Birdman (2014)

Winner of the Academy Award for Best Picture in 2014, and subtitled 'The Unexpected Virtue of Ignorance', this film is a monumental achievement for all involved, even if it feels a bit too much like art for art's sake in my opinion.

Riggan Thompson (Michael Keaton) is an actor who enjoyed moderate success years ago with his superhero character named Birdman. Now, many years later, he is trying to revive his career with a stage adaptation of a Raymond Carver short story, that he has written, is directing and starring in. And it previews on Broadway tonight, but it is definitely not ready.

When a co-star, Ralph (Jeremy Shamos) is knocked unconscious during a final rehearsal, he storms out and quits the production, threatening to sue. Mind you, this isn't entirely a bad thing, as Riggan couldn't stand him, nor could Riggan's manager Jake (Zach Galifianakis).

Another co-star, Lesley (Naomi Watts) suggests her friend and fellow actor Mike Shiner (Edward Norton) to play the role, and he steps in (at incredibly short notice) and takes on the role that Ralph vacated.

Add to the mix Riggan's daughter Sam (Emma Stone), with whom he is relatively estranged, but trying to get back in touch with, and you have the ingredients for quite a confrontational story.

Oh, and I almost forgot to mention, Riggan is going slightly crazy, hearing Birdman's voice in his head, and believing himself to possess god-like powers of telekinesis and so on.

The very first thing anyone would notice about this film is the fact that it takes place entirely in one, two-hour long, camera shot (or at least it appears so, with some clever edits and camera tricks). The effect of this is in one sense unsettling, adding to the overall psychological feel of the film, and at the same time, drawing the audience right into the centre of the action from beginning to end.

It also works well as a parallel of the play that the film largely centres around, as there don't seem to be any 'edits', it all just feels like one long unified piece.

The script, by Alejandro G. Iñárritu & Nicolás Giacobone & Alexander Dinelaris & Armando Bo, which incidentally also won an Academy Award in 2014, is absolutely superb. Again, as with the single-camera-shot idea, the script feels very much like a stage play, as we observe these characters confronting one another throughout, and dealing with their conflicts largely through their dialogue, and so on, which is very much the way things are done in a stage play as opposed to a film.

Emmanuel Lubezki's cinematography, already briefly mentioned above, also won him an Academy Award that same year, and rightly so in my opinion. The way this film has been shot is just so clever, and the use of shadow (predominantly to cover the edit points) is done so well. But trust me, the edits happen so quickly you won't notice them; the whole thing feels like one continuous moving shot, and Lubezki's talent in pulling this off to such an extent is clear.

The score by Antonio Sanchez consists entirely of a drum kit, which in some sections of the film, is actually part of the on-screen action (such as when Riggan and Shiner are walking down Broadway and walk past a busking drummer). As such, the score never takes away from anything happening on screen, and it certainly does not overpower the action at any point, as it is only the one instrument, and thanks to a decent sound mix, never stands out in any obtrusive sense.

I am a little reluctant to discuss the performances of the cast here, as I'm still not entirely sure how it is they are supposed to function. In the case of every single performer in the film, overacting seems to be the soup of the day, with no exceptions. When someone wants to make a point, they yell. If they need to show any emotion, they yell. The entire film feels like one big joke to everyone, it would seem.

However, I don't know if this is intentional - with the director making a statement about the nature of stage performers versus film performers - or if the cast are just plain bad at what they do. I tend to believe the former is true, as many of the cast have given amazing performances in other films they have done before and since.

Director Alejandro G. Iñárritu has made a wonderfully cinematic piece of art here, but it feels just a little too self-indulgent for my tastes. I'm not saying it's bad - because it's actually very good - but there's only so much of it I can take.

7 out of 10.

While We're Young (2014)

While We're Young - directed by Noah Baumbach - is the story of forty-somethings Josh and Cornelia (Ben Stiller and Naomi Watts) and their growing friendship - and in some cases idolisation - with twenty-somethings Jamie and Darby (Adam Driver and Amanda Seyfried).

Josh is a documentary filmmaker who has been working on his current project for the last ten years, meaning he and Cornelia have had to forgo other things they might have wanted to do with their lives. Unfortunately for Josh, there is something not quite right with the documentary, and he doesn't seem to be able to work out what that something is.

When he meets Jamie and his wife Darby, there is something about this young energetic couple that awakens something in him and in Cornelia.

Jamie is also trying to make a documentary of his own, and Josh takes him under his wing in a way to help him out, perhaps seeing something of himself in the young filmmaker.

As the friendship between these couples develops, Josh and Cornelia's other friendships seem to fall by the wayside, due to them spending almost all of their time with Jamie and Darby.

Josh's relationship with his father-in-law (played with a beautiful subtlety by Charles Grodin) is also strained. Grodin's character is/was also a documentarian, but has enjoyed significantly more success than Josh has. He tries to give Josh advice about his current project, but it doesn't seem that Josh wants to take his advice.

I don't want to go into too much detail, because I feel that would spoil your own potential enjoyment of this film, but I will take a moment to talk about some of the underlying themes as I see them. The idea of documentary, and fact vs. fiction, plays a big part in this story. Most of the characters are at some point lying either simply to themselves or to others about who they really are and how they really feel. This does of course make for many large-scale disagreements further down the track, and it isn't until each of them are able to be honest - first with themselves, later with each other - that things can even begin to change for them.

Ultimately, this film is about the choices we make in life, and the fact that each of us is a product of the choices we have already made, and the choices we continue to make each day. If we want to change ourselves for the better, perhaps we need to change some of the choices we make.

There are a lot of laughs to be had in this film, but it also allows for a lot of tears. It is a wonderfully heartfelt piece of cinematic art, and I feel there is a lot to digest after watching the film, perhaps I will have more to say about it once it has percolated in my mind a little longer.

6 1/2 out of 10.