ReportWire

Tag: anya taylor-joy

  • Bong Joon Ho Recalls Film School Days As He Hits Marrakech In Jury President Role Alongside Jenna Ortega & Anya Taylor-Joy

    [ad_1]

    Korean Oscar-winning director Bong Joon Ho fondly recalled his film student days as took up the baton of Jury President at the 22nd Marrakech Film Festival on Friday.

    He was joined on stage at the opening night ceremony by jury members Celine Song, Anya Taylor-Joy, Jenna Ortega, Karim Aïnouz, Hakim Belabbes, Julia Ducournau, and Payman Maadi.

    Over the course of the next eight days, they will judge 14 first and second features in the running for the festival’s Golden Star Award.

    Joon Ho cast his mind back to his own filmmaker beginnings at the opening ceremony.

    “22 years. What were you doing when you were 22-years-old? Or what are you planning to do when you turn 22?,” he said.

    “At 22, I was greedily devouring movies as a student of cinema. I watched three, four films a day. I wanted to make them myself. Why did they put the camera there? Why is the actor facing that direction? Why did they cut away from that scene at that moment?”

    “Those were the questions that consumed me at 22. Looking back, my 22-year-old self was brimming with energy and passion for cinema. I feel that Marrakech is also buzzing with a special energy as it enters its 22nd year.”

    He noted the festival’s strong Korean connections.

    Korea has won the main competition twice, with Park Jung-bum’s The Journals of Musan clinching the Golden Star in 2010, followed by Lee Su-jin’s Han Gong-ju in 2013, which received the prize from a jury presided over by Martin Scorsese.

    Joon Ho is the festival’s first Asian jury president.

    Speaking on the red carpet, festival director Mélita Toscan du Plantier said she had been courting the director for the jury president role for years.

    “He is always busy, but he said if you ask one year ahead, I will commit. I was like ‘really’, and he is here. That’s very rare. People often, say they’ll come, and then they’re busy.”

    Toscan du Plantier suggested her longtime friend Martin Scorsese, regular guest and past Joon Ho collaborator Tilda Swinton (Okja and Snowpiercer), and Korean Marrakech winner y Lee Su-jin had also pressed upon him to attend.

    Friday’s opening ceremony also saw veteran Egyptian actor Hussein Fahmi feted with a career achievement award.

    Egyptian star Yousra read out a tribute to the actor celebrating the diversity of his roles and support for cinema  across his 50-year career.

    The Marrakech Film Festival runs from November 28 to December 6.

    [ad_2]

    Melanie Goodfellow

    Source link

  • ‘Sacrifice’ Review: Romain Gavras’ Entertaining Eco-Satire Has A Surprisingly Emotional Impact – Toronto Film Festival

    [ad_1]

    For a book that not many people know about or have read, James George Frazer’s The Golden Bough (1890) has had quite an impact on cult cinema, particularly in the ’70s. For reasons that would take too long to go into here — and thanks to its influence on Joseph Campbell’s 1949 book The Hero with a Thousand Faces — it turns out that Frazer’s non-fiction investigation of religion, mythology, folk tales and the subsequent journey to science has since shaped films as seemingly far afield as The Wicker Man, the very first Star Wars, and Apocalypse Now. Well, you wouldn’t necessarily ever put those three films on a triple bill, but, once you see it, there is a certain overlap, mostly in the concept of the unwitting hero, a man chosen by fate, and not necessarily for the better.

    With that in mind, Greek-French director Romain Gavras’s Sacrifice, his English-language debut, comes at a very interesting time in the world’s history. Though outwardly a blunt comedy (of sorts), it’s a film that, through its central character, asks questions about seeking out actual heroism within the fog of tokenism.

    That character is Mike Tyler (Chris Evans), a Hollywood star recovering from a recent nervous breakdown and attending a garish eco-friendly charity party for the super-super-rich that’s being held in a fantastically austere Greek mine. Tyler, conflicted even about his own attendance, is sceptical about everyone else’s motives and says so, calling out the event’s star guest, environmental billionaire Ben Bracken (Vincent Cassel), on a live video stream for his hypocritical politics, condemning the mining of fossil fuels yet happy to exploit the sea for energy.

    To backtrack, Gavras’ film is an odd fish in that respect, because, despite the comedic veneer, its agenda is actually very real, and that’s how it starts. Before we meet Tyler, we see Joan (Anya Taylor-Joy) overseeing the fiery funeral of her own mother (who, worryingly, might not actually be dead yet). Joan is the leader of what looks like a teenage militia from The Village of the Damned (1960 or 1995, take your pick), and she’s on a mission. “The old way must burn to ash,” she says, under orders from a nearby volcano. Which is what guides her, and her two siblings, to storm the event and take its guests hostage — while Tyler is in the bathroom, licking his wounds after his mic drop moment goes horribly viral.

    The gala itself is a cringeworthy as you might expect, the imminent climate catastrophe spelled out to the private jet-ferried audience through — what else? — the medium of an interpretative dance battle and a neon sign saying “MAKE EARTH COOL AGAIN”. In fact, it’s so cheesy that it takes a while for the guests to realize that Joan and her army aren’t part of the entertainment too; it’s only when the blood starts to flow that they realize she’s serious. At which point Tyler re-enters the room and is given up by the terrified crowd (and, more importantly, anointed by Joan) as one of three people — including Bracken and one of the show’s dancers — who must make the film’s titular sacrifice to save the world from an imminent catastrophe.

    As a hostage, Tyler gets Stockholm Syndrome early on, taking all this to be student hijinks (“No justice, no peace,” he roars to the media), much to the annoyance of Bracken, who accuses him of promoting what he calls “Green Isis”. The ratio of laughs to drama changes quite sharply, however, as Joan takes her hostages off on their journey, leading to a bond with Tyler and a lot of unexpected revelations about Joan’s background.

    You might think you know where all this is going, and the script does cover a lot of those bases, most of them involving movie stars’ egos and their power and privilege in the real world. But Sacrifice is interesting, not just because it takes risks even within its own sui generis genre (note to self: is sci-fi folk horror a thing yet?) but because it’s actually quite clear in its thinking: What constitutes is a sacrifice in today’s world?

    As Tyler, Evans holds the film surprisingly well, given the twists and turns (in story as well as tone) that await him, and the poker-faced Taylor-Joy, never more serious (and quite convincingly playing way younger than she actually is), is a great foil to that. To make things even more entertaining, John Malkovich pops up as what seems, briefly, to be the voice of reason.

    In short, it’s nuts, and not for everyone. But Sacrifice does have a message, and it’s about the ouroboros — the perpetual self-eating snake — that is the world’s performative reaction to climate change. It goes further than where you might not think it will, and the emotional payoff from that may well outlast the jokes.

    Title: Sacrifice
    Festival: Toronto (Special Presentations)
    Director: Romain Gavras
    Screenwriter: Will Arbery, Romain Gavras
    Cast: Chris Evans, Anya Taylor-Joy, Vincent Cassel, Salma Hayek Pinault, John Malkovich, Ambika Mod, Charli xcx, and Jonatan “Yung Lean” Leandoer
    Sales agent: Rocket Science
    Running time: 1 hr 43 mins

    [ad_2]

    Damon Wise

    Source link

  • Reviews For The Easily Distracted: Furiosa: A Mad Max Saga

    Reviews For The Easily Distracted: Furiosa: A Mad Max Saga

    [ad_1]

    Title: Furiosa: A Mad Max Saga

    A Little Late On This One, Aren’t You? The preview screening was canceled due to lack of power. Truly, nobody knows the critic’s struggle.

    Describe This Movie In One The Waste Land Quote:

    T.S. ELIOT: I think we are in rats’ alley/Where the dead men lost their bones.

    Brief Plot Synopsis: Looks like the only people who survived the apocalypse were fashion consultants.

    Rating Using Random Objects Relevant To The Film: 3 Bobos out of 5.

    Tagline: “Remember her.”

    Better Tagline: “Forget the Alamo.”

    Not So Brief Plot Synopsis: Life in the post-apocalypse isn’t all pretzels and mother’s milk, and no one knows that better than Furiosa (Alyla Browne, then Anya Taylor-Joy). She’s snatched from the Green Place at a young age by the warlord Dementus (Chris Hemsworth) before disappearing into Immortan Joe’s (Lachy Hulme) Citadel, where she disguises herself as a boy, learns how to navigate the Wasteland, and bides her time before taking her vengeance.
    “Critical” Analysis: Since the word “saga” is right there in the title, it follows that Furiosa differs significantly in tone and pacing than its predecessor, Mad Max: Fury Road. Referring to Max at all is a bit of a throw-off as well, because both these movies are Furiosa’s stories, this one just isn’t as coy about it.

    And besides being longer and more deliberate in fleshing out several returning characters, it also feebly asks the question: can romance bloom in the Wasteland?

    This being a prequel, there are other factors to consider. For example, anyone who’s seen Fury Road knows who’s going to live and who’s going to die (or disappear, which is the same thing). Furiosa the Character is as deserving of backstory as anyone in the franchise*, but Furiosa the Movie threatens to undercut George Miller’s previous accomplishments.

    Which is what makes Taylor-Joy’s performance notable: she inhabits Furiosa to such an extent that the new stuff doesn’t diminish Theron’s take … without really adding to it. Fury Road’s Furiosa hooked us with nothing more than her fierce determination to free the Wives, stone-cold badassery with a Type 56 SKS rifle and a War Rig, and a blistering “Remember me?” delivered while ripping Immortan Joe’s face off. The horrors of her early years were devastating even when merely implied.

    Next to the action pieces, Taylor-Joy’s best bits come as she’s learning to survive under the boot of the various warlords, and in the brief period of (almost) romantic idyll with the heretofore unknown Praetorian Jack (Tom Burke).

    click to enlarge

    Headshots. All of them. Snap! Right in the medulla.

    If we take Miller at his word, he’d storyboarded Furiosa before a single frame of Fury Road was filmed. That’s a little hard to reconcile with the latter’s whiplash pacing and the former’s occasionally languid running time. Furiosa is the longest Mad Max movie by a good thirty minutes, and didn’t need to be.

    Take Hemsworth. He’s fine, but still can’t top Hulme’s Immortan Joe for menace. Dementus is Road Warrior’s Lord Humungus with a schmear of Thunderdome’s Auntie Entity, and the results – which aren’t bad by any stretch – often feel unnecessary. Hemsworth is clearly having a ball playing a nutbag bad guy, and has the most lines in the movie. But half would have done just as well.

    The action, once it ramps up, is expectedly excellent. No one knows their way around vehicular carnage like George Miller, and the “40 Day Wasteland War” is depicted in a very Road Warrior fashion, with dissociative scene transitions and abrupt, martial music backstopping the carnage.

    Furiosa isn’t superfluous, by any means. The first act, in which Furiosa’s mother(?) (Charlee Fraser) pursues carves her way through Dementus’ stooges trying to get her back, is masterful. But if Miller is merely going to create stories in the Mad Max Universe without Max, that’s certainly his prerogative (he built the damn universe, after all), the reaction may not be as shiny and chrome as before.

    *Runners-up: Warrior Woman (Road Warrior) and Fifi (Mad Max).

    Furiosa: A Mad Max Saga is in theaters now.

    [ad_2]

    Pete Vonder Haar

    Source link

  • Open Channel: Tell Us Your Thoughts on Furiosa

    Open Channel: Tell Us Your Thoughts on Furiosa

    [ad_1]

    Image: Warner Bros.

    Nearly 10 years ago, George Miller brought the Mad Max franchise blasting back to relevance with Fury Road. The film wasn’t just well-liked, it was basically a game changer for plenty of moviegoers and delivered them something they’d never really seen at the time. And of the many things to love about Fury Road, people fell greatly in love with Charlize Theron’s Imperator Furiosa, who is more of the film’s true protagonist than Tom Hardy’s Max.

    When Miller revealed he was following up Fury Road with a prequel focused on Furiosa, eyebrows were definitely raised, particularly when Anya Taylor-Joy was cast as a young version of the character. Then we got to see Furiosa’s first trailer, and it instantly became clear Miller was about to cook yet again. Now that it’s out, people have gotten to experience what’s been said in the weeks since its premiere at Cannes: Furiosa: A Mad Max Saga is the real deal, and a more than welcome return to mad, mad car-heavy wasteland.

    While not quite the revelation that Fury Road was, or at least not in the same way, critics and audiences have been fairly high on Furiosa. Amid criticisms of the pacing and visuals, those who like it really like it, particularly its cast and 15-year scope that makes it feel like the post-apocalyptic epic it’s been marketed as. With the summer movie season in full swing, this film will probably end up as the highlight for many once all is said and done.

    If you saw Furiosa, let us know what you thought about it. Did it live up to whatever expectations you had, and wht do you want out of Miller and Mad Max next? Tell us in the comments below.


    Want more io9 news? Check out when to expect the latest Marvel, Star Wars, and Star Trek releases, what’s next for the DC Universe on film and TV, and everything you need to know about the future of Doctor Who.

    [ad_2]

    Justin Carter

    Source link

  • Let’s Talk About the Ending of Furiosa

    Let’s Talk About the Ending of Furiosa

    [ad_1]

    What a lovely, lovely day! After years of anticipation and discussion, George Miller’s follow-up to Mad Max: Fury Road is finally here. Furiosa: A Mad Max Saga is now in theaters and it acts as a perfect compliment to that 2015 masterpiece, giving the character of Furiosa an intense backstory while also building out the world of the Wasteland.

    And while there’s nothing wildly surprising in the film, especially since we know what happens immediately after, we do love the ending a lot and figured you might want to dive into it a bit after seeing the film. Major spoilers follow.

    All of Furiosa leads up to the character (Anya Taylor-Joy) finally getting face to face with Dementus (Chris Hemsworth), the maniacal warlord primarily responsible for ruining her life by kidnapping her and killing her mother. The showdown happens, Furiosa is victorious, but we then see multiple versions of the exact conclusion. It’s Miller’s wink at legend and storytelling. An acknowledgment that what’s real and what’s told are not always the same, especially in mythology.

    What’s fascinating here is that the legends of how Furiosa defeated Dementus are way less exciting than the truth. What Furiosa actually did to Dementus wasn’t simple and straightforward. It was brutal. It was, in fact, epic, and proves that her legend is merely a fraction of her reality. She’s a mythical creature but in real life, she’s even better.

    So what happens? Well, all throughout the movie, we see that Furiosa carries a seed with her. It’s a seed given to her by her mother as a reminder of her home. It’s her most prized possession because it’s not only from her home, it also represents the possibility of renewal.

    The seed doesn’t factor into the final fight but it becomes crucial right after. Instead of just killing Dementus, we see that Furiosa somehow figures out a way to use his body as the soil to give life to the seed. He becomes part of its roots, forever stuck in agony, as the seed slowly sucks the life out of him and transforms into a beautiful fruit tree. Basically, Dementus becomes the basis for Furiosa’s rebirth. It’s an inexplicable, but brutal and fascinating fate for Hemsworth’s character. One ripe—pun intended—with meaning.

    Furiosa then picks a piece of fruit, brings it to Immortal Joe’s wives, and leads them to a War Rig where, in Mad Max: Fury Road, we’ll see them attempt to escape. The film goes right up until to the next movie. Then, in the end credits, it even shows a little Fury Road highlight reel just as a reminder.

    So Furiosa ends with the character becoming a Wasteland legend and linking up perfectly with the next film. In terms of endings, it doesn’t get much better than that.

    What did you think of Furiosa’s ending? Did you see it a different way? Let us know below.


    Want more io9 news? Check out when to expect the latest Marvel, Star Wars, and Star Trek releases, what’s next for the DC Universe on film and TV, and everything you need to know about the future of Doctor Who.

    [ad_2]

    Germain Lussier

    Source link

  • George Miller on How ‘Furiosa’ Provides a Template to Survive the Apocalypse

    George Miller on How ‘Furiosa’ Provides a Template to Survive the Apocalypse

    [ad_1]

    They also follow the same ecological through line that informed the first movie. The oil crisis of the 1970s hit the Australian city of Melbourne particularly hard, Miller recalls. Eventually, only one gas station in the city remained open for business. As lines to fill up grew longer and tensions continued to mount, “it took 10 days for the first shot to be fired,” Miller says.

    “It wasn’t fired at anybody,” he hastens to add, saying, “We don’t have a gun culture in Australia.” But still, the ostensibly nonviolent incident stuck with him. If it only took 10 days for gas-related gunfire to break out, “what would happen in a hundred days?” he says he thought. “What would happen in a thousand days?” The Mad Max movies attempt to answer that question.

    Man’s eternal struggle to secure and protect resources provided the seed for the original 1979 film, with the great, roving hordes of Hannibal and Genghis Khan inspiring some of its most indelible images—mobile groups that “consumed everything before them.” But because Miller’s hordes are enabled by fossil fuels instead of elephants or horses, we’re back to that issue of scarcity. (Electric cars don’t work in the Mad Max universe, as “you can’t charge them anymore.”)

    While Miller’s most recent Mad Max films share the DNA of the first film, 1981’s The Road Warrior, and the Tina Turner–starring Mad Max Beyond Thunderdome, the director acknowledges one major development that happened between the third film’s 1985 release and 2015, when Fury Road debuted to global acclaim. “The biggest shift in cinema after sound was the digital dispensation,” Miller says, citing Jurassic Park as the film that ushered in the digital-effects era.

    Miller dipped his toes into those waters with the porcine fairy tale Babe, which he cowrote and produced, and then dove in with Happy Feet, the 2006 penguin saga that netted Miller his first Academy Award, for best animated feature. “Almost at the same time, I was thinking, Wow, these tools…we could apply [them] to action films or stories like Mad Max,” Miller says. “We can do things that we can never dream of doing in the past.”

    An indelible image from Buster Keaton’s 1926 action comedy, The General, informed a memorable shot in Beyond Thunderdome. Technological advances allowed Miller to take the moment to its logical conclusion in Fury Road, which was impossible to safely shoot before the advent of digital. “Cinema, like all arts or all human endeavors—there’s a kind of cultural evolution. One thing builds on another,” he says.

    [ad_2]

    Eve Batey

    Source link

  • Furiosa: She Found Love in a Hopeless Place

    Furiosa: She Found Love in a Hopeless Place

    [ad_1]

    If there’s any movie/film franchise that’s more relevant to the moment, it’s Mad Max. Or, in this case, Furiosa: A Mad Max Saga. Released almost exactly nine years after Mad Max: Fury Road, Furiosa serves as a prequel to the events in that film, detailing how its heroine (or anti-heroine, if you prefer) came to be in her current situation, searching endlessly for redemption. Even if most other people’s concern in The Wasteland is mere survival. As a History Man narrates, that’s all a person is reduced to when there’s nothing left and the social contract has been irrevocably broken. And yes, the usual soundbites commence the movie, giving viewers the indication that civilization collapsed due to, among other causes that are completely believable (especially at this juncture), war (both “general” and nuclear), ecocide and oil shortages. 

    Returning to New South Wales for filming (whereas Fury Road’s backdrop came courtesy of Namibia), just as it was for 1981’s Mad Max 2, director and Mad Max co-creator (along with Byron Kennedy, RIP) George Miller opens the Furiosa story with an overhead shot of a barely detectable green strip of land in the midst of an otherwise barren landscape. This, of course, is The Green Place that The Five Wives of Immortan Joe (Hugh Keays-Byrne) speak of so hopefully in Fury Road. When Max (Tom Hardy) asks Furiosa, “How do you know this place even exists?” she solemnly replies, “I was born there.” Max then rightly asks, “So why’d you leave?” It is in this next piece of dialogue that the premise for the prequel is set up as Furiosa states, “I didn’t. I was taken as a child. Stolen.”

    So it is that we see how she was stolen and who stole her: a gaggle of goons from a gang known as the Horde of the Biker Warlord Dementus. Dementus (Chris Hemsworth) initially seems like a man who is more or at least as powerful as Immortan Joe, for the goons that happen upon The Green Place and snatch Furiosa (after we see her snatching a peach from a tree—in a moment that has decided “Eve in the Garden of Eden” overtones) are extremely eager to please him with this discovery. Not just of a geographical location that possesses “copious bounty,” but of a young girl who isn’t riddled with health issues from malnourishment. Furiosa (played at this age by Alyla Browne) endures the kidnapping with the aplomb and cool-headedness we’re used to seeing her with as an adult, trained from an early age, it appears, to expect such a scenario, even if she was sheltered by the idyllic cushion of The Green Place. Besides, she knows her mother, Mary Jo Bassa (Charlee Fraser), is quietly and doggedly pursuing her, picking off the members of Dementus’ gang that have stolen her until only one remains. That one, unfortunately, manages to get back to the “base camp” and tell Dementus about this place of “abundance” as Furiosa is paraded as being a product of that environment. 

    Hanging back to watch and wait from afar, Mary Jo knows that Furiosa will never give up the secret of where The Green Place is. She’s been conditioned far too well for that, knowing that to trust anyone outside of The Green Place, let alone this pack of war-mongering men, is the last thing that would be beneficial to her. No, instead, she bides her time, waiting for the moment when Mary Jo will appear to rescue her. When she does, Mary Jo makes the mistake of believing a misogynistic woman when she tells her she won’t tell a soul that Mary Jo has reclaimed Furiosa. Two seconds later, the woman is doing just that, alerting the proverbial media to Mary Jo and Furiosa’s escape, giving Dementus and his gang plenty of notice to catch up to them—which of course they do. Although Mary Jo tries to give Furiosa a fighting chance by telling her to take the motorbike and go off on her own to get back home, she can’t bring herself to leave her mother behind. Especially after she hears shots fired in the distance. Though her mother was the one shooting the gun, she ends up being captured and mounted, Jesus-style, to a tree, with Dementus burning her feet like she’s a witch. 

    When Dementus sees that Furiosa has come back to watch the “fun,” he promises her that he’ll let her mother live if she tells him where the place of abundance is. Furiosa says nothing (also likely aware that Dementus isn’t exactly the “man of his word” type and would probably kill Mary Jo regardless of her giving him the location of The Green Place). Forced, instead, to watch her mother’s torturous death. In the days that follow, Dementus’ History Man (George Shevtsov) advises Furiosa to make herself invaluable to Dementus rather than playing the sullen, bereaved part she’s fallen into. But Furiosa knows that by sheer virtue of not being a mutant, she’s less likely to be fucked with. And it’s true, Dementus sees her as something of a “special creature.” One he seems “affectionate” toward (or as affectionate as someone like him can be). If for no other reason than because he does know she’s liable to be “useful” to him somewhere down the line. And in a post-apocalyptic world, being useful is the name of the game more than ever. 

    As Furiosa, who has remained in a mute state ever since being captured, watches Dementus in diabolical, erratic action, she appears to be processing all the information she can glean in order to know how to proceed next. Calculating what the best move will be (like Elizabeth Harmon in The Queen’s Gambit—another Anya Taylor-Joy project). At one point in their odyssey, Dementus and his gang see red smoke shot in the sky by a flare gun. They approach the source to find one of Immortan Joe’s War Boys prattling on about The Citadel. When he speaks of it as a place with everything one could need, Dementus presumes it to be The Green Place that Furiosa hailed from. Thus, he gets the War Boy to take them to The Citadel, where he rolls in with big dick-swinging energy, assuming he can just take over the place by telling the maltreated masses that they have a choice—that they don’t have to follow an abusive leader and can choose him instead. He who insists he’ll give them as much food and water as they want. It’s a scene that feels familiar in terms of how political leaders bulldoze their way into power with promises of being “better” or “different” from a previous “ruler,” only to end up being more or equally cruel and incompetent. 

    But Dementus was very much overestimating his clout when he arbitrarily showed up on Immortan Joe’s turf, with The Citadel being the only so-called port in the storm of The Wasteland besides Gastown and The Bullet Farm. As such, there’s no way Immortan Joe would ever let it go—especially with so many War Boys willing to die in a fight to defend his reign over it (in many ways, they’re like Islamic extremist suicide bombers). 

    Taken aback by the counter-ambush against him and his crew, Dementus is totally unprepared when most of his gang is killed off. Unwilling to accept a powerless state, however, Dementus gathers a new gang of men together and hatches a plan to take over Gastown as leverage to negotiate with Immortan Joe for more rations. Allowed into The Citadel for these negotiations, Immortan Joe catches sight of Furiosa in the background of Dementus’ crew, demanding that she becomes part of their trade deal. So it is that Furiosa’s path is detached from Dementus’ (at least for a while). But that hardly means she’s free of nefarious men who are obsessed with her. 

    After being placed in Immortan Joe’s “special area” for wives, one of his sons, Rictus (Nathan Jones), becomes fascinated with her in a way that pretty much screams “pedophile.” As though anticipating a scuffle with him or some other creep that might try to do something to her, Furiosa shaves her head but refashions the hair back on it as a wig, of sorts. This way, when Rictus ends up pulling on her hair after demanding to know what the tattooed constellation on her arm means (it’s a map back to The Green Place), the whole thing comes right off and she’s able to run like hell into the night. As far as Rictus can tell once he manages to catch up to the place he saw her escape, Furiosa has “disappeared.” In reality, she’s merely clinging perilously to the bottom of a platform until she can scurry back up again when no one is around (granted, Miller never deals with actually showing how she managed to fully escape undetected). 

    A number of years pass (as the “wig” that has fallen on an ever-changing tree branch indicates) until Furiosa grows into a young woman (allowing Anya Taylor-Joy her time to shine). Only she’s posing as a War Boy so that she can not only learn how to tinker with and build one of the War Rigs, but as a means to plan her escape from The Citadel. Taking notice of the main commander of the War Boys, Praetorian Jack (Tom Burke, in his most commercial role yet since Joanna Hogg’s The Souvenir), Furiosa clocks him as the one to watch. Or watch out for. After all, he’s clearly the sharpest tool in the shed, therefore the person most likely to catch on to her scheme. Which is to conceal a motorcycle and enough rations for her journey back to The Green Place on the War Rig for the next ride to Gastown. On the way, the rig is attacked (in the manner and style viewers grew accustomed to seeing nonstop throughout Fury Road) by Dementus’ band of followers, who manage to exterminate all the War Boys tasked with defending the rig. Jack and Furiosa, as the only survivors, are left to kill the remaining gang members. In the midst of the brutal battle, Furiosa’s true gender is revealed to Jack. 

    Despite how well the two have worked together to overcome the enemy, Furiosa still aims a gun at Jack and tells him to pull over. Alas, her gun is empty and Jack tosses her out of the vehicle. Left in the middle of nowhere (which is the crux of what The Wasteland is except for The Citadel), Furiosa resigns herself to walking. Just as she does, Jack returns to invite her to join him in rebuilding his battalion. This, of course, is a running theme throughout the Mad Max universe: rebuilding again and again, even though civilization—life—itself has broken down entirely. With that in mind, there comes a point when Dementus name-checks Darwin, and how showing weakness isn’t an option in a non-society such as this. Although the Darwinism element was always implied in the Mad Max movies, it’s never been so explicitly called out. 

    And yet, even in the face of survival being the sole concern—for there is little time to occupy one’s mind with anything else—Furiosa can’t help finding love in a hopeless place. For it’s apparent that her dynamic with Jack is one ever-shifting toward a romantic rather than platonic love (the latter variety seeming to be what she has with Max in Fury Road). With this part of Furiosa’s backstory offered up by Miller, it becomes mildly heartening to know that, no matter how bad or apocalyptic life gets, this innate human craving can’t be stamped out any more than the innate need to survive. Alas, it becomes immediately disheartening to know that anyone who finds out about such love—such hope—in a hopeless place will become enraged by another person having it as a result of their own jealousy. Their own desire to keep watching the world burn. Dementus is just one such exemplar of that asshole trope. 

    And so, when he catches and captures Jack and Furiosa in their bid to escape together back to The Green Place, he tells them that they “break his heart” for being foolish enough to have such hope. It is his job, he feels, to remind them that “there is no hope” in this world. That hate is what drives everything in conditions such as these. Thus, Dementus orders Jack’s slow, cruel murder while Furiosa is bound to the back of a rig, unable to do anything to prevent losing the only man she’ll ever love (like that). Dementus obviously has no idea who he’s dealing with though, and that he’s only fueling the flames of her burning for revenge. 

    In the final act, when she finally gets him alone and defenseless, Furiosa screams at Dementus to give her mother back, to give her childhood back (cue Taylor Swift singing, “Give me back my girlhood/It was mine first”). Dementus is unmoved, saying that his own family and childhood were ripped from him as well (this is where a shrink would spout that “hurt people hurt people”). He also goads her attempt at finding “peace” or “redemption” by killing him, reminding her that even after he’s dead, it still won’t bring Jack or her mother back. He tells her she’ll never find peace, and that the two of them are the same: dead already. Ghosts haunting The Wasteland in search of more and more pain just so they can feel something. Could that be, in the end, why Furiosa succumbed to the emotional dangers of falling in love? Knowing full well that it could only conclude in tragedy. That it was endlessly naive to imagine returning to The Green Place at all, let alone with Jack. 

    If that’s the case, and an inherent sense of masochism was the reason Furiosa allowed herself to become vulnerable enough to love someone, well, then at least viewers can take comfort in knowing that our post-apocalyptic selves aren’t so different from our apocalyptic ones.

    [ad_2]

    Genna Rivieccio

    Source link

  • Furiosa is a 15-Year Journey Through Its Heroine’s Life

    Furiosa is a 15-Year Journey Through Its Heroine’s Life

    [ad_1]

    Image: Warner Bros.

    Mad Max: Fury Road was a revelation when it released in 2015, and a lot of that can be owed to Charlize Theron’s Furiosa. Even with Max Rocktansky getting top billing, it’s more her movie than his, and we’ree now primed to get an origin story with the upcoming Furiosa: A Mad Max Saga.

    “Saga” is an apt word, it seems. In Empire Magazine’s new write-up on the prequel, the outlet reveals we’ll watch Furiosa—played here by Anya Taylor-Joy—throughout 15 years of her life. “The story is the saga of Furiosa,” explained director/co-writer George Miller, “and how she gets taken from home, and spends the rest of her life trying to get back. ”

    In that first trailer, which calls the film Furiosa’s “odyssey” of finding her way back, you get a sense of how much time will be covered. Not only do we see Furiosa as a young child and a young woman donning her black forehead paint for the first time, she also has both of her arms. That trailer ends on the sight of the Furiosa will come to know, prosthetic included, and it’ll be interesting to see how she gets to be an eventual enforcer for Immortan Joe. And while it may be a prequel, Miller has no intent of coasting on the almost 10-year goodwill of that previous movie. “It’s a different animal,” he said. “It’s an odyssey. No question.”

    15 years is a long time—Fury Road, for comparison, took place over a couple of days—and as a result, Miller teased we’ll be seeing “many different locations.” Since this is meant to lead directly into its predecessor, he was asked if this meant there’d be a cameo from Tom Hardy’s Max at any point in the film. To that, all he said was the Road Warrior was “lurking in the background. I won’t give away too much about that.”

    Furiosa: A Mad Max Saga releases on May 24.


    Want more io9 news? Check out when to expect the latest Marvel, Star Wars, and Star Trek releases, what’s next for the DC Universe on film and TV, and everything you need to know about the future of Doctor Who.

    [ad_2]

    Justin Carter

    Source link

  • Wait … Did Timothee Chalamet and Kylie Jenner Break Up?

    Wait … Did Timothee Chalamet and Kylie Jenner Break Up?

    [ad_1]

    I’ll admit it here: I didn’t read Dune. But I’ll also swear on my life that I’ve had Frank Herbert’s massive odyssey of a novel on my TBR long before the new adaptation, Dune: Part One(let alone Dune: Part Two), was set in motion by Denis Villeneuve. I’m not new to this, but I’m also not true to this.

    It’s my father’s favorite book, so I grew up half-grateful, half-scornful he didn’t name me Chani. Now that Zendaya is playing that role, I’m still ambivalent about the choice.

    Which is to say, all these long years, I still haven’t even turned to the first page. Therefore, I don’t know how it ends — specifically if Prince Paul Atreides (Timothee Chalamet) gets the girl in the end. I guess I’ll find out on March 1st, Dune: Part Two’s long-awaited release date (shoutout to the SAG strike). But until then, I have even hotter Dune tea to contemplate: Did Timothee dump Kylie Jenner?


    Where have these two been? No Kylie and Timothee Paparazzi Pictures, No Nothing.

    For a couple comprised of two of the hottest celebrities alive, their relationship has been so amorphous in the public eye. They haven’t been taking over tabloids with not-so-candid appearances. In fact, all the Kylie and Timothee pictures have been rare and somewhat tame. Yet, they also haven’t been completely hush-hush. This middle ground is somewhat unsatisfying. After Kylie and Timothee pictures broke the internet at Beyonce’s Renaissance tour and then again at the US Open, 2023’s odd couple have been fairly quiet. This year, they only came up for air to smooch on camera at the Golden Globes. Now, with radio silence persisting ad Timothee in his flop era, some wonder if this unlikely pair has run its course. I mean, even the famously private Tom Holland and Zendaya are more conspicuous than these two.

    Are Kylie and Timothee actually dating?

    I will say, I’m a hater. I never loved this pairing. Not because I have some parasocial claim on our generation’s Leonardo DiCaprio. Nor because I have some purist notion that he is somehow “too good” for Kylie Jenner just because his name is a little French. And, unlike my darling Aaron Taylor Johnson, the Kylie Jenner/Timothee Chalamet age difference is perfectly acceptable — only two years, even though she sometimes looks like his mom (sorry, Miss Girl!).

    When it comes to celebs, I think they all deserve each other. But since it’s become so ubiquitous that Kris Jenner orchestrates her daughters’ lives with the dexterity and precision of a chess grandmaster, nothing the KarJenner clan does surprises me. The most gossip these two ever gave was Selena Gomez Gate.

    Even if I believe it’s a real relationship — I mean, c’mon, who could resist either of them — there’s absolutely nothing charming about the fact that it probably had to be Kris-approved to come into the world and will have to be Kris-approved to come out of it.

    That’s not sexy. That’s not what I want from my Timothee Chalamet dating rumors. I miss when he was making out on boats in grainy pictures with Lily-Rose Depp and Eiza Gonzalez. I wish for him what Dua Lipa has with Callum Turner. What Sabrina Carpenter has with Barry Keoghan. Hell, even what the American Royal Couple Taylor Swift and Travis Kelce have. Not this sanitized version of a surprise couple.

    So … Did Timothee Dump Kylie?

    If the rumors are true: I might get my wish after all. Reports (re: Deuxmoi and Reddit) say that Timothee was acting very single on a night out after the Dune: Part Two premiere in New York City. While his committed costars Austin Butler, Florence Pugh, Anya Taylor-Joy, and Zendaya slept, Timmy was allegedly out partying in SoHo like a singleton. Oh, to be young and hot in New York.

    Where was Kylie? Putting Stormi to bed, one can assume. But was she waiting for a call from her man? Or is that not her man anymore? If not, her recent paparazzi pics in her Khy bodycon dress might have to be reclassified as a revenge dress. We’ll have to wait and see if more Kylie and Timothee paparazzi pictures surface. Though Kris Jenner, I implore you: if there are more Kylie and Timothee pictures, please keep them to yourself.

    Take this all with a grain of salt, of course.

    I may not know much about Dune, but one thing I know for certain is who pulls the strings in this town. When Kris Jenner deems the timing right, and only then, will the news break (and the Kylie and Timothee pictures cease for good)— not with a bang, I fear, but a whimper. I can only hope Dune: PartTwo goes out with a grander finale than this controversial, but ultimately uninteresting. coupling.

    Anyway, watch the Dune: Part Two Trailer Here:

    See you all on March 1st.

    Dune: Part Two | Official Trailer 3www.youtube.com

    [ad_2]

    LKC

    Source link

  • We Know Who Anya Taylor-Joy Is Playing in Dune: Part Two (Probably)

    We Know Who Anya Taylor-Joy Is Playing in Dune: Part Two (Probably)

    [ad_1]

    Dune: Part Two, the upcoming sequel to Denis Villeneuve’s 2021 sci-fi epic based on the Frank Herbert novels, is releasing in just two weeks, but somehow the team behind it kept one major star’s involvement a total secret. During the February 15 world premiere in London, The Queen’s Gambit actor Anya Taylor-Joy appeared on the red carpet to confirm that she is, indeed, a member of the sequel’s cast. This came after an eagle-eyed Letterboxd user noticed that Dune: Part Two was listed under Taylor-Joy’s credits on the review aggregation app.

    Variety confirmed that Taylor-Joy is a part of the cast, which includes Timothée Chalamet as Paul Atreides, Zendaya as Chani, Rebecca Ferguson as Lady Jessica, Florence Pugh as Princess Irulan, Austin Butler as Feyd-Rautha, and many more huge Hollywood stars. But, Variety refused to “spoil” who Taylor-Joy is playing, and it doesn’t appear that anyone else is willing to say who, either.

    Except me. Dune novel spoilers below, but let’s be real, the book came out in 1965.

    Anya Taylor-Joy is probably Alia Atreides in Dune: Part Two 

    First, an attempt at a brief Dune synopsis. In the far future, an interstellar society is comprised of noble houses whose fiefdoms are entire planets. The Atreides family, led by Duke Leto (played by Oscar Isaac in Dune: Part One), is ordered to take a harsh desert planet known as Arrakis as its new fief. Though the planet is virtually inhospitable, it is the only source of the highly sought after resource known as “spice,” a psychedelic drug that is used in space navigation. But as soon as the Atreides family arrives on Arrakis, it’s clear that they’ve walked into a trap set by the rival House Harkonnen, who wants to wipe them out entirely.

    Read More: The Dune Ornithopter Lego Set Is Almost Too Good To Be True

    As seen in Dune: Part One, the Harkonnens’ plan results in Leto’s death, and forces Paul and his mother, Jessica, to flee into the desert. It’s there that they come into contact withe the Fremen, Arrakis’ native people who have learned how to thrive (not just survive) on the harsh planet. There’s a whole messianic thing that I can’t even begin to get into, but what’s important here in regards to Taylor-Joy is this: Jessica is pregnant, and submits to the “spice agony,” a ritual where she takes a deadly amount of spice. Because she’s with child, the baby is exposed to the spice in utero, and is born possessing all the knowledge of a fully grown adult.

    Alia Atreides looks and sounds like a child, but is a full-blown Reverend Mother, the highest tier attainable amongst the Bene Gesserit (a matriarchal order that has religious and political power). In David Lynch’s Dune from 1984, Alia is played by a child actor, but I think (especially when seeing what Taylor-Joy wore to the premiere, and how it compares to what Alia wears in Lynch’s film) that Villeneuve has figured out a way to present Alia as an adult.

    I await confirmation that I am correct.

    [ad_2]

    Alyssa Mercante

    Source link

  • Your Favorite Celebrity Was Styled By Law Roach…Now What?

    Your Favorite Celebrity Was Styled By Law Roach…Now What?

    [ad_1]

    Last week, the fashion world was taken by surprise as Law Roach noisily retired from styling. The famed stylist is known for saving the fashion careers of many celebrities, pulling them out of tone-deaf, trendless outfits and into the world of serving absolute looks. If you’ve loved what a celeb is wearing, Law Roach probably styled them.


    He’s the wizard who turned Zendaya into Cinderella for the Met Gala (
    who also styles her boyfriend, Tom Holland), he’s the maven who re-branded Celine Dion’s style. But the fashion industry is both cutthroat and rarely without drama. Law took to Instagram to announce he was retiring for good, and that the industry had seemingly “won.”

    But retirement can mean so many things. Tom Brady has retired from football twice now. So it’s safe to say that people have questions when it comes to Law Roach’s sudden retirement post.

    Is Law Roach Retiring?

    People love giving credit where credit is due – and as such, stylists have their very own fan bases.
    The Guardian likens this phenomenon to Rachel Zoe’s Zoe Bots, which spawned her own spinoff show and fame in her own right, and not just for styling Lindsay Lohan.

    This just means Law Roach will be fine if he’s not styling everyone anymore – he’ll be sitting on a million Instagram followers and a networking catalog that most would kill for. He has some of the biggest names in Hollywood behind him like Zendaya herself. In other words, Law Roach probably isn’t going anywhere.

    The dramatic, shady Insta post wasn’t Law stepping away from fashion altogether, as he told
    Vogue. And it most definitely isn’t due to the fact that Zendaya didn’t save him a front-row seat at Fashion Week this year – or that he asked Emma Stone to give up hers. Law Roach is taking his career into his own hands, far away from “the politics, the lies, and false narratives” that Roach credits for his retirement from celebrity styling.

    Law Roach told
    AP,

    “I just wanna breathe. I wanna fly. I wanna be happy,” Roach said. “I wanna figure other things out.”

    Who Has Law Roach Styled?

    His looks have been seen on Anne Hathaway, Anya Taylor-Joy, Ariana Grande, and Bella Hadid. Law has created a multi-million dollar empire styling clients for photoshoots and red carpet appearances, while collaborating with some of the biggest fashion houses in the world.

    This year’s Oscars showcased Megan Thee Stallion, Hunter Schafer, Kerry Washington, Eve Jobs, and Hailee Steinfeld, all dressed by Roach. Most of which ranked as the most talked about looks of the evening – so who’s going to style them now?

    Law Roach and Zendaya at the Met Gala 2019

    David Fisher/Shutterstock

    And while each and every look was a slay and a serve in their own respect, no two looks were similar. In fact, each look was praised in their own ways, for different reasons. It’s something Law Roach talks about with The Cut.

    “It’s always the narrative of, “Oh, he’s never gonna treat you the way he treats Zendaya. You’re gonna get what she doesn’t want.” And that’s not true, because none of my clients ever look the same. Like, I don’t use edits.

    I don’t walk around with suitcases of edits that Zendaya didn’t want and offer ’em to other people. It’s always those narratives, and I’ve lost a bunch of clients that I really care for and really wanted to work with because of the gatekeepers.”

    Law even styled Priyanka Chopra-Jonas, who told People that a stylist (seemingly Roach) informed her she wasn’t “sample sized.” While Law Roach told The Cut that this conversation didn’t happen in the way she framed it, it was an example of the false narratives he cited in his retirement.

    What’s Next For Law Roach?

    More recently, Roach was spotted making his modeling debut for Boss. Law Roach strutted the runway in good company amongst Pamela Anderson, Naomi Campbell, and Precious Lee. He told Vogue,

    “I don’t think I have any challenges. I’m a fucking diva! Even if they were to put me on a 10-inch high heel I would be walking that runway. The little gay boy in me—I’m living out a dream! The hair, the makeup, the look they chose for me: it’s literally a dream!”

    [ad_2]

    Jai Phillips

    Source link

  • A Look Into Paris Fashion Week 2023: Trends, Takes, And Tailored Suits

    A Look Into Paris Fashion Week 2023: Trends, Takes, And Tailored Suits

    [ad_1]

    There’s no Fashion Week like Paris Fashion Week. Maybe it’s thanks to French fashion houses like Dior, Hermès, Chanel, and Louis Vuitton that go above and beyond for each runway show, outdoing themselves and each other, year after year.


    And if you’ve been paying attention, maybe you, too have been wondering what everyone packed for Paris FW, and who landed the likes of Kendall Jenner and Bella Hadid on their runways. Regardless, Paris determines the ultimate trends of the upcoming seasons.

    We cycle through so many decades of trends that it feels like we’re already back to romanticizing the 2010’s – something we escaped only a few years ago when it was still that decade. Look no further than the rise of chevron recently: both ominous and harrowing that we’re cycling so quickly.

    However, this Paris Fashion Week gave me a bit of hope with all of the trends emerging. We aren’t going insane with huge pops of colors, but sticking to neutrals yet again. Camels, taupes, cocoas, and blacks will still dominate the colorways. But what else?

    It’s time to talk about Paris. The future trends, the standout brands and the celebrity fashion that we love to chew apart with our friends in group chats.

    The Trends, According To WWD

    Balmain model

    Gil-Gonzalez Alain/ABACA/Shutterstock

    The world has fallen in love with a neutral palette, and it looks like it’ll stay that way moving forward. Fashion houses stuck with monochromatic moments, but Women’s Wear Daily notes that red is the pop of color brands like Balmain and Valentino chose.

    Perhaps the best news received from the runway is that skirts are very much in. And lengths don’t matter at all. No longer does the micro-mini low-rise skirt dominate the market, maxis and midis have been invited back to the party. Which means there’s more of a variety in outfits varying from person-to-person.

    One of the biggest messages from Paris Fashion Week 2023 is that we’re back to dressing to impress. Less of a focus on your classic oversized streetwear – looking polished and put together in tailored skirt sets is the move of the summer.

    It’s back to the classics for our favorite brands. Designs are looking sleeker and elegant once again. There’s less of an avant-garde “wow” factor, but the simplicity speaks for itself. Almost everyone who attended Paris FW talked about a tailored look: suits, pinstripes, blazers, vests. The revival of the pencil skirt is among us, ladies.

    According to Victoria Dartigues, merchandising director of fashion and accessories for Samaritaine Paris Pont-Neuf, almost every fashion line had an oversized fur coat of sorts. That’s right, femme fatale fashion is here and ready to rule 2023.

    Let’s Talk About Loewe

    Emily Ratajkowski for Loewe

    Scott Garfitt/Invision/AP/Shutterstock

    Women’s Wear Daily credits Loewe as being the It Girl of Paris Fashion Week this year.

    “Victoria Dartigues, Samaritaine Paris Pont-Neuf’s merchandising director fashion and accessories, called it a “demonstration of pure beauty.” Many cited Jonathan Anderson’s inventive use of confetti cubes inside the Château de Vincennes as one of the best show sets of the week and the brand’s new tote was ticked off as a “must have” on many lists.”

    The show itself nodded to fashion trends throughout the world: a wallpaper-esque stick-on sweater that could only be worn once was a major dig at the fast fashion world in which most people often only wear the garments one time before throwing them in the trash.

    They played with visuals through fabrics like vacuum-molded leather to look like plastic and images of dresses on t-shirt dresses made of satin. The show was conducted in a brightly lit room, contrasting most fashion houses who prefer nighttime shows often shrouded in darkness for added drama and flare.

    EmRata’s leaf shirt, for example, is all about playful textures and out-of-the-box thinking. It’s taking camp to a new level by playing with fabrics you already know and transforming them into something that almost makes you uncomfortable to look at.

    All Eyes On The Front Row

    Balenciaga’s show

    Steve Wood/Shutterstock

    The front row of these shows are always telling. It’s a conglomeration of highly regarded celebrities who are often representing the brand. Think Kylie Jenner with Schiaparelli and Anya Taylor-Joy with Dior.

    In the wake of a monumental scandal, Balenciaga under Demna tried to pick up the pieces. Their show featured a runway without the famous Balenciaga logo emblazoned anywhere, and also without celebrities in the front row. While this collection was the favorite of few, its simplicity shows Demna’s message: fashion doesn’t need to be a show.

    [ad_2]

    Jai Phillips

    Source link

  • Paris Fashion Week 2023 Has Been Interesting

    Paris Fashion Week 2023 Has Been Interesting

    [ad_1]

    Another Paris fashion week rolls around and up pops up another viral celebrity outfit. There are the understated…and the outlandish. Think Kylie Jenner’s lion and Doja Cat’s literal head-to-toe Swarovski look…but that’s sooo yesterday‘s news.


    While the Schiaparelli couture show was newsworthy on its own, both Doja and Kylie are making headlines for their looks du jour. Kylie choose the controversial route and went with Givenchy’s gasp-worthy, noose necklace. Yes, you read that right. A noose necklace.

    Meanwhile, on Planet Doja Cat, she attended the Viktor & Rolf show sporting faux eyebrows, mustache, and goatee fabricated from false eyelashes. The false eyelashes were intentional, as Doja had heard that her fans were upset that her red Swarovski getup hadn’t included eyelashes…so Mz. Cat gave them eyelashes.

    The one thing we do have to respect about Doja is that she is committed. There’s not a fashion week that struts by where Doja isn’t decked out in an outrageous, avant-garde outfit. She’s notorious for having her face and entire body painted in the name of red-carpet-
    fashion. The Paris Schiaparelli Haute Couture Spring/Summer 2023 show featured 30,000 red Swarovski crystals covering every inch of Doja’s fabulous skin.

    Doja Cat

    Laurent VU/SIPA/Shutterstock

    And let’s not forget newly single Kylie Jenner — who just announced her son’s name as Aire (don’t get me started) — wearing Schiaparelli’s latest couture: a dress with a gigantic fake lion head. What’s even more fascinating is that Irina Shayk sported this very same look on the same runway…where Kylie sat front row.

    But don’t fret! Kylie’s borderline terrifying look was PETA-approved! Sleep better at night knowing this nightmare “celebrates” a lion’s beauty and may be a statement against trophy hunting…” according to PETA.

    Personal favorites include Anya Taylor-Joy, who attended the Dior Haute Couture show in a cropped cream blazer with black applique detailing and matching corset.

    Anya Taylor-Joy

    By: Laurent VU/SIPA/Shutterstock

    And in the name of Nepotism Babies…Apple Martin — daughter of Gwyneth Paltrow and Chris Martin — arrived at Chanel’s show in a classic Chanel set, seated in the front row. We all know this means Apple will be the future of Chanel, so prepare to see her in years to come.

    [ad_2]

    Jai Phillips

    Source link

  • Dior’s Spring 2023 Haute Couture Collection Is Inspired by Josephine Baker

    Dior’s Spring 2023 Haute Couture Collection Is Inspired by Josephine Baker

    [ad_1]

    Dior unveiled its latest haute couture collection by Maria Graziai Chiuri, inspired by Josephine Baker.

    Through a mostly black and white color palette — save for some silver and muted green — the Spring 2023 line highlights the craftsmanship of the house’s atelier through construction: blazers with sharp shoulder pads, corseted dresses, cinched overcoats. As always, Chiuri imbues the collection with touches of femininity, expressed through floral appliqués on a sheer top, puffed sleeves on a dainty cardigan and playful tassels swinging at the hem of a full skirt.

    [ad_2]

    Angela Wei

    Source link

  • The Rich Eat: The Menu

    The Rich Eat: The Menu

    [ad_1]

    At the crux of every basic class divide is food. It is the most essential unit of life, and yet, it took little time at all after the world became “civilized” for it to become the first source of division between the haves and the have-nots. Over the centuries, especially in America, it created the ironic phenomenon of poor people being, frankly, fat (“unhealthy,” if you prefer) and rich people being thin beacons of wellness. Because rich people can afford to sidestep the overprocessed foods that the broke can actually afford. Shoveling their faces with it every day to sustain themselves. What’s more, they would never dream of paying/wasting top dollar for minuscule portions at a fine dining restaurant, the cost of which is more than they make in a month.

    With this sense of a historically-rooted class war in food, former The Onion writers-turned-screenwriters Will Tracy and Seth Reiss bring us The Menu. And no, it’s not entirely “coincidental” that the fine dining restaurant they use, called Hawthorn, as their backdrop for brutal “satire” (read: unbridled honesty) is located on a remote island. For the idea that planted the seed of the screenplay arrived when Tracy himself took a boat to a restaurant on an island off Norway (it could have been many establishments, but Cornelius comes to mind, though that’s probably too “gauche”). With that herculean effort (by restaurant-going standards), Tracy started to have some paranoid feelings about being on an island with only a handful of other diners, prompting him to wonder if this was the kind of extreme emotion worth writing about with his go-to partner, Reiss. Indeed, it was. Not to mention perfectly-timed for a market that has eating the rich on its mind. But if one was hoping for another cannibal movie (on the heels of Bones and All), don’t get your hopes up. This is not a literal “eat the rich” film, so much as a mock-their-absurd-self-importance-which-extends-into-food film. Timely, to be sure, for if it has been the year of anything in cinema, it has been the year of eating.

    Whether that meant “keeping it down” or not. For there was the now-legendary vomiting scene after the passengers consume improperly-refrigerated shellfish in Triangle of Sadness (The Menu’s less-than-“distant” filmic cousin, complete with a captain that reminds one of our chef in The Menu). Then there was the cannibalistic notion of an “eater” in the aforementioned Bones and All. And, released the same day in U.S. theaters, The Menu. Maybe it’s because, somewhere in the subconscious of the average person, an awareness is dawning about food scarcity. Another food irony (in addition to the poor and destitute often being overweight) is that if this is the year of eating in cinema, it’s also “the year of unprecedented famine,” per the World Food Programme. An organization that also noted of alarming 2022 famine statistics, “The number of those facing acute food insecurity has soared—from 135 million to 345 million—since 2019.” At such a ballooning rate (thanks to climate change, war and a pandemic), the implications of what that could do to further cement class warfare imbue one with Children of Men-esque visions for the future. Visions that no doubt present a certain moral quandary to any chef that caters to an affluent clientele. Just as “celebrity chef” Julian Slowik (Ralph Fiennes, looking his most Liam Neeson-y yet) does.

    Part of that celebrity comes from the fact that he charges thousands of dollars for the “experience” of taking a boat to the island where his restaurant is perched (Norway-style, so to speak). And blowhards like Tyler Ledford (Nicholas Hoult) are only too happy to pay the price. Unfortunately for this “foodie fanboy,” Slowik discriminates against single diners—meaning you can’t just sit at a table alone. So it is that he brings along a replacement “date” named Margot Mills (Anya Taylor-Joy) when Tyler’s original plus-one backs out. This resulting in a flinching reaction from the restaurant’s stoic maître d’, Elsa (Hong Chau), and even more of a grimace from Julian himself.

    Margot’s presence has tampered with his last menu masterpiece. The one he wants to call “egoless” for the first time since he started his career (which commenced with slinging burgers for the plebes, a detail that Margot will use to her advantage by the end). But to do so would be another form of self-delusion, almost on par with the rich telling themselves they worked hard for the money (try claiming that to the actual working class performing their day-to-day job requirement horrors). Which is why Reiss commented that such a statement was about Julian “wanting to say to himself that tonight is completely egoless, but if we take a step back, how could this monumental night that you want to be your masterpiece, how could it not be ego-filled?”

    The only egos that must ultimately be put aside by the end of the night are that of the patrons, including, in addition to Tyler and Margot, food critic Lillian Bloom (Janet McTeer), her sycophantic editor, Ted (Paul Adelstein), Hawthorn regulars Richard and Anne Liebbrandt (Reed Birney and Judith Light), George Díaz (John Leguizamo), a washed-up Hollywood star, his assistant/girlfriend, Felicity (Aimee Carrero), and tech business trio Soren (Arturo Castro), Bryce (Rob Yang) and Dave (Mark St. Cyr). With each part of the movie divided into courses, the food that gets served (or doesn’t… namely, bread—because rich people don’t deserve to enjoy what the poor have no choice but to live on daily) becomes increasingly part of something like performance art. Complete with Julian’s sous-chef, Jeremy Louden (Adam Aalderks), killing himself in front of the patrons to bring them a dish called “The Mess.” What Julian deems, more specifically, as being emblematic of the mess we all make of our lives as we try so hard and so stupidly to please people we’ll never even know (that goes for plebes in addition to famous people) and who will never actually care about all the work we put in to please.

    By this moment in the film, it’s clear Fiennes is having the time of his life in the role, and it’s difficult to imagine anyone else playing it. Unlike Taylor-Joy, whose character was originally meant to be portrayed by the aesthetically and vocally similar Emma Stone. Talking of similarities, The Menu’s kinship with Triangle of Sadness is notable throughout (complete with the idea of filming the bulk in one location; in the latter’s case, that’s on a yacht). Both are an unshrinking attack on the rich, each premise toying with what can happen when that class’ money no longer has clout. In both cases, that transpires within the context of an island, where all “real-world” power can be stripped away. And oh, how Julian is happy to strip it. After all, chefs are the biggest power-hungry control freaks of anyone.

    As for the original director attached to the film, Alexander Payne, Mark Mylod might have been destined to do it instead by sheer virtue of having previously worked with Tracy on an episode of Succession (one that fittingly centered on a dinner party) called “Tern Haven.” Tracy confirmed that reteaming with Mylod assured further seamlessness on set, noting, “…it’s just great to have someone whose tastes I trust and [whose] working process [I knew].” That sense of trust between writer and director is undeniably part of what makes The Menu come across as such a confident serve.

    And what Julian aims to serve up by the end of the night (apart from tortillas etched with some highly specific and incriminating memories of each patron) is a clean, simple dose of karmic balance. With the rich even getting off more than just a little on being abused by the climax. For it’s almost as though they’ve been surrounded by obsequious “yes” people their entire lives and they just want to experience Truth for once.

    To this end, Margot herself is the antithesis of a sycophant for Julian, undermining him at every turn with her “that don’t impress me much” expressions and commentary about the meal. It is through this “tell” that Julian can surmise she is not “one of them.” She bears the mark of someone who serves, not someone who is served; therefore, she is but a spy among the rich’s kind as opposed to being of their kind. And so, by the end of the night, per Julian’s insistence, she must take her rightful place on the side of the “givers,” not the “takers.” Or the cooks and the eaters, as it were.

    [ad_2]

    Genna Rivieccio

    Source link

  • ‘Wakanda Forever’ extends reign, ‘She Said’ struggles

    ‘Wakanda Forever’ extends reign, ‘She Said’ struggles

    [ad_1]

    “Black Panther: Wakanda Forever” pulled in $67 million in its second weekend.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Anya Taylor-Joy had a ‘life-changing’ experience on ‘Furiosa’ | CNN

    Anya Taylor-Joy had a ‘life-changing’ experience on ‘Furiosa’ | CNN

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    Anya Taylor-Joy is staying busy.

    “The Queen’s Gambit” star appears in the prequel to “Mad Max: Fury Road,” called “Furiosa,” and can be seen in “The Menu” alongside Nicholas Hoult.

    Taylor-Joy says she’s getting lots of offers but is selective about what she chooses.

    “All these characters were coming to me that I needed to play, and now, having done this for seven years, I’m in a position where I have to be way more picky about what I choose,” Taylor-Joy told The Hollywood Reporter. “I do think that one can spend their passion, and you want to make sure that you’re putting your passion into things that you care about so that it’s actually refueling that well rather than just taking from you. I never want to fall out of love with my art.”

    One of those roles was in “Furiosa.” She just wrapped filming a few weeks ago and said it was an experience she will never forget.

    “It will take me the full two years before the movie comes out to even begin to process what I just left 12 days ago. [‘Furiosa’] was the most life-changing experience that I’ve ever had, with such talented artists. I really felt like I grew so much, but yes, it’s wild. It’s utterly unique,” Taylor-Joy said.

    Taylor-Joy stars in the film alongside Chris Hemsworth, Tom Burke and Nathan Jones.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • F Is For Fascism, Not Freedom: Amsterdam Shows That, When It Comes to the Many Incongruities of U.S. Politics, History Repeats

    F Is For Fascism, Not Freedom: Amsterdam Shows That, When It Comes to the Many Incongruities of U.S. Politics, History Repeats

    [ad_1]

    Considering David O. Russell is the type of person who would write his college thesis on the United States intervention in Chile, his commitment to “being political” (when he’s not being philosophical) in the majority of his films is par for the course. What annoyed conservatives would call the usual “Hollywood liberal bullshit.” But Amsterdam is by far Russell’s most grandiose statement on American politics. Particularly as it pertains to the recent attempt at a coup on January 6, 2021. And this could likely be part of the reason why Americans seemed so averse to watching it, as the film has now notoriously bombed at the box office (costing the studio roughly one hundred million dollars in losses—but it’s not like they’re not good for it, right?).

    With a fresh release in Europe, however, perhaps the movie will have slightly better odds at attracting a more open and understanding audience. An ilk that can see the U.S. and its government objectively for what it is: positively villainous. And yes, for a movie called Amsterdam, very little of the plot actually takes place there. Most of the stage, in fact, is set in New York, where Russell opens the timeline in 1933—better known as: the height of the Great Depression. An economic circumstance that provided plenty of opportunity for demagogues around the world to take power (including, obviously, Hitler). As well as the rich financial backers who would want such a thing to occur in order to influence and control that power.

    Ah, but before all that, there was “the war to end all wars.” A real laugh of a tagline for World War I. But nonetheless, simps who trusted in their government went to battle without question for that war. Men like Burt Berendsen (Christian Bale) and Harold Woodsman (John David Washington). The former is a doctor essentially forced to use his skills overseas by his Park Avenue parents-in-law who think this is what will make him respectable in the eyes of their peers. The latter is among the many Black men forced to wear French uniforms while fighting against the enemy because the white men don’t want to be seen sharing the same fatigues, as they represent the “real” America. And oh, how they do with that “logic.” This blatant form of racism that the white soldiers still find time to employ despite being, you know, up against death every day is something that upsets General Bill Meekins (Ed Begley Jr.) greatly. And it’s part of why he asks Burt to step in as the doctor for the Black soldiers, being that he doesn’t seem too prone to discrimination a.k.a. just leaving them to bleed out because they’re Black.

    So it is that an unbreakable bond is formed between Burt and Harold. One that transmogrifies into a triangular bond with a nurse named Valerie (Margot Robbie), who takes care of both of them when they end up shrapnel-filled in her hospital. Shrapnel that, as she eventually shows them, she turns into art (one of the most charming and Wes Anderson meets Jean-Pierre Jeunet details of Amsterdam). This comes after also revealing that she’s not actually French, though she has been speaking it the entire time (for it’s easy to fool non-French speaking Americans of one’s “authenticity”). But that’s just one of the many “kooky quirks” of Valerie, in addition to her knowing a man who can help Burt pin down a decent glass eye—having lost his while “fighting for democracy,” or something.

    The British Paul Canterbury (Mike Meyers, who likes to play characters with “eye things,” if View From the Top is an indication) knows all about the nuances of the eye. Accordingly, he offers Burt a quality glass one for his trouble of coming all the way to Amsterdam, where Valerie has ferried him and Harold. In Paul’s company is an American named Henry Norcross (Michael Shannon), another man using glass eye manufacturing as a front for intelligence gathering. Valerie has done some of her own for them in the past, and knows that things work quid pro quo. That, one day, they’ll call upon the trio for something in return.

    But, for now, this period in Amsterdam is what Valerie calls “the dream.” Whatever comes after will be horrible, which is why she’s adamant to Burt that they shouldn’t break up their Bande à Part ways (not that she uses that term—since said movie wouldn’t come out until the 60s) just so he can go back home to his wife, Beatrice (Andrea Riseborough). A wife that so obviously doesn’t give a shit about him, especially not now that he’s “mangled.” Cast out of Park Avenue, Burt goes rogue on practicing medicine, specializing solely in the specific pains of veterans. Those who, in addition to the presence of his own constant physical pain, have inspired him to cook up various chemical compounds commonly referred to as “drugs.” Ones he says need to be created because what’s out there ain’t cuttin’ the mustard in terms of catering to the level of agony veterans have.

    This is back in the New York of 1933, when fifteen years have passed since that glorious Amsterdam blip that allowed Valerie and Harold to love each other freely, without the tarring and feathering of U.S. racism. Once Burt breaks up the triad, however, it all dismantles. For Valerie is asked by Harold to pull some strings with her mysterious, but powerful family—the one she ran away from—to get Burt out of jail. Because of course that’s where he would find himself for his ribald, experimental ways upon returning to the Land of the Subjugated and Repressed. Alas, once Valerie does that, it means her family will know where she is, and demand her return. So it is that she pulls the “I’ll leave you before you leave me” maneuver on Harold, departing from Amsterdam soon after she calls in the favor without forewarning him.

    With all of this packed into the first hour, Russell has already woven a complicated web to land us in “present-day” 1933, where we first encountered Burt, and where Bill Meekins’ daughter, Elizabeth (Taylor Swift), has enlisted the services of Harold and Burt to perform an autopsy on her father. Incidentally, that autopsy leads to a budding romance for Burt when he meets the attending medical examiner, Irma St. Clair (Zoe Saldaña). In any case, Liz doesn’t believe her dad simply “died”—she’s convinced he was murdered on his way back from Europe. On a side note, Swift herself might be deemed part of the box office bombing of Amsterdam, being that she’s somewhat illustrious for only acting in doomed projects (ahem, Cats). Indeed, it’s surprising that Swift agreed to be in the movie at all when taking into account her fixation with being “aboveboard” vis-à-vis her squeaky-clean persona. This includes not working with people who have been accused of sexual harassment or violence—a.k.a. David O. Russell and Christian Bale.

    Those critical of certain people’s continued ability to “separate the artist from the work” would likely accuse Swift and co. of “following the wrong god”—a phrase used throughout Amsterdam to refer to how Burt followed the wrong god home from the war. The god of false love. Other men, powerful men, continued to follow the god of power. Stopping at nothing to get more of it, sort of like Prescott Bush. But the Business Plot that Amsterdam centers its events around is not the core of the film. Ultimately, the crux of it is a simple message that has been repeated to deaf ears though the ages: love is more potent than hate. The latter always being the “wrong god.” Something that General Gil Dillenbeck (Robert De Niro) is particularly aware of with his vast experience in war.

    Of all the characters—and there are a great many—in Amsterdam, Dillenbeck is the only one based on a real person, specifically Smedley Butler. The man tapped by a cabal of rich businessmen to influence veterans to stage a coup against the “cripple” president, Franklin Roosevelt. Indeed, the eugenics “philosophy” that was very in vogue at the time (leading to the most extreme version of it in the form of concentration camps) also features prominently in Amsterdam.

    As for the statement Russell is making on the nefarious machinations of the “elite” (only deemed as such because of their endlessly deep pockets and not their character), it’s a resonant theme that has only become more pronounced in the twenty-first century. To boot, it seems no coincidence that one of Sinclair Lewis’ most famed novels, It Can’t Happen Here, was released in 1935—just two years after the Business Plot. Regardless of many still believing that Butler was either a quack or blowing the “plot” out of proportion, the fact remains that even a casual conversation among the rich about wanting to manufacture a government like one of their products is not to be taken lightly.

    Regarding the coterie of unique and memorable characters Russell came up with to weave a tapestry around this historical event, he described it best when he said, “For me as I think of this guy [that Bale plays], I always like outsiders. I always like people on the edges, on the fringes.” Thanks to Amsterdam, Russell might fully become that person in Hollywood. But maybe he’s not too bent out of shape about it, so long as the same Santa Monica diners where he thought up the script for Amsterdam with Bale allow him to keep coming. And dreaming. Those diners being almost like what Amsterdam was to the thick-as-thieves trio in the film. For it was only outside the diner, when the film was made and released, that the dream got crushed.

    [ad_2]

    Genna Rivieccio

    Source link

  • ‘Amsterdam’ and ‘Lyle Lyle’ struggle, letting ‘Smile’ repeat

    ‘Amsterdam’ and ‘Lyle Lyle’ struggle, letting ‘Smile’ repeat

    [ad_1]

    NEW YORK — David O. Russell’s star-studded 1930s mystery “Amsterdam” flopped and the children’s book adaptation “Lyle, Lyle, Crocodile” debuted softly, allowing the horror thriller “Smile” to repeat atop the box office in U.S. and Canada theaters, according to studio estimates Sunday.

    Neither new release caught fire with moviegoers but the disappointment was most acute for “Amsterdam,” a poorly reviewed $80 million screwball romp starring Christian Bale, Margot Robbie and John David Washington. The 20th Century Studios production, co-funded by New Regency and released by the Walt Disney Co., opened with just $6.5 million — a stinging rebuke for the decorated filmmaker of “Silver Linings Playbook” whose splashy ensemble also includes Chris Rock, Anya Taylor-Joy and Taylor Swift.

    Sony Pictures’ “Lyle, Lyle, Crocodile,” a musical based on Bernard Waber’s children’s book featuring Shawn Mendes as the voice of a computer-generated reptile, fared better, collecting $11.5 million in ticket sales. But that still was a relatively modest result, especially for the first major family movie to land in theaters since the summer. The film, which cost $50 million to make, could benefit from children being out of school for Monday’s Columbus Day and little kid-movie competition this month.

    A week after topping the charts with a $22-million launch, Paramount Pictures’ “Smile” remained No. 1 with $17.6 million at the box office — an impressive second week for the modestly budget horror flick. Horror films usually fall steeply in their second week of release but “Smile,” a creepy thriller about trauma and evil spirits, dropped just 22%. To keep the momentum, Paramount on Sunday announced a weeklong series of promotions, including discounted tickets and a “Smile” NFT giveaway for some ticket-buyers on Thursday.

    The best news for Hollywood over the weekend was a sign that adult audiences, after two pandemic-plagued seasons, may be eager to come out for the fall’s top awards contenders. Todd Field’s “Tár,” starring Cate Blanchett as a world-renown conductor, debuted with $160,000 in four New York and Los Angeles theaters, good for a stellar $40,000 per-theater average. After its premiere at the Venice Film Festival, Field’s first film since 2006’s “Little Children” has drawn raves from critics and Oscar nomination predictions for Blanchett.

    The promising start will encourage a long line of awards contenders coming in the next few weeks, including MGM’s Emmett Till drama “Till,” MUBI’s Park Chan-wook thriller “Decision to Leave” and Searchlight Pictures’ “The Banshees of Inisherin,” by writer-director Martin McDonagh.

    At the same time, a prolonged sluggish period in theaters may be coming to a close. Not since “Bullet Train” opened in early August has a film cleared $23 million, a downturn owed in part to a light release schedule. But next week, Universal Pictures debuts “Halloween Ends” both in theaters and on Peacock. The following weekend sees the release of Warner Bros.’ “Black Adam,” with Dwayne Johnson.

    Estimated ticket sales for Friday through Sunday at U.S. and Canadian theaters, according to Comscore. Final domestic figures will be released Monday.

    1. “Smile,” $17.6 million.

    2. “Lyle, Lyle, Crocodile,” $11.5 million.

    3. “Amsterdam,” $6.5 million.

    4. “The Woman King,” $5.3 million.

    5. “Don’t Worry Darling,” $3.5 million.

    6. “Avatar,” $2.6 million.

    7. “Barbarian,” $2.2 million.

    8. “Bros,” $2.2 million.

    9. “Ponniyin Selvan Part One,” $910,000.

    10. “Terrifier 2,” $825,000.

    ———

    Follow AP Film Writer Jake Coyle on Twitter at: http://twitter.com/jakecoyleAP

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Reactions To Chris Pratt’s ‘Mario’ Voice Have Been A Little Harsh

    Reactions To Chris Pratt’s ‘Mario’ Voice Have Been A Little Harsh

    [ad_1]

    Let’s go! The Super Mario Bros. Movie trailer is finally here, and people have some opinions. First of all, the animation looks perfect and the casting of Charlie Day as Luigi couldn’t be more fitting.

    That being said, people are kind of upset at Chris Pratt‘s voice, as expected. Rather than donning the trademark high-pitched Mario voice, Pratt opts for using his regular voice. To be fair, it seems like he’s making a really lazy attempt at a New York accent.

    When the movie was first announced, people were upset that Mario’s voice actor was Chris Pratt. Especially when Charles Marinet, Mario’s voice actor since 1990, was completely available. A lot of people have pointed this problem out, though. Rather than just using readily available voice actors for existing characters, Hollywood almost always opts for bringing major stars in instead. If you look at the cast of the film, you’ll quickly notice how star-studded it is.

    Let’s pop over to Twitter to get a read on how people are feeling.

    People are also picking on Chris Pratt for struggling to remember the name of Mario’s main enemies:

    The Super Mario Bros. Movie is scheduled for release on April 7, 2023. While as of now that’s the only major Mario movie we know of, there are potential spin-offs and sequels on the horizon. There have been rumors of a Donkey Kong spin-off, as well as a Luigi’s Mansion adaptation after Charlie Day expressed interest.

    Every Video Game Movie Ever Made, Ranked From Worst to Best

     

     

    [ad_2]

    Cody Mcintosh

    Source link