Reviews

HBO's Westworld gives credit to 10 writers/co-writers. Many have only contributed to a single episode with a handful of exceptions, namely Michael Crichton, Lisa Joy & Jonathan Nolan who have worked on the entire show. The latter two are credited as the main writers.

A lesser known fact perhaps is that Michael Crichton has already written & directed Westworld, back in 1973. It was very well received publicly and critically, with the synopsis reading:

"An amusement park for rich vacationers. The park provides its customers a way to live out their fantasies through the use of robots that provide anything they want. Two of the vacationers choose a wild west adventure. However, after a computer breakdown, they find that they are now being stalked by a rogue robot gun-slinger."

As a consequence, the 2016 Westworld represents Crichton's work as a foundation that has been expanded by Lisa Joy, but most importantly and noticeably, by Jonathan Nolan.

David Bordwell in his essay titled Nolan vs Nolan talks about 4 ways a filmmaker can innovate:

You can innovate by tackling new subject matter. You can also innovate by developing new themes. Apart from subject or theme, you can innovate by trying out new formal strategies. Finally, you can innovate at the level of style

Given the premise of Westworld as well as the involvement of Jonathan Nolan, it would be fair to analyze it through this prism of innovation as well as project the influence Chris Nolan had on his brother.

The formal strategy that the writers utilized to tell the narrative, the one that relies almost solely on continuous exposition, is something Nolan fans will appreciate, while others will undoubtedly hate. It's a technique Chris Nolan has been deploying since 'Memento', and can be seen at it's peak in 'Inception' and 'Interstellar' where exposition becomes the 'meat of it', as Chris Nolan once said.

Westworld provides that continuous exposition whereby we are always learning new things about the hosts abilities, their creators, the park itself as well as the true ambitions of it's stakeholders. As a result, we become involved with a plot not through learning about characters background and traits, but rather through learning the information along with the characters, while they work through the mechanics.

While Westworld's style might seem simple, it echoes the efficiency and consistency that can be seen in his Nolans' work. Westworld employs mainly mid-range shots to establish scenes while the dialogues and action packed sequences are dominated by rapid, shoulder to shoulder closeups. There is nothing highly original in these techniques as many will be overly used to them from shows like 'Game of Thrones' or 'Ray Donovan', which employ some of the same cinematographers. What separates Westworld is that it's seemingly simplistic style is overarched with exposition and continuous crosscutting while it's plot is dominated by a long time favorite theme of the Nolan brothers - character subjectivity.

Westworld's style therefore is ingrained in this subjectivity, it's dependent on it. Here an attempt is made to tell a story through a character's point of view. Often we see only what certain characters can see, emphasizing their subjective views & agendas, like in many scenes involving Dolores, Ford, Bernard or Maeve. As can be seen in 'Memento', The Batman trilogy or 'The Prestige' , amongst others, Nolan is fascinated by unusual storytelling strategies. His efforts often times attempt to 'reconcile character subjectivity with large-scale cross-cutting'. This unusual narrative form prospers in Westworld where the story is told in a non-linear fashion and heavily utilizes cross-cutting.

As a result the viewer is constantly shifted from person to person, past to present, place to place. David Bordwell mentioned that in theory combining crosscutting and subjectivity might seem contrary, "One is intensive, the other expansive; one is a local effect, the other becomes the basis of the film's enveloping architecture."

Westworld tackles this by establishing a handful of key protagonists and confining the majority of it's scenes to them. The sheer volume of these protagonists however, coupled with such dynamic style makes it incredibly hard to fully convey the subjectivity of it's characters. This is where Westworld might lose some of it's viewers. While Nolan's techniques might flourish in the cinema, as a 10+ hours TV show, they are confusing. And not confusing in the show's ability to answer the questions it raised, but in how it got to these answers. While the final episodes are truly ambitious and excellently executed, the middle act is uninspiring and uneventful.

Thus when the fascination for the subject matter fades and one adjusts to the innovations Westworld has to offer, it becomes monotonous and dare I say unimaginative. Attempts to tackle this through extensive cross-cutting, wonderful acting and a unique score give Westworld a unique flare, however not for long, since the substance quickly disappears. Nolan and Joy have placed too much emphasis on the show's foundational idea as well as its actors ability to maintain the viewers interest, as opposed to building something truly thought provoking on top.

The themes that are raised within the subject matter are exciting and surely the ones science fiction fans will find familiar, asking the ever-growing questions of purpose, place and existence. Westworld initially lays down the necessary foundations to address these questions in a truly unique fashion, yet ends up being too indulgent in it's form while delivering the answers. As such, what seemingly starts as a science fiction narrative at it's core, sadly transgresses into a sort of a 'sci-fi psychological thriller', where the answers lay not within a mystical or futuristic form but are rather deep-rooted in the subjectivity of the characters.

Oliver Stone's Snowden is a story about an NSA whistleblower who's revelations about the Government's secret surveillance programs have shaken the public to it's core. It is a story of a man who willingly went against his country to initiate a change projected by the freedom of speech and information. During the summer of 2013 when all the information came to light, Ed's case was widely publicized as the vast majority of news channels and papers headlined his stories and discovery's. In 2014 Laura Poitras' Oscar-winning 'Citinezfour' carefully documented Snowden's account. Poitras, just like Greenwald, MacAskill & Gibson played an integral part in making Snowden's story come to life.

All of these characters feature in 'Snowden' and possibly through great acting as well as the relevance of the story, they are able to project the realism and tension that make this film demanding. Joseph Gordon-Levitt looks so much like Edward Snowden it's uncanny at times. He does an incredible job of replicating the person we see in all the documentaries and actual footages of Edward, yet his character still feels mechanic and robotic. It's not however Joseph's fault as Oliver Stone's script seems too shallow at times. Rather then portraying Ed's emotions and feelings, Stone's 'Snowden' looks a lot like a Hollywood version of 'Citizenfour'.

Throughout the movie Stone uses extensive crosscutting between various important events from Edward's past and the final days with the reporters in the infamous Hong Kong hotel room. The events that Stone shows act as a good summary of how Snowden has come to make the decisions he has made. However this feels repetitive at times. I'm afraid that 'Snowden' will not get much credit mainly due to the amount of information already made available by 'Citizenfour'. While Oliver Stone is undoubtedly a great storyteller, this story could have been told from a more human angle. There is no subjectivity in Stone's character. I have very similar thoughts about Robert Zemeckis 2015 movie 'The Walk' and James Marsh's documentary 'Man on Wire'. Funnily enough it also involves Joseph Gordon Levitt.

Anthony Dod Mantle's cinematography is stunning and very fitting to how Stone tells the story. Employing mainly mid-range shots and taking time to establish the scenes, he gives the characters room to move around and act, while the 'mood' of the scenes differs drastically as we are guided through secret Government Intelligence locations, Hong-Kong hotels & Hawaii landscapes. Anthony knows exactly how to achieve impact and tension, employing similar techniques he used in 'Slumdog Millionaire', 'Rush' & '127 Hours'.

While Oliver Stone does an honest job showing some of the main pieces of Edward Snowden's story as well as projecting the 'Architecture of Oppression' that he faced, his script feels empty. In one of the scenes Snowden says that a lot of people cruise happily through life, why can't he? Unfortunately, we never get a chance to explore this question.

Spotlight tells a story of the reporters of the Boston Globe, where the 'Spotlight' team uncovered a huge, global scandal of child molestation within the local Catholic Church. Spotlight is at its foremost a story about humans, communicating the sides of victims, layers, priests, clerks and reporters, as well as the one of true determination, honor and persistence.

Spotlight at its core is a great, detailed investigative reporting piece. It deeply analyzes the human against the bureaucratic and political aspects of being a reporter, righteously glorifying the seemingly boring parts of the profession, which in the end all play an integral role in the resolution.

The nature of the piece that is being investigated is so surreal and unbelievable that it adds an incredible aura of mystery and suspense into scenes that otherwise would have not stood out. The dialogues are sharp and smart. They show not just the reporting side, but carefully convey the human emotions of these reporters.

Tom McCarthy's style is very fitting to the picture he paints. He is very direct and honest with his shots, giving us many close ups of the characters, helping further analyze the emotions that they are going through. The cast made this kind of directing possible by perfectly blending in with the characters; no one in particular stood out because no one needed to. There is no single hero here.

At first glance Spotlight might seem like another story of underdogs against a blind, soulless, corrupted system, yet the involvement of the Church significantly changes how the story is perceived. It makes these terrible events seem so much more appalling and significant that even the most eventless scenes become incredibly tense and thought provoking.

Yet the point of Spotlight is not to glorify the underlying story or bring the guilty to justice. We get none of that. Spotlight is about showing the process of true, detailed reporting. The 'Catholic Church' story of 2001 was most likely picked due to it's relevance. In essence, this movie could have been about any story, and it still would have succeeded on all the notes that it had. This might make Spotlight one the best films about investigative reporting, the one that fully communicates the demanding, punishing and grueling aspects of the profession.

As such the conclusion of Spotlight is not a victory of the justice system, it is not even a human victory where the victims can finally rest assured. It is the victory of the Spotlight team as reporters, echoed by the storm of incoming calls from victims all across America - their piece has made a difference.

Anomalisa marks Kaufman's second directorial work and it is definitely his most personal, sensitive and honest movie to date. In the sad, watery eyes of Michael Stone everyone will find something that they can deeply relate to, regardless of the age. It is this border, this invisible line per se, between having a movie that is a touch too personal but at the same time so simple and relatable, that makes Anomalisa a truly unique piece.

'Lisa' is made entirely of stop motion animation, which greatly adds to the blurry and human aspects of Kauffman's story. This style paints the events in a very surreal, dream like way, which surprisingly makes us appreciate and admire the 'grown-up' moments of this story so much more. Sometimes the animations simply make the movie seem less depressive as we get entangled in scenes that otherwise would have had less value and impact. Imagine If Anomalisa was a motion picture - it would have been the most unbearably sad movie ever made.

Charlie Kaufman's 'Michael Stone' is a man that is seemingly crippled by his prior life experiences. Not so much as crippled, but these experiences have made him lonely, hopeless and tired. It seems that Michael is on a verge of literally giving up. Everything seems like a drag in his life, people bore and annoy him, everyone literally looks and sounds the same. Michael is smart, but also inherently paranoid, and this paranoia, these sets of self-conscious beliefs, is what seems to be dragging him down.

He seems to constantly try to get back to something that he thought was true. We see his excitement when he calls Bella, his ex-girlfriend that he ran away from, only to see that excitement completely destroyed when faced with the reality's of life.

Michael has a family back home, a wife and a son that love him and need him. Even so, at this stage in life it seems that he is ready to take anything for granted in order to find 'true happiness and meaning'. It is a funny parallel where a happiness of one man somehow ends up being more important then of the ones around him. We all go full circles before we realize and make piece with the inevitable. Through meeting Lisa, Michael seemed to yet again experience the sad anomaly of life, where 'the one', was so close that you could 'hear' her, yet so far away that it's unreachable.

Anomalisa in this sentimental sense is a very human film. We all takes love and loving ones for granted at times, we are paranoid, we disregards the feelings of others and we all have an unrealistic perception of ourselves. At the same time, everyone is human and no one is left un-impacted. Through our mindless actions, we impact others, even if we sometimes forget about it.

Charlie Kaufman has managed to take a script that is truly sad and depressive and show it through a compassionate, sympathetic and approachable lens, where every viewer is bound to derive their own conclusions. Like all of us, Michael Stone thinks he knows what he wants, but time after time, he runs away at the sheer possibility of actually getting it.

'"The Hateful Eight" 70mm Roadshow pays tribute to the grand film exhibition style popularized in 1950' and 60's and that brought audiences to theatres with a promise of a special event. It delivers a unique experience that hasn't been had in over fifty years.'

'The Hateful Eight' truly is a unique and special event. Three hours long, including a beautiful musical intro, a ten-minute intermission in the middle and a small souvenir program. This format pays tribute to pictures like Lawrence of Arabia, Gone with the Wind, Ben-Hur and a handful of others that were presented in the same, captivating manner.

The Roadshow Engagement really changes the underlying nature of a modern day cinema experience, making it seem as going to a theatrical performance. The Ultra Panavision 70 format, which was used to shoot the movie, and Tarantino's masterful editing, have greatly enhanced that theatrical feel. The camera provides an incredibly wider and more detailed image. Each scene simply captures more and thus gives the viewer more room to explore the intricate details. Only a handful of movies have ever been made in this format, with the last motion picture (Khartoum) dating 1966.

It seems that Quentin Tarantino is in the best possible way 'indifferent' to critical acclaim, in same magnificent way Coen brothers or Paul Thomas Anderson are, amongst a few others. He is shooting about 'what he truly loves' and his pictures consistently retain an unbelievably unique flair.

It is an incredibly rare example of a director and a writer who is mindlessly comfortable in his own style and given all the means to conceptualize and visualize that style; and yes, that style happens to have controversy, dark humor, raw violence, vivid portrayals of greed, revenge and hatred.

'Eight' might be discredited due to it's seeming 'shallowness'. Many will argue that the dialogues are pointlessly long, the 'N' word is this time aimlessly abused and the bloody violence is not so much out of place as it is simply not qualified for. The Tarantino 'hero' has usually evoked violence based on something noble, like 'The Bride' in 'Kill Bill', 'Django' in 'Django Unchained' or the bastards in the 'Inglorious Bastards'.

Yet these exact arguments could and should be turned upside down. In 'The Hateful Eight' we receive a work of a master that is not afraid to experiment with rare formats and movie plots that contain solely antagonists. Tarantino knows that he can 'get away' with almost anything and he utilizes it to his advantage. He loves to examine ruthless characters motivated by questionably noble causes that are placed in the worst situations that bring out the worst in human nature. While this might at times look and feel 'over the top', this is exactly what makes Quentin one of the most fascinating directors of all time.

'The Hateful Eight', Tarantino's 8th film is by all means no exception. Containing an incredibly captivating and thrilling storyline, in the best possible way it pays homage to Tarantino's first movie, 'Reservoir Dogs', adding the so- familiar, crime-fueled 'confusion'. In detail, we examine Eight bad guys that 'find shelter' in Minnie's haberdashery in the middle of a blizzard. As events unfold and true motivations are slowly unraveled, we receive a violent, bloody tale fueled by merciless revenge, racial tensions, rage and integrity.

The dialogues are wonderfully smart and satirical, however what truly makes them stand out are the actors. The all-time, old school Tarantino cast seems as comfortable with the director as he is with violence and blood. This results in some of the best performances that a cast could possibly produce.

Legendary Ennio Morricone marks 'The Hateful Eight' as the first Western he has composed music for in forty years, with the last movies being 'The Good, the Bad and the Ugly', 'Once Upon a Time in America', 'The Untouchables' and many others. His music is fitting to the plot and to the scenery, at times softly flowing with the story and at times doing the exact opposite, adding even more emotion and suspense.

The exceptional 70mm format, that practically transforms us into the freezing, gorgeous, remote, wintery landscapes of 'Wyoming' and the remarkable skill, experience, and thorough knowledge of Quentin Tarantino, all make 'The Hateful Eight' the best Western of the 21st Century as well as one of the best cinema experiences one could ever encounter.

For the second year in a row Fargo has managed to raise the bar for modern Television. It is hard to compare both season due to the differences of the underlying plots and characters, however the overall storytelling, the acting, the dialogues and the deeply ingrained satire on the nature of the human actions still remains, and moreover flourishes even more as the show continues.

While Season One had clear parallels to the original Coen brothers movie 'Fargo', Season Two takes those parallels into a glorious new level. It feels like the viewer is thrown into a world where various characters from various Coen brother movies exist and interact; and they do so with the same 'Coenesque' dark humor and wit, incredibly thought provoking dialogues and subtle yet hilarious references to the absurdity of the times.

To name a few, we have Rye Gerhardt who resembles Jerry Lundegaard from the original Fargo; Zach McClarnon as Hanzee is terrifyingly similar to Javier Bardem's Anton in 'No Country for Old Men' while Kirsten Dunst's Peggy is at times a comical yet striking copy of Edwina from 'Raising Arisona'.

These vivid characters are coupled with songs from Bob Dylan, Kenny Rodgers and T Bone Burnett to name a few, presenting different, more tuned to the 80's, versions of songs then the ones we are so used to from the Coen brother films; the UFO might be a reminiscent nod to the surrealism of the times seen in 'The Man Who Wasn't There' while the scene with Bear and Dod's daughter in the woods is as emotionally heavy and daunting as the infamous scene in Miller's Crossing.

Somehow in his writing, Noah Hawley has managed to stay true to all these characters and entangle them in a story that is full of violence, noir-like plot twists and dark humor, but the one that still retains it's sentimentality. It is a rare instance where the story, the characters, and the dialogues are so deeply ingraining that one can't stop watching and demanding for more.

While the performances, the '80's-feel' settings and the editing in Fargo are all absolutely outstanding, the show's strength lies in it's storytelling. Second Season's plot is a little more complicated, introducing the viewer to a larger volume of interlocking characters in an even more intricate setting. Yet, in the hands of the same writer, we receive a story that in the best possible way feels similarly to Season One, yet adds another layer of glorious complexity. This in turn gives room for plot twists that will make episodes pass in split seconds while leaving the viewer craving for more.

Fargo in its essence is a dark, psychological, satirical thriller that examines the nature of human actions while leaving the reasons up for debate. It is truly the best of it's kind.

'Love' will most likely be discredited by many due to it's sheer honesty, like many films of it's kind are. Yet this honesty, as brutal and daring as it might seem, feels necessary to connect with and understand what the characters are going through, on an entirely new emotional level. In the words of Murphy, Gaspar Noe might have made the only movie that truly depicts 'sentimental sexuality'.

'Love' has many subtle and not-so-subtle references to the underlying story and to the director himself. Gaspar's mother is named Nora Murphy, while Murphy's son is named Gaspar and Electra's ex boyfriend - Noe. His favorite movie is Kubrick's '2001', while hers is Lang's 'M', both of which seem to fuel Murphy and Electra's behavior throughout the movie, where Murphy is often aimlessly overwhelmed with hope and desire, while Electra seems unable to forgive.

Gaspar Noe constantly cuts through the past and the future, using the techniques he is so familiar with since Irreversible. The movie abruptly switches between various stages of Murphy's and Electra's relationship, always cutting back to the present, where Murphy's is in absolute emotional agony and despair, raising a child with Clara.

At times Murphy and Electra are so deeply engrained in one another that their fights and dialogues seem outright comical and immature, as if we are observing a 16 year- old couple. But this is truly where 'Love' stands out. Being in love feels and looks exactly like this, it's raw, emotional and brutal yet foggy and sweet; when no one else exists or matters.

In one of Electra's and Murphy's conversations they talk about the sad reality that they are going nowhere and dragging each other down, they discuss taking a break. It is an extremely sad and emotional scene, where the thought itself brings so much fear into them, that they simply end up holding each other even tighter.

The script for 'Love' is only 7 pages long. It is full of beautiful and weird dialogues and extremely emotional, 'free-played' graphic scenes. These scenes however are not there to impress the viewer or open the doors to the unknown. This is also not a nymphomaniac-like sexual exploration. Gaspar Noe does a masterful job in showing us the true emotional aspect of love, in it's raw and relatable form, sex.

The sound-score is stunning, with the music gradually changing depending on the mood and the context of the scenes. Even though a lot of times it seems like we are watching the same people 'fuck' in the same positions, different context, feelings and music make each of these scenes truly unique and mesmerizing on it's own.

Noe also does a wonderful job in his minimalistic depiction of the story and the scenery. Murphy and Electra always wear contrasting colors, while the background is usually very simple yet fitting to them both. As if to say that when in love, everything should be seen through the eyes of the lovers.

'Love' might sometimes seem silly, overly graphic and way too sentimental, yet it hits all the right notes.

In Spring 2015 Israeli composer Shye Ben Tzur, Radiohead's Jonny Greenwood and a wide array of truly unique Indian artists were hosted by the Maharaja of Jodhpur at the beautiful Mehrangarh Fort. PTA depicts this stunning collaboration that results in an album called Junun.

Being an art-house documentary, PTA does a perfect job of simply guiding us through this complicated and inspirational process. There is no need for narration, the artists themselves are so interesting and creative that the viewer simply needs to observe. PTA achieves exactly this.

There is almost no dialogue as the movie intricately explores every member of the group and emphasizes how integral each little sound and voice is. We see silent Jonny Greenwood playing his signature moody guitar in the corner, while Shye Ben Tzur tediously orchestrates the process.

PTA shows us how various artists go great lengths to tune their instruments and just how difficult they work to get all the sounds and vocals exactly right. At the same time, all the group members are so deeply, culturally and religiously, ingrained in the process that it bring them true artistic and life joy.

It is extremely inspiring and beautiful to see and hear all the sounds come together. Junun is a truly unique musical album made by artists with highest levels of skill. Witnessing this process first hand through the creative and silent lens of Paul Thomas Anderson was a wonderful journey.

Pixar's Inside Out is incredibly refreshing. It is one of those rare instances when an animation film succeeds to deliver on every level, it is touching, emotional, funny, extremely artistic and imaginative.

Our antagonists are the emotions that drive a 13 year old girl named Riley. We have Joy, Sadness, Anger Fear and Disgust. Like any child growing up, Riley experiences various sad and happy events and her emotions act accordingly, many times in hilarious and sarcastic ways. Every character is thus driven by their own emotions and everyone's emotions, even though they are the same, look and act differently, shaping and growing along with their rightful owner.

What is most striking about inside out is how creative and clever it is. Yet, nothing is ever overcomplicated or confusing. One would assume that an animation film about the adventures of emotions in a girls mind can get really out of hand, Inside Out is the complete opposite. Everything is touchingly logical and simple, from the train of thought and 'memory islands' to the 'cleaners' that get rid of useless memories. Whilst watching you are almost wondering: 'is this really what could be happening inside my head? '

The animations are very vivid yet soft, supporting Pixar's consistent style. The plot itself is interesting and very thought provoking due to the nature of the underlying idea. It something that both kids and adults can deeply relate to. That idea is so creative, with a capital C, that it almost wouldn't have mattered what the plot was, I would have been more then happy to just explore different characters' emotions and their behaviors. And these are the feelings that a truly good film should evoke.

Inside Out, by a long mile, is the best animation film released this year.

Written and directed by George Miller, this is his fourth Mad Max film to date. His portfolio is notably diverse and also includes the horror/comedy The witches of Eastwick and the Oscar winning animation gem Happy Feet. To date, Mad Max is also Miller's most audacious and vivid attempt to truly impress and dazzle the audience, in a much less cuter way then Happy Feet. Unfortunately this is the one and only note that Miller succeeds in.

Mad Max is beautiful, stylish and vivid. The premise of the storyline of Mad Max movies in it's nature has always been fascinating, a dystopian future dominated by motorcycle gangs, violent heroes, villains and survival. As such this also might be the biggest thing that's wrong with Mad Max, it's too ambitious, there is too much happening and thus too much time is spent on showing and depicting the scenery, the characters, leaving little room for actual dialogues and an interesting storytelling. The movie is essentially one, big, 2-hour long, chaotic chase - no wonder Max is a man of few words.

The vast majority of the scenes are very fast paced and short, switching from one angle to another in split seconds, making it hard to concentrate or capture the full creativity of the scenery. There are however a few scenes with very unusual camera angles which greatly add to the dynamic of the movie. The premise of a huge long chase also makes it hard to focus on someone for a long time. The colors are amazing, vivid and contrasting, which is very enjoyable to the eye, the same way the works of Frank Miller are. The golden-yellow desert, matched with dark biker hybrid cars, motorcycles and insane gang-members is definitely pleasing and fun, but only for about thirty minutes. After the initial 'wow' moment passes and one adjusts to the scenery, Hardy's brutality and Theron's new hairstyle, one should quickly realize that Mad Max has nothing more to offer.

The storyline and the dialogues are too dull to compensate for the amazing special effects, background and characters. I was personally disappointed, expecting more of a 'Sin City' then a '300'.

Don is woken up by Melanie, his real estate agent. She is unsuccessfully trying to sell Don's weirdly deserted apartment. Yet another chapter is about to close in Draper's empty(ing) life.

At one point Don get impatient and lashes out at Melanie for not being able to quickly sell his apartment.

''Why don't you tell the buyer that someone lived here who made a million dollars inventing a Frisbee and they had to move in a hurry to a castle in France' - quickly suggests Don.

It provides a good contrast into the fact that Melanie can't imagine and make up stories like a magician, much like Don have been trying for the past years. She has to "show it to people with their eyes open", accurately summarizing that the eyes tell the clients that the apartment 'reeks' of a sad, lonely, and careless person, Don.

Meantime Joan travels to LA to meet with Lou to interview potential work candidates. By accident she encounters Richard Burghoff, a real estate big shot, divorced retiree, who has transitioned his life into having no plans and responsibilities. What starts as an innocent one night stand quickly turns into Richard following Joan to New York, where he finds out about her child. Overcoming the initial shock, this might be a start of a promising relationship, even though Richard is much older, which again points to Joan's shining 'foxiness'.

Roger assigns Don a task to perform a speech at the Mccan's retreat in Bahamas, giving a foray into the firm's future plans and ambitions. A very sarcastic task for Don who can barely figure out what the next day might bring. Having no idea what to say, in his subtle and at times comical way, Don asks for everyone's opinion, even his assistants.

Sally gets a visit from Glen Sharlock, Drapers' old neighbor who has always had a crash on Betty. In another sad parallel to the current events at the time, Glen announces he is shipping out to Vietnam. The irony is that we don't know what will happen to him but somehow assume the worst; we subtly feel the sadness feeling closure to the character we saw 'grow' up from the beginning of the show, however secondary. This is most likely the last time we see Glen.

In his failed attempt to kiss Betty, we see all the sadness of the situation, where a sweet silly kid who acts tough and strong, really has no idea what to do with his life.

The forecast conveys the thought that no one knows what will happen in the future. Like Don, Glen, Peggy and Joan we are left making uneducated guesses that at best are backed up by judgment, facts and experience.

After an innocent one stand, our antagonist Jay finds herself plagued with a mysterious virus, an unknown force, 'IT', that follows her around everywhere she goes. Throughout the movie Jay and her friends try to demystify this strange occurrence, which is always a few steps away.

The plot is original and very interesting to follow, however it is also relatively straightforward which does take some of the suspense away closer to the credits. Yet, 'It Follows' is shot and edited with a surgeon's precision, it is genuinely scary, extremely suspenseful and will leave you paranoid and holding tight to your seat on more then a few occasions. It is truly a horror film at it's finest, mysterious, terrifying and gripping.

Parts of this film, especially the ending reminded me of Kubrick's Shining, sometimes it feels very nostalgic, like you are watching bits of The Sixth Sense again. What makes this film truly great is the nature of the plot, the mystery behind it. 'IT' takes many forms, which at times makes it almost impossible to distinguish it from a normal human being, just like in real life in some way. The monster could be anywhere and anyone.

"It doesn't think. It doesn't feel. It doesn't give up."

The soundtrack really stands out; It is perfectly in tune with the scene, surroundings and the plot. It gives you goose bumps even during the scenes where nothing is happening. Dark, classical sounds adds so much emotions, gives you a feeling that 'IT' is somewhere behind you, in the movie theater.

Even though all the actors' performances are rock-solid, this movie is really about the maestro. Written and Directed by David Robert Mitchell (his second feature film), this is all about his craft, his story and his ability to turn this story in one of the most refreshing horror films I have seen in years.

'New Business' opens with Don in a cozy kitchen at Betty's house, making milkshakes for his kids. The scene is set out in a way, that is very nostalgic to the first seasons, as if Don and Betty were still together.

"Have a milkshake like everyone else dad!", - shouts Bobby, Don's middle son.

On his way out, Don briefly turns around to glance at the happy family together at the kitchen table.

Don's (recent) ex-wife Megan gets back into the picture and we see the couple finalizing their divorce papers. Megan is having money issues while her mother and sister seem to be deeply upset by the divorce and it's financial terms. Unfortunately we are yet to find out the reason of the divorce.

In a moment filled with a desire to get away from everything, Don hands Megan a check for a million dollars and tells her that he is sorry. Without saying a word, Megan walks away, again leaving Don completely alone.

In the meantime, Don keeps seeking out Diana, the waitress that first reminded him of Rachel, but now is his last connection to warmth and a feeling of belonging. Diana, overwhelmed with her own grief, asks Don to leave, most likely closing this storyline all together.

In parallel, Peggie feels threatened as a new photographer Pima shows prominence in creative work and has a very authoritative attitude, which Peggy is secretly jealous and envious about. In a serious of comic scenes Pima seduces Stan and even tries to flirt with Peggy.

Megan's mother, whilst arranging to steal all of Don's furtniture, reaches out to her old forgotten lover, Roger, who quickly comes to help pay for the move. In the mean time, the pair have sex in the apartment, eventually forcing Megan's mother to decide to leave her husband.

'New Business' is about loneliness and belonging. No matter how crowded Don's life might be, his day ends in a completely empty apartment.

Birdman or the unexpected virtue of ignorance is this year's film of the year. A remarkable deep satire on modern Hollywood shot and panned out so brilliantly it leaves one shocked and stunned with emotions long after the credits start running.

Genuinely and passionately portrayed by M. Keaton, Birdman follows up a once-famous-now- washed-up movie star (Riggan Thomspon) who is trying to revamp himself by directing, writing and acting in his own adaptation of a love story. Riggan, just like all of us to an extent, has a big ego, which is portrayed as a physical character in birdman, a representation of something that Riggan was never able to let go. He misses the fame, the power, the fans; his desire is to be on the top again. After all, we would all love to fly across Times Square, high above everyone else. And this is all a part of a great, hilarious and clever sarcastic joke that Inarritu allows us to see.

Every major character in the movie is a satire on Hollywood and it's ways. From the co-actresses starring in the play (brilliantly portrayed by Naomi watts and Andrea Riseborough) who only desire to make it and get recognized, Riggan's agent who only cares about the public outcome rather then the one of his best friend, the critic that puts her own emotions and thoughts above everything else, audiences reactions when Riggan actually shoots himself on stage, to finally Riggan himself, who can't stay true to the twitter-and-facebook era and simply dreams of making it big again, despite all the difficulties and the sheere absurdity of doing something as blunt as his own theater production.

Yet on the side of this all, Riggan's wife is the most sensible of it all, and maybe the only thing Riggan has in his life that is true, real. She loves him for who he is and seemed to adjust to his ever growing ego, but you can clearly see how she despises it all, everything to do with this industry and it's pretentious people. And we see this echoed in their conversation just before the final scene, where Riggan can finally be honest enough to say that he regrets it all, not being with his family enough for the most part. Yet was is still so striking and inspiring about Riggan is his inability to give up, no matter what obstacles come his way, he has managed to put them aside in various ignorant (remortgaging his house that was meant to be for Sam) and hilarious (dropping a light bulb on an actor he didn't like) ways.

Mike is another character that adds so much needed diversity and angle to this film. He is a complete opposite of Riggan, he couldn't care less about the critics or what people think of him, as opposed to Riggan, he can only be himself on stage, he can't get it up with women and seems like a self-absorbent and ignorant character. His ego clashes with Riggan's, but Mike's "Birdman" isn't quite the same as Riggan's – he seems genuinely happy with what he has achieved and most importantly he is confident in everything he does, the exact opposite of Riggan himself. This provides a superb contrast into two completely different yet very similar people.

Everything is amplified even more with an amazingly original drums-only soundtrack that is so emotionally powerful it almost takes your breath away. Adding an even more original one-shot directing style makes this movie really stand out. It is a daring and honest experiment that in my opinion is a trillion times harder to pull off then something like boyhood.

The controversial ending simply represents the transformation of Riggan from Birdman to his stage character, who kills himself in the end. On the last scene we see Birdman, however this is the first time when he is not talking to Keaton, finally birdman's time has come and Riggan is able to move on by flying and exploring uncharted territories of his own. He was finally able to let go of Birdman.

What are we doing here? – is the question asked by Michael (Ed Norton) to Sam (Emma Stone) at one point in the movie, which might just be the subtle sense of it all.

Howl's moving castle.

Hayao Miyazaki is truly in a league of his own. His fantasy, tedious attention to details, unpredictable and gripping style all make his work stand out. And what I mean by stand out is that it really captivates you, every scene makes you demand for more and at the same time wonder how could one think of something this surreal. Yet, no matter how surreal, vivid, and sometimes outright ridiculous Miyazaki might seem at times, his work is still full of valuable lessons, meaningful comparisons and fairy tale-like emotions. Howl's moving castle is no different.

Our antagonist is a hat maker Sophie, who, due to a spell had been turned into an old woman, and a brave young wizard named Howl, who constantly spends his time in a constantly moving castle, powered by a quirky little ball of fire named Calcifer, who itself is a part of Howl's heart. Howl's moving castle takes us on a beautiful, thrilling and breathtaking journey that introduces us to some of the funniest and bizarre characters a viewer would expect to see. All the characters however are there for a reason and each little story, from Sophie helping the witch that cast the spell on her to Howl constantly running away from his problems, are there to teach us a lesson. But not in the kind of a way Madagascar or Ice Age would. Miyazaki really forces us to think and come to our own conclusions. I think this is the essence of all truly great films – everyone takes lessons of their own out of them.

Howl's moving castle, like most Moyazaki's films, is a true work of art. The plot is thrilling, unpredictable, subtly funny and remarkably original. The animations are stunning. The details in every scene will leave you dazzled and amazed, to say the least. The classical music soundtrack, that is constantly fading in and out is perfectly in tune with the beautiful style and scenery.

Yet again, Hayao Miyazaki manages to raise the bar on what true animation and story telling is really about. A near perfect film.

Heat of combat, Iraq war, we are introduced to a bomb disposal team of 3 who are in the middle of action. We are thoroughly guided through scenes of just how dangerous and unpredictable this job is and how much precaution and observation needs to be taken at each step. This is amplified by the death of the team leader, who goes on to physically disarm the bomb only to get blown up by a triggered detonator set up by an unforeseen enemy. This scene provides a great contrast going forward, when a new sergeant, James, takes over the squad. He will be conducting similar physical disarming's on a daily basis, even unnecessarily at times, which greatly adds to the heroic recklessness of his character, brilliantly portrayed by Jeremy Renner (maybe the only deserved Oscar nomination).

Throughout the rest of the movie we get to know the squad better, which now consists of team leader James, sergeant Sanborn and a less experienced specialist Owen Eldridge. Both Eldridge and Sanborn are depicted just how one would expect from soldiers in their line of work – human - they are terrified, scared for their lives, extremely cautious and counting down the days to dispatch.

In retrospect James is a true, real life hero. No matter how dangerous the situation might be, he will dive into it head first. We see James almost die while trying to save innocent people – an Iraq civilian and earlier an Iraq child that he was careless enough to bond with. He disarms numerous bombs, sometimes without even wearing a protective suit. On one occasion we learn that his total was somewhere around '857' disarmed bombs. James proves a great leader too and even though his fearless tactics are –at heart- resented by his teammates – they definitely realize and respect his experience, courage and authority. James, in the best way he can, really cares for his team, but in the same way as a hero tends to care for those that need help and guidance – he seems to have this never ending desire and drive to help.

This desire for some reason does not echo at James' home, where he has a wife and a child waiting. His wife seems to accept John as he is, in the mere amount of time that is devoted to that, and realize that there is nothing she can do to change that. And maybe no one can.

Unfortunately there is not enough intimacy with the characters. A lot of time is devoted to gripping and suspenseful combat scenes and the portrayal of characters through these scenes, however the dialog's remain relatively dull and to the point. Bigelow doesn't let us really dive into any of the characters fully. We want to know more about James' past, what kind of man he was before the army, and what really motivates him. We are eager to find out Sanborn's past and what mistakes he has done in his life. Kathryn Bigelow only leaves us making educated guesses. And as such, this movie does not succeed.

This movie is about real life war heroes that unfortunately no one will probably ever hear or read about. And as such this move succeeds on a thrillingly patriotic kind of way, yet it fails to give us a full, detailed look into the human aspects of these heroes, which makes for a very unfulfilled feeling at the end.