Category Archives: 2016 Films

2016 Films, Anya Taylor-Joy, Betty Buckley, Bruce Willis, James McAvoy, M. Night Shyamalan, Thriller

Split-2016

October 18, 2018 scottmet99 Leave a comment

Split-2016

Director M. Night Shyamalan

Starring James McAvoy, Anya Taylor Joy

Scott’s Review #821

Reviewed October 18, 2018

Grade: B-

Split (2016) is the second part of a planned trilogy; the first is Unbreakable (2000), and the third is to debut in 2019.

This point confused me because I did not notice any correlation between the films until the final scene, which was unclear.

Split has its ups and downs, mainly because of James McAvoy’s spectacular performance, which is the highlight, but the film is sadly riddled with many plot holes and nonsense.

I do not predict the film will be remembered all too well.

Casey (Joy) is a withdrawn teenage girl with an abusive past at the hands of her uncle, who raised her after her father died. She, along with two other girls, is accosted by a man (McAvoy) who chloroforms them and takes them to a hidden basement.

The girls quickly learn that their abductor is Kevin Wendell Crumb, a man suffering from Dissociative Identity Disorder (DID).

His personality ranges from that of a nine-year-old child to that of an effeminate artist, a well-dressed woman, and Kevin.

The audience (but not the girls) learns that Kevin is in therapy under the care of Doctor Karen Fletcher (Betty Buckley), an established Philadelphia psychiatrist. Fletcher is aware of Kevin’s other personalities, including an additional personality deemed “The Beast.”

She assumes this is a fantasy superhero figure.

Karen slowly pieces together the frightening depth of Kevin’s disorder and must race against time to save the girls.

McAvoy, best known for his outstanding performances in The Last King of Scotland (2006) and Atonement (2007), is also a central figure in the X-Men film franchise (2011-2019). He knocks it out of the park.

What a challenging role (or roles!) for the handsome Scottish actor. He is as convincing as the stoic and confident Kevin and provides the perfect swagger as “Patricia” and “Dennis.” Finally, he plays nine-year-old “Hedwig” with childhood innocence and insecurities.

The casting of McAvoy is a treat and a success.

How lovely to see film and television stalwart Betty Buckley back in the game with a central film role. The actress is a legend in other genres, not to mention her achievements on stage in play after play.

Eagle-eyed horror fans will undoubtedly remember Buckley’s role as the sympathetic gym teacher in Carrie (1976). In Split, she portrays another benevolent character as she is concerned for her patient’s well-being, not realizing the sinister sides he keeps hidden. The role is perfect for the warm Buckley.

Written, co-produced, and directed by the acclaimed M. Night Shyamalan, Split is no masterpiece like The Sixth Sense (1999) or even on par with The Village (2004). Instead, the result is a peculiar and uneven effort- the fascination is with McAvoy’s twenty-three different personalities, granted we only see four or five of them.

The film misses the numerous backstory scenes of Casey and her uncle hunting in the woods. These scenes slow down the action and seem overly lengthy. She was abused and can now handle herself- we get it.

This point could have been achieved within one scene.

The relationship between the three girls is okay, but the story point of Casey being an outcast and different from the other two girls seems unnecessary and thrown in.

The final scene of Bruce Willis (as Dennis Dunn from Unbreakable) is a nice nod to the previous film but is lost on anyone who has not seen it since it premiered well over a decade ago.

More of a connection between the two stories should have been featured.

In addition to McAvoy’s impressive performance, a positive is that no male characters are designed to “save the day,” which is still typical of mainstream films.

The film’s heroes are Casey (a teenage girl) and Karen (a woman in her sixties). Despite all the story pieces not aligning, attempts to make Split a more progressive-minded film must be credited.

The film’s result is fair to middling. Split (2016) is not a great effort but a decent watch. The highlights are McAvoy, a worthy role for veteran Buckley, and some good tension and moments of good peril. The story is not the high point, and Shyamalan has made better films.

2016 Films, Andrew Neel, Ben Schnetzer, Drama, James Franco, Lowest Rated Films, Nick Jonas

Goat-2016

May 23, 2018 scottmet99 Leave a comment

Goat-2016

Director Andrew Neel

Starring Ben Schnetzer, Nick Jonas

Scott’s Review #762

Reviewed May 23, 2018

Grade: D

Goat (2016) is a film that made me angry for one hour and forty minutes. I deride it completely.

Incorporating outrageous and unnecessary scenes for no other reason than to offend, the film fails to achieve either a lesson learned or any central point.

I understand what the filmmakers were going for by portraying fraternities as evil and their members as monsters. Goat never provided logic, much character development, or any good intentions.

I was left disturbed by what I had just seen.

College student Brad Land (Ben Schnetzer) is viciously attacked by two peers following a party one summer night. As the police search for the assailants, Brad begins the fall semester at a college attended by his older brother Brett (Nick Jonas).

There, he decides to pledge a fraternity during “Hell week,” enduring one humiliation and degradation after another. When a fellow pledge dies following the fraternity’s abuse, someone rats the fraternity out, with Brad as the likely suspect.

Brad is an interesting study. The protagonist makes his first mistake by giving ominous-looking strangers a lift home. At this point, we feel sympathy for the character and should root for him throughout the film, but I didn’t.

As nasty as the fraternity brothers are, it is not until nearly the end that Brad ever stands up to any of them, and he oddly refuses to point the finger at his assailant despite being right in the police lineup.

I found the character all over the place and never knew his motivations.

Most other characters (including the victimized pledges) have little rooting value and are primarily one-dimensional “frat boys” written poorly.

The writers of the script do their best to make fraternity brothers look awful- they beat, berate, humiliate, and degrade not only the pledges, but they barely treat females or animals any better.

This isn’t comforting to witness since there is little point. The humiliation scenes continue as if we are watching the same scene repeatedly.

Ludicrous scenes of the guys drinking, acting belligerent, using anti-LGBT slurs, and taunting each other commenced almost from the get-go.

A ridiculous cameo by James Franco goes nowhere and makes little sense other than his character being a former frat boy the current members looked up to. If I had a nickel for every “bro,” “dude,” or “man” used in the film to show machismo, I’d be a rich man.

In the final segment, the film makes a feeble effort to humanize Brett, who is hot and cold towards his brother all along (this is never explained).

They also write a few of the frat boys as feeling sorry for the sudden heart attack suffered by one of the pledges, but this only fueled me with rage as unknown was whether they were genuine or wanted to save their asses (they caused his death!).

My vote goes for the latter.

The only prop I will give to Goat is that it is not a middling glossy Hollywood affair and goes for the jugular in its intensity and brutality.

But the point I thought the film was trying to make (that of a thought-provoking look at the problem of fraternities) only made me hate fraternities and develop a negative view of them.

From the despicable scenes where the frat feeds a poor goat chocolate laxatives and forces a blindfolded pledge to eat what’s thought to be excrement to the concussion they give a pledge before he succumbs to a heart attack, the film is not an easy watch.

Too many scenes feel overly hammered home and redundant, and the conclusion is unsatisfying. We are left with Brett and Brad gazing out at the spot where Brad was attacked, and this scene does nothing to wrap up the film.

From the onset, I squirmed uncomfortably during Goat and never felt connected to the film or any of the characters.

Perhaps Goat (2016) would have succeeded or appreciated more with more development and purpose, but the film failed me.

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

Bad Moms-2016

December 20, 2017 scottmet99 Leave a comment

Bad Moms-2016

Director Jon Lucas, Scott Moore

Starring Mila Kunis, Kristen Bell, Kathryn Hahn

Scott’s Review #706

Reviewed December 20, 2017

Grade: D+

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Why Him?-2016

December 6, 2017 scottmet99 Leave a comment

Why Him? -2016

Director John Hamburg

Starring John Franco, Bryan Cranston

Scott’s Review #704

Reviewed December 6, 2017

Grade: D

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

O.J.: Made in America-2016

October 8, 2017 scottmet99 Leave a comment

O.J.: Made in America-2016

Director Ezra Edelman

Starring Various

Scott’s Review #690

Reviewed October 8, 2017

Grade: A

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

2016 Films, German, Independent, Independent Comedy, International, International Comedy, Maren Ade, Peter Simonischek, Sandra Hüller

Toni Erdmann-2016

October 1, 2017 scottmet99 Leave a comment

Toni Erdmann-2016

Director Maren Ade

Starring Peter Simonischek, Sandra Hüller

Scott’s Review #686

Reviewed October 1, 2017

Grade: A-

Reaped with a slew of award nominations in 2017, mainly in the Foreign Language film categories, Toni Erdmann is a unique film that I must champion, but for its imagination and humanistic perspective alone.

It can be watched in segments—almost a miniseries—at two hours and forty-two minutes. The film is set in Bucharest, Romania, so viewers are treated to several exterior scenes of the bustling city and fascinating European culture.

However, the film is German and Austrian-produced.

Winfried Conradi (Peter Simonischek) is a hippie-type man in his sixties. Divorced and working as a music teacher, his dog suddenly dies, resulting in his decision to reconnect with his corporate, power-hungry daughter, Ines (Sandra Hüller). She is forging her career in business consulting and is currently on assignment in Bucharest.

Winfried insinuates himself into Ines’s busy life as she wants little to do with him or the petty practical jokes he continues to play on her.

Gradually, involving a few hysterical antics and embarrassing situations, father and daughter reunite and forge the loving relationship they once shared.

Toni Erdmann is unusual because one will not know what to expect from it or what direction it will go as we get to know and love the characters. We know that Ines is a driven career woman, busy beyond belief, with no time for her father.

Yet, in all of the scenes that Ines and Winfried share, due to fantastic and believable acting by the two leads (Simonischek/Hüller), there is an underlying love and appreciation for each other that comes across.

This chemistry made me root for the father-daughter reunion and reconnection.

When Winfried dons his garish wig and horrid false teeth and names himself “Toni Erdmann,” a series of hilarious scenes ensue. Winfried is noticed at essential corporate functions and dinners, and he follows Ines, too. He also attends a ladies’ dinner with Ines and her friends and explains to the women that he is in Bucharest for a funeral that a friend is having for his pet turtle.

Simonischek fills his character with earnestness and dry wit, making these scenes hilarious.

My favorite scene that will indeed be talked about for years to come is the “naked party” scene.

Not only is the scene comical, but it is also fraught with meaning as it is a turning point for the character of Ines. Hosting a team-building party for her birthday, the party is set to begin, except Ines cannot get her dress on, and her shoes do not match.

Frustrated, with a guest already at the door, Ines strips naked and decides to turn the party into a naked team-building experience.

Some guests are disgusted and leave. Others reluctantly agree to strip nude. It is when Ines sheds her clothes and her stodgy, rigid persona and begins to appreciate and enjoy life again, thanks to her father.

Toni Erdmann is a unique and unpredictable film by a female director (Maren Ade) with an interesting and strong perspective on the female psyche. She carves a thoughtful tale about a damaged father and daughter with characters to root for and realism.

The film is a fun, laugh-out-loud romp that goes into dramatic territory, careful to remain playful and not be too overwrought.

I enjoyed it tremendously.

Oscar Nominations: Best Foreign Language Film

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

2016 Films, Andy Powers, Eli Roth, Horror, Independent, Independent Horror, Jon Watts, Laura Allen, Peter Stormare

Clown-2016

September 16, 2017 scottmet99 Leave a comment

Clown-2016

Director Jon Watts

Starring Andy Powers, Laura Allen

Scott’s Review #681

Reviewed September 16, 2017

Grade: B-

As a fan of all things horror and with a robust appreciation for the genre, clowns in said genre are always a stroke of genius, and the 2016 film Clown establishes a creepy premise right off the bat.

After seeing the film, it was not until a few days later that the story began to marinate in my mind, and I gained a bit more appreciation than I had once the film had ended.

Clown is one hour and forty minutes long, but it reminds me of the mid-2000s Showtime horror anthology series Masters of Horror.

The film has a unique, creepy vibe, is also a highlight of the cherished series of yesteryear, and oddly plays out like a vignette.

The premise is creepy as the action kicks off.

When Kent McCoy (Andy Powers), a likable young father who works far too much maintaining his real estate business, is notified by his wife, Meg (Laura Allen), that the clown they hired to entertain at their son Jack’s birthday party has canceled, he is determined to save the day.

Kent discovers an old clown suit in the attic of one of his abandoned houses and dons the costume. The next day, Kent and Meg are startled when Kent cannot remove the costume, even when pliers, a hacksaw, and other horrid machinery are used on him.

The story then introduces a strange character named Herbert Karlsson (Peter Stormare), who informs Kent that the clown costume is not a costume but the hair and skin of an ancient demon from Northern Europe.

Kent realizes that the demon needs to feast on and devour children to survive, and he becomes ravenous and hungry. Karlsson attempts to kill Kent, revealing that the only way to destroy the beast is via beheading.

The clever and compelling part of the story is the mixture of clowns and children in peril, a recipe for success in most horror films.

The fact that Kent and Meg slowly begin the temptation to harm children is both shocking and compelling.

The McCoys are average, everyday folks, Meg even working as a nurse, so the likelihood of the pair harming kids on any other day is remote, but tested by a vicious demon and their son Jack in peril makes Clown work well.

My favorite sequence occurs during a birthday party at Chuck E. Cheese. While the kids play in a lavish and dark tunnel, the demon (Kent) is on the loose, causing havoc and eating two children.

When Meg drives an unwitting young girl home, she is conflicted and tempted to offer the girl to the demon as a sacrifice to hopefully save Kent.

The girl’s pleading is palpable.

The film is gruesome from a violent perspective and hesitates not to go where many horror films dare not to go, with the death and slaughter of young children.

One kid, in particular, is shown disemboweled. The kid is written as a bully and gets his comeuppance in grisly form.

Sad is the death of a lonely trailer park-type kid, only looking for a friend in Kent. Little does he know his short days are numbered.

As strong and measured as the story idea is, Clown does have some negatives. The film has an amateurish quality, not because it is independent. Instead, the style almost comes across as a student film.

Some of the acting is not great, specifically Laura Allen’s performance as Meg. The filmmakers might have been wiser to make this project more of an episodic venture instead of a full-length release.

Clowns, kids, and demons make a fun combination for horror, and the aptly named Clown is a solid B-movie effort in the glorious chambers of the cinematic horror genre.

With a few tweaks and zip-ups, Clown (2016) might have been an even more memorable film. It will not go down in history as a masterpiece, but it has the necessary elements for a good watch.

2016 Films, Adam Scott, Bradley Whitford, Chris Kelly, Comedy, Drama, Independent, Independent Comedy, Independent Drama, Jesse Plemons, June Squibb, LGBTQ+ Comedy, LGBTQ+ Films, Molly Shannon, Paul Dooley

Other People-2016

August 24, 2017 scottmet99 Leave a comment

Other People-2016

Director Chris Kelly

Starring Jesse Plemons, Molly Shannon

Scott’s Review #676

Reviewed August 24, 2017

Grade: B+

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Along with Joanne’s battle with cancer, a lovely story about David is included. A gay man, David has broken up with his boyfriend Paul, who previously lived together on the East Coast (though he still pretends to spare Joanne worry), and is returning to the West Coast.

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

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

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

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

This part of the story is unclear.

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

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

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

2016 Films, Documentary, Raoul Peck, Samuel L. Jackson

I Am Not Your Negro-2016

August 19, 2017 scottmet99 Leave a comment

I Am Not Your Negro-2016

Director Raoul Peck

Starring Samuel L. Jackson

Scott’s Review #674

Reviewed August 19, 2017

Grade: B

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

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

Released in a year that saw similarly racially themed documentaries emerge, such as 13th and O.J.: Made in America, all were recognized with award nominations in several year-end ceremonies.

If comparisons are drawn, 13th, the most similar in theme to I Am Not Your Negro, is the superior piece. While interesting, the latter did not quite grip me as much as the former.

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

The documentary revolves around the discussion and backstory of all the leaders mentioned. Old footage of each man is used for location shots and speeches.

A high point is Baldwin’s interview and his insight into his racial experiences, both positive and negative. Each leader, King, X, and Evers, receives roughly the same amount of screen time, and the best part is Baldwin’s dealings with each man.

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

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

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

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

Samuel L. Jackson’s narration is unnecessary. Being a well-known name, the actor is distracted from the message. Jackson seems to read Baldwin’s words as if he were acting, and Baldwin and Jackson are two very different types of men, so the result is disjointed.

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

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

Oscar Nominations: Best Documentary-Feature

Independent Spirit Award Nominations: Best Documentary Feature

2016 Films, Australian, Bentley Dean, Drama, International, International Drama, Marie Wawa, Martin Butler, Mungau Dain

Tanna-2016

August 18, 2017 scottmet99 Leave a comment

Tanna-2016

Director Bentley Dean, Martin Butler

Starring Mungau Dain, Marie Wawa

Scott’s Review #673

Reviewed August 18, 2017

Grade: A

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

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

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

Tanna is shot in the Nauvhal and Nafe languages.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Their love is then tested ultimately.

The actors who play Dain and Wawa are authentic and truthful. Although they have never acted before or seen a camera, both pour their souls into the characters they portray.

This also applies to Wawa’s little sister, a goldmine in her honest portrayal. All the performances are rich.

Visually, Tanna is breathtaking. One thing is the exotic lushness of the green jungles, mixed with the gorgeous running streams and waterfalls. Still, the oozing volcano inhabiting the island is colorful and picturesque during the night scenes.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Oscar Nominations: Best Foreign Language Film

2016 Films, Documentary, Gianfranco Rosi, International, International Documentary, Italian

Fire At Sea-2016

August 12, 2017 scottmet99 Leave a comment

Fire at Sea-2016

Director Gianfranco Rosi

Scott’s Review #671

Reviewed August 12, 2017

Grade: B+

Fire at Sea was honored with a coveted 2017 Best Documentary Feature Oscar Award nomination, but despite this high achievement, it received largely negative reviews from its viewers.

This is not as surprising as it might seem.

The documentary was also the Italian entry for the Best Foreign Language Film category but was not chosen. It is a hybrid between a “typical” film and a documentary, making it all the more unique.

The lackluster comments are undoubtedly due to the documentary’s slow pace and the way it intersperses snippets of the story, which do not weave together with the main message.

Compounded by the length (one hour and fifty-four minutes is very long for a documentary), the work will not go down in history as a rousing crowd-pleaser.

But it is an important film.

The story tells of a group of modest individuals inhabiting a tiny Sicilian fishing island named Lampedusa between Sicily and Libya. The island is prominent for being a rescue area for migrants forging a treacherous journey from African countries (mainly Libya and Sudan) to the island for safety and medical treatment.

It is implied that the migrants do not stay on the island for very long. Lampedusa serves as a temporary sanctuary. It is not explained where the migrants go or what happens to them after medical treatment.

After a slightly tedious start, I immersed myself in the various stories and began to appreciate the slow pace.

I found this calming.

We see snippets of daily events: a young boy and his friend carve a face out of cactus plants. Later, the boy undergoes an eye exam and is told he needs glasses. We then see a lengthy scene of his family eating pasta.

We also get to know a resident doctor, grandmother, disc jockey, and scuba diver.

Admittedly, I began to wonder what a young boy preparing a slingshot or a grandmother preparing sauce had to do with the documentary’s main subject, migrants coming to the island.

Then I realized that director Gianfranco Rosi was telling a human story. The ordinary Lampedusa citizens’ lives contrast with the fleeing and terrified migrants.

I was able to put all the pieces together.

Fire at Sea is unusual, as it is told without narration and with dialogue in Italian containing sub-titles. These are additional unique aspects of the project, but I admired its essential message.

The most powerful scene in the film is a quiet one with a resident doctor describing his experiences with the migrants.

He professes how any decent person should help any needy soul and describes the grisly task of performing autopsies on the people (many women and children) who do not survive the harried journey across the Mediterranean Sea. Many die of hunger and thirst or are burned by the diesel fuels from the tiny boats they are stuffed into.

His long yet powerful account will move one to tears.

This testimonial speaks volumes regarding the influx of needy individuals, mainly from Syria, who need help from neighboring countries.

Some have been kind and have let individuals into their countries, while others have shunned the migrants (namely in 2017, the United States).

The honest account from the doctor summarizes the message of humanity that Fire at Sea represents.

Another powerful scene emerges towards the end of the documentary, as several African men are rushed from their ship to another ship and tended to by rescuers.

Sadly, the barely alive yet conscious men are not long for this world as a few minutes later, we see a series of body bags lined up containing the expired men. This tragic realization speaks volumes about the need for such humanistic individuals in Lampedusa.

Fire at Sea (2016) is worth watching. It is a story about the fiery waters the residents could see from afar during World War II. It teaches kindness and decency and reminds us that some people are just good, generous souls, all but willing to help those in need.

We can all learn from this documentary.

Oscar Nominations: Best Documentary-Feature

2016 Films, Ava DuVernay, Documentary

13th-2016

August 5, 2017 scottmet99 Leave a comment

13th-2016

Director Ava DuVernay

Scott’s Review #669

Reviewed August 5, 2017

Grade: B+

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

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

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

The documentary examines the United States prison system. It starts with an audio clip of former President Obama informing us that the United States has five percent of the world’s population. Twenty-five percent of the world’s prisoners are in the US, a direct message to those convinced that the US is the greatest country in the world.

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

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

13th does not feel dated or monotone as some documentaries do. Instead, it feels creative and nuanced with interviews and news clips of events such as the Civil Rights movement and Depression-era footage. Modern-day footage is included, representing over a hundred years of history.

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

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

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

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

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

13th avoids being too preachy and presents “both sides of the aisle.” Some feel that political figure’s harsh take on crime is not meant to repress minorities. A few of these folks are interviewed and given time to explain their viewpoints, but the film is mainly left-leaning in tone and views.

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

Interviews with prominent activists such as Angela Davis, leader of the Communist Party USA, and a woman with close ties to the Black Panthers are informative. Considered a radical in her day (the 1960s), the documentary features clips of her interviews both then and now.

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

Overall, I found 13th (2016) to be an educational and historical lesson in the challenges and race issues that people of color have dealt with over the years and how their world is still affected by current legislation and decisions by political figures (mainly white), who hold all the cards and repress people who speak out against them.

Oscar Nominations: Best Documentary-Feature

Independent Spirit Award Nominations: Best Documentary Feature

2016 Films, Asghar Farhadi, Best International Film Oscar Winners, Drama, International, International Drama, Persian, Shahab Hosseini, Taraneh Alidoosti

The Salesman-2016

August 2, 2017 scottmet99 Leave a comment

The Salesman-2016

Director Asghar Farhadi

Starring Shahab Hosseini, Taraneh Alidoosti

Scott’s Review #668

Reviewed August 2, 2017

Grade: A

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The audience is presented with a powerful, intriguing mystery to absorb and unravel. Throughout most of the film, questions are raised to be considered: Who was the intruder? Will Emad exact revenge? What happened?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

These minor characters appear during the most pivotal part, giving it the acting chops to pull the result.

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

I cannot wait for his next film.

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

2016 Films, Aaron Abrams, Aliocha Schneider, Connor Jessup, Drama, Isabella Rossellini, LGBTQ+ Drama, LGBTQ+ Films, Stephen Dunn

Closet Monster-2016

July 23, 2017 scottmet99 Leave a comment

Closet Monster-2016

Director Stephen Dunn

Starring Connor Jessup, Aliocha Schneider, Aaron Abrams

Scott’s Review #665

Reviewed July 23, 2017

Grade: B

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Oscar is a strong and well-written character.

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

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

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

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

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

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

He fills the film with non-cliche moments.

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

2016 Films, Documentary, Gilbert Gottfried, Jonathan Freeman, Roger Ross Williams

Life, Animated-2016

July 9, 2017 scottmet99 Leave a comment

Life, Animated-2016

Director Roger Ross Williams

Starring Owen Suskind, Ron Suskind

Scott’s Review #662

Reviewed July 9, 2017

Grade: B+

Autism is still a baffling disease to many people (myself included) since I know nobody personally who is afflicted with it and, before watching this documentary, had many questions.

It’s terrific to see a documentary that not only teaches the viewer about autistic people but presents an incredible story of how Disney films helped an autistic child into a world of normalcy with the aid of loving parents.

Life, Animated (2016) is an empathetic film with a positive and inspirational message.

The production is based on a 2014 novel, Life, Animated: A Story of Sidekicks, Heroes, and Autism, written by journalist Ron Suskind. Ron tells the story of his son Owen and how Disney films helped him communicate with the outside world.

The documentary, however, is told from Owen’s perspective, from childhood to adulthood. The story incorporates not only Owen’s challenges with autism but also his love life, relationship with his brother and parents, and various other autistic people he has come to bond with.

He was fortunate to be invited to Paris, France, to speak at a conference.

How Owen, an energetic and “normal” three-year-old, suddenly shrunk into himself and away from the rest of the world is mysterious, but also how autism works.

Owen’s parents, baffled at the sudden change in Owen’s behavior, did the dutiful parental actions of doctors and studies, but, in essence, helped Owen on their own. When Ron, on a lark and with some desperation, began speaking in the voice of a Disney character, Owen sprung to life like magic.

The film will please fans of Disney films since Owen lives and breathes the various classic movies, immersing himself in their worlds and memorizing scenes and dialogue alike. Specifically, The Little Mermaid (1988) and Beauty and the Beast (1990) are heavily featured reference points.

Unfortunately, Owen was tormented by school bullies as a teenager, which caused him a setback. Fortunately, his creative mind allowed him to write stories using his characters to relieve everyday stress.

The film intersperses various drawings of Owen and his family throughout, adding a creative edge to the documentary.

The documentary wisely does not state that Disney films will cure anyone with autism, but Owen’s love of these films served as a stimulus to bring him back to life.

Presumably, any autistic child could find a source or something they love to help build self-esteem and achieve skills.

I highly recommend Life, Animated (2016) to anyone with an autistic child, sibling, relative, or friend seeking an empathetic experience and a heartwarming achievement.

From a film perspective, the documentary is clear, concise, and to the point, with videotaped images of Owen’s life.

Life, Animated received a 2016 Best Documentary Oscar nomination.

Oscar Nominations: Best Documentary-Feature

2016 Films, Drama, Hannes Holm, Ida Engvoll, International, International Drama, Rolf Lassgård, Swedish

A Man Called Ove-2016

June 12, 2017 scottmet99 Leave a comment

A Man Called Ove-2016

Director Hannes Holm

Starring Rolf Lassgård, Ida Engvoll

Scott’s Review #653

Reviewed June 12, 2017

Grade: A

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

The film is terrific.

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

The film is magical in a sense.

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

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

He despises several neighbors, including a beautiful cat who walks around the complex as if she owns it.

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

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

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

A Man Called Ove is not exactly dark, but it is certainly not trivial or fluff. The film is rich with excellent writing and character development.

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

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

Later, when Sonja’s story is fully explored, we show a new appreciation for Ove and why he is the way he is today. We understand him better, and the character develops.

Some paths that life takes Ove and Sonja down are tear-inducing and emotional, primarily due to Sonja’s character and personality. Along with the backstory of Ove and Sonja, we are treated to scenes of Ove and his father in the past.

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

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

A Man Called Ove (2016) is a pure treat in modern cinema. It perfectly balances drama, comedy, churning emotions, and heartbreaking honesty. It is highly recommended for those seeking a treasure with many characteristics.

Oscar Nominations: Best Foreign Language Film

2016 Films, Denzel Washington, Drama, Jovan Adepo, Stephen McKinley Henderson, Viola Davis

Fences-2016

June 11, 2017 scottmet99 Leave a comment

Fences-2016

Director Denzel Washington

Starring Denzel Washington, Viola Davis, Jovan Adepo

Scott’s Review #652

Reviewed June 11, 2017

Grade: B+

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

What a blessing and a curse.

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

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

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

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

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

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

Sometimes, it is too safe and slightly watered down; the stage version may be the best option.

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

2016 Films, Andrew Garfield, Biography, Drama, Hugo Weaving, Luke Bracey, Mel Gibson, Rachel Griffiths, Sam Worthington, Teresa Palmer, Vince Vaughn, War

Hacksaw Ridge-2016

June 9, 2017 scottmet99 Leave a comment

Hacksaw Ridge-2016

Director Mel Gibson

Starring Andrew Garfield, Luke Bracey, Vince Vaughn

Scott’s Review #651

Reviewed June 9, 2017

Grade: B+

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

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

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

The film also leans anti-war and pacifistic.

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

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

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

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

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

He saves the real gore for later in the film.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

2016 Films, Andrew Ahn, Drama, Independent, Independent Drama, International, International Drama, Joe Seo, LGBTQ+ Drama, LGBTQ+ Films, LGBTQ+ International

Spa Night-2016

May 19, 2017 scottmet99 Leave a comment

Spa Night-2016

Director Andrew Ahn

Starring Joe Seo

Scott’s Review #645

Reviewed May 19, 2017

Grade: B+

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

2016 Films, Anne Consigny, Drama, French, International, International Drama, International Thriller, Isabelle Huppert, Laurent Lafitte, Paul Verhoeven, Thriller

Elle-2016

May 17, 2017 scottmet99 Leave a comment

Elle-2016

Director Paul Verhoeven

Starring Isabelle Huppert

Scott’s Review #644

Reviewed May 17, 2017

Grade: A-

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

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

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

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

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

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

Michele lives a complicated life.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Oscar Nominations: Best Actress-Isabelle Huppert

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

2016 Films, Bradley Cooper, Dan Trachtenberg, Horror, John Gallagher Jr., John Goodman, Mary Elizabeth Winstead, Science Fiction

10 Cloverfield Lane-2016

May 11, 2017 scottmet99 Leave a comment

10 Cloverfield Lane-2016

Director Dan Trachtenberg

Starring Mary Elizabeth Winstead, John Goodman

Scott’s Review #643

Reviewed May 11, 2017

Grade: B+

10 Cloverfield Lane is a 2016 psychological thriller billed as somewhat of a successor to the 2008 hit Cloverfield, though I fail to see the apparent correlation between the films.

Furthermore, the two stories seemingly have little or nothing to do with one another.

Despite these pesky details, 10 Cloverfield Lane is a perfect, edge-of-your-seat type film that is unpredictable and thought-provoking.

By the time the credits roll, it is a film worthy of discussion—an excellent quality for a movie.

Without any dialogue during the opening sequence (a clever move), we meet Michelle (Mary Elizabeth Winstead), a twenty-something woman presumably on the outs with her boyfriend, who we never see.

Alone, she flees their residence and drives into the night to parts unknown. The couple is metropolitan, living in central New Orleans.

Now in the middle of Louisiana, and hearing radio reports of strange blackouts, Michelle is soon involved in a terrible car accident. When she awakens, she finds herself chained to a bed inside a small bunker inhabited by two men, Howard (John Goodman) and Emmitt (John Gallagher, Jr.).

They insist that the outside world is no longer and all human beings are dead as a result of a catastrophic attack. Initially skeptical, Michelle slowly uncovers various clues that baffle her about the truth.

10 Cloverfield Lane may very well be John Goodman’s best film performance.

He plays Howard with gusto and mystery, and the audience is primarily baffled about whether to trust this man. Is he a vicious abductor, creating a make-believe world to keep Michelle hostage-or is he telling the truth?

He plays the character as creepy and surly but with a tinge of vulnerability and sadness.

I certainly was both fascinated and confused by Howard and could not determine his true motivations.

Winstead also deserves credit for portraying a strong yet sympathetic female character who is never reduced to playing a victim, a testament to the actress’s ability.

Over the years, Winstead has appeared in several duds (Black Christmas, 2006, and The Thing, 2011), so seeing her in a film worthy of her talents is nice.

Michelle is intelligent and determined to deduce her surroundings and formulate a clever escape plan. However, in a nice twist, the filmmakers ask whether she wants to leave the safety of her bunker after all.

Producer J.J. Abrams weaves a story with twists and turns, keeping the tension and interest high throughout the film. The primary question that reoccurs is, “What on earth lies outside of the bunker?”

I enjoy that this film is not the typical, cookie-cutter fare in which we root for the female victim to escape the clutches of a male maniac—it is much deeper and more complex than that.

Most enjoyable is how events slowly unfold, and we, the audience, begin to question thoughts we have harbored throughout the run of the film.

A perfect example of this comes in the final chapter, when events take off in an entirely different direction than the rest of the film. I felt a bit suffocated inside the bunker. What a relief to finally have some action occur outside of this location and into the fresh air.

But what lurks in this new setting?

One slight oddity is that the film includes Bradley Cooper’s voice as Michelle’s boyfriend, Ben, who is heard only by telephone. I did not notice this until the credits rolled, and it seemed like a silly and unnecessary inclusion.

Also, we never know the turmoil between Michelle and Ben. Is their domestic trouble simply plot-driven antics, or does it have a deeper meaning?

In a nutshell, 10 Cloverfield Lane (2016) is a film best watched when one does not know the first thing about the plot or circumstances surrounding events.

The film was enjoyable because I did not know the twist, the conclusion, or even who starred in it. This kept all of the elements of surprise from me, making it more enjoyable.

2016 Films, Amy Adams, Denis Villeneuve, Drama, Forest Whitaker, Jeremy Renner, Michael Stuhlbarg, Science Fiction, Shawn Levy

Arrival-2016

May 9, 2017 scottmet99 Leave a comment

Arrival-2016

Director Denis Villeneuve

Starring Amy Adams, Jeremy Renner, Forest Whitaker

Scott’s Review #642

Reviewed May 9, 2017

Grade: B-

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

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

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

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

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

Sadly, the rest of the film is rather middling.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

2016 Films, Aaron Taylor-Johnson, Amy Adams, Andrea Riseborough, Armie Hammer, Isla Fisher, Jake Gyllenhaal, Laura Linney, Michael Shannon, Michael Sheen, Thriller, Tom Ford

Nocturnal Animals-2016

April 30, 2017 scottmet99 Leave a comment

Nocturnal Animals-2016

Director Tom Ford

Starring Amy Adams, Jake Gyllenhaal, Michael Shannon

Scott’s Review #640

Reviewed April 30, 2017

Grade: A-

Nocturnal Animals (2016) blurs the lines between fantasy and reality in a revenge-themed thriller directed by Tom Ford, in only his second directorial effort- 2009’s A Single Man was his first.

While not constantly hitting the mark and, at times, very difficult to follow, the film is unusual, mesmerizing, and lovely to look at from a visual perspective. Some scenes blur together splendidly, so they seem interposed—a brilliant touch.

David Lynch influences the film in tone and style.

Events are divided between “The Real World” and “The Novel”.

The film begins strangely as a bevy of nude, obese women prance and dance on video screens during an art exhibit opening.

The gallery is owned by Susan Morrow (Amy Adams), a successful woman living a glossy life in Los Angeles. We quickly learn that Susan is involved in a loveless marriage with hunky Hutton (Armie Hammer), a business person who is inattentive towards Susan.

Before Hutton, Susan was briefly married to Edward (Jake Gyllenhaal), a novelist who dedicates his latest manuscript to Susan, received via mail. As Susan reads the manuscript, she is transported down a dark path of memories and fantasies concerning Edward and their past.

The film’s locales are mainly between Los Angeles (the real world) and western Texas (where the novel occurs). This compelling aspect of the film separates the two worlds.

Los Angeles is featured mainly at nighttime as Susan, presumed to be suffering from insomnia, is compelled by her reading. She also rubs shoulders with sophisticated artist types and colleagues at her studio.

Conversely, western Texas is worlds apart from the Los Angeles setting—like night and day. In Texas, we are introduced to the protagonist of the story Susan reads.

Tony, traveling through Texas with his wife, Laura, and their daughter, India, are accosted and terrorized, bypassing local motorists.

Clearly from out of town, the family is stranded in the middle of nowhere and kept at bay by the rednecks- the story has a tragic ending. The stories intersect interestingly as we see the differing worlds.

The scenes in western Texas were frightening and tense—so much so that my heart beat quickly. I pictured myself as Tony in a situation of peril and danger.

As the family attempts to reason with the thugs, they get deeper and deeper into trouble. The feeling of being vulnerable and unsafe with no help around is tremendous in the film.

The acting in Nocturnal Animals is excellent overall, which is no surprise given the tremendous cast. Adams and Gyllenhaal are especially worthy of mention. Through flashbacks, we see their scenes and find them both sympathetic and vulnerable (at first— he is a sensitive writer, and she is a college girl with aspirations of love and family life.

As the plot thickens, both characters become more nuanced and complex- the subject of betrayal and revenge certainly comes into play, and both characters, now older and more pessimistic, intersect again as mature adults.

Michael Shannon, though believable as Detective Bobby Andes, assigned to Tony’s case and suffering from stage four lung cancer, is not the standout for me. I disagree with his Oscar nomination for Best Supporting Actor.

Indeed, it is an acceptable performance. I would have much rather Gyllenhaal or Aaron Taylor-Johnson (as one of the rednecks) be awarded the nomination.

I was reminded of David Lynch’s masterpiece, Mulholland Drive (2001), mainly during the Los Angeles scenes. The slick night air and the trials and tribulations of the wealthy mirrored each other quite readily.

The sequences contain a gothic, haunting, moody vibe.

The central theme of revenge is present in both worlds. Tony and Bobby seek revenge on the criminals in western Texas, while revenge also focuses on Los Angeles, though much more subtly.

A hint is given several times in Susan’s art gallery, where a large ” Revenge ” exhibit is a focal point. However, what the Los Angeles revenge is is not revealed until the very last scene.

One thing is sure about Nocturnal Animals- the film is dreamy, complex, and worthy of conversation.

Tom Ford is an up-and-coming director with visual sensibilities and a dream-like vision. I hope we see more from this fascinating director.

Oscar Nominations: Best Supporting Actor-Michael Shannon

2016 Films, Ben Whishaw, Colin Farrell, Comedy, Dark Comedy, Drama, John C. Reilly, Léa Seydoux, Olivia Colman, Rachel Weisz, Romantic Drama, Satire, Yorgos Lanthimos

The Lobster-2016

April 20, 2017 scottmet99 Leave a comment

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

2016 Films, Aaron Eckhart, Anna Gunn, Biography, Clint Eastwood, Drama, Katie Couric, Laura Linney, Tom Hanks

Sully-2016

March 10, 2017 scottmet99 Leave a comment

Sully-2016

Director Clint Eastwood

Starring Tom Hanks, Aaron Eckhart

Scott’s Review #623

Reviewed March 10, 2017

Grade: B

I think most film critics would agree that each modern film directed by Clint Eastwood would accurately be described as a compelling film yet safe film, and the 2016 Eastwood offering, Sully, fits into both of these categories snugly- just as Sully feels like a snug film.

Everything seems to fit into a nice package when the credits roll.

While the film is sympathetic and has leanings of a character study, it is also shrouded in a wholesomeness that is incredibly safe and “Hollywood.”

This is not a knock or a detriment to the film, as it is very good, well-made, and has a high budget. However, edginess is not its forte, and it might have been better off with a bit more grit.

The actual film recounts the lively, perilous recent United Airways flight 1549, on which the now-famous Captain Sully successfully landed in New York’s frigid Hudson River one January morning.

Tom Hanks is the subdued and unassuming hero to perfection as his calm demeanor and grounded persona make him a likable chap, to say nothing of saving 155 lives aboard the would-be doomed flight that day.

Instead of going in a purely linear direction, building up the events (gravitating passengers, takeoff) in sequential order until the inevitable crash, Eastwood wisely decides to begin directly after the crash.

Captain Sully, clearly jarred by the events, is startled awake by nightmares. He dreams of crashing into midtown Manhattan instead of safely landing the jet.

The hero is beginning to suffer from symptoms of PTSD.

He is kept in New York City for days on both a press tour, interview after interview, as well as being questioned by The National Transportation Safety Board, who wonder why Captain Sully did not return to a nearby airport for an emergency landing as simulated computer recreations show that he could have.

This leads to both Sully and First Officer Jeff Skiles (Aaron Eckhart) being put under a microscope and questioned.

I was a bit caught off guard and got slightly bored, as the film takes about thirty minutes to focus on the actual crash or show an airplane scene rather than building up the events by concentrating on Sully and Skiles’s mental health. However, in retrospect, Eastwood made a wise decision.

The entire film is barely over ninety minutes total, so the action comes fast and furious mid-stream.

Still, the film is not quite all that it could have been. Despite the potentially horrific consequences faced by an airplane blowing both engines due to the flocks of birds, I never got many extremely perilous moments during the film.

While technically well done, the danger scenes as Sully navigates the plane into the river lack much in the way of the punch.

Sure, there are a few quick shots of passengers praying or appearing frightened, but we never get to know any of the passengers very well.

A “don’t blink or you might miss it” scene of an elderly mother and her daughter shopping for a snow globe at the airport or three men rushing to catch the plane to catch a golf game in Charlotte is not enough for the audience to become too enveloped in their characters.

They almost seem thrown at the last minute as a way of personalizing the passengers.

As I mentioned above, the film’s point surrounds Sully (and arguably it should; there is nothing wrong with that) and, to a lesser degree, Skiles. The supporting characters contain no character development, and even Skiles’s personal life is not explored well.

Scully’s wife is only seen through phone conversations (played by Laura Linney), and he is happily married with two daughters. There is a brief talk about money trouble, but the wife is underdeveloped.

Additionally, the NTSB agents are portrayed as quite antagonistic towards Sully and Skiles (rumors abound that this was embellished for movie making), which makes sense.

I enjoyed the ending of the film- in tandem with the credits rolling- of seeing not only the real-life Sully but his wife and the passengers and crew of the actual United Airlines Flight 1549 through interviews and photographs.

This offering in true-life biography films is now a standard feature to look forward to as it brings a humanistic conclusion to the story just watched.

The film’s focus centers on Captain Sully, which is fine by me- the man is a hero- but as a film, and more than a biography, it might have added depth to have richer supporting characters and a more substantial background of the man that is Sully.

A few rushed childhood aviator and battle plane scenes seemed somewhat out of place.

Still, the film is pleasant and immensely watchable. It will not set the world on fire or be remembered as much more than a decent film based on a true story.

Oscar Nominations: Best Sound Editing

Welcome to my blog! 1,450 + reviews posted! My name is Scott Segrell and I reside in Stamford, CT. My blog is a diverse site featuring tons of film reviews I have written since I launched my site in 2014. I hope you enjoy perusing the site for latest or greatest films or to search for your own favorites to see how we compare. Please take a look at my featured sections at the top of the page which change often! Utilize the tags and category links.