If you have never seen this odd film from director John Huston and Star Humphrey Bogart, you are likely to be thrown for a loop when you do. It is not at all what you would expect. It started out as a serious project but some of the circumstances are odd and after Truman Capote signed on to work th script, it becomes an outright comedy.
Jennifer Jones is really interesting as a woman who is fickle in love and has a tenuous relationship with the truth. The oddball characters start stacking up and although there is murder in the air, the drama of the story never seems to be the focus. Instead we are anticipating the next outrageous turn of events or quip from Bogart.
The first half of the film takes place onshore as the cast of characters awaits repairs to the vessel they are supposed to sail on. We take in local ruins, and the cast mistakenly think that characters have died. When you have Gina Lollobrigda and Jennifer Jones as romantic interests, you are a lucky guy. At least in love, but the scheme seems to be going off the rails at times. Bogart's partners include Robert Morely and Peter Lorre and Italian actor Marco Tulli. Everyone is double crossing everyone else and you will have a hard time following the plot and scheme, but that is mostly not relevant to enjoying the picture.
The program featured a discussion of the filming by script supervisor Angela Allen, who told several amusing stories about working with the cast. Apparently, one day when they were shooting at sea, the captain misunderstood the directions and had the ship sailing off to North Africa for a couple of hours before anyone realized it. The cast and crew did not get back into port until many hours into the night and they were lucky they did not wake up in Tunisia.
This/morning we have animated fare on the plate. The works of Ub Iwerks are going to be the subject of the program, Beyond the Mouse. There were ten cartoons from the 1930 period, starting with an Oswald Rabbit short that was pretty primitive but very amusing. The level/of violence was a bit high but it was entertaining. Steamboat Willie was next and it is probably a bit harsher than you remember.
Iwerks was very much responsible for the Look of Mickey Mouse early on. The reasons he went off on his own for this period did not seem to be about a problem with his friend Walt Disney, but rather exploring his creative impulses. There were a couple of early color cartoons and some of the background stuff stands out a bit more.
The Skeletons Dance was a great Black and White, I think that was still with the Disney group, but there were two follow ups with a character named Flip the Frog. They were both amusing but definitely a bit different. There was one sequence that the frog ends up with his pants around his ankles for a/big chunk of time. That seemed awkward. There were two Willie Whopper cartoons, a character I was not familiar with who tells tall tales. One was kinda dark about a trip to Hell and the Devil. So we got a little history lesson to start our day.
Opening night at the TCM Film Festival was a double edged sword this evening. My plan had been to see the main event and then cruise down afterwards to see "The Man Who Knew Too Much (1934)". Something created a hangup, and the screening did not start until forty-five minutes past the scheduled time. The late start meant that if we stayed for the whole film, we would miss the Hitchcock film. A real bummer because at the last minute it was announced that Martin Scorsese was going to introduce the film. Amanda had never scene the whole of "In the Heat of the Night" so it seemed wrong to leave, plus once the film gets started, you don't want to go anywhere. You get a chance to watch actors who are really good do what they do so well. Also, the guest list for the film is impressive.
Our host was TCM's Ben Mankiewicz, and his line up was amazing. Actress Lee Grant, who had been blacklisted and not worked for twelve years before this film, was there to talk about her experience. She was joined by the director Norman Jewison, who's CV is about the length of your arm. The producer of the film, who won the Academy Award that year for Best Picture, is Walter Mirisch. He is ninety-six years old, and still amazingly engaged with the film business. If you loved a movie from the sixties or seventies, there is a good chance his name is attached to it somewhere. He mentioned that he has lunch every week with the man he considers his best friend, the star of this film Sidney Pointier. Mr. Pointier has voice issues so he could not participate in the discussion, so he just sat and watched the film from the row right in front of us.
Just on the other side of the aisle from us were Alan and Marilyn Bergman, who wrote the title song that was sung by Ray Charles. Their other musical collaborations are too long to even think about listing. Right behind them was actor Scott Wilson, who played the second suspect in the film. He is a personal favorite of mine because of his starring role in The Ninth Configuration among others. OK, now that the name dropping is over, let me share a little bit of what they shared.
Mirisch talked about his seventy year friendship with Poitier, and how the two of them found the property and spent a great deal of time developing it. The original treatment fixed a number of issues that the book had, but the screen writer had a job offer he could not turn down and he left the project to be replaced by Stirling Silliphant, who went on to win the Academy Award for best screenplay. Mirisch also told of how he negotiated the production cost of the film, based on the possibility that it would not play south of the Mason-Dixon line. He handicapped Director Jewison with a tight budget but a great script that they did not want to change. There was worry that the slap that Pointier gives to a white gentrified suspect might create race riots. Jewison regaled us with stories about how he and Rod Stieger worked out Chief Gillespie's character. The gum Stieger chews in the film is almost a co-star.
Of course the film holds up well in spite of the progress we have made as a country. The raw racism shown so casually would certainly shock today's younger viewers who would have a hard time seeing how blatant such prejudice was, not that long ago. The film is an important landmark in the transition from the Jim Crow attitudes of the day to more enlightened perspectives just a few years later. The murder mystery is a plot device to allow us to see racial tension boil over and remain in an undercurrent simultaneously. Pointier was also in "Guess Who's Coming to Dinner" in the same year. He was the number one box office star, and it mattered that this film succeed as it did.
We got to walk the Red carpet before the movie, so for a brief moment, we felt like celebrities, but no one asked me "Who I was wearing?"
This is the plan, of course that is the thing that makes God Laugh. We will see what parts of it we manage to accomplish. I hope some of my blogging colleagues will be attending and will look for me. I'll be looking for them. [I know the first three things are Thursday and not Friday. Don't Worry.]
With many film series, it is easy to say what your favorite is. Star Wars fans seem pretty passionate about "The Empire Strikes Back" and let's face it, no one likes "Cars 2". With directors, the same is not as obvious. When the film maker has such a unique style but also the talent to apply it to almost any genre, it gets to be more difficult. If asked, I would say my favorite Hitchcock films are "Vertigo", "North By Northwest" and "Psycho". As to which one I think is the best, well it depends on which one I saw last. Today, my favorite is the Cary Grant, Eva Marie Saint, James Mason thriller from 1959.
Since I am such a big fan of James Bond, it seems natural to love "North by Northwest" because it really feels like it set the groundwork for contemporary spy films. There is an intricate plot, but most of the mystery is background for a series of sequences that are amazingly staged or performed. The actors get to play with their characters and make them something unique because the dialogue is so arch. 007 could easily have spouted the lines spoken by either Cary Grant or Eva Marie Saint. Mason is a forerunner for Dr. No and a dozen other masterminds who trade quips with the protagonist and make plans that in the end go awry.
Two major Hitchcock themes are fully exploited by this film. There is a cool blonde with the aura of danger surrounding her and there is the innocent man, caught up in a story wrongfully but effectively. Mild maneuvered mama's boy Roger Thornhill does not seem to be the type to be able to stand up to ruthless spies and killers but he turns out to be resourceful and charming enough to get halfway across the country to the climax of the film. His cleverness at escaping is demonstrated by his witty performance at a Chicago auction. The manner in which he thwarts the henchmen of the lead baddie is just the kind of thing that James Bond and Indiana Jones would specialize in later. Eva Marie Saint comes on like a locamotive which is appropriate given where she first meets Grant's Thornhill. Eve Kendall is a mystery wrapped in a most appealing package and dropping hints as to what is inside in the sexiest way possible.
Their exchanges while on the train to Chicago are worth the price of admission all on their own.
The two big set pieces of this movie are justifiably famous. The whole sequence with Grant out in the hinterlands of Iowa, waiting for a non-existent man to meet him in the middle of nowhere, is fascinating . From the time his bus drops him off to the moment the crop duster ends up as it does, there is basically only the sound of the fields and the infrequent traffic on the roads. Hitchcock doesn't have to sweeten the suspense with music at this point. Everything build tension by developing slowly and quietly. It is a far cry from the manner of most modern films which overdo it ninety percent of the time. The spectacular chase across the heads and faces of Mt. Rushmore however, are perfectly framed by the amazing Bernard Hermann theme from the film. When silence is required, the music pulls back to allow the menacing face of Martin Landau to move closer to our heroes and really frighten us.
Everywhere in the movie, Hitchcock and his collaborator , writer Ernest Lehman, have created little moments of character that provide humor for the story. Roger Thornhill is a befuddled man, but he is also a creative advertising executive who can toss off a quip as easily as most jingles of the day. He has lines to his secretary, the thugs who kidnap him and his love interest, that would be memorable if they were in a pure comedy. Lehman and Hitchcock put those bon mots in his mouth at just the right time for effect but never in the way that some of the lines made famous by action stars of the 80s dropped like a hammer. Subtlety is a gift that the makers of this piece of entertainment provide us in regular doses.
I own this Blu ray and have watched it a number of times, but as usual with film, the experience of seeing it in a theater with an audience just as captivated as you are is intangibly better. There is an extensive selection of films being provided by TCM and Fathom for the next few months. Maybe if you are lucky, you will find something as wonderful as this movie to fill your eyes and brain with.
Children of the 90s can rejoice. Your childhood will not be besmirched by a film that takes your memories and mangles them. The new version of Power Rangers should be exactly what you want. It takes a stupid premise, removes the ridiculous, adds some real teen angst, and comes up with a popcorn film that won't make you hate yourself for going.
My kids were just the age for the show when it first aired. They liked it well enough but they never obsessed about the "Green Ranger" the way some kids at the time did. As a dutiful dad, I endured the cheese factory that was "The Mighty Morphin Power rangers Movie" in 1995, but I have not revisited it since then. My kids grew up and out of this phase and we moved on to other things. I thought I was done with all of this, but nostalgia isn't what it used to be. The film makers of today are the children of yesterday, and apparently they needed to have a worthy Power Rangers reboot. OK, here it is.
There are two things about the movie I'd warn you about, after that, everything else is on you if you are interested. First, there is a crude old joke used in the introduction of the first of our soon to be hero kids, that is disgusting and probably not something that should be heard by anyone under thirteen. My guess is that it was included to get the film up to a PG-13, because a PG rating would just not be enough for the cool kids. Every other reference to a four letter word is turned into a joke without actually saying the word. So the film pushes the edges by playing it safe. The second warning is that the film is long. It is over two hours, and the Rangers don't morph until well into the second hour. That's a lot of back story, exposition and set up for the comic book action we will want. It does however give the movie a little more seriousness and it feels like a movie, not a cartoon show simply blown up to the big scree.
That said, if you don't mind weird monsters and karate mixed with some Transformers style effects and action, you should enjoy this film. Elizabeth Banks and Bryan Cranston add a bit of depth to the cast, which otherwise consists of five young actors I've never heard of before. They all seemed perfectly acceptable for their roles. Billy and Naomi are the two with the most interesting background. The film gives a nod to special needs communities and also makes a plea for redemption of stupidity. None of which should be taken very seriously but it was nice anyway.
I doubt that I will ever see this again, except in passing as I scroll through channels, but someone out there is going to love this. It takes something completely disposable, and treats it seriously for two hours before we can dispose of it again. Millennials may now celebrate, now let's get some Junior Mints and remember the past as being better than it really was.
[This is traditionally a spoiler free site. This review may have content which indirectly gives away some plot elements. Sorry, but the movie turned me a bit reactionary.]
I will hold my powder dry until the end of this post. There are so many things I liked about this movie that it would be a disservice to start with the thing that irritated me the most. Instead, we'll concentrate on the strong points at the outset and hope that my ire calms down enough to be fair to the movie. "Life" is a horror film in a science fiction atmosphere. That makes it sound derivative of "Alien", but that's OK because as great as "Alien" is, it is also a product of ideas that came before it, and it made a great film, so this could do the same.
An International Space Station, set up to process materials from other planets, (basically Mars), receives a sample back after the delivery capsule encounters some problems on it's way to them. A group of six scientists and engineers are ready to take possession and begin analysis in the safety of space, above the Earth. Naturally things do not go as smoothly as expected. Proof of life beyond our planet becomes an international moment of celebration, but the initial joy of the scientists becomes dread as the life form begins to develop some dangerous characteristics.
As with all horror films, the group of potential victims is faced with a variety of options. Almost all of the choices are bad and most of the actions of the crew will in retrospect seem foolish. An early mistake that supposedly can't happen allows the life form access to a larger area of the space lab. This sequence happens so fast that it is difficult to tell exactly what happened. However, the sequence that immediately follows is the best section of the film. Astronaut Ryan Reynolds attempts to rescue his comrade from a seemingly sudden attack. Just like in "Alien" someone has to break the protocol to allow events to play out. Immediately we get a sense of the power and potential intelligence of the new life form. Just as with Alien, the use of fire is not particularly effective. The results are gruesome and frightening in a very tense five or six minute scene. It is exactly the kind of thing you hope for in a story of this type.
It begins to feel like we are playing out the "Ten Little Indians" scenario in a horror film one more time. We are given glimpses of the personalities of the crew and one by one they will be killed by the monster. A few red herrings are set up and the plotline plays them out reasonably well for a while. The visual effects of the activities on the station and the movement of the creature are very disturbing and effective. The actions of stars Jake Gyllenhaal , Rebecca Ferguson, and the rest of the cast, sometimes are heroic, sometimes lucky and occasionally clever. For most of the ride we get the kinds of action and suspense that we paid our money for. Just as I thought last year's "The Shallows" was a reasonably entertaining variation of the "Jaws" concept, I found this to be a pretty effective variant on "Alien". That is until we get to the Ian Malcolm moment.
[Potential spoilers. We wary of proceeding].
In "Jurassic Park", the character of Ian Malcolm explains very simply that "If there is one thing the history of evolution has taught us it's that
life will not be contained. Life breaks free, it expands to new
territories and crashes through barriers, painfully, maybe even
dangerously, but, uh... well, there it is. ..."Life" finds a way." We might be lead to believe that this is a description of the science team, and that gives us the rooting interest that an audience will need. Unfortunately just as most of the characters make a mistake or bad choice along the way, just as we think the writers responsible for "Deadpool" and "Zombieland" are about to show that they can find a way the make "Life" work, ...they choose poorly. The twist suckerpunch at the end of the film destroys most of the goodwill the film built up for me. There were a lot of other options that could have been more satisfying, but no, the film makers go for a big finish and they flop.
There will be people out there who like the choice made at the end, I think those people are wrong. It denies the value of most of what we saw for the opening hour and forty minutes of the film. I saw this coming as soon as a sequence continues past a natural stopping place. I guess I could do what some folks do, step out at that point, or turn the movie off before the finale. That's not in my nature. Which is why, like Sky Masterson I say, "Daddy, I got cider in my ear."
There is a world full of film bloggers who dislike the whole idea of live action remakes or reboots of classic animation films. They regularly let it be known that there is no need for a live action film, that the existing version is excellent and, "gasp", the production of such a movie is a money grab. Well those are all ideas that I can sometimes understand, they often get bandied about without regard to the product for which those comments are intended. I try to hold my opinion until I see each film and I do my best to judge it by it's own merits. That goal is exceptionally hard to achieve with the current "Beauty and the Beast". The animated film from 1991 is beloved by many, and I include myself in that group. It holds a pivotal place in my nostalgia file, since my kids were the perfect ages to see that film when it came out and we lived on a steady diet of "B & B" video watches for almost five years. Although I try to avoid other reviews and certainly spoilers on line, it is hard to exclude them entirely, and I'd heard one of the regular guests on the Lambcast, knock this version for being lifeless. So although I wanted this film to be a success, it was with some slight trepidation that I approached the screening. To put it mildly, there is nothing to worry about, this film is solid.
The legend of the original animated design of Belle was that they wanted her to resemble Julia Roberts. I think we can dispense with that image. Emma Watson is a fantastic fit as the heroine of this story. She has the pluckiness that we want out proto-feminist character to deliver and the charm that we remember. I think her voice is very solid as a singer and the big numbers at the beginning of the movie are carried off with aplomb. She also seemed to develop some chemistry with the Beast, through hard work as an actor in some pretty well filled out sections of the film. The transformation from antagonist to friend and love interest was very believable in this version of the movie. I also thought her relationship with her father was more adult like and based in a long standing status rather than just being patronizing.
There are places in the film where there are additions to the well known story that I think work, but there are also a couple that seem unnecessary. I don't know that the enchantress that places a spell on the castle and town, needs to be a character after the first sequence. I did like the fact that the town was included in the enchantment, which helps to explain a couple of minor inconsistencies in the '91 animated film. The character of LeFou changes in a couple of ways. Much has been made of the character's "identification", and those that are bothered by that sort of thing will probably ind the slight bit of humor related to that offensive. I wonder if that alteration is the justification for turning the character into a more sympathetic figure toward the end of the film. As if an orientation transplant also requires a morality defense. It's just a thought I had as I was considering the whole film. It doesn't qualify or disqualify the movie for me.
Here and there are minor changes in scene and blocking. Gaston, as played very effectively by Luke Evans, is introduced in much the same manner but already as a suitor for Belle, in fact she has turned him down before. Their interactions have less of the comic effect than the animated film was able to achieve, and that is a small drawback, but the back story of Gaston as a soldier makes some of his attitudes a little more sensible. His temper issue, which replaces the blackmail into marriage strategy of the animated version, is a lot more logical and it also justifies LeFou a bit more. Another set of background issues concerns Maurice, Belle's Father played by Kevin Kline. Instead of being an inventor, he is an artist, and some of his work is mechanical like clock making. I suppose it makes sense to enlarge the part if you are going to expand the film and hire an actor of this stature, but I don't know that we needed to know all the history of their departure from Paris to the provincial areas.
The Beast himself, is seen early on as an adult, although they disguise his appearance a little for the reveal at the end. This was another place where the story gets expanded. It seems the young Prince, when denied maternal oversight became a reflection of his father. Not much was told to us about all of that, but because we get a little more of his origins, the library becomes more important as a way of connecting Belle and he. One of the minor criticisms of the animated film is the quick step to love that occurs. I think this is a little more realistic in timing, although it still happens faster than one might expect.
I may be an outlier on this film. On the podcast that I was a guest on today, two of the other participants were quite harsh in their judgments and the other was mildly enthusiastic. I'm all in, so take that for what it is worth. If you are interested in hearing the discussion, I will be posting a link when the podcast gets published. Until then, you are invited to be my guest, and enjoy this tale as old as time, without worrying that all those little people in the provincial town you find yourself in, will judge you too harshly.
There is no news here. This is a big action film with a giant ape that fights humans an monsters on an island. It is pretty much what you expect it to be. It is entertaining while you watch it and forgettable almost immediately. You will have enough time to consume your popcorn, but I don't expect there to be deep conversations into the night over the nuances of the story. Samuel Jackson may be playing Captain Ahab or Colonel Kurtz, trying to win the Vietnam War after we abandon our ally, but that plotline goes no where except to create a little motivation for otherwise foolish choices by a professional.
Tom Hiddleston seems to be auditioning for his role as the next James Bond by playing a SAS agent, out of service but willing to contract for a fee. He is supposed to be the hero part in the movie and he was fine, but the character is so thin that we don't get much rooting interest. Academy Award Winner Brie Larson is on hand as a photo journalist who smells a story. It's never clear how she got authorized to be there but that doesn't matter. I was completely surprised that the film is set in 1973. I suppose there are story issues that are easier to sell that way but it does seem a bit disconcerting. John C. Reilly is part Rip Van Winkle and part Dennis Hopper when the expedition gets to the island. Somebody on the writing team must be a Cubs fan because that is a thing here.
Anyone who has seen a King Kong movie before, knows that Kong is a double edged sword. He is as scary and dangerous as hell, but there are always other things that are more frightening and dangerous, including mankind. There is actually a subtle environmentalist message in the movie, but I doubt anyone will notice it between all the helicopter crashes and monster battles. The tribesmen on this version of the island are just as silent as the ones in the Peter Jackson film of a Dozen years ago, but thety are less malevolent and apparently wise in the balance of nature. They have the role of religious shamans who convey wisdom to the modern world but do so in a silent manner.
John Goodman got a star on the Hollywood Walk of Fame in conjunction with the release of this film. This is a good sized part but nothing special as far as his performance. It would have been so much more befitting if the honor had been bestowed on him last year. Samuel Jackson is a lot more subdued than he usually is, I don't think I can remember one use by him of his favorite adjective. There was a nice call back however to his role in Jurassic Park. That was entirely fitting given the nature of this film being about giant monsters on the loose on an island.
You are probably aware that there is an after the credits scene. It is entirely there to set up a series of future films featuring Kong. The studios that combined to create this movie are trying to set up a cinematic universe which will support all kinds of 50s monsters being in a story. It will probably work, this movie will do business until another action film worthy of our attention shows up. Until then, check your common sense at the service counter and pass the Hot Tamales. They will go well with the butter oil in the popcorn, and they will be satisfying for about the same amount of time as this film.
The X-Men franchise has been going pretty strong for the better part of two decades now. Both Hugh Jackman and Patrick Stewart have grown older in their roles as Wolverine and Professor Xavier. I don't know how they will replace Jackman, but Stewart has been gracefully edged aside for James McAvoy in the last few outings, including a dual casting in "X-Men: Days of Future Past". The two of them have been cast in this capstone film, which basically cements their exit from the franchise. This episode is tonally very different from any of the other films, including the last outing for Jackman which was "The Wolverine" back in 2013.
Most of these films have been cartoony super hero stories with a new "big Bad" to fight against in each edition. There is some subtext about ethnicity/sexuality and culture but usually it comes down to some big action sequences that everyone is looking forward to. "Logan" has plenty of action scenes but they are mostly a series of mutants versus mercenaries, and usually involve a car chase or two. No stadiums are lifted into the air, the Statue of Liberty is not at risk, and the wold does not seem to teeter on a single moment. The darker subtext here has to do with genetic manipulation for intentional purposes. Since the film is set ten years in the future, it is safe to make some jokes about GMO crops and GMO humans. The Frankenfood that most alarmists are worried about is mocked, but the human process is the thing that provides some depth to the movie.
Let me share a quote with you from my review of the 2013 film: " I know the film is PG-13 because we get only one f-bomb, and the blood
from all the fighting and evisceration that is taking place, stays
mainly on the characters. Body parts don't come flying off the screen,
there are no fountains of blood spraying the walls, and the violence
remains mostly in the imagination." Apparently, director/writer James Mangold felt the same way, or else he read my comments and decided to fix this deficiency. "Logan" is R-rated for blood and language. It's not a surprise that when freed from some contractual restrictions, Wolverine would find colorful uses for the f-adjective. What is a little more of a shock is the degree to which the claws get set free. The number of times the three prongs end up in the head, throat, or chest of a bad guy rivals John Wick's kill count. It gets a little wearisome at times. Let's throw in another character with claws, and the dismemberment, decapitations and general viscera is way up. If you have trouble with violence that looks really violent, then this film may not be for you.
I mentioned that the tone of the movie is different. Both Charles and Logan have medical issues in this movie. In a different X-Men Universe, there would be brilliant blue furry mutants and mystic scientists working to discover solutions for their problems. Instead, we have a pair of overworked caregivers who are struggling to get by while hiding from the world. Some vaguely hinted at disaster has made the X-Men disappear. Getting the pill count and schedule is hard enough, but some characters also need assistance in going to the toilet. That's not something you will see in the comic books I bet. Another thing that will show how different and dark this world is, no one is spared in the story. Sympathetic characters die and often in gruesome ways. I thought we were being set up at one point for a secondary character to use some skills that are human based, but no. As soon as we hear about those accomplishments and start thinking of how they might be used, the character is dead. The warmth of friendship or humanity is held out only long enough to make us feel something when it is snatched away.
Overall I liked the movie quite a bit, but I have my reservations. The violence is continuous without the self awareness of a movie like John Wick. There is background missing that would make the story a little more interesting, and just as we get some monologing to explain it, a bit of violence jumps in and cuts it off as if to say "That's not the story we are telling here." This is really an elegy for the X-Men characters we have known and a passing of the torch to new mutants. It feels like the studio has set up the whole franchise for a second reboot since they got started. The Deadpool 2 teaser at the start of this film has nothing to do with this movie except for a brief reference to Logan as a joke. The mood of the opening teaser is incredibly different from the movie that follows it. The final tip off for where this is all going to end up is contained in the use of a Johnny Cash song in the trailer and a different Cash song in the end credits. The dire and desperate voice of Johnny Cash is a natural for Mangold to use. He was after all the director of "Walk the Line". It is also a Cliff Note sized clue that this movie is a tragedy and not an adventure.
Last night I had a disappointing experience. We decided to watch a horror film and we chose "The VVitch" because we'd heard a lot of positive things about it. Maybe it works for other people but I was not happy. In fact I found it quite irritating in the way the story gets resolved, or at least sort of resolved. Today, to wash the bad memory out of my brain, we picked another widely acclaimed horror film. This movie is more contemporary and it has an interesting perspective on the world. I'd seen the trailer and I was afraid it was going to be a polemic on white privilege, instead, the movie twists the idea of cultural appropriation in a way that is totally off the wall and satisfying.
Daniel Kaluuya is a name I did not recognize, but he was in a movie I saw a couple of years ago, "Kick Ass 2". His part in that movie was not significant, but his role in this movie is impressive. He is the lead and he carries most of the drama and horror of the film on his shoulders. The only thing I know Allison Williams from is the highly criticized Peter Pan Live form a couple of years ago. She was also very good in this film and her character has surprising elements to it that will turn the story at some points. Three other well known old timers are also in the cast. Bradley Whitford from the West Wing and "Cabin in the Woods" plays the neurosurgeon father of Rose, the white girl that is dating Kaluuya's character Chris. Dad is just enough of a social justice liberal to be disarming, but still he and his wife player by Catherine Keener, are just a little off. Mom is a psychiatrist who uses hypnotherapy to help clients deal with smoking and other issues. At first they seem just a little odd but as time passes, Chris begins to listen to the doubts that he might be expected to have as a lonely black face in a well off suburban neighborhood. The third character played by an old hand is Jim Hudson, another blind character played by Steven Root. He turns out to be a key element of the reveal when it shows up.
The slow burn creep factor in this movie is exquisitely patient. We know things are off but we have no idea exactly what is going on. Chris gets warnings from his friend Rod, who is concerned about him going into the country with all the white people. Rose is supportive in the way a girlfriend ought to be, but she is also a bit nonplussed by the potential of her black boyfriend meeting her parents without their knowledge of his background. All of the family friends that show up at the parents house are also a little too awkward and direct about Chris and his ethnic difference. There are a couple of disturbing or frightening scenes that involve the servants at the house, and there is definitely a Stepford Wives feel to the goings on.
The twist comes and it is a dozy. Suddenly things are more frightening than they might have appeared and the story gets clever with the social conventions but maybe a little to direct with the horror elements. Rod gets some great sequences that add some comic moments to the film, and that makes the story feel a lot more believable than it otherwise would have. I can't give away anything, it's not my style to do so, but I can say that the story is a lot more satisfying than the psychological supernatural film I saw last night. The wrap up to this film may be more conventional, but at least it feels like it is part of the story that we have been watching.
Writer /Director Jordan Peele is a guy I recognize but I have not really paid much attention to. I have seen the routine with the substitute teacher, in fact, I plan on using it in my classes. As an actor, I remember him from the "Fargo" TV series, as one of the FBI guys who screws up massively. This film shows that his talent is not limited to comedy and he clearly understands the check points for a good horror film. This probably does not need any recommendation from me, the movie is doing good business after all, but I will be telling anyone who will listen, this is worth your time. As I said to my daughter at the end of the film, "Now that's how you make a horror film!".
Day two promised to be a long one. There are five films left and none of them is a crisp ninety minutes. Even the two that manage to come in under two hours are deliberately paced. Shane, who has been our regular host for a couple of years now, was out of town but AMC employee Johnny was an enthusiastic substitute and ran the trivia with efficiency. Of course maybe I say that because we cleaned up with three movie poster prizes and some Batman Lego pieces. I'd seen all of the films already, so this will mostly be a quick recap and there are links back to my original comments in each title and picture below.
As an exploration in anthropology, this was a revelation to me. I'd not expected myself to have a lot of empathy for drug dealers but the way this story unfolds gives us a lot more to connect with. The three part structure of the film is not subtle but it does choose the three stops in Chiron's life that seem to be most critical in our understanding of him. As much praised as the first chapter was, I found the last chapter with the regretful visit with his mother and the reunion with his somewhat reformed school buddy Kevin, to be most interesting this time out. The performances are very solid in this adult world.
I was pretty critical of this film when I first saw it. The structure is so bifurcated that it seems like two different pictures. On this viewing I was more able to appreciate the connection between the two and give the second section a little more credit. Inevitably, it is the miraculous story of Saroo's use of Google Earth to reconnect with his original family which is the heart of the film. Little boy lost is
found, but the story has some sad twists to it. Once again I cried at the last ten minutes of the movie as our hero reconciles his two lives and we discover some resilience in his mothers as well. I did not give Nicole Kidman much credit before but as I watched the movie again, my appreciation for her work was elevated. Dev Patel is a good actor, and supporting actor is the right category for him even though he is the first listed star of the film.
This movie is the closest thing to a sure thing for me. I am eternally grateful to our fathers and grandfathers for the sacrifices they made in two world wars. The exceptionalism of Desmond Doss is a perfect illustration of the diversity of Americans who stood up to tyranny in all kinds of ways. I recently listened to a Lambcast where one blogger complained about this movie and the prayer that Doss made on that day of his heroism. She found it cliched and annoying, she also asked about the triage issue. Doss acted as a fellow soldier would at times rather than just as a medic. I found it humbling and inspiring. The opening act in the film should get some credit as well, Hugo Weaving was not nominated but he was very good as the battle embittered father of Doss, and an indirect inspiration for the choices he made.
This movie about communication is also a thoughtful puzzle for us to solve. This second viewing allowed me to percieve scenes in a way that I could not have expected in the first screening. There are secrets revealed at the end of the movie which force us to rethink much of what is going on. Since there is a time shifting component to the process, it also introduces some of those pesky conundrums that make our brains hurt to much if we get carried away trying to work them all out. I can confidently say that the biggest Oscar snub this year was Amy Adams, who carries this movie in almost every frame and who not only deserved to be nominated but also to win. The production design her also deserves to be singled out, it sells the concepts in great ways, both the fantastic and the mundane.
My wife has been sick the last two days and she toughed it out as long as she could but this film was starting at 8:30 and she was spent, so we left before we got to re-watch this fine entertainment. I think this is a popular choice to include in the categories that it was nominated in, but I will be surprised if it wins in any of them. While the story and the themes are important, and the film was entertaining, the film making did not seem extraordinary. This is an excellent film that deserved to be included but it is not quite in the same class as some of the other contenders. A second viewing changed my mind a little about Manchester By the Sea" and "Lion", maybe this one would have gone up in my mind as well.
The very distinctive animation here made this less appealing but still interesting. There is a YouTube Version available, I have posted it here for you.
Borrowed Time
A morbid but touching western theme for a Pixar short. There are some gruesome elements so it's not really for kids. I liked it quite well but it ends up being pretty depressing. Below is the trailer.
Pear Cider and Cigarettes
If I thought "Borrowed Time" was depressing, I was slapped by reality with this offereing. The longest animated short of the evening. It centers on a friendship with a self destructive person, and it is not a pretty story. It is however excellently animated. Another trailer below.
Pearl
The most pleasant surprise of the collection. This looks like a rotoscoped film and it has a nice design that is different from most of the other films here. This is another one where I found a complete version on line and you will find it next.
Piper
The last nominated short is also Pixar. I think it played with "Finding Dory" so it should be familiar to most of you. The computer animation is lush and photo real while still maintaining a sense that it is animated. No words, just the usual high class story telling from the premire animation group working today. It is below.
Live Action Shorts
Enemies Within
A French Short that basically consists of an interrogation of an Algerian man applying for French Citizenship. You never know which one of the participants to sympathize with, but the experience is insightful.
Le Femme et le TGV
A Swiss film about the odd connection between an older woman and the high speed train she greets twice a day. This was an interesting and nicely complete story.
Silent Nights
Another fairly complete story with several highs and lows. The power of love and hate come together in two people from very different worlds. It is a painful but sweet experience for each.
Sing
A Hungarian film about a school choir. I think it was my favorite because it is subversive in a very nice way. Kids have feelings and adults should stop worrying about always getting their way.
Timecode
The shortest of the shorts, Timecode is a winner of the Special Distinction Award at Cannes. It is also odd and entertaining and ultimately charming.
So we put on our lanyards and started off another year of the AMC Best Picture Showcase at 10:00 am on Saturday Morning. Our host for another year was Shane, a long time employee at the AMC Santa Anita 16. He greeted us and set up the schedule for the day. There are four films on this weeks menu, next week there will be five. I still haven't found anyone willing to do the 24 hour marathon with me. Oh Well, maybe next year. I've already seen all the films so this is a recap. The titles and pictures will link you to my original comments.
A movie that has improved in my esteem with a second viewing. There was nothing wrong with it the first time out, it was just so overwhelmingly tough to view that some of the nuances that make it a great film slipped by. As hard as it is to re-experience, it is rewarding in additional ways. The sadness hangs like a pall over almost everything, but there are moments of humor throughout, which help make the story feel completely human. Casey Affleck is almost certainly going to win the Award for his acting performance here. Completely deserved as he manages the difficult task of portraying a man paralyzed by grief and guilt, who must find at least a little room in his life for the family he has remaining.
I still have the same issues with this movie that I first had on viewing it. This is a very stage-bound set of dialogue, performed wonderfully by the cast, but still a two set scene. Director Denzel Washington has taken the story as far as he can to make it feel more like a movie, but in spite of some trash trucks, Pittsburgh neighborhoods and a scene at a public building with some old murals, it still comes down to actors standing around talking to each other in the backyard or kitchen. If you don't know baseball, half the metaphors in this film will leave you uncertain as to what the character of Troy Maxson is talking about. I understood, but the poetry of the diamond sounds too conspicuously well written.
This is a movie that has grown on me more every time I have seen it. If there is a chance for an Oscar upset, this is the movie I would be happiest to see take the prize. There are four really good performances at the heart of this film, and a half dozen smaller roles that add so much character to the movie. Once again I was impressed with the work of Ben Foster as the older of two brothers, who is not as smart as his younger sibling, but has the gumption and fierceness to push their plan of economic justice to fruition. The ambiguity of the ending is perfect, it feels like a film from my youth, in the glorius days of the last golden age of Hollywood, the 1970s.
This exuberant update of the Hollywood musical, stole my heart when I first saw it. On second viewing, the few lapses and pacing issues were more apparent, but they bothered me only slightly. I finally downloaded the digital version of the soundtrack to my device and I expect to be listening t it all week. The two lead performances are even better when you have adjusted to the musicals style. This is the front runner for good reasons. I still expect it to be victorious, although that sense of inevitability may detract a bit from the current experience.
Movie blogging is an act of self disclosure. You tell the world what your thoughts are, what your feelings might be and you make yourself subject to all types of evaluation by anyone who chooses to read your work. This post will probably reveal more about me than is prudent. I basically spent the afternoon watching two pieces of pornography. They each have a different canvas that they are painting on, but both are designed to get you off in a way that you would probably not be proud discussing with your mother.
First of all, each of these movies in a second installment of a recent "franchise". "Fifty Shades Darker" is the visualization on the mommy porn phenomena that seemed to sweep the country three or four years ago. The books have been widely criticized as poorly written fan fiction. I can't remember if I read the first book or not, which tells you a bit about how impressive it was. I can say that although the first film was no piece of art, it is not nearly the travesty of cinema that many make it out to be. "Fifty Shades of Grey" supposedly left us with a cliffhanger ending, but the new film dispenses with the conflict that was so meant to be traumatic at the conclusion of the first movie. Anastasia and Christian get over their tiff within minutes, and she is once more anxious to be his plaything.
The second chapter of "John Wick" starts off with an immediate action sequence that is meant to be a continuation to some degree of the revenge plot in the first movie. Just as with the Sex based romance, the initial story end abruptly and a new story begins. This time Wick, or "The Boogeyman" as he is known in the underworld, gets dragged back to his former profession, unwillingly, to make good on a personal debt. The code of ethics in this fantasy criminal world excuses all sorts of unpleasant behavior, but one of the two rules that they live by is that a marker must be made good. [We'll discuss the other rule a bit later.] So Keanu Reeves is back in action, set to kill out of professional obligation this time rather than revenge [at least immediately]
Both of these movies live in a fantasy world where wealth and privilege are taken for granted. Christian's red room full of BDSM equipment is neatly shelved and apparently dusted by a chipper housekeeper who knows what a pervert he really is. John has his basement floor vault, while buried under a messy concrete pile, it is contained in a trunk with a neat slot for every gun, passport, and gold coin of his profession. Both of them also have dog collars but they use them very differently thank goodness. As part of the foreplay in both of these pieces of pornography, there are long sections devoted to dressing the participants correctly. Anastasia gets a corset, garter belt, stockings and a ball gown. John has two custom suits made which have lightweight armor between the lining and the cut of the suit. He has one made for day wear and one for the evenings.
The sex toys in "Fifty Shades Darker" are shown to us first. We are treated to a brief expository discussion of ben wa balls and nipple clamps. Since this is a theatrically released film we a spared a close up of the balls being inserted and later removed, although it is acted out for us in both cases. A leg yoke is introduced and then visually demonstrated for us so we do get a money shot with that. With John Wick, we see him select, fetishize and dress himself with a number of weapons. Much like might happen with food porn, we are lead through this process by an expert. Referred to as the "sommelier ", he describes each weapon in detail and highlights the characteristics that make it special. In the action films of the 80s, Arnold or Sly might spend two minutes of montage getting ready for action by arming themselves. John Wick is a connoisseur of violence so his prep time takes almost four times as long. Ultimately, both films are trying to build our anticipation for the use of the selected devices. In Fifty Shades, those sequences are relatively brief and only slightly erotic. In Chapter Two of John Wick, the payoff is long, varied and intensely satisfying. [Do you see what I mean by these posts being so revealing about the author?]
Apparently another fantasy of these two different porn worlds is "the Party". When you are a billionaire sadist with very rich parents, it's possible to have a masked charity ball one night, and then a few days later throw a birthday party for your boy with a couple hundred of your closest friends attending. In the criminal underground fantasy, crime families meet at a coronation of sorts that is designed to officially crown the heir to a criminal nation. Such an event would include a pretentious rock act caterwauling while overdressed stereotypes dance to the music. A second coronation must be held in a museum filled with renaissance versions of Greek figures in one room and a fun house of mirrors disguised as an art exhibit at the end of the hall. The trappings of both the elite rich and the criminal rich are not that far apart, except that their tastes differ slightly.
So having set up the fact that the movies are both about titillation, one concerning sex and the other violence, the question remains, do they achieve their objectives?
"Fifty Shades Darker" is more bold in it's confrontation of the sex hangups of the title character than it's predecessor was. The implied use of the tools of the trade is more frequently explicit , and the foreplay was the better part of the sex. The disrobing part of the movie is usually where things turn a little dull. The two leads are attractive enough but the simulated sex rarely feels passionate in spite of all the writhing and moaning. When the conflicts between the two are so rapidly dispensed with so that another scene featuring them rolling around naked on sheets with incredibly high thread counts, the movie just feels like a slog through a series of sex dioramas.
At least John Wick gets it right, and from the very beginning. If you are an action fan and muscle cars turn you on, the opening of Chapter Two is great. We don't really see that it is John Wick driving the Chevelle SS that is being used like a pair of nun-chucks on some bad guys, but we know it is him. When he recovers his beloved Mustang, it too becomes a weapon against an overwhelming number of foes in cars, on motorcycles and on the ground. The payoff is satisfying and makes you yearn for another evening with your mystery date. Wick kills more people in this movie than died in that battle scene in "Hacksaw Ridge". It is done so stylishly as well. There are multiple martial arts killings, plenty of stabbing and slashing, and of course for an action movie, the plain vanilla sex of gun shots, repeated incessantly. I thought it was a very nice touch in the penultimate climax of the film, all of the henchmen lined up to be killed by Wick were in nice matching white dinner jackets. The better to see the spaltter as each money shot is delivered.
I don't think it gives anything away to note that both series have third films planned. There is a hoe hum denouement, as two side characters appear to be set up for complex machinations in the final chapter of the Mommy porn. Maybe if you were interested in these films for the plot, you should stick to the books. There is just not much energy here. John Wick Chapter Two's conclusion, sets up a clear story to anticipate with a promise of even more violence than we have had in the first two films [as hard as that is to believe]. There is a slow burn energy as the film ends creating a desire to watch what comes next. I know that "Fifty Shades Freed" is due a year from now, I hope that "John Wick Chapter Three" is not far behind it. Another hybrid review would be fun to write, and maybe next time I can say it was the sex rather than the violence that did it for me. This Valentine's week, I'm afraid I enjoyed the fifty shades of red splattered on the screen much more than the heaving bosom of Christian Grey. See, I've said too much.
