Entries tagged with “Casey Affleck”.


I am seldom asking such questions, but now I need to ask it. ‘Why did they do this film?’. Seriously. A film may made because the director or the script writer have one or more messages to transmit. In some other cases the message is not that important, and the goal is to entertain. Films have target audiences that go to see it because of the message or because they want to be entertained. Of course, there are better films and not so good films. In the case of ‘s A Ghost Story I can appreciate some moments of good cinema. And yet, I did not get any message and I was deeply bored. Life of ghosts is probably boring, this is what I understood from this film. But why should film audiences be bored also, some of them after paying money for the film tickets? So, please, somebody who understood the messages that I missed, and/or was entertained by this film, please, be kind and help me!

 

source http://www.imdb.com/title/tt6265828/mediaviewer/rm948854016

source http://www.imdb.com/title/tt6265828/mediaviewer/rm948854016

 

A young couple, C for and M for live in a country house. He is a musician, she uses to leave hidden messages in places she lives. He dies suddenly in an accident and has to cope with grieving and continuing to live. He turns into a ghost, with a blanket and two holes (for eyes? we never see them) who watches her, the house, the life that goes on, time. I will stop telling more in order to avoid spoiling whatever pleasure one may get from watching this film. I could understand the feelings. I could relate to what the characters are feeling. But I never understood whether the director really wanted us (viewers) to resonate or just played a big joke. It just did not make sense.

 

(video source A24)

 

There is a game with time that the script is playing with the viewers. I will again avoid spoilers and say no more that time happens differently to ghosts than to humans which is something quite obvious. At some point in time, in a rather unrelated scene a supporting character makes a party drunk speech about Beethoven and the cosmic cycles of the Universe. Are we supposed to understand that we all (human and ghosts) live some smaller cycles within the Big Cycle? Maybe.

and  are fine actors, but they did not help too much in this film. The ghost blanket looks kind of funny, maybe it was supposed to provide the comic counterpoint, actually there are a few more, including a she-ghost in a neighboring house. Cinematography is good, but the overall slowness of the camera movements make feel the about 80 minutes like three hours. Overall it’s a pretentious, boring and confusing experience.

 

I was quite curious to see Manchester by the Sea which was considered one of the best movies of the year and received two Academy Awards. Overall I was quite disappointed (relative to the expectations and the fuzz) and I believe that the success of this film is due merely to the dry season that was 2016 for the American film industry, with a selection missing movies that were both ambitions and well made, and with criteria for promotion and selection as nominees dominated by non-cinematographic arguments.

 

source http://www.imdb.com/title/tt4034228/

source http://www.imdb.com/title/tt4034228/

 

There are certainly many reasons for the film to be interesting. The script is well written (director has authored several smart scripts beyond the ones of his own movies) and builds carefully the characters while gradually dissipating the fog around their past and the reasons they behave as they do with a mix of the progressing story and flash-back scenes interleaved in a clever manner. The atmosphere of the small town by the sea not far from Boston is well described, the characters that populate it are credible, and the cinematography is so poignant that it makes us feel the cold, the wind, the proximity of the sea. All these cannot however hide the thin content of the story – a mix of a tutoring story of a teenage boy orphaned by his father and of guilt caused by the responsibility of a terrible tragedy in the past of the uncle assuming the parenting. One way or another all characters in the story are marked bu grief – how they cope with it and what are the consequences of the disappearance and absence of the dear ones differs. The problem is that the story is thinner than the materials it is built from, and the characters are less interesting from the moment we understand their stories. I happened to see this film three days after 20th Century Women which was also bringing to screen a piece of life including the story of coming of age of a teen boy. What a difference between the characters in the two movies, between the rich and interesting universe of ‘ film and the dry and empty world of the world described by  !

 

(video source Movieclips Trailers)

 

What about acting? A lot was written and said about ‘s performance which earned him the Best Performance by an Actor in a Leading Role Academy Award. I appreciate his acting of a man who hardly survives the grief, but there is nothing unexpected or interesting in the character. He is under shock, he has accesses of violence, he tries to do best to help his nephew, but is and will be forever marked by the tragedy of his life. All these are obvious. Are these worth an Academy Award? I doubt. Young provides actually a good counterpoint with some unexpected but well placed humor for a teenager who sometimes acts as the adult in the difficult relationship with his uncle. The rest of the cast does well, with being wasted talent in a film that is not bad, but is certainly overrated and in many moments simply boring.