Category Archives: Michael Fassbender

Inglourious Basterds-2009

Inglourious Basterds-2009

Director Quentin Tarantino

Starring Brad Pitt, Christoph Waltz

Top 250 Films #92

Scott’s Review #589

Reviewed January 7, 2017

Grade: A

Inglorious Basterds (2009) is simply a great movie. Blending many film genres, it is hard to categorize, but that is because it is a Quentin Tarantino film, and that says it all.

The film as a whole contains excellent acting, is wonderfully shot, and is extremely detail-oriented, plus it has the familiar “Tarantino” style of music and sound, the chapter breakdown, and the heavy violence.

Set mainly in German-occupied France during the early 1940s, during World War II, the action centers around two stories- Shosanna (Melanie Laurent), a teenage girl whose entire family is killed after being discovered hidden by a dairy farmer.

He is a Jewish sympathizer, and Shosanna barely escapes with her life when an SS Colonel, brilliantly played by Christoph Waltz, interrogates the man.

Three years later, now living in Paris and owning a cinema, she plots her revenge. The other story is also of a revenge plot by a group of Jewish-American soldiers to kill as many Nazis as possible.

Both stories eventually intersect with a grand finale inside a cinema.

The story itself is richly nuanced and unlike many generic films of today. The fantastic set design and the perfection of every last set-piece are amazing. Long scenes play out slowly but bristle with authenticity and good dialogue.

Take the first scene for example- as the SS Colonel, aptly nicknamed the “Jew Hunter” plays cat and mouse with the dairy farmer, politely asking for two glasses of milk, the audience knows the payoff will be huge, but the conversation crackles with good dialogue.

What strikes me most about the film is the intelligent writing. The many scenes of conversations between characters- a chat over strudel and cream, a trivia game at a bar, and the aforementioned scene at the farmhouse, bristle with unique, clever written dialogue so that the scenes are far from mere filler.

Of course, this is also a characteristic of Tarantino.

At over two and a half hours Inglourious Basterds (2009) is long but satisfying.

My only criticism is of Brad Pitt. I didn’t buy him as a Tarantino guy and found his character the only weak point of the film. His southern drawl just did not draw me in like I thought it might.

He was touted as the main character (perhaps because he was the biggest star), but he plays a supporting role.

Oscar Nominations: 1 win-Best Picture, Best Director-Quentin Tarantino, Best Supporting Actor-Christoph Waltz (won), Best Original Screenplay, Best Sound Editing, Best Sound Mixing, Best Cinematography, Best Film Editing

Black Bag-2025

Black Bag-2025

Director Steven Soderbergh

Starring Cate Blanchett, Michael Fassbender

Scott’s Review #1,473

Reviewed March 30, 2025

Grade: B+

Steven Soderbergh offers Black Bag (2025), a taut spy thriller that is very slick and fast-paced. Wasting no time to lag or drag, he gets right down to the action in a quick one hour and thirty-four minute running time.

Stars Cate Blanchett and Michael Fassbender play British intelligence officers and husband and wife, George and Kathryn. His superior, Meacham (Gustaf Skarsgård), gives George one week to investigate the leak of a top-secret software program code-named Severus.

One of the five suspects is Kathryn.

Viewers familiar with Soderbergh’s films will recognize the familiarity of the tense electronic musical score by David Holmes, a frequent collaborator of Soderbergh. He scored the Oceans trilogy (2001-2007), which Black Bag resembles.

Those films, hits at the time, now feel less impactful, but Black Bag takes a similar style and envelops a modern, sophisticated London backdrop.

The immediate draw is Fassbender and Blanchett, who play exceptionally well opposite each other. Both stars light up the screen electrically, offering cat-and-mouse scenes that cackle with dry wit and sensuality.

George can always sense untruths and despises liars. As much as he loves Kathryn, he doubts her when he finds a movie ticket receipt in the trash for a film she claims never to have seen. But is she being set up?

The supporting characters are impressive, with Marisa Abela and Tom Burke as sparring partners and Clarissa and Freddie getting the meatier roles.

The best sequence is the riveting dinner sequence when George invites the four other suspects, all colleagues, to dinner. When he drugs their food to lower their inhibitions, he has them play a warped game of ‘Resolutions’ in which they make a resolution for the person to their right.

Since the other couples are each dating, this leads to revelations, squabbles, and a jealous stabbing.

Even in mainstream pictures, Soderbergh loves incorporating corporate work sequences and independent cinema/arthouse qualities. Propelled by the musical score, sometimes frenetic, there is a thrilling vibe even in quiet scenes.

He also loves closeup shots, which are especially important for Fassbender, Blanchett, and the dinner guests.

Nearly putting style over substance, the story, written by David Koepp, is complicated to follow. We assume that one of the dinner guests or Kathyrn’s boss, Arthur (Pierce Brosnan), is the rat, serving up a film whodunit.

Kathryn has access to a Zurich bank account containing ₤7 million in misdirected and unexplained funds, and there is something to do with a Russian operative who Kathryn flies to Zurich to meet.

The rest of the plot is gray, and after the film, I needed to read a synopsis to gain some understanding.

Small wonders that may have had little to do with the story impressed me. A simple scene in a crowded movie theater where Kathryn and George munch popcorn and flinch at scary scenes enhances the importance and joy one gets from watching a film in the movie theater.

The couple’s duplex London loft is pure magic to look at. As George prepares simmering food and quality wine in the vast kitchen with modern trimmings, their upstairs bedroom is equally enthralling with cosmopolitan furniture colors and just the right polish.

The couple is obviously worldly.

Black Bag (2025) is an entertaining film. Do not struggle to follow every nuance or story point, or you will be frustrated. Instead, sit back and enjoy the experience of a spy thriller with incredible music, sets, and stars.

A Dangerous Method-2011

A Dangerous Method-2011

Director David Cronenberg

Starring Keira Knightley, Viggo Mortensen, Michael Fassbender

Scott’s Review #1,009

Reviewed April 9, 2020

Grade: B+

A literal psychological-themed drama, if ever there was one, director David Cronenberg uses popular actors of the day to create a film based on a non-fiction book.

Famous psychoanalysts, Sigmund Freud and Carl Jung share a tumultuous relationship when they catch the eye of the first female psychoanalyst, who was a patient of each.

Thanks to a talented cast and an independent feel, the result is a compelling piece and a history lesson in sexual titillation, jealousy, passion, and drama, among real-life elite sophisticates.

Set on the eve of World War I in Zurich, Switzerland, a young woman, Sabina Spielrein (Keira Knightley), suffering from hysteria begins a new course of treatment with the young Swiss doctor Carl Jung (Michael Fassbender).

He uses word association, dream interpretation, and other experimental methods as part of his approach to psychoanalysis and finds that Spielrein’s condition was triggered by the humiliation and sexual arousal she felt as a child when her father spanked her naked.

They embark on a torrid affair.

Jung and friend and confidante, Sigmund Freud (Viggo Mortensen) explore various psychoanalytical methods, but cracks appear in their friendship as they begin to disagree more frequently on matters of psychoanalysis.

When Spielrein, now a student, meets Freud, she confides her relationship with Jung to him, which leads to animosity between the men. Spielrein embarks on other lovers as she attempts to reconcile the geniuses, to allow for their psychoanalysis studies to continue to develop with relevancy.

The film is intelligently written and for any viewer fascinated with psychology or sexual interest, a wonderful marvel. Since Freud and Jung are two of the most recognizable names in behavioral science and Spielrein is one of the most influential women in the field, the production is as much a historical and biographical study as it is dramatic enjoyment.

Spanking, bondage, and sexual humiliation for gratification and pleasure, strong taboos at the turn of the twentieth century, are explored and embraced in delicious and wicked style.

Given that Fassbender, Mortensen, and Knightley are easy on the eyes provide further stimulation than if less attractive actors were cast. Nonetheless, what the actors provide in eye candy is equally matched by their acting talent as each one immerses themselves into each pivotal role.

Cleverly and uniquely, the film is not a trite romantic triangle or giddy formulaic genre movie. Rather, the sets, costumes, and cinematography are fresh and grip the audience.

Carl Jung is the central figure as both his personal and professional experiences are given plenty of screen time. He wrestles between remaining committed to his wife or giving in to his deepest desires with Speilrein- we can guess how this turns out!

The early scenes between Fassbender and Knightley crackle with passion and will make many blush and smirk with naughtiness.

The title of the film is bold but doesn’t always live up to the subject matter. More sensual, fun, and intelligent than dangerous, the film is hardly raw or gritty, surprising given it’s an independent project. It is softer to the touch, especially during scenes between Jung and Speilrein than hard-edged.

Many early psychoanalytical ideas of approach and remedy are discussed and explored making the film more of a study than a thriller.

A Dangerous Method (2011) received stellar reviews and year-end awards consideration, but unsuccessful box-office returns. Hardly a popcorn film and deeply accepting of its indie roots, the film ought to be shown in high-school or academic psychology classes- whether in abnormal or general studies remains a question.

With a fascinating story that risks making the prudish blush or turn away, the film will please those independent thinkers, sexual deviants, or those aching for an expressive and satisfying film.

300-2007

300-2007

Director Zack Snyder

Starring Gerard Butler, Dominic West

Scott’s Review #977

Reviewed January 7, 2020

Grade: D

On paper 300 (2007) could have been a good or even a great film under different circumstances, if a historical realism or a message of some kind had existed.

Unfortunately, what sounds like an interesting premise is met with a cartoon quality, over-acting, and cheesy testosterone-laden bombast.

Little more than drivel, the film is saved slightly by a charismatic lead, male flesh, and potent homo-eroticism, but this is no Magic Mike (2012), and the content fails because it is intended to be taken seriously.

The result is a silly affair, with predictability, and cliches for miles.

The story is based on a 1998 comic series of the same name that is a fictionalized retelling of a battle within the Persian War.

The flimsy plot revolves around King Leonidas (Gerard Butler), who leads 300 Spartans into battle against the Persian “God-King” Xerxes (Rodrigo Santoro) and his invading army of more than 300,000 soldiers (hence the title).

As the battle rages on, Queen Gorgo (Lena Headey) attempts to rally support in Sparta for her husband (Leonidas) and conquer the army.

Butler is the only slight positive worth mentioning as he preens and prances in little more than a loin-cloth with chiseled abs during the battle scenes, ferociously bellowing at his enemy.

A fine-looking man, he is unarguably charismatic and poised, so the audience is strongly encouraged to root for him, and naturally for the Spartans. Leonidas makes for a powerful leader and is great to look at, but that is where any positives to this film end.

The scantily clad gimmick is not intended to draw female viewers to the film, or at least the intent doesn’t seem to be there unless the marketing is botched. There is enough male nudity to go around and the beefcake and machismo are clear in most of the characters.

Laughable is how the Spartans all have washboard abs and appear to be freshly waxed. Did they have access to state-of-the-art fitness centers in 479 BC?

The Persians are mostly face-pierced and sneering, the clear enemy, which does nothing to diminish racist overtones. Spartan-good, Persian-bad.

Zack Snyder’s (Dawn of the Dead-2004) motivation seems to be to market this film to pubescent teenage males or the low-IQ crowd so the stereotypes are not the best thing to witness nor will they cause anyone to feel very liberated or united.

The characters are either cookie-cutter or grizzled and violent, which is in tune with most of the film- bloody, but without reason, substance, or merit. One-note character after one-note character appears through each scene.

Most bothersome is the intent to stir a pro-war stance, not helpful given the target audience.

300 was filmed mostly with a superimposition chroma key technique, to help replicate the imagery of the original comic book which does nothing but make the film look like a high-energy video game.

The product is quite stylized with gloomy battleground scenes and dire bleakness and derives a graphic novel or comic book approach but lacks any subtle qualities or pretty much anything else interesting from a cinematography perspective.

The battle scene finale is by the numbers and should come as no surprise who the inevitable victor is. The film requires little thought or attention span and one can simply immerse themselves onto a cushion and absorb the nonsense couch-potato style.

Battle after battle erupts with cliched earnestness and a bevy of blood-spurting wounds and kills. This would be okay if there existed any point or good plot twist.

Any character development is missing.

300 (2007) is a weak offering and decidedly boring, a surprise since much of the events take place on the battleground where the action is produced a mile a minute. The experience is forgettable, and a legion of other action-fueled films exist with more meat and potatoes on their plate.

The sinister and stereotypical aspects make the resulting film less than fun and the big, loud, dumb product is only marginally cinematic.

We can do better.

Steve Jobs-2015

Steve Jobs-2015

Director Danny Boyle

Starring Michael Fassbender, Kate Winslet

Scott’s Review #288

80049358

Reviewed November 25, 2015

Grade: B+

Steve Jobs is a name that almost everyone has heard of. Most associate him with Apple products or at least know that he is some technological genius who has influenced the modern world in some fashion.

His name is a household one.

The film Steve Jobs (2015) presents a slice of his life, mostly focusing on his professional leap to success, his damaged personal life, and his inability to stay close to people within his circle.

Michael Fassbender plays the title role. He looks nothing like Steve Jobs, but this did not bother me.

It is quickly revealed that Steve Jobs is a competitive, cut-throat, and sometimes unkind man. He is driven, ambitious, and willing to do what it takes to succeed in business. He is also complex and as the film rolls along we witness the complexities of this man, arguably deemed a “genius”.

But where he has flaws is in his personal life as the film makes abundantly clear.

Kate Winslet is excellent in the supporting role she plays. Joanna Hoffman, Jobs’s loyal marketing executive, stays in his corner through the years, enduring ups and downs, yet their relationship never goes beyond the platonic. They are colleagues and both are absorbed in their creations.

Her character is a bit under-explored as we never are exposed to much of her personal life. Winslet in a rare “dowdy” role, makes the most of Joanna as she is the type of woman who throws herself into her work at the expense of her private life.

The film is primarily set during the three important software launches and, predictably, all are filled with issues and stress.

The bulk of the first act occurs in 1984 when Jobs and Hoffman struggle and fret during an Apple Macintosh launch in front of an auditorium filled with industry types eager to see the new technology.

The scene is tense as the new computer will not say “hello” as advertised and Jobs demands lead engineer, Andy Hertzfeld, fix it.  The scene escalates in its intensity.

We immediately bear witness to the fact that Steve Jobs is a shark. He is demanding and unlikable and the film is not afraid to stress that fact as the action continues.

We are next introduced to Jobs’s personal life. A beautiful young woman arrives at his office with a young girl. They are both on the brink of being destitute and thrown out of their home, yet Jobs refuses to help them and coldly calculates the probability that the young girl (Lisa) is biologically not his.

As the film chugs along Steve Jobs has a turbulent relationship with Lisa as the film spans the period from 1984-1998.

The film is a character study of sorts and we learn the complexities of Jobs. Fassbender gives a nuanced performance allowing the audience to absorb these character traits and ultimately feel emotional sympathy for him.

I admire this character study of Steve Jobs and feel that I know him quite a bit more, on a human level, than I once did.

Perhaps the supporting characters might have been fleshed out a bit more, but in large part, Michael Fassbender’s portrayal of a real-life person makes this film successful.

Oscar Nominations: Best Actor-Michael Fassbender, Best Supporting Actress-Kate Winslet

12 Years a Slave-2013

12 Years a Slave-2013

Director Steve McQueen

Starring Chiwetel Ejiofor, Lupita Nyong’o, Michael Fassbender

Scott’s Review #62

70284282

Reviewed June 24, 2014

Grade: A

At the time of 12 Years a Slave’s (2013) release, a ton of buzz began circulating. Was it that good?

Considered the front-runner to win the Best Picture statue, it did go on to win the top honor.

The film is not easy to watch. It is brutal and heart-wrenching at times. I will spare the details, but the most intense scene involves a whip.

There are scenes of torture, degradation, and cruelty against the slaves by the slave owners.

While tough to watch, I applaud the film for not glossing over the atrocities of slavery. Some have criticized it for being a retread of similar films, but I disagree. It is worlds more intense than watered-down versions.

However, the film is not a downer.

Yes, a class of people is beaten down and victimized, but they also rise above and never give up hope. The fact that it’s a true story and a book was written on the subject by the real Solomon Northup makes it all the more powerful.

The performances are outstanding (Ejiofor, Fassbender, Paulson, and Nyong’o).

The look and cinematography are sharp and I love the distinctiveness of the north and south scenes. The setting is stifling hot and dreary.

There are at least two scenes where the camera pans on a shot and holds it for seemingly an eternity until an action occurs, which makes the scenes effective.

While difficult to watch, 12 Years a Slave (2013) should be viewed by everyone to see how far society has come, not forgetting how far we still need to go to eliminate discrimination and victimization.

Oscar Nominations: 3 wins-Best Picture (won), Best Director-Steve McQueen, Best Actor-Chiwetel Ejiofor, Best Supporting Actor-Michael Fassbender, Best Supporting Actress-Lupita Nyong’o (won), Best Adapted Screenplay (won), Best Production Design, Best Costume Design, Best Film Editing

Independent Spirit Award Nominations: 5 wins-Best Feature (won), Best Director-Steve McQueen (won), Best Male Lead-Chiwetel Ejiofor, Best Supporting Male-Michael Fassbender, Best Supporting Female-Lupita Nyong’o (won), Best Screenplay (won), Best Cinematography (won)

The Counselor-2013

The Counselor-2013

Director Ridley Scott

Starring Michael Fassbender, Brad Pitt

Scott’s Review #18

70276713

Reviewed June 17, 2014

Grade: A-

The Counselor (2013) is a star-studded, unique, drug trafficking thriller set in Mexico and Texas.

The film has met with some debate as viewers either loved or hated it. There appears to be a case made that those who hated it did not understand the movie.

It is not a “by the numbers” or “predictable” popcorn film. It’s much better than that. It’s a thinking man’s movie.

I saw shades of Quentin Tarantino’s influence and parts were reminiscent of the wonderful TV series Breaking Bad (2008-2013).

There are intersecting stories and heavy acting talent (Fassbender and Diaz are the standouts). This is Cameron Diaz’s best role and wish she would go edgy more often.

There are three brilliantly well-done scenes (motorcycle, Brad Pitt on the street, and landfill scene) that are as disturbing as they are artistic.

There are some plot holes, that can be overlooked.

It’s not simply an action film, but a character-driven one.

The viewing of The Counselor (2013) is a unique experience.