Category Archives: Social Issues

Guess Who’s Coming to Dinner-1967

Guess Who’s Coming to Dinner-1967

Director Stanley Kramer

Starring Spencer Tracy, Katharine Hepburn, Sidney Poitier

Scott’s Review #1,539

Reviewed June 29, 2026

Grade: A

Guess Who’s Coming to Dinner is a groundbreaking, socially themed film made in 1967, in the midst of the Civil Rights movement that was sweeping the United States.

The movement aimed to abolish legalized racial segregation, discrimination, and disenfranchisement in the country, which most commonly affected African Americans.

So, the time was perfect for a star-studded film of this caliber.

The screenplay by William and Tania Rose is rich with character motivation and development.

Both the characters themselves and audiences can understand the perspectives of each of the six prominent characters as they slowly explain their thoughts and, at times, their underlying unconscious biases.

At the time of release, the film was understandably a commercial and critical hit during a fabulous time in cinema.

On the threshold of increased creative richness in the 1970s, the late 1960s laid the groundwork for expressionism and tremendous cinematic thought.

The film was one of the first to depict an interracial marriage in a positive light.

While a film like Guess Who’s Coming to Dinner would be dated if made in 2026, sadly, lots of blatant racism and discrimination still exist in the United States, though we have certainly made progress.

Joey Drayton (Katharine Houghton) is a young, free-thinking white woman from a wealthy family in San Francisco. She and a successful black doctor, John Prentice (Sidney Poitier), become engaged.

Beyond their racial differences, he is much older than she is and has been married once before.

They nervously fly to San Francisco to meet her parents and break the news, and they are to be married two weeks later in Switzerland.

Matt Drayton (Spencer Tracy) and his wife, Christina (Katharine Hepburn), are open-minded liberals who must confront the many issues and feelings the impending marriage arouses.

Also attending the Draytons’ dinner are Prentice’s parents, John Sr. and Mary (Roy E. Glenn Sr., Beah Richards), who vehemently disapprove of the relationship.

Other supporting characters, like the kindly Monsignor Mike Ryan (Cecil Kellaway), a white male, and the efficient yet unfeeling black housekeeper Tillie (Isabel Sanford), offer differing perspectives on the union.

While the interracial pairing is front and center, the set pieces and artistic design are flawless, offering a looming backdrop of San Francisco.

Frequent scenes occur on the family terrace, lush with bright flowers, images of the Pacific Ocean and the Golden Gate Bridge, and, in one sequence, a rich orange hue amid a dazzling sunset.

To say nothing of the lavish family estate with exquisite art, furniture pieces, and grand rooms all on display during the film.

Director Stanley Kramer deserves praise for these elements and many more, as the film is woven together tremendously well.

The acting is flawless all around, with the top honors going to Hepburn and Poitier.

A poignant scene in which Christina (Hepburn) remembers how happy Joey always was as a child, and how her past happiness pales in comparison to how happy she is now, will bring any viewer to a soggy mess as Hepburn slowly tears up.

Poitier shows his strong range during John’s knockdown, drag-out argument with his father, exclaiming that he owes nothing to his father and that a father’s role is to want the best for his child and let his child make his own choices.

While Mike thinks nothing but beauty from the union, Tillie is outraged at the nerve of John to mix with white wealth. She shockingly calls him ‘boy’ and scolds him for thinking above his ‘station in life’.

With Tillie and John Sr., we see that bias and racism are not always exclusive to the white community. Black people also see color and prejudice.

This is the film’s genius: most characters undergo deep dives and learn about themselves, for better or worse.

Some fun facts are that Houghton is the niece of Hepburn, and the film is Spencer Tracy’s final role, having battled illness throughout shooting, but insisting on finishing the film.

Guess Who’s Coming to Dinner (1967) challenges the norms of the times amazingly well, and the brilliance of the acting holds up decades later.

Oscar Nominations: 2 wins-Best Picture, Best Director-Stanley Kramer, Best Actor-Spencer Tracy, Best Actress-Katharine Hepburn (won), Best Supporting Actor-Cecil Kellaway, Best Supporting Actress-Beah Richards, Best Story and Screenplay-Written Directly for the Screen (won), Best Art Direction, Best Film Editing, Best Original Song, Score, or Adaptation Score

Golden Globe Nominations: Best Motion Picture-Drama, Best Director-Stanley Kramer, Best Actress Drama-Katharine Hepburn, Best Supporting Actor-Cecil Kellaway, Best Supporting Actress-Beah Richards, Best Screenplay, New Star of the Year- Actress- Katharine Houghton

Far From Heaven-2002

Far From Heaven-2002

Director Todd Haynes

Starring Julianne Moore, Dennis Haysbert, Dennis Quaid

Top 250 Films #127

Scott’s Review #332

Reviewed January 8, 2016

Grade: A

Far From Heaven (2002) is a gorgeous film, set in 1950’s upper-class, sophisticated Connecticut, that tackles not one but two separate social issues in a wonderfully crafted story.

An interracial couple fraught with discrimination, and a homosexual husband hiding his secret lifestyle, encompass this amazing film by acclaimed director Todd Haynes.

In the years to follow, Haynes would also direct masterpieces in a similar period (and story) to Carol (2015).

For starters, the cinematography and art direction are breathtaking- the beautiful and colorful small town in Connecticut, on the surface, prim and proper, is oozing with secrets and scandal just waiting to bubble to the surface.

An aerial view of the town allows the viewer to see it in a sweeping motion, perfectly carved.

Far From Heaven contains many similarities to All That Heaven Allows, made in 1955, and also focuses on a great scandal in a small, seemingly idyllic New England town.

Cathy Whitaker (Julianne Moore) seems to have everything perfectly styled and kept at home in affluent Connecticut: a successful husband, Frank (Dennis Quaid), an advertising executive, beauty, and a neighborhood filled with friends.

One night, when Frank is working late, Cathy surprises him with dinner at the office, only to be surprised herself by catching Frank passionately kissing another man.

In an awkward scene, Frank admits to Cathy that he needs conversion therapy, but instead turns to alcohol and continues to see men secretly.

Devastated, Cathy befriends her gardener, Raymond Deagan (Haysburt), a handsome black man, and slowly begins a relationship with him.

Needless to say, this causes gossip and scandal amongst the townspeople.

Far From Heaven is fantastic storytelling, weaving together, in essence, two main social stories.

Frank questions his sexuality, is afraid to admit he is gay, and risks his reputation and career. Undoubtedly, he is a tormented individual, and we see him slowly come to terms with his sexuality.

Haynes, fantastic at crafting a worthy story, carves a similar tale in 2015’s Carol, only she is a woman confident about her sexuality, but hiding it from society.

Since the time in both films is the 1950s, the sexual revolution has not occurred, let alone anything gay-related.

The central story, though, belongs to Cathy, and Julianne Moore portrays her to perfection. I would argue that Cathy is Moore’s best role, along with Amber Waves from Boogie Nights.

Hurt and betrayed by her husband, she suddenly is filled with new and dangerous emotions- falling in love with a black man in a not very open-minded time.

Moore and Haysbert have fantastic chemistry from their very first scene together.

I love how Haynes showcases the perfection of the town- the lawns are perfectly mowed, the flower beds flawless, and everyone appears cheerful and colorful.

But when something in their little town becomes amiss (in this case, Cathy going against the grain), the fangs come out, and the animals bear their teeth.

A wonderful scene showcases Cathy and Raymond slow-dancing in a black-only bar. They sway as one, and the black patrons accept Cathy.

Raymond (and his daughter) are not treated the same way by the white folks of the town once they catch wind of the shenanigans going on between the interracial couple.

Far From Heaven (2002) is a beautiful film, from the way it looks and is shot to the powerful performances throughout.

Moore may be the star and the central character of the film, but Quaid and Haysbert certainly deserve their due.

They each give layered performances as wounded and tortured men, and the conclusion of the film- perceived as open-ended- is also not a happily ever after climax.

Oscar Nominations: Best Actress-Julianne Moore, Best Original Screenplay, Best Original Score, Best Cinematography

Independent Spirit Award Nominations: 5 wins-Best Feature (won), Best Director-Todd Haynes (won), Best Female Lead-Julianne Moore (won), Best Supporting Male-Dennis Quaid (won), Best Cinematography (won)

The Trial of the Chicago 7-2020

The Trial of the Chicago 7-2020

Director Aaron Sorkin

Starring Sacha Baron Cohen, Eddie Redmayne, Joseph Gordon-Levitt

Scott’s Review #1,136

Reviewed April 26, 2021

Grade: B+

The Trial of the Chicago 7 (2020) is a Hollywood film with an important message. It’s conventional and explores a historic episode of great importance, and it tells the story well, taking many liberties for effect.

Director Aaron Sorkin sticks to a familiar formula, peppering humor with the standard heavy drama, and creates a film that will appeal to mainstream audiences. He earned several Oscar nominations for the film.

It’s a crowdpleaser first and foremost.

I would have been bothered more by the traditional approach if the subject matter hadn’t been so weighty or presented in a left-leaning way, which it was.

Solidly anti-war, this made the film more powerful and meaningful, though some of the comedic elements seemed silly and trite, and added to lighten the mood.

The period is 1969, though the main subject occurs in 1968, so there is a lot of back and forth. After antiwar activists clash with police and National Guardsmen at the important 1968 Democratic National Convention in Chicago, violence erupts.

Charged with conspiracy and inciting to riot, seven of the protestors are put on trial. The charges are controversial because a new president, Richard Nixon, has just been elected, and a revenge-seeking Attorney General lusts for an example to be made of them.

The casting is tremendous.

John Doman is fabulous in the quick role of the evil Attorney General John Mitchell (historians know he later became a convicted criminal), and Frank Langella makes Judge Julius Hoffman into the asshole he was.

I’ve never been as impressed with Sacha Baron Cohen (or rather, this is the first time I’ve been impressed) as he steamrolls into the role of Abbie Hoffman, a social and political activist.

Eddie Redmayne, John Carroll Lynch, Mark Rylance, and Joseph Gordon-Levitt also deserve praise as either a member of the seven or lawyers for either side.

Whether it achieves specific accuracy isn’t top of mind for me. The Trial of the Chicago 7 provides a historical account of the events that unfolded the night of the riots and the subsequent courtroom proceedings the following year. I’m okay with a few exaggerations for cinema’s sake.

The product is a safe, glossy affair and incredibly slick to the eye.

The editing is fantastic. Snippets of the real Chicago riots of 1968 are interspersed with the created scenes, creating a sound effect through the back-and-forth.

But before this, real-life comments from Martin Luther King Jr. and Robert Kennedy kick off the action. Both assassinated, their existence is essential to witness before the point at which the film is ever made.

Justice is not always served. Sorkin’s point in including these sequences seems to be that good politicians are out there fighting for truth and fairness.

My favorite scene is the final one. At the end of the trial, Hayden (Redmayne) is given a chance to make a case for a lenient sentence. However, over Judge Hoffman’s objections, Hayden uses his closing remarks to name the 4,752 soldiers who were killed in the Vietnam War since the trial began.

This act prompts many in the court to stand and cheer. Viewers will as well.

The main problem that gnawed at me is the same concern I had when I realized that Sorkin was at the director’s helm. He is a dazzling screenwriter, making the dialogue crisp and rich with intelligence.

But, known for television successes such as The West Wing (1999-2006) and Sports Night (1998-2000), this causes The Trial of the Chicago 7 to look like a made-for-television production versus a raw film experience.

I realize that Sorkin will likely never be a film auteur. Sorkin is why The Trial of the Chicago 7 is a B+ film, not an A film.

The late 1960s were a prominent and sometimes tragic time in United States history. The Trial of the Chicago 7 delves into a pivotal event in which several people were railroaded and punished for something they did not do.

The film makes sure that the railroaders get their just desserts, and that’s fun to see.

Oscar Nominations: Best Picture, Best Supporting Actor-Sacha Baron Cohen, Best Original Screenplay, Best Cinematography, Best Film Editing, Best Original Song-“Hear My Voice”

Hairspray-2007

Hairspray-2007

Director Adam Shankman

Starring Nikki Blonsky, John Travolta

Scott’s Review #1,095

Reviewed December 28, 2020

Grade: B+

Hairspray (2007) is a fun film, without being superfluous. The third incarnation of the musical treat doesn’t disappoint, offering a brighter production.

A safer affair than the 1988 escapade directed by naughty filmmaker John Waters, it’s nonetheless not a “watered” version either. It loses none of the charm that the original had and includes plenty of big-name stars.

In short, it’s a solid summer popcorn flick with sing-along tunes and a cool vibe.

The important message of racial relations is not lost nor dismissed.

The setting is early 1960s Baltimore, Maryland, a city rife with racial problems representing the entire United States during that decade.

Our star, Tracy Turnblad (Nikki Blonsky) is a chubby, bubbly, sixteen-year-old, who wants nothing more than to trudge through the school day and come home and indulge in her favorite television show, The Corny Collins Show, a popular local dance competition.

Tracy auditions for a spot on the show and wins.

She became an overnight celebrity, a trendsetter in dance, fun, and fashion. She and her fans hope that her new status as a teen sensation is enough to topple Corny’s reigning dance queen, Amber von Tussle (Brittany Snow), and bring racial integration to the show.

Amber’s racist mother, Velma (Michelle Pfeiffer), runs the television station and thwarts Tracy’s efforts, fueling tension and a dance competition between Tracy and Amber.

The casting is a big part of the success.

Blonsky, making her film debut, carries the film flawlessly. Both energetic and empathetic, she is the perfect girl next door and relatable for any young girl who is not a stick figure.

More broadly, she represents anybody who feels like a misfit or is put upon for not being classified as perfect.

Her joy and sincerity as she sings and dances to “Good Morning, Baltimore” and “I Can Hear the Bells” is infectious and makes her a perfect protagonist.

The supporting cast is delightful and laden with A-list Hollywood stars having a ball with their over-the-top roles.

My favorite is John Travolta as Tracy’s mother and compadre, Edna. Fans of Hairspray know that Edna is always cast with a male actor in drag, and Travolta is fantastic. His mannish body and movements only make the character more fun and fabulous.

And with his beehive hairdo and pink ribbon, he is so darn cute!

Tracy’s father, Wilbur, is played by Christopher Walken. His love for his wife and daughter is sweet. Pfeiffer fuels her one-note character with venom as the racist woman gets her just due.

Director Adam Shankman focuses on the musical numbers, and that’s just fine.

For added pleasure, he includes both John Waters and Rikki Lake (the original Tracy) in cameo roles, which is a treat for anyone who has seen the original.

The best numbers occur when the entire company joins in, especially the wonderful finale, “You Can’t Stop the Beat”. Besides being musically contagious, the song sends an important message of progression and embracing change.

Despite the fluffy trimmings, the important message of racial inequality is not overlooked, nor does it feel dated in the year 2007.

Racism is still an issue. Justifiably so, the racist characters like Velma and Prudence Pingleton (Allison Janney) look ridiculous with outrageous fear for anyone different than themselves.

Tracy and her friends champion causes such as anti-racism, integration, and being true to oneself, which are central themes of the film, along with the merry songs.

While I still prefer the 1988 version of Hairspray for its seedier a colder vibe, Hairspray (2007) is a colorful rendition that exposes a new generation to the chirpy, danceable tunes while maintaining the important themes.

It’s a family-friendly affair and a very funny experience without sacrificing any credibility.

A Better Life-2011

A Better Life-2011

Director Chris Weitz

Starring Demian Bichir

Scott’s Review #1,004

Reviewed March 26, 2020

Grade: B+

A Better Life (2011) is a heartwarming and timely project that focuses on and showcases Hispanic culture, both positively and negatively.

The film explores illegal immigration amid a powerful family drama.

Lead actor Demian Bichir deservedly earned a Best Actor Oscar nomination for his sensitive portrayal of a man who wants only the best for his son, even as life stacks the odds against him.

The film is an atypical Hollywood production, told simply and with heart.

Carlos Galindo (Bichir) is a struggling Los Angeles gardener who manicures the lawns of the rich and famous in sunny California with his partner and close friend Blasco.

Carlos lives a content life but is always on guard because he is an illegal immigrant and worries about his son Luis (Jose Julian) falling in with the wrong crowd.

When one day Carlos’s sister loans him $12,000 to purchase a truck he needs for his job, he hits his stride, only to have the truck stolen.

Desperate, Carlos and Luis are determined to get back the truck while avoiding trouble with the law.

The film’s title, while basic and not sexy, is powerful in its simplicity. Bold and thought-provoking, this is merely what Carlos wants for Luis and what every father wants for his son.

His trials and tribulations are a constant; he strives to teach Luis to stay on a positive path and avoid the mistakes Carlos made.

Regardless of the political discussion the film could have, what lies beneath is a heartwarming story of cherished love between a man and his son.

Cleverly, the film provides a hopeful final message for both major characters.

I adore the rich Mexican culture the film represents. A battle of traditional appreciation of one’s roots versus immersing oneself in American culture is examined.

Nearly the entire cast is of Hispanic descent, and with numerous scenes of ethnic flavor, from restaurants and cafes to nightclubs and street life, the film is authentic and fresh.

Thankfully, the filmmakers do not try to pull off the insulting ploy of casting white actors clad in Mexican garb or a big-name actor in the role of Carlos.

Many of the characters even seem like non-actors.

The Los Angeles setting is highly successful, especially since the low-budget independent film uses tons of exterior shots.

The camerawork isn’t exceptional but feels fresh, letting the warm climate marinate with viewers so they feel immersed in the Southern California neighborhoods.

The contrast between the East Los Angeles area where Carlos lives versus where he works is a harsh reality for most landscapers.

Bichir more than deserves the accolades heaped upon him for this mesmerizing and intelligent role. He quietly portrays an empathetic man who is an unsung hero and a representative of many fathers who never get their due respect, especially if they are undocumented immigrants.

When Luis denounces Mexican music, Carlos’s pain is evident as he endures what surely breaks his heart.

Bichir’s realism and commitment to the characters’ truth drive the film.

A Better Life (2011) is a story rich with poignancy and relevance, showcasing the plight of a good man. Now, almost ten years later, the film is arguably more important than ever since immigration has become a hot-ticket item in the turbulent political climate.

Do hardworking, undocumented people deserve a break from being in the United States? The answer seems obvious, and the film skews steadily to the left, but is there any other strong viewpoint?

Oscar Nominations: Best Actor-Demian Bichir

Independent Spirit Award Nominations: Best Male Lead-Demian Bichir

A Beautiful Mind-2001

A Beautiful Mind-2001

Director Ron Howard

Starring Russell Crowe

Scott’s Review #1,003

Reviewed March 25, 2020

Grade: A-

A Beautiful Mind (2001) is a superior film based on the life of American mathematician John Nash, a Nobel Laureate in Economics and Abel Prize winner.

The biography explores Nash’s battles with schizophrenia and the delusions he suffered, causing tremendous stress for friends and family.

The film is well-written and brilliantly acted, but it deserves a demerit for its factual inaccuracies, especially regarding Nash’s complex sexuality and family life.

This leaves a gnawing, paint-by-the-numbers approach aimed only at mass appeal.

The film was an enormous success, winning four Academy Awards for Best Picture, Best Director, Best Adapted Screenplay, and Best Supporting Actress.

It was also nominated for Best Actor, Best Film Editing, Best Makeup, and Best Original Score.

Arguably one of the best films of 2001, it cemented director Ron Howard’s reputation as a mainstream force to be reckoned with in the Hollywood world.

The Pulitzer Prize-nominated book of the same name inspired the project.

Starting in 1947, we meet Nash (Russell Crowe) as a virginal, socially awkward college scholar at Princeton University. He is a whiz at science and mathematics, coming up with unique, dynamic ideas for solving problems.

As he rises in the ranks, he is given an important job with the United States Department of Defense, tasked with thwarting Soviet plots.

He becomes increasingly obsessive about searching for hidden patterns and believes he is being followed, sinking further into depression and secrecy.

A Beautiful Mind is an important film because it brings to light the overwhelming issue of mental health and the struggles one suffering from it is forced to endure.

Nash largely lives in a fantasy world, with imaginary friends who have followed him for decades by the time the film ends.

Nash conquers his demons with little aid from medication, causing a controversial viewpoint. Amazing that the man was able to rise above, but is this a realistic message for those suffering from hallucinations?

Russell Crowe carries the film, fresh off his Oscar win the year before for his stunning turn in Gladiator (2000). He would have won for portraying Nash had he not recently received the coveted prize.

Crowe, hunky at this point in his life, convincingly brings the brainy and nerdy character, rather than the stud, to life, adding layers of empathy and warmth to the role.

We root for the man because he is as sensitive as he is a genius.

Jennifer Connelly, in what is disparagingly often described as the wife-or-girlfriend role, does her best with the material given.

My hunch is her Oscar nomination and surprising win have more to do with piggybacking off the slew of other nominations the film received.

She is competent as the supportive yet strong Alicia, Nash’s wife. In her best scene, she flees the house after a confused Nash leaves their infant daughter near a full bathtub, putting her life in danger.

The most heartfelt scene occurs during the conclusion.

After many years of struggle, Nash eventually triumphs over this tragedy and, finally, late in life, receives the Nobel Prize. This is a grand culmination of the man’s achievements and a sentimental send-off for the film.

The aging makeup of all principal characters, specifically Nash and Alicia, is brilliantly done.

Despite the heaps of accolades reaped by A Beautiful Mind, several factual points are reduced to non-existence.

It is questionable why Howard chose not to explore Nash’s rumored bisexuality, instead of passing him off as straight.

Admittedly, the film is not about sexuality, but isn’t this a misrepresentation of the truth? Nash had a second family, which is also never mentioned.

These tidbits, left out of the film, give it a glossy feel, as if Howard picked and chose what to tell and what not to tell for the sake of a mainstream audience.

Bringing needed attention to a problem of epic proportions, A Beautiful Mind (2001) addresses mental health issues in the United States.

The methods may be questionable, and the film has an overall safe “Hollywood” vibe. Still, it deserves credit for doing a good job as a film that is not only important but also offers a strong biography for viewers eager to learn about a genius who faced unrelenting issues.

Oscar Nominations: 4 wins-Best Picture (won), Best Director-Ron Howard (won), Best Actor-Russell Crowe, Best Supporting Actress-Jennifer Connelly (won), Best Screenplay Based on Material Previously Produced or Published/Adapted Screenplay (won), Best Original Score, Best Makeup, Best Film Editing

Golden Globe Nominations: 4 wins-Best Picture-Drama (won), Best Director-Ron Howard, Best Actor-Drama-Russell Crowe (won), Best Supporting Actress-Jennifer Connelly (won), Best Screenplay (won), Best Original Score

Imitation of Life-1959

Imitation of Life-1959

Director Douglas Sirk

Starring Lana Turner

Scott’s Review #918

Reviewed July 9, 2019

Grade: A-

The original film production, made in 1934, is based on a 1933 novel by Fannie Hurst. Imitation of Life (1959) is a relevant dissection of race relations, class systems, and gender roles, all of which still feel timely decades later.

The film is a fresh, progressive effort that sometimes teeters too much into soap opera land but is an important story to be exposed to.

The dynamics between the central characters in deliciously raw scenes are the most significant part of the film.

Lora Meredith (Lana Turner) is a widowed, stylish New York woman with dreams of becoming a Broadway star.

One day, she meets a lovely black woman, Annie Johnson (Moore), on the beach, and the women become fast friends, each having a daughter around the same age.

The women decide to move in together for financial reasons and to further Lora’s chances for success in the entertainment industry. Lora begins a casual romance with handsome Steve Archer (John Gavin).

Eleven years pass, and Lora is now a big star, living in a luxurious New York house and flocking to film locales in Italy. Annie continues to live with her, serving as her housekeeper and confidante.

The girls are now teenagers with issues of their own. Susie (Sandra Dee) has developed feelings for her mother’s boyfriend, while Sarah Jane (Susan Kohner), of mixed-race ethnicity, is ashamed of her black heritage and frequently can pass for white.

The trials and tribulations of all are played out throughout the film.

Imitation of Life has two key distinctions and focuses on each separately. Since the story is set in 1947 and the film was released in 1959, before the Civil Rights movement of the 1960s, the racial story is poignant and truthful and the main draw.

Sarah Jane is embarrassed to be black, and her eventual abandonment of both her life in New York and her mother can be deemed reprehensible if not for the times. Her regrets come too little too late, but Kohner nonetheless infuses much sympathy into her complex role.

The second central aspect of Imitation of Life is more mainstream and dramatic, easily more accessible to the public than the former. This is why some misunderstood or even dismissed the film as melodramatic.

Lora is glamorous, well-dressed, always stylish, and poised, and soon, Susie grows jealous and resentful of Lora’s achievements and the attention she receives from men at every turn.

This invokes a female rivalry with pure 1950s Hollywood glitz. It seems manipulative and naughty, using bright colors, dazzling costumes, and flair to promote excess drama.

As tremendous as Kohner is, Juanita Moore knocks it out of the park and does the best acting job out of all the principal performers. Her frequent dramatic scenes are filled with emotional bombast without the actress ever going over the top.

Instead, she keeps her composure, earning her well-earned Best Actress Oscar nomination for no other scene than the heartbreaking mother/daughter showdown in a California hotel room.

When Moore’s Annie is mistaken for Sarah Jane’s maid instead of her mother, the pain and worry are clear as she realizes she has lost what she knew of her daughter for good. She returns to New York an older woman with a broken heart and spirit, both defeated and deflated.

The last sequence is challenging to watch as tragic results and a coldness encompass the film.

The prevalence of more than one suitor for Lora and the implication that she could have up to three, including her agent Allen and playwright David, while Annie has none, is absorbing.

This point is slightly bothersome, and a missed opportunity—or at least the potential for one—as a male companion for Annie might have changed her life forever.

The film is faithful to the novel, but how wonderful it is to imagine Annie being treated to a more admirable life while finding true love.

Imitation of Life (1959) is a film treasure with subtle and not-so-subtle nuances and bold, powerful storytelling enveloping the entire experience.

Although the film suffers from a sometimes too-suds-like mass-appeal approach and too much focus on melodrama, it nonetheless does not abandon its social-issues theme, especially given the harsh treatment of minorities during this period.

No other film deals with the psychological turmoil of mixed race like Imitation of Life does.

Oscar Nominations: Best Supporting Actress-Susan Kohner, Juanita Moore

Golden Globe Nominations: 1 win-Best Performance by an Actress in a Supporting Role in any Motion Picture-Susan Kohner (won), Juanita Moore

The Lost Weekend-1945

The Lost Weekend-1945

Director Billy Wilder

Starring Ray Milland

Scott’s Review #856

Reviewed January 10, 2019

Grade: A

Billy Wilder, considered one of the most influential directors of the Hollywood Golden Age of cinema (the 1940s), created a masterpiece that tackles a social issue that had never been explored.

The Lost Weekend (1945) tells a tale of alcoholism and the desperation and degradation of a person with an addiction. Wilder bravely goes where no film had dared to go with astounding results.

The film was awarded several Academy Awards, including Best Picture, Best Director, and Best Actor.

Don Birnam (Ray Milland) plays a New York writer left alone for one hot summer weekend. His brother Wick (Philip Terry) and girlfriend Helen (Jane Wyman) are aware of Don’s drinking problem, but leave for the weekend anyway when Don goes on a bender.

He spends each subsequent day desperate for liquor and in need of cash to purchase it. He resorts to theft and selling personal items out of desperation and the need for booze.

The story features flashbacks to events such as his first meeting with Helen and an embarrassing attempt to meet her parents for lunch.

The film is adapted from Charles R. Jackson’s 1944 novel of the same name.

Although it is a dark story that can be categorized as a downer, the film does not paint a glamorous picture of the pains an alcoholic experiences or the lengths he will go to out of desperation.

Before The Lost Weekend was made, drunkard characters in the film were primarily portrayed as either bumbling or as comic relief, so this character study is a welcome departure from tradition.

Milland is perfectly cast and effectively relays the troubled and desperate Don. Handsome, well-dressed, and professional, he is not the stereotypical image of a drunk.

Dressed in a suit and tie by all accounts, he does not fit the bill for a desperate man, but slowly begins his descent, spiraling out of control.

This makes Wilder’s message more potent as he shows that alcoholism can afflict anyone, even professional, intelligent men.

Milland, who resembles actor Jimmy Stewart, is supposed to be liked by the audience, eliciting a rooting factor even when he mistreats Helen. We want him to face his problems and recover.

Many glimpses of Manhattan are shown, and exterior shots are used plentifully. Wilder shoots the scenes as largely bleak and lonely, which aligns with the film’s overall feel.

Third Avenue looks desolate and isolated as we watch a desperate Don wander around, trying to sell his typewriter for booze money. He is grief-stricken when he realizes that it is Yom Kippur weekend and the pawnshops are closed.

The camera remains firmly fixed on Milland, showcasing a range of powerful emotions throughout the film.

The Lost Weekend (1945) was a groundbreaking film at its release. It is a serious and detailed tale of the life and times of an alcoholic.

With a superb acting performance by Milland, Wilder can darkly and frighteningly portray the world of a person with an addiction.

Decades later, the film is still cited as an inspiration by other filmmakers creating works about alcohol abuse.

Oscar Nominations: 3 wins– Best Motion Picture, Best Director-Billy Wilder (won), Best Actor-Ray Milland (won), Best Screenplay (won), Best Scoring of a Dramatic or Comedy Picture, Best Cinematography, Black-and-White, Best Film Editing

Golden Globe Nominations: 3 wins-Best Picture (won), Best Director-Motion Picture-Billy Wilder (won), Best Actor in a Leading Role-Ray Milland (won)

Crash-2005

Crash-2005

Director Paul Haggis

Starring Sandra Bullock, Matt Dillon, Thandie Newton

Scott’s Review #799

Reviewed August 3, 2018

Grade: A-

A superior film that has unfortunately suffered greatly after controversy, Crash (2005) is a story of intersecting vignettes, all interrelated.

The controversy stems from the film’s very surprising Oscar win over the heavily favored Brokeback Mountain. Many thought the latter was a shoo-in, poised to set the LGBT genre ahead of the game.

Sadly, now, when film lovers discuss Crash, it’s usually in tandem with Brokeback, and usually on the heels of its having stolen the Oscar crown.

On its own merits, the film excels as a social story exploring the many facets of race, racism, and bigotry.

The events in Crash take place within one thirty-six-hour day in metropolitan Los Angeles.

Featuring a slew of characters that would even impress Robert Altman, the audience witnesses situations involving many races and backgrounds.

We meet Rick and Jean Cabot (Brendan Fraser and Sandra Bullock), a white, affluent couple who are carjacked when driving home from dinner.

The black men who carjack the couple then strike a Korean man and bring him to the hospital.

A racist police officer, John Ryan (Matt Dillon), cares for his troubled father, who cannot afford insurance. A Persian father and daughter wish to buy a gun for protection, and a Hispanic father (Michael Pena) worries about a rash of drive-by shootings.

The stories go on and on as a myriad of characters come into situations involving other characters.

The interconnecting stories all cascade into overlapping situations of interest. The point of Haggis’s film is racism, but with a creative twist.

The director points out and shows that those who are racist have good qualities too, and those who are discriminated against in turn discriminate against others themselves.

The most interesting character is Dillon’s, John Ryan.

On the surface, a racist, wise-ass, who in one scene embarrasses an affluent light-skinned black woman (Thandie Newton), simply because he carries a gun, then ends up saving her life in a horrific car accident.

But is he redeemed? Does he see the world as black people getting ahead, and he is left behind?

What about the Persian man, discriminated against, but then vowing revenge on a Hispanic man after a misunderstanding?

The black men who carjack the white couple then release a group of immigrants who will surely be sold, perhaps even for sex trafficking. Does this act make the men good?

The point Haggis makes is that each character is neither all good nor all bad, but rather complicated and nuanced, with emotions shaped by past experiences and by discrimination itself.

Crash is highly similar to Traffic (2000) and Babel (2006) in terms of pace, style, and the way the stories align. The film is different, however, in that the location is strictly confined to Los Angeles, making the setting of monumental importance.

How would events be different in a setting like Middle America? Or in a different country? These possibilities are worth considering, given that Los Angeles is one of the most diverse cities in the United States.

If racism occurs there, it can occur anywhere.

Now, more about that pesky Oscar controversy! In later years, critics would largely agree that the inferior film had won that year, and Brokeback Mountain lost due to a level of homophobia on the part of the voting academy.

Since the academy is filled with Hollywood liberals, albeit of an older generation, an alternative way of thinking is that perhaps Crash won because it was the “safer” film.

Everyone seems to have forgotten the other three nominated films that year. Alas, Crash is permanently marred for winning Best Picture. It would undoubtedly have more supporters had it lost.

Ranked as one of the lowest-scoring Best Picture winners, I still believe Crash has some worth- though I agree that it should not have won over Brokeback Mountain.

Taken on its own merits, the film is quite good. A message film with great atmosphere, it succeeds in making the viewer think and ponder, perhaps their discrimination, whether conscious or subconscious.

The ensemble acting and character representations are all very good and worthy of a second watch.

Oscar Nominations: 3 wins-Best Picture (won), Best Director-Paul Haggis, Best Supporting Actor-Matt Dillon, Best Original Screenplay (won), Best Original Song-“In the Deep”, Best Film Editing (won)

Independent Spirit Award Nominations: 2 wins-Best Supporting Male-Matt Dillon (won), Best First Feature (won)

I Am Not Your Negro-2016

I Am Not Your Negro-2016

Director Raoul Peck

Starring Samuel L. Jackson

Scott’s Review #674

Reviewed August 19, 2017

Grade: B

I Am Not Your Negro, a 2016 documentary by director Raoul Peck, chronicles an unfinished manuscript by social critic James Baldwin titled Remember This House.

The memoir is a series of recollections by Baldwin, who died in 1987, of his experiences with famous civil rights leaders Malcolm X, Martin Luther King, Jr., and Medgar Evers.

Released in a year when similarly racially themed documentaries emerged, such as 13th and O.J.: Made in America, all received award nominations at several year-end ceremonies.

If I have to compare them, 13th, the one most similar in theme to I Am Not Your Negro, is the superior piece.

While interesting, the latter didn’t grip me as much as the former.

Still, I Am Not Your Negro is worth watching, if nothing else, to understand and be exposed to the ongoing battle for racial equality in the United States.

The documentary centers on the discussion and backstory of the leaders mentioned. It uses old footage of each man for location shots and speeches.

A high point is Baldwin’s interview and his insight into his racial experiences, both positive and negative.

Each leader, King, X, and Evers, receives roughly the same amount of screen time, and the best part is Baldwin’s dealings with each man.

I immensely enjoyed the multitude of scenes featuring racial history in cinema, and the harsh reality is that blacks have not been given their due until relatively recently in how their characters are portrayed.

As recently as the 1950s and 1960s, and arguably later than that, blacks were demeaned or treated as nothing more than secondary characters. Worse yet, some were portrayed for laughs or as caricatures.

A startling admission comes from Baldwin himself. An enormous John Wayne fan as a child, reveling in the joy of his films, it was a harsh reality to understand that the Indians in Wayne films, seen as the “bad guys,” were Black Americans, and therefore himself.

Baldwin’s films were viewed through a child’s innocent eyes, but real life was harsher.

Samuel L. Jackson’s narration is unnecessary.

As a well-known name, the actor distracts from the message. Jackson seems to read Baldwin’s words as if he were acting, and Baldwin and Jackson are very different men, so the result feels disjointed.

The most important takeaway I Am Not Your Negro left me with is a crucial. A better understanding of the historical plight of Black Americans and how far the United States has come in achieving racial equality.

Even more important, however, is the realization that we still have so much work ahead of us as a nation to ensure even better race relations, and this is a sobering message.

Oscar Nominations: Best Documentary Feature

Independent Spirit Award Nominations: Best Documentary Feature

13th-2016

13th-2016

Director Ava DuVernay

Scott’s Review #669

Reviewed August 5, 2017

Grade: B+

Hot on the heels of her successful feature film Selma (2014), director Ava DuVernay follows up with another race relations piece: an informative documentary entitled 13th, named after the Thirteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America, which abolished slavery.

The documentary, however, exposes loopholes in the Constitution and shows how progress for Black people has been too slow since the Civil War and into modern times.

It looks at the escalating incarceration rates of the United States black population over the years and how the prison system as a whole has been used as both a money-making system and as a way of controlling minorities.

The documentary examines the United States prison system.

It opens with an audio clip of former President Obama saying that the United States has five percent of the world’s population. Twenty-five percent of the world’s prisoners are in the US, a direct message to those convinced that the US is the greatest country in the world.

This powerful message sets 13th off right as we explore why the statistic exists.

I thoroughly enjoyed the documentary’s high production values, including the modern graphics that edgily displayed the number of incarcerated Black people on screen.

13th does not feel dated or monotone as some documentaries do. Instead, it feels creative and nuanced with interviews and news clips of events such as the Civil Rights movement and Depression-era footage.

It includes modern-day footage, representing over a hundred years of history.

A significant aspect of the 13th is its chronological progression through history, beginning with the Civil War and ending in 2017 when the unpopular Donald Trump was elected President of the United States.

The gloomy implication is that, with the current (2017) presidency, the minority population is still repressed and discriminated against by many political figures and that they are still primarily feared and blamed for the “perceived” high crime rates.

DuVernay’s central point is that many political figures use “scare tactics” to influence voters to vote a certain way, and voters repeatedly fall for this strategy.

She analyzes the history and dissects several presidents’ terms and campaign messages, focusing heavily on Nixon, Reagan, Clinton, Bush Sr., and Obama.

I love this aspect since it was a fresh history lesson for me on how the times have changed but have stayed the same.

13th avoids being too preachy and presents “both sides of the aisle.” Some feel that political figures’ harsh take on crime is not meant to repress minorities.

A few of these folks are interviewed and given time to explain their viewpoints, but the film is mainly left-leaning in tone and views.

The negative portrayals of Trump, Nixon, and Reagan are proof of this.

Interviews with prominent activists such as Angela Davis, leader of the Communist Party USA, and a woman with close ties to the Black Panthers are informative.

Considered a radical in her day (the 1960s), the documentary features clips of her interviews both then and now.

Current political figures Van Jones and Newt Gingrich are featured, giving 13th a crisp, modern, and relevant feel rather than a long-gone period.

Overall, I found 13th (2016) to be an educational and historical lesson in the challenges and racial issues that people of color have dealt with over the years.

Their world is still affected by current legislation and decisions by political figures (mainly white), who hold all the cards and repress people who speak out against them.

Oscar Nominations: Best Documentary Feature

Independent Spirit Award Nominations: Best Documentary Feature

Hidden Figures-2016

Hidden Figures-2016

Director Theodore Melfi

Starring Taraji P. Henson

Scott’s Review #619

Reviewed February 26, 2017

Grade: A-

Hidden Figures (2016) is a mainstream, “Hollywood” style film that is well-produced, well-written, and well-acted.

The film tells the story of three female African American mathematicians who faced many struggles and were somewhat overlooked in the early 1960s.

The women achieved historical success and helped John Glenn orbit Earth.

From a film perspective, the story is feel-good but not contrived. It feels quite fresh and features an excellent ensemble cast with good chemistry.

I enjoyed this film immensely.

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

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

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

Katherine has the most prominent role and the main story. Since the Russians had already achieved success in outer space, the United States was racing to follow suit. Katherine is assigned as a “computer” in the Space Task Group, led by Al Harrison (Kevin Costner).

Initially, her colleagues dismiss Katherine, but she eventually earns their respect with her smarts.

In subplots, Dorothy struggles to be given a supervisory position. Mary aspires to be the first female engineer despite needing to enter an all-white school to take the necessary classes.

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

The actress impresses with her spunky, well-mannered portrayal, especially in the scene where she has had enough of the segregation and the difficulty of doing her job.

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

Henson is the film’s lead actress and carries it well.

The chemistry between the three actresses makes Hidden Figures work so well and appear believable. The women always have each other’s backs and are friends outside of work, attending church and picnics together.

The film wisely features women’s lives outside their professions.

A nice side story follows single mother Katherine (her husband has died) as she meets and is courted in a lovely way by handsome National Guard member Jim Johnson (Mahershala Ali), a it’s genuinely told.

The two also have great chemistry.

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

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

Hidden Figures plays it safe, and the actual struggles of the real women undoubtedly had darker and meaner situations, as the discrimination they faced had to have been more intense.

Still, the film downplays some of the grit in favor of light-hearted, crowd-pleasing fare, but I fell for it hook, line, and sinker and enjoyed the ride it gave me.

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

Precious: Based on the Novel Push by Sapphire-2009

Precious: Based on the Novel Push by Sapphire-2009

Director Lee Daniels

Starring Gabourey Sidibe

Scott’s Review #581

Reviewed January 2, 2017

Grade: A

Precious is an amazing film and one of the best to come out in 2009. Due to the hype, I had high expectations entering the theater, and I was not disappointed.

The film is an in-your-face slug-fest with some of the rawest acting performed in recent years.

The marvelous aspect is that the film takes the viewer into a world that is probably not one’s own experience and makes them empathize with the characters.

The film is very disturbing at times, raw, gritty, and violent, but also has some light, humorous moments and is an important film to see.

There is a heartwarming charm that offsets the violence perfectly.

The story itself and the direction are basic, but the wonderful acting is what sets this film on a high pedestal.

Gabourey Sidibe, a relatively unknown and novice actress, gives an astounding turn as an unloved, overweight, pregnant teen mom.

Both of her parents abuse her in separate ways and seem to have a life of pain ahead of her.

Paula Patton, who has been in several fluff films, impresses as a teacher who takes a shine to Precious, and Mariah Carey is unrecognizable as a plain-looking social worker who is also a sympathetic character.

However, actress and comedienne Mo’Nique plays an unfeeling, brutal, violent mother to the hilt and holds nothing back. Her Best Supporting Actress Oscar win was deserving.

Everyone should see this fantastic slice-of-life film.

Oscar Nominations: 2 wins-Best Picture, Best Director-Lee Daniels, Best Actress-Gabourey Sidibe, Best Supporting Actress-Mo’Nique (won), Best Adapted Screenplay (won), Best Film Editing

Independent Spirit Award Nominations: 5 wins-Best Feature (won), Best Director-Lee Daniels (won), Best Female Lead-Gabourey Sidibe (won), Best Supporting Female-Mo’Nique (won), Best First Screenplay (won)

Night Catches Us-2010

Night Catches Us-2010

Director Tanya Hamilton

Starring Kerry Washington, Anthony Mackie

Scott’s Review #503

70129370

Reviewed October 29, 2016

Grade: B+

Night Catches Us (2010), as a film, has some strong qualities and is captivating and interesting to watch.

It is largely set in 1970s Philadelphia and explores the racial tensions of the time.

Kerry Washington and Anthony Mackie star and do a great job with the material.

The film tells the story of a former 1960s Black Panther (Mackie) who returns home after a decade to start his life over, or so he hopes.

Night Catches Us is a combination of love stories and political/social commentary and is an important film to watch.

The leads, along with Wendell Pierce, are great, and the real-life 1960s Black Panther rally footage is interesting to see from a historical perspective.

My only criticism is that I wanted a bit more.

Certain events seem plot-driven and forced- slightly clichéd in the romance department- but overall I enjoyed the film very much, especially for Mackie and Washington’s performances.

Great acting and a socially relevant story.

Independent Spirit Award Nominations: Best First Feature

To Kill a Mockingbird-1962

To Kill a Mockingbird-1962

Director Robert Mulligan

Starring Gregory Peck

Scott’s Review #468

1051852

Reviewed August 25, 2016

Grade: A

To Kill a Mockingbird is a 1962 film based on Harper Lee’s renowned novel. It was released only two years earlier, in 1960.

The novel was groundbreaking, and the film is equally so. Race and racism are front and center in the storyline.

The film is still a marvel because it tells the story through the eyes of a child, in present-day terms, and as an adult, as she reflects on her experience.

The film is set in the 1930s in a small Alabama town.

We follow the lives of Atticus Finch, a respected lawyer and father, and his two young children- Scout and Jem.

Gregory Peck, as Atticus, is the moral center of the film.

Scout (Mary Badham) narrates, and her innocence makes the story much more compelling and less like a preachy vehicle for a social topic.

The Finches are a tight family unit as Atticus is widowed, leaving Jem and Scout motherless. A poor black man, Tom, is accused of raping and beating a white woman, coached into the accusations by her racist father.

We accept that the woman had designs on Tom and, when caught by her horrified father, was beaten, with Tom left to take the blame.

Much of the film, but not too much, takes place in the courtroom, as we hear testimony by the poor woman, her father, and Tom.

Not to be missed is that every juror is a white man, a sad reminder of the racism that existed and one argues still exists, though not as blatant in today’s modern world.

One cringes when the black attendees are forced to sit in the upper portion of the courthouse, an obvious way to demean and lessen them, and which speaks volumes for the town.

We realize Tom does not have a chance, yet we hope against hope for his acquittal.

Wisely, I do not feel the point is the trial’s outcome—we know what will result. But the film teaches us a lesson about reality: life is often unfair and painful.

The after-effects of the trial are the most exciting part of To Kill a Mockingbird.

Gregory Peck was awarded the Best Actor Oscar in 1962 for his role as a liberal, progressive, and honorable man who can do no wrong and is an excellent example for his children.

A black maid, Calpurnia, works for him, and he treats her like family. I could not help but think she is the mother figure in Jem and Scout’s lives.

Atticus does the right thing, treating everyone fairly and living a moral life. He is an excellent example, and it is no wonder Peck won the trophy.

A subplot involves a mysterious neighbor, Boo Radley, feared by the town kids but turning out to be a protector and companion to Scout and Jem.

This role was the first for acclaimed actor Robert Duvall; the actor has a tiny yet important role and does a great deal of expressive acting without uttering a line.

The title of the film is poignant and essential to the ending.

The film is really about Jem and Scout and their quick journey into the pains and unfairness endured by adults. Once innocently enjoying the summer, playing games, and making friends with a visiting young boy, they are exposed to evil and a hate-filled racist town, which they slowly come to realize exists.

Filmed in black and white, this quality enhances the picture. The blowing leaves and dark shadows add much to the impressive cinematography and give the film a dark quality that color would have ruined.

The 1930s time period is very authentic.

To Kill a Mockingbird (1962) is a timeless film with an important message about the world. Children and adults of every generation should view it as a lesson in empathy and compassion.

The film is not ugly or raw but is truthful and still feels fresh. It will resonate with all audiences patient enough to give it a good watch.

Oscar Nominations: 3 wins-Best Picture, Best Director-Robert Mulligan, Best Actor-Gregory Peck (won), Best Supporting Actress-Mary Badham, Best Screenplay Based on Material from Another Medium (won), Best Music Score-Substantially Original, Best Art Direction, Black-and-White (won), Best Cinematography, Black-and-White

Golden Globe Nominations: 3 wins-Best Motion Picture-Drama, Best Director-Motion Picture-Robert Mulligan, Best Performance by an Actor in a Motion Picture-Drama-Gregory Peck (won), Best Original Score (won), Promoting International Understanding (won)

Bully-2011

Bully-2011

Director Lee Hirsch

Scott’s Review #419

70181711

Reviewed June 19, 2016

Grade: B+

Bully is an informative, topical 2011 documentary on the bullying problem that has plagued the United States in recent years and, thankfully, has received more attention as a result.

Shockingly, bullying has resulted in several suicides, which the documentary addresses.

The documentary focuses on a handful of bullied students and tells their individual stories.

Unfortunately, the documentary says teachers and school administrators too often either don’t take the issue seriously or try to downplay it to avoid more attention.

Bullying is a nationwide problem in the United States.

I wish the producers had focused more attention on the actual bullies and their accountability, but surprisingly they did not.

This point was almost completely glossed over, and the film featured only the victims.

It would have been interesting to hear the bully’s perspective. Do they have issues at home causing them to bully? Do others bully them?

Despite this flaw, Bully (2011) is a well-made documentary that anyone with kids should see, especially teachers and school administrators.

The Danish Girl-2015

The Danish Girl-2015

Director Tom Hooper

Starring Eddie Redmayne

Scott’s Review #310

80058477

Reviewed December 29, 2015

Grade: A-

The Danish Girl (2015) tells the loosely based story of Danish painters and married couple Lili Ebe and Gerda Wegener and Lili’s struggles as the first known recipient of sex reassignment surgery, unheard of at the time (1930).

The film showcases terrific acting (Eddie Redmayne and Alicia Vikander especially) and a journey of one person’s struggle with gender identity.

The subject matter is important and timely, as the recent transgender movement has emerged at the forefront of today’s social issues.

A happy, young couple living in Copenhagen, and married for six years, Gerda and Einar are inseparable and madly in love.

They are best friends and help each other with their art. Because a female model is late, Gerda convinces Einar to stand in for her.

This event triggers a lifelong identification as a female named Lili Elbe. Lili has emerged sporadically since childhood.

Through painful self-assessment and encouragement from progressive loved ones, Lili decides to go through with a highly experimental and risky sex change operation.

Gushing with sensitivity and tenderness, and groundbreaking, though I bet even more so if made ten years ago, one feels for both lead characters, as they both go through emotional turmoil.

It would be easy to lessen Gerda’s emotions, and perhaps with a lesser actress, this might have happened, but Vikander (unknown to me before seeing this film) gives a raw, empathetic performance.

One can imagine how they would feel if their spouse identified as the opposite sex. Confusion, blame, anger, and sorrow would all be common reactions.

Gerda is strong, brave, and helpful while crumbling beneath the surface.

Vikander brings all of this to the screen flawlessly.

Similarly, Redmayne brings depth and empathy to his role.  Redmayne’s Einar is masculine, but he has something sensitive and slightly feminine about him from the start.

Was this done on purpose to soften the blow? He also appears slightly built. Redmayne lost weight to portray this role and have a softer appearance.

Actors can easily dress up in drag, but the emotional investment needs to be there, and Redmayne makes the viewer care about Lili.

One is teary-eyed along with Lili as she sees no other choice but to undergo the risky operation. We see the desperation in Lili’s eyes thanks to Redmayne’s acting skills.

I loved how supportive the characters are. Granted, Einar/Lili and Gerda move in liberal, progressive circles, but for 1930, it was wonderful to see.

Of course, Copenhagen and Paris are open-minded cities, but Lili’s childhood friend Hans, a sophisticated, macho guy, offers support. The same goes for the Doctor taking on Lili’s surgery.

These elements create a delicate, peaceful film of encouragement.

To be clear, Lili is not gay, and this is made crystal clear during the film as she meets a gay man, and the distinction between them is made.

She does, however, identify as a woman. She was born with the wrong parts.

The greatest aspect of The Danish Girl is its powerhouse acting and compelling subject matter.

One’s gender is a given for most, but watching a riveting drama about someone who is unrestful with their gender is eye-opening and still rather taboo.

2015 was a year of progressive transgender films, and The Danish Girl is among the best, handling the subject matter gracefully a without judgment.

Oscar Nominations: 1 win-Best Actor-Eddie Redmayne, Best Supporting Actress-Alicia Vikander (won), Best Production Design, Best Costume Design

Suffragette-2015

Suffragette-2015

Director Sarah Gavron

Starring Carey Mulligan

Scott’s Review #291

80046819

Reviewed December 1, 2015

Grade: A-

Led by an excellent performance by Carey Mulligan, Suffragette (2015) is a British film that tells the true story of the fight for women’s suffrage.

A team of women fought endlessly to obtain their right to vote, a vote that today most (men and women) take for granted.

Several characters are real-life portrayals; however, Mulligan’s central character, Maud Watts, is fictional. She is assumed to be a hybrid of other real-life characters.

Perfectly shot and giving a fantastic impression of life in England in 1912, the film centers on a bevy of working-class women, many of whom work endless, thankless hours in a sewing factory, forced to tolerate a vicious, unkind man.

Their lives are bleak.

A women’s movement has developed, led by the mysterious Emmeline Pankhurst (Meryl Streep) and Edith Ellyn (Helena Bonham Carter), both financially successful but very passionate women, spearheading the “women’s movement”.

The main character is Maud. The film is told from her perspective.

She is a hard-working laundress in her early twenties, married to Sonny and raising a young son. Plain, yet pretty, the audience knows this is all her life will ever be.

She has worked at the same sewing shop since a young age and has been sexually abused by her boss for years.

While delivering a package, she witnesses a co-worker smashing a window protesting the women’s movement.

Initially reluctant to join the movement, Maud realizes the importance and loses her family and job because of her devotion to the cause.

When women were finally granted the right to vote in England in 1928, sixteen years after the movement began,  this took a brave group of women who risked (and lost) their families and jobs and were imprisoned.

In one heartbreaking scene, the loss of one’s life, all in powerful devotion to what they felt was right and just, despite numerous powerful figures beating them down.

How sad to think this happened.

The film accurately portrays the women’s strength and courage.

One of the film’s most powerful scenes is as follows and belongs to Mulligan.

After her husband and community leave her, and she is imprisoned more than once, Sonny decides to give their son to an affluent couple. The boy is ripped from Maud’s arms, and we realize she will likely never see the boy again.

It is tragic and painful to watch, and Mulligan nails it from an acting standpoint. I have always admired Carey Mulligan; she chooses wonderful, challenging parts and never succumbs to mainstream mediocrity.

Think portrayals in Shame (2011), Never Let Me Go (2010), and An Education (2009).

The second powerful scene comes at the end of the film.

When a character sacrifices her life (a real-life person, mind you) at the Epsom Derby, where King George V is present, simply so that the women’s movement can get major exposure by running onto the track and wielding a sign, she is brutally trampled to death.

Subsequently, a funeral parade results, finally leading the masses to take notice and realize how important an issue this was.

The filmmakers of Suffragette wisely used real-life footage of the parade.

An important film with a message, Suffragette (2015) is beautifully shot and driven by bravura acting and a true historical story, and it deserves appreciation for its honesty.

Dear White People-2014

Dear White People-2014

Director Justin Simien

Starring Tessa Thompson

Scott’s Review #274

70298948

Reviewed September 18, 2015

Grade: B+

Dear White People (2014) is a highly creative, independent satire that begs to be watched for its message about racism today, homophobia, and class distinctions.

Set at an Ivy League college and written tongue-in-cheek, but also with a direct message from newly discovered director Justin Simien, it is a meaningful gem that challenges audiences to think, be entertained, and occasionally chuckle at the wit and comical lines.

Set in the present day- assuming 2013 or 2014- and well beyond the Civil Rights era, the film features a hip, sharp look and a myriad of characters, all with differing perspectives, all Caucasian or black in racial identity.

All the characters attend the affluent, sophisticated Winchester University, a mostly white, conservative school with a small community of black students who curiously all seem to live in the same dorm house.

The Dean is a Black man (played by Dennis Haysbert).

Sam White (Tessa Thompson) is a rebellious female student of mixed race who runs a radio show entitled “Dear White People”, which challenges the current state of racism in America, specifically at Winchester University.

Supporting characters include Lionel Higgins, a gay, bookish student with an enormous afro, excluded from almost all the sub-groups. Lionel is intrigued by Sam’s radio show.

Other characters include Coco- an attractive black girl with typically “white” mannerisms and friends, who try to fit in with the white culture. Troy, a very handsome black student (who tries to act “white”), dates a white girl (who tries to act “black”).

Finally, the film features Kirk, a white student whose father is the school president, who values an old-style way of thinking.

Shockingly, Kirk hosts a blackface party, which sparks major controversy at the school and drives much of the film’s drama.

The main theme is race, but different characters have different viewpoints on it, and the film explores all of them, which makes it unique and interesting.

Sam, for example, is a true advocate for racial equality and constantly challenges white people’s motivations and actions, blatantly so.

Coco, on the other hand, is resistant to being stereotyped as a woman of color and, in one scene, is incorrectly assumed to be from the hood by a reality television producer she is auditioning for.

She is envious of white people and the advantages they have, even going so far as to have straight hair and blue contact lenses.

Then we have Lionel, who is both gay and black, and considered an outcast. He fits in with no group and, curiously, seems okay being his own person.

What is unique and compelling about Dear White People is that it brings up a controversial issue, mixes it with satire, humorously, but presents compelling arguments against stereotypes, also bringing those stereotypes center stage, which most films avoid like the plague.

One black character is frustrated that, in their mind, most black people are content watching dumb black comedies, thereby supporting a negative racial stereotype.

One interesting aspect regarding the score is the use of lily-white classic film music- such as Barry Lyndon (1975)- the most lily-white of lily-white films (British and Irish).

Famous film director Quentin Tarantino is called out as being a racist director.

What wonderful irony!

Dear White People (2014) is a witty, intelligent slice of inventive filmmaking worth seeing, if only for its controversial subject of inequality and racism, which is too often forgotten.

An indie treat for those inclined to think a little.

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

The Normal Heart-2014

The Normal Heart-2014

Director Ryan Murphy

Starring Mark Ruffalo, Matt Bomer

Scott’s Review #198

70302186

Reviewed December 1, 2014

Grade: B+

The Normal Heart is a 2014 HBO television movie based on the true story of Ned Weeks, an openly gay AIDS activist/writer, played by Mark Ruffalo.

The film is set during the period when the epidemic first surfaced, from 1981-1984, and the challenges and frustrations faced, mostly within the gay community, to bring exposure and assistance to the disease.

Weeks was famous for building a group of passionate members who banded together to overcome these struggles.

Brad Pitt produced the film.

This is wonderful to know, as films with this content (AIDS) are often tough to produce. It’s wonderful that Pitt’s wealth and influence were used effectively.

At a vastly different time in the country to be gay, the government did very little to assist with financing for treatment or researching a cure for it, which is the main point of the story.

The talented cast makes this film what it is.

Matt Bomer plays Ned’s closeted gay lover, Felix Turner, one of the many casualties of the deadly disease. Bomer lost 40 pounds to prepare for the role.

Julia Roberts plays polio-stricken doctor Emma Brookner, who helped the sick when few others in the medical community would.

Other supporting actors include Alfred Molina, who plays Ned’s supportive, powerful attorney and brother, and Joe Mantello, who delivers a terrific meltdown scene as his anger and anguish over the government not taking the disease seriously finally bubble to the surface.

Finally, Mark Ruffalo plays Ned competently, but why the slight feminization? The real Ned Weeks was masculine. A needless stereotype the film (or Ruffalo) chose to pursue.

The film shows the discrimination faced by people living with AIDS, from an airline pilot refusing to fly a plane carrying a sick patient, to an electrician refusing to enter a patient’s hospital room to fix a television set.

It is sad to realize how ridiculous these unfounded fears proved to be.

According to the film’s statistics, a major point of the film is how the United States Government, specifically President Ronald Reagan, did very little in the way of funding or even wanting to discuss the issue for years following the initial outbreak, resulting in thousands of lost lives.

And why exactly is Reagan considered a great President?

It makes one ponder. It was only due to beloved Hollywood star Rock Hudson contracting and dying from the disease. Elizabeth Taylor used her star power to get people involved, which finally led to the topic being discussed and action taken on a federal level.

My slight criticism of the film is that it looks and feels like a television movie, similar in texture to HBO’s Behind the Candelabra (2013).

The colors are bright and vivid, and it looks television-like. It could have used darker lighting and perhaps a gloomier, more dour feel, especially given the subject matter.

Otherwise, thumbs up, and respect for bringing this story to millions of viewers and hopefully educating those who weren’t there.

Short Term 12-2013

Short Term 12-2013

Director Destin Daniel Cretton

Starring Brie Larson

Scott’s Review #149

70272893

Reviewed August 6, 2014 

Grade: C+

Having just viewed Short Term 12 (2013), I am not sure I am getting all of the “this movie is brilliant” or “beyond amazing” or glowing praise surrounding the film.

The film is set in a group home for troubled teens and centers on the home’s supervisor, Grace (Brie Larson). Grace runs the home with her boyfriend and other twenty-somethings, mostly former troubled youths.

The film’s focal point is Grace and both her problems (she is pregnant and her abusive father is being released from prison) and her relationships with the teens currently staying in the group home.

The film is fairly engaging but seems a bit forced and not gritty enough given the subject matter.

I enjoyed the relationship between Grace and a new charge, Jayden, whom she befriends.

The group of teens is almost too perfectly cast, with a mix of races and stereotypes; the kids did not come across as genuine.

I would have liked to see more backstory for some of the kids besides the two that were given one.

Subjects were introduced but not followed through with- why was Grace’s father never introduced onscreen? Where was the mother?

Her childhood issues were mentioned only in passing. Some of Grace’s actions were unrealistic and out of character for a counseling supervisor.

Would she smash the windows of one of the teen’s father’s cars out of anger and not consider the repercussions? And what was with the constant poop jokes, especially in the first ten minutes?

That was dumb and out of place.

The film feels glossed over, and I didn’t feel the realism- almost like a CBS television drama with swear words added to seem harsher. The subject was brave, but many more details could have been explored in Short Term 12 (2013).

Independent Spirit Award Nominations: 1 win-Best Female Lead-Brie Larson, Best Supporting Male-Lakeith Stanfield, Best Editing (won)

Smashed-2012

Smashed-2012

Director James Ponsoldt

Starring Mary Elizabeth Winstead, Aaron Paul

Scott’s Review #139

70227949

Reviewed July 28, 2014

Grade: B

Smashed is an independent film from 2012 and a showcase for Mary Elizabeth Winstead, who impressed me enormously as an actress.

She gives a fantastic portrayal of a twenty-something elementary school teacher who has alcoholism.

Known for either crappy or supporting roles (or both) in bombs like The Thing (2011) and Live Free or Die Hard (2007), Winstead comes into her own and is the main reason to see the film.

I am always amazed when an actor who hasn’t been given great material to shine finally goes indie and takes a risk.

Aaron Paul plays her husband, who also has alcoholism.

They both love music and partying. When she decides to sober up, conflict emerges in their marriage.

Despite the subject matter of alcoholism, the film is not a downer. It borders on a romantic comedy, with drama thrown in, and isn’t depressing.

My one criticism would be that the side effects of alcoholism are glossed over. There is not much grittiness in the film-she becomes an alcoholic, struggles a bit, and recovers, almost television movie-like.

The film doesn’t show the true, horrific battles.

Octavia Spencer and Megan Mullally appear in small roles.

Independent Spirit Award Nominations: Best Female Lead-Mary Elizabeth Winstead

The Purge-2013

The Purge-2013

Director James DeMonaco

Starring Ethan Hawke, Lena Headey

Scott’s Review #128

70265234

Reviewed July 23, 2014

Grade: A-

On paper, the premise of The Purge (2013) is intriguing. It immediately caught my attention, and I was compelled to see it.

The government, fed up with the overwhelming crime and prison overcrowding, decides to initiate a once-a-year purge, where anything goes.

It’s like Christmas for the criminals and the insane.

All emergency and police services shut down on this night, and citizens are left to their own devices as a way to purge the violent and aggressive instincts from human systems.

An affluent family, led by a security systems genius (Ethan Hawke), nestles in their lavish home.

Of course, events go awry, and chaos ensues.

The film has suspense, thrills, frights, and a bit of humor, while raising questions of class distinction and societal inequality: Why are the wealthy better off than the poor? Do they deserve to be?

I enjoyed the setting of the wealthy, gated Los Angeles community and the eerily Stepford-wife-like atmosphere of the neighborhood, where housewives delivered casseroles and other dishes to each other for the big night.

Throughout this sunny environment, the viewer could sense a too-good-to-be-true cheerfulness and the darkness to follow, anticipated as sunset emerged.

I found this film unpredictable and edge-of-your-seat, and it delved into a home-invasion thriller that worked well.

I couldn’t predict what would happen next, and that was incredibly entertaining.

I am unsure whether some of the humor in the film was intentional; some of the kills were over the top and included one-liners, but The Purge (2013) is a crisp, fun, summer popcorn horror film.

The Waiting Room-2012

The Waiting Room-2012

Director Peter Nicks

Scott’s Review #59

Reviewed June 23, 2014

Grade: B+

The Waiting Room (2012) is an interesting documentary that takes the viewer on a day in the life of a shift in a very busy public hospital in a poor section of Oakland, California.

Most of the patients are uninsured, low-paid, or unemployed workers who are sick and in need of medications and treatment, and in some cases quite ill.

The documentary balances the perspectives of both the patients and the weary hospital staff, who strive to prioritize cases and treat everyone, which is not easy due to overcrowding and underfunding.

I found the documentary fascinating and felt like an observer during a chaotic yet everyday experience in the busy, stressful Emergency Room.

The situations that arise are heartbreaking, and the staff does their best to accommodate each patient, but tragedy often ensues or tempers flare due to frustration.

It speaks volumes about the shameless world of United States insurance company profits and selfishness at the cost of human lives and patient suffering.

Sadly, The Waiting Room (2012) was overlooked by the Academy Awards but did receive an Independent Spirit nomination.

Independent Spirit Award Nominations: 1 win-Best Documentary Feature, Truer Than Fiction Award (won)