La La Land (2016)

This review I wrote after watching La La Land during the spring semester of my sophomore year at college. In preparation for that year's 89th Academy Awards, I saw all 9 Best Picture nominees: La La Land was the seventh nominee watched. My overall rating for the film was 3.5 stars out of a possible 4. On my scale, 3.5 stars qualifies as "very good."

2016 has been a terrific year for Classic Hollywood. I realize that this must sound truly bizarre, seeing that Hollywood’s Golden Age ended, depending on who you ask, c. 1959. But it’s true and there are two reasons for this: Hail, Caesar and La La Land. Two very different pictures in both presentation and content. Two very different pictures even when using both as a study for Classic Hollywood, the effects it has had on the film world, and most importantly, how to hold the former Hollywood in reverence and introduce it to the film audiences of the 21st century. Both films are love letters, but each pays its respect to a different Classic Hollywood. By taking these two love letters and putting them together, you have the perfect tribute. Hail, Caesar writes to the studio system and everyone that worked to keep the studio on top and the stars in order. La La Land writes to the Classic Hollywood musical, and shows that it is the true musical, as opposed to the Broadway to Silver Screen messes that we get today.

La La Land is very much a 21st century film. Hell, all you need to do is look at the cars, the pool music, and the character mannerisms. But on a different level, the inner meaning of La La Land is so much more than being a 21st century film: it is a 21st century film that proves that Classic Hollywood not only still exists, but can be reached by a cast and crew, can touch an audience and the critics, and with just a little bit of effort, and the extermination of Michael Bay and M. Night Shyamalan, 2016-17 Hollywood can become 1940s Hollywood while still being the modern day and age.

Although not a musical lover by any means, I do respect the musical genre. Well, I respect the musicals that deserve to be respected. La La Land is a musical that deserves to be respected. Why? Because it separates its plot and dialogue from its song and dance numbers. That is the primary problem with the 21st century musical. For some stupid, ridiculous reason, everyone now believes that the sole purpose of the songs is to advance the plot. But that’s simply not true. Gene Kelly didn’t think so, nor did Fred Astaire & Ginger Rogers. And Damien Chazelle joins that elite group because he doesn’t either.

Moving on to the actual film: I liked it. Sure it has its flaws. Everyone, apart from J.K. Simmons, seems to be rusty at the start, with Ryan Gosling certainly being the slowest to get going. But apart from the acting, none of the flaws are significant enough to be worth mentioning in this review. I loved the cinematography. It was not Emanuel Lubezki good, but Linus Sandgren did a fantastic job nonetheless. I am not a John Legend fan, but this film made me like him. I loved the screenplay. It had just enough Classic Hollywood references for it to be a great tribute without crossing over into a torturous slaying of the past by only harping on nostalgia. But what I liked most about the screenplay, even more than the Classic Hollywood references, is that it felt like someone was actually writing it from 1945. The dialogue flows as if it is from Classic Hollywood. Even when Gosling swears, which is something Hollywood, in the gripping binds of William Hays and his production code, would have never allowed, you hear it as if Humphrey Bogart, Cary Grant, or Clark Gable spoke it.

The art direction is incredible. I know its Oscar title is production design now, but I’m a nostalgic, and besides, art direction sounds significantly better. Unsurprisingly, La La Land and Hail, Caesar are both nominated for Best Art Direction. I would give it to La La Land between the two. This film deserves to be recognized for its technical achievements and successful attempts to look and feel like the 21st century meets Classic Hollywood. This is one of the most vibrant films I have seen. It certainly reigns supreme over Hail, Caesar in this department because of the glaring issue that I had with the Coen Brothers picture: it is not shot in a period color process. Hail, Caesar would have been more terrific and a better love letter if it had been shot in Technicolor, since the film is set in the 1940s. La La Land is set in the 21st century, but looks like Technicolor-millennial style. And I love the various appearances of Ingrid Bergman throughout the film. In fact, that may be the best part of the film for me. That and the reference about the Casablanca (1942) window.

This is a very good film. It’s just lacking in a few sections, most notably the beginning scenes for everybody. I'd be remiss to end this review without giving props to how the film wrapped up... but what can you say about its ending other than one simple interjection, "Wow!"? It is one of the most heartbreakingly satisfying endings in cinema. In fact, I think only Casablanca tops it in that regard.