Movie Review" Spotlight"

Spotlight (2015)

R

5 Stars out of 5

Director                                Tom McCarthy
Writer                                   Tom McCarthy, Josh Singer
Cinematography                 Masanobu Takayanagi
Editing                                  Tom McArdle
Music                                    Howard Shore

Mark Ruffalo                       Mike Rezendes
Michael Keaton                  Walter Robinson (Robbie)
Rachel McAdams               Sacha Pfeiffer
Liev Schreiber                     Marty Baron      
John Slattery                       Ben Bradlee, Jr.
Stanley Tucci                       Mitchell Garabedian

 

It is rare for me to find a movie or TV show where I cannot stop talking throughout the film (pity my poor wife) or program about how great the writing is (see “The Wire” 2002 – 2008 for a TV version of great writing). It is even rarer for the acting, directing and editing to be at just the same high level of performance. Finally, it is unbelievably rare for that same film (should it be a movie) to be the winner for that year’s Oscar Best Picture Award, and yet writer/director Tom McCarthy (along with co-writer Josh Singer) has done just that with 2015’s “Spotlight”. The story-telling and completely believable characters that inhabit this film seem so true to actual people that you too may be tempted to exclaim throughout the movie, “why can’t more pictures be as authentic in their depictions of real people, how they think, react and act”. This is truly a 5 Star Movie.

“Spotlight” begins with a priest in trouble with the law for child abuse. He is being held in a Police precinct holding area while in another room, a second priest “counsels” the family of the children abused by the first priest. A telling conversation takes place in an outer office by two policemen; the older, more experienced policeman evinces little hope to the younger cop that any real justice will take place in the back rooms. Shortly thereafter, we the see accused priest being driven off with the second priest in a dark limousine. No further views of the family are to be seen.

The movie jumps to the first day for a new editor at the Boston Globe, Marty Baron (Liev Schreiber). The introduction of the new editor unsettles the staff at the Globe as they are already fearful of layoffs, and Baron coming as he does from Miami brings both the persona of the Outsider and the reputation of a corporate axman, someone with a history of cutting costs by cutting people. The use of the Outsider in this early phase and indeed throughout the movie is extremely clever as it helps define the insularity of Boston. Despite being in the Top 25 largest US cities, Boston (at least in this movie) is seen to be a very homogenous city where the various powers in the city, the police, the district attorney’s office, the press, and the Catholic Church all work so closely together there is none of the expected checks and balances between these forces. As this movie progresses, it becomes increasingly clear that those working to (say) enforce the law or to prosecute the law in the name of the city’s victims will instead in some cases work just as hard, perhaps harder to help protect the name of the Catholic Church. The abuse victims that come to light as the movie moves forward will be the unnamed collateral damage in the fight for some greater good that by protecting the Church’s reputation will allow the Church to provide.

As the staff of the Globe get to know their new editor it is made quickly clear that while he is indeed there to review staffing versus costs, he is also very interested in pushing the Globe’s investigative team, Spotlight, into pursuing hard hitting stories. Early in his tenure, he wants them to drop what they are doing and work on a story he had recently read in a Globe column concerning a pedophile priest, Father John Geoghan. More to Baron’s point though is the article’s coverage of a local lawyer’s, Mitchell Garabedian (Stanley Tucci) assertion that the local Catholic Archbishop, Cardinal Bernard Law (Len Cariou) has known of Geoghan’s activities for years and has been covering them up. This dual focus of Spotlight’s investigative team (i.e. individual priest pederasty vs. systemic cover-ups) will create some dramatic tension on the Spotlight team as the members do not always have the same target in mind. However, it also raises many disturbing questions; not the least of which is “what are the Church’s priorities”?

“Spotlight” will now begin a fascinating journey as the movie employ’s many Newspaper Movie clichés in its efforts to demonstrate the tenacity and the tedium needed to research a problem. In this case, the team will discover that the abuse of children by Catholic priests is an old problem, one kept secret via the efforts of the Church and the complicity of the city’s power brokers. They will discover that there are patterns in the choice of victims, the heretofore successful efforts at cover-up, and the oftentimes knowing decisions by those set up to protect the innocent to turn their gaze, their concern away from the problem right before their eyes; worse, within their power to do something about. Also complicit in the cover-up is the Globe itself as the movie reveals that they have had in the past five years information that they should have followed up on, but didn’t. Another curious point made by the movie is that the Globe had less obviously incriminating information in their own basement; they just needed the right stimulus to get them to review the data. When they did start looking for patterns in those basement books of the Church’s records for each priest in the Boston diocese, they could see that the Church was moving certain priests far more frequently than the average and they were using code words (e.g. sick leave) to conceal the true reason for the move.

This is an excellent movie – there is no other way to describe it. Director Tom McCarthy has set the pacing and use of camera angles to expertly create a kind of tension that would not normally be expected from a team of reporters poring over books in the Globe’s basement. McCarthy has also in his command some of the year’s best acting. Michael Keaton as the Spotlight team leader, “Robbie” Robinson is asked to portray a wide range of emotions as he skirts his own loyalty and history to the Church as well as that to the Globe and investigative journalism. He is shown to be torn as he realizes his own role in the history of the problem; consider for example, the scene of his return to his high school (ironically, directly across the street from the Globe) to discuss with one of this former classmates a third classmate that had been abused by a priest while a student at that school. The pull of his conflicting loyalties play across his face in an astonishingly clear manner. Another good pair of performance are by Spotlight team members Mike Rezendes (Mark Ruffalo) and Sacha Pfeiffer (Rachel McAdams). McAdams must like Robbie balance her own relationships to the Globe and in her case, to her Nana’s touchingly played devotion to the Church. Ruffalo has a more influential role as he is the ultimate author of the article. Additionally, he is apparently also battling some internal demons. What these demons are is never made clear. Ruffalo plays Rezendes as a man determined to expose the priests involved in the various abuse cases. He flies from room to room, from airport to Justice Department buildings and on to the Globe. His demeanor is of one possessed at times as he screams out his frustrations at the slow pace of the investigation.

As good as the above acting is the best is by Schreiber. He comes into the Globe and immediately takes charge. He is the Outsider, not a Bostonian, not a Catholic, but he is in charge. What is most delightful about his acting is the manner in which he takes control. An excellent example is the initial meeting between Schreiber’s character, Marty and the Spotlight staff. They want to stay on a story they working on the Boston P.D. Marty most clearly wants them to move to the child abuse story. He does not rant, he does not command, he suggests and comments. It is clear what he wants, and despite the ever present reluctance of every Bostonian in this movie to challenge the Church, that is exactly what he wants them to do. Schreiber’s character will get his way with the Spotlight crew as he will with many others in the film, but it is his calm, clear thinking and decided leadership that win him his arguments. It is so refreshing to see actors acting like real people. This is done from beginning to end in “Spotlight”.

“Spotlight” is as close to a perfect movie as I have seen in several years. My only gripe is the casting of John Slattery as Chief Editor, Ben Bradlee, Jr. His role is not critical to the movie’s success. It is possible I cannot avoid seeing Slattery as “Madmen” executive Roger Sterling due to my own limitations. Unfortunately, Slattery seems to be still playing Sterling on several occasions in “Spotlight”. That being said, this movie is a gem. It is worth seeing for the many technical merits of acting, directing, and editing. But it is also quite clearly worth seeing for the questions it raises regarding the Catholic Church’s decisions during this period. It is tempting to condemn Cardinal Law’s behavior, but I came away wondering at his promotion to the Church’s most prestigious church (Basilica di Santa Maria Maggiore) following his public disgrace in the wake of the Globe’s reporting. Was he rewarded with the Rome posting for doing his job? If he was, what are the Church’s values when they balance off the need to maintain the Church’s reputation with the harm done to the abused children? I cannot fathom their motives. It is strongly to McCarthy’s credit that “Spotlight” raises these questions. It is also curious to examine the Church’s generally positive public responses to the movie. It really leaves the viewer with the hope that these abhorrent problems are truly a thing of the past and that the Church has learned from its errors. Time will tell.

Movie Review: Birdman

Birdman (2014)

Four and half Stars out of Five

R

Riggan Thomson: Michael Keaton

Sam Thomson: Emma Stone

Jake: Zach Galifianakis

Lesley Truman: Naomi Watts

Laura: Andrea Riseborough

Mike Shiner: Ed Norton

Sylvia Thomson: Amy Ryan

Tabitha: Lindsay Duncan

Director: Alejandro G. Iñárritu

Writer: Alejandro G. Iñárritu, Nicolás Giacobone, Alexander Dinelaris, and Armando Bo

Music: Antonio Sanchez

Cinematography: Emmanuel Lubezki

In 2006, Hollywood was the lucky beneficiary of three imports from Mexico. Alfonso Cuarón provided us with “Children of Men”, Guillermo del Toro with “Pan’s Labryrinth”, and Alejandro González Iñárritu with “Babel” – all four star or better films. Cuarón continued the Mexican momentum with “Gravity” in 2013 and now in 2014, Iñárritu has outdone them all with “Birdman”. This powerful influence from Mexico in the form of these three directors is notable, but is there an underlying theme to their artistic efforts; is there something like the Magical Realism that infuses South Americans Gabriel Garcia Márquez (Colombia) and Isabel Allende (Chile)? If there once was a unifying feature to the three Mexican directors, Iñárritu may have abandoned it in Birdman. This movie departs from the others as it fuses influences from the Theatre, from American Cinema, from contemporary American life, and, yes even from Magical Realism. It is a bravura effort notable for its artistic merits, though possibly lacking in some of the qualities that make American movies financial successes.

Like Orson Wells’ “Citizen Kane” (1941), Iñárritu has become with his cinematographer Emmanuel Lubezski a master of the long panning shot. Wells was a great innovator and his opening shot to Citizen Kane as the camera pans into Kane’s castle and into and through the building is justifiably famous. Iñárritu and Lubezki have instituted very similar techniques throughout “Birdman” as they fly from the opening scene in Riggan Thomson’s (Michael Keaton) dressing room to the cramped hallways of his off-Broadway theater and out into the world inhabited by Riggan. Additionally, Iñárritu has chosen to use another film style last seen in Joe Wright’s 2013 version of “Anna Karenina”. In that movie, Wright experimented with a technique wherein each scene within the movie blended and segued right into the next scene. This lends a sense of a single shot movie as well as a complete collapse of the time sequences within the movie to match those of real life; it gives the movie the feel of live action theater. To say that shooting and acting within such constraints must be especially difficult is clear, but to do it as seamlessly as Iñárritu and Lubezki do in “Birdman” is remarkable.

To help accentuate the theme and background scenery of off-Broadway plays, Iñárritu has also borrowed from the stage many of the acting techniques used in live productions. Each of the actors within “Birdman” are either shouting or at the very least speaking at the top of their voices. This lends a sense of the stage wherein the actors must project their voices to be heard, but it also refers to the near psychotic nature of the mind that resides within Riggan Thomson. Another aspect of his mental deterioration is punctuated by the driving drum rhythms heard in the movie’s score and even more highlighted by the claustrophobic nature of the dark hallways that line his theater. He is in a tight place fiscally, mentally and emotionally. He is emotionally cut off from or has cut himself off from everyone who loves him. He is a kind of bomb waiting to go off.

Riggan’s back story is that he is a former big star celebrity from Hollywood famous for making action/comic book movies featuring a flying character named Birdman. Riggan has moved to New York to open a play he has written; he will also direct and star in this play. This is ostensibly to re-start his career. He is supported by his lawyer and friend, Jake (Zach Galifianakis), his daughter Sam (Emma Stone), his girlfriend and fellow actor Laura (Andrea Riseborough), and yet one more actress Leslie (Naomi Watts). As he enters the final preparations for his play, he must find a new actor to replace one injured on stage. Leslie suggests her former boyfriend and Broadway phenomena Mike (Ed Norton). Mike joins the cast as the play moves through its three final warm up productions before the official opening. Mike is a brilliant but eccentric actor that brings more problems to the already troubled production. Meanwhile, Riggan’s mental condition is shown to be in a deteriorating situation. He talks to his imaginary alter ego Birdman. Despite being imaginary, Birdman being the comic hero argues against the artsy play and demands a return to Hollywood with its action-themed movies; that Birdman is actually Riggan’s lack of self-confidence made manifest is clear. It is also revealed that Riggan’s daughter is a former drug addict who suffered an unhappy childhood as a result of Riggan’s absences.

Iñárritu blends several themes into the movie. To help accent Riggan’s mental state he is shown to display the ability to levitate and use telekinesis while he is alone – always alone. Such abilities can be a kind of Magical Realism, but are really not so in the context of this movie, they are more a symptom of Riggan’s growing delusion. Even though he is widely recognized on the streets of New York for his Birdman role, Riggan seeks a rebirth via an artistic effort. He wants to be recognized as an actor. He thinks not being recognized as an artist, as anyone other than Birdman is the source of his problems. To make this point quite clear, he has an argument with an arrogant but influential theater critic, Tabitha (Lindsay Duncan). She forcefully explains to him that he is a celebrity and not an actor, and that she intends to pan his play so fiercely that it will close very quickly. Riggan comes back just as forcefully that she is no artist either, but simply someone that labels true artists; she is someone that cannot do, but can merely comment. Iñárritu’s comparison of art and celebrity, and even more effectively of the techniques of fantasy in a fictional life versus mental illness are two examples of the high level of art as practiced by him within this film.

Michael Keaton has like Iñárritu achieved a pinnacle in his own career within this movie. His acting life prior to "Birdman" was entertaining, but hardly of the serious artistic heights he demonstrates in this movie. Keaton smoothly moves from one mood to another, even from one personality to another multiple times during the course of the movie. He is morosely arguing with his Birdman legacy wishing for more, he is angrily arguing with a critic or destroying his dressing room, he is broadly smiling following some minor victory, or ultimately he is inwardly facing his reality while reassuring his daughter. Virtually every scene Keaton acts in, he aces with the perfection of the Broadway actor, his character Riggan yearns to be. That Keaton won the 2015 Oscar for Best Actor is no surprise, and an event that gives me some hope for the integrity of the Oscar nomination process. The movie is replete with excellent acting: Norton as Mike and Stone as Sam are two other standouts.

There are some problems within the movie. The three adult women that surround Riggan are so nearly interchangeable in terms of their near identically transparent personalities it is sometimes hard to tell them apart except by hair color or context. We can tell Sylvia is his ex-wife from their conversation, but the role of Sylvia is so truncated and her personality so absent within the story she is easily mixed up with the other blonde, Leslie. Leslie’s personality and that of Laura are nearly invisible. You can tell them apart by hair color but not by much else. To make matters even more obscure, Laura initiates a love scene with Leslie for no obvious reason in terms of the movie or their characters. The motivations and behaviors of these three female characters remain throughout the move quite a mystery. If they are in the movie to symbolize how invisible all the women in Riggan’s life are or have been to him, then that is a valid point; it is just not a point clearly made in the movie.

The much better defined character of Sam also has problems. She is yet another female left on the side of Riggan’s life due to the exigencies of his career in Hollywood. The problem with her character as shown in the movie is that her character is constantly changing. When she first appears in the movie, she is buying flowers for Riggan in her role as his personal assistant (the implications of this are clear – she is an assistant, not a loved daughter). Her affect is one of constant anger and agitation. As the movie progresses, so does her personality: angry to nihilistic to sympathetic to her father’s needs and situation to loving, even adoring of who her father is revealed to be. Such changes could occur in anyone, and indeed as Sam came to know her father and his personal demons better, this would have been a reasonable progression. But to have her change so in only a matter of days seems less than realistic. Emma Stone's acting for these various mood and attitude changes is spot on, but the character herself is problematic.

The sub-title to Birdman is “Unexpected Virtue of Ignorance”. It is referenced as a quote in the movie attributed to the theater critic, Tabitha. She uses it as a back handed compliment to Riggan following his play’s opening night. Her meaning is that despite not being a true artist, Riggan has nevertheless pulled off an unexpected coup with his play. Surely a second meaning could be a sly reference to Riggan’s personal life. He lived his career not his family life; as such he lost his wife Sylvia and is losing or has already lost his daughter. Too late he realizes these losses in a discussion with Sam late in the movie. This scene is there to justify Sam’s warming attitude towards Riggan as her father. And it does also seem to be a reference to how many people live their lives. Maybe reaching for stardom and its pointless celebrity or in the case of the average Joe working long hours to pay the rent and buy the food; but in the end losing what truly matters, the love of those you were trying to nurture and protect. Like the shallow Birdman character that lives in Riggan’s mind, bad choices are made, and Riggan/Birdman just wants to fly away from his problems and himself.

The movie ends with a scene of Sam looking out the window. This scene is both ambiguous and clever. On the one hand, the movie has portrayed Riggan’s mental unravelling in a manner that strongly suggests his levitation, telekinesis and Birdman conversations exist only in his mind. Everyone else in the movie lives with their feet firmly planted in the world we all live in. These people may be theater people, shouting out their lines or like Mike adhering to some extreme views on method acting (even as he hides his personal inadequacies, symbolized by his E.D.). But none of them could fly or hurl objects with the force of their minds. Such events were presented solely as examples of Riggan’s psychosis. And then at the movie’s end, we see Sam look out and down through a window, looking for her father. She does not seem to seem him on the ground, but then smiles as she looks skyward. Has Magical Realism now spread into the movie; is Riggan flying? Or has she seen him lying on the ground and then turned her eyes heavenward with assumption that her father is now finally happy? If the former, I really don’t see the point of the movie, but if the latter, that is has Sam and her father finally reconciled, then the movie has made its point. Riggan has regained the one thing that mattered; it wasn’t his fame, his psychotic belief in his ability to fly, his escape from his bills and harsh critics, it was the love of the one person whose love he must have.

This movie is a powerful one made by an artist who is at the top of his game. But the driving musical score, the cramped scenes, the extreme characters like Mike, will make this movie a hard one to please many movie goers. If you like exceptional acting, clever cinematic techniques, and want to see a complex story told in a complex manner, then “Birdman” may be for you.