IbrahimKhider

I notice a trend to have women become the action protagonist in films and TV shows, which I am fine with, on condition that it is believable. This film protagonist relies more on dumb luck and playing crazy long odds rather than skill, strength and smarts. In all appearance, her opponents are 'storm trooper' level incompetent while she is barely competent, but highly stubborn.

The start of the film the viewer meets 'Emily' played by a winsome Aubrey Plaza who works a food delivery service to (barely) make ends meet. A large student loan hovers over her life with little hope in finding a job that pays well enough to service the massive debt. She is a visual artist/graphic designer who yearns to produce something meaningful. Because of some skirmish she had while a student, she has a criminal record that affects her chances at getting good paying work.

Emily finds a way to earn quick cash at some illegitimate enterprise. A moral dilemma develops, her 'legitimate' work opportunities exploit her low status to try get free or abused labor out of her. Turning to illegitimate means could be the bridge to find more meaningful income to service her debt and find a future. (Criminals tell me that the so called 'legit' world is dodgier than the underworld, maybe this films plays into that) Emily asks herself, does she have the intestinal and psychological fortitude to do whatever it takes to come out ahead? Emily thinks she does.

I do not quibble with the writer and character conclusions, what I have a problem with is the HOW. Fight scenes could have been choreographed a bit better. You have a five foot six, one hundred and twenty pounds of scrawny, untrained woman careening herself at street thugs with little more than stun weapons and everyday objects. One scene that would have done-in a woman of her size, she somehow miraculously got out of. Spend a couple of more days on set to work out escape tactics with stunt coordinators for goodness sake! You want the woman to win? Great! Help make it real and believable. I 'get' it, she is DETERMINED. But determination is not enough. She must have a massive horseshoe or lucky charm tucked away somewhere on her person to get out of her scraps.

I like the premise, the moral dilemmas, the injustices and the challenges this film poses. The solutions come off a bit weak. The point is, the protagonist will not bow to any rules, including the laws of physics.

I was engaged with the film, was on Emily's side and want to see her win. It is not much fun, however, when you have the weakest, dumbest and most spineless opponents with non-existent IQ's as your enemies. This viewer is left craving a real battle of wits and a prize truly earned.

I laughed when I saw Michael Mann thanked in the end credits. Aspects of the this film reminded me of Thief (1981), Michael Mann's first film starring James Caan and Tuesday Weld. I am guessing that Brosnahan's character continues where Tuesday left off in the film when she was sent off with a guard and a bag of money by Frank, who had a whole syndicate after him. Same situation, Frank met Jessie who could not have children and because the former had a criminal record, they could not adopt either. A child was delivered from a syndicate connection. Thus, a pretty hefty nod to an earlier film classic (and one of my all-time favorites). I think Frank would have been nicer and more competent than Eddie in this film. Same with Jessie and Jean, as in Jessie from Thief would be more competent than Jean, but maybe the former might not have the courage to use a gun, as jean does. Speaking of which, is 'I'm you're Woman' any good? Yeah, it's alright. Not great but not bad either. Sorta dark, not-so-feel-good trying to be a feel-good, but plot sort of T-bones all that. I was chuckling throughout, but I like dark humor. Not bad, it's okay. As for those who complain about the crying kid, eventually he does stop and the story picks up.

We meet our protagonist, Dave when he starts off as an transporter of wholesale quantity illicit drugs for a firm. The job pays very well and Dave who is far more accustomed to being 'skint' than 'flush' is not sure what to do with his newfound riches. Dave helps himself to liberal samples of the wholesale product he transports while also buying other brands of artificial joy to supplement. We discover that Dave has a moderation problem. But business is booming and Dave brings in his friend, who also happens to be ethnic, to share the wealth. Trouble is, the tight-nit corporate culture Dave is a part of does not really celebrate ethnic diversity. This poses greater problems down the road. As business picks up, so do Dave's responsibilities where he is promoted to also administer penalties to 'delinquent clients'. This promotion leads to an awakening of sorts within Dave as he discovers he has something called a conscience. Not just any conscience it seems, rather one that wreaks havoc on par with the Incredible Hulk on a tantrum. Immediately Dave attempts to bludgeon his conscience through upping his dosages of wholesale product and other substances in a bender that would put frosh week students to shame. But Dave's conscience also has the power, strength, and the resilience of The Incredible Hulk and will not be vanquished. Dave runs to a local mosque that his little ethnic friend frequents in a desperate bid to satiate his conscience. Yet when our protagonist sees and listens to the worshippers, he dismisses the lot as 'brainwashed'. That is, until Dave encounters the dark night of his beleaguered soul and feels he has nowhere left to run. We then have what writer William Faulkner phrases as, 'the heart in conflict with itself', torn between the rending demands of the material world and ravenous desire for inner peace.

Snow in Paradise is a debut film by Andrew Hulme based on the memoirs of actor/co-writer Martin Askew. Hulme already has a distinct style, the 'claustrophobia-inducing up-close-and-too-personal camera framing' such that the odd wide shot allows the audience to gasp for air and lower her/his pulse. Ernest Hemingway may be an influence because the film intimates that there is not snow, but an iceberg in paradise where the audience gets the tip and the rest of the story is beneath the waters. Symbolic hints point towards a larger, darker story and Hulme is not big on exposition, rather leaving the audience to flail or tread for answers. We even have a boxing scene that would do Papa Hemingway proud. The cinematography is accomplished and clean, clinical almost. Yet most striking is the music score, or rather, the lack of it. Sparse plucks from a bass during intense scenes, but mostly silence so the audience can reflect on what is happening instead of music directing emotion. Hulme is no spring chicken when it comes to the film, having edited for such directors as Anton Corbijn (Control, The American) and Julian Jarrold (Red Riding: The Year of Our Lord 1974). Like Daniel-San from The Karate Kid, Andrew Hulme has 'waxed-on', 'waxed-off' for decades and is now ready to crane-kick his way into film goers hearts, though the fare he offers is a tad bleak.