F  I  L  M     C  R  I  T  I  Q  U  E

Cast: Nicole Kidman, Aaron Eckhart, Diane Wiest
Director: John Cameron Mitchell
Screenplay: David Lindsay-Abaire
Studio: Olympus Pictures
Runtime: 91 mins
Genre: Drama/Independent
Country: USA






Grief in cinema is not always very pretty, even if you see pretty people bawling their eyes out and suffering in all-encompassing sadness. Rabbit Hole's premise is nothing new - the death of a child usually makes for a brooding, character-driven movie about parental grief, whether it's in psychological horror domain seen in Nicholas Roeg's Don't Look Now with Julie Christie and Donald Sutherland trying to recover from post-traumatic death-of-a-child stress in Venice, or gripping melodrama in Clint Eastwood's Changeling with Angelina Jolie launching a crusade to find her lost son, or perhaps existential psychobabble in Lars von Trier's grief-porn Antichrist with Charlotte Gainsbourg and Willem Dafoe blaming each other for their kid's demise and slicing up genitals in the woodlands. John Cameron Mitchell's Rabbit Hole shouldn't work, or end up as plain clichéd, as there couldn't be possibly anything more to say about couples mourning over the loss of a child. But it works, and rather beautifully, and ends up being a subtle, nuanced, carefully studied exploration into what makes grief somehow bearable. Rabbit Hole isn't merely about suffering, despite of the profound sadness of its subject matter, or being deeply buried in an emotional underground, to use the title's metaphor, but this film is about coming to terms with the loss of a loved one and subsequently  finding the light and emerging out of the dark tunnel. 


That says a lot for a film that deals some dark issues, the ultimate parent's nightmare, yet somehow manages to be hopeful and sensitive. Structurally, the action begins in media res, months after the child's death. We don't get to see the tragic accident, not until a brief, sensitively handled flashback later. We plunge headlong into a suburban Connecticut couple's seemingly handsome yet mundane life - Nicole Kidman's Becca kills time by eternally pruning the garden and baking homemade pies and Aaron Eckhart's Howie carries on daily officework routines. Yet the narrative unveils cracks in the portrait through various moments - Becca gets subliminally furious as her neighbour accidentally stumps on her newly planted rosebush, cracks up in a group counselling after a remark about God and banishes all trace of toys, lunchboxes, drawings and every other trace of her deceased son out of the house. Howie deals with it differently, angry at Becca's insistence, wanting their son's memorabilia to be left where they are.


Kidman, whose curriculum vitae as of late has been terribly misguided (due to an unmoving forehead, depends on which tabloid you read), hasn't delivered a strong performance in a few years, except for the vastly unseen Margot at the Wedding and Baz Lhurrman's misunderstood Australia. But here she comes back with a solid return to form, perhaps her best performance since The Hours. It's a galvanised, complex, multi-layered piece of screen acting, proving her skills in intimate human dramas. Her Becca Corbett is doesn't stereotype the 'grieving Mum' character, but rather gives reasons to her emotional deep-freeze, whether it be lashing at her own mother (a terrific Diane Wiest) and grouchy with her own pregnant sister. Kidman wrings out all manners of expressions rarely seen in this actress these days, and she makes Becca believable, even loathesome and somehow sympathetic. She finds curious solace in the beleaguered teenager driving the car that accidentally killed her son. In other lesser films, this would have turned to some sort of psycho-friendship, but here Becca doesn't do scape-goating. Instead, both of them feels linked by fate, albeit a terrible one. Eckhart also stands his own ground, giving a heartfelt performance as the husband, grappling with ways in which he could deal with the loss whilst never letting go of his wife. Director Mitchell doesn't play for all-out, overwrought theatrics from his actors, but rather wrings out emotions and character motivations through a deft skill of observation and naturalistic handling. 'Less is more' must be his guiding philosophy in filmmaking.




With its painful and sad excursion into parental grief, Rabbit Hole somehow provides hope in distress and beauty in the breakdown without reducing to schmaltz or diluting its honesty. This is a subtle, nuanced little film with a bruised humanity, rooted with two compelling central performances by Kidman and Eckhart.





F  I  L  M     C  R  I  T  I  Q  U  E

Cast: (voices)Stéphane Aubier, Bruce Ellison
Director: Stéphane Aubier, Vincent Patar
Screenplay: Stéphane Aubier, Vincent Patar
Studio: La Parti Productions
Runtime: 90 mins
Genre: Animation/Arthouse
Country: Belgium






At the first sight of this lo-fi Belgian animated export, it looks like a herky-jerky tomfoolery assembled by primary school kids let loose in a playroom with a bunch of plastic action figures. The plot boomerangs around from a mad shenanigan to another that virtually makes no shred of logic - A Town Called Panic is about a trio of toys, aptly named Horse, Indian and Cowboy, with the latter two mistakenly purchasing 50 million bricks instead of 50 for Horse's birthday barbecue, and misadventures follow that includes an aquatic rescue with reptilian marine scuba-divers, cannonball pigs, and wacky penguins. It doesn't make any sense, and it doesn't strive to have some. It's deliberately wacky, hilariously inventive and you'll find yourself laughing out loud that nothing onscreen seems to matter. Directors Stéphane Aubier and Vincent Patar (must in hallucinogens whilst making this) provide gleeful abandon and deadpan nonsense that makes A Town Called Panic a sort of anti-Pixar, an anarchic, irreverent animated work that defies any linear, or conventional, structures. Where Toy Story, Up and the likes aim for emotional fluency, character arcs and CGI perfection, it's quite refreshing to see something like this that ditches out pixels and embraces old-school playground aesthetic and Pythonesque codswallop. Too much of it might drive one insane, but gladly it runs for 90 minutes, and it's just wonderfully, bizarrely pitch-perfect.




A deliriously madcap mo-cap. A Town Called Panic makes for a trippy, hallucinogenic animated feature that daringly defies glossy mainstream aesthetic - and so much better for it. It's also very dementedly funny.







F  I  L  M     C  R  I  T  I  Q  U  E

Cast: Daniel Radcliffe, Emma Watson, Rupert Grint, Ralph Fiennes, Helena Bonham-Carter
Director: David Yates
Screenplay: Steve Kloves
Studio: Warner Bros. Pictures
Runtime: 130 mins
Genre: Fantasy/Adventure/Drama
Country: United Kingdom






Up until now, the decision to split J. K. Rowling's the Harry Potter finale into two parts seems debatable, and the clash of wits between those who think it's for financial reasons and those who argue about 'narrative purity' extends to infinity. There is no denying that Rowling's behemoth of a book The Deathly Hallows is ridden with munificent amount of sequences and plot threads that might be a testament to her genius or just mere over-plotting, depending on your opinion of this saga, that leaving out such details might stir a major uprising from the Potter sector the size of China's population. Nevertheless, it's sheer hypocrisy to claim that the cleaving act is done out noble artistic integrity. That's bullshit. This is Hollywood we're talking about. Where the cash goes, the cows follow. Potter is Warner Bros.' biggest cash cow in the studio's history, and splitting the final one into two movies only gives studio honchos the golden opportunity to squeeze some more milk.

But it remains surprising, despite of blatant studio voracity, that this franchise continues to be consistent throughout and Deathly Hallows: Part One is a solid entry to the series. It might not rank as the best of the franchise (that goes to Alfonso Cuaron's superb Prisoner of Azkaban), but it's not far off either. Director David Yates, the longest mainstay director of them all, brings his own dynamics, tone and artistry to this penultimate instalment, which improves from his previous work on The Half-Blood Prince, which was a rather sluggish affair. For the first time in the Potter universe, the narrative structure has been freed from the now-becoming monotonous school-calendar basics, shunting the main three characters, Harry, Ron and Hermione far from the comfort zones of Hogwarts and are plunged into a very uncertain, treacherous and forbidding territories. This sense of danger and darkness can be felt spilling from the screen. Cut off from the world were chaos reigned, courtesy of malice-stricken Voldemort (a magnificently hissy and terrifying Ralph Fiennes), the trio are set out with a task to find and destroy the Horcruxes that contain shards of the Dark Lord's soul. Yes, it's like The Lord of the Rings, only more McGuffins, more British thespians and plenty of darkness. What is the fantasy genre without the influence of Tolkien, anyway? The difference is that the trio come across the so-called Deathly Hallows, three magical instruments that can defy death.


Part One combines elements of mystery, heist thriller genre and even fugitive film  and the result is often electrifying. There's an excellently staged Ministry of Magic infiltration, with political undercurrents of a totalitarian Third Reich with the Mudbloods treated like Jews, and the memorable Privet Drive convoy with seven Harry's to bewilder and escape the clutch of the Death Eaters. These sequences are all very well, yet there are those who bemoan about the 'slow' middle-half where the trio wander around forests, battling egoes and expectations. This is not a Michael Bay or a James Cameron film where you get bombarded with explosive chases and gunfights. Screenwriter Steve Kloves, with the structure of the book, allows to fully flesh out the characters as rarely seen before, underscoring Harry, Ron and Hermione's isolation, loss, fears and anxiety of the world around them. What is more, the trio are played by the same actors in a stretch of a decade, and that's nothing short of remarkable for a Hollywood franchise, and those who have invested in this series will feel emotionally engaged in this coming-of-age allegory. The films gets to spend time with these leads, often set against wide, open landscapes in Eduardo Serra's bleak but beautiful cinematography, hammering home the trio's loneliness and desolation. Sometimes, there are moments that these characters are fugitives or survivors from a wartime period.


It's also quite a sad, sombre film to watch. Despite the series coming to an end, there's also this burgeoning sense of loss here, with death and sacrifice playing vital parts in the narrative. Emma Watson's Hermione, in a beautifully understated performance, erases the memory of her parents and the scene is handled with such concise, haunting power and Watson makes it very poignant. Rupert Grint, his most mature work, also gets to shine as he is taunted with surreal sexual images of his two friends making out, a long-harboured jealousy and longing leaking out of the gaps. Daniel Radcliffe brings moments of suppressed pain, most especially during the visit to Godric's Hollow, the graveyard of his parents. It's quietly heartbreaking. Yet are also moments of well-timed humour and élan, demonstrated in the Tale of the Three Brothers where the narrative is allowed to breathe, using a wonderful shadow animation unusual in a Potter film that might be Part One's most subtle and bold move. 




For those who carp about The Deathly Hallows: Part One being long-winded and with little pay-off, this is not really made for you. This is made for those who went aboard the Hogwarts Express a decade ago and grew up with this franchise. Although inevitably flawed, there are flickers of sombre beauty, moments of sadness and heartfelt, mature performances from its three leads that lend this film some resonance and dramatic weight.