REVIEW: The Zone of Interest

[TW: This review contains information and descriptions of film content surrounding the Holocaust.]

Inspired by the 2014 book with the same title, The Zone of Interest  takes us into the political landscape of 1943 Poland. The film follows the journey of Rudolf Höss (Christian Friedel), and his family of six living a seemingly ordinary life inside the walls of the most horrific area on the planet. Framing the film through Höss’ character is an adaptive choice by director Jonathan Glazer and is based on a real person: a high-ranking S.S. Commandant whose contributions to the Nazi regime propelled significant advancements at the concentration camp Auschwitz I. He was the longest-serving commander at Auschwitz, and the film primarily revolves around his family’s life in a villa within the camp.

The movie first depicts the Höss family living a blissful life filled with trips to the nearby lake, picnics in the sun, and small gatherings in their beguiling backyard. His wife, Hedwig (Sandra Hüller), and five children reside in their idyllic house only a 10-foot, barbed wire-lined wall away from unimaginable horrors. Their pristine home is lined with a blossoming garden and filled with a herd of anxious servants attending to their every need. While the family lives in comfort, sounds of screams, trains, and gunshots are consistently murmuring in the background. Hedwig remains dismissive of the disruptions, choosing to ignore the truth behind her privilege, but her guests often question the blazing fires surrounding the sky at night and the smoky cough-prone air. The title, “Zone of Interest”, comes from the German word “Interessengebiet”, which was a term used to depict the restricted zone around Auschwitz. (Much like the family’s eerily cultivated lifestyle.)

The shots in the film are very matter-of-fact. We see moments in their life as they happen naturally, without a direct opinion from Glazer. The audience is fitted as bystanders, set up to observe the observers. We were left to parse through the morally uncomfortable life of the family individually, making the content even more unsettling. Glazer gracefully dances around the known violence that is occurring within the camp, but there is an implication that the audience is aware of the nightmares beyond, limiting the voices of the victims to sounds from outside and alarming innuendos. This choice haunts us and leaves us waiting for the terror that the audience never directly faces. Almost like the remaining five members of the Höss family.

The film briefly features music from the University of Michigan’s own Dr. Patricia Hall’s research, who founded the project “Music From Auschwitz”. Dr. Hall brings to life lost music written and performed by Auschwitz prisoners. The music is accompanied by a deeply painful context, but a firm reminder of history and a memorial to millions of lost lives. Her group has toured Holocaust memorial centers throughout Michigan and New York, and this summer will be traveling to Vienna to perform a concert of her manuscripts.

The film stands as a reminder of the horrors behind violent perpetrators and ignorant familial bystanders, along with all the art-deco bells and whistles. Zone of Interest  is playing in theaters now in Ann Arbor.

 

More on Music from Auschwitz.

105 minutes. Rated PG-13. German and Polish with English Subtitles. 

Image thanks to Cut & Run.

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.

PREVIEW: Cocaine Bear

Cocaine Bear is a film notorious for its origin: the true story of a bear having found and eaten cocaine. I personally don’t know much about the movie or how much of it is based on true events, but my friends have been very excited to watch it for its goofy nature.

The genre of Cocaine Bear is thriller and comedy, and it’s a relatively short movie (or at least what I felt was short: 95 minutes). I tend to stay away from both of these genres because I don’t have the confidence to watch thriller movies and lack interest in watching comedies (in theaters at least), so I’m curious about how I’ll feel about this film in terms of quality, history, and personality.

The movie is soon to stop showing, so either check it out yourself or wait to see if it’s worth based on others’ or my review!

REVIEW: Ant-Man and the Wasp: Quantumania

Ant-Man and the Wasp: Quantumania is the 31st film in the Marvel Cinematic Universe, and it is only one of two MCU movies to receive a rotten score on Rotten Tomatoes. While it is fair Quantumania was rated rotten, I would argue there are MCU films that deserve to be rated more rotten. 

The film follows Paul Rudd as Scott Lang/Ant-Man, who is now famous for saving the world alongside the Avengers, and has written a biography about his experiences. He has lost five years of time with his daughter – played by Kathryn Newton reprising her role from Big Little Lies – during the events of Avengers: Infinity War and Endgame, and is doing his best to reconnect with her. Cassie reveals that she has been working on a device that allows her to study the Quantum Realm – where Michelle Pfeiffer’s Janet van Dyne was trapped for 30 years – from Earth. However, Janet immediately tries to shut down the device, causing it to malfunction, sending Scott, Cassie, Janet, her husband, and her daughter down into the Quantum Realm. There, Janet reveals a dangerous threat looms in the form of Kang the Conqueror, played by Jonathan Majors. 

The stakes in the film are almost ridiculously high with how powerful Kang is, however the film is very much not serious. Scott and Cassie befriend an ensemble cast of gooey, blobby, and strangely proportioned supporting characters, and Michael Douglas clearly wanted to be on set as little as possible. It would be safe to assume that when Douglas’ character shows up after not being in the film for a bit and says “Sorry I’m late,” that is simply footage of him showing up to set every day. There is an interview of Douglas at the premiere of the film, where he states he would come back for a fourth Ant-Man film only if they kill his character off. 

On the other hand, Jonathan Majors and Michelle Pfeiffer seemed to be in a completely different state of mind, demonstrating such careful and expert acting. I would have much preferred a film just about their characters, because every time Kang and Janet were on screen together, I was enthralled. What kept me going throughout the rest of the lackluster film was the anticipation of their characters interacting again. I am not sure what kind of spirit possessed them on set. Majors was so charismatic and suave while harboring a deep sadness that came through the look in his eyes and the myriad facial expressions he was able to portray. Pfeiffer was mysterious and anxious, yet warm, and these two forces on screen together seemed to be acting in a completely different film. 

Ultimately, Quantumania is an enjoyable popcorn movie, but it is probably only enjoyable if you do not go in with a serious mindset. The comedy in the film was weaker than in the first two, however what made this movie funny was probably not intentional. The film is ridiculous in tone, premise, and writing – and also how good Majors and Pfeiffer are. I hope they’ll star in a different, better film together sometime. 

Ant-Man and the Wasp: Quantumania is playing at the State Theater.

PREVIEW: Ant-Man and the Wasp: Quantumania

Ant-Man and the Wasp: Quantumania is the newest installment in the Marvel Cinematic Universe. This is the third of the standalone films with these characters, and it has been promised to be the biggest one yet. The film follows Scott Lang and Hope van Dyne as they are sucked into the Quantum Realm along with their families. There, they come face-to-face with Kang the Conquerer, played by Jonathan Majors – who we know from the Creed III trailer to be someone even Michael B. Jordan doesn’t want to mess with.

I grew up watching and loving the MCU, but the superhero fatigue is definitely settling in. The newer MCU films have all been just fine, and they all end the same way when you think they might be finally changing it up. That being said, I have found some of the new installments to be entertaining – those that embrace the goofy nature of adapting a comic book on screen. This is what I particularly enjoyed about the first two Ant-Man movies – Paul Rudd is always hilarious and a joy to watch, the ensemble cast fully embracing their ant leader often lets the weaker parts of the films slip by under the radar. I am curious to see how this new film will stand, as it seems to be the most related to the greater MCU and is promising to kick off the next phase of the world. With Quantumania being seemingly so pivotal, I wonder if the balance of comedy and setup will come at the cost of the spirit that made the first two films enjoyable.

Ant-Man and the Wasp: Quantumania will be playing at the State Theater at the end of this week, with advance screenings starting on Thursday, February 16.

 

REVIEW: Perfect Blue

Content Warning: mentions of rape and sexual assault

 

Perfect Blue is an anime that follows Mima, a young woman who leaves her pop trio to launch her acting career. As Mima is forced to shed her “good girl” image through disturbing scripts and marketing moves, she is increasingly harassed by fans, and ultimately begins to lose her grip on reality. The film explores these themes of the unreasonable expectations of fame, stalking and parasocial relationships, and the exploitation of young breakthrough actresses through the lens of an unreliable narrator.

 

As the film progresses, the narrative becomes less and less clear; timelines are muddied, certain scenes are repeated back to back with slight but key differences, and once hallucinations interrupt the film’s established unreality, nothing can be taken as fact. There could be very long pieces written that theorize what truly happens in the film versus what Mima hallucinates, but I believe the point of the film is to show the extreme to which Mima is pushed by showrunners, her management agency, and the public. The film utilizes its nonlinear sequence of events effectively to highlight the twisted nature of the entertainment industry, the horrors new actresses are put through in order to be taken seriously, and how Mima’s own agency and identity spiral out of her control.

 

That being said, the graphic nature of the film must be called into question. For context, Mima’s managers begin to question if her becoming an actress was worth leaving her music career as she is only booking small roles with very short lines. Then, one day, she is presented with a huge breakout moment that will surely get her recognition for her acting abilities – via a rape scene. Mima accepts the role, but the staging of the scene is so upsetting that even characters in the film comment on its nature. They are not allowed to film in an actual club “due to what they’re shooting,” and it is later suggested that the filming of the scene was so traumatic that Mima feels as if the event actually happened to her. Of course, this is a perfect example of how many new actresses are treated, and it is clear what kind of toll this can take on someone forced to perform such a scene. 

 

However, what is questionable is the execution of this criticism. The rape scene is very long and Mima’s distress is very visible and very audible – it is very, very disturbing and overwhelming. And when the scene is compared to the way violence is handled in the film – a serial killer’s kills are primarily offscreen, though gore and fight sequences are shown – the rape scene feels extreme. There is almost an obsession in media with building suspense by hiding and revealing what happens rather than showing the effects of trauma, and building character. And in Perfect Blue, it is clear the focus was meant to showcase Mima’s deteriorating mental state and need of support, but there are ways to handle such subjects with more care – perhaps the way Never Sometimes Rarely Always suggests what may have happened to its protagonist but focuses on her denial into the beginning of her healing process, and the near impossibility of her ability to receive proper care. Even Last Night In Soho – which I thought lacked a certain depth needed to say something beyond “men can be bad” – shows the before and after, the glamor and idealization of fame that leads to a change in character and behavior, but it never shows an event in such graphic detail that Perfect Blue does. Even one of the most recent episodes of House of the Dragon shows a huge improvement in the treatment of such topics from the original Game of Thrones series to the current series – a rape is not shown, the word is never said aloud. All that we see is sympathy for the victim, but the bleak reality that she must keep the event to herself as she is of a lesser status than the perpetrator and is therefore subject to more scrutiny, and a mother and victim’s disappointment in her own son and perpetrator. 

 

My criticism of the film is not that the film should have had a happy ending for Mina or that it should have sugar coated the horrors of what happens to her and many actresses, but that in order to take a stance criticizing the treatment of newcomers to the entertainment industry, a piece of media does not have to treat its characters the same way. To handle such topics more gently and with the understanding that an audience can imply what has happened shows more expertise in portraying this subject on screen. Trauma is not needed to establish backstory, especially at the expense of character development, not does it need to be explicitly spelled out in order to be effective.