cult classic crime thriller The Usual Suspects in 1995 where an award-winning screenplay and unforgettable performances bolstered the director’s work enough for 20th Century Fox to have a meeting about it. The character-driven student-teacher Stephen King drama Apt Pupil came next in 1998, but Fox had reportedly already approached Singer for X-Men. He turned it down, made Apt Pupil instead, was courted again—this time by good friend Tom DeSanto—only to finally sign on and set the course for the modern film age of superhero dominance we’re currently (suffering) in.

For the first time in his career, Singer worked with special effects, a budget of $75 million, and in the Sci-Fi sandbox where comic book fandom reigns. And boy did he make it work. It’s near-impossible to measure the magnitude of the aftershock this movie created, after grossing over $200 million at the box-office. Hugh Jackman became a star, studios realized that comic book property was a gold mine they could finally tap into, and Singer made such a triumphantly left turn from chamber dramas to splashy blockbusters, he’s never hard to turn right again. By no means the best superhero film, X-Men is still a perfectly entertaining spectacle that turned its director into one of the best comic book helmers working today. I very much doubt Nichols will make the same impact. [Nik]

Over the past several weeks we have provided an extensive individual breakdown for all of the major Oscar categories. Today we have compiled our 2014 Oscars Predictions on a convenient one sheet for you, along with links to our previous analysis. Oscar night is right around the corner, so be sure to tune in to see how well we predicted.

86th Academy Awards will air March 2, 2014 at 7 p.m. ET on ABC.

Complete List of 2014 Oscar Predictions:

Best Picture:

American Hustle
Captain Phillips
Dallas Buyers Club
Gravity
Her
Nebraska
Philomena
12 Years a Slave
The Wolf of Wall Street

Best Director:

David O. Russell – American Hustle
Alfonso Cuarón – Gravity
Alexander Payne – Nebraska
Steve McQueen – 12 Years a Slave
Martin Scorsese – The Wolf of Wall Street

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

Best Actress:

Amy Adams – American Hustle
Cate Blanchett – Blue Jasmine
Sandra Bullock – Gravity
Judi Dench – Philomena
Meryl Streep – August: Osage County

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

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

Best Original Screenplay:

Eric Warren Singer and David O. Russell – American Hustle
Woody Allen – Blue Jasmine
Craig Borten & Melisa Wallack – Dallas Buyers Club
Spike Jonze – Her
Bob Nelson – Nebraska

Best Adapted Screenplay:

Richard Linklater, Julie Delpy, Ethan Hawke – Before Midnight
Billy Ray – Captain Phillips
Steve Coogan and Jeff Pope – Philomena
John Ridley – 12 Years a Slave
Terence Winter – The Wolf of Wall Street

Best Foreign Film:

The Broken Circle Breakdown
The Great Beauty
The Hunt
The Missing Picture
Omar

Best Cinematography:

Philippe Le Sourd – The Grandmaster
Emmanuel Lubezki – Gravity
Bruno Delbonnel – Inside Llewyn Davis
Phedon Papamichael – Nebraska
Roger A. Deakins – Prisoners

Best Animated Film:

The Croods
Despicable Me 2
Ernest & Celestine
Frozen
The Wind Rises

Best Documentary:

The Act of Killing
Cutie and the Boxer
Dirty Wars
The Square
20 Feet from Stardom

Best Film Editing:

Jay Cassidy, Crispin Struthers and Alan Baumgarten – American Hustle
Christopher Rouse – Captain Phillips
John Mac McMurphy and Martin Pensa – Dallas Buyers Club
Alfonso Cuarón and Mark Sanger – Gravity
Joe Walker – 12 Years a Slave

Best Original Score:

John Williams – The Book Thief
Steven Price – Gravity
William Butler and Owen Pallett – Her
Alexandre Desplat – Philomena
Thomas Newman – Saving Mr. Banks

Best Original Song:

“Happy” – Despicable Me 2
“Let It Go” – Frozen
“The Moon Song” – Her
“Ordinary Love” – Mandela: Long Walk to Freedom

Best Production Design:

American Hustle
Gravity
The Great Gatsby
Her
12 Years a Slave

Best Costume Design:

American Hustle
The Grandmaster
The Great Gatsby
The Invisible Woman
12 Years a Slave

Best Makeup & Hairstyling:

Dallas Buyers Club
Jackass Presents: Bad Grandpa
The Lone Ranger

Best Sound Editing:

All Is Lost
Captain Phillips
Gravity
The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug
Lone Survivor

Best Sound Mixing:

Captain Phillips
Gravity
The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug
Inside Llewyn Davis
Lone Survivor

Best Visual Effects:

Gravity
The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug
Iron Man 3
The Lone Ranger
Star Trek Into Darkness

Best Short Film (Live Action):

Aquel No Era Yo
Avant Que De Tout Perdre
Helium
Pitääkö Mun Kaikki Hoitaa?
The Voorman Problem

Best Visual Short Film (Animated):

Feral
Get a Horse!
Mr. Hublot
Possessions
Room on the Broom

Best Documentary (Short Subject):

CaveDigger
Facing Fear
Karama Has No Walls
The Lady in Number 6: Music Saved My Life
Prison Terminal: The Last Days of Private Jack Hall

It requires a lot of restraint for me not to put down Steve McQueen as the director that should win the award on Oscar night. I believe he is one of the best upcoming directors of our time, so I am delighted that he is finally starting to be recognized for his brilliant work. In 12 Years a Slave, Steve McQueen was able to capture deeply moving performances from his cast and present difficult subject matter in a raw and powerful way. Despite all of this, I must concede that there is another director that might deserve the win just slightly more.

Alfonso Cuarón’s expert filmmaking abilities are on full display in the visually breathtaking film Gravity. The film opens with what I would consider to be one of the best scenes in all of 2013. The director uses a long continuous (digitally blended) fifteen-minute shot that introduces the characters and also establishes the vast environment of space. Despite a relatively weak story, it would be hard to argue that the cinematography and visual effects found within the film are anything but downright stunning. Cuarón spent four years developing the film and it certainly shows.

The rest of the field in this category (David O. Russell, Alexander Payne, and Martin Scorsese) have tremendous amounts of reputation behind them. The only director that I would exclude from the category is David O. Russell for American Hustle. The film benefited from a stellar cast, but did not have much else going for it. Although it would be a long shot, it would have been nice to see Destin Cretton in this group for his breakout indie film Short Term 12. Other worthy nominees for Best Director are Derek Ciafrance for The Place Beyond the Pines and Paul Greengrass for Captain Phillips. However, the biggest nomination snub from the Academy was the absence of Spike Jonze on the ballot. His vision in the film Her was one of the most original and artistic achievements in cinema that 2013 had to offer.

Category Predictions

Best Director Nominees

David O. Russell – American Hustle (review)

Alfonso Cuarón – Gravity (review)

Alexander Payne – Nebraska (review)

Steve McQueen – 12 Years a Slave (review)

Martin Scorsese – The Wolf of Wall Street (review)

Previous Category Analysis

Best Shorts
Best Supporting Actress
Best Supporting Actor
Best Original Screenplay
Best Adapted Screenplay
Best Foreign Film
Best Documentary
Best Actress
Best Actor

Not only is Alfonso Cuaron’s Gravity one of the most visually immersive moviegoing experiences in memory, it’s also one of the handful of films that utilize 3-D technology to enhance the cinematic experience in a significant way. The “survival” element of Cuaron’s outer-space survival epic is unquestionably enhanced by the 3-D effect, which helps to convey the infinite vastness that constantly threatens to devour stars Sandra Bullock and George Clooney.

In this short vignette, which is essentially a showcase for View-D 3-D convergence technology, we’re shown an example of exactly what’s going on behind the curtain to make the 3-D in Gravity look so damn good. Here’s a description of the clip from the original post:

In this Artist Breakdown we analyse a scene from ‘Gravity’ starring Sandra Bullock and George Clooney. Prime Focus World’s Richard Baker (Creative Director, View-D) and Matthew Bristowe (SVP, Production) take you on a step by step journey through the stereo conversion of the shot, describing how PFW’s View-D conversion process allows for the full integration of the VFX and conversion processes.

There will surely be more of these neat little breakdowns to come in the coming weeks, so keep an eye out for those!

Certainly no sci-fi film, and packed with more adrenaline than the average action film, it’s impossible not to have a physical reaction to the film Gravity. From the opening scene where astronaut Matt Kowalski (George Clooney) and medical engineer Dr. Ryan Stone (Sandra Bullock) work high above the earth, the perspective is entirely disorienting. Voices from Houston check in on the astronauts, asking Dr. Stone if she’s feeling sick, and her queasy expression is easy to sympathize with. While the sensory impact of Gravity is what will make this film hard for any viewer to shake, it’s focus on every human’s instinct for survival and even human connectedness is what makes it a good film.

Gravity, while groundbreaking in its visuals, does rely upon them a bit heavily. The story is obvious by Hollywood conventions. Veteran astronaut Kowalski is finishing his final spacewalk, while Dr. Stone is on her first mission and not much of a space traveler. All seems to be going well in their mission to perform minor repairs on a space shuttle. A third astronaut, whose voice is all the character we’re really given of him, glides through space gleefully, as though to mock the tethers that keep him from spinning out into the cosmos. Then Houston gives them the command to abort. The Russians, (them again!), have destroyed one of their satellites and its remnants are hurtling in orbit directly toward them. A moment later they are bombarded with the high-speed pieces. Kowalski tries to hold on to Stone, but she is sent spiraling away from him. Thus begins her dizzying nightmare.

At times Alfonso Cuaron pulls the perspective into Stone’s helmet. Which, in that first harrowing moment, is the unending spinning of the universe as Dr. Stone demonstrates the laws of physics in sickening fashion. The universe has never seemed so big as in the drawn out minutes that Stone spends alone spinning into space unable to stop herself. Kowalski is able to reach her after a time, but their nerve-shattering journey to survive has only begun. With oxygen depleting, Kowalski’s jetpack running out of fuel, and the orbit of the earth set to bring the debris hurtling back at them in 90 minutes it’s a race against time and space, (sorry, I couldn’t resist), to survive.

Cuaron has been working on Gravity for almost four years, since the release of his last tale of human survival, Children of Men. Clearly drawn to stories of perseverance, Gravity isn’t as poignant as he is likely aiming for, but is most definitely a standout survival film. Cuaron’s decision to use Bullock in a space-based thriller may not seem the likely choice, but she was clearly a great decision. Her character is given the entirety of the sentimentality of the film to carry, including some hackneyed and hokey dialogue. But Sandy B. is America’s Sweetheart for good reason. She’s just so easy to root for. Each line delivered with just enough of an emotional waver in her soft voice to pull at the heart. Clooney is equally as typecast with his easy confidence and dulcet-tones that could talk anyone to safety. So while neither actor may be doing anything entirely new in their careers, they certainly do what they do best.

Choreographed and staged with intricate detail, the film’s visuals are like nothing ever experienced before in film. Forget ‘edge of your seat’, Gravity has its audience clinging to their seats and leaving with a newfound appreciation of terra firma. Never has 90 minutes felt so long. Alfonso Cuaron’s breathtaking film puts every viewer up into space in a way never before possible. Though admittedly in a way that may make any future space travelers think twice. Gravity is a healthy reminder of human smallness in a vast universe, but also successfully demonstrates the phenomenal strength of the human spirit.

Full disclosure: I personally do not like 3D movies, I feel that they are distracting to the true art of filmmaking. That being said, I saw the advanced screening of Gravity in 3D, however, my review would likely be no different for its 2D counterpart.

Gravity brings the long awaited return of Children of Men director Alfonso Cuarón. Set almost entirely in space, this sci-fi thriller with a dash of humor has stunning special effects and dedicated 3D scenes. Actors George Clooney and Sandra Bullock play characters Commander Matt Kowalsky and Mission Specialist Dr. Ryan Stone. Within the first 15 minutes viewers are taken from a light-hearted and even slightly humorous conversation between three astronauts outside a shuttle to an adrenaline packed thrill ride. The focus then turns to Bullock’s character who must now overcome the cornucopia of challenges that comes with trying to get back on Earth when you’ve just been flung into empty space by a large cloud of increasingly speeding satellite debris (all caused by the Russians of course).

I wish I could tell you the rest, but I’m guessing you would not like the spoilers. Besides, I forgot it all within 2 minutes of leaving my seat. It’s just not that memorable. What I can tell you is that it’s filled with dazzling special effects and “3d-ness” that is sure to wow and perhaps even shock some audiences. However, I thought it was overkill. With such a small amount of dialogue, you have more time to focus on the scenes that often were tilted or flipped, but I was severely disappointed by the lack story development through the somewhat meager pace of the movie. Bullock’s character has an emotional back story but that emotion remains untapped for the most part. The storyline itself is decent, though Gravity certainly left me begging for more development in both the story and the characters.

The two redeeming qualities in my opinion are the fact that it’s set in space and that the sound score was decent. Something that seems to have become more popular, but does not entirely distract from the poor storyline development and what to me are overly done special effects. It is sure to win something for it’s massive technical feats. Warning – if you just happen to be an astrophysicist or a nerdy space geek, you will shudder at the sight some of the scenes, just keep in mind it’s purely science fiction.

Gravity premieres October 4th for its wide release. Despite what I mentioned above, I suggest you go see it in theaters…perhaps with an astronaut’s helmet on if your local theater permits such awesomeness (and if it does not, you may want to find another theater). If you do decide to see it, keep a lookout for Marvin the Martian’s cameo appearance.

Gravity trailer:

My previous day at TIFF was originally going to comprise of four films as well, but unfortunately I had to bail out of one film due to pure tiredness (I’ll keep the film’s title unnamed here, but if it wasn’t for my physical limitations I would have stayed since it was good from what I saw). Luckily, I was able to chug through my second four-film day without a hitch, but I’ve learned now that it’s not something I should try more than once.

Night Moves

I decided to start my big day with Night Moves, which turned out to be the worst possible film to choose as a starting point. I’ve been a fan of Kelly Reichardt’s work from what I’ve seen, and was excited to see her approach being used on a genre film. Three activists from different walks of life get together to pull off a dangerous act of ‘eco-terror’: They buy a boat and rig it with explosives, hoping to blow up a dam. Theoretically what Reichardt is attempting here is interesting in its own right. Her stripped down style getting applied to a thriller makes for some neat moments, and the way things unravel so the three characters become corrupted by the same selfish behavior they abhor is a nice development.

The only problem is that Reichardt’s approach is bone dry, sucking out all of the tension and forward momentum. Paradoxically, while the main group (played by Jesse Eisenberg, Dakota Fanning and Peter Sarsgaard who all do their best at understating as much as possible) feel well-defined and realistic as characters, the tone of the film is so distant it’s impossible to feel anything about them. The last time Reichardt took a crack at a genre film it was the western with Meek’s Cutoff, which worked wonderfully. This time I think she simply picked the wrong area to work with. Hopefully next time she’ll be successful again with whatever she chooses.

RATING: 5.9

Gravity

Next up was the film that I had been waiting for since it was announced back in July: Gravity. Alfonso Cuaron spent seven years developing his follow-up to the brilliant Children of Men, and it’s apparent from the start just how much effort went into this film. The special effects are incredible, and it will be impossible to watch this without wondering exactly how they pulled off some moments. So Gravity does deliver in the spectacle department, but that’s mostly it. Granted it’s really good at it, and it’s an easy recommendation, but this is far from the new classic that people have been going on about.

Gravity is merely a well-done thriller that never lets up pacing-wise. Starting right in space with Ryan Stone (Sandra Bullock), a new astronaut, and a veteran on his last mission (George Clooney), it takes all but 10 minutes before debris from a satellite crash has Bullock and Clooney flying in opposite directions with nothing to hold on to. That’s merely the start of the many, many problems Bullock encounters while she frantically tries to make it back to Earth alive, and by the end the amount of near-death experiences become absurd (and it drew some laughter from the audience as well).

There really won’t be anything better this year on a technical level, but Gravity is far too basic to enjoy beyond the surface. Bullock and Clooney are terrific in their roles, making the most of the little material they’re given. Bullock is given some backstory to work with, but the film’s suffocating and repetitive pace drown out any emotional impact. I know that what I’m saying sounds very negative about the film, but it’s mostly because I came away disappointed that Gravity did not live up to my high expectations. There are some truly incredible sequences in here, and for a studio tentpole it’s quite original, but don’t expect a masterpiece.

RATING: 7

October November

Continuing my strange tonal shifts in films throughout the day, I went to check out October November. Gotz Spielmann’s last film Revanche blew me away when I saw it years ago, and at the beginning I was expecting more of the same riveting drama when an actress (Nora von Waldstätten) is confronted by the wife of a man she’s having an affair with. That scene turns out to be the only moment where fireworks go off, as the focus shifts to the actress’ sister (Ursula Strauss) who runs a small hotel in the countryside owned by her father.

The two sisters reunite when their father takes a heart attack, and the tensions between them form the basis for October November. Strauss is jealous of her sister leaving to be successful while she was forced to stay at home, and Waldstätten feels like she has no idea who she really is. It’s another existential European drama, and Spielmann really doesn’t seem to know how to get these issues across. The majority of October November is a no-stakes drama until the final act sees the two daughters waiting for their father to finally pass away. Despite being superbly shot and acted, there really is very little to get interested in. There’s no doubt that Spielmann is still a mature and terrific writer/director, but he seems to have invested in subject matter that returns very little.

RATING: 6

Under the Skin

I ended my day with Jonathan Glazer’s Under the Skin, and what a way to close off my long weekend at TIFF. I’m not over the moon like some people who have seen this, but I can’t blame them for being so ecstatic. Glazer is a master of style, and his 9 year absence seems to have made his images even more striking. The film’s first half, which simply follows Scarlett Johansson’s alien character around as she seduces men to a horrific fate, works as an excellent mood piece. Glazer has created some shots that will probably stick with me more than any other film I’ve seen here, and Micah Levi’s score is one of the best of the year by leaps and bounds.

It pained me a lot when Under the Skin didn’t coalesce into something wholly terrific for me. The second half of the film, in which Johansson gains human qualities and gets hunted down by her alien superiors, is a step down from the beautifully expressive and original first half. Glazer seems to have a hard time getting across what he wants to say at some points (his goal, to show Earth through an outsider’s perspective, wasn’t exactly successful in my eyes), and while Johansson is great her role is too enigmatic to make any of the final acts resonate. At times horrifying, beautiful and strange, Under the Skin is a classic case of a film not adding up to the sum of its parts.

RATING: 6.9

Next up:

Ben Wheatley’s hallucinogenic trip through A Field in England, and the best film I’ve seen at TIFF.

Alfonso Cuaron’s Science Fiction film Children of Men is devastatingly beautiful. The film is full of ugly greys and a tone that suggests nothing other than failure and yet, it’s the most hopeful film I have ever seen. There are so many things that make the film special but above all the film is a technical marvel. Cuaron should have easily won Best Director the year it was up for Academy Awards but alas, the film only pulled in nominations for Screenplay, Editing and Cinematography. All of which the film lost.

We are plunged into the middle of chaos at the beginning of the film. When the film begins we find out the youngest person on Earth, an Argentine named Diego, has died at the age of 18. 18? How is this possible? Soon we find out that humans have lost the ability to reproduce. We are dying out. As soon as this distinct possibility catches hold of the minds of the world, civilizations everywhere crumble. Governments collapse as there is no hope left in the world. The only bright spot on the globe is Great Britain. I use the term bright lightly as Britain itself is a cesspool.

We are introduced to Theo (Clive Owen) within a minute of the film starting. We follow him for nearly every second of the film. He is our guide to this disgusting world we now inhabit. He works for the government and spends a lot of his time hanging out with his old friend Jasper, played by Michael Caine. Caine’s performance is sensational. Jasper spends pretty much all of his days watching over his wife who is now a mute.

A few days after the news of “Baby” Diego’s death, Theo runs into his ex-wife Julian. She’s played by Julianne Moore. She now runs with a small terrorist group known as The Fishes. Theo’s past with his ex is a troubled one. They seemed to have split after the grieving over the death of their young child got the best of both of them. I guess it’s hard to say he runs into her when in actuality The Fishes kidnap Theo in broad daylight. The Fishes then demand that Theo escorts a mysterious girl out of London.

The girl is an immigrant to Britain. Normally this isn’t a big issue, but with the world in a complete state of disarray, Britain has outlawed anyone from entering the country. Theo hitches a ride with Julian and her cohorts as they take this immigrant (her name is Kee) out of the city to refuge at a cottage in the English country side. What Theo discovers next is the biggest revelation anyone could have made in 20 years. Kee is pregnant.

The rest of Children of Men has Theo taking control of Kee’s destiny into his hands as he guides her to the The Human Project. This project (that may or may not exist) consists of a group of scientists dedicated to finding out why humans cannot conceive anymore and trying to possibly find a cure.

As I mentioned earlier, the filmmaking choices in Children of Men are some of the best any director has made in recent years. Everything on a technical level is brilliant. Most movies would’ve had a narration or an opening crawl explaining the film’s situation. Cuaron instead chooses to explore the plot of the film with information about the collapse of the world being provided in the background. Newspaper clippings, newscasts, protesting marches through the city and massive digital billboards show the audience what kind of world we live in. He trusts his audience to go along with this. All of this works with ease as we unknowingly go along with tons of information being thrown at us.

In terms of the film’s special effects, Cuaron makes the right choice not to distract from the film. Instead he uses them to enhance the world the film occupies. Some shots of London are given a dystopian uplift as tons of huge LCD screens adorn the buildings of the English metropolis. These screens show everything from ads about how to turn in an immigrant to world news. The visual effects also help out with Emmanuel Lubezki’s stunning Cinematography.

Lubezki’s camera work is some of the best this decade, if not the best. In fact, it’s a crime he lost the Oscar for it. Cuaron’s direction and Lubezki’s camera team to put you as close to the action as possible. Using hand held camera work we are thrown alongside Theo as if we were helping him.

Cuaron made a decision to film as much as the film as possible in long takes. This heightens the realism of the film. There are a lot of long takes in the film and if that isn’t enough to keep the actors on their toes, then a couple of exquisitely fine set pieces will. There are two scenes in the film that are downright insane in terms of their difficulty to film.

The first scene involves Theo, Julian, Kee and two members of The Fishes as they are driving through a road in the forest as they are viciously attacked by a marauding gang. The camera is situated in the middle of the car during the attack and basically turns in a 360 degree angle for over 4 minutes showing the carnage being inflicted on the group. The camera work combined with the visual effects creates a realistic nightmare for us as we are situated right in the middle of all the action.

The second shot of brilliance comes at the end of the film and has to be one of the greatest shots ever put forth on the silver screen. Lasting over 6 minutes the camera follows Theo through a hellish warzone as he seeks out to protect Kee from those who mean to do her harm. Following him through bullets, explosions, blown out cars and eventually a dilapidated building; the camera never loses him. Granted the shot is aided by visual effects it’s nonetheless audacious filmmaking.

The production design of the film is top notch. Every scene feels completely authentic to the film’s setting. I can’t imagine the planning of the film or even the shooting of it. The streets of London, even if it’s the last civilized city left, are a complete mess. Trash permeates the streets of the city and makes the city look like a decaying cavity that is Britain’s society.

What makes Children of Men so special is its endearing heart that pushes its characters hope through the most terrible odds. The film is the most violent Valentine ever filmed about the endurance of the human spirit. In a world of absolutely no hope, a man is given the most arduous task of his life. Everything is stacked against him. What do you even do with the only child born in 20 years? Do you trust a group who wants to use the baby as a symbol for a society to overthrow its government? Or do you take it to a one that may not even exist? Children of Men throws Theo head first into these tribulations.

What I love about the film is how it presents hope. Hope is one of the hardest things I’ve ever had to describe. Hope is a thing not guaranteed. I first saw the film during a time in my life where I was pretty down and out. When I finished it, I wasn’t given the answers I needed, but instead I was filled with the confidence I needed to make changes.

That’s what makes the film so special. It doesn’t tell you everything but it does supply the idea that anything, no matter how difficult, can be accomplished. The film plays by these rules too. The film ends on a note that doesn’t show you what ends up happening as a result of this pregnant woman. It ends at a pretty abrupt moment. But the point I think most people miss is that this is Theo’s story. Not the pregnant woman’s. When he leaves the story, the film is done. But the idea that something good will come about from all of the hard work is what I think the film is about.

Alfonso Cuaron is a Mexican director of vast talent. He has shown great promise in the past with such films as Y tu Mama Tambien and Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban (easily the best of the series), but Children of Men is Alfonso on another level. His previous films only hinted at what he accomplishes here. There is no stopping him either. The film he is involved with now (Gravity), looks to see him taking his filmmaking to the next step.

Despite its ugliness and crassness, Children of Men is a film of great beauty. Yes, it is very violent and full of brutality. The film, however, shows great moments of tenderness throughout; enough at least to keep our hearts cheering for a happy outcome to all the suffering endured by Theo and Kee. Never has the human spirit suffered a more perilous task in a film. Come for the brilliant filmmaking, stay for the sounds of children’s laughter as the credits run over your screen. Children of Men is one hell of a film.