Reviews

3 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
Birdy (1984)
Flying Away From Society (a kind of long synopsis of Birdy's themes)
9 July 2001
Warning: Spoilers
Note: this is best read *after* having seen Birdy, as it contains some general spoilers.

`As scary as a bird's life may be, they always have that. They can fly away.'-Birdy.

To say that Birdy is a film about a young man obsessed with birds and flying is to oversimplify a great deal. Birdy is an extraordinary film that deals with the longing to fly, and everything that such a yearning entails about a person. It's about people who weren't meant to live in this world, this society, who don't belong, who don't fit in and don't really want to fit in. It's about the overwhelming frustration of not having asked for any of `this', yet constantly being reminded that no matter how much one doesn't want to be a part of it all, just by being human there is no escape; the world will not let you do as you want, and one cannot fly away. In director Alan Parker's vision, these feelings that are so hard to put into words are articulately and beautifully expressed.

I'm not going to focus on plot details as much as on what Birdy is `about', but I will just say that Matthew Modine gives an incredible performance as Birdy. At moments his greatest power simply comes from his eyes and facial expressions (especially in his scenes in the military asylum). This is a perfect example of superb casting and an actor just disappearing into his role. Obviously the character of Birdy is central to understanding the film, and his fascination with birds and particularly their flight is his way of trying to deal with a cold, insensitive world while being a sensitive individual. His growing obsession with his birds and disassociation with the outside world comes with his realization that he is alone and no one understands him, even Al (Nicholas Cage), his best and only friend.

Birdy doesn't care about the outside world, and his ideas of what is truly important and what freedom is couldn't be further from the society that tells him to be concerned with superficial things. He is pure to the highest extent in that he is not in the least tainted by the constant pressure the world places on him to fit in and be `normal'. Al connects him to the outside world, and allows him to share some of his dreams to a certain degree, but Birdy more or less continues to live in his own little world. And even though Birdy isn't disturbing anyone, it seems that just the little things that mean so much to him are what are constantly threatened to be taken away. His own mom always threatens to get rid of his birds, and uses this to force Birdy to go to the prom, which he has no interest in. This serves as an example of a relatively trivial matter that is looked upon as some major event in every young person's life. Here Birdy is more or less being told 'fit in, or I'll take away the one thing that you have that truly matters to you'. Similarly, all of Birdy and Al's chances of fun and freedom are taken away throughout the film--their car for example, the closest thing they have to being able to get up and take off. And they get into trouble when they haven't really done anything too bad, showing the ways the uptight, unreasonable society tries to force everyone into line. How it sucks the life out of people is also shown, especially through adult characters like Birdy and Al's parents. While it's true that Birdy's parents just want better for him, they could never understand what would be better for him. This idea of losing any sort of idealism and settling down is shown in Birdy and Al's father's jobs. Birdy's dad is a janitor at his school and Al's is a garbage man. I think I can honestly make a judgement that no one grows up dreaming of or even expecting to become one of the above jobs. But time and time again the world crushes ideals and hopes and dreams and forces everyone into some kind of role.

Birdy and Al's going off to Vietnam is not only the ultimate example of being forced to do something one doesn't want--- of no escape and no choice--- but also shows the irony of war for people like Birdy, who doesn't want anything to do with this world anyway, and the anti-authoritarian Al. Supposedly they are fighting for freedom; yet is this really freedom for people who never even wanted to be part of this society in the first place? Freedom for the very society that crushes their souls and determines how they will live, to continue to exist? The film is brought to its climatic height in the scene that shows what sent Birdy over the edge. As bombs explode and men die around him there is nothing he can do but sit and watch as all sorts of species of birds fly away from the horror. Birdy is sent over the edge with this realization that he *can't* fly like a bird, he is not free and will never truly be on this earth, as a human being.

Finally, I guess at this point it's practically mandatory to comment on the much-debated ending. I personally like it and happen to think its one of the funniest moments in film I've ever seen. But besides, it also fits into the context of the film. Here we have a whimsical film about quirky people doing quirky things. So why should a quirky ending suddenly be considered a cheap gag? Sure it's abrupt, but the entire film has been unconventional and has also had its share of humorous moments. Furthermore, I've noticed a great deal of symmetry throughout Birdy, especially with the `jump/fly' scenes; where every time Birdy gets himself in trouble and it looks as though he's about to fall to his death, and Al gets all worried, Birdy manages to be okay and land on his feet (sort of). If you watch closely, and also listen (to the music which seems to signify these scenes) a lot more than you may have expected will fall into place. I also just want to quickly mention how beautifully and poetically shot some of the scenes are (a great moment is when we fly from a bird's point of view). Obviously, a lot more can be said and be gotten out of Birdy, and I didn't use many specific examples because there are just too many to choose from, but here I just tried to best sum up what strikes me the most about this film. Anyone who's ever felt absolutely out of place in this world and frustrated with being stuck on the ground here will almost certainly be able to make a connection with this film.
27 out of 31 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Ravenous (1999)
a deliciously savage comedy
11 June 2001
Oh man, where do I begin with my inexplicable obsession with this movie? I think part of the reason I love `Ravenous' so much is that it often seems that no one else does; either due to not having seen it, or just not appreciating it. I admit, it's the kind of movie you're going to love or hate, either you get it or you don't. But I can remember seeing it in the theater the first time, and just not being able to believe that I was laughing at what I was laughing at. That's really the best way I can sum up my reaction to this film; there's a certain absurdity underlying all of its themes. It seems like the biggest confusion with people/critics and `Ravenous' is over whether or not it's intent is to be comic. Indeed the comic tone is established from the very beginning, from the opening quotes and first scene. To be sure, it is certainly dark, very very dark comedy, with an interesting mix of `cannibal/vampirism' (see Roger Ebert's review, the only one I've read that does Ravenous justice). However, director Antonia Bird does carry some more serious themes throughout Ravenous, but with a biting satirical edge-- she particularly seems to be commenting on American excessive consumption of all kinds, from meat-eating (and human-flesh eating in this case), to manifest destiny. Most powerful is the truthful notion that we all must "kill to live" in some way or another, and in our willingness or unwillingness to do so, we must differentiate between cowardice and morality. I'm just pounding the dark comedy thing into the ground though because I think that watching Ravenous, it is very important to keep in mind that principally it is supposed to be humorous, and yes, you are supposed to laugh at cannibalism believe it or not, because if you don't, you'll probably just find the film gory and disgusting.

Ravenous is carried by its bold, wacky, charismatic characters. Well, okay, the one exception here is Guy Pearce as central character Captain John Boyd, who is rather subdued in contrast to everyone else, quite intentionally so. Pearce does a very fine job making Boyd very quiet, introspective, and uncomfortable as he is sent to the wonderfully creepy and dysfunctional Fort Spencer, due to his discovered "cowardice" in war. Robert Carlysle is also excellent as the crazy Colqhoun/Ives. I liked the rest of the people at Fort Spencer, all eccentric in their own ways, although all may not last too long. It's nice to see Jeremy Davies as the adorable, religious Toffler, but Neal McDonough is the real stand out as the tough, super-hero like character of Reicht, `the soldier'; with his icy blue eyes and shocking white-blond hair he is the epitome of bravery and masculinity, and certainly forms a direct contrast to the sensitive, cautious, and all-too-human Boyd. Basically, the plot comes to revolve around an old Native American legend--the Wendigo myth–-which states when a man eats another man he takes on his strength and spirit. There are quite a few twists and turns and surprises in Ravenous that should be enough to hold any viewer's attention.

The soundtrack to this film is also quite striking and omnipresent; with original eerily beautiful orchestral tracks that add much of the atmosphere in every situation. Particularly beautiful is the simple, little ‘Boyd's theme', which is used throughout the film as Boyd journeys. The music adds not only to the eerieness of the film, but yes, even the humor. If there is any point at which I still had any kind of doubt about Ravenous being comical it was shattered in a scene where Boyd and Reicht go after the evil Ives, and I hear classic banjo `chase music' complete with yodelling; you just can't help but laugh and shake your head. And even though everyone else already has, I'll give another nod to the cinematography of the gorgeous yet bleak and dangerous icy mountain range.

Ravenous is classic for scenes of such absurd, dark humor in any situation, as when (in the same chase scene) Boyd leaps off a cliff to go tumbling down a hill and crashes into Reicht. Just when a moment is getting serious, it boldly will hit you with such a cartoonish image. Like i said, either you'll love it, or you just won't. It's hard to pinpoint exactly what it is about Ravenous that grabs me so much, but it is just a combination of everything. It's like no movie I've ever seen. It's smart, satirical, observant and insightful (watch for a nice use of Ben Franklin quotes), and yes, funny. While not for everyone, it surely has cult film potential written all over it.
116 out of 144 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
A beautiful little film that is more complex than it seems
1 January 2001
Warning: Spoilers
"All the Little Animals" is a special, strangely beautiful film, powerful in its gentleness, unforgettable in the depth that lies beneath its simplicity. Watching it, one will easily grasp its ideas about being kind to the animals, how animals are innocent, and humans often "evil", and the ensuing exploration of good vs. evil, etc... However, as the story unfolds, it becomes clear that the characters, the plot, and the "moral message" are all used to much more deeply explore themes that deal with just what humans' purpose here on earth is. I felt compelled to comment on "All the Little Animals" after reading several reviews where the critics ripped this complex film apart.

Christian Bale does a wonderful job as Bobby, a 24 year old man with the soul of a child. He is labeled as mentally impaired, but as the film progresses it becomes clearer, or at least to me, that he has been scarred by pain and fear. I don't think I can recall a more innocent grown-up character in a movie, and it is Bobby's very simplicity and innocence that help to continuously identify him with the animals he loves so very much. John Hurt is also very memorable as a man who has devoted his life to burying dead animals, or to be more specific, road kill, all animals that have been killed by humans' carelessness. Certainly, the automobile becomes a prevalent symbol of destruction throughout the film, from Bobby being scarred as a child, to (*possible spoiler*) the later scenes in the film as Bobby's "evil" step-father seems intent on repeating the accident.

Just to quickly sum up what I got out of this film: Reflections on humans' duty as protectors of animals, and of nature in general, stemming from biblical times, seem to be made here. There is one particularly haunting dream sequence where we see Bobby as a boy floating down a river, holding the red fox, protecting it, surrounded by "all the little animals" (and some bigger), all alive. There is an almost heavenly quality to this dream, which for me raised the question of how humans have gotten from being natural creatures, as innocent and harmless as animals, to the unthinking beings who so easily destroy animals, even other humans, and increasingly unconsciously, blinded by their own greed and yes, growing technologies. Obviously these themes can be explored in depth, but since I don't have room here, I'll just say that this is a highly thought-provoking film that for certain people will be dearly special and unforgettable. This is the kind of film I love; quiet, beautiful, strange, and really makes you think about what exactly you are doing here on this planet, and of course, to ask why...
3 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed