The Whale

 

Let's get the Elephant in the room out of the way immediately, yes, it is extremely likely that Brendan Fraser will follow Will Smith as the winner of the Academy Award for Best Actor. I don't want to take anything away from his performance, but there is a sociological reason for this to happen in addition to the artistic achievement. Fraser has been largely absent from the film world since his heyday twenty years ago. A story about his physical decline and about abuse by Hollywood entitled power players suggested a career that was largely in the review mirror. This is a comeback story, and the guy making a comeback is one of the most likable fellows you are going to encounter. This is perhaps the perfect counter-programming to last year's disastrous ceremony, where the eventual winner of the Acting prize, assaulted the host and was not removed from the venue but actually got up a few minutes later to receive an award that was overdue but was now clouded by controversy. Two years after presuming a win by the late Chadwick Boseman, only to be shown as craven exploiters of the emotional turmoil, the Academy needs a clear win for a popular player that will generate little controversy and much needed good will.

Now as to the performance itself, it is truly memorable. Fraser has to restrain his emotions in some segments and let them spill out in others. His voice is heard early on when talking to his on-line class, and the deep tenor of that voice feels completely appropriate for the English professor he is. When we see him, it is at first difficult to reconcile the voice with the body because of our natural reflex to classify things together. "Tall, dark and ugly" is not the phrase that comes to mind. We expect handsome. Now take the voice. "Rich, assured and disgusting", no that does not work either, but in the long run, that is what we are going to be faced with. "Charlie", is not disgusting simply because of his morbid obesity, but rather the sloth that has lead to it. His self concept reflects self loathing and he recognizes the destructive path he is on, but is unwilling to change it. Fraser plays Charlie as a sympathetic figure with deep flaws. He is a real human being with emotions and conflicts that all of us share. His uplifting attitude in talking about his daughter and the essay about Moby Dick that he continues to focus on, are inspiring and frustrating at the same time. He has taken the words of  Samuel Hunter the playwright and screenplay author, and made them sing at the right moments.

Director Darren Aronofsky has made one film I love ("The Wrestler") and one that I find maddeningly irritating ("Black Swan") and two films I have stayed away from because the word of mouth on them simply told me I should avoid them ("The Fountain"/"Mother!"). This story adapted from a play, probably tightens the direction of the film a bit because the locations are very limited, and the biggest visual element is the physical presence of the main character. I did very much like the way the characters coming into the scene were sometimes glimpsed in shadow, passing by a window before entering the apartment. On the other hand, the number of times the angry daughter storms out and pauses in the doorway in silhouette, seemed excessive. In spite of the limited cast, the camera does not overuse close up to create a claustrophobic atmosphere. The real dilemmas of a morbidly obese man are painfully demonstrated without being used to manipulate our emotions.

There are only six characters on screen in the film, and the two youngest other than Fraser himself, have to carry a lot of the story burden. Ty Simpkins is a young actor with a pleasant face who coneys an innocence that may not be real. The character of Thomas, an evangelical missionary, presents discordant behaviors, sometimes offering us a sympathetic person who can be admired for his faith, but also someone leads us to a point of anger with the blind judgmental way his faith may influence his perception. Sadie Sink, from "Stranger Things", is the other jewel in this film. She perfectly embodies an entitled Gen Z teen with resentful Daddy issues. Her casual cruelty may or may not be in the best interest of the other characters, but we can see how it can go either way. It is Charlie's insistence on his perspective that ends up making this an emotionally engaging story. 

In a way, this film is about selfishness. Charlie's selfish decision in regard to romance had a devastating effect on others. Alan, his dead partner committed one of the most selfish acts known to man and it had consequences to others that were as substantial as Ahab's metaphorical whale. Charlie is repeating the process by committing the slowest, most indulgent form of suicide you can imagine. This film reminds me of "Leaving Las Vegas", where our protagonist has elected to deal with his grief in the most destructive manner they can choose. We need to understand Charlie's grief a little bit more so that we can sympathize in spite of his self destructive behavior. We never quite get there, but it is close. In the end it is the love he has for his estranged daughter, in the face of all her animus and anger, that allows us to forgive the character. He does not fling invective at Thomas for his conclusions about Charlie, and that is another plus. The two other women who appear in the story deserve better than what Charlie is giving them, but they too have made their peace with it and so we can as well. The essay that he obsesses over, is itself a commentary on his life, and it is a theatrical device that works well for the story.

Be warned that there are moments in the film where you will feel revulsion at Fraser's character. Gluttony is not, as once observed by Orson Welles, a secret vice. Seeing it frantically displayed however can be a bigger challenge than observing the results. Aronofsky's film "Requiem for a Dream" may be one of the best anti drug messages ever made, "The Whale" could do the same thing for our dietary habits, except that some idiot out there will probably argue that it is fat shaming.  

Puss in Boots: The Last Wish

 

Well I saw this on Christmas Day and I wish it had been the second film of the day rather than the first. We finished the evening with the bad taste of "Babylon" in our mouths, but the memory of earlier in the day helped because this movie is simply delightful. Sure it's a kids animated feature, but the lead is Antonio Banderas doing the Puss in Boots character and he is exactly what a movie like this needs. Sly charm, cocky confidence and a little bit of befuddlement in his voice and you have a character that everyone will recognize immediately. 

Two plot lines make up the story and they converge about halfway through in a couple of unexpected ways. Puss in Boots has used up most of his nine lives and has to retire to a secret identity as a housecat to a crazy cat lady. He is being pursued by a bounty hunter who is actually a more sinister figure as we find out down the road. He is also being pursued by others who want his assistance in tracking down a map to a fallen star that will grant one last wish. So there are a few fairy tale characters who get in on the pursuit and fit this movie into the Shrek Fairy Tale Universe. 

When I saw the first trailer for this movie, I was not very interested. Something in the animation looked cheap and not up to the levels that we have come to expect from theatrical animated films. The word of mouth however was pretty positive and the grim "Babylon" looked like it was going to be our main option on the holiday, so I decided to take the chance. There is something different about the animation, but it was not necessarily bad. Most of the film looks like it is pretty standard Dreamworks quality, but the action sequences are stylized very differently. They are not bad but they seem deliberately distinctive which gives the movie a little unevenness. 

There are plenty of slapstick moments for the kids to enjoy but there is also a quip, look or character to give the adults something different to laugh at. That is exactly the secret to having an animated film break out of the kiddie ghetto, Mom and Dad need to get something out of the movie as well. Of course my kid is now thirty four, so maybe I need to just accept that the film wants to entertain all of us. It's been eleven years since the last "Puss in Boots" movie, and I don't think the character or Banderas have suffered at all by the decade layoff. 

If like me, you want the theatrical experience to survive, you need to support movies that are aimed at a general audience and legitimately try to entertain you. Antonio Banderas' self parody is worth the price of admission, but there is more to enjoy as well. This may not have anything to teach our kids, but it won't hurt them and it can bring you together and that is a pretty good goal in itself.  So put away your catnip mouse and laser pointer and go out to see a movie. It may not be purrfection, buy it will provide a Meowy Christmas memory for you. 

Babylon

 

Director Damien Chazelle is a talented visualist with a love of style. His movies "La La Land" and "Whiplash" are two of my favorite films since I started blogging. So it is with regret that I must say "Babylon" is a misfire of gigantic proportions. This movie is visually audacious and simultaneously repugnant.  There are moments of great beauty, juxtaposed with some of the vilest imagery you can imagine. Chazelle may have wanted to comment on the the ugliness hiding under the veneer of movie fantasy, but instead, he has made a movie that proves that sometimes the path of success leads to excess. Peter Bogdanovich, Steven Spielberg, Francis Ford Coppola and recently Sam Mendes have learned that the the power of success gives license to shoot yourself in the foot. Whether Chazelle can recover from this self inflicted wound will take time to discover.

"Babylon" is the dark side of early Hollywood, as seen by a lover of movies but a hater of the system that produces them. Taking urban legends and real historical characters for inspiration, Chazelle has created the anti-"Singin' in the Rain".  The Gene Kelly classic is the polar opposite of this movie. When Debbie Reynolds cute wannabe drops into the movie business, she is charming, full of energy and sweetness galore. Margo Robbie as Nellie LaRoy is a  conniving, entitled climber, with a little talent but a big appetite for stardom.   Brad Pitt is a John Gilbert stand in. Replicating his success in silent pictures, frequent marriages and loss of popularity with the coming of sound. So no Gene Kelly happy reclamation by trying his star to Kathy Selden, Pitt's Jack Conrad is a closer approximation to Gilbert than we may have seen before. 

The underbelly of Hollywood is shown in it's most grotesque forms, including a scene with a Fattie Arbuckle style character, enjoying a golden shower and accidentally crushing a woman's chest cavity. Meanwhile an orgy is being entertained in the rest of the house with a lesbian chanteuse, a diarrhetic elephant, and Nellie, fearlessly dancing in an orgiastic manner with the crowd. People engage in sex amid the throngs of people at the party, and drug use is rampant. The whole purpose of the title of the film is contained in the long opening sequence. Of course there are moments of beauty as well. The jazz inflected party is pumped up by a band of black musicians who know their stuff and deliver it with verve. The double edged sword of creativity and debauchery is being wielded with a heavy hand from the very start of the movie.

Jack makes an impassioned speech to one of his wives about the art of cinema. The passion for film as art is shown when Robbie's character gets on a set and emotes more effectively for the silent screen than had been seen before, and her erotically charged dancing brings a spark to a melodrama that would certainly be forgettable without her. The casual friendship she struck up with Mexican immigrant and also Hollywood wannabe Manny Torres, played by Diego Calva, will become the spine for a story that brings the three leads, Calva, Robbie and Pitt, into one another's orbit on regular occasions as the movie business is transitioning to sound. Manny is no Donald O'Conner, he really wants to make movies and be a player at the executive level, his Spanish Language skills and ethnicity seem to banish him to doing the Spanish version of bigger English language films. His infatuation with Nellie, his contacts with Jack and the random insertion of a story about how blacks were treated in the era, make for a rough plot to follow. 

As the story grows darker, the scenarios become more off putting. Nellie is a degenerate gambler and coke fiend who has gotten deeply in debt to a shady mobster with slight connections to the Hollywood scene. Manny's mission to help her out when she is desperate, is a trip down a rabbit hole that can literally be labeled a descent into hell. Toby Maguire, a producer on this film, plays the gangster, and he shows us a walking nightmare world that is hypnotically repugnant.  This is another path that Chazelle has decided should push the boundaries of what is acceptable to portray in films. The goal may be to demonstrate the lack of humanity in Hollywood, but it really just feels like a freak show that is designed to make the audience nauseous.   

There is a coda segment that may be trying to explain and justify what happened in the first two hours and fifty minutes of the movie. Foolishly, Chazelle references the film that this movie is at the polar opposite of, and instead of redeeming the character of Manny, it feels like it is mocking him. A montage of other great film moments is dumped on us as a recompense for what we have endured, and I suppose the message is that it may be all worth it, except that's not how it feels. After being shit on, vomited on, peed on and visually assaulted, it will be hard for anyone to appreciate the many dazzling moments in this movie. To get them, we have to keep stepping over piles of feces left for us by the writer-director. I'm sorry, but the fact that after to step in it, the smell follows you home, does not mean it was successful. 

It's a Wonderful Life

This is the classic Christmas film that is widely regarded as one of the best emotional experiences in movies.  We covered it extensively as the Lambcast MOTM for December. 

We went to a new theater complex for us which is basically a bar and restaurant with movie screens.  FLIX Brewhouse is a well run place and the screening was a TCM Fathom format. 

It's a Wonderful Life,  doesn't need a lot of justifications.  It's simply great.

 https://largeassmovieblogs.com/2022/12/lambcast-664-its-a-wonderful-life-motm.html

Avatar The Way of Water

 

You have probably already heard some of the comments, "Never doubt James Cameron", " Cameron delivered ", and  “the most amazing cinematic journey” by James Cameron to date. When it comes to visual splendor and technical excellence, Cameron is "The King of the World".  Now when it comes to the narrative, that may be another thing entirely. The director is sometimes criticized for simplistic story telling and cringe worthy dialogue.   I don't think those are always true faults but they will certainly not be swept away by this film, which continues to wear it's heart on it's sleeve, and go for the most direct approach to your emotions possible. 

"The Way of Water" is set a decade after the events of the first film, still on Pandora, so maybe the delay in arriving is appropriate. The lead characters played by Sam Worthington and Zoe Saldana are in the story, but the main protagonists, especially in the second act of the film, are their children,  Neteyam and Lo'ak; their biological daughter, Tuk; and adopted daughter; Kiri. They are forced to flee into hiding in a new environment with the distant tribe of  Metkayina reef people. This creates a new cross cultural story, with adolescents acting more human than you might expect from the Na'vi. This is the section that will probably give critics of Cameron's storytelling, the ammunition they need to launch their attacks. Teens get jealous and act capriciously to prove themselves. Kids get alienated from peers that they don't see as like themselves, I guess growing up is the same all over.

Relocating from the forest to a seaside location gives Cameron the chance to invent more creatures and environmental twists and he runs with that opportunity. Tulkun, an intelligent and pacifistic cetacean species, is the most interesting of the new inventions. I do think this is a place where Cameron can use alien species in a non-human form, to make the future stories more creative. Like the connection with the planet itself in both films, the relationship between the tulkun and the Na'vi gives a moral center to the actions of our heroes. The "skypeople" are the hunters, the tulkun are the buffalo, being hunted only for one thing, and physically cast away once that has been acquired and the Metkayina are the Indians, shaking their heads at the horrible waste. Unlike the buffalo however, our game here is sentient and understands the threat and conveys the fears that go along with it. Cameron's allegory is not very subtle. 

Once again, the visuals are the thing that can most sell a James Cameron story. The tech weapons used by the invaders are inventive upgrades from the earlier film. The adaption of the mech suits to a water environment is clever and you will see the creatures it is based on immediately. The characters move in an underwater environment because the motion capture was done underwater. The actors and director should get all the praise they deserve for the innovation and hard work that this took. I saw the movie in 3-D and I think it was screened at the 48 fps for some sequences. I did not have any of the reservations that I experienced when looking at the Hobbit movies of a decade ago, but this is a hyper-stylized world with very few human characters, so the images my slip by a bit more easily. The 3-D effect is well worth the effort, and I don't always think that is true. 

This movie looks amazing and you should see it on the biggest screen you can find, in 3-D. In the long run, this is the kind of film that may save cinemas, but only for the epic quality of their visuals. Traditional dramas may get relegated to streaming if these are the only kinds of movies that people will go out to see in a theater. The basic war adventure parts of the movie create some terrific action beats, and Cameron tops himself as well as cribbing from himself in a couple of spots. James Cameron should always be respected when it comes to the visualization of his stories, but the stories 
continue to be the least innovative part of his film-making.

Christmas Movie Advent Calendar

Conan the Barbarian 40th Anniversary Fathom Event

 

I remember the first time I saw "Conan the Barbarian" in a theater. It was opening weekend in May, 1982, and it was at the Edwards tri-plex in Monterey Park. While we were there to see "Conan", one of the reasons I remember the event so well is that there were promotion postcard posters for "Star Trek II the Wrath of Khan" available at the theater, and I was quite excited about that movie. 40 years later, I can say I went to anniversary screenings of both films at a real theater.

We can start with the obvious, Arnold Schwarzenegger is perfectly cast in the film. I read a story many years ago about Arnold meeting with Dino DeLaurentis, the film's producer, as he was being considered for the part. According to what I read, Arnold was his usual arrogant and playful self, and inulted Dino in his office by asking him "Why does such a little man ( De Laurentiis was 5'4") need such a big desk?' In spite of that awkward opening, Arnold got the part, because who else were you going to cast? It was his big break into action films and as a lead performer. His Austrian accent might have worked for him a bit as a character, and he trained like the dickens to get the swordplay, stunts and action just right. It also helps that in a two hour or so movie, his character does not speak for the opening twenty five minutes, or in the last twenty five minutes. 

Director John Milius is a favorite of mine, I am a big fan of his "Dillinger" and a huge fan of "The Wind and the Lion". This film seems to fit his sensibilities immediately. The Nietzschean attitude and the strong sense of masculinity, are very much part of his wheelhouse. When I posted that I was at a screening, the first response I got was a prompt for the famous line about what is best in life. Although Oliver Stone originated the script, Milius transformed it with several important changes and when he directed it, those changes become obvious. The opening credit sequence features the powerful Basil Poledouris theme playing over a sequence of the forging of a sword. You can see only brief ghost images of the characters in this sequence, everything is focused on the "steel" and fire of the moment. 

Anyone expecting this to be a cartoonish kids adventure will be soon disillusioned. Young Conan's village is burned to the ground, his father is slain in valiant battle, and his mother is unceremoniously decapitated while she is holding his hand. This is going to be a brutal, violent story with grim surroundings and an air of doom hovering over our lead character.  William Smith, who was so often the bad guy in seventies and eighties films, got a nice brief turn here as Conan's father. Smith, who passed away just a year ago, was always a favorite of mine to spot in a movie or television show. 

There is a clever montage sequence where young Conan transforms into the Arnold visage, as he build his muscles and endurance as a slave at a mill site. Slowly he becomes the only surviving slave pushing the wheel, and we see shots of the child  shifting to shots of the adult and finally he lifts his head and reveals the face that we all know today. A similar montage shows him developing fighting skills as a pit gladiator and training with a sword master. The muscles that Schwarzenegger is famous for come into full play as the camera captures them in sweaty, bloody combat and sleek sword play sequences in the sun.  

Once Conan is freed from his captivity, he acquires companions and they embark on a series of action scenes that tell us more about the character. They are bold thieves with little regard for their own lives, much less the lives of others. Subotai, the thief he rescues from the captivity of a witch, is played by surfing champion Gerry Lopez. Lopez is fine, although his voice ends up being dubbed. Sandahl Bergman on the other hand is excellent. A professional dancer with a few acting credits prior to this film, she puts on a very good performance as Conan's love interest and thieving companion. She looks great in the action sequences and she did her prep to get the combat moments right, but her dramatic chops were solid in a couple of important moments. As she embraces Conan at one point, she talks about the loneliness of the life she has lead. 

      "I would look into the huts and the tents of others in the coldest dark and I would see figures holding         each other in the night. And I always passed by. You and I, we have warmth. That's so hard to find         in this world. Please. Let someone else pass by in the night. "

This was a terrific character moment. She gets another great scene later when she and Subotai are protecting Conan's wounded body from the spirits that are trying to take him to the next world. She is more defiant there and this is another great character piece. 

The second lead of the film is the villain Thulsa Doom, He murdered Conan's parents, and heads the snake cult that is engulfing the surrounding kingdoms. James Earl Jones has that magnificent voice to convey ominous power, but his face is also very animated. He has a couple of moments where he uses his eyes to control the women he is adding to his cult. We see that first when he freezes Conan's mother at the beginning of the film. He attempts to do the same with Conan at the end, as he twists the story of his relationship to the Barbarian, in a manner that will benefit him. With the hair extensions and contact lenses, it might seem like a comic book performance, but it is really a skillful use of expression and voice that makes Thulsa Doom a character that is memorable. 

King Osric, the man who sends the thieves after Thulsa Doom to return his daughter to him, is played by the late Max Von Sydow. This is an actor who had a career that spanned from the late forties to just a couple of years ago before his passing. He has been in a dozen of my favorite films over the years and I can't think of a role where he disappoints. He has only one scene in this film and he practically steals the movie. In the brief trailer above, you will get the immediate sense of fun he seemed to be having as part of this cast. 

Although I have seen this movie a dozen time, I was foggy on one moment in particular. I had not remembered the animated effects in the scene on the beach when the spirits are coming for Conan. The subtle images that never look like cartoons but are clearly animated creatures, were very satisfying. I thought it worked much better on the big screen than I remembered from home viewings. Just another example of why seeing a movie in a theater is so much better. This was the thirty third film I saw this year that was a screening of an older film(Five of those films were from 1982). More than a dozen of those have been Fathom Events. Let me offer my heartfelt thanks for Fathom and the studios they work with. I know that sometimes the showings are not much more than commercials for upgraded video releases, but that's OK with me. I'll buy the 4K or Blu-Ray, but first let me re-experience it where it belongs. 

Empire of Light

 

I have to say that I was disappointed in this film, but not nearly as let down as I thought I might have been. I try to avoid looking at other reviews before I see a film for myself, but the Rotten Tomato scores popped  up somewhere and when I was looking for guests for the podcast, a couple of preview statements on Lamb pages seemed to be discouraging. While they are mostly right, there are a few things to recommend the film, and I want to start with those.

Regular readers are aware that this site is sometimes driven by nostalgia, heck, that was most of the original purpose of the initial project, and I have continued that with a couple of other projects that you can find here. "Empire of Light" is set in 1980/81. Some of the films that get referenced are treasured favorites, from "All That Jazz" to "Being There". Sadly, the movies mentioned get short shrift from the script and the promise held out by the marketing team is broken. The power of movies to transform lives is not really the focus of the story, no matter how luminous Olivia Coleman looks while watching a film in a dark auditorium. The setting on the other hand does much to make up for these oversights. The "Empire" Theater is a glorious old movie palace, in spite of half the screens and a restaurant gone to seed. The glowing lobby, the red velvet curtains and the traditional auditorium seats, made me wish I was watching this movie in that theater.

Lighting Magician Roger Deakins does his usual fine work in making the images on screen look spectacular. From the Lobby of the theater, to the beach-side dunes, to the main character's drab apartment, we get a feeling about how to feel because of how things look.   He also lights Coleman as the zoftig love interest in a way that highlights her mood swings very accurately. One moment she is sweet and longing, the next she is threatening and harsh. Coleman of course does most of the heavy lifting for these moments, but the lighting and composition make it work really well as she descends into her pit. A sex scene that is meant to be off putting is exactly that, in large part due to the unflattering lighting of a dingy office with the scent of shame washing over us in waves of shadow.

Michael Ward, who is the second lead and who the story should really be about, also looks great on screen. He has a natural charisma and he plays his character of Stephen as a real person, surprised to find himself struggling with his life but drawn to the much older Hilary.  The problem is that screenwriter Sam Mendes, has given himself a schizophrenic story to direct. There are at least four plot lines that could be the spine of the story; the romance, the racial unrest, the me-too relationship and the miracle of movies thread. Unfortunately, they don't all gel together, and some are so underdeveloped that they feel like plot contrivances rather than real moments in the character's lives. 

See this movie for Coleman's performance, Deakin's paintbox, and Ward's star suggesting turn. Just don't get your hopes up too much. We aren't going to finish watching this film and see a beautiful curtain close behind an ornate proscenium. Your multiplex may be nice, but it won't create the warm feeling that going to the movies used to produce. Unfortunately, neither will this film. 

link to podcast:

https://largeassmovieblogs.com/2022/12/lambcast-665-empire-of-light.html

Violent Night

 

This was so up my alley that I am not even sure a review is necessary. The trailer above is filled with spoilers of some of the best moments in the film, and I still managed to enjoy, laugh and groan at the things that I'd already been tipped off to. This is the kind of counter programming movie at the holiday season that I thrive on. Like "Krampus" and "Anna and the Apocalypse", "Violent Night" goes to some dark places at the most joyous time of the year. Don't get me wrong, I still love a sentimental Christmas movie, in fact I'm  in the middle of a Movie A Day Christmas watch that is filled with Netflix fodder as well as classics, but you have to take a break every now and then. 

The set up of this movie is easy. This is "Die Hard" crossed with "Home Alone" and Santa is John McClane. David Harbour has just the right feel as a sadly dissatisfied Santa, weary of the instant gratification culture that modern Christmases present. He has not gone completely to seed, but he has been tippling a bit on Christmas Eve and his fuse is getting shorter with every stop he makes. Maybe the one weakness of the film is that Santa has magical powers, but they don't protect him from physical harm, and he can be hurt. The problem is that those powers are inconsistent, and sometimes he can use a magic trick and sometimes he can't. The only explanation we get is that Santa doesn't understand how it works either.  

Santa is also given a slightly different backstory here than you will find in most traditional origin tales. His history as a Viking Berserker, being redeemed by love and the opportunity to be kind to the world, means that when he has to get down and dirty in this story, we can believe he has the skills to do so, and boy does he let loose with those skills. As John Wick is to a Gun, Santa is with a Hammer. Yeah! His reluctance to engage at first is understandable, but when his conscience gives him permission, he takes off and it is a lot of bloody, violent fun. 

John Leguizamo plays a part that feels like it could have been done by his character in "The Menu". He is all scenery chewing badguy, and his unfettered resentment at Christmas reflects his narcissism. Beverly D'Angelo gets to play the matron of a family at Christmas time again, but this time she is hard-bitten and bitter rather than Griswold sweet and patient. Alexis Louder was my favorite thing about "Copshop" but it is not until the end of the film that she gets to shine a little. There are several other supporting players who also work primarily because they are well cast and the caricatures that they play are so easy to pick up on. 

If you are not the kind of person who thinks violence can be played for laughs, you may want to skip this one. If however, you wanted to see what would really happen to Marv and Harry if Kevin's traps were real, this is a film you should embrace. The nail on the ladder scene will be enough to justify your ticket price, but there is so much more. Dash away, dash away, dash away now, to your nearest multiplex, before the woke sugar plum fairies realize what a demented bunch of fun this is. 

The Fabelmans

 

Arguably, the most important film director of the last fifty years, Steven Spielberg has created on origin story for himself. This autobiographical, but supposedly fictional story, shows us the inspirations and the learning curve that Spielberg encountered on his journey to fame and cinema excellence. The frequent theme in his movies of an absent father or parents divided, shows up in his own narrative, and at times it is inspiring while being simultaneously frustrating. Oh yeah, you get to enjoy the hypnotic effect that movies can have on you both by watching the Spielberg stand in, but also by simply being in a theater to experience this. 

Let's begin by complimenting the performers in this film. The main young actor playing the Spielberg based Sam Fabelman, is Gabriel LaBelle, and he sure looks like a doppelganger for a young Steven. Every time he has the camera in front of his face, making one of those childhood created movies, you can see the future creator of "Jaws", "Saving Private Ryan" and Jurassic Park" at work. Casting is everything for a part like this and whoever found this young man deserves a bonus. We may not have the same secure visual references for his parents, but Paul Dano as the father and Michelle Williams as the mother, are completely believable. Williams has the meatier role and she runs with it. There has been talk that she would walk away with the Academy Award if she was being promoted as a supporting actress, but that would be such a misclassification of her contribution to the film, that it would be the equivalent of saying Brando was a supporting actor in "The Godfather". Regardless of screen time, this is the central character in the film. Even the Spielberg character plays second fiddle to the mother in most of the story. Judd Hirsh arrives for one extended sequence and walks off with the picture in five minutes of screen time. Seth Rogan plays it straight as a dramatic actor, although the character has light moments, and he also is quite good. In the final moments of the film, we get one more great performance from an actor in a single scene, but I won't spoil it for you. When the identity of the actor dawns on you, you will laugh and be amazed.

For most film buffs, the key parts of the story will center around young Sammy's movies. The montage of his sisters and friend, role playing in his pre-teen and teen productions is almost enough to satisfy, but then we get extended moments in the making of his war epic, the filming of a family picnic and his film project presented at the prom, that also add to the juice that we movie fans crave. The editing, special effects and camera tricks show us that he is a great story teller, but as we see him making his film about his Mom, we get to see how he learns to put heart into his stories. Sammy (Spielberg) learns that it is not just technique that makes a movie work. The audience needs an emotional investment, and we actually see him learning that as the movie unwinds.

Things in the film get a little tricky when confronting the Jewish heritage of our hero. No doubt there were times in his life when bigots swarmed but given the experiences of his earlier schools, boy scouts and neighbors, these Aryan idiots in Northern California seem like bad guys issued by Central Casting. The fact that a cute Christian girl takes a distinct interest in him also belies the notion that anti-Semitism ruled the school.  That one of his antagonists has a moment of moral crisis after being presented as the equivalent of a Greek God at their High School in Sammy's film, is confusing. The closest explanation I could come up with in my own head was that this High School Star is being confronted by his apex moment, and it simply underlines that it is all downhill from here on. I sort of like the idea that the film of student activities will alter people's perspectives, but it was a little fuzzy how this ended up benefitting Sammy. It does end up with a pretty funny punchline however, which works because we are watching this movie when it gets delivered.

Not to give anything away, but the film ends on a promising note and a terrific scene. The brusque advice Sammy gets from a legendary film director, is quickly applied in a manner that allows the audience to laugh and see a technique at work. Director Spielberg playfully lets us in on the fact that he is still influenced by the films he saw in his youth and the lessons he was taught as a teen. The last sequence is where we get that surprise I mentioned earlier and it is a great five minutes of film. Maybe this will not rank with his great adventure films, but when the list of dramas made by Spielberg is presented, "The Fabelmans" will probably be somewhere near the top.

Devotion

 

When many people refer to a movie as "old fashioned", they are not giving it a compliment. I on the other hand find it to be one of the best recommendations for a film, if the subject matter calls for it. "Devotion" calls for a traditional telling, set as it is during the Korean war and telling a story about a time when racial equity was a long way from being realized. This is not really a movie about racial justice, but it does have that as an important component of the story, along with the real story about aviation and war. There is also a love of aviation that seems to fuel a lot of military films, see: Top Gun and Top Gun Maverick. Coincidentally, the second lead in this film was in "Maverick" and played John Glenn in "Hidden Figures".  

The lead in this film is Johnathan Majors, playing Jesse Brown, a aviator with a strong will to fly, who must overcome the self doubt promoted by the racists he has encountered his whole life. The men who flew planes between WWII and Korea, seem to be struggling with ennui, but not Brown. He makes his routine flights into adventures in technique, but he has over relied on his own vision to become the flying expert he has turned into. When he has to adapt to a new fighter, with a bigger engine and restricted eyelines, it becomes a problem for him. As he struggles to adapt, he must also learn to adapt to a friendship with a fellow pilot who doesn't fit into the experiences he has had. While he is respected by the other pilots in his squadron, he is not close to any of them, and others outside of the squad are derisive of his race and skills. Enter Glenn Powell as Tom Hudner, an Academy graduate who missed the war by a couple of months and longs to prove himself in battle. The relationship between these two real life heroes is the basis of the film.

The opening segments of the film really focus on the thrill of flight and the love of aviators for their craft. The planes and stunts seem very realistic. It was hard to tell where the practical and CGI meet. In the later battles, representing combat during the Korean conflict, it seems intuitive that the work is mostly special effects but it still looks really convincing on screen in most sequences. When the two pilots have conflict with one another, it is based on the chain of command structure that would probably go worse for Brown than anyone else, because he is the first black Naval Aviator. When Hudner acts to try and protect him in combat, it feels like an act of redemption from the earlier event, but still seems like the kind of thing a hero would do. Both men take actions that are admirable but also problematic, but we can see why they are justified in the context of the story. 

The domestic story wit Brown's stateside wife, fretting over his duties is underplayed effectively, especially in the performance of Christina Jackson. She and Majors have a real chemistry that works in convincing us of their love and the title of the movie "Devotion". There is an amusing interlude played out in Cannes, France, where it seems that race based discrimination is not unique to America. The most entertaining element of this section is the insertion of movie star Elizabeth Taylor as a character in the story. I have no idea if this event actually took place, it feels like a movie plot invention, but it was particularly satisfying as it played out. 

So we have a well told war story, with real American heroes, told against an emotional backdrop that seems believable. The social issues are in a respectful place but they are not the main point of the film. The three lead performances are also quite good, as are several of the supporting characters. The combat sequences look terrific, and everything is paced well. I can proudly say this will be on my list of favorite films at the end of the year because it moved and educated me in the way a film should. 

The Menu

 

Part social satire, part morality tale and part horror film, "The Menu" mixes it's ingredients in the right proportions to set a satisfying movie meal before you. If you think too hard about what it all means, you are probably committing some of the same offenses as one of the lead characters in this film. Be careful, you could end up in the sequel called "The Screening". If you can just sit back and savor what is in front of you, you will enjoy it so much more. Then you can digest it for hours afterwards and come up with all the right adjectives to make your own dessert.

The trailer for the film seems to suggest that this is a variation of the Hunger Games with guests being hunted down by the staff. That scenario does occur for about three minutes of the film, but it is mostly misdirection. This is a story about a group of zealots, taking out their frustrations on what they see as deserving targets, before they themselves participate in their own version of the "Heaven's Gate" event from nearly twenty five years ago. This time, the cult leader "Do" is replaced with the star Chef played by Ralph Fiennes. Chef Slowik is a lot more charismatic than the befuddled Marshall Applewhite, but he is no less deadly and utterly fierce in his convictions. There is an incident in the story to demonstrate how he feels no compunction over what he is planning, because he is taking blame for his faults as well. This scene helps set up the twist at the end because we learn that in spite of the narcissism that he is guilt of, he wants to reject the label of being "special".  A chink in the armor is revealed.

With flashes of brilliant absurdism, the conceit of an exclusive dining establishment, imposing a menu on the guests that reflect their vapidity works very well at providing opportunities for surprise. A gourmet  take down of the guests with the denial of a standard part of the meal, provokes laughter at the haughty way it is imposed and the deconstructionist baloney that lets the guests accept it. This is followed by a true reveal of how insidious the evening is going to be with a shocking swipe at mere excellence, in a ugly joke perpetuated as a lost soul dies. The nature of the cultish thought process sinks in at this point and that is where the real horror begins.

Anya Taylor-Joy as the last minute replacement on the guest list, matches words with the Chef  in an assertive manner that gets slapped down, at least until she discovers the way to a man's heart is through his choice of cuisine. Nicholas Hoult as a preening foodie who laps up all of the experience as a member of a very different cult, also provides a huge amount of amusement by his words and actions. It is the early relationship between Hoult and Taylor-Joy that makes the set up so intriguing and at first funny. In the end though, It is her manipulation of inside knowledge and her understanding of the Chef, that makes the story soar at the end.

"The Menu" has plenty of other characters but they are used for very brief bits of business. The three corporate stooges who feel entitled by their positions, each offer a moment of levity, but the story never takes any of them seriously. The same is true of the other guests. They have some chances to get a laugh out of us, or joust unsuccessfully with the staff, but in the long run they are background for the main relationship of the film. The devious menu is capped off with a dessert that mocks the gourmet spirit of the guests and celebrates the mendacity of the Chef and his crew. It will also provide you  with an hysterical visual joke to finish your meal with. "Bon appetite!"

Dead of Night

[This post is nearly a decade old. It was written for Fogs Movie Reviews as part of my "Movies I Want Everyone to See" column. This week I participated in a Podcast featuring this film ,"Pop Art" and so I am republishing this now for the first time.]

I think everybody loves the idea of sitting around a campfire, a dark living room or driving at night in the car and listening to a spooky story. We have been trying to entertain one another since the first primitive man came back from the hunt and shared his tale of the day with the rest of the tribe. I suspect that the first ghost story told was by the next guy, who in trying to one up the hunter made his story more supernatural in nature and more interesting as a result. Ghost stories and horror pull us in because they show something that we would not want to encounter in real life but don't mind living through vicariously. Movies have attempted to frighten audiences from the beginning. One of the most vivid images that people have of silent films is Max Schrek in Nosferatu walking out of the shadows and revealing the horror of a vampire. Universal Studios was built by the monsters they showed in their films. Monsters are not the only kind of horror that early film makers tried to exploit. Psychological terror is a subject of many early films. It was natural that at some point the process of telling the stories would become part of the story itself. That's where anthology films began to show up and up the ante with each succeeding tale. "Dead of Night" is maybe the first well know horror anthology and it is a "Movie I Want Everyone to See".

While not as frequent as they once were, horror anthologies continue to be made, "V/H/S" from last year being an example (and a film I have yet to see myself). All horror anthologies probably have "Dead of Night" to thank for creating a format and softening up audiences for a mixture of styles in telling the stories. This 1945 film had four different directors and a big variety of screen writers (including H.G. Wells who contributed the story that the humorous segment was based on). Each of the segments is told in a different style but all of them have a element of the supernatural to tie them together.

The film begins with the arrival of Walter Craig, an architect hired to do some renovations on a country manor,  for a weekend visit. Mr. Craig has a serious case of deja vu that is quickly explained by him as coming from his dreams. He knows the layout of the house and the names of other guests before he even walks into the house for the first time. One of the other guests is a well know psychologist and it is the way in which the doctor tries to explain Craig's dreams away that starts the interweaving story. Each guest tries to challenge the doctor's explanations by providing a story of their own that may break the rationality of the psychological explanations. Thus we get five very different stories, each with a little something to appreciate.

The first to step up is a race car driver, who is still recovering from an accident that was a near death experience. He shares a

short but chilling story of forewarning that prevented him from being in a second deadly accident. The image of a horse drawn hearse appears to him and an avuncular driver smiles in a slightly friendly but also creepy manner and tells him, "There's room for one more". If you are a fan of the "Final Destination" series, you know that death is always knocking at the door and that it can't be cheated for long. This story takes that as a premise sixty years before that series of films began. Tony Todd nods and winks in the first "Final Destination" film in almost exactly the same menacing way that the driver does in this movie, that is not a coincidence. "I'll see you later" is an echo heard sixty five years later.

The transition segments back at the country house are not always smooth or closely tied to the stories that the guests share. That awkwardness is rarely noticeable because "Dead of Night" is paced so quickly in the transition scenes that we are moved to the following story almost immediately. This film is indirectly a haunted house film and the second story makes that connection a little stronger. The youngest visitor at the house is a teenage girl. She confronts the psychologist with her own unexplainedexperience. A couple of times in my own blog, I have mentioned how ghost children seem to be a touchstone for horror films. This movie has such a story. It is not as immediately scary as the twins in "The Shining" but it has the benefit of being based on an actual murder. The resolution of the original case is said to have inspired detective fiction beginning with Sherlock Holmes. This segment also takes place at a Christmas party so if you are ever looking for another film to fit your annual Christmas list of movies, you can cheat a bit and throw this one in as a choice.

Haunted mirrors are the subject of the most intense story in the film. Horror stories are filled with examples of people seeing something in a mirror that is not there when they turn around. Mirrors are also used to give contemporary films a "boo" moment so often that it has become a cliche. In the segment here, we don't get that kind of a scare, instead we are treated to an early kind of a possession story. It is the easiest one for the doctor to explain away with his theories of how the mind works. The bit here is a melodramatic interlude and it builds the tension of the movie up pretty well. Modern audiences will see what is coming but if you look at it from the perspective of an audience in 1945, it will be a bit more of a surprise.

In the 1983 "Twilight Zone Movie", Joe Dante's segment had a supernatural twist but it was largely played for laughs. That was the case in 1945 as well with a salacious ghost story involving golf. Two best friends who have devoted their lives to golf, suddenly fall for the same woman. Between the three of them, they agree to a match that will resolve the dilemma as to who gets the girl. When the loser drowns himself in the water hazard at their club everything seems to be resolved. Of course that is not the case.  The ghost of the best friend arrives in time to haunt the upcoming wedding and honeymoon. By divine rule he must be no more than six feet from the man he is haunting and that will make the bridal suite a little uncomfortable. This section is filled with British "good show" and sportsmanship until the issue of cheating comes up. If you don't think a golfer's devotion to the sport can be funny or that a woman should be treated like a tournament prize, then this segment may not appeal to you. This was the segment that H.G. Wells contributed. It has the least consistently eery atmosphere of all sections of the film. In fact, this segment was excised  from the original American release of the movie because it was so different from the rest of the movie. I suspect it was placed in the original spot in the film to give the audience a bit of a break before launching into the darkness of the stories that finish off the movie.

The psychologist now shares his own story, one that comes close to making him accept that supernatural events can occur. The most famous segment of the film is the multiple personality thriller featuring Michael Redgrave. He plays Max Frere, the sensational ventriloquist entertaining in a posh Parisian  nightclub. An American with the same vocation tracks him down to watch his act and discovers that the dummy in the act is the one wearing Frere's face. The idea of a ventriloquist losing himself in his art is so effective that it served as the basis of not just one but two Twilight Zone episodes. Another Shakespearean 

actor will follow Redgrave's path thirty five years later when Anthony Hopkins can't make "Fats" shut up for five minutes. The psychologist is called in to consult on the case and he sees something that becomes the most complex personality issue he ever had to deal with, at least to that point in the story. The lighting of the vent dummy Hugo, and the obnoxious patter that isn't really an act are the highlights of this macabre tale.

Classic horror from the past often relies on mood rather than shock.  It was rare that any blood got spilled. That is not the case in subsequent anthologies. "The House That Dripped Blood", "Creepshow", "Tales From The Darkside" and others have put more than their fair share of crimson on the screen. They all follow a tradition however, that frightened our grandparents and great grandparents with hardly anything more than an idea.  The final "tie up" of the story, is most horrifying because of it's apparent inevitability.  Every opportunity to break out of the "stranglehold" of the story is defeated by a piece of logic that we ultimately see was a mistake. When the denouncement arrives it might seem like old hat to modern audiences but it was as fresh in 1945 as "Memento" was in 2000.  If a modern audience can have the patience required and recognize that acting styles that are older are not automatically invalid, then you are likely to enjoy adding "Dead of Night" to the list of films you saw before you died.

Richard Kirkham is a lifelong movie enthusiast from Southern California and now Texas. While embracing all genres of film making, he is especially moved to write about and share his memories of movies from his formative years, the glorious 1970s. His personal blog, featuring current film reviews as well as his Summers of the 1970s movie project, can be found at Kirkham A Movie A D

In Case you missed it above, here is the link to the Pop Art Podcast

https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/pop-art-episode-88-magic-dead-of-night/id1511098925?i=1000587010144

Black Panther Wakanda Forever

Faced with the loss of their charismatic and talented lead actor, the team at the Marvel Studios was faced with a crisis of huge proportions. Do they recast the part or do they find another way to proceed with one of the most important surviving character lines after the pinnacle of Endgame? I think most fans who see this will agree they made the right choice. By acknowledging the death of T'Challa and creating a new path to becoming the "Black Panther", they have cleared the way for new stories on this path while still respecting the legacy that Chadwick Boseman had helped to create. Director Ryan Coogler and his co-writer Joe Robert Cole have handled the transition gracefully. There are still issues with the film but none of those will diminish the memory we have of our original Panther star.

The movie does have an interesting perspective with a political angle that will sound familiar as we go along. Wakanda has lost it's King and his guilt ridden sister is angry at the world and herself. The Queen seems to rule with confidence but is struggling to show her daughter a way to grieve that will strengthen her rather than weaken her. There are some good action scenes that surround an attempt by other nations to obtain access to the resource vibranuim , the source of Wakanda's power. Queen Romanda, has a stronger case than Colin Powell was able to make, since they present the captured mercenaries to the U.N. in person. Her warning to the world reveals that she has a steel backbone and a sense of righteousness to go with it. Angela Bassett has the kind of dialogue in this scene that should launch a thousand memes.

It does not give away anything to say that a new power appears on the scene with some legitimate gripes about how the late King T'Challa has created a problem for their world. Namor, the ruler of the undersea kingdom of Talokan, has a spine as unbending as Romanda, and the two powers find confrontation in the ultimatum, because a moral choice has to be made. Shuri, the princess of Wakanda chooses an ethical path at first, but manipulation and deception are required to free herself and an innocent scientist from captivity, and the consequences trigger a moral crisis. The fact that Wakanda is not a colonial power per se gives them some perceived high ground in the clash between the rest of the world and Wakanda, but that position seems shaky when Talokan enters the picture and the Wakandans react the way any powerful nation must with a display of power of their own. As with many grievances between nations, there is a valid point of view on most sides, but resolving the differences requires diplomacy which is not enhanced by belligerence. Everyone gets to suffer a bit in the process.

 Vibranium has been the McGuffin in other MCU plots and that is one of the drawbacks for me. Although it makes perfect sense that it would be a continuing issue, as the power stones were for the Avenger's movies, it feels a little tired. The scientist who creates a tool for locating the resource in potential underwater locations, is of course a young student, far in advance of her own instructors and not able to realize the dangers of her own work. This is a trope of dozens of stories, and the fact that she becomes the plot driving device also seems to be a bit old. However the action scenes involving her kidnapping, second kidnapping and subsequent rescue, are all solid moments for a comic style action film.  I do have a complaint about the look of the movie. In these days of high definition, it is a regular occurrence that stories take place in the dark. More than two thirds of this film take place underwater, or at night, rendering several dim sequences that just look washed out. Apparently, this was also shot for 3D presentations and lighting for that effect frequently contributes to a less than stellar sharpness to the images. 

Namor as an antagonist is convincing and strong, with some self justifying principles. When he leads the final confrontation and the way to defeat him is basically a giant hair dryer, that power seems less intimidating. It's as if retreating to Death Valley would solve Wakanda's problems with Talokan. It was not clear to me how the lakes and rivers of Africa would give a sea based power access to a landlocked nation, but that is just comic book exposition that does not matter much. On the podcast this week, we heard an interesting perspective on the original Black Panther, and many of the issues raised by that point of view are addressed by this film. I will say however that if you think that Killmonger's solution was the appropriate one, you have given up the high moral ground and accepted the notion that "might makes right" which is the antithesis of the story. Replacing one imperial power with another is not a good solution. Shuri has to learn that lesson as well, and that is the real journey of this plot.  

Black Adam

 

The DCEU has struggled to make the same sort of impact as the MCU has managed. They have a deep bench of characters to draw on, but the folks behind the scenes have not managed to find a tone, story-line or believable connections between the characters. The Justice League movie, turned into an awkward amalgam of stories and the resurrected Snyder Cut, while having some promise , still felt bloated and not much has been done with it since. "The Flash" movie has been hobbled with the problems surrounding the star, and the only emotionally satisfying film that they produced was the surprisingly lighthearted "Shazam!". "Black Adam" is a project that Dwayne Johnson was committed to and the decision was made to separate it from it's roots in the "Shazam!" sequel and make it it's own thing.

This is a film that feels very much in the style of the "Aquaman" movie. It is a CGI heavy, action film filled with creative imagery but so much background exposition that it feels more convoluted than it really is. Teth Adam is the slave infused with the powers of the gods, who was almost immediately put into a prison for 5000 years. It takes us a while to discover the dark back story that fuels his rage and makes him a danger to the rest of the world when he is released, using the same command that brings forth "Shazam!". The imaginary history of the Kingdom of Kahndaq forms the background of an origin story which takes up a chunk of the first part of the film. No one bothers to create a backstory for the other superheroes in the film. I'm not familiar with the Justice Society of America, or the two leaders of that group that appear in this film Dr. Fate and Hawkman. I got their character pretty quickly without those introductions and then we get two additional younger characters to fill out the team that is supposed to confront this character that apparently Amanda Waller knows about before he was even revived. She seems to be in charge of the Justice Society, I guess it is the counterpart to the Suicide Squad.

I enjoyed the superheroes relationship, in large part because Pierce Brosnan and Aldis Hodge sell it pretty well. There are occasional humorous bits with the character Atom Smasher, who feels like an Ant-Man substitute. The character of Cyclone is not as interesting as her powers are, and she is underused in the film which is too bad because there is potential there that is just wasted. The non-empowered humans are only important occasionally, with Anon, the skateboarding juvenile protagonist being both charming and annoying. For every moment that we want to root for him, he has a sense of self awareness that just feels cartoonish, which doesn't quite work here. Anon's Mother and Uncle are instigators, but after saving the Uncle, his character disappears from the film for most of the rest of the story. 

Dwayne Johnson does have to carry the movie however and he succeeds well. This may be the most stoic I've seen him in a film. I don't remember his trademark arched eyebrow showing up at all, and he is stingy with his smile, using it mostly in sarcastic moments rather than in any warmth. Clearly his physique and face are the acting tools he is using in this film, and sometimes he gets a little lost in all the CGI. The goal of keeping him as an anti-hero is largely met, although the finish of the film with a threat and a challenge from Waller feels like piling on. Most of that though pays off in the mid credit sequence that is trying to tie the films together and set up a future confrontation.

Black Adm is perfectly acceptable but it does seem to be more standard than groundbreaking. I'm not sure that it is the gamechanger that Johnson and the folks in charge of the DCEU want it to be. Frankly, I'm more excited by the "Shazam!" sequel which got pushed back then I am at the prospect of a second film in this series. It will happen I am sure because even though comic book fatigue may be a real thing, they seem to be the only kinds of films with the reliability that theaters need.  

10 Year Lookback Memory Test

So I had this idea a while back, and I thought I would follow through on it, unlike so many ideas I have. I went back through the site, and picked out two films for each of the last ten years, that my memory barely contained. I was looking for movies that I recalled as enjoying and those that I did not care for, with the proviso that I have not really seen the films again since that viewing in a theater.  Without looking at what I wrote, I selected the films and designated them "Worthy" or "Worthless". 

Now it's time to look back and see if my memory has completely failed me, or if I was right all along. There are links to each of the reviews and I invite you to tell me that I have lost it, or that I should not worry too much about early onset memory loss. Have fun. 

	Worthy	Worthless
2012	Lockout	House at the End of the Street
2013	47 Ronin	Carrie Remake
2014	Begin Again	The Other Woman
2015	SPY	Taken 3
2016	Pete's Dragon	Allied
2017	A Monster Calls	Power Rangers
2018	Tag	The Predator
2019	Scary Stories to Tell in the Dark	The Dead Don't Die
2020	Becky	The Rhythm Section
2021	Copshop	Voyagers