PAWN SACRIFICE

Film Review by FIORE

 

Though I was but a wee Bern at the time, I remember the strong emotional context of the Boris Spassky – Bobby Fischer championship chess match.  The height of the cold war, with both Russia and America flexing their muscles to the rest of the world.  In chess, the Russians had no equal, until Fischer.  He was a game wunderkind.  Their match become more than a simple game;  it became an international arm-wrestling contest between the world’s two super powers.  I remember when Fischer began his antics prior to and during the match, I thought it was a chess master controlling the board outside of the board.  Fischer wanted to win and show the world he was the best, but he was up against a Russian juggernaut machine.  It seemed to me, at the time, Fischer was playing a game inside the game.  One would not conceive that notion with the new film about the historical match called Pawn Sacrifice.  

The movie paints Fischer as a certified loony;  an authoritative genius who accomplishes his life’s ambition at an early age and then has nothing more to live for.  The script, penned by Stephen Knight, strongly suggests Fischer hated Communism, not because it is a failed social-government policy resulting in the deaths of millions, but rather because the party took his mother away from him.  

In Knight’s script, Fischer’s mom is heavily involved with the Communist Party of America, wanting to spread Karl Marx’s ideologies to the land of the free.  She even becomes engaged in politics; obviously, she joins the Democratic Party.   Fischer despises his mother for ignoring him in favor of Communism and the various refugee Kosacks she beds to make her mark with the Party.  So, while the country looks to Fischer for patriotic propaganda, Fischer is seeking revenge on the folk who stole his mother away.  I honestly don’t remember that perspective from living through this episode in history.  I do remember the erratic play and behavior Fischer utilized to defeat his Russian adversary.  This perspective, from Knight while different, makes for a good story.  It is especially engrossing when augmented by actually footage of Fischer in his latter years, seen at the film’s end.

KEY SCENES TO LOOK FOR:

1.      THE SIXTH GAME

2.      SPASSKY’S CHAIR

3.       LOST VIRGINITY

Tobey Maguire plays Bobby Fischer.  His manic, eclectic acting style is perfect for this role.   I, for one, thought Maguire’s glory days in Tinseltown were doomed after the shenanigans he pulled with the Spider-Man Trilogy.  Not many would have survived that rather childish jape, but luckily this was before Disney conquered Marvel.  Maguire was smart; he shifted his emphasis to behind the camera and became a member of the Producer’s Guild of America.  He not only stars in this film, but serves as principal producer as well.

Live Schreiber is subtle, non-descript, but effective as Boris Spassky.  He successfully maintains his calculating veneer, until he realizes he is  being played.  Also strong is Peter Sarsgaard as Father Bill Lombardy, the only man to beat both Spassky and Fischer in his younger days, before turning to God.  He is the only one who has a hint at the game Fischer is truly playing.

Before the film began, the screen displayed the MPAA rating.  It’s PG-13, for, among other items, “Historical Smoking”.  I must admit bewilderment.  Is this smoking in an historical context, in which case, what does it matter? Or is this smoking in a most profound manner?  If so, I didn’t see that.  Just another example of Hollywood attempting to be too pigeon-holed in order to appear politically correct.

All told, Pawn Sacrifice is an interesting view.  It may not capture the essence of the patriotism the incident contained, but it does serve as a glimpse into a genius, tortured soul.

THE GRADE FOR PAWN SACRIFICE = B-

LEGEND Review

LEGEND

Film Review by FIORE

Brian Helgeland is a bit of a roller coaster.  Considered one of the more prolific screenwriters in Tinseltown, he loses his panache when he combines his writing with directing.  To date, only two of the seven oeuvres he has written and directed are noteworthy:  PAYBACK, the revenge thriller starring Mel Gibson; and LA CONFIDENTIAL, about corruption in Hollywood with Russell Crowe and Guy Pierce.  His latest writing and directing combination, LEGEND, does not stand next to those two endeavors.  It must be something with the additional duties, because LEGEND drags on more than old ladies leaving church on Sundays.  The middle of the film is so slow, one can literally walk away from the screen, fix a regal repast complete with complimentary wine, and return having missed nothing at all.

LEGEND is the story of the Kray brothers, who ran the underworld in London during the 1960’s.  The Krays were twins from East London and both brothers are played amazingly by Tom Hardy.  Hardy, as I stated in an earlier review of THE REVENANT is challenging Doug Jones as Hollywood’s premiere chameleon actor.  He is nearly unrecognizable in his last four films, catering to the whims of make-up artists and dialogue coaches.  If LEGEND is worth seeing, it is solely to see Hardy’s performance.

KEY SCENES TO LOOK FOR:

1.      THE JAIL GUARD

2.     THE HAMMER FIGHT

3.     THE BROTHERS CONFLICT

Helgeland’s meandering script is not aided by Editor Peter McNulty, who, after a rather slow start, teases viewers with a sprinkling of action, only to sink into a morass of rambling, clichéd soap opera drama.  Dick Pope is a stalwart in the British Society of Cinematographers, but he is doing mere yeoman duty here; it’s good, but not outstanding, and he is usually outstanding.  There are several key scenes in which the matting is noticeable between the two brothers.

Besides Hardy, LEGEND features Emily Browning, David Thewlis and Chazz Palminteri.  All attempt to help raise LEGEND to a comfortable level, but truly, the script is just not there.  The presentation of the material is suspect as well.  For two brothers ruling a criminal empire for so long, one wonders why they surrounded themselves with misfits.  The supporting cast seems to be purloined from THE GANG THAT COULDN’T SHOOT STRAIGHT. 

LEGEND is receiving considerable notice from various film societies.  This is probably due to Hardy’s performance, and because one of the brothers, Ronald, was openly gay.  This theme in a film is seen by Hollywood sycophants as brave, bold and daring.  Just look what they did to Bruce Jenner.  Unfortunately, for the 93% of the population who is not homosexual, these themes are becoming mundane and largely annoying.

 

The only reason to sit through LEGEND is to watch Tom Hardy.  If you’re not into great acting pieces, skip this one.  It tries to be a gangster film, but in the end, fails miserably.

THE GRADE FOR LEGEND = D

THE REVENANT Review

THE REVENANT

Film Review by FIORE

I am beginning to like the manner which Alejandro G. Inarritu approaches filmmaking.  With the exception of his dreadful BIRDMAN, he brings an interesting perspective to his endeavors.  That said, Inarritu seems to be falling prey to Hollywood trappings, allowing his story telling to expand vast deserts of time, rather than relaxing in a comforting oasis.  In his latest, THE REVENANT, he combines with Editor Stephen Mirrione, ACE, to tell a simplistic tale of revenge in over two and a half hours.  This causes THE REVENANT to drag mercilessly.  There are no surprises; everyone knows where the film is travelling.  The saving grace to the movie is without question, Cinematographer Emmanuel Lubezki, ASC/AMC.

The great Northwest is largely uncharted and uncivilized terrain, inhabited by Indians, the French and Americans.  THE REVENANT begins with a group of independent contractors hired to hunt pelts and furs.  The group is taking care of business, without BTO, when they are beset by Indians.  The savages want to purloin the collected pelts and trade them for guns and horses with the French.  Never trust the French.  Meanwhile, the guide for the pelt-hunters, Hutch Glass, played by Leonardo DiCaprio, is mutilated by a grizzly bear while on a seek and destroy mission for food.  The Americans are forced to stash their booty and flee the Indians, while tending to the badly injured Glass.  This does not bode well with John Fitzgerald (Tom Hardy), who feels Glass is at the core of the troop’s troubles.  He kills Glass’ son and buries Glass alive.  Naturally, our protagonist will not rest until he avenges this heinous act.

DiCaprio continues to be a stalwart in Tinseltown.  He proves, with each performance, he has talent to spare.    For THE REVENANT, it’s not his line delivery that marks his presentation, but rather his facial emotions.  His enactment is visual and is aided immensely by the work of Lubezki.  He uses graphic vectors, 360 spin shots and double zoom POVs to enhance both the characters and establishing shots.  Meanwhile, Tom Hardy is battling Doug Jones for the label of chameleon actor.  Hardy has started off 2016 with three roles and in each, he is barely recognizable.

Unfortunately, there is nothing more THE REVENANT has to offer.  Those old enough to have seen films in the 70’s will easily note the movie bears a striking resemblance to Richard Harris’  MAN IN THE WILDERNESS.  Both plotline and natural hardships are similar.   Screenwriter Mark Smith’s adaptation is analogous to taking the long way home.  In addition, he incorporates a multitude of injury inconsistencies as Glass recuperates.   For instance, how can a man, who can barely walk due to back injuries, have enough dexterity to snag a fish out of a running stream?

THE REVENANT is another in a growing list of Hollywood films attempting to draw self-importance by adding extended scenes.  It detracts here; causing THE REVENANT to drag and plod along until the final reel, which viewers will know is coming right after the first reel.  If not for the excellent cinematography of Lubezki, this one could be skipped.

THE GRADE FOR THE REVENANT = C