Birdman (2014)

Birdman: Or the Unexpected Virtue of Ignorance (2014)

Director: Alejandro Gonzalez Iñarritu

Cast: Michael Keaton, Emma Stone, Zach Galifianakis, Naomi Watts, Edward Norton

I enjoy Alejandro Gonzalez Iñarritu films because of the level of realism they have, they have immediacy to them that attracts me to them, they feel like real life and not like many of today's color filtered, fake looking films. If you don’t believe me go rent Amores Perros (2000), a film that tells five stories that are all connected by one catastrophic car accident, an idea that Paul Haggis borrowed heavily from for his film Crash (2004). Amores Perros is shot in this hyper realistic documentary style that just blows me away every time I see it, actually all of Iñarritu’s films are shot this way which is what I like about them. So anyways, I always look forward to Iñarritu’s films, because he is one of those few directors with a pitch perfect record, he hardly ever makes a disappointing film. The only time I wasn’t blown away by one of his films was with Babel (2006), and even that film has its merits. Iñarritu’s the kind of director that even when he makes a “bad” film, it’s still good. When I heard about Birdman I was immediately attracted to it because of its premise, I thought it was a novel idea, but I have to admit I was more than a bit curious as to what Iñarritu was going to say with this film. What would it be about? 

Birdman is all about Riggan, an aging actor trying to gain the respect of an audience that has forgotten all about him. You see, at one point in his life Riggan was the biggest star on the planet when he starred in a series of comic book films called Birdman; a series of films about a super hero with wings, which by the way is a pretty cool looking character. Point is Riggan stopped making Birdman movies and is now fading away from the spotlight. His plan to regain the audiences approval and attention is putting on a play called ‘What we talk about when we talk about love’.  When the movie begins, the play is days away from premiering in a theater in New York City and he is all kinds of nervous looking for a new actor to take the lead role. Will he get to premiere his play successfully? Does he still have what it takes? Will the audience accept him once again?

Various elements make Birdman one of the best films of 2014, but let’s start with its obvious technical prowess. Here’s a film shot in a way that makes it look like its one long continuous shot, and though this might fly undetected by the common moviegoer, those with a more keen sense of observation will realize just how difficult it is to make a film this way. The big problem is that when an actor messes up a line, you have to start filming the shot all over again. Also, shooting a film with long continuous shots proves difficult in the editing room, because through editing you can establish certain beats in the rhyme of the visuals and the storytelling, you can even add comedy through editing, but if it’s all one continuous shot, things become just a little more demanding. Performances and shots have to be incredibly well choreographed and timed in order for this technique to work well, so this is why I applaud Iñarritu for achieving this technique so well.  Alfonso Cuaron also used this technique effectively in Gravity (2013). And it’s not that they don’t ever cut, they do, but the cuts are placed in a way that you hardly notice them, and they are very few. Entire sequences will go on and on and on without cutting, it’s quite amusing for those interested in filmmaking. It certainly makes things more demanding for everyone involved. Some shots are amazing, keep your eyes peeled for them, there’s quite a few of them.

Iñarritu directs a scene

Another area in which this film excels is in its themes, you see this is one of those films that’s about film. It’s not unlike Hugo (2011), The Big Picture (1989) or Shadow of the Vampire (2000), which are films that explore the nature of filmmaking both from the filmmakers view point and from the actors view point. On Birdman filmmaking is explored from the point of view of the actors, it’s all about the never changing fact that “Hollywood takes you in, chews you up and then spits you out”. There’s a reason why that saying hasn’t faded away and it’s because it still remains true. Hollywood caters to the young, the beautiful, the ‘now’, what’s in and what’s hot is what matters. You get old, suddenly you’re not getting as many roles as you used to. The movie addresses this idea that in Hollywood, unless you become a raging icon to the masses, you are more than likely going to fade away, quietly into the night. And sometimes that “fading away” ain’t a pretty sight because it’s hard for actors to let go of the fame and the spotlight. The film focuses on that frustrating moment when the actor simply doesn’t like the fact that he or she is no longer “popular”. What makes things even more interesting is the fact that Michael Keaton used to play a comic book character himself, same as the character in Birdman. It’s no wonder Keaton’s performance rings so true, I’m sure a lot of his own frustrations were channeled into his performance, because while Keaton has never stopped working, he isn’t as popular as he was when he made Batman (1989) or Bettlejuice (1988). There’s this amazing moment when Riggan is locked out of the theater by mistake and he’s in his underwear, the scene comments on how acting is a very vulnerable profession, you expose your soul to others through your performance, so I loved the metaphor there, an actor desperately baring his naked soul to his audience, humanity, the masses. You can expect a real heartfelt performance from Keaton. Could the critical success of Birdman spell a comeback for Keaton? It certainly feels like it, from what I hear, he’s gonna be reuniting with Tim Burton for Beetlejuice 2 next! It will be interesting to see how they make that one work after so many years have passed.   

The film also speaks about how aging actors have to adjust to the changing of the times, and the way things are marketed nowadays. For example, there’s a moment when a video of Riggan becomes popular on You Tube and is ‘trending’ and his daughter shows him how many people have viewed it and tells him “this is power”, a fact that Riggan is completely clueless about. The film also talks about how a lot of Hollywood films are aimed at a young audience and that what the masses love is action, blood, explosions and special effects. Which is true, just ask Michael Bay and Roland Emmerich. The masses don’t want “philosophical bullshit” and the filmmakers behind Birdman are obviously frustrated by this.  I agree with them to a certain extent, because while I enjoy big fx spectacles, I also love brainy, artistic films. In my book there’s space for both types of films; the escapist summer movies as well as the more philosophical, story driven films. But of course, what the masses like, which is to say what the grand majority likes is brainless action and effects like the next Transformers movie, this in turn speaks volumes about the kind of people that make up the majority, which in turns is a sad state of affairs. When we get down to it, I think what the filmmakers behind Birdman are really frustrated with is the level of education of the majority, in other words, if we’re to read between the lines, there’s a genuine frustration with how many brainless zombies exist in the world. So yes my friends, we have an amazing film here, certainly deserving of being called one f the best of the year and one that I’m sure will garner Michael Keaton an Oscar nod, and quite possibly an Oscar win, here’s hoping.

Rating: 5 out of 5 

Biutiful (2010)

Title: Biutiful (2010)

Director: Alejandro Gonzalez Inarritu

Cast: Javier Bardem, Maricel Alvarez

Review:

What I like most about Alejandro Gonzalez Inaritu’s films is that they have this enhanced feeling of reality to them. It’s not only the documentary style he uses or how he lights them, or the excellent performances he squeezes out of his actors, which are all attributes that I love from his films; no, what I really love about Inarritu’s films is what happens in them; because when you watch an Inarritu film, you feel like you’re getting a slice of raw realism placed before your eyes. Inarritu’s films are filled with the kind of realism that most Hollywood films shy away from. Sometimes when I watch a film, and I see for example a character living in a house or driving a car that’s obviously way out of the characters financial reach, I feel disconnected and cheated. I mean, sometimes you can just tell that the filmmakers are putting their characters in these unrealistic situations just so the film can look pretty and so the characters end up surrounded by huge houses and expensive cars that only Hollywood can buy. Unfortunately, both you and I know that in films like those, real life isn’t being represented. This is something that does not happen in Inarritu’s films, where the common man, the poor man, lives in a humble home and has very little food to eat. Inarritu's characters wear worn out clothes and have to struggle to survive.

Poverty is a theme that not a lot of filmmakers like to address, or more appropriately Hollywood doesn’t like address. Why? Because poverty by nature is an extremely sad thing, real poverty and the kind of lives that real poor people live can bring you to tears...and the masses (read: the grand majority of people) want to go to the movies to laugh and to be entertained. There are exceptions of course. That scene in The Pursuit of Happiness (2006) for example, where Will Smith’s character ends up having to sleep in a public restroom with his son because he has no money, I bet you choked up with that one didn’t ya? Or how about that scene in Cinderella Man (2006) where Russell Crow’s character doesn’t have a job and all he has to give to his kids for dinner is a slice of salami? I know that one got the waterworks going for me, and with good reason. Damn, we can even go as far back as Chaplin and his tramp eating a shoe during New Years Eve in Chaplins Gold Rush (1925). Situations like these happen in the world every day, and worse, and its sad that this is so. Yes folks, poverty is a sad ugly thing that many choose to ignore, but not Inarritu.

Javier Bardem plays Uxbal, a hustler with no money to feed the kids

I love it when films explore the dark sad side of life, because all that sadness and darkness is part of the world we live in. What’s the point of ignoring it when we can learn something from it? Inarritu is a filmmaker that knows this and has become a champion of the dark side of life. From day one in his career back when he made his first film Amores Perros (2001), I fell in love with his style of filmmaking. It felt real somehow. You felt like these characters could very well exist in the real world. And they act and talk like real people, not an ounce of dialog feels unnatural. Inarritu’s films are filtered through the sadness and despair of real life. It’s why his films are so refreshing.

Alejandro Gonzalez Inarritu

In Biutiful we meet Uxbal, a hustler. This is a character rooted in duality, he is equal times a good guy and a bad guy. He’s a bad guy because he works running a sweat shop that employs illegal immigrants in the production of cheap imitations of big name brand products. Basically they make imitation purses, watches, sun glasses, you know the drill. He delivers the dirty money used to pay the police so they can sell these things on the streets without getting caught. He makes sure his workers have a place to sleep and are paid for their work. But he is also a good guy in the sense that he is a family man, and he is trying to give his children a better life. But no matter how much he tries, he just can’t seem to get out of the rut he is in. He barely has enough money to put some decent food on the table for his kids. One heart breaking scene has his kids begging for a good dinner, and all he has to give them is a bowl of cereal. As he pours the milk on it, he says “heres your steak and your potatoes”

So yeah, the film is about poverty and about money (or lack of it) and of how the world we live in has people back stabbing each other for it. It’s kind of similar to No Country for Old Men (2007) in that sense. Almost every single character in Biutiful is looking for a way to make that little extra cash by cheating, lying and betraying others. This is the kind of world we live in. Uxbal himself is always trying to take a little for himself, he takes money from the money he is supposed to give to the cops, he takes money that’s given to him to run the business. He does this in order to feed his family. He’s the kind of character that looks for the cheap solution to whatever problem, just so he can have some money left for his responsibilities as a father. He steals so that he can feed his kids, this is the kind of situation that he has been forced into. And it’s the kind of movie this is, actually it’s the kind of movie Inarritu has been making from the beginning where he shows us the lengths and risks that the poor will take to make some extra dough. Biutiful is a movie that shows us how the world we live in forces people to live this way. Does the world have to be like this? Why is Uxbal and his family struggling like this? Why can’t Uxbal get out of the rut?

Which brings me to the films title: Biutiful. The title of the film accentuates what it’s really about. The lack of education and the need for it in order to get out of the proverbial hole. One scene has Uxbal’s daughter ask him how to write the word ‘beautiful’ in English and Uxbal writes it the way it sounds in Spanish: Biutiful. It is misspelled, accentuating in this way the need for education in order to have a better life. But education is currently under attack in the world we live in, schools are being shut down, the price you have to pay for Higher Education has gone up to astronomical prices, hell, right now even federal grants are in danger of being taken away in some countries. And so, for me, Biutiful was trying to show us how much Education is needed for the poor to get out of poverty. My question is: why is higher education becoming so inaccessible to the less fortunate? Is there some sort of master plan to keep education out of the reach of the poor? If it is, then families like the one seen in Biutiful will continue to multiply. Yes, Biutiful is a bleak picture, the kind of film where nothing but bad things happen to the main character, so be ready for that.

And yet another theme that Biutiful addresses is death. Uxbal is a character stricken by cancer. He’s case is pretty hopeless, cancer has practically eaten him up, so much so that he urinates blood. So this urges him to do something for his kids, save money for them, because ultimately, that’s all that matters when you are a parent. The well being of your kids. When you are about to leave this world, you want to leave something for them, make sure they will be okay when you die. Sadly, in this difficult and complex world we live in, where ‘the people’ are the ones that have to end up paying for their governments economical “crisis’s” and “deficits” even that becomes a difficult task.

Rating: 5 out of 5