The Grand Budapest Hotel – The Unreliable Narrator


To describe a Wes Anderson film all we can say that it’s a Wes Anderson film such is the enigma of the man he single-handedly created a genre which is both whimsy and attractive. Distinct shot selection with the camera moving in almost every shot and an OCD-like obsession for centered frames are among his signature style. Every film of his is outlandishly stylish with superb production design but it has never been as good as “The Grand Budapest Hotel”. In the film, we can sense both a progression and summarizing of the entire Wes Anderson canon. Just plain fun, full of the filmmaker’s signature flourishes and curlicues, worked out with skill and finesse. Anderson sets new cinematic trends on the way as he creates something mesmerizingly stunning.

“The Grand Budapest Hotel” is written by Wes Anderson and Hugo Guinness, it has a multi-laired narrative flow which is constructed through a frame within a frame narrative structure. This is a story about a young man finding love, is a lobby boy at a glorious landmark of a hotel is told by his older self to the younger version of a man who then writes a book that is ultimately remembered by a young girl. The continuous change of the narrators creates a sense of urgency in the story and a bit of mystery which is certainly a new element the Wes Anderson arsenal. These constant and uncanny changes of narrators make the case of the unreliable narrator.


This film has a downright strange obsession with frames. Where there are narrative framing elements within the cinematic frames chasing literal frames throughout the film using narrative framing devices. The film shows framing people for crimes within the narrative, looking out over the vast story about to tell through a pair of speckled frames. Even the whole film has different frames around it all the time because of the different aspect ratios.


The film is ultimately about pathos, the love story ends in tragedy the hotel ultimately goes to disrepair and is ultimately demolished. Gustave dies, Agatha dies, one of our narrator dies actually most of our narrator dies. Unlike other films of the director, this film doesn’t end on a happy note but such is Anderson’s understanding of his audiences that he sustained the illusion with a marvelous grace.


It’s Zero Mustafa’s life seen through the eyes of different people. He has lived a life of pain and misery but for one feting moment of time he was happy especially in this particular story it’s not about the end in a lot of ways, it’s about reliving the ecstasy of the past over and over again. We are nothing if not for our memories locked in a constant state of reliving our past and editing it to suit our different needs as we tell our favorite stories from our lives over and over again.

Zero & Gustave.jpg

The bulk of the story takes place directly in between World War one and two when the power vacuum created by the First World War gave rise to the ever-expanding empires like Japan, Russia, and Germany. The motif of the film also talks about a power vacuum creating a power struggle between expanding empires. But in the end, it didn’t really matter which side own because every side lost something or the other like the wars. The film looks are those great wars with empathy and points out the pointlessness of the entire process.

Wes Anderson once said in an interview, “I have a way of filming things and staging them and designing sets. There were times when I thought I should change my approach, but in fact, this is what I like to do. It’s sort of like my handwriting as a movie director. And somewhere along the way, I think I’ve made the decision, I’m going to write in my own handwriting.”


Anderson celebrates time, places, people, and relationships both old and new alike in this film. The structure of the narrative keeps going back in the timelines which elevate the importance of nostalgia. The hotel is the symbol of everlasting nostalgia which is why it’s an enchanting old ruin. Critics often say that Anderson’s films are superficial or vague but I beg to differ from these opinions, he creates a particular brand of films which are extremely pleasing to the eyes, relaxed but at the same time also is whimsy, it’s like striking the right balance of whimsy and brilliance. The way all the characters are portrayed in the film narrates their individual stories with their dialogues. The film starts in a cemetery and end with the news of one of the protagonist’s death.

Author & the girl.png

As a writer-director, Anderson had already made a name for himself as a visionary. The whole film is constructed in a way that it hides in plain sights. The unreliability of the narrators helps the story in a way because the entire story is so much removed from an actual reality that it is assuredly played up for effect passing through so many hands and no doubts increasing an absurdity with which is kind of a perfect way to construct a Wes Anderson film.


The man to whom the film is dedicated to is Stefan Zweig, an Austria-Hungarian novelist, and playwright. He once said, “My life was still governed in some odd way by the idea that everything was only temporary.” It is the motif of the film. Nothing lasts forever but art is almost immortal because you can choose to experience it again and again, like in this case the film.


Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban – Why it’s the best film of the series


In 2001 Warner Bros. took a chance on fantasy project adapted from a novel written by a Britt which was primarily meant for children. What they achieved was nothing short of any fairytale, the name Harry Potter went on to crave its charm into lives of millions. According to reports, nearly 60% of the audiences that saw the first Harry Potter movie were 17 of younger at that time. Then on for the whole generation of us, the Harry Potter series spanned our adolescence and imprinted into our lives. It would be a great injustice to take away the serious impact of the books but for the wider audiences, it was the film series that peacefully coexisted with J. k. Rowling’s macular creation.

“Which one is the best Harry Potter movie?”-  It has been a consistent topic of discussion among film buffs and Potter lovers for close to a decade now. For me, the Harry Potter film series had an immense impact on my filmic education. With every phase of discovering the world from my childhood to the penultimate stage of my teenage, I grew up with the layers of wizardry fantasies. Throughout this journey these films made me feel all the emotions of an immature human heart. Today, when I chose to discuss which one is the best Harry Potter movie I’m keeping my personal likings aside to write about a great movie.

Yes, I do think that Harry potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban is the best film of the series. The third film of the series marks Potter’s transition from playful adventure stories for children to an increasingly darker and grimmer shade of storyline, character, and plot. This film basically constructs the foreground of the upcoming ill-lit covertness of the final installments of the series but also blended smoothly with the lighter shades of the first two films. And for that the director Alfonso Cuaron deserves every bit of praise he got. It was the Mexican who managed the whole transition turmoil of a fantasy franchise and took it to new heights.


Warner Bros. must be credited for taking a chance with a director whose last film was an explicit Mexican road trip drama about sexual discovery called “Y Tu Mamá También”. Cuaron’s visual style has been praised by the critics prior to Azkaban. He inflicted his visual methodologies in the film to establish the poly-thematic flow of the characters and plot. Cuaron has a peculiar liking for moving and often handheld camera movements and in this, he uses it almost as a plot device.

The first few scenes of the film make the audiences feel comfortable to some extent with the scenes of Harry blowing up his horrible aunt and that of with the ridiculous knight bus. The mood of these scenes serves as reminders of the lightheartedness of the previous two installments of the franchise. The tone of the movie remains radiant till Harry learns about Serious Black from Mr. Wisely at the dinner table in Leaky Cauldron. This scene is probably the most important scene in terms of the tonal shift of the movie as well as the entire series. The framing of the scene is extremely relevant with the existing drama surrounding Harry. Cuaron falls back to his signature long shot with the precise use of visual metaphor to construct the tension of the situation and also to uplift the central theme of the film – isolation. The shot was designed to inject the sense of isolation directly into the heart of the viewers with masterful use of visual metaphor.

Watch the scene carefully, as Mr. Wisely pulls Harry into an empty part of the dinner hall separating him from his friends while the specter of Sirius Black remains in the frame. When their conversation shifts towards Black his image is framed between and family and friends framed in the background. Then Mr. Wisely takes Harry to a tighter space and even farther from his friends to tell him not to go look for Black and the shot ends with a key dramatic question the camera only frames Harry in the same continuous shot to expand the theme of isolation.

Cuaron teamed up with cinematographer Michael Seresin for this fantasy endeavor as creates a hauntingly thorough experience for the audiences. Seresin repeatedly frames Harry alone to inflict the character’s feeling of being alone “the chosen one”. Harry’s gradual realization that the burden he must carry without help as he enters his teenage in a world of dark magic. The imagery of the film deepens, reflects and signals these emotions by its consistent framing pattern for the main character.

Seresin often framed Harry separated from his surroundings or else placing him apart from those who are around him. The director never misses falling back to this isolation theme as he shoots Harry in a wide frame where he is separated from his best friends or tracking him to a tight close-up for a dramatic shift. Cuaron also ends the film with a shot where harry flies away from a crowd on his Firebolt.

Cuaron’s vision to endow a specific brand of emotional attachment with stylish imagery makes the film compelling for the viewers. Motifs shoot back and forth across the runtime like magic spells and comment on each other tightening the web that Lisa’s meaning throughout. Cuaron uses on small things to make a big impact on the narrative flow. A little bird flies around the grounds of Hogwarts in the beginning of the film to places it will only later occur to the viewers that map the sites of significant scenes in the movie. He even uses some immediate foreshadows to give emphasis on some important things, like following empty footsteps in snow before introducing Marauder’s Map – a key object of the film that visualizes people moving through Hogwarts with footsteps.

The film is more tonally darker and a lot of the colours are darker, but I think what we’re really seeing here is contrast as there is so much colour through the darkness. The Knight Bus flooring it through central London at night, the bright orange pumpkins that the threesome hide behind near the dark forest walls, the glimmer of greens and reds through the torrential rain during the Quidditch match. Things may have gotten darker, but that’s allowed for the beautiful contrast.


The misty and vast landscape that surrounds Hogwarts had almost served as a character in its own right in Prisoner of Azkaban. The moody, dark colours are a magic in itself and the perfect accompaniment for the darker narrative.

This film’s best bits are in small details. Cuaron not only translates the emotion of youth into a fantasy noir film with the help of some superb VFX but it’s his attention to small details that makes everything look so alive. His repetitive usage of visual metaphors to convey the mood of a scene or the character makes Prisoner of Azkaban so much special. He uses the camera as a plot device which directly interacts with the audiences.

His recurring motif of moving the camera through the glass makes the case about these small details that he used in the film. This technique pays off twice in professor Rumus Lupin’s “boggart” class. Students fight off a boggart, a creature that visualizes your worst fear. Twice in this scene two beautifully choreographed shots, the camera moves through the mirrors of the wardrobe suggesting that while it’s important to look through the windows to see the world you can also look through mirrors which are to say to look into yourself.

Music is a very important part of any movie as it makes a particular scene more compelling. Music adds its own language to the narrative and often it maps a vivid vibe of a character through its tune. The great John Williams composed the music for Prisoner of Azkaban which also sees a transition along with the visual narrative as the story drifts into a grimmer path. This film’s music is not as bright as that of the previous installments, with distinct medieval influences in the instrumentation. One of the new themes, “Double Trouble,” was written during production so that a children’s choir could perform it in Hogwarts’s Great Hall in one of the film’s earlier scenes. The lyrics of “Double Trouble” are from a ritual performed by the Weïrd Sisters in Act 4, Scene 1 of Shakespeare’s Macbeth which takes about the volume of its darkness.

Harry Potter is a mega franchise which millions and millions of children and adults watched over and over again and the third installment of the series makes the cut for me as a cinema lover to admire the art of films. The Prisoner of Azkaban is not just a great film it’s a learning experience.

ANd for all, mischief mannaged.

Sherlock – The Final problem – TV Review – An outlandish thrill ride but is the game still on?

sherlock_TFP 2.jpg

NOTE: The following review contains spoilers.

If The final problem marks the end of Sherlock, the last we’ll see of Benedict Cumberbatch and Martin Freeman as Holmes and Watson, this felt every inch a series finale of the high-functioning franchise.

The BBC phenomenal has never been a perfect show. There have been consistent portions, to be sure. It was from the beginning, and remains, a terrific showcase for a talented and hardworking ensemble. It’s a great place to turn for hallucinatory visuals and pithy dialogue, for twists and turns. For a better or worse, it’s a mystery series wrapped with unapologetic theatrics and query visuals. The final episode of season 4 was written by both the creators Mark Gatiss and Steven Moffat. The co-creators have gone to great lengths to produce one of the most outlandish episodes the series has even seen.


Last week it was discovered that Sherlock had a long-lost sister named Eurus, who he had blocked out from his memory to deal with some childhood trauma. But as the episode eventually confines that Eurus is much more than a dramatic apprehension intended to shake Sherlock of his sociopathic life narrative. As Mycroft eventually tells his brother, “The man you are today is your memory of Eurus,” which is intended to suggest that it was Eurus who resulted in his inability to form emotional connections and more importantly forged his obsession with solving crimes.

Sherlock_ TFP 1.jpg

Titled The Final Problem, this rollercoaster thrill-ride of an episode began with a literal bang, as a bomb blew 221B Baker Street to smithereens, propelling our beloved duo out of the windows with a huge fireball.  As “I want to break free” drives the tension to insanity our very own Jim Moriarty makes a comeback, despite having lost his life five years ago: alive and well and up to his old devilish tricks. And for some time the makers tricked the audiences in believing that TV’s most electrifying villain is alive.


The episode is poured in with mysteries and deductions, even from Dr. John Watson. The final problem is not only about dysfunctional Holmes family, or Sherlock’s childhood trauma, or Mycroft’s devastating lie to his family, or John’s inability to coup up with his wife’s death. It is virtually imposable to talk about the episode in a linear narrative.

Sherlock_TFP 5.jpg

Eurus (Greek God of the East Wind), an “era-defining genius”, kept captive in an Island, abandoned from civilian knowledge for their own safety. The increasingly volatile youngest Holmes was in Sherrinford, a special, secure and very secret installation to contain what we called the uncontainable. She was moved to this facility after she tried to burn her house as a child and was almost successful. But her biggest impact was on his brother Sherlock as she killed his pet dog Redbeard. The incident had a devastating impression on young Sherlock which led him to the path of emotional abundance.


The episode also deals with a superficial case a young girl in an airplane where everyone is sleeping including the pilot and other aircraft staffs. Sherlock has to solve this mystery in a bid to save the girl by going through several cases and emotional layers of his high-functioning consciousness, all of this while he along with his big brother and best friend was held as captive by Eurus. The trio experienced a series of an extraordinary exercise of science from a point of view of lab rats.


The metaphysical stimulation of Eurus was finally solved by his brother as he found that the young girl in the plane is not real, it’s just an extension of Eurus’ emotional state in a form of metaphor, alone in the sky with no one by her side.

As a finale, the episode makes every note hit the right tune as Sherlock becomes a soldier, Watson starts to deduce and Mycroft shows his emotional side in a bet to safe Sherlock and Watson.


The biggest thematic procedure of the entire series had been emotions, from the first episode when Sherlock called himself a “high-functioning sociopath”, but it’s the virtue of human mind which is blessed or cursed emotions both good and bad. But the final montage of footage where John and Sherlock watch Mary’s DVD “miss you” everything comes to full circle as their relationship with each other and everyone else makes their life a less extraordinary.

Sherlock – The Six Thatchers – TV Review – Don’t be deceived by the tragedy, the episode was not worth the long wait



NOTE: The following review contains spoilers.

Death is inevitable. All good things come to an end and more often than not we actually cherish the past with a teary-eyed abundance and unfeigned despair.  That’s the thing about tears, they make vision blurry. Everything seems secondary to that devastating feeling of loss that you were only consumed by it. Generally, we think if something had the power to move us to tears, it surely must have been really moving. But moving and good are not the same things or is it?

After a gap of nearly three years, BBC’s acclaimed TV drama Sherlock came back with its fourth season. The gripping drama had caused a serious buzz among the fans with its modern-day adaptation of the world’s most famous consulting detective. The first three seasons along with last year’s Christmas special episode gained huge commercial and critical acclamations.

sherlock_TST 4.jpg

Unlike the previous episodes of the series this time around the creators banked on inexpensive simulations, after making fans wait for three long years. The only thing that the series never had became the center point. A sudden death of a fan favorite might have done wonders for Game of Thrones but the same strategy backfired heavily for the sleuth series as far as I’m concern.

Killing the strongest female character of the story also made little sense to me. Moreover, the death also didn’t come suddenly, it was pretty evident by the last few episodes that the series is slowly drifting towards dark allies. Mary Watson’s character in the series has gone through a series of changes from the original work of Sir Arthur Conan Doyle and still became a fan favorite. Mary’s mysterious past has drawn plenty of attention and just when she was getting recognized as the third wheel of the investigative trio the creators decided she must die.


So what did they do with 90 minutes of screen time? Make Mary travel across continents in a long montage only to later reveal it was all for nothing? Take a weird, extremely off-character digression for Watson and having him cheat on his wife? Or have a long James Bond style fight scene between Sherlock and an assassin? Anything and everything as long as it doesn’t involve actual detective investigation. The only case that Sherlock takes up in the entire episode, he solves it in just a few minutes. And oh yes, the episode is full of text messages, this time Watson also joined Holmes’ ranks.


So, why do I think the much-awaited episode is bad? You see, unlike Sia, I don’t love cheap thrills. Over time, my appreciation for Mary as a character grew into affection and it hurt to watch her go like that. It was the good construction of earlier episodes that her departure hurt the way it did. All this episode did is to steal her of a fitting death. Died from a misdirected bullet from an elderly secretary’s gun? You certainly deserved better Mary. We as audiences deserve better.




Sherlock- The Abominable Bride – Drug trip to the depths of the Reichenbach fall


NOTE: The following review contains spoilers.

Though for the first time in human history the entire world (read except Donald Trump & members of ISIS) got united to term 2016 as a despicable year but it started with a bang. To the delight of fans across the globe BBC premiered a new episode of Sherlock but at the same time, the British network also got fans confused as most of them expected two more episodes.

The return of world’s most favorite shark-face as world’s most famous detective (consulting detective to be precise) and a hobbit with an exceptional reaction-face as his sidekick in this drug loaded superhero flick. The newest British Television adaptation of Sir Arthur Conan Doyle’s numero uno creation is set in current day London and the first three seasons of the TV series has gained huge commercial and critical success.


The special episode is a continuation of the ongoing events but is also set in Victorian England simultaneously filled with cocaine, hallucinations, feminism and the depths of the Reichenbach fall. After reminding us all that happened in the show which revolves around the remarkable life of a “high functioning sociopath” who is also a drug addict. As Sherlock comes back from his minutes of exile due a situation, the story alternatively drives time back to the last half of the 19th century.


In the backdrop of Victorian London Dr. John Watson meets a strange man who is beating up corpses with a cane to establish the principle of bruising after death invites him to share his flat at two hundred twenty-one one B Baker Street. As a quite shocked Dr. Watson gets an assurance of Holmes’ strangeness in the form of friend Stamford the title track hits. The opening monologue of this special episode is recreated from the first ever episode of the Series and established Holmes and Watson relationship in the alternative Victorian narrative.

In 19th Century internet and blogs would have been a serious work of science fiction hence the makers paid their respect to the Strand magazine on which world’s best known sleuth made his first ever appearance. It can be termed as a triumph for the production team for giving the period drama a tantalizing Victorian look. Every significance of the 19th Century were present be it steam engines or hansom cabs even Shelock’s oiled back brushed hair spreader Victorian vibes. These elements became to carry more significance as the two narratives started to jumble with spontaneous flow of mesmerizing imagery. Most of the regular character’s function remained the same within the alternative narrative both thematically and metaphorically. These Victorian plot devices blended with the fast moving unorthodox narrative structure allied with witty dialogues. Among some of the haze of narrative ambiguity of the Victorian part that of Mycroft’s immense presence is an out an out winner.


Mrs. Hudson is the first female character to enter the screen in this episode and thus makes his presence known while discussing her function within the narrative with Watson. The feminist touch that has been drawn to the script has also historical significances, the voting rights for women stood as a monumental step in that era. Every female character in the episode has been shown agitated with this patriarchal society which doesn’t consider the half of human race as equal to the other. The utter unexpected treat of a righteously angry Molly Hooper in the Victorian part disguised as a man is a bright extension of visual metaphor.


The Victorian setting was all a roller-costar drug trip in the mind of modern-day Sherlock, who’d deliberately overdosed and entered his hallucinogenic sphere of “mind palace” to desperately prove that Moriarty couldn’t have come back from the dead. It was also a metaphor for Sherlock’s addiction (though he kept on insisting that he is a user, not an addict) to puzzles, as much as that seven per cent solution of cocaine.


The visual stylization is stellar as always with masterful writing combined with a collectively supreme performance of the cast made the New year a virtual drug inflicted trip to remember for the fans.