CINEMANN A FILM AND TELEVISION MAGAZINE
THE SPRING ISSUE
INSIDE CINEMANN /Spring Issue
2
MOVIE REVIEWS
PREVIEWS
04 Concussion
20 Summer Previews
by Allen Park
by Sophia Schein
06 Captain America: Civil War
24 Ghostbusters
by William He
by Zarina Iman
08 The Hateful Eight
25 Miss Peregrine’s Home for Peculiar Children
by Sam Heller
by Lisa Shi
09 Spectre by Cameron Chavers
26 X-Men: Apocalypse by Armand Dang
10 Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice
28 A Monster Calls
by William He
by Lisa Shi
TELEVISION REVIEWS
FEATURED
14 Black-ish
30 Celebrating Leonardo Dicaprio
by Cameron Chavers
by Emma Jones
15 Mythbusters
32 Looking Back in Wonder
by William He
by Sophia Schein
16 Crazy Ex-Girlfriend
34 The Bard on The Silver Screen: Shakespeare and Film
by Emma Jones
by Emma Jones
18 House of Cards by Maggie Brill
36 Chris Rock Oscar Host Review by Cameron Chavers
38 Why Am I Scared? by Sophia Schein
STAFF Editor-in-Chief Kenneth Shinozuka
3
Senior Content Editors Lorenzo BrogiSkoskiewicz Maddie Bender Chief Design Editor Benjamin Ades Junior Content Editors Dahlia Krutkovich Gabe Broshy Junior Design Editors Kyra Hill Zarina Iman Anne Rosenblatt
30 Celebrating Leonardo Dicaprio by Emma Jones
Faculty Advisor Dr. Deborah Kassel
10 Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice by William He
36 Chris Rock Oscar Host Review by Cameron Chavers
CINEMANN / Spring Issue
Managing Editor Jasmine Katz
CONCUSSION by Allen Park
4
CINEMANN /Spring Issue
REVIEWS
WILL SMITH IN CONCUSSION
Inspired by a GQ exposé, Concussion tells the gripping true story of Dr. Bennet Omalu, a Nigerian-American forensic pathologist whose autopsy of former Pittsburgh Steeler Mike Webster uncovered severe brain damage caused by years of repeated blows on the field. Noticing identical damage in other deceased players, Dr. Omalu, along with fellow neurologists, coroners, and former team doctors, published a paper titled “Chronic Traumatic Encephalopathy in a National Football League Player.” The film chronicles Dr. Omalu’s efforts to draw attention to the problem, while being thwarted at every turn by the all-powerful NFL, whose SPECTRE-like influence reaches to the highest levels of government. Combining the forensic detective plot of an above-average CSI episode with a nuanced character study, Concussion’s righteous anger makes up for what it occasionally lacks in focus. The movie sometimes strays off the main idea. Two-time Oscar nominee Will Smith should expect to be nominated once again for his heartfelt performance as the crusading Dr. Omalu. Capturing the pathologist’s devotion to God as well as to science, Smith lends an air of gentle humor to the role, which helps humanize a character who appears a bit too noble at times. Between his convincing Nigerian accent and solemn dignity, it’s hard to believe that this is the same actor whose ultra-cool confidence and sexy charm lent the con man comedy Focus so much frenzied energy last year. Writer/director Peter Landesman, who was an investigative journalist with The New York Times magazine before turning to filmmaking, is at his best when documenting the steady accrual of scientific data that leads to the explosive CTE diagnosis. These medical sequences have a chilling intensity that propels the movie forward, whether we care about football or not. The intensity at which the actors perform and how the storyline moves along is thrilling. Later in the film, when Dr. Omalu’s reputation comes under attack and sinister vehicles begin following his wife’s car, Landesman expertly channels the tone of classic ‘70s conspiracy thrillers like Three Days of the Condor and The Conversation, giving Concussion a dose of well-crafted suspense just when it’s needed most. The film is less successful when it deals with Dr. Omalu’s personal life. British actress Gugu Mbatha-Raw, who was so dazzling in the 2014 romance Beyond the Lights, is somewhat wasted as Omalu’s Kenyan-born wife. Their relationship, while admittedly sweet, does little to advance the plot or deepen the characters. Instead, it merely offers Smith an opportunity to impart inspirational wisdom to a dewy-eyed ingenue. For a character who already borders on too saintly, their scenes together risk tipping the scales against him. Sports fans who are concerned that the film might be anti-football propaganda need not worry. Despite the seriousness of the issue it deals with, Landesman gives Smith several memorable monologues in which Omalu praises the game’s inherent beauty and cultural importance. This isn’t an angry polemic against the sport, but a dramatic call to arms for the health and well-being of its players. Nevertheless, the film’s depiction of the NFL’s willful ignorance to a crisis that is quite literally killing its athletes makes Concussion essential viewing. Landesman takes us behind the curtain of the National Football League’s inner cham-
5
REVIEWS
ALEC BALDWIN AND WILL SMITH IN CONCUSSION
scandals that have plagued his recent tenure as Commissioner, this film just might be the straw that topples his Teflon career. Ultimately, Concussion offers no easy answers to the tragedy of CTE, other than that alerting players to the dangers of football is a moral obligation. After viewing the film, if the sight of two athletes colliding head-on gives you newfound cause for concern, then Will Smith, Peter Landesman and the real life Dr. Omalu have done their jobs.
CINEMANN / Spring Issue
bers, revealing some of the most sinister executives and doctors this side of a John Grisham novel. Watching them manipulate facts, bury information and threaten anyone who gets in their way, all while ignoring the safety of their own players, is a lesson in outrage. Chief among these nefarious executives is Roger Goodell. As played by Wilson, an actor equally adept at portraying both smarm and sincerity, Goodell emerges as the shadowy figurehead of a monolithic corporation which, according to the film, “owns a day of the week.� Though his role in the film is relatively small, the weight it carries is enormous. Coupled with the non-stop
6
CINEMANN /Spring Issue
REVIEWS
THE CAST OF CAPTAIN AMERICA: CIVIL WAR
CAPTAIN AMERICA: CIVIL WAR by William He Captain America: Civil War is one of the best movies that has come out in the past several years. As an early summer blockbuster, it had to live up to both the hype and everyone’s general expectations of this movie. Civil War has passed with flying colors. Directors Joe and Anthony Russo have created a masterpiece of plot, fight choreography, humor, and emotion. Where most movies succeed in doing one or two of these things properly, this one gets them all right, with perfectly timed humor; amazing action; a logical, concise plot that builds off the previous 13 movies of the Marvel Cinematic Universe; and highly emotional moments that are shocking and deep. It also does a great job of introducing new characters to the MCU, spotlighting our old favorites and somehow doing them all screen-time justice in 147 minutes. Captain America: Civil War is the beginning of Phase Three of the MCU. It builds off Avengers: Age of Ultron, and Captain America: The Winter Soldier by continuing the story that was presented in the end of each respective movie. Tony Stark, or Iron Man (Robert Downey Jr) has retired from the Avengers, instead spending time as a philanthropist and benefactor of the Avengers. Clint Barton (Jeremy Renner), better known as Hawkeye, has also retired to spend time with his family. Steve Rogers, or Captain America (Chris Evans), is left in charge of the Avengers, now comprised of Sam Wilson/ Falcon (Anthony Mackie), Scarlet Witch/Wanda Maximoff (Elizabeth Olsen), War Machine/James Rhodes (Don Cheadle), Natasha Romanoff/Black Widow (Scarlett Johanssen), and The Vision (Paul Bettany). The film opens with the Avengers tracking Crossbones (Frank Grillo), better known as Brock Rumlow,
a former SHIELD strike team operative who was secretly a member of HYDRA and was badly burned at the end of The Winter Soldier. Crossbones, driven by revenge, draws out the Avengers and goes one-on-one with Cap. As tensions build, Rumlow sets off a suicide bomb vest, and the resulting collateral damage prompts world leaders to create the Sokovia Accords, intended to place the Avengers under UN control. Former and current Avengers meet, and the ensuing conflict between our titular heroes begins. Civil War is predominantly an action movie, with the best scenes involving our favorite heroes locked in combat with each other. Even so, one of the greatest strengths of this movie that sets it apart from other movies, such as Batman v Superman, is that it not only builds off of a series of characters that we’re emotionally invested in, but that the whole conflict is presented clearly and logically to anybody who’s seen the previous films. That being said, this film is not for newcomers; you’d better be extremely invested into these heroes and know their beliefs, attitudes, and character traits if you truly want this movie to shock you to your core. When the heroes split, Iron Man is the main figurehead for the Sokovia Accords; he’s seen what uncontrolled arrogance can do (Ultron, a genocidal robot). Since we first met him, we’ve known him to be an arrogant, somewhat vain, and headstrong person. As he’s developed, we’ve seen his character transform from carefree narcissism to utter guilt over the magnitude of carnage that can occur when no one keeps power in check. Meanwhile, Cap is opposed to the Accords. In his experience, government bodies aren’t great sources of leadership; they have agendas that constantly change, not to mention that the last government body he trusted (SHIELD) was corrupted by HYDRA from the very top of the administration to
the lowest soldiers. The remaining Avengers are split; they divide based on their beliefs and connections to characters, and if their decision isn’t made clear from the beginning, the more the movie progresses the more the motivations of each character are made clear. The philosophical debates of the first act proceed smoothly into the second act of all-out conflict, wrapping up smoothly with the emotional thriller in the third act of the movie. As an action movie, Civil War excels. Combat seems both familiar and new, with old techniques and new tactics getting combined together and used more brutally than ever before. If The Winter Soldier and The Avengers had some of the best action sequences in the MCU, new ones from Civil War blow them out of the water. The mercilessness of the fights makes them not only more fun to watch, but also keeps us on the edge of our seats, waiting for the next blow. It’s so harsh that you actually believe that our heroes are in real danger. The trailers have given us two major fights to look forward to: the airport fight, and Cap and Bucky vs Iron Man. Both of these fights are stellar, easily taking their places as one of the best Marvel fight scenes. The airport is 20 minutes worth of heroes using their powers to whale on each other, with all heroes using their respective skillsets to their fullest extent. Falcon’s upgraded flight technology and Vision’s density-changing abilities are just some more examples of the new superpowers introduced in Civil War. By the time this fight finishes and the third act rolls around, we’re left with the most emotional fight scene in Marvel history, as Cap and Bucky try to finish off Iron Man. When it becomes a one-on-one affair between Cap and Iron Man, the movie reaches a pinnacle of awesomeness. As iconic images are recreated from the comics, the two fight with an unprecedented intensity while still remaining comical; throughout every fight the heroes throw in a quick one-liner, such as Iron Man’s “Anybody on our side hiding any shocking, or fantastic abilities they’d like to disclose, I’m open to suggestion” in the middle of the airport fight. Sure to keep you mesmerized with awe,
REVIEWS
7
CINEMANN / Spring Issue
these fight scenes not only enhance but also exemplify the main conflict in ways that dialogue never could. And they look awesome too. Civil War also does a great job of giving every hero their due. With an ensemble of 12 heroes and other characters, each character gets a fulfilling role within the movie. Cap and Iron Man continue their story, Vision’s education about the world and humanity continues, and Bucky gets closure for the immediate future. It’s a wonder how the Russo brothers managed to fit such a huge ensemble into the movie. They especially should be given huge kudos for is the inclusion of Spider-Man and Black Panther. Black Panther, the king of Wakanda (an African nation that’s also the world’s only source of vibranium), is set on a quest for revenge that brings him into conflict with Cap and onto Team Iron Man. He is generously allocated time in both fight and non-fight scenes, where we get a very good sense of his personality and a nice closure to his character arc. Spider-Man, played by Tom Holland, is well-developed even though he was added in after a good portion of the script had been written without him in it. Tom Holland’s adaptation of the web-slinger is easily the best of the past 15 years; in his Peter Parker scenes he excels at bringing out the naive, slightly awkward, and nerdy New York teen from Queens. He also excels as Spider-Man, keeping the energy and humorous attitude of a young, teenage Peter Parker while also exemplifying the dueling righteousness and recklessness that form the backbone of Spider-Man character. (Both Spider-Man and Black Panther get solo movies in the next three years.) Civil War isn’t all about the fight and the moral of the heroes, however. In the dark shadows of the world, Baron Helmut Zemo is quietly furthering his own plans. Zemo, traditionally an enemy of Captain America from WWII, is now brought to life by Daniel Brühl (Inglourious Basterds). Zemo isn’t a fighter; he excels at mind games and deception and also seeks to exact revenge against the Avengers. Without spoiling his ultimate plan or his true motivations, I will note that you will simply be blown away by his effectiveness as a villain, easily joining Loki on the list of great Marvel villains. Someone somewhere once described the third act of the movie as an emotional horror story. I won’t go that far, but I will say that the third act will make you feel and understand Captain America and Iron Man more than you ever have in the past. The fight brings Cap and Iron Man to the edge of their morals and beliefs, with one specific moment of absolute terror where time seems to slow down and the threat of destruction looms for both duelists. With Zemo’s extra motivations added in, you can’t help but feel the despair and regret that comes with the knowledge of Zemo’s plans. When you also add in the 8 years of movies that have been made out of these characters, this movie really begins to make you think and reflect. All in all, by the time even this fight is over, Tony Stark pleasantly surprises all of us with the closure of his story arc. For a movie that’s supposed to be about heroes beating the lights out of each other, it’s surprisingly and deeply emotional as the heroes end the brawl. Captain America: Civil War is easily one of the best films that has Marvel has ever created. It has everything that a summer blockbuster needs to have and stands out from every other comic book movie created so far with its profound emotional twists. It brings about some of the best action in recent years and uses its large ensemble of characters well. It keeps audiences on the edges of their seats, while also setting up future solo movies. All in all, Civil War has definitely been worth the wait.
by Sam Heller
8
CINEMANN /Spring Issue
REVIEWS
THE HATEFUL EIGHT
The Hateful Eight, Quentin Tarantino’s 8th film, is an intense and violent movie that manages to tell a gripping story and keep the audience excited for its nearly three hour run time. With all the giant and expensive action films being released year round, such as Jurassic World or any superhero film, The Hateful Eight offers a nice suspenseful alternative, showing that less can actually be more. Unlike these blockbusters, this film relies on its brilliant script and only takes place in two small locations. The film takes place a few years after the end of the Civil War on a snowy mountain in Wyoming. It starts with John Ruth (Kurt Russell), a bounty hunter nicknamed “The Hangman,” in a stagecoach with the deadly Daisy Doumergue (Jennifer Jason Leigh) who has a bounty worth $10,000. He then picks up Major Marquise Warren (Samuel L. Jackson), another bounty hunter, who is stranded in the snow with three dead bodies that he needs to turn in for a reward. Later on they come across Chris Mannix (Walter Goggins), a racist sheriff, who forces his way onto the carriage. The stagecoach eventually stops on the outskirts of the mountain town of Red Rock at a small rest stop named Minnie’s Haberdashery. Here, they meet a cast of suspicious characters from a confederate general to a British man with the outlandish name Oswaldo Mobray (Tim Roth). At this point, the film begins to pick up, as these eight people are ultimately trapped at the rest stop together. Eventually paranoia takes over; Ruth believes one of these characters is not who they claim they are and may be working to try and free Daisy Domergue. The film is split into six uneven chapters. While the first three are relatively gore-free, the second half has a completely different pace and the plot speeds up significantly. The Hateful Eight suffers greatly from this uneasy pacing, containing scenes of long discussions that, at the acme of these intense conversation, erupt into violence that only lasts a few seconds. Compared to other scenes that are full of gore, these seem to take place in entirely separate films. However, this is actually not the main problem that The Hateful Eight presents to an audience. Tarantino attempts to produce shocked reactions, causing some scenes to come across as completely ridiculous and over-the-top. In particular, one scene towards the end of the third chapter seems to exist for no other reason than to shock the audience. Although unnecessary, Tarantino’s use of dialogue makes these scenes enjoyable for the audience to watch. Tarantino chose to release the movie in certain theaters in a longer cut called The Hateful Eight: Roadshow Edition. This seems to be the best way to view the movie and offers a completely different experience. While the original film runs just over three hours, this one is 20 minutes longer but feels much easier to sit through as it has a perfectly-timed intermission. There is also a souvenir booklet handed out beforehand, an overture, and a lack of previews that makes the entire experience more immersive for the audience. The Hateful Eight may suffer from uneven pacing and unnecessary shock, but the dialogue is brilliant. Those that are easily offended or have a weak stomach should stay away from this film, but others who can stand gore will not be disappointed. While it may not be one of Tarantino’s best films, it is one of the best films out currently and makes for a fun experience that will remain on your mind for days after.
SAMUEL L. JACKSON IN THE HATEFUL EIGHT
SPECTRE by Cameron Chavers
DANIEL CRAIG IN SPECTRE
REVIEWS
Like any Bond movie, Spectre is full of action, Aston Martins, hard liquor, and beautiful women. It is the fourth in the series starring Daniel Craig, and possibly his last. Although it is beautifully shot and action-packed, Spectre lacked lots of the famous “James bond qualities” that have made the chain a success for 53 years. When the film opens in Mexico, Bond has taken leave from MI6, which we later learn has merged with MI5 and is struggling to stay afloat. Bond is tracking the head of the terrorist organization Spectre, during which journey Bond ends up promising to protect Dr. Madeline Swann, played by Léa Seydoux. Spectre also introduces characters from the past three Bond movies. This movie follows the pattern of other Bond movies; a new actor plays James Bond and makes a really good movie, then as he continues the series the movies become progressively worse, and finally the cycle repeats. Spectre is the perfect example of a failing Bond Movie. It missed the classic Bond style and plot of Casino Royale, and the depth of Skyfall, not to mention the numerous occasions on which its script fell flat. I partially think that Spectre was lacking as a movie because of its close proximity to the near-perfect Skyfall, which would have been a perfect end to Craig’s Bond cycle. Overall, I still think that it is a movie worth seeing because it is fun to watch. Despite the few upsets, Spectre still has beautiful cinematography, and it adds some closure to the earlier Bond movies. Even though Daniel Craig has said this is his last movie, he still has one left in his contract, so hopefully there will be another to create a strong ending to his time as James Bond.
CINEMANN / Spring Issue
9
10
CINEMANN /Spring Issue
REVIEWS
BATMAN v SUPERMAN DAWN OF JUSTICE by William He This may be the only review I write that matters. Did you get the reference? If not, you clearly did not see Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice. Now go watch it. It’s absolutely amazing. That’s not to say that the film doesn’t have its pitfalls, some of which are pretty huge, but personally, they didn’t take away from the quality. I’ll make this clear up front, however: this is one of those films that you really need to go see to make a judgment. Oh, and make sure you see it in IMAX or Dolby. Now then, on with the rest of the review. Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice is the next installment in DC’s ever growing DC Expanded Universe. Filmmaker and comic book avid Kevin Smith summed up my opinions pretty well, and to paraphrase his own quotes, this movie didn’t really have a heart, was logically humorless given that nothing funny is going on in this very dark DCEU, but had lots of spectacle. Director Zack Snyder is a beautiful visual stylist, but this came with a lack of characterization for some characters, including Superman. In short, there were some drawbacks, and some huge positives. The film begins eighteen months after the Battle of Metropolis, where Superman (Henry Cavill) battled General Zod (Michael Shannon) to save Earth from becoming a new Krypton, as shown in Man of Steel (2013). In the process of defeating Zod, thousands died from the collateral damage. For comparison, it’s basically the government’s nightmares of urban terrorism fulfilled. Superman is now the center of controversy in the United States, as both the government and the general population have issues with the fact that Superman is beholden to nobody but himself and his own values. Some, like Senator June Finch (Holly Hunter), Batman (Ben Affleck), and Lex Luthor (Jesse Eisenberg), begin to take measures to stop Superman. Meanwhile, Bruce Wayne/Batman is following up on a case in a subplot that will bring him to conflict with first Lex Luthor and then Superman by tailing a smuggled shipment that is Lex Luthor’s kryptonite package, for use against Superman. Batman and Superman end up in direct conflict with each other in a movie whose title makes you think that’s what most of it is about. In reality, if you consider the long, lengthy, at least an hour and a half long set up as part of the fight, then you’ve got a lot of that. On the other hand, if you really just wanted to see Ben Affleck and Henry Cavill punch each other, you’ll have to wait. It’s worth the wait; the fight is absolutely mind-blowing, with each character utilizing as much of their powers/skills as possible for some truly amazing moments. Quoting Kevin Smith once again, “[It’s] the best cinematic presentation of Batman fighting you’ve ever seen in a movie.” The even better part is that we get to see Batman fighting in multiple styles, giving us a great look at what Batman’s capable of. Wonder Woman’s combat abilities are also demonstrated, and it’s quite invigorating to watch, as there’s almost no other hero in recent movies with her specific toolset of sword, shield, whip, arm braces, and super strength. Superman’s not as exciting as he’s been in years past; given that he’s no longer fighting another alien with the same powers, Superman is downplayed until the final showdown between the three heroes and Doomsday, Lex Luthor’s personally created monster that is designed to defeat Superman. Even in this fight, he’s still
out of the main action for a good portion. Maybe it’s that we’ve already seen the best Superman can do in Man of Steel, but either way Superman is a bit of a letdown combat-wise. As part of the DC Universe, BvS is also quite dark, especially concerning the story. A good portion of it takes place at night, such as both fight scenes, but that’s beside the point. The movie is joyless; there’s no intended humor whatsoever written into it. There’s plenty of “WTF” moments that happen, ranging from “WTF is going on I don’t understand” to “WTF that was not expected.” A lot of the “WTF’s” do happen if you don’t come in knowing a fair amount of DC history, but that’s not really an issue since those questions are answered later anyway in future movies. Regardless, the joylessness of the film is not really a problem; the DC universe so far has a Superman that wins his first major battle by snapping the only other member of his species’ neck. Changing the tone of our Superman would have been a terrible idea for continuity. Batman is understandably dark. I take that a step further and say that he has to be a very dark character. The character, especially the 20-year crime-fighting veteran Batman that we get in BvS has seen a lot of violent and disturbing things. He’s seen good people go bad; he’s cynical. In short, if he’s not dark, then you’re doing something wrong. The dark seriousness of this film is also a welcome change from the silliness of other recent superhero films like Deadpool or Ant-Man. Not only does it separate the DC and Marvel properties, but it also gives us the impression that comic book films do not need to be funny, campy, or silly to succeed, and that a wide range of comic book films is possible. The film also sets up the Justice League for future movies. The Justice League is DC’s super hero team-up of their greatest characters, and has traditionally included Superman, Batman, Wonder Woman, and many other famous DC heroes, some of which are introduced in this film. Saying who would spoil the surprise, and saying how would spoil key parts of BvS, but the way by which Batman and Wonder Woman discover other future members of the Justice League is quite unique and ingenious. Even if you don’t think it’s overly original, somehow, in the span of less than 5 minutes, it sets up the main characters of the Justice League in a scene that is highly similar to a series of cameos. The best introduction, however, is Wonder Woman (Gal Gadot). She didn’t have much backstory, and what little she does get is all shrouded in mystery, setting her up for her own solo film coming out in 2017. Her introduction in this film is perfectly timed and fun to watch, as we get to see Wonder Woman utilize her superhuman powers and weapons (sword, shield, lasso, arm braces) against Doomsday, in a truly epic fight where she actually makes a huge difference. From the moment she steps in as Wonder Woman, she steals the show and leaves us wanting a lot more, but not in a way that takes away from the rest of the film. She’ll be the most anticipated character alongside Affleck’s Batman for the next few years in the DCEU, and her inclusion in this film brings BvS to new heights and overall, she makes it a better film. In the villains department, Jesse Eisenberg’s Lex Luthor is easily one of the best live-action comic book villains in recent memory. Where Tom Hiddleston’s Loki is considered the
BEN AFFLECK IN BATMAN V SUPERMAN: DAWN OF JUSTICE
REVIEWS
CINEMANN / Spring Issue
11
CINEMANN /Spring Issue
REVIEWS
12
HENRY CAVILL IN BATMAN V SUPERMAN: DAWN OF JUSTICE
13
REVIEWS
Lex is manipulating him the entire time. While it’s understandably harder to show a man’s thoughts in a movie, the lack of an understanding of Batman as a character is apparent throughout the film, and given what I’ve said, this is especially true at the end of the Batman/Superman fight. Two other problems that some people have mentioned is that Batman does kill in this film and his use of guns; I personally don’t have a problem with them even if it detracts from who Batman is, and in some cases, I actually really liked the usage of both “problems.” Given how much Batman has been through, if he kills, it at least makes sense. At the same time, the way Batman uses guns also makes a lot of sense since you can’t exactly walk up to Superman and hope that punching him will stop him. All in all, don’t get me wrong, Ben Affleck as Batman is one of the greatest things I’ve seen in a while. To focus more on Superman, character aside, the main plot points behind him aren’t bad, just not as invigorating to watch as the other characters. Superman’s story embraces the controversial ending to Man of Steel and builds upon it, bringing us to the eventual battle. However, before that battle, a number of other events conspire, culminating in the final battle. These events are all caused by the world’s opinion of Superman, an opinion that we, as an audience, can relate to. Distrust of power, something which we see everyday in our own lives, plays a pivotal role in Superman’s story. In this case, it’s that while Superman usually does good, he could just as easily do bad. Even so, for a film that’s supposed to be a lot about Superman, he ends up becoming one of the least memorable characters of the film, with a plot line that’s just not as enthralling as the other characters and subpar emotional development. Superman isn’t that good of a character in this film, even though he becomes the deciding player in the Doomsday fight. Finally, as previously mentioned, this film has no heart. There’s no real message DC tries to send with this movie. Sure, it’s a team up film. Sure, we’re seeing the birth of something greater. Sure, we’re seeing something different from what we’re used to seeing. At the end of the day, while that’s all 100% true, this film doesn’t leave audiences with a feeling that they’re truly watching something that will never again be replicated. We’re not seeing a film that’s going to last in our memories forever and ever for any reason other than the twists, the heroes, or just Doomsday on screen. The Avengers truly embodies everything that Marvel stands for; Dawn of Justice, while admittedly is part of the very young DCEU, just doesn’t feel like it embodies what DC, or superheroes stand for. If anything, you’ll leave the movie feeling the wrong embodiment of superheroes. It’s hard to put what heart is into words, but overall, Dawn of Justice feels lacking in that area. This is a film better seen before opinions are made. Overall, sure, the list of drawbacks was pretty lengthy. The list of positives wasn’t very long either. But overall, what did I think of it? Even with the cons in some pretty serious areas, I still loved this movie for its most integral part: an intriguing story filled with deception that ends with two fights that will almost certainly never be matched again in cinema. This movie is a once in a lifetime cinematic opportunity that will blow your mind away due to pure awesomeness. Even better, we get glimpses of what the future of the DCEU holds, which is also very exciting. To wrap this review up: Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice has its problems, some of which are pretty big. These problems don’t matter once it comes down to the true meat and potatoes of the movie. The issues that arise truly are outshined by the amazing successes that we see, and that’s what makes this movie amazing to watch. I loved this movie for what it is, and I personally can’t wait to see it again.
CINEMANN / Spring Issue
best villain in Marvel, and Luthor easily outshines him. Similar to Loki, Luthor is more a “villain of the mind” than villain of the battlefield. This is a good setup and helps set up Lex’s role in this film and future films. Moreover, Lex Luthor isn’t just a guy trying to beat up the heroes by hitting them repeatedly. Even in the comics, he’s first known as a genius. His genius is used to create other villains in this film, in fact, we see him use it in setting up the entire plot. He’s entertaining to watch; he starts out as a young, outgoing, smart, friendly, and seemingly harmless CEO. Within 5 minutes, we see him become the slightly psychotic, cunning, manipulative character that he’ll be for the rest of the film as he manipulates the government and the heroes to do his bidding. Minor spoiler: Lex doesn’t die, and he will easily take his place among the impossibly hard to reach pantheon of good super villains. Zack Snyder’s visuals in this film are stellar. If anything can be given to him, it’s his ability to create what is best described as visual spectacles. This is evident throughout the movie, whether it be the skyline of two cities from the top of Lexcorp in Metropolis, to the three heroes vs Doomsday in one shot, to Doomsday destroying everything with energy waves, or even Batman simply taking on a room full of thugs. In each instance, the shot looks beautiful and stays with the audience. When it comes to CGI combat, given that he has some of the greatest characters ever created to work with, Snyder doesn’t disappoint; the fights are fantastic and eye popping. Despite these incredible positives, the film has its drawbacks, the biggest of which is character representation, especially in Superman’s case. Superman is supposed to be an upbeat, outgoing character. Traditionally, he’s been a symbol of hope. BvS gives us a serious, cynical Superman, living in a world where he is not the symbol of hope that he traditionally is. Unfortunately, this is impossible to avoid given Man of Steel, but it does show a general lack of understanding of the character’s basic nature, especially since Henry Cavill does nothing to try to get us to understand his character any better. It’s not that he embodies the conflicted character in such a way that it’s detrimental, but he doesn’t try to make us understand Superman any more than what Superman is at the end of Man of Steel. The script definitely didn’t help him either; while he is painted in the light of a symbol of hope by the end of the film, the way by which Superman’s story arc in this film is portrayed doesn’t live up to the symbol that we’ve come to know and love. Batman is in a better situation; Batman’s supposed to be a darker character, but the way film makers get around to that also misrepresents him on a basic level. Yes, they show him doing detective work. Yes, we see him as an amazing crimefighter. But the defining feature of a superhero isn’t what their powers are or what they do, their motivations make them who they are. Otherwise, Superman may as well be Zod. Batman gets the proper execution, but not so much the proper reasoning. We see him give his “1% danger is an absolute Superman needs to be stopped” speech, but that isn’t who Batman is. Batman might not be the most trusting of people, but he’s not just one to openly declare war on Superman just because he feels like it. This becomes especially annoying once you consider the fact that Batman is ruled by his emotions in this story; we see his point of view of the events of Man of Steel, including the deaths of his employees. This is one of multiple factors that drive him in a quest for personal vengeance. While it may sound cold, the Batman that we’ve gotten to know for the past five decades doesn’t do things just because he’s hurt; he’s always used logic to determine his course of action, something we don’t see him do here. If Batman had stayed truer to the logic-driven character he’s supposed to be, he would have seen that Superman does everything for the greater good. We’re also used to seeing him as a genius in his detective work; the one and only time we truly see him doing detective work he messes up completely, moreover he never even sees that
by Cameron Chavers
14
CINEMANN /Spring Issue
TELEVISION
BLACK-ISH
ANTHONY ANDERSON IN BLACK-ISH
ABC’s Black-ish, now on its second season, is a great family comedy. The series, starring Anthony Anderson, follows an upper middle class black family in southern California. In each episode the protagonist, Andre “Dre” Johnson, who grew up in a working class community, continually tries to pass on his childhood experiences to his pampered children. The show is extremely funny and is able to depict family life while touching on racial issues in America. When the show first aired, there was a lot of controversy over its name. Many felt uncomfortable or offended by the title Black-ish, stating that it was offensive to the African American community without even watching the show. However, I would argue the exact opposite. The word “blackish” isn’t supposed to diminish black culture, but rather expand upon it. The show depicts the diversity of African American culture and experiences. The show’s title isn’t trying to suggest that wealthy educated blacks are no longer “black”, or that they are superior to other African Americans. I think that the show is called Black-ish because the Johnson family’s life differs so much from what the creators of the show thought of as the “black American experience” when they were growing up. Like Dre, Black-ish creator, Kenya Barris, grew up in a predominantly Black, working class neighborhood very different from his life as a successful Hollywood writer. His personal family experiences inspire the show’s storylines. The show’s great script allows it to touch on racial issues through comedy. In one episode this season the family follows a police brutality case on the news, and each showcases a different variety of emotions and opinions. Other episodes focus on lighter subjects. In the show’s pilot episode, Dre ends up throwing a “Bro-mitzvah for his son”, since Junior is surrounded by a large Jewish population at school. Another episode explores what happens when Andre’s younger 6 year-old son accidentally says the N-word in a talent show. Although all of these are controversial issues in our society, the show presents them in an accessible manner and doesn’t make its viewers feel uncomfortable. In fact Black-ish still remains accessible to people of all demographics. It focuses on issues that all families, regardless of race, can relate with. Episodes deal with problems like not getting along with the in-laws, children fighting with their siblings, and having disagreements with the
neighbors. My personal favorite aspect of Black-ish is the ensemble cast. Even though Dre is technically the protagonist, all the others actors play important roles in the show and contribute to what makes it so fun to watch. The writing and development of each of the characters also establishes them as individuals that can stand alone, but are even better when placed together. This creates an amazing family dynamic that is responsible for how enjoyable the show is. Between Andre, his practical wife Rainbow, whose parents are hippies, his popular teenage daughter Zoey, his socially awkward son Jr., his adorable twins, Jack and Diane, and all the crazy in-laws, it seems almost impossible to pick a favorite. Black-ish is a great sitcom that I strongly recommend. It is a light-hearted (but not always) show that is super fun to watch, yet is also able to address important racial issues that resonate with all its viewers.
THE CAST OF BLACK-ISH
MYTHBUSTERS By William He
ADAM SAVAGE AND JAMIE HYNEMAN IN MYTHBUSTERS
eye candy, that standing between two identical explosions at the midpoint has constructive disruption (the shockwave doubles, not cancels out), that dry ice bombs are very dangerous, that wooden tables, cars, and dumpsters are all viable shockwave defenses, and that explosives can be used to clean a cement truck. Not all of their explosions have been educational; in an attempt to reach truck-cleaning status the Mythbusters successfully removed a cement truck from the face of the Earth with ANFO, which is now one of their most famous explosions. Many historical myths have been tested, ranging from a Confederate steam machine gun (possible but not effective), a two-stage missile with rocket propelled arrows (possible), the Archimedes Death Ray (as much as I want to try this myself, it’s busted), and the ancient Korean hwacha with explosive arrows (200, to be exact). The Mythbusters have also experimented extensively with duct tape, confirming that it can hold together a wooden trebuchet, a functioning seafaring boat, and a cannon. Movie myths have also been incredibly popular; they have concluded that Jack could have survived by joining Rose on the floating debris in Titanic, that Jaws’ method of killing sharks is ineffective, and that using a grappling hook to make a sharp turn like Batman is impossible.
That may have been a pretty long list, but it is merely a small snapshot of what the Mythbusters have done over the past 14 years. While the Mythbusters have certainly contributed to science in ways never seen before (quite literally in many cases), their true achievement won’t be in the extra knowledge that they’ve given the world; it’s actually the fact that they have successfully made science fun for everybody. The Mythbusters tackle some of the craziest stuff that people suggest to them. (Who else is going to shoot flamethrowers and fire extinguishers at each other?) They stand out because they don’t laugh at the absurdity of their own myths, but rather use the scientific process to rigorously evaluate them. They clearly state their own hypothesis, get data on how to set up the experiment while always remaining faithful to the configuration of the actual myth, act out the experiment, evaluate the data, and come up with a conclusion. They also revisited myths after fans pointed out inaccuracies in their methods, demonstrating the Mythbusters’ devotion to precise science. On top of that, their humor made Mythbusters highly enjoyable for people of all ages.
TELEVISION
15
CINEMANN / Spring Issue
On Saturday, March 5, Adam Savage and Jamie Hyneman, better known as the Mythbusters, aired their season finale on The Discovery Channel. On Sunday, Mythbusters moved to the Science Channel and aired a special episode on duct tape. From 2003 to 2016, they were entertaining, fun, and most of all, informative. They brought the scientific method to everyday people, while also winning praise from esteemed scientists like Neil deGrasse Tyson. They will be truly missed from the regular TV lineup. The Mythbusters typically spend $5,000 to $10,000 dollars per episode. No matter what myth (usually myths) they’ve tackled, it’s very clear that they have spent their money well on over 1,000 myths covered by 271 episodes spread out over 14 years. These myths span a lot of categories, including idioms, movie myths (Star Wars, Indiana Jones, James Bond, and film clichés just to name a few), TV, explosions, gunshots, history, and health. Each one was tested thoroughly using the scientific method and in some cases retested. Often times when the myth was ultimately ‘busted’, Adam, Jamie, and former Mythbuster hosts Grant Imahara, Tory Belleci, and Kari Byron revisited it to see how they could get such a phenomena to occur. The list of myths is far too numerous to list out, but there have been many of note, for a multitude of reasons. In their very first episode, Adam and Jamie tested out the JATO rocket car, and whether or not one could increase elevation from a flat surface (the answer is no). Predictably, it was highly entertaining to watch. Other myths involving rockets include using gummy bears as rocket fuel (confirmed), flattening a car with a rocket sled to see how much force a car can withstand, and determining whether a scholar from the Ming dynasty could have reached space using a throne powered by bamboo rockets (busted). The Mythbusters have also become famous for guns; they have tested whether lighters, fish tanks, and several pizzas in a warming bag are bulletproof (depends on circumstances, but all of them in some capacity yes), whether a bullet fired straight up is lethal (yes), shooting a moving target through a wall (yes), and what it takes for a gun to misfire (bomb shockwave). Most of these myths probably would not have been corroborated if not for them, but something that definitely wouldn’t have been tested is the Mythbusters multitude of explosions. They have proven, with much
16
CINEMANN /Spring Issue
TELEVISION
CRAZY EXGIRLFRIEND
RACHEL BLOOM IN CRAZY EX-GIRLFRIEND
by Emma Jones When I saw the title Crazy Ex Girlfriend, I thought I knew what to expect from it. The trope is everywhere. There’s the wild, heart-eyed, unattractive girl chasing a boy she can’t achieve. Her passion is pathetic, her attempt at happiness is hilarious, and her ultimate failure is the biggest joke of all. There’s something in our society that thinks female feelings are ugly, that girls wanting things is bratty or crazy or gross. I didn’t want to watch a show that bought into the myth that dehumanized my feelings. Well, it turns out Crazy Ex Girlfriend show-runner Rachel Bloom didn’t want to watch that show, either. Crazy Ex Girlfriend is all about female feelings. Crazy Ex Girlfriend’s mission statement is practically that it’s going to show the ugly parts of being a woman. From the struggles of putting on Spanx to explaining an irrational fear of men on the street, Crazy Ex Girlfriend is a show that just gets it. The basic premise of the show is that Rebecca Bunch, a deeply anxious and dissatisfied lawyer from Westchester played by Bloom, suddenly runs into a boy she dated in summer camp ten years ago, Josh Chan (Vincent Rodriguez III) on the street and is moved to change her life and move out to the West Coast where Josh lives. Rebecca struggles with her own clinical depression and deep-seated issues with her family, and in a way meeting Josh again and moving to West Covina, California is a catalyst that sets her off on a journey to take control of her life. Crazy Ex Girlfriend is very aware of the implications of its title. Rebecca struggles with accepting her feelings for Josh because she feels like she’s the crazy ex. And, in a sense, she is. She molds her new life around a guy she hasn’t seen in a decade. But she doesn’t do that because it’s funny and crazy or a joke in any way; she feels so attracted to the idea of Josh and to a new life because she has never had the chance to make any of her own choices. (Her mother sent her to
RACHEL BLOOM IN CRAZY EX-GIRLFRIEND
mock trial camp every summer but the one she spent with Josh.) To her, Josh represents the only choice she’s really ever been allowed to make on her own. She’s emotionally immature because she was never given the space to actually grow up in between her mother’s iron fist and her father’s absence. She’s a real character that the audience can feel sympathy towards. In the opening sequence, Rebecca Bunch declares, “That [“crazy ex girlfriend]’s a sexist term,” while the title rolls and then “It’s a little more nuanced than that,” when the theme song declares how broken inside she is. Rachel Bloom understands the trope of the crazy ex-girlfriend better than anything. On the surface, Rebecca Bunch is the stereotype of the crazy ex-girlfriend trope down to a T, but her character shows the truth that so many girls want people to realize about them: they’re more than that. There is no such thing as a girl who’s just a “crazy ex-girlfriend.” The myth of the crazy ex-girlfriend and of girls’ feelings being jokes not only damages girls’ self-esteem but often leads to denial and doubt about their mental health when they grow into adults. (Side note: Crazy Ex Girlfriend is one of the few shows I’ve ever seen that actively acknowledges depression and anxiety and talks about them in a real and normal way.)
VINCENT RODRIGUEZ III AND RACHEL BLOOM IN CRAZY EX-GIRLFRIEND
17
TELEVISION
tary on the way guys are not as held up to the ridiculous standard girls are in relationships. A girl telling a guy to lower his standards is pathetic, but a guy telling a girl to lower her standards is charming. Guys are allowed to just be okay, and more often than not girls are told to settle for “just okay” because they’re never going to get somebody better, but the idea of a guy settling for a girl is less acceptable. Crazy Ex Girlfriend makes full use of its talented cast, and Rachel Bloom’s rapier wit in her lyrics deliver musical numbers that both make you laugh and make you think. Crazy Ex Girlfriend is not for everyone. It’s raunchy, energetic comedy, and not everyone appreciates that. But what I don’t want for this show is for people to turn away from it because of its name like I almost did. Crazy Ex Girlfriend continues the fight that Broad City arguably started to get women to be allowed to be angry, to be raunchy, to be three-dimensional. Women in comedy have been one-note jokes for too long. Crazy Ex Girlfriend is a celebration of being a girl: The hilarious parts, the meaningful parts, and well…the crazy parts.
CINEMANN / Spring Issue
Men are given the space on television to be nuanced characters whose motivations are acknowledged even when they do things that are absurd or morally grey, whereas women’s feelings are reduced to one-dimensional tropes. Crazy Ex Girlfriend was, above all, born from a desire to be understood. And on top of that it’s a musical. Yes, you read that right. The show has two or three songs per episode, and they’re some of the most brilliant satires of pop music I’ve ever seen. Often they deal with the norms that pop music sets up for women. A good example would be, “Put Yourself First,” which sets itself up as a direct parody of Fifth Harmony’s “Worth It.” It mocks the way in which popular music champions self-love in women as long as it’s still tame and attractive enough to cater to men. “Put yourself first in a sexy way / Put yourself first for him,” Bloom writes. Confidence shouldn’t be sexy. It should be normal. Girls shouldn’t have to describe their self-confidence as beautiful or sexy for men. This criticism of the “confidence is sexy” movement is incredibly nuanced and intelligent, but Bloom also manages to make it hilarious. Another one of my favorite songs is “Settle For Me,” sung by Santino Fontana’s character Greg, which describes all the ways Greg is reasonably okay and worth settling for in lieu of Josh. This song is extremely funny, but it’s also a very smart commen-
18
CINEMANN /Spring Issue
TELEVISION
KEVIN SPACEY IN HOUSE OF CARDS
HOUSE OF CARDS
WARNING! SPOILERS AHEAD
19
investigator, begins to come uneasily close to uncovering Underwood’s secrets, particularly his connections to the death of Zoe Barns, after Goodwin’s death. Yates, a novelist, is employed by the Underwoods to write a novel to promote their campaign. However, Yates proves to be too observant and forces the couple to acknowledge their marital problems. Yates later becomes Clare’s speech writer and eventually a love-interest for Clare, who is on the road promoting her vice-presidency. All these subplots are woven together brilliantly, so that the viewer can follow them, but also must remain attentive. By the fourth season, most TV dramas lose their charm and the storylines become too repetitive and convoluted to enjoy. Miraculously, House of Cards continues to keep the viewer on edge and engaged. The current 2016 presidential election is almost a drama within itself, but the show dives deeply into important issues that presidential candidates face currently. Underwood is faced with a scandal in the middle of his campaign, when an image of his father and a member of the Klu Klux Klan arises on a billboard in the South. The image forces Underwood to reassess his approach on race-relations. This issue is surprisingly relevant to the current election, because Donald Trump recently faced backlash for failing to rebuke the endorsement of a Klan member, David Duke. This is a particularly bizzare coincidence. In addition, the show mirrors current political discourse over ISIS, by creating a fictional terrorist group called ICO. Conway, Underwood’s opponent, uses fear of ICO to campaign against the president, criticizing him for his inaction. The show uses this issue to illuminate the rise of prejudice against Muslims and to grapple with the issue of Muslim-American relations. The issue over gun control is also raised when Clare tries to pass a bill to increase background checks and is faced with strong opposition from Republicans. Interestingly, it is later revealed to the viewer that the Republican candidate for president, Conway, supports gun control privately. This contradiction demonstrates the dynamics of party politics that forces candidates to morph their beliefs to fit within their political party. House of Cards provides an interesting perspective on these issues from the behind-the-scenes view of a presidential candidate. House of Cards does not disappoint this season. The show plays on our fascination with American politics by masterfully juggling various and intertwining plotlines involving power-hungry and devious politicians. This season, in particular, provides a nice contrast by also highlighting the humanity of each character through his or her desires, their own internal conflicts, and relationships.
TELEVISION
On March 4, 2016, Netflix released the fourth season of House of Cards, its hit TV political drama. The show, starring Kevin Spacey and Robin Wright, returned stronger than ever, and the storyline continues to thrive in new ways. The new season couldn’t have been more perfectly timed, paralleling the current politics with the 2016 election. Francis Underwood (Kevin Spacey) is running for presidential re-election, a plotline that is much more engaging then the previous season’s focus on international and domestic policy. Underwood strategically vies for the presidency, but faces many obstacles including a strong set of political opponents. In the beginning of the season, Underwood faces up against Heather Dunbar (Elizabeth Marvel), a strong Democratic female candidate, who seems to take the moral highroad. This strategy is a refreshing contrast to Underwood’s cunning tactics and poses a real threat to his re-election. Later in the season, Underwood faces a Republican candidate, who is a young, likeable family man (all qualities that Underwood lacks in the pubic and private eye). Will Conway (Joel Kinnaman) seems to match Underwood in cunning and deception behind closed doors, but is able to put on a friendly face in public to hide his power-hungry desires. As has been true throughout the series, the marriage between Francis and Clare Underwood (Robin Wright) is a major focus in this season. Marital tensions between the two escalate, as Clare becomes frustrated with her subordination to Francis. Despite her critical role in making Francis president, she is forced to simply be the woman at his side during the campaign. Issues with Clare’s sick mother provide an excuse to put their marriage on hold and Clare even seeks office of her own despite Francis. As tensions rise, Clare sabotages Francis, convincing him the only solution is to make her his running mate. This bold and unprecedented political move provides the couple with an uphill battle, but neither shies away from the challenge. Many characters, who sort of disappeared in Season 3, returned to the show, creating interesting subplots. Lucas Goodwin (Sebastian Arcelus) returns to the show, after being imprisoned by the president. Upon his release, he continues to seek revenge against Francis Underwood. He ends up attempting to assassinate Underwood at a rally and gets killed in the process. Even Zoe Barnes (Kate Mara) and Peter Russo (Corey Stoll) return briefly in Francis’ hallucinations during surgery. Doug Stamper (Michael Kelly), Francis’ troubled chief of staff, begins to work at the White House again after a terrible injury, trying desperately to grapple with his old demons. However, he finds himself dealing with new demons after the president’s attempted assassination. Two minor characters, Tom Hammerschmidt and Thomas Yates, take on major roles in this new season. Hammerschmidt, a retired
CINEMANN / Spring Issue
by Maggie Brill
by Sophia Schein
CINEMANN /Spring Issue
PREVIEWS
20
SUMMER PREVIEWS MAY X-MEN: APOCALYPSE
27th
Though it’s not officially summer till June 20th, X-Men: Apocalypse and Alice Through The Looking Glass kick off summer movies on the Friday of Memorial Day weekend, May 27th. X-Men: Apocalypse is the ninth installment in the X-Men film series, and will feature many famous actors, including Michael Fassbender, Jennifer Lawrence, Sophie Turner, and Lucas Till. The young X-Men battle an ancient and vengeful enemy, Apocalypse, played by Oscar Isaac.
27th
ALICE THROUGH THE LOOKING GLASS Alice Through The Looking Glass premiers nationwide on the same night. It is the sequel to the 2010 film Alice and Wonderland and will star Mia Wasikowska as Alice, Johnny Depp as the Mad Hatter, and Helena Bonham Carter as the Red Queen. The film is based on Lewis Carroll’s 1871 novel, Through the Looking Glass. It will follow teenage Alice as she delves into the mystical world of Underland through a looking glass to save her old friend, The Mad Hatter, from Time and the Red Queen. With the intricate plot, fantastic CGI, and all-star cast, Alice Through The Looking Glass is sure to be a hit.
JUNE 3rd
21
CINEMANN / Spring Issue
The following week on June 3rd, the movie adaptation of Me Before You will premiere in theaters. It stars Emilia Clarke from Game of Thrones and Sam Claflin and is based on Jojo Moyes’s best selling novel, Me Before You. It tells the story of Louisa Clark, a quirky young woman, as she loses her job at a local bakery and by chance becomes the caretaker for a suicidal recently disabled man named Will Traynor. As they get to know each other better, their sweet and tragic love story unfolds. If the book it’s based on is any indication, this movie will be bittersweet and wonderful.
10th WARCRAFT On Friday June 10th, Warcraft, Now You See Me 2, and The Conjuring 2 will all arrive in theaters across the nation. Warcraft, based on the massively popular video game series World Of Warcraft, is directed by Duncan Jones and will star Travis Fimmel, Paula Patton, and Ben Foster. As the orcs flee their dying home to attack the human world in Azeroth, heroes from either side, Lother and Durotan, clash and change each other’s fate forever. For fans of the video game, this intense action film will give exciting new insight into the mythical world of the game.
NOW YOU SEE ME 2
Now You See Me 2, the sequel to the 2013 film Now You See Me, is directed by Jon M. Chu and stars Jesse Eisenberg, Mark Ruffalo, Woody Harrelson, and Dave Franco as four illusionists known as The Four Horsemen. In Now You See Me, the four brilliant illusionists, lead by Jesse Eisenberg’s Atlas, joined together to perform incredible magic tricks while simultaneously draining money from major banks. After a series of separations and escapes from the FBI, the team finds themselves together again at the end of the the first film. The sequel will pick up as The Four Horseman try to reestablish their reputations and take on the biggest scheme of their careers, exposing a famous tech tycoon.
10th
PREVIEWS
ME BEFORE YOU
10th On the same night, another sequel, The Conjuring 2, will premiere nationwide. The Conjuring, based on real events, followed the Perron family as they were haunted and tormented in their new home, which turns out to to be the former home of an accused evil witch named Bathsheba. After receiving help from legendary paranormal investigators, Ed and Lorraine Warren, the family thinks that their trouble is over, but in the last second, it is revealed that the menacing evil spirits have not been banished. The sequel, The Conjuring 2, will move away from the Perron family and follow the paranormal investigators to their next case in Northern London where a single mother and her children are being tormented by ghosts in their home. As with the first film, the plot might not be all that complex but the suspense and jump scares will be sure to terrify audiences.
22
CINEMANN /Spring Issue
PREVIEWS
THE CONJURING 2
SWISS ARMY MAN
17th
17th
On June 17th, Daniel Radcliffe’s newest film, Swiss Army Man, will premiere. It is directed by Daniel Kwan and Daniel Scheinert and will star Paul Dano as a suicidal man stranded on a remote island and Daniel Radcliffe as his magical corpse companion. Just as Dano’s character, Hank, is about to kill himself out of desperation, he spies a washed up corpse, Radcliffe, who sparks his curiosity. He names him Manny and begins to care for him. Manny it turns out is not a regular corpse. He can talk and interact in numerous supernatural ways. Swiss Army Man is sure to be a quirky, clever, and funny film.
FINDING DORY
24th
The long awaited Finding Dory will also premiere on June 17th. It will follow Dory, Nemo’s dad’s quirky and forgetful fish companion on his mission to find and save Nemo in the original film. It takes place several months after the events of Finding Nemo when Dory recovers her cryptic childhood memories. They lead her, Nemo’s dad, Marlin, and Nemo on a journey to the Monterey Marine Life Institute where they team up with a beluga whale, and shark, and an octopus. Dory sets out with her newfound friends on an exciting adventure to find her long lost family. For fans of the 2003 Finding Nemo, the sequel is sure to be a hit.
INDEPENDENCE DAY: RESURGENCE 20 long years after the original Independence Day, Independence Day: Resurgence will premiere on Friday June 24th. It will take place in the same universe as the original, but stars and brand new cast and trouble for humanity to conquer. It features Maika Monroe, Liam Hemsworth, and William Fichtner as several of humanity’s warriors against a new alien threat. To fight earth’s new intruders, humans have recovered alien technology from the attack two decades ago. With a dangerous and unprecedented threat of destruction, will the humans be able to win once again?
JULY AUGUST
CINEMANN / Spring Issue
On July 1st, The BFG and The Purge: Election Year will premier nationwide. The BFG based on Roald Dahl’s beloved book by the same name will star Ruby Barnhill as Sophie and Mark Rylance as the BFG (Big Friendly Giant). The film is directed by Steven Spielberg and he has said that, “it’s the most ambitious motion capture of a character that any film has ever done.” It tells the tale of a young orphan girl named Sophie who befriends a massive but kind creature who blows dreams into children’s windows at night. He tells her his story and takes her away to his own whimsical world where he protects her from bad giants and other threats. For all fans of the charming children’s story, The BFG is sure to be a sentimental and exciting film.
1st
THE PURGE: ELECTION YEAR
1st
SUICIDE SQUAD
Suicide Squad, will hit theaters on August 1st. It has a star-studded cast including Margot Robbie, Cara Delevingne, Ben Affleck, Jared Leto, Joel Kinnaman, and many more. It will follow a team of anti-heroes, known as the Suicide Squad as well as Task Force X, from a series of DC comics that came out originally in 1959. It will follow a team of imprisoned supervillains as they are released under the condition that they agree to help the government attack other dangerous criminals. It features a cast of terrifying and enticing villains who are sure to simultaneously frighten and attract viewers. With these movies and many more, everyone should be able to find at least a few films to spark their interest this summer.
PREVIEWS
THE BFG
23
1st
by Zarina Iman 24
CINEMANN /Spring Issue
PREVIEWS
GHOSTBUSTERS The Ghostbusters reboot is one of the most highly anticipated of this summer. However, following the release of the first trailer, the film is facing harsh criticism on multiple fronts. Like the original, the reboot is set in New York City and focuses on a team of four Ghostbusters. The team, comprised of three scientists and one MTA worker, must stop a demon that can control human forms. From the beginning of the movie’s production, the director, Paul Feig, made his goal for this film abundantly clear; he wanted to create a successful female driven horror-comedy film. According to him and the writers, the tone of the film is supposed to be a bit more frightening than the previous movies, by including more sinister ghosts. The Ghostbusters dealing with these ghosts are a quartet of women, portrayed by hilarious comedians, like Melissa McCarthy and SNL writer, Leslie Jones. To further display disregard for traditional gender roles, Feig also cast Chris Hemsworth to be the team’s secretary. These refreshing casting decisions generated mostly positive reviews, though there are those who adamantly protest the mostly female cast. Despite the casting, which some may call controversial, gender played little to no part in why the trailer was so ill-received. Lacking both the frightening and comedic aspects required of films in the horror-comedy genre, the trailer garnered a substantial amount of dislikes and negative comments, after released on YouTube. The jokes were cliché and could cause one to smile at best. Moreover, the special effects and CGI in the film diminished any possible scariness. Some ghosts looked a bit creepy, but the majority, overdone with CGI, just glowed in different colors. There were no jump-scares, which is not necessarily a bad thing, although there was an attempt at one that was instead incredibly predictable. As a person who scares easily, I found the trailer to be reminiscent of the Halloween specials that Disney used to air when I was younger, mildly entertaining and not scary. Again, this reboot does not have to be terrifying; the original movies were not scary either. However, given that the crew promised to make the movie frightening, the trailer indicates that they may not be able to deliver.
THE CAST OF GHOSTBUSTERS
KRISTEN WIIG AND LESLIE JONES IN GHOSTBUSTERS
Critiques of the film go beyond the jokes and special effects. Following the showing of the trailer, many attacked the film for making the only black main character, played by Leslie Jones, an MTA worker, while her white counterparts were scientists. Part of the outrage is due to the character’s part in the trailer. It seemed that she was reduced to playing the stereotypical black friend, only there to offer sassy remarks. Jones, herself, responded on Twitter by defending her role and sharing the words of support she got from an MTA worker. Overall, Ghostbusters has had a rocky start. The absence of good jokes is a surprise, considering the cast of comedians, who have each proven that they can be funny. If the trailer is a reflection of the movie, it will not be successful. The Ghostbusters advertising team has four months to turn this disaster around before the movie premiere on July 15th.
The trailer for Miss Peregrine’s Home for Peculiar Children begins with a girl demanding, “Come with me. There’s a place I go when I want to be alone.” Cue underwater shots of mermaid-esque blonde hair, translucent in the sunlight. The girl then horrifyingly begins to force air to escape from her body, limbs spread out, eyes open, as if she were drowning. A boy swims after her, struggling to hold his breath, before a bubble fits over his head, allowing him to breathe. Faint, haunting music plays, with a voice singing, “There’s a new beginning, and it’s just around the bend,” promising a new, hopeful world. The pair soon reaches a rickety ship underwater, and the girl closes the doors as the slow, haunting score swells, reaching a climax. The girl begins exhaling huge amounts of air, and the water rapidly gushes out of the room. The boy stares in amazement. “How’d you do that?” he asks. The girl responds nonchalantly, “Air. It’s my peculiarity.” Their eyes lock, blue irises glowing in the gray mist. The girl makes a curious request. “If I show you the rest, you must promise not to run away.” The music begins again, but more uplifting, surer, and more promising than it was before. Drums kick in. Shots of the British countryside ensue, of leafy green foliage and a stately castle. A woman, presumably Miss Peregrine, appears with her black hair pinned up, donning a Victorian-era black dress. “Delighted to meet you,” she smiles. Each “peculiar” child is shown, with his or her various abilities. Jake, our protagonist, is revealed to be the protector of the peculiars. Miss Peregrine makes him promise to look after the others before turning into a peregrine and flying away. “There’s a new world coming,” echoes once more, before thunder booms and a monster appears, screeching. Multiple tongues slither out of its fanged mouth, eyeless head approaching closer. Jake lifts a bow calmly, aiming at the creature. Miss Peregrine’s Home for Peculiar Children by Ransom Riggs was one of my favorite books when growing up; the same can be said for many other readers throughout the world. It is the first book in a trilogy by Riggs. In all three books, the vintage images collected by the author in conjunction with the writing form the perfect amount of eeriness. While creepy, it does not quite enter the genre of horror. The fantastical plot and pictures work harmoniously together to keep readers gripped. The movie is based on the book of the same name; as such, it can expected that it keeps to a similar plotline. The book follows Jacob Portman, who travels to Wales to learn about his grandfather’s life after his murder. He finds that his grandfather lived in an orphanage for “peculiar children.” Along the way, he meets Emma, a girl who he later learns can control fire. She takes him back to 1940 to meet Miss Peregrine, who is in charge of the orphanage and caregiver of the children. Miss Peregrine is one of many ymbrynes, beings that can shift into bird form and manipulate time. They create time loops, which can only be accessed by other peculiars; these time loops are stable locations in which peculiars are protected from hollowgasts, monsters who crave and feed on the souls of peculiars. This utopia is not completely
EVA GREEN, ASA BUTTERFIELD AND GEORGIA PEMBERTON IN MISS PEREGRINE’S HOME FOR PECULIAR CHILDREN
25
safe, however, as the hollowgasts can still find their way in. Jacob meets and bonds with other peculiar children such as Millard, who is invisible, and Bronwyn, who possesses incredible strength. Later, he discovers that his grandfather was himself a peculiar with the ability to see hollowgasts, a capability that few others have. He had used this power to protect the peculiars, and left the time loop to find and kill hollowgasts. He was finally murdered by one after many years of systematically hunting them down and killing them. The other peculiars explain to Jacob that he has the same peculiarity as his grandfather, and so is charged with the same duty as his grandfather before him. After Jacob and Emma kill one of the hollowgasts, Miss Peregrine is kidnapped. The children retrieve Miss Peregrine, but she is trapped in bird form and cannot revert to human form. A time loop must be reset every day by its owner, and as Miss Peregrine is confined as a bird and unable to complete this task, the loop begins to disappear, forcing the peculiars to find a new home. Tim Burton directs the film version; as such, the dark undertones and whimsicality seen in the book are likely to come through. It features Eva Green as Miss Peregrine, Asa Butterfield as Jacob Portman, Samuel L. Jackson as Mr. Barron, and Ella Purnell as Emma Bloom, among others. The film is highly anticipated, and set to be released September 2016.
PREVIEWS
by Lisa Shi
CINEMANN / Spring Issue
MISS PEREGRINE’S HOME FOR PECULIAR CHILDREN
26
CINEMANN /Spring Issue
PREVIEWS
X-MEN: APOCALYPSE by Armand Dang
There was once a time when sequels to major blockbusters were a bonus, not guaranteed. Nowadays, studios enter into long term negotiations with actors and directors, knowing that just one movie isn’t enough. They need to create a long lasting storyline, or franchise that keeps the viewers engrossed and wanting to see more. 20th Century Fox has done exactly that. The first eight X-Men movies, including Deadpool, have grossed nearly 4 billion dollars worldwide. The franchise is nearly 16 years old, with the first movie released in July 2000. X-Men: Apocalypse is the third installment in this alternate trilogy and is to be released on May 27th in the U.S. After a multi-year absence from the franchise he helped launch back in 2000, Bryan Singer made his triumphant return to the superhero series for X-Men: Days of Future Past and it was epic. It was everything fans wanted. X-Men: Days of Future Past combined the best elements of the series to produce a fast-paced action-packed thriller that in my opinion ranks the second best in the entire series after X-Men 2. Convinced that mutants are threatening humanity, robotic killer weapons that can detect mutants called Sentinels are developed by Dr. Bolivar Trask (Peter Dinklage). By the 21st century, the Sentinels have evolved into killing machines. With mutants now facing extinction, Wolverine (Hugh Jackman) volunteers to go back in time and gather the X-Men of the past to help change a crucial moment in history to save their future. He then returns to the year 1973 in order to prevent Dr. Trask from taking the gene of Mystique (Jennifer Lawrence), which would help him develop the Sentinels. X-Men: Apocalypse continues the storyline from X-Men: First Class and X-Men: Days of Future Past (DOFP). While DOFP took place in 1973, Apocalypse picks up exactly 10 years after in 1983. This means that Bryan
THE CAST OF X-MEN: APOCALYPSE
OSCAR ISAAC AND BEN HARDY IN X-MEN: APOCALYPSE
Singer and his team are including younger versions of characters like Jean Grey, Cyclops and Storm who weren’t included before. We know the basic plot of the movie at this point. Now that the existence of mutants has been exposed to the world, they get two different reactions. Some think they are criminals who should be killed and others believe that they are holy figures and worship them. These worshipers are what reawaken Apocalypse, an immortal mutant from ancient Egypt who is more powerful than any other mutant we have ever seen before. Of course, it’s up to Professor Charles Xavier and his team of X-Men to stop this terrifying being before he destroys humanity. Lets talk about the most important character in the X-Men franchise: Charles Xavier (James McAvoy). It was revealed that he will no longer have his flowing hair, as he will finally go bald in X-Men: Apocalypse. He will be going through emotional chaos as his friend Magneto continues to betray him. Erik M. Lehnsherr is a survivor of the Holocaust who has seen the worst, and throughout the X-Men movies has been a relatable character despite the fact he has goals to wipe out humanity. He is more commonly known through his mutant name, Magneto. In the early going, he is torn between good and evil, with sadly evil triumphing most of the time. He was last seen fleeing from Washington D.C. after being shot by Mystique. It is not clear what happens to him between 1973 and 1983, but in the upcoming movie he is enlisted as one of the Four Horsemen. The Horsemen
THE CAST OF X-MEN: APOCALYPSE
27
PREVIEWS
had serious body issues and has served at Xavier’s side when he was weakest. We don’t know much about his role in the upcoming film except for the fact he will be back at the helm of the blackbird. In the original X-Men trilogy we were introduced to Mystique (Rebecca Romijn) as a sidekick of Magneto’s who lost her powers in the third movie. That all changed when Jennifer Lawrence took over in First Class. A much more intimate relationship has been established between her and Charles Xavier, but now that she didn’t assassinate Dr. Bolivar Trask, she has headed down a much different path than just being part of the Brotherhood of mutants. At the end of DOFP, Mystique officially broke things off with Magneto, very abruptly, going as far as to shoot him and also took Wolverine into custody disguised as William Stryker. The trailer shows her suiting up with the rest of the X-Men but what could have happened in the last decade to lead up to that point? Lana Condor is portraying Jubilee who did not receive that much screen time in the original trilogy. Angel, who was rushed in X-Men: The Last Stand is to be portrayed by British actor Ben Hardy. Psylocke (Olivia Munn) will be introduced as one of the Four Horsemen for the first time in the X-Men movies. Quicksilver (Evan Peters), who stole the show with his spectacular prison-break sequence in DOFP will be playing a much bigger role in Apocalypse. To this point Wolverine has appeared in every X-Men movie except for Deadpool. At this point he is getting ready to say goodbye to the character with one last standalone Wolverine film, but we don’t know if he will be aiding the X-Men in the efforts against The First Mutant. I would really like Wolverine to show up in Apocalypse because there are still some unanswered questions. First, as I mentioned before, Wolverine’s body was fished out and taken by Mystique disguised as William Stryker, but does this mean Logan never went through the Weapon X program? Then how would he develop his claws? If we don’t get the answer in X-Men: Apocalypse, we’ll just have to wait for the untitled Wolverine 3. I recommend that you see this highly anticipated film in theaters when it is released. If you are new to X-Men, you should check out the other movies or at least First Class and DOFP before seeing this one to understand the plot. X-Men: Apocalypse should be a major blast especially with all the new characters being introduced.
CINEMANN / Spring Issue
of Apocalypse are mutants that have been mentally conditioned and genetically altered to serve the ancient mutant. It’s still confusing as to how Apocalypse gets Magneto to join his side. After several encounters with Magneto, and clashing with Dr. Bolivar Trask, the mutants are finally ready to take on Apocalypse. We got our first look at him in the end credits sequence in DOFP. He was seen using his powers to manipulate the Great Pyramids in Egypt, which suggests he has been around for a very long time. The Marvel Comics Database reveals that his given name, En Sabah Nur, translates, as “The First One,” and it’s a fitting name given that Apocalypse was the first mutant in existence. He was born with grey skin and blue traces around his face, and had powerful gifts from the time of his birth. Apocalypse’s various powers, include flight, invulnerability, superhuman strength, teleportation, telekinesis, he’s basically invincible. Oscar Isaac has been handed this villainous role, meaning he will move directly from being on screen in Star Wars: The Force Awakens to Singer’s X-Men world. He is quickly becoming one of the most well known young actors in Hollywood. In the original X-Men movies, Cyclops, or Scott Summers was portrayed by James Marsden, and although his performance was fine, he wasn’t written too well. He had more of a secondary role, and was barely in the third movie at all. He is considered to be the leader of the X-Men however Wolverine received all the attention. Thanks to the timeline-changing events of Days of Future Past, these events have been completely wiped out giving Singer a chance to start over again with a fresh take on the characters. Another important member, Jean Gray was portrayed by Famke Janssen in the original movies, but she is also having a tiny-reboot in X-Men: Apocalypse. She will be played by game of Thrones star Sophie Turner. In the first trailer of this movie, we could see Jean Grey’s powers starting to get out of control as she was beginning to have apocalyptic nightmares. The footage shows Jean Grey fighting as a member of the X-Men. Replacing Halle Berry, Storm will be portrayed by Alexandra Shipp. She will not be fighting with the X-Men, but against them, on the side of the Four Horsemen. Solely because of the character’s legacy I expect that she will somehow be spared, and become a member of the X-Men but I’m curious to see how that goes down. Nightcrawler, who has only appeared in X-Men 2 will also be included. Kodi Smit-McPhee will portray him. Since the events of X-Men First Class, Beast has struggled with romantic feelings toward Mystique, has
28
CINEMANN /Spring Issue
PREVIEWS
BEHIND THE SCENES OF A MONSTER CALLS
A MONSTER CALLS by Lisa Shi
The trailer for A Monster Calls begins with The Monster’s (Liam Neeson) deep, rumbling murmur over a peaceful piano score. The Monster tells the story of an invisible man who hated his lack of existing, for he was not actually invisible; people just grew accustomed to ignoring his presence. “If no one sees you, are you really there at all?” the man wonders. Scenes of British schoolchildren play, with a particular focus on one boy named Conor, (Lewis MacDougall), whom we follow through the day. He is bullied at school, and aside from that, participates in few other social interactions. The boy, to whom the Monster is telling the story, wonders what the invisible man does. “He calls for a monster.” A giant tree-like creature proceeds to reach in through Conor’s window, tear the wall apart, and pull him out of his room. The upcoming film, directed by J.A. Bayona, is based on a children’s novel of the same name by Patrick Ness. As such, it should follow a similar plot. The book tells of a boy named Conor who escapes from the real world into a fantasy one. Conor’s life is full of pain his mother is sick and he has trouble accepting his own grief. Additionally, he is the victim of bullying at school and as a consequence, he has distanced himself from all other social contact. The story begins with Conor waking up at 12:07, as he always does, from a recurring nightmare, one that he has had for a few months. He does not illustrate the dream in much detail, but briefly describes it as “the one with the darkness and the wind and the screaming.” One night, however, a voice calls to him from outside his bedroom window at 12:07. The voice belongs to the yew tree that grows in the cemetery behind his house. The tree, however, has now become a monster in human shape, a towering mass of branches
LIAM NEESON IN A MONSTER CALLS
and leaves. The monster insists that Conor summoned it and says he will tell Conor three stories. In exchange, Conor must tell his own story after. The monster continues to meet Conor, almost always at 12:07 am, to tell him the three stories. The first is of a Prince, his lover, and his stepmother, who is currently the Queen of the country. The story characterizes morality and the gray area in which all inherently exist; no one is “good” or “bad,” and as such, should not be categorized. The next day, Conor’s mother’s condition further deteriorates and she must be sent to the hospital to be cared for. Conor goes to stay with his grandmother. Similarly, the next two nights, the Monster tells Conor stories that result in real-life consequences that mirror the tales and help Conor come to terms with his mother’s illness. Throughout the entire novel, it seems as if the characters surrounding Conor fear
LEWIS MACDOUGALL IN A MONSTER CALLS
29
PREVIEWS
his mother in the hospital, and at 12:07, she dies. The novel is excellent in its approach towards the portrayal of grief and loss, with a beautiful collection of artwork to accompany it. Having been arguably one of the best novels for children, many are excited to see what the film brings. The trailer does not feature Conor’s mother at all, who is a crucial figure in the novel, focusing more on the adventurous aspect that concerns the Monster; hopefully, this will be different in the movie. The film, aside from Neeson and MacDougall, will feature Felicity Jones as Conor’s mother, Sigourney Weaver as Conor’s grandmother, and Toby Kebbell as Conor’s father. A Monster Calls is set to premiere October 2016.
CINEMANN / Spring Issue
upsetting him due to his mother’s disease. Everyone in his life, including his classmates, is very careful around him. In fact, this is the source of contention for Conor’s bullies, who believe he wants special treatment because of his mother’s illness. Conor is in denial about the entire situation; this is encouraged by his mother herself, who insists that she is all right. Conor ultimately makes a conscious decision that compels him to consider himself a bad person who should be punished for his thought. The yew replies that just as in the first story, the choice he made does not make him a bad person. Humans are inherently more complex than that. He has accepted his mother’s imminent death and the changes it will bring. He visits
30
CINEMANN /Spring Issue
FEATURED
ACADEMY AWARD WINNER LEONARDO DICAPRIO
So, Leonardo DiCaprio has an Oscar. After being nominated five times across his twenty-three years in the acting business, at the 2016 Academy Awards the forty-one year old received the “Best Actor” Academy Award for his work in The Revenant, ending what has been one of movie fans’ most beloved jokes. It’s hard to put a finger on exactly what made the DiCaprio-Doesn’t-Have-An-Oscar joke last so long and so widely beloved. From an Academy Award cleverly edited next to DiCaprio’s sobbing body in the final scene of Romeo + Juliet, to a picture of DiCaprio with Star Wars actor Oscar Isaac captioned “The only Oscar Leo’s gotten to hold,” poking fun at DiCaprio’s lack of an Oscar has been a staple of popular culture since his first nomination. It’s never been particularly mean-spirited, and if anything the joke rose out of bitterness that DiCaprio hadn’t won anything yet. But what’s most interesting about the evolution of DiCaprio’s career is that for many people, he’s become an emblem of the idea that an actor doesn’t need an Oscar. He’s one of the most recognizable faces of our generation. From the time he first appeared on screen in What’s Eating Gilbert Grape, his charm and talent as an actor has always stuck out. DiCaprio’s career is so polished it almost doesn’t seem real. He went from a strikingly talented child, to a teen heartthrob, to a suave and humble adult. If there are scandals in his life, we rarely hear about them. He’s played Romeo Montague, Jay Gatsby, the romantic hero Jack Dawson of Titanic, and so many more loved characters. Something about him has always felt untouchable, outside of the world of awards and red carpets. There’s a rare sensitivity to him that people have always connected with. DiCaprio said himself on being nominated for an Oscar for the first time in 1993: “My first reaction was being terrified of ever having to go onstage in front of a billion people.” In The Revenant, a survival epic based on the life of real frontiersman Hugh Glass, DiCaprio hardly has to speak at all. For most of the film, he’s by himself just trying to survive. DiCaprio has done some gritty films like Django Unchained and Shutter Island before, but The Revenant is a new type of film for him. He is the main event of the film, almost uncomfortably exposed in the center of every shot. Hugh Glass is not what most people would consider a DiCaprio role, the actor looks practically unrecognizable with a matted beard and tattered fur trappers’ clothes. It’s hard to define exactly
what a Leonardo DiCaprio film is due to his huge versatility as an actor and gigantic résumé, but there is a distinct image most viewers associate with him; even when it’s a darker film, DiCaprio’s movies tend to be big and high production. The Revenant certainly feels sweeping and awe-inspiring, but it never feels like a big movie in the same way something like Shutter Island or J Edgar does. It’s a gruff film that inhabits a barren, cold cinematographic landscape. Although The Revenant does not have the glitziness of some of DiCaprio’s other work, it is a beautiful film, partially because of DiCaprio’s rich performance. Fans have wondered whether The Revenant should be considered DiCaprio’s “best” film just because it’s the one he’s gotten an award for. Personally, no, I don’t think it’s the best film he’s ever done. But the reason why it won, in my opinion, is that it convinced the Academy that DiCaprio is adaptable. So many male stars make the same movie over and over again and begin to feel expendable. Over the span of DiCaprio’s career, he’s had an incredible variety of roles and The Revenant was the jewel in the crown. It’s shot entirely in natural light and was filmed in incredibly remote locations. The dialogue is minimal. The Revenant could not be a Zac Efron or Channing Tatum movie. It needed an amount of dedication and genuineness that DiCaprio was able to go above and beyond in providing in his performance. But what really makes an Oscar-winning actor? Do the Oscars really matter? This year in particular there’s been a rise in discussion of the subjectivity of the Academy’s picks, especially in regards to diversity or lack thereof in nominations. Everyone has a different opinion on film and it’s difficult to prove why the Academy’s matters so much more than anyone else’s. They’re educated in the medium of film, but since when has not having a doctorate in film history stopped anyone from arguing why their favorite best picture nominee didn’t win? But in any case, this year was a moment of triumph for one of the most beloved actors of our generation. If 2016 can be the year Leonardo DiCaprio wins an Oscar, then this can be the year you can do anything.
FEATURED
by Emma Jones
31
CINEMANN / Spring Issue
CELEBRATING LEONARDO DICAPRIO
32
CINEMANN /Spring Issue
FEATURED
THE CAST OF THE WONDER YEARS
LOOKING BACK IN WONDER by Sophia Schein The TV show The Wonder Years premiered almost 30 years ago in January of 1988. It is based in an unspecified suburb during the 1960’s. It follows a typical sixth grade boy, Kevin Arnold, played by Fred Savage, as he struggles through adolescence and an innocent crush turned romance with his childhood neighbor, Winnie Cooper, played by Danica McKellar. While Kevin and Winnie are special characters that are easy to care and root for, it is the evolution from childhood friendship into love, and all the bittersweet emotions that come with that metamorphosis, that make anyone watching the show relate to it. In each episode, Kevin is able to simultaneously encapsulate the moment and reflect on what he learned about love, family, and growing up through each experience. The main focus of the show was the young romance between Kevin and his neighbor, Winnie Coo-
per. They grew up side-by-side and as they entered adolescence, Kevin found himself hopelessly in love with Winnie. In the pilot episode, they shared their first kiss, setting the sweet tone for the rest of the show. As they moved through middle school and high school, viewers watched their countless breakups and reunions with bated breath. Through all of this, Kevin learned about love, heartbreak, and eventually the crushing realization that people grow apart and you can’t end up with the girl you loved as a child. The show also explored complex topics like the startling realization that parents are not the omnipotent heroes you imagine them to be when you are a child, but are human beings with their own struggles. As Kevin was managing his own adolescence he also had to cope with the difficulties of having a father who was gruff, preoccupied and often distant from the fam-
THE CAST OF THE WONDER YEARS IN 2014
33
FEATURED
the young star of the show, Fred Savage, became the youngest actor nominated for an Emmy for a comedy series. The next year, it went on to win a Peabody Award for pushing the preconceived notions of what a sitcom should be. The Wonder Years forever changed the format of sitcoms. More importantly, its storyline has proven to be timeless, such that even today’s audiences are able to connect to the narrator’s sincere, thoughtful and meaningful commentaries on adolescence, love, and the meaning of life. While the plot lines may not have much excitement and action, they are able to reach the hearts of viewers. It may have even stronger nostalgia for those who grew up in the 60’s but the universal nature of Kevin’s experiences make it timeless. Most if not all people have struggled with young love, growing up, and understanding oneself and one’s family. It has, however, remained relatable to me and the many others, who now watch it on Netflix. Kevin’s emotions and experiences are ageless, and it doesn’t matter to us that the show was based nearly 50 years before our time.
CINEMANN / Spring Issue
ily. After seeing his father at work one day, Kevin is able to gain insight into how unsatisfied his father is as a middle manager at a large electronics corporation. That realization, while helpful to understanding his father, spoils his innocence. Many reasons have been cited for the show’s cancellation after it’s sixth season, but perhaps the most convincing is the simple fact that the characters and actors grew up. The show’s audience had become accustomed to the tenderness and sweetness of the story. As the characters reached the end of their teenage years and Kevin and Winnie’s relationship matured, more explicit content would have been far too shocking for the primetime time slot it held. It would have been unrealistic to keep them innocent and sheltered forever, and so the show appropriately ended. From the very beginning, The Wonder Years stood out as something never done before. It was unique and unprecedented in the fact that it had no laugh track and featured an offscreen narrator. Before the first season had even finished airing the show received a Primetime Emmy Award for Outstanding Comedy Series and
by Emma Jones CINEMANN /Spring Issue
FEATURED
34
THE BARD ON THE SILVER SCREEN: SHAKESPEARE AND FILM You rarely hear people saying: “Oh no, not another Shakespeare film” the way audiences tend to lament about the Transformers franchise getting another reboot. Shakespeare adaptations range from niche films like Throne of Blood to mainstream releases like The Lion King and its sequel. In any person’s life, he or she has undoubtedly watched a film influenced by Shakespeare. Shakespeare pervades our culture in ways we sometimes don’t even realize. One thing is for sure: Shakespeare’s storytelling remains timeless and immortal, whether being told line by line or frame by frame. In the medium of film, it’s much harder to focus on language and metaphor, and the most useful tool for conveying meaning becomes imagery. Take Trevor Nunn’s 1990 adaptation of Othello, wherein a shot of Iago pushing aside two black and white king and queen chess pieces into a well is shown near the middle of the film, and in the final scene of the film Othello and Desdemona’s bodies are shown being disposed of in the Mediterranean sea. This is one of the central themes of Othello, namely Othello and Desdemona’s helplessness in the face of Iago’s manipulation and how Iago’s actions escalate from ideas to real action with horrifying consequences, translated into a visual motif. Another example of this text-tofilm is in Baz Luhrmann’s Romeo + Juliet. Juliet’s dress when she goes out to dance has costumed wings attached to it and is shown in numerous shots near angels and other religious motifs, thematically implying with its cinematography that Romeo and Juliet’s love has an almost spiritual element to it the same way the original text does through its language, such as the first scene between Romeo and Juliet, wherein Romeo begins their conversation with “If I profane with my unworthiest hand/This holy shrine, the gentle fine is this,” and the coy, flirtatious backand-forth between the two uses an image of saints, sin, and prayer. The biggest challenge of a Shakespearean film is adapting the language for modern ears. While using the visual medium to convey the meaning is one way to go about it, some decide to modernize the play as a whole. Tim Blake Nelson’s O transposes Othello into a high school. The character of Othello is reworked to be Odin, a star basketball player and Iago reworked to be Hugo, the jealous deuteragonist who is the basketball coach’s overlooked and bitter son. O does not use Shakespeare’s original language and instead chooses to have the characters speak as modern high school students would. It’s by no means a word-for-word adaptation of the script, but there are some cases when the linguistic references are very obvious. “Reputation? Who cares about reputation? Michael, f*** reputation,” Hugo says to a beleaguered
BAZ LUHRMANN’S ROMEO + JULIET
AKIRA KUROSAWA’S THRONE OF BLOOD
KELLY ASBURY’S GNOMEO & JULIET
ROB MINKOFF AND ROGER ALLERS’ THE LION KING
and oblivious Michael Cassio after Cassio has been kicked off the team for misconduct, which Hugo had a hand in setting up. One of Cassio’s most recognizable lines in Othello is “Reputation, reputation, reputation! Oh, I have lost my reputation!” To which Iago replies, “Reputation is an idle and most false imposition, oft got without merit and lost without deserving!” This particular scene did an excellent job of conveying the emotion in the original text while adapting the language to fit the characters’ more modern incarnations. It is true that an element of the text can be lost when changing the Bard’s words, but it brings the screenwriter’s own originality to the film. Many films reference Shakespeare in a less obvious way due to how many storytelling tropes his works have influenced. A notable example is Disney’s The Lion King. The Lion King is its own story with its own massive cultural influence, but the story of The Lion King is at its core a retelling of Hamlet. You can easily re-cast the characters of The Lion King as the characters of Hamlet; Simba as Hamlet, Timon and Pumba as Rosencrantz and Guildenstern, Scar as Claudius, and Zazu as Polonius. The protagonist’s father, the king, is dead and the protagonist’s uncle is eager to get rid of him, and the protagonist must thwart his uncle’s greed to take over the kingdom while simultaneously being guided and haunted by his father’s ghost. On the other hand, The Lion King is about talking lions. Hamlet is…about a lot of things, but definitely not about talking lions. They are not the same story by any means, but The Lion King was influenced by a Shakespearean trope. Some of the visuals, such as the skulls in the Elephant Graveyard as a symbol
of despair parallel the skull of Yorick as a symbol of despair. The Lion King is not meant to be a Shakespeare adaptation and the casual viewer probably is not really meant to pick up on the Shakespearean ideas in it at all. But its Shakespearean influence shows through all the same. And who’s to say an adaptation of Hamlet can’t be about talking lions? We did, after all have Kelly Osbury’s Gnomeo & Juliet in 2011, a retelling of Romeo and Juliet with, yes, anthropomorphic garden gnomes. Part of the beauty of Shakespeare is the versatility of his stories. From an adaptation Macbeth with the lead character as a fry cook in suburban Pennsylvania to a re-telling of Othello about high school basketball, adaptations of Shakespeare’s plays are ubiquitous in the landscape of modern film. Part of the reason for this lies in the fact that Shakespeare has been so incredibly influential on the tropes and plots of any kind of storytelling. Romeo and Juliet is often thought of as the quintessential love story, Hamlet as the quintessential tragedy. The tropes Shakespeare used were undoubtedly not created by him, but his works became so popular and had such a wide sphere of influence that “Shakespearean” becomes a genre of its own. Without Shakespeare, there would be no given name Hal or Jessica, no idiom for “breaking the ice” or being “faint-hearted.” Those are just two examples of how much we owe fundamental parts of the English language and our culture to him. Shakespeare’s enormous reach is undeniable.
FEATURED
CINEMANN / Spring Issue
35
36
CINEMANN /Spring Issue
FEATURED
CHRIS ROCK HOSTING THE 88TH ACADEMY AWARDS
Chris Rock’s hosting of the Oscars was, for lack of a better word, amazing. After lots of controversy over the lack of black nominees this year, Rock’s performance not only addressed these racial issues but had me falling out of my seat with laughter. Not only did he ridicule the Oscars and Hollywood in general, but he also made small jabs at those who decided to boycott the award show, despite agreeing with their plea. One thing he did particularly well was his justification for hosting the Oscars considering the circumstances. His first reason and joke, was that only unemployed people tell you to quit. This provided comic relief to a serious situation. However, what truly took the cake was when Rock stated, “The last thing I need is to lose another job to Kevin Hart.” This statement was not only funny to all those watching, but it shifted the blame away from the criticism he received about his acceptance of the job. Chris Rock had so many great moments like this as host that it is hard to pick a favorite. Lots of them were presented in his opening monologue, which helped to break down a lot of the racial tension early on in the show. One example of these moments is when he said, “It’s the 88th Academy Awards which means this whole no black nominees thing has happened at least 71 other times… Why[did we not protest it]? Because we had real things to protest at the time, you know? We had real things to protest; you know, we’re too busy being raped and lynched to care about who won best cinematographer.” I loved this joke, not because it trivialized the racial issues faced in this Oscars, but because it both highlights that there is nothing unique about racial exclusion from the Oscars, and it reminded people of longstanding racial prejudice in society. Another great joke Chris made in his monologue is that if black people really wanted to be nominated they would need to have all black categories. He then continued by using the example that we don’t truly need all female categories, but if we didn’t have them there wouldn’t be female nominees. I thought this was a great point because it not only showed racial injustice in Hollywood, but it also touched on gender inequality. Throughout his monologue he successfully confronted the audience about race and sex-
ism in Hollywood, and he not only talked about inequality for African Americans but described how we also live in a slightly overly “P.C.” society, which can sometimes lose the forest for the trees. Chris’s humor continued throughout the night. Like most hosts he included segments other than stand up. One in particular was a video where he interviewed black people going to see the movies. There, Chris asked the moviegoers about several of the nominated films. Interestingly enough, a lot of the moviegoers hadn’t heard of or didn’t have interest in seeing some of them. This segment highlighted that though it may not represent intentional racism, the Academy often rewards films that certain groups of people don’t relate to. For example, a lot of the people at theatre were not going to see Brooklyn, but they loved Straight Outta Compton, which was only nominated for one award. The academy members don’t have to watch all the potential nominated movies, and several said that they didn’t watch movies like Straight Outta Compton. This segment was not only funny since some of the black moviegoers thought that the nominated titles Chris Rock was asking them about weren’t real movies, but it also highlighted the gap between black moviegoers and the Academy. Race wasn’t the only thing that made Chris Rock a good host this year. A segment that even people who did not see the Oscars heard about was when he sold Girl Scout cookies for his daughter’s troop. This was funny, light hearted, and so bizarre that it made for one of the greatest moments of the night. Plus, Chris Rock was able to sell up to 65,000 cookies. Chris Rock was exactly the sort of host that the Oscars needed to help mend their mistakes. Several critics have said he was the best host in a couple of years, and I strongly agree with them. His candor and humor helped to make an extremely long Oscars entertaining.
FEATURED
by Cameron Chavers
37
CINEMANN / Spring Issue
CHRIS ROCK OSCAR HOST REVIEW
CINEMANN /Spring Issue
FEATURED
38
WHY AM I SCARED?
NATALIE DORMER IN THE FOREST
by Sophia Schein
Horror films since their creation have aimed to make their audiences uncomfortable and afraid. Over the years, the tactics used to do this most effectively have changed radically. The things proven to be the most terrifying are often the unknown. These unknowns are interesting and provide important insight into understanding the society that they were meant to scare. Understanding why certain plot devices, villains, and monsters were considered terrifying in the past, yet today are thought of as tame and cheesy is vital to understanding current trends in horror movies. First, monsters films such as Frankenstein and Dracula were the epitome of terror in the early 1930’s. Next, stories of government control and slasher films like Psycho took over in the 1960’s. They represented the fears of the time and what was unknown. These genres and many more have become obsolete aside from a few exceptions. In their place, films depicting mental illness have become the newest trend. This very concept is incredibly controversial. Is it morally okay to turn people’s struggles into clichéd horror? Does it further stigmatize the mentally ill? Some movies in this trend have portrayed mental illnesses in much better ways than others. As a result of my interest in this trend, I’ve reviewed a wide range of portrayals of mental illness. While the vast majority fall into a range of simply average a few films stand at either extreme. One of the best examples I’ve seen was The Babadook, a 2014 Australian psychological horror film. Essie Davis stars as Amelia, a troubled widow, alongside her six-year-old son Oskar, played by Benjamin Winspear. Unlike other films in this trend, the mother who clearly has some unspecified mental illness is portrayed as the victim rather than a monster to be feared. The
ESSIE DAVIS AND NOAH WISEMAN IN THE BABADOOK
“monster” in this film is unique in its ambiguity and is known for the knocking noises it makes to let you know it is close. While the shadow of it can be spotted in several shots, it is never clarified what is real and what is imagined. The line between the mother’s issues and a classic horror movie monster is blurred. It is increasingly unclear how much of the film is taking place in Amelia’s mind. Critics have praised the film for the way it maintains fear without cheap jump scares. Unlike many other films in this mental illness trend, The Babadook addresses the mother’s illness in a comparatively respectful way. The film also found a way to somewhat accurately show the reality of how mental illness is resolved. It isn’t a simple demon that can be banished and forgotten. As a family, the mother and son work together to recognize their tormentor, the mother’s illness, and find a way to manage and live with it. While it still may be exploitative to use mental illness as a horror device, The Babadook is by far one of the better portrayals.
39
FEATURED
MARION CRANE IN PSYCHO
color in the movie were used as jump scares and forest guides. The forest used for the setting is notorious for its long history of suicide victims taking their lives in the shadows of Mount Fuji. Many were offended by the way the film made victims of depression into cheap demons. While horror movies are not exactly known for being politically correct, this film may have crossed the line into something far too offensive. This range of portrayals and the sheer number of films that fall into this trend show the fears of our time. Mental illness is still a mystery and therefore something that can be exploited as a fear factor.
CINEMANN / Spring Issue
In contrast, one of the most harshly criticized recent films depicting victims of mental illness was The Forest, which premiered this January. It was directed by Jason Zada and starred Natalie Dormer and Taylor Kinney. The film follows an American woman following her missing identical twin sister into the Suicide Forest in Japan. Once in the forest, she and her sister are terrorized by demons, suicide victims, trying to kill other forest visitors. It was criticized before its release for its cultural appropriation of Japanese history and culture and treatment of suicide victims. For a movie set in Japan, it was surprising to see that the only people of
LATE CINEMATOGRAPHER VILMOS ZSIGMOND
COME WRITE FOR CINEMANN! Contact Kenneth Shinozuka through the email below.
Kenneth_Shinozuka@horacemann.org