House of Gucci

Patrizia and Maurizio and the story of love and murder

House of Gucci tells the story of a key period in the history of the Gucci fashion house by focusing on “Patrizia Reggiani”. Who sets her eyes on Maurizio the heir of 50% of the Gucci empire and manages to marry him. Then pushes him hard through the years to take his place on top of the family business, never shying away from actively scheming against other members of the family. A long journey filled with hopes, dreams, lies, deceit and eventually much worse things.

The element of peculiarity, or let’s call it the untraditional treatment, in the way the film feels is definitely intentional. The film didn’t make a mistake, it only took a risk. Which is understandable putting into consideration that it’s a real story and almost everybody knows how it’s going to end. It is always a great thing when a veteran filmmaker shows the courage to take risks with projects but it is also a good occasion to remind ourselves that risks can misfire.

Among the various areas where our movie failed, the most disappointing department is the screenplay. How long our running time is versus how little we explored everything that matters. Every angle of our story stole time from the other angles and never reached maturity. The key story of the relationship between our two leads felt rushed. Patrizia and Maurizio went through a lot together and their emotions towards each other seriously shifted. While our film presented so little to justify those shifts or study how each of them truly felt towards the other in critical moments and it didn’t really come in favour of other sides of our story.

Our story takes place in the core of the world of fashion. We’re talking about Gucci through the 70’s, 80’s and 90’s, and the transition of the gigantic fashion house plays the most important role in the shifts in the nature of relationships between the members of the house of Gucci. That is also poorly explored. It’s a movie about fashion with so little fashion in it. I heard a lot of lines explaining the philosophy of the Gucci products, the fact that it wouldn’t evolve and the so many other brands that managed to adapt and surpass it, but I just didn’t see it. Wouldn’t it be weird if a movie with the word “Gucci” in its title fails to land a nomination in costume design?!

What really works in “House of Gucci” is the study of “Patrizia” in the opening chapters. Offering the profile of an ordinary girl whose eyes shine at the rise of an opportunity. Playing the long game, knowing how to sleep on the winning ticket and when exactly to cash it. You see that in the design of her encounters with her love interest and other members of his family. Nothing is ever said about her except in the confrontation between Maurizio and his father and at this point, quite honestly, I’d seen much from her to suggest that they both could be right and without any contradictions in the performance of Lady Gaga. It was the finest display of her quality performance. The same could not be said about the second half though when all we could see is just reasons to hate her and suggest that she’s not really that smart or even in control of her own tools.

Adam Driver is great. He even managed to make the American English with the Italian accent not sound so weird .. and it was generally speaking weird and silly. Al Pacino and Jeremy Irons are also great. Jared Leto is just weird .. and slow. The worst moments for the entire cast, with the exception of Pacino, is when they had to share the screen with him. He would take so long to convey emotions and speak so slow, it seemed they didn’t know what to do meanwhile.

The epic story of the Gucci fashion house with the Patrizia/Maurizio drama in the middle of it is a challenging project. It’s tricky but it’s also rich. In the hands of Scott, that cast and everybody involved in the project I expected to see a triumph. I don’t believe it was facing a deadline so it can end up being half cooked. “House of Gucci” reminds me a lot of Ashton Kutcher’s Jobs. A movie you can’t call bad but can’t perceive as worthy.

Michael Fassbender Stars in Alien: Covenant

Apart from a few existential questions, as far as the “Alien” universe is concerned, remaining unanswered, I have no significant hard feelings towards Alien: Covenant, neither as a standalone feature, nor the way it fits into the bigger saga. In fact, I do admit that it’s a superior film to its successor in the prequel trilogy, and this statement comes from somebody who thought “Prometheus” was a very good film.

This edition takes place 10 years after the events of “Prometheus” with the colonizing space ship “Covenant” heading towards planet Origea-6 with 15 crew members, 2000 colonists, in stasis, and 1000 embryos on board. Members of the crew receive a human signal from a nearby planet that appears to be well suited for human life. The ship heads over and several members descend to study the conditions of the planet. It doesn’t take long for a few of those members to become infected with the virus that transforms them into hosts for neomorphs.

What happens next is all but unusual, monsters burst out killing their hosts and our crew members become potential preys to the menacing monsters in their various stages of evolution. The colonizing mission quickly becomes a fight for life with one striking question forming the unique arc of this story; who sent the signal that brought them to the hostile planet?

Alien: Covenant is rich on every single ingredient that you would’ve expected. The story is interesting and offers satisfying depth, especially biologically in explaining the origin of the xenomorphs and all their derivatives. A smart plot is in place with with a decent effort for a twist. The shocking horror and gruesome violence are well timed, properly portioned and extremely well executed. The visual experience is exactly what you would expect in a Ridley Scott sci-fi. I really don’t have a single idea that, in my mind, could’ve made the film better. However, I don’t think that any effort in “Covenant” was as effective as it should’ve been.

The undeserved heat that “Prometheus” received seems to have discouraged the urge for taking risks on this film. Our micro, and macro, stories progress skillfully but we don’t see any signs of trying something new. Even the frowned upon “Engineers” have been benched on this episode to make way for Xenomorphs, Neomorphs and all other sorts of “Alien” monsters that I’m no expert in. A decision responsible for the biggest question that remains unanswered by the end of “Alien: Covenant”.

With everything in the mix feeling too familiar, I don’t believe I’ve ever been that relaxed watching a film in the franchise, especially with that much excellent horror in place. The same applies for the visual experience, the spaceship, the hibernation pods, all the gadgets and technologies, they’re all so well designed and presented but it’s becoming sort of an overdose both inside and outside the Alien universe. Prometheus, Interstellar, Life, Passengers and, arguably Gravity as well as The Martian; so many great concepts and impressive products of innovation and creativity within the space of only 5 years, making it impossible for to appreciate any additional contributions in the same domain without a proper break.

This is not to say that my reception for “Alien: Covenant” was in any way negative. On the contrary; again, it is a superior film to its predecessor and, maybe, with different circumstances boosting its influence and effectiveness it would’ve reached the highest spot in the “Alien” pyramid.