American Hustle

  With the marginally overrated Silver Linings Playbook behind him, David O'Russell continues his success with a hilariously talented {and familiar} cast.

Directed by: David O'Russell
Released: 2013
Staring: Christian Bale, Amy Adams, Bradley Cooper, Jeremy Renner, & Jennifer Lawrence
Rated: R

While this is not O'Russell's strongest film, it's certainly is his best script.

  O'Russell discovered a successful formula in creating unique and amusing characters; however, strong characters and the actors who portray them can't be relied upon to carry an entire film. 2010's The Fighters and last year's Silver Linings Playbook are solid examples. He takes subjects that could potentially develop into deeper, complex narratives and ultimately turns them into feel good, family success stories. Everyone gets their happy ending, save a politician or two, and the only thing audience members walk away from the film with are smiles on their faces.

Stars Christian Bale & Amy Adams on set with Director David O'Russell.

  David O'Russell again proved his talents in both writing and directing but doesn't deliver anything new to either categories. That being said, American Hustle's script turned out to be one of the best if not  THE BEST and my favorite of 2013. From start to finish I fully embraced this film as a comedy; Jennifer Lawrence in particular was blessed with one of film's most amusingly neurotic and engaging characters of 2013. O'Russell simply knows how to write great characters (with great actors in mind) "I told you not to put metal in the Science Oven!"is bound to be a new staple for film quote fanatics accompanied by "…so they can get married and have children so the Pope can have more followers." and "Tell me the Ice Fishing story!" Near the third act, the story verges on ridiculous; however, a surprise ending certainly justifies some of the rather outlandish circumstances our anti-heroes get themselves into.

  Speaking of anti-heroes, O'Russsell penned quite the ensemble and reunited almost every actor he's worked with in the past three years. Crowd pleaser Jennifer Lawrence does not disappoint; bringing her larger than life personality and injecting it into a character that could have been a whining downer of a woman. Lawrence does some very nice work with this character; the scales are often tipped more towards humor than showcasing true emotion. This role is one where Lawrence's performance mirrored her own personality dangerously close. I don't dislike Lawrence by any means, she's one of my generation's most talented actresses, but I she's teetering on a thin line between character and real personality.

Anyone remember that young, talented unknown actor from Katherine Bigalow's award winning film The Hurt Locker? Oh ya, that young guy…he can act, ya. Ever since The Avengers, I've forgotten that Jeremy Renner is actually quite the talent. His portrayal of the heartbreakingly oblivious Mayor of Atlantic City, Carmine Polito, is adorably innocent and well played. Speaking of Atlantic City, Boardwalk Empire cast member Jack Huston makes a surprisingly pleasant appearance accompanied by another major Hollywood star {no spoilers}
  The main cast of Bradley Cooper, Amy Adams, and Christian Bale are strong and work brilliantly as a whole. American Hustle's script demands strong chemistry between it's leads and Adams, Cooper, & Bale exudes a confidence that MAKE the film. Adams is devilishly versatile playing Cooper and Bale's characters for all they're worth. Slowly rising as one of Hollywoods brightest stars, Adams' role in Hustle showcased her best work. Comparing her performance to Lawrence's proves difficult, the two roles are immensely different; however, Adams' performance is vastly more complex and compelling than Lawrence's.

With his pot belly, comb over and sleazy suits, Bale looks the part of slimy villain but co-star Bradley Cooper ultimately ends up with the title. In past years Cooper's work fell by the wayside, nothing exceedingly impressive. I felt his role in Silver Linings Playbook was overrated…please feel free to pelt me with aggressive insults about how wrong I am. Silver Linings was a NEW role for Cooper, different than the work he'd done in the past and for that I acclaim the performance; however, it was ultimately a performance I feel could have been given by any number of actors. I left Hustle with a similar opinion. Cooper is talented no doubt and I enjoyed him immensely, especially in those perm rods, but I feel it was the strength of script that made the performance so entertaining.

  O'Russell is just too damn good at writing captivating, unique characters and none are more expertly executed than Irving Rosenfeld portrayed by Christian Bale. Bale is relentless and raw, once again completely transforming his physical appearance. A head toe metamorphosis is one thing, generating an equally impressive acting performance is another and Bale pulls its off. His is a seamless, fully developed character that undergoes an emotional development that the audience clearly witnesses from start to finish. Bale owns both his role and the film and was it any other year, this dynamic performance would have earned him a second Oscar. 2013 was an exceptional year for male performances in cinema, the Best Actor category is already bulging despite the absence of two of the best showings by Tom Hanks (Captain Phillips) and Oscar Isaac (Inside Llewyn Davis)

  The sounds, colors, and atmosphere of the 1970's come to life in Hustle, design elements remain consistent and bold from opening studio logos to final credit. Costuming is both hilarious and accurate from Adams' plunging neck lines to Bale's dazzling ascots. This year's Academy Awards will be a closely run race between Catherine Martin for Gatsby and Michael Wilkinson for Hustle. Martin's partnership with Prada resulted in an extraordinary fusion of modern glam and classic silhouette but Wilkinson's devotion to accuracy in 1970's fashion proved just as exciting! Both were stunning and imperative in creating defined worlds for each film; the decision of who takes home Oscar will be a difficult one indeed! A great soundtrack and groovy original score from a personal favorite, Danny Elfman, only boost the quality of Hustle higher.

  Charming, witty, and unashamedly gaudy, American Hustle proved to be a far greater treat than expected. This is nothing new from David O'Russell and doesn't quite match The Fighter in overall direction; however, it's superior to his previous hit Silver Linings Playbook. A strong main and supporting cast play up O'Russell's droll ensemble of characters and appeal to a wide audience.

12 Years a Slave

Steve McQueen's brutally honest film depicts both the best and (mostly) the worst of man kind. 

Directed by: Steve McQueen

Released: 2013

Staring: Chiwetel Ejiofor, Michael Fassbender, Paul Dano, Benedict Cumberbatch, Lupita Nyong'o, & Brad Pitt

Rated: R 

Times Viewed: 1

  Every fall as the weather transforms from glowing warmth to chilling cold, a new film season emerges to draw audiences to theaters. The first budding blooms include previously reviewed films Gravity & Captain Phillips; each release seemingly better than the next. Awards Season may only be in it's early, yet essential months of release, but Steve McQueen's bio-pic 12 Years A Slave may possess what it takes to persist the cold winter winds all the way to March 2nd. 

  12 Years A Slave tells the true tale of Solomon Northup; a free black man, making a living as a violinist in upstate New York before being tricked and sold into slavery.  Frame by frame, director Steve McQueen paints an unrelenting portrait of the human soul in both it's brightest and darkest colors.

Cinematgrapher Sean Bobbitt & Director Steve McQueen

  12 Years a Slave is meticulously crafted, each individual shot looks as though it could be a masterpiece painting. The angles at which cinematographer Sean Bobbitt and McQueen shoot are unique, fresh, and fascinating. Wether it be Benedict Cumberbatch standing in a door frame with Chiwetel Ejiofor at his feet; or Ejiofor hanging from a tree, the source of his punishment and suffering, an unfinished cabin looming in the background, the imagery and iconicism are breathtaking. No frame was shot without the closest consideration, and every shot is intentional and for that reason, powerful.

  From the beginning scenes of the film McQueen uses camera angles, light and sound to establish the right from the wrong, the natural from the unnatural. The film begins with Solomon cutting sugar cane but moves quickly into another scene later that night in which he and a fellow female slave become intimate. The scene was shot from a tight, overhead, horizontal view, the characters only visible from the chest down. The abruptness of the scene is somewhat jarring in not only it's placement in the film but also the angle at which it was shot, with both actors heads situated far screen right. The lighting is cold and harsh. Another rapid cut to atheistically contrasted shot; Solomon and his wife sit in bed in upright vertical positions. A warm light is cast around them and both actors are centered screen, a comfortable distance from the audience. The transition from one intimate scene to another create a vivid image to emotionally influence the audience as to what feels warm and safe, verses cold and uncomfortable. 

  "Uncomfortable" is a word many would use to describe any number of scenes in 12 Years A Slave but eliciting an emotion from an audience is the sign of a true director. McQueen utilizes not only camera angles/light but also manipulates sounds and ABSENCE of sound. A score by Hans Zimmer feeds the desolate undercurrent of the film but rises when called upon to become a tool of heightened drama. Sound builds and builds in moments of strife; however, once action has been taken, the audience is left with nothing but the bodily sounds of the characters, accompanied by silence. It's this silence that delivers the true impact of suffering better than any motif ever could. 

Our main character left hanging by a rope, his toes sloppily grace the mudded ground below last for an "uncomfortable" amount of time. No synthetic sound is heard, and with nothing but staggered breathes and the call of birds, this is the most powerful scene in the whole film. Prolonged silences and takes are what drive 12 Years a Slave and turn a possible generic period film into Oscar GOLD.

The beautiful Lupita Nyong'o as Patsey along side Michael Fassbender & Chiwetel Ejiofor. 

12 Years A Slave has quite the list of Hollywood names, those names however are reputable, respected names. 

  Adds are selling this as a Brad Pitt film when in reality his total screen time can't equal more than 15 minutes; that being said, he gives a well acted performance. Pitt's hand is more in producing than acting which, I have no complaints about. It takes a strong and humble actor to have so much invested in a production and yet take such a small role. Pitt's eye and and status in film making have matured immensely over the past 10+ years and I can't help but feel my sense of respect for him, as both actor and person, grown.  

Chiwetel Ejiofor, Benedict Cumberbatch & Paul Dano 

Benedict Cumberbatch's role as plantation owner Ford plays as the contrasting figure to Michael Fassbender's maniacally cruel and unhinged Edwin Epps. Ford, while a slaver non the less, displays acts of kindness, generosity, and humanity. Cumberbatch was a perfect choice for the role, not only a goodnatured face but he also emits a disposition to match. His range of work in 2013 alone must be noted and applauded. I find it hard to believe that this man on screen is the same who plays the cheeky Sherlock Holmes and intimated nerds world round as the ruthless Khan. Benedict Cumberbatch is a rising star who shows no signs of slowing down...and I hope he doesn't.

  Our leading man Chiwetel Ejiofor, a relative unknown to both me and most likely the average movie goer, gives a performance that is nothing short of superior. To pull the truth and raw emotion from a story and script such as this is a feat daunting to any actor, no matter what their status. Ejiofor demonstrates a fearlessness and force that radiates through the screen. As I wrote before, 12 Years A Slave features numerous prolonged scenes of silence with nothing but the actor and perhaps a breath of wind. These scenes could have become dull and lifeless but Chiwetel Ejiofor emotes pain, trepidation, and hope all through his eyes. He knows how to utilize his face without seeming overdramatic and mime-esque. When he does speak, his delivery is believable and powerful.

 

Closely tied with Ejiofor for best performance in this film is unsurprisingly Michael Fassbender. The audience isn't sure whether he's a racist or a sadist, or just plain insane, but what Michael Fassbender creates is nearly beyond words. He demonstrates a calmness that makes his character all the more dangerous and terrifying; a burning and intense gaze accompanies words that had many an audience member shaking their head and murmuring in disgust. Edwin Epps is an unforgiving man, holding true to the belief that these people are his property and he many do with his property as he chooses. In the same fashion, Fassbender's method and performance are just as unforgiving. He could have gone complete passion and emotion, yelling and gesturing about, but he saves it for when it counts...a silent attack that explodes at the slightest push. Michael Fassbender has proved time and time again to be one of the best performers working in cinema today in for his role in 12 Years A Slave I'd be shocked if he didn't receive an Academy Award nomination for Best Supporting Actor.

  Paul Geomati makes a brief but note worthy appearance and I've never heard an audience applaud so loudly as they did when Paul Dano's character was beaten by Solomon. THAT is a true testate to the power of acting and the influence it can have on an audience. Where Fassbender's character had a quiet  yet deranged force behind it, Dano was it's counterpart. His performance as the overseer Tibeats on Ford's plantation is a boiling pot of superiority and temperament, quick to jump on any slave that shoots him a definite eye and acting rashly with no concern for law and order.

  The performances in 12 Years a Slave were the strongest to have graced in screen in all of 2013 and I will be shocked if there's not one or more cast member who's nominated for an Academy Award. For all of it's successes, the film does get heavy. With very few, if any light moments, the film may prove hard for some to sit through. It's an intense emotional roller coaster from start to finish, but the quality of the production and performances make it well worth the strife. Moving in more ways than one and important in the fact this is not an African American movie, it's an AMERICAN movie. One of the greatest countries in the world, America is also one who's held a blood-soaked ledger.  Steve McQueen reminds us how important our history is, he shows us the good, the bad, and the worst of ALL Americans.

  The only other obstacle I see 12 Years facing is what I've come to call the "Lincoln Bug." This time last year, everyone had Steven Spielberg's presidential bio-pic to be front runner for the Academy's highest award; however, following it's release, interest in the film dissipated and soon it lost to thriller Argo. The problem with Lincoln was it was all talk no action....what everyone thought would be a stirring drama turned out to be a Daniel Day-Lewis performance piece filled with the President telling lengthy stories and jokes...while all performances were excellent (I did cry) as a whole, Lincoln was one of my biggest disappointments of last year. Honestly I don't think 12 Years will suffer the same fate...it's equal parts performance drama and cinematic beauty along with severe depictions of plantation life.

  12 Years a slave received a rousing reception at The Uptown Theater with both the 7:00 and 10:00 shows selling out, the 7:00 showing by 3:00pm! There was not a dry eye in the house during the final scene and credits. Goosebumps, cheers, and tears were a plenty throughout the film; this is one film that MUST not be missed for both it's cinematic achievements  and outstanding cast.

Les Miserables

That awkward moment when you and your drunk friends plan a revolution and NO ONE shows up...

Directed by: Tom Hooper

Released: 2012

Staring: Hugh Jackman, Russell Crowe, Anne Hathaway, Eddie Redmayne, Sasha Baron Cohen, Helena Bonham Carter, Amanda Seyfried Samantha Barks, & Colm Wilkinson

Rated: PG-12

Times Viewed: 3

  Hipster musical Morgan has to say this...I am terrified by the obsession that people have with this film. Yes, It's a pretty good movie but the musical is MUCH better. It's just kinda scary. TUMBLR, FACEBOOK, TWITTER, PINTREST, YOUTUBE, people are posting Les Mis non stop everywhere...I mean good, great...if it gets you interested in the music and the book bravo but...ah...so much everywhere. 

  So here's how I've watched this movie. The first time I watched it, I was blown away by the sheer scale and amped up music score. I'm quite used to listening to the original Broadway cast recording from 198(1?) So lots-o synthesizer, but great voices.  Then, as with any movie, you rewatch it and see...well just things you didn't see and aren't necessarily looking for. Things to poke fun at...like an older sibling poking fun at the younger. You do it out of love; not because you wish any hard feelings...it's just too funny not to. 

Honestly, "Honest Trailers" are the best. 

Bah, so I suppose I have to get it out of the way now...The LIVE singing. Duh, duh, Duuuuuhn!

  So the first time I heard about this I was like OH MY GOSH! THAT SOUNDS AWESOME! GREAT IDEA...MORE ACTING INSTEAD OF REHEARSED SINGING! Umm...ya I take that back. Again, a good IDEA but just executed...poorly? In reality this has NOTHING to do with the singing abilities of the actors, except poor Russell Crowe and possibly Amanda Seyfried, but let's think about this. Making a movie and performing in a musical are two very different things. Movies have takes. Take after take after take. And when you do a take multiple times you are going to get tired, your VOICE is going to get tired. This leads to awkward pauses, sing talking, and all over poor quality of singing. Take Anne Hathaway. Yes her performance while singing "I Dreamed a Dream" was heart wrenching and worthy of an Oscar, the actual song itself has some horribly low low notes and terribly troubling high notes. Apologies, but I must speak the truth! Chorus is good. Individuals not on key...just sounds...eh...not sure what to make of it...

I'm just not a fan of it. And really, I see all these people walking around campus listening to the movie soundtrack on their iPods and I'm just like HOW? It's about 45% talk singing. No lie. Not music. Monologue-ing. 

Also, they fudged up my favorite songs "Love Montage/A Heart Full of Love" But that might have been Amanda Sigfasddsfjlkj fault. And that's all I'm going to say to that...

     

   So APART from the live singing/singing EVERYTHING, This was a fantastically made film. Tom Hooper, who you all may know, is the relatively new, Oscar winning director of The Kings Speech and the brilliant yet under-viewed The Damed United. This man is the KING of the period piece. He is the Duke of Detail and the Count of the CGI Crane shot! Ehehe ok not that the later of the two is really that impressive but this man takes everything little thing into account when directing. Even teeth! Genius he is, Tom Hooper had the make up department make caps for the majority of the cast becaauuse if you're singing with you trap wide open (Anne Hathaway has an unbelievably large mouth) the audience WILL see each and every one of your teeth. And in the mid 1800's dentistry wasn't the industry it is today. 

Anne Hathaway sports a less than lovely smile during her performance as Fantaine.

  For the amount of detail Hooper puts in his films he works at polar opposites of shot ratios. The film opens with a huge (cgi :S ) descending crane shot and uses this technique several more times throughout the film; however, when it's not CGI, there are some beautiful cinematographic moments set in the mountains earlier in the film. Wide shots are then contracting by...

   Yes...Tom Hooper loves, looves his extreme close-ups. Not saying they're horrible but can you just back it up like two frames and you'll be good. There are also a couple of odd angles he enjoys shooting at...maybe Hooper is friends with J.J. Abrams...psh Anything is possible. 

  So how's the cast? Obviously there won't be much to talk as far as acting is concerned but there is still quite a bit to be said about this star studded cast. 

  The Good

          Hugh Jackman, Sasha Baron Cohen and Eddie Redmayne/Samantha Barks.

  Casting Hugh Jackman in the leading role was, without a doubt, the best decision that was made in the film. Jackman is not just a movie star, he IS a singer. He's been successful in many a musical. In other words, he is the experienced one. Jackman ages his voice with the character and while his vibrato may be a BIT for me, he is the one who most effectively utilizes the new concept of live singing...Jackman does have some pitch issues at times when he EMOTES ehehe, but so does everyone else.

  Sasha Baron Cohen...I remember I when I thought you were just that nasty Borat man who ran around in string speedos. Thankfully over the past few years, Baron Cohen has proved me wrong. I now LOVE seeing this man. He is a fantastic character actor. He can transform himself into anyone yet still always seems to have such a self aware presence. Take Hugo, a "serious" role for him but with many added humorous attributes. He's just a treat and bumps any film up ten notches.  

Eddie Redmayne...Not only are you completely adorable, but I LOVE YOUR VOICE. Please, Eddie Redmayne, skip hollywood, get a some more lessons and and become an OPERA SINGING! With some training he could be fantastic. 

Eddie Redmayne can creep on me anyday. Anyone else see him in My Week With Marilyn? He was wonderful!

    I really enjoyed the fact that they cast a relatively unknown actress for the part of Eponine. Samatha Barks was perfect for the part. She didn't over act and she didn't under act. She was spot on. 

The Bad

        Russell Crowe and Amanda Seyfried. 

In interviews Top Hooper said they needed someone who could go toe to toe with Jackman both physically and in acting ability...so they chose...Russell Crowe? Russell, Russell Crowe. YOU TIRED! You tried SO hard and it's sometimes painful to listen to and watch. You were uncomfortable...and so were we...But you tried.

Amanda Seyfrinedajs;kldjfaks FOR THE LIFE OF ME I WILL NEVER BE ABLE TO TYPE YOUR NAME WITHOUT LOOKING IT UP AT LEAST 10 TIMES!

    I have to hand it to A.S., if you would have told me 5 years ago that she would have a career after Mean Girls, I would have laughed in your face. After playing such a memorable role like Karen in the unforgettable Mean Girls I would have thought it impossible for her to get past the dumb ditzy teen. But SHE DID! So while she is not my favorite, I must say GO GIRL. Really. Good for you.  Yes, some of her movies are stupid (Mama Mia) and some of them are quite bad (Red Riding Hood, a guilty pleasure of mine) but she keeps trekking on and landing roles so...good for you! And I must say, if I had to choose between A.S. and Taylor Swift, I'm ecstatic that they chose A.S. If only she could have gotten a couple more lessons. The role of Cossette is basically the role of Johanna in Sweeney Todd. You're locked inside a house with a considerably older man, (who in the case of Les Mis is sexy, buff and scruff Hugh Jackman in stead of a creepy judge who raped your mother and imprisoned your father) you meet a boy through a window/gate and without a proper conversation fall desperately in love with him before YOU know his name even though HE knows yours. And he says your name...all the time. But seriously, this I think this soprano part must have been written for the same girl or at least is always sung by one that sounds like a song bird gargling lemonade. It's sooo sweet but toooo much weeble-wobble. And RANDOM, but is anyone else creeped out by her overly large eyes? In Les Mis especially...they age her too much. Just looks disturbed. To reconcile this insult, she did look HAWT at the Academy Awards...she made my Best Dressed list.

Perhaps it's just me, but she's not looking too good here...

mid 30's I'd say...Step away Marius!

  As much as I pick at her for singing, guess what? SHE ADMITS that she's not the best and needs more work. I read an article in which she expressed her interest in joining a show like Wicked on Broadway but came right out and said she wasn't (vocally) ready. Again, GOOD FOR HER! This is not sarcasm, I am truthfully happy for her. Unlike most young actresses, she recognizes he weaknesses and wants to get better. 

...Know what? GOOD LUCK! 

Elegant and lovely, Amanda SEYFRIED at the 2013 Academy Awards.

Overall, I like this movie. The singing is not singing and some times is can be laughable, but Tom Hooper knows how to MAKE beautiful, moving films and it's a fantastic musical by itself. Musical are never intended to be taken too seriously and that's why sometimes you just need to let things go and flow.

       Random thoughts while watching the last hour of the movie

-THERE IS A barricade boy WHO LOOKS LIKE CONAN!  

Coco. Found.

-Hugh Jackman is too sexy to be anyone's father. Open billowy white shirt, manly man chest. This is inappropriate. 

-CGI Crane shots

-SBCOHEN killin' it

-so many freckles...

-Tennant Hair.

-Hugh Jackman basically wills himself to die. It's ok. 

-Valjean and Fontine are going to have ghost sex. ANGST! ANGST! ANGST!

-WHENEVER I SEE COLM WILKISON I JUST FEEL LIKE CRYING BECAUSE HE WAAS JEAN VALJEAN!!! 

-OK that last song is overly impressive and moving. Nice job.

-CAMERON dUCKIN MACKINTOSH! If you ever want to kiss a Broadway producer, he's the one. (He and Andrew Lloyd Webber are buds)

-That "Suddenly" song ya I don't like that stuff...ick.

Anna Karenina (2012)

  A revolutionary vision that stops mid revolution. 

Directed by: Joe Wright
Released: 2012
Staring: Keira Knightly, Jude Law, Aaron Taylor-Johnson, Matthew Macfadyen, Domhnall Gleeson, Alicia Vikander, Michelle Dockery, Kelly Macdonald, & Emily Watson.
Rated: R
Times Viewed: 1

  If you know me, you know THIS is my kind of film. Victorian bustles, lace, taffeta and tool. Hats and feathers. Jewels and dramatic silouhettes. Yes, I'll admit I'm a costume whore. Periodical costume whore. Victorian periodical costume whore to be specific. I love theater and fireworks, magic and romance. Needless to say, when this trailer was released I was a tad bit excited. Not only did it star the lovely and talented Keira Knightly along with Jude Law, but was being directed by Joe Wright; master of the modern day romantic period piece. This makes sense yes? Yes. For those of my readers who are not up on the know who of directors, Joe Wright directed Atonement and Pride & Prejudice.  With an academy acclaimed director and killer ensemble of actors, check out that list above, I had this one pegged to beg a big contender at this year's academy awards. Come awards season though, the film seemed to be all but forgotten about in every category save Costume Design, Art Direction, and Cinematography & Score. This leaves the viewer believing this was solely a visually accomplished film and nothing else. So what happened? After FINALLY tracking down a copy of the film I think I have an idea.

While visually striking, the vast scale and grandeur of Joe Wright's Anna Karenina sometimes engulfs the actors; swallowing performances and the well developed production.

Now, I'm not going to lie, I've never read the entire novel. It was one of those HUGE pieces of classic literature I picked up in 8th grade thinking I could finish it and soon discovered it was not meant to be. From 8th grade, I felt I simply didn't have the time to finish the lengthy book, so Anna Karenina has never made it's way from my "Want to read" to "Read." shelf....I tell you all this to reiterate that this review will not be a comparison of book and film (screen play) adaptation. I will be reviewing visual aspects of the film along with acting/character progression in relation to THIS FILM.

Set, cinematography, and an unique approach to a classic

  The visual/cinematographic aspects without a doubt, are what drive this film to existing apart from other period, costume dramas. The revolutionary idea behind the spectacle is setting all scenes in St. Petersburg on (a) stage and transitioning the scenes as a play transitions sets. I wish I could find a clip of the opening scene because it's that scene that establishes to the audience the new and unique road that Wright has chosen to take. The bustling, "fake", acting, world of city life in St. Petersburg is contrasted by natural, organic, sweat and blood "reality" of life in the country. The transformation between the staged city and the natural city, while absolutely brilliant, lost me at times In various shots it seemed as though there should be even MORE over exaggeration or at least transitional method from stage to field. On several occasions I wondered if the actors really had left the set of the city or whether it was just an abrupt stop of the set changing motif the film carried. I honestly thought the revolutionary vision had stopped mid revolution. This was until I realized that the stage was the city and the large, open fields were the "real world" of the country...but this realization didn't happen until the film was almost over! As the film progressed, I though they had just forgotten the set changes; using them simply as a lure to gain the audiences attention for the first hour and a quarter...but that would be an amateur mistake. While the set metamorphosis IS used LESS as the film advances, it's not completely abandoned.

At work in the fields 

  This being said, I truly loved the concept of the set transitions and wish they would have used it to the extent they did in the opening and establishing scenes. The form is so unique to film, the viewer CAN NOT stop watching. It's an engaging technique that reminded me quite a bit of Kenneth Branagh's Hamlet from 1996. *One of my favorite films* While Branagh used cuts in his film, in many scenes servants are seen moving certain set pieces and working in the back, transitioning the scene from one location to another. 

The films even bare similar posters as well as several artistic shots and set design.

As Jude Law throws torn pieces of a letter into the air, the shreds turn into falling snow. Beautiful

This action is reminiscent of the wedding scene at the beginning of Ken Branagh's Hamlet (1996)

The "Play" of Anna Karenina's life in St. Petersburg is set within the "Play" of the stage.

"The play's the thing, wherein I'll catch the conscience of the king!"

Hamlet also deals with plays inside plays, who's acting, who's catching who, what is real and what is for show ect. ect. Branagh's adaptation deals heartily with the young Prince putting on a show for his Uncle the King. The film features an abundance of rich gold tassels and fringe along with velvety red curtains. Anna Karenina utilized many of the same decorations.

Anna Karenina

Hamlet

   The sets designs were amazing and it's a shame Sarah Greenwood & Katie Spencer didn't win the Oscar for Production Design or Seamus McGarvey for Cinematography. Sadly though, I feel like the design and over designed approach out weighed the story and performances. This film went from a beautiful retelling of classic in a unique way, to a film who's main focus is it's design and distinct staging. I believe Branagh's Hamlet could handle the lush furnishings because the performances were just as bold. Not say the acting in Anna Karenina isn't fantastic, because it is, I just feel the story was told more through visuals and less through acting/performances/words.
       Now for me this wasn't a horrible thing, I enjoy spectacle/pomp/avant-garde, it's just a fact to keep in mind if you're wondering why you the viewer didn't see more of Anna Karenina during awards season.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

One member of the crew who DID receive an Oscar for her work on Anna Karenina was the impecable Jaquline Durran. 

To the costumes....the costumes the costumes the costumes. Honestly I cannot begin to describe how GORGEOUS and detailed every character's costume is in this film...I can try my best and show you every screen shot, but it wouldn't begin to describe how wonderfully Jaquline Durran's pieces move and work on screen.  She is a beautifully gifted designer that believes in collaboration with the actors to help develop the character's they've created from the film...an invaluable characteristic to have while working in film.
  In interviews, Durran has stated that Joe Wright's original concept was to mix 50's couture with 1870's silhouettes. In an unimaginable way, these two time periods mesh together almost seamlessly. Many of the fabirics used in the late 1800s (taffeta, brocades, silks of course) were hugely popular in couture houses of the 1950s...specifically Dior and Balenciaga. Not only are similar fabrics and necklines used, but  the majority of hair accessories are HUGE nods to fashionable, rich women of the 50's....when I say hair accessories I mean feathers. The use of feathers ares dramatic and unique. Instead of featuring a single plume as many films of the late 1800's or Victorian era did, Durran bends, clips, and position the feathers into new and fascinating shapes that seem both old and new. She remains true to the respective period, alludes to the 50s, but keeps the whole film relevant without loosing the characters in heaps of fur, feathers, and tool.  Here's a great behind the scenes short with  interviews from Jaquline Durran and some of the main cast...

There is a reason she won the Oscar people....

Jaquline Durran with some costumes from Anna Karenina

A very 50's pill box hat.

Another pill box hat as well as swooping 50's neck line.

Touch ups and a gorgeous feather hair piece. 

FUR!

Breath taking!

~~~~~~

Acting

  Now I'm not going to touch much on the quality of the acting in the film because when you have Keira Knightly, Jude Law, Matthew Macfayden, and Michelle Dockery you can assume, quite correctly, that the performances are great. Not to contradict myself though, sometimes the lavish epicness of the film does swallow the actors a bit leaving the story telling up the visuals and "wow factor" versus the the pure talent of it's main cast.

Keira Knightly- As the leading lady she does fantastic as always, but in this role Knightly did something that I don't believe she's ever done before. She made me hate her character...this doesn't pop up till the very end, but after hours of her not making up her mind, going crazy and ultimately killing herself I didn't feel much pity for the character in the last 20 minutes or so. I feel this is a strong quality though...it shows the audience developing with the character. I went from liking this young, fashionable  lady, to feeling bad for her, and ultimately not shedding a tear when she dies...cold hearted am I? Perhaps, but any actor that can make me feel a strong emotion one way or the other towards a character  has already done their job.

Jude Law- I felt the same way towards his character as I did towards Knightly's only in reverse. Frist hate, then pity...an interesting character.

Aaron Taylor-Johnson- I can't really say much for the young, somewhat unknown who played Anna's lover Vronsky. He was fine, neither a nuisance nor an asset...simply a pretty face who delivers lines in an obsessed, gentlemanly like fashion.

Matthew Macfadyen- Oh my gosh MR. DARCY I LOVE YOU'RE MUSTACHE! I say this in all honestly that I bore the most ridiculous grin whenever Matthew Macfadyen's character Oblansky was on screen...and NOT just because he IS Mr. Darcy...it was because he was so NOT Mr. Darcy. Oblansky is a total social deviant; loud, smiling, having affairs and not really apologizing for any of it. I. loved. it. A great performance that shows Macfadyen's true range as an actor.

Reunited and it feels SO GOOD! 

Michelle Dockery- Although her role is somewhat small, Michelle Dockery leaves her stamp on the character to the point where you're not sure if it's Princess Myagkaya (uh...Russian names) or Lady Mary Crawley. So yes, she does play somewhat of the same crass yet truthful character, but she just does it so well! Dockery's character is one of the only one's to remain a true friend to Anna through out her adulterous troubles. Now come on, who WOULDN'T want to have Michelle Dockery as their best bitch friend ready to slash any haters down with her sassy wit and sharp tongue? Plus I really loved her dress...

Michelle Dockery is judging you and it is NOT a secret...

Watching out for her friends and looking lovely in lavender.

Alright and finally if you're not sold on the whole "epic love tragedy affair" nonsense, you can watch for the real love story and the character that I enjoyed most in the film, LEVIN! Freakin' most adorable man in this film. His love for Anna's friend Kitty represents a sincere pure love that Anna and her brother Oblansky will never know.

 

Thomas Hacker I give you exhibit B to our "No Male Gingers Are Attractive" discussion.

I want a rugged ginger, Russian Farmer!!!

So in loooove!

Find me that ginger, get me that ginger, I will MARRY that ginger.

Yeay for the tragic, love sick ginger! In a plum suits no less!

Uh...AND I just discovered that he played BILL WEASLEY in the HP films. It's done.