Skip to main content

I have to find my way back home.

Lion
(2016)

(SPOILERS) A picture of two halves. The first being compelling, powerful and moving. The second featuring Dev Patel. No, that’s unfair. Patel’s BAFTA-winning performance in Lion is perfectly respectable, and it’s easy to see why he has also garnered an Oscar nod for Best Supporting Hair and Beard Ensemble, but he’s nevertheless far subordinate to his character’s junior version, played by Sunny Pawar, who might be the most winningly wide-eyed whippersnapper to grace the screen since Salvatore Cascio in Cinema Paradiso.


That’s not a bad comparison, actually, as everyone remembers Cinema Paradiso for the establishing scenes with Phillipe Noiret; the rest of the character’s life reminisced is watchable but lacks the same spark. So it is with Lion, possibly the most non-descript of Oscar nominees this year, recognised for its well-meaning and worthy thematic content, rather than how successful it is as an overall movie (that, and it being the picture Harvey Scissorhands chose to put his tried-and-tested weight behind for awards consideration – namely Patel for Best Supporting Actor, a canny move as he wouldn’t have got a look-in in the lead category).


The traumatic episode that befalls Pawar’s five-year-old Saroo, separated from his brother at a train station and finding himself bound for Calcutta, a thousand miles away, soon becomes a succession of narrowly avoided dangers and threats, as he evades a wave of predators, from men capturing street kids, to a man and woman (that latter seemingly benign at first: too benign) intent on selling him into the child sex trade, and finally eking out an existence begging before winding up in an orphanage.  Saroo is well- treated there, even though another orphan has told him it is “a bad place”; soon, he is duly sent to Tasmania for adoption. Despite its accessible PG certificate, then, this part of the picture offers an emotionally demanding exploration of child poverty, where the glossier Slumdog Millionaire (also starring Patel) opted to deal with the subject as an excitingly-fabricated thrill ride.


Garth Davis, in his big screen directorial debut, is uninterested in visual fireworks or fancy editing, letting Hauschka and Dustin O’Halloran’s expressive score provide a potent underpinning to Saroo’s journey. He knows intuitively that simply focussing on Pawar will be sufficient, whose expressive eyes and entirely natural demeanour are a match for any child performer you care to mention. Saroo’s a stoic youngster, able to survive without his mother and brother (and sister) and quickly cognisant of those who’d bring him into harm’s way. But, crucially, he’s unable to provide information about his home village (it turns out that “Ginestlay” is “Ganesh Talai” mispronounced, just as “Saroo” is actually “Sheru” – the Hindi for “Lion”).


The problem Davis encounters subsequently is that Luke Davies’ screenplay (based on A Long Way Home by Saroo Brierly and Larry Buttrose) has very little dramatic meat left to propel it. Adult Saroo looking at Google Earth for six years isn’t the stuff of a commanding viewing, and Lion soon develops the feel of artificially-extended material, from his conflicts with girlfriend Lucy (Rooney Mara, very good, although the role isn’t up to much), adoptive parents Sue (Nicole Kidman) and John (David Wenham), and adoptive brother Mantosh (Dividan Ladwa).


Because the material is thin, at times the translation to screen tends to make Saroo appear more self-involved than genuinely distraught and conflicted, as if he is unnecessarily making an ordeal of matters. The plot thread with Mantosh’ emotional and behavioural difficulties is obliquely touched upon, but is actually the only really challenging part of this later section (in real life, it appears that the poor guy isn’t dealing so well with the picture’s release, something that should perhaps be considered before becoming too effusive about the good things the film will do for promoting the Indian Society for Sponsorship and Adoption).


Kidman’s fine as the mother, although her technical skill rarely translates into emotionally-invested characters for me. Wenham’s very much on the side lines. The eventual reunion, bittersweet due to the discovery that Saroo’s brother Guddu died years before (that very night, hit by a train) is slightly detracted from by a too-prevalent device of throwing in footage of the real people, as if to say “Look, this really is true, making us all the more valid”. Admittedly, in the case of Hacksaw Ridge, it led me to seek out the documentary, but usually I find it an unnecessary step too far; the picture shouldn’t need reinforcing that way. As for Oscar night, Lion may walk away empty-handed, but if it has any longshot chances, it’s in the categories of Score and Supporting Actor. Possibly, if Pawar had been acknowledged, he’d have been a sure thing.



Agree? Disagree? Mildly or vehemently? Let me know in the comments below.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

She was addicted to Tums for a while.

Marriage Story (2019)
(SPOILERS) I don’t tend to fall heavily for Noah Baumbach fare. He’s undoubtedly a distinctive voice – even if his collaborations with Wes Anderson are the least of that director’s efforts – but his devotion to an exclusive, rarefied New York bubble becomes ever more off-putting with each new project. And ever more identifiable as being a lesser chronicler of the city’s privileged quirks than his now disinherited forbear Woody Allen, who at his peak mastered a balancing act between the insightful, hilarious and self-effacing. Marriage Story finds Baumbach going yet again where Woody went before, this time brushing up against the director’s Ingmar Bergman fixation.

You're not only wrong. You're wrong at the top of your voice.

Bad Day at Black Rock (1955)
I’ve seen comments suggesting that John Sturges’ thriller hasn’t aged well, which I find rather mystifying. Sure, some of the characterisations border on the cardboard, but the director imbues the story with a taut, economical backbone. 

My name is Dr. King Schultz, this is my valet, Django, and these are our horses, Fritz, and Tony.

Django Unchained (2012)
(MINOR SPOILERS) Since the painful misstep of Grindhouse/Death Proof, Quentin Tarantino has regained the higher ground like never before. Pulp Fiction, his previous commercial and critical peak, has been at very least equalled by the back-to-back hits of Inglourious Basterds and Django Unchained. Having been underwhelmed by his post Pulp Fiction efforts (albeit, I admired his technical advances as a director in Kill Bill), I was pleasantly surprised by Inglourious Basterds. It was no work of genius (so not Pulp Fiction) by any means, but there was a gleeful irreverence in its treatment of history and even to the nominal heroic status of its titular protagonists. Tonally, it was a good fit for the director’s “cool” aesthetic. As a purveyor of postmodern pastiche, where the surface level is the subtext, in some ways he was operating at his zenith. Django Unchained is a retreat from that position, the director caught in the tug between his all-important aesthetic pr…

It looks like we’ve got another schizoid embolism!

Total Recall (1990)
(SPOILERS) Paul Verhoeven offered his post-mortem on the failures of the remakes of Total Recall (2012) and Robocop (2013) when he suggested “They take these absurd stories and make them too serious”. There may be something in this, but I suspect the kernel of their issues is simply filmmakers without either the smarts or vision, or both, to make something distinctive from the material. No one would have suggested the problem with David Cronenberg’s prospective Total Recall was over-seriousness, yet his version would have been far from a quip-heavy Raiders of the Lost Ark Go to Mars (as he attributes screenwriter Ron Shusset’s take on the material). Indeed, I’d go as far as saying not only the star, but also the director of Total Recall (1990) were miscast, making it something of a miracle it works to the extent it does.

How do you like that – Cuddles knew all the time!

The Pleasure Garden (1925)
(SPOILERS) Hitchcock’s first credit as director, and his account of the production difficulties, as related to Francois Truffaut, is by and large more pleasurable than The Pleasure Garden itself. The Italian location shoot in involved the confiscation of undeclared film stock, having to recast a key role and borrowing money from the star when Hitch ran out of the stuff.

He tasks me. He tasks me, and I shall have him.

Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan
(1982)
(SPOILERS) I don’t love Star Trek, but I do love Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan. That probably isn’t just me, but a common refrain of many a non-devotee of the series. Although, it used to apply to The Voyage Home (the funny one, with the whales, the Star Trek even the target audience for Three Men and a Baby could enjoy). Unfortunately, its high regard has also become the desperate, self-destructive, song-and-verse, be-all-and-end-all of the overlords of the franchise itself, in whichever iteration, it seems. This is understandable to an extent, as Khan is that rare movie sequel made to transcendent effect on almost every level, and one that stands the test of time every bit as well (better, even) as when it was first unveiled.

I’m not the Jedi I should be.

Star Wars Episode III: Revenge of the Sith (2005)
(SPOILERS) Star Wars Episode III: Revenge of the Sith is the only series entry (thus far) I haven’t seen at the cinema. After the first two prequels I felt no great urgency, and it isn’t an omission I’d be hugely disposed to redress for (say) a 12-hour movie marathon, were such a thing held in my vicinity. In the bare bones of Revenge of the Sith, however,George Lucas has probably the strongest, most confident of all Star Wars plots to date.

This is, after all, the reason we have the prequels in the first place; the genesis of Darth Vader, and the confrontation between Anakin and Obi Wan. That it ends up as a no more than middling movie is mostly due to Lucas’ gluttonous appetite for CGI (continuing reference to its corruptive influence is, alas, unavoidable here). But Episode III is also Exhibit A in a fundamental failure of casting and character work; this was the last chance to give Anakin Skywalker substance, to reveal his potential …

I take Quaaludes 10-15 times a day for my "back pain", Adderall to stay focused, Xanax to take the edge off, part to mellow me out, cocaine to wake me back up again, and morphine... Well, because it's awesome.

The Wolf of Wall Street (2013)
Along with Pain & Gain and The Great Gatsby, The Wolf of Wall Street might be viewed as the completion of a loose 2013 trilogy on the subject of success and excess; the American Dream gone awry. It’s the superior picture to its fellows, by turns enthralling, absurd, outrageous and hilarious. This is the fieriest, most deliriously vibrant picture from the director since the millennium turned. Nevertheless, stood in the company of Goodfellas, the Martin Scorsese film from which The Wolf of Wall Street consciously takes many of its cues, it is found wanting.

I was vaguely familiar with the title, not because I knew much about Jordan Belfort but because the script had been in development for such a long time (Ridley Scott was attached at one time). So part of the pleasure of the film is discovering how widely the story diverges from the Wall Street template. “The Wolf of Wall Street” suggests one who towers over the city like a behemoth, rather than a guy …

My dear, sweet brother Numsie!

The Golden Child (1986)
Post-Beverly Hills Cop, Eddie Murphy could have filmed himself washing the dishes and it would have been a huge hit. Which might not have been a bad idea, since he chose to make this misconceived stinker.

I think the exorcism made the problem worse.

Exorcist II: The Heretic (1977)
(SPOILERS) While I’ve seen instalments the originaland III a number of times, until now I hadn’t got round to checking out the near-universally reviled first Exorcist sequel. Going in, I had lofty notions Exorcist II: The Heretic would reveal itself as not nearly the travesty everyone said it was, that it would rather be deserving of some degree of praise if only it was approached in the right manner. Well, there is something to that; as a sequel to The Exorcist, it sneers at preconceptions right off the bat by wholly failing to terrify, so making its determined existence within the fabric of that film becomes downright bizarre (the relationship is almost like Back to the Future Part II to Back to the Future, but not). Further still, it warrants a twisted validation for being its own thing, refusing to rehash its predecessor like 90% of sequels, then and now, thus exerting fascination all its own. Unfortunately, John Boorman’s film is also equal parts lis…