Category Archives: Drama

The Way He Looks-2014

The Way He Looks-2014

Director Daniel Ribeiro

Starring Fabio Audi, Ghilherme Lobo

Scott’s Review #408

70307130

Reviewed June 4, 2016

Grade: B+

The Way He Looks is a foreign language film (Brazilian) from 2014 that tells a coming-of-age story about a blind high school student, who develops feelings for the new kid in town. The other boy has rapidly become his new best friend and the boys, while unsure of the other’s sexual preferences, fall in love.

The film is a charming story about a modern romance, now becoming more prevalent today.

Leonardo (known as Leo) is a blind high school student struggling to be his true self.  His close friend Giovana (Tess Amorim) is in a similar situation as neither has ever been kissed, yet they feel adolescent desires- they are lonely but share a close bond.

Regardless of his disability, Leo is quite independent, despite having parents who border on smothering. One day, a new student named Gabriel volunteers to sit behind Leo in class and strike up a friendship.

Giovana, unaware of Leo’s sexual preferences, develops a crush on Gabriel.

The film then tells a sweet story about a young, blossoming, romance. The main characters do not face particularly tough obstacles from outside sources, but rather from each other as their feelings and emotions are fragile.

In addition to romance, the film focuses on the friendships between Leo, Gabriel, and Giovana.

The Way He Looks is a warm film. It is sweet, compassionate, and tenderhearted. The viewer witnesses a budding romance between two teenagers and the fact that they are both males is secondary- that is how charming the film is.

The audience will root for Leo and Gabriel because they are nice kids. Giovana, the outsider, also has a rooting factor- she is in no way a villain, nor does she harbor resentment for either Leo or Gabriel, but rather yearns for her first romance and happiness.

The film wisely does not turn her into an emotional wreck, or a psycho. Sure, she gets drunk at a party, but this is only to escape her feelings.

I recoiled at the scene after scene of Leo’s parents either fretting about something, worried sick about Leo coming home late or worried that something may happen to their son.

Relax already. Life is not meant to be spent frazzled because your son is blind.

The parents are not the strongest written characters in the film and are rather secondary characters. The case is the same for the bullies, the slutty girl, and the teacher.

The film belongs to Leo, Gabriel, and Giovana.

The supporting characters in The Way He Looks are meant to react to the central characters.

The Way He Looks is about a same-sex, young romance. Charming, not too heavy, with likable characters, who one can root for. There are no bombs, car chases, or explosions needed.

The Way He Looks (2023) is a slice of life that is simple, pure, and true.

The Girls-1968

The Girls-1968

Director Mai Zetterling

Starring Bibi Andersson, Harriet Andersson

Scott’s Review #404

70052262

Reviewed May 11, 2016

Grade: B+

The Girls is a 1968 Swedish film that is political, surreal, dreamlike, and feminist. These may seem like too many adjectives to describe a movie, but they all happen to be warranted and work to categorize it, which is tough- it is a complex film.

The film left me deep in thought about what I had just viewed- that is a positive for me.

Directed by Mai Zetterling, a woman, the film is told from a female perspective and is quite tricky to follow. However, the message portrayed is a compelling thought of a woman repressed, whether in reality or fantasy, by men.

In my attempt to describe The Girls accurately, it appears to feature a boys-versus-girls element throughout, told by the girls. The plot centers around three women: Liz (Bibi Andersson), Marianne (Harriet Andersson), and Gunilla (Gunnel Lindblom).

The women are hired to star in a touring production of Lysistrata, and each faces conflict and concern over leaving their respective families, but for differing reasons.

Liz’s husband, who is having an affair, cannot get rid of her soon enough. Marianne has recently dumped her married boyfriend. Gunilla has four children and suffers from guilt.  All of the women are very friendly with each other.

All three principal actresses are familiar to eagle-eyed Ingmar Bergman fans as each of them has appeared in numerous films of his-in very different types of roles.

Wild Strawberries and The Seventh Seal (both 1957) feature these actresses.

The women go on tour and have various surreal experiences based on the play in which they are stars. The film, made in black and white, has very overexposed cinematography. The blacks and the whites look very sharp, and this is no doubt done deliberately.

On the surface, it would appear that the women hate men and yearn to be free of them. Is that the point of the film? It seems to go in other directions as well. Do they hate their lives and feel confined with men and free without them, when they are touring their play?

How do they feel about their children? Do they miss them on tour, love them, resent them, or perhaps a bit of each? They yearn to be free of restraint.

We are treated to numerous scenes that seem to be a dreamlike state or a fantasy of one of the women. One runs through the forest and comes upon a grizzled, dirty child on the ground. Is it hers? She then sees her husband sitting in a living room chair in the middle of the forest.

The symbolism resonating through The Girls is countless. We also see the women fantasize about a handsome, young man. Are they tired of the doldrums- looks and otherwise- that their husbands have caused them?

Many political protests occur throughout the film. In one, the women march in unison- Nazi-style and chant. In another, the women lead what appears to be a charge of women-suffragette style, until the women start attacking each other and punching and kicking each other in the streets.

These scenes and countless others are tough to analyze, but perhaps this is the point. I decided to escape into the film and not try to figure out what everything meant.

Fantastic to see the exterior scenes shot in Stockholm, Sweden, which reminds us what a liberal, democratic city it is. Yet the women are repressed. Made in 1968, during the sexual revolution, the film’s timing is perfect.

The Girls (1968) left me pondering the story and the viewpoint, and I will need further viewings for the film to sink in more successfully and for me to get it, if I ever do, but I enjoyed it nonetheless.

The film is the kind of film that requires further viewing to understand. I look forward to watching this film again, which is high praise.

Les Cousins-1959

Les Cousins-1959

Director Claude Chabrol

Starring Gerard Blain, Jean-Claude Braily

Scott’s Review #402

70200457

Reviewed May 5, 2016

Grade: A-

Les Cousins is a 1959 Claude Chabrol French-language film.

Made in black and white and set in Paris, the focus is on metropolitan life as seen from the perspective of one of the main characters, who is from the country and far removed from the bustle and complexities of city life.

The focal point is contrasting traits- personality, background, and otherwise. The film delves into psychological aspects that lend themselves to making the film a character-driven, thought-provoking experience.

Les Cousins is open to many interpretations. The film, therefore, has many nuances to ponder and sink one’s teeth into deep thought.

Les Cousins is about two male cousins, Charles and Paul.

They appear to be similar in age and are both law students, but they are opposites in almost every other way. Paul is the alpha male—self-centered, quick-tempered, and forceful. Living an affluent life in the heart of Paris, he has many friends, is a social butterfly, and has no filter on his criticisms and judgments of others.

On the other hand, Charles has an entirely different set of qualities. Sent by his mother to live with Paul and study for the agonizing, impending law exam, Charles is meek, quiet, and insecure.

When Charles meets Florence, a beautiful friend of Paul’s, who has a reputation for “sleeping around”, Charles falls madly in love with her, almost love at first sight, unaware of her reputation.

What follows is a strange triangle between Paul, Florence, and Charles that is laced with jealousy, revenge, and ultimately violence.

The relationships between the three principal characters are interesting to consider and are at the film’s heart.

When Paul realizes Charles is in love with Florence, does this turn of events disturb him? Does he feel sorry for Charles or elicit some perverse joy in bedding Florence in front of Charles? If so, why does he resent Charles?

Is Florence in love with Charles, or is it a guise? Does she even realize the extent of his love for her? A sexually expressive woman, she is not outlandish in her appearance and seems quite virginal to the outside viewer.

Does she enjoy the fact that the unwitting Charles sees her as pure? Does she wish that she was virginal?

Finally, the complexity of Charles’ character is mysterious. We learn that he writes letters to his mother to give updates on his studying habits and exams.

Does he harbor resentment toward his mother? Is he a “mama’s boy”? Is he overwhelmed in the city? Does he genuinely love Florence (tough to believe after one or two dates) or yearn for the freedom that she represents?

We see countless scenes of Paul and his good-looking friends engaging in various forms of merriment, usually in his modern apartment overlooking the city.

He is affluent. Is this the main reason for his popularity?

The partygoers are all well-dressed and very good-looking—sort of a fraternity party for the exceptionally tailored, if you will.

Interestingly, a female couple- appearing to be a lesbian couple- featured numerous times at the parties. Is this meant to show Paul and Parisians as open-minded and progressive?

A revolver- with only one bullet in a six-chamber gun prevalent throughout the film in a Russian roulette sequence comes into play after the film.

In the last sequence, someone is mortally wounded without ultimately revealing the ending, and we are left to ponder what is happening now.

Are the survivors lives forever changed and ruined? A knock at the door just before the credits roll leaves us wondering who is there.

My one complaint about Les Cousins is that exploring its complexities takes a long time. After the film ended, I was left pondering more than wholly engaged.

I also wondered if the pompous and over-indulgences were slightly overdone to elicit more audience reaction and contrasting elements between Paul and Charles.

A French new wave experience by one of France’s best directors, Les Cousins (1959) is a character study of three fascinating characters that leave the audience thinking about their lives past, present, and future, comparing their idiosyncrasies, actions, and thoughts to delve deeper into their psyches.

Bridge of Spies-2015

Bridge of Spies-2015

Director Steven Spielberg

Starring Tom Hanks, Mark Rylance

Scott’s Review #399

80050060

Reviewed April 28, 2016

Grade: B+

Tom Hanks teams with Stephen Spielberg once again in another A-list Hollywood film.

Like Saving Private Ryan (1998), Bridge of Spies (2015) is in the historical vein. This time, the Cold War is featured; the film begins in 1957.

The camera work, the artwork, and the set decorations are second to none as the film looks and feels authentic.

As interesting as the overall result is—it felt like I was watching a well-made film—there was also something missing, which did not make it truly riveting, and that is why it received a B+ rating.

With Spielberg and Hanks on board, one will get a quality film.

Hanks portrays James B. Donovan, a Brooklyn attorney specializing in insurance law, but a wiz at negotiation and experienced with the Nuremberg trials.

He is assigned to defend suspected spy Rudolf Abel (Mark Rylance) in what is assumed to be an open-and-shut case, his guilt is considered a given.

Abel has been arrested by the FBI and is thought to be a Russian spy. They are willing to release him on the condition that he reveal Soviet contacts, but he refuses.

Meanwhile, an American pilot, Frances Powers, is captured in Soviet territory and taken hostage. To make matters more complicated, an American graduate student, Pryor, is trapped behind the Berlin Wall in East Germany and not allowed by the Germans to leave.

The pressure is on Donovan to defend Abel in the United States but to make a deal to return the three men to their respective countries.

Hanks, a great actor, is his typical stoic, capable self, and his portrayal reminds me of his role in Captain Phillips (2013), calm, well-mannered- a clear yet quiet leader.

The role is not flashy compared to other legendary Hanks roles (Forrest Gump-1994, Philadelphia-1993). The film centers around Hanks and caters to his acting style. His character is always at the forefront.

Hanks never gives a bad performance and I admire him in almost anything.

Let’s discuss the role and the portrayal by Mark Rylance in his Oscar-winning role.

Giving a very subdued, nuanced performance, he is good and low-key in what could have been an energetic, over-the-top performance if written that way, but I am not sure I would have handed him the golden statuette over a few of the other nominees in the 2015 Supporting Actor category.

This isn’t a criticism, but I am unsure if he warrants an Academy Award.

Bridge of Spies is very detail-oriented and every set piece- from late 1950s cars, clothing, hairstyles, and home furnishings is spot on.

The film was expensive to produce and no expense seems to have been spared.

The film travels from Brooklyn to the Soviet Union, to Germany, and gives off a patriotic, Americana flare, which is true to life in the given time. There was such a sense of country and community.

Nothing makes this more apparent than the distasteful glares coldness and hatred displayed by many characters towards Donovan.

To counteract this, when Donovan is ultimately more the hero, he is revered and celebrated.

As great as the film looks, there is something slightly disconnecting about it. I was left wanting more from a story perspective and feeling slightly disengaged throughout parts of it. I was never riveted or blown away despite realizing I was watching a well-made film.

This can happen if the story is less compelling than the way the film looks as with Bridge of Spies.

After I finished watching I felt that I did not need to see the film again, in contrast to truly great films where one can watch over again.

A slight mention is that Bridge of Spies is a “guy’s film”. Amy Ryan, a great actress, does all she can with the only real female role in the film in that of Donovan’s dutiful, supportive wife, a role written one-dimensionally hundreds of times.

It is a shame her character is not fleshed out. The typical worried scenes or fretting for her husband to return home to his family are purely reactionary and do not further the plot.

In this sense, the film deserves criticism for being too traditional.

Bridge of Spies is a good effort but not a tremendous film. It is the type of film I liked but did not love.

Perhaps, the names Spielberg and Hanks on the marquee had me expecting more.

Oscar Nominations: 1 win-Best Picture, Best Supporting Actor-Mark Rylance (won), Best Original Screenplay, Best Original Score, Best Sound Mixing, Best Production Design

Girlhood-2015

Girlhood-2015

Director Céline Sciamma

Starring Karidja Touré, Assa Sylla

Scott’s Review #398

80013602

Reviewed April 24, 2016

Grade: B

Girlhood (2015) is a coming-of-age foreign language, French drama that tells the story of a sixteen-year-old French girl, living in a poor area (the projects) just outside Paris.

She faces numerous conflicts and tough decisions on how to live her life. School, gangs, and romance are the main issues she tackles, as well as troubled home life.

Wisely, the film uses a female director, Céline Sciamma, which lends some authenticity to the largely female issues discussed. For all its good intentions and some interesting nuances, the film suffers from a lack of grit and has a safe feel making it less compelling than it could have been.

I felt I was watching a glossy film rather than any harsh reality.

Still, worth the effort.

Marieme is a tall, gorgeous teenager living near Paris. She struggles academically and is rejected from attending high school, instead of being sent on a vocational track to be able to find a job.

Her mother works long hours as an office cleaner, and Marieme’s abusive brother is in charge of the household. Marieme also has two younger sisters.

Upset to learn she will not be attending high school, she is approached by a gang of girls, led by Lady, who asks her to go to the city with them.

She agrees to join their gang when she realizes that her brother’s best friend, Ismael, whom she has a crush on, is friendly with the other girls. Marieme and the girls begin to while away the days by stealing, fighting, and terrorizing anyone in their path.

Partying in hotels, they make the rounds. Marieme must ultimately decide if this is the life she wants.

What I found most interesting about the film is its use of an all-black cast. Sciamma (who ironically is white) felt that the female black population in Paris is underrepresented.

This is accurate and scores point with me. I love the camaraderie among the girls. They always have each other’s backs and when Marieme fights a rival girl to defend the recently beaten Lady, there is a sense of sisterhood that is appealing and is at the heart of the film.

Friendship, loyalty, and bonding are explored.

Also worth noting is that most of the cast are either unknown actors or non-actors picked off the streets to appear in the film. To this effect, the acting is surprisingly good for most novice or non-actors.

The romance between Marieme and Ismael is another strong point. They share an undeniable attraction but are forced to spend time in secret. Marieme’s brother appears to run a gang of all boys and forbids anyone from being with his sister.

The scenes shared between Marieme and Ismael are tender, sweet, and believable. They have a rooting factor.

The positives are also the negatives to Girlhood. The film lacks real grit or dirt and the friendship and romantic elements are also played safely.

Everything is glossy and bright.

For example, two fight scenes occur, one with Lady and a rival girl, and one with Marieme and the rival girl. A group of spectators gathers in a circle egging the girls on. They are in a hot, deserted parking lot.

The scenes could have been brutal, bloody, and fierce. Instead, they are short, lack blood or bruising, and feel safe. When Marieme pulls out a knife, it is intended to cut the rival girl’s bra, not to stab her. This seems unrealistic and not how things would play out in an urban gang situation.

And on a nitpicky level, why was the mother absent from the family life? Sure she had a night job, but the film presented her as being all but out of the picture. She tried to help Marieme get a job working with her, so why so much turmoil due to her busy schedule?

Also, the silly scene of the girls playing miniature golf added nothing to the plot and should have been dropped.

Girlhood (2015) is a nice, albeit sweet, coming-of-age, female gang story, that might have been more intense, but the decision was to make a soft film rather than a harsh one.

An effort that mainly focuses on bonding, friendship, and life choices over the realistic brutality it could have dealt with.

Independent Spirit Award Nominations: Best International Film

Kiss Me Deadly-1955

Kiss Me Deadly-1955

Director Robert Aldrich

Starring Ralph Meeker

Scott’s Review #391

60020642

Reviewed April 2, 2016

Grade: A-

Kiss Me Deadly is a 1955 noir drama that influenced many subsequent films. After years of keeping it on my “to see” list, I finally got around to viewing this influential gem and now realize its power.

At times, it is confusing and perplexing and requires additional watching. I rate it an A——; however, I can see its grade rising to a solid A upon subsequent viewings.

Still, Kiss Me Deadly has much respect from me as a lover and appreciator of a good film.

The mysterious plot goes like this: Mike Hammer (played by Ralph Meeker) is a stern Los Angeles private eye. One evening, driving along a lonely country road, he picks up a hitchhiker, Christina (Cloris Leachman’s film debut), who is clad only in a trench coat.

He quickly realizes she has escaped from a mental institution but is compelled by her desperation.  When thugs catch up to them, this sets off events as Mike spends his days investigating the strange turn of events.

The plot twists and turns in innumerable ways and becomes complex but fascinating. A peculiar glowing box, which everybody seems to want, comes into play.

Wonderfully directed by Robert Aldrich, Kiss Me Deadly features unique and creative uses of lighting, camera angles, and moody shadows to significant effect, and this is one of the first aspects I noticed.

Shot in highly effective black and white, allowing Kiss Me Deadly a murky, suspicious look- as if danger and doom might be around every corner.

Meeker and Maxine Cooper as Velda, Mike’s secretary/lover, make a nice pair, as they are good-looking, but a rather B-movie type couple, in contrast, to say, Cary Grant and Eva Marie Saint, two gorgeous upper echelon Hollywood stars of the day.

Casting those stars might have changed the tone of the film.  Meeker and Cooper bring, perhaps, a blue-collar look to the film. Nevertheless, the chemistry works.

An interpretive film, Kiss Me Deadly undoubtedly influenced later film noir classics such as Chinatown (1974), L.A. Confidential (1997), and Pulp Fiction (1994), as well as science-fiction films and, arguably, Raiders of the Lost Ark (1981).

The list could go on as Kiss Me Deadly crosses into numerous genres.

The ending is highly complex, spooky, and downright weird. It is one of the craziest endings I have ever experienced.

Once the mysterious box is opened, the film becomes a strange Twilight Zone episode with screeching sounds. The explosion is open to complete interpretation and changes the dynamic. I had the enormous fortune to view the alternate ending not released in theaters.

Mike and Velda’s fates were vastly different from one end to another. My preference was the alternate ending. Sometimes, the studios play things too safe.

What does it all mean? Nuclear weapons, the apocalypse, the Cold War, glowing boxes, and detective work are many elements in one film.

A conversation about Kiss Me Deadly (1955) could be enjoyed, as it speaks volumes about the film’s high quality.

I look forward to seeing this revolutionary film again for further appreciation.

The Misfits-1961

The Misfits-1961

Director John Huston

Starring Marilyn Monroe, Clark Gable, Montgomery Clift

Scott’s Review #389

60000725

Reviewed March 27, 2016

Grade: B+

A dark film about loneliness, insecurity, and the need for friendship, The Misfits (1961) stars several of the era’s great legends in a film that I found both sad and disturbing.

Tragically, two stars would soon be gone from this world shortly after the film was made- Clark Gable and Marilyn Monroe.  This was the final film for each.

The film, shot in black and white,  has a bleak feel and represents the onset of darker decades in the film (the 1960s and 1970s). Primarily starring in light, feel-good films, The Misfits is a complete departure for Monroe.

The film is well-written and character-driven, which appeals to me, but cruelty to animals is a lot to take.

Set in Reno, Nevada, Roslyn has arrived from out of town for a quickie divorce. She is staying with Isabelle (Thelma Ritter), who frequently assists women needing divorces, lending as their witness in court.

After the divorce is final, they go to a local watering hole to celebrate life, where they meet an aging cowboy, Gay (Gable), and his tow-truck friend, Guido. They all agree to go to Guido’s house in the desert to party. When they arrive, they learn that Guido’s wife has recently died.

From this point, Gay and Roslyn become a couple and grow vegetables at Guido’s house, attempting to begin an everyday life. Later, the group decides to round up Mustangs and hire a rodeo hand, Perce (Montgomery Clift), to help.

This leads to conflict as Gay intends to sell the horses as dog food. A subplot of a love triangle between Gay, Roslyn, and Perce emerges.

The Misfits is a rugged watch. From a story perspective, it is cynical and sometimes heartbreaking. Each of the principal characters is severely damaged and pained.

We learn that Gay has two estranged children. When he runs into them at a bar, he excitedly wants to introduce them to Roslyn, but they have left before he can.

In a drunken stupor (and a sad scene), he pathetically calls out for them to return, causing a stir. Perce’s father has died, and his mother left a changed woman- his stepfather selfishly takes their ranch for himself, despite Perce’s father wanting it to go to Perce.

Alcohol abuse is prevalent throughout the film- obviously, the characters drown their sorrows to escape or avoid the pain that they feel.

The opening credits are unique and feature puzzle pieces. This symbolizes the group’s isolation and desire to find each other and fit in. They are all misfits who come together for some sense of companionship.

This is a unique aspect of the film, and director John Huston deserves the credit for immediately setting the tone for clever viewers.

The acting in The Misfits is outstanding, and I would argue that Monroe and Gable’s performances are the best in their respective careers. They both chartered very dark territory in the lonely and damaged characters they portrayed.

Thelma Ritter adds sardonic humor but inexplicably vanishes from the film about halfway through- never to return or be mentioned again.

I would have liked to have seen much more of Isabelle and more depth to her character. Why was she a misfit? She mentions loving all cowboys, so we might assume she has had her share of damaged relationships with men. More clarity might have been interesting.

The final portion is difficult to match. Ann’s interminable scene involves Gay and Perce savagely rounding up the horses and roping them down overnight—the length of the scene and the the horses’s struggles to escape will tug at one’s heartstrings.

Knowing that animals, until quite recently, were not treated well on film sets leaves me twice as unsettled.

Dark stuff.

A film fraught with difficulties (Monroe and writer Arthur Miller’s marriage breakup, Monroe’s and Huston’s substance abuse issues), and a dark subject matter, make The Misfits an intriguing experience.

Having watched the film twice, I appreciate it more with each viewing and think it contains memorable qualities worth exploring.

As the years have passed, The Misfits (1961) has become more appreciated, like a fine wine- I am realizing why.

Obvious Child-2014

Obvious Child-2014

Director Gillian Robespierre

Starring Jenny Slate

Scott’s Review #387

70301275

Reviewed March 22, 2016

Grade: C+

Obvious Child is a 2014 independent comedy/drama nominated for a couple of independent spirit awards, that has mixed results.

It works on some levels but has an irritating underbelly and some unneeded components that ultimately give it a thumbs down.

The major success is star Jenny Slate, a real-life Brooklyn stand-up comic with immeasurable comic timing, who will hopefully become a rising star.

Slate starred in a 2009 short film of the same name before said film graduated to a full-length feature.

Slate stars as a twenty-eight-year-old Brooklyn-ite, who moonlights as a stand-up comic in a dingy bar while working in a desolate bookstore that is soon closing.

Conversely, her parents are successful- her mother is a famed professor. When she is unceremoniously dumped by her steady, she takes up with a handsome young man for a one-night stand filled with fun.

Predictably, she winds up pregnant and forges ahead with a plan to abort their child.

The abortion story is quite interesting since there is never a doubt about what will happen. Unlike films that make abortion the main focus of conflict, Obvious Child wisely does not- every character supports, and even encourages her to have the procedure, including her mother and best friend.

Having been written and directed by women, this is intentional and a way of empowering women, which is one of the high points. If one is on the fence about the topic of abortion or is a pro-life stance, this film may be very tough to watch as its slant is made crystal clear.

Slate is the other high point of the film.

She exudes confidence and comic range. Jewish and slightly awkward looking, she is not the leading-lady type and this arguably makes her wit and sarcastic language all the more comical. She is a natural in the comedy department and hope she will go far.

Two slight props for me worth mentioning are the wonderful mention of the classic film Gone with the Wind (1939) and the setting of Brooklyn. This was a great nod to film history and the setting gave Obvious Child an authentic New York City feel.

On the other hand, an utter annoyance about Obvious Child is the shameless and constant use of blatant and off-putting bathroom humor- not just once or twice, but numerous times.

How is this necessary to the plot? I can’t say, but surmise that it was deemed necessary by the filmmakers to show that females can give as good as males can.

Almost saying, “men can make poop jokes, why can’t women”? Why this is necessary for any film is beyond me and it gives Obvious Child a crass, ugly feel.

The film also has an unrealistic quality to it. Max is portrayed as prince charming. He can do no wrong, supports Donna in any decision she makes, is enamored by her sole being, and loves her unconditionally after only a one-night stand.

This would not happen in real life.

The fact that Donna is Jewish and quirky and Max is Christian and straight-laced is not explored. What conflicts would they undoubtedly face? Why were his parents not featured?

Highly uneven, with a great premise and an interesting slant on a still-controversial social issue, Obvious Child (2014) succeeds in the story department but fails in its uncalled-for use of potty humor to elicit cheap laughs.

Independent Spirit Award Nominations: Best Female Lead-Jenny Slate, Best First Feature

Daisy Miller-1974

Daisy Miller-1974

Director Peter Bogdanovich

Starring Cybill Shepard, Cloris Leachman 

Scott’s Review #383

DaisyMillerPoster

Reviewed March 6, 2016

Grade: B

Daisy Miller is a largely forgotten 1974 film based on a Henry James novella of the same name, directed by Peter Bogdanovich and starring then-girlfriend Cybill Sheperd in the title role.

I admire the film in certain aspects, but ultimately rank the film as good, but not spectacular. I pondered the film afterward and had a feeling that something was missing from it.

The story, set in the late 1800s, tells of a wealthy upstate New York family, led by the naïve Daisy Miller (Sheperd), visiting Europe in the hopes of becoming more cultured and worldly, but instead, are largely met with defiance and snobbery from European sophisticates. Daisy attempts to find love with her numerous potential suitors.

The film is largely shot in Switzerland and Italy.

The romantic story between Daisy and upper-class Frederick Winterbourne is the focal point. Daisy, a chatterbox and flirtatious, captures Winterbourne’s fancy and he gradually woos her but is conflicted by social norms and her innocent involvement with other men, most notably dashing Italian Giovanelli.

This leads to conflict. I noticed some chemistry between Daisy and Winterbourne.

Bogdanovich, who only directed a handful of films, including the masterpiece The Last Picture Show (1971), uses several great actors in both films.

In addition to Sheperd, Cloris Leachman, and Eileen Brennan appear in supporting roles. Leachman as Daisy’s equally chatty and naïve mother, and Brennan as the vicious socialite Mrs. Parker.

Brennan, in particular, shines. Outstanding at playing snobs and unique character roles, this was right up Brennan’s alley and she almost steals the show.

I adored the cinematography and the costumes featured in the production and thought both were the film’s main strengths.

The clothing that the characters were dressed in is both gorgeous and believable for the period. The backdrop during the hotel garden scene is exquisite and picturesque as the lake, sky, and mountain are all in full view adding a unique viewing experience.

I also found the subject of cultural class distinctions quite interesting. The Millers are rich but uneducated and unlikable- they live in Schenectady and are considered far beneath the clever, intelligent figures of Europe.

They do not measure up and they lack the same breeding and class as many of the characters.

Adding to this is the fact that the Millers never really seemed all that interested in being in Europe, almost taking the opportunity for granted, so I was never completely captured by the Millers or found them particularly sympathetic as a group.

Given that she is the focus, I found the character of Daisy Miller a bit unlikable and this could be due to the casting of Sheperd. Daisy’s endless rants, largely about herself, teetered on annoying to say nothing of her irritant little brother.

Sure, Daisy is sweet and kindhearted, but there is something that did not compel me about her. She was a less charismatic, northern version of Scarlett O’Hara.

I kept wondering if other actresses might have brought more to the character and given her more muscle. Was this role a showcase for Sheperd because of her relationship with Bogdanovich?

The conclusion of the film surprised me and features a downcast ending that I did not expect given the sunny mood of the rest of the film, and this is to Bogdanovich’s credit.

He certainly did not make a mainstream film and I admire that.

Daisy Miller (1974) is a mixed bag for me. I give my admiration for some aspects, but the story and the casting could have used a bit of altering.

Oscar Nominations: Best Costume Design

The New Girlfriend-2015

The New Girlfriend-2015

Director Francois Ozon

Starring Romain Duris, Anais Demoustier

Scott’s Review #382

80017300

Reviewed March 5, 2016

Grade: B

The New Girlfriend (2015) is a French, and lighter, version of The Danish Girl, a similarly themed film also released in 2015.

The story involves gender identification confusion among the central character, though the time in The Danish Girl is the 1920s, The New Girl is set in present times.

The film begins with a brief montage of the lives of two best friends,  Laura and  Claire, inseparable as children, young adults, and even as married women.

Sadly, we learn that Laura has recently died of a terminal illness and this is where the film begins. Claire embarks on a unique friendship with Laura’s husband David when she catches him wearing female clothing and acting as a “mommy” to his infant daughter.

They form a bond and Claire agrees to harbor David’s secret and even accompany him in public as he slowly takes on the persona of “Virginia”.

I found the film quite compelling throughout most of the running time as we see David’s burning desire to dress as a woman and feel like a woman.

We mostly see the bond develop between Claire and David, who sometimes is Virginia, and other times David. Claire is happily married to her successful, handsome, husband Gilles and the three individuals are friends. They share dinners, tennis matches, and evenings consuming wine.

Gilles is unaware of David’s secret and begins to fear an affair between his wife and friend. Likewise, during moments, Claire imagines David and Gilles beginning a torrid affair.

Interestingly, the film does not go full steam ahead with the love triangle between Claire/Gilles/David (Virginia), a wise choice. That would have made the film more typical and perhaps even one-note.

Rather, the point is struggles by David to feel like a woman and how his friends support him. When he kisses Claire and snuggles with her, it is not sexual, it is to feel close to another woman.

This makes the film more character-driven.

As with many foreign-language films, The New Girlfriend is liberal with nudity, male and female. When nudity is featured in American films typically it is gratuitously or sexually.

This film is French, so the nudity is tasteful and even beautiful. When Claire is topless it is more expressive as the mystique of the female body than in a showing of a chesty woman, which Claire is not.

The ending slightly disappointed me. The idyllic, fairy tale way it wrapped was romanticized and unrealistic. I would have liked to have seen more of David/Virginia’s struggles and how his in-laws might have wrestled with their granddaughter being raised by a single man dressing as a woman.

Another flaw was the lack of explanation as to whether David, as a male, desired and yearned biologically to become a woman or if he was satisfied to dress up and publicly look like a woman.

The film chose not to go this route and undoubtedly would have made the film darker, containing a much deeper story.

Instead, The New Girlfriend (2015) was light, fun, and wholesome in its overall story.

Beasts of No Nation-2015

Beasts of No Nation-2015

Director Cary Fukunaga

Starring Idris Elba, Ama Abebrese

Scott’s Review #380

Beasts_of_No_Nation_poster

Reviewed February 21, 2016

Grade: B+

Having been made aware of this film following the healthy number of independent film award nominations heaped upon it in 2015, Beasts of No Nation is a war drama, set in an unnamed West African country.

It tells of dire events from the perspective of a young boy, who has lost his family.

He is forced into a life of brutality and death, taken under the wing of a charismatic commander.

Beasts of No Nation is sometimes raw, sometimes gorgeous, but at all times thoughtful and a powerful telling of the devastation of human life, in a world very few can comprehend.

We first meet Agu (approximately aged eight or nine), wonderfully played by unknown child actor Abraham Attah, during happy times.

He plays with his childhood chums and adores his older brother who is attempting to woo a pretty girl. His father is a leader and the family lives in a small village protected by troops.

They allow refugees in for care.

Their country is in a civil war, but the family happily survives and makes a life for themselves, sharing meals. Suddenly, the government has fallen and rebels seize the area.

Soon, Agu’s family is gone, leaving him alone and scared.

His world turns upside down, he becomes involved with a militia commandant, played by Idris Elba, and a fellow child soldier named Strika, who takes him in.

The film belongs to two actors, Attah and Elba, though all actors perform their roles with precision. The relationship between the characters is interesting and complex, like a father/son mixed with mentor/protégé, and is the most compelling part of the film.

The commander is a father figure to Agu. He sees a warrior in him, taking him under his wing, feeding, and caring for him. He is never violent or abusive towards Agu and in one powerful scene, Agu is sodomized ( mostly off-screen yet very much implied) and Agu seeks comfort in his best friend Strika, who has also met the same actions prior.

One cannot help but think sexual assaults like this are perceived and handled differently in Africa.

Rape is a subject that comes up numerous times in the film, mostly against women.

I noticed throughout the film the beauty of the cinematography as most scenes are set outside. Lush, green forests and the villages are tranquil and beautiful, contrasting starkly with the violence.

Agu does some terrible things- in one brutal scene an innocent student is hacked to bits by Agu and Strika at the commander’s coaching as a sort of initiation.

Agu sees the student as responsible for his family’s fates and goes berserk.

Agu then tearfully mistakes a village woman for his mother and angrily shoots her dead as she is being raped by his cohorts. The film is not soft and contains lots of violence. But again, this is a world unknown to most viewers.

At times we despise Agu and the violent rage he emits, but then we remember he is a young boy being turned into a warrior by savages.

He talks to God and his mother and knows what he does (and what is happening to his country) is wrong.

I would have liked to have learned more background about Elba’s character. What makes him tick? Has he lost loved ones long ago as Agu has?

I surmised that the answer is yes. He is brutal, but a calm, calculating, thoughtful man, but one that is in control at all times.

As war rages on Agu and his fellow tribe question what they are doing. Such smarts for a young boy and the audience admires his views. He is intellectual and worldly way beyond his years.

That is what makes Beasts of No Nation a compelling character study. I more than once thought that I had seen this type of film before (Last King of Scotland, 2006, comes to mind in recent times), but never to the extent of what a character-driven story it was, especially in the eyes of a child.

Beasts of No Nation (2015) takes the viewer to an unpleasant world of brutality and a world where there is no rule book. We are exposed to a once innocent child’s experiences and conflicted feelings in the face of danger and heartbreak, and learn its complications.

Independent Spirit Award Nominations: 2 wins-Best Feature, Best Director-Cary Joji Fukunaga, Best Male Lead-Abraham Attah (won), Best Supporting Male-Idris Elba (won), Best Cinematography

Wild Tales-2014

Wild Tales-2014

Director Damian Szifron

Starring Liliana Ackerman

Scott’s Review #374

80013561

Reviewed February 5, 2016

Grade: A

What a crazy adventure!

Receiving a well-deserved 2015 Best Foreign Language Film Academy Award nomination, Wild Tales is a Spanish film that weaves six unique vignettes together.

Each tale involves conflict between characters and centers around the subject of revenge. Each reminds me of a foreign language version of a Twilight Zone episode, albeit much darker, mixed with a prevalent Quentin Tarantino influence.

A psychopath arranges for all of his enemies to be on the same flight (“Pasternack”), a hit-and-run accident among a wealthy family turns murderous (“The Proposal”), a bomb expert turns his expertise onto a corrupt towing company (“Little Bomb”), a disturbed bride and groom bizarrely celebrate their wedding reception (“Until Death Do Us Part”), a revenge-driven waitress waits on her rival (“The Rats”) a brutal tale of road rage (“The Strongest”) are the stories told in this fantastic film.

Wild Tales is an outrageous journey and as each chapter unfolds we are treated to the unexpected and each is cleverly written- bear in mind that they are independent stories and have nothing to do with each other chronologically or otherwise.

The vignettes also vary vastly. One as short as ten minutes and another hovering around the forty-minute mark.

Some characters are sympathetic and hateful, which is interesting in itself. The diner in “The Rats” is despised and we wish for his demise.

After “Little Bomb”, the protagonist (or antagonist depending on how you look at it) receives a hero’s welcome for standing up to corruption.

In other stories, particularly in “The Strongest”, all the characters are unlikeable.

Famed director Pedro Almodovar (The Skin I Live In, Volver)  does not direct Wild Tales but does produce the project and his imprint is all over it. Almodovar has a thing for the weird and, as in 2013’s I’m So Excited, a thing for passengers in peril inside airplanes.

After “Pasternack”, the first installment, one will experience an “OMG!” moment, which wisely sets the tone for the entire movie.

We wait and wonder what can happen next.

My favorite tale is between “The Proposal” and “The Strongest”. I love the class distinction evident in the former as a wealthy father struggles to cover up his family’s dirty deeds initially at any cost necessary, but has he finally had enough?

Will the wealthy once again victimize the poor?

In the latter, class distinction is again explored, as a hotshot in a slick car angers a simple man in a battered car, only to regret his outburst of road rage.

The story turns into a Lord of the Flies situation where it is “kill or be killed”. The clever ending for this one is fantastic as the officials completely misinterpret the events.

The most bizarre tale is “Until Death Do Us Part”, which is also the finale.  A glorious and festive Jewish wedding reception turns bitter and bloody as the bride’s jealousy is tested. But is the bride the unstable partner or is the groom? Or perhaps both?

This chapter reminds me of a Quentin Tarantino film (must have been The Bloody Bride), as the tone and the texture are reminiscent of his films (and yes, the blood too!).

Unusual, delightful, and sometimes even deranged, Wild Tales (2014) is a nice reminder that there are still creative and left-of-center projects being made in modern film that must be experienced and enjoyed.

This is not an ordinary, predictable film making it quite a gem.

Oscar Nominations: Best Foreign Language Film

Room-2015

Room-2015

Director Lenny Abrahamson

Starring Brie Larson, Jacob Tremblay

Scott’s Review #373

80073823

Reviewed January 31, 2016

Grade: A

Room (2015) is a compelling story of a woman’s battle in captivity with her five-year-old son in tow.

The film also tells of the after-effects of reclusive living as they both strive to adapt to their changing world.

Receiving a slew of Academy Award nominations, the film is more than a one-dimensional story of peril or rescue, but rather, a smartly woven tale that delves into the psychological issues involved with being confined in a room for years, giving the film a deeper meaning.

Room is adapted from the novel of the same name, written by Emily Donoghue.

We meet twenty-four-year-old Joy (Larson) and her five-year-old son Jack, who live in squalor in a shed made into one room. They exist from food and supplies delivered by their captor “Old Nick”, who abducted Joy seven years prior.

He periodically rapes her and is Jack’s father, though there is no affection on either side. Joy has attempted escape before but has failed.

She is determined to break free once and for all and allow her and Jack a normal life.

In the first half, we learn about Joy and Jack and how they exist and forge a life together. Joy tells Jack they are real and the outside world and people on television are not.

They live in a fantasy world and Jack periodically treats objects (chair, toilet, bed) as real-life things, giving morning greetings to these objects- this is both cute and sad. His only channel to the outside world is a small skylight, which he endlessly gazes at.

I love how the film suddenly changes course at the halfway point and shifts focus to the aftereffects taking a dark, complex, psychological turn.

The first half takes place entirely in the “room”, and suddenly, a new world has blossomed. A monumental event changes the course of the film.

From this point, the film deals with the traumatic effects of being shut away for years. Joy suffers from depression. Jack sees a new world. We see how other characters deal with the turn of events.

Joy’s parents, wonderfully played by Joan Allen and William H. Macy react in completely different ways.

How have their lives changed because of Joy’s abduction? Will they see Old Nick every time they lay eyes on Jack? How will Joy’s mother’s new boyfriend react?

There is a strong theme of coping throughout the film and how all the characters cope with life events and attempt to resume a life of normalcy. There is such a unique humanistic feel to the film that makes it deeper than I would have expected.

Sure, Brie Larson gives a dynamic performance, but the film offers reflection and thought.

The direction and camera work are a marvel. We see a blurred view of what Jack sees in “the real world”.  It is almost like the audience is reawakening to life and we see it through a child’s eyes- the sights, the sounds.

Jack has created an imaginary dog in his mind and the film introduces more than one real dog that plays a pivotal role. We see Jack’s joy and terror at the new experiences.

Room (2015) encompasses thought-provoking ideas making what might only have been a basic story and turning it into an intricate journey into human psychology through many different nuances and facets.

What a wonderful, dark experience this is.

Oscar Nominations: 1 win-Best Picture, Best Director-Lenny Abrahamson, Best Actress-Brie Larson (won), Best Adapted Screenplay

Independent Spirit Award Nominations: 2 wins-Best Female Lead-Brie Larson (won), Best First Screenplay (won), Best Editing

Showgirls-1995

Showgirls-1995

Director Paul Verhoeven

Starring Elizabeth Berkley, Kyle MacLachlan

Scott’s Review #372

962109

Reviewed January 31, 2016

Grade: D

Having heard much about the infamously badly reviewed Showgirls (1995), and its ranking as one of the worst films ever made, I finally got around to watching this (twenty years after its release).

Now considered something of a camp classic, I am glad I did.

While I recognize the dubious distinction it holds and does not disagree with it, I also found something slightly entertaining about the film, and my thought process throughout was “this film is so bad that it might be good”, but in the end, it is pretty much just a bad film.

Nomi Malone (Elizabeth Berkley) hitchhikes to Las Vegas intending to find success as a showgirl. Having her belongings stolen, she is then befriended by a kind-hearted woman named Molly, who works as a seamstress at the topless dance revue, Goddess.

Molly takes her in and introduces her to the star of the show-Cristal (Gina Gershon).

A rivalry immediately develops between the women as Cristal mocks Nomi’s job at another topless club. The main story centers on this rivalry, as Nomi attempts to climb the ranks and achieve success in the shady world of adult entertainment.

Along the way she becomes involved with various men, specifically entertainment director (and Cristal’s boyfriend), Zack, played by Kyle MacLachlan, leading to further tensions.

Let me be honest here- Showgirls is a bad film in every way. I observed three major flaws in the film- poor acting, poor writing, and the film being over-the-top on every level.

Let’s break it down.

Within minutes, I knew the acting was sub-par, and I wondered if that was the fault of the director’s (Paul Verhoeven) directing or the actors themselves- or a combination.

Known for directing Basic Instinct (a sexy, smoldering film), one wonders if he had the same success in mind for Showgirls.

Berkeley gets the brunt of the mention since she is the lead character, but, wow what a bad performance. From the over-dramatic delivery to the phony earnestness, I did not buy the performance for a minute and fantasized on more than one occasion about how a different actress might have tackled the role (Nicole Kidman and Julia Roberts came to mind).

Gershon was almost worse as her sexiness and vixen-like character were fraught with an irritating brooding pout.

The writing is one-dimensional- a poor girl tries to achieve success in a bad, bad world and meets challenge after challenge. Nothing new here.

The predictability was apparent almost immediately and most of the characters were unlikable. When Nomi garners interest in a man, he turns into a player with another aspiring female star on the side, feeding her the same lines as he did Nomi.

Even the one sympathetic character (Molly), exists only to make Nomi more likable as is the case when Molly is attacked and Nomi races to her bedside.

Forced and formulaic, this scene is a prime example of poor and contrived writing.

Most scenes play over the top.

Brimming with nudity and sexual excitement, the film is bawdy and party-friendly. In one scene, dancers take a line of coke before hitting the stage and a feud between two of the dancers results in one sabotaging the production so that the other dancer will break her hip.

The larger-than-life (in more than one way) x-rated, well-endowed, mama dancer, while entertaining, is also silly and foolish.

Chaotic and pointless, each scene was hard to believe and take seriously.

You may be wondering what positives can be found in Showgirls- the answer is not many, but there is a charm I found in the film, but perhaps I am glutenous for punishment.

I think the film “feels” like it wants to have fun and a certain level of entertainment can be found in viewing it, but this is like trying to find a needle in the haystack to see any good in Showgirls.

I do not disagree with the distinction that Showgirls (1995) is one of the worst films ever made, but I found a sliver of charm, interest, and fun mixed in with the more prevalent drivel, poor quality, and painfully bad acting.

But perhaps that is because it is so bad.

Leviathan-2014

Leviathan-2014

Director Andrey Zvyagintsev

Starring Elena Lyadova, Vladimir Vdovichenkov

Scott’s Review #370

80013610

Reviewed January 16, 2016

Grade: B+

Nominated for the 2015 Best Foreign Language Film (Russian), Leviathan is a tale of governmental corruption at the expense of the “little man”, mixed in with a family drama- and is quite heavy.

The film is above average. It’s a standard, tense drama, if you will, though a bit slow-moving at times. This is not so much a complaint as it is an observation.

As with many Foreign language films versus American films, there is more nudity (not in a gratuitous way) and fewer explosions, which is admiration, and hats off to foreign language films as a whole.

Leviathan made me think of the overall foreign language film genre in that assessment as it did not need CGI or any other “bells and whistles” commonplace in current American films.

Set in a gorgeous coastal area of Russia, featuring landscapes and outdoor shots, Leviathan is a story with religious overtones mixed with drama. “Good vs. evil” and both sides questioning God or defending their actions for god are featured message points.

The protagonist, Koyla, lives with his second wife, Lilya, and his son Roma in a coastal fishing town. Koyla is hot-headed and sometimes expresses rage, but is a good man living a simple life as a mechanic.

The corrupt Mayor is determined to take Koyla’s land and build a villa, offering Koyla an insulting sum of money to sell his land. The disputed land is currently in legal hands, and Koyla’s handsome lawyer friend, Dima, arrives from Moscow to handle the case and support the family in their uneasy times.

A secondary plot involves a love triangle between Koyla/Dima/Lilya, and Roma’s hatred for Lilya that, while somewhat interesting on its terms, did not do much to further the main plot and I am not sure how necessary it was to the film as a whole.

It has nothing to do with the land dispute and was left unresolved.

The clear “hero” of the film is Koyla, but he is no saint himself. He drinks heavily, at one point smacks his son (albeit deservedly so), and has a temper. But his land is being taken from him by a corrupt figure making Koyla empathetic and likable.

Leviathan is a compelling film as the clear message received is “bully vs. beleaguered working man”. The mayor is a fat, unattractive, drunken bully and the audience is instructed to root against him. He has the town justice department in his back pocket and uses blackmail to achieve success.

The film brings religion into the plot as a priest tells the mayor he is doing “God’s work”, thereby justifying his motivations (at least in his mind). Later, a defeated Koyla converses with a religious man questioning God and God’s actions.

The film is cold despite being set in what I believe to be the summer or fall. There is a chill in the air, it always looks windy, and the look of the film is dark. This is effective as Leviathan is a dreary film with an unhappy ending.

Life is harsh and cruel and the film extends that message.

I did not quite understand Lilya’s motivations and not much is known about her character, despite being involved in the events. What motivates her to have an affair with Dima? Why does she return to Koyla? Is she unhappy and seeking a more glamorous life?

This can be assumed but is never made clear so she is a mysterious character.

Enjoyable to me most is the final thirty minutes or so. When a character’s sudden death occurs, I wondered if a particular character was responsible for the death before it was revealed what truly happened.

A cinematic treat and an interesting premise, mixed with a bit of religion and a whodunit, make the Russian film Leviathan, a worthy viewing experience.

Oscar Nominations: Best Foreign Language Film

Independent Spirit Award Nominations: Best International Film

Dancer in the Dark-2000

Dancer in the Dark-2000

Director Lars von Trier

Starring Björk, Catherine Deneuve

Scott’s Review #365

60002276

Reviewed January 9, 2016

Grade: A

Dancer in the Dark is in my opinion one of the most important, inventive films of the 2000s and proudly is one of my favorites of all time.

However, the film is not pleasant to watch, and is quite painful and depressing, if the truth be told. But the relevance and sheer emotion the film elicits is more than enough reason to be exposed to it- if only, but perhaps, once.

Director, Lars von Trier, is a master at creative and disturbing, dream-like films that are either odd, non-linear, or otherwise open to interpretation in some way.

He has directed such gems as 2011’s Melancholia and 1996’s Breaking the Waves, to name but two.

With Dancer in the Dark, he uses handheld cameras which add much grit to the film so it almost feels documentary style, and a grainy, shaky look.

The addition of musical numbers mostly written and performed by the star, Bjork, is a wonderful touch.

Speaking of Bjork, words cannot express what a brilliant performance she gives in the film, and the raw emotion she expresses in her starring role is awe-inspiring.

So much was the stress of filming Dancer in the Dark, that she, to my knowledge, has never made another film.

She was shamefully overlooked in the Best Actress Oscar category- an omission that is one of the biggest fails in Oscar history.

Tensions were reportedly high on the set of Dancer in the Dark, as Bjork reportedly despised her director, never missing a chance to tell him so, disappeared from the set for days on end, and spat in his face. Co-star Deneuve, a former French mega-film star, reportedly did not get along well with Bjork.

Despite all the drama, the stars managed to pull together a masterpiece.

Bjork plays Selma, a Czech immigrant, living in Seattle with her young son. The year is 1964. Selma is poor, struggling to survive by working in a clothing factory along with her best friend Cvalda (Deneuve).

Selma and Cvalda escape their dull lives by watching classic musical films at their local cinema. To make matters worse, Selma is suffering from a degenerative eye disease causing her to gradually lose her sight. She struggles to save enough for surgery for her son, who is sure to suffer the same fate without it.

Selma frequently imagines musical numbers in her day-to-day life involving friends and co-workers. When a tragic turn of events occurs and Selma is accused of a crime, the film goes in a very dark direction.

The conclusion of the film will always require handkerchiefs as it is as powerful as it is gloomy.  The aspect I love most about Dancer in the Dark is that it smashes barriers about what film art is and throws all of the rules out the window.

Lars von Triers, famous for this created a dreamy, independent hybrid musical and drama, a dynamic, tragic, emotional experience all rolled up into one great film.

Oscar Nominations: Best Original Song-“I’ve Seen It All”

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

Forrest Gump-1994

Forrest Gump-1994

Director Robert Zemeckis

Starring Tom Hanks, Robin Wright, Gary Sinise

Scott’s Review #362

60000724

Reviewed January 9, 2016

Grade: A

Awarded a bevy of Academy Awards in the year 1994, Forrest Gump is a film that is engrained in many people’s memories since the film was a monster hit in the mid-1990s.

Some complained that the unrealistic nature of the film was silly, and the story too saccharine, but the film is an innocent, sweet piece about a simple-minded man’s journey through life and the insurmountable success that he achieves.

I adore the film largely from a sentimental standpoint and the memories that watching the film years later conjures up.

I find the film to be a comfort.

Zemeckis, a feel-good film director (Back to the Future-1985, Who Framed Roger Rabbit? -1988), carves a whimsical tale of a fellow, Forrest Gump (played brilliantly by Tom Hanks), a slow-witted, but gentle soul, from Alabama, and his decades-long journey through life.

His lifelong love is Jenny (played by Robin Wright), who is a troubled girl and relies on Forrest over their friendship spanning decades.

Forrest is always in the right place at the right time and influences the events of history in his innocent way.

Forrest Gump is unique in its clever use of editing to incorporate Forrest into real-life historical events, which is a big part of the appeal of the film.

In one instance, Forrest meets with Richard Nixon and reveals the Watergate scandal. He also met President John F. Kennedy after winning a football scholarship.

And who can ever forget the numerous lines made famous from the film- “Stupid is as stupid does”, and “Life is like a box of chocolates. You never know what you are going to get.”, to name just two.

What I love most about the film is that it has heart and the relationships that Forrest shares with the central characters in his life are rich. Forrest’s haggard, but kind mother (Sally Field) loves her son and they share a tender, emotional relationship.

When Forrest enlists in the Army during the Vietnam War, his grizzled commanding officer, Lt. Dan Taylor (an Oscar-nominated performance by Gary Sinise), surprisingly becomes one of Forrest’s closest friends.

The film takes a darker turn when we begin to see a more human side to Taylor after a horrible accident, which leaves him without legs. To counterbalance this tragedy, Forrest is comically wounded in the buttocks.

I am not sure if I love or loathe the character of Jenny. Wright is perfect at giving her some vulnerability and her terrible upbringing can excuse some of her actions and take advantage of Forrest for arguably her gain.

Still, she has Forrest’s heart so she cannot be all that bad.

A favorite scene occurs in Washington as Forrest speaks at an anti-war rally. Jenny, in the crowd, recognizes Forrest and their reunion is sweet. Jenny, now a hippie and expelled from school, returns to Forrest’s life.

The fate of both Jenny and Mrs. Gump are scenes that will undoubtedly require tissues to get through as they are tender and emotional as can be.

Zemeckis’s Forrest Gump (1994) has emotion, sweetness, and heart, and those are nice qualities for a film to have.

It is not too sappy overwrought or manipulative, instead provides an honest story.

Oscar Nominations: 6 wins-Best Picture (won), Best Director-Robert Zemeckis (won), Best Actor-Tom Hanks (won), Best Supporting Actor-Gary Sinise, Best Screenplay Based on Material Previously Produced or Published (won), Best Original Score, Best Sound Effects Editing, Best Sound, Best Art Direction, Best Cinematography, Best Makeup, Best Film Editing (won), Best Visual Effects (won)

The Danish Girl-2015

The Danish Girl-2015

Director Tom Hooper

Starring Eddie Redmayne, Alicia Vikander

Scott’s Review #310

80058477

Reviewed December 29, 2015

Grade: A-

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

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

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

A happy, young couple living in Copenhagen, and married for six years, Gerda and Einar are inseparable and madly in love. They are best friends and help each other with their art. Because of a female model’s tardiness, Gerda convinces Einar to stand in for the female model.

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

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

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

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

One can imagine how they would feel if their spouse identified as the opposite sex. Confusion, blame, anger, and sorrow, would all be common reactions. Gerda is strong, brave, and helpful while crumbling beneath the surface.

Vikander brings all of this to the screen flawlessly.

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

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

Actors can easily dress up in drag, but the emotional investment needs to be there and Redmayne makes the viewer care about Lili. One is teary-eyed along with Lili as she sees no other choice but to undergo the risky operation. We see the desperation in Lili’s eyes thanks to Redmayne’s acting skills.

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

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

These aspects lend to a delicate, peaceful film of encouragement.

To be clear, Lili is not gay, and this is made crystal clear during the film as she meets a gay man, and the distinction between them is made. She does, however, identify and feel that she is a woman. She was born with the wrong parts.

The greatest aspect of The Danish Girl is its powerhouse acting and compelling subject matter. One’s gender is a given for most, but watching a riveting drama about someone who is unrestful with their gender is eye-opening and still rather taboo.

2015 was a year of progressive transgender films and The Danish Girl is towards the top in its class and graceful in dealing with the subject matter in a judgmental-free way.

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

Tangerine-2015

Tangerine-2015

Director Sean Baker

Starring Mya Taylor, Kitana Kiki Rodriguez, James Ransone

Scott’s Review #301

80037676

Reviewed December 17, 2015

Grade: A

On the rare occasion that I am lucky and privileged enough to stumble upon a gem like Tangerine (2015), it reaffirms my faith in film and creative filmmakers in general.

Here is a universal lesson- it does not require oodles of money to make a great film. This film was shot with three smartphones!!

It takes talent and creativity.

Tangerine is a groundbreaking film- the first (that I am aware of anyway) to feature transgender actresses at the forefront of the feature.

The film has been honored with multiple Independent Spirit Award nominations.

Shot documentary style, with grittiness and a frenetic pace, while mixing in unique styles of music (hip hop to classic) as the musical score (a child-like tune begins the film), Tangerine is unique from both a story perspective and a visual style.

The film’s first scene begins with two transgender sex workers- Sin-Dee Rella and Alexandra, having a conversation in a coffee shop. Sin-Dee has just been released from jail and learns that her boyfriend, and pimp, Chester (James Ransone), has been cheating on her.

It is Christmas Eve.

The film explores Sin-Dee’s rage and subsequent search all over Los Angeles for Chester, and the girl he has been with. She vows revenge on them both.

However, beyond this story point, the heart of the film is of loneliness and isolation that most of the characters (trans and otherwise), share, in one form or another.

Interspersed with the Sin-Dee story, are stories involving Alexandra’s feud with a “john”, and her pursuit of a singing career.

Another interesting story is that of a straight male, Razmik, an Armenian cab driver who is enamored with transgender sex workers.

This may sound bizarre or too out there for some, but Razmik’s story is quite tender and compelling. He has a wife, child, and other relatives and is the breadwinner. He is also very conflicted. He does not “use” the sex workers, but rather cares for them and admires them.

I found all three principal characters interesting in different ways- Sin-Dee and Alex are over-the-top, yet sensitive. While Sin-Dee is aggressive and vengeful, Alex is the kinder of the two and the more sensible and rational.

She is a sex worker but aspires for more out of life. Razmik is even more interesting- does he have a fetish? Is he shameful for spending money on prostitutes while supporting a wife and child?

All of the characters are victimized in one form or another and all are dysfunctional- at the same time, they are all weirdly likable.

I witnessed moments of Quentin Tarantino’s film style coming across the screen- most notably in the coffee-shop scenes (the beginning and final scenes) as all hell breaks loose, and the characters delve into all sorts of crazy behavior.

Tangerine is a sweet tale about friendship too.

It is a memorable and powerful film experience.

In the end, all the characters are hurting, living such sad lives, especially since the time is present-day Christmas Eve, which might make this film sound depressing, but it is not.

I found it almost uplifting in a way.

Tangerine (2015) is a completely original, groundbreaking film that I hope will be remembered and appreciated fifty years from now.

Independent Spirit Award Nominations: 1 win-Best Feature, Best Director-Sean Baker, Best Female Lead-Kitana Kiki Rodriguez, Best Supporting Female-Mya Taylor (won), Piaget Producers Award

Big Night-1996

Big Night-1996

Director Stanley Tucci, Campbell Scott

Starring Stanley Tucci, Tony Shalhoub

Scott’s Review #300

305300

Reviewed December 16, 2015

Grade: B+

Big Night (1996) is a sweet, whimsical little film that is a food lover’s dream come true since that is the focal point of the story with more than one dish being prepared on-screen giving it realism.

It centers on the restaurant business and, specifically, how two brothers struggle to keep their failing restaurant afloat through their love and passion for food.

The story tells of two Italian immigrant brothers, Primo and Secondo, played by Tony Shalhoub and Stanley Tucci, respectively.

The time is the 1950s and they reside in blue-collar New Jersey. Times are tough for them as they try to succeed in the difficult restaurant business- they specialize in Italian food of course.

Secondo is a playboy of sorts- suave and handsome, he dates Phyllis (Minnie Driver) while galavanting with a sophisticated older woman named Gabriela, the wife of a competitor.

Primo, on the other hand, is quiet, and serious, yet an all-star chef. The food he prepares is wonderful and his talent is evident.

But how can they market themselves to be successful?

At this point, their restaurant is dying and they risk being reduced to returning to Italy or eke out a meager existence working for someone else.

An idea is announced to have a celebrity singer (Louis Prima) perform for a one-night extravaganza at their restaurant, where they will make the meal of their lives and impress the town, thus achieving success.

The film is charming and my favorite parts are on the “big night”. As the duo prepared the liquor order and shopped for flowers and other decorations in preparation, the mood and spirit left me with a warm feeling.

What a sense of togetherness Primo and Secondo, along with friends, felt to achieve this challenging goal. Inevitably, there is tension between the brothers, and between Secondo and Phyllis, but truthfully, these are merely sub-plots, and the heart of the film is in the food.

The scenes that take place in the kitchen left my mouth watering. As Secondo prepares a baked pasta dish (Timpano), the meal oozes with love and tastiness. The entire story arc is grand and magnificent.

The group of diners revels in the dining room of the restaurant enjoying spirits and dancing the night away. By morning everyone is full and drunk, both with love and alcohol, but most are happy. They get merry as they eat the night away.

I could almost taste the main course!

A subplot that works for me is the burgeoning romance between reserved Primo and equally reserved flower shop owner, Ann. Both very timid, they finally muster the courage to admit their feelings for each other while enjoying (what else?) wine and food- what better way to begin a romance?

The tenderness and chemistry between these two are very innocent and captivated me while watching the film.

The final scene of the brothers making an omelet is also wonderful and a fitting way to stress togetherness and perseverance, which is what the small film is really about.

For lovers of food, Big Night (1996) is a shining moment.

Independent Spirit Award Nominations: 1 win-Best Male Lead-Tony Shalhoub, Stanley Tucci, Best First Screenplay (won), Best First Feature

She’s Lost Control-2014

She’s Lost Control-2014

Director Anja Marquardt

Starring Brooke Bloom

Scott’s Review #299

70305205

Reviewed December 14, 2015

Grade: B+

She’s Lost Control (2015) is a dark, independent drama, and the directorial debut of Anja Marquardt.

This film is one reason I proudly support independent film, as it is otherwise a film that most would not know about, and will never know about, if not for good word of mouth and award recognition- think indie spirit awards.

Hopefully, Marquardt will one day be a household name.

The film is heavy yet intriguing and a character study.

It is a dark and dreary experience- some might argue depressing, centering on Ronah (Brooke Bloom)- a young, female, college student, aspiring towards her master’s degree in psychology, who works as a sexual surrogate in Manhattan.

The film explores her experiences with various clients, specifically, a disturbed, volatile man she takes on as a client. As she becomes better acquainted with Johnny, they forge a special bond, but will romantic feelings and jealousy get in the way of the therapy assigned to both parties?

How each of them explores their feelings is the focal point of the tale, and clearly, the feelings involved are not peaches and cream.

Ronah is not a prostitute and there is very little sex that goes on, albeit the implication is there. She is nurturing and emotionally invested and intends to become a psychiatrist one day.

It is unclear whether her “boss”, a shady seeming character, is her pimp or simply an employer. His role and motivations are unclear.

The most interesting aspect of the film is the title and throughout my viewing of the film I wondered about the title more and more- are any of Ronah’s experiences in her mind? Is she stable or does she have some emotional or mental issues?

She befriends a kind neighbor around her age and invites her for dinner- they bond. The neighbor invites her out to dance, but Ronah declines.

She also has an older female confidant- a former surrogate who gives Ronah tips and suggestions. Still, Ronah is lonely.

Again we wonder if perhaps all is not what it seems. This is a fascinating aspect of the story. One must watch to determine the answers to questions such as these.

New York City can be a tough, unkind world and She’s Lost Control does not sugar coat an individual’s difficult existence when not blessed with family money, strings, or some other advantage.

Ronah lives in a dump with holes in her shower and cramped quarters. In addition to the hardships, she is constantly kept abreast of problems concerning her brother and mother back home in upstate New York.

Quite simply, Ronah is overwhelmed by her life. Might she be spinning out of control?

The dreary aspect of the film is not so much the sexual aspect. Ronah is a therapist and everything is with mutual consent.  Unfortunately, she is challenged by some of the people she encounters in her profession.

I admire She’s Lost Control (2014) quite a bit for its insight, thoughtfulness, and compelling story of a woman with a difficult life, trying to make ends meet, and aspiring to something worthwhile.

She is brave, troubled, and interesting all rolled up in one fascinating lead character.

Independent Spirit Award Nominations: Best First Screenplay, Best First Feature

Brooklyn-2015

Brooklyn-2015

Director John Crowley

Starring Saoirse Ronan

Scott’s Review #298

80037688

Reviewed December 12, 2015

Grade: A

Brooklyn (2015) is a classic-style Hollywood film that I adored watching. It has a genuine innocence to it with wonderful, powerful acting and perfect cinematography/art direction.

The film is conventional and mainstream, but never sappy.

Based on Colm Toubin’s popular novel, Brooklyn takes place in the early 1950s and is set in Ireland and New York City.

Eilis Lacey, played by Saoirse Ronan, is a young Irish girl with good morals and traditional values. She is faithful and Catholic, with a good upbringing. Not rich by any means, she is intelligent and uses good sense, working hard on weekends in a grocery run by an unkind woman, to save money.

Thankfully, her older sister Rose, whom Eilis adores, has scrimped and saved enough for her to study in the United States, via a church program. Rose does not want Eilis to be trapped in the small Irish town.

While in New York City, an event occurs that necessitates Eilis’s return to Ireland. While home she develops a romantic dilemma that causes her to ponder whether to return to her new life in New York City or stay in Ireland.

Eilis is conflicted, which is the main focus of the story.

On paper, one might assume that Brooklyn is sappy, “chick flick” or a trite romance with predictability for miles- it isn’t. Everything about the film is perfect and is very detail-oriented.  The pieces somehow fit together- good direction, good camerawork, good acting, and good story-telling.

Throughout the film, I found myself in an emotional state.

When Eilis meets the young and charming Tony, a working-class Italian American, who becomes infatuated with her, I worried how their different backgrounds will be handled. Their courtship is sweet and tender and I cheered for them as their slow romance builds.

She is taught to eat pasta correctly to impress his traditional parents. He walks her home every night. Tony and Eilis have a sweetness and purity that is tough not to fall in love with as an onlooker.

On the other hand, when dramatic events unfold, the excellent acting makes Brooklyn a delight and quite emotionally powerful. One might find themselves in a flood of tears by the end.

Thanks to Ronan, an impressive talent since my discovery of her work in 2007’s Atonement, she elicits in Eilis a strength and stoicism that is tested when she breaks down at one point in the film.

Important to mention is the awe-inspiring performances by Fiona Glascott as Eilis’s sister Rose, and Jane Brennan as Eilis’s mother.

Unknown actresses (to me), both give dramatic and dynamic performances in their respective roles.

Wonderful to see are veteran character actors Jim Broadbent and Julie Walters as Father Flood and Madge, respectively.

What a visual treat Brooklyn is! As the title reveals, most of the action does take place in this New York City borough, and the influx of Irish and Italian immigrants during this period of history is apparent in the clothing and the cinematography.

The lush green and vast landscape of Ireland makes this divine to view.

A story of bravery, romance, and kindness, Brooklyn (2015) is a wholesome and feel-good film, but, I was immersed in the story and the look of the film from the very first shot.

Oscar Nominations: Best Picture, Best Actress-Saoirse Ronan, Best Adapted Screenplay

Spotlight-2015

Spotlight-2015

Director Thomas McCarthy

Starring Michael Keaton, Mark Ruffalo, Rachel McAdams

Scott’s Review #294

80061341

Reviewed December 9, 2015

Grade: B+

Spotlight (2015) is a film with an important story to tell.

A telling of true events that occurred within the Catholic Archdiocese for ages, Spotlight’s focus is specifically on the Boston scandals, as a team of reporters working for the Boston Globe uncovered and exposed a multitude of child molestation cases committed by priests.

They were subsequently covered up, leaving victims paid off to keep quiet. The number of proven cases in Boston alone is staggering.

Starring are a plethora of talents including Michael Keaton, Mark Ruffalo, and Rachel McAdams, who lead the pack.

They make up the “Spotlight” team at the newspaper,  an investigative unit that works on special stories as they arise.

Their new boss, Marty Baron (ironically a Jewish man), played compellingly by Liev Schrieber, takes over as head of the department. He quizzically asks why the story is not already a priority. Suddenly it is a hot-burner issue and the film delves into an investigation to uncover the facts.

Spotlight is a minimalist film. There is nothing cinematically unique or razzle-dazzle about it, but somehow that is okay.

In some aspects, the film reminds me of the 1975 thriller All The Presidents Men, starring Dustin Hoffman.

For instance, the bleak, bare news rooms-sterile in their look, are similar- cubicle after cubicle,  harsh lighting, and generic conference rooms.

This is the filmmaker’s intent.

Also, the fast, energetic pacing, successfully emitting the tight deadlines newspaper folks face, transfers perfectly on film.

The sexual abuse scandal is a cold, harsh reality and the film introduces several victims, who, now as adults, are forever scarred. Some attend support groups, some take drugs, one is sadly not “all there”. Another, now a gay man, was singled out by a priest during a vulnerable period in the then-young boy’s, life.

It is a heartbreaking reality that many victims in the film are based on real cases.

Let’s focus on Schrieber’s character for a minute.  He gives such an understated yet compelling performance there is a risk it will wind up being overlooked. He calmly, yet passionately initiates the case. It is not a showy performance and subdued but a compelling one if enough attention is paid to it. He is a standout.

Unfortunately, the film does not delve much into the defense (if any) of the Catholic church. Did they do anything but deny the allegations? Why were the victims paid off? Not much is noted from the church’s point of view.

In real life, the Catholic church did hide the abuse that transpired for decades.

A slight negative is that the film does not delve into the characters’ personal lives.

Michael Keaton’s character, Robby Robinson, is arguably the lead character, spearheading the case,  though very little is known about him.

Is he married? happily? Yes, he is a workaholic, but what else?

Ruffalo’s Michael Rezendes is separated from his wife, but little is known to the reasons.

Finally, McAdam’s Sacha is probably the most fleshed-out. She is happily married, close with her religious grandmother, and hurt by the scandal. But we do not know her in-depth either.

I found myself wanting to know more about these people.

All in all, Spotlight (2015) is a superior film deserving of the recognition it is receiving. Intense, gritty, and filled with honesty, it is a story that needed to be told and has been told well.

Oscar Nominations: 2 wins-Best Picture (won), Best Director-Tom McCarthy, Best Supporting Actor-Mark Ruffalo, Best Supporting Actress-Rachel McAdams, Best Original Screenplay (won), Best Film Editing

Independent Spirit Award Nominations: 5 wins-Best Feature (won), Best Director-Tom McCarthy (won), Best Screenplay (won), Best Editing (won), Robert Altman Award (won)

The Immigrant-2013

The Immigrant-2013

Director James Gray

Starring Marion Cotillard, Joaquin Phoenix

Scott’s Review #293

70275521

Reviewed December 5, 2015

Grade: A-

The Immigrant (2013) is a lovely, classic, old-style Hollywood film set in early 1920’s New York City.

The film is a classic tale of a poor Polish immigrant who travels to America in hopes of a better life, only to be met with hardship, manipulation, and conflict.

However, The Immigrant is not a downer. Rather, a powerful and intriguing story of life and the clichéd pursuit of happiness with a compelling love story mixed in.

Nominated for Best Actress for Two Days, One Night, eligible the same year as The Immigrant, this is a good example of how the Academy got it wrong as Marion Cotillard should have been nominated for this performance instead of the other.

The actress was, however, recognized with an Independent Spirit Award nomination for Best Actress for this role. A true talent, she gives a wonderful performance.

Little is known about Ewa’s (Cotillard) life before she arrives on Ellis Island with her sister Magda in tow. We meet them as they disembark a ship and wait in line on the immigration line, weary from their escape from war-torn Poland.

They have escaped their native country in hopes of a better life in the United States.

Unfortunately, Magda is ill and cannot hide a cough and is sent to the infirmary most likely before being sent back to Poland. Ewa desperately needs money and is told that her Aunt and Uncle have not shown up to collect her as she had originally thought.

Ewa is now on her own and desperate in a land where she knows not a soul.

As the plot unfolds, Ewa encounters two men who enter her life- Bruno (Joaquin Phoenix) and Emil (Jeremy Renner)- brothers with a rivalry, both professionally and in regards to Ewa. They both fall in love with her- she is gorgeous and innocent after all.

But can the men be trusted? Are their feelings true? We begin to get to know the men better and all may not be exactly as it seems or originally appeared to be.

The Immigrant perfectly captures the 1920s era cinematically with gorgeous cinematography and camera work.

Directed by James Gray, a director with a tendency to direct films set in New York City and feature a romantic element (Two Lovers comes to mind- also starring Joaquin Phoenix as a Jew pursuing a blonde girl).

In The Immigrant, I felt like I was transported to the 1920s with Bruno’s dark coat and bowler and the character’s costumes in general.

The Lower East Side, from the automobiles to the theaters, seems like that’s how it was back then- charming, artistic, and yet combustible too.

Marion Cotillard gives a soft yet tough performance as the long-suffering, heart-of-gold Ewa. The character’s yearning to keep her traditional catholic values while transported into a new and dangerous world filled with corruption and the need to survive is heartbreaking and Cotillard wears her heart on her sleeve.

She is also tougher and more stubborn than we first think she is- she will not be taken advantage of and these aspects give the character complexity.

I did not see her as a victim.

Let’s not forget the men in the film and while it borders on turning into a “woman’s movie” towards the climax, and Cotillard is front and center, Phoenix and Renner are flawless.

Phoenix, with the larger role, is extremely complex and it takes the audience until the final scene to entirely figure Bruno out.

I wish The Immigrant (2013) would have found a wider audience, but for fans of a traditional, classic, romantic Hollywood experience, this film is a treat.

It will take you back to an earlier time in the world- in a completely authentic way.

Independent Spirit Award Nominations: Best Female Lead-Marion Cotillard

Les Biches (Bad Girls)-1968

Les Biches (Bad Girls)-1968

Director Claude Chabrol

Starring Stephane Audran, Jaqueline Sassard, Jean-Louis Trintignant

Scott’s Review #292

Reviewed December 3, 2015

Grade: B+

Les Biches (translated as “Bad Girls” in English) is a French-Italian film from 1968 about a peculiar relationship between two women: one a wealthy, gorgeous, sophisticated woman named Frederique; the other a poor, waif-like, struggling street artist named Why.

They embark on a tumultuous love affair marred by competition for handsome Paul Thomas, the local architect.

At its core, the film delves into the class struggle, lust, and violence.

The beginning of the film sets the tone as Frederique gives a large sum of money to Why as she stops to admire her art on the streets of Paris. She invites Why back to her lush villa in gorgeous Saint Tropez, where Frederique lets two outrageous gay men cohabitate with her.

The household is a circus of sorts as the men prance around wildly, but Frederique teaches Why about high society and good living.

Soon, Paul is introduced to the story and takes a shine to Why. She calmly rejects him, and Frederique then begins to fancy him, thereby emotionally rejecting Why and leaving her feeling out in the cold.

The film then takes a psychologically dramatic turn as the characters turn against one another.

I admire this film for its unorthodox story, especially for 1968. Same-sex stories are not the norm these days, and the interesting key is that the classes are different.

Frederique has control and power over Why because she has money. Paul admires Why, but he cavorts with Frederique. Is he genuinely interested in her, or does he value her money most of all?

The film never makes the distinction crystal clear, but one speculates it is the latter. Frederique uses her wealth (and beauty) to obtain what she wants- namely, Paul to spite Why.

Why is younger and fresher, and has not been marred by the world… yet? The gay men are cartoon-like. It is not clear exactly who they are or why they live in the villa. Little background is known about any of the characters.

Foreign-language films, especially of the 1960s and 1970s, are fascinating- filled with life and interesting facets, and Les Biches is a prime example of interesting filmmaking.

A trip down the bi-sexuality lane with two gorgeous women at the forefront of the story, both struggling for power over the other, though one with a clear advantage.

Interesting to note that at the time of release, the film was touted as a lesbian skin-flick and humorously mis-thought to be entitled “Les Bitches” (perhaps to get audiences in the door), but it is hardly a sex romp- quite the contrary, as the psychological elements overtake everything else.

Les Biches (1968) is an odd little adventure, but one to be appreciated and traveled with an open mind if the mood is right. Stylish, interesting, and certainly non-mainstream, it challenges the social norms of the day and offers Hitchcock-like elements, especially in the final chapter.