The Michigan Daily — michigandaily.com
Arts
Tuesday, November 10, 2015 — 5A

FILM REVIEW
‘Spectre’ doesn’t 
live up to the hype

New Bond film falls 
short of spectacular 
previous installments

By RACHEL RICHARDSON

For The Daily

Despite the hype, “Spectre” 

falls short of being something 
spectacular. 
While 
not 
the 

worst of the recent Bond films, 
it definitely isn’t on the same 
level as “Casino 
Royale” 
and 

“Skyfall.”

In the 26th 

installment 
of 
the 
Bond 

series, a video 
message 
from 

the 
deceased 

M (Judi Dench, 
“The 
Vote”) 

leads Bond (Daniel Craig, “Sky-
fall”) on a mission to hunt and 
destroy the leader of Spectre, 
Oberhauser (Christoph Waltz, 
“Big Eyes”). Predictably, Bond 
must seek out a woman, the 
daughter of “Quantum of Sol-
ace” villain Mr. White (Jesper 
Christensen, “Ich und Kamin-
ski”), the easily irritable Made-
leine Swann (Léa Seydoux, “The 
Lobster”), to locate the enemy. 
While Bond frantically travels 
through Austria, the rest of his 
team faces a mole who is infil-
trating MI6’s headquarters.

Hoyte van Hoytema does an 

excellent job with the cinema-
tography; however, his efforts 
are not capable of saving the 
film from being a disappoint-
ment. The film’s editor executes 
the opening scene perfectly by 
synching the on screen imag-
es with the film’s theme, Sam 
Smith’s “Writing’s on the Wall.” 
Transitions from the Spectre’s 
octopus logo to shards of glass 
and snakes slithering around 
women’s bodies are seamless, 
instantly drawing the viewer 
into Bond’s world. As in the 
film itself, the extended track-
ing shots during the opening 
fight sequence in Mexico, sig-
nificantly elevate the action’s 
intensity. Using long lenses, 
makes it impossible to see what 
or who is coming into the frame, 
which leads to heightening both 
the intensity and the suspense-
ful mood. The helicopter and 
Aston Martin DB10 stunts are 
incredibly executed — the best 
stunt is when Bond grips the 
outside rail of the helicopter as 

it does a 360 in mid-air.

Craig excellently portrays 

Bond’s suave, seductive ways 
with his piercing blue eyes and 
sharp suits, while his stern 
facial expressions exude an 
alarming sense of confidence 
that only enhances Bond’s inde-
structibility. Of course, his mas-
sive muscles also add a degree 
of intimidation to Bond’s char-
acter — they’re even powerful 
enough to take down the freak-
ish Mr. Hinx (Dave Bautista, 
“TripTank”) However, without 
the help of Q (Ben Whishaw, 
“Cloud Atlas”), he would be 
a significantly less efficient 
agent. Q, whose name certain-
ly stands for quirky, provides 
interesting depth to the movie 
with his sharp contrast to Bond, 
and the two have an almost 
brotherly relationship. Unfor-
tunately, Q’s role in the film is 
very limited, so his ability to 
truly enhance the film is irrel-
evant.

While Bond’s MI6 team-

mates strengthen the film, 
his enemies do not. Although 
they both clearly hate Bond, 
it’s hard to believe that either 
is actually evil. Oberhauser’s 
“villain creds” are quickly 
diminished by his display of 
affection for a fluffy white 
persian cat, not to mention the 
lackluster dialogue that makes 
him seem anything but menac-
ing. Instead of being brashly 
threatening, the conversations 
between Bond, his team, the 
two villains feels inappropri-
ately colloquial, much like the 
typical dialect of spiteful sib-
lings and not that of hostile 
adversaries.

Bond’s newest love doesn’t 

fare much better as far as cred-
ibility goes. Other than the fact 

that she can put a bullet through 
someone’s head, Swann is just 
like every other girl who has 
crossed Bond’s path — foreign, 
promiscuous and moody. It’s 
hard to believe Swann is a psy-
chologist given the degree to 
which Swann struggles with 
maintaining 
her 
emotional 

composure. Her constant whin-
ing and false-sounding griev-
ing is painful to both watch and 
hear.

A majority of the movie is a 

reference to past films instead 
of developing a new storyline: 
essentially, “Spectre” feels more 
like a tribute than an entirely 
new film. Bond wears a mask 
during the Day of the Dead cel-
ebration in Mexico, which mim-
ics Baron Samedi’s skull mask in 
“Live and Let Die.” Bond’s ask-
ing for his dirty martini to be 
shaken, not stirred refers back 
to the classic line in “Dr. No.” 
For the final tribute hurrah, an 
entire wall inside the old MI6 
building is lined with posters of 
all Bond’s previous villains and 
deceased lovers, which Bond 
suddenly stops to view even 
though he’s running out of time 
to make it out alive. These refer-
ences might enhance the expe-
rience for a Bond fanatic, but 
they exist for the sole purpose 
of being cutesy, and do not add 
much to the film overall.

Unfortunately, what made 

past Bond films so incredible 
can’t effectively be recreated, 
and definitely can’t be thrown 
together in order to form 
another movie. Had it been 
focused on continuing Bond’s 
adventure from where it left off 
at the end of “Skyfall,” “Spec-
tre” could have been another 
critical success in this new era 
of Bond.

‘Shitty Boyfriends’ 
won’t fill your gaps

By DANIELLE YACOBSON

Daily Arts Writer

Misery loves company, and 

there’s no better way for women 
to commiserate together than 
gossip 
about 

the 
losers 

they’ve dated. 
“Shitty 
Boy-

friends,” 
an 

original 
web 

series 
from 

executive 
producers 
Lisa 
Kudrow 

(“Friends”) 
and Dan Bucatinsky (“Scandal”), 
proves yet again how fictional 
the perfect guys in rom-coms 
are. Released on Refinery29, an 
online news and fashion out-
let, the comedic show strikes a 
chord when you’re feeling par-
ticularly screwed over by men, 
but ‘Boyfriends’ won’t hold your 
attention for long in comparison 
to other more compelling con-
tent online.

Amanda 
(Melissa 
Hunter, 

“Adult Wednesday”) is an up-
and-coming cartoon artist on the 
hunt for The One. In each seven-
minute 
episode 
installment, 

Amanda finds herself involved 
with 
yet 
another 
deadbeat. 

While her exaggerated dating 
faux pas are comical, the stilted 
acting draws a noticeable divide 
between the show and reality. 
Desperately trying to abandon 
her single status, Amanda looks 
for love in the most obscure 
prospects that inevitably fulfill 
the show’s title. From one epi-
sode to another, Amanda leaves 
her romances without any dis-
tinct lessons learned (unless the 
moral is to immediately ditch 

the guy who gifts her a sample 
size Bath & Body Works spray 
for Valentine’s Day). Unfor-
tunately, “Shitty Boyfriends” 
focuses more on ridiculing men 
than it does developing the hero-
ine’s character as a strong, inde-
pendent woman. 

The series features Sandra 

Oh (“Grey’s Anatomy”), who 
slips naturally into the role of 
the remorseless boss with a 
killer fashion sense. Though Oh 
only appears in three of the five 
released episodes, her striking 
presence leaves the audience 
begging for more screentime. 
It seems there is more curiosity 
surrounding her love life than 
Amanda’s.

The show fully elucidates 

the ludicrous archetypes of 
men in the 21st century, por-
trayed 
through 
the 
terrible 

men Amanda dates. The self-
proclaimed happy vegan turns 
“free-gan” as he starts rummag-
ing through garbage bins for 
food, and the guy who says they 
should get married after the first 

date is, not surprisingly, crazy. 
But, though the tortured film 
enthusiast who enjoys watching 
“Schindler’s List” to wind down 
warrants a chuckle, “Shitty Boy-
friends” is just not memorable. 
With entertainment powerhous-
es like Kudrow and Bucatinsky 
as producers, the show carries a 
burden of expectation for side-
splitting comical punches left 
and right, instead of awkward 
cringe-worthy scenarios.

Refinery29’s content focuses 

on fashion and lifestyle, and the 
series is another outlet to show-
case quirky style through the 
costumes. Sporting loud prints 
and colors, the characters’ ward-
robe tells a story of its own. In 
this respect, “Shitty Boyfriends” 
naturally fits into the site. But 
ultimately, it’s clear that the web 
series is not destined to become 
the Internet’s next hit-sensa-
tion. The episodes may tempo-
rarily cheer you up after a lousy 
date, but they won’t be enough 
to keep you from drowning your 
sorrows in ice cream.

B

Shitty 
Boyfriends

Available online 

at Refinery29

By DREW MARON

Daily Arts Writer

“Flesh and Bone” is the new 

limited series from Starz about 
the gritty underbelly of the New 
York City bal-
let. If that sen-
tence 
makes 

you giggle a 
bit because it 
has both the 
words “ballet” 
and 
“gritty” 

in it, well, that 
seems to kind 
of be the point. 
The 
series 

comes from the 
mind of Moira Walley-Beckett, 
the master behind some of the 
best episodes in “Breaking Bad,” 
including the nerve-shattering 
“Ozymandias.” Like her previous 
series, “Flesh and Bone” seeks to 
destroy the disparity between 
the sacred and of the profane. 
Many have already grown skep-
tical about the show, going so far 
as to compare it to the reviled 
“Showgirls.” Yet, while the series 
does fill the screen with beauti-
ful people engaged in exploitative 
and overly-sexualized activities, 
“Flesh and Bone” seems use tropes 
of premium-cable dramas to say 
something not only relevant to the 
world it creates, but to the greater 
landscape — and intersections 
between — contemporary art and 
entertainment.

The show follows Claire (Sarah 

Hay, “Black Swan”) as she runs 
away from her troubled home in 
Pittsburgh to become a ballerina 
in the prestigious American Bal-
let Company. The leader of the 
company is Paul (Ben Daniels, 
“Locke”), a sociopathic artistic 
director who believes his dancers 
are his property. Though many 
might compare the character to 
Vincent 
Cassel’s 
sex-obsessed 

director from “Black Swan,” Dan-
iels seems more concerned with 
maintaining his power rather than 
just sleeping with his dancers. 
Daniels is an intimidating force 
in the pilot, even if the character 
might be one we’ve seen else-
where, whether in “Black Swan” 
or “Whiplash.” Unfortunately, it’s 

a character whose reality never 
stretches beyond the veil of believ-
ability. There really are people out 
there — whether in film, music, 
theatre or journalism — who do 
sink this low, while relishing their 
unchecked authority over those 
who are vulnerable.

With the same gothic sensi-

bility Walley-Beckett brought to 
“Breaking Bad,” the repressively 
polite world of ballet is ironically 
juxtaposed with the sordid under-
belly of exotic dancing. This aspect 
of “Flesh and Bone” — along with 
its pervasive use of nudity and 
sexuality — might draw the series 
its most criticism. Yet what sepa-
rates “Flesh and Bone” from other 
premium-cable dramas is that the 
nudity has a purpose connected 
to the overarching themes of the 
show. “Flesh and Bone” is very 
much about the male gaze and 
the physical, emotional and psy-
chological punishment it inflicts 
on those caught in its sight. In 
his world, director Paul is god, 
and all must shape themselves 
according to his vision.

In a manner, the show feels 

like an apt companion piece 
to the Cinemax original series 
“The Knick,” giving us the sordid 
details allowed by premium cable 
— whether that be the gore in 
“The Knick” or the sex in “Flesh 
and Bone” — but just in a subver-
sive context.

The ballet, in a fashion, can 

be looked at like premium-
cable, itself: an environment in 
which the wealthy and power-
ful indulge their baser instincts 
under the guise of sophisticated 

cultural engagement. After all, 
premium cable might have given 
the world “The Sopranos” and 
“The Wire,” but it’s also been the 
home of “Max After Dark.”

Whether 
or 
not, 
Walley-

Beckett is intentionally playing 
around with premium cable’s 
reputation for both cutting-edge 
art and deliberate exploitation 
remains to be seen, as the show 
has yet to achieve the same 
nuance as “Masters of Sex.” 
However, Walley-Beckett suc-
ceeds by providing the viewer 
with an almost voyeuristic frame 
in which to pull back the curtain 
on a seemingly high-brow form 
of art.

Neither the world of strippers 

and gangsters nor that of the bal-
let is necessarily appealing to 
Claire and, like “Breaking Bad,” 
Walley-Beckett 
intelligently 

negates the notion of a high and 
low path. In both worlds, the 
characters are thrown to the 
dogs; the only choice they really 
have is which pit they’re more 
comfortable being devoured in.

There are many who have 

already criticized the show, and 
not without reason. Some of its 
characters become cliché (the 
dominating dance teacher, the 
street smart fellow dancer, the 
prudish main character); however, 
in the hands of Walley-Beckett 
and director David Michod (“Ani-
mal Kingdom”), the pilot manages 
to transcend its lesser qualities to 
deliver a perverse, entertaining 
hour of television, and hopefully 
only the first entry in Walley-Beck-
ett’s oeuvre of original dramas.

B

Flesh and 
Bone

Series Premiere

Sundays at 8 p.m.

Starz

C+

Spectre

MGM and Colum-

bia Pictures

Rave and 

Quality 16

TV REVIEW

REFINERY29

Come on, gals. The headline wasn’t that bad!

TV REVIEW
‘Flesh’ has potential

STARZ

Maybe it will be as good as “Breaking Bad” some day.

MGM AND COLUMBIA PICTURES

“Fewer hop-ons than my last car.”

FILM NOTEBOOK
Crowdfunded ‘Fury’

By ANA LUCENA

For The Daily

As an aspiring filmmaker, I 

was excited when I saw friends 
post on Facebook and Instagram 
about an incredible short film 
titled “Kung Fury” that is free 
to watch on YouTube. Since I 
don’t particularly like kung fu 
films more than any other genre, 
I was hesitant to believe the 
hype at first. But its wild success 
inspired me, not only because 
you can finally reach a wider 
audience to appreciate your 
work, but also because it shows 
that anyone who believes in 
their craft finally has a platform 
where they can make it big.

“Kung Fury” is a brilliant 

homage to the cinema of the 
1980s — especially kung fu and 
cop films — and illustrates the 
maximum potential filmmakers 
have in the digital age. The proj-
ect was crowdfunded through 
Kickstarter and raised more 
than $600,000 in funds, which, 
while short of the $1 million 
needed for a feature-length film, 
exceeded the $200,000 origi-
nally asked for. This garnered 
the short film a lot of atten-
tion, including this year’s Lovie 
Internet Video Person of the 
Year Award for director David 
Sandberg for his spectacular use 
of netizens’s support in getting 
his short film completed and 

released on YouTube and Netf-
lix for free. This is in addition to 
the positive reviews critics gave 
“Kung Fury.” The way the proj-
ect was funded is a stark change 
from the difficult, traditional way 
to fund films, which changed my 
view of the profession after won-
dering how I would solve such a 
problem.

My biggest concern in becom-

ing a filmmaker is funding. 
Patiently infiltrating Hollywood 
over several years seems to be the 
most common technique used, 
but that means that I would have 
to wait a long time before I could 
quit my day job. You can’t pre-
dict what the public will enjoy, 
which leads to producers play-
ing it safe when they decide what 
projects to pursue. This difficulty 
to finance films has led to main-
stream cinema producing the 
same old movies that follow the 
same old tropes no matter how 
devoid of originality or creativ-
ity or taste they are (I’m looking 
at you, Michael Bay!). This makes 
sense, considering film produc-
tion is an expensive and con-
suming effort. After writing and 
rewriting your script, you have to 
gather actors, props and people 
who know how to handle camer-
as, lights, costumes and makeup 
before you can even begin to edit 
and add special effects. Funding 
a film the way Sandberg did was 
unimaginable before the wide-

spread use of the Internet.

A case in point is the 1994 

classic 
“Clerks” 
by 
director, 

screenwriter and producer Kevin 
Smith. The philosophical com-
edy was solely funded by Smith, 
including maxing out multiple 
credit cards and dipping into 
his college fund. Even then, he 
was forced to film at the conve-
nience store he worked at when 
it was closed, and had to get his 
family and friends to act in the 
movie in order for his budget to 
make ends meet. Fortunately for 
him, Smith’s deep investment 
in his craft paid off, winning 
several awards at the Sundance 
Screen Festival and the Cannes 
Film Festival and leading to the 
creation of the “View Askewni-
verse” franchise. Yet, Smith’s 
experience remains a rare one. 
The same can’t be said by all film-
makers struggling to get their 
vision seen.

Though “Kung Fury” ’s suc-

cess from crowdfunding doesn’t 
change the fact that making it 
big in the film industry is easier 
said than done, I expect that 
more people will be able to share 
their cinematic art this way and 
improve entertainment for all. 
And if this pushes movie studios 
to compete with the web’s access 
to such raw talent, and in turn 
makes them raise the standard of 
today’s mainstream movies, I’m 
all for it.

