W./E. (2011, UK)

I was somewhat hesitant about this one because it was directed by Madonna, and that worried my inner historian. I didn't need to be worried at all. This film was beautiful. The music, the costumes, the sets... everything brought the time period(s) to life. (Yes, even the 1990s were spot on, without being stereotypical.)

I really like Abbie Cornish, but this wasn't my favorite role of hers. (See Candy for pure, unadulterated brilliance.) The real show stealer was Andrea Riseborough. I don't think I've seen anything of hers before, and I don't think I'll ever see anything of hers without thinking, "That is Wallis Simpson." (Oops, I lied. She was Chrissie in Never Let Me Go. What a change!) She completely sweeps the viewer up in her whirlwind. As she says, she's not beautiful but she dresses well. She does everything with style and flair, and it's easy to see how Wallis captured the prince's interest with her infectious personality, carefree manner, and her caring heart.

The use of parallels between Wally and Wallis, 1998 and 1936, were really well done. It's really impossible to do justice to the subtly as Wally becomes obsessed with Wallis, partially to escape the unhappiness of her own marriage. I loved the part when she went to see Mohamed al Fayed to ask if she could read the Duchess of Windsor's private letters, telling him that she wanted to know what the commoner gave up for the king, since everyone focused on what the king gave up for the commoner. (Though not explicitly mentioned, this line of reasoning obviously had an effect on Fayed, whose son had died the previous year while in a relationship with Diana. Well done parallel that further makes 1998 a perfect counterpoint to the 1936 plot.) The film really was about two women in two very different relationships and what they gave up for the men they loved, why they did it, and whether they could live with their choices. Oh, I'm not explaining it well at all. Basically they are very, very different, and yet each of stories really sharpen the clarity of the other's. I also liked the use of water and mirrors as a sort of symbolism.

Anyway, this film is very well done, very artistically done. It says a lot about the struggles and decisions that women sometimes face through the stories of two strong, self-possessed women. I would definitely recommend it.

Rating: 4.0

A Single Man (2009, U.S.)

Wow. This is a truly beautiful film, but in a quiet, understated way. Basically, it's about a man who was in a long term relationship, and his partner dies in a car accident. Because they're gay, the man isn't able to properly or publicly grieve.

It was directed by a fashion designer, which I thought was very clear in the overall look. Everything was brown, white, tan, and black, but then there are moments of bright color, like a little girl's dress—why that? When George remembers the deceased Jim, everything turns into this reddish gold, glowing tone, which is very effective in making his memories feel pleasant and warm, especially in contrast to the stark, painful present.

Colin Firth is absolutely phenomenal. His performance is so subtle and detailed and believable. He was George Falconer. The rest of the cast was good too, but they didn't shine as much as Firth. They also had a great script to work with. It used poetic writing without being saccharine. I thought the plot was more effective than if a woman was mourning her husband because a) he is a man and therefore less able, or allowed, to share his grief with anyone and b) because he is gay and therefore has to hide his love for Jim and therefore his grief.

A lot of the film revolves around the importance of human connection to pull George back from his suicidal grief. It's the "stranger" (student) who does more than George's close and intimate friend. The writer also uses a Huxley novel to talk about minorities and fear. In a college class he teaches, George compares the Nazi fear of Jews to the current fear of homosexuals, and he compares the fear of the unknown (from which most persecution of minorities stems) to the pervading fear of being alone. It was well done, much more smoothly than I can explain it.

The score was one of the best I've heard in awhile, especially as a companion to the film. It is understated for the most part, lovely but unremarkable until the end, when it is very heavy on the violins and much more prominent, as if an audio parallel to the clarity George is finally getting.

The 1960s sets and costumes were beautiful and realistic, which gave the movie a strangely dated feel when the subject matter seemed so current. It really underlines the fact that we have the same problem with gays that we've had for years, and that it's a really backwards mindset to have. Paired with the classroom discussion of Nazi antisemitism, it subtly says, "This is just as prejudiced and just as ridiculous." It was so subtle that I didn't even notice it until I started thinking about the film afterward. I do wonder why they chose a 1960s setting. I see why they didn't use present day and why they wanted to use a post-WWII setting. It's just interesting because the last movie I saw about a socially unaccepted sexual relationship was An Education, which was also set in the 1960s. I guess it's just a good decade to show a parallel with the current hypocritical decade, sexually repressed/judgemental and sexually open all at once. Interesting.

Rating: 4.5