REVIEW: The Silence of the Lambs

Every so often, the Michigan or State Theater will screen a classic— last Thursday, it was The Silence of the Lambs, the quintessential 1991 psychological horror, directed by Jonathan Demme and starring Jodie Foster and Anthony Hopkins. I went into the screening without any expectations, knowing only that the film involved a cannibalistic serial killer fittingly named Hannibal and I could probably expect gore. The horror was done incredibly well, but the genius of The Silence of the Lambs is that the gore and terror of murder were only a fraction of the film’s emotional appeal. Demme fills each scene with the psychological unease of reality as the story follows an FBI trainee, Clarice, who is constantly shown to be looked down upon or disrespected because she is a woman. The script declares this outright with creepy remarks from higher-ups and even from Hannibal himself, but this is also accomplished with careful framing: throughout the movie, close-ups force us to stare into the eyes of men as Clarice sees them, hauntingly blank or grotesquely hungry, eyes either pointing condescendingly down at the camera or unnervingly straight into our own. Clarice is often alone, often being hit on or disregarded by serial killers and FBI agents alike, and cannot avoid it despite her skillful maneuvering of misogynistic encounters. This inspires a very real fear rooted in our awareness of her vulnerability. We’re quick to doubt the intentions of the film’s men— which is where the character of Hannibal becomes complicated, who should be the easiest to distrust.

Clarice and Hannibal are expertly crafted, and their relationship keeps us on our toes. Close-ups of Hannibal, played perfectly by Anthony Hopkins, reveal his sunken features, his icy and unblinking stare, and the sense that every word is part of a secret, sinister plan; close-ups of Clarice reveal unwavering confidence and sly intelligence. The interrogation scenes between the two are laden with tension and electricity, the investigation unfolding to be double-sided as Hannibal and Clarice race to break each other down. As the film progresses, this relationship becomes tangled and unclear; despite being the most clearly deranged and untrustable character, Hannibal treats Clarice with more respect and curiosity than the rest of her peers. The psychological horror of the film lives largely in this relationship as we struggle to decode Hannibal’s intentions and predict his next move.

The Silence of the Lambs is evenly polished: the score is haunting but not overbearing, each scene is intentional, and moments of crude humor balance the gore. I can see how this film earned so many awards and became a classic— it has a cinematic simplicity familiar to the 90s, attaining the perfect balance of explaining some while leaving some to the imagination. Besides the more fast-paced third act, our fear relies on insinuations about what happened or what’s going to happen, close shots of corpses and bloody nail marks down a wall. The only point of the film that left a sour taste in my mouth was the film’s handling of Buffalo Bill, a serial killer who believes he is transgender and who multiple characters claim isn’t truly transgender, but rather psychologically confused and tormented on a more complex level. As much as Buffalo Bill is distanced from the transgender community, described as obsessed with transformation and envious destruction rather than conventions of gender, his portrayal aligns too closely with common stereotypes about transgender women being deceitful predators. The social commentary is fitting for the time of its release, and it is nuanced, but given this film’s insane popularity, it’s inevitable that some audiences would fit this portrayal into pre-existing biases and fail to critically analyze the character.

I loved the experience of watching this movie for the first time in a small theater; the audience was visibly excited, gasping at gory shots and laughing at absurd one-liners. The big screen amplified the intensity of close-ups and the architecture of the old theater amplified the nostalgia of the early 90s. Keep your eyes peeled for the next screening of a cult classic in downtown Ann Arbor, and keep a weekend night open so you can catch one; student tickets are only $8.50!

REVIEW: The Holdovers

There was no better way to spend my afternoon like catching the Sunday matinee of a film I have had on my mind ever since I saw a trailer for it this past summer – an early screening of Alexander Payne’s latest film “The Holdovers.”  An apparently highly anticipated screening, as the Michigan Theater was practically swarmed with Ann Arbor-ites of all ages, passionately discussing the ins and outs of their virtuous presumptions. Afterwards, it was difficult to say if their expectations were met – but surely, smiles of perhaps off-duty professors and trend-outfitted undergrads had endured.  And for me, as I left the theater, I left the film inside.  There was no lingering impression that was tied to me, which is infrequently my experience after an Alexander Payne film, but there was an inexplicable warmth that carried through the theater. Ultimately, this overdrawn, meandering, melancholic comedy is made lovable, in part, by touching performances and tender moments, if frustratingly fleeting. 

In the film’s opening, Payne situates us in the snowy outskirts of 1970s Massachusetts, our plot following a whiskey-drinking, fish-smelling, scrooge of a classics teacher, Paul Hunham (Paul Giamatti, “Billions,” “Sideways”) at Barton prep school, who is forced to watch over the students who have nowhere to go for Christmas.  Soon, we see our main group of students disassemble – departing via parent-dispatched helicopter – except for an irreverent and awkward junior, Angus (Dominic Sessa.) Leaving Mr. Hunham, Angus, and the school cook, Mary (Da’Vine Joy Randolph,“High Fidelity,” “Only Murders in the Building.”) The three form a makeshift family, bonding through mealtime small talk, clandestine excursions, and ritualistic midnight-viewings of the “Newly Weds” game show.  As their bond tightens, so begins the unraveling intricacies of their own stifled grief – and the solace they find in one another’s company. 

Visually, the film brings a warm, saturated flare to a muted, wintery landscape that envelops the rigid collegiate architecture – and could be easily mistaken for the Law Quad, come January.  And our eyes savor the composition of every long-held, establishing shot, each tempting the bound between effortless realism and dreamlike uniformity – a very Wes Anderson-esque framework. But this aesthetic isn’t contained in these few scenes, instead it remains a lingering presence in the air – just as tangible as the actors breathing it in.  Embedded with true 1970s visual stylings, the film is riddled with covert film flickering, wide zoom outs and ins, making the viewer feel like they are in the middle of a “Columbo” episode. This stylistic undertaking of recreating that “70s look” in modern films is often its own character – giving into gimmickry and performativity.  Yet Payne manages to distill the sweet oddities of the distinctive 1970s cinematography into an illusive, atmospheric mood. 

And while this film’s clear aesthetic certainly builds an intimacy with viewers, the script doesn’t necessarily.  “The Holdovers” at its core, is a film about the impermanence of youth and the grief that accompanies its passing – and this is where it shines – however briefly. 

For example, we have Mr. Hunham who is at a standstill in his life; working for the school that he attended in his youth, and under the command of one of his previous students.  And despite his hard exterior, he softens – sheepishly sharing and diminishing his dreams of writing a monograph.  In a later scene, he and Angus run into a former classmate of his at Harvard.  During their interaction, we see Mr. Hunham lie through his teeth about his employment and accomplishments, keying in the audience to what he dreamed his life could have been.  Arguably, Mr. Hunham is simultaneously the most wretched, but also the most developed and sympathetic character in the film. This is, in part, ascribable to Paul Giamatti’s wonderfully evocative performance.  Sincerely, the best role I have seen him in, thus far – and an undoubted Oscar-nominee.  And speaking of Oscar worthy performances, it would be remiss not to discuss the force that is Da’Vine Joy Randolph’s evocative portrayal of Mary – whose warmth is palpable and was often the perpetrator of the laughter in the audience. In Mary’s case, she is grieving the loss of her son who had previously attended Barton, but enlisted in the military to save for college, which led to his death. However disjointed in the script, she frequently muses over the prospect of what could have been his future – what would have been the rest of his youth.  This is, I think, a poignant commentary (and one that I am sure is relatable to many of us at Michigan) of you can go to the best schools in the world, but there will always be a barrier between opportunities if you are at a financial disadvantage. 

Lastly, we have Angus who has no shortage of privilege – except when it comes to his familial relationships.  In the film, he is ostensibly abandoned by his mother who decides to spend the holidays with her new husband, and pays him off as a desultory apology.  Meanwhile, Angus’s biological father is in a mental hospital, suffering from (herein lies a plot shortcoming) maybe schizophrenia and early onset dementia? This is explained at the end, quite haphazardly.  Nonetheless, this leaves Angus with a fractured household – one that he tries desperately to revive and derive affection from throughout the film.  With that being said, Angus has the propensity to be highly childish, but he is often stifled from doing so as he internally reckons with his neglect, and the imposed independence that is required with no parental guidance.  One of my favorite scenes from the film is when Angus becomes captivated by a snowglobe.  Perhaps insignificant at first glance, but I believe this scene shows his longing for the sanctity of childhood – a childhood which is quite literally trapped within an object that  is unable to be revisited – but only looked upon with admiration.  Though unspoken, Dominic Sessa’s subtleties are what makes his performance memorable.  Fascinatingly, he was reportedly scouted from a nearby school’s theater department.  That and his empty IMDB page give a naturalistic mystique to his performance.  Yet, it wasn’t clear if he has the acclaimed, “it.”  Great actor, yes, but he was lackluster in more emotionally demanding sections of the film.  Although I won’t speak too soon, given the cultural trajectory of the general public flocking to lanky brunette men – I can imagine his future acting prospects are looking positive – if he chooses to forgo that path. 

Come the ending of the film, I found myself reeling at why I felt completely disconnected and untouched by a story that I thoroughly enjoyed and characters that I deeply understood.  I will admit that it remains unanswered still in my mind.  Though my best effort at extracting this dissonance, ultimately boils down to the sheer unfocused execution of Payne’s excellent ideas.  We can see all of our characters suffer and persevere internally, but rarely do they share moments of true, unadulterated connection between their greatest commonality: stolen youth.  And when they do, it lasts no longer than a minute or two, being promptly interrupted by uncharacteristic dialogue, tangential storylines, or an abrupt shift in plot.  Just one example of this is seen after a charming turned overwrought Christmas party, the trio heads back to the car, Angus and Mr. Hunham consoling a drunken, tear-stained Mary.  Angus half-heartedly comforts Mary, in true teenage boy fashion, which elicits a maligning outburst from Mr. Hunham.  Mary then quickly snaps out of her grief to scold Mr. Hunham, and then she is suddenly fine – the scene is never mentioned again. This fragmented narrative hinders a deeper emotional connection to the trio as a whole, leaving the audience yearning for more enduring moments of resonance. 

And this element of the film is the catalyst for what would be an average runtime, to feel so extensive and interminable.  In spite of this, our actors manage to sustain our engagement and investment in these characters through an amalgamation of clever one-liners, vulnerable confessionals, and unquestionably moving depictions of the beauty in unexpected companionship – however sporadically placed and decidedly short-lived.  Altogether, Payne’s “The Holdovers” feels like a vivid, albeit voyeuristic glimpse into the heartfelt happenings of three strangers who form and rely on their newfound family.  With vintage flair, Payne creates a spritely, if a little tedious holiday film that is sure to earn a spot on people’s shelves – even just to collect dust. 

While this was an early screening, the wide release of “The Holdovers” is on November 10th, 2023.  



REVIEW: Taylor Swift | The Eras Tour

Taylor Swift | The Eras Tour was a crazy 2-hour and 45-minute-long film, and I enjoyed every second of it. I highly recommend experiencing it in theaters instead of at home; unlike regular movies, people sang, danced, cheered, and clapped in their seats (some even stood)! Although nothing could ever compare to seeing her perform live, the energy of the crowd was great and I felt like I got a glimpse of the ecstatic atmosphere at the SoFi Stadium in Los Angeles: the last stop of Taylor’s tour in North America and where the movie was shot. Not only was her tour sold out, but the movie the night I watched it was too!

Like most people, if you weren’t lucky enough to see her live, then the film is the next best thing. I’m not a Swifite, though I was in my elementary days. That’s why I especially enjoyed the discography in The Eras Tour, which covered all the music she’s released in the past 17 years of her career, including the three albums she never got to tour with. As the title of the tour suggests, it was truly a journey through all of her musical eras, and she ended the night with her most recent album Midnights (2022). My favorites were the classic You Belong With Me and Love Story.

The cinematography was absolutely amazing and truly captured Taylor’s stage presence and control over the crowd. The camera work showcased everything so well, such as the great chemistry between her and the backup dancers and singers, the stage set-up, and the graphics. The most breathtaking transition was right after she finished performing Our Song; as she walked towards the back of the stage she suddenly jumped down and became one with the ground, swimming with her striking red dress. She had several wardrobe changes throughout the night, ranging from black cloaks and white flowy dresses to glittery skin-tight bodysuits. They helped express the emotion of each era and she pulled off each one. In addition to being a phenomenal singer, Taylor also proved that she was a great dancer, guitarist, and pianist throughout her performances.

Though it was the longest movie I’ve ever seen it never felt like it dragged on. I highly recommend watching it, even as a casual fan or listener. It simply won’t be the same as watching it at home, so get a ticket soon! There will be multiple showings up until October 26th at the Michigan Theatre.

Review: Seoul Station

*Played at the State Theatre on October 6th and 12th*

Despite being produced in the same year and by the same director, Seoul Station (2016) is the lesser-known prequel to the famous movie Train to Busan (2016). Interestingly enough, Seoul Station is an animation whereas the latter is a live-action film. The director Yeon Sang-ho is well known for his brutal stories, and while I haven’t seen Train to Busan yet, Seoul Station certainly did an excellent job of portraying not only the brutality of a zombie apocalypse but also the social disparities between income classes, especially emphasizing the discrimination against the homeless community.

There were three main characters: Hye-Sun, her boyfriend Suk-gyu, and her father Ki-woong (in the featured image, Suk-gyu is on the left and Ki-Woong is on the right). Like a typical zombie movie, the plot revolved around survival. However, Hye-Sun and Suk-Gyu were in the lower class and that was already enough of a struggle before being further exacerbated once hell broke loose. To me, what was most interesting wasn’t their endeavors to live, but rather the humorous character dynamics and the focus on economic differences, which I felt to be the true horror highlighted by the writers. The wealthy were rarely, if not never, featured. 

In Seoul Station the color palette was very grim and muted; even the bright pink of Hye-Sun’s dress appeared gray. I enjoy watching animated films, but I haven’t seen many Korean ones. The character designs were realistic and diverse, which I felt made the animation pop due to their facial expressions. The voice acting hit differently, too, because the characters had similar voices to people I know. However, the animation itself didn’t flow as smoothly as I expected. In the beginning, it felt clunky, but I quickly adjusted and didn’t pay much attention to it afterward. My favorite part was the incredible plot twists, which were so shocking I couldn’t stop talking about it with my friends after. In fact, a majority of the audience gasped at one specific scene and the excitement rose in the theater. 

I heard from others that although it’s meant to be a prequel, the two movies are surprisingly disconnected from each other. It apparently didn’t add much to the storyline of Train to Busan and would’ve been normal to be a separate world. Since I haven’t seen Train to Busan I unfortunately can’t compare the two very well, but I’ve always wanted to watch it. I’m excited to see more of Yeon Sang-ho’s work, especially since it’s such a praised movie. If you’re looking for a funny horror movie that also implies a deeper meaning, I recommend Seoul Station! It’s a shorter movie, around an hour and a half, so it’d be a good film to engross in during a busy time like midterm season!

 

REVIEW: Michigan Pops Orchestra “A Night at the Popscars”

The featured image above was taken from their Instagram: @michiganpops

This semester’s Michigan Pops Concert has been my favorite out of all the concerts I’ve attended! There was a crazy line at the door and the crowd turnout was also the largest I’ve seen, so much so that the start time was postponed to accommodate more audience members. It’s always refreshing to see that both children and the elderly are present in addition to college students; it shows that this student organization is popular among locals too.

They had a large and impressive list of repertoire (most were already familiar to the audience thanks to the theme they chose) and I appreciated how well they balanced the amount and order of classical and contemporary music. My favorite and most anticipated piece was Howl’s Moving Castle, but I wished it was longer. I felt that the arrangement could’ve been better too, though that doesn’t mean the Pops Orchestra didn’t play it well.

It seemed like there were more featured soloists in this concert than in the previous ones, but I think it still showcased the orchestra as a group pretty well without being overshadowed. Unfortunately, there were some balance issues and at times it was hard to hear the soloists.

The winner of this year’s high school concerto competition was a Sophomore from Huron High School, which is so impressive since the winners have historically mostly been Seniors. She played the Lalo Violin Concerto, and she exuded so much power and charisma as she performed. Shoutout to the violist who gave an amazing show of Bohemian Rhapsody and the pianist who shined during La La Land! You can watch them on Youtube, but nothing will beat the live music so pull up next year!

As for the skits, the most memorable part for me was when some students wore paper swans on their heads as they performed swan lake. It impressed me how well-made the swans looked!

It appears lots of members will be graduating, which is a little sad, but I’m looking forward to what changes the remaining and new Pops board and members will bring us next year.

 

REVIEW: Cocaine Bear

To be completely honest, I was rather disappointed after watching this movie. Perhaps it was because my friends hyped it up so much or the comedy just wasn’t to my taste, but it had too many plotholes for it to be satirically viable. Having a comedy movie be understandable is a personal preference though, so I’m sure a lot of people didn’t mind that. There were certain scenes that I found funny since they caught me off guard (I won’t elaborate much to avoid spoilers), but most of the time I got upset about the character development and storytelling.

They use gore and of course, the consumption of cocaine, as their comedic selling point, so if you’re easily squeamish or not interested in that I don’t recommend this movie. Well, I don’t recommend it in general. There are also lots of jump scares, so beware if you’re startled easily! If I had to rate it on a scale of 1-10, I’d give it a 4.5; that may be a controversial statement though.

I did end up watching this movie twice to show others how ridiculous it is; I guess watching this with others could be a good bonding experience! The second time around I could understand more of what was going on. Many of the characters have Southern accents and there are a lot of characters in general that become hard to keep track of, so if you can watch it with subtitles it’d be super helpful.

To summarize, I don’t think this film was a must-watch.

PSA: I had mistakenly thought and questioned how much of the film was true but none of it is, which may have played a factor in my disappointment. Now that you know what you’re getting yourself into, give the movie a shot! Or don’t, it’s up to you.