Category Archives: Romantic Drama

The Great Lie-1941

The Great Lie-1941

Director Edmund Goulding

Starring Bette Davis, Mary Astor

Scott’s Review #891

Reviewed April 28, 2019

Grade: B+

Breezing into her heyday of films at this point, Hollywood starlet Bette Davis had become an expert at portraying tarts and bitches in most of her movies. Desiring to turn left of center and play a more sympathetic character, the actress jumped at the chance to play an ingenue.

The Great Lie (1941) is the perfect showcase for her talents in a gripping, dramatic film that is purely predictable soap opera, but lovely escapism did well.

Maggie Patterson (Davis) is a demure and sensitive southern socialite vying for the affections of former beau, aviator Peter Van Allen (George Brent). Peter impulsively married sophisticated concert pianist Sandra Kovak (Mary Astor), and both were startled to learn that their marriage was invalid.

Confused, Peter decides to marry Maggie and is quickly sent off to Brazil on business when his airplane crashes into the jungle, leaving him presumed dead.

When Sandra realizes she is pregnant, Maggie proposes that she be allowed to raise the child independently in exchange for financially caring for Sandra. The two women go to Arizona to await the birth, and Sandra delivers a boy named after his father.

When Peter shows up alive and well, the women face a quandary. Sandra bitterly announces to Maggie that she intends to ride off into the sunset with Peter and her son. For the remainder of the picture, the women metaphorically scratch and claw at each other.

Despite being melodramatic and stellar for an afternoon daytime drama, the storyline is engaging and never suffers from too much contrivance.

Both Maggie and Sandra have appeal, and both women are likable—or at least the film does its best not to make one woman the clear villain. Sandra, dripping with gorgeous fashion and sturdy poise, is confident, pairing well with Maggie’s southern charm and sensibilities—to say nothing of her wealth. Peter would do well with either woman, and I found my allegiances shifting throughout the film.

Mary Astor’s terrific performance as Sandra nearly upstages Davis. The women are the reason for The Great Lie’s grit and gusto. They play the hell out of their roles, and according to legend, both hated the script and vowed to turn the project into gold together.

They nearly succeed as the best sequence is when the women travel to deserted Arizona to spend the remainder of Sandra’s pregnancy. They cooped up together. Seeing Davis’ Maggie play caretaker to a whiny and spoiled Sandra was delicious. Typically, Davis would play Sandra’s character, so the scenes are a treat.

Suspension of disbelief must be achieved as the film’s primary plot is jarring in incomprehension. Maggie offers to provide Sandra with a large sum of money to ensure her security. I did not buy this point as Sandra appears well-off, touring the world with incredible success and living a lavish lifestyle, including a staff of servants and a gorgeous apartment in New York City.

The character hardly appears to need a handout despite the incorporated dialogue of Sandra’s success predicted to wane as she ages.

Another oddity is the location of Maggie’s estate. Although Maryland is hardly a southern mecca, the area has all the trimmings of the deep South, perhaps Mississippi. With an all-black staff, magnolia trees, and southern-style cuisine, the Maryland backdrop is quite perplexing and a misfire.

More relevant would have been if the location were Mississippi, Louisiana, or Alabama. Finally, remiss would it be not to mention appearances by Hattie McDaniel and brother Sam as Violet and Jefferson, employed by Maggie, always a treat.

With high drama and terrific acting, The Great Lie (1941) offers tremendous chemistry between the female leads, resulting in a deserved Best Supporting Actress Oscar for Astor.

The dialogue may be silly and superfluous with plot gimmicks and obvious setups, but the film does work. Viewers can let loose and enjoy a sudsy drama with enjoyable trimmings.

Oscar Nominations: 1 win-Best Supporting Actress-Mary Astor (won)

Crazy Rich Asians-2018

Crazy Rich Asians-2018

Director Jon M. Hu

Starring Constance Wu, Henry Golding

Scott’s Review #860

Reviewed January 26, 2019

Grade: B+

Crazy Rich Asians (2018), the romantic comedy smash of 2018, is a fun romp that is memorable because it centers on the Asian population, which is shamefully underrepresented in mainstream American cinema.

For this point alone, the film is recommended and worthy of praise, but otherwise, it is a standard genre film with gimmicks, stock characters galore, and a predictable conclusion.

The numerous cultural tidbits included must be mentioned, which raise the film above mediocrity.

Rachel Chu (Constance Wu) and Nick Young (Henry Golding) are a happily dating New York City couple; she is a New York University college professor, and he is an entrepreneur.

They fly to Singapore to attend Nick’s best friend’s wedding, which results in antics and anguish. Rachel realizes that Nick comes from an extremely wealthy family and is Chinese royalty, owning a multitude of lavish hotels and real estate.

Most of Nick’s family, especially his traditional mother Eleanor (Michelle Yeoh), disapproves of the pairing, viewing Rachel as a typical American who prioritizes passion over family.

Nick is a sought-after commodity among the single women of Singapore, and Rachel is forced to endure harassment and mockery at every turn. Her allies are Nick’s kind sister Astrid (Gemma Chan), Rachel’s outrageous college pal Peik Lin (Awkwafina), and her equally garish family.

The plot thickens when Nick’s scheming mother does a background check on Rachel and discovers a family secret.

Crazy Rich Asians is a formulaic romantic comedy with the standard situations and characters expected of a genre film. The rivalry between the good girl and her boyfriend’s domineering mother, the comic relief of the gay sidekicks as Peik Lin and another friend of Rachel’s, provides.

The caricatures of Peik Lin’s wild family, her unattractive brother fond of taking secret photos of Rachel, and Eleanor’s snooty, judgmental circle of female friends are all well cast yet one-dimensional.

It is perplexing why the filmmakers decided to make Nick only half Chinese rather than authentically Asian. Sadly, this may have been a reassurance that the film would be more marketable to mass audiences.

The film is presented as an Asian film, but it is an American film.

The storyline justification is that Nick’s father (surprisingly never seen) is British and that he and Eleanor met in college, only she being Chinese. Nick and Astrid’s English accents gnawed at me throughout the film.

Despite the myriad of cliches and manipulations, Crazy Rich Asians has a nice flow and offers a fun two hours. The film is flavorful with bright colors and visual spectacles of stylish and sophisticated Singapore and its modern and sleek nuances.

I adored the locales featuring the skyline and a rich overview of the robust and relevant city/country.

Fantastic is how the filmmakers add spices of traditional Chinese culture throughout the film’s telling, quickly becoming more of an ode to the good history. Nick’s grandmother, Su-Yi (Lisa Lu), takes pride in her excellent and artistic flowers, and Rachel is introduced to the art of dumpling making.

Crazy Rich Asians introduces a history lesson for those unfamiliar with ancient Chinese customs.

Flavorful inclusions of Mandarin Chinese language versions of American pop hits are also lovely additions, so the film has some tidbits to revel in other than the story.

Most songs reference money, such as “Money Honey” by Lady Gaga and “Rich Girl” by Hall & Oates.

The pacing of the film is nice. There is never a dull or dragging moment, and a nice balance of comedy and drama. Humorous is when Peik Lin provides Rachel with a costume makeover, ensuring she looks dynamic for the grand wedding, as she convinces her to fight Eleanor with fire.

Drama ensues when someone casts a dead fish on Rachel’s bed, and Eleanor spits that Rachel will never be enough for her son.

The film’s conclusion is predictable, resulting in a marriage proposal aboard a jet heading from Singapore to New York City. With a movie like Crazy Rich Asians, it is guaranteed that the couple lives happily ever after, riding off into the sunset in great defiance of Nick’s roots.

Due to the film’s success, a sequel is a solid bet, though I am also not betting the follow-up will be any good. Are romantic comedy sequels ever decent?

Filled with cliches, but satisfying most mainstream film-goers, Crazy Rich Asians (2018) creates a film with enough shards of Asian culture to at least get the Asian population on the map with a Hollywood production.

Although the film has a polished look and some stereotypes, it breaks no new ground other than good inclusion, and that is a start.

If Beale Street Could Talk-2018

If Beale Street Could Talk- 2018

Director Barry Jenkins 

Starring Kiki Layne, Stephan James

Scott’s Review #854

Reviewed January 8, 2019

Grade: A

2018 proved to be a year where filmmakers of color prided themselves in telling stories of diversity, inclusion, social injustice, and the never-ending challenges of minorities.

One of the year’s best films is If Beale Street Could Talk (2018), a lovely piece of storytelling by director Barry Jenkins. His other major work, Moonlight (2016), is a similarly poignant and melancholy experience.

The film is based on a novel by James Baldwin.

The title is explained in the first dialogue of the film. Beale Street exists in New Orleans, but thousands of streets exist in other cities. It is a metaphor for discrimination and unnecessary struggles that black folks continue to endure.

Right away, the audience knows that an important story is to be told.

The wonderful part of If Beale Street Could Talk is the combined elements that lead to brilliance.

Tish Rivers (Kiki Layne) and Fonny Hunt (Stephan James) have known each other since childhood. Growing up in a Harlem neighborhood, their families are interconnected and community-centered.

Events begin in 1973 when Tish realizes she is pregnant. Ordinarily, a happy occasion, this situation presents a major challenge because Fonny is imprisoned for a crime he did not commit.

A woman has accused him of rape and a corrupt policeman has positively identified Fonny as the rapist despite this being a logistical impossibility. Tish is determined to prove his innocence before the baby arrives with the assistance of her family.

The story is non-linear. Jenkins begins the film in the present day with Tish breaking the news of her pregnancy to him and then notifying her family.

As the film progresses, more of Fonny and Tish’s love story is explored. The couple falls in love, has romantic dinners, and nervously makes love for the first time. In this way, the film becomes a tender story of young love.

The social injustice and family drama are carefully mixed amid the central romance.

The film impresses with warm touches, ingenious cinematography, and a musical score that left me resounding with pleasure at the intricate and intimate details. The frequent use of jazz music over dinner or as the Rivers family sips celebratory wine adds sophistication to many scenes.

The film’s texture is muted and warm, giving it a subdued look that is genuine to the quiet and timeless nature of the production.

A plume of cigarette smoke can be seen in nearly every scene, as most of the characters smoke. Since the period is the 1970s, the authenticity is there, and a glamorous image is portrayed.

Smoking enhances the sophistication of the characters and adds to the tremendous cinematography.

Several scenes of simple dialogue crackle with authenticity and passion. In one of the best scenes, Fonny’s friend Daniel, a recent parolee, stays for dinner, and the friends talk while consuming beer and cigarettes.

The lengthy scene is poignant and tremendous with meaning. Daniel recounts his experience in prison and how black men are victims of the whims of white men and the terror involved in that. The scene is powerful in its thoughtfulness and a foreshadowing of Fonny’s impending trauma.

The supporting characters are stellar and add to the bravura acting troupe.

Regina King as Sharon Rivers gives an excellent performance when she bravely travels to Puerto Rico and confronts Fonny’s accuser, hoping to get her to modify her story. The scene is laden with emotion and honest dialogue.

The other notable actors are Colman Domingo and Teyonah Parris, who play Tish’s father and sister, respectively. Both do wonders in fleshing out the Rivers family as strong and kind people.

Jenkins is careful to add benevolent white characters to offset the other dastardly white characters. An example is the kindly old woman who comes to the rescue of Fonny and Tish and berates the cop.

The Jewish landlord who agrees to rent a flat to the pair is portrayed as decent and helpful, and finally, the young lawyer who takes Fonny’s case is earnest and understanding.

If Beale Street Could Talk (2018) continues talented director Barry Jenkins’s plunge into the depths of being one of the modern greats. With a beautifully visual and narrative film, he creates an experience sure to win more fans.

The ending is moving yet unsatisfying, as there are so many more miles to go in the race for prison justice. Adapting an important story of race and repression based on skin color is a powerful and detailed affair.

I cannot wait to see what Jenkins comes up with next.

Oscar Nominations: 1 win- Best Supporting Actress- Regina King (won), Best Adapted Screenplay, Best Original Score

Independent Spirit Award Nominations: 3 wins- Best Feature (won), Best Director- Barry Jenkins (won), Best Supporting Female- Regina King (won)

Mrs. Miniver-1942

Mrs. Miniver-1942

Director William Wyler

Starring Greer Garson, Walter Pidgeon

Scott’s Review #841

Reviewed December 13, 2018

Grade: A-

Released in 1942 amid the horrific World War II, Mrs. Miniver (1942) was a smash hit, winning over audiences concerned with the troubled and uncertain times.

Decades later, the film does not age as well as other similarly themed films, but still entertains and tells a good story with an important theme.

The film is nestled in the war drama genre with romance. The film won numerous Oscars the year of its release, including Best Picture and star Greer Garson won for Best Actress.

The story is told from the perspective of an affluent British family and the struggles they face to keep things together during growing peril. The focus primarily remains on an unassuming housewife, Kay Miniver (Garson).

The supporting players do much to flesh out the film with fantastic performances by Walter Pidgeon, Teresa Wright, and Henry Travers as Clem Miniver, Carol Beldon, and Mr. Ballard, respectively.

The direction by William Wyler is astounding and adds to the perfectly crafted ambiance and homey details.

The family lives a comfortable life in a whimsical village outside of London. Quite idealized, they own a large garden and a motorboat on the River Thames.

Along with Kay and Clem, their three children of varying ages and their housekeeper and cook reside with them. Besides the parents, the central couple is son Vin (Richard Ney) and the prominent Carol (Wright); the pair initially disagree on politics but finally fall madly in love.

As the soap opera-style family situations continue, the war grows closer and closer to their house.

As Mrs. Miniver progresses, Vin enlists in the army to assist with war efforts, a German Nazi breaks into the Miniver house, a central character dies, and bombs and planes crash.

Through it all, Kay remains stoic and takes the family through challenging situations, adding melodrama to the film. The woman’s journey and resolve to keep everything and everyone intact is at the core.

The film is mainly a family drama with the Minivers and the townspeople experiencing trials and tribulations. In this way, Mrs. Miniver risks being a one-trick pony, albeit an emotional and teary-eyed one.

The film’s rich characteristics and polished nature make it more than it ought to be, and the superlative cast, production values, and timely release undoubtedly made it what it was in 1942.

In present times, however, Mrs. Miniver seems diminished in importance and relevance with a sappy and overly sentimental feel, World War II in the distant past, and several other wars come and gone.

Wyler carefully packaged the film to hit every emotion, from the bombastic musical score to the proper English characters to the comic relief housekeeper.

The film is a giant Hollywood production, but perhaps a bit too perfect to age with any zest or reason to watch more than once.

The film might be better remembered for its strong female lead. Told from Kay’s perspective, it was unusual in 1942 for a movie (especially with a war theme) not to have the story from the male point of view. Still refreshing in 2018, this quality was downright groundbreaking at the time.

Kay stays strong and proud through the ravages of war that are closing in on her family with unbridled boldness and nary a simpering quality. Wright’s Carol is an early champion for strong, female-driven characters, and, in a more minor way, she is also a muscled female role model.

Mrs. Miniver (1942) is a well-crafted film of its time that displays lavish production values and strong characters worthy of admiration.

The film is a significant win for a glimpse of the 1940s, especially for fans of good, solid drama. There are no significant flaws to harp on, but the overall piece has not aged exceptionally well, and other similar films (Casablanca, 1942) are more memorable.

Oscar Nominations: 6 wins-Outstanding Motion Picture (won), Best Director-William Wyler (won), Best Actor-Walter Pidgeon, Best Actress-Greer Garson (won), Best Supporting Actor-Henry Travers, Best Supporting Actress-Teresa Wright (won), Dame May Whitty, Best Screenplay (won), Best Sound Recording, Best Cinematography, Black-and-White (won), Best Film Editing, Best Special Effects

Film Stars Don’t Die in Liverpool-2017

Film Stars Don’t Die in Liverpool-2017

Director Paul McGuigan

Starring Annette Bening, Jamie Bell

Scott’s Review #840

Reviewed December 11, 2018

Grade: B+

Film Stars Don’t Die in Liverpool (2017) showcases a compelling performance by stalwart actress Annette Bening as she plays faded, insecure Hollywood glamour girl Gloria Grahame.

The film focuses only on Grahame’s final two years of life as she battles breast cancer and begins a relationship with a much younger man, Peter Turner (Jamie Bell).

The film is a sad yet poignant dedication to the star, featuring enough performance gusto from its actors to compensate for a limited period. However, there is too much back-and-forth within the timeline, which complicates the film too much.

As a result, Film Stars Don’t Die in Liverpool is endearing but does not hit it out of the park.

The entire film takes place between 1979 and 1981. In 1979, actress Gloria Grahame, with her best days behind her, resides in a rented Liverpool room. She finds some success in local theater and befriends her much younger male neighbor.

The pair become romantic partners and experience trials and tribulations as the film teeters back and forth between Grahame’s ailing final days in 1981 to happier times in Los Angeles and New York. Gloria also befriends and finally lives with Peter’s parents, who care for her unflinchingly.

The story is enveloped in sadness but is not a downer either.

The film begins towards the end of Gloria’s illness, though the audience is not yet aware of her disease’s seriousness. Insisting she has painful gas, the tender relationship between the actress and Peter is explored.

The story begins in 1979 when Peter and Gloria first met. He is an aspiring actor who is unaware of who she is until a bartender makes the connection.

In this way, the film makes it clear that this is not a story about a young man seeking the fortunes of a presumably wealthy woman. I like this point, as the story is about romance, not money-grubbing.

Film Stars Don’t Die in Liverpool belongs to Bening.

The supporting roles are well cast, and they do not diminish Bell’s performance or Julie Walters’s nice turn as Peter’s mum.

However, Bening does wonders emulating Grahame’s mannerisms with an innocent, damsel-in-distress nature (mirroring the roles she made famously).

Bening was amazing at revealing the actress’s insecurities, fear of aging, and older appearance. During a fight, Peter cruelly refers to her as an “old lady,” and we see the comment strike a deadly blow as if she had been physically slapped.

Bening is so good at portraying a myriad of emotions throughout the film.

Another high point comes towards the end of the film. I love how the film connects Gloria and Peter’s earlier argument (and breakup) with a later sequence.

Peter assumes she is carrying on with another man when he learns she has lied about her whereabouts. The haunting reality is later revealed, changing the audience’s perception of the events.

This is good writing by the screenwriters.

To counter the above point, the constant back and forth from 1981 to 1979 and everywhere in between detracts from my enjoyment of the overall film.

Although the film spans only two years, it spends way too much time in multiple locations without enough explanation. Suddenly, G, Loria, and Peter are in Los Angeles having dinner at Gloria’s modest house, and they are in New York City in her lavish Park Avenue apartment.

The film would have been better suited with a straightforward approach chronicling events from 1979 to 1981 in sequence.

Another negative is the omission of any scenes before 1979.

The actress’s career thrived during the 1940s and 1950s, so capturing those earlier days would have been interesting. If the fear was that Bening was too old to pass for a younger Grahame, another actress could have been used for those scenes.

While a clip of the real Grahame winning the Oscar and a few clips of her starring in films are nice, way more time could have been spent on more stories.

Thanks to a brilliant performance by Bening and an emotional story that in large part succeeds, Film Stars Don’t Die in Liverpool (2017) is a win.

The film was not recognized during awards season as initially anticipated. This could have been due to the overly complex timeline, which produced a limiting feeling. The production and writing are excellent but lack greatness.

Casablanca-1943

Casablanca-1943

Director Michael Curtiz

Starring Humphrey Bogart, Ingrid Bergman

Scott’s Review #838

Reviewed December 7, 2018

Grade: A

Casablanca (1943) is a classic style Hollywood film made during a decade when big studio productions were all the rage. The film may very well be in the top ten creations of its day and a movie that nearly everyone has either seen or is aware of.

A grand romantic World War II drama released at the perfect time, the film contains legendary stars Humphrey Bogart and Ingrid Bergman. It is flawless in nearly every way, as a lavish production should be.

Bogart stars as Rick Blaine, an expatriate who owns a lavish nightclub in Casablanca, Morocco. The film takes place in December 1941, before the United States entered the vicious World War II.

His clientele ranges from French and German officials to refugees attempting to flee the country, fearful of being stuck in a foreign land. Mixed in with the melee of varied characters is Ilsa (Bergman), a former flame of Rick’s, who appears with a new husband, Victor, a Czech leader.

Ilsa begs Rick for help escaping the country, and their romance begins to blossom again.

Through scenes, we see Rick and Ilsa living perfectly in pre-war Paris. They happily co-exist, sharing a happy life, unaware of the conflict and secrets that will emerge in Casablanca two years later.

Victor is initially presumed dead, which leads to Ilsa’s initial freedom and romance with Rick.

Back in Casablanca, Rick has essential letters that will allow the holder to escape the city and be bound for safety in another country. While Ilsa is desperate for these letters, she is also madly in love with Rick, and vice versa, adding a strong romantic element to the film.

Supporting characters are mixed into the plot as desperation and impending doom interplay.

Casablanca is a film with things happening simultaneously, which is a significant part of its draw. From the apparent romance of Rick and Ilsa- the focal point of the story part of the draw are the sub-plots weaved within.

The nasty Nazi Major Heinrich Strasser encompasses the future Third Reich and the devastation this group would ultimately cause. A multitude of supporting characters and extras perfectly flesh out both the cast and the look and feel of the film.

The most interesting character is Rick.

Once idealistic and moral, he has changed, becoming cynical and broken. In this way, the film nearly becomes a character study. The audience sees the change in Rick and slowly realizes he has given the war the culprit.

The final sequence reveals Rick and Ilsa’s fate. Their doomed romance is assuredly no surprise, true to the message. An “unhappily ever after” result was rare in a big studio production and is a testament to the well-written story.

The featured piano number and Casablanca’s “theme song” is the lovely yet melancholy “As Time Goes By.” Beautifully played by Sam (Dooley Wilson), the house pianist and close friend of Rick, the number is instrumental to the plot and specifically to Rick and Ilsa’s romance.

The song is a painful memory of the once-idyllic life the pair shared.

The film’s timing, made in 1941 and released in 1943, is the key to its unrelenting success. American audiences undoubtedly found it identifiable, and the uncertainties of the impending war threatened their current freedoms.

Casablanca was wonderfully marketed in this way, and its compelling nature resonated. Audiences shared Rick’s conflict and “for the greater good” perspective.

Casablanca (1943) is a film that educates, entertains, and romances without exhibiting a shred of pretension. The crisp black-and-white filming and the unique use of light and shadows to reflect the characters’ thoughts make the film lovely and has a lofty budget.

Immersed in the richness are sadness and a timely message about a changed man, a failed romance, and the ravages of war that still resonate decades later.

Oscar Nominations: 3 wins-Outstanding Motion Picture (won), Best Director-Michael Curtiz (won), Best Actor-Humphrey Bogart, Best Supporting Actor-Claude Rains, Best Screenplay (won), Best Scoring of a Dramatic or Comedy Picture, Best Cinematography, Black-and-White, Best Film Editing

Slumdog Millionaire-2008

Slumdog Millionaire-2008

Director Danny Boyle

Starring Dev Patel

Scott’s Review #786

Reviewed July 11, 2018

Grade: A-

Winner of the 2008 Best Picture Oscar (as well as seven other Academy Awards), Slumdog Millionaire (2008) arguably was the “feel-good” film of the year.

While I am not sure all those awards are ultimately deserved, the film is nonetheless very good, offering a mix of rich culture, a young man overcoming enormous odds, and a love story.

Fans of the universal game show hit, Who Wants to Be a Millionaire, will be pleased.

Young Dev Patel (critically acclaimed for 2016’s Lion) stars as a poor young Indian man, Jamal Malik.

He is detained after being a contestant on Who Wants to Be a Millionaire after he came one question away from winning a million dollars.

The producers go on a commercial break, and Jamal is whisked away to custody as suspicions are aroused and the young man is accused of cheating. Since he is a “slumdog” and poorly educated, it is assumed that he could not know all the answers.

Jamal recounts, through flashbacks and experience, how he came to know all the correct answers.

Director Danny Boyle does a fantastic job. Slumdog Millionaire is edited in a fast-paced fashion, and the camera angles are quick and stylized, making for an excellent flow.

The soundtrack to the film is very effective and enhances the plot. For example, the music is extremely diverse, featuring genres such as traditional Indian classical music, European house music, and American-style hip hop.

This is an ingenious way for Boyle to incorporate multiple cultures, and he therefore creates a rousing, crowd-pleasing experience.

Another successful aspect of the film is its use of knowledge and intelligence to tell a story.

As we experience Jamal’s difficult life, beginning as a five-year-old orphan, his unlikely success story and his adventures on the streets are intertwined with both life lessons and education.

The audience is learning important details about the world while Jamal is simultaneously.

The romantic love story featured in Slumdog Millionaire is also a highlight and extremely well-crafted. Heartbreakingly, Jamal, his older brother Salim, and the lovely Latika (later played by the gorgeous Freida Pinto) are on the run when Latika vanishes.

Her disappearance and later reappearance are vital aspects to the heart of the film, and Patel and Pinto make a handsome and highly likable couple. Their reconciliation is heartfelt and beautiful, and gives the film a nice emotional investment.

The incorporation of a relevant and acclaimed game show into the story is wonderful, though hopefully, as the years go by, the film does not suffer from a dated feel if and when Who Wants to Be a Millionaire is long forgotten, but alas, this is a risk, and only time will tell.

The glossy set and for American audiences, the Indian-style version of the game show is great fun, as are the Indian locales, which visually dazzle.

A slight detraction of Slumdog Millionaire is that the film is unquestionably uplifting and light-hearted. Even though the characters face peril and dangerous experiences, the film “feels” safe.

So much so that qualities such as slick and mainstream resound.

Don’t get me wrong, the film is genuine and has heart and soul, but just slightly too cheery. Of course, since the film is well-made and the story and acting are great, this can easily be overlooked.

Slumdog Millionaire (2008) is a wonderful piece of work and, quite simply, a film that many people will champion. All of the elements are perfectly in place, which is a main selling point and a prime reason for the film’s many accolades.

The romance and adventure pieces are the best parts, with a quick flow and lots of fun, educational tools utilized.

The film is a nice pleasure to experience.

Oscar Nominations: 8 wins-Best Picture (won), Best Director-Danny Boyle (won), Best Adapted Screenplay (won), Best Original Score (won), Best Original Song-“Jai Ho”, “O Saya”(won), Best Sound Editing, Best Sound Mixing (won), Best Cinematography (won), Best Film Editing (won)

That Hamilton Woman-1941

That Hamilton Woman-1941

Director Alexander Korda

Starring Laurence Olivier, Vivien Leigh 

Scott’s Review #779

Reviewed June 27, 2018

Grade: B+

That Hamilton Woman (1941) is an obscure, black, and white gem that stars legendary actors and real-life couple Vivien Leigh and Laurence Olivier.

Providing a story of an old-fashioned style romance, war battles, and dazzling cinematography, the film succeeds as a classic film that should be better remembered than it is.

The overall theme here is a tragic love story with a sad ending.

One of the best aspects of That Hamilton Woman is witnessing the super-couple team of Leigh and Olivier act opposite one another. The actor’s talents are reason enough, but it makes a fascinating viewing experience.

The curiosity of the pairing of big stars in their heyday is a delight and highly appealing, and both actors do not disappoint. One wonders whether they were acting or otherwise enjoying the experience.

Lady Hamilton begins with a jarring scene in which the title character, Emma Lady Hamilton (Vivien Leigh), is thrown into debtor’s prison after stealing booze in France.

The rest of the story is told via flashbacks as she regales her fellow prisoners with how she ended up in her current state. Her former life starkly contrasts Emma’s appearance as a young woman with hope, promise, and riches.

It is hard to imagine how her life turned out so severely, which gives the film quality of intense intrigue.

The film then has a “riches to rags” element as the story is reversed. Full of energy, British Emma moves with her mother to the Kingdom of Naples, where she marries the affluent (and much older) Sir William Hamilton (Alan Mowbray), presumably for his money.

When handsome Admiral Horatio Nelson (Olivier) appears on the scene, the pair fall madly in love. They face tremendous hurdles, however, as the war rages on and each is unfaithful to their respective spouses.

Since the film was made scarcely two years after the epic romance Gone with the Wind (1939), one cannot help but compare Leigh’s portrayal of Emma to Scarlett O’Hara.

Emma comes across as a British version of the southern lass, especially as she is clad in gorgeous gowns or romancing men.

However, as the film develops, she becomes a much more sympathetic character and certainly less of a vixen. Still, there are plenty of similarities for viewers to draw from.

The role of Lady Frances Nelson (Gladys Cooper) is completely one-note, so the rooting value is never doubted. The film intends for the audience to be in the corner of Emma and Horatio, and that said, Cooper does a fantastic job of making her character completely unlikeable. Her icy, vengeful spirit perfectly complements the sympathetic lead characters. The fact that Horatio and Emma are adulterers, especially for the year the film was made, is not fully explored.

To be critical, the video quality is not the greatest, presumably because the film is old. If the film had been in color, the gorgeous Italian landscapes and Leigh’s lovely costumes would have appeared even more lavish and picturesque.

However, due to the film’s age, not much can be done about it unless it is decided to repackage the disc or make it a Blu-ray offering.

Still, the film frequently features southern Italy’s luminous mountains and lush oceans, which is a real treat.

Purely a showcase for newlyweds Olivier and Leigh to dish their real-life romance for mainstream audiences, That Hamilton Woman (1941) must have been a big deal at the release.

While suffering from lackluster film quality, the story is quite hearty, featuring romantic scenes, loud, bombastic battle scenes, and a bit of British and Italian history.

Sadly, this film is largely forgotten, but it is a good watch for fans of the legendary stars.

Oscar Nominations: 1 win-Best Sound Recording (won), Best Art Direction-Interior Decoration, Black-and-White, Best Cinematography, Black-and-White, Best Special Effects

God’s Own Country-2017

God’s Own Country-2017

Director Francis Lee

Starring Josh O’Connor, Alec Secareanu

Scott’s Review #773

Reviewed June 13, 2018

Grade: B+

God’s Own Country (2017) is a British, romantic, LGBT-themed drama directed by Francis Lee, making his directorial film debut.

The setting is farming land in the Yorkshire (northern England) territory, making the film quite lovely to watch, and the pace is slow. Lee does not rush the story’s pace either, so it mirrors the slow life that farmers must endure.

The film is somewhat autobiographical of Lee’s own life.

The connection and chemistry between the two leads are palpable, and the love story is endearing. It is awe-inspiring to see two cultures come together and merge as one.

The film is a nice watch and an above-average story, making it worthy of LGBT audiences worldwide. Those who believe in true love and find their soulmate will be deeply satisfied.

Twenty-something Johnny (Josh O’Connor) lives a dull existence on his father’s farm in remote Yorkshire, England. His grandmother (Gemma Jones) also lives there, and due to his father’s recent stroke, the farm’s success is in question. Johnny is depressed, drinking regularly, and engaging in sexual encounters with men.

Romanian migrant worker Gheorghe (Alec Secareanu) is hired to help, and the two young men eventually fall in love. After some ups and downs in their relationship, they decide to live on the farm together and presumably live happily ever after.

God’s Own Country is a rich story of romance, and the only real obstacles that Johnny and Gheorghe face are internal struggles.

In a unique fashion for LGBT films, neither of the men are necessarily unhappy with their sexual identities, nor do they face hurdles by other characters because of their sexuality. Gheorghe faces harassment because he is Romanian and deemed an “outsider”.

Besides Johnny’s grandmother and perhaps his father, no characters seem aware that the men are a couple.

The cinematography is gorgeous and a perfect backdrop for the love story. The farm is lush with spacious green rolling hills for miles and miles.

The family raises lamb and cattle, and more than one scene features a beautiful birth and the nuzzling of the parent to the newborn baby. Sadly, one birth is also a breach, which is tough to watch.

The themes of life and birth perhaps mirror the feelings and emotions that Gheorghe and Johnny experience- new love.

Throughout God’s Own Country, I frequently drew comparisons to arguably the most mainstream and revolutionary film in LGBT history- that of 2005’s Brokeback Mountain.

Both films feature similar elements of animals, farming, and the outdoors. Additionally, commonalities like loneliness and loss are heavily featured. Finally, the rough-and-tumble, machismo-fueled wrestling scenes that result in rough sex between the men are used in both Brokeback Mountain and God’s Own Country.

Both films could be companion pieces.

The film does not delve too much into the back story of the main characters; at least, I did not catch many mentions. Admittedly, viewing the movie on DVD with no closed captioning or subtitle capability made capturing all of the dialogue difficult.

Especially with English and cockney accents, this was made doubly challenging. Regardless, both men are lonely, even despondent, but why? What happened to Johnny’s mother? Where are Gheorghe’s parents or his family?

Upstart Francis Lee carves a quiet, thoughtful, yet compelling story of unexpected love that develops between two lonely men in a remote area of the United Kingdom.

God’s Own Country (2017) paints a nearly perfect experience, slow, yes, but featuring exceptional acting from both leads and the two supporting turns.

The film is recommended for those seeking a poignant and fulfilling love story.

Vanity Fair-2004

Vanity Fair-2004

Director Mira Nair

Starring Reese Witherspoon

Scott’s Review #772

Reviewed June 12, 2018

Grade: B

An adaptation of the classic 1848 novel by William Makepeace Thackeray, Vanity Fair (2004) softens the traditionally unlikable, roguish character of Becky Sharp quite a bit.

This proves not to be the smartest move as the character, now more of a heroine, is watered down and forever changed, as is this film adaptation.

Reese Witherspoon (Becky) drew harsh criticism for her starring turn, but I do not think she is so bad, and the costumes and set designs are wonderful and quite the highlight of the resulting period piece.

In 1802 England, we meet Becky Sharp, a young woman who has just graduated from a School for Girls and been sent to work as a governess.

Because her father, a talented painter, is impoverished, Becky is cast aside as lower-class and deemed undesirable by anyone in the upper class, the men she is most interested in.

Despite her reputation as a tart, Becky aspires to marry rich and frequently gets into trouble with her shenanigans and smart tongue while romance blooms with the handsome Rawdon Crawley (Purefoy).

The story is supposed to encompass Becky’s life from approximately age eighteen through her mid-thirties (though Witherspoon never appears to age) and displays her trials and tribulations, her loves and losses through the years.

We follow her from rural England to London and Belgium, eventually residing in Germany, reduced to working in a casino, where the film concludes.

The film is a treat, as it features various countries as they appeared in the nineteenth century and the wars and battles of the period, making for an interesting history lesson.

The main appeal should be Becky Thatcher, since the film revolves around her, and numerous criticisms were leveled, accusing the film of casting Reese Witherspoon in the important and demanding role based on her star power at the time.

In 2004, Witherspoon was experiencing enormous film success after 2001’s Legally Blonde and 2002’s Sweet Home Alabama- admittedly fluff films- but securing her box office power nonetheless.

These films undoubtedly led to her being cast in the pivotal role, but I thought the star was perfectly adequate and gave Becky appropriate humor and zest.

Based on Witherspoon’s “girl next door” persona and the fact that she looks like a good character, it’s perplexing to cast her if filmmakers want to be true to the character.

Witherspoon was delicious in 1999’s Election as villainous Tracy Flick, a role of a lifetime. But that is the exception and not the standard.

But I digress- the bottom line is that while she is a capable actress, she does not give the gritty performance that many were expecting to be true to the character in the novel.

The rest of Vanity Fair is just mediocre as far as the story goes.

While Becky’s antics are both humorous and dramatic, her rooting value in the romance department does not come across in the 2004 film; there is not enough chemistry between the leads to warrant much support.

Opinions abound that other incarnations of Vanity Fair are far superior and more compelling than this film is, but I have yet to see any.

Compliments must be reaped on the costume department and the art direction- both are superior. Such threats are the lavish and colorful costumes and gowns that mark the time.

From the classic-style hats and highfalutin dresses featured in ball after ball, this aspect is nearly enough to recommend a watch over the dull story and, immeasurably, the highlight of the entire film.

Vanity Fair (2004) is considered a messy travesty to those well-read enough to have turned the pages of the classic novel.

Since I have not yet read the book, perhaps I enjoyed the film slightly more than I should have, but alas, I did not find the casting of Witherspoon as Becky, nor the overall product, to be drivel, as many did.

I recommend the film for the gorgeous visual treats if nothing else.

Shelter-2007

Shelter-2007

Director Jonah Markowitz

Starring Trevor Wright, Brad Rowe

Scott’s Review #758

Reviewed May 16, 2018

Grade: B+

By the mid-2000s, independent LGBT films were coming fast and furious as the genre was still relatively new and ripe for the picking with good ideas.

With Shelter (2007), we have a sweet film that focuses on the new romance between two young men, one of whom is coming to terms with his sexuality.

The lead characters are not gay stereotypes and could easily pass for straight men, a characteristic impressive in LGBT films- and other mainstream films for that matter.

Rather than focusing on the discrimination the characters may face or on obstacles from other characters (family and friends), the film wisely makes the story a character study of the demons one man wrestles with while “coming out”.

The small film is written intelligently, save for one supporting character’s plot-driven decision.

Also, in the modern age, we are beginning to see a bevy of similarly themed films emerge from the LGBT community, and Shelter offers nothing we have not seen before.

Set in sunny southern California, our main protagonist is Zach (Trevor Wright), an aspiring artist in his early twenties.

The ultimate “good guy,” he is popular with friends and girls and frequently babysits his five-year-old nephew Cody while his sister parties and has one-night stands.

When Zach meets his best friend’s older brother, Shaun (Brad Rowe), the pair fall in love as Zach wrestles with his sexuality and conflicts with his plans.

Zach’s sexual and family struggles are the main themes of the film.

Shelter (not sure I get the title’s meaning) is a solid slice-of-life story.

Zach initially dates a pretty girl, Tori, who is blonde, wholesome, and a girl-next-door type. This is done intentionally to show that Tori is a girl any young straight man would be interested in.

We never see Zach show interest in any men other than Shaun, so the film leans towards a solid romantic drama once the fellas get together.

Still, we see Zach’s internal struggles and his acceptance of himself for who he is play out.

Actor Wright and director Jonah Markowitz capture this successfully.

Shaun, arguably second fiddle to Zach, is a character that I feel is very well written. Avoiding negative stereotypes, Shaun is handsome, masculine, and charismatic.

Completely confident and exuding great poise, he is a character that any gay male should look up to. He is openly gay yet “one of the guys” as he should be.

He immediately connects with Cody, becoming a father or a cool surrogate-uncle figure for the lad. A quick concern of Zach’s sister, Jeanne, about having the boy around a gay man is trivialized in a quick form.

Another positive aspect of the film is the multiple scenes that show Zach, Shaun, and Cody as a happy family, and how normal that is. Examples of this are frolicking around the beach, playing football, or engaging in horseplay.

A quiet dinner of barbecue steaks and red wine for the men and macaroni and cheese for Cody elicits images of a connected family unit, despite some in society still poo-pooing this idea.

The film presents the connectivity as normal.

A tiny flaw in the character of Jeanne shows her willingness (almost eagerness) to leave Cody (and her ailing father) behind when she decides to take off to Oregon with her brand new boyfriend. This point seems rushed and out of character.

While a party girl with a crappy job at a grocery store, Jeanne exhibited heart and was portrayed as sympathetic and caring throughout the film. Surprisingly and unrealistically to me is that she would give up her life.

A paltry excuse of “Oregon not allowing kids” was left unclear and unexplained.

A part coming-of-age story, part coming-out story, Shelter (2007) is an example of a little film that could with an appreciation of independent cinema.

The film tells a nice story about one man’s journey of self-discovery and the people he surrounds himself with. With impressive California oceanfront and working-class principles as a backdrop, the film has a calming texture and weaves a solid viewing experience.

Phantom Thread-2017

Phantom Thread-2017

Director Paul Thomas Anderson

Starring Daniel Day-Lewis, Vicky Krieps, Lesley Manville

Scott’s Review #722

Reviewed January 31, 2018

Grade: A

Phantom Thread is a 2017 gem that should ideally be studied in film schools and remembered for decades to come, or at the very least discussed and dissected among those fortunate enough to see it currently.

Set in England during the 1950s and centering on the dress-making industry, the film mixes romance with a bizarre psychological element that leaves the viewer breathless as the final act comes to a dramatic and startling conclusion.

Daniel Day-Lewis brilliantly portrays Reynolds Woodcock, an esteemed and famous dressmaker who lived and worked in London in the 1950s.

He creates lavish dresses for the members of high society, including the wedding gown for the famous Belgian princess. Masterful at his work, he is also controlling and demanding, requiring plenty of support and attention from his equally controlling sister, Cyril (Lesley Manville).

When he meets Alma Elson, a waitress from a countryside resort, the pair fall into a relationship. She acts as his assistant, muse, and lover. Complexities develop between Reynolds, Alma, and Cyril as the plot progresses in cerebral and nail-biting fashion.

The film is ravishing and a feast for the eyes if only for the classic costumes alone.  Each dress that Reynolds creates is exceptional and at the height of glamour. His domineering nature only makes this realistic as perfection is his modus operandi and his dresses are evidence of this.

In one particularly fantastic sequence, Reynolds begrudgingly creates a dress for the boozy Barbara Rose, a rich and mature woman who promptly falls asleep drunk at her wedding and soils the garment.

A livid Reynolds, along with Alma, strips Barbara of the dress, rather than see her sleep in and tarnish it.

However, the main draw to the film is the excellent, intricate main plot involving Reynolds, Cyril, and Alma.

This weaving of personalities and their nuances must be attributed to the fabulous direction of Paul Thomas Anderson,  known for edgy, dark films such as 1997’s Boogie Nights and 1999’s Magnolia.

He comes up with a masterpiece in Phantom Thread.

The three principal characters are pretty unlikeable and the viewer’s allegiances may change throughout the tale. Appearing to be the innocent, debutante character of the film, the character of Alma will be surprised, especially in the film’s final act.

A successful nuance is the scenes involving characters breaking bread with others as events unfold over Danishes, omelets, and crisp asparagus. Sometimes the banter involves discussions and debates about the preparation of the food.

This characteristic is a dream for any foodie and the meals aid in the progression of the plot.

Earlier in the film, Alma is scolded by a maid for nearly picking poisonous mushrooms, which later becomes a major clue and part of the film’s conclusion.

During a pivotal scene between Reynolds and Alma, she prepares a delicious mushroom omelet for her love as motivations, secrets, and desires surface.

The grand twist that Anderson reveals at the end of the film will only leave the viewer open-mouthed and quickly reviewing the events and circumstances of the entire movie.

Anderson’s close-up scenes are magical, and each actor is allowed to be very expressive. The camerawork in several breakfast scenes—Alma and Cyril gazing at each other, revealing emotions that border between hatred and mutual respect—is effectively done.

Manville, in particular, does so much with her blue eyes as she sips coffee and peers over her cup with venomous indignation at her foe.

How splendid is the comparison of Cyril to the famous Hitchcock villainous Mrs. Danvers from the classic 1940 film in her cold and creepy mannerisms?

I hope that Phantom Thread will eventually be appreciated and analyzed as a cinematic work of art.

Deservedly honored with a 2017 Best Picture, Best Actor, Best Supporting Actress, Best Director, and Best Costume Academy Award nomination, the film is a lesson in excellent writing, bizarre angles, and essential effects.

Let’s hope that this film will be recognized as the great work it is.

Oscar Nominations: 1 win-Best Picture, Best Director-Paul Thomas Anderson, Best Actor-Daniel Day-Lewis, Best Supporting Actress-Lesley Manville, Best Original Score, Best Costume Design (won)

The Big Sick-2017

The Big Sick-2017

Director Michael Showalter

Starring Kumail Nanjiani, Zoe Kazan

Scott’s Review #720

Reviewed January 29, 2018

Grade: B+

The Big Sick, a 2017 independent “dramedy” film, takes what could be a standard premise and turns it upside down, offering a fresh perspective on a familiar tale about a prospering relationship.

The screenplay is the standout as the writing is intelligent and crisp. Thanks to exceptional acting by all four principal characters, The Big Sick is a success and worth watching.

The story follows an interracial couple, Emily and Kumail, played by Zoe Kazan and Kumail Nanjiani, who have recently started casually dating. Kumail is a standup comic living in Chicago who meets the flirtatious Emily after a club performance one night.

They share a one-night stand and agree never to see one another again.

As the smitten pair break their promise and form a romance, a tragedy occurs, landing Emily in a coma.

Kumail must handle Emily’s parents, Beth (Holly Hunter) and Terry (Ray Romano), who are angry with Kumail for misleading Emily and not telling her about his strict Muslim parent’s intentions of marrying him off by arranged marriage.

The screenplay (nominated for a 2017 Oscar nomination) is loosely based on the relationship between actor/writer Nanjiani (who stars), and Emily Gordon (who co-wrote the screenplay).

Especially since Nanjiani stars, the film is sincere and authentic, as if Nanjiani is living the role.

The chemistry between Nanjiani and Kazan during their many scenes at the start is a significant plus to the film. Before the drama takes off, the audience will become fully invested in the pair as a couple.

Whether the couple flirts as Kumail drives Emily home or fights when Emily learns about his Muslim culture’s belief in arranged marriage, the couple has a tremendous connection, and it shows.

The story fabric takes an interesting turn about midway through when Emily is stricken with a debilitating illness.

A medically induced coma is needed, as Kumail is forced to pretend to be her husband, this opens up many moral and legal ramifications that the film chooses essentially to ignore, instead of dealing with the relationships between Kumail and Emily’s distraught parents.

Hunter and Romano are excellent in the parent roles. Hunter is the more showy of the two and has more meat, while Romano holds his own and powers a vital comedy club scene in which he defends his wife from a callous heckler.

Admittedly, the film decides to go the “happily ever after” route, this is hardly a surprise given that Judd Apatow is the producer.

Remember, this is the same guy who produced safe films such as Superbad (2007) and Anchorman 2 (2013). Still, the story within The Big Sick is an enjoyable, character-driven ride, if not unpredictable.

A darker-tinged affair might have set this film over the top as it contains many other credible film qualities.

The addition of comic talent in the supporting roles of Kumail’s comedy club buddies adds a good balance and nicely counterbalances the drama so that it does not become too dour.

Much of the film involves Emily in a coma, so comic talent such as SNL’s Aidy Bryant and Comedy Central’s Kurt Braunohler are suitable ads.

I enjoyed the inclusion of the traditional Pakistani custom of arranged marriages, but at times this seems played for laughs rather than being a significant obstacle to the couple.

Kumail’s controlling mother parades one young Pakistani girl after another in front of her son as a way of encouraging him to select one of them. Kumail’s traditional family is played as stereotypes and the lighthearted foils of the film.

The Big Sick (2017) succeeds with crisp, witty dialogue and a solid story that nicely complements the intended comedy.

A few too many stereotypes and goofiness keep the action light even when compared to the more serious parts—great acting all around.

Oscar Nominations: Best Original Screenplay

Independent Spirit Award Nominations: 1 win-Best Supporting Female-Holly Hunter, Best First Screenplay (won)

The Shape of Water-2017

The Shape of Water-2017

Director Guillermo del Toro

Starring Sally Hawkins, Richard Jenkins, Michael Shannon

Scott’s Review #705

Reviewed December 16, 2017

Grade: A

Director Guillermo del Toro created a lovely Beauty and the Beast-style film, The Shape of Water (2017). It is gorgeous to look at, and the story is intelligent and sweet to experience.

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

Vanessa Taylor co-wrote the story, giving it a needed female perspective to perfectly balance the traditional male machinations.

The setting is Baltimore, Maryland, in the early 1960s. The Cold War is ongoing, pitting the United States and the Soviet Union against each other.

Both sides are mistrustful of the other.

Kindly and mute, Elisa Esposito (Hawkins) is a curious and whimsical young woman who works as a cleaning lady at an Aerospace Research Center.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Each character is written exceptionally well and has a storyline rather than simply supporting Hawkins’s character.

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

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

The film is a gorgeous and lovely experience with a magical element. The opening and closing sequences, shot underwater, resound in beauty as objects float along in a dreamy way.

The narrator (Jenkins) takes us on a journey to explain the events of the story.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Oscar Nominations: 4 wins-Best Picture (won), Best Director-Guillermo del Toro (won), Best Actress-Sally Hawkins, Best Supporting Actor-Richard Jenkins, Best Supporting Actress-Octavia Spencer, Best Original Screenplay, Best Original Score (won), Best Sound Editing, Best Sound Mixing, Best Production Design (won), Best Cinematography, Best Costume Design, Best Film Editing

A Room with a View-1986

A Room with a View-1986

Director James Ivory

Starring Helena Bonham Carter, Julian Sands

Scott’s Review #695

Reviewed November 3, 2017

Grade: B+

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

The foursome shares common elements, such as the vast English countryside and class distinctions, which lead to heartaches and passion.

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

The film is a period drama mixed with lots of authentic, unforced good humor, and at its core is a solid romantic drama, though, compared with the aforementioned other films, it is not quite on par.

It is still an entertaining watch, given the dismal year of cinema circa 1986.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Smith injects vigor and comic wit into her character, as Charlotte seemingly makes one blunder after another, using her self-deprecating manner to her advantage to humorously manipulate other characters into doing things her way.

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

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

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

A coincidence? I think not. As the trio of rascals comes upon the properly dressed girls on the path, hilarity ensues.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Black Orpheus-1959

Black Orpheus-1959

Director Marcel Camus

Starring Breno Mello, Marpessa Dawn

Scott’s Review #689

Reviewed October 8, 2017

Grade: A

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

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

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

The setting is key to the film as the beauty and merriment are mixed with loss and tragedy.

Loads of exterior shots of Rio de Janeiro flesh out the film with many shots high atop a hill in a quaint village where all of the characters live, most in very close proximity to each other.

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

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

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

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

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

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

The tragic conclusion, culminating in an incredible chase scene in Orpheus’s trolley station, is fantastic. The morbid ending, based on the legendary Greek tale, is unsurprising.

However, the Romeo and Juliet comparisons are still heartbreaking and challenging to experience, most notably the final scene atop a cliff.

The scene is shocking and brutal as the lovelorn couple topples down a hill together at the hands of another central character.

However, as they are intertwined in each other’s arms, the scene is also gorgeous and a confirmation of true love and artistic beauty.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

My Cousin Rachel-2017

My Cousin Rachel-2017

Director Roger Michell

Starring Rachel Weisz, Sam Claflin

Scott’s Review #685

Reviewed September 25, 2017

Grade: B-

My Cousin Rachel (2017) has the advantage of providing wonderful, scenic locales in Florence, Italy, and lovely scenes filmed around England, which make the film a joy to watch from a cinematic perspective.

The acting, especially by seasoned veteran Rachel Weisz,  is also stellar and noteworthy.

The plot, however, is a big negative to the film as My Cousin Rachel suffers from weak dramatic storytelling, an anti-climactic conclusion, and missed opportunities with the plot.

The film is based on Daphne du Maurier’s 1951 novel of the same name. I have yet to read the book, but I am certain the film does it no justice. The overall tone of the film contains little mystique, to say nothing of lacking any sort of haunting elements as one might expect to receive with titillating anticipation.

The story begins well enough as, through narration, we learn that a young man named Philip, having been orphaned as a child and raised by his older cousin, Ambrose, returns home from school to his childhood home in lavish Cornwall.

Through a letter, he learns that Ambrose has married his widowed cousin, Rachel, and has moved to Florence. He also cryptically writes that he is in fear for his life and suspects Rachel of poisoning him.

The main plot starts after Philip finally meets Rachel and astonishingly falls madly in love with her.

To be fair, the film is shot beautifully and glimmers with interesting camera angles. In a few hallucination scenes, the filmmaker uses a blurry, almost magical film-making style.

The aforementioned locales give My Cousin Rachel a sophisticated, graceful look. On the negative side of this filming evaluation, the lighting is much too bright, appearing more like an episode of the PBS series Downton Abbey rather than the mysterious, cryptic film that My Cousin Rachel is promoted as.

The best thing about the film is the outstanding acting performance by Rachel Weisz as the title character, Rachel. While not played quite as mysterious, Weisz envelopes her character with a passionate, earnest quality that sells the character as enchanting.

With a winning smile and a polite, dutiful manner, Rachel is tough to imagine as a murderess, which helps the lackluster plot just a bit. She happily makes a “special” tea or performs other household tasks with cheerful, uniform pizzazz.

Without Weisz in the role, I shudder to think how bleak the result might have been.

Early on in the story, Philip’s wealthy family, the Kendalls, are surprised that Ambrose married, as he was never known to be in or enjoy the company of women. It also must be noted that in flashbacks, Ambrose is portrayed as somewhat effeminate or, at most, less than manly.

This seems a blatant attempt to question the character’s sexuality, yet the film chooses never to pursue this topic again. I know how the novel handled this plot item, but it seems like a wasted opportunity.

Chemistry, or lack thereof, is also an issue with My Cousin Rachel. No connection between Weisz and Claflin exists throughout, nor is there any between either character and Philip’s intended love interest, Louise Kendall, played by Holliday Grainger.

The actress is acceptable in a role given little meat or substance.

Uneven at best, My Cousin Rachel is a beautiful-looking period piece, but it is mostly just mediocre filmmaking. The ending is quite sudden and definitively answers none of the main plot questions.

Released in 2017, the film will likely be forgotten by 2018.

Latter Days-2003

Latter Days-2003

Director C. Jay Cox

Starring Steve Sandvoss, Wes Ramsey

Scott’s Review #679

Reviewed September 7, 2017

Grade: B

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

The film was popular among film festivalgoers, yet critically, it received only mixed reviews

There are both positives and negatives to this film.

When rigid Mormon innocence meets plastic Los Angeles Playboy, anything is bound to happen as a surprisingly sweet romance develops between them.

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

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

Young Mormon missionary, Aaron Davis, just out of Idaho, is sent to Los Angeles with three fellow missionaries to spread the word of faith.

Soon, he meets an openly gay waiter, Christian, promiscuous, brazen, and proud of it.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Also positive is the casting of Jacqueline Bisset as the motherly Lila.

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

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

In contrast to Bisset’s character, the fine casting of Mary Kay Place as Gladys, Aaron’s rigid mother, stands out.

Hoping to “pray the gay away”, she and her husband banish Aaron to a garish rehabilitation facility to turn him straight after a suicide attempt.

The character does show unconditional love for her son, but refuses to accept his sexual preferences.

There is no question that director C. Jay Cox slants the film in a clear direction, portraying the Mormon characters as stodgy and bland.

Latter Days slips when the focus is on the other supporting characters.

I tend to champion large casts and neat, small roles, but Christian’s friends are largely self-centered, bantering about either their sexual escapades or their career aspirations as they wait tables, hoping to get a big break.

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

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

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

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

All in all, a decent effort.

The Lobster-2016

The Lobster-2016

Director Yorgos Lanthimos

Starring Colin Farrell, Rachel Weisz

Scott’s Review #635

Reviewed April 20, 2017

Grade: A-

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Oscar Nominations: Best Original Screenplay

Holding the Man-2015

Holding the Man-2015

Director Neil Armfield

Starring Ryan Corr, Craig Stott

Scott’s Review #612

Reviewed January 24, 2016

Grade: B+

Holding the Man (2015) is a brave love story centering on two young men and spanning fifteen years as the men begin as high school sweethearts and progress into adulthood and sadly both contract AIDS.

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

The film is tender and poignant, but despite these characteristics, I felt something with more vigor was missing. I did not have the exact emotional reaction I thought I might have.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

I did enjoy how the film does not focus too much on the opposition by John’s father (Anthony LaPaglia). He would wish his son’s sexuality differently but is more concerned with how his son’s relationship with a male looks to Dad’s friends and neighbors.

The deeper story was the love between the men who knew no barriers.

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

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

Holding the Man (2015) is a nice film, but does not have the power that other LGBT films in recent decades had. Brokeback Mountain (2006) immediately comes to mind as a similar film, but one that was more emotional and engaged me much more.

An honest effort, though.

Closer-2004

Closer-2004

Director Mike Nichols

Starring Julia Roberts, Jude Law, Natalie Portman

Scott’s Review #605

Reviewed January 11, 2017

Grade: B+

Closer (2004) is a very odd, offbeat sort of film, yet it is strangely fascinating and reels you in as the story unfolds and more is revealed.

One will become engrossed in the characters as the film is rich in nuanced character development.

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

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

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

Purely a character study, the film shows many different emotions in each, which is its strength.

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

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

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

The Reader-2008

The Reader-2008

Director Stephen Daldry

Starring Kate Winslet

Scott’s Review #603

Reviewed January 11, 2017

Grade: A

The Reader (2008) is by far my favorite of all of Kate Winslet’s film roles-and that is saying something!

It is her most challenging and provocative to date and will ruffle some feathers for sure based on the subject matter of the story.

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

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

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

He teaches her to read and other things, and they become inseparable. When she leaves town one day, the boy is devastated.

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

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

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

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

An excellent film.

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

Broadcast News-1987

Broadcast News-1987

Director James L. Brooks

Starring William Hurt, Albert Brooks, Holly Hunter

Scott’s Review #602

Reviewed January 11, 2017

Grade: B

Broadcast News is a 1987 feature film that is admittedly an intelligently written romantic comedy.

It was rewarded with several Academy Award nominations, in what has been a bleak year for the film industry.

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

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

The principal characters are interesting enough, albeit safe.

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

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

The film explores the relationships between the characters.

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

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

Revolutionary Road-2008

Revolutionary Road-2008

Director Sam Mendes

Starring Leonardo DiCaprio, Kate Winslet

Scott’s Review #598

Reviewed January 10, 2017

Grade: A

Revolutionary Road (2008) is an outstanding film- what superior, human, raw acting by stars Leonardo DiCaprio and Kate Winslet.

The duo reunites in the film over ten years after the monstrous success of Titanic (1997).

The trailers might lead one to believe that this film is a romantic comedy or some love story- it is a love story, but a very real, dark one.

Both characters are flawed.

Set in affluent New England, somewhere in Connecticut to be precise, April and Frank seemingly have it all. He is a successful doctor, and she is the perfect housewife; they live a happy existence free of problems- or do they?

Slowly, the audience sees their lives spin out of control, and varying emotions between the pair emerge to the surface.

Great supporting turns by Kathy Bates and Michael Shannon as characters presenting roadblocks to April and Frank’s happiness.

If you are looking for a film with true, gritty, layered acting, this is it. Revolutionary Road (2008) is a much more complex film than the previews would allow you to think.

It shows the depth of DiCaprio’s and Winslet’s acting ability.

Some might feel it is a bit slow-moving, but the payoff is worth it.

Oscar Nominations: Best Supporting Actor-Michael Shannon, Best Art Direction, Best Costume Design

WALL-E-2008

WALL-E-2008

Director Andrew Stanton

Starring Various voices

Scott’s Review #594

Reviewed January 8, 2017

Grade: B+

After hearing so much buzz about WALL-E (2008), I decided to see for myself what all the fuss was about.

Disney-Pixar has created another fantastic film. Visually, it is a creative and intelligent experience that warrants the praise it has received.

They also do a lot with intricate graphics and animations.

In a futuristic world where humans have destroyed their environment and thereby abandoned planet Earth, the robot WALL-E is left to clean up the mess.

He then meets a fellow female robot named EVE, and the two develop an innocent, sweet relationship that is charming and authentic.

The humans in the film are portrayed as fat, lazy, incapable of intelligent thought, and mostly unable to move much since technology has trained them to be that way.

Sad.

The story itself is very sweet and touching, and sends a very important message about society and taking care of our environment.

Very enjoyable.

Oscar Nominations: 1 win-Best Original Screenplay, Best Animated Feature Film (won), Best Original Score, Best Original Song-“Down to Earth”, Best Sound Editing, Best Sound Mixing