Tonight I saw Ghost, starring Patrick Swayze and Whoopi Goldberg.
The week this film debuted in 1990, I was at the theater, first in line. I loved all the actors, I loved the title and that was all I needed to know to buy the ticket. Luckily, it didn't disappoint. It not only became one of my all-time favorite films, it also took home two Academy Awards (Best Screenplay and Best Supporting Actress for Ms. Goldberg).
I own the film, and have watched it several times since, but haven't seen it in a theater since the year it came out. I was thrilled when a nearby indie theater said they'd present it as part of their Throwback Thursday series and settled into my favorite balcony seat tonight to enjoy it.
In so many ways the film remains timeless—the themes of love, spirituality, good vs. evil and betrayal all resonate as vividly today as they did 30 years ago. There's also many things that are dated—the black computer screens with archaic green text, the landline phones, the clip of The Arsenio Hall Show that plays as the characters watch. None of these details diminished the story for me this many years later, but I could see how someone young seeing it for the first time may deem it "old."
What still gave me goosebumps? The iconic pottery-making love scene set to "Unchained Melody." The first time the subway ghost rages at Sam. The moment Oda Mae surrenders to the ghost and yells "Sam" after he chases her around the table. The first "capture" of a bad soul to the other side.
It's also sheer pleasure to witness the chemistry between Demi Moore and Swayze and between Swayze and Goldberg. I can't begin to picture anyone else in any of their roles because they were so spot on.
Worth mentioning is the fact this film manages to dip in and out of several genres seamlessly: drama, comedy, thriller, horror, supernatural, romance. Ghost has it all, which is why it will continue to delight viewers for decades to come.
~~~
Showing posts with label drama. Show all posts
Showing posts with label drama. Show all posts
Thursday, February 20, 2020
Saturday, February 01, 2020
Live Action Short Film Nominees (Oscars 2020)
Yesterday I saw all five of the nominated films in the Live Action Short category. I'll present my reviews in the order the films were shown.
A SISTER (Belgium)
We join the film as a woman in peril makes a phone call from the car she's riding in with who appears to be her date. A date that has gone horribly wrong. Next, we see the person receiving the call who tries to make sense of the situation. It's a tense, simmer-beneath-the-surface thriller that we're not sure will turn out the way we hope. I was glued to the edge of my seat.
BROTHERHOOD (Tunisia, Canada, Qatar, Sweden)
A Tunisian family's harmony is disrupted when the eldest son, who has been gone for a long time, returns home to introduce his new pregnant Syrian bride. His father doesn't approve of what he suspects his son has been up to during his hiatus from their community and tensions rise. Perhaps I have dysfunctional oppressive family fatigue, but I didn't feel like there was anything new in this one. My least favorite of the bunch.
THE NEIGHBORS' WINDOW (USA)
A New York family of five is going through the motions of life—Dad works, Mom cares for the kids, they're comfortable financially. One night after the kids are in bed, the couple notices a couple in the building across the way making love with no inhibitions or worries that people may see them (though they have no blinds on their windows). At first they laugh, but then they become borderline obsessed with watching this couple, who appears to have an active sex and social life. Then, something changes and the perspective shifts. Basically, this is a good "grass is always greener" tale that was inspired by a true story. I had no idea I'd cry at the end—but I did.
SARIA (USA)
In March of 2017, 41 children lost their lives in a fire at a safe home in Guatemala. This film recounts the days leading up to the fire, including a riot led by female residents (who suffered sexual abuse and torture at the hands of their caretakers), who briefly escaped only to be captured, beaten and locked back up. In that lock up, a fire broke out and those responsible for guarding the girls didn't unlock the door to let them out, resulting in mass fatalities. This film was especially hard to watch because at the time of the real event, I worked for a Guatemalan company and spent time in the city near where it happened just a month later. The citizens were still raw with grief and searching for answers. Unfortunately, justice has not yet been achieved for the victims; perhaps this terrifying glimpse into what it was probably like will help that.
NEFTA FOOTBALL CLUB (France, Algeria, Tunisia
The final film in the presentation was the only one that provided solid comedy, but for that I was grateful. The story follows two Tunisian brothers who find a donkey wearing headphones. Yes, you read that right—the donkey is listening to tunes on a mountainside, so the boys make the most of the encounter, listening to the music and stealing the contents of the donkey's load to take home to their village. What they do with those contents left me smiling and caused the audience around me to spontaneously clap. The most charming of the five films, this just may be this year's winner.
~~~
Friday, January 31, 2020
1917
On Wednesday I saw 1917, starring George MacKay and Dean-Charles Chapman.
Two Lance Corporals (MacKay and Chapman) in the British army during World War I are sent by their general (Colin Firth, who disappointingly only appears only for a few minutes of the film) across the French countryside to stop an attack that will likely not end well for their people, if executed.
That's it. That's the whole film.
So, yes, despite the gorgeous cinematography and the haunting silences that befall our protagonists, the story drags on and on ... and on.
Only one "unexpected" thing happens along the way, a sure consequence of any war, but before and after that event, we see our share of corpses, explosions and worst of all, rats.
There's nothing enjoyable about this film for someone who's not a die-hard war buff. And there's really nothing that bonded me to either main character (in fact, I got most excited when seeing Firth, and Benedict Cumberbatch, who has a cameo later in the story). I have a feeling I'd have been more entertained by the story told to Director Sam Mendes by his grandfather, which inspired the film.
Of the Best Picture nominees, this doesn't come close to the top for me.
~~~
Two Lance Corporals (MacKay and Chapman) in the British army during World War I are sent by their general (Colin Firth, who disappointingly only appears only for a few minutes of the film) across the French countryside to stop an attack that will likely not end well for their people, if executed.
That's it. That's the whole film.
So, yes, despite the gorgeous cinematography and the haunting silences that befall our protagonists, the story drags on and on ... and on.
Only one "unexpected" thing happens along the way, a sure consequence of any war, but before and after that event, we see our share of corpses, explosions and worst of all, rats.
There's nothing enjoyable about this film for someone who's not a die-hard war buff. And there's really nothing that bonded me to either main character (in fact, I got most excited when seeing Firth, and Benedict Cumberbatch, who has a cameo later in the story). I have a feeling I'd have been more entertained by the story told to Director Sam Mendes by his grandfather, which inspired the film.
Of the Best Picture nominees, this doesn't come close to the top for me.
~~~
Tuesday, January 28, 2020
Jojo Rabbit
Today I saw Jojo Rabbit, starring Roman Griffin Davis and Thomasin McKenzie.
Jojo (Davis) is a 10-year-old boy in Nazi Germany. He is a youth training to fight for Hitler and his mother (Scarlett Johansson) isn't happy about it, but plays along for the sake of survival.
One day, Jojo discovers a young Jewish friend of his dead sister's hiding out in his house—apparently his mother has kept her there for quite a while, but she's never been discovered. He is torn whether or not to report her presence to the Gestapo.
But then he falls in love with her.
Sounds like a sweet story, right? Well, moments of it are, but that's all buried by the bold satire via Jojo's imaginary friend in the form of Adolf himself (Taika Waititi). And the precocious kid that's on-screen for virtually the entire film. Seriously, he's exhausting.
Perhaps it's healthy to explore WWII from a different angle and try to bring an absurd light to the infinite darkness of the Holocaust, but I just couldn't find myself getting on board.
The film was all over the place and because of that I couldn't completely 'feel' for any of the characters, though several were indisputably tragic.
I understand why Johansson got an Oscar nod for her performance in the film, but I'm baffled by it's Best Picture nomination.
~~~
Jojo (Davis) is a 10-year-old boy in Nazi Germany. He is a youth training to fight for Hitler and his mother (Scarlett Johansson) isn't happy about it, but plays along for the sake of survival.
One day, Jojo discovers a young Jewish friend of his dead sister's hiding out in his house—apparently his mother has kept her there for quite a while, but she's never been discovered. He is torn whether or not to report her presence to the Gestapo.
But then he falls in love with her.
Sounds like a sweet story, right? Well, moments of it are, but that's all buried by the bold satire via Jojo's imaginary friend in the form of Adolf himself (Taika Waititi). And the precocious kid that's on-screen for virtually the entire film. Seriously, he's exhausting.
Perhaps it's healthy to explore WWII from a different angle and try to bring an absurd light to the infinite darkness of the Holocaust, but I just couldn't find myself getting on board.
The film was all over the place and because of that I couldn't completely 'feel' for any of the characters, though several were indisputably tragic.
I understand why Johansson got an Oscar nod for her performance in the film, but I'm baffled by it's Best Picture nomination.
~~~
Saturday, January 18, 2020
Pain and Glory
Today I saw Pain and Glory, starring Antonio Banderas and Penelope Cruz.
Salvador (Banderas) is an aging film director who is suffering a rapid decline in health. Through a series of events, he looks back on his life—both with fondness and regret—over many of the choices he's made.
I seldom look at the time during Pedro Almodovar films, but I'm sad to say that I did during this one.
Though Banderas is wonderful in the role, it feels like we're watching a dreary loop of his past, which is both easy to anticipate and anticlimactic to experience.
It's easy to see that Almodovar wanted to cover big themes (as he usually tends to do), addressing desire, betrayal, death, etc. but he approaches it with a frustratingly slow pace, which does no favors for the audience's attention span.
The pockets of humor were well-executed, but too far and few between to keep the overall vibe light enough.
A disappointing result from such a talented team of filmmakers.
~~~
Salvador (Banderas) is an aging film director who is suffering a rapid decline in health. Through a series of events, he looks back on his life—both with fondness and regret—over many of the choices he's made.
I seldom look at the time during Pedro Almodovar films, but I'm sad to say that I did during this one.
Though Banderas is wonderful in the role, it feels like we're watching a dreary loop of his past, which is both easy to anticipate and anticlimactic to experience.
It's easy to see that Almodovar wanted to cover big themes (as he usually tends to do), addressing desire, betrayal, death, etc. but he approaches it with a frustratingly slow pace, which does no favors for the audience's attention span.
The pockets of humor were well-executed, but too far and few between to keep the overall vibe light enough.
A disappointing result from such a talented team of filmmakers.
~~~
Tuesday, January 14, 2020
Just Mercy
On Friday, I saw Just Mercy, starring Jamie Foxx and Michael B. Jordan.
Walter McMillian (Foxx) is a black man, living in Alabama, running his own business clearing out trees and brush around town. He has a family, a clean record and is well-liked in his community. One day in 1986, a white girl is murdered at a local dry cleaning store. There are no obvious suspects, but after six months, they bring McMillian in and accuse him of the crime, mostly because he once had an affair with a white woman. They have no evidence to support their theory, yet he is convicted and lands on death row.
His saving grace is Bryan Stevenson (Jordan), a recent east coast transplant who is dedicated to helping those wrongly convicted with their legal cases.
In the film, Foxx portrays McMillian as calm, rational, patient and (justifiably) angry. He doesn't have a lot of faith when Stevenson materializes because he's been let down so many times in the past, but you can feel him wanting to trust; wanting to have hope in someone. Alternately, Stevenson can't believe just how unfairly McMillian and several others in the system have been treated and vows to vindicate them. Jordan conveys a determined, if at times naive, man driven to succeed.
Though the reality of what I was watching was hard to take (because the story is true and the film is accurate in its retelling), I enjoyed it thoroughly. The performances drew me right in as if I was a member of that community, watching for the sidelines, praying for justice.
The wins have you wanting to cheer and the losses will make you weep, but you won't look at your watch once, and if you stay through the credits you get to see photos and updates about all of the featured characters.
~~~
Walter McMillian (Foxx) is a black man, living in Alabama, running his own business clearing out trees and brush around town. He has a family, a clean record and is well-liked in his community. One day in 1986, a white girl is murdered at a local dry cleaning store. There are no obvious suspects, but after six months, they bring McMillian in and accuse him of the crime, mostly because he once had an affair with a white woman. They have no evidence to support their theory, yet he is convicted and lands on death row.
His saving grace is Bryan Stevenson (Jordan), a recent east coast transplant who is dedicated to helping those wrongly convicted with their legal cases.
In the film, Foxx portrays McMillian as calm, rational, patient and (justifiably) angry. He doesn't have a lot of faith when Stevenson materializes because he's been let down so many times in the past, but you can feel him wanting to trust; wanting to have hope in someone. Alternately, Stevenson can't believe just how unfairly McMillian and several others in the system have been treated and vows to vindicate them. Jordan conveys a determined, if at times naive, man driven to succeed.
Though the reality of what I was watching was hard to take (because the story is true and the film is accurate in its retelling), I enjoyed it thoroughly. The performances drew me right in as if I was a member of that community, watching for the sidelines, praying for justice.
The wins have you wanting to cheer and the losses will make you weep, but you won't look at your watch once, and if you stay through the credits you get to see photos and updates about all of the featured characters.
~~~
Wednesday, January 01, 2020
Little Women
Yesterday I saw Little Women, starring Saiorse Ronan and Florence Pugh.
It's a beloved book, but one I'll confess I always found a tad boring. That said, this film isn't boring and provides a more faithful adaptation than most that have come before it.
Greta Gerwig's casting of Ronan as the star sister, Jo, couldn't have been more spot on—the Irish actress has just enough spunk to inspire and not enough glamour to be unbelievable. Pugh as her rival sister Amy is also strong, capturing just the right amount of allure and arrogance.
I also enjoyed the performance by Laura Dern, who plays the Little Women's mother. She's warm and lively and everything she'd need to be to navigate parenting four such unique girls.
As we watch the ladies fall in and out of love, follow their passions and explore each of their unique gifts, we're reminded of author Louisa May Alcott's era when it wasn't a given women would get to 'be' what they desired. Not that it's even necessarily true now, but less so then, which is what makes their paths as writers, painters, actresses and musicians all the more miraculous.
If you loved the book, chances are you'll love this retelling. If you didn't love the book, like me you may still enjoy their charming journey.
There are worse ways to spend two hours and fifteen minutes.
~~~
It's a beloved book, but one I'll confess I always found a tad boring. That said, this film isn't boring and provides a more faithful adaptation than most that have come before it.
Greta Gerwig's casting of Ronan as the star sister, Jo, couldn't have been more spot on—the Irish actress has just enough spunk to inspire and not enough glamour to be unbelievable. Pugh as her rival sister Amy is also strong, capturing just the right amount of allure and arrogance.
I also enjoyed the performance by Laura Dern, who plays the Little Women's mother. She's warm and lively and everything she'd need to be to navigate parenting four such unique girls.
As we watch the ladies fall in and out of love, follow their passions and explore each of their unique gifts, we're reminded of author Louisa May Alcott's era when it wasn't a given women would get to 'be' what they desired. Not that it's even necessarily true now, but less so then, which is what makes their paths as writers, painters, actresses and musicians all the more miraculous.
If you loved the book, chances are you'll love this retelling. If you didn't love the book, like me you may still enjoy their charming journey.
There are worse ways to spend two hours and fifteen minutes.
~~~
Sunday, December 29, 2019
Judy
Today I saw Judy, starring Renee Zellweger and Finn Witrock.
Sometimes even the greatest of artists aren't given a fighting chance in this world and that seemed to be the case for actress/singer Judy Garland (Zellweger). On stage since she was 2 1/2, Garland's mother began supplying her with pills to ensure she was fit to perform before the age of 10. Once she was under contract with MGM studios as a child actress, it was reported they continued to supply pills, and further her dependency. This film shows the journey and result of her difficult path through life as an addict.
Garland is struggling financially when we join her on screen here, and is forced to take her two youngest children to their father's house in the middle of the night so they'll have a place to sleep. From here she must face the fact that she has to take the only job currently being offered to her to stay afloat, and that job happens to be a long way from California—in London. Though she loves the English city, she has a tough time leaving her children behind (though the stability is good for them) and continues to self-medicate to get through it all.
Her performances are both triumphant and tragic, and her audiences respond in kind. She's often late for her shows, so terrified to go on stage that she has to physically be pushed onto it to perform and often ends up swearing or storming off before it's over. In one instance, the guests are so angry with her behavior that they begin throwing dinner rolls at her.
In the midst of all of the chaos, she finds a fifth husband in musician Mickey Deans (Witrock), who provides her momentary happiness from the state of her fractured life, but he isn't enough to save her. Just months after her London tour concludes, he finds her dead of an accidental overdose.
The film shows a good representation of how addicts function, even in spite of huge commitments like sold-out concerts. There is a desperation in Zellweger's performance that left me exhausted, but that's a good thing because that's what being around an addict is like.
Zellweger's mannerisms, her voice, her speaking cadence—all very close to the real Garland who we can watch at will in the library of famous performances she left behind.
I was sad to see that most of the sequences in the film are based on truth simply because they're so sad, but perhaps we all need to see how influences, whether they be family or industry, can literally kill someone.
~~~
Sometimes even the greatest of artists aren't given a fighting chance in this world and that seemed to be the case for actress/singer Judy Garland (Zellweger). On stage since she was 2 1/2, Garland's mother began supplying her with pills to ensure she was fit to perform before the age of 10. Once she was under contract with MGM studios as a child actress, it was reported they continued to supply pills, and further her dependency. This film shows the journey and result of her difficult path through life as an addict.
Garland is struggling financially when we join her on screen here, and is forced to take her two youngest children to their father's house in the middle of the night so they'll have a place to sleep. From here she must face the fact that she has to take the only job currently being offered to her to stay afloat, and that job happens to be a long way from California—in London. Though she loves the English city, she has a tough time leaving her children behind (though the stability is good for them) and continues to self-medicate to get through it all.
Her performances are both triumphant and tragic, and her audiences respond in kind. She's often late for her shows, so terrified to go on stage that she has to physically be pushed onto it to perform and often ends up swearing or storming off before it's over. In one instance, the guests are so angry with her behavior that they begin throwing dinner rolls at her.
In the midst of all of the chaos, she finds a fifth husband in musician Mickey Deans (Witrock), who provides her momentary happiness from the state of her fractured life, but he isn't enough to save her. Just months after her London tour concludes, he finds her dead of an accidental overdose.
The film shows a good representation of how addicts function, even in spite of huge commitments like sold-out concerts. There is a desperation in Zellweger's performance that left me exhausted, but that's a good thing because that's what being around an addict is like.
Zellweger's mannerisms, her voice, her speaking cadence—all very close to the real Garland who we can watch at will in the library of famous performances she left behind.
I was sad to see that most of the sequences in the film are based on truth simply because they're so sad, but perhaps we all need to see how influences, whether they be family or industry, can literally kill someone.
~~~
Tuesday, December 17, 2019
Ford v Ferrari
Today I saw Ford v Ferrari, starring Christian Bale and Matt Damon.
Caroll Shelby (Damon) is a former race car driver who had to stop racing due to a heart condition. He has been tasked with helping the Ford motor company develop a new race car to beat Ferrari, who insulted them during acquisition negotiations.
Shelby accepts the challenge and brings his friend, British war veteran Ken Miles (Bale), who is an engineer and driver, along with him. The entire film centers around the building of this super-fast vehicle and the race that will determine certain victory for one of the rivals.
Chtristian Bale is predictably superb as a hot-headed, but good-at-heart racer who has a deep passion for his craft. Miles is also a family man who dearly loves his supportive wife Mollie (Catriona Balfe) and adoring son Peter (Noah Jupe).
Damon is predictably solid as Shelby, who wants to do right by his bosses, but usually personally agrees with Miles (though his behavior is sometimes wild).
The story makes the representatives of Ford very unlikeable, especially that of VP Leo Beebe (Josh Lucas), who, though based on the real man, is portrayed as a composite of every slimy corporate white-man-of-privilege any of us have had the displeasure of working with or for, and that's a bit much to take.
With few exceptions the order of events is followed faithfully to the climactic race that determines the winner. And the buildup to that is fun to watch, but the best parts of the film are the moments that examine the genuine friendship between Shelby and Miles and the genuine love between Miles and his family.
I enjoyed the film—mostly because of Bale's performance—but thought it could have been about an hour shorter.
~~~
Caroll Shelby (Damon) is a former race car driver who had to stop racing due to a heart condition. He has been tasked with helping the Ford motor company develop a new race car to beat Ferrari, who insulted them during acquisition negotiations.
Shelby accepts the challenge and brings his friend, British war veteran Ken Miles (Bale), who is an engineer and driver, along with him. The entire film centers around the building of this super-fast vehicle and the race that will determine certain victory for one of the rivals.
Chtristian Bale is predictably superb as a hot-headed, but good-at-heart racer who has a deep passion for his craft. Miles is also a family man who dearly loves his supportive wife Mollie (Catriona Balfe) and adoring son Peter (Noah Jupe).
Damon is predictably solid as Shelby, who wants to do right by his bosses, but usually personally agrees with Miles (though his behavior is sometimes wild).
The story makes the representatives of Ford very unlikeable, especially that of VP Leo Beebe (Josh Lucas), who, though based on the real man, is portrayed as a composite of every slimy corporate white-man-of-privilege any of us have had the displeasure of working with or for, and that's a bit much to take.
With few exceptions the order of events is followed faithfully to the climactic race that determines the winner. And the buildup to that is fun to watch, but the best parts of the film are the moments that examine the genuine friendship between Shelby and Miles and the genuine love between Miles and his family.
I enjoyed the film—mostly because of Bale's performance—but thought it could have been about an hour shorter.
~~~
Saturday, December 14, 2019
Richard Jewell
Yesterday I saw Richard Jewell, starring Paul Walter Hauser and Sam Rockwell.
During the 1996 Olympics in Atlanta, a domestic terrorist detonated a bomb in Centennial Park that killed one person and injured over a hundred others. The reason there was not a larger loss of life was due solely to the actions of a security guard on duty that night, Richard Jewell (Hauser).
At first the media—and the world—celebrated Jewell as the hero he was. He was interviewed by dozens of prominent journalists to tell his story of that night and appeared as a sincere, thoughtful man.
Then, the FBI needed a fall guy, so they decided Jewell was the easiest target. A local newspaper reporter got wind of their suspicions and blew the story up, making Jewell's life a living hell and shifting resources away from finding the true bomber (Eric Rudolph, who was caught years later).
This film tells the story of what was happening behind the scenes to Jewell and his mother (who he lived with). The acting is superb; especially from Rockwell, who portrays the attorney who stood by Jewell and ultimately got him cleared.
Watching it will make you angry, sad and disappointed in the pack mentality that seems to run rampant in our country, but hopefully will restore the reputation of a hero some still mistakenly think was responsible for a horrible act.
Too bad Jewell himself is no longer alive to see it.
~~~
During the 1996 Olympics in Atlanta, a domestic terrorist detonated a bomb in Centennial Park that killed one person and injured over a hundred others. The reason there was not a larger loss of life was due solely to the actions of a security guard on duty that night, Richard Jewell (Hauser).
At first the media—and the world—celebrated Jewell as the hero he was. He was interviewed by dozens of prominent journalists to tell his story of that night and appeared as a sincere, thoughtful man.
Then, the FBI needed a fall guy, so they decided Jewell was the easiest target. A local newspaper reporter got wind of their suspicions and blew the story up, making Jewell's life a living hell and shifting resources away from finding the true bomber (Eric Rudolph, who was caught years later).
This film tells the story of what was happening behind the scenes to Jewell and his mother (who he lived with). The acting is superb; especially from Rockwell, who portrays the attorney who stood by Jewell and ultimately got him cleared.
Watching it will make you angry, sad and disappointed in the pack mentality that seems to run rampant in our country, but hopefully will restore the reputation of a hero some still mistakenly think was responsible for a horrible act.
Too bad Jewell himself is no longer alive to see it.
~~~
Wednesday, December 11, 2019
Marriage Story
On Saturday I saw Marriage Story, starring Adam Driver and Scarlett Johansson.
Charlie (Driver) and Nicole (Johansson) are a creative couple in the New York theater world, and they are divorcing. They share one son, whom they both adore, but struggle to work out the details of their new lives, though they mostly want the same things. It's a good exploration how even those with good intentions in situations like this can spiral out of control at the suggestions of others.
Like the characters toward each other, I have mixed emotions about this film.
On one hand, there are several incredible performances to note: Laura Dern, Merritt Weaver, Julie Hagerty and Ray Liotta all come to mind. They're supporting characters, but they're the folks in the film who feel real.
On the other hand, our two leads, Driver and Johansson are of course great actors and their performances here are no exception, but their delivery is nothing short of annoying (and I don't think that's their fault). I realize they're supposed to be stage actors in the film, but every one of their arguments or sad conversations is delivered as a monologue as if they were starring in a play. Instead of the raw, authentic way we see the others.
If only each scene didn't feel like a performance, I would have believed them.
~~~
Charlie (Driver) and Nicole (Johansson) are a creative couple in the New York theater world, and they are divorcing. They share one son, whom they both adore, but struggle to work out the details of their new lives, though they mostly want the same things. It's a good exploration how even those with good intentions in situations like this can spiral out of control at the suggestions of others.
Like the characters toward each other, I have mixed emotions about this film.
On one hand, there are several incredible performances to note: Laura Dern, Merritt Weaver, Julie Hagerty and Ray Liotta all come to mind. They're supporting characters, but they're the folks in the film who feel real.
On the other hand, our two leads, Driver and Johansson are of course great actors and their performances here are no exception, but their delivery is nothing short of annoying (and I don't think that's their fault). I realize they're supposed to be stage actors in the film, but every one of their arguments or sad conversations is delivered as a monologue as if they were starring in a play. Instead of the raw, authentic way we see the others.
If only each scene didn't feel like a performance, I would have believed them.
~~~
Monday, November 25, 2019
A Beautiful Day in the Neighborhood
Today I saw A Beautiful Day in the Neighborhood, starring Matthew Rhys and Tom Hanks.
The story is a simple one: cynical journalist gets fluffy assignment and the subject softens him. Sounds sappy, right? Well, it could have been, but it wasn't. This film, which tells of Lloyd Vogel's (Rhys) coverage of children's icon Fred Rogers (Hanks) several decades ago, gets the temperature right.
The star, Matthew Rhys of The Americans, was perfectly cast as the prickly writer who scoffs at his boss when she assigns him to interview Mr. Rogers. He's a Serious Journalist after all, and reporting on humanitarian "heroes" is well beneath his skill set.
But actually, it wasn't. The timing coincided with some personal conflicts the writer was going through and true to form, Mr. Rogers was exactly the salve his soul needed to resolve them. Of course, Hanks as Rogers is as good as it gets, him nailing the legend's slow cadence of speaking and mannerisms.
Really, the whole film, though quite sad in many sequences, was a pleasure to watch, both for its message and its reminder of a man who made genuine kindness his brand.
A welcome return to the neighborhood.
~~~
The story is a simple one: cynical journalist gets fluffy assignment and the subject softens him. Sounds sappy, right? Well, it could have been, but it wasn't. This film, which tells of Lloyd Vogel's (Rhys) coverage of children's icon Fred Rogers (Hanks) several decades ago, gets the temperature right.
The star, Matthew Rhys of The Americans, was perfectly cast as the prickly writer who scoffs at his boss when she assigns him to interview Mr. Rogers. He's a Serious Journalist after all, and reporting on humanitarian "heroes" is well beneath his skill set.
But actually, it wasn't. The timing coincided with some personal conflicts the writer was going through and true to form, Mr. Rogers was exactly the salve his soul needed to resolve them. Of course, Hanks as Rogers is as good as it gets, him nailing the legend's slow cadence of speaking and mannerisms.
Really, the whole film, though quite sad in many sequences, was a pleasure to watch, both for its message and its reminder of a man who made genuine kindness his brand.
A welcome return to the neighborhood.
~~~
Saturday, October 26, 2019
Harriet
On Wednesday, I screened Harriet, starring Cynthia Erivo and Leslie Odom, Jr.
Minty Ross (Erivo) was a headstrong slave in Maryland who yearned for her freedom. She decided that she would risk anything to achieve that liberty, so in 1849 she left her husband, parents and siblings behind to walk alone nearly 90 miles to reach the safety of Pennsylvania. Minty Ross would transform into Harriet Tubman.
In this film chronicling her journey and what happened beyond her arrival, we learn just how awful the family was who owned hers; how she couldn't rest until she went back for her family and so many others (she did, successfully) and how she believed the visions she saw were coming directly from God.
Cynthia Erivo is painfully convincing as this tortured soul who finds the strength not only to free slaves but to continue the fight for justice in many more ways, during the war and later during the women's suffrage movement. As an American child, I studied Mrs. Tubman, but never knew the raw details of what she actually faced.
The film is brutal during several scenes, but never gratuitous—if ever there was a time where we needed to see the effects of the violence of racism, that time is now.
Go see this film and rejoice on Oscar night when it deservingly wins some major awards.
~~~
Minty Ross (Erivo) was a headstrong slave in Maryland who yearned for her freedom. She decided that she would risk anything to achieve that liberty, so in 1849 she left her husband, parents and siblings behind to walk alone nearly 90 miles to reach the safety of Pennsylvania. Minty Ross would transform into Harriet Tubman.
In this film chronicling her journey and what happened beyond her arrival, we learn just how awful the family was who owned hers; how she couldn't rest until she went back for her family and so many others (she did, successfully) and how she believed the visions she saw were coming directly from God.
Cynthia Erivo is painfully convincing as this tortured soul who finds the strength not only to free slaves but to continue the fight for justice in many more ways, during the war and later during the women's suffrage movement. As an American child, I studied Mrs. Tubman, but never knew the raw details of what she actually faced.
The film is brutal during several scenes, but never gratuitous—if ever there was a time where we needed to see the effects of the violence of racism, that time is now.
Go see this film and rejoice on Oscar night when it deservingly wins some major awards.
~~~
Saturday, September 14, 2019
Downton Abbey
On Thursday night I screened Downton Abbey, starring Dame Maggie Smith and Allen Leech.
We rejoin our beloved upper-class British family in 1927 when they are set to host King George V and Queen Mary for a night at their estate. As preparations for the royal visit progress, the staff is excited for the opportunity to serve royalty and the Crawleys themselves are anxious, yet pleased.
True to fashion, things don't exactly go as planned. Lady Mary (Michelle Dockery) is concerned that Barrow (Robert-James Collier) isn't up to the task of leading the team and requests that Mr. Carson (Jim Carter) come out of retirement to assure things run smoothly. Flattered, he agrees to do so. Then, the boiler breaks, and a sexy plumber (James Cartwright)—sort of a cross between Ben Affleck and Justin Hartley—arrives to save the day, making Andy (Michael C. Fox) furious with jealously, as Daisy (Sophie McShera) flirts up a storm.
Lady Edith (Laura Carmichael) is awaiting the delivery of her ball gown and has a secret to share with her husband. Violet (Smith) is ready to cause trouble when a cousin comes along for the visit and doesn't plan to name Robert as the family heir. Items around Downton also mysteriously start to go missing.
As usual, there's a lot going on.
In addition, Tom (Leech) maintains a prominent place in the family, still raising his daughter at Downton and managing the property with Lady Mary. He is part of two main storylines here, but I can't mention them in any depth without spoilers, so I'll just say his presence is welcome and he's better than ever.
At heart, this felt like a very satisfying extended episode of the show we said goodbye to just a few years back. There's drama, romance, mystery and comedy. But is there anything particularly cinematic about it? Not really, but that's okay. Downton was grand as a television show with lavish costumes and sweeping landscapes, and it's even more of a pleasure to watch them on a big screen.
The show maintains its usual charm and wit, especially in Smith's delivery, then goes for an emotional sucker-punch (that I personally didn't see coming) at the end. If you're like me, you'll both laugh and cry as you acclimate to the comfort of spending time with characters who already feel like family.
~~~
We rejoin our beloved upper-class British family in 1927 when they are set to host King George V and Queen Mary for a night at their estate. As preparations for the royal visit progress, the staff is excited for the opportunity to serve royalty and the Crawleys themselves are anxious, yet pleased.
True to fashion, things don't exactly go as planned. Lady Mary (Michelle Dockery) is concerned that Barrow (Robert-James Collier) isn't up to the task of leading the team and requests that Mr. Carson (Jim Carter) come out of retirement to assure things run smoothly. Flattered, he agrees to do so. Then, the boiler breaks, and a sexy plumber (James Cartwright)—sort of a cross between Ben Affleck and Justin Hartley—arrives to save the day, making Andy (Michael C. Fox) furious with jealously, as Daisy (Sophie McShera) flirts up a storm.
Lady Edith (Laura Carmichael) is awaiting the delivery of her ball gown and has a secret to share with her husband. Violet (Smith) is ready to cause trouble when a cousin comes along for the visit and doesn't plan to name Robert as the family heir. Items around Downton also mysteriously start to go missing.
As usual, there's a lot going on.
In addition, Tom (Leech) maintains a prominent place in the family, still raising his daughter at Downton and managing the property with Lady Mary. He is part of two main storylines here, but I can't mention them in any depth without spoilers, so I'll just say his presence is welcome and he's better than ever.
At heart, this felt like a very satisfying extended episode of the show we said goodbye to just a few years back. There's drama, romance, mystery and comedy. But is there anything particularly cinematic about it? Not really, but that's okay. Downton was grand as a television show with lavish costumes and sweeping landscapes, and it's even more of a pleasure to watch them on a big screen.
The show maintains its usual charm and wit, especially in Smith's delivery, then goes for an emotional sucker-punch (that I personally didn't see coming) at the end. If you're like me, you'll both laugh and cry as you acclimate to the comfort of spending time with characters who already feel like family.
~~~
Wednesday, June 19, 2019
The Souvenir
Tonight I saw The Souvenir, starring Honor Swinton Byrne and Tom Burke.
Julie (Swinton Byrne) is a film student in love with journalist Anthony (Burke), who also happens to be a heroin addict. It's England in the 1980s and she'll sacrifice everything for her art and her affair.
Who hasn't fallen for someone they shouldn't? Who hasn't made bad choices in the name of love ... or lust? Who hasn't stayed in toxic situations because of the emotions attached to them? These themes, along with a passionate thirst for the craft of film, are the tapestry that weaves this narrative together. Sort of.
I say 'sort of' because although the story is easy to follow, it's anything but linear, and the pace is agonizingly slow. Still, you can't look away. Swinton Byrne, who shares the screen with her real-life Mother (portraying her mother here too), Tilda Swinton, is phenomenal as a naive, yet fiercely dedicated film student. Tom Burke, as her tortured and torturous, addicted beau is equally compelling.
The way the film is shot captures the feel of the era it represents and what's left unsaid becomes just as important as the dialog that's spoken.
I wouldn't say I enjoyed the film, because it's a truly tragic story (and drawn from the real life of its creator, Joanna Hogg), but I certainly appreciated it and all that it represents.
If you're wondering why it's achieved almost universal acclaim, it's because of the lingering feelings about the powerful characters you're left with long after you leave the theater.
~~~
Julie (Swinton Byrne) is a film student in love with journalist Anthony (Burke), who also happens to be a heroin addict. It's England in the 1980s and she'll sacrifice everything for her art and her affair.
Who hasn't fallen for someone they shouldn't? Who hasn't made bad choices in the name of love ... or lust? Who hasn't stayed in toxic situations because of the emotions attached to them? These themes, along with a passionate thirst for the craft of film, are the tapestry that weaves this narrative together. Sort of.
I say 'sort of' because although the story is easy to follow, it's anything but linear, and the pace is agonizingly slow. Still, you can't look away. Swinton Byrne, who shares the screen with her real-life Mother (portraying her mother here too), Tilda Swinton, is phenomenal as a naive, yet fiercely dedicated film student. Tom Burke, as her tortured and torturous, addicted beau is equally compelling.
The way the film is shot captures the feel of the era it represents and what's left unsaid becomes just as important as the dialog that's spoken.
I wouldn't say I enjoyed the film, because it's a truly tragic story (and drawn from the real life of its creator, Joanna Hogg), but I certainly appreciated it and all that it represents.
If you're wondering why it's achieved almost universal acclaim, it's because of the lingering feelings about the powerful characters you're left with long after you leave the theater.
~~~
Saturday, April 06, 2019
Gloria Bell
This morning I saw Gloria Bell, starring Julianne Moore and John Turturro.
Gloria (Moore) is a fifty-something divorcée working in a standard job, living her best life in the after-hours, dancing the night away at Los Angeles clubs. It's at one of these clubs that she meets Arnold (Turturro), a more recently divorced father of two with a demanding ex-wife and two grown children who are just as needy.
At first, they find bliss in each other's arms, then Gloria grows tired of the hold Arnold's family has over him and from there they begin a frustrating pattern of wanting to be together, but often abandoning plans (sometimes in the middle of said plans). All the while Gloria is navigating a disturbingly loud neighbor, a hairless cat that keeps sneaking into her apartment and her own grown children, who have issues too.
The film seemed to repeatedly remind us that in life, "It's always something."
Moore is fantastic as this independent woman, prone to sing-a-longs and demanding more from the world. Her face never betrays her intentions and her intentions are often bold. That's not to say she doesn't have moments of weakness—one of the best scenes in the film happens when she's most vulnerable and her mother, played by the always-amazing Holland Taylor, comes to pick up the pieces. In those moments of quiet, we really saw the essence of the woman.
That said, the film sometimes meandered too much for my attention span and scenes lingered longer than they needed to for sufficient effect.
Still, you could do worse than spending a few hours with these characters.
~~~
Gloria (Moore) is a fifty-something divorcée working in a standard job, living her best life in the after-hours, dancing the night away at Los Angeles clubs. It's at one of these clubs that she meets Arnold (Turturro), a more recently divorced father of two with a demanding ex-wife and two grown children who are just as needy.
At first, they find bliss in each other's arms, then Gloria grows tired of the hold Arnold's family has over him and from there they begin a frustrating pattern of wanting to be together, but often abandoning plans (sometimes in the middle of said plans). All the while Gloria is navigating a disturbingly loud neighbor, a hairless cat that keeps sneaking into her apartment and her own grown children, who have issues too.
The film seemed to repeatedly remind us that in life, "It's always something."
Moore is fantastic as this independent woman, prone to sing-a-longs and demanding more from the world. Her face never betrays her intentions and her intentions are often bold. That's not to say she doesn't have moments of weakness—one of the best scenes in the film happens when she's most vulnerable and her mother, played by the always-amazing Holland Taylor, comes to pick up the pieces. In those moments of quiet, we really saw the essence of the woman.
That said, the film sometimes meandered too much for my attention span and scenes lingered longer than they needed to for sufficient effect.
Still, you could do worse than spending a few hours with these characters.
~~~
Tuesday, January 29, 2019
At Eternity's Gate
Tonight I saw At Eternity's Gate, starring Willem Dafoe and Rupert Friend.
The famed painter Vincent Van Gogh (Dafoe) was not accepted as the artistic genius he was during his time on earth. The connection he felt to nature and the closeness he felt to his work weren't fully appreciated while he was alive, but this film aims to validate those aspects of his career.
Filmed on location in Arles, France, where Van Gogh spent his final weeks, Director/Co-Screenwriter Julian Schnabel puts the viewer in a stream-of-consciousness time machine that offers a glimpse of how the artist absorbed and visually shared his surroundings. A friend described the movie as "hypnotic" and that to me was the perfect interpretation of the vibe.
Dafoe, moving easily between English and French throughout the narrative, was captivating as the troubled painter. Aside from physically resembling the real artist (which undoubtedly helps), his manner, the confusion behind his eyes, his passion—it all made us viewers sure we were stealing an intimate look at one of the most fascinating characters in all of art history.
Though the pace is slow and the story not entirely linear (except that it's chronological), it keeps your attention, as you want to know why Van Gogh felt the things he felt and acted the way he did.
There's tragedy in the suffering his mental illness causes; there's sadness in the lack of recognition he received while he was in his prime, but most off all there's light in the beautiful landscapes and people he brought to life through his timeless paintings.
That's what's illuminated so magically in this film.
~~~
The famed painter Vincent Van Gogh (Dafoe) was not accepted as the artistic genius he was during his time on earth. The connection he felt to nature and the closeness he felt to his work weren't fully appreciated while he was alive, but this film aims to validate those aspects of his career.
Filmed on location in Arles, France, where Van Gogh spent his final weeks, Director/Co-Screenwriter Julian Schnabel puts the viewer in a stream-of-consciousness time machine that offers a glimpse of how the artist absorbed and visually shared his surroundings. A friend described the movie as "hypnotic" and that to me was the perfect interpretation of the vibe.
Dafoe, moving easily between English and French throughout the narrative, was captivating as the troubled painter. Aside from physically resembling the real artist (which undoubtedly helps), his manner, the confusion behind his eyes, his passion—it all made us viewers sure we were stealing an intimate look at one of the most fascinating characters in all of art history.
Though the pace is slow and the story not entirely linear (except that it's chronological), it keeps your attention, as you want to know why Van Gogh felt the things he felt and acted the way he did.
There's tragedy in the suffering his mental illness causes; there's sadness in the lack of recognition he received while he was in his prime, but most off all there's light in the beautiful landscapes and people he brought to life through his timeless paintings.
That's what's illuminated so magically in this film.
~~~
Saturday, January 26, 2019
Green Book
Today I saw Green Book, starring Viggo Mortensen and Mahershala Ali.
Tony (Mortensen) needs a temporary job while the club he works for undergoes renovations; Dr. Shirley (Ali) is a pianist who needs a driver who can double as a bodyguard for his upcoming tour. Tony is Italian; Dr. Shirley is black. It's the 1960s and America isn't the safest place for black citizens.
As they embark on their journey, the differences between the two men become clear: Dr. Shirley is an educated man who takes pride in behaving with dignity; Tony is a tell-it-like-it-is guy with an uncommonly large appetite and low threshold for BS. At first, this personality contrast divides them, but as their trip carries on they begin to mutually appreciate each other's differences.
So why is the film called Green Book?
That's the travel guide black families used in that era to determine safe places to sleep and eat across America. It's the book these two utilized when they took their actual trip (the film of course is based on a true story). It's absurd that the guide ever existed—that it ever had to—but it's also a symbolic reminder of how far we've come as a nation, though our nightly news would indicate otherwise.
Though the film was undeniably formulaic and predictable (even if you hadn't read up on the real story), it was enjoyable from start to finish. The two lead actors disappeared into their roles and delivered award-winning performances.
It's a long movie that doesn't feel long, which drives home a lesson that a nation should have long ago learned: we're all more alike than different.
~~~
Tony (Mortensen) needs a temporary job while the club he works for undergoes renovations; Dr. Shirley (Ali) is a pianist who needs a driver who can double as a bodyguard for his upcoming tour. Tony is Italian; Dr. Shirley is black. It's the 1960s and America isn't the safest place for black citizens.
As they embark on their journey, the differences between the two men become clear: Dr. Shirley is an educated man who takes pride in behaving with dignity; Tony is a tell-it-like-it-is guy with an uncommonly large appetite and low threshold for BS. At first, this personality contrast divides them, but as their trip carries on they begin to mutually appreciate each other's differences.
So why is the film called Green Book?
That's the travel guide black families used in that era to determine safe places to sleep and eat across America. It's the book these two utilized when they took their actual trip (the film of course is based on a true story). It's absurd that the guide ever existed—that it ever had to—but it's also a symbolic reminder of how far we've come as a nation, though our nightly news would indicate otherwise.
Though the film was undeniably formulaic and predictable (even if you hadn't read up on the real story), it was enjoyable from start to finish. The two lead actors disappeared into their roles and delivered award-winning performances.
It's a long movie that doesn't feel long, which drives home a lesson that a nation should have long ago learned: we're all more alike than different.
~~~
Sunday, January 06, 2019
If Beale Street Could Talk
This morning I saw If Beale Street Could Talk, starring Kiki Layne and Regina King.
Tish (Layne) is in love with Fonny (Stephan James), a childhood friend she's grown up with in their predominantly black New York City neighborhood. They have a bright future ahead of them with Tish employed by a perfume counter at a high-end department store and Fonny getting his own career off the ground as they prepare to set down roots with a space of their own.
When they make love for the first time, Tish becomes pregnant with their child, which is unexpected but welcomed by the couple. Fonny's mother and sisters aren't so accepting (and the announcement to them about the pregnancy is perhaps the best scene in the film).
Unfortunately, Fonny has been arrested for a crime he did not commit and is placed in prison while Tish's family desperately tries to find and convince the accuser to recant her lineup identification. All the while, Tish faithfully visits and updates him on her pregnancy.
Some viewers may be frustrated by the slow pace of the film, but I actually appreciated it. We really got to know these characters and believe in their love as they battle the injustice of their situation.
Regina King who plays Tish's mother, Sharon, is especially phenomenal, showing every ounce of pain and concern as she comforts and helps her daughter. King deservedly won the Golden Globe for this performance and I'm hoping the takes the Oscar for it as well. She's that good.
Also important is the timing of this story. As our country seems to be enduring an unwelcome revival of hate crimes and racism, these are the narratives we need too see via art to help turn things around. Granted, the folks who need to see films like this probably won't. But for the few that may, it will have been worth it.
Another excellent chapter from Barry Jenkins.
~~~
Tish (Layne) is in love with Fonny (Stephan James), a childhood friend she's grown up with in their predominantly black New York City neighborhood. They have a bright future ahead of them with Tish employed by a perfume counter at a high-end department store and Fonny getting his own career off the ground as they prepare to set down roots with a space of their own.
When they make love for the first time, Tish becomes pregnant with their child, which is unexpected but welcomed by the couple. Fonny's mother and sisters aren't so accepting (and the announcement to them about the pregnancy is perhaps the best scene in the film).
Unfortunately, Fonny has been arrested for a crime he did not commit and is placed in prison while Tish's family desperately tries to find and convince the accuser to recant her lineup identification. All the while, Tish faithfully visits and updates him on her pregnancy.
Some viewers may be frustrated by the slow pace of the film, but I actually appreciated it. We really got to know these characters and believe in their love as they battle the injustice of their situation.
Regina King who plays Tish's mother, Sharon, is especially phenomenal, showing every ounce of pain and concern as she comforts and helps her daughter. King deservedly won the Golden Globe for this performance and I'm hoping the takes the Oscar for it as well. She's that good.
Also important is the timing of this story. As our country seems to be enduring an unwelcome revival of hate crimes and racism, these are the narratives we need too see via art to help turn things around. Granted, the folks who need to see films like this probably won't. But for the few that may, it will have been worth it.
Another excellent chapter from Barry Jenkins.
~~~
Thursday, November 29, 2018
Bohemian Rhapsody
Today I saw Bohemian Rhapsody, starring Rami Malek and Lucy Boynton.
The life of Freddie Mercury (Malek) is explored with great flair in this loose retelling, which chronicles his rise to fame with Queen through to their landmark performance at Live Aid.
First of all, it can't be understated how good Malek is at capturing Mercury's movements and mannerisms. If you squint you may just not be able to tell the difference. He was a joy to watch because you could tell he was having a ball portraying this legend.
Second, Mary (Boynton), who many claim was the true love of Mercury's life, is given a respectable place in his history (though before this film casual fans may never have heard of her).
Third, the finale, which replicates the famous Live Aid performance is stunning. Note-for-note, prance-for-prance, it's all there in its incredible glory. I went right home afterward and watched the real performance and marveled about how close the film truly got to it.
Now, for the issues: the creative team took liberties with some key facts, which is forgivable if it makes the story better, but I'd argue that Mercury's story was plenty interesting as it really occurred.
Also, the film is called "Bohemian Rhapsody," and we get teased by seeing how the song came to fruition, but we never get a full performance of it, which I thought was a missed opportunity.
And while we're on the topic of songs, I sort of felt like this was a wanna-be musical that would only tease us with the beginnings of the hits (i.e. "We Will Rock You") and then move on to the next scene before our thirst for the music was quenched.
It was also too long. This is a trend in movies these days, to exceed the standard 2-hour running time, but really, less is more. It could've been shorter or they could have used some of the time they took to remind us of his bisexuality and just played the title song.
~~~
The life of Freddie Mercury (Malek) is explored with great flair in this loose retelling, which chronicles his rise to fame with Queen through to their landmark performance at Live Aid.
First of all, it can't be understated how good Malek is at capturing Mercury's movements and mannerisms. If you squint you may just not be able to tell the difference. He was a joy to watch because you could tell he was having a ball portraying this legend.
Second, Mary (Boynton), who many claim was the true love of Mercury's life, is given a respectable place in his history (though before this film casual fans may never have heard of her).
Third, the finale, which replicates the famous Live Aid performance is stunning. Note-for-note, prance-for-prance, it's all there in its incredible glory. I went right home afterward and watched the real performance and marveled about how close the film truly got to it.
Now, for the issues: the creative team took liberties with some key facts, which is forgivable if it makes the story better, but I'd argue that Mercury's story was plenty interesting as it really occurred.
Also, the film is called "Bohemian Rhapsody," and we get teased by seeing how the song came to fruition, but we never get a full performance of it, which I thought was a missed opportunity.
And while we're on the topic of songs, I sort of felt like this was a wanna-be musical that would only tease us with the beginnings of the hits (i.e. "We Will Rock You") and then move on to the next scene before our thirst for the music was quenched.
It was also too long. This is a trend in movies these days, to exceed the standard 2-hour running time, but really, less is more. It could've been shorter or they could have used some of the time they took to remind us of his bisexuality and just played the title song.
~~~
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)