Creed II

November 25, 2018 at 6:51 pm | Posted in 2018 | Leave a comment
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

◊ ◊ ◊ ½

I feel as though I should almost just refer you to my review of the first “Creed” movie. My review of this one feels essentially the same. Michael B. Jordan has a charisma that’s undeniable, and his combination of ferocity and vulnerability really work with this character. He also has great chemistry with Sylvester Stallone; their interactions, both playful and serious, have a comfortable, natural cadence to them. It is no surprise that Stallone lives this character. He has been living with him for 40 years. But, that Jordan can slip so easily into his character is impressive. This story is a call back to “Rocky IV” where he has to fight the Russian solider, Ivan Drago, in a battle of the Cold War superpowers. Well, we may no longer be in a cold war, but tensions between the US and Russia are higher than for most of the past three decades. Drago has returned with his son, Viktor. Drago killed Adonis Creed’s father and he’s hoping for more of the same. Dolph Lundgren returns to play Drago in a remarkably understated performance; he is all shame and simmering rage. Viktor is played by the gigantic Romanian boxer, Florian “Big Nasty” Munteanu. He says very little, probably because he doesn’t sound Russian, but he does not need to. He is so ridiculously big that his just being on screen is intimidating. Woven throughout the larger story are subplots about Adonis’s relationship to his wife and his mother, and Rocky’s relationship with his son. These stories can often feel distracting or given short shrift, but not here. They are paced well, add depth to both characters and allow the audience to feel what is at stake. Stallone’s own son, Sage, who played his son in “Rocky V,” died in 2012. You can feel Stallone bring this pain to Rocky’s discussions about his son with Adonis. Stallone was robbed of an Oscar in 2016 for this role. It will be interesting to see if he get’s nominated this year. With the studios placing so many of their lead actors in the Supporting Actor category this year, so as to avoid competition, Stallone will have an uphill battle to win this time around. But, let’s not forget, this is a fight movie first. It rouses the audience with swelling music, has the appropriately inspiring training montages, and a couple of truly thrilling fight scenes. I must say that, for at least a couple of slow-motion hits, I thought, “these men must be really getting hit. I don’t know how you could fake that.” So, either Jordan and Munteanu really took a beating for the job, or there was some amazing CGI at work. I warn you, those fight scenes are intense, they look grimly real, and the final one goes on a while. This is not a film for those who are squeamish of violence. This film is, in the end, a genre film (sports film, boxing film) and a very specific type of genre film (“Rocky” movie). As such, it fulfills its duties admirably. You will not be surprised by a single thing on screen, but you will likely have a good time, none-the-less.

Green Book

November 25, 2018 at 9:41 am | Posted in 2018 | 1 Comment
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , ,

◊ ◊ ◊ ◊

I can just hear the Hollywood pitch now, “ya gotta make this movie! It’s ‘Driving Miss Daisy,’ only with the roles reversed! People can feel good about how far we’ve come!” Well, sort of. This is a lovely, charming movie, as long as you know what it is and what it isn’t, and you can take it as it is. Based very loosely (as I understand it) on the real friendship between Dr. Don Shirley (a cultured, well-educated, wealthy, gay, Black man, played by Mahershala Ali) and Anthony Vallelonga (aka Tony Lip, a brash, vulgar, working-class, straight, Italian-American, played by Viggo Mortensen). Dr Shirley hired Vallelonga in the Fall/Winter of 1962 to drive him/protect him on his musical tour of the Deep South. Heart-warming hilarity ensues. This is a feel good movie painted in broad strokes. Most of the characters are caricatures, none more so than Tony Lip. Mortensen hits on every possible stereotype of a 60s Italian-American with such glee that it is near impossible not to laugh along. He chews through every line he is given in much the same way Tony chews threw the endless supplies of food he devours– with great gusto and little finesse. Mortensen’s commitment to the eating needed for this role seems as strenuous as any method acting required of Bale or Day-Lewis. But, it’s worth remembering that Mortensen is a world class actor, not some hack. And he may well get an Oscar nod for this role, not because of the bigness of this performance, but because of the small gestures he managed to slip into such a big character. As loud and over-the-top as Tony was, you could always see him thinking. Mortensen beautifully captured the kind, thoughtful human being under all the bravado. It would have been easy to just play Tony as one note, but he was as complex as any of Dr. Shirley’s piano performances. Speaking of which, Ali is another award-winning actor with tremendous talent. His skill is easier to see in this performance of the prim, overly-controlled, and deeply lonely Dr. Shirley. If you have seen him in “Moonlight,” “House of Cards,” or “Luke Cage,” then you know his range. In many ways, this film was essentially an “Odd Couple” buddy comedy, and it is so easy for the “uptight” one to play the straight man for the “loose cannon” (think “Lethal Weapon,” “48 Hours,” or “The Heat”). It’s a credit to Ali’s skills that he can make his character both rigid and genuinely funny (and laughing-with-him funny, not just laughing-at-him funny). In fact, I suspect most viewers will find themselves laughing throughout the entire film. Even the ugliness of racism in the South is handled with so much concern for the audience, lest anyone be uncomfortable for too long, that it always resolves well, fairly quickly, and often with another laugh. This film is sweet going down, from start to finish. In that way, it is very like “Driving Miss Daisy,” in that it wants to talk about racial issues but only in a way designed not to offend the majority of its primarily White audience. Some might legitimately take issue with that. You could argue that we are long past platitudes and gentle pats on the back. We are long past whitewashing our past and feeling smug about how far we have come. We need films that are angry, confrontational, unflinching, and do not care how uncomfortable they make a White audience. Now, perhaps more than in many decades, we need to name racism for exactly what it is, pull no punches, and leave no one (especially the audience) unscathed. I would agree. We do need those films and I am delighted that we are starting to see more of them (“Get Out,” “Sorry to Bother You,” “Blackkklansman,” “Blindspotting,” “The Hate U Give,” just to name a few). But, I don’t think the need for those films, as real as that is, means that films like this one don’t also have value. It is not such a bad thing that we can laugh at/laugh with two very different human beings learning how to respect and care for each other. We could use some more of that in today’s world also.

Chef Flynn

November 24, 2018 at 10:04 am | Posted in 2018 | Leave a comment
Tags: , , , , , ,

◊ ◊ ½

As a character study of a chef or an examination of his food, this is no “Jiro Dreams of Sushi,” but perhaps that’s an unfair comparison. That film was a masterpiece of pacing and mood, but it was made by a professional. “Chef Flynn” is essentially his mother’s home movies stitched together. It is frenetic, at times discordant, and also energetic, passionate, and very much alive. Flynn McGarry started cooking because his mother could not. He was bored of the handful of recipes she knew and was clearly born with an expansive palette, so he set out to create his own. By 10, he had his own pop-up supper club. By 15, he was on the cover of the New York Times magazine. After that, his world went nuts and his mother was there to record it all. There are legitimate reasons to be suspicious; this is a very singular view by an adoring parent. You will find no real criticism of his skills as a chef, or of the parenting choices his mother has made. That seems to bother some people, though I can’t figure out why. It helps that, since the film was completed, Flynn moved to NYC at 16, ran his own successful pop-up there, called “Eureka NYC” and, now at 19, owns his own successful New York restaurant, “Gem.” And, it’s worth noting, nobody accused “Jiro” of being one-sided, though it was far more one-sided then this film. Flynn’s mother, Meg, has an obsessive need to keep the cameras rolling, even when nobody else wants them to be, even when it means seeing her insecurities, tendency to complain, and self-involvement. There is something deeply intimate about the journey she takes us on. Flynn is a boy: sullen, snarky, whining, petulant, and everything else you would except a kid to be. Those moments are what allow his excitement, his sweetness, and his creativity to land. The overall production is unpolished for sure and you can see Meg sometimes trying too hard to get the perfect shot. But, in many ways, the messiness is part of the fun because it allows their humanity to shine through. I don’t know that anyone needs to run to theaters to see this film, but I wouldn’t miss it when it shows up on Netflix in the near future. Whatever else anyone might think, I am encouraged by a mother who is brave enough to let her son find his own path, no matter how unlike the mainstream it is. And, perhaps as the best testament to Flynn’s skills, I left the theater hungry.

The Ballad of Buster Scruggs

November 20, 2018 at 4:32 pm | Posted in 2018 | 2 Comments
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

◊ ◊ ◊ ◊ ½

In their on-going attempt to expand their media empire, Netflix has scored it’s best coup to date in getting The Coen Brothers’ newest movie released on their site the same day as in theaters. And what a delightful film, too. This anthology is one of their best films in years, full of Coen wit (sometimes dry, sometimes absurd), and with a dark vein running through it. The story is made up of 6 “chapters” that are not quite evenly divided in it’s 132 minute run time. All the stories are humorous, but the tone of the film definitely shifts throughout. The first story, “The Ballad of Buster Scruggs,” is delightfully silly. If that’s not your thing, don’t worry; none will be as light-hearted as that one. From there, it inches darker until the somber, meditative final scene, “The Mortal Remains,” leaves the audience with a feeling that there was a lot more going on in this film than meets the eye. In fact, that final story, with it’s dark blue hues and cut-out buildings felt more like an allegory; it was saying something about certainty and uncertainty that seemed to be the through line for all of these stories. The film begins with Buster, who speaks directly to the audience. It ends with a stagecoach ride, in which the riders all seem to be speaking bigger truths. In between all the entertainment, these characters are telling us something about life, cruelty, and justice. And, along the way from silly to somber, the Coens take us through scenes that are funny, heartbreaking, and deeply deeply creepy (I think “Meal Ticket” may be the darkest story they have ever made). As is typically true of them, every scene is beautifully constructed and full of rich details. They create mood so beautifully. From start to finish, this was a lush, gorgeous, disturbing work. And it was one of the best films I have seen this year.

Widows

November 20, 2018 at 3:57 pm | Posted in 2018 | Leave a comment
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

◊ ◊ ◊

With a Rotten Tomatoes score of 91%, this film has been getting a lot of buzz. It’s important to remember that Rotten Tomatoes is a straight up-and-down vote; we know that almost every single critic liked this film but not how much they liked it. That makes sense to me. I do absolutely like this film. If you came to the movies to watch a heist/thriller, I don’t know how you could not like it. This film checks all the boxes and does so very well. Written both by director Steve McQueen (“12 Years a Slave,” “Shame”) and Gillian Flynn (author of “Gone Girl”), the script is taut and well executed. The big twist was not much of a surprise, but that is more a consequence of hiring big-name actors than of any flaw in the story. McQueen makes some interesting directorial choices, some of which bring a sly, unexpected humor to the film. My favorite one occurs early on, when Colin Farrell’s character jumps into a limo with his assistant. We can hear him yelling and complaining, but the camera sits on the hood at a weird angle; it captures a portion the windscreen and the street as they move through it. Farrell’s character is on a racist rant that is suddenly given more power when the camera slowly pans to sit dead center on the hood and we discover that the driver is Black. It’s a clever, powerful moment that demonstrates McQueen’s skill at the understated. It is that skill that elevates an otherwise pretty standard genre flick. Viola Davis, Michelle Rodriguez, Elizabeth Debicki, and Cynthia Erivo play the titular widows who are trying to pull off their husbands’ last job to get out from under the debt the dead men left them. They are being harassed by the scene-stealing Daniel Kaluuya, who is perfectly menacing every time he is on screen. An all-star cast lends a hand as dead husbands, rich aldermen, and various other villains. This is a world in which nobody is really good, they are only varying gradations of criminal: lifelong criminal, inter-generational criminal, criminal of necessity, criminal with a soul, criminal without… the variations are many. Still, the women are the clear protagonists and it is hard not to root for them. Davis has made a career of playing “I’m stronger and craftier than you think I am,” and she’s in her element here. The film is fun and it moves along at a good pace. The audience will hardly have a chance to get bored. They will also never be particularly inspired. As I said, this is a good, fun genre film. But, you won’t be hearing about it at the Oscars. So, go and enjoy it for what it is; just don’t expect anything more than that.

Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald

November 17, 2018 at 2:47 pm | Posted in 2018 | Leave a comment
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

◊ ◊

Well, I think there is one thing we can all agree on: “Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald” has to be one of the most unwieldy (and worst) movie titles in recent history. The second film in the second Rowling film series, “Grindelwald” takes place in New York, London and Paris in 1925. It follows Newt Scamander (Eddie Redmayne) as he is recruited against his will into the escalating battle with Grindelwald (Johnny Depp in his best role in years). After the gentle slapstick nature and light-heartedness of the first “Fantastic Beasts” movie, it is clear Rowling, et al. are returning to the same dark, serial format that has served them so well. This is not a bad thing. I was most engaged with the “Harry Potter” series when it went dark, and the goofiness was the least engaging thing about the last “Fantastic Beasts.” This will, no doubt, be one of several films in the “Grindelwald” series. Grindelwald is a promising villain, but the writing needs to be a lot better if I am going to be drawn in. While riddled (may I say Tom Riddled, or is that going too far?) with lots of beautiful special effects and some fun creatures, this film has little else to offer the viewer. The plot meanders pointlessly for the films 2:15 run time, only getting any real momentum in the last couple of scenes. My impression was that the story was an excuse to stitch together all the cool effects they wanted to show the audience on their way to the 30-minutes of story they had actually written. The characters felt equally ill-conceived. There is real complexity in Grindelwald’s and Dumbledore’s backstory, but it is only hinted at in the vaguest way. I hope that’s because they are saving that story for a future movie and not because they are afraid to make Dumbledore’s sexuality too overt. As much as I love Redmayne, I find Newt to be too awkward and painfully shy to draw an audience in. The sexual/romantic tension between Newt and Tina Goldstein (Katherine Waterston), or Leta Lastrange (Zoë Kravitz), or his animal keeper all fell flat. He was so repressed that nothing really showed through; no relationships had any impact. The only relationship that seemed to contain any emotional punch was the one between Queenie and Jacob (Alison Sudol, Dan Fogler), particularly at the end of the film. I will be curious to see how that develops. Ultimately, this felt like an empty affair: a lot of flashy effects and a lot of setting the stage for something Rowling presumably has planned. Well, let’s hope that comes quickly. I’m not sure I can sit through too many more films like this one, on the way to something better.

Boy Erased

November 11, 2018 at 5:11 pm | Posted in 2018 | 1 Comment
Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,

◊ ◊ ◊ ◊

First, a confession. I grew up a gay boy who spent many years in a conservative religion. I confessed my sins, got “counseling,” and, to a much lesser degree than in this film, I participated in change therapy. All of which is to say that I am hardly an unbiased lens. And I did find myself wondering several times, who is the film for? And how do you access this film if not through the medium of personal experience? I was moved several times by the way the story struck deep cords in me; small details rung very true. Yet, without that emotional connection to carry you through the story, I am just not sure how one experiences this movie. As a story arc, it does not have much energy. The film is remarkably still, moving along slowly, almost placidly, toward a climax that we could all see coming and that lacked the drama and emotional release that I think the audience was expecting. In it’s place, what we got was something that felt a lot more like the truth. Lucas Hedges has had an impressive couple of years. Since 2016’s “Manchester by the Sea,” he has been in “Lady Bird” and “Three Billboards outside Ebbing, Missouri.” In fact, he’s in three films that will be out and the same time (and is the lead in two of them): this one, “Mid90s,” and “Ben is Back” (which will be released in 3 weeks). He might be trying to give Timothée Chalamet a run for his money. While not as expressive an actor as Chalamet, Hedges does a solid job in the role. He is most effective when his “Jared” is struggling with shame. His anger is somewhat less convincing to me. Joel Edgerton (“Animal Kingdom,” “Warrior,” “Loving,” “It Comes at Night“) is one of the most underappreciated actors in Hollywood today. Watch the four films I just listed to see how versatile he is. He directed this film and wrote the screen play, based on the biography by Garrard Conley. He also plays “Victor,” the director of the conversion therapy program Jared is placed into. Edgerton is fantastic as Victor and brings much of the energy that propels the mid-section of the film. That said, I think the best performances belong to Jared’s parents, played by Nicole Kidman and Russell Crowe. They both played those characters with such heart. Crowe, in particular, should get a nomination for Best Supporting Actor. His was a difficult character that could have easily become a stereotype. Instead, Crowe plays him with such deep compassion, that you can’t help but relate to this man. Especially in his final scene, Crowe gave some of the best acting of his career. His was the performance that will likely stay with me the longest. This was a solid, well-crafted film and one that took me on a personal journey. I hope that others, who have no connection to this material, can take that same journey and can be as moved by the final scene as I was.

The Kindergarten Teacher

November 4, 2018 at 5:31 pm | Posted in 2018 | 1 Comment
Tags: , , , , , ,

◊ ◊ ◊ ◊ ½

I still haven’t figured out a consistent rule for when I include a Netflix release on this blog. In theory, it would be any movie that is eligible for the Oscars, but I am not sure how to figure out which ones are. So, I debated on this one. In the end, I included it because it’s a fantastic film, and I want people to know about it. Maggie Gyllenhaal is absolutely amazing as Lisa, a loving kindergarten teacher in need of some boundaries. She is not particularly happy at home. She feels unappreciated by her kids, who are not the sensitive intellectuals she wanted them to be, and her marriage has lost all spark. She is ghost walking through her life, until one morning when 5-year-old Jimmy suddenly waxes poetic. Lisa cannot believe her ears and is even more shocked to discover that he spouts poetry on a regular basis. And, from there, everything slowly unravels, as she becomes more obsessed with protecting/exploiting his gifts. Jimmy is played with remarkable sensitivity by Parker Sevak; one could almost believe this shy, lonely boy was actually a poetic savant. Nobody understands the importance of his gift, except for Lisa, who clearly has to nurture it. On occasion, I talk with people who can’t stand horror movies. They make them so uncomfortable they feel like they have to run out of the room. I have never felt that way about horror, but I felt that way here. It was painful to sit through parts of this movie because they made me so uncomfortable. I actually left the room for a while and listened while doing dishes. Gyllenhaal’s Lisa was so needy and making such bad decisions that it made me squirm to watch her. Fortunately, I returned for the final scenes. The movie’s ending is perfect. Really. It was a tour de force of writing, acting and directing. That final scene will stay with me and will likely be on the short list of favorite film endings. It leaves us with no easy answer; Lisa was completely right, and she was completely wrong. When the credits roll, there is so much to discuss, debate, and shake your head about. How can you not love a film like that?

Border

November 4, 2018 at 5:05 pm | Posted in 2018 | Leave a comment
Tags: , , , , , , , ,

◊ ◊ ½

If John Ajvide Lindqvist is known at all in the U.S., it would only be for his novel, “Let the Right One In,” which got made into a Swedish movie of the same name and an American one called “Let Me In.” I read that book and found it to be a bit of a grisly affair. It was so dark in parts, I had to put the book down and walk away. Both films tempered that darkness, resulting in a couple of really good vampire horror movies. I have not read the short story, “Gräns,” that this film is based on, but Lindqvist’s fingerprints are all over it. Themes of pedophilia, gender ambiguity, seduction, loss of innocence, the supernatural, and revenge against human evil play key roles in both stories. Here, we have Tina, who works as a border patrol guard. She looks like a Neanderthal and has a sense of smell so keen, she can even smell emotions. She meets a man she feels strangely drawn to and takes him in as a border on her property. Together, they explore the border between this world of humans and something darker and more feral. The makeup is fantastic. Even up close, Tina looked completely believable. Given how beautiful actress Eva Melander actually is, that’s quite an accomplishment. The animal energy between her and Vore (Eero Milonoff) gave the film its teeth and drove it forward. There was an energy of danger that pervaded the movie and kept me curious what was going to happen. But, in the end, it never had the slickness, the creepiness, nor the danger of “Let the Right One In.” It was neither horror, a love story, nor a cautionary tale. It was an interesting journey, with some interesting ideas, but, in the end, it never fully materialized.

Bohemian Rhapsody

November 4, 2018 at 9:56 am | Posted in 2018 | 1 Comment
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

◊ ◊ ◊

“Bohemian Rhapsody” starts and ends with what could be called Queen’s defining moment: their Live Aid performance. It was certainly the first time they stood out to me as more than just the band who wrote “We Will Rock You.” Later, mostly in the 90s, I came to understand the band’s amazing talent and the fact that Freddie Mercury is largely considered one of the best (if not the best) male vocalist of the 20th Century. And later still, thanks to “Wayne’s World,” the band was introduced to a whole new generation. Since then, Mercury’s story has been a hot commodity and many in Hollywood have tried to make his biopic, only to be thwarted when the band refused to release the song rights. The three remaining members (Brian May, John Deacon, and Roger Taylor) have been determined that the film be made their way. This conflict is allegedly what thwarted the Sasha Baron Cohen version a few years ago. This film got made not only by consulting them, but by making them executive producers; they were hands-on from start to finish. The results are a fun, lively production that treats the three of them like saints. Depending on what you are looking for, that may matter little or quite a lot. I couldn’t help but reflect on Cameron Crowe’s beautiful “Almost Famous” several times during the film. His movie is so warm, emotionally generous, and sweet. “Bohemian Rhapsody” was directed by Bryan Singer (“The Usual Suspects,” the “X-Men” movies), whose films can hardly be called emotionally generous or sweet. He is a bombastic film-maker and he has brought that energy to this production. That isn’t a bad thing. Mercury was bombastic and over-the-top himself, and any film about him should try and match that energy. And along those lines, cinematographer Newton Thomas Sigel, whose work in “Drive” I just loved, did a fantastic job of representing Mercury’s playfulness, energy, and loneliness through his visual choices. I would like to see him get an Oscar nomination for his work here. Where all that flash gets in the way a bit is that it can keep the audience at an emotional distance. Unlike in “Almost Famous,” the audience has no way to really connect with the central character until half the movie has passed. There is a moment when Mercury clicks lights on and off with his ex-girlfriend where he finally becomes a person, lonely and self-doubting. That is a pivotal moment for the film and it begins to slowly gain warmth after that. Rami Malek (“Mr. Robot”) manages to look remarkably like Mercury, particularly in the final scenes, but acting is more than just looking like your subject. There were times when I felt he overplayed a scene. I’m not sure if that was Singer’s direction (he is not a subtle man), Malek’s choice, or a faithful representation of Mercury (who was also not a subtle man). But, I did find it distracting at times. Early in the film, Malek just didn’t seem comfortable in Mercury’s skin. That also shifted, though. In general, as the film wore on, I felt more connected to the characters and to Mercury in particular. The final scenes were rousing and powerful and, yes, even a little sweet. For some additional fun and a touch of “where’s waldo,” you can try and find these cameos: Allen Leech (Tom on”Downton Abbey”), Joe Mazzello (the kid from the first “Jurassic Park”), and Mike Myers as a guy who thinks no teen will ever rock out to “Bohemian Rhapsody” in a car (ha!). This was a fun, energetic movie and well worth seeing. It made me want to relisten to all the Queen I own. And I could watch those final moments at Live Aid again and again. I’m just not sure I feel that way about the rest of the film.

 

Blog at WordPress.com.
Entries and comments feeds.