Napoleon (2023)
Director: Ridley Scott
Screenwriter: David Scarpa
Starring: Joaquin Phoenix, Vanessa Kirby, Tahar Rahim, Rupert Everett, Paul Rhys

Almost a quarter of a century after his swords and sandals epic Gladiator became a critically acclaimed cultural phenomenon and Oscars Best Picture winner, Ridley Scott re-teams with one of its stars – one of this generation’s leading actors and a multi-time Academy Award nominee, Joaquin Phoenix – to revisit another of history’s most written about leaders, Napoleon Bonaparte of France. With more historically accurate locations and just as many period-appropriate costumes as in his turn of the century fable, this life and times of France’s great-then-disgraced general should be a lot more affecting than it actually is. This bullet point journey through Bonaparte’s rise and fall from power doesn’t make powerful comment on the corruption of man, nor does it evaluate the emperor’s influence on war or peace, on Europe or France or the United Kingdom or Russia. In fact, it doesn’t say much at all…

It would be difficult to chronicle Napoleon’s story and fail to capture the imagination in one way or another. This is one of history’s most important figures, an emblem of power and greed. His various roles in post-revolution France took him across continents, saw him as the figurehead of coups, and brought about the deaths of more than one million people. His was a life filled with so many historically significant events, moments, and decisions, that anyone with so much as an Encyclopaedia Britannica could recount his story with at least some drama, shock and awe. The issue with this $200million film is that the script does little more than precisely that, recounting the significant moments of his leadership as if listing them out of a book, with a cheap and at times barely legible love angle tacked on to evoke empathy and provide commentary on the events that come fast and often with little context.

Joaquin Phoenix tries his best. He dominates every scene, embodying a character he clearly sees as more of a creature than a man. Under his spell, Napoleon Bonaparte is worthy of attention, a character whom we are desperate to investigate, to interrogate. But the film doesn’t allow for that. As we depart the beheading of Marie Antoinette in revolution-era France to first meet our subject, Phoenix is not unlike a lion with his jaw clenched, his eyes glazed, his uniform as extravagant and symbolic as a mane. There is so much promise held within this introduction – a potentially world-shifting performance, some spectacular wardrobe work, effective framing and blocking – and instead it sadly becomes emblematic of a film that leaves so much of its potential unfulfilled.

The bullet point journey through Napoleon’s conquests, political manoeuvres, and exiles, requires an emotional core for any potential audience to attach to, and it finds that in the would-be emperor’s marriage to his beloved Josephine. Vanessa Kirby embodies the infamous leader’s muse as if a witch who has cast a spell, and the Oscar-nominated performer’s turn is at times just as beguiling as Phoenix’s. Together, they never hit the highs of some of their other on-screen relationships (Phoenix in Her, Kirby in Pieces of a Woman), nor is their relationship as moving as that presented by Mel Gibson and Catherine McCormack in Braveheart, or as lustful as that presented by Omar Sharif and Julie Christie in Doctor Zhivago. There isn’t even a sense of dangerous plotting as underlined by the incestuous relationship hinted at between Phoenix and Connie Nielsen in Gladiator, which at least provoked a reaction. In Napoleon, Phoenix and Kirby are believably brought together, but they are far from enchanted by one another, and as time passes and events occur, you expect that to become part of the commentary on Napoleon’s lack of humanity, but it doesn’t. Napoleon instead frames this relationship as the beating heart of its subject, as the primary motivating factor, the biggest achievement, the biggest regret. And the film only takes brief moments to dissect this, or even present a valid argument as to how the relationship motivated the man to achieve otherworldly horrors. Theirs is a story that runs parallel to the story of Napoleon’s “achievements”, evolving from time to time but largely suffering from the same “this happens and then this happens and then this happens” that plagues the rest of the tale.

Beyond the limitations of David Scarpa’s screenplay, which was no doubt limited in its potential by the vast period of time it sought to cover (a period of more than 25 years), and the effects this has on Claire Simpson’s editing and pacing of the film, Napoleon does achieve a lot cinematically. First and foremost, the costume work is spectacular. David Crossman and Janty Yates’ work in costuming is nothing short of stellar, and a glimpse at the level of quality many expected a modern Ridley Scott historical epic to achieve. Everyone looks unique and period-appropriate, but the smaller details on the limited selection of main characters are worthy of the biggest screen possible and plenty of critical acclaim. Similarly, the production design by Arthur Max is a significant factor in bringing cinematic qualities to scenes that are otherwise inconsequential or at least far from unmissable. The party and governmental scenes are where the latter shines the brightest, some sequences decked out and presented as if the period’s great paintings.

Ridley Scott must be commended for his role in bringing this to life, too. Some shots are of the highest cinematic calibre, a master clearly touching on the greatness that has been foundational to his visually impressive career to date. His party scenes are filled with life, there are unique physical qualities to many of the major historical figures at play in the story, and he seems intent on ensuring that not a single battle is presented in as bland a fashion as many other director’s have long since settled. His work with cinematographer Dariusz Wolski in the capturing of cold, of fog, of early morning winter sunrises, imbues the piece with a sense of reality and ensures that nobody can be bored by the achievements held within each frame. Some sequences, such as the one in which Napoleon takes Moscow, are worthy even of a highlight reel that includes The Duellists, Alien, Blade Runner, Thelma & Louise and Gladiator.

As has often been the case in more recent Scott movies, there are also shots, scenes and sometimes even entire sequences that seem absent of his once unique and form-topping touch. Early on, it is easy to be removed from the reality of the time period courtesy of poor CGI, such as that showing Joaquin Phoenix riding a horse on a beach or large crowds resembling AI renditions more than actual people. The picture is also so awash with greys that it seems more like a mid-2000s early digital filmmaking release than even Scott’s own from that era. Some night time shots are utterly spectacular, and seem to be of the same school as those celebrated in Jordan Peele’s Nope, but there are vast periods in which everything looks washed out, and it is almost certain that minutes of this film will be barely legible (too dark) to anyone who eventually watches it at home.

Ridley Scott has spoken a lot in the press tour for Napoleon about how his movies do not need to be historically accurate. When a film seeks to explore something thematically, personally, or ideologically, then Scott is most certainly correct. Film is art, and art seeks truth rather than fact. Gladiator worked because of this perspective, because of how it abandoned fact in search of the truth held within the myth. But Napoleon doesn’t do that. It presents moment after moment from the history books, often inaccurately out of negligence as opposed to deeper purpose. There is no doubt that a lot of care and artistry can be seen on screen in Napoleon, but that negligence will be the story of this film: a movie that could have been great, that could have meant something, that could have simply been accurate, and ended up being none of those things. Like Napoleon himself, Napoleon thinks itself as greater than it is. It isn’t insulting like Ridley Scott’s idea of Napoleon firing canons into the Great Pyramid of Giza was to historians the world over, but it does offer only glimmers at its full might. Some individual pieces are greater than the whole in this instance, and what a shame that is. This should have been special.

Score: 15/24

Recommended for you: Ridley Scott Films Ranked

In this edition of Ranked, we at The Film Magazine are taking a look at these 8 films, the Best Picture nominees that found massive box office success. These are movies that smashed records and received critical praise, while managing to reach the masses and enthral Oscar voters. From pioneers in special effects to genre-defining stories of love and loss, these blockbusters pursued the highest artistic integrity, became touchstones in cinema, and stayed with us long after the lights went up. From fantasy epics to disaster movies, supervillain origin stories to legacy sequels, here is Every $1Billion+ Best Picture Nominee Ranked.

Follow @thefilmagazine on Twitter.

8. Joker (2019)

Joker Review

Set against the backdrop of the increasingly volatile and corrupt home of Batman, Gotham City, Joker tells the story of Arthur Fleck (Joaquin Phoenix), an aspiring stand-up comic who just can’t catch a break. After an assault on the subway results in a violent and deadly confrontation, Arthur slowly descends into madness and unknowingly becomes the symbol of the oppressed and downtrodden.

Joker’s success can largely be attributed to our collective thirst for something outside the increasingly predictable, paint-by-numbers formula of the Marvel Cinematic Universe. Gone are the witty one-liners and post-credits scenes; say goodbye to the colorful and smooth spandex suits and lengthy action sequences. Instead, director Todd Philips opts to paint a grim and intimate portrait of a man just trying to get by; a man largely ignored and abused by the system. Clearly inspired by the films of Martin Scorsese, namely Taxi Driver and The King of Comedy, Joker is frustratingly self-serious, desperately trying to say something deep and meaningful without saying much of anything at all.

Whilst Joker falls short thematically, it excels in performance. Joaquin Phoenix, who won his first Oscar for this role, is tremendous. Following in the footsteps of Cesar Romero, Jack Nicolson and Heath Ledger, Phoenix makes the Joker his own, breathing new life into a character that has been a constant presence for comic book fans for more than 80 years.

Despite the divisive response amongst audiences and critics, Joker no doubt made its mark on the superhero genre. In addition to its nomination for Best Picture, the film was nominated for a total of 11 Oscars, breaking The Dark Knight’s previous record of 8 nominations for a superhero movie.

Recommended for you: 2020 Oscars Best Picture Nominees Ranked

7. Avatar (2009)

James Cameron is no stranger to box office success. With Avatar, Cameron managed to beat his own record, unseating Titanic as the highest-grossing film ever made. At the 82nd Academy Awards, the film was nominated for 9 Oscars including Best Picture, and won 3. The film was in development for roughly a decade whilst Cameron waited for the right technology to become available. When it eventually premiered in 2009, Avatar was groundbreaking – showing off numerous innovations in visual effects, including motion capture.

Avatar takes place sometime in the distant future. Earth’s resources are depleting and humans have set their sights on mining and colonizing the moon of Pandora. Marine Jake Sully (Sam Worthington) is selected for the avatar program and tasked with earning the trust of the indigenous Na’vi people and convincing them to relocate. But when Jake meets and falls in love with Neytiri (Zoe Saldana), he must decide whose side he’s really on and what he’s willing to fight for.

While Avatar’s visuals were unmatched at the time, its storytelling leaves something to be desired. The dialog is often stilted and the characters, especially Jake and his fellow Marines, sound more like video game Non-Player Characters (NPCs) than real people. The narrative is one we’ve seen countless times before, and although the story is largely predictable, it’s also accessible, which no doubt helps with regard to the film’s wide appeal.

The Master (2012)
Director: Paul Thomas Anderson
Screenwriter: Paul Thomas Anderson
Starring: Philip Seymour Hoffman, Joaquin Phoenix, Amy Adams, Jesse Plemons, Price Carson, Bruce Goodchild

Suffering, sexual depravity, dysfunctional non-biological paternalism and a chance meeting that changes everything – Paul Thomas Anderson’s 2012 masterpiece The Master is not without all the signature trimmings we’ve come to know and love from one of American cinema’s most respected 21st century directors. 10 years on and the truths it serves resonate more profoundly than ever. Undeniably, The Master has left a mark on the history of cinema.

Following a stint in the US Navy, Freddie Quell (Joaquin Phoenix), a depraved alcoholic, can’t hold a job or a girlfriend down. Fuelled by his own dangerous concoctions, Freddie stumbles into a yacht where he enters the orbit of charismatic cult leader Lancaster Dodd (Philip Seymour Hoffman). Freddie, vulnerable, sex-hungry and traumatised, is invited to stay with Lancaster and Peggy Dodd (Amy Adams) so that he can join “the Cause”. Freddie hungrily laps up the higher purpose offerings of “the Cause” and quickly becomes the meathead muscle mouthpiece for Lancaster Dodd’s dictum.

Freddie is a man that wants to be dominated – perhaps from his time spent in the Navy – and most certainly displays severe symptoms of Post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). Lancaster is a megalomaniac, splaying out tendrils of control across everything he touches. Their relationship becomes symbiotic, mutually poisonous, fired up with oedipal homoeroticism (see lyrics to Depeche Mode’s “Master and Servant”), the pair at once propping each other up and simultaneously dragging each other down. Underpinned by the stunning score written by Radiohead’s Jonny Greenwood and performed by The Aukso Chamber Orchestra, the tension holds throughout and makes for an uneasy watch.

Parallels between Lancaster and Scientology founder L. Ron Hubbard are present throughout but feel peripheral to the central focus of the film. In fact, the actual matters of story and plot serve only to support the infinite moments between the characters. The outstanding performances and carefully crafted characters are what hold this film together, with the main cast scoring a hat-trick of Oscar nominations for their performances. Joaquin Phoenix’s sexually-charged and raw delivery makes for mesmerising viewing, while the late Phillip Seymour Hoffman’s memorable and magnetic performance stands the test of time and multiple viewings. Amy Adams stunningly portrays a powerfully dedicated wife in the role of Peggy Dodd, the great woman behind Lancaster Dodd’s vision of a great leader, which NPR accurately describe as a kind of modern Lady Macbeth moment.

Paul Thomas Anderson creates a world which echoes the real world, and ten years on, post-Trump, following the rise of viral Netflix documentary specials like ‘Tiger King’ and ‘Keep Sweet: Pray and Obey’, the trajectory of personality into power is a narrative that still captures our attention (see also Once Upon a Time… in Hollywood). Perhaps if The Master were set today, Lancaster Dodd would be misogynistic TikTok influencer Andrew Tate.

The grip that Hoffman’s character Lancaster Dodd has over Joaquin Phoenix’s character Freddie, and the other cult members, weakens over time. And, having started with nothing, Freddie is somehow left with even less than before. It could be speculated that Joaquin Phoenix, who would go on to become the star of Todd Phillips’ groundbreaking Joker (2019), drew on personal experience of growing up in the religious cult, Children of God.

Beautiful static shots and stylised framing contrasted with frenetic camera movements give an insight into the psychological state of the characters on the screen. The power of one human over another, delusion, self-belief, animality – things we can’t measure or harness – are explored in ways that make this feel like a film about the unrestricted magic of charisma.

In one of the most memorable scenes – an inexplicably naked gathering of cult members (big Brave New World energy) – Amy Adams (as Peggy) delivers a performance that shows enduring talent and further establishes Adams as screen-royalty. The composition, light and texture help play out the debased imagination of sex-addict Freddie, and what is imagined by Freddie is given as much gravitas as the ‘real’ events, which is part of the mastery of Paul Thomas Anderson: the ability to reach for an image that goes in aware of its own futility to being able to describe something of what it means to have human experience – Magnolia’s raining frogs comes to mind.

The lack of resolution or clear takeaway at the end is possibly frustrating. Many people may feel that they just weren’t able to ‘get it’. Perhaps it’s possible to enjoy The Master for what it is – complex characters explored on screen, a presentation of the worlds that can be found in the space between strained relationships? 10 years on, The Master is one of the seminal works of its masterful director, a watching experience you won’t forget in a hurry.

Score: 21/24

Written by Rachael Norris

Rachael Norris is a pop-culture nerd who usually writes about literature but has interests ranging from Harry Styles to Samuel Beckett. Rachael is especially concerned with 90s rom-coms and anything starring Steve Buscemi.

It’s no joke, the follow up to Todd Phillips‘ smash hit Joker is already making waves with some potential casting news. Pop superstar and actress, Lady Gaga, is in early talks to star opposite Joaquin Phoenix in the recently announced sequel.

Details around Lady Gaga’s character are unknown, but many have speculated that she will be playing the clown prince of crime‘s psychiatrist turned lover, Harley Quinn. If this pans out, then we will have two live-action Quinns on the big screen, with Margot Robbie’s version having appeared in three films in the DCEU, including The Suicide Squad and Birds of Prey. These incarnations will not be connected, as Joker exists outside of the DCEU in its own standalone universe.

Lady Gaga starred in the 2018 remake of A Star is Born, which Joker writer-director Todd Phillips produced. The film was praised by critics and earned Gaga an Oscar nomination for Best Actress. More recently she appeared in Ridley Scott‘s House of Gucci. The film received mixed reviews but Gaga’s performance was commended, garnering SAG and BAFTA nominations.

Sources indicate that the highly anticipated Joker sequel will be a musical. The first film had minor elements of the musical genre, such as a scene in which Joker dances down some stairs, but the sequel will reportedly take that even further. This might have informed the choice to cast Gaga due to her global success as a pop star. Her song Shallow (from A Star is Born) won Best Original Song at the Oscars, so perhaps Warner Bros. are hoping to repeat that success. Joker actor Joaquin Phoenix also has a history of singing, portraying legendary country musician Johnny Cash in Walk the Line. The actor performed all the songs himself, and even learned to play guitar for the role.

This Lady Gaga news follows Todd Phillips announcing the sequel on social media. In his post he teased the potential title of the film, Joker: Folie à deux, referencing a mental disorder that affects two or more people. That title certainly fits the narrative that Gaga could play Quinn.

The first film was hugely successful for Warner Bros., becoming the highest-grossing R-rated film in history, earning an impressive $1,074,251,311 at the box office globally. The film received 11 Oscar nominations, winning Best Actor (Phoenix) and Best Original Score (Hildur Guðnadóttir). It comes as no surprise that the studio are working on a sequel, and adding a star like Lady Gaga may cement their way to further success.

No release date is currently known.

Anderson, like many auteurs, may be best known for the actors he has consistently worked with. Joaquin Phoenix, Daniel Day-Lewis, and Philip Seymour Hoffman have led several of his films to much critical acclaim. Actors who are not often thought of for their great dramatic work have turned in incredible performances too, such as Mark Wahlberg, Adam Sandler, and John C. Reilly. Anderson clearly has a talent for getting the best out of his performers, and working with his team to find the right person for a role. This may be his biggest strength in an industry where the on-screen talent is so often the focus of the movie-going public. 

Outside of his debut Hard Eight, and the Sandler-led Punch-Drunk Love, each of his films have received attention at the Academy Awards, and his work has also earned him Best Director recognition at major film festivals – at Cannes for Punch-Drunk Love, at Berlin for There Will Be Blood, and at Venice for The Master. Magnolia also received the Golden Bear for Best Film at the Berlin International Film Festival. His industry and critical recognition puts him on a level few filmmakers reach. 

It can be difficult to decide where to begin with Anderson’s filmography, so allow us here at The Film Magazine to guide you on your journey through his oeuvre. Here is Where to Start with Paul Thomas Anderson.

1. Boogie Nights (1997)

Paul Thomas Anderson’s breakthrough film brings viewers to the height of the pornographic film industry in 1970s Los Angeles. Mark Walberg leads an ensemble cast composed of Julianne Moore, Burt Reynolds, Heather Graham, John C. Reilly, Don Cheadle, Philip Seymour Hoffman, William H. Macy, and many more. Reynolds is director Jack Horner, a passionate pornographic filmmaker who genuinely wants to create good work. The rest of the cast play porn stars and crew members in Horner’s orbit who help Walberg’s well-endowed Dirk Diggler navigate the new world in which he finds himself. Boogie Nights is ultimately the story of the American dream – striking rich in the entertainment industry and achieving material gains, only to find oneself weighed down by the vices that come along with success. The story is filled with comedy and tragedy, and maintains an exceptional pace throughout. 

What’s interesting about Boogie Nights is that it is as much about the film industry as the porn industry. Anderson’s camera spends more time on the equipment of 1970s filmmaking than it does on Dirk Diggler’s legendary tool. The flashing lights of Polaroids, the film and canisters used to shoot the porn, and diegetic, contemporary film shots are incorporated into Anderson’s movie. The rise of the videotape is documented, and shows how it affected the quality of cinema in every aspect. It creates a characterization of cameras that parallels the humanization of its often objectified subjects. Cinema has been a part of all of our lives for decades, and Anderson celebrates it through all of Boogie Nights’ ups and downs.

Boogie Nights is a good representation of Anderson’s early work, and shows his ability to portray and analyze the human experience without judgment.

2. There Will Be Blood (2007)

Perhaps Paul Thomas Anderson’s best work, There Will Be Blood tells the story of oil magnate Daniel Plainview and his prolonged rivalry with preacher Eli Sunday. Daniel Day-Lewis stars as Plainview in one of the most prolific performances of the great actor’s career. Day-Lewis is a dark, menacing presence with plenty of dimension to help this villainous character feel human. Paul Dano turns in an equally stunning, explosive performance as Sunday, going toe-to-toe with Day-Lewis in every scene they share. It’s tactile in its cinematic style – the heat of burning fires, the slickness of fresh oil, and Daniel Day-Lewis’ grizzled appearance can be felt through the screen. 

The cinematic styling also gives this small story an epic quality, reminiscent of the work of David Lean or John Ford. The camera drinks in the landscape of the slowly urbanizing old west, and turns oil derricks into architectural idols. Flames erupt from them as if hell itself is attempting to emerge onto the earth to drag Daniel Plainview into its maw. Don’t go in expecting similar pacing to Boogie Nights, however – the film takes its time with every shot and scene, lending to the harsh, gruelling journey faced by the characters. The impressionistic aspects of sound, camera, and editing, show that realism is a means utilized by the film, and not only a great accomplishment in its own right. The authenticity and representationalism work in concert with the emotional components of the performances and story as well as the aesthetic style to bring the film to a higher level.

There are hardly any weaknesses in Anderson’s filmography, so to call There Will Be Blood his magnum opus is a testament to its position as a 21st century masterpiece.

3. The Master (2012)

What makes The Master great are the performances from its two lead actors, Joaquin Phoenix and Philip Seymour Hoffman, who play Freddie Quell and Lancaster Dodd respectively. The two share an odd, cosmic relationship. Dodd is the head of a cult called The Cause, and Freddie is an alcoholic seaman with mental health issues. Dodd feels drawn to him despite their seeming differences, but Freddie’s violent outbursts and crude nature create as many problems for the pair as Dodd’s pride and hedonism. 

The Master is somewhat of an enigma of a film. It’s quite provocative and begs for interpretation, but carries no clear meaning. There are numerous influences on the story, and critics have read themes about post-World War II America, religion, and, more specifically, Scientology. The filmmaker himself may not even know. Perhaps that in itself is a goal – The Master is a Rorschach test, a journey into one’s own subconscious to search for a takeaway. There is the question of whether humans can overcome their animalistic nature, as Dodd tries to tame Freddie to bring him into the fold. The characters contrast, but each has their moments where they take on the temperament of the other. 

This relationship is what drives The Master, and if you’re not sold on it then the film may be a laborious watch. It is Paul Thomas Anderson’s favorite of his films, and it deserves a watch from any cinephile for that reason alone.

Recommended for you: Paul Thomas Anderson Films Ranked

As of writing, Paul Thomas Anderson has released nine films, and there’s reason for any of them to be in this guide. It hurts to not include Phantom Thread or Punch-Drunk Love, and you really can’t go wrong checking out any of his movies.

To Die For (1995)
Director: Gus Van Sant
Screenwriter: Buck Henry
Starring: Nicole Kidman, Matt Dillon, Joaquin Phoenix, Casey Affleck, Illeana Douglas, Alison Folland, Wayne Knight

Suzanne Stone is a manipulative, cunning, career-driven woman. She’s also a murderer. On its 25^th anniversary, Gus Van Sant’s To Die For expresses clear and often uncomfortable connotations to grooming and abuse, and both cultural and societal roles imprinted on women pre-Millennium. Eager to get into television and quickly become a famous journalist, Suzanne Stone takes a job at a local TV station. Starting with a report on the kids of the local community, Suzanne befriends three teenagers and grooms them into killing her husband.

Gus Van Sant had already made a name for himself by the turn of the century, with directing credits for My Own Private Idaho (1991), Good Will Hunting (1997) and the shot-for-shot remake of Psycho (1998) sitting amongst his most memorable work, as well as book-to-film adaptations such as Mala Noche (1985) and Even Cowgirls Get the Blues (1993). To Die For is one of his strong list of 1990s releases, this film adapted from Joyce Maynard’s 1992 novel which, in turn, is based on the Pamela Smart murder case of 1990.

Nicole Kidman is striking as Suzanne Stone, with her charming yet wicked smile and intense monologues into the camera. She holds herself and her character with grace, slowly and expertly progressing the façade that Suzanne carries through the narrative. It’s easy to be distracted by the iconic looks that the costume department created; putting To Die For up there with Elle in Legally Blonde and Cher in Clueless for delivering another embodiment of the stylish and unforgettable blonde bombshell.

Suzanne is, of course, the ultimate threat to the male-controlled entertainment industry of pre-2000. At a dinner meeting with a sleazy TV exec, Suzanne is told that she must be willing to do anything to get further in her career, while being touched inappropriately. Once she understands his meaning, her continuous motive becomes clear: that’s not how she’s going to do things. Suzanne then becomes the manipulator, demanding a job at the local TV station and working incredibly hard on her journalism, taking chances instead of asking for them. Initially, it presents a particularly empowering tone, until her actions become very clearly misguided and her relentless greed becomes apparent.

Joaquin Phoenix (Joker) is only 20 in To Die For, but his talents are evidently boundless – it’s baffling to think that it’s only recently that he has become a household name. Taking on the role of James “Jimmy” Emmett, he quickly falls for Suzanne’s impressive looks and wholesome charm, starting a seemingly innocent relationship with her. Phoenix portrays Jimmy’s vulnerability effortlessly, his naivety blooming in such a childlike way that it makes Jimmy and Suzanne’s relationship all the more uncomfortable to witness. Suzanne grooms him and his friends, Lydia and Russell, to murder her husband, only to avoid them once the job is done and, further, verbally abuse them. Her manipulative and insulting tendencies are rather terrifying, yet Suzanne remains such a mesmerising character.

Ending somewhat comedically and certainly in a satisfying way that offers great closure, Van Sant’s direction and Elfman’s haunting soundtrack work in harmony to leave this disturbing narrative with something tangible and pure, quite the opposite of the fake and wishful world of television that Suzanne pursues.

On its 25th Anniversary, To Die For sits perfectly in the throngs of today’s culture; showing explicitly the drive and determination felt among women continuing to live in a man’s world. As a pair, Nicole Kidman and Joaquin Phoenix deservedly take the spotlight, but To Die For is a genuinely engaging and at times challenging film constructed with the same mastery apparent in Van Sant’s other work; a film that remains as watchable as ever.

18/24

Lynne Ramsay’s 2018 psychodrama, You Were Never Really Here, doesn’t explicitly use the music of Aphex Twin, but its mood and score, composed by Jonny Greenwood, rely heavily upon it. A harrowing story of a contract killer tasked with rescuing a girl from a pedophile ring, the Joaquin Phoenix-led thriller is a balanced, troubling film, more straightforward than Ramsay’s previous work, and with meditative lapses in action that leave as much of a pit in your stomach as watching Phoenix beat someone down. For Ramsay, it was the spirit of an Aphex Twin song “#3” that inspired her, citing “a shot in the film where there’s a girl in the street and she’s crying… I played [“#3”] for Joaquin and we were looking at the shot and we were both mesmerized.” Some of the boldest shots in We Need to Talk About Kevin, Ramsay’s Tilda Swinton-starring breakthrough, are without music, relying totally on an actor’s face. Really Here is darker and more minimalist by comparison: a shot of blood catching in Joe’s (Phoenix) sprawling gray beard is unceremonious. Not quite flat, but without the pomp one might expect when the script calls for blood to be splattered on the leading man’s money-maker. Stepping in for the lack of visual drama, music elevates the scene: Greenwood’s score lurches into the shot just as Joe’s face is painted dark red, light synth drums picking up the pace just as the audience is given a taste of the odds Joe is up against. 

Powerful outside forces reclaim the girl Joe rescues, and after narrowly surviving an encounter with heavily-armored hit-men, Joe realizes his mother may be in danger. He visits her house to find her shot in bed, a pillow over her face for a silencer. Memories of a violent childhood flash on screen, replicating the thoughts and regrets that barge into Joe’s mind at a moment’s notice. He’s a war veteran, and former FBI agent, alluding to both his current mental state and a past of failed attempts to channel his violent skills into legal contexts. Rather than fly into a rage after seeing his mother, however, he makes his way calmly down the stairs and into the kitchen, where the two killers are idling. Joe draws, shoots one, then the other, but the second man doesn’t die right away. Joe leans over him and demands information; he gives it to him, and so on, but in a change of mood, Joe kneels down and offers the man a painkiller. He lays on the ground to hold his hand, the kitchen tile turning a distorted shade of crimson, and the killer takes his final breaths. The audience knows that Joe wasn’t shot, but the image of his body lying on the ground next to the near-lifeless assassin suggests he isn’t far from death. The camera lingers over their necks and hands as they sing along to the radio, and with no score from Greenwood, their humanity is seen in a shared knowledge of Charlene’s “I’ve Never Been to Me”, the perfect soundtrack for the moment: a song each of them know too well, drawing yet another line from Joe to the man bleeding on the floor. There’s a certain level of empathy to every scene in the film, but seeing as Joe was cracking a pedophile’s skull to rescue a girl not twenty minutes earlier, it’s easy to feel caught off guard by this tender moment. A life in the military and FBI has trained him to kill without emotion, but it’s also confirmed the rarity of a chance to make things right. The men’s roles could easily be reversed, Joe bleeding on the floor, with a song about the deceptive nature of paradise to play him out, and Ramsay’s decision to have him pause and lie down with this man, singing this song, creates that moving effect. 

A more subtle borrowing of musical motifs comes in an underwater burial Joe performs for his mother. To this point, Greenwood’s score has primarily kicked in to bolster a scene: Joe gets covered in blood, and a beat drops in to highlight his surprise, or he prepares materials for a rescue while light synths accentuate a montage. For the burial scene, a softer touch is required. Wrapped in a black trash bag, Joe attaches rocks to his mother’s makeshift coffin and walks her into a lake, himself dressed in a suit and tie. She begins to sink, but Joe has placed rocks in his own pockets as well, and only after recalling the uncertain fate of the girl he rescued does he dig them out and swim to the surface. Compared to the way Greenwood’s score is used in other scenes, the music here capitalizes on multiple emotions, emphasizing the uncertainty of the future, the mother’s death, and Joe’s possible rebirth. The song used here, “Tree Synthesizers”, is Greenwood’s homage to “#3”, constructed around two back-and-forth chords that resolve in a third, like the feeling of stepping onto dry land after a day at sea. This could be Joe’s funeral, and the music seems to encourage it; there’s nothing to bolster, just a rocking sense of finality, yet the presence of the resolving third chord contains margin for something else: it could be an exasperated sigh, the end of a life of pain and endless regret. Or, it could be a step in a new direction, something that provides freedom from a clinging past. Joe’s mind turns to the girl, now in the hands of the same people who killed his mother, bound to end up right where she was before Joe found her. His decision is made, and as Joe claws to the surface, he appears renewed. Really Here isn’t a precisely “healing” film, but with moments like this, there’s no better descriptor. 

At the crossroads between life and death, past and future, a song has immense emotional power. “Tree Synthesizers” isn’t just any song, either, but a finely tuned microcosm of Joe’s existence: back and forth, with only temporary moments of reprieve. You Were Never Really Here will long be remembered for the way it dodges convention in individual scenes, but with every one of these moments there is applicable music, meant to bolster or break up the violence so that Joe’s journey is more than a straight line to revenge. He is jagged, bothered, and quintessentially “messed up”, and a score that challenges his tenderness and rage is a unique way to soundtrack such a film, dialoguing with Joe’s tortured humanity rather than admonishing or glorifying it. For as violent as it is, You Were Never Really Here is a calming experience.

Written by Cole Clark

You can support Cole Clark in the following places:

Twitter – @colelclark

South Korean film Parasite and British film 1917 were the dominant awards winners however, the pair taking home a number of technical awards as well as sharing the Best Film awards, Sam Mendes taking home the Best Director award in the process.

Elsewhere, Andy Serkis and Lucasfilm head Kathleen Kennedy were handed the awards for Outstanding British Contribution to Cinema and the BAFTA Fellowship awards respectively, rounding out a night dominated by calls from presenters, winners and His Majesty Prince William for greater opportunity for under-represented groups in cinema and at major awards shows.

The full list of BAFTA Film Awards winners 2020:

BEST FILM – 1917
The Irishman
Joker
Once Upon a Time… In Hollywood
Parasite

OUTSTANDING BRITISH FILM – 1917
Bait
For Sama
Rocketman
Sorry We Missed You
The Two Popes

FILM NOT IN THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE – Parasite
The Farewell
For Sama
Pain & Glory
Portrait of a Lady on Fire

DOCUMENTARY – For Sama
American Factory
Apollo 11
Diego Maradona
The Great Hack

ANIMATED FILM – Klaus
Frozen II
A Shaun the Sheep Movie: Farmageddon
Toy Story 4

DIRECTOR – Sam Mendes (1917)
Martin Scorsese – The Irishman
Todd Phillips – Joker
Quentin Tarantino – Once Upon a Time… In Hollywood
Bong Joon-Ho – Parasite

LEADING ACTRESS – Renee Zellweger (Judy)
Jessie Buckley – Wild Rose
Scarlett Johansson – Marriage Story
Saoirse Ronan – Little Women
Charlize Theron – Bombshell

CASTING – Joker
Marriage Story
Once Upon a Time… In Hollywood
The Personal History of David Copperfield
The Two Popes

LEADING ACTOR – Joaquin Phoenix (Joker)
Leonardo DiCaprio – Once Upon a Time In Hollywood
Adam Driver – Marriage Story
Taron Egerton – Rocketman
Jonathan Price – The Two Popes

SUPPORTING ACTRESS – Laura Dern (Marriage Story)
Scarlett Johansson – Jojo Rabbit
Florence Pugh – Little Women
Margot Robbie – Bombshell
Margot Robbie – Once Upon a Time… In Hollywood

SUPPORTING ACTOR – Brad Pitt (Once Upon A Time… In Hollywood)
Tom Hanks – A Beautiful Day in the Neighborhood
Anthony Hopkins – The Two Popes
Al Pacino – The Irishman
Joe Pesci – The Irishman

ORIGINAL SCREENPLAY – Parasite
Booksmart
Knives Out
Marriage Story
Once Upon a Time… In Hollywood

ADAPTED SCREENPLAY – Jojo Rabbit
The Irishman
Joker
Little Women
The Two Popes

CINEMATOGRAPHY – 1917
The Irishman
Joker
Le Mans ’66
The Lighthouse

PRODUCTION DESIGN – 1917
The Irishman
Jojo Rabbit
Joker
Once Upon a Time… In Hollywood

COSTUME DESIGN – Little Women
The Irishman
Jojo Rabbit
Judy
Once Upon a Time… In Hollywood

MAKE UP & HAIR – Bombshell
1917
Joker
Judy
Rocketman

EDITING – Le Mans ’66
The Irishman
Jojo Rabbit
Joker
Once Upon a Time… In Hollywood

ORIGINAL SCORE – Joker
1917
Jojo Rabbit
Marriage Story
Little Women
Star Wars: The Rise of Skywalker

SOUND – 1917
Joker
Le Mans ’66
Rocketman
Star Wars: The Rise of Skywalker

SPECIAL EFFECTS – 1917
Avengers: Endgame
The Irishman
The Lion King
Star Wars: The Rise of Skywalker

BRITISH SHORT ANIMATION – Grandad Was A Romantic
In Her Boots
The Magic Boat

BRITISH SHORT FILM – Learning to Skateboard In A Warzone (If You’re A Girl)
Azaar
Goldfish
Kamali
The Trap

OUTSTANDING DEBUT BY A BRITISH WRITER, DIRECTOR OR PRODUCER – Bait
For Sama
Maiden
Only You
Retablo

EE RISING STAR AWARD – Michael Ward

OUTSTANDING CONTRIBUTION TO BRITISH CINEMA – Andy Serkis

BAFTA Fellowship Award – Kathleen Kennedy

[DISPLAY_ULTIMATE_SOCIAL_ICONS]

Awards season is upon us once again, and so too is the discourse around who has, hasn’t and should have been nominated.

The BAFTA and Oscar noms have caused the most dismay – white actors nominated twice at the expense of the inclusion of people of colour, the distinct lack of Jennifer Lopez in the Supporting Actress category for Hustlers, Little Women apparently directing itself, and, largely, the same safe films sweeping the board. 

One of the biggest surprises – depending on what you thought of the film, of course – was Todd Phillips’ Scorcese-lite Joker topping the list at the Academy Awards, receiving eleven nods in total. The surprise here lies in the fact that Joker is, in many ways, not a traditionally Oscar-winning type of movie – despite Black Panther making an impact last year, featuring heavily in the technical categories and receiving a nomination for Best Picture, films based on comic books were unable to break into the major acting, directing and screenplay categories until now.

And Joker is, well, strange. It’s dark, horrifying at times, feels more like an addition to the crime or thriller genre than true-story Oscar bait – and for many (myself included), really not deserving of its enormous box office takings or showering of awards praise. 

A film that feels sadly left out of the awards conversation is Jordan Peele’s second feature Us, a landmark in the film calendar back in March. It had all the visionary stamps of excellence we’d come to expect from the director after his debut, Get Out, became a cultural phenomenon – and, most importantly, it matches (and in some cases exceeds) the achievements of Joker when it comes to the very things that the Clown Prince’s origin story was nominated for. 

Joker Suit Vs. Jumpsuit

Joker has been Oscar nominated in both the Costume Design and Makeup & Hair categories, and it’s easy to see why; the image of Joaquin Phoenix’s Arthur Fleck with bold green hair, sad smile painted roughly across his lips, and kitted out in a suit of clashing reds and oranges is the most memorable thing about the film. This updated Joker look has inspired many a tattoo, makeup tutorial, and Insta-star flocking to this set of steps to get the perfect shot for the ‘gram. 

It’s undeniable that the image of this new Joker has reached full cultural penetration, but the character design in Us is arguably just as iconic. The Tethered’s red jumpsuits, fingerless leather gloves and metal scissors made a huge impression from the moment the world saw the first poster, and after the film’s release (and box office success), director Peele was inundated with people sharing their Halloween costumes based on their look. 

There was more to Kym Barratt’s costume design on Us than just the jumpsuits – even Adelaide’s all-white outfit became synonymous with imagery from the film, as did the way it was increasingly blood spattered throughout, bringing her closer and closer to the red clothing of her doppelgänger. 

Joaquin Vs. Lupita

The gong that has seemed most nailed on for Joker from the start was for Joaquin Phoenix’s lead performance.

That Phoenix signed up for this film at all was curious, but the way the actor transformed himself to vanish into the troubled Arthur Fleck, and the singular intensity he brought to the role meant that the critical applause for him in particular was inevitable. In Joker, Phoenix is the most thin and gaunt we’ve ever seen him, ribs and spine protruding, and he embodies Fleck with equal amounts of mania and grace – plus, the screeching chimes of his uncontrollable laughter rings in your ears for days. 

But if physicality is what determines Phoenix’s nomination, then the fact Lupita Nyong’o has been overlooked for her work in Us is even more baffling. Starring in two roles – protagonist Adelaide and her Tethered self, Red – gives her the opportunity to bring two distinct performances. The way she expresses Red’s character through movement is astonishing; her walk that is more of a scuttle, the way she taps her fingers across her face as she holds it in her hands, and how she drops her voice into the low, husky tone of a woman who has been silenced for so long. 

There’s more to both performances than the way they look or move, but the complexity of each feels equal. Phoenix’s success at the Oscars so far looks somewhat like that of Leonardo Dicaprio’s prior to his win for The Revenant – this is his fourth time nominated, but he hasn’t won yet – whereas Nyong’o scooped up Best Supporting Actress for her first major role in 12 Years A Slave. Her previous win made it seem all the more likely she would be recognised, and the fact that the Academy has yet again only nominated a Black woman for a role related to slavery (Cynthia Erivo in Harriet) makes Nyong’o’s omission all the more frustrating. 

In terms of Peele’s filmography, Daniel Kaluuya did receive a Best Actor nod back in 2018 for his stunning lead performance in Get Out – but again, whilst the iconic horror isn’t necessarily a period piece depicting slavery at its peak, it is still a film about the entitlement White people assume over Black bodies, and its entire construct is highly racially charged. Us stars Black people, and clearly has a lot to say about social issues, but its story isn’t hinged on race in the same way – and in the eyes of the Academy, must seem somehow less worthy in order to disqualify Nyong’o from so much of the conversation.

Phillips Vs. Peele

Todd Phillips may have caused quite a stir by sharing some controversial opinions in interviews since the release of Joker (for example, how he thinks ‘woke culture’ has killed comedy), but it doesn’t seem to have affected his success with the Academy. As well as the overall recognition for the film, Phillips himself has been nominated for Best Director, and his writing for Best Adapted Screenplay. 

These are curious accolades to potentially award him. Phillips is best known for douchey bro comedies like The Hangover, which could have limited how seriously the Academy considered him – but, you’d be hard pushed to find a review of Joker that doesn’t cite its obvious Scorcese influences, and in a year where films by legacy directors like Tarantino and Marty himself have swept the board, Phillips’ obvious homage may have worked as a point in his favour. Whilst his previous work certainly doesn’t disqualify him from the conversation, it does make you wonder why Jordan Peele hasn’t been a bigger part of it. Peele is undoubtedly one of the strongest filmmaking voices of his generation, a true visionary whose work so far has not only given us some of the best Black representation of recent years, but also scathing and authentic social commentary. 

Comparing Peele and Phillips in terms of their screenplay also begs the question as to what makes the latter so worthy of recognition where the former is not. Joker comes under the Adapted Screenplay category only because the character and his world is already established, but Phillips himself has said that they didn’t base the script on anything from the comic books. His screenplay is shockingly uneven at times and annoyingly on-the-nose at others, and the way it links violence and mental illness is stigmatising and problematic. 

Peele’s work on Us would fall under the Original Screenplay category, for which he won the Oscar in 2018 for Get Out. In this second feature script, Peele brings his concept to life in a way that is darkly humorous, entertaining, and much more effective in making a statement about class than the lonely-white-guy-turned-murderer vibe at the centre of Joker. Even looking back at Get Out‘s Oscar success, it beggars belief why a piece of cinema so incisive, timely, intelligent and groundbreaking received only four nominations, whilst Todd Phillips’ reimagining of the Joker walks into the ceremony with eleven.

There are other areas in which these films are comparable, making the two more alike than we might immediately think. Hildur Guðnadóttir’s astonishing score for Joker is perhaps the least contested of all of its nominations, an ominous rumbling of cellos that perfectly soundtracks Arthur’s slow descent into madness – but how can we forget Michael Abel’s chilling reimagining of ‘I Got 5 On It’, which was added to Us to such stunning effect at the last minute? Lawrence Sher’s cinematography is another of the most impactful elements of Joker, all turquoise tones and a swaying camera, capturing Fleck’s balletic dancing – but so too is Mike Gioulakis’s work on Us, with that overhead shot of the family walking across the sand, or young Adelaide bathed in blue in the house of mirrors being just two moments that spring to mind. 

The argument here isn’t that Us should have been nominated instead of Joker, that either they both should be present or neither, or that other nominees shouldn’t have made the cut – there’s no real correct answer at all. What matters are the questions – why did Joker resonate so deeply with audiences despite a more mixed reception by critics, and why did Us seemingly have the opposite effect? Why is one gaining so much awards recognition, while the other receives none at all? Is it because the Academy bowed to box office pressure? Or, the theory that they would surely deny, because Black-led films like Us are judged differently?

Perhaps this is all down to marketing; Joker hit screens right in the run-up to the Oscar sweet spot, whereas the release of Us back in March feels like a distant memory – though an earlier release didn’t do Get Out or Black Panther any harm. It’s hard to gauge how much money Universal put behind Us in terms of a ‘For Your Consideration’ campaign in comparison to the support for Joker at Warner Bros, but regardless of PR specifics, maybe we should be demanding a more thorough approach from the Academy (Carey Mulligan has the right idea). If the nominations became more about digging a little deeper into the films of the past year and truly finding the best of them, instead of responding to movies based on the efficacy of their advertising campaigns, perhaps we’d be talking about a much more diverse and representative set of nominees right now.

We can’t know for sure, and we won’t even know if Joker manages to actually win anything until February 9th. Regardless, awards don’t mean everything, and only time will tell what kind of lasting impact these two films will have on the landscape of cinema. For what it’s worth, I know which one I’ll be rewatching for years to come – in fact, I would happily never have to hear ‘Send In The Clowns’ again. 

But you know what’s really great about 2019? People can complain so much about an animated character following a movie trailer that the studio takes time and money to go back to fix it. How many more people will now go see a movie that looks twenty years out of date because of this change? And what does that mean for cinema, if anything? What sort of power do we hold?

Probably not that much, but more conversation about the best films can only lead to positives for the industry. There’s the chance someone may discover a film they haven’t seen, or help with choosing something out of the ever-growing collections of content. That’s why I believe in top 10 lists, and now present my own Top 10 of 2019.

[Author’s note: I haven’t had the opportunity to see Portrait of a Lady on Fire or A Hidden Life. I write this with the assumption that at least two of those will supplant films in this list.]

Honorable Mention: The Mountain

The Mountain only misses out because it’s on the border of being a 2019 movie. Rick Alverson makes strange films, and this one is a beautiful work of weirdness. It follows Tye Sheridan as he works for Jeff Goldblum’s character, the doctor that invented the lobotomy. A lot of important dialogue is heard as if the audience were just barely in earshot, while the camera and editing tell the bulk of the “story”. At the core are questions about human nature told through bleak expressionism and vague allusions to myth.

Recommended for you: The Mountain (2019) Snapshot Review

10. Joker

Joker (2019) Review

This is number ten on my list because everyone’s heard of it. The sole non-Disney property to cross $1 billion is everything I want from a mainline studio film with a proper budget. They can afford great actors, and have the ability to get capable directors. Todd Phillips and his crew constructed a dreary, gritty world that incorporated primary colors to denote its protagonist’s mood and mental state without feeling out of place. The lighting, music and action each have their own memorable moments. Not even the people who disliked the film can say a bad thing about Joaquin Phoenix as an actor. I’m only picking one superhero movie, so I’ll take the theme park ride that borrowed from Chaplin and Scorsese.

Recommended for you: Joker: Incels, Violence, the Alt-Right – Tackling the Discourse Around 2019’s Most Controversial Movie

9. Greener Grass

Greener Grass (2019) Review

I can’t gush about Greener Grass enough. This surreal comedy follows two moms as they live their bizarre lives in an upscale American neighborhood. The silly take on suburban life begins when Jill gives Lisa her baby, and before you know it you’re learning about the pioneers and wondering if you need to give pool water another chance. The jokes run deep into the costuming, production design and editing, something only achieved by the best comedy has to offer. Directors Jocelyn Deboer and Dawn Luebbe are a duo to look out for in the future.

Recommended for you: “I’m A Weirdo Builder” – Costume Designer Lauren Oppelt In Conversation

8. Jojo Rabbit

Jojo Rabbit (2019) Review

The premise of Jojo Rabbit is so blunt that it requires the right person to handle it – there’s so much more to it than a little fascist boy that has Hitler as an imaginary friend. Taika Waititi points out the absurdity of white nationalist propaganda, and he mocks fascists by cleverly paralleling them with children and childishness. He creates a relationship between a mother and son that feels real and heartwarming despite their obvious conflicts, and there’s a storybook quality to the images that evokes a less intense Wes Anderson. What’s most striking are the attempts to show a glimmer of good in those around us that may have fallen into a mindset of supporting bad ideas. Neighbors, friends and family can believe stupid things without being evil themselves, and the relationship at the center of the film –  Jojo and Elsa’s friendship – shows that empathy and communication with those around us can go a long way.