All posts by scottmet99

Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs-1937

Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs-1937

Director David Hand

Starring Various Voices

Scott’s Review #625

Reviewed March 18, 2017

Grade: A-

Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs (1937) is the debut feature-length production by storied producer, Walt Disney, and has the grand honor of being the first animated feature ever to be made.

Until the time of its release, animated stories were not features at all, but rather, shorts that were shown as gag-filled entertainment not to be taken very seriously.

Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs made animated films something to be appreciated and respected- the film, released in 1937, was re-released in theaters many times until the 1990s and is a blueprint for what animated features would become.

The film is based on the famous Brothers Grimm fairy tale and is a cherished treasure.

Beautiful inside and out, Snow White is a lonely princess who lives with her devious wicked stepmother, the Queen. Making the most out of her troubled life, Snow White hums and sings with her bird friends who gather to keep her company as she is forced by her stepmother to work as a scullery maid.

The Queen is a vain woman, jealous of Snow White’s natural beauty, constantly consulting her mirror to ask “who is the fairest one of all?”.

One day the Queen decides to put an end to Snow White and orders a henchman to kill her in the forest and return her bloody heart to her in a box. When the henchman is unable to do the deed, he pleads with Snow White to flee.

She winds up in a little cottage housing seven dwarf men whom she befriends as the Queen is determined to take drastic measures to find her.

Circa 1937, and for years to come, animated features were not created as they are today. Rather, they were simplistic- and wonderful- in the use of storyboards and drawings in their creation.

This daunting task, and the creativity involved, make them just lovely to look at.

Since Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs was the debut animated feature, the drawings are fantastic to view- like pictures- and to appreciate the craftsmanship involved.

The characters are richly created, with bright, vivid colors that distinguish them from one another- the bright red lips of Snow White and the blue and gold colors of her dress contrast with the regal purples used on the Queen, to say nothing of the deep red color of the poison apple.

The color makes the apple appear delicious, but also dangerously blood red. These nuances make the characters deep with texture.

The friendships Snow White makes with the dwarfs and the animal life in the forest are whimsical and filled with love and the animal element later would become a staple of Disney’s works- Dumbo and Bambi.

The animals are naturally fond of Snow White because she is joyous and kind- they in turn warn her of impending danger as the Queen turns herself into an old woman and lumbers towards Snow White, snug in the cottage.

Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs features an old-style romance- the handsome Prince takes a shine to Snow White, noticing her natural beauty as she sings and later determined to save her- which of course he does when he magically kisses her in the finale of the film.

The songs featured only enhance the love story- “Some Day My Prince Will Come” is a lovely ode to romance and is tenderly sung by Snow White as she longs for the Prince’s touch, frustrated with her life.

The creation of the seven dwarfs is done magically and seven little men living together seem quite natural in those innocent times.

Each distinctive from the other- Dopey being my personal favorite in his innocence and playfulness- Happy, Doc, Grumpy, Sneezy, Sleepy, and Bashful are all written with great zest as we fall in love with each of them from the first moment we meet them as they belt out “Heigh-Ho” in unison.

Since Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs deserve merit for being Disney’s first, overlooked can be the omission of any family members of Snow White’s besides the evil Queen. Where are Snow White’s father and mother? Any siblings? Certainly, they are presumed dead, but they are never mentioned.

Also, why does the Queen have a Magic Mirror and why does she have special powers that nobody else has?

At one hour and twenty-three minutes, Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs is a quick film but does not feel underdeveloped. The story and the characters are rich with appeal and intrigue making the film a classic that should be shared with all youngsters.

It is a classic tale of good versus evil, a great love story, and sets the tone for other Disney masterpieces to follow.

Oscar Nominations: Best Scoring

King Kong-1933

King Kong-1933

Director Merian C. Cooper, Ernest B. Schoedsack

Starring Fay Wray, Robert Armstrong

Scott’s Review #624

Reviewed March 11, 2017

Grade: A

The original, black and white, 1933 version of King Kong (a few other remakes or reboots followed) is a masterful achievement in special effects never before done in film and is also a great horror/adventure film that is timeless in its look and feel, capturing 1930’s New York City, especially, in majestic fashion.

Some of the dialogue and scenes are now dated or slightly racist, but it still holds up well as an overall lesson in film exploration and is a treasure to watch time and time again.

The film is a take on the classic tale, Beauty and the Beast, sans the happy ending.

In the watery harbors of New York City, filmmaker Carl Denham (Robert Armstrong) prepares to embark, via ship, on a journey to film his latest picture.

Known for films about exotic wildlife, he has a film to end all films in mind, and reluctantly, is talked into casting a female lead in the part. He scours the streets of New York City, finding broke and hungry Ann (Fay Wray)- a struggling actress unable to find work. She agrees to the role and off they go headed towards a destination unknown.

Weeks later, he reveals to the crew that they are headed for Skull Island, a secret island known for pre-historic creatures and a beast only known as “Kong”.

Amid the voyage to the island, Ann and First Mate Jack Driscoll (Bruce Cabot) fall madly in love with each other giving the film a nice romantic slant along with the male-driven adventure story.

The adventure begins when the crew arrives at Skull Island to find a weird, ancient ritual marriage occurring by the tribal people and all hell breaks loose when the dangerous “King Kong” escapes from captivity and falls in love with Ann.

Mixed in with the story are enormous dinosaurs who destroy everything in their paths including many of the men from the island and the film crew.

As I watched the film in 2017, not too far out from 100 years past the film’s incarnation, I oftentimes sat in wonderment, amazed at how the filmmakers were able to achieve the luminous special effects throughout the second half of the film.

Given the film is in black and white, the contrast of the dark, enormous ape (Kong) and the bright New York City, and the majestic Empire State Building, prominently featured in the final, climactic, act.

Scenes of a struggling Ann in the hand of King Kong seem flawless and believable and I marvel at how these scenes were shot and the enormous amount of effort to make them dramatic and not hokey looking.

Since the film was made “pre-code”, several shocking scenes exist- when Kong rips off Ann’s clothes as she struggles in his palm and Kong’s stepping on and squashing men are featured sparing no graphic details.

In addition to the great adventure story that is King Kong, lies a tender love story and a bit of melancholy. King Kong is not so much a dangerous creature, rather, has fallen in love with Ann and serves as her protector.

He is a scared animal, chained and confined, and subsequently shown to a stuffy Broadway crowd as entertainment- he becomes angry. I find Kong to be a sympathetic, misunderstood character, and because the human beings in the story are frightened, he becomes their enemy. He adores Ann and would not harm her in any way, but he is perceived as vicious, which he is not.

It can be argued who the real villain of the story is. Would it not be filmmaker Carl, intent on exploiting King Kong and gaining profit from it? Is it the tribe people who keep Kong locked up or is it for their protection?

My favorite scene is the climax of the film. After taking Ann from a hotel room, he scales the Empire State building and is pursued by four military airplanes.

When he sets Ann down on the rooftop ledge, he battles the planes, only to sadly topple down to the ground- dead. As he swipes at the planes and succumbs to gunshot wounds, it is a sad and powerful scene.

King Kong (1933) is a legendary film.  A film where audiences will empathize with the “villain” of the story and be impressed by the nuances on the technical side as well as enjoy the conventional and the unconventional love stories presented.

One thing is for sure, King Kong is one of the most influential films ever made.

Sully-2016

Sully-2016

Director-Clint Eastwood

Starring Tom Hanks, Aaron Eckhart

Scott’s Review #623

Reviewed March 10, 2017

Grade: B

I think most film critics would agree that each modern film directed by Clint Eastwood would accurately be described as compelling films yet safe films and the 2016 Eastwood offering, Sully, fits into both of these categories in snug fashion- just as Sully feels like a snug film.

Everything seems to fit into a nice package by the time the credits roll and while the film is sympathetic and has leanings of a character study, it is also shrouded in a wholesomeness that is incredibly safe and “Hollywood”.

This is not a knock or a demerit towards the film as it is very good and well made with a high budget, but edgy is not its thing in the least and it might have gone for a bit more grit.

The quite recent perilous United Airways flight 1549 that now-famous Captain Sully successfully landed into New York’s frigid  Hudson river one January morning, is recounted in the film.

Tom Hanks plays the role of the subdued and unassuming hero to perfection as his calm demeanor and grounded persona makes him quite a likable chap to say nothing of the fact of saving 155 lives aboard the would-be doomed flight that day.

Instead of going in a purely linear direction, building up the events (gravitating passengers, takeoff) in sequential order, until the inevitable crash, Eastwood wisely decides to begin directly after the crash has already happened.

Captain Sully, clearly jarred by the events, is startled awake by nightmares as he dreams of crashing into midtown Manhattan instead of safely landing the jet.

The hero is beginning to suffer from symptoms of PTSD. He is kept in New York City for days on both a press tour, interview after interview, as well as being questioned by The National Transportation Safety Board, who wonder why Captain Sully did not return to a nearby airport for an emergency landing as simulated computer recreations show that he could have.

This leads to both Sully and First Officer Jeff Skiles (Aaron Eckhart) being put under a microscope and questioned.

I was a bit caught off guard, and getting slightly bored, as the film takes about thirty minutes to even focus on the actual crash or show and airplane scene, rather building up the events by focusing on Sully and Skiles mental health, but in retrospect, this is a wise decision by Eastwood.

The entire film in itself is barely over ninety minutes total so the action does come fast and furious mid-stream.

Still, the film is not quite all that it could have been. Despite the potentially horrific consequences faced with an airplane blowing both engines due to the flocks of birds, I never got many extremely perilous moments during the film.

The danger scenes as Sully navigates the plane into the river, while technically well done, lack much in the way of the punch.

Sure, there are a few quick shots of passengers praying or appearing frightened, but we never get to know any of the passengers very well.

A “don’t blink or you might miss it” scene of an elderly mother and her daughter shopping for a snow globe at the airport or three men rushing to catch the plane to catch a golf game in Charlotte are not enough for the audience to become too enveloped in their characters.

They almost seem thrown in the last minute as a way of personalizing the passengers.

To my mention above, the point of the film certainly surrounds Sully (and arguably it should; nothing wrong with that) and to a lesser degree Skiles, the supporting characters contain no character development and even Skiles’s personal life is not explored well.

Scully’s wife is only seen by way of phone conversations (played by Laura Linney) that he is happily married with two daughters. There is brief talk of some money trouble, but the wife is underdeveloped.

Additionally, the NTSB agents are portrayed as quite antagonistic towards Sully and Skiles (rumors abound that this was embellished for movie making), which makes sense.

I enjoyed the ending of the film- in tandem with the credits rolling- of seeing not only the real-life Sully, but his wife, and the passengers and crew of the real United Airlines flight 1549, through interviews and photographs.

This offering in true life biography films is now a standard feature to look forward to as it brings a humanistic conclusion to the story just watched.

The focus of the film centers on Captain Sully is fine by me- the man is a hero- but as a film, and more than a biography, it might have added depth to have richer supporting characters and a stronger background of the man that is Sully.

A few rushed childhood aviator and battle plane scenes seemed rather out of place.

Still, as a whole the film is nice and quite watchable, just nothing that will set the world on fire or be remembered as much more than a decent film based on a true story.

Oscar Nominations: Best Sound Editing

American Honey-2016

American Honey-2016

Director-Andrea Arnold

Starring-Sasha Lane, Shia LaBeouf

Scott’s Review #622

Reviewed March 6, 2017

Grade: A-

American Honey is an unconventional coming-of-age drama that deserves kudos for not only being shot on a shoe-string budget, but also for having something of substance to tell.

The film is mostly shot outdoors throughout the scouring summer months in heat-drenched Oklahoma, Nebraska, and Kansas, as the film follows a group of rebellious, lonely teenagers as they attempt to sell magazines as part of a shady con organization.

Their female leader uses cult-like rallying techniques to achieve loyalty.

The film is shot mainly by hand-held cameras and only uses natural light, which is an admirable feat in film.

The film’s central character is an eighteen-year-old girl named Star, played by novice actress, Sasha Lane.

Saddled with a deadbeat boyfriend with two young kids that she is forced to care for, she takes food from dumpsters to survive.

One day, she is approached by a charismatic, handsome bad boy, Jake (Shia LaBeouf). Jake, along with a group of teenagers, offers her a job in Kansas.

Hesitant, but realizing her dead-end existence, she accepts the mysterious job and travels with other unsavory characters across the bible-states, where they prey on wealthy, religious types willing to lend a hand, under the guise of selling them magazines.

The main story envelopes Star, her romantic feelings for Jake, and the quandaries that she faces on the road. She drinks, smokes, curses, and is sexually active, yet also savvy and wise beyond her years.

The audience wonders if she will continue this lifestyle and worries when she comes into contact with older men- all rather well-mannered and some affluent.

Will they pay her for her magazines or some other form of entertainment? How will Star handle propositions and scrapes in and out of precarious situations? Star grows up throughout the film. Star is also a kind and confident character.

At two hours and forty-three minutes long, American Honey is extremely lengthy, especially given the fact that the film is an independent feature and also seems not to contain many concrete plot points nor much of a conclusion.

It seems to just go on and on and on.

Despite this, the film never bored me and I was quite enraptured with the antics of the story’s characters, finding myself quite fond of the surprising love story shrouded amongst the hip hop and rap soundtrack.

Star and Jake (thanks in large part to the talents of Lane and LaBeouf) have true chemistry and likability as a couple.

The mystery surrounding Star is we know nothing about her parents or family or how she came to this existence at such a young age. At one point, she does mention her mother dying of a meth overdose, but it is unclear whether she makes this story up for the benefit of a magazine sale or if it is the truth.

Star is rebellious, but very intelligent and capable, all the while exhibiting kindness to strange children and her “colleagues”.

Interesting to note about American Honey are two key aspects: the film uses almost all non-actors- most of the kids were scouted and offered roles at local malls or various hangouts by director Andrea Arnold, so the film has a rawness and energy that is powerful given that the film is largely improvised.

Also, the film is almost entirely shot using a basic hand-held camera or cellphone eliciting a shaky, documentary-style feel. Instead of these characteristics giving American Honey an amateurish feel, it gave the film an authentic quality.

The left of the center approach of featuring male frontal nudity and same-sex relations gives the film much credo as an alternative film- the teens also swear and use drugs quite a bit, which could turn some off.

Receiving a heap of 2016 Independent Film award nominations (but winning none), my reason for watching the film, American Honey breathes some fresh air into the world of independent cinema, where sometimes too many big-name stars appear in the indies to garner some credibility.

Watching a film of novices or individuals with no acting aspirations simply create a good story is worth something in itself. And kudos to Arnold for spinning such a fresh tale.

Independent Spirit Award Nominations: Best Feature, Best Director-Andrea Arnold, Best Female Lead-Sasha Lane, Best Supporting Male-Shia LaBeouf, Best Supporting Female-Riley Keough, Best Cinematography

Happy Birthday to Me-1981

Happy Birthday to Me-1981

Director J. Lee Thompson

Starring Melissa Sue Anderson, Glenn Ford

Scott’s Review #621

Reviewed March 4, 2017

Grade: A-

Happy Birthday to Me is a 1981 slasher film that I fondly remember scaring the shit out of me as a little kid-too young to be watching a film of this nature, but sneaking into my parent’s bedroom with my brother to catch it on HBO.

Certain that the film helped shape my passion for the horror genre, I hold a fondness for it- critics be damned. My opinion is that the film is a small treasure in the land of 1980s slasher films, containing a neat whodunit and a grotesque ending.

Melissa Sue Anderson, desiring to break out of her nice television persona thanks to the wholesome Little House on the Prairie, is cast in the lead role.

Happy Birthday to Me also achieves some merit since the film is directed by acclaimed British director, J. Lee Thompson (Cape Fear).

Anderson carries the film quite well in a challenging part and Glenn Ford co-stars as a Doctor.

Virginia Wainwright is a pretty and popular senior at exclusive Crawford Academy- a school for elite, rich kids. She is part of the “Top Ten”, the most popular and richest kids in the school. The ten friends meet nightly at the local pub.

One night, Bernadette, one of the top ten, is murdered by an assailant on her way to meet her friends.

This murder sets the tone as, one by one, the others are subsequently killed off, sending the school and local townspeople into a frenzy of panic.

To thicken the plot, Virginia was involved in a horrible car accident four years earlier, which killed her mother, and caused Virginia to only have sparse memories of the accident.

This piece is key to the film’s mystery.

There are many comparisons I can make to slasher classics that heavily influenced Happy Birthday to Me, but the most prominent must be 1978’s Halloween.

The character of Virginia is very similar to Laurie Strode (Jamie Lee Curtis), in their somewhat virginal, good girl characters, and both have an almost identical hairstyle!

Also, Happy Birthday to Me successfully uses the killer’s point of view as the camera frequently serves as the perspective of either the killer or somebody lurking around spying on someone else.

The film also just “looks” similar to Halloween.

The whodunit aspect is the most effective of all the qualities of the film. There are a multitude of likely suspects and the film does not shy away from this, purposely casting doubt on several characters- could it be the creepy Alfred, who carries around a pet mouse and creates a fake head of the murdered Bernadette?

Or the suave French student, Etienne, who snoops in Virginia’s bedroom and steals a pair of her panties? Finally, could it be Head Mistress, Mrs. Patterson, a harsh, no-nonsense woman harboring resentment for the snobbish, elitism that exists at her school?

When the killer is finally revealed a measure of pure shock and confusion will undoubtedly transpire- how can this be? But by the time the ultimate finale is played out, all will make sense.

The conclusion does disappoint slightly in the implausibility factor, and the original ending is much more logical and compelling than what was actually in the final cut- rumors have run rampant that the screenplay of the film was rewritten numerous times well into the production- never a good thing.

So, the motivations of the actual killer are quite weak, but the buildup is amazing.

Not to be outdone by the whodunit, the kills themselves are superlative: a shish kabob to the throat, falling gym weights, a scarf caught in the spokes of a bike, and the traditional fireplace poker are done in macabre and fantastic fashion.

We always see the killer’s gloved hands and we are aware that the victim is friendly with the killer, so we continually try and deduce who it could be.

The gruesome “Birthday party” finale is gruesome and gleeful at the same time. Each murder victim is propped up around a dining room table, each with a party hat on and all in various forms of dismemberment or blood-soaked from their murder wounds.

It is a grim and hilarious reveal. The murderer parades out of the kitchen wielding an enormous birthday cake, cheerily singing “Happy Birthday to Me”.

This is one great finale.

Happy Birthday to Me (1981) is a wonderful trip down memory lane and still holds up as a key, perhaps overlooked part of the slasher genre that should be rediscovered by fans and followers everywhere.

The Children’s Hour-1961

The Children’s Hour-1961

Director William Wyler

Starring Audrey Hepburn, Shirley MacLaine, James Garner

Scott’s Review #620

Reviewed March 3, 2017

Grade: B+

The Children’s Hour is one of the earliest films to center around an LGBT theme and the subsequent scandals that the subject matter would provoke in the innocent year of 1961-pre Civil Rights and pre-Sexual Revolution.

However, since the film was made in the year that it was, homosexuality was presented as something dark and bad rather than something to be accepted or even embraced.

Still, the film, and director William Wyler are brave enough to recognize the topic- with limitations to spin a compelling film rich with well-written characters and some soap-opera style drama.

The Children’s Hour is based on a play from 1934 and written by Lillian Hellman.

The setting of the film appears to be somewhere in New England, perhaps Connecticut or Massachusetts, though the film never really says the exact area.

College friends Karen (Audrey Hepburn) and Martha (Shirley MacLaine) open a private all-girls boarding school, catering to the affluent community they reside in. They run the school along with Martha’s Aunt Lilly, a faded Broadway actress, who oftentimes hen-pecks the women.

Karen has been dating handsome obstetrician, Joe (James Garner) for two years when he proposes marriage and she hesitantly accepts, which saddens Martha.

All the while, spoiled brat child, Mary, furious over being punished by her teachers, plots revenge against Martha and Karen and embellishes a heated discussion between the ladies into a scandalous lie that she whispers to her grandmother (Fay Bainter).

The grandmother promptly tells the parents of the other students, who remove their children from the school en masse. The lie, of course, is that Karen and Martha are lovers and that Mary has witnessed the two women kissing.

Meanwhile, Mary is blackmailing a fellow student, Rosalie (Veronica Cartwright) over a stolen bracelet. Martha and Karen are then ostracized by the small town.

The Children’s Hour becomes even more compelling when one of the women begins to realize that she does indeed have homosexual feelings towards the other woman and has always harbored anger and resentment as well as feeling “different” from other women.

As well-written as the film is, the fact that the audience does not get to hear what Mary whispers to her grandmother is rather telling and prevents the film from being even more powerful than it is.

Also, the downbeat conclusion to the film sends a clear message that in 1961 audiences were not ready to accept lesbianism as anything to be normalized or to be proud of.

The decision was made to make it abundantly clear that one of the central characters is not a lesbian. Any uncertainty may have risked freaking out mainstream audiences at the time.

Since the traditional opposite-sex romance between Karen and Joe is at the forefront of the film, I did not witness much chemistry between actors Hepburn and Garner, but might have this been the point in achieving a subliminal sexual complexity?

The Children’s Hour and William Wyler deserve heaps of praise for going as far as censorship in film in 1961 would allow them to successfully offer nuggets of progressivism mixed into a brave film.

Incidentally, Wyler made another version of this film in 1936 named These Three. Because of the Hays Code, any hint of lesbianism was forbidden causing Wyler to create a standard story of a love triangle between the three with both Martha and Karen pining after Joe.

What a difference a couple of decades make!

MacLaine and Hepburn must be credited with carrying the film and eliciting nice chemistry between the women, though it is too subtle to be realized if the chemistry is really of a friendship level or a sexual nature.

And, I adore how Wyler decides to make both characters rather glamorous and avoid any stereotypical characteristics.

Oscar Nominations: Best Supporting Actress-Fay Bainter, Best Sound, Best Art Direction, Black-and-White, Best Cinematography, Black-and-White, Best Costume Design, Black-and-White

Hidden Figures-2016

Hidden Figures-2016

Director-Theodore Melfi

Starring-Taraji P. Henson, Janelle Monae, Octavia Spencer

Scott’s Review #619

Reviewed February 26, 2017

Grade: A-

Hidden Figures is a mainstream, “Hollywood” style film that is produced, written, and acted very well.

It is a film that tells of three female African American mathematicians who faced many struggles and were rather overlooked at the time, the early 1960’s. The women achieved historical success and were instrumental in allowing John Glenn to orbit planet Earth.

From a film perspective, the story is feel-good but does not feel contrived it feels quite fresh and features a wonderful ensemble cast with nice chemistry.

I enjoyed this film immensely.

Blessed with good smarts, Dorothy Vaughan (Spencer), Mary Jackson (Monae), and Katherine Johnson (Henson) are fortunate enough to work for the Langley Research Center – the time is 1961.

In those days, segregation still existed and the women worked as temporary workers and used separate “colored” bathrooms and were largely excluded from the white workers.

The three women are best friends and drive to work together- each of them has an individual specialty and the film focuses on each woman’s story.

The larger role and main story are about Katherine. Since the Russians had achieved success in outer space already, the race was on for the United States to follow suit. Katherine is assigned as a “computer” in the Space Task Group, led by Al Harrison (Kevin Costner).

Initially, Katherine is dismissed by her colleagues but eventually is accepted due to her smarts. In sub-plots, Dorothy struggles to be given a Supervisor position, and Mary aspires to be the first female engineer, despite needing entry into an all-white school to take necessary classes.

My favorite of the three performances is Taraji P. Henson.

The actress impresses with her spunky, well-mannered, portrayal, and specifically her fantastic scene when she has simply had enough of the segregation and the difficulty in performing her job.

She loses it in front of the entire team and rails against them- expecting to lose her job, instead, her boss Al, (a fantastic nice-guy role for Costner), sees her point and declares NASA will see no distinction of color.

Henson is the lead actress in the film and carries it well.

The chemistry between the three actresses is what allows Hidden Figures to work so well and come off as believable. The women always have each other’s backs and are friends outside of work- attending church and picnics together.

The film is smart to feature women’s lives outside of their professions.

A nice side story of single mother Katherine (her husband having died) meeting and being courted in lovely fashion by handsome National Guard Jim Johnson (Mahershala Ali) is a sweet story, genuinely told.

The two also have nice chemistry together.

The film’s finale as the attempted launch of John Glenn is met with problems, is compelling. Due to the genius of Katherine, she must save the day as Glenn trusts only her judgment and calculations of the ever so important numbers.

The scene is a “just desserts” moment for Katherine as the country rallies behind the events in patriotic fashion.

Hidden Figures plays it safe and the true struggles of the real women undoubtedly had darker and meaner situations as the discrimination they faced had to have been more intense, but the film strives to downplay some of the grit in favor of light-hearted, crowd-pleasing fare, but I fell for it hook, line, and sinker, and enjoyed the film ride that I was given.

Oscar Nominations: Best Picture, Best Supporting Actress-Octavia Spencer, Best Adapted Screenplay

The Stoning of Soraya M.-2008

The Stoning of Soraya M.-2008

Director Cyrus Nowrasteh

Starring Shohreh Aghdashloo

Top 10 Disturbing Films #2

Scott’s Review #618

Reviewed February 18, 2017

Grade: A

The Stoning of Soraya M. (2008) is a brutal film and one of the most disturbing films that I have ever seen. I have viewed the film a total of two times and that is enough for me.

The terrifying aspect of the film is that the story is true and the events depicted not only have happened to the woman featured but happen to women day in and day out in certain cultures.

The film is a frightening reminder of the atrocities of human suffering.

The film is an American Persian language film made in 2008. Academy Award nominee, Shohreh Aghdashloo, stars as a woman living in a remote village in Iran- the time is 1986.

Interestingly, the film begins following the events that conclude the story and works in reverse. A reporter who has car trouble and is lost in the village is taken by the aunt of Soraya (Aghdashloo) who must tell the journalist the painful story of a tragedy that befell poor Soraya the day before.

Soraya was brutally stoned to death, and wrongfully accused of adultery, and the journalist wisely records the aunt’s tale with his tape recorder. The journalist must then escape the village alive for Soraya’s story to be told to the masses.

From this point, the film transfers to several days earlier.

Soraya’s abusive husband, Ali, wishes to divorce Soraya so that he can marry a fourteen-year-old girl from the village. When she refuses, Ali uses manipulation and blackmail to turn many in the village against Soraya, including her two teenage sons.

Ali convinces everyone that Soraya has been unfaithful to him with a widower whom Soraya innocently works for. Ali is then granted his divorce and Soraya is sentenced to be stoned, as an example, in front of the entire village.

The message is clear- women are not equal to men and are not permitted to do the things that men can.

Throughout the film, we get to know Soraya and she does have her loyal female friends and supporters. Aghdashloo portrays Soraya with gusto and bravery and the fact that we care for the character so much makes the inevitable stoning sequence heartbreaking and painful to watch.

When Soraya is chained to a short pole and buried up to her neck so that she cannot move, the scene of her victimization is almost unbearable to watch. Ali and her sons are the first to cast the stones that strike her square in the head.

Director, Nowrasteh provides the stoning sequence with a dull, muted sound so that we almost experience the thuds of the rocks from Soraya’s perspective, making the scene all the more chilling.

The scene also goes on for seemingly an eternity as it takes a long time for Soraya to succumb to her many wounds. Needless to say, she is a bloody mess and unrecognizable.

This scene is not for the squeamish.

How disheartening to know that experiences like Soraya’s still occurring to this day in Iran and many other countries and there is not much that is done to help.

The Stoning of Soraya M. is based on a 1990 book, Le Femme Lapidee, written by Freidoune Sahebjam, who appears in the film as a journalist. The book has been banned in Iran.

The Stoning of Soraya M. (2008) is one of the most disturbing films that I have ever seen and as much as the message is tragic and painful, I never want to see this film again.

The pain rings too real and the thought fills me with sadness.

Tommy-1975

Tommy-1975

Director Ken Russell

Starring Roger Daltrey, Ann-Margret

Scott’s Review #617

Reviewed February 15, 2017

Grade: B+

The film version of Tommy (1975) is a musical fantasy, rock opera based on the famous album recording by The Who in 1969.

Composed and adapted by The Who member Pete Townsend, the film tells the story of a deaf, dumb, blonde kid named Tommy.

Featuring a star-studded cast of actors and singers performing musical numbers, the film is an over-the-top treat and quite campy late-night fare. The stage version is usually a bit more serious and sedate than the film.

I enjoy the film but it pales in comparison to the stage versions- which I was fortunate enough to see at my local community theater recently.

The film is directed by Ken Russell.

Set during the 1940s and told mainly through song, we see a montage of Captain Walker (Robert Powell) and his wife Nora (Ann-Margret) on their honeymoon and Walker subsequently being sent off to war leaving a pregnant Nora behind.

When his fighter plane is shot down and he is presumed dead, the montage skips ahead five years, and Nora is now involved in a relationship with Frank (Oliver Reed).

Tommy is five years old and is visited by his father, who is very much alive. After a struggle with Frank and Nora, Powell is killed and a traumatized Tommy is unable to speak, see, or hear (except within his mind) as Frank and Nora are desperate to make sure he keeps quiet.

As Tommy grows into a young man, he becomes a “Pinball Wizard”, a prodigy at pinball, creating great wealth for Nora and Frank. Still unable to speak or see, he is first abused by his Uncle and Cousin but then championed as they are all able to get rich off of his abilities.

Through the years Nora and Frank attempt to “cure” Tommy of his ailments via a preacher (Clapton) leading a Marilyn Monroe cult and a prostitute (Turner).

The joy in Tommy (the film) is seeing the star-studded cast- Elton John, Tina Turner, and Eric Clapton, as well as Roger Daltrey, bring a sense of wonderment to the film. Who doesn’t like to see rock stars perform?

Famous actors Jack Nicholson, Ann-Margret, and Reed are featured.

The musical numbers are the splendid part of the film and one must be prepared to escape into a world of fantasy. Musical highlights for me include, “Acid Queen”, “It’s A Boy”, and “We’re Not Gonna Take It”.

My most recent viewing of the film Tommy disappointed me slightly, and this may be due to recently seeing the stage version- far superior in my mind.

Ann-Margret, while superb and believable as Tommy’s mum, is not the character that Townsend had in mind.

Sultry and sexy, she is cast to bring some sex appeal- nothing wrong with this, but the stage character is more of a working-class woman and more in line with the rest of the cast.

The film also seems a bit too over the top almost silly at times. But Tommy is an escapist film- based on the album, which is more serious.

I wonder if Russell was going for a more late-night, Rocky Horror Show or Little Shop of Horrors type of feel.

Tommy (1975) has its place, certainly, but I would first recommend the stage or the album version as a starting point and move to the film as escapist fare.

Oscar Nominations: Best Actress-Ann-Margret, Best Scoring: Original Song Score and Adaptation or Scoring: Adaptation

Captain Fantastic-2016

Captain Fantastic-2016

Director-Matt Ross

Starring-Viggo Mortensen

Scott’s Review #616

Reviewed February 10, 2017

Grade: B+

A thought-provoking story that raises a question of home-schooled, non-traditional book intelligence versus the lack of social norms and interactions, and debates which upbringings are more relevant, Captain Fantastic is a terrific film with a moral center.

Starring Viggo Mortensen, who is not afraid to tackle complex and thoughtful roles, the film is a family drama with a unique spin and an edgy subject matter.

Perhaps not as gritty as it could have been and feeling a bit safe, it still entertains and elicits thought, which is an important aspect to film and is oftentimes lacking in modern films.

Director Matt Ross immediately treats us to aerial views of green and mountainous Pacific Northwest where a family of seven- 1 father and 6 children ranging in age from five to seventeen- silently prey on and kill a deer grazing in the forest- this is their dinner.

The family is unorthodox, to say the least. Led by Ben Cash, he teaches the children how to fight, how to survive, and how to be ready for any situation. They are highly intelligent kids- able to recite the Bill of Rights and the most complex of literature.

Soon, it is revealed that their mother, Leslie, has committed suicide and a battle ensues between her parents (Frank Langella and Ann Dowd) who are determined to bury her “properly” with a Christian funeral, and Ben and his children, who are determined to honor her last wishes for cremation.

Ben and the gang travel via their run-down school bus to New Mexico, meeting local townspeople along the way as a battle of cultures takes place.

I commend Ross for creating a story that challenges the viewer to think- depending on the viewer’s religious or political views, there is a risk of people either loving or hating the film.

The film is skewed toward the left, certainly, like dinner and sleepover with Ben’s sister and her very “Americanized” family is awkward- the families having completely different styles.

Ross makes it clear that Ben and his families are the intelligent ones and his sister’s kids quite dumb- not even knowing what the Bill of Rights is and mindlessly playing violent video games.

The fact that they are a “typical American family” is sad and quite telling of what Ross’s view might be.

Captain Fantastic wisely shows that either side is not perfect. His oldest son, Bodevan, blooming sexually, has an awkward encounter with a pretty girl, proposing marriage to her with her mother present because he knows no social norms.

A younger son is attracted to a “normal” life with his grandparents, who are a wealthy couple. The grandparents are not presented as bad people, but rather, wanting the best for their grandchildren, and fearing how their lives will turn out without better structure or what they perceive as a better upbringing.

Some of the kids blame Ben for their lack of social skills and being what they perceive as “freaks”.

The film does end safely as a happy medium is ultimately reached, but I never felt cheapened by this result. I found Captain Fantastic to be rich in intelligent writing and a challenging tale.

Many moments of “what would you do?” were brought to the forefront. Mortensen portrays Ben Cash flawlessly mixing just the right vulnerability with stubbornness to the character, and it is a great film for anyone fearing being intelligent is not cool, because it is.

Oscar Nominations: Best Actor-Viggo Mortensen

Independent Spirit Award Nominations: Best Male Lead-Viggo Mortensen

From Russia with Love-1963

From Russia with Love-1963

Director Terence Young

Starring Sean Connery, Daniela Bianchi

Scott’s Review #615

Reviewed February 5, 2017

Grade: A

From Russia with Love (1963), only the second in the storied James Bond film franchise is a sequel to the debut installment, Dr. No, and received twice the budget that its predecessor did.

This is evident as the cinematography and the look of the film are exquisite with chase and battle scenes galore.

The film is lavish and grand and what a Bond film ought to be consisting of adventures through countries, gorgeous location sequences, and a nice romance between Bond (Sean Connery) and Bond girl, Tatiana (Daniela Bianchi), though she is not in my top Bond girls of all time.

Terence Young returned to direct the film with successful results.

Vowing revenge on James Bond for killing villainous Dr. No, SPECTRE’s Number 1 (seen only speaking and holding a cat) recruits evil Number 3, Rosa Klebb, a Russian director and defector, and Kronsteen, SPECTRE’s expert planner, to devise a plot to steal a Lektor cryptographic device from the Soviets and kill Bond in the process.

Klebb recruits expert killer Donald “Red” Grant and manipulates Tatiana into assisting. The story takes Bond mostly through Istanbul, Turkey, into a gypsy camp, and via the Orient Express through Yugoslavia to the ultimate climax.

The villains in From Russia with Love are outstanding and a major draw to the film.

Both Klebb (Lotte Lenya) and Grant (Robert Shaw) are perfectly cast. Klebb, militant and severe with her short-cropped red hair, has a penchant for deadly footwear (she has a spike that shoots out from her boot containing venom that kills in seconds) and casually flaunts her lesbianism in front of Tatiana.

I admire this level of diversity in early Bond films from a sexual perspective- it was 1963 and this was extremely rare to see in the film.

Grant, on the other hand, is handsome and charismatic and has a chest of steel. With his good looks and bleached blonde hair, he is a perfect opponent for Bond as the final battle between him and Bond aboard the Orient Express is a spectacular fight scene and a satisfactory conclusion to the film.

The action sequences are aplenty and compelling especially the aforementioned, and lengthy Orient Express train sequence finale, which is grand. As Bond and Tatiana, along with their ally Ali Kerim Bey, a British Intelligence chief from Istanbul, embark on a journey, they are stalked by Grant, who waits for an opportunity to pounce on his foes.

This sequence is the best part of the film for me- Grant, posing as a sophisticated British agent, has a cat-and-mouse style conversation with Bond and Tatiana over a delicious dinner of Sole.

Grant drugs Tatiana by placing capsules in her white wine- the fact that he orders Chianti with Sole- a culinary faux pas- gives him away.

Other notable aspects of From Russia with Love are the soon-to-be familiar cohorts of Bond who will be featured in Bond films for years to come: M, Q, and Miss Moneypenny become treasured supporting characters that audiences know and love.

Mere novices in this film, it is fun to see their scenes- especially lovelorn Moneypenny.

An odd scene of sparring female gypsies is both erotic and comical as the two women wrestle and fight over a gypsy chief, only to soon forget their rivalry and both bed Bond- falling madly in love with him as the two women suddenly become the best of friends.

The chemistry between Connery and Bianchi is good, but nothing spectacular and not the real highlight of this Bond entry. Don’t get me wrong- they make a gorgeous couple- his dark, suave looks and her statuesque blonde figure look great, but I found the pairing just decent rather than spectacular.

The action sequences, especially the Orient Express scenes are a spectacle and the many location shots in and around Istanbul are ravishing.

From Russia with Love (1963) is a top entry in the Bond series and a film that got the ball rolling with fantastic Bond features- it is an expensively produced film and this shows.

The Diary of a Teenage Girl-2015

The Diary of a Teenage Girl-2015

Director-Marielle Heller

Starring-Bel Powley, Alexander Skarsgard, Kristen Wiig

Scott’s Review #614

Reviewed February 2, 2017

Grade: A-

I was not entirely sure of what I expected from the Independent Spirit award-winning film, Diary of a Teenage Girl.

I surmised that I would be treated to a light-hearted, yet well-written coming-of-age story, but the film is much darker than I would have thought- and this is a plus- the film is edgy.

There is so much depth to the central characters and incredibly complex performance by newcomer, Bel Powley as the title role.

Stars Kristen Wiig and Alexander Skarsgard also give tremendous performances.

The film is based on the graphic novel The Diary of a Teenage Girl: An Account in Words and Pictures by Phoebe Gloeckner.

Set in 1976 San Francisco, a time filled with hippies, drugs, music, and life, fifteen-year-old Minnie, an aspiring comic book writer, is insecure as any typical fifteen-year-old is.

With wide eyes and stringy hair, she is cute, but rather quirky looking, not the prettiest girl in her class, and records all of her deepest thoughts into a cassette recorder. Minnie is intelligent and worldly, accepting of alternative lifestyles and drugs, despite her young age.

She is wise well beyond her years.

Minnie’s mother Charlotte (Wiig), lives a bohemian lifestyle, constantly partying and losing jobs, and is divorced from Minnie’s and sister Gretel’s affluent, but mostly absent father, Pascal (Christopher Meloni).

Comically, the girls refer to him as “Pascal” instead of “Dad”, which he abhors. Determined to lose her virginity, Minnie is man crazy and develops a sweet relationship with her mother’s boyfriend, Monroe (Skarsgard).

Things begin slowly but develop into a full-blown sexual relationship. A controversial piece to the story is that Monroe is thirty-five years old- Minnie is only fifteen. Both Monroe’s and Minnie’s feelings are challenged due to circumstances and Minnie’s emotions spiral out of control.

The subject matter of The Diary of a Teenage Girl will undoubtedly be off-putting for many folks as the actions are technically statutory rape, but the film never goes in that direction.

Rather, director Marielle Heller crafts a tender story of young love, and when there is too much drama, there is comic relief thrown in.

Monroe is never the aggressor and Minnie is. She is a young girl who knows what she wants.

Since the director is female there is absolutely no hint of Minnie being taken advantage of or regretting her affair- the film is not about this.

Rather, it is about a young girl with blooming sexuality and blooming emotions finding herself in the world. I admire this left of center approach to the story immensely.

Other aspects of the film may be too much for some- Minnie and her best friend pretend to be prostitutes and orally service two young men in the men’s room on a lark.

Later, Charlotte uses filthy language to describe Monroe’s and Minnie’s relationship.

The film is not safe, but brazen and honest- I admire its courage.

Enough cannot be said for the three principal actors in Diary of a Teenage Girl. Bel Powley is a find! Nominated for an Independent Spirit award, this amazing young actress should have been recognized by the Academy Awards, but she no doubt has many years and films ahead of her. She is a “regular girl” type and reminds me a bit of actress Lena Dunham in her looks and her rich delivery.

Kristen Wiig is fantastic and is evolving into a great dramatic actress. As Charlotte, Wiig is wonderfully insecure and an offbeat mother. She does not discipline, but rather befriends her daughters, showering them with hugs and kisses and giving vulnerable neediness to the character.

Wiig, dynamite in the comedy/drama The Skeleton Twins, has embraced small, but important indie films, and kudos to her for this.

Lastly, Skarsgard, mainly known as HBO’s villainous Eric on True Blood, is inspiring as Monroe. Providing his character with sympathy and humanity (tough when having an affair with a teenage girl who also happens to be your girlfriend’s daughter), Skarsgard evokes so much emotion into the role that you almost root for Monroe and Minnie before remembering that she is too emotionally fragile.

Skarsgard is brilliant in Monroe’s breakdown scene. I hope audiences see him in more of these complex roles as he is far more than a hunky actor.

Diary of a Teenage Girl intersperses graphic novel/animated elements into the story told from the perspective of Minnie and the character narratives parts of the film.

An authentic, interesting story not only for teenagers but for smart thinkers and anyone who has ever been over their heads in the emotions of love.

Independent Spirit Award Nominations: Best Female Lead-Bel Powley, Best First Screenplay, Best First Feature (won)

Florence Foster Jenkins-2016

Florence Foster Jenkins-2016

Director-Stephen Frears

Starring-Meryl Streep, Hugh Grant

Scott’s Review #613

Reviewed January 30, 2017

Grade: B

Director Stephen Frears certainly loves to direct films that are starring vehicles for mature actresses- Judi Dench, Helen Mirren, and now Meryl Streep has benefited vastly from his direction (all received Oscar nominations).

In Florence Foster Jenkins, Frears crafts a warm-hearted tale of a famous real-life opera singer, the title character, played by Streep.

The film is likable, but not up to par with other Frears’ gems, specifically Philomena or The Queen.

The film is a tad too safe for my tastes and should have been darker given the subject matter.

Florence Foster Jenkins is a New York City socialite and heiress living and flourishing during the year 1944. She is the founder of the Verdi Club and does a world of good for music, specifically the world of opera, which she adores.

Nicknamed “Bunny” by her husband Bayfield, played by Hugh Grant, he reveres her, but not in the physical sense- he resides elsewhere with a girlfriend.

This is due to Bunny being afflicted with long-term syphilis, causing her to be medicated and rendering her bald and unable to engage in sexual relations.

Bunny is a wretched, flat singer, despite her passion for singing, yet everyone convinces her how wonderful she is because she is so well regarded in her social circle. Many people are paid off in exchange for their support.

Due to Bunny’s medication, it is assumed that she cannot hear properly leaving her unaware of how bad she sings. Bunny now determined to sing at Carnegie Hall, Bayfield must scramble to make sure no critics are anywhere in sight for the big show, saving his wife from humiliation.

Any film starring Meryl Streep is assured to be fantastic from an acting standpoint and, per usual, she does not disappoint. Streep envelopes the role of Bunny- giving her charm and a vulnerability that only Streep can do.

The character knows what she wants and is stubborn, but there is a kindness to her and we see the passion oozing from her pores.

Streep is the highlight and the draw of the film.

Hugh Grant is worthy of kudos himself and I rather liked the chemistry between the two actors. Seeking physical relations with another woman may risk making him appear a cad, but Grant also gives Bayfield sensitivity and genuine care for his wife. They have “an arrangement” but he hides his girlfriend when Bunny shows up unexpectedly- not wanting Bunny to be embarrassed.

Grant’s and Streep’s scenes together are tender and believable.

Simon Helberg, like Bunny’s pianist, McMoon is also a positive of the film. Hired to accompany Bunny’s singing, he is first appalled, bemused, and finally understanding of Bunny, coming to love and respect her for who she is.

The character is clearly gay (the film never comes out and says this), but gay themes are common in Frears films and it is a non-issue among the principal characters- wonderful, but perhaps unrealistic for that time.

A flaw of the film is the lack of any purely great moments during the film. I suppose the climax at Carnegie Hall should have been it, but I did not completely buy the entire film.

Even the laughter and the mocking of Bunny by the crowd seem done in a soft, light way.

The film is a decent offering, nonetheless, and Streep the ultimate selling point. Great costumes, too.

Oscar Nominations: Best Actress-Meryl Streep, Best Costume Design

Holding the Man-2015

Holding the Man-2015

Director-Neil Armfield

Starring-Ryan Corr, Craig Stott

Scott’s Review #612

Reviewed January 24, 2016

Grade: B+

Holding the Man is a brave love story centering on two young men and spanning fifteen years as the men begin as high school sweethearts and progress into adulthood and sadly both contract AIDS.

This is a pivotal aspect of the film as it is set during the 1970s and 1980’s- a time when this disease was dreadful and more or less a death sentence.

The film is tender and poignant, but despite these characteristics, I felt at times something with more vigor was missing from the film- I did not have the exact emotional reaction that I thought I might have and felt a slight blandness.

The film is set in Australia and adapted from a 1995 memoir of the same name.

The action begins in 1976 as we meet Tim and John- both high school students. They are from opposite social groups- Tim a theater student and John captain of his soccer team.

Surprisingly, they connect romantically as Tim asks John out on a date.

For the period, it was, the pair receive little hassle and are quite open with their relationship. Certainly, they face a bit of opposition from officials at the school, but this is not the main aspect that the film goes for.

Instead, the main problems come from John’s family- specifically, his father, but this is certainly played safely. Tim’s family is much more accepting.

Over the next fifteen years, the couple encounters death directly when they are simultaneously told they have acquired HIV.

The film is mostly told chronologically, but does go back and forth at times- specifically, we are reminded of John’s youthful good looks in flashbacks, when he is close to death-now bald and sickly looking.

The main point of the film is the men’s enduring love for each other, which is a nice message.

Otherwise, the film (2015 and long since the AIDS plague), goes for a reminder of how harsh those times were for gay men, though there is a softness to the film that I felt instead of the brutal reality.

The actors playing John and Tim (Craig Stott and Ryan Corr, respectively) have decent chemistry, but this may have been stronger than my perception was, and the reason I did not feel emotionally invested in the film.

The film was nice and sweet-the romance part, but when one of the men succumbs to AIDS I should have been a puddle of tears and I just wasn’t.

I did enjoy how the film does not focus too much on the opposition by John’s father (Anthony LaPaglia). He certainly would wish his son’s sexuality differently, but is more concerned with how his son’s relationship with a male looks to Dad’s friends and neighbors. The deeper story was the love between the men that knew no barriers.

It was nice to see Geoffrey Rush and Guy Pearce in supporting turns as a drama teacher (Rush) and as Tim’s father, Dick (Pearce). Both do well with limited roles and I adored how the film portrayed Dick as a supportive father- even dancing a slow dance with his son at a wedding- free of embarrassment.

Also notable is the sweet ending of the film where a photo of the real Tim and John is shown during a narrative from an interview the real Tim did before his death.

Holding the Man is a nice film, but does not quite have the power that other LGBT films in recent decades had- Brokeback Mountain immediately comes to mind as a similar film, but one which was more emotional and engaged me much more.

A nice, honest effort, though.

20th Century Women-2016

20th Century Women-2016

Director-Mike Mills

Starring-Annette Benning, Greta Gerwig, Elle Fanning

Scott’s Review #611

Reviewed January 22, 2017

Grade: A-

Annette Benning gets to shine in her leading role in 20th Century Women, a film directed by a formidable independent director, Mike Mills, whose credits include 2010’s Beginners, and 2005’s Thumbsucker.

In 20th Century Women, Mills serves as both director and writer, so the film truly is his vision.

All of the five principal characters are quirky and well-written, though Benning’s is the most nuanced and fascinating to me.

The time is 1979, Santa Barbara. Despite the image of Santa Barbara as a wealthy, grand town, dripping with the wealthy and powerful (perhaps due to the sweeping 1980’s daytime soap opera of the same name), Mills does not present this film as such. He presents Santa Barbara as a more artsy town as least where his characters are concerned.

Benning plays Dorothea Fields, a fifty-five-year-old divorced mother of a fifteen-year-old boy, Jaimie. She is a free spirit and allows two borders to live with her-Abbie (Greta Gerwig), a twenty-five-year-old aspiring photographer with fuchsia-colored hair, recovering from cervical cancer, and William (Billy Crudup), a handyman.

They are joined by Jaimie’s good friend, Julie (Elle Fanning), a depressed neighbor.

The film nicely dives into the trials and tribulations of each character as well as their interactions with each other, in a highly quirky manner, and we fall in love with each of them. Dorothea enlists the help of Abbie and Julie to assist in having a positive influence over Jaimie after he nearly dies after a foolish teenage prank.

Mills successfully gives a slice of life feel to the period as punk rock and the political climate of the times are heavily used in the film. Bands such as Talking Heads and Black Flag are focused as Dorothea strives to learn what young people like, herself striving to remain youthful and in touch with her charges.

Dorothea is a chain-smoker and many scenes of her pondering a situation while taking long drags, are featured. I love this aspect of the film as it showcases Benning’s cerebral performance. She is a thoughtful woman, only wanting her son to grow up sane and productive since his father is absent.

Sex and feminism are big parts of the film. Abbie loans Jaimie two books by female feminist authors to allow him a better understanding of women.

When he begins to discuss orgasms and a strange conversation about sex and virginity ensues during a dinner party Dorothea is hosting, the graphic detail is a bit too much for Dorothea.

She is a conflicted character- open-minded and caring, when it comes to her son, she has a more conservative edge while trying to remain open to his new experiences as a teen.

20th Century Women is strictly a character-driven film, which is an enormous strength. Each character is in a different place in their lives and I adore how the film gives a conclusion to each of the characters’ lives in the years to come.

Certainly, the film does go the “happily ever after” route, but this does not bother me. Rather, the film is so well composed that I was enraptured by the characters’ lives. Admittedly, the film is slow-moving at times, but this is due to the richness of the dialogue- nothing is rushed along.

Kudos to the cast- specifically Gerwig and Fanning are wonderful. Fanning’s Julie is a unique character- her mother is a psychiatrist who forces her to attend group sessions that she holds. Julie has a step-sister with cerebral palsy, so Julie frequently sleeps at Dorothea’s house as a way to escape her life.

Sexual active, Julie has a pregnancy scare during the story.

A coming of age type film set in an interesting time, 20th Century Women showcases the talents of a stellar cast, led by Benning, takes its audience into a wonderful, character themed world, and discusses the lives of its intriguing characters with a clear portrayal of life in the late 1970s.

Oscar Nominations: Best Original Screenplay

Independent Spirit Award Nominations: Best Female Lead-Annette Bening, Best Screenplay

The Lady in the Van-2015

The Lady In The Van-2015

Director-Nicholas Hytner

Starring-Maggie Smith

Scott’s Review #610

Reviewed January 19, 2017

Grade: B

As far as I am concerned Maggie Smith can do no wrong and I will happily enjoy watching her in anything- anytime. Around in film since the 1950s this lady deserves a starring film role.

Utterly distinctive she is- as legendary actress Bette Davis was- Smith has a style purely her own- her facial expressions and exasperated gasps make her one of the great film stars.

The Lady in the Van is specifically made for her, I have no doubt, but besides her talents, the movie is a decent offering, but very safe.

It lacks the depth that it could have had.

Written by Alan Bennett, the film tells the true story of Mary Sheperd, an elderly woman living in a broken down van, who befriends Bennett and eventually lives in his driveway for fifteen years before her inevitable death.

Set in northern London, a quaint and gorgeous part of the world, Mary harbors a deep secret involving her van and is revealed to have been a star piano pupil in her day.

Smith has no qualms about playing unflattering characters.

Shepherd is grizzled, abrupt, and rude, but Smith puts a lot of heart into her too, so that the audience senses her vulnerability and falls in love with her. With her sad protruding blue eyes, wrinkles for miles, and chirpy voice, Smith is fantastic at giving her all to the role.

The rest of the cast, however, adequately play their roles but are limited and out-shadowed at every turn. Most notable is the wasted talents of Jim Broadbent, appearing in a small and quite meaningless role.

Besides Smith’s brilliant performance, The Lady in the Van lacks any layers. The story is well and good, but we never see many of Mary’s struggles- how does she afford food? how is she not sick? The film skims over the darker elements of being homeless in favor of a lighthearted tale. Fine, but what about her inevitable issues?

Other less important stories are mentioned but not fully explored. Alex speaks to what looks like his twin brother, but is it his alter ego?

Young men come and go at night, so the presumption is that Alex is gay, and in the end, we do see Alex living with a man, but why is this so vaguely written? Why mention it at all? This story would have been interesting to delve deeper into especially given the fact that the real Alex Bennett wrote the film.

Other side stories are introduced but remain on the surface. Alex’s mother suffers from Alzheimer’s, but this is not explored much, and Mary’s brother, who institutionalized her at a young age, offers no explanation as to why this was done she had a mental illness- but the brother’s motivations are not clear.

I wanted more from the supporting characters than was offered.

Still, the bottom line is that The Lady in the Van is a Maggie Smith film, and any film in which she has the lead role, is pretty damned good for that reason alone.

Hell or High Water-2016

Hell or High Water-2016

Director-David Mackenzie

Starring-Jeff Bridges, Chris Pine, Ben Foster

Scott’s Review #609

Reviewed January 16, 2017

Grade: B+

Reminiscent of the Coen Brothers No Country for Old Men or a classic Sam Peckinpah film from the 1970s, Hell or High Water is a splendid tale of bank robbers being chased by lawmen in rural, western Texas.

The film provides a good story with a tale of morality so the viewer is unsure who to root for the good guys or the bad guys. This gives the film substance compared to the typical action, guy film, done to death.

Odd, quirky, small characters are interspersed throughout the film which adds comedy and a unique feel. The film is directed by David Mackenzie- up until now an unknown to me.

Chris Pine and Ben Foster play Toby and Tanner, two brothers who embark on a series of small-town bank robberies to save their recently deceased mother’s ranch.

Tanner (Foster) is the more seasoned criminal of the two, having spent time in jail and being more volatile than his brother. Toby (Pine) is a family man with two kids and is more intelligent and sensible than his brother.

They are pursued by two Texas Rangers, Marcus Hamilton (Bridges), a grizzled man-weeks away from retirement, and his partner, Alberto Parker (Gil Birmingham).

What I enjoyed most about this film is the authenticity of the setting.

The film was shot in New Mexico, but, meant to be in west Texas, this is believable and the cinematography is gorgeous. The vastness of the land, the sticky desert heat are filmed very well.

Small town Texas is portrayed as tiny characters are introduced as townspeople, giving many credos to the film.

My favorites are the diner waitress-smitten with the handsome Toby (and her $200 tip), and t-bone waitress- grizzled and rude after forty-four years in the same place- their sassy and abrasive behavior works and adds much to the film. Dale Dickey is a treat in any film and her turn as a bank employee is a joy.

How nice to see Chris Pine in a challenging role. His character is conflicted morally- not wanting to hurt anyone, he struggles with the robberies and wants to do right by his kids and his mother. He is a decent man caught in uncertain circumstances and Pine does an excellent job at portraying him, proving the actor is becoming more than just a pretty face.

Bridges play anger quite well and how nice to see the actor succeeding career-wise in his golden years. His Texas Ranger character is determined to uphold the law, but below the surface is more than a bit worried about his upcoming retirement, closing a chapter in his life that undoubtedly is important to him.

His relationship with his partner is jovial, and buddy-like, but is there an underlying physical attraction between the men? The film does not go there, but perhaps on a subconscious level, it is hinted at.

A fantastic scene laced with tension occurs near the end of the film when two of the main characters are killed. It is a stand-off of sorts, atop a desert mountain ridge. One of the characters loses it, which results in a shoot-out and a shocking loss of life.

The scene is great in that it is good, old-fashioned shoot ’em up done well.

Hell or High Water is a gritty action film that contains great elements, nice characterization, and good, clean fun. A throwback to a crime-western of long ago, without the standard stock characters.

This film is more layered than the traditional sort of film and is intelligently written, thereby achieving something unique in its own right.

Oscar Nominations: Best Picture, Best Supporting Actor-Jeff Bridges, Best Original Screenplay, Best Film Editing

Independent Spirit Award Nominations: Best Supporting Male-Ben Foster (won), Best Screenplay, Best Editing

London Has Fallen-2016

London Has Fallen-2016

Director-Babak Najafi

Starring-Gerard Butler, Aaron Eckhart

Scott’s Review #608

Reviewed January 13, 2017

Grade: D

Save for plenty of very interesting, cool London shots- mostly aerial views- London Has Fallen is complete drivel.

The film’s attempt at being a red-blooded, patriotic film, comes across as insulting and racist, with a machismo that is cringe-worthy.

The dialogue is bad and the “us against them” mantra has been done to death in film- mostly the 1980s and 1990s. To quote one reviewer, “London Has Fallen is Donald Trump in film form”.

How the film convinced such a talented cast to appear is beyond me (must have been money), and several’s parts are so small (Robert Forster, Melissa Leo, Jackie Earle Haley) they are nearly glorified extras.

The plot is painfully contrived to say nothing of the ludicrous nature of the entire story.

To retaliate against a drone strike killing a Pakistani leader, terrorists take advantage of the death of the UK Prime Minister to assassinate several world leaders who have gravitated to London to attend the funeral services.

The President of the United States (played by Aaron Eckhart) is naturally in attendance and his murder is thwarted by top Secret Service official, Mike Banning (Gerard Butler)-our films hero.

The rest of the film involves the President and Mike running throughout London attempting to catch the terrorists and bring them to justice while avoiding death.

The London locales are superb, but sadly, mainly appear at the beginning and the end of the film. The London Eye, the Thames river, the Underground, and various metro stations are featured. The numerous London bridges also get some exposure.

The best part is the way the film showcases the vastness of London and not just the up-close shots of historic places like Westminster Abbey or Buckingham Palace.

Certainly, London is known for those gems, but the aerial views give the viewer an appreciation of all that London has to offer- I loved only this aspect of the film.

The supporting roles are abysmal and one imagines the actors cringing as they read the scripts for some of these roles, given the more artistic parts they’ve received in the past.

I hesitate to think what possessed Leo, Forster, and Haley to accept meaningless roles save for a hefty paycheck. Each played members of the President’s staff and were largely reduced to reactionary shots.

Getting more screen time, but being treated to equally uninteresting roles are Angela Bassett as an ill-fated Secret Service Director and Radha Mitchell as Banning’s weary-looking, pregnant wife.

The performances overall are forgettable. Respectable actors Butler and Eckhart merely phone in their vapid, dull lines, failing to make any of it believable.

The film never bothers with character development or anything beyond basic good and bad roles- every character is either 100% good or 100% bad. It is made crystal clear that the Americans are the good guys, and the foreigners (all Middle eastern or Asian actors, of course) are simply the bad guys.

There is never an explanation of what the “bad guys” motivations are and one cheesy line after another is written for the “good guys”.

During the finale Banning professes that “we have been here for thousands of years and always will be”, as he beats a bad guy senseless. Good grief. I’ve seen better dialogue on a network television drama.

And there is never any doubt how the film will end there is an American mole who has used his power to enable all of the assassinations, but when the mole is revealed, it is a character we have never seen before, so who cares?

Surely a film soon to be forgotten for the poor story, cliche-riddled script, and stereotypes galore, but the fantastic London shots were inspiring and lovely to see.

I would have been happy with one hour and forty minutes of those.

Snakes on a Plane-2006

Snakes On A Plane-2006

Director David R. Ellis

Starring Samuel L. Jackson

Scott’s Review #607

Reviewed January 11, 2017

Grade: B

Snakes on a Plane, the surprise internet bruhaha sensation of 2006 has much to criticize.

The plot is inane, the acting way over the top, and the subject portrayed in such a dumb manner, I could see the results being horrific, but there is just something I enjoyed about the film too, as admittedly stupid as it is.

I simply could not help but sit back and enjoy it.

I enjoyed the setting of an airplane- trapped at 35, 000 feet, in peril, has always enamored me (think Airport disaster films of the 1970s).

The story involves a plot to release hundreds of deadly snakes on a passenger flight, to kill a witness to a murder trial.

Of course, innocent passengers are met with their dire fates as the cartoon-like characters are offed one by one, horror film style.

Sadly, the film did not live up to anticipated expectations, commercially or critically, and was considered somewhat of a dud after all of the hype, but I rather enjoyed it for what it was.

Hardly high art, it entertained me.

Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man’s Chest-2006

Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man’s Chest-2006

Director Gore Verbinski

Starring Johnny Depp, Orlando Bloom

Scott’s Review #606

Reviewed January 11, 2017

Grade: B-

Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man’s Chest is the follow-up to the original Pirates of the Caribbean: The Curse of the Black Pearl, from 2003.

The sequel is decent but inferior to Curse of the Black Pearl.

The visual effects are spectacular, and the budget is very high, but the story isn’t there. The film drags along at times as well as being a bit confusing.

Johnny Depp gives his all to his role of Jack Sparrow, performing with gusto, and is the highlight of the franchise.

The supporting characters, Bloom as Will Turner, and Keira Knightley as Elizabeth Swann, are fine, but not on the level of Depp.

Otherwise, the performances are all okay, but just a carbon copy of the first film.

Story-wise, Will and Elizabeth are arrested for aiding Jack Sparrow’s escape execution, and the plot involves the attempts at locating Sparrow along with the typical adventure aspects of a film like this and the stock character villains, with grimaces, heavy makeup, and over-acting, but I expected as much.

Not a bad sequel, certain to entertain the masses, and guaranteed to make a ton of money, inevitably ensuring another sequel will be made, with little doubt of being even less compelling.

Oscar Nominations: 1 win-Best Sound Editing, Best Sound Mixing, Best Art Direction, Best Visual Effects (won)

Closer-2004

Closer-2004

Director Mike Nichols

Starring Julia Roberts, Jude Law, Natalie Portman

Scott’s Review #605

Reviewed January 11, 2017

Grade: B+

Closer (2004) is a very odd, offbeat sort of film, yet it is strangely fascinating and reels you in as the story unfolds and more is revealed. One will become engrossed in the characters as the film is rich in nuanced character development.

Closer is very adult and not for everyone, but if you enjoy character-driven films this one is worth checking out.

Based on a play of the same name and featuring a star-studded cast to go along with several Oscar nominations, Closer tells the story of companionship, isolation, and betrayal.

It centers on four characters, (Anna-Julia Roberts, Dan-Jude Law, Alice-Natalie Portman, and Larry-Clive Owen), each of whom spends the film either bedding, scheming, or jealous of each of the others.

Purely a character study, we see many different emotions from each, which is the film’s strength.

To the film’s credit, it is shot much like a play, however, is just a tad on the slow-moving side.

However, I adored the London locales, and the film’s successful attempt at making the viewer uncomfortable and just a tinge disturbed.

Oscar Nominations: Best Supporting Actor-Clive Owen, Best Supporting Actress-Natalie Portman

My Bloody Valentine-2009

My Bloody Valentine-2009

Director Patrick Lussier

Starring Jensen Ackles, Jaime King

Scott’s Review #604

Reviewed January 11, 2017

Grade: B

What can I say? The remake of the classic slasher film from 1981 is a very slick version of the perfect Valentine’s Day treat- My Bloody Valentine.

To compare the 2009 offering to the original is unfair since I consider that one top-notch. This version is what I expected it to be.

Though several aspects of it were changed from the original, it was entertaining all the same.

The sleepy mining town that the film is set in becomes immersed in scandal as a string of grisly murders occurs in one of the town mines. It is revealed that a tragic accident occurred at one time causing several deaths. The one remaining victim awakens from a coma and goes on a killing spree.

At the same time, youths throw a party near the mine and a series of deaths begin again.

The 3-D effects are necessary for a film like this because, without them, this movie would have been as generic as anything else in the same style.

The story is lame and implausible, and the characters are dumb, but looking past all that, as I usually do in the horror genre, this was a fun ride.

Lots of gore, nudity, violence, and a few genuine scares.

The Reader-2008

The Reader-2008

Director Stephen Daldry

Starring Kate Winslet

Scott’s Review #603

Reviewed January 11, 2017

Grade: A

The Reader (2008) is by far my favorite of all of Kate Winslet’s film roles-and that is saying something! It is her most challenging and provocative to date and will ruffle some feathers for sure based on the subject matter of the story.

The subject of a grown woman in her thirties involved in a steamy and passionate love affair with a young boy half her age is too much for some, but I found the bravery of the film admirably.

To be fair, the film is a slow build-up type of story and it takes a little while to get going, but if you stick with it, it will be worth your time.

Winslet plays a woman (Hanna) in 1950’s Germany, living an ordinary life. She is a poor woman and a young boy she meets changes her life for the better.

He teaches her readings and other educational things and they are inseparable. When she leaves town one day, the boy is devastated.

The film then fast-forwards thirty years to the 1990s and the boy, now grown up and played by Ralph Fiennes, comes upon Hanna in a most unusual, dramatic, and devastating way.

The film is told from the perspective of Fiennes’s character, which is a wonderful decision.

The Reader (2008) is very heavy on sex and nudity (I mean lots!), so if anyone is offended by that you might want to skip it.

The story is riveting and the acting is top-notch.

An excellent film.

Oscar Nominations: 1 win-Best Picture, Best Director-Stephen Daldry, Best Actress-Kate Winslet (won), Best Adapted Screenplay, Best Cinematography

Broadcast News-1987

Broadcast News-1987

Director James L. Brooks

Starring William Hurt, Holly Hunter

Scott’s Review #602

Reviewed January 11, 2017

Grade: B

Broadcast News is a 1987 feature film that admittedly is an intelligently written romantic comedy. It was rewarded with several Academy Awards nominations, in what has been known to be a bleak year for the film industry.

That being said, I found the overall result of the film to be a decent experience, but certainly nothing fantastic. I was left with the feeling that it was “okay”.

I do not think it was good enough to warrant Oscar nominations, but it was enjoyable all the same.

The principal characters are interesting enough, albeit safe.

The film centers around three television news people- a neurotic news producer (Holly Hunter), a reporter (Albert Brooks), and his rival (William Hurt).

All of them are ambitious and determined to climb the ladder of success in their Washington D.C. base.

The film explores the relationships between the characters.

As stated, there is nothing wrong with the film. I would have expected a bit more- perhaps a deeper or darker story- instead, despite some witty dialogue, the film is largely a safe, predictable journey.

Oscar Nominations: Best Picture, Best Actor-William Hurt, Best Actress-Holly Hunter, Best Supporting Actor-Albert Brooks, Best Screenplay Written Directly for the Screen, Best Cinematography, Best Film Editing

The Player-1992

The Player-1992

Director Robert Altman

Starring Tim Robbins, Peter Gallagher

Scott’s Review #601

Reviewed January 11, 2017

Grade: A

The Player (1992) ranks up there with other Robert Altman classics such as Gosford Park (2001), Nashville (1975), and Short Cuts (1993).

The film is an excellent piece of Hollywood satire and centers around a jaded movie executive, played by Tim Robbins, who does an incredible job with his role.

Robbins plays Griffin Mill, a man with no scruples. Feeling usurped by a younger executive, played by Peter Gallagher, as well as receiving death threats, he goes on the hunt for the person he feels responsible for, which leads to murder.

The audience is unsure whether to love or hate Mill, thanks to Robbin’s performance. He is snarky, but also vulnerable and a tad sympathetic.

The film contains a slew of real Hollywood celebrities (Cher, Malcolm McDowell, Bruce Willis) playing themselves and is largely improvised (as many of Altman’s films are).

Whoopi Goldberg and Lyle Lovett star as odd police detectives.

The plot is nothing that hasn’t been done before, but it’s the realness and the direction that make this movie a must-see, especially for Robert Altman fans.

The Player (1992) is a hidden gem.

Oscar Nominations: Best Director-Robert Altman, Best Screenplay Based on Material Previously Produced or Published, Best Film Editing

Independent Spirit Award Nominations: 1 win-Best Feature (won)