All posts by scottmet99

1954 Films, Howard Keel, Jane Powell, Jeff Richards, Julie Newmar, Musical, Russ Tamblyn, Stanley Donen

Seven Brides For Seven Brothers-1954

Leave a comment

Seven Brides For Seven Brothers-1954

Director Stanley Donen

Starring Howard Keel, Jane Powell

Scott’s Review #711

Reviewed January 7, 2018

Grade: B-

Seven Brides For Seven Brothers (1954) is a musical and another in a string of Metro-Goldwyn-Meyer productions, ever so present during the “Golden Age of Hollywood.”

The songs are not quite as memorable as similar musicals of the day, and the film has a sexist slant that is jarring by today’s gender-equal standards. Given the time that the film was made and the timed setting of the mid-nineteenth century, however, things were very different, and the film does contain one semi-strong female character.

Seven Brides for Seven Brothers is a lovely film, but in the present day, it is pretty dated and irrelevant—little more than an ode to yesteryear.

Adam Pompitee (Howard Keel), is a dashing, rugged man, living in the Oregon Territory in 1850. He struts into town and proclaims his desire for a wife- presumably to cook and clean for him and his six younger brothers, all living together in a cabin in the rural mountains.

When he falls head over heels for tavern worker Milly (Jane Powell), they impulsively marry, but she is disappointed to learn she will be caring for seven men- not one. Milly then plots to marry off the unruly bunch to local girls.

Throughout the film, characters partake in song and merriment as the hi-jinks play out.

At its core, Seven Brides For Seven Brothers is meant to be a lighthearted romp, and it succeeds at that. It contains a strong romantic angle, and the message of finding one’s soulmate is palpable- Milly is the sensible female counterpart to erratic Adam, and there is chemistry between the actors.

Milly is strong-willed and eventually puts her foot down, but still accepts her role as the domestic and the caretaker.

Fun is how each of the brothers finds the one girl in town meant for him as the duo pairs off in unison. This is a cute aspect of the film- and perhaps a film such as this one is not entirely meant to be over-analyzed.

Humorous, if not slightly overdone,  is the luscious red hair that each Pontipee brother has- dyed hair or wigs were used as needed.

The film succeeds when it sticks to the song and dancing numbers, which are far more entertaining than the storyline. MGM used actors who were classically trained singers or dancers, giving the film a more authentic choreography.

Given the fourteen principal characters in the production, this must have been a beast to achieve without making things look ridiculous. Keel, as the main character Adam, is a professional singer who has appeared in several musicals, such as Kiss Me Kate and Showboat. Powell, as Milly, holds her own with a gorgeous singing voice and has appeared in other musicals.

Still, Seven Brides For Seven Brothers contains a bothersome sexist story, and women are treated more as objects for men to conquer rather than real people with feelings or emotions. The overall implication within the film is that women are desperate to get married and should be flattered to be chosen by any man.

This is readily apparent when the brothers accost the girls from their homes and take them unwillingly to the cabin, where, predictably, the women succumb to the men’s desires and fall in love with them.

A film to be taken with a grain of salt and a trip back to olden times, Seven Brides For Seven Brothers is a dated picture, but it is fun. It contains grand production numbers such as “Lonesome Polecat,” “When You’re In Love,” and “June Bride.”

These songs are light and airy and a high point of the film.

For those seeking a liberal-minded affair, this film will disappoint, as the film is very conservative with traditional male/female roles and expectations, as much as one could imagine.

Oscar Nominations: 1 win-Best Motion Picture, Best Screenplay, Best Scoring of a Musical Picture (won), Best Cinematography, Color, Best Film Editing

1996 Films, Courtney Cox, David Arquette, Drew Barrymore, Frances Lee McCain, Henry Winkler, Horror, Liev Schreiber, Linda Blair, Matthew Lillard, Neve Campbell, Patrick Lussier, Rose McGowan, Skeet Ulrich, Slasher, Wes Craven

Scream-1996

Leave a comment

Scream-1996

Director Wes Craven

Starring Drew Barrymore, Neve Campbell, David Arquette

Scott’s Review #710

Reviewed January 5, 2018

Grade: A-

Wes Craven’s 1996 film Scream is a piece that greatly assisted in bringing the horror genre back into relevance after a long drought throughout the late 1980s and early 1990s when horror films suffered from both over-saturation and cliche-riddled messes.

Thanks to Scream, creativity and plot twists and turns returned to the forefront of good horror films, and a clever film was birthed.

Fast-forward to 2018, the film does suffer a bit from a dated 1990s look but is still great fun to watch and a treat for all classic horror buffs as the references to classic greats are endless.

The film is sectioned off nicely and gets underway quickly  (in the best sequence of the film) as Casey Becker (Drew Barrymore)  receives a flirtatious phone call while making popcorn, from a man asking her to name her favorite horror film.

The friendly game quickly turns vicious as the caller threatens to kill her boyfriend should she answer a question incorrectly.

In a clever twist (think 1960s Psycho!) Casey and her boyfriend meet deadly fates and the opening credits begin to roll.

Given the huge star, Barrymore was in 1996, this twist was all the more shocking and attention-grabbing.

The remainder of the film centers around Sidney Prescott (Neve Campbell), a popular California high school student, as she is pursued by an attacker known only as “Ghostface”, who dons a creepy costume and terrorizes victims via phone calls.

The small town, led by police officer Dewey Riley (David Arquette) and bitchy newswoman Gale Weathers (Courtney Cox), is determined to unmask the killer and figure out his or her motivations.

Sidney’s boyfriend, Billy (Skeet Ulrich), and other friends are along for the ride as a possible connected sub-plot involving Sidney’s deceased mother is introduced.

A romance between Dewey and Gale is also broached.

Scream is an enormous treat for fans of the horror genre as numerous references (and film clips!) of classics such as 1978’s Halloween abound throughout the film.

Other references to Friday the 13th, Prom Night, and A Nightmare On Elm Street appear during the film.

Writer, Kevin Williamson, a horror enthusiast, must have had a ball writing the screenplay that would become Scream.

In 1996, the mega-success of the film successfully not only jump-started the entire genre but also introduced younger fans of Scream to classics that were perhaps their parent’s generation and got them interested in the films.

Classic horror films are not only referenced during the film but also explained, mostly by the supporting character of Jamie, the nerdy kid who works at the video store and adores horror films.

A sequence in which he explains several “rules” of the horror genre is superlative, creative, and just great fun. He tells the teenagers at a party that anyone who drinks, has sex, or says “I will be right back”, is doomed to suffer a violent fate.

This clever writing makes Scream enormous fun to watch.

The climax of Scream is quite surprising in itself and the “great reveal” of the murderer (s) is also intelligent writing and quite the surprise. Several red herrings are produced along the way, casting suspicion on other characters who may or may not be the killers.

A small gripe of the writing is the motivations of the murderers- when the explanation is given for their killing spree, the reasoning is a bit convoluted and hard to fathom, but this is horror, and suspension of disbelief is always a necessity.

Scream is best remembered for giving the horror genre a good, hard kick in the seat of the pants and shaking all of the elements up a bit while preserving the core ideals of a good slasher film (suspense, a whodunit, and good solid kills).

Scream (1996) was followed by several sequels, some achieving better successes than others. In 2018 the film may not be quite as fresh as it once was, but is still a solid watch and memorable for relaunching a genre.

2017 Films, Drama, Juno Temple, Kate Winslet, Woody Allen

Wonder Wheel-2017

Leave a comment

Wonder Wheel-2017

Director-Woody Allen

Starring Kate Winslet, James Belushi

Scott’s Review #709

Reviewed December 31, 2017

Grade: B+

Woody Allen typically churns out a new film release each year and 2017’s project is a film called Wonder Wheel.

Set in 1950’s Coney Island, a seaside beach in Brooklyn, New York, the film is an authentic-looking period drama, with lovely costumes and legitimate New York accents from all principal actors.

The story itself is overall quite depressing, though, as a likable character is tough to find, but Wonder Wheel contains fantastic acting, mainly on the part of star Kate Winslet, whose troubled character is the film’s focal point.

Winslet portrays Ginny Rannell, a struggling forty-year-old woman living in the seaside neighborhood and working as a waitress at a dingy Clam House. She despises her life and longs for a way out of the doldrums- yearning for the life she had years ago as an aspiring actress.

Her husband, Humpty (Jim Belushi), a carousel operator, is an alcoholic. Together they raise Ginny’s son, Richie, a young boy who loves to start fires.

When Humpty’s estranged daughter, Carolina (Juno Temple), shows up on their doorstep, having provided information about her mobster husband, and subsequently “marked”, Ginny’s life slowly begins to unravel as she and Carolina pursue the same man, hunky lifeguard, Mickey (Justin Timberlake).

The New York setting of the film is an enormous plus and a standard of many Woody Allen films- the authenticity is clear. The summer mood of the beach, sand, and the sunny boardwalk and beach scenes make the viewer feel like they are transported in time.

The 1950’s period works as beachwear and the amusement park sets are used to their advantage. The New York accents of the actors and the language and sayings are appropriate for the times. The apartment that the Rannells rent is a great treat to the film- the set is used with a wonderful beach landscape that is featured during daytime scenes and nighttime scenes so that the change of mood can be noticed-these are all enticing elements to Wonder Wheel.

Enough cannot be said for the talents of Winslet, who makes the character of Ginny come to life. Undoubtedly a tough role for her to play, Winslet, who can make reading the phone book sound interesting, tackles the complex part and arguably gives one of the best performances of her career- my vote would still go to her portrayal of Hannah Schmitz from 2008’s The Reader.

Initially a sympathetic character, she longingly desires to return to the stage and perhaps find stardom as an actress and sees Mickey as her last chance. When events curtail her dreams, her character takes a sharp turn and does an unspeakable act.

I love the acting talents of Justin Timberlake and by 2017 he has successfully proven himself a major star in the film world as well as the music world. As the hunky, charismatic, yet studious and intelligent lifeguard, Mickey, he teeters between womanizer and earnest, love-stricken, young man.

Timberlake has taken on more interesting film roles beginning with the 2010s The Social Network and let’s hope there are more to come.

Juno Temple is just perfect as the naive Carolina. With an innocent, sweet, personality, all she yearns for is love and a fresh start. Temple, largely known for quirky independent film roles, fits perfectly in a Woody Allen creation.

Finally, legendary actor James Belushi fills his character of Humpty with dedication, loyalty, and alcoholic rage. He adores Ginny but sometimes takes her for granted.

What a treat for fans of The Sopranos to see a couple of familiar faces appear as (what else?) mobsters. Tony Sirico and Steve Schirripa make cameo appearances as Angelo and Nick, henchmen for the unseen husband of Carolina, who are intent on tracking down and killing her.

Despite very small parts, the actors seem to have a ball reprising similar roles that made them famous.

Wonder Wheel, certainly shot in a similar tone to a stage production, draws comparisons to A Streetcar Named Desire, both with four principal characters- two male and two female, Ginny, Carolina, Mickey, and Humpty, all with some similarities to and some differences with storied characters Blanche, Stella, Stanley, and Mitch.

But the comparisons can easily be studied and analyzed.

Woody Allen creates a film that can be appreciated mostly for its top-notch acting talent not surprising given the actor’s cast, and a compelling, never boring story.

The film is a downer, however, with no heroic characters to speak of. Thankfully, this is counterbalanced perfectly by a great New York setting, which is a high point of Wonder Wheel and cheers up the otherwise dour tone of the film.

2017 Films, Armie Hammer, Drama, Independent, Independent Drama, LGBTQ+ Drama, LGBTQ+ Films, LGBTQ+ Romance, Michael Stuhlbarg, Timothée Chalamet

Call Me By Your Name-2017

Leave a comment

Call Me By Your Name-2017

Director-Luca Guadagnino

Starring-Timothée Chalamet, Armie Hammer

Scott’s Review #708

Reviewed December 27, 2017

Grade: A

Call Me by Your Name is a gorgeous film, simply beautiful in story-telling, cinematography, and acting.

A humanistic film that crafts a lovely tale of young love, friendship, and emotions, that is simply breathtaking to experience.

In fact, in the LGBT category, I would venture to proclaim that this film is groundbreaking- leaving behind any tried and true homophobic elements and instead, telling a good story that is fresh, sincere, and simply flawless.

The period in the summer of 1983 and the landscape is the beautiful Italian Riviera. Seventeen-year-old Italian-American, Elio,  (Timothée Chalamet) dreams the summer away living with his parents in a small village.  They are affluent and his world is rich with culture and learnings- his father (Michael Stuhlbarg) is a professor and his mother is a translator.

A brilliant student, Elio wiles away the days reading, playing music, and flirting with girlfriend  Marzia. When a handsome, twenty-four-year-old American student, Oliver, (Armie Hammer) arrives for a six-week stay assisting Elio’s father on a project, desire and first love blossoms between the young men, as they struggle with their burgeoning relationship.

Directed by Luca Guadagnino, has also directed the lovely 2009 film, I Am Love, is a man known for stories of desire in small Italian villages. Call Me By Your Name is the third in a trilogy- I Am Love and 2015’s A Bigger Splash being the others.

The setting is incredibly important to the story as both the summer heat and the world of the intellectual scholars are nestled into a grand shell of culture and the philosophical nature of the story is palpable- the film just oozes with smarts and sophistication.

By 2017, the LGBT genre has become populated with films in the romantic, drama, and comedy sub-genres, but many use the standard homophobic slant to elicit drama and conflict.

Not to diminish the importance of homophobic discussions to teach viewers, Call Me By Your Name stands alone in that homophobia is not an issue in this story.

Given the time of 1983, this may be surprising- at the very cusp of the AIDS epidemic, this topic is also not discussed- rather, the subject matter is simply a love story between two males and the coming of age story that their love expresses.

The film is quite moving and both Elio and Oliver are characters filled with texture and raw emotion. Oliver is confident, charismatic and a great catch for any lucky young lady in the village. Hammer fills the role with poise and humanity. Chalamet, a beautiful young man, gives the complex role his all as so much can be conveyed not by dialogue, but by expressions on the actor’s face.

As Oliver slow dances with a local girl, the wounded look that Chalamet reveals, his eyes welling up with tears, is heartbreaking. Seventeen is a tough age for most young men, but when coming to terms with one’s sexuality it can be excruciating.

The final scene is poignant as it features at least a five-minute-long scene gazing into the eyes of Chalamet as many emotions are expressed in this sequence.

Enough credit cannot be given to Stuhlbarg as Elio’s father as he gives one of the best speeches ever performed in film history. What a subtle and poignant performance the actor gives as the sympathetic and knowing father.

His speech of understanding and warmth is riveting and inspirational- to be cherished. Mr. Perlman is a role model to fathers everywhere and any gay son’s ideal parent.

One scene that could stir controversy is the sure-to-be-controversial “peach scene”. Involving an innocent peach used during a sex act, the scene is erotic and borders on “icky”, but is also important to foster the connection between Oliver and Elio.

Another potential risk to the film is the fact that Oliver is twenty-four and Elio is seventeen, meaning that Elio is underage. However, the film never plays Oliver as more the aggressor and the relationship remains tender and consensual.

Call Me By Your Name is not just a great LGBT film, but it is a film for the ages.  Beautifully crafted with gorgeous landscapes and nuanced, powerful acting, the sequences are subtle and carefully paced. The film is simply a treasure.

Oscar Nominations: Best Picture, Best Actor-Timothée Chalamet, Best Adapted Screenplay (won), Best Original Song-“Mystery of Love”

Independent Spirit Award Nominations: Best Feature, Best Director-Luca Guadagnino, Best Male Lead-Timothée Chalamet (won), Best Supporting Male-Armie Hammer, Best Cinematography (won), Best Editing

2017 Films, Musical, Rebecca Ferguson

The Greatest Showman-2017

Leave a comment

The Greatest Showman-2017

Director-Michael Gracey

Starring-Hugh Jackman, Michelle Williams, Zac Efron

Scott’s Review #707

Reviewed December 26, 2017

Grade: A-

A pure musical, escapist film, The Greatest Showman holds a dear and relevant message and elicits hope for outcasts everywhere by leading a story of acceptance and perseverance in the feel-good film of 2017.

Hugh Jackman leads the pack, starring as P.T. Barnum, a man struggling to create an entertainment show with live and unusual performers- deemed “freaks” in those days- the 1800’s in New York.

The film is quite joyful and light with many cheery musical numbers sure to leave audience members humming along for hours after the conclusion of the film. The Greatest Showman is a rag to riches story and a thoroughly enjoyable film.

Jackman is charismatic and likable as the entrepreneur and showman, Barnum, who we meet as a young boy, the son of a poor tailor. He becomes enamored with wealthy young  Charity (Michelle Williams) and the two eventually marry, much to the chagrin of her pompous parents.

Barnum and Charity at first struggle to make ends meet as they begin to raise a family, but eventually, find success and wealth when the show succeeds.

The film chronicles Barnum’s rise to fame and the trials and tribulations (romantic, business) for several years, mainly through musical numbers. Zac Efron is wonderful as Barnum’s eventual business partner, Phillip Carlyle.

The supporting characters that director Michael Gracey offers up are creative, if not typical mainstays of carnivals and circuses everywhere- the bearded lady, the fat man, and a man covered in tattoos are featured prominently.

Unclear to me is whether these characters actually existed or are created simply for plot purposes, but rumor has it that The Greatest Showman has taken great liberties with the factual accuracy of the real P.T. Barnum and his escapades.

This would be bothersome if not for the wonderful message this film contains- acceptance and celebrating diversity.

Certainly, in today’s chaotic world this is of prominent importance for young people everywhere.

Those expecting anything of more substance than a cheery and bright holiday slice of enjoyment may be disappointed- some mainstream critics were not too high on this film, but I am okay with a little escapist adventure on occasion.

The message throughout The Greatest Showman is quite good.

The best musical number is the show-stopping and anthemic “This Is Me”, and Keala Settle is fabulous as the bearded lady, who leads this important song. The number is empowering and energetic.

The chemistry between Jackman and Williams is not remarkable, but not altogether vacant either. Rather, it is simply decent, and not the film’s strongest point. I sense better chemistry between Jackman and Rebecca Ferguson as grand Swedish singer, Jenny Lind.

Their “romance” is unfulfilled however and we will just need to imagine the possibilities of that one.

I adore seeing Efron in quality roles (think 2012’s exceptional The Paperboy) and his performance as Phillip is great. Sharing a good bond with Barnum, he has his romance with acrobat, (and of mixed race) Anne Wheeler.

His values and earnestness make the character very appealing as he is torn between riches and standing on principle.

The Greatest Showman may not go down in history as the ultimate tops in filmmaking or even one of the best musicals, but the film does succeed in dazzling the audience and providing a couple of hours worth of fun and entertainment- similar to the way P.T. Barnum energized the crowds with a slice of make-believe, this is more than appropriate.

Oscar Nominations: Best Original Song-“This Is Me”

2016 Films, Christina Applegate, Comedy, David Walton, Jada Pinkett Smith, Jay Hernandez, Jon Lucas, Kathryn Hahn, Kristen Bell, Lowest Rated Films, Martha Stewart, Mila Kunis, Scott Moore, Wanda Sykes, Wendell Pierce

Bad Moms-2016

Leave a comment

Bad Moms-2016

Director Jon Lucas, Scott Moore

Starring Mila Kunis, Kristen Bell, Kathryn Hahn

Scott’s Review #706

Reviewed December 20, 2017

Grade: D+

Bad Moms (2016) tries to do for women what The Hangover (2009) did for men and create a raunchy, R-rated party romp that haggard mothers everywhere can relate to and appreciate.

The film’s billboard displays the three main characters boozing it up under the caption “Party Like a Mother.” Perhaps since I am not a mother, I did not entirely gravitate toward this film, but Bad Moms fell flat for me despite a smidgen of mild laughs.

Primarily because of tired characters, gimmicky situations, and an over-the-top tone.

The film, written by the same individuals who wrote The Hangover, is a direct ripoff with a different gender in the driver’s seat.

The central character is Amy Mitchell (Mila Kunis), a thirty-two-year-old mother of two who is living a busy life in the Chicago suburbs.

Considered “old” by her hipster boss and with a porn-obsessed husband, she runs around frazzled and behind schedule most of the time.

After a particularly hairy day, Amy abruptly quits the school PTA run by militant Gwendolyn (Christina Applegate). She befriends fellow moms, sex-crazed Carla (Kathryn Hahn) and timid Kiki (Kristen Bell).

After she incites Gwendolyn’s wrath, Amy decides enough is enough and embarks on a plot to win the PTA presidency while dumping her husband and dating a hunky widower, Jessie (Jay Hernandez).

Admittedly, Kunis is very likable as Amy. She’s an incredible, energetic chick who most would love to befriend, and we empathize with her predicaments and schedule.

But this can only go so far in a comedic film. The setup pieces and the supporting characters are too plot-driven and lack authenticity. The result is little more than one root-able character.

As an actress, Applegate is quite capable, but Gwendolyn, the transparent foil, is primarily written as a cartoon character. Her bitchy comments to her underlings, who inexplicably are afraid to cross her, seem too staged.

Jada Pinkett Smith, in need of a paycheck, is disposable as “second in command” crony Stacy. Furthermore, Amy’s husband, Mike (David Walton), is portrayed mainly as a buffoon and childlike.

The point of these character examples is to stress that the film contains too many caricatures rather than characters. 

An irritating quality of Bad Moms that I cannot shake is that the film is written and directed by a duo of men! Jon Lucas and Scott Moore are the individuals in question, and the fact that the film, painted as a female empowerment story, is not written by females is almost unforgivable.

A case in point involves a bathroom scene where the ladies discuss uncircumcised penises, a dumb scene if you ask me, that is lousy taste considering men wrote and directed it.

In this day and age of Harvey Weinstein sexual harassment suits bubbling to the surface, the scene seems icky. It should not be this hard to find women to write for other women.

Of the additional trio of females, Kathryn Hahn’s Carla has a few funny scenes but is written as so sex-obsessed that it is impossible to take the character seriously, and the same goes for Bell’s Kiki.

When mousy Kiki finally lays down the law and tells her boorish husband to deal with their kids, it is meant to be a rah-rah moment, but instead becomes eye-rolling. Not the best actress in the world, Bell continues to get roles like this in sub-par films.

An attempt by filmmakers to make a girl film on par with male-driven raunchy comedies thrust on moviegoers over the years, Bad Moms (2016) comes across as too unoriginal and too desperate for laughs.

Undoubtedly hoping to win over the same audiences who flocked to the last funny female-driven comedy hit, 2011 Bridesmaids, the film falls flat and lacks genuine fun.

Kunis’s lead role and the sweet romance her character shares with Hernandez’s Jessie slightly bolster this.

2017 Films, Best Picture Oscar Winners, Drama, Michael Shannon, Michael Stuhlbarg, Octavia Spencer, Richard Jenkins

The Shape of Water-2017

Leave a comment

The Shape of Water-2017

Director-Guillermo del Toro

Starring-Sally Hawkins, Richard Jenkins, Michael Shannon

Scott’s Review #705

Reviewed December 16, 2017

Grade: A

Director Guillermo del Toro creates a lovely Beauty and the Beast style film that is as gorgeous to look at as the story is intelligent and sweet to experience.

Thanks to a talented cast led by Sally Hawkins, the film is part drama, part science fiction, even part thriller, but touching to one’s heart and a lesson in true love regardless of outward appearances.

The story was co-written by Vanessa Taylor giving it a needed female perspective to perfectly balance the traditional male machinations.

The setting is Baltimore, Maryland during the early 1960s. Ongoing is the Cold War pitting the United States and the Soviet Union against each other- both mistrustful of the other side. Kindly and mute, Elisa Esposito (Hawkins) is a curious and whimsical young woman, who works as a cleaning lady at an Aerospace Research Center.

When she stumbles upon a mysterious “shape” being held prisoner for experimentation purposes, she slowly communicates with and befriends the creature, eventually falling madly in love with him.

The “asset” as the scientists like to call him is an amphibian/humanoid needing saltwater to survive. Elisa sees an opportunity to help her love escape captivity and off she goes.

Hawkins exudes warmth and fills Elisa with courage and a determination that is astounding. Not to utter a word is a tough feat for an actor to challenge, but instead of words, Hawkins successfully provides a vast array of emotions to reveal how Elisa feels.

Despite her “handicap” she is a strong woman and speaks her mind on more than one occasion using sign language to offer her frustration. Hawkins gives a fantastic and believable performance.

Cast in wonderful and important supporting roles are Richard Jenkins as Elisa’s friend and neighbor, Giles, a closeted gay man who works as a commercial artist. Jenkins fills this character with intelligence, heart, and empathy as he struggles with his issues of alcoholism and loneliness- unable to be accepted for who he is.

Octavia Spencer shines as witty and stubborn Zelda Fuller, Elisa’s best friend and co-worker. Zelda has her domestic problems but is forever there for her friend, and Spencer gives her character zest, humor, and energy.

Finally, Michael Shannon plays the dastardly and menacing Colonel Richard Strickland, the man who found the “asset” in the rivers of South America and has a nice family.

Each of these characters is written exceptionally well and each has its storyline rather than simply supporting Hawkins’s character.

The audience becomes involved in the private lives of Giles, Zelda, and Strickland and we get to know and care for them- or hate them as the case may be.

Giles, harboring a crush on a handsome pie-shop owner, is afraid to make his feelings known. Zelda, with a lazy husband, dutifully takes care of her man though she is as sassy as they come. And Strickland lives an all-American family life with a pretty wife and two kids, totally unaware of his shenanigans.

The film is a gorgeous and lovely experience and by this I mean the film has a magical element. The opening and closing sequences shot underwater, resound in beauty as objects float along in a dreamy way, the narrator (Jenkins) taking us on a journey to explain the events of the story.

At its core, The Shape of Water is a romantic love story, and my favorite scenes- those of Hawkins and the “asset” are to be treasured. Yes, the two do make love, which may be too much for some, but the scenes are tasteful and important to show the depth of the character’s love for one another.

Cherishing is the way that Elisa uses both music and hard-boiled eggs to communicate with the “asset”. When Elisa imagines the two characters dancing, the sequence is an enchanting experience reminiscent of Beauty and the Beast.

Other underwater scenes involving Elisa and the “asset” are tender, graceful, and filled with loveliness.

A key part of the film involves a story of intrigue between the Americans and the Soviets, and while both are portrayed negatively, the Americans are arguably written as more unsympathetic than the Soviets.

Thanks to Strickland- abusive and vicious, and his uncaring superior, General Holt, we do not root for the government officials at all, but rather, the ordinary folks like Elisa, Zelda, and Giles, who are outcasts.

Interestingly, Dmitri (Michael Stuhlbarg), a Soviet spy who is a scientist, is the only character working at the center who wants to keep the “asset” alive and is written sympathetically.

My overall assessment of The Shape of Water is that it is a film to be enjoyed on many levels and by particular varied tastes- the film will cater to those seeking an old-style romance, complete with some tasty French music.

Then again, the film can be lumped into a political espionage thriller, with a cat-and-mouse chase and other nail-biting efforts.

Overall, the film has heart and truth and will appeal to vast audiences seeking an excellent film.

Oscar Nominations: Best Picture (won), Best Director-Guillermo del Toro (won), Best Actress-Sally Hawkins, Best Supporting Actor-Richard Jenkins, Best Supporting Actress-Octavia Spencer, Best Original Screenplay, Best Original Score (won), Best Sound Editing, Best Sound Mixing, Best Production Design (won), Best Cinematography, Best Costume Design, Best Film Editing

2016 Films, Ben Stiller, Bryan Cranston, Cedric the Entertainer, Comedy, Elon Musk, Gene Simmons, James Franco, John Hamburg, Jonah Hill, Keegan-Michael Key, Lowest Rated Films, Megan Mullally, Paul Stanley, Romantic Comedy, Shawn Levy, Zoey Deutch

Why Him?-2016

Leave a comment

Why Him? -2016

Director John Hamburg

Starring John Franco, Bryan Cranston

Scott’s Review #704

Reviewed December 6, 2017

Grade: D

Why Him? (2016) is epic film drivel starring quite capable actors in a mish-mash of dull, predictable stories, obnoxious characters, and a need to attempt to go raunchier and raunchier for a cheap laugh.

Why there is a market for films like this is beyond me as no thinking is required (maybe the film will please those fans!), but the film scores slightly higher than a solid “F” based solely on a few chuckles uttered thanks to the only dim bright spots in this mess, Bryan Cranston and Megan Mullally.

A story told dozens of times before in “slapstick comedy” fare, the premise is tired beyond belief. A good girl meets a bad boy, they fall head over heels in love and must deal with the aftermath of her parent’s meeting, and hating the bad boy.

The main gimmick is the rivalry between boyfriend and girlfriend’s father, like an unfunny Meet the Parents (2000).  A silly and uninteresting plot point about each character’s business success or lack thereof is mixed in as if anyone cares.

As with all films of this ilk, the story is wrapped up in a neat, tidy little bow by the time the credits roll, and all characters live happily ever after in perfect harmony.

In one of his most disappointing roles, James Franco plays Laird Mayhew, the wealthy, eccentric, thirty-something CEO of an upstart video game company.

He is foul-mouthed and comically speaks his mind or absentmindedly shows his ass on a Skype chat with his girlfriend Stephanie (Zoey Deutch) while her parents are linked to the chat at a birthday party.

Stephanie, a college student and girlfriend of Laird, invites her parents, Ned and Barb (Cranston and Mullally), along with their fifteen-year-old Scotty, for the Christmas holidays.

Predictably, Stephanie’s parents are appalled by Laird and want her to have nothing to do with him. When Stephanie arranges for Ned, Barb, and Scotty to stay at Laird’s spacious home, the antics take off as feuds and misunderstandings erupt.

The main problem with Why Him? is that director John Hamburg (famous for mainstream comedies such as Along Came Polly, 2004, and I Love You, Man, 2009) seems determined to push the raunchy comedy elements further with this idiotic film.

He makes Laird as obnoxious and crass as possible yet tries to make the character more “likable” by giving him a clueless quality; therefore, he is not mean-spirited and should be beloved by the audience.

The character does not work. Franco has played terrific roles- specifically in 127 Hours (2010) and  Howl (2010). As a fan of the talented actor, I expected more from him, but alas, some performances are only as good as the written material.

If there is a bright spot worth mentioning, it is with the casting of Cranston and Mullally.

Two actors are undeniably good at physical comedy. They do as much as they can with poorly written, stock-type roles. Cranston’s Ned, a middle-class small business owner from Grand Rapids, Michigan, is both envious and resentful of Laird, perhaps admiring the young man’s business savvy and regretting not being as successful.

Barb is a one-note, ditzy yet lovable wife, a role made slightly better by Mullally’s goofy portrayal. In one of the best scenes, Barb smokes pot and becomes a mess in her bedroom.

The following day, Ned is trapped on the toilet and has an embarrassing experience with Laird’s best friend, Gustav. While these scenes are juvenile, they are made better by the funny actors.

Suffering greatly from a tired and overused storyline that falls flat, unlikable, and dull characters, the film offers nothing of substance or worth.

Why Him? (2016) is entirely plot-driven with no character development or well-written characters.

The film is a complete waste of time. It results from a studio hoping to achieve box office success by churning out a poor comedy with wasted talent that will please only those audiences not expecting much from their films.

2017 Films, Comedy, Dark Comedy, Independent, Independent Comedy, Peter Dinklage, Woody Harrelson

Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri-2017

Leave a comment

Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri-2017

Director-Martin McDonagh

Starring-Frances McDormand, Woody Harrelson, Sam Rockwell

Scott’s Review #703

Reviewed December 4, 2017

Grade: A

Frances McDormand takes control of Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri from the first scene and never let’s go as she gives a riveting portrayal of an angry mid-western woman seeking justice in the Martin McDonagh directed 2017 vehicle.

The up-and-coming director has also created such films as  2008’s In Bruges and 2012’s Seven Psychopaths.

Similar to these films, Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri is peppered with dark comedic moments and vile, bitter characters. The film is a measured success as it is not your standard Hollywood production and is quite left of center.

The action begins as we meet McDormand’s Mildred Hayes, sitting alone in her beat-up station wagon, brooding by the side of the road gazing at three tattered billboards.

She is clearly both pissed off and thoughtful as she formulates a plan to purchase a year’s worth of billboards, questioning the local police’s ineptitude at finding her daughter’s rapist and killer.

Woody Harrelson portrays the Ebbing police chief, Sheriff Bill Willoughby, and Sam Rockwell plays the racist and dim-whited officer Jason Dixon, both displeased with Mildred’s activities.

Other casting decisions in small yet important roles are Lucas Hedges as Mildred’s adolescent and depressed son, Robbie, and John Hawke as her ex-husband, Charlie, who is dating an eighteen-year-old ditz.

Peter Dinklage is well cast as a local car salesman, James, an earnest dwarf with a crush on Mildred.

Supporting roles are prevalent throughout the film as small-town locales like Jason’s mother, and Red, the owner of the advertising agency, who rents the billboards to Mildred, shape the experience.

The casting in Three Billboards Outside of Ebbing, Missouri is a strong point of the film as a whole.

The town of Ebbing is portrayed as dreary, blue-collar, and racist, but just perfect as a way of setting the tone of the film.

I suspect residents of the mid-west or the southern United States of America may take some issue with character representations. Jason is written as both racist and not too smart and he encompasses numerous characters in the film.

Enough cannot be said for Rockwell’s performance in transforming a hated character during the first two-thirds of the film to suddenly almost becoming the hero towards the end.

Props are also deserved by Harrelson’s Chief Willoughby- bordering on hick and racist, he also has a heart, and cares about Mildred’s predicament- when a shocking event occurs, he becomes an even richer character.

Worth pointing out and impressive to me as a viewer is that the three prominent black characters- Willoughby’s replacement, Abercrombie, Mildred’s best friend and co-worker, Denise, and a kindly billboard painter, are each written as intelligent and sensitive, a fact I found to perfectly balance the other less sympathetic characters.

In this way, a nasty film becomes more satisfying.

Three Billboards Outside of Ebbing, Missouri, though, belongs to McDormand. Successful is she at portraying a myriad of different emotions. From her sly eye-winking as she crafts a good verbal assault on whoever crosses her path, to an emotional breakdown scene towards the end of the film, McDormand embodies the character with depth.

During a gorgeous scene, she has a sweet conversation with a peaceful deer grazing nearby, for a second imagining it could be her dead daughter reincarnated. The scene richly counterbalances other violent and difficult scenes. McDormand manages to look downright homely in some scenes- beautiful in others.

A film sure to divide viewers- some will champion the film’s crisp writing and witty dialogue, others will undoubtedly be turned off by the foul language and nasty nature of some of the characters.

I found Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri to be sarcastic, gritty, and well-told, a versatile affair rich with layers and brimming with enjoyment.

Oscar Nominations: Best Picture, Best Actress-Frances McDormand (won), Best Supporting Actor-Sam Rockwell (won), Woody Harrelson, Best Original Screenplay, Best Original Score, Best Film Editing

Independent Spirit Award Nominations: Best Female Lead-Frances McDormand (won), Best Supporting Make-Sam Rockwell (won), Best Screenplay

1992 Films, Anthony Hopkins, Best Film of the Year, Drama, E.M. Forster, Emma Thompson, Helena Bonham Carter, Independent, Independent Comedy, Independent Drama, Independent Romantic Comedy, James Ivory, James Wilby, Period Drama, Romantic Drama, Vanessa Redgrave

Howards End-1992

Leave a comment

Howards End-1992

Director James Ivory

Starring Anthony Hopkins, Emma Thompson, Helena Bonham Carter

Scott’s Review #702

Reviewed December 1, 2017

Grade: A-

Howards End is my favorite film in the collection of E.M. Forster’s adapted novels turned into films during the 1980s and 1990s (1985’s A Room with a View and 1987’s Maurice are the other two quality works).

The novels were written during the early 1900s and set during the same period, focusing on class relations in 20th-century England.

The film is lovely, and picturesque, and tells an interesting story about romance and drama between the haves and the have-nots during this period.

The film was a success and received heaps of Academy Award nominations in 1993.

Margaret Schlegel (Emma Thompson), an upper-middle-class intellectual, part of London’s bourgeoisie, befriends wealthy and sophisticated, yet shockingly conservative Ruth Wilcox (Vanessa Redgrave).

The two women strike up a powerful friendship, which results in her beloved country home being left to Margaret when an ailing Mrs. Wilcox dies.

To complicate matters, Margaret falls in love with a businessman (and husband of Ruth), Henry (Anthony Hopkins), while Margaret’s sister Helen, briefly becomes engaged to Paul Wilcox, Henry’s son.

The two families’ lives further intersect when they wind up as neighbors in London and the true owner of the beloved “Howards End” is questioned.

Added to the mix are several other characters of various social backgrounds, having connections to the families.

The writing in Howard’s End is rich and emotional as each character is perfectly fleshed out this includes the supporting as well as the lead characters.

Thompson and Hopkins, both sensational actors, have tremendous chemistry together, and unsurprising was Thompson’s win for Best Actress during this competitive year. She carries the film seamlessly with her upper-middle-class ideals- not conservatively rich, but far from working-class- she epitomizes poise grace, and empathy for those less fortunate than she.

Hopkins, on the other hand, is calculating and confident, yet charismatic and sexy as an old-school, controlling businessman.

Somehow, these two characters complement each other exceptionally well despite their varied backgrounds

The role of Helen may very well be Helena Bonham Carter’s finest. Not being an enormous fan of the actress-overrated and too brooding in my opinion enjoys portraying an interesting character in Helen.

Lovelorn and earnest, yet somewhat oblivious, she develops a delicious romance with the young clerk, Leonard Bast, my favorite character in the film. Living with Jacky, a woman of dubious origins, he is the ultimate nice guy and sadly winds up down on his luck after heeding terrible business advice.

Bast, thanks in large part to actor Samuel West, who instills an innocent, good guy quality in his character, deserves major props.

The cinematography featured in Howards End is beautiful with extravagant outdoor scenes- the lavish gardens of Howards End- just ravishing and wonderful.

Kudos too to the art direction, set design, and costume department for making the film look so enchanting.

There is something so appealing about the look of this film and director, James Ivory, undoubtedly deserves praise for pulling it all together into a suave picture. Whether the scene calls for sun or rain, tranquil or bustling, every scene looks great.

If I were to knock any points from this fine film it would be at two hours and twenty-two minutes, Howards End does drag ever so slightly, and many scenes involve the characters merely having chats with each other, without much action.

But this criticism is small potatoes when compared to the exceptional writing and well-nuanced character development displayed throughout the piece.

Admittedly, and perhaps shamefully, I have not read any of the Forster novels, but Howards End appears to be the film that is most successfully adapted, gleaming with textured finesse, grace, and style.

With the film’s finest actors along for the experience, and intricate, fine story-telling, Howards End (1992) is a film well worth watching.

Oscar Nominations: 3 wins-Best Picture, Best Director-James Ivory, Best Actress-Emma Thompson (won), Best Supporting Actress-Vanessa Redgrave, Best Screenplay Based on Material Previously Produced or Published (won), Best Original Score, Best Art Direction (won), Best Cinematography, Best Costume Design

Independent Spirit Award Nominations: Best International Film

1960 Films, Barbara Shelley, British, British Horror, George Sanders, Horror, Peter Vaughan, Science Fiction, Wolf Rilla

Village of the Damned-1960

Leave a comment

Village of the Damned-1960

Director Wolf Rilla

Starring George Sanders, Barbara Shelley

Scott’s Review #701

Reviewed November 30, 2017

Grade: B

Village of the Damned is a 1960 black and white horror film released during a spectacular year for the film genre- and specifically for the horror genre.

With legendary films such as Hitchcock’s Psycho and Michael Powell’s British Peeping Tom making their debuts at the same time, what a coincidence that Village of the Damned (also British) shares the same year.

The film is a satisfying treat- certainly not on par with the aforementioned duo of masterpieces, but on its terms, it is a fine film with just enough suspense and intrigue to make it a memorable affair.

Anything in movie horror involving children is downright creepy, so German director Wolf Rilla is wise to adopt a film based on a 1957 novel entitled The Midwich Cuckoos by John Wyndham.

I adore the title and wish Rilla had kept it for the film. Alas, he did not, but the story is well-written and almost like an extended episode of The Twilight Zone or a similar television chapter from the 1960s—it just seems like more of an episodic experience.

No disrespect, of course, but the film does not contain the bombast expected from a feature film, but rather a compartmentalized, small tale.

In the sleepy little town of Midwich, England, a polarizing force suddenly and without warning overtakes the city, causing all the inhabitants to fall unconscious and into a state of inactivity.

Attempts by the military to enter the town fail, even as an airplane crashes to the ground after attempting to cross into Midwich.

As quickly as these events occur, the townspeople “wake up” and resume normalcy. Two months later, all women of childbearing years suddenly become pregnant, causing gossip and intrigue. As the years pass, the children look similar, with platinum-blonde hair, piercing eyes, and rapid growth spurts.

Furthermore, they all are telepathic and communicate with each other in this manner.

The central characters include a prominent professor, Gordon Zellaby (George Sanders), and his wife, Anthea (Barbara Shelley). They are the parents of one of the children, named David, who appears to be the leader of the other children.

As the children become increasingly menacing and intelligent as they grow older, sometimes hurting or killing other townspeople by somehow “possessing” their thoughts, Gordon must race to find a way to trap and stop the children from more dastardly deeds.

The use of black and white cinematography and the small-town setting successfully give Village of the Damned an eerie and mysterious vibe, is little or no bloodshed nor the traditional horror-themed elements- hence the above Twilight Zone reference.

The film does not need these to succeed, as the psychological mystique is compelling enough. We wonder, “What is wrong with these kids?” and “Why do they act so strangely?” “Are they possessed?” and  “Is this some weird experiment?”

The answers are never really explained in detail.

Slight negatives to the film are the only limited character development among any prominent characters such as Gordon or Anthea, and these roles are one-dimensional- the children are the stars.

Sanders and Shelley are adequately cast, but I can think of numerous other actors who could have played these parts well.

The conclusion to Village of the Damned is unspectacular, and I was left with an unsatisfied feeling, especially as related to other more satisfying aspects of the film as a whole.

I felt like a bit of potential was not reached.

Gordon merely orchestrates a big event, sacrificing himself to destroy the children, and the film ends.

Village of the Damned was followed by a 1963 sequel entitled, Children of the Damned, which was not deemed a critical nor a commercial success.

Years later, in 1995, the film was remade and directed by John Carpenter but also received poor reviews.

2017 Films, Comedy, Daniel Zovatto, Greta Gerwig, Independent, Independent Comedy, Saoirse Ronan, Stephen McKinley Henderson, Timothée Chalamet

Lady Bird-2017

Leave a comment

Lady Bird-2017

Director-Greta Gerwig

Starring-Saoirse Ronan, Laurie Metcalf

Scott’s Review #700

Reviewed November 28, 2017

Grade: A

Lady Bird is a 2017 independent film release and a wonderful effort by actor turned writer/director, Greta Gerwig, in her solo directorial debut.

No stranger to the indie syndicate herself Gerwig puts her unique stamp on the film with a rich, female-centered perspective that works quite well and that is seeping with charm and wit.

Worth noting is how the story is a semi-autobiography-one based on Gerwig’s own life and her stormy dealings with her mother. The story is well-written, well-paced, and empathetic as the audience views a slice of life through the eyes of a restless yet kindly teenager on the cusp of womanhood.

Saoirse Ronan gives a bravura performance in the title role. Her given birth name is Christine, she defiantly changes it to Lady Bird, in a show of adolescent independence, and much to her parents, Marion and Larry’s (Laurie Metcalf and Tracy Letts ) chagrin.

Christine lives in suburban Sacramento, California, and yearns for a more exciting life in New York City, and far away from what she considers Dullsville, USA. Now in her senior year- attending a Catholic high school-Christine applies to college after college, hoping to escape her daily dilemmas. Christine’s best friend Julie and somewhat boyfriend Danny (Lucas Hedges) are along for the ride.

The period is 2002- shortly after 9/11.

The brightest moments in Lady Bird are the scenes between Christine and her mother, which are plentiful. The chemistry between Ronan and Metcalf is wonderful and I truly buy them as a real mother/daughter duo, warts and all. They fight makeup, get on each other’s nerves, fight, cry, makeup, etc.

I especially love their knock-down-drag-outs, as each actress stands her ground while allowing the other room to shine- feeding off of each other.

My favorite Metcalf scene occurs while she is alone- having gotten into a tiff with Christine and giving her the silent treatment while Christine flies to New York, Marion reconsiders as she melts into a ball of tears while she drives away- regretting her decision and missing her daughter already.

Metcalf fills the scene with emotional layers as she does not speak- we simply watch in awe as her facial expressions tell everything.

Comparably, Ronan- likely to receive her third Oscar nomination at the ripe old age of twenty-three (Atonement and Brooklyn are the other nods), successfully gives a layered performance of a teenage girl struggling with her identity and restless to see different worlds and get out of what she sees as a bland city.

Of Irish descent, Ronan is remarkable in her portrayal of a California girl- sometimes selfish, sometimes sarcastic, but always likable and empathetic.

The casting from top to bottom is wonderful as the supporting players lend added meat to the story. Christine’s best friend, Julie, played by young upstart Beanie Feldstein (Jonah Hill’s sister) is compelling as the lovable, chubby, and nerdy theater geek.

Letts is perfect as Christine’s father, depressed at losing his job in the tough economy and having to compete with young talent as he sees his career slip away.

Legendary actress, Lois Smith, adds heart to the role of Sister Sarah Joan- a by-the-book nun, who proves to be a cool, old chick.

Finally, Hedges, seemingly in every film in 2016-2017, is emotionally resounding as Danny, the troubled boyfriend of Christine- struggling with his sexuality.

Gerwig simply does it all with this piece of film- she directs and writes, scripting both laugh-out-line moments and eliciting heartfelt emotion from her enchanted audience.

A hilarious scene occurs as Christine attends a dreary class assembly- an anti-abortion-themed one- by a woman who almost did not exist, but for her mother’s decision not to have an abortion.

When a bored Christine icily points out that had the woman’s mother had the abortion, she would not be forced to sit through the assembly, it is a laugh-out-loud moment.

Lady Bird, thanks to a fantastic writer and director, and superlative casting is a film that has its all-heart, emotion, humor, and great acting.

The film is intelligently written and forces the audience to quite willingly embrace its characters. Gerwig carves a story, perhaps done many times before in film, but with a fresh and energetic feel to it.

Oscar Nominations: Best Picture, Best Director-Greta Gerwig, Best Actress-Saoirse Ronan, Best Supporting Actress-Laurie Metcalf, Best Original Screenplay

Independent Spirit Award Nominations: Best Feature, Best Female Lead-Saoirse Ronan, Best Supporting Female-Laurie Metcalf, Best Screenplay (won)

2012 Films, Amber Tamblyn, Best Film of the Year, Bruce Dern, Christoph Waltz, Don Johnson, Franco Nero, James Parks, Jamie Foxx, Jonah Hill, Kerry Washington, Leonardo DiCaprio, Michael Parks, Quentin Tarantino, Robert Carradine, Russ Tamblyn, Samuel L. Jackson, Tom Savini, Tom Wopat, Walton Goggins, Western

Django Unchained-2012

Leave a comment

Django Unchained-2012

Director Quentin Tarantino

Starring Jamie Foxx, Christoph Waltz

Scott’s Review #699

Reviewed November 26, 2017

Grade: A

Quentin Tarantino, the brilliant filmmaker, can do very little wrong in my opinion, and he releases yet another masterpiece with 2012’s Django Unchained, a western story centering around the delicate subject matter of slavery.

As with several other talented director’s stories, the main focal point here is a revenge-driven tale with plenty of bloody scenes and stylistic ferociousness, making Django Unchained yet another masterpiece in the Tarantino collection.

Certainly not for the faint of heart, the film will please fans of film creativity and artistic achievement.

As with many Tarantino films a stellar cast is used and each actor cast to perfection- it seems almost every actor in Hollywood is dying to appear in the director’s films- this time Jamie Foxx, Christoph Waltz, Kerry Washington, Leonardo DiCaprio, and Samuel L. Jackson are the lucky ones, all featured in prominent roles- not surprisingly the acting is top-notch.

An interesting fact to note is that whoever appears in a Tarantino film seems to be having the time of their lives- what creative freedom and interesting material to experience.

A comparable director to Tarantino- as far as recruiting fine actors- is Robert Altman- also tremendously popular with talent.

The saga begins with clear Western flair as Django Freeman (Foxx) is led through the scorching heat of Texas with a group of other black slaves, presumably, to be sold by their abusive white captors- the time is 1858, and the abolition of slavery has not yet occurred the Civil War is still two years away.

Doctor King Schultz (Waltz), a former dentist and current bounty hunter, is on a mission to find and kill the Brittle brothers and realizes that Django can help him find the men.

To complicate matters, Django has been separated from his wife Broomhilda (Washington) and vows to find her and avenge her abductors.

As circumstances lead Schultz and Django to a vast Tennessee estate, the duo becomes business partners and friends. The race to rescue Broomhilda takes the pair to sunny (and equally hot) Mississippi- the home of vicious Calvin Candie (DiCaprio) and his dreaded “Candyland”.

The crackling heat and the atmospheric nature of Django Unchained combined with the revenge theme make the film an immeasurable success.

An ode to spaghetti westerns of yesteryear, the film incorporates similar music and grit so that the result is a modernized version of those films, with lots more blood and violence.

Slavery is a tough subject matter to tackle, especially when members of the Ku Klux Klan are featured, but Tarantino does so effortlessly, and as Django gains revenge on his tormentors, there is major audience satisfaction to be enjoyed.

The indignities and downright abuse that several black characters suffer can be quite tough to sit through.

The climactic dinner scene in Mississippi is splendid and the best sequence of the film. Schultz and Django dine with Calvin at his spectacular mansion. Calvin’s sinister and loyal house slave (Jackson) suspects a devious plan is about to be hatched and a vicious shoot-out erupts between the parties involved.

The ingenious and long sequence is a cat-and-mouse affair with all of the characters carefully tiptoeing around the others in fear of being revealed or discovered as fakes.

The scene is exceptional in its craft as we watch the characters dine on delectable food and drink, all the while motivations bubble under the surface.

Django Unchained is not for film-goers seeking either a linear story or a mainstream piece of blockbuster movie-making-Tarantino is not a typical Hollywood guy.

The film is exceptionally carved and constructed in a way that challenges the viewer to endure what some of the characters (specifically Django and Broomhilda) are made to go through. This discomfort and horror make the inevitable revenge all the more sweet and satisfying.

Quentin Tarantino has created masterpiece after masterpiece throughout his filmography of work.

Proudly, I can herald 2012’s  Django Unchained as one of the unique director’s very finest and will be sure to be remembered decades and decades in the future as being able to challenge, provoke thought, and satisfy legions of his fans.

Oscar Nominations: 2 wins-Best Picture, Best Supporting Actor-Christoph Waltz (won), Best Original Screenplay (won), Best Sound Editing, Best Cinematography

2017 Films, Agatha Christie, Daisy Ridley, Derek Jacobi, Drama, Johnny Depp, Olivia Colman, Thriller

Murder on the Orient Express-2017

Leave a comment

Murder On The Orient Express-2017

Director-Kenneth Branagh

Starring-Kenneth Branagh, Johnny Depp, Michelle Pfeiffer

Scott’s Review #698

Reviewed November 25, 2017

Grade: B+

Kenneth Branagh leads an all-star cast as well as directs them in a 2017 remake of the 1974 thriller, Murder On The Orient Express.

The film was, of course, based on the famous 1934 Agatha Christie novel of the same name. With a ritzy cast including Judi Dench, Johnny Depp, Michelle Pfeiffer, Penelope Cruz, and Willem Defoe, top-notch acting is assured.

The cinematography is tremendous as the film looks gorgeous from start to finish and the story is an effective, good, old-fashioned whodunit that will satisfy audiences.

We meet our hero, Hercule Poirot (Branagh), in Jerusalem as he has recently solved a murder mystery and is anticipating a good rest. Poirot is invited by a friend to travel back to his homeland of London via the lavish Orient Express.

Amid a group of thirteen strangers, all inhabiting the luxurious first-class accommodations, one of them is savagely murdered in the middle of the night, as a blustery blizzard and subsequent avalanche, derails the train atop mountainous terrain. The strangers are trapped together with a murderer on the loose. Poirot must deduce who has committed the crime and why.

Murder On The Orient Express has all the trimmings for a good, solid murder mystery, and director Branagh sets all of these elements in motion with a good flow.

Paced quite nicely, each of the principal characters is introduced intriguingly, so much so that each contains a measure of juicy intrigue. The film gives a brief background of each character as he or she boards the grandiose train.

Judi Dench broods as rich and powerful Princess Dragomiroff oozing with jewels and a chip on her shoulder. Corrupt American businessman, Samuel Ratchett (Johnny Depp), is suave and shady as he seems destined to cause trouble. Finally, Penelope Cruz gives her character of repressed Pilar Estravados enough shame and guilt that we cannot think something may be off with her motivations.

The details of the characters are rich and compelling.

With actors such as Dench and Depp, the acting playing field is set very high, and all of the actors play their parts with gusto.

Wonderful to experience with Murder On The Orient Express is the true nature of an ensemble cast– each character is relevant in his or her way, regardless of screen time, and the casting works well.

Evident is how the cast must have enjoyed working together on this nice project. Each character is written in a way that the individual actor can sink his or her teeth into the role and the wonderful reveal at the end of the film allows for each a chance to shine so that equal weight is given to each part.

After the actual murder is committed the story takes off as each character is interviewed by Poirot and given a glance of suspicion.

The first half of the film is just the buildup and, at times, the story slightly lags, but this is fixed when the film kicks into high gear midway through. Sometimes a climactic conclusion makes up for any slight lag time suffered in the first portion of the film and Murder On The Orient Express is a great example of this.

The standouts for me are Branagh himself as Poirot and Pfeiffer as the sexy Caroline Hubbard, an American man-crazed older woman.  How wonderful to see Pfeiffer back in the game in 2017- with wonderful roles in both Murder On The Orient Express and Mother!

She has the acting chops to pull off sex appeal, vulnerability, and toughness.  In the case of Branagh, the actor never disappoints in any film he appears in, but seeing him in a leading role is fantastic and he can carry a film with such a dynamic cast.

Branagh’s Poirot is classy, intelligent, and charismatic.

I adored the conclusion of the film and found the explanation and the reasoning of the murderer or murderers quite effective and believable. Through the use of black and white flashback scenes, the action aboard the grandiose, yet slightly claustrophobic train scenes, are a perfect balance.

Furthermore, the explanation and the motivations of the killer or killers make perfect sense and much sympathy is evoked. In this way, the story is moralistic and certainly not a black and white subject matter.

Murder On The Orient Express succeeds as a wonderfully shot and star-studded affair. The filming is grandiose and the production values are high as a caper film with a mystique and class.

The film may not be a true masterpiece or necessarily remembered ten years from now, but what it does it does well.

The original film from 1974 is a tad bit better, but as remakes go, the 2017 offering is quite good.

A rumored sequel, Death on the Nile, is planned.

2006 Films, Abigail Breslin, Alan Arkin, Best Feature- Independent Spirit Award Winners, Bryan Cranston, Comedy, Greg Kinnear, Independent, Independent Comedy, Jonathan Dayton, Paul Dano, Steve Carell, Toni Collette, Valerie Faris

Little Miss Sunshine-2006

Leave a comment

Little Miss Sunshine-2006

Director Jonathan Dayton, Valerie Faris

Starring Greg Kinnear, Steve Carell

Scott’s Review #697

Reviewed November 23, 2017

Grade: A

A film that became a sleeper hit at the time of release in 2006 and went on the achieve recognition with year-end award honors galore, Little Miss Sunshine holds up quite well after over ten years since its debut.

Combining family humor with heart, audiences will fall in love with the antics of the dysfunctional Hoover family, warts and all, as they strive to persevere endless obstacles to enable precociously, seven-year-old daughter, Olive, a chance at competing in a beauty pageant hundreds of miles away.

The film is a comedic treat with charm and contains uproarious fun.

Directors  (and husband and wife team) Jonathan Dayton and Valerie Faris start right to work kicking off the humor in style as the one hour and forty-one-minute film introduces depressed Uncle Frank (Steve Carell) to the rest of the Hoovers as he comes to live with the family after a failed suicide attempt.

Frank, who is gay and has recently been dumped, is Sheryl Hoover’s (Toni Collette) brother and has a dry sense of humor.

He fits in well with the other peculiar members of the clan- Dad Richard (Greg Kinnear), a struggling motivational speaker, Grandpa Edwin, a vulgar, irritable man, brother Dwayne, angry and refusing to speak, and finally, pudgy-faced, Olive.

The brightest spots in Little Miss Sunshine are the exceptional writing and the nuanced, non-one-dimensional characters. Each character is both good yet troubled in their way and the overall message of the film is an important one.

The plot of the film encompasses a beauty queen pageant and the lifestyle this involves- hypocrisy and plastic nature is the main theme.

When the family stops at a roadside cafe for breakfast, Olive hungrily orders ice cream and is shamed by a member of the family- she must watch her figure, she is told.

Other members instead encouraged Olive to be herself.

Little Miss Sunshine poses an interesting dissection of the pressures very young people face to be perfect, especially in the beauty pageant business, and the message society sends.

Shocking is a scene where many of the contestants, all under the age of ten, appear in sexy, glamorous makeup, and bikinis.

Little Miss Sunshine is a very funny film and this undoubtedly is due to the chemistry that exists among the cast of talented actors. Quite the ensemble, all five of the principal characters have an interesting relationship with each other.

Too many film comedies suffer immensely from forced jokes or typical “set-up” style humor, plot devices created to elicit a response from the audience- which I call “dumbing down”.

Little Miss Sunshine, however, feels authentic and fresh- a situation becomes funny because there is an honest reaction by the characters.

The film is a slice of the life experience of an average blue-collar family.

A standout scene to mention is the hysterical one in which the Hoovers are pulled over by a highway police officer. To say nothing of the fact that the Hoovers are “escorting” a corpse to their destination, along with pornographic magazines, their classic, beat-up, yellow Volkswagen bus barely runs and contains a malfunctioning horn that beeps at inopportune times.

These hilarious scenes work on all levels as the comic timing is palpable and leads to a laugh-out-loud response.

Furthermore, the climactic “beauty pageant” scene is fraught with physical humor.

Olive, the oddball in a group of hypersexualized, young starlets, takes inspiration from her grandfather to simply “be herself”. She does so in a hilarious version of “Super Freak” that is R-rated, both shocking the audience and celebrated by others- specifically her entire family.

Olive successfully proves that she can be herself and happily does so.

How wonderful and refreshing to find a comedy with honest, ample humor and real integrity that can shine many years after its first release and retain the richness and zest that originally captured legions of viewers.

As proven over time with many independent films, wonderful writing and directors sharing a vision, go a long way in achieving a quality piece of filmmaking.

Oscar Nominations: 2 wins-Best Picture, Best Supporting Actor-Alan Arkin (won), Best Supporting Actress-Abigail Breslin, Best Original Screenplay (won)

Independent Spirit Award Nominations: 4 wins-Best Feature (won), Best Director-Jonathan Dayton and Valerie Faris (won), Best Supporting Male-Alan Arkin (won), Paul Dano, Best First Screenplay (won)

2017 Films, Adventure, Chris Pine, Connie Nielsen, David Thewlis, Super Hero

Wonder Woman-2017

Leave a comment

Wonder Woman-2017

Director-Patty Jenkins

Starring Gal Gadot, Chris Pine

Scott’s Review #696

Reviewed November 20, 2017

Grade: B

Wonder Woman is a 2017 summer offering (and a mega success) that is firmly nestled in the comfort of the superhero, adventure genre but is unique in that it is directed by a woman in what is typically a male-dominated field.

This must be championed, and the film has a palpable, female-empowering quality that I adore since it is still lacking in most mainstream films.

However, at times, the film teeters too much around predictability and possesses many traditional superhero elements, such as good versus evil, climactic fights scenes, and stock villains. But liberties must be taken and overall I saw the film as a female-driven work.

The fact that Wonder Woman was celebrated by the masses is wonderful news.

Director Patty Jenkins, notable for having previously tackled weighty subject matter in films such as 2003’s Monster, is at the helm of this project and embodies her lead character with a good blend of earnestness, pizzazz, and heart.

“Wonder Woman” is a likable character and newcomer Gal Gadot, an unknown to me, is interesting casting. Certainly, there are a myriad of young Hollywood “names” who could have championed the part- Scarlett Johansson or Jennifer Lawrence may have been palpable in the role.

Seemingly a brave choice, Gadot takes command of the character and fills her with substance.

We meet “Princess Diana” as a young girl, living on the protected Amazon island of Themyscira- inhabited only by females. The time is around 1918, amid the harsh reality of World War I, though the members of the tribe know nothing about the war or any other current events- nor do any males live on the island.

Most of the women are trained warriors, presumably to protect the island from potential dangers. It is soon revealed that Diana has special powers, and after meeting a lost American soldier, Steve Trevor (Chris Pine), she embarks on a mission to save the world from the ravages of war.

Mixed in with the main story is a briefly mentioned ancient legend of Zeus’s son Ares plotting to return and destroy the Amazons, whom Zeus created.

My only issue with Wonder Woman as a whole is with the story.  The plot is not weak, but simply put- it is nestled in Hollywood predictability rather than containing any surprises along the way.

Despite deserved kudos for the characterization of Diana, the story ultimately turns ho-hum like many superhero films do- peppered with the inevitable battle scenes.

The genre-specific “save the world” is played to the hilt as Diana takes it upon herself to stop the war with the belief that people are not entirely bad. With this thought, Diana finally learns a valuable lesson about the complexities of human beings- in this way Wonder Woman contains a moralistic tale- but then come more battle scenes.

The villains are mainly cartoon-like and what one might expect for a film of this kind.  Chemist Isabel Maru/Doctor Poison (Elena Anaya), dons a mask to hide a disfigured face (intentionally to test the poison gas), and General Erich Ludendorff (Danny Huston) plans to destroy all of mankind.

These characters are straight out of comic books and contain no redeeming qualities.

Contrary to where the main story may be a tad lacking, the romantic element is nicely done and the scenes involving Diana and Steve are sweet and romantic making them fun to watch and a good balance against the action sequences.

Gadot and Pine have great chemistry, adding humor, so the scenes are not forced. As Diana sees Steve naked for the first time a clever sexual flirtation develops and a sly lesbian backstory is briefly hinted at.

Diana remarks with a smirk that men are only needed for procreation and that the women on the island “can satisfy themselves”. The duo also has a play of words about his “manhood”.

Due to the success of Wonder Woman, a sequel, again directed by Jenkins is in the works. My hope is that because of the box office performance many more liberties can be taken by the talented director and she can further push the envelope as she did with Monster.

Wonder Woman is a good film, let’s hope the next installment is a great film.

1986 Films, British, Daniel Day-Lewis, Drama, E.M. Forster, Helena Bonham Carter, James Ivory, James Wilby, Judi Dench, Julian Sands, Maggie Smith, Period Drama, Romantic Drama, Rupert Graves, Simon Callow

A Room with a View-1986

Leave a comment

A Room with a View-1986

Director James Ivory

Starring Helena Bonham Carter, Julian Sands

Scott’s Review #695

Reviewed November 3, 2017

Grade: B+

A Room with a View (1986) is one of four major films to be based on famed British author E.M. Forster’s novels- Howards End (1992) and A Passage to India (1986), and Maurice (1987) being the other three.

The foursome contains common elements such as the vast English countryside and class distinctions, leading to heartaches and passion.

In the case of A Room with a View, the film traverses from artistic Florence, Italy to a cozy village in England.

The film is a period drama mixed with lots of authentic, unforced, good humor and at its core is a solid romantic drama, though if compared with the aforementioned other films, is not quite on par, though is still an entertaining watch- given the dismal year of cinema circa 1986.

The film was considered one of the best releases that particular year and was awarded a handful of Oscar nominations- winning Costume Design, Adapted Screenplay, and Art Direction.

Cultured and oftentimes brooding, Lucy Honeychurch (Helena Bonham Carter), goes on holiday to Florence with her rigid and conventional older cousin Charlotte (Maggie Smith), who also serves as her chaperone.

While enjoying the artistry of the European city, Lucy meets and falls madly in love with free-spirited George Emerson (Julian Sands), who is also visiting Florence with his easy-going father, Mr. Emerson (Denholm Elliott).

The men seem oblivious to Lucy’s (and Charlotte’s) Victorian-era upbringing, which attracts Lucy and appalls Charlotte.

Months later, the would-be lovers reunite in England and spend time averting obstacles thwarting their love, while admitting to themselves that their love is blossoming.

As Lucy has become engaged to snobbish Cecil Vyse (Daniel Day-Lewis), a sophisticate deemed suitable by her family to marry Lucy, the pair lacks the romantic connection that she shares with George.

Day-Lewis, on the cusp of becoming a breakout star and brilliant talent, gives Cecil a somewhat comical, yet endearing persona, that makes him the main foil, but also breathes sympathy into the character. This is especially evident during the Lucy/Cecil break-up scene.

The standout performance in A Room with a View is the comic brilliance of Smith as the manipulative and witty, Charlotte Bartlett, and this is evident throughout.

Smith injects vigor and comic wit into her character, as Charlotte seemingly makes one blunder after the other in the self-deprecating way she manages to use to her advantage to humorously manipulate other characters into doing things her way.

A risqué and quite hysterical all-male frontal nudity scene occurs mid-way through the film and, while not advancing the plot in any way, steals the entire film in its homoerotic and free-spirited way.

As the Reverend, young George, and Lucy’s energetic brother, Freddy, walk along a beautiful path, they decide to skinny dip in a pond where they horseplay and wrestle with each other completely in the buff.

As they chase each other around the pond, grab each other, and lightly smack bottoms, one cannot help but wonder if this scene set the tone for 1987’s gay-themed period piece based on another E.M. Forster novel, called Maurice.

A coincidence? I think not. As the trio of rascals come upon the properly dressed girls on the path, hilarity takes over the scene.

The art direction and costumes are of major excellence to A Room with a View as the film “looks” like a 1910 period rather than seeming like it is 1986 with the actors donning early twentieth-century styles.

Every scene is a treat from this perspective as we wonder who will wear what attire in the next scene.

As with the other aforementioned E.M. Forster films, class distinctions, and expectations are a major element in A Room with a View and make Lucy and George all the more likable as a couple.

Still, from an overall standpoint, there is something slightly amiss in the story department.

I did not find Helena Bonham Carter, an actor I like, overall very compelling as Lucy, and I think this leads to the story being slightly less than it might have with another in the role.

We may root for Lucy and George, but if the pair do not wind up together it is more of a pity rather than a travesty.

To summarize A Room with a View, the story is good, not great, and other key components to the film are much better than the central love story of Lucy and George but are therefore secondary to the main action.

Given a Charlotte romance, the film’s best character, that would have catapulted this film to the exceptional grade. Imagine the possibilities.

Or more of the two Miss Alan’s and their gossipy nature, or even a story to the rugged nude horseplay among men.

Many of the aspects that could have made A Room with a View (1986) great, were too often on the sidelines.

Oscar Nominations: 3 wins-Best Picture, Best Director-James Ivory, Best Supporting Actor-Denholm Elliott, Best Supporting Actress-Maggie Smith, Best Screenplay Based on Material from Another Medium (won), Best Art Direction (won), Best Cinematography, Best Costume Design (won)

1953 Films, Audrey Hepburn, Comedy, Eddie Albert, Gregory Peck, Romantic Comedy, William Wyler

Roman Holiday-1953

Leave a comment

Roman Holiday-1953

Director William Wyler

Starring Gregory Peck, Audrey Hepburn

Scott’s Review #694

Reviewed October 26, 2017

Grade: B+

Roman Holiday, released in 1953, was a box office hit, pleasing legions of fans at the time, and a critical darling.

The film reaped Academy Award nominations, including the coveted Best Actress statuette for a young Audrey Hepburn.

A happy, uplifting story, the film is not diminished by Cinderella in the reverse storyline but rather is a charming, romantic experience immersing itself in pleasing locales of the cultural city of Rome.

Admittedly, Roman Holiday is an example of a film in which I preferred the latter half to the former, but it set the bar high in the romantic comedy genre.

Our heroine, Princess Ann (Hepburn), has it all glamorous life, gorgeous clothes, and assistants tending to her every need and want. However, she is unhappy and trapped in a rigid life that lacks freedoms or decisions, to say nothing of the fun. She catches glimpses of party-goers reveling in each night from her expansive palace window.

Simply put, she is lonely and unfulfilled.

When she sees an opportunity to escape her life for a night, she snatches it and stumbles upon an American reporter, Joe Bradley (Peck). Despite their differing backgrounds, they fall madly in love.

At first, I found something missing in the film, and the chemistry between Peck and Hepburn did not immediately embrace me. As the duo meets Ann, who is drunk from sleeping pills, and Joe is the ultimate nice guy who allows her to sleep in his apartment, the story seems lagging and lacks a good punch.

The pair drives around Rome on a scooter and acts childish and silly. Ann acts girlish because fun is an entirely new concept to her. At this point, the film is reasonable but little more than a farce.

As Roman Holiday progresses, primarily through the final act, the film sheds some of its light skin and becomes much more poignant and meaningful.

Ann and Joe, while in love, realize they will not and cannot embark on a fairy tale ending, which truthfully, would have made Roman Holiday little more than a standard romantic comedy we have all seen before- you know the type- boy meets girl, roadblocks persist, boy whisks girl away and rides off into the sunset together.

While not a dark film, it goes deeper than a transparent, predictable ending.

Related to this point is that Roman Holiday contains a realness that sets it apart from many films undoubtedly drawn from it. Still, unlike this film, it leans into contrived or predictable situations.

As Joe and Ann fall in love, the audience falls in love with them. The main plot hurdle—Joe’s temptation to profit from Ann once he realizes her true identity after a sought-after interview—is earnestly handled without pretension.

Other similar films ought to take note of this.

Indeed, the historic and culturally relevant locales of Rome are a significant selling point of the film, and if these scenes had been shot on a movie set, a lack of authenticity would undoubtedly have emerged.

Instead, we are treated to such fabulous location sequences as the Colosseum, the Tiber River, the Trevi Fountain, and Piazza Venezia. Such a delight is the long sequence of Roman escapades as Joe and Ann traverse the city in giddy bliss.

It is enjoyable to see how Roman Holiday contains no real villain.

There are no physical hurdles to the duo’s relationship—no outside forces plotting to keep Joe and Ann apart, other than their lifestyles. Ann lives in a world of royalty and pampering, but Joe is an everyman, so the chances of living happily ever after are slim.

Film lovers intent on discovering one of the early romantic comedies—one could argue that It Happened One Night (1934) was the first—should watch a feel-good Hollywood classic from 1953. It is rich in honesty, good humor, and raw emotion without being too heavy a melodrama.

After a mediocre start, the film finishes with gusto.

Oscar Nominations: 3 wins-Best Motion Picture, Best Director-William Wyler, Best Actress-Audrey Hepburn (won), Best Supporting Actor-Eddie Albert, Best Screenplay, Best Story (won), Best Art Direction, Black and White, Best Cinematography, Black and White, Best Costume Design, Black-and-White (won), Best Film Editing

1973 Films, British, British Horror, Donald Sutherland, Horror, Julie Christie, Nicolas Roeg

Don’t Look Now-1973

Leave a comment

Don’t Look Now-1973

Director Nicolas Roeg

Starring Julie Christie, Donald Sutherland

Scott’s Review #693

Reviewed October 22, 2017

Grade: A

Don’t Look Now is an exceptional 1973 supernatural horror film that is as thought-provoking as it is intelligently written and directed.

Combined with riveting acting by famous Hollywood stars of the day, the film is simply an anomaly and must be seen to be appreciated. It is also the type of film that can be watched again and again for better clarity and exhibits the age-old “it gets better with age” comparison.

The film is rich with story, atmosphere, and cerebral elements, as well as being highly influential to horror films that followed.

An affluent married couple, John and Laura Baxter (Donald Sutherland and Julie Christie), live happily together in their English country home, raising their two children, Johnny and Christine.

After a tragic drowning incident, resulting in the death of Christine, the devastated couple relocates to Venice, after John accepts a position restoring an ancient church. Soon, Laura meets a pair of elderly sisters, one of whom is blind and claims to be clairvoyant, warning her of imminent danger and that Christine is attempting to contact her from beyond.

Don’t Look Now is hardly your standard horror film, which is the main part of its appeal- psychological in nature, the film holds only one gruesome death- not including the death of Christina, which is a terrible accident- not malicious.

Rather, director Nicolas Roeg quietly builds the suspense to a startling final sequence by using a chilling musical score to elicit a reaction from the audience. We know not what will happen, only that something sinister is bound to.

Due to the successful chemistry between Sutherland and Christie, in 1973, both cream of the crop in terms of film success and marketability, the actors deserve much credit for making Don’t Look Now both believable and empathetic.

John and Laura, each give their character a likable nature and immeasurable chemistry, which makes the audience care for them.

Despite the supernatural elements in the film, at its core, the story is quite humanistic. John and Laura have tragically lost a child and we see them deal with the painful grief associated with this loss.

The famous sex scene between the pair is shocking given the time, but also tastefully done, as Roeg uses a fragmented filming style that mixes the nudity with the couple dressing for dinner.

Visually, Don’t Look Now is a pure treat. The viewer is catapulted to the cultural and wonderful world of watery Venice, where scene after scene features gondola rides, exterior treats of the city, and filming locations such as the famous Hotel Gabrielli Sandworth and the San Nicolo dei Mendicoli church, wisely chosen as shooting locations giving the film an effective realism.

The characters of the elderly sisters, Heather and Wendy, are wonderfully cast. Hilary Mason and Clelia Matania are fantastic and believable as the mysterious duo. Seemingly kindly and eager to help, I was never really sure what the character’s true motives were.

Was Laura paying them for their assistance?

The film never reveals this information, but Heather especially contains a sinister look that shrouds her motivations in uncertainty. Fabulous actress Mason shines in her important role.

As John begins to “see things”, the use of the color red becomes very important. Christine died wearing a red coat and John sees a child wearing a red coat walking around the city, but cannot make out her face.

When he sees Laura and the sisters at a funeral, we begin to question his sanity. But are the sisters up to something and attempting to trick him or is his mind playing tricks on him?

The terrific conclusion will only lead the viewer to more questions.

Don’t Look Now (1973) is a unique, classic horror film, with incredible thematic elements, an eerie psychological story, fine acting, and location sequences that will astound.

Mixing the occult with an unpredictable climax, the film is influenced by Alfred Hitchcock and succeeds in achieving a blood-curdling affair sure to be discussed upon the chilling conclusion.

The film is non-linear in storytelling, which only makes it more challenging to watch and appreciate.

2007 Films, Bruce Willis, Comedy, Ethan Maniquis, Fergie, Freddy Rodriguez, Horror, Horror-Comedy, Josh Brolin, Michael Parks, Quentin Tarantino, Robert Rodriguez, Rose McGowan, Tom Savini

Grindhouse: Planet Terror-2007

Leave a comment

Grindhouse: Planet Terror-2007

Director Robert Rodriguez

Starring Rose McGowan, Freddy Rodriguez

Scott’s Review #692

Reviewed October 15, 2017

Grade: B-

The umbrella title of “Grindhouse” is part of a 2007 double-feature, one film directed by Quentin Tarantino (Death Proof), and the other directed by Robert Rodriguez (Planet Terror).

The gimmick was part of an attempt at something novel and also book-ending fictional trailers within the films. The term “grindhouse” refers to a cinematic specialty of either B movies or exploitation films- largely during the 1970s.

While Planet Terror gets credit for being unique and fun, it is oftentimes too cartoon-like and rather over the top throughout.

The premise of Planet Terror is not one to be taken seriously- as our heroine, Cherry Darling (Rose McGowan), quits her stripper job vowing to move on to bigger and better things, she runs into her ex-boyfriend, El Wray (Freddie Rodriguez), and the two teams up to lead a group of rebels, who are fleeing for their lives after a vicious zombie outbreak.

The attack was caused by a group of military officials, led by the vicious Lieutenant Muldoon (Bruce Willis).

The film contains an undeniable retro feel- the sets and the props traverse back to the 1970s in style and look, however, characters do use cellular phones.

Rodriguez attempts to make the film an homage or a throwback to a different time in cinema- this feat is quite impressive and the film is a marvel from a stylized perspective.

Another positive is that the film is reminiscent, by the camera styles and angles, of an actual 1970s film, with grainy elements and a comforting old-style texture, which works.

The plot, though, is the source of frustration, and many aspects of the film are just plain silly. The actors play way over the top as they were probably directed by Rodriguez to do, but the result is too much like watching a cartoon rather than a piece of art.

Rodriguez appears to be copying many aspects of Quentin Tarantino films- specifically, the mixture of violence with camp, although these attempts do not always work.

The acting and casting are fine. Bruce Willis shines in the lead villain role and plays demented to the hilt. Unquestionably “borrowed” by Rodriguez through Tarantino, Willis, who was dynamic in Pulp Fiction, knows how to do his thing well in films such as this.

Muldoon is quite a different character than boxer Butch Coolidge in 1994’s masterpiece, Pulp Fiction, but the acting style is the same.

Stars such as Josh Brolin, Kurt Russell, and Rosario Dawson also make appearances so the film is assuredly a star-studded affair.

The casting of McGowan and Freddy Rodriguez as the leads is acceptable and the pair make a decent screen coupling. Still, her artificial leg which doubles as a deadly machine gun, and his maniacal persona seem somewhat forced and, again, way over the top.

Planet Terror was a moderate box office success upon release in 2007, but watching the film in 2017, ten years later, unfortunately, some of the clusters have been tarnished and the gimmick is not as catchy as at the time of release.

Still, a decent offering in the horror, cartoon, and campy genres, but much better films exist, like anything by Tarantino.

2017 Films, Andrea Riseborough, Biography, Danny Boyle, Drama, Emma Stone, Sports

Battle of the Sexes-2017

Leave a comment

Battle of the Sexes-2017

Director-Jonathan Dayton, Valerie Faris

Starring-Emma Stone, Steve Carell

Scott’s Review #691

Reviewed October 11, 2017

Grade: A

Battle of the Sexes is a film that achieves worth on many levels- equal parts sports film, drama, and biography, the film excels across all genres, with exceptional acting and crowd-pleasing storytelling.

To boot, the film is a true story based not only on the very famous pro tennis match of 1973, termed the “Battle of the Sexes”, but a story of the sexual identity conflict of one of the opponents, in a time where being ones true self was not easy, especially for a public figure.

Emma Stone might very well have given her best portrayal of her young career as Billie Jean King, the talented tennis pro featured in the film. She is kind and fair, but a fierce proponent of women’s rights in a time in the United States when feminism was beginning to first take shape and women, and their male supporters, demanded equal treatment.

At first uncertain whether Stone could pull the role off (not because of lack of talent, but the women seem so different), she truly shines as the tomboy athlete with shaggy, feathered locks, and a toothy grin.

Equally worthy of praise is Steve Carell, who bolsters his film credo by tackling the role of King’s opponent and foe in the big match, Bobby Riggs.

Portrayed as a certifiable “jerk” and a sexist pig, Carell somehow pours the perfect amount of sympathy and likability into the part. We witness scenes of Riggs’ playfulness with his young son and tender yet troubled relationship with his wife, Priscilla (Elisabeth Shue in a well-cast role), that never seems neither trite nor contrived, but rather quite genuine.

The acting in Battle of the Sexes is across the board good.

Sarah Silverman drips with confidence and humor as Gladys Heldman, founder of World Tennis magazine and leader of the troupe of female tennis players parades around southern California seeking the same respect and pays as their male counterparts.

Bill Pullman, makes the most of his one-dimensional role of Jack Kramer, a wealthy and male chauvinistic promoter, while the talented Andrea Riseborough is brilliant as Marilyn, the bisexual, closeted lover of Billie Jean- giving a blend of vulnerability and toughness to her role.

The romantic scenes between Stone and Riseborough smolder with tenderness and heart as they forge ahead with their forbidden romance.

The film makes clear that a same-sex romance in those days, while accepted by those around them, would be met with shame and rejection by a large part of King’s legions of fans- this is a heartbreaking reality.

One of the most tear-jerking scenes comes at the end of the film when a victorious King is unable to acknowledge Marilyn- her openly gay male dresser earnestly whispers to her that one day she will be free to love who she truly loves- the scene is poignant.

Directors Dayton and Faris carve a finale that is careful not to fall into the cliched territory. Given that Battle of the Sexes is a sports film, this is a real risk, as typically these genre films teeter into the “good guys beat bad guys” fairy tale land.

Rather, while the film does champion King in the end, the moment is laced with good humor, drama, and sentimentality that does not seem forced, but rather honest and real- I enjoyed the final act immensely.

As the film progressed I found myself drawing parallels to the ever-dramatic and historical 2016 Presidential election- sure to have films made in years ahead-and King in many ways mirrors Hillary Clinton while Riggs resembles Donald Trump in the sexist department. The political and sports “Battles of the Sexes” warrants an amount of analysis.

My point is a sad one and as much as I love the film, I was left with a cold feeling that forty-five years after the famous Billie Jean King versus Bobby Riggs match, male superiority and chauvinism is alive and well in the United States- we still have so much progress to make.

Battle of the Sexes is a film with fantastic acting, stellar casting, passion, excitement, and a telling of a historical, true story.

In short, the film contains all of the elements of a compelling cinematic experience.

2016 Films, Best Documentary Feature Oscar Winners, Documentary, Ezra Edelman, O.J. Simpson

O.J.: Made in America-2016

Leave a comment

O.J.: Made in America-2016

Director Ezra Edelman

Starring Various

Scott’s Review #690

Reviewed October 8, 2017

Grade: A

Simply put, O.J.: Made in America (2016) is one of the greatest documentary films I have ever seen- if not the best.

The level of detail thoroughly explored without being overinflated is to be marveled at. It is much more than a documentary; it is a chronicle of one of the most talented professional athletes and one of the most controversial figures of our time.

The piece dissects not only O.J. Simpson and his tumultuous life but also how race, wealth, and celebrity factored into the infamous trial that took over the world in 1994. This story tells of the examination of the rise and fall of an American sports hero.

At seven hours and forty-three minutes, I had no intention of actually committing to watching the entire saga. I assumed I could quickly grasp it after watching only one disc, but it needs to be viewed in its entirety to be fully realized and appreciated.

The documentary is an ESPN production, and part of the 30 for 30 series plays like a mini-series, with multiple chapters (five in total) encompassing the entire chronicle.

The title of O.J.: Made in America is vital and a powerful reason for the documentary’s success, as filmmakers question whether many factors were instrumental in making O.J. Simpson what he became rather than merely creating an overview of the events.

An immediate positive that intrigued me is how the documentary begins in present times. O.J. Simpson, now imprisoned and presumably at a parole hearing, is asked about his duties and how old he was when he was first arrested.

The answer was age forty-six when he was accused of murdering his wife, Nicole, and her friend, Ron Goldman.

The documentary then immediately returns to Simpson’s humble upbringing in the ghettos of San Francisco and how, through scholarships, she could attend and become a major star at the University of Southern California in the mid-1960s.

What I adore most about O.J.: Made in America is its multi-faceted nature. Instead of a straight-up biography about the troubled celebrity, the filmmakers balance the documentary with related stories about racial tensions.

A chronological approach is taken when it comes to Simpson- yes, we learn about his skyrocketing trip to super-stardom as a college football player and then professionally as a Buffalo Bill.

We are educated about achievements in commercials, films, and various endorsements, but the documentary relates this to what America made O.J. Simpson into- a beloved star.

Finally, the documentary explains his relationship and marriage to Nicole Brown and the dreaded death and subsequent trial that was sensationalized beyond belief.

Time is spent with oodles of interviews ranging from the prosecution- Marsha Clark, Gil Garcetti, and numerous friends and relatives of both Simpson and Nicole Brown. An astounding seventy-two interviews were conducted.

Surprising to me at first, but making total sense in retrospect, is how the issue of race relations, especially in Los Angeles, has an enormous amount to do with the O.J. Simpson murder case.

Filmmakers draw many wise comparisons to the history of poor relations between the black community and the Los Angeles Police Department, and indeed, the documentary explores the Rodney King incident from the late 1980s and poses a crucial question- was O.J. Simpson found “not guilty” as a way of making up for Rodney King?

More than one juror has admitted she refused to find O.J. Simpson guilty and send a black man to prison.

O.J.: Made in America (2016) is a superb, well-rounded, concise, and brilliant study of a troubled man deemed a hero with a dark side.

The excellent documentary wholly explores his life and provides a fair, unbiased assessment of the events and the thoughts and opinions of those surrounding the case.

It is a sad story, but one that is told brilliantly.

Oscar Nominations: 1 win-Best Documentary-Feature (won)

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

1959 Films, Art, Best International Film Oscar Winners, Breno Mello, International, International Drama, Marcel Camus, Marpessa Dawn, Portuguese

Black Orpheus-1959

Leave a comment

Black Orpheus-1959

Director Marcel Camus

Starring Breno Mello, Marpessa Dawn

Scott’s Review #689

Reviewed October 8, 2017

Grade: A

Black Orpheus is a 1959 French film made in Brazil, honored with a win in the coveted Best Foreign Language Film Academy Award category in 1960, considered somewhat of a surprise to win.

The film is adapted from the well-known Greek legend of Orpheus and Eurydice. It is now set in Rio de Janeiro during the festive celebration of Carnaval.

Black Orpheus, starring almost all black actors and providing a look at life on the streets of Brazil, is vibrant and filled with lively songs and dances.

The setting is key to the film as the beauty and merriment are mixed with loss and tragedy- loads of exterior shots of Rio de Janeiro flesh out with many shots high atop a hill in a quaint village where all of the characters live most in very close proximity to each other.

Like Shakespeare’s Romeo and Juliet, the film is romantic and lovely, but the story is also mired in jealousy and drama amid the dancing and many celebrations.

Many of the actors, lead Breno Mello and Marpessa Dawn, are non-actors, cast undoubtedly because of their gorgeous, authentic looks. Still, surprisingly, both are phenomenal in their roles and perfectly cast.

Wholesome Eurydice (Dawn) arrives in Rio de Janeiro by trolley driven by Orpheus (Mello), intent on visiting her cousin, Serafina. There is an instant attraction between the young man and the woman as he provides directions to her cousin’s village, which is also his.

Orpheus, however, is engaged to be married to his possessive and demanding fiance, Mira. He is less enthused about the impending marriage and would rather fix his guitar than buy Mira an engagement ring.

As the Carnival festivities get underway, Orpheus and Eurydice give in to their mutual attraction and dance the night away while subsequently trying to avoid the wrath of Mira and avoid a mysterious costumed man who has been stalking Eurydice since she escaped her village and fled to Rio.

Eurydice is terrified that the man may want to kill her, and his motivations are unknown. His character is particularly frightening as he is known as “Death” and dons a tight skeleton costume.

The tragic conclusion, culminating in an incredible chase scene in Orpheus’s trolley station, is fantastic. The morbid ending, based on the legendary Greek tale, is unsurprising. However, the Romeo and Juliet comparisons are still heartbreaking and challenging to experience, most notably the final scene atop a cliff.

The scene is shocking and brutal as the lovelorn couple topples down a hill together at the hands of another central character. However, as they are intertwined in each other’s arms, the scene is also gorgeous and a confirmation of true love and artistic beauty.

Some accusations of racial stereotypes within this film have abounded over the years, mainly the depiction of Brazil being inhabited by party-going, sex-crazed people.

I find the film a masterpiece and the type of cinematic experience to be enjoyed rather than over-analyzed.

The almost nonstop musical score created by Luiz Bonfa and Antonio Carlos Jobim is to die for and is an enormous part of what makes the film so engaging and entertaining.

Perfectly capturing the spirit of a jovial, cultural environment, Black Orpheus (1959) spins a riveting, heartbreaking tale of love amid a musical.

Tragedy, art, true love, romance, and death are all elements captured in this excellent film.

Oscar Nominations: 1 win-Best Foreign Language Film (won)

1947 Films, Best Film of the Year, British, David Farrar, Deborah Kerr, Drama, Emeric Pressburger, Jean Simmons, Michael Powell

Black Narcissus-1947

Leave a comment

Black Narcissus-1947

Director Michael Powell, Emeric Pressburger

Starring Deborah Kerr

Scott’s Review #688

Reviewed October 5, 2017

Grade: A

A British film made in 1947 that is way ahead of its time, Black Narcissus is a brilliant foray into the mysterious entity of nuns and the bitterness, both from humanity and from the elements, a group of nuns must face as they attempt to establish a new school atop the hills of the Himalayas.

The film’s look is as fantastic as its story, with incredible cinematography and a foreboding, eerie quality.

Black Narcissus is one of the great treasures of classic cinema.

Based on the 1939 novel by Rumer Godden, Black Narcissus tells the story of revolving jealousy, rage, lust, and tension amid a convent of nuns living in isolation.

Deborah Kerr, fantastic in the lead role of Clodagh, Sister Superior and leader of the group, faces the temptations and anger of men while dealing with an unbalanced nun, Sister Ruth, played terrifically by Kathleen Byron.

The cinematography and the art direction must be praised as the lavish sets are just that- sets. However, the average viewer will be whisked away on a magical experience where it seems the sets are real locales- high atop the Himalayan mountains.

Scenes contain howling wind, mist, and fog that are believable. All sets are built and structured, and Black Narcissus was filmed entirely on a set. This tidbit is unbelievable, given the realism, especially since the film was made in 1947.

The lighting in the film is unique, precisely the vibrant colors of the pink flowers and, later, the closeups of Sister Ruth. A fantastic example of this is her descent into madness during the final act, as her face, maniacal yet lovely, is heavily featured. Her face appears bright and hypnotic.

The main event, though, is the tales the film tells, which are pretty edgy for the year the film was made. Religion is always risky, and the treatment of the nuns as real human beings with actual emotions, even lustful ones, is brazen.

Specifically, Clodagh (Kerr) is a fascinating study as the character teeters on a romance with the charismatic, handsome, local British agent, Mr. Dean (David Farrar) while attempting to forget a failed romance during her youth in Ireland.

Meanwhile, Sister Ruth spirals out of control, leading to a dire climax involving an enormous church bell atop the restored structure.

A slight misstep the film makes is mainly casting white actors with heavy makeup in the Indian roles instead of actors with authentic ethnicity.

This detail is glaring because the makeup used is not overly convincing, and incredibly guilty is the casting of the gorgeous Jean Simmons as Kanchi, a lower-class dancing girl who the Prince becomes infatuated with in a subplot.

Still, this pales in comparison to the fantastic story and look of the film.

Black Narcissus is a classic film that contains a bit of everything—drama, thrills, intrigue, gorgeous sets, lavish design, and even a bit of forbidden passion—and brilliantly executes all aspects of the film.

A film admired by critics and directors throughout the ages and explicitly championed by Martin Scorsese, it has the unique quality of getting better with each viewing.

Oscar Nominations: 2 wins-Best Art Direction-Set Direction, Color (won), Best Cinematography, Color (won)

2017 Films, Jovan Adepo, Thriller

Mother!-2017

Leave a comment

Mother! -2017

Director-Darren Aronofsky

Starring Jennifer Lawrence, Javier Bardem, Ed Harris, Michelle Pfeiffer

Scott’s Review #687

Reviewed October 4, 2017

Grade: A

Mother! is an intense, disturbing, and brilliant 2017 work by acclaimed director Darren Aronofsky, having crafted left of the center works such as 2000’s Requiem for a Dream, 2008’s The Wrestler, and 2010’s Black Swan- I shudder to think this film rivals the other in the insanity department.

Stocked with four principal characters portrayed by mainstays in the Hollywood world, much buzz circled this film upon release.

The film is thought-provoking, analytical, and surely will be discussed following the conclusion. I appreciate the complex, difficult watches, and Mother! succeeds in spades.

The film is set entirely within the confines of one enormous house in the middle of a vast field of land. Aronofsky never reveals the location adding mystery to the already intriguing premise.

A young couple known only as Him (Javier Bardem) and Mother (Jennifer Lawrence) cheerfully enjoy married life together and seem very much in love. Him is a renowned author suffering from writer’s block and his mother had fixed up the house after it had burned long ago.

One day Man (Ed Harris) arrives looking for a place to stay- while Him is delighted by the visitor and encourages Man to stay, the mother is not as pleased.

When Man’s wife, Woman (Michelle Pfeiffer) arrives, the houseguests turn Him and mother’s lives upside down. This is merely the beginning of a complex puzzle.

As the plot unfolds, Mother! is oozing with one bizarre event after the other. mother witnesses unsettling images such as a beating heart within the walls and a bloodstain within the floor that will not go away. When relatives of Man and Woman overtake the house and a violent event occurs, events go from dark to downright chaotic.

Giving too much more of the plot points away would ruin the element of surprise, making Mother! a difficult film to review- the film is polarizing and mesmerizing and each of the principal characters can be analyzed and their motivations questioned.

Why do Him and mother react differently to the visitors? What manifests the resentment each has towards mother?

Each actor gives a compelling turn and Aronofsky has admitted the character of the mother is the one he related to most of all logically one might assume that Bardem’s Him might receive that honor since the character is famous and a writer. How strange and this revelation by the director will only result in more character analysis.

How wonderful to see Michelle Pfeifer back in the forefront of a Hollywood film- it seems eons ago since we have seen her grace the silver screen, and she is back with a vengeance.

Her bitchy portrayal is purely delicious and she encompasses Woman with the perfect amount of venom, toughness, and mystery. As she icily quizzes mother about her intentions of starting a family, she slowly immerses herself in mother’s life without missing a beat.

The film is unconventional and layered with symbolism and differing interpretations. Is Aronofsky’s message biblical? Is it political? Or could it be a reference to the obsessions everyday folk has with celebrities?

After much pondering and all three possibilities went through my mind, the biblical message seems the most solid and plausible explanation, but with Aronofsky films, the pleasure is in the analysis.

The final act of the film is particularly macabre as, until this time, the action exclusively centers on the four principal characters and the setting is largely bright.  A slow burn if you will, suddenly, all hell breaks loose as mobs, blood, fire, death, and darkness take over. The brutality and cannibalism involved will churn anyone’s stomach.

Quick to note are the lurid closeups of Jennifer Lawrence’s face during most of her scenes. Certainly, the camera loves her, but there is more going on here. Is the intention to make the viewer focus more on her character or to sympathize more with her character?

Mother! is a film that has stirred controversy among film-goers with some ravishing its elements and themes, while others have reviled and been revolted by the film.

Time will tell if Mother! holds up well, but my hope and guess would be that it will become a film studied in film schools everywhere.