Amir here, with more coverage from Toronto. Steve McQueen can direct the next Rambo sequel with The Situation in the lead and I’ll be there first in line. Most directors would be lucky to make two films as strong as Shame and Hunger well into their career, let alone in their first two attempts, but McQueen is a rare talent with a knack for visual storytelling that is unmatched by most directors
Shame
In Shame, McQueen’s “regular” star Michael Fassbender plays Brandon, an Irish-born New Yorker whose uncontrollable addiction to sex drives his life, dictates his work and defines his relationships. When his troubled cabaret singer sister Sissy (Carey Mulligan) moves in with him, the endless cycle of his sexual routine is broken and things go awry.
On the surface, this might sound like a much lighter subject matter for the director than Hunger, but he approaches the film with the same dazzling formal control. And though he claimed in the Q&A session that he can’t point to specific influences that he’s drawn from his work as a visual artist, one would have to be blind not to notice his fine arts background bleeding into Shame. With the help of Sean Bobbitt (cinematographer) and Joe Walker (editor) who have both done brilliant work – particularly the latter – they create a stunning, rhythmic, heartbreaking and achingly real portrayal of addiction. Addiction is nothing new to the screen. Even sexual addiction has been shown on the screen many times before, but it’s never felt as delicate as it does in McQueen’s hands. Better yet, this film is at once universal and incredibly personal.
Michael Fassbender, Woody Harrelson and Oscar speculation after the jump.
Those of you who have followed the news last week already know that much credit goes to Michael Fassbender, who, believe it or not, ups his stellar performance in Hunger with a vulnerable portrayal of an addict filled with guilt, denial, and of course, shame. Behind the handsome face and the sexual confidence, he’s internalized the defencelessness that comes with his condition, and as in his previous partnership with McQueen, he overcomes the challenge of exposing himself physically and mentally.
With Fassbender hogging all the attention, you’d be forgiven for assuming he gives the only strong performance in the film. But Mulligan, working totally new terrain, eases into her character with an exciting confidence that previous performances have lacked. Perhaps it’s McQueen’s free-spirited direction, or maybe the effect of Fassbender as co-star, but this film proves she's deserving of the attention she’s already been winning for two years.
Shame is the best of the fest so far and I can’t wait to dive back into it when it gets a release. I’m even more eager to see Twelve Years a Slave, McQueen’s next film. He’s set the bar really high for himself but then again, he jumped high enough this second time.
That was yesterday. Today, I travelled across to the West Coast where Woody Harrelson was beating the hell out of people in L.A. in Oren Moverman’s second feature, Rampart. I was a huge fan of The Messenger but a bit underwhelmed by Moverman's follow up, which didn’t come together as well for me.
Rampart
The story is about a LAPD cop named David (Harrelson) whose professional life is in jeopardy after he’s caught on tape brutally beating a man. Instances of racism in the past and the alleged murder of a serial date-rapist make his case all worse. His personal life is not going much better either. His previous marriages to two sisters (Cynthia Nixon and Anne Heche) have predictably failed and his relationship with his two daughters (one from each sister) is crumbling. Rampart shows David’s struggle as tries to cope with all these problems.
The script is overplotted with a lot of rough edges that should have been sanded. That's a bit of a surprise, really, given Moverman’s dense but precise writing on The Messenger . Stylistically too, the film feels a little overcooked. Rampart is an honest film open in its depiction of brutality and urban aggression but it's too messy to completely engage the audience.
But Moverman continues to prove that he's quite an actors’ director as a series of strong supporting performers (Sigourney Weaver, Robin Wright, Ice Cube, Ben Foster, Anne Heche, etc.) enter and leave the film. The standout, of course, is Woody Harrelson in the lead role. Like Fassbender and McQueen, Moverman and Harrelson have found the right notes to play together with perfect interactive understanding. Harrelson walks a fine line between insanity and hallucination, apathy and hatred, and angst and misanthropy in a nuanced star turn that is not entirely different from the intense character he embodied in The Messenger. He’s long proven himself as one of America’s most versatile actors. Whether or not it's career-best work, it's a fine entry in his already stellar resume.
I’ll be back with ALPS, Yorgod Lanthimos’ Dogtooth follow-up and a second opinion onf Edwin Boyd (Paolo sounded off on that one already), but I’ll leave you with a final note on the Oscar potential of these Shame and Rampart.
If you ask me, Shame is an emotionally accessible film, but I fear that on nomination morning, the Academy may disagree with me. The explicit sex scenes and full frontal nudity of both stars is not going to help. McQueen would be a slam-dunk for a Best Director nomination in a just world, but I can’t see this film scoring anywhere outside the best actor category and with a really hard campaign push, supporting actress. Both nominations would be well-deserved.
It's difficult to imagine Rampart gaining traction for anything other than Best Actor either. If the film finds release and enough people see it, Harrelson will have a real shot; the performance is strong enough and I’m sure there are people who think he’s under-rewarded. But with Oldman, Clooney, Pitt, DuJardin, Gosling and of course Fassbender already in the mix, much will depend on Rampart’s release strategy.