Atonement (2007)

I was wandering through the library shelves when I picked up Ian McEwan's Atonement. I didn't know what it was about, but I remember it was adapted into a movie with Keira Knightly and Saoirse Ronan that I had meant to watch for quite some time, so I read it. And I loved it which is why I was no longer sure I wanted to see Joe Wright's Atonement.

The story opens in 1935 when a 13-year-old aspiring writer and playwright, Briony (Saoirse Ronan), witnesses an act she doesn't fully understand, the long-time family servant, Robbie Turner (James McAvoy), making love with her older sister, Cecilia (Keira Knightley). Later on, she becomes the witness of a crime she doesn't understand but she thinks she does and falsely accuses Robbie because of what she had seen earlier. This accusation of hers tears apart the two lovers, maybe forever as Robbie is sent to serve the army in WWII. Five years later, a grown-up Briony (Romola Garai), aware of the damage she has caused, tries to make amends for it.

Adapting McEwan's novel was not easy, but screenwriter Christopher Hampton did a very good job, leaving out all the subplots that couldn't have been included in a two-hour film, focusing only on the important aspects of the story. Unfortunately, the storytelling is not as good as it could have been. While the first act is wonderful as it draws you in and keeps you on the edge of the seat to see what would happen — impressive considering I had just read the novel — the second and third act are unfortunately not as compelling. I did like how the ending was changed, not the ending of the story, but the way it is delivered to us with Briony giving an interview rather than speaking to the reader/viewer. 

Just like in the novel, none of the characters is particularly sympathetic as they all are pretty self-centered and melodramatic, and yet it's fascinating to watch them because they are complex and developed characters, even though their thoughts aren't as well-rounded and intimate as they are in the book. 

Relativity Media

Arguably Atonement's greatest strength is the acting. Keira Knightley is delightful in the role of Cecilia as she conveys her character's feeling within a single glance, James McAvoy is terrific in the role of Robbie as he delivers a strong performance filled with emotions and wonderfully conveys the innocence of young love as well as the brutalities of war. Also, Knightley and McAvoy have such great chemistry, not only it's obvious they would way for each other and that we want them to be together, but it feels like visual poetry. It's not often that two actors are able to make you feel such strong emotions only with a glance. Saoirse Ronan is quite extraordinary and steals her scene she is in as she conveys the naivety, frustrations and anger of 13-year-old Briony to perfection. Also notable is Vanessa Redgrave's performance in the role of old Briony as she effortlessly conveys many emotions through her expressions.

Also worthy of a mention are Seamus McGarvey's breathtaking cinematography, the superb set design, the costumes, and a terrific musical score by Dario Marianelli that infuses the film with beauty and sadness.

It's such a shame the second and third act are not very compelling and feel dragged because this had the potential to be a masterpiece.

Lost River (2014)

I added Lost River on my list years ago because of Saoirse Ronan but, I don't know why, I never cared to watch it. Probably because it sent me a negative vibe. 

Anyways, the film centers on Billy (Christina Hendricks), a single mother of two who has fallen behind on her house payments and may lose her home because of it. As a desperate attempt to save her childhood home, she takes a disturbing job into a macabre underworld. In the meantime, her older, teenage son, Bones (Iain De Caestecker), steels chopper from old houses to make some money and gets into trouble with a vicious local criminal named Bully (Matt Smith). 

Writing the synopsis doesn't feel like the most appropriate thing when it comes to Lost River because it would be assuming that the film has a narrative structure, which it doesn't. This is not the issue with the film though, the fact that the plot is dreadfully developed, that it feels dragged even though it's quite short and rushed, and that there are many elements that aren't explored as they should have, and it has quite an abrupt ending, these are the major issues with the film. And it's quite angering because it feels the story had so much potential but ended up being a dull, predictable tale with no compelling twist. 

As for the characters, the film does a nice job at setting them up and, despite their oddness, they never feel like caricatures. Unfortunately, they don't have a background, they have very little development, and they are not very memorable —they are pretty forgettable, actually. Also, I didn't care about any of them and felt absolutely no sympathy towards them.

Despite the lacklustre screenplay, the cast does a pretty good job. Christina Hendricks is quite impressive as the single mother, although she never gets the chance to shine as she barely has something to do; Saoirse Ronan gives yet another of her compelling performances in the role of De Caestecker's love interest; Ben Mendelsohn is clearly having a lot of fun in the role of a sinister bank manager and club owner who abuses his power and position; and Matt Smith gives a menacing performance as (the) Bully, a violent, creepy man with an unpredictable behaviour. 

Warner Bros. Pictures

The visuals are easily the best aspect of Lost River. At his directorial debut, Ryan Gosling proves he has quite an eye as the film is filled with stunning, artistic shots, vibrant colours, neon lights, and successful attempts of symmetry, all clearly influenced by Nicolas Winding Refn. The melancholic score is also quite mesmerizing and fits the visuals incredibly well.

Ultimately though, Lost River still remains a pretty shallow, empty film that prefers style over substance. It doesn't have much of shock value, it's just a Refn wannabe that never reaches its potential.

Mary Queen of Scots (2018)

Historical movies aren't really my thing —despite the fact that I loved my teacher, history was one of my least favourite subjects in high school— but I checked out Mary Queen of Scots anyway because one does not simply pass a movie starring Saoirse Ronan and Margot Robbie. And of course eye-candy in the form of Jack Lowden is always welcome. 

The film tells the story of Catholic Mary Stuart (Saoirse Ronan). Queen of France at 16 and widowed at 18, she returns to Scotland to reclaim her rightful throne. But Scotland and England are both ruled by her cousin Elizabeth (Margot Robbie), the Protestant Queen of England, and her claim to the English throne puts her on a collision course with Queen Elizabeth I.

A more or less compelling political battle of wits is what I was expecting, but what I got instead was a beyond tedious and "not so easy to follow because of all the double-crossing" plot filled with historical inaccuracies —this part of history was unknown to me but there were things so far fetched I checked for facts on Wikipedia—, Mary refusing to do what people advised her and Elizabeth crying. There are political intrigue and backstabbing, lots of both, but the story is not interesting, it's not engaging and I just didn't care because of the dull, inconsistent storytelling.

The characters are also pretty bland and uninteresting as they are poorly characterized, poorly developed and, for the exception of Mary, they don't even have clear motivations. They are just cartoonish characters that deserve absolutely no sympathy, especially Elizabeth who is presented as a weak, constantly whining woman. Not to mention the openly gay friend of Mary, or her gay husband.

At least there's the cast, part of it, that makes Mary Queen of Scots more bearable. Both Saoirse Ronan and Margot Robbie do a good job in the roles as they manage to make their characters slightly more interesting, and both doing a great job at hiding their accents, Irish the first, Australian the latter —I'm not sure though why Mary has a Scottish accent since she grew up in France. The rest though is quite a mess. It's not entirely the actors' fault as the script is quite poor but most of them give wooden performances or over-act like David Tennant and when they are actually decent, they are criminally underused like Guy Pearce.

Focus Features, Universal Pictures

The strong performances from Ronan and Robbie aren't the only good things about Mary Queen of Scots. The cinematography is quite breathtaking with plenty of beautiful scenery and locations rich in colour; the costumes are gorgeous; the makeup is very good.

Unfortunately, the writing is terrible, the direction is dull, and the casting of people of colour to play 16th century Great Britain aristocrats just doesn't feel right. If they wanted to make a politically correct movie, they should have gone with fictional characters. But I guess it fits the film very well if you consider all the inaccuracies.