Category Archives: Drama

The Red Shoes-1948

The Red Shoes-1948

Director Michael Powell, Emeric Pressburger

Starring Moira Shearer, Marius Goring

Scott’s Review #683

Reviewed September 19, 2017

Grade: A

The best in the collection of cinematic ballet films, 1948’s The Red Shoes is a highly artistic and influential film undoubtedly studied in film schools everywhere.

One cannot view The Red Shoes without amazement, and the realization that this piece must have been dissected by legendary director Darren Aronofsky before he created his creepy 2010 psychological thriller, Black Swan, is evident.

The Red Shoes is a British film that gives it a transparent element of grace, class, and sophistication, perfectly enveloping the themes of love, ambition, and jealousy- the Brits do it right. Director Michael Powell later crafted the odd and controversial 1960 film Peeping Tom, sure to have wholly ruined his career, bringing his A-game to this 1948 work.

Decades later, Powell now is considered a genius director.

The film is laden with foreshadowing, at least a handful of times during its running time, as we meet our heroine, Vicky Page (Moira Shearer), a bright-eyed young woman with flowing red locks and aspirations of grandeur as she emerges as a fledgling ballerina in the Covent Garden area of London.

Partially due to her aristocratic upbringing and assertive and snooty aunt, she lands an audition for the ballet company led by sophisticated Boris Lermontov (Anton Walbrook).

He is immediately enamored of her yet gives her the cold shoulder, making her question her talent. The key here is the incorporation of trains in multiple sequences.

As Lermontov and Vicky’s lives begin to intertwine, a young music student named Julian (Marius Goring) is perturbed by the plagiarism of his music by his professor, having conducted Heart of Fire under the guise of it being his work. When Julian expresses his displeasure to Lermontov, he is hired to perform with the orchestra.

The addition of Julian to the plot kicks off a compelling triangle between the three characters- their lives overlapping in a mixture of young love, passion, and jealous rage.

The action takes off even further as the film moves to the gorgeous setting of Paris and Monte Carlo, a treat for any worldly or aspiring world traveler, as the photography and cinematic angles of the lush locales are breathtaking.

As former prima ballerina Irina Boronskaya decides to leave the company to be married, Lermontov creates a new ballet, The Red Shoes, starring Vicky, with music composed by Julian.

This creates enormous pressure for all involved as the film turns dark.

Dashes of influence surrounding the exquisite performance of the famous Swan Lake dance number heavily influenced the 1950s classic An American in Paris (1951).

The long, colorful, dramatic sequence emits lush, vivacious music and performance. This “time out” from the heavy drama encompassing the rest of the film is beautiful and peaceful and one of the sheer highlights of The Red Shoes.

The film belongs to the dynamic between the three principal characters as each actor is spot-on and rich with flare.

Incredibly profound are the performances by Shearer and Walbrook, as each actor gives their respective character a perfect amount of fury, ambition, and tension. Still, Goring as Julian is equally worthy of mention. Kudos.

I adore witnessing Moira Shearer dance; her talent and tenacity are astounding. An internationally renowned British ballet dancer and actress, Vicky’s role is perfectly carved out for her as the character must have been close to her heart.

Who can forget the most famous scene, where a determined and crazed Vicky finishes her stage performance, Powell firmly holding the camera on her makeup-stained face, her blue eyes wide and hair wild?

Her look of triumph and insanity, lost in the moment, is a grand and unforgettable image that is often repeated in cinema reference books.

Equal parts dramatic, romantic, eerie, lustful, and wise, The Red Shoes (1948) is a classic film made way ahead of its time. Its startling visuals, treasured art and set designs, powerful acting, and compelling story make it a must-see.

No wonder this film easily influenced other masterpieces to come.

Oscar Nominations: 2 wins-Best Picture, Best Motion Picture Story, Best Scoring of a Dramatic or Comedy Picture (won), Best Art Direction-Set Decoration, Color (won), Best Film Editing

Chronic-2015

Chronic-2015

Director Michel Franco

Starring Tim Roth, Robin Bartlett

Scott’s Review #682

Reviewed September 18, 2017

Grade: A-

Chronic (2015) is a brave film, a character study, that offers an in-depth look at the life of a male nurse. He has rich relationships with his patients.

What the film also does quite soundly is reflect on not just the obvious physical needs of the patients, but the deep effects that the main character’s dying patients have on himself as well.

The film is quite bleak with a quiet element and very long scenes containing little dialogue but a treasure in bold storytelling and brazen reflection.

The film is a subdued work requiring attention and focus.

Yes, some would deem Chronic to be slow, and most would describe it as “a downer”, but dismissing the film is a mistake as it offers rich writing and an in-depth look at a vocation and lifestyle misunderstood or confusing to most people.

Tim Roth, famous for his bad boy roles, especially in Quentin Tarantino films, does an about-face, delivering a superb, subdued performance as David Wilson, a lonely and depressed nurse in the Los Angeles area.

He is a quiet, kindly man whose internal pain registers on his face as he dutifully treats his mostly close-to-death patients, sometimes attending their funerals after they have expired.

Initially, we meet David as he treats a sickly young woman. Once beautiful, she is now haggard and I cringed when the woman’s nude, skeleton-like body, is on display as David washes her with a washcloth.

The filmmakers do not gloss over his tender attention to her private areas, shot gracefully and not done garishly. Still, the long scene is frightening in its realism.

When the woman succumbs to AIDS, David reluctantly becomes involved in a celebratory drink with a newly engaged young couple after he goes to a bar to unwind.

When he pretends the deceased woman is his wife, he receives sympathy, but the couple quickly becomes aloof when he reveals what she died of.

Does he do this purposely to push the couple away? Throughout the film, we realize that David thrives on being with his patients, and can do no other work.

In contrast, he has difficulty with relations with “normal” people.

Perplexities abound in this film, which makes the viewer think and ponder throughout, and after the story ends.

For example, David searches through a young girl’s Facebook account looking at her photos- he later finds the girl, revealed to be studying medicine, and they happily reunite.

Is she his daughter or the daughter of a deceased patient?

Later, David is sued by an affluent family and subsequently fired, after he watches porn with an elderly man to lift his spirits. There is a glimmer of uncertainty where we are not sure what David’s sexual orientation is.

In the most heartbreaking sequence of all, David begins caring for a middle-aged woman with progressive cancer. Martha (Robin Bartlett) is strong-willed and no-nonsense and makes the painful decision not to continue with chemotherapy after suffering chronic nausea and later soiling herself.

It is apparent that her family only visits her out of obligation as she lies to them that her cancer is gone and she is in the clear. She then pleads with David to end her life with dignity using a heavy dose of morphine- the sequence is heartbreaking.

The final scene will blow one away and I did not see this conclusion coming. The event left me questioning the entire film, wondering how all the pieces fit together.

Surely, being overlooked for an Oscar nomination, Tim Roth proves he is a layered, complex, full-fledged actor, in a painful, yet necessary story called Chronic (2015).

Independent Spirit Award Nominations: Best Feature, Best Male Lead-Tim Roth

Latter Days-2003

Latter Days-2003

Director C. Jay Cox

Starring Steve Sandvoss, Wesley A. Ramsey

Scott’s Review #679

Reviewed September 7, 2017

Grade: B

In the now saturated genre of LGBT film, a novel little more than a decade ago, Latter Days, released in 2003, tells a story with an interesting religious spin and is the first LGBT film to my knowledge to depict a clash of religious values, which deserves kudos.

The film was popular among film festival goers, yet critically, received only mixed opinions.

There are both positives and negatives to this film.

When rigid Mormon innocence meets plastic Los Angeles playboy, anything is bound to happen as a surprisingly sweet romance develops between the two young men.

While the overall feeling of the film is rather “cute”- not exactly a rallying cry of cinematic excellence- Latter Days suffers mostly from some sophomoric acting and an odd combination of a soft-core porn film and a wholesome Hallmark channel television movie quality.

This, in turn, allows the film to achieve only slightly above mediocre as a final score.

Young Mormon missionary, Aaron Davis, just out of Idaho, is sent to Los Angeles with three fellow missionaries, to spread the word of faith. Soon, he meets an openly gay waiter, Christian, promiscuous, brazen, and proud of it.

After a silly bet with friends predicting how long it will take Christian to “deflower” Aaron, the young men become enamored with each other as Aaron’s secret desires for men are exposed.

This leads to a test of faith for Aaron, especially with his religious and rigid parents, waiting with fangs drawn as he is banished back to small-town Mormon territory.

The romance and chemistry between the lead actors are the best part of Latter Days. Though Aaron and Christian could not be more opposite, there is warm chemistry that actors Sandvoss and Ramsey successfully bring to the screen.

Sandvoss’s “aww shucks” handsome, innocent looks compliment Ramsey’s extroverted, pretty-boy confidence, and the film succeeds during scenes containing only the two actors.

Much is gained from a throwaway laundry scene as the young men chat and get to know one another’s backgrounds, as during the brilliant soft-porn scene as the nude men thrash around a hotel bed making love.

Though, admittedly, neither actor is the best in the acting department.

The nudity in the film is handled well- explicit, yes, but never filmed for cheap or trashy effect. While the nudity is sometimes sexual, the men also lounge around nude in bed while chatting about life and their various ideals.

Also positive is the casting of Jacqueline Bisset in the motherly role of Lila. Suffering from her drama (an unseen gravely ill romantic partner, and admittedly an unnecessary add-on to the story), she is the sensible, liberal-minded owner of Lila’s restaurant, where Christian and his friends work and socialize.

The film creates a “family unit” in this rather nice way. Bisset and her British sophistication add much to the film.

Contrasting Bisset’s character is the fine casting of Mary Kay Place as Gladys, the rigid mother of Aaron.

Hoping to “pray the gay away”, she and her husband banish Aaron to a garish rehabilitation facility to turn him straight after a suicide attempt. The character does show unconditional love for her son but simply refuses to accept his sexual preferences.

There is no question that director C. Jay Cox slants the film in one clear direction as the Mormon characters are portrayed as stodgy and bland.

Latter Days slips when the focus is on the other supporting characters. I tend to champion large casts and neat, small roles, but Christian’s friends are largely self-centered, bantering about either their sexual escapades or their career aspirations as they wait tables hoping to get a big break.

Worse yet, a silly side story is introduced focusing on a misunderstanding between Christian and his best friend Julie.

I could have done well without many of these secondary characters.

In the final act, the film goes the safe route with a brief red-herring about a character’s death only to then quickly wrap the film in a nice happy ending moment featuring a nice Thanksgiving dinner at Lila’s restaurant.

Latter Days (2003) contains a good romantic story between two males that does just fine without the added trimmings that occasionally bring the film down.

All in all a decent effort.

Reflections in a Golden Eye-1967

Reflections in a Golden Eye-1967

Director John Huston

Starring Marlon Brando, Elizabeth Taylor

Scott’s Review #678

Reviewed September 3, 2017

Grade: A

Reflections in a Golden Eye is a film made during the beginning of a rich and creative time in cinema history (the latter part of the 1960s and the beginning part of the 1970s), where films were “created” rather than produced.

Less studio influence meant more creative control for the director- in this case, John Huston, who cast the immeasurable talents of Elizabeth Taylor and Marlon Brando in the key roles.

Worth mentioning is that Montgomery Clift was the intended star, but died before the shooting began. Richard Burton had turned the role down.

The film is an edgy and taboo story of lust, jealousy, and sexual repression set amid a southern military base. In the novel 1967, repressed homosexuality is explored in full detail, as well as heterosexual repression and voyeurism.

Originally a flop at the box office, the film has since become an admired and cherished part of film history.

Reflections in a Golden Eye is based on the classic 1941 novel, written by Carson McCullers.

Major Weldon Penderton (Brando) resides with his spoiled wife Leonora (Taylor) at a US Army post somewhere in the south during the 1940s and 1950s era.

A neighboring couple, Lieutenant Colonel Morris Langdon (Brian Keith) and his depressed wife, Alison (Julie Harris) are also featured and the trials and tribulations of Army life are exposed. Playing key roles are Langdon’s effeminate houseboy, Anacleto, and a mysterious Private Williams, played by a young and dashing Robert Forster.

Weldon is a repressed homosexual, rigid, and very unhappy with himself and his life, despite being successful professionally. To make matters worse, he is repeatedly needled and tormented by Leonora, who is having an affair with Morris.

Leonora adores her prized horse Firebird, who becomes a major part of the story. When Weldon and Leonora spy Private Williams completely naked in the woods riding bareback, Weldon feigns disgust, but his secret desires for the young man are revealed.

The two men then begin a secret cat-and-mouse game of spying and following each other around until a tragedy occurs.

Reflections in a Golden Eye is not a happy film, but rather a depressing piece of troubled lives and emotions. Passions are unfulfilled and repeatedly repressed as each character can be dissected in a complex fashion.

I am intrigued most of all by the character of Private Williams. A bit of an oddity, he mainly watches the action from afar learning Weldon and Leonora’s secrets- they keep separate bedrooms and repeatedly squabble.

We wonder- is Williams obsessed with Weldon or Leonora? Or both? He sneaks into her room and rummages through her lingerie and perfume drawers. Would he, in a different time, consider himself to become transgender? Or merely intrigued by cross-dressing?

Weldon can also be carefully examined- he has fits of rage and violence frequently erupts. Poor Firebird suffers a violent beating at his hands to say nothing of the main character’s fate at the end of the film. Having a macho and masculine exterior, his job is that of a leader, but the perception of a homosexual male during that time- if it was thought of at all was more like the femininity portrayed by the Filipino male, Anacleto.

Huston wisely casts both males well in this department as the men, along with Williams, could not be more different and nuanced.

A wise and telling aspect of the film is how it was originally shot with a muted yet distinguishable golden haze- appropriate to the film’s title- and much of the action seems to be viewed from the viewpoint of the horses.

The color theme was reportedly changed because it confused audiences, but my copy has the intended golden haze and I find this tremendous and works brilliantly with capturing Huston’s original intentions.

The film is reminiscent of Who’s Afraid of Virginia Woolf or Cat on a Hot Tin Roof, the former made only one year earlier. Arguably Taylor’s character in that film is very similar to Leonora.

In ways, Reflections of a Golden Eye (1967) could have been a stage production. One thing is clear- the film explores deeply the human psyche. I look forward to repeated viewings and further digging into the feelings and motivations of every principal character in a groundbreaking film by Huston.

Other People-2016

Other People-2016

Director Chris Kelly

Starring Jesse Plemons, Molly Shannon

Scott’s Review #676

Reviewed August 24, 2017

Grade: B+

2016’s recipient of numerous Independent Film award nominations is equal parts a touching drama and equal parts witty comedy, providing a film experience that crosses more than one genre.

Is it a heavy drama or is it a comedic achievement?

Without being sappy or overindulgent, Other People is a film that will elicit laughs and tears from viewers fortunate enough to see it. The subject is a tough one- a woman dying of cancer.

The title, in which one character states he always thought cancer was something that happened to “other people” is poignant.

Jesse Plemons and Molly Shannon play son and mother. The film is both written and directed by Chris Kelly.

The very first scene is a confusing one and caught me off guard. We see the entire Mulcahey clan- father Norman (Bradley Whitford), three kids, David (Plemons), Alex, and Rebeccah, along with their dead mother Joanne (Shannon), all lying in the same bed, sobbing and clutching hands.

Joanne has just succumbed to her battle with cancer. This powerful opening scene, also the final scene, sets the tone as Kelly, works his way back, beginning a year before the important “death scene”.

Cancer is a tough subject to cover in film, especially going the comedy/drama route.

The sensitive filmmaker must be careful not to trivialize the subject matter with too many comedic elements or heavy drama. Kelly successfully mixes humor and drama well so it works as a cross-genre film.

He achieves this with capable talents like Plemons and Shannon. They share tremendous chemistry in every scene they appear in together.

Scenes that show David and Joanne crying in each other’s arms work as well as others, such as when David takes a giddy Joanne to meet his comedy friends.

Most impressive is that the story in Other People is largely autobiographical. Kelly, a gay man like the character of David, moved from New York City to Sacramento, California, to tend to his ailing mother, who had also died from cancer.

Actress Shannon reminded him so much of her that he had the fortune of casting the talented lady in his film- the part originally slated to go to Sissy Spacek instead.

Mixed in with Joanne’s battle with cancer is a nice story about David. A gay man, David has broken up with his boyfriend Paul, previously living together on the East Coast (though still pretending to spare Joanne worry), and returning to the West Coast.

Over the next year, we see Joanne and Norman slowly come to terms with David’s sexuality. The turbulent father/son relationship is explored during the film as Norman, initially hesitant to meet David’s boyfriend, Paul, pays for his airline ticket to attend Joanne’s funeral.

A slight miss with the film is the Norman/David dynamic.

Other than a few hints of Norman encouraging David’s struggling writing career and his obsession with David joining the gym and boxing, it is not clear what issue he takes with his son being gay or why he is uncomfortable with it. Besides the family being rather conservative no other reason is given.

David’s sisters and grandparents do not seem to take issue with David’s sexuality, though it is not made certain if the grandparents are even aware of it. Is it a machismo thing with Norman?

This part of the story is unclear.

Still, Other People (2016) is a good, small, indie film, rich with crisp, sharp writing and a tragic “year in the life of a cancer patient” along with good family drama and the relationships that abound when a family comes together and unites based on a health threat.

The film is nothing that has not been done before, but thanks to good direction, a thoughtful, nuanced approach, and one character’s sexuality mixed in, the film feels quite fresh.

Independent Spirit Award Nominations: 1 win-Best Male Lead-Jesse Plemons, Best Supporting Female-Molly Shannon (won), Best First Screenplay, Best First Feature

Beautiful Thing-1996

Beautiful Thing-1996

Director Hettie MacDonald

Starring Glen Berry, Scott Neal

Scott’s Review #675

Reviewed August 20, 2017

Grade: B

Based on the play of the same name, Beautiful Thing is a heartwarming 1996 British LGBT film written by Jonathan Harvey and directed by Hettie MacDonald.

Incorporating music from the Mamas and the Papas, and specifically Mama Cass, the film undoubtedly was groundbreaking upon release in the 1990s due to its taboo (at that time) gay romance, but in the year 2017, this film suffers a bit from both a dated feeling and a play it safe vibe.

The action, just like a play would, takes place almost entirely within a working-class London apartment building in the present times.

The lead character is Jamie (Glen Berry), a high school student, intrigued by his male classmate and neighbor, Ste (Scott Neal). He also must keep an eye on his flighty mother, Sandra, who changes boyfriends like the weather, and aspires to open her pub- she is currently dating neighbor and understanding hippie, Tony.

Ste is the other central character. Shyer than Jamie, he has a difficult upbringing, living next door to Jamie with an abusive father and brother. Ste and Jamie eventually bond and a secret love story begins as the young men conceal their relationship from everyone else.

In the mix is a vivacious black teenage neighbor girl, Leah, who is obsessed with Mama Cass’s records, which her grandmother owns and frequently plays. Leah and Sandra are engaged in a lightweight feud, in large part because Sandra believes Leah is a bad influence on Jamie.

Keeping in close mind when Beautiful Thing (1996) was made, the film deserves an enormous amount of praise for, at the time, simply existing when LGBT films were hardly the norm.

Watching in 2017, though, the film loses a bit when compared with subsequent LGBT releases that broke more barriers with their mainstream viewership and much darker themes (LGBT masterpieces like 2006’s Brokeback Mountain and 2016’s Moonlight immediately come to mind).

Beautiful Thing also contains a safer, lightweight touch than the aforementioned films, making it now seem too much like fluff.

Director, MacDonald, mixes in humor so that while the message of a same-sex relationship is important, it is softened a bit by the comedy.

Specifically, the sidekick character of Leah lightens the message. The supporting characters may get a bit too much screen time. Sandra’s giggle-worthy job interview attempting to do “respectable work” in an office environment, or her man-hungry escapades, take away from the main story.

I also never felt any real threats or danger to the same-sex relationship. Sure, there is some brief disapproval, and a quick mention of Jamie not liking football (a negative gay stereotype that is unnecessary) combined with Ste’s abuse at the hands of his family, but even that is not perceived as a major obstacle to their, at that time anyway, shocking relationship.

On the other hand, the chemistry between the two leads (Berry and Neal) is wonderful and the best aspect of the film. Both actors convey the emotions of the characters perfectly- both coming into their sexuality, Berry’s Jamie is the more confident one, asking Neal’s Ste, in a sweet scene, whether he has ever been kissed.

This leads to a sleepover that is innocent and tender rather than steamy or sexual. I completely buy the characters as young lovers, coming to terms with their own identities while supporting the needs of the other, and becoming a good team.

The final scene, naturally accompanied by a Cass Elliot song “Dream A Little Dream Of Me”, is a touching, wonderful scene. Jamie and Ste dance together in broad daylight, for their entire complex to see, and subsequently are circled by both supporters and the curious.

As their show of support, Sandra and Leah join the boys and end their dispute.

Beautiful Thing (1996) offers a heartwarming conclusion to a fine, yet lightweight by modern standards, LGBT romantic film.

Tanna-2016

Tanna-2016

Director Bentley Dean, Martin Butler

Starring Mungau Dain, Marie Wawa

Scott’s Review #673

Reviewed August 18, 2017

Grade: A

Tanna, named for the tiny South Pacific nation of Vanuatu, close to Australia, was made in 2016 and nominated for the Best Foreign Language Academy Award.

A marvelous work in every way, but the crowning achievement is how this film was made.

Shot entirely on the island with a minimal budget and the use of nonactors, the result is a romantic, yet tragic love story that will move its viewer to tears in its innocence and beauty.

Tanna is shot in the  Nauvhal and Nafe languages.

Film-makers reportedly spent seven months in the village of Yakel, immersing themselves in the tribe’s culture and civilization. The people are the last of their kind, rebuffing nearby colonial and Christian influences in favor of their traditional values and beliefs.

The film is based on a true story of love by two tribe members and played out by the villagers, each portraying a role close to their lives and hearts.

As the movie opens, we are immediately exposed to a tribal community living their daily lives. They wash, hunt, and wander through the jungles exploring their natural surroundings.

The men wear simple penis sheaths and the women are mostly topless. We sense a great community and a sense of togetherness.

When Dain and Wawa  (I am unsure if these are the “actors” names or the real-life people) lay eyes on one another from across the jungle, they instantly fall in love and begin to secretly spend time in a tender and romantic courtship.

A traditional rule is arranged marriage, which becomes a major problem for Dain and Wawa as their love blossoms. When a neighboring tribe attacks the Shaman over a dispute regarding bad crops, Dain wants revenge.

When cooler heads prevail, the leaders of each tribe decide that Wawa will marry a member of the other tribe, leaving her and Dain distraught and desperate.

Their love is then tested ultimately.

The individuals who play “Dain” and “Wawa” are authentic and truthful. In addition to never having acted before, they had never seen a camera, but both pour their souls into the characters they portray.

This also goes for the little sister of Wawa, who is a goldmine in her honest portrayal. All the performances are rich.

Visually, Tanna is breathtaking. The exotic lushness of the green jungles mixed with the gorgeous running streams and waterfalls are one thing, but the oozing volcano that inhabits the island is both colorful and picturesque during the night scenes.

The entire film is shot outdoors and is captured incredibly well. The film immerses the audience wholly in the tribal world.

Comparisons to the William Shakespeare play, Romeo and Juliet must be made.

The film is a romantic tragedy of epic proportions and the doomed couple shares everlasting love and a bond that can never be broken.

The truth in this tale is genuine as the couple must agonize over a decision to either remain together or risk the threat of Dain’s life and Wawa’s freedom if they return to their native village.

The film is almost poetic, never more so than in the final act, set upon the glorious spitting volcano.

Sadly, films similar in richness and honesty are rarely made in modern times, but Tanna (2016) stands out as a treasure in beauty and thought.

Interestingly, because of the real-life couple’s determination and strength, the age-old tradition of chosen marriages has since been lifted and true love encouraged.

Oscar Nominations: Best Foreign Language Film

Punish Me-2005

Punish Me-2005

Director Angelina Maccarone

Starring Maron Kroymann, Kostja Ullman

Scott’s Review #670

Reviewed August 9, 2017

Grade: A-

Punish Me (sometimes titled Hounded) is a provocative 2005 German-language film that pushes boundaries and titillates the viewer with its racy themes of masochism and pedophilia that will be way too much for your average viewer to marinate and digest.

Some may be completely turned off (rather than on) by this film. However, for the edgy thinker, the film is quite the find. Unique, extreme, and thoughtful, Punish Me is an experience to remember.

Shot entirely in black and white (rare for twenty-first-century cinema) the film appears bleak and harsh, cold almost- and that is no doubt an intentional measure.

The grizzled German landscape (the city is unidentified), gives the film interesting and effective cinematography, transforming the black and white colors exceptionally well, whether the scene is set in daylight or nighttime. Something about the black-and-white decision is genius.

Elsa Seifert (Maren Kroymann) is a fifty-year-old probation officer. Married and raising a teenage daughter, she appears to live a stable, middle-class existence. When one of her charges, Jan (Kostja Ullman), a sixteen-year-old, handsome young man, gives pursuit of her, their relationship turns into an obsessive, lustful situation for both.

Jan, you see, likes to be sexually beaten, and, at first, hesitant, Elsa slowly gets immersed in Jan’s world.   When other characters begin to catch wind of the situation between Jan and Elsa, the film becomes intense.

Astounding to me is the fact that Punish Me is directed by a woman, Angelina Maccarone. This both surprises and impresses me. Thought-provoking is the female perspective in the film.

Elsa is not an unhappy woman- though she nervously chain-smokes in almost every scene.

She initially has no intention of being sucked into Jan’s eccentricities. As she awkwardly spanks him in their first steamy, sexual encounter, she is gentle, yet she quickly intensifies.

Is she insecure with her middle-aged body? She gets carried away by Jan’s charms, putting both her career and her husband at risk.

Can she stop herself before it’s too late?

One wonders a few things- How would this film feel if it were directed by a man? Maccarone centers the perspective on Elsa more than she does Jan- or are we to assume that Jan, at sixteen, is merely experimenting with his sexuality and therefore not the more interesting character?

This was my determination. Elsa has way more to lose than Jan does. We are not sure why Jan is so troubled, to begin with, or why he likes to be beaten- was he abused by his parents? sexually or otherwise? What deep-rooted issues does Elsa have?

I imagined the complexities offered had the film gone something like this- Elsa is a male character. Would the man-on-boy be too much? Is female on boy safer?

One wonders, but if Elsa was a male and Jan a female, I do not think the film would be half as controversial or daring. It would seem more exploitative or dare I say, conventional.

Instead, Maccarone turns the film into a psychoanalytical feast as we wonder what makes both Elsa and Jan tick and why they enjoy the discipline scene. Perhaps there is no clearly defined answer.

The supporting characters are not explored very well, other than a fellow troubled girl that Jan beds, commenting that she is too fat (she is not), or Elsa’s husband is revealed to have once had an affair with another woman pronouncing “it was only sex, not love”.

From this, one concludes that Elsa and her husband will reunite and resume their middle-class life together, but what will become of Jan?

Thanks to effortless direction and good choices by Maccarone, she makes Punish Me (2005) an examine-worthy look at sexuality, desire, and emotions.

Many will loathe the film or not bother to give it the time of day based on the subject matter, but the film is a treat for the creative cinematic lover and lovers of analysis.

The Salesman-2016

The Salesman-2016

Director Asghar Farhadi

Starring Shahab Hosseini, Taraneh Alidoosti

Scott’s Review #668

Reviewed August 2, 2017

Grade: A

The Salesman is the latest film directed by Asghar Farhadi to win the coveted Best Foreign Language Film Oscar. 2011’s A Separation also won the crown and 2013’s The Past, nestled in between the other films, is nearly as good.

All contain mesmerizing and gripping plot elements that leave the audience in good discussion long after the film has concluded. That is what good storytelling is all about.

Rich with empathetic elements and crisp writing, Farhadi has become one of my favorite international filmmakers. Each of his pictures is as powerful in humanity as their counterparts.

Along with fellow contemporary Claude Chabrol (admittedly around a lot longer), similarities abound between the two creative maestros in the form of thrills, mystery, and differing character allegiances. I adore how both directors incorporate the same actors into their films.

Farhadi incorporates the classic stage production, Death of a Salesman by Arthur Miller, into the story. The play and the film contain similar themes- humiliation and secrets.

The young and good-looking couple, Emad (Shahab Hosseini) and Rana (Taraneh Alidoosti) are community theater actors living in metropolitan Tehran, Iran.

They have wonderful friends and companions and are popular with their close neighbors and theater buddies. Emad, a well-liked high school teacher, and Rana, a housewife, make a perfect couple, but their bond will soon be severely tested.

Forced to move from their crumbling apartment into temporary quarters owned by a theater friend, they are unaware that the former tenant worked as a prostitute and had a bevy of gentleman callers.

She carelessly left the unit, leaving behind all of her belongings for them to sift through. One night when Rana is home alone, she inadvertently allows a mystery person to enter, which leads to a terrible incident.

The film centers around determining what exactly happened between Rana and the intruder. Is she hiding the truth? Can she and Emad get past the implications of the events?

The audience gets a powerful and intriguing mystery to absorb and unravel. Throughout most of the film, questions are brought to the surface to be thought through. Who was the intruder? Will Emad exact revenge? What happened?

The brilliance of The Salesman is that we, as the audience, never actually see the incident inside Emad and Rana’s apartment, so we are baffled by what has transpired. We merely witness the after-effects and the questions the characters (mainly Emad) have.

Is Rana being truthful? Did she know the man who entered the apartment? Was it even a man or perhaps the former female tenant? With Farhadi, anything is possible, but rest assured, a startling climax will ensue.

The genius is how the viewer’s loyalties will be divided by character and change within a scene.

In one tense sequence, a heroic character becomes the villain and slowly returns to being the hero again-talk about a topsy-turvy experience!

The Salesman is smothered with a roller coaster of emotions and feelings.

The way that more than one of the central characters changes their motivations is largely the film’s greatest success. Rana, Emad, and “the Man” are flawed, complex characters, and what a treat it must have been for these actors to sink their teeth into these roles.

A special mention must be given to the other actors involved in the film. The Salesman is fraught with great performances big and small.

In addition to the leads (Hosseini and Alidoosti), the supporting cast exudes immeasurable talent. Farid Sajadhosseini as “the Man” is astounding and his family members, appearing largely in the conclusion, deserve much praise.

These small characters appear during the most pivotal part and give it the needed acting chops to pull the result.

Asghar Farhadi hits another one out of the park with The Salesman (2016) and how deserving is the Oscar win for this man, a director whose films are always sure to be compelling, thought-provoking treats?

I cannot wait for his next film.

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

Closet Monster-2016

Closet Monster-2016

Director Stephen Dunn

Starring Connor Jessup, Aliocha Schneider, Aaron Abrams

Scott’s Review #665

Reviewed July 23, 2017

Grade: B

Closet Monster is a 2016 Canadian LGBTQ+ drama featured at the Toronto International Film Festival and crowned the Best Canadian Drama winner.

Stephen Dunn, an upstart director adds interesting visual techniques and images.

The story is a compelling coming-of-age piece, but the film as a whole is uneven at times, mainly due to character underdevelopment.

Still, for the subject matter, it is a nice film for LGBTQ+ teenagers to be exposed to.

The film is set in Newfoundland, where eighteen-year-old Oscar Madly (Connor Jessup) is a closeted, creative teenager. He aspires to be accepted into a prestigious school in New York, designing special effects makeup.

Through the opening scenes, featuring Oscar as an eight-year-old child, we learn that his mother has left the family to begin a new life and that Oscar witnessed the vicious beating of a gay teen, leaving him terrified of his developing feelings towards the same sex.

Oscar has issues with both of his parents- his mother’s abandonment, and his father’s temper and homophobia. He frequently escapes into a private treehouse he and his father have built and daydreams of happier childhood times with his father.

Oscar’s best friend is Gemma, who his father mistakenly assumes is his girlfriend. When Oscar meets a suave co-worker, Wilder, he immediately becomes obsessed with him.

Director, Dunn, creates a talking pet hamster for Oscar, voiced by actress Isabella Rossellini, a wonderful, creative add-on to the film. Buffy is a source of advice and wisdom throughout Oscar’s constant trials and tribulations and has been with him through the years.

In a clever revelation that goes over his head, Buffy reveals to Oscar that she, in reality, has been replaced several times by other hamsters over the years.

Closet Monster has its positives and negatives. Certainly, for teenagers or any age group struggling with sexuality issues or for children of divorce, the film hits it out of the park and serves as a relatable film.

Dunn successfully makes Oscar an empathetic character with wit, charm, and just the perfect amount of vulnerability. In many ways, Oscar is mature beyond his years.

Oscar is, for the most part, a careful character. He is surrounded by a world of chaos and disorder and uses escapism (his fantasies and secluded treehouse) to get through life.

Oscar is a strong and well-written character.

Also, a hit is Oscar’s love interest, the sexy Wilder. More of a bad boy, and assumed to be straight, Wilder, while rebellious, also becomes a sweet and trusted friend to Oscar.

When he realizes Oscar’s sexual preference and that he is the object of Oscar’s affection, he does not freak out or dismiss Oscar. Rather, the young men become even closer. In a tender scene, Wilder offers to be Oscar’s first kiss and he can experience the monumental moment especially.

Still, the film would have been wise to develop Oscar’s parents better. At first, the father (Peter Madly), appears to be a decent man, dumped by his wife, and forced to raise his son alone.

Conversely, the mother (Brin), is written as abandoning her child to selfishly start a new life with a new family (Oscar even spits in her face!). Somewhere along the line, Peter becomes a reckless homophobic with severe anger issues, and Brin is painted as the sympathetic one who is suddenly there for Oscar.

The characters should have been better developed. I found their motives unclear and perplexing. Why did they split in the first place?

Dunn is great at making Closet Monster an atypical film. He does not pepper the story with predictability or tried and true same-sex romance story points, which is a brave choice.

He fills the film with non-cliche moments.

Closet Monster (2016) is a worthy entry in the LGBT film category and a must-see for those struggling with identity issues because the film acts as a form of therapy.

In the Flesh-1998

In the Flesh-1998

Director Ben Taylor

Starring Dane Ritter, Ed Corbin

Scott’s Review #663

Reviewed July 10, 2017

Grade: B

In the Flesh is a steamy, pre-Brokeback Mountain, LGBT film from 1998. The budget for this film is very small and the acting is quite wooden.

My initial reaction was that In the Flesh is a terrible film, yet something sucked me in as a fan, whether the crime theme or the romance (or both).

The atmosphere is quite dreamlike and moody, which I find appealing and the addition of a whodunit murder mystery amid the romantic drama is highly appealing- therefore I hesitantly recommend this film for perhaps a late-night adult viewing.

But be prepared for endless plot holes and unnecessary subplots.

Oliver Beck (Dane Ritter) is a handsome college student who works as a hustler in a dive bar named The Blue Boy in Atlanta, Georgia. He has his share of loyal, older men who use his services and adore him, especially a lonely man named Mac- a barfly at the watering hole.

When closeted Detective Philip Kursch (Ed Corbin) begins an undercover assignment to bust a drug ring at The Blue Boy, their lives intersect, as Philip falls in love with Oliver and investigates his past.

As the drug investigation seems to be quickly forgotten, a murder mystery develops when Mac is murdered at the ATM- Oliver looks on, panics,  and speeds away. When Philip covers Oliver as an alibi, the plot thickens.

Other side stories like a flashback sequence involving Oliver’s past- while driving drunk he killed his best childhood friend, the introduction of his sometime boss and girlfriend, Chloe, and his caring for Lisa, his sister, addicted to heroin- are brought to the table, but really have little to do with the main story and only confuse the plot.

The most compelling element is the relationship between Oliver and Philip and their dysfunctional love story, but many questions abound. Is Philip secretly married or dating a female? We know nothing about his personal life.

Oliver, hustling and hating every minute of it, merely as a way to support Lisa’s habit is ridiculous- why not get her help?

Neither actor Ed Corbin nor Dane Ritter will ever be accused of being the world’s greatest actor, and can hardly act their way out of a paper bag. Both actor’s performances are wooden and unemotional, even when emotion is required in the scene.

Still, oddly this somewhat works in the film.

Regardless of In the Flesh being riddled with plot holes and sub-par acting, the film has some charm.

The moody Atlanta nights, rife with sex and secrets, are quite appealing. A murderer on the loose and disguised save for a green watch is intriguing.

The film also has a mysterious, almost haunting nature, and the muted camera work, whether intentional or the result of a poor DVD copy, works very well.

Since the time is 1998, a time when more and more LGBT films were beginning to be made, but not overly so, In the Flesh and its director, Ben Taylor, deserve credit for even being able to get this film produced and made.

The mainstream success of the LGBT juggernaut, Brokeback Mountain (2006), undoubtedly helped, albeit in a small way, by this film.

Though, strangely, I never noticed the two main characters ever kiss- too soon for 1998?

Not the finest acting nor the best-written screenplay, In the Flesh (1998), is a bare-bones film that will be enjoyed largely by an LGBT audience seeking a peek into a time when these types of films were not running aplenty and typically made in the independent film venue.

The Beguiled-2017

The Beguiled-2017

Director-Sofia Coppola

Starring-Nicole Kidman, Colin Farrell

Scott’s Review #659

Reviewed July 4, 2017

Grade: A-

A remake of the 1971 film (also adapted from an earlier novel) starring Clint Eastwood, The Beguiled is a 2017 release directed by Sofia Coppola (Lost in Translation), a director ready to burst onto the front lines.

Coppola carefully chooses her films, but each one is different from the others and The Beguiled is no different. A piece fraught with atmosphere and tension, Coppola does wonder from a directing standpoint.

The story has tons of unchartered potential and drags at times, but overall The Beguiled is a hit if nothing more than to look at in wonderment.

The film gets off to a moody start as we follow a young girl, eerily humming as she picks mushrooms, along a deserted southern road. It is Civil War times (1864), and the setting is a mostly deserted all-girls boarding school in southern Virginia.

The girl (Amy) is startled when she discovers an injured, handsome Union Army soldier, Corporal John McBurney (Farrell). Sympathetic, Amy helps the soldier back to the school, led by the headmistress, Martha Farnsworth (Kidman).

Slowly, the females in the school become enamored with John as they develop rivalries with each other to gain the upper hand for his affections.

There is something so sinister and wickedly foreboding about almost every scene as we shrink at the thought that something bad will happen at any moment- sometimes it does and sometimes it does not.

Almost like a horror film would, the camera angles are such that something or someone is bound to suddenly leap out and grab a character.

The colors are muted and almost pastel and there is commonly fog floating through the exterior scenes. Coppola does a fantastic job of portraying a deserted southern landscape. The lighting of the film is also intriguing as lit candles serve to enhance the dimness and the final dinner scene (poison mushrooms anyone?) is gloomy and Shakespearean.

Beyond the look of the film, The Beguiled is well-acted. With heavyweights like Farrell, Kidman, and frequent Coppola star, Kirsten Dunst, as the vulnerable and unhappy teacher, Miss Morrow, the acting is stellar and believable. The audience is unsure if John is manipulating the women for his gain or if he has developed feelings for any (or all) of them.

The lovesick teen, Alicia (Elle Fanning), with hormones raging, sets her sights on John almost from the beginning, sneaking out of musical lessons, to kiss an unconscious John goodnight.

The story, while compelling, is quite slow-moving and left with oodles of possibilities when the conclusion finally happens. Other than the tart, Alicia, the endless romantic potential could have been reached with both Miss Morrow and Miss Farnsworth.

I was left wondering throughout the film when a romance would develop between Martha and John, but only towards the end of the film was this ever addressed and barely skirted over, as they take charge and stoic Martha slowly began to let her guard down.

In this way, the film could have added some further romantic complications and beefed up the very short running time of ninety-three minutes.

As Nicole Kidman is one of my favorite film stars of all time (she can tell a story by facial expressions alone), she has wisely begun to choose fantastic supporting roles as she ages in Hollywood (2016’s Lion immediately comes to mind).

Dunst has aged gracefully into a middle-aged actress chomping at the bit for meaty roles, and Colin Farrell is as ruggedly handsome as ever sprouting a dark and bushy beard for most of the role. The acting in The Beguiled is fantastic.

The Beguiled is a film to watch if only to escape to the joys of great, atmospheric, film-making, and to appreciate the wonderful talents of one of the few prominent female director’s of today (hopefully the mega success of 2017’s female-directed Wonder Woman will begin to change this).

The story has a few issues, but overall The Beguiled is worth the money spent.

The Boys in the Band-1970

The Boys in the Band-1970

Director William Friedkin

Starring Kenneth Nelson, Frederick Combs

Top 100 Films #80

Scott’s Review #658

Reviewed July 4, 2017

Grade: A

An excellent counterpart to the equally brilliant, and equally unpleasant, Who’s Afraid of Virginia Woolf? (1966) The Boys in the Band is also a stage production made into a feature film.

As such, shot very much like a play and seemingly in one long take, the film is highly effective and delicious in wit and dark humor. With a macabre and bitter element, the characters snipe and ridicule each other during a birthday party.

The Boys in the Band is a groundbreaking film on many levels as it is one of the first LGBTQ+ films to feature gay characters in prominent roles. Furthermore, it has the dubious honor of being the first film to use the word “cunt”.

Regardless, the film is fantastic and a must-see for anyone intrigued by LGBTQ+ film history. All of the actors appeared in the stage production and reprised their roles for the film version.

The setting is the Upper East Side of Manhattan in the late 1960s.

Michael, a writer, is hosting a birthday party for his good friend, Harold. When Michael receives an urgent call from his straight and married college chum, Alan, he begrudgingly invites him over at the risk of having his lifestyle exposed.

One by one, the guests arrive for the party. Emory is quite effeminate and loud, Hank and Larry are masculine and a couple, but with monogamy issues and Hank’s marriage as obstacles.

Bernard, a black bookstore clerk is an amiable, nice guy.

“Cowboy”, a dim-witted hustler, and Harold, the sarcastic, bitter, guest of honor, round out the attendees.

As the night wears on, the party turns into a free form of insults, bad feelings, and vicious conversation. Alan and Emory get into a fistfight, and later a hurtful telephone game forces everyone to call the one person they truly love which results in anxiety and sadness for most of the guests.

The key aspect of The Boys in the Band is that it is shot like a play would be, with a highly effective result. In this way, especially mid-way through the film when the guests are all in the same closed room, the action becomes suffocating and stifling as the fangs are bared by a few of the guests.

Director, Friedkin, uses many close-ups of his characters to further portray their raw emotions.

My favorite characters are Alan and Hank as these characters are the most complex.

Both are married, and both hit it off famously, although Alan’s sexuality is never completely revealed. He is married but troubled, and the audience never learns why, although we could wager a guess that he is, indeed, conflicted by his sexuality.

What will become of him? Will he accept his sexuality or live a repressed existence?

Hank, during a divorce from his wife, lives with Larry as a couple. Hank is complex because he is transitioning from a straight life to a gay lifestyle and that must have been very difficult in the late 1960’s- for this reason, I find the character of Hank quite brave.

The film does not explore this angle as much as it could have, but a character such as Hank fleshes out the cast in a positive way. Alan and Hank are multi-dimensional characters whereas some of the others contain gay stereotypes.

I would have enjoyed a deeper dive into the personal lives of some of the characters, but the film is really about the emotions many of the characters possess and feelings of love, some unrequited, and there are too many characters for each to receive his due focus.

Plus, the main focus of the film is the back-and-forth banter between the characters.

Valley of the Dolls-1967

Valley of the Dolls-1967

Director Mark Robson

Starring Barbara Parkins, Patty Duke, Sharon Tate

Scott’s Review #657

Reviewed July 3, 2017

Grade: A-

Based on the best-selling novel written by Jacqueline Susann a year earlier, the film version of Valley of the Dolls has become rather a cult classic in the years following release- it has earned the dubious description of “it’s so bad it’s good”.

The film dives headfirst into the soapy and dramatic world of Hollywood and Broadway and the trials and tribulations that three young women encounter as they try to “make it” in the backstabbing business.

The film teeters on camp, but is a favorite of mine, as I love the theme of aspiring stars in La La land. The set design and groovy styles of the late 1960s are also noteworthy.

Bored with her life in sleepy New England, Anne Welles decides to move to the bright lights of Manhattan seeking fame, fortune, and excitement.

After she lands a secretarial job for an entertainment lawyer, who handles temperamental Broadway star Helen Lawson (Susan Hayward), Anne meets and befriends two other struggling young actresses.

Neely O’Hara (Patty Duke) is a vivacious, gifted singer, and Jennifer North (Sharon Tate) is a gorgeous blonde with limited talent but looks to die for.

The three women wrestle with the ups and downs of show business as they each achieve various levels of success and failure.

The film centers on both the love and the losses of each woman and at times the film is rather soap opera-like, especially the bitchy feud between Neely and Helen, but the film is a fun, entertaining experience.

Various men come in and out of the lives of the trio. The “dolls” referenced in the title are a nickname for pills that the girls readily pop and alcohol is also used in the film.

One interesting aspect of the film that I am fond of is that the three women are vastly different from one another.

Anne is the most sensible of the three and arguably the most intelligent. Neely is wild, reckless, and constantly battles drugs and alcohol, yet she is both the most successful and the most talented. Jennifer is gorgeous but lacks the talent or the vigor to succeed in Hollywood.

Two of the three women do not experience happy endings to their respective stories.

Some are admittedly a bit uneven, especially the performance of Duke as Neely. She plays the role wildly over the top, especially during her shrieking, drug-saddled tirades, but rather than find the performance irritating (some certainly might), I find the role loud, bombastic, yet sympathetic.

We root for Neely because she has talent despite her shortcomings and she is a likable character to me as I want her to find happiness.

Also playing up the camp is Hayward, as she fills Helen with fire, spite, and gusto, doing everything to make the audience view her as a queen bitch. Helen was scheduled to be played by illustrious star Judy Garland (she would have been perfect!) but was reportedly fired for showing up for work drunk.

An enjoyable aspect of Valley of the Dolls is the humor, though sadly the laughs are not always intentional. The finale involves a catfight between Neely and Helen in the classy ladies’ room of a famed theater.

With sheer delight, Neely yanks off Helen’s bright orange wig to reveal her natural head of hair. In campy fashion, Helen’s real hair is perfectly fine- more shocking would have been if she were bald or had thinning hair, but her hair is bleached blonde and full.

In melodramatic fashion, Helen waltzes out of the theater sans wig.

Valley of the Dolls is a late-night treat that can be enjoyed and not taken overly seriously- the film differs vastly from the actual novel and even the time (the 1960s versus the 1940s through the 1960s) is changed.

The film was followed by a much more campy and satirical film,  Beyond the Valley of the Dolls, made in 1970 and directed by Russ Meyer.

Oscar Nominations: Best Original Song Score or Adaptation Score

I Smile Back-2015

I Smile Back-2015

Director Adam Salky

Starring Sarah Silverman

Scott’s Review #654

Reviewed June 13, 2017

Grade: B+

As a fan of Sarah Silverman, the comedienne, I was anxious to see the 2015 film, I Smile Back, which garnered her a Screen Actors Guild Award nomination.

Silverman tackles a heavily dramatic role in a film that teeters on being a pure “downer”. Many fans expecting the actress’s comic wit to be featured need not see it.

Rather, I embraced the performance and found the film to be an independent film treat, thanks to Silverman’s powerful performance. She nails the part and carries it to success.

I Smile Back is a small film that I wish had garnered more viewers.

Laney Brooks (Silverman) appears to have it all. She lives an affluent existence in Westchester County, New York with her handsome husband, Bruce (Josh Charles), and their two young children.

With a gorgeous house, dinner parties, and friends, who could ask for anything more?

Bored and troubled by a tough childhood and “daddy issues”, Laney tends to drink too much, abuse drugs and prescription pills, and carry on an affair with her best friend’s husband, all while managing to run a household.

As she gradually spirals down a darker path, Laney sees her perfect world slowly crumble around her.

Throughout the film, I asked, “Are we supposed to root for Laney or dislike her?”

Director Adam Salky does not make it easy to like her.

In addition to her substance abuse use (or over-use), Laney is rather selfish. From the small scenes when Laney drops off her kids from school and is annoyed when the crossing guard and a teacher refuse to give her special treatment, she mutters insults under her breathe as she grabs a cigarette and heads for her scandalous rendezvous.

But when she is put in great peril later in the film, following one of her benders, I could not help but feel deep sympathy for her.

It is a bit unclear what the audience should feel.

This leads me to conclude that the film belongs to Silverman.

What impresses me most is how believable she is in most scenes. She packs creative lunches for her kids and plays fun birthday cake decorating games with them, but in the next breathe snorts cocaine and rails at a neighbor lady for not celebrating Thanksgiving.

Thanks to Silverman, she plays these scenes with gusto.

Some critics have complained about the script, but I find no real fault. While not the strongest element, it is fine, nonetheless.

I Smile Back is a low-budget indie drama that serves its purpose- it does not delve too deeply into the how’s and why’s of her addiction, and a nice scene with Laney’s father (Chris Sarandon) offers no concrete evidence of why this man drove her to drugs by his abandonment.

The film seems to be more about proving a good performance by Silverman than anything else.

Sarah Silverman commands great respect for her dark portrayal in I Smile Back.

This role, combined with her recent turn in Showtime’s Masters of Sex television series, portraying a pregnant lesbian in the 1960s, proves that she has what it takes to compete with the great dramatic actresses of today.

She is much more than a stand-up comic. Here’s to hoping for more drama from this talented lady in the years ahead.

A Man Called Ove-2016

A Man Called Ove-2016

Director Hannes Holm

Starring Rolf Lassgård, Ida Engvoll

Scott’s Review #653

Reviewed June 12, 2017

Grade: A

A Man Called Ove is a wonderful 2016 Swedish film honored with a Best Foreign Language Film Oscar nomination and a darling watch.

The film is wonderful.

Equal parts whimsical, humorous, and heartbreaking, the film churns up emotions brought to the surface, which is quite telling about the experience.

The film is magical in a sense.

The lovely scenery of Sweden also abounds, making A Man Called Ove an unexpected marvel worth checking out for good film lovers.

Ove (Rolf Lassgard) is a fifty-nine-year-old curmudgeon living in suburban Sweden. He is the keeper of law and order in his quaint, little community of bungalows, regularly ridiculing rule breakers and the oblivious with torrents of shouts and insults.

He despises several neighbors including a beautiful cat that walks around the complex as if she owns the place.

When an interracial family moves in next door to Ove, his life forever changes as he becomes acquainted with the husband, the wife, and their two young girls. In his newfound entertainment, Ove regularly visits his deceased wife’s gravestone, bringing her flowers, and plotting his suicide.

Through flashbacks, we are taken on a journey through the past as we learn all there is to know about Ove.

The film is a beautiful experience. I worried that A Man Called Ove would be too lighthearted and sentimental.  The type of foreign language film the Academy far too often recognizes in place of darker, more complex (and in my mind, deserving) films.

A Man Called Ove is not exactly dark, but certainly not trivial or fluff. I found the film rich with great writing and character development.

Romance is also a major theme but not in a corny way. For much of the running time, Ove’s deceased wife Sonja is a complete mystery. We only know that Ove misses her terribly and cannot wait to be with her in the afterlife. We only get brief glimpses of her photo on the table.

When finally introduced to the story, we see them both in their younger years, filled with hope and promise. I beamed with delight during these wonderful moments. The scenes of their innocent first dates and the connection they develop are heartwarming.

Later, when Sonja’s story is wholly explored, we come to a new appreciation for Ove and why he is the way he is in present times. We understand him better and the character develops.

Some paths that life takes Ove and Sonja are tear-inducing and emotional, largely due to the character and personality that Sonja possesses. Along with the Ove and Sonja back story, we are treated to scenes of Ove and his father, in the past.

With his mother dying way too young, the pair develop an unrelenting bond that is severed only by tragic circumstances.

Ove’s constant bungled attempts at suicide (he buys poor-quality rope to hang himself, a visitor interrupts his attempt to breathe in toxic garage fumes, and he ends up saving a life when he intends to be hit by a train) are the comic turns that the film mixes perfectly with the heavy drama.

A perfect balance of drama, comedy, churning emotions, and heartbreaking honesty, A Man Called Ove (2016) is a pure treat in modern cinema and is highly recommended for those seeking a treasure with a full array of characteristics.

Oscar Nominations: Best Foreign Language Film

Fences-2016

Fences-2016

Director Denzel Washington

Starring Denzel Washington, Viola Davis, Jovan Adepo

Scott’s Review #652

Reviewed June 11, 2017

Grade: B+

Denzel Washington and Viola Davis both give dynamic performances in Fences (2016), a film directed by Washington himself, and based on a stage play, written by August Wilson.

The film reunites several actors from the stage version and, while compelling, Fences does not translate as well onto the screen as hoped. Throughout the movie, I surmised how much better Fences would be on the live stage.

Still, a tremendous acting tour de force transpires, which is well worth the price of admission.

Set in 1950s Pittsburgh, Troy Maxson (Washington) is a struggling fifty-three-year-old black man who works as a trash collector alongside his best friend, Jim Bono.

Troy is married to Rose (Davis). They have a teenage son, Cory (Jovan Adepo), an aspiring high school football player. Troy’s younger brother, a mentally impaired World War II veteran, and Troy’s older son, Lyons, a fledgling musician, are also in the mix.

Everyone lives in a close-knit community, and there is a sense of comradery, though the principal characters are frequently at odds with each other as dramatic situations slowly arise.

Troy is an irate man, frequently going on rants about his time playing in the Negro baseball league and complaining about the unfairness of the world, specifically the racial injustice of the time.

The friction between Troy and Cory is thick as Cory wants to dedicate his life to football, while Troy feels his son will ultimately be disappointed. When Troy drops a startling bomb on Rose, their lives are forever changed as they work to mend the damage inflicted between them.

At its core, Fences is a family drama and the story offers conflict. Almost all the action is set in the Maxson family home, a two-story brick house. Scenes frequently play out in the backyard.

The film stays very true to its roots as a stage production, which is good and bad.

The film feels like a play, so I fantasized about how good the production would be on the stage rather than on the screen, especially since some actors (Washington and Davis) starred in that version.

What a blessing and a curse.

The film feels limiting and has a glossy “Hollywood look”. This is good, but the stage version would undoubtedly be more bare-bones, giving the production a raw feel, important in several key dramatic scenes between Troy and Rose.

Despite other opinions, I did not find Troy to be a likable character. Washington infuses power and good acting grit into the character, but I found few redeeming qualities. To say nothing of the situation with Rose, he does not treat his son Cory with much respect.

After a while, I found Troy’s repeated verbal rampages and stories irritating and wondered, “Why should we root for this man?”

Viola Davis deserved the Best Supporting Actress award she received for her turn as Rose. Dutiful, loving, and woefully underappreciated, her character rises well above a traditional housewife, as during one pivotal scene, she explodes with rage.

Davis, a fantastic “crier”, saves her best tears, in a weepy portrayal. But more than that, she exudes a strong woman, during a time when black women had it particularly tough.

I would have preferred an edgier film than Fences (2016) brings to the big screen, but the wonderful performances more than compensate for what the film otherwise lacks in darkness.

At times too safe and slightly watered down, the stage version may be the one to see.

Oscar Nominations: 1 win- Best Picture, Best Actor-Denzel Washington, Best Supporting Actress-Viola Davis (won), Best Adapted Screenplay

Hacksaw Ridge-2016

Hacksaw Ridge-2016

Director Mel Gibson

Starring Andrew Garfield, Luke Bracey, Vince Vaughn

Scott’s Review #651

Reviewed June 9, 2017

Grade: B+

Hacksaw Ridge (2016) is considered a comeback film for troubled director Mel Gibson, having not directed a film in over ten years.

The film received several Academy Award nominations, including Best Picture, Best Director, and Best Actor (Andrew Garfield).

While the film has a few minor flaws, despite being another exhausting war film, Hacksaw Ridge is quite mighty, primarily because of Garfield’s warmth and convictions into the central character and real-life hero, Desmond Doss.

The film also leans anti-war and pacifistic.

During World War II, Desmond is a young man living in Virginia. With a brother around the same age, they deal with an abusive, alcoholic father and a passive mother.

Desmond realizes he has a talent for medical care. He falls in love with a small-town nurse and enlists in the Army as a non-combat medic.

After refusing to use weapons and train on Saturdays, he is met with contempt by his commanding officers and fellow recruits. Doss and his troops are deployed to the Pacific theater during the Battle of Okinawa, and he becomes a hero when he saves numerous lives on the frightening “Hacksaw Ridge” in courageous form.

For the first half (save for a peculiar opening battle sequence that comes into play during the second half), the action primarily exists in Desmond’s hometown of Virginia or at a basic training facility.

We learn about Desmond’s childhood experiences, love life, and love of country and duty. His father, a retired military man himself, is damaged. He drinks, beats his wife, and hits the boys, though Gibson tones down the abuse by not showing much of it.

He saves the real gore for later in the film.

The film during the earlier portions has a mainstream, safe feel, and I found more than a couple of aspects to nitpick. Desmond’s fellow training recruits are laced with too often used stereotypical, stock characters.

The brooding one, the cocky one nicknamed “Hollywood” for his good looks and tendency to walk around naked, the funny one, the strange one, the list goes on and on.

Drill Sergeant Howell (played by Vince Vaughn, now parlaying from comedy roles to drama) is tough as nails. This is a character we have seen in dozens of war films before, and it feels stale, as do all of the characters.

Some jokes are cheap one-liners like, “We are not in Kansas anymore, Dorothy,” to describe new surroundings.

The masculinity is glaring and serves as a negative, making the film feel like nothing more than standard fare.

However, the second half of Hacksaw Ridge drew me in much more than the first half. Now, in Okinawa, the film grips a much darker tone with the inclusion of battle scenes, some very gruesome with the loss of limbs and life.

Technically speaking, the cinematography and camera work are shaky and move very quickly, effectively shifting from the sun and peace of the United States to the dark and fog of unfamiliar territory.

A sweet scene between Desmond and brooding former rival, Smitty Ryker, inside a foxhole is terrific as we get to know each character much better within that one scene.

Both men discuss their pasts and grow a new affection for one another. This is humanistic and character-driven, making the film much more powerful.

Andrew Garfield is a marvel and deserves the attention received for the role. Coming into his own as an actor after suffering hiccups with Spider-Man (2014), he has returned to character-driven and empathetic roles.

The role of Desmond is a genuinely heroic role for him, and he is wonderfully cast.

A war film with a distinct Anti-war message, Hacksaw Ridge is overall a “guy’s film,” with the female characters taking a backseat to the men. It suffers from some tried-and-true aspects, and some of the hairstyles seem 2016. However, in the end, the film depicts a wonderful human being and tells his heroic story, so that makes the film a good watch.

Oscar Nominations: 2 wins-Best Picture, Best Director-Mel Gibson, Best Actor-Andrew Garfield, Best Sound Editing, Best Sound Mixing (won), Best Film Editing (won)

Fellini’s Roma-1972

Fellini’s Roma-1972

Director Federico Fellini

Starring Britta Barnes, Peter Gonzales

Scott’s Review #649

Reviewed June 5, 2017

Grade: A-

Fellini’s Roma (1973) is a trippy experience through Rome during two different periods

As with all Fellini films, the film is meant to be experienced rather than analyzed.

One must nestle into the life that Fellini offers on-screen- in this instance the fabulous city of Rome, Italy in both positives and negatives.

The experience was very good for me, as both a world of odd characters and of ancient Rome oozed from the screen appealingly and absurdly.

From a plot narrative- there is a rot one. Arguably the only character portrayed is Rome herself. The film takes place in both the 1930s as well as the 1970s and is said to be an autobiographical tale of director Fellini’s experiences growing up in Rome.

We see little Fellini as a youngster, experiencing the vast city for the first time, and as a teenager now living in the city. Interestingly, the film traverses from both sets of periods back and forth with really no rhyme or reason.

Throughout the film, we see both the beauty and the ugliness of Rome- the majestic Colosseum and the dirty entrails of the gloomy city. Scenes of seedy brothels, mainly in the 1930s, and a myriad of strange and scantily clad females prance before the cameras looking for a lucky score amid the droves of men lusting after them.

Another depicts a fashion show, of sorts, taking place at the Vatican, involving nuns and priests in bizarre costumes.

The 1930’s setting is my personal favorite. Gritty, cold, and harsh, the bleakness of Rome is depicted. Unsurprisingly, this has much to do with the historical period Since Mussolini was in power, and on the eve of World War II, the darkness was apparent.

In a frightening scene, bomb sirens wail while a woman shrieks in panic. The brothel scenes are downright creepy and the subsequent theatre scenes involving drunken, rowdy, young men leering and cursing at the entertainment, is a particular slice of a life sequence.

In contrast, the 1970s sequences are layered with more beautiful depictions of the city. Brighter colors are featured, and there appear to be either scientists or explorers digging into ancient ruins and finding gorgeous art that is subsequently ruined by the blowing air. We also see hippy types basking in the sunlight.

Again, much of this film is largely open to interpretation.

I adore Fellini’s Roma in terms of an expression of the city of Rome as an art form, but the film is highly unconventional- another plus for me.

Sure, I may have desired to learn more about the bevy of creepy and potentially interesting characters, but I finished the film with an appreciation of Rome, unlike none I have ever known.

A startling final scene, in which legendary Italian film star, Anna Magnani, appears scantily clad, implied to be a prostitute, was filmed shortly before her untimely death at the age of sixty-five.

As a film, Fellini’s Roma is a wonderful history lesson, but also a lesson in interpretation and film appreciation. Most filmgoers are accustomed to a beginning, middle, and end, as well as some semblance of a plot.

Roma contains none of that, but rather, is mind-opening and still fresh many years after its release, which is a true testament.

Spa Night-2016

Spa Night-2016

Director Andrew Ahn

Starring Joe Seo

Scott’s Review #645

Reviewed May 19, 2017

Grade: B+

On the surface, Spa Night (2016) may seem like a straight-ahead independent LGBTQ-themed film (of which, in recent years, there has been no shortage), but the film’s plot is twofold.

Sure, it tells the coming-of-age story of a young man’s sexuality. Still, Spa Night is also a story of the boy’s Korean parent’s financial struggles and their desire to raise a son into a successful young man, sacrificing their happiness.

The film’s tone is very subtle, and the action moves slowly, but it is a sweet and relevant story.

David Cho is a shy Korean-American high school student on the cusp of going to college. His parents (who only speak Korean) have sadly recently lost their take-out restaurant in Los Angeles. The parents struggle to make ends meet (she by waitressing, he by doing odd moving jobs), while David takes SAT classes to ensure he gets into a great college.

David is also struggling with his sexuality and one-night visits a local male spa with drunken friends. He gets a job there and begins to experience male-on-male shenanigans taking place on the sly in the spa, all the while developing his blossoming sexual feelings.

David’s development in the story is key- he is resistant to coming out as gay because his parents are traditionally Korean, constantly mentioning David finding a girlfriend and succeeding in school, becoming what they have failed to achieve.

When, at one point, he fools around with another male in the spa, David insists on a no-kissing policy. This reveals to the audience that he has issues with intimacy with another male, and in one compelling scene, some self-loathing occurs.

When he stares too long at a buddy in the bathroom, while both are inebriated, this clues in the friend, who is then distant towards David.

The film is enjoyable because it tells two stories rather than one, which helps it succeed. We also care greatly about David’s parents, who are compassionately portrayed rather than the stereotypical “tiger mom” and rigid father.

Wanting only the best for him and having no clue about his sexuality struggles, they trudge along with their issues. The father drinks too much, and the parents frequently squabble.

This is a clue to the film because it explains why David hesitates to mention anything to them, even though he is close to his parents.

I also enjoyed the slice-of-life and coming-of-age appeal that the film possesses.

Several shots of day-to-day life in Los Angeles are shown, mainly as characters go about their daily routines.

The budget allotted for Spa Night must have certainly been minimal. Still, the lesson learned is that some fantastic films are made for minuscule money, but as long as the characters are rich and the story humanistic, the film succeeds- this is the case in Spa Night.

Almost every character is of Asian descent- I am guessing all Korean actors. This is another positive I give to Spa Night.

In the cinematic world, where other cultures and races are woefully underutilized or still stereotypically portrayed, how refreshing is it that Spa Night breaks some new ground with an LGBTQ-centered film with Korean characters?

Spa Night has deservedly crowned the coveted John Cassavetes Award at the 2016 Independent Spirit Awards (for films made for under $500,000), and director Andrew Ahn is undoubtedly a talented novice director to be on the watch for.

He seems destined to tell good, interesting stories about people.

Independent Spirit Award Nominations: 1 win-John Cassavetes Award (won), Acura Someone to Watch Award

Elle-2016

Elle-2016

Director Paul Verhoeven

Starring Isabelle Huppert

Scott’s Review #644

Reviewed May 17, 2017

Grade: A-

Sure to evoke both disgust and intrigue from viewers brave enough to watch it all the way through and hopefully ponder the character dynamics, Elle is a titillating French film that was showered with heaps of praise upon its release in 2016.

Controversial without question, in large part by the film’s main character, Elle, will undoubtedly divide film fans- some heralding the picture as greatness, others detesting it as too exploitive.

It is not an easy watch by any measure, but one aspect is cemented in truth-Isabelle Huppert gives a fantastic performance in a complex and perverse role.

Unique even in its first scene, Michele Leblanc (Huppert) is a ruthless, alpha businesswoman who is raped and beaten by an intruder in her lavish Paris home.

The violent act occurs in the first scene, immediately giving the film an “in your face” presence. When the rapist, who wears a ski mask, flees, Michele shakes off the incident with nary an emotional scar.

Through backstory, we learn that years ago, Michele’s father brutally murdered many people and was imprisoned for life. Michele’s mother is an aging glamour girl who hires sexy male escorts. Michele’s son is engaged to a domineering pregnant woman, and her ex-husband is dating a younger woman.

Michele lives a complicated life.

At first, Michele seems sympathetic, and we feel her pain as she is taunted by a woman in a coffee shop for her father’s past deeds.

To say nothing of her rape, we cringe when Michele hears noises and imagines the masked intruder returning to rape again, empathizing with the character.

When the mystery man harasses Michele, he sends notes and leaves “gifts” in her home, and we are scared for her. However, as the film goes along, Michele’s obsession and other questionable actions make the character challenging to like.

I also began to wonder if Michele was perhaps dreaming the entire film!

As a fan of acclaimed film director Claude Chabrol, Elle appears to be heavily influenced by him.

Director Paul Verhoeven certainly must have studied his works. He is no slouch himself—female-empowering sex films such as Basic Instinct (1992) and Showgirls (1995) that he directed come to mind. He gives Elle a sleek and sexy feel.

The fact that it is set in romantic Paris helps make the film glamorous and cultured. Verhoeven even weaves a whodunit into the story for much of the movie until the rapist is revealed shockingly.

If the film had ended with the big reveal, this would have made for a compelling, if not mainstream, Lifetime television-type film, but Elle takes off from this point. Michele, already fancying her handsome rapist, actually begins a macabre relationship with the man, going so far as to act out the rape again- her fantasies coming true!

This story turn may repel the average viewer, but to me, this turns the film into a completely left-of-center, layered, psychologically themed story.

Elle is not a revenge tale or a film about a victimized woman; it is much more.

What a dynamic performance Ruppert gives, and here is why- she successfully makes Michele both sympathetic and reviled.

Besides the aforementioned rape complexities, she despises her mother and sleeps with her best friend’s husband. In a scene that arguably makes Michele cross the line in reprehensible behavior, she confesses her affair to a best friend, Anna, when Anna is at her happiest moment- this is downright cruel!

So, no, the audience does not entirely sympathize with this character, but how layered this makes the character, and what a treat it is for actress Ruppert to sink her teeth into a character like this one.

With a wounded yet cold central character, partly thanks to exceptional direction by Verhoeven and a brilliant portrayal by Huppert, he takes Elle into largely unchartered territory and brave waters to create a film that will make the viewer both think and loathe.

Part nymphomaniac wounded bird and vicious shark, Elle contains a complex and memorable leading character.

Oscar Nominations: Best Actress-Isabelle Huppert

Independent Spirit Award Nominations: 1 win-Best Female Lead-Isabelle Huppert (won)

Arrival-2016

Arrival-2016

Director Denis Villeneuve

Starring Amy Adams, Jeremy Renner, Forest Whitaker

Scott’s Review #642

Reviewed May 9, 2017

Grade: B-

Arrival (2016) is the latest in a recent trend of science fiction-themed films garnering Academy Award praise, either for technical achievements or, in the case of Arrival, a surprising Best Picture nomination in addition to the more traditional awards notice for categories like sound effects and editing.

Traditionally, science fiction gets little or no recognition in significant categories; this makes the inclusion of films in the under-the-radar style with the big guns all the more surprising.

Similar in style to recent films such as Interstellar (2014) and Gravity (2013), Arrival ultimately proves a disappointment as a complete film, succeeding only in specific avenues like its musical score and a sort of surprise twist ending that the film presents, but at times is downright to say nothing of its tedious moments.

Needless to say, I wholeheartedly disagree with its Best Picture nomination.

I am not claiming to be the world’s greatest science fiction fan. At times, Arrival does have glimmers of success (mainly in the first act) and some high points in the vein of 2001: A Space Odyssey (1968), the greatest of the greats in the genre. However, the good moments ultimately fade as the story lumbers on, only to show a brief resurgence in the final act.

Sadly, the rest of the film is rather middling.

In a role seemingly written just for her, Amy Adams stars as Louise Banks, a linguist professor living and teaching in Massachusetts.

One day, a series of twelve extraterrestrial aircraft appeared across the world. Louise is summoned by an Army Colonel (Forest Whitaker) to travel to a remote area of Montana where one aircraft has taken up residence and assist a physicist, Ian Donnelly (Jeremy Renner), in communicating with the aliens.

Their goal is to determine why they have come to planet Earth.

Interspersed with the main story are strange flashbacks of a life Louise briefly spent with her daughter, who appears to have died of cancer as a teenager.

The film’s premise is reminiscent of another film named Contact, made in 1997, starring Jodie Foster.

The film seems to borrow aspects from several other famous science fiction films, such as the creepy, ominous score that harkens back to 2001: A Space Odyssey in its mysteriousness to the oddity of The Day the Earth Stood Still (1951).

So much so that the film reminds me too much of other films, it, therefore, has little identity, especially throughout the film’s mid-section.

Other than Louise’s character, there is no character development, and this is glaring among the male cast of top talents like Whitaker and Renner. The roles are glorified throwaway roles.

Except for Renner’s limited involvement in the film’s climactic “twist,” which admittedly barely raises the movie above mediocrity, neither character serves many purposes and could be played by any actor.

Whitaker’s G.T. Weber has little motivation other than convincing Louise to participate in the mission. The film also seems unsure whether to fully explore a romantic entanglement between Louise and Renner’s Ian.

Indeed, a flirtation exists on the surface, but the film never hits a home run with it. Couldn’t a meatier story be created for these two storied actors?

The unique extraterrestrial, a hybrid of tentacles, fingers, and funny eyes appearing as a pair humorously nicknamed Abbott and Costello, is impressive from an artistic perspective, and this does help the film.

The characters’ unsureness about whether Abbott and Costello are friends or foes is also slightly intriguing. However, the film’s main negative is that nothing much happens other than Louise’s repeated attempts to communicate, whimsically staring into the camera in wonderment and ultimately figuring out the alien’s messages and purpose.

Worthy of mention is a fantastic and ominous musical score that gives the film some climactic and dark elements that feel like its highlights. It adds chilling, practical elements, bringing the movie up a notch from complete blandness.

The film’s best part is its ending, which sent a chill down my spine. The unique and inspired big reveal made me a bit shiver.

This way, Arrival saves itself from being completely lackluster, but too little, too late. I would have preferred the film to balance the emotions, surprises, and thrills more rather than exist mainly as a tedious, uninteresting film.

Overall, the outcome of Arrival (2016) is more of a retread than anything new or original.

Oscar Nominations: 1 win-Best Picture, Best Director-Denis Villeneuve, Best Adapted Screenplay, Best Sound Editing (won), Best Sound Mixing, Best Production Design, Best Cinematography, Best Film Editing

Free Fall-2013

Free Fall-2013

Director Stephan Lacant

Starring Hanno Koffler, Max Riemelt

Scott’s Review #641

Reviewed May 3, 2017

Grade: A-

Free Fall is a 2013 German-language film that is very reminiscent of the highly influential LGBT film, Brokeback Mountain (2005), only set in Germany- during present times.

The loneliness, struggles, and deceit that the characters face are similar in both films and both are arguably bleak as overall films. I, however, truly enjoyed this film and embraced the touching aspects and truthful writing.

In the case of Free Fall, as compared with Brokeback Mountain, only one of the male characters is a family man- coming to terms with his sexuality at very bad timing, while the other male character is more comfortable in his skin.

A case could be made that a similar characterization is apparent in Brokeback. In both films, a love story develops between two men, and outside forces thwart their happiness.

The film is a very good watch and the love scenes are particularly steamy and emotional.

Marc Borgmann is a young police officer, fresh out of the academy, living with his very pregnant girlfriend, Bettina. They are temporarily staying with Marc’s parents until the baby is born.

Seemingly happy, Marc befriends a recruit, Kay, and they begin a ritual of jogging together in the forest.

Both men are young and handsome and very masculine- an aspect in an LGBT film that I find as a positive. Kay is much more brazen about his sexuality than Marc, and they eventually fall in love with the added pressure of their very macho surroundings, and Marc’s pregnant girlfriend to contend with.

Free Fall, as the title implies, is not a cheerful, romantic film, as a whole- nor is it completely bleak either. Yes, the love affair between Marc and Kay has some happy moments, but more often than not they face some sort of peril and do not get much time to relax and enjoy each other.

As circumstances begin to unravel, Marc’s girlfriend slowly suspects something is going on with Marc, but when Kay is outed (the film suggests he purposely outs himself) during a gay nightclub raid, their lives spiral out of control.

The film itself is very realistic and does not come across as forced or plot-driven. The acting by both principal actors (Koffler and Riemelt) is quite strong and I buy their attraction instantly.

The scenes where Marc questions whether the pair are buddies while internally fighting his attraction for Kay are excellent and very passionate. The range of emotions on the face of the actor, Koffler, is excellent.

Passion is felt during every scene the pair share together.

The way many of the supporting characters are portrayed, however, is disappointing,  yet also a brutal strength of the film. Marc’s parents are quite unsympathetic to either Marc or Kay and are written as stereotypical, anti-progressive, and rigid.

When Marc’s mother catches Marc and Kay kissing, she coldly chastises Marc for being “raised better than that”. In her mind being gay is bad- the father wholeheartedly shares her beliefs.

Another of the cops in the police academy is written as homophobic, but the film wisely writes Marc and Kay exceptionally well, proudly with none of the unfair effeminate qualities films and television still seem to cling to.

The characters are not written for laughs, nor should they be. They are strong men.

The film wisely throws in a handful of supportive characters, like the police force as a whole- teaching and recognizing diversity and inclusion, and a fellow cop who is supportive of the situation with Marc and Kay, but most of the characters come across as harsh and unfeeling to same-sex attraction.

The conclusion of the film is slightly disappointing as the story ends abruptly and in a rather unsatisfying way- rumors of a proposed sequel have circulated the film.

Shot on a very small budget, the funding for a follow-up film must still be raised, which hopefully will occur. A nicer (and happier) ultimate resolution would be great.

American LGBT films, sometimes going too much the comical, or worse yet, the sappier route, can take a lesson from this treasure of a German-language film.

Free Fall (2012) is a humanistic, realistic, and brave film that I hope more people find themselves experiencing. The film will touch those who are either involved in or sympathetic towards the LGBT community.

The Lobster-2016

The Lobster-2016

Director Yorgos Lanthimos

Starring Colin Farrell, Rachel Weisz

Scott’s Review #635

Reviewed April 20, 2017

Grade: A-

One thing is sure about the puzzling 2016 film The Lobster: It is a film worthy of discussion long after the end credits roll and will leave the viewer pondering its many facets—a great movie to dissect.

This in itself is worth recognition and praise for the power of the film- so many questions abound.

I was immediately struck by how heavily The Lobster contains primary subject matter influences from “message novels” (and films) such as Brave New World, 1984, and A Clockwork Orange, as well as creative, stylistic recent film influences from The Grand Budapest Hotel (2014) and the Moonrise Kingdom (2012).

The story begins outside of Dublin, where David (Colin Farrell) has recently been dumped by his wife in favor of another man.

Now single, he is whisked away by authorities to a luxurious hotel in the woods, where he (and the other guests) are given forty-five days to find a suitable romantic partner, or else they will be turned into an animal of their choice.

David is accompanied by his brother, now a dog, and has decided that he should be turned and that he will become a lobster because he loves the sea, and they tend to live to be over one hundred years old.

The hotel management adheres to strict rules- no masturbation, mandatory temptations by hotel employees, and a strange outdoor hunting game where the guests hunt other guests to win extra days extended to their stays.

As David befriends fellow hotel guests, he is conflicted and desperate to find a mate. Events take a surprising turn when circumstances allow the rules to change for him, and he becomes involved with a short-sighted woman (Weisz).

The film’s plot is strange beyond belief yet incredibly creative and thought-provoking. The subject matter is pure dystopian- a facility, presumably controlled by the government, with a rebel group intent on ruining the “status quo.”

Suddenly, an odd little secret romance between David and Shortsighted Woman appears, beginning only during the film’s final act.

One aspect of the film that I found interesting was the odd monotone dialogue the characters used. They were almost matter-of-fact in whatever they said, even while expressing anger.

This peculiarity perplexed me, but the more I think about it, the more this decision makes the film dark-humored and dry with wry wit.

Another interesting nuance to the film is the multitude of quirky characters, many of whom are mainly referred to by their nicknames. Lisping Man, Limping Man, and Nosebleed Woman, to name a few.

And what viewer would not spend the film’s duration imagining which animal he or she would desire to be turned into and why?

My favorite aspect of the film is the offbeat performance by Colin Farrell- typically a rugged sex symbol, he goes against the grain and plays a pudgy, socially awkward, insecure man, but all the while instilling the character with enough warmth and likability to make the character work- and his chemistry with Rachel Weisz is fantastic.

This turns the strange dark comedy into a peculiar romantic drama.

A beautiful forest becomes the backdrop for a large part of the film, as does the city of Dublin itself, contrasting the film in nuanced ways. Combined with the lavish hotel, the film achieves several different settings for the action, each meaningful in its own right.

Without giving anything away, the conclusion of the film- the final scene in particular- is gruesome in what goes through the viewer’s mind, and the resolution is unclear.

Does David do it, or doesn’t he? Much of the film is open to one’s interpretation and imagination.

Black humor and cynicism are significant components of The Lobster, a thinking man’s movie. I continue to think of this film as I write this review.

The film is filled with originality and thought, which is a tremendous positive. Confusing and mind-blowing? For sure. A run-of-the-mill film? Not.

The Lobster (2016) is a film that gives no answers and is not an easy watch but an achievement in film creativity- something sorely needed.

Oscar Nominations: Best Original Screenplay

99 Homes-2015

99 Homes-2015

Director Ramin Bahrani

Starring Andrew Garfield, Michael Shannon

Scott’s Review #633

Reviewed April 13, 2017

Grade: B+

99 Homes is a 2015 independent film containing an underlying theme of morality as its central message, bubbling to the surface throughout the run.

Our main hero is faced with a major dilemma.

Set in 2010 amid the dark economic housing crisis where thousands of families lost their homes to foreclosure, the film is depressing but turns uplifting towards the end.

Reminiscent of The Big Short (2015) and Inside Job (2010) in subject matter, we witness a wonderful performance by Andrew Garfield in the lead role, with a worthy supporting turn by Michael Shannon as an opportunist.

Director Ramin Bahrani immediately creates tension with a taut musical score that bombards the screen. We see a poor victim of foreclosure, having shot himself to avoid the humiliation of being evicted from his home, followed by the introduction of a powerful real-estate mogul, Rick Carver.

Carver has wisely capitalized on the slew of Florida working-class families, living well beyond their means and novice homeowners, booted from their homes thanks to adjustable mortgages that they cannot afford to pay.

Andrew Garfield plays Dennis Nash, a struggling construction worker, raising his young son and presumably supporting his mother (Laura Dern).

They are fated to be evicted even though they have tried to win an extension with the court- months behind in their mortgage payments. They feel victimized and are forced to move to a seedy motel that houses many others in the same circumstances.

Desperate for work, Dennis ironically ends up working for Rick and becomes encased in the dishonest world of real estate scheming- manipulating banking and government rules at the expense of homeowners down on their luck.

The main point is the exploitation of the “working man” at the expense of “the man” and Rick is an example of this beast. Dennis represents the goodness of humanity as he wrestles with the moral repercussions of evicting families since he has met with similar circumstances.

Is the money worth the pain and the hardship he causes people? How is it Rick has no morals, but Dennis does? Will Dennis choose money and lose himself in the process? What would the viewer do?

Despite the morality questions, the film does play like a slick thriller, with a few slight contrivances and the “wrapped up in a neat bow” style ending.

This slightly makes the film lose its luster at times. It is implied that it ends happily for Dennis and that Rick gets his “just desserts”, but what about the characters kicked out of their homes?

Sadly, as in real life, they are largely forgotten by the end and play as footnotes in a larger story. Some follow-up as to what happens to them might have been nice.

99 Homes is a thinking man’s film and will undoubtedly leave the viewer asking what he or she would do in many situations that Dennis faces.

The emotions ooze from the face of Andrew Garfield as Bahrani uses many close-ups and enough cannot be said for Garfield’s bravura performance.

In one heart-wrenching scene, he is forced to evict a man and his wife and children from their home, the man is reduced to tears, comforted by his wife-Dennis is pained.

In another, an elderly man with nowhere to go is evicted, and defeated by the side of the road.

These scenes may have played as overwrought, but Garfield convincingly brings honesty and raw emotion to the work.

Laura Dern is good in her role as a young mother, Lynn,  to Garfield’s Dennis and I am perplexed why she was cast- she barely seems old enough to play convincingly as his Mom, but she does pull it off.

However, I could not help but desire more meat from this Oscar-nominated Actress- sure there is one great scene when Lynn realizes the extent of Dennis’s involvement with Rick, but I wanted more.

Still, the acting all around in this film is superb.

What left me so bothered by 99 Homes (2015) is that situations just like the ones that played out in the film are examples of countless real-life occurrences people experienced due to greed, dishonesty, and uncaring fellow human beings and that is a sad realization.

Director, Bharani, surrounded by a stellar cast, brings this realism to the big screen in raw, honest, storytelling.

Independent Spirit Award Nominations: Best Supporting Male-Michael Shannon