The Oscars

1917 takes the cinematic portrayal of war to new heights

Éamon Goonan

looks at how 1917 differs within the

saturated genre of

Despite the popular aphorism that war never changes, cinematic portrayals of war vary greatly in consistency. Sam Mendes’s “1917”, however, succeeds in delivering an unflinching portrait of World War I.

In an evocation of Spielberg’s “Saving Private Ryan”, the premise involves young soldiers being sent on a perilous Homeric odyssey. George MacKay and Dean-Charles Chapman, who slot perfectly into the boots of lance corporals Schofield and Blake, are tasked with a seemingly insurmountable mission, one in which they must race against time.

Our two protagonists must encroach behind enemy lines before dawn to hand-deliver a message war films The breathtakingly fluid cinematography of Roger Deakins glides effortlessly around the protagonists; making the viewer feel as though they are an accompanying soldier “

which will prevent a potentially catastrophic assault on the German trenches.

Mendes employs a “one-shot” format for the entire duration of the movie, giving the impression of a movie which has ostensibly been shot in a seamless single take, albeit with infrequent ellipses. The result of this audacious cinematic technique is uncompromising, breathless, encompassing immersion.

The breathtakingly fluid cinematography of Roger Deakins glides effortlessly around the protagonists; making the viewer feel as though they are an accompanying soldier.

The epic scale of the battlefield is manifested as the action traverses various hellscapes, effectively capturing our heroes’ anxious reluctance to progress to the next uncharted territory.

The movie is interspersed with nail-biting, edgeof-your-seat moments, amplified in shock-value by the film’s “point of view” format; a booby-trapped bunker, an ostensibly innocuous dogfight, a gunshot slicing through silence.

While these visceral, shocking scenes evoke a significant emotional response, it is in fact the more restrained scenes that pull on the heart strings.

“1917” oscillates between the inglorious, fatalistic face of war and the innocent, hopeful face of MacKay. As a result of this juxtaposition, we are

periodically confronted with the expedient human cost of war.

On occasion, the two young soldiers allow themselves an intermission from the gravity of their mission, exchanging boisterous stories and slightly juvenile humour. At times like these, it doesn’t require much imagination to liken the soldiers to two schoolboys, sent on an errand by a secondary school teacher to deliver a message.

The youthful appearance and demeanour of the army men might be highlighted to Irish viewers who recognise Chris Walley, one half of “The Young Offenders”, as one of the soldiers encountered on the expedition.

Young male viewers will likely exit the cinema with an unfolding sense of relief, grateful for not having come of age in a conscripting country during wartime.

Some authoritarian military figures in this movie possess a certain ignorance which harks back to the renowned poem, “Dulce et Decorum Est” by Wilfred Owen.

“Hope is a dangerous thing,” utters Benedict Cumberbatch’s Colonel MacKenzie, as he itches to send the next wave of troops into the industrial meat grinder of no man’s land.

The overarching visual motif of the cherry blossom is very fitting in this movie, as it represents the fragility and beauty of life. The petals, which fall from the tree shortly after blossoming, reflect the short-lived but meaningful lives of the fallen soldiers.

The buddha supposedly came to enlightenment while sitting under a tree; perhaps it is appropriate that a key closing scene involves a protagonist sitting solemnly under a tree.

Like the buddha, the soldier finds himself without possessions, realising that the true worthwhileness of life stems from the intangible relationships we craft between ourselves.

Little Women brings a classic tale to a modern audience

Beth Molloy reviews the timeless tale of Little Women

Louisa May Alcott’s “Little Women” is one of the few novels written by a female author, featuring female protagonists that has stood the test of time. Off the top of one’s head, similar novels such as Jane Austen’s “Pride and Prejudice” and L.M Montgomery’s “Anne of Green Gables” spring to mind, and while all three of these books have been reworked for both stage and screen in many different ways, Alcott’s “Little Women” is perhaps the story that is most loved and remembered for its on screen adaptations.

Published in the 1860’s against the background of civil war and the abolition of slavery, it’s a time when women are told to marry well and obey their husbands. Despite this Alcott presents us with a novel that works hard to deliver a truth about women, that they too, like men, can hope and dream and feel and know their own minds. This is perhaps why many directors have tried to capture this ageless tale. Greta Gerwig is the latest to try her hand.

Gerwig’s adaptation has been incredibly well received. The movie, released in December 2019, has received a plethora of award nominations. Most notably, Saoirse Ronan is nominated for her fourth Oscar for her performance as Jo March and Florence Pugh is also nominated for her portrayal of Amy March. Arguably the film should have been nominated for more, the opinion of many is that Gerwig was unfairly snubbed for best director.

Ronan delivers a strong performance as Jo March. She is fiercely independent and Ronan

delivers an inspired performance. She works hard to ensure that Jo is a well rounded character and doesn’t shy away from scenes that might show Jo to be in a less favourable light.

The best part about this whole film however is Florence Pugh’s performance as the youngest March sister, Amy. Pugh delivers a much more likeable character than the 1994 adaptation and it was clear that Gerwig had worked hard to ensure that Amy didn’t appear as the spoilt younger sister. Pugh lands an emotional delivery and made us question pre-existing opinions that we might have of Amy March.

Timotheé Chalamet makes a good Laurie. When he is on screen alongside Ronan and Pugh he allows their character’s to breathe. He brings out both the best and worst parts of them and he should be commended for this. This is after all a story about little women, not a man trying to find his place. Chalamet is aware of this and he gives an educated performance.

What Gerwig did best however was showing that women can be whatever they like once they are happy. She did this well by highlighting the fact that despite Meg, played by Emma Watson, having a love for acting, she also would love to be a mother and it was okay for her to choose this. Marriage is not conceding to the societal norms that “Little Women” challenges, but instead shows that women making their own decisions is empowering.

Published in the 1860’s against the background of civil war and the abolition of slavery, it’s a time when women are told to marry well and obey their husbands. “

Aoife McMahon looks at season two of Netflix’s Sex Education O tis, Maeve, Eric and all our beloved characters from Netflix’s hit show “Sex Education” returned to our screens on January 17th. After the colossal success of the first season, the second season was much anticipated by the fans of what has been suggested to be Netflix’s best original show.

As you might remember, the last season ends with late bloomer Otis, played by Asa Butterfield, finally being able to masturbate, so naturally this one starts with him becoming obsessed with it. The first few minutes of the show make for uncomfortable watching as Otis deals with his newfound sexual urges.

This echoes the start of the previous season, as that too opened with an intensely sexual scene. These scenes reminded the viewers that a show called “Sex Education” isn’t going to be for the faint hearted and you should think twice about watching it with your parents.

The character development in this season is to be applauded. Nearly every character matures as their storylines progress. This is not limited to the main cast but also the secondary characters. This is true for Lily, the somewhat nerdy band girl, who in the first season was obsessed with having sex, grows to accept herself and her virginity. Similarly, Jackson realises there is more to life than swimming and that sometimes you have to stand up to your parents.

This season also sheds more light on the LGBTQ+ community as we are introduced to Florence, who opens up to Jean, Otis’s sex therapist mother played by the wonderful Gillian Anderson, about how she doesn’t feel normal because she has no sexual desires.

In the truly touching scene, Jean informs her that she is normal and tells her about what it means to be asexual. Ola, who starts the season as Otis’ girlfriend discovers she is pansexual and Adam, after years of bullying Eric for being gay, finally admits to being bisexual.

Eric Effiong played by Ncuti Gatwa, a fan favourite, undergoes a huge growth this season as he experiences what it’s like to be in an openly gay relationship with Rahim and is forced to make the decision between being with him or being in a more hidden relationship with Adam.

This season’s empowering “It’s my vagina” moment comes in the form of the female characters putting aside their differences to help Amy overcome difficulties after she is sexually assaulted The show gets to the heart of sexual taboos and identity struggles, it will have you laughing one second and crying your eyes out the next “

in the third episode. This is just one example of the scenes that will make you tear up as beneath all the sex and humour in this show there are genuine emotional stories.

We also get to understand more of the characters’ relationships with their parents. In this season, we see Otis’ emotionally stunted dad, Eric’s supportive family and Maeve’s narcotics addicted mother who Maeve fears becoming like, encouraging her to go back to school and getting rid of her iconic pink hair.

The show gets to the heart of sexual taboos and identity struggles, it will have you laughing one second and crying your eyes out the next. It will reassure you that any unusual sexual thoughts or insecurities are perfectly normal. The second season of “Sex Education” is funny, educational and a must watch.

You comes down with vertigo

Brendan Fernando Kelly Palenque

reviews the second season of Netflix’s You

Last year, “You” created a social media storm. This was thanks in part to the handsome lead Joe Goldberg, played by Penn Badgley.

The number of people thirsting over a murderer made Badgley uncomfortable, and he made several tweets discouraging people from lusting after a literal killer.

With the release of its second season, the conversation re-emerged. Particularly after a Vogue interview in which Badgley said that “You” is about “how far... we [are] willing to go to forgive an evil white man”. This analysis was mainly met with great applause, and understandably so.

If someone did not know about the show, that could make it sound like a deep dive into the more pernicious aspects of our society, how we forgive abusers and how privilege plays a part in who we forgive. “You” does absolutely none of those things.

Badgley’s description of the show is utterly bizarre. “You” is a cheesy thriller with much more in common with “Riverdale” than “The Sopranos.” The plot is a bit nonsensical; Joe avoids capture far more times than should be possible. Season two is even less grounded in reality than the first.

And that’s fine. “You” is an easy watch with an intriguing plot if you suspend your disbelief a little bit. It’s definitely not high-brow, despite what Badgley might say. It’s engaging, ridiculous and

“The show isn’t predictable, but that’s mainly because it’s not logical

honestly a bit lazy.

The latest season is largely the same as the first. Just replace any New York clichés with those of Los Angeles. Joe finds himself taking on a new identity in LA and violently obsessing over another woman. Joe’s new lover, Love (Victoria Pedretti), is just as obnoxious as her name would suggest. And that goes double for her brother Forty (James Scully). However, Forty slowly does become bearable as the season progresses.

Granted, that’s if you even make it further than the first few episodes. You’s second season is the first with a fresh coat of paint. Despite this, there’s very little continuity with the events of season one. And again, if “You” is taken to be some cheap fun, that’s fine. But it’s most certainly disappointing for something that’s being presented as thoroughly thought-provoking. The show isn’t predictable, but that’s mainly because it’s not logical.

That said, the suspense of the show was ruined with the announcement of a third season not too long after the newest season’s debut. Any viewer who had yet to binge the latest ten episodes was robbed of the idea of Joe facing any karma for his evil. Knowing that Joe’s never really in any danger really lowers the stake of what should be an incredibly high-stakes show.

The two stand-outs of this most recent season have to be sisters Delilah (Carmela Zumbado) and Ellie (Jenna Ortega). Delilah is a Ronan Farrow type journalist who reports on predators by night and looks after her cinephile sister by day.

Those who weren’t blown away by season one should skip this latest instalment though. It has little to offer beyond a mildly interesting Weinsteinesque plotline.

Aoife O’Brien analyses Netflix’s Spinning Out

In the world of figure skating, perfection is everything. It means measured movements and elegant execution.

It means never straying from your routine and never revealing your personality. You are the demure, poised character of your routine both on the ice and off. No more. No less. This is a struggle faced by every character in Netflix’s new original series “Spinning Out”, which follows the lives of four-figure skaters all dreaming of the Olympics.

But the most compelling parts of this series are the quieter struggles that the characters face even as they deal with the pressure of athletic careers.

Kat Baker, played by Kaya Scodelario plays a young figure skater who has become traumatised after sustaining a gruesome skull injury on the ice. However, her problems don’t end there. Suffering from generational poverty, having an abusive single mother suffering with bipolar disorder, a history of self-harm and her personal bipolar diagnosis mean she doesn’t fit the usual stereotype of the rich ice princess from Sun Valley.

Despite this Kat is never just depicted as only a bipolar woman. She has her desires and ambitions that are completely separate from her disorder.

“Spinning Out” does a great job of separating the disorder from the person. It portrays the alarming effects of the illness without condemning the person suffering and explains but never excuses the abusive behaviour.

It also highlights the stigmas surrounding mental illness and showcases how some of those stigmas are evolving.

After Kat suffers an episode, her mother, Carol, tries to protect her by telling everyone that she had pneumonia. However, while the figure skating world may not be ready to accept her bipolar, Kat believes that the people who are important to her will.

“Spinning Out” also tackles more than just mental health issues, sending a clear message about racial discrimination.

The series takes special care to contrast the experiences of a black man, Marcus, to that of Kat, Serena, and Justin, all of whom are white.

When Marcus and Justin get into trouble with the law, Marcus is treated differently than Justin and recalls his parents’ experiences with racist police officers.

He receives much of the same unequal treatment as the only black person on Sun Valley’s preOlympic ski team. Marcus is afraid to tell his coach the reason that he ended up in prison because he was afraid of being judged because of his race.

As one of the only black people in a predominately white environment, even his dating life comes under question.

Similarly to Kat, he is not defined by his struggles. His storyline and goals are complex not because he is a person of colour but because he is a multifaceted human.

The race, sexuality and socioeconomic status of the characters in the series are not focused on as their only overwhelming quality or merely included as a token. They are refreshingly treated as an integral part of human life.

Spinning Out does a great job of separating the disease from the person “

Gang teen angst takes a darker turn in On My Block season two Róisín Phelan looks at the gang life portrayed in teen

After a long wait, season three of “On My Block” will finally hit screens in March 2020 and if you aren’t already caught up on the antics of Freeridge, this is your one-month warning to do so.

“On My Block” first appeared on Netflix in March 2018 and over the space of two seasons, viewers have fallen in love with the characters and their story. It quickly became Netflix’s most “bingewatched” original show of 2018.

The show follows the coming of age story of friends Monse, Ruby, Jamal and Cesar as they fearfully start high school, have their first crushes and deal with pressures from their families.

A typical teen storyline, aside from the fact that this group of fifteen-year-olds live in Freeridge, a gang run neighbourhood based in Los Angeles. The ruling gang, The Santos, controls the neighbourhood and entrench it in violence and crime.

Although our foursome tries their best to avoid any trouble they are pulled into the world of The Santos when Cesar reaches 15 and is forced to join the gang.

The overlap between gang activities and everyday teen life is an eye-opening concept that has sparked much thought and conversation among viewers.

We watch as this group of friends learn the hard way that staying alive in Freeridge should never be taken for granted. While watching their friends get shot, threatened and killed they go to their first dances, they fight with their parents and they find

drama On My Block

their first loves.

Although each character takes a turn to be the protagonist, much of the story follows the trials of Cesar’s new gang life when he is expected to step up and carry out violent tasks, some of which backfire and put targets on his friends.

The ending of season one displays this fact and if you have not watched it yet, you should skip the next two paragraphs.

At the end of season one, we watched helplessly as Ruby and Olivia were shot at Olivia’s birthday party. The bullets were in fact meant for Cesar,

The overlap between gang activities and everyday teen life is an eye-opening concept but not unusually his friends end up caught in the crossfire.

The closing scene showed lovers Olivia and Ruby bleeding out and reaching for one another surrounded by their stunned and powerless friends and family. This scene perfectly represented the narrative of the show. That no matter how hard the crew tries, violence always seems to get in the way of their happiness.

Jason Genao’s performance is particularly outstanding in the second season as he portrays Ruby’s struggle through grief and tragedy as he tries to understand the meaning of his life and his friend’s death.

On My Block excellently balances the lighthearted, comedic and genuine friendships between young teens while also shining a stark light on the dangerous world that they and so many others across the United States and the world.

The show has been praised for its representation and inclusivity with all of the characters being of non-white ethnicity. The Latina, African-American, and Mexican characters are portrayed honestly and authentically making scenes richer. “