Joe Wright’s The Soloist is an aesthetically and emotionally brilliant film. Based off of true events, it tells the story of Nathaniel Anthony Ayers Jr., a gifted musician who unfortunately loses any recognizable sanity. The narrator is Steve Lopez, a staff writer with a widely popular column at the LA Times. Mister Lopez, like Ayers, has recently had a few impediments in career and societal areas. These two, after a couple awkward and difficult encounters, develop a bond that helps and educates them both.
Steve Lopez is a journalist whose stories would largely be classified as human-interest stories. He stumbles across Nathaniel Ayers while recovering from researching a Blood Donor Clinic. He hears the muted sound of a violin in the distance and wanders to a statue of Beethoven only to find destitute man playing a damaged and vandalized instrument. The conversation is slow to start and understand, as Ayers continually digresses and deviates via loose tangents in whatever off-hand comment he or Lopez makes. Lopez inquires about a few names written on a palm tree located near the Beethoven effigy and Ayers responds by saying that the names were that of his classmates at Julliard. After confirming this conjecture, Lopez abruptly realizes that Ayers would make a superb subject for his column, which is aptly dubbed Pointwest. Then the madness ensues.
Lopez has dived into the rabbit hole that is Nathaniel Ayers and his crime-filled abode Skid Row. His first column inspires a former musician to donate a proper cello to Ayers. Lopez subsequently passes along the gift to Ayers who is taken aback by the generosity. And so begins the slow and difficult process towards rehabilitation. Nathaniel can readily be categorized as a contrarian. He opposes adopting an apartment as a home, he resists playing his newly acquired instrument at the Lamp Shelter, he fights efforts by Lopez to have his mental disorders professionally diagnosed and treated. All were attempts by Steve, whom Nathaniel says he has chosen as his God, to normalize Nathaniel. Lopez constantly worries if his actions are best method to improve Nathaniel’s situation, largely because of Ayers’ hostility to change. Do not mistake Lopez’s efforts as invariably against Ayer’s wishes because such sentiment is far from the truth. Lopez invites Ayers to a practice recital at the LA Philharmonic which Ayers immensely enjoys, and there are many more examples to boot. After ardent opposition, Nathaniel makes a few concessions, such as moving into the apartment, but by and large Ayers remains that unforgettable, schizophrenic character.
The Soloist incorporates all elements of beautiful and masterful cinema. It is aesthetically pleasing in its shots of LA’s poorer communities and infrastructural marvels; it conveys a beautiful story via realistic dialogue, wonderful directing and acting, and a bit of well-placed paranoia. The two main characters have a wonderful relationship and acts as perfect comic foils. But most importantly, The Soloist finds genius in the most unlikely of places. This film brilliantly integrates comedy, drama, tragedy, and near horror. The Soloist, as Lopez says of Ayers’ music, “will take you home.”
Sunday, April 26, 2009
Monday, April 6, 2009
Che
Che is a supremely entertaining film from the ingenious talent of Steven Soderbergh. Che is a bio-pic centered on the revolutionary life and times of Ernesto ‘Che’ Guevara. It begins with a mundane dinner scene in which Ernesto joins a group comprised of many likeminded revolutionaries, including Fidel Castro. This well-done scene launches the subtitle-dubbed, two-hour epic into a fury of action, passion, and politics.
Soderbergh’s Che is divided into two parts, which are aptly entitled The Argentine and Guerrilla. They run two hours and nine and eight minutes, respectively. The first chronicles Ernesto’s revolutionary triumph in Cuba, and briefly displays his foray into world affairs. The second details Che's attempt to further his socialist ideology into South America. A trip by Ernesto to the UN is shown intermittently throughout Part One in a passé yet functional black-and-white. Coupled with his contentious UN discourse is an interview with Lisa Howard also shot in an effectual black-and-white. Through this query-based medium some striking and poignant lines are delivered that encapsulate one’s image of Che and of the film’s tone. She questions Che about his worldwide acclaim and his politics concerning America-Cuba relations. The rest of the film is devoted Che’s and Fidel’s conquering of Cuba.
It all starts in that aforementioned dinner scene where a band of insurrectionists join together to topple a despotic Cuban leader Batista. Their initial strength is far from sufficient, so after months of further preparation they begin the fight. It is a long and hard-fought battle for both sides, yet in the end the 26th of July Movement is triumphant. With this new found control, Fidel asserts himself as a dictator of sorts (albeit much less repressive than his antagonist Batista). Che is endowed with the position of Head of Industry and was the de facto arbiter of economic policy. Throughout the skirmish, Che’s position oscillates from what would be a general-equivalent to an unassuming recruiter. Che often expresses frustration with Fidel’s leadership and with the movement in general; however, Che puts it best in his New York interview in that, “a revolutionary goes where he is needed.”
There is minuscule time lapse from the first to the second part. The beginning of the Part Two chronicles Che’s departure from Cuba and Fidel’s and the Cuban people’s reaction to said exodus. It then skips straight from his economic leadership in Cuba to his efforts in Bolivia, while glossing over his myriad of failures in Congo, Mozambique, and various other parts of his native South America. This revolution is much less effective than his staggering feat in Cuba. His labors hardly produce a quantifiable positive result; conversely they attract attention to him which he’d rather avoid. The latter half of Che Part Two is Che evading enemy hands. Ultimately, despite Che’s best efforts, the CIA captures, tortures, and executes the dynamic Ernesto Che Guevara. At the close of Part Two, footage is brought back from the first part to remind the audience of Che’s domineering presence and worldwide esteem. It harkens back to the dinner meeting that commenced it all, most notably when Fidel promises Che that he will be permitted to spread this revolutionary fervor across the globe.
All in all, Part One is likely the better film, but incomplete without its counterpart. Part Two was missing some sense of history or tie to world politics as one had in Che’s speech to the General Assembly and his interview with Howard. Both are incredible achievements and together formulate a political and human epic. Soderbergh’s Che will likely never be forgotten and is undoubtedly a masterpiece of bio-pic cinema.
Soderbergh’s Che is divided into two parts, which are aptly entitled The Argentine and Guerrilla. They run two hours and nine and eight minutes, respectively. The first chronicles Ernesto’s revolutionary triumph in Cuba, and briefly displays his foray into world affairs. The second details Che's attempt to further his socialist ideology into South America. A trip by Ernesto to the UN is shown intermittently throughout Part One in a passé yet functional black-and-white. Coupled with his contentious UN discourse is an interview with Lisa Howard also shot in an effectual black-and-white. Through this query-based medium some striking and poignant lines are delivered that encapsulate one’s image of Che and of the film’s tone. She questions Che about his worldwide acclaim and his politics concerning America-Cuba relations. The rest of the film is devoted Che’s and Fidel’s conquering of Cuba.
It all starts in that aforementioned dinner scene where a band of insurrectionists join together to topple a despotic Cuban leader Batista. Their initial strength is far from sufficient, so after months of further preparation they begin the fight. It is a long and hard-fought battle for both sides, yet in the end the 26th of July Movement is triumphant. With this new found control, Fidel asserts himself as a dictator of sorts (albeit much less repressive than his antagonist Batista). Che is endowed with the position of Head of Industry and was the de facto arbiter of economic policy. Throughout the skirmish, Che’s position oscillates from what would be a general-equivalent to an unassuming recruiter. Che often expresses frustration with Fidel’s leadership and with the movement in general; however, Che puts it best in his New York interview in that, “a revolutionary goes where he is needed.”
There is minuscule time lapse from the first to the second part. The beginning of the Part Two chronicles Che’s departure from Cuba and Fidel’s and the Cuban people’s reaction to said exodus. It then skips straight from his economic leadership in Cuba to his efforts in Bolivia, while glossing over his myriad of failures in Congo, Mozambique, and various other parts of his native South America. This revolution is much less effective than his staggering feat in Cuba. His labors hardly produce a quantifiable positive result; conversely they attract attention to him which he’d rather avoid. The latter half of Che Part Two is Che evading enemy hands. Ultimately, despite Che’s best efforts, the CIA captures, tortures, and executes the dynamic Ernesto Che Guevara. At the close of Part Two, footage is brought back from the first part to remind the audience of Che’s domineering presence and worldwide esteem. It harkens back to the dinner meeting that commenced it all, most notably when Fidel promises Che that he will be permitted to spread this revolutionary fervor across the globe.
All in all, Part One is likely the better film, but incomplete without its counterpart. Part Two was missing some sense of history or tie to world politics as one had in Che’s speech to the General Assembly and his interview with Howard. Both are incredible achievements and together formulate a political and human epic. Soderbergh’s Che will likely never be forgotten and is undoubtedly a masterpiece of bio-pic cinema.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
