Three good films available on Netflix right now

 

I think this article speaks for itself - there's no real need for an introduction, but that won't stop me. Whilst it's true that I'm recommending 3 films that can all be found on Netflix (currently), this is a rather makeshift premise for the article. It's more the case that three films I like happen to be on Netflix at the same time, so I'm taking the opportunity to write about them. Any excuse. I'll try and briefly outline the films, and then I'll explain what I liked about each one too. Such is the nature of Netflix, I'd be surprised if you haven't already seen (whether that's actually watching or choosing not to watch) these films. Once again though, I'm writing this article for my own enjoyment, so it's neither here nor there to me whether it's actually useful to anyone else. Only joking. I hope I can convince you to watch (and enjoy) these films. 

I'll begin with Damien Chazelle's 'First Man' as my initial film of interest. Out of my choice of three, this is the movie I've seen most recently, so it's probably also the movie I'll have the most to say about. First of all, it's been on Netflix for a fair while now, so you might have to act fast if you're interested in it (be prepared to set about two and a half hours aside though!) I recognise that this is a daunting prospect, but I’m here to talk you round. It’s important to note that this film was directed by the same man who brought us La La Land, so you should be instantly interested. Admittedly, the story of Neil Armstrong and the moon landings couldn’t be farther away from the revival of Jazz in Los Angeles, but they’re both superb films in their own right (in my opinion). What have they got in common? (beyond the director) Ryan Gosling in a leading role, of course. To be able to name Mr. Gosling in your cast-list is to be a good film. You should know this if you’ve listened to my films of the decade podcast. Ryan Gosling plays Neil Armstrong, the ‘First Man’. He brings real gravity *cough* to the character. You might be surprised to hear that this film is really a sad one - without wanting to give much away, Neil Armstrong suffered tragedy in the 1960s, and Gosling captures this with authenticity. Claire Foy plays his wife, Janet Shearon, commendably too. One of the film’s most memorable scenes arrives when NASA cuts the transmission from Gemini 8 to Janet’s radio, as they fear the worst for Neil. The astronaut’s children are playfully tormenting their mother as the drama unfolds, and it makes for tragicomic viewing. I loved the movie for charming moments like this - Justin Hurwitz’s score (complete with Theremin) was perfectly matched to scenes of this nature, in that it was pleasurably quaint. Indeed, I think that the music was one of my favourite bits about the film. The climactic scene of the movie, Armstrong on the moon, was made by the music - once again without giving it away, it’s one of the most touching scenes I’ve seen in cinema. The visuals matched the idiosyncratic score: I detected a certain tint on the camera, which gave the film a 1960s feel. This added to the quaint, charming appeal of the film. Chazelle’s cinematographer Linus Sandgren also excels in his shot framing (the scenes in Armstrong’s house are brilliantly set up) and I adore the way he manipulates colour in the film, e.g. the strong red of Armstrong’s cap, or the contrasting light areas in Houston mission control. Alas, I digress. What I’m thrusting at is that ‘First Man’ is a real one-off, in my opinion. The movie focuses essentially on the means of the moon landing, specifically the human cost of progress. This story is realised through stunning visuals, an enchanting score, and stupendous acting. ‘First Man’ is as unforgettable as ‘La La Land’. I haven’t even mentioned the ‘whitey on the moon’ segment, which was the cherry on top of the film for me. The spaceship scenes, of which there are many, are filmed well too: we can hear the nuts and bolts rattling around the astronauts as they blast into space, which augments the sense of imminent death. All in all, ‘First Man’ is a brilliant movie which is tucked away behind masses of dross on Netflix. If you feel that you can suffer a slightly sadder plot in the name of experiencing quality cinema, then this is the movie for you. I highly recommend it.

Aaron Sorkin’s ‘The Trial of the Chicago Seven’ is the next film on my list, and it just so happens that this movie is based in 1969 too. The similarities with ‘First Man’ end here. Sorkin’s picture, a Netflix Original, is an overt social study to Chazelle’s character driven piece. Whilst the space biopic is notable for its score and cinematography, the courtroom drama is strongest in its superb script (my last recommendation is a combination of both). This is the beauty in lining both films up on Netflix: you'll be experiencing two totally different types of movie, but you'll still be getting two doses of quality cinema (my third recommendation is more a whack on the head than any sort of dose) As Sorkin’s film is a Netflix Original, I think I can be safe in saying that it won’t be disappearing anytime soon - not to mention the fact that it only came out a few weeks ago. That said, my article has failed if I don’t inspire you to watch the film straightaway, so forget my previous sentence - the film is taken off Netflix tomorrow! The movie is based on real life, telling the story of eight (eventually whittled down to seven) individuals who were arrested and charged for trying to incite a riot in Chicago around the time of the 1968 Democratic National Convention. The plot follows the progression of the trial of the seven, interspersed with flashbacks of their actions in the period before the riot. The film is poignant, and very apt with things that have happened recently (in America), but it’s hilariously funny above all. Sorkin’s script is electric, particularly in the courtroom scenes. There isn’t a line wasted. Francine Maisler’s casting gets the most out of the screenplay: Sacha Baron Cohen is brilliant as the eccentric Abbie Hoffman; Jeremy Strong was born to play Hoffman’s sidekick Jerry Rubin, and Mark Rylance is raucously dry-witted as their lawyer William Kunstler. The back and forth between the defendants and the judge (who is comically slow) is simultaneously aggravating and hysterical - it makes for impossibly spellbinding cinema. On the other hand, the treatment of Bobby Seale (leader of the Black Panthers and the 8th defendant) will make your blood boil, as will the flashback scenes of police brutality (although the uniform turquoise of the riot police helmets is a nice visual). This film is certainly one that will keep you engaged, whether it’s making you laugh, or sending you into a crazed anarchist frenzy. I’ve barely touched on it, but the film is rather stylish too - the setting and period help with this, but there’s some delectable cinematography too: the scene of the defendants walking up the steps to court is a fine example. ‘The Trial of the Chicago Seven’ is a film that everyone needs to see - it’s a film that everyone will enjoy. 

My last recommendation is my last recommendation for a reason - it’s probably the least accessible of my three films, and that’s saying something. As such, if you’re likely to watch anything I recommend in this article, make it something I’ve already mentioned. David Fincher’s ‘Mank’ is the movie I disparage, and it’s a singular cinematic experience. The black and white movie is set in 1930s Hollywood, following Herman Mankiewicz (Mank) who wrote the Oscar-winning screenplay for ‘Citizen Kane’ in that era. The film is designed to emulate contemporary movie practices: Erik Messerschmidt (‘Mank(‘s) cinematographer) employs photographic techniques that were first seen in ‘Citizen Kane’; the film was shot in a monochrome camera, and Ren Klyce’s sound design captures the crackling sound of old movies. All of this adds up to a charismatic and agreeable film - especially when combined with the movie’s swinging jazz score. Indeed, I would say that the film’s appeal to the senses is its central strength - this makes up for ‘Mank(‘s)’, what I would call, heavy dialogue. You’ll need to bear with Fincher’s flick: Mank the man is a witty arsehole, and I often found it hard to keep up with his conversations (I’m sure you’ll cope better than me). Hopefully you’ll be too wrapped up in the sounds and sights of the film (like me) to really care about this. Don't get me wrong though - it's not impossible to follow the movie's plot (with some help from Wikipedia). This is all you need with 'Mank'. The movie is an enjoyable experience: several scenes stood out to me in particular, for example the wonderfully edited election-night party; the frantic political debate in Hearst's mansion; Louis B Mayer asking his employees to take a wage cut, and best of all, Mank's drunken rant at the banquet. These are moments you can look forward to enjoying for yourself. Mank’s ongoing dispute with Mayer is entertaining too (it certainly kept my interest). What I’m essentially saying is that ‘Mank’ is a film of glitz and glamour, which is aimed at scratching beneath the glitz and glamour of early Hollywood. This makes for a totally enthralling 2 hours and 10 minutes of film. I think that you should watch it.

That’s it then. I’m sorry I didn’t get this article out in time for Christmas Eve/Boxing Day/Christmas Day - I suppose you would’ve been off work on those days, and might’ve had more of a chance to sit down and watch films. Well, I was simply too lazy to get the post over the line for the 24th; there’s not much more to be said I’m afraid. I hope you can still find a way to watch some of these movies though: it’ll be worth it if you can! Thanks for reading the post - please tweet me your thoughts on the films @Torpaldo (and tell me if there’s anything else I’ve missed on Netflix)!

Thanks.