Canopy (2013)

A film with more than the usual spoiler issues. Talking about it in any detail feels akin to handing you a gift-wrapped present and saying, "I hope you like it -- It's a thriller about a diabolical secret experiment."

Go in cold, and you're likely to emerge with your blood boiling. This has to be seen to be believed.

The film never slows down or bores, plunging from one harrowing sequence to the next.

This is one of the best movies I’ve seen in a very long time. You have to go and see this on the big screen.

I watched this in the dark with high volume. Which I would advise everybody else to do so also, as this movie is all about it's sounds, feel and atmosphere. I wasn't expecting much from this movie as I had not heard of it, however I was pleasantly surprised. The movie is set with one main character who is crash landed in a foreign destination in the midst of the second world war.The movie is eerie, the scenery is beautiful and the character is very well played. The constant build up of suspension leaves you driven to wondering what will happen next, and although nothing much appears to happen by way of extremities, there is a great awareness of the solitude and danger which could always be nearby... Admittedly this is not the type of block buster war movie you would put against such movies of recent showing extreme heroism and patriotism, it is not the same, and for these reasons above, I think 8/10 is warranted.. Enjoy

I read the reviews and thought id give this movie the benefit of the doubt as they say. A lot of reviews appeared to be nothing more than advertisements dressed up as reviews and others were more balanced while many didn't like it. Sadly after watching and trying really hard to feel into the film and find something deeper in the mood and atmosphere I couldn't get into this and switched it off halfway through. PARTIAL SPOILER Basically all that happens in this film is.. long and drawn out shots of jungle canopy.. jungle foliage, occasional Japanese with guns.. gun shots every now and then.. scared looks on the actors faces.. that's about it really. What could have been a nice little short film, was for some reason made into a feature length film? It didn't work for me. For some this could be an interesting nature walk into jungle environments, but for someone who has been in such places its just like a walk in the jungle.. in fact my own experiences in such conditions felt more exciting and interesting, and there were no Japs to worry about, there is so many dangers that can happen in these conditions and the director has barely scratched the surface of what its like to be in such conditions. There's some lovely bush scenery, and well that's just not enough to make a movie sorry.

Although Canopy is far from the worst Australian film ever made, there will be few that will be as tedious. It is a World War II film made with minimal historical context, few personal details for its central character, and not enough tension. Its photography is pretty but thematically and ideologically vacuous and too keen to imitate much grander war films without understanding their meaning. First time director Aaron Wilson can't decide if he is making an art house project that belongs in a gallery or a gritty war story. By attempting to be a little of each he comes up short on both fronts. Although seventy-nine minutes sounds like a slender running time for a feature film, you would be surprised how slowly time moves when the story is impersonal and lacking a clear purpose. I found it extremely hard to care or be engaged by Canopy. The film is set in 1942, when Singapore has been invaded by the Japanese. An Australia soldier named Jim (Khan Chittenden) is shot down over the jungle and parachutes into the trees. He aimlessly crawls through the mud and the vegetation of the jungle, hoping to survive. His only ally is when he meets Seng (MO Tzu-Yi), a Chinese soldier. While they barely say a word to each other, they team up to hide from the Japanese forces that are searching for both of them. Not only do they have to contend with the density of the environment but also a nasty wound that injures Seng. Paring a film down to cinematic images can enhance the realism by hiding the schematics of the script, so long as the director can justify the film's length. It worked in All is Lost (2013) because the main character had practical tasks that fulfilled the action and time. There was also ongoing physical and mental tension from the ocean, storms and the frailty of its elderly protagonist. By contrast, Canopy is a premise without a story. It is too thin, dull and padded, even for a miniscule running time. As Wilson has only made short films before, the scope gets the better of him. He says the film is about the birth of trauma but it rests too heavily on atmosphere, the scenery and cheesy sound effects rather than characterisation to address an enormous theme. It doesn't help that he also hampers the realism by making Jim and Seng the only two friendly soldiers in the area and forgetting that stomach wounds can't just be sown up. They bleed quickly. Silence instead of dialogue also proves fatal and unintentionally comic when the actors are only allowed to use hand signals and point, not even improvise, when they are not in danger. Wilson is aware of the thinness of the script and tries masking it by being arty. The film's pacing isn't slow, it's deathly. Far too much time is spent dedicated to examining the foliage. It is simply filler. Low angle shots of trees might be a speciality of Terrence Malick films like The Thin Red Line (1998) but he is a master filmmaker who supports images with philosophy. Many long, unbroken camera shots in Canopy are meaningless and showy, like a long shot of a grassy area covered in tiny Japanese flags or tight close-ups of the characters lips and mouths. In the opening credits a technique is copied from Zero Dark Thirty (2012), where the screen is black for an age and we hear screams and bombings. It worked in Kathryn Bigelow's film because it was a reflection of the lack of information surrounding September 11. Without the context the same technique looks like a poor imitation. At the end of the film a point of view shot from a Japanese truck is juxtaposed with the back of a Ute in the outback. I thought this was a flashback but the film's production notes suggest otherwise. Who would know?Although Canopy is terribly dreary and unsatisfying, I am still optimistic that the director will learn from this film and write a much more complete script. He is already preparing for his next film, which is said to be about men returning from war. It could be a lot more promising. Ultimately though, it is time that Australian films stopped posturing and imitating and started carving a new identity for themselves through improved scripts. Even a small film can become a great one if the writing outlines and sustains the intentions of the director.

-May Contain Spoiler- Canopy is the first of Aaron Wilson's acclaimed works to hit screen. I must admit the movie was quite entertaining, leaving plenty of room for thought. Despite the scripts broad structure, it did compel an audience to journey onwards with its heroic protagonist. The movie is anything but cohesive though, which would normally denigrate a films substance and leave the audience dumbfounded or confused. In the case of Canopy confusion is the highlight of the entire movie. The films takes place in Post World War II, Singapore; with the protagonist Jim (Khan Chittenden), crashing into the Singaporean interior. Canopy thus centres on Jim's many trials in the Singapore jungle. The general premise of the film is to exemplify the feeling of lost and confusion. This I must admit was done adequately, using minimal dialogue Wilson was able to create a film; that showed what a true soldier is forced to endure. The environment that Jim must now venture through is completely alien to home. Actor Khan greatly personifies the feeling of dismay, confusion, hopelessness and stress; that a soldier in such a predicament would be forced to bear. His performance was uplifting and even I found myself empathetic to his numerous struggles. From a historical standpoint Wilson was partially dead on, showing an Australian soldier's possible reaction to war in a different land. One of the more subdued parts of the films is Jim's reaction to foreign ally Seng (Tzu-yi Mo). Their first encounter shows the formidability of war and the threat of not knowing ones ally, from ones enemy. This I believe is a point that could have been expanded on more thoroughly but was unfortunately minimized. Despite this Seng was a very revitalizing figure for he gave us our first glance, at certain anthropological dichotomies that may take place within the movie. Tzu-yi as an actor did phenomenally installing sorrow, resilience, fear and cultural imbalances into his audience. His journey with Jim emulates the brotherhood many soldiers are forced to adhere to, in order to survive warfare. Now the only flaw in this movie is its lack of cultural anomalies. We are dealing with a historically based film, with a protagonist from another land; yet majority of the film focuses on the harsh and inhospitable terrain. Understandably the environment is the key focus of the film but once you throw in a foreign ally, certain cultural boundaries should be addressed. The film threw in a mediocre amount of Chinese and American cultural/religious references; much of which did not correlate cohesively with the actual plot structure. Language barriers, religious acts, cultural ambiguity and different forms of engagement, were present but not given the time, nor attention they so truly deserved. When the film did amalgamate cultural anomalies, such as Chinese or American music into the film, it was done sparsely and without precedent. There was never an ideal transitional period that allowed the music to mix in successfully with the plot. Nor was there enough character development, for anyone to understand the importance of certain cultural displays. It was also disappointing to note, that Japanese acts of aggression during the films seemed to be out of focus. I am not advocating for extended scenes of violence or the showing of increased brutality but I do not believe they adequately showed the extent of Japan's attack in Singapore 1942. From a thespians point of view, this movie is amazingly executed. Due to its minimal dialogue, the film relies primarily on motion, effect, transitional execution and sound; as well as the malleability in recording the rough terrain. A cinematographer would love this film, the technique in capturing scenes are definitely sublime. Unfortunately some shots definitely were repeated to increase the alluring sense of despair; despite this the movie did capture a wide eclectic of different topography. At TIFF, Wilson had mentioned that he only had 9 days to actually capture most the scenery; which is rather impressive given the large terrain visited in the film. The sound really emphasized that sense of realism and made you feel like you were part of the action. The transitional execution did correlate successfully with the sound and scenery, giving you more authenticity to the environment and Jim's anxious state in the jungle. This is definitely a movie, where lack of dialogue is much appreciated. The minimal talking between Jim and ally Seng extended the feeling of lost. Even without the extensive dialogue, you could feel their need for companionship and the reliance both soldiers had on one another. In terms of production, sound, editing and to a lesser extent script the movie is remarkable. I just feel that the film failed to maintain a certain degree of authenticity. This could have been remedied if they paid further attention to actual warfare engagements during the Second World War and cultural anomalies that should have been addressed in the film. The footage overall was spectacular and the acting was breathtaking. Coherency was not necessarily the problem with this film. It was convoluted but that adhered strictly to actual theme of the movie. I feel that more time allocation to actual historical and cultural anomalies would have made this film more captivating. They definitely stayed right on track with their focus on the arduous terrain but I believe deviating from this construct and focusing on other ideals would have made the movie a bit more progressive.