:00:00. > :00:00.prepare to meet last year's runners-up, Madrid. England prepare
:00:00. > :00:07.to meet Ireland in the Six Nations. That is all at 6:30pm. Now one BBC
:00:08. > :00:18.News, it is time for the Film Review.
:00:19. > :00:21.Hello and welcome to the Film Review on BBC News.
:00:22. > :00:24.To take us through this week's cinema releases is Mark Kermode.
:00:25. > :00:31.So, Mark, what do we have this week?
:00:32. > :00:44.We have Get Out, a horror movie come social thriller. We have The
:00:45. > :00:53.Salesman, a prize-winning offering. And Personal Shopper on top form. I
:00:54. > :00:56.am fascinated to know what you thought Get Out, because even
:00:57. > :01:00.watching the trailer, I felt very tense. The trailer sells it as a
:01:01. > :01:05.horror movie, and it is. The director described it as a social so
:01:06. > :01:11.essentially, it is a satire about post-racial America, in inverted
:01:12. > :01:17.commas. There is a photographer with a preppy girlfriend, and they are
:01:18. > :01:21.going to have rich parents' house for the weekend, and he says, they
:01:22. > :01:25.do know I'm black, right? And she said, why would they need to know,
:01:26. > :01:29.they are liberal? And when they arrive at the Mansion- like cows,
:01:30. > :01:37.that is pretty much the first thing he says cinema I would have a delete
:01:38. > :01:41.-- I would have voted for Obama for a third time. Here is a clip. How
:01:42. > :01:54.long has this been going on, this thing? For months. Four months? Five
:01:55. > :02:05.months, actually. She's right, I'm wrong. That's a boy, better get used
:02:06. > :02:13.to saying that! I'm so sorry. She's right, I'm wrong. Does he have an
:02:14. > :02:18.off button? D1 to unpack? At first, everything seems chummy, but there
:02:19. > :02:21.are signs that everything isn't quite right. The housemaid and
:02:22. > :02:26.groundskeeper smile in a way that seems robotic almost. The friends
:02:27. > :02:29.turn up and they are not just attentive, it's almost as if they
:02:30. > :02:36.are treating the guest as some kind of trophy. We then move into
:02:37. > :02:39.something that the writer of Stepford wives would have
:02:40. > :02:42.recognised. It manages the ship between being just about credible
:02:43. > :02:46.and going into something rather different very gradually. At its
:02:47. > :02:51.best when I think all the horror remains hidden. The way to think of
:02:52. > :03:00.it is as something that starts out as a modern version of Guess Who's
:03:01. > :03:04.Coming To Dinner and then it drifts towards Greenroom. There is humour
:03:05. > :03:07.all the way through, and there are dark laughs in it. The satire is
:03:08. > :03:11.really sort of piercing, and then when it needs to turn into something
:03:12. > :03:16.thrilling, shocking, it doesn't hold back. I thought it was a really
:03:17. > :03:19.effective piece of work. I so it with a full screening room of people
:03:20. > :03:25.who were jumping, shrieking and laughing when they were meant to.
:03:26. > :03:34.It's a really, really smart social thriller/ horror film. Overall, is
:03:35. > :03:37.it a satire about race? Weirdly, it is about the underlying racism of
:03:38. > :03:42.the Liberal elite, to some extent. It is not a film in which rednecks
:03:43. > :03:45.are the bad guys. The Liberals, who appear to be incredibly egalitarian,
:03:46. > :03:50.but there is something really sinister beneath the surface. I
:03:51. > :03:53.don't want to give anything away. As you say, the trailer is a real
:03:54. > :03:56.teaser and will get a lot of people going dizzy. They will be
:03:57. > :04:08.disappointed. Really intriguing. The Salesman won the best
:04:09. > :04:11.foreign-language Oscar. It did. It was boycotted by the director
:04:12. > :04:16.because of Donald Trump's travel ban. I think this is a very fine
:04:17. > :04:25.piece of work. Husband-and-wife, part-time actors, putting on the
:04:26. > :04:28.play, Death Of A Salesman. The real-life relationship spills onto
:04:29. > :04:31.the stage. Some people have complained the film is too
:04:32. > :04:35.schematic, that the bridge between the play and real life is too
:04:36. > :04:39.contrived. I disagree. I thought it slip from social observation into
:04:40. > :04:43.psychological thriller almost unnoticed. The performances are
:04:44. > :04:46.terrific. I think it is a really humane work and you can absolutely
:04:47. > :04:50.believe in the characters and their situations. I think it's a film that
:04:51. > :04:57.blends the personal level and the political rather beautiful Lake --
:04:58. > :05:05.rather beautifully. Having heard a few lukewarm reviews, I was very,
:05:06. > :05:11.very impressed by it. He won before for A Separation. That is in a
:05:12. > :05:17.league of its own and it's not as good as that, but that is a high
:05:18. > :05:20.water mark. It is a smart, intelligent, melancholic, insightful
:05:21. > :05:24.drama about people you can really believe in. You mentioned good
:05:25. > :05:25.performances in that. That seems to be the overriding theme of
:05:26. > :05:38.Personal Shopper. It juxtaposes the spiritual and material wealth. It is
:05:39. > :05:42.literally a search for the afterlife and a search for a nice pair of
:05:43. > :05:46.shoes. She is a personal shopper for a rich celebrity, so she spends her
:05:47. > :05:50.life going round choosing her wardrobe. However, she is also
:05:51. > :05:53.buried, having lost a brother, and she's trying to make contact with
:05:54. > :06:00.her brother because she was a medium. He was a clip. You're
:06:01. > :06:15.staying here tomorrow? I'm waiting. I told you I was waiting. What are
:06:16. > :06:20.you waiting for? We made this both. -- oath. Whoever died first would
:06:21. > :06:25.send the other a sign. A sign... From the afterlife? You could call
:06:26. > :06:33.it that, call it a million things. How do you know if it is a sign? I'm
:06:34. > :06:40.a medium. He was a medium. I'll just know it. So, it's a really
:06:41. > :06:44.intriguing setup. At the beginning, it looks like being a really creepy
:06:45. > :06:48.goat story, has her walking around the house, attempting to contact her
:06:49. > :06:52.brother. Then, she starts getting text messages, and it's almost like
:06:53. > :06:56.her phone is working as a Ouija board. She doesn't know that the
:06:57. > :06:59.text messages are coming from a brother, another spirit, a real-life
:07:00. > :07:02.stalker, or whether as the Don suggests, they are coming from
:07:03. > :07:07.herself, they are somehow subconscious. The techs are asking,
:07:08. > :07:11.what are you afraid of and ashamed of? The phone almost becomes a
:07:12. > :07:17.confident. As the film slips between the genres, as far as the
:07:18. > :07:20.supernatural stuff is concerned, it starts to be less sure-footed and
:07:21. > :07:24.drifts into territory that could be rather foolish. The reason that
:07:25. > :07:28.holds it together is because of her performance. She is in almost every
:07:29. > :07:33.shop, and it's a really sort of raw performance. She is brilliant,
:07:34. > :07:37.someone who is trying out different identities in the way she tries out
:07:38. > :07:43.different clothes. For all the flaws of the film, and there are many, she
:07:44. > :07:47.is so good that she just carries it through, and I was mesmerised by
:07:48. > :07:53.her. As I said, I have been a huge fan of hers for a while. I love the
:07:54. > :07:55.Twilight movies, but in this, she is really fine and it silences all the
:07:56. > :08:02.critics. This is a properly brilliant performance. So it is
:08:03. > :08:07.worth seeing it for her? The film is fine, adventurous, but it is flawed,
:08:08. > :08:10.but I would rather something aimed high and fell slightly short of the
:08:11. > :08:14.mark than just settled for something. This isn't something that
:08:15. > :08:22.you've seen every day. OK. We always like to talk about film of the week.
:08:23. > :08:25.You and I could still be talking about the film at won the best
:08:26. > :08:30.picture Oscar. It is great, go and see it. We should perhaps pick out
:08:31. > :08:36.something else. There is another choice, this animate called Silent
:08:37. > :08:42.Voice. It is a schoolyard drama dealing with serious subjects -
:08:43. > :08:48.bullying, isolation, loneliness, self harm, suicidal thoughts,
:08:49. > :08:51.disability, in a way that is uplifting. A beautiful score, the
:08:52. > :08:58.animation is really well done, and it is one of those films that is all
:08:59. > :09:01.about learning to look the world in the, about learning to apologise for
:09:02. > :09:05.your mistakes. It is a film with a lot of crying in it, and I don't
:09:06. > :09:12.just mean on-screen. I thought it was very touching, very impressive,
:09:13. > :09:18.and done with honesty. Good. Moonlight is still the best film!
:09:19. > :09:26.DVD of the week is, and anyone who follows me on Twitter know is that I
:09:27. > :09:32.detested Nocturnal Animals. Very stylish but hugely anti-women, and a
:09:33. > :09:36.difficult watch as a woman, and a lot of people have said that. I
:09:37. > :09:41.don't think it is, but I understand that point of view. There is an LA
:09:42. > :09:44.art dealer who receives a manuscript from her ex-husband, which is a
:09:45. > :09:47.violent story which seems to have parallels with their life together,
:09:48. > :09:51.and the way in which one reads that story within a story, the fiction
:09:52. > :09:55.within a fiction, affects the reading of the film. I know that a
:09:56. > :10:06.lot of people really don't like it, and I utterly respect that they
:10:07. > :10:09.don't. I have to say that I don't think that it is offensive in the
:10:10. > :10:12.way that some people do, but it is worth flagging up the fact that
:10:13. > :10:15.there are some people who have seen it and thought, this is just a film
:10:16. > :10:17.that is revelling in his violence. In its defence, on the violence
:10:18. > :10:20.issue, there is very little that you see. I mean, I think that one of the
:10:21. > :10:25.reasons it is powerful is because its ideas are powerful, and
:10:26. > :10:29.unpleasantly power. -- powerful. You don't, that's right, but it is
:10:30. > :10:36.unsettling. And that may account for the fact that it is only a 15 as
:10:37. > :10:40.well. It would be more unsettling if it was less well made and you could
:10:41. > :10:45.just switch off. It is a 15 because there is very little actually
:10:46. > :10:49.explain -- actually despite, but you think it is worse because it is
:10:50. > :10:53.tense. I absolutely understand your reservations, I just uncheck them.
:10:54. > :11:01.Ferry North. Thank you very much. That's the DVD for this week -
:11:02. > :11:09.Nocturnal Animals made by Tom Ford. Before we go, you will find all our
:11:10. > :11:13.film reviews on the website. And all our previous programmes are there,
:11:14. > :11:17.and on the iPlayer, of course. That is it for this week. Enjoy your
:11:18. > :11:20.cinema going. Goodbye.