Tagged Mark L. Smith

Martyrs 2.0 – The Little Remake That Shouldn’t

Martyrs. 2016. Directed by Kevin & Michael Goetz. Screenplay by Mark L. Smith; based on the original characters from Pascal Laugier’s film.
Starring Troian Bellisario, Caitlin Carmichael, Kate Burton, Bailey Noble, Toby Huss, Diana Hopper, Lexi DiBenedetto, Taylor John Smith, Peter Michael Goetz, and DaJuan Johnson. Blumhouse Productions/The Safran Company/Temple Hill Entertainment.
Unrated. 81 minutes.
Drama/Horror/Thriller

★1/2
COVERI always try to give remakes a fair shake. Slightly different story when you have to push through a favourite film being remade, especially if it comes out poorly. Though I love Spike Lee, as a filmmaker, his remake of Oldboy is one of the worst in recent memory. And that’s been a favourite of mine for years. When I heard Pascal Laugier’s frantic, bloody, wild movie Martyrs was being remade, it didn’t exactly excite me. Sure, I love when a fresh take or update can be done on a film, such as Alexandre Aja and his efforts on The Hills Have Eyes. But more often than not, an excellent foreign language film gets turned into nonsense by way of North American directors and writers.
Sadly, this new version of Martyrs is not up to the task of making things fresh, exciting, or even much different. It is definitely not a shot-for-shot remake, but it also doesn’t have a lot of what made the original French film so impressively visceral and continually interesting. This re-imagining, remake, or whatever word you choose to employ, didn’t have to go for big gore and get as graphic as Laugier. What it did need, though, is the emotional resonance, the quality techniques of Laugier and the original team, and generally a better screenplay if it were meant for glory. Not near being one of my favourite remakes. Another great film gets an unjust treatment for North American audiences, many of whom are probably too lazy to read subtitles and watch the original, evident by how many foreign films get remade here in the West. If that weren’t the case, if the demand weren’t so high, I’d assume people were seeking out the original pieces of work. In this case, I certainly suggest you watch Laugier’s movie. It’s leaps and bounds better than this mediocre, run of the mill dishwater.
Pic1
Two young girls come together as orphans at a young age, Lucie (Troian Bellisario) and Anna (Bailey Noble). Lucie escaped from a terrifying, abusive situation of captivity, which Anna helped her get past.
Cut to years later. They’re grown young women. Lucie finds the family who supposedly held her captive, then shotguns them all, including the kids, to death. She calls Anna frantically, telling her what happened. Her friend arrives to try and help things go smoother, as far as is possible. But Lucie spirals out of control. Soon, Anna is in the house, bodies everywhere, and a group of armed people take over.
Brought to room and tortured, Anna discovers what Lucie went through. The two girls are pitted against their captors. Although, the past comes back to bear on their present situation. As things are revealed the capture of Lucie as a young girl becomes more clear, the movie behind it all unearthed. Can they survive this? Will Lucie be able to make it out of the horror a second time?
Pic3
*SPOILER ALERT: TURN BACK OR THOU SHALT FOREVER BE SPOILED!*
One thing I quickly disliked about this version is that the screenplay from Mark L. Smith (The RevenantVacancy) decides to keep both of the main women alive. Whereas in the Laugier original, the Lucie character dies. What I love about that original screenplay is that the Anna character is then forced to deal with the aftermath of the situation, as well as the group who come to find her, forcing her to also suffer the torture her friend once did years ago. In this film there’s this sense of a bunch of subjects captured at once, while Anna and Lucie then also find themselves captives. Part of why I enjoyed the original French film is that Laugier went for a definitively tragic and truly epic plot. Smith, though he did amazing stuff with The Revenant, makes the mistake of going for something more hopeful. Realistically you have to look at the group doing these experiments; they are obviously massive, a solid organization, so to just do another escape thriller with this setup is wasting a lot of potential. The original capitalized on all its brutality, as well as emotions, and went for a dark ending. Without spoiling anything, this remake cops out. Some say the original was all nihilistic. Except for the fact the people torturing the hopeful martyrs, for all their faults and bloody terror, are seeking a way to discover what makes someone into such a portal to view what’s in their eyes, seeing beyond life and into the chasm of death. So, it’s not really nihilistic, not in true terms. But any of the impact of the film is taken away in this screenplay. Not at all impressed with Smith’s choices.
The execution isn’t a whole lot helpful either. Tons of exposition that the original never needed, as well as so much sanitized horror. It all combines into a real mess. There are, yes, several moments of decent blood, and also several intense sequences. Yet none of this adds up to even half the impact Laugier came off with, which does nothing to make me enjoy this needless remake. There was a grim, moody atmosphere and a gritty tone to the original. Here, most of the movie feels glossy, bright even in the darkness, and overall there is nothing technique-wise that ever grabs me. Kevin and Michael Goetz did 2013’s Scenic Route and I actually enjoyed that a good deal. It was entertaining, gritty at times, funny even. Lots of good stuff. Their follow-up film is nowhere near as good. Hopefully next they’ll go with an original film with a better story because they’ve proved themselves on the previous movie. Martyrs is a step backward.
Pic4Pic2
I’ll give the film a 1&1/2 star rating, solely because I did enjoy aspects of Bailey Noble’s performance, even if I wasn’t a fan of the plot. Likewise, Troian Bellisario is decent enough to keep your attention particularly later when the torture commences once more. But this is an unnecessary remake. Honestly, I try to give these remade films a chance, however, they more often than not let me down big time. This one is no different. Over the past few years this is one of the worst. Again, I hope the Goetz brothers go forward and make something better. As I hope Mark Smith pushes on and finds better success with another movie. These are better artists than the movie suggests. Martyrs, the original, is worth your time. Despite what others say about a totally boring, gory film, Laugier made an impact with that one, which I will never forget. Skip this, see his original. You’ll thank me.

The Revenant is Beautiful & Wild & Maybe a Little Exaggerated

The Revenant. 2015. Directed by Alejandro González Iñárritu. Screenplay by Mark L. Smith & Alejandro González Iñárritu; based in part on the novel by Michael Punke.
Starring Leonardo DiCaprio, Tom Hardy, Domhnall Gleeson, Will Poulter, Forrest Goodluck, Paul Anderson, Kristoffer Joner, Joshua Burge, Christopher Rosamond, Robert Moloney, Lukas Haas, and Brendan Fletcher. New Regency Pictures/Anonymous Content/Appian Way/RatPac Entertainment/Soho VFX.
Rated 14a. 156 minutes.
Adventure/Drama/Thriller

★★★★
PosterAlejandro González Iñárritu is a director I’ve admired for a while. Around 13 years ago I remember seeing Amores perros on television; I went on to get the name of the film tattooed on my wrist, after it became a favourite of mine. Pretty much every one of his films since have been magical, in some way, shape or form. Whether it be the story itself or just the way Iñárritu serves it up for us, the movies he makes are unique and exceptionally made overall. This one is no different.
And while I definitely believe The Revenant is one of the best films of the past 15 years, I wasn’t totally pleased with the story. Lots of fun, no doubt. It’s the distortion of what’s known about Hugh Glass, the focus of the story; I know films get dramatized, and I love parts of what this screenplay added onto Glass at times, yet there could’ve been plenty intensity without all that. Nevertheless, with Iñárritu alongside composer Ryuichi Sakamoto, the immensely talented cinematographer Emmanuel Lubezki, plus a host of others including Leonardo DiCaprio and Tom Hardy, The Revenant has the goods and also gives us an interesting, intensely raw modern Western.
the_revenant_trailer_alexa_leo
During a trapping expedition in 1823, Captain Andrew Henry (Domnhall Gleeson) leads a party of men through the wilderness of America. In the party are John Fitzgerald (Tom Hardy) and Hugh Glass (Leonardo DiCaprio), as well as Hugh’s son, a native boy named Hawk (Forrest Goodluck), among others. After an encounter with the Arikara, a Native American tribe, the hunting party ends up on the run.
The worst comes when Hugh is mauled savagely by a bear before luckily killing it. Afterwards, Fitzgerald suggests putting Hugh out of his misery, though, others are much more willing to try and help. What little they can, anyways. When a young Mountain Man Jim Bridger (Will Poulter) and Hawk stay behind along with Fitzgerald, Captain Henry instructs that if and when Glass succumbs to his wounds, he’s offered a proper burial.
Only Fitzgerald ends up doing the unthinkable, killing Hawk in an argument, then convinces Bridger with a lie to leave Glass to die, half-buried in a grave.
But Hugh survives. As Fitzgerald and Bridger move back towards an American settlement, Glass tries to hang on. Hoping to cross their paths again.
revenant-04Tom-Hardy-in-The-Revenant
Between the scenery and Emmanuel Lubezki’s wonderful eye, as well as Iñárritu and his vision, the look of The Revenant lingers with me. All the shooting with natural light truly is gorgeous. And it isn’t just how nice things look either. The forest, the people, everything feels raw and untouched. Nasty even, at times. It makes everything look better in that the stripped down cinematography helps the realism. There are so many amazing sequences, one after another. Possibly my favourite are a couple of the dream-like moments in the screenplay where Glass sees very wild images. I like that there are these surreal pieces thrown in now and then. The whole film has plenty of typical but awesome Western imagery, on top of that Iñárritu shows us these vivid, strange scenes where Glass is almost outside of himself, outside of the world. A bunch of action sequences in the movie are completely worth the salt, including the opening moments depicting a run-in with a Native American tribe which drives Glass, Henry and the others out into the wilderness, down the river. The movie starts off with a big bang. But it’s not like a typical action movie, the cinematography and the entire production just pulls you into that world, the space of these characters so immediately.
Revenant
Everyone onscreen throughout The Revenant does a fantastic job, even the small roles played by the likes of two actors I love such as Brendan Fletcher and Kristoffer Joner. Then we’ve got Will Poulter depicting Jim Bridger at age nineteen before he went on to become the fabled Mountain Man (though his actual involvement in Glass’ desertion is debated historically); Poulter pulls his weight, that’s for certain.
But the showcase comes from Tom Hardy and Leonardo DiCaprio. The way Hardy oozes menace even without saying much is a testament to his acting ability. Apparently he drew from Tom Berenger in Platoon, which I can absolutely see. There’s a great cinematic villain here that will stand the test of time in the Western genre.
DiCaprio gives what is arguably his best performance. No hype. He gives the expected grueling performance at certain times. Then at others there’s a perfect silence about his disposition. We could get bored watching him. Instead, he says what more often than not Glass actually can’t, with his face and eyes instead of tons of exposition. Most of all, the determination is visible at every moment, his inextinguishable courage always present. The vulnerability of Glass’ character, alone in the wild, is also something Leo gets across because of the youthfulness in him, but even more so due to the fact of his nuance as an actor. I’ve always enjoyed the range DiCaprio has displayed over the course of his interesting career. Here, The Revenant gives him a chance to show a ton of that, from start to finish.
revenant-skulls1
Even with the historical liberties taken story-wise, Iñárritu’s film is a 4 star production. Top to the bottom, all aspects of The Revenant fire on every available cylinder. DiCaprio and Hardy put on an absolute clinic, as far as acting goes. Then you’ve got Gleeson and Poulter in supporting roles that add plenty to the whole show. But the technical side of things, the filming (and even the CGI on the bear which was incredible), the work that went into every aspect from the amazing score to the locations and everything in between, it’s all so admirable. Sure, there are lots of homages to other movies, scenes that felt very similar to other older Westerns and so on. Yet there’s too much here to find enjoyable, too many well designed and filmed sequences to say The Revenant is anything but excellent. If anything, I wish they’d have stuck closest to the true story because that alone makes for a great story. For all his realism, Iñárritu doesn’t seem to worry about the discrepancies between the real events and this semi-Hollywooded version.
Nevertheless, see this in theatre, don’t wait until it’s out on VOD or Blu ray. This first and foremost needs to be watched on a massive screen. Take it in. A great movie.