FILM REVIEW: Blue Is the Warmest Color / La vie d’Adèle – Chapitres 1 et 2

The film that launched a thousand reviews and criticisms.

Blue Is the Warmest Color stars Adele Exarchopoulos as Adele, and Lea Seydoux as Emma. Much has been said about this film, both praises and heavy criticisms. Film critics and feminists have attacked and analyzed filmmaker Abdellatif Kechiche’s approach on the intimate scenes between Seydoux and Exarchopoulos. However the film has more to offer than sex. Blue is the Warmest Color focuses on raw emotions, especially that of a young girl who is transitioning into womanhood—yet has some questions—deep questions—about her sexuality and, more importantly, her identity.

The French title of the film is “La vie d’Adèle – Chapitres 1 et 2”, which is an important thing to note because while a good portion of this film is dedicated to Adele and Emma’s love story, it is not primarily about them. This film centers on Adele and her experimentation, struggles, curiosity, appetite, and loneliness. It is centered on her, and sadly, the film opened and closed with Adele in solitude, enduring everything—confusion and misery—on her own, and worse, in silence.

At first her character is established as the young girl with a huge appetite—literally and figuratively. She is your typical teenager, with nice parents, a standard group of friends, and a boyfriend. Things take their turn when Adele comes across Emma for the first time. It was in this scene where we remember what Adele’s teacher had discussed earlier in the film—how does one feel after experiencing first love? Do they feel as though they gained something, or do they feel as though they had lost something? Worse, do they feel any form of regret?

After their paths cross, Adele starts to question her actions and moreover, her identity. She opens up to her friend, “I feel like I’m faking. Faking everything.” Adele soon ends her relationship with Thomas (Jeremie Laheurte) and starts pursuing Emma. The film then carries on from their budding friendship, to their first sexual encounter, and to their breakdown.

Adele and Emma had many differences that might have been a factor in their eventual break-up. Emma, for one, was sure of her identity. She did not need to cling onto anyone to define herself, for she also had a strong sense of philosophy instilled in her. Adele, on the other hand, was young and searching for herself. Then she found Emma and thought she had found something equally as important as her identity in their relationship—her happiness. Which was why when Emma pushed Adele to write, thinking that writing would give her a sense of fulfillment, Adele responded that she did not need to become a writer to be happy. She was already happy the way she was with Emma. This is where perhaps “I Follow Rivers” was the most fitting song to describe how Adele felt for Emma—that she would follow her anywhere, and perhaps when she was singing and dancing along to the song, she only had Emma in mind.

Performances by Exarchopoulos and Seydoux were nothing short of remarkable. They did openly share their struggles in Kechiche’s directing technique, saying that some takes were too intense, to the point where it felt grueling, but no signs of weariness were shown in their acting, except for the scenes that needed it. May I also note that Seydoux has completely transformed from that sweet French girl Owen Wilson eventually ended up with in Midnight in Paris.

The thing with Blue Is the Warmest Color is that it explores the different dimensions of youth, self-discovery, and romantic relationships that are universal despite the same-sex backdrop. It is not afraid to show the angst, social and economic crises, and sexual curiosity that altogether make up this masterful piece of art.

*Blue Is the Warmest Color / La vie d’Adèle – Chapitres 1 et 2 has won Palme d’Or in Cannes 2013

 

To conclude this review, let me share with you my favorite scene that I sometimes always dance to.

 

FILM REVIEW: Dukit (Armando Lao, 2013)

 

Can you forgive the sorrows of the past, even when it’s carved on wood?

Armando Lao carves the story of Willy Layug as the son who struggled in dealing with the different phases of his life without a father to guide him – especially in raising and fending for his own family.

Waldo has his humble beginnings as a simple woodcarver to being the recipient for the Presidential Merit Awardee for Ecclesiastical Art.  There are three stages in Waldo’s life that were shown in the film – the 60’s that was his childhood, the 80’s wherein he was a young man struggling to fend for his family (portrayed by Bor Ocampo), and finally the present day, where he is already an established and acclaimed artist (portrayed by Willy Layug himself). The performances of Willy Layug, Bor Ocampo, Bambalito Lacap, and Mark Joseph Griswold were nothing short of remarkable.

The film makes use of the nonlinear narrative which may have served as both its strength and weakness. The transitions from one time period to another were cleverly knit together by utilizing the film’s dialogues and visuals. However, there is a risk in using nonlinear narrative, especially if some viewers are accustomed to the traditional linear narratives that most viewers are comfortable watching.  I heard someone in the movie house say that he found the film hard to watch at first as the scenes kept jumping and he was getting lost in the story.  But as the plot unfolded, he started appreciating it more, and this perhaps could be the case with most audiences.

Despite the film’s rough start, later on audiences will be able to appreciate its depth and depiction of humanity and culture. The visuals, while being one of the film’s strong points with its dreamy feel, also had its down moments.  Some scenes were a little hard to look at because the camera was too shaky at times.  Likewise, on some of the film’s most moving moments, the camera angles were a bit awkward thus dissolving the scene’s impact. However despite Dukit’s flaws, it is undeniably one of Metro Manila Film Festival’s (MMFF) gems.

4/5.

 

*DUKIT has won Best New Wave Film and Best New Wave Picture.  Director Armando Lao has also won Best New Wave Film Director and actors BorOcampo, Willy Layug, and BambalitoLacap have won New Wave Best Actor(s) in the 2013 Metro Manila Film Festival

FILM REVIEW: Don Jon (2013)

Written and Directed by Joseph Gordon-Levitt

Joseph Gordon-Levitt weaves a tale of building illusions in his directing debut, Don Jon.

The film is focused on Jon Martello (Joseph Gordon-Levitt) who only cares about his body, his pad, his ride, his family, his church, his boys, his girls, and—one thing we all can’t miss—his porn.  Jon lives a life wherein every night would mean having a different woman on his bed.  Hence, his friends call him “Don” for having such a smooth way with the ladies.  However, Jon finds real sex inadequate and thus turns to pornography for the “real” pleasure, as he would put it.  Gordon-Levitt dedicates a good amount of time in emphasizing Jon’s porn addiction and narcissistic nature, and does so in a routinely or repetitive technique.  The viewers are constantly given scenes of Jon confessing his sins, which mostly compose of having sex outside of wedlock and watching pornographic videos.  It is also notable that Jon clearly remembers the exact number of times he has watched porn.

All these somehow changed when he met Barbara Sugarman (Scarlet Johansson) one night in the usual bar where he and his friends would go and start rating women on a scale of 1 – 10.  If a woman scored a 10, Jon and his friends would call her a “dime”, and this was especially the case for Barbara.  Jon pulls a great amount of effort to get with her, and later on they become a steady couple.  However, things began to be shaky once Barbara caught Jon watching porn once after they had sex.

The case of Jon’s porn addiction is almost identical to Barbara’s.  Only this time, Barbara builds these unrealistic expectations from romantic films.  Barbara is a fan of the typical Hollywood chick flicks which practically have the same storyline – girl meets boy, they fall in love, they break up, and they get back together.

Things do not work out for Jon and Barbara, and later on, Jon finds renewal through the character of Esther (Julianne Moore).  She is older than him, and despite her share of extra baggage, she was able to somehow change a few of Jon’s perspectives, one of which being how he sees sex.

Don Jon was cleverly knit together by Gordon-Levitt as he took on the nontraditional route of storytelling.  As said earlier, the viewers were given a routinely view of Jon’s life, wherein we can see that on a superficial basis, he can be quite normal—yet once he is alone, his eccentricities (as we may put it) begin to surface, more specifically his obsession with watching porn.  In the beginning, viewers may see Jon as the typical Jersey douchebag, yet if we dive deeper into this, we can see that his addiction for pornography actually emphasizes his escapist nature in which he is reluctant to make sex a two-way act.  Yet after a number of both sexual and social interactions with Esther, we see a lighter and better Jon than the previous hot-headed and self-absorbed man.

For a directing debut, Gordon-Levitt has proven that he has much to offer in the film industry.  Though certain people may have branded Don Jon as profane and offensive, the film actually goes deeper as Gordon-Levitt’s script was intended to establish the setting as well as the characters.  His portrayal of Jon’s family was also noteworthy as he established Jon Sr. (Tony Danza) as a little more extreme version of Jon, Angela (Glenne Headly) as a mother who is constantly wishing for her son to find “the right one”, and Monica (Brie Larson) as the teenager who basically worships her phone.  All these portrayals show at least a little reality in a family set-up.

Don Jon is ambitious and intelligent.  It took a lot of risks and nontraditional styles, but Gordon-Levitt somehow managed to pull them off.  The film may not be for everyone, but it was worth the money and time.

 

Theater Review: Breaking the Silence

There once was a land of milk and honey, but no, it was not the Promised Land. This was a land where the trees were tall and the grass was green; where the dew was pure and the air was fresh.

This was the land of the rising sun.

This land had, of course, its people. Some preferred to stay, yet others flew to another land. Now this land was different. It was not of milk and honey; it was not even filled with pure dew. The trees were somehow scarce and the fields were not as vast.

But what made the Japanese choose this land over others?

“America, America… the talk is gold.”

Breaking the Silence covers the time when the American Dream was tantamount to going through a rebirth stage. At that time, the American Dream would make one believe that the universe would conspire for them, that the universe would grant them their wildest dreams. This dream would intoxicate people with the promise of a new life—moreover, a better life.

The universe, however, did not conspire for the Japanese people who fled to America. These were the Japanese-Americans. The Japs, as the Americans that time would call them.

Nikki Nojima Louise, a Nisei writer, weaves the history of the Japanese-Americans, specifically their three phases – from the faint spark of their desire to go to America, to being sent to camps after the bombing of Pearl Harbor, and finally to the post-war years filled with burning activism.

Unlike traditional plays, Breaking the Silence used the Reader’s Theater style wherein the actors would have their scripts on hand and use the power of voice and minimal actions and props to portray a story. It is also notable that this type of theater style was budding at the time of World War II.

The play’s well-weaved script and ingenious use of sounds served as its strong points as it was able to let the audience play with their imagination. The mise-en-scène of this play involved no props, no backdrops, and no flamboyant costumes. The mise-en-scène of this play included the actors, the script, and the ability of the audience to build their own image of the scene – imagination.

Breaking the Silence does not only serve as a historical play for Japan. This is a play that would remind the viewers that inhumanity is evident in almost every history of every country or race. For the Jews, we have the Holocaust; for the Philippines, we have the Martial Law under the former president Ferdinand Marcos; for Afghanistan, we have the rule of the Taliban.

Let this play serve as a wake-up call to not commit the same mistakes. Let this play be a reminder of the importance of understanding humanity. And lastly, let this play survive long enough to remind us of how far we have gone, or perhaps to let us ask this very question – have we really gone that far from these inhumane times?

X-Published: HJU Global Voice

Gatsby? WHICH Gatsby?

I came to know Baz Luhrmann through Moulin Rouge – a film that I saw rich in talent and imagery, but not in substance.  When I found out that Luhrmann was to direct The Great Gatsby, which is considered by many as one of Fitzgerald’s greatest pieces ever written, I was curious on how it would turn out.  It stars Leonardo DiCaprio (as Jay Gatsby), Carey Mulligan (as Daisy Buchanan), and Tobey Maguire (as Nick Carraway).

This is not, however, the first time Hollywood has made an attempt to translate The Great Gatsby into a film.  In 1974, Jack Clayton (director) and Francis Ford Coppola (screenwriter) worked together and crafted their own take on the book.  This starred Robert Redford (as Jay Gatsby), Mia Farrow (as Daisy Buchanan), and Sam Waterston (as Nick Carraway).

The ‘original’ Gatsby

The Great Gatsby of Fitzgerald tells the tale of longing, deceit, and obsession.  Jay Gatsby was once a poor boy who fell in love with the well-heeled Daisy.  Their short affair was put to a halt once Gatsby was sent off to war, leaving Daisy behind.  She then resorted to marrying Tom Buchanan – a wealthy polo player.  Despite the picturesque façade of their mansion, Daisy finds her marriage with Tom crumbling due to his constant need of having a mistress.

Soon, Daisy and Gatsby’s paths cross once again after five long years with the help of Daisy’s cousin, Nick Carraway, and friend, Jordan Baker.  The infidelity then penetrates deeper into Daisy and Tom’s marriage, however Tom only sees it wrong on Daisy’s part.  This is one of the points where Fitzgerald emphasizes how society sees gender.  Despite the emergence of the flappers in this era, certain women were still expected to “conform”.  Men were still the superior ones.

The “problem” with the novel is that the strength of its plot is too hard to compress all in one motion picture.  The mystery behind Gatsby’s character – his ambition, his fraud, and his humanity are all paradoxes that serve as a challenge to portray.

 

Gatsby? Which Gatsby?

The Gatsby of Luhrmann provided viewers with immediate details and explanations, thus thwarting the story’s enigma, yet it succeeds in being a grand spectacle – as expected from Luhrmann.  However, I found flaws in terms of depth in portraying the roaring twenties – though Luhrmann was able to capture 1920 in its wildest state, the true essence of the period was not completely captured.  But it was notable on Luhrmann and Pearce’s (co-screenwriter) part that they were able to make a story out of Nick’s narration, yet their whole sanatorium gimmick has been used in various films thus making it a bit cliché.

The Gatsby of Clayton, on the other hand, was straightforward in the sense that there were no special effects nor were there any long emphasis on the vices brought about by the roaring twenties.  Clayton and Coppola focused on the plot itself and the interactions among
the characters.  However, they remained too loyal to the book to inject a little of their own interpretations.  Yet to some, this could be seen as a good point.

 

The final verdict

In terms of crafting, I found Clayton and Coppola’s piece better.  However, the actors in Luhrmann’s Gatsby showcased superior performance than most of Clayton’s – Leonardo DiCaprio’s being the most evident.

FILM REVIEW: Insiang (Lino Brocka, 1976)

 

Brocka is known for his ability to merge symbolisms with reality, and this is much evident in Insiang, which was one of the Filipino films to be introduced in Cannes.

The film opens in a slaughterhouse.  The helplessness of the pigs, the cruelty of the men – these variables immediately set the film’s tone.  It also straightaway gives the viewers a taste of Brocka’s allegorical nature.

Insiang (Hilda Koronel) is portrayed as a young, beautiful, and quiet girl.  She still lives with her mother, Tonya (Mona Lisa).  Insiang’s father left them for another woman, which may be the reason why Tonya is always so bitter.

Despite the fact that the man of the house left them, Tonya takes in her in-laws, but later on kicks them out because she claims that they have been greatly unappreciative to all that she has done for them.

The in-laws, who Insiang had grown accustomed to, were then replaced by the neighbourhood bad boy, Dado (Ruel Vernal). His attitude left Insiang, boyfriend, Bebot (Rez Cortez), feeling and seen inferior beside him.

Insiang finds herself in danger in the comfort of her own home (or was it ever one at all?) as Dado’s true intentions towards the mother and daughter come to light. Out of fear, she asks Bebot to elope with her but the latter’s fear towards Dado left him and Insiang in a whirlwind problem.

However, one night Bebot brought Insiang to a cheap Chinese motel.  Insiang, hoping that this would be their first step in eloping, agreed and even finally gave herself up to Bebot.  When she woke up the next morning, she found herself alone.

Due to the several misfortunes inflicted on her, the once kind and soft-spoken girl turns into a silent demon. Insiang slowly avenges towards those who cause her pain, one by one. Gone is the weak and dependent woman as she’s replaced by a strong one who turns down the young man who promised to give her the world. For him, it’s a moment too late.

Bebot was assaulted by Dado, Dado got killed by Tonya, and Tonya went to jail.  All these were done through Insiang’s adept schemes – schemes that one would not really expect of the likes of Insiang to do.

The film closes with Insiang visiting her mother in prison to confess.  Although unlike other films portraying maternal relationships, Insiang and Tonya do not end well.  Despite the fact that Insiang asked Tonya for forgiveness, Tonya remains cold.  The infant she once raised and perhaps loved to a certain extent, became the very reason as to why she would rot in jail.

Overall, Insiang is a dark masterpiece covering man’s inner demons such as lust, jealousy, resentment, and revenge.  Let the fact that this is one of the Filipino films to be ever introduced in Cannes do the talking.

FILM REVIEW: Maynila sa mga Kuko ng Liwanag (Lino Brocka, 1975)

 

In the beginning of the film, we see still shots of a black and white Manila, first in its quiet state, then gradually turning into a crowded, busy city.  There was no musical scoring for the first part, only sounds from the actual scene, which quickly establishes the reality of Manila and shows the evident sense of realism by the director, Lino Brocka.

Color then comes in once the frame hits Julio Madiaga (Bembol Roco with hair), which sets the tone for the whole film.

Much like the myth of Orpheus and Eurydice, Maynila: Sa Mga Kuko ng Liwanag(Manila in the Claws of Neon) follows the tragic story of Julio Madiaga and Ligaya Paraiso (Hilda Koronel) and encompasses the several social issues of the Philippines during the seventies (or was it only during the seventies?).

Ligaya is brought to Manila by Mrs. Cruz (Juling Bagabaldo) and was promised to be treated well and to be given proper education.  She was hesitant at first, but her mother insisted that she goes.  Feeling obligated to help her mother rise from the poverty in the province, Ligaya goes with Mrs. Cruz with high hopes.  Those high hopes, however, were soon tarnished when Ligaya discovers that she was brought to Manila to be a prostitute along with two other women from her barrio.  She is then met by a greater poverty than what she had grown accustomed to back in her province.

Soon, a letter from Mrs. Cruz addressed to Ligaya’s mother arrives, saying that Ligaya left the business and is nowhere to be found.  Julio now feels the need to venture into the underworld that is Manila and find Ligaya.

In order to survive Manila, Julio needs to find a regular job, and so he results to being a low-waged construction worker.  He is expected to work for eight hours carrying heavy load and not to mention risking his life at the construction site on a daily basis – and for that he only earns 2.50 PHP per day.  To add to that, they have what they call taiwan, wherein their wages are extorted.  The other workers, however, advise Julio not to complain because he could easily lose his job once he tries to fight for a higher salary.

Julio’s search for Ligaya goes on, almost to the point of being relentless, and he soon finds the bright claws of Manila sinking deeper into his skin.  Julio is soon dispelled from his work at the construction site since they had to cut down the workers given that the building was almost done.  In order to attain fast money, Julio then results to prostitution.

Back in the day, going to Manila was likened to the American Dream, where people would fly off to America in hopes of pursuing their dreams.  To the people in the province, Manila was their America and was a realm filled with infinite possibilities.  They would venture to Manila with high visions for themselves, only to be sullied by its deadly consumerist claws.  Chaos would fill the once pleasant utopia one has formed in his psyche and before long, everything will seem nothing more but a distant dream.  From utopia to dystopia.

Despite the fact that this is a film done in 1975, the social conditions remain unchanged, if not worse, in the contemporary Philippines.  The problem of wages for those with blue collar jobs, the human trafficking for men and women alike, the monstrosity brought about by the consumerist culture – all these issues presented in the film remain pertinent even decades after it was released.

The film closes with a huge crowd chasing after Julio because he had just killed who he believed to be Ligaya’s Chinese husband, or oppressor, as he is portrayed.  Julio is met at a dead end, and the men in the crowd start gathering anything in sight that they can use to attack Julio.

The scene slows down at the sight of Julio’s face.  What I like about this scene is the ability of Brocka [the director] and Roco [the actor] to portray the last whirling emotions of Julio – terror, anger, and sorrow.

Ligaya’s face then soon appears on the frame, overlapping with Julio’s.  If one takes the film on a more optimistic perspective, then this could perhaps signify the reunion of the two ill-fated lovers and their course to a new life with a brighter, better light – a light with no claws.

Maynila: Sa Mga Kuko ng Liwanag is arguably one of the most powerful films ever done in the history of Philippine cinema.   It portrays the several illnesses the country was and is facing.  Watching it in the modern times would even add up to its power, since it remains to be relevant despite decades after its release.  The task of the modern Filipino now is to make the issues presented in the film obsolete, and to makeMaynila: Sa Mga Kuko ng Liwanag nothing more but a nostalgic cinematic tour de force by the illustrious Lino Brocka.

Film Review: Norwegian Wood (Tran Anh Hung, 2010)

Director Tran Anh Hung unravels the beautifully morbid fires of teenage passion as he adapts the acclaimed 1987 novel of Haruki Murakami,Norwegian Wood.

Much like the novel, the film is narrated by Toru Watanabe (Ken’ichi Matsuyama).  He takes the viewers back to his college days wherein he experiences the unexplained suicide of his best friend, Kizuki (Kengo Kôra), and his thorny love affair with Naoko (Rinko Kikuchi).  Prior to Kizuki’s suicide, the three [Toru, Kizuki, and Naoko] were always together, but after the suicide Naoko and Toru started going separate ways.  It was not until later in the film where the two meet again and develop a rather strong connection with each other.

On Naoko’s 20^th birthday, she loses her virginity to Toru.  It started with her wishing people were stuck at 18 and 19 for the rest of their lives, which led to her sudden breakdown that soon intensified to a lengthy love-making scene between her and Toru.

Toru, assuming that Naoko had intercourses with her former boyfriend Kizuki, was surprised to know that the intercourse they had at that time was her first.  He then asks why she had never had sex with Kizuki, and thus resulted to Naoko bursting in tears once more.

The string of communication had been cut between the two ever since that night.  Naoko moved out from her apartment and Toru decided to address his letter back to her hometown, hoping it would be directed to where Naoko was.  She soon responds to the letter, saying that she is not yet ready to see Toru and that she is to be brought to a sanatorium in the mountains.

However, Naoko is later advised to interact with people from outside the sanatorium, and thus resulting to the reunion of her and Toru.  They are joined by Naoko’s roommate, Reiko – a middle-aged woman who is also a patient at the sanatorium.

Naoko and Toru’s indecipherable obsession for each other gradually intensifies, without ever knowing what actually bound them together.  They were of two broken souls that were suddenly tied together, but were they together due to love or sheer grief?  Though in the middle of this intensifying passion, Toru meets another girl, Midori, to whom he grows fond feelings for as well.

Midori contrasts with Naoko in several areas, one being that she [Midori] is livelier and worries less about adversaries.  This does not mean that Midori does not have a dark side, she just copes with it differently than how Naoko does.

The film’s ability to capture the mystery behind Toru and Naoko’s affair was one of its strong points.  However, it lacked growth and depth among its characters, and that is one of the most important things to consider in storytelling.  Yet certain scenes remained poignant to the point of almost leveling towards the novel’s depth, but in general that remains a distant gap.

However, it would be unfair to measure the film’s quality by comparing it to the novel.  These are two different mediums, yet let me just say that I find the film effective in somehow capturing the strength of the novel, but that only scratches the superficial levels of the novel’s true power.

Norwegian Wood [the film] seduces its viewers through its clever play of sounds and music, rich imagery and artistic cinematography, and well-sprinkled love-making scenes.

*

photos (c) wildgrounds

 

FILM REVIEW: Rebecca (Alfred Hitchcock, 1940)

“Last night, I dreamt I went to Manderley again.”

Rebecca stars Laurence Oliver, who plays the role of the handsome yet seemingly gloomy widower, Maxim de Winter, and the lovely Joan Fontaine, who plays the “young and naïve” Mrs. de Winter.  She remains nameless throughout the film and was only addressed ‘Mrs. de Winter’ after her marriage with Maxim.

The film is adapted from Daphne du Maurier’s novel and was translated into screenplay by Robert Sherwoood.  The plot is about a guileless young woman who started out as a paid companion of a wealthy old lady, Mrs. Van Hooper (Florence Bates).  In both the novel and the film, this young woman remains nameless until she wed the handsome and immensely well-off Maxim de Winter, and thus this young woman is now called “Mrs. de Winter”.  The story continues to unfold as she [Mrs. de Winter] finally moves in to Maxim’s mansion – Manderley.

The ghost of Maxim’s ex-wife seems to continue wandering inside the walls of Manderley as she haunts the new Mrs. de Winter through her initials embroidered on certain decorations and furniture, and through the servants themselves, most especially the housekeeper, Mrs. Danvers.

Mrs. Danvers is portrayed as the quiet and uncanny housekeeper who strictly keeps her loyalty to the past Mrs. de Winter, Rebecca.  Other characters in the film claim that Mrs. Danvers “simply adored” the late Rebecca de Winter.  Thus, for her [Mrs. Danvers] to warmly accept the new Mrs. de Winter was like expecting the weakest person you know break steel with his own hands.

Alfred Hitchcock was always known for his astounding mystery films, and Rebecca is no exception to that.  The film takes the viewers into a whole new dimension bound to keep them thinking if Mrs. de Winter’s name will ever be revealed, or if Rebecca’s image will actually be shown, or if it was actually Mrs. Danvers who murdered Rebecca out of intensified obsession, and the assumptions go on and on.  That’s what a Hitchcock film does to its viewers – it plays with their heads.

There had been rumors in the past about Sherwood actually giving a name to Mrs. de Winter for the film version.  Some say it was supposed to be “Daphne”, inspired by the author of the novel herself, yet it could be a good thing that it didn’t push through.  Making Mrs. de Winter unnamed until her marriage gave the film a more dynamic feel and can instantly provide viewers with certain presumptions – such as the possibility of Mrs. de Winter only having a concrete concept of herself through her dependency on her significant other, Maxim.

The technique of not showing Rebecca’s exact image also gives a chance for the viewers to create their own picture of a seemingly perfect woman who possessed such rare beauty – the type of beauty that would still be talked about even after you’re long gone.  Rebecca was seen as the perfect wife not only because of her beauty, but because of her wits and high breeding.  Yet despite this seemingly perfect image hid a demon that only Maxim was able to see, but then again later on in the film certain revelations are brought to light.  Thus, this becomes a thought to ponder on – was there really ever a demon inside Rebecca or were her actions justifiable?  Rebecca’s true character, her true image, remained a mystery all throughout.

Rebecca will play with your mind.  Watching the film is like performing a 130-minute mind game with one man pulling the strings.  Despite how viewers try to make assumptions, only one man knows what is going to happen next (well, okay. One man and the rest of his production staff).  So the only logical thing to do is to sit on the edge of your chair and keep your head glued to the screen.

The film, ‘’Rebecca”, is much like the character, Rebecca, herself – enigmatic, beautiful, and [seemingly] undecipherable.

FILM REVIEW: Hitchcock (Sacha Gervasi, 2012)

In 1959, Psycho was born and had been deemed as one of Alfred Hitchcock’s greatest masterpieces ever crafted.  In 2012, a film about the creation of Psycho was made, with its main focus being the love story [during that time period] between the great director, Alfred Hitchcock, and his wife, Alma Reville-Hitchcock.

The film’s poster has a quote, “Behind every psycho is a great woman”, which basically captured the main situation of Alma and Alfred.  Alma had always been suffering from Alfred’s childish and [often regarded as] insane ways, such as his obsession for most of his leading ladies, yet Alma chose to withstand it.  The film remained loyal to this quote as it emphasized Alfred’s need to be taken care of by Alma, and how Alma had been suffering yet very enduring.

The most relevant scene for the quote was during Alfred’s illness and inability to direct Psycho for a couple of days, and the problem was they were already behind roughly 2 days.  Alma advised him to stay at home while she took charge in shooting the remaining scenes for Psycho.  This scene was inaccurate since it was actually Alfred’s assistant director who took charge, but nonetheless it was essential to make this inaccuracy in able to further strengthen the film’s core theme – that behind every psycho is a great woman.

It was surprising to see no presence of Patricia Hitchcock (their daughter) in the film. In fact, she did play a role in Psycho, which I found odd since it seems like the writers were trying to suggest that Alfred and Alma were empty nests.  In this film, Alfred and Alma were portrayed as an unhappy and aging couple with two dogs.

Yet despite the film’s inaccuracies, I still found it watchable and, to a certain extent, enjoyable.  Performances by Anthony Hopkins and Helen Mirren were flawless.  The ending was, as expected, a happy one.  The writers wanted to tell the love story between Alfred and Alma, and so they made it appear that the couple had finally settled their issues after Psycho.

All in all, Hitchcock is probably one of those typical films trying to portray a prodigy’s life by both skimming and creaming information all for the viewer’s delight.