The Brady Bunch Movie-1995

The Brady Bunch Movie-1995

Director Betty Thomas

Starring Gary Cole, Shelley Long

Scott’s Review #750

Reviewed April 30, 2018

Grade: B

Capitalizing on nostalgia from the popular 1960s-1970s television comedy “The Brady Bunch”, 1995’s The Brady Bunch Movie offers a nice treat for fans of the series, fondly reminiscing about their youth or the hours spent enjoying subsequent reruns after the show ended.

For this reviewer, the film version is cute and silly. Still, as expected, the attention to detail, drawing on facets from the original series, makes the film a wonderful experience and a job well done by director Betty Thomas.

The Brady Bunch Movie is not highbrow nor complex,  nor should it be. The work is just peppered with great jokes and a solid ode to the fun past.

Film fans looking for a good comedy and not having seen the series might miss out on some of the fun, as a multitude of references only fans will appreciate abound throughout the film.

The plot is not the strongest quality, but liberties must be taken since the intention is of a throwback and not much more- the story might have existed during the series but lengthened for film purposes.

Larry Dittmeyer, played by Michael McKean, schemes to coax all of his Southern California neighbors into selling their houses at a good price to develop a lucrative shopping mall, presumably so they will all get rich.

When earnest Mike and Carol Brady (Gary Cole and Shelley Long) refuse the business deal, Larry embarks on a plot to use a foreclosing notice issued to the Brady’s as leverage in his deal.

The Bradys, owing $20,000 in back taxes due within a week, scramble to raise the money.

Predictably, the Brady kids rush to the rescue with a plan to secure the funds via a singing contest.

The film immediately gets off to a familiar start as we view the comfortable Brady house and all of the cozy qualities nestled inside- unchanged from the late 1960s- the groovy orange colors, the tie-dye, and the plaid outfits are all in tow.

Lovable Alice, in her blue-and-white housekeeper outfit, Mike, Carol, and all six Brady kids are back at the helm, having never missed a beat.

In short, they still live as if it were 1969 instead of 1995 and are oblivious to the outside world.

A tremendous treat for fans is the cameo appearances of a few of the original cast: Florence Henderson (Carol) and Ann B. Davis (Alice) have the more interesting parts, that of the Brady grandmother and truck driver, respectively.

Oddly, Maureen McCormick’s (Marcia), Susan Olsen’s (Cindy), and Mike Lookinland’s (Bobby’s) scenes were shot, but all cut- a major fail of the film whose fans undoubtedly would have liked to have seen all cast members.

Wouldn’t a group scene versus individual scenes have been a wonderful touch?

Missing is Robert Reed (Mike), who was deceased, and Eve Plumb (Jan), who refused to appear.

The plot is silly, trivial, and completely predictable, but so is the television series. As each episode was wrapped up in a nice bow with a defined conclusion and perhaps a lesson or two learned along the way, the film plays similarly.

McKean’s Larry and man-hungry wife Dina (Jean Smart) are perfect foils, playing their roles with a relish, only adding to the zany fun.

A wonderful and timely point is how a Japanese businessman saves the day for the Bradys, with a nice cultural inclusiveness touch that is still relevant today.

An observation made while watching the film in the present time (2018) is its intended point. In 1995, the point was to show how out of touch the Bradys were with “modern times”.

But in 2018, the tide has turned, and 1995 now seems dated concerning the Brady years- sadly, this gives the film itself more of a dated quality.

This is always a risk when a film uses the present as part of its plot.

The cool, hip cellular phone used by one character seems garish and uncool by today’s standards.

Still, from Marcia’s flattened nose, The Monkees’ Davy Jones resurfacing, Cindy’s tattling, Jan’s insecurities, Greg’s cool, suave manner, Peter’s breaking voice, and Bobby’s hall-monitor job, the familiar stories and antics all resurface in a fun-filled hour and a half of comic nostalgia.

The Brady Bunch Movie (1995) is a light achievement and a nice trip down memory lane for many folks.

The Seduction-1982

The Seduction-1982

Director David Schmoeller

Starring Morgan Fairchild, Michael Sarrazin

Scott’s Review #749

Reviewed April 27, 2018

Grade: C

The Seduction (1982) is a slick, by-the-numbers voyeuristic thriller that could be a made-for-television Lifetime channel or Hallmark channel production- or something of that ilk.

A woman being stalked by a dangerous admirer is quite formulaic and episodic. Alas, at the time of its release, it was a major motion picture and a perfect vehicle for the upstart young actress of the time, Morgan Fairchild.

She is well cast, and the film has a smoldering,  glossy, sexy appeal, but is quite predictable in the story department, leaving little substance behind after the droll conclusion.

Gorgeous and sexy television news anchorwoman Jaime Douglas (Fairchild) has it all with a handsome beau on her arm (Michael Sarrazin); they swim, bathe, and make love many a steamy night as they reside in the lavish Los Angeles hills.

A photographer approaches Jaime, Derek (Andrew Stevens), eager to take her pictures. He slowly develops an obsession with her as events become more dangerous and sinister for the young woman, until she is finally forced to defend herself against the now-crazed stalker.

Jamie is Morgan Fairchild’s big-screen debut, and, being unaware that any other actresses were in the mix for the part, she is perfectly cast in a role that just “is her”.

In the glitzy and steamy world of Los Angeles media, how adept were the filmmakers at landing the blonde and leggy actress who screams plastic and glamour?

Posing on posters on the walls of millions of teenage boys everywhere in the 1980s, director David Schmoeller wisely incorporates multiple scenes of Jamie swimming naked,  soaping in the bathtub, or in other situations where the actress is semi-nude.

He certainly capitalizes on her looks and popularity with the sensual The Seduction.

The film’s perplexity, though, is clearly on the story front.

The chemistry between Fairchild and Stevens is readily apparent, and while chemistry is crucial between acting leads, it also makes the story far-fetched.

Call me crazy, but I did not get the fear Jaime would experience at the hands of Derek. Dashing and handsome, with much more appeal than her boyfriend, Brandon, I felt that Jamie and Derek should have been dating!

Arguably, the only reason Derek becomes obsessed with Jamie is that she refuses to give him the time of day.

I get that the film wanted a really good-looking male lead, but a homely or even average-looking actor playing Derek would have made more sense from a story perspective.

Stevens is way too handsome to elicit real terror- especially since his only crime is wanting a nice romantic date with Jamie.

The film offers a decent glimpse into the bustling corporate Los Angeles newsroom studios, where the offices exude 1980s glitz and glamour. The entire film is drizzled with sunny California excess, and it makes perfect sense to be set on the West Coast.

The Seduction does well by combining the dark voyeurism of lurking figures in the shadows and the hairspray, lipstick,  and shoulder pads shown under the hot lights of competitive L.A. television cameras.

The Seduction falls victim to being a predictable, poorly acted film, with its inevitable clichés and final scenes. As the police are of no help to her and her boyfriend brandishes a rifle, the audience knows there will be some sort of final stand-off between Jamie and Derek.

The film pulls out all of the possible female-in-peril stops- the nighttime scenes, Jamie being home alone, scantily dressed, and ready to be victimized, Derek continually lurks around (as he does through most of the film), secretly taking photos, sweating, and breathing lustfully.

The climactic conclusion was neither satisfying nor surprising.

A wise cinema friend once coined the term “craptastic” to describe an otherwise atrocious film that somehow contains some morbid appeal- perhaps being so bad it’s good?

I think the 1982 film The Seduction falls perfectly into this category- predictable and trivial, the film is an intended watch for only those seeking something shamelessly awful, that holds little appeal, yet for the gorgeous stars Fairchild and Stevens, who hold the film together while looking great.

Working Girl-1988

Working Girl-1988

Director Mike Nichols

Starring Melanie Griffith, Harrison Ford, Sigourney Weaver

Scott’s Review #748

Reviewed April 26, 2018

Grade: B+

Released during a decade known for excess, fun, and light comedy films, especially in its latter half, 1988’s Working Girl was a blockbuster hit at the time and, in modern times, is perfectly positioned as an identifier of the decade itself.

This can be both good and bad, with both a dated feel and a whimsical, basic good girl versus a bad approach that is appealing.

The film is romantic comedy fluff, but it is entertaining and features lovely views of New York City- one of my very favorite locales.

The film is directed by Mike Nichols, better known for heavier subject matter (1966’s Who’s Afraid of Virginia Woolf and 1967’s The Graduate).

His leading of the picture, as well as all-star casting, surely made this film better than it ought to have been.

Tess McGill (Melanie Griffith) commutes via the Staten Island Ferry each morning into vast Manhattan, where she holds a secretarial job at a Wall Street investment bank.

When she has a bad experience with one of the brokers, she is reassigned to a female boss, the assertive Katharine Parker (Sigourney Weaver).

After Katharine steals Tess’s business idea and passes it off as her own to get in good with handsome Jack Trainer (Harrison Ford), Tess is determined to reveal the truth as a triangle develops among the three.

In tow are Tess’s best friend, Cynthia (Joan Cusack), and her cheating boyfriend, Mick (Alec Baldwin), in supporting roles.

Working Girl feels overwhelmingly like a “1980s film,” and while relevant at the time and kindly nostalgic, it does not hold up well in modern times, seeming better suited to a time capsule, unlocked from time to time for kicks.

The most garish example is the hideous hairdos that Nichols has Tess and Cynthia don- frizzed out and caked with Aqua Net hairspray is over-the-top even for the 1980s.

Then there are the inevitable tacky outfits, complete with bright colors and shoulder pads, as the girls hustle to their dull jobs. With these costume tidbits and the filming style, the tone screams the 1980’s.

The casting of the three leads is very good- Griffith, Ford, and Weaver all share nice chemistry, and the clear rooting value is for Tess and Jack to live happily ever after, with Katharine as the obvious foil.

The conclusion of the film is unsurprising, but as a romantic comedy, it is standard fare. The point is that the relationships are dynamic and the ride is fun.

Griffith is quite breathy and seductive in her role- a clear homage to the talents of Marilyn Monroe in her 1950s-era films.

Never known for great acting, Tess is the role of a lifetime for Griffith. Weaver sinks her teeth into an against-type villainous role, and Ford is dashing and charismatic as the leading man.

My favorite parts of Working Girl, and the strongest aspects of the film, leaving an indelible impression even after all of these years, are the sweeping camera sequences of New York City featured throughout the film.

Lots of scenes were shot in neighboring Staten Island, but the best shots of all are the luminous skylines of Manhattan that encompass the opening sequence and, later, viewpoints from the corporate offices.

There we see Tess on the Ferry heading across the Hudson River, all with the wonderful soundtrack song by Carly Simon, Let the River Run, playing in the background. The soothing tune and the approaching mammoth city set a nice tone.

The story itself is a sort of rags-to-riches, Cinderella-style experience from the point of view of Tess.

Taking night classes to better herself and clearly, a blue-collar type battling the giants of the corporate world, and the more sophisticated Katherine (she speaks fluent French!), is an enormous draw of the film to sustain mainstream audiences.

Corporate greed versus the little guy is an apt comparison here. Almost borderline fairy-tale, the fact that Tess gets the dashing Jack (in real life, he would undoubtedly be with Katharine) makes the film good escapist fare.

The working-class Staten Island versus the sophisticated Manhattan is another theme worth mentioning.

Thirty years beyond its original release. 1988’s Working Girl now seems dated, dusty, and of its time, like many similar-style films, but it still retains some of the enjoyment that undoubtedly made it a hit at the time of release.

A film that is fine to take out of the vault, dust off, and enjoy for some good escapist cinema and a predictable story of good overcoming bad.

Oscar Nominations: 1 win-Best Picture, Best Director-Mike Nichols, Best Actress-Melanie Griffith, Best Supporting Actress-Joan Cusack, Sigourney Weaver, Best Original Song-“Let the River Run” (won)

Lean on Pete-2018

Lean on Pete-2018

Director Andrew Haigh

Starring Charlie Plummer, Steve Buscemi

Scott’s Review #747

Reviewed April 24, 2018

Grade: B+

Lean on Pete (2018) is a heartbreaking and emotional slice-of-life film written and directed by British director Andrew Haigh.

The film centers on the relationship between a boy and a horse, so the heartstrings will be tugged a lot as the viewer is taken on a journey as the protagonist struggles through both pain and triumph.

While slow-moving and matter-of-fact, the film celebrates excellent writing and good story chapters, perfectly nestled into the independent drama genre.

Based upon the novel of the same name—reportedly a much darker experience—actor Charlie Plummer portrays Charley Thompson, a fifteen-year-old boy living outside of Portland, Oregon, with his troubled father.

His mother has taken off for parts unknown.

As his already complicated life turns upside down after a violent attack, Charley becomes increasingly attracted to the world of local horse racing and becomes involved with a shady horse trainer, Del Montgomery (Steve Buscemi).

There, he befriends and falls in love with an aging horse named Lean on Pete, who sadly is destined for the slaughterhouse in Mexico.

The film is about Charley’s journey and determination to survive while facing seemingly insurmountable odds and obstacles. The intriguing aspect of Lean on Pete is watching what Charley experiences and hoping against hope that he will come out unscathed and undamaged.

The youngster aspires to reach his estranged aunt, whom he knows only to have been living in Wyoming as a waitress. How on earth will he be able to find her? If he does reach her, will she welcome him with open arms, as he hopes, or will he suffer more defeat?

Several key aspects struck me as I watched this film. Charley embarks on his travels to find his beloved aunt, with Lean on Pete in tow, and encounters many individuals who either aid or hinder his intentions.

However, the common theme of waitresses continues to be portrayed—for starters, his aunt is referenced as working as a waitress at a bar. When Del gives Charley some fatherly advice, he implores him that the best women have always worked as waitresses.

On the road, he is treated kindly by two different waitresses—one of whom gives him free dessert, the other gives him a major break. I am not sure why Haigh chose to add this to the film, but it is a nice touch and effectively gives the story a warm, blue-collar sensibility.

Another intelligent decision Haigh makes is to keep the focus on Plummer and Charley’s facial expressions and reactions during pivotal scenes- for example, a scene where Charley is painting a house for extra money is essential.

As he hears a jovial father and son playing outside, Haigh shoots Charley’s reactions to this poignant scene rather than deciding to show the father and son. Hearing their pleasure is enough to elicit a look of pain on Charley’s face, rather than a blatant scene of said father and son shoved down the viewer’s throat.

Enough praise cannot be given to young talent Plummer, who gives a layered performance that will surely make him a star in future years.

The actor possesses an earnest, trustworthy sensibility, making him a likely hero in any film he appears in. Furthermore, he quietly gives Charley depth with various emotions, including disappointment, fear, and anger at his predicament.

The supporting cast members give well-acted performances that add to the overall meat of the story. As grizzled, yet responsible Del, Buscemi sinks his teeth into a role that allows his sarcastic humor and wit to take center stage, and he is perfect.

Chloë Sevigny, like Bonnie, a female jockey who befriends Charley, yet also gives it to him straight with lessons on life’s hard knocks, offers a satisfactory performance.

Lean on Pete (2018) is a quiet film that elicits an emotional response from its intended audience by giving firm texture to the story and fantastic cinematography of the western United States landscape.

Viewing a likable young adult in constant turmoil seems to be a complex subject, but instead, it is rather beautiful and inspiring, as captured by Haigh’s piece, instead of a complete downer as it might have been.

The film is a tale of a journey and struggle that accomplishes what it sets out to achieve.

Do the Right Thing-1989

Do the Right Thing-1989

Director Spike Lee

Starring Spike Lee

Scott’s Review #746

Reviewed April 21, 2018

Grade: A

Do the Right Thing is one of the few great films to come out of 1989, not remembered as a fantastic year in cinema when most mainstream films were as glossy as tin foil- and barren of quality substance.

Here we have a small, independent gem that sparked discussions about current race relations in the United States and became a monumental, influential film.

Filmmaker (and star) Spike Lee carves a controversial story of racial tensions in a Brooklyn neighborhood on a hot summer day.

Beginning rather light and comedic, then turning violent and dark, the action is set in a largely black neighborhood, Bedford-Stuyvesant, Brooklyn, where twenty-five-year-old Mookie (Spike Lee) works delivering pizzas at an Italian pizzeria owned by Sal (Danny Aiello).

With a toddler at home and a nagging girlfriend, Tina (Rosie Perez) always in his face, Mookie is unmotivated yet still a decent guy and loyal friend.

Sal has two sons who work at the pizza place- Pino (John Turturro), who is angry and racist, and nice guy Vito, who is a friend of Mookie’s.

When conflicts erupt over whether Sal’s restaurant should celebrate black celebrities and white celebrities on a wall in the dining room, tensions reach their breaking point as the intense heatwave makes matters much worse.

What makes Do the Right Thing a marvel is both the film’s overall tone and the atmosphere Spike Lee conveys, who does an incredible job of writing, producing, and starring in it.

The elements having little to do with the actual story immediately impress with big, bright colors in comic-book style, screaming at the big screen, eliciting both a warm, inviting feeling and an angry, contemptuous vibe.

The loud rap and hip-hop beats are instrumental in conveying a specific feeling and emotion in the film.

Made independently and on a small budget, the film feels raw and intense from the get-go.

Brooklyn and New York City, in particular, are the perfect settings, as Sal and his family are white folks living in a predominantly black neighborhood, so, in turn, the minorities in the story are the ones in the minority.

Additionally, the viewer sees the friendly neighborhood and feels a sense of belonging regardless of race- the humorous drunk, the kindly, grandmotherly type people-watching from her stoop, and the boombox music kid all form a sense of community and togetherness.

This point is tremendously important to the film’s overall plot.

The relationship between Mookie and Sal and his sons is very important and the centerpiece of the entire film, which I found quite interesting as a character study.

Open-minded, Sal is a decent man and fine with the diversity in his neighborhood- yet still true to his Italian roots. Aiello does a fantastic job of portraying this complex, conflicted character.

His two sons could not be more different from each other- Vito, who is a close friend of Mookie’s, is sympathetic and sweet, with nary a racist bone in his body.

Pino, on the other hand, is angry and resentful of the black community taking over what he feels is his territory.

Finally, while lazy, Mookie is also a sympathetic character, as he is conflicted when the tension reaches its boiling point.

These diverse characters make the film so dynamic.

Revered director Spike Lee carves out a story and brings it to the big screen, telling an important topic that is as vital in modern times as it was when Do the Right Thing was released in 1989.

The film is intelligent and timely without being condescending to either black or white races, nor preachy- instead of telling a poignant story that is angry and sometimes painful to watch, but more importantly, is empathetic and real.

Oscar Nominations: Best Supporting Actor-Danny Aiello, Best Screenplay Written Directly for the Screen

No Country for Old Men-2007

No Country for Old Men-2007

Director Ethan Coen, Joel Coen

Starring Tommy Lee Jones, Javier Bardem, Josh Brolin

Scott’s Review #745

Reviewed April 19, 2018

Grade: A

No Country for Old Men, made in 2007,  is arguably Joel and Ethan Coen’s greatest work save for the amazing Fargo (1996).

Achieving the Best Picture Academy Award and appearing on numerous Top Ten lists for its year of release, the film is one of their most celebrated.

Containing dark humor, offbeat characters, and fantastic storytelling, adding in some of the most gorgeous cinematography in film history, No Country for Old Men is one of the decade’s great films.

The time is 1980 and set in western Texas as we follow dangerous hitman, Anton Chigurh, played wonderfully by Javier Bardem.

He escapes jail by strangling a deputy and is subsequently hired to find Llewelyn Moss (Josh Brolin), a hunter who has accidentally stumbled onto two million dollars in a suitcase that Mexican smugglers are desperate to find.

In the mix is Sheriff Tom Bell (Tommy Lee Jones), who is pursuing both men. Moss’s wife, Carla Jean (Kelly Macdonald) in turn becomes an important character as she is instrumental in the web of deceit the chain of events creates.

The film subsequently turns into an exciting cat-and-mouse chase with a dramatic climax.

The crux of the story and its plethora of possibilities is what makes the events so exciting to watch. As characters are in constant pursuit of each other the viewer wonders who will catch up to whom and when.

One quality that makes the film unique with an identity all its own is that the three principal characters (Moss, Bell, and Chigurh) seldom appear in the same scene adding a layer of mystery and intrigue.

The hero and most well-liked of all the characters is, of course, Sheriff Bell- a proponent of honesty and truth while the other two characters are less than savory types, especially the despicable Chigurh.

My favorite character in the story is Chigurh as he is the most interesting and Bardem plays him to the hilt with a calm malevolence- anger just bubbling under the surface.

One wonders when he will strike next or if he will spare a life- as he intimidates his prey by offering to play a game of chance- the toss of a coin to determine life or death- he is one of cinema’s most vicious villains. With his bob-cut hairstyle and his sunken brown eyes, he is a force to be reckoned with by looks alone.

True to many other Ethan and Joel Coen films the supporting or even the glorified extras are perfectly cast and filled with interesting quirkiness.

Examples of this are the kindly gas station owner who successfully guesses a coin toss correctly and is spared his life. My favorite is the matter-of-fact woman at the hotel front desk, with her permed hair, she gives as good as she gets, and her monotone voice is great.

It is these smaller intricacies that truly make No Country for Old Men shine and are a staple of Coen Brother films in general.

Many similarities abound between Fargo and No Country for Old Men, not the least of which is the main protagonist being an older and wiser police chief (Marge Gunderson and Tom Bell, respectively).

Add to this a series of brutal murders and the protagonist being from elsewhere and stumbling upon a small, bleak town. Of course, the extreme violence depicted in both must be mentioned as comparable.

Having shamefully only seen this epic thriller two times, No Country for Old Men (2007) is a dynamic film, reminiscent of the best of Sam Peckinpah classics such as The Getaway (1972) or The Wild Bunch (1967).

The Coen brothers cross film genres to include thriller, western, and suspense that would rival the greatest in Hitchcock films.

I cannot wait to see it again.

Oscar Nominations: 4 wins-Best Picture (won), Best Director-Joel and Ethan Coen (won), Best Supporting Actor-Javier Bardem (won), Best Adapted Screenplay (won), Best Sound Editing, Best Sound Mixing, Best Cinematography, Best Film Editing

Milk-2008

Milk-2008

Director Gus Van Sant

Starring Sean Penn, Josh Brolin

Scott’s Review #744

Reviewed April 18, 2018

Grade: A

Milk is a 2008 film that successfully teaches its viewers both a valuable history lesson about the introduction of gay rights into the United States culture, as well as to the prolific leader associated with this, Harvey Milk.

The film belongs to Sean Penn, who portrays Milk, but is also a fantastic biopic and learned experience appreciating his wonderful journey through the 1970s- mainly in San Francisco and New York City.

Moreover, Milk portrays a gay character not played for laughs as many films do but portrayed as a hero.

Harvey Milk was the first openly gay person ever to be elected to any political office, winning a seat on the San Francisco Board of Supervisors in 1977.

The film, however, opens in 1978, after a stunning announcement of Harvey Milk’s assassination along with the Mayor of the city, which was met with much heartbreak.

The film then returns to 1970 as we meet Penn as Milk and follow his decade-long battles and prosperity of changing the gay culture.

Having seen actual footage of Harvey Milk, Penn perfects the mannerisms and the speech patterns of Milk giving him an immediate passionate and likable persona. The political figure had such a whimsical and innocent style all his own that Penn perfectly captures.

His determination for honesty and fairness is admirable and inspiring and Milk seems like he was an innately good person.

Particularly heartbreaking is Penn’s facial reactions during his assassination scene-a scene that director Gus Van Sant brilliantly shoots as a follow-up to a joyous scene when Proposition 6 is defeated.

As a troubled colleague, Dan White (Brolin), (rumored to be himself closeted and struggling with self-identity), fires several shots into Harvey at City Hall, the scene is filmed in slow motion for additional dramatic effect and poignancy.

The look of pain and sadness on Milk’s face will undoubtedly bring tears to even the most hard-hearted viewer.

The film shows the many close relationships that Milk formed throughout the 1970s, including his steady lover Scott Smith, played by James Franco. The two actors share solid chemistry as they are both fun-loving and driven in what they hope to achieve.

Sadly, Milk’s drive eventually outweighs Smith’s as they ultimately drift apart, but retain a special bond. Emile Hirsch is nearly unrecognizable as Cleve Jones, a young man who Harvey inspires and mentors throughout the pivotal decade.

A minute criticism noticed while watching Milk is that, except for Penn, many of the supporting characters (Hirsch, Franco, and especially Alison Pill) seem to be “dressed up” in 1970s costumes, giving a forced rather than authentic feel.

The costume designers seem intent on making them look so realistic that it backfires and looks more like actors made up to look like they are from the 1970s.

Penn, however, looks and acts spot-on and stands out from the rest of the cast by miles.

An inspiring biography of a legendary political figure, Harvey Milk, led by a fine lead actor (Penn), deserving of the Best Actor Oscar he was awarded, Milk is an astounding story of both triumph and tragedy.

The film successfully portrays a time when a class of people was not treated fairly and equal rights were barely a possibility and the uprising that occurred in large part due to one man and his followers.

Milk (2008) is a wonderful testament to a time gone by and the accomplishments achieved since then- a truly inspiring and tragic message.

Oscar Nominations: 2 wins-Best Picture, Best Director-Gus Van Sant, Best Actor-Sean Penn (won), Best Supporting Actor-Josh Brolin, Best Original Screenplay (won), Best Original Score, Best Costume Design, Best Film Editing

Independent Spirit Award Nominations: 2 wins-Best Male Lead-Sean Penn, Best Supporting Male-James Franco (won), Best First Screenplay (won), Best Cinematography

The Lure-2015

The Lure-2015

Director Agnieszka Smoczynska

Starring Michalina Olszanska, Marta Mazurek

Scott’s Review #741

Reviewed April 12, 2018

Grade: B

2015’s The Lure is as odd a film as one can imagine- dreamlike and sometimes even absurd. The story mixes a strange blend of the horror genre with musical numbers, but I would wobble to the side of gothic horror for classification purposes.

Oddly enough, some of the choreography numbers are reminiscent of 2016’s La La Land, but that is where the comparisons between those films end as the former musical numbers dark and the latter cheery.

A tough film to review, The Lure is rather disjointed, but kudos for creativity and unpredictability.

Bravely directed by a female (more kudos!),  Agnieszka Smoczynska, a Polish filmmaker, the story is a cross between an autobiography of her troubled youth, and a retelling of the Hans Christian Anderson fairy tale, The Little Mermaid.

Besides the obvious Polish language content the film does not appear overly Polish- it might have been nice to be exposed to some of the cultures.

The film immediately gets off to a mysterious start as two teenage girls, later revealed to be mermaids/vampires named Silver and Golden, emerge from the water and follow a rock band back to a tacky nightclub where the band regularly performs for patrons there for the strippers.

It is sometime in the 1980s.

The girls perform music and strip, becoming an act called “The Lure”. While Golden continues to thirst for blood, Silver falls in love with a bassist causing her to yearn to be a real girl, and subsequently has surgery to remove her tail and grow real-girl legs.

As part of the fairy tale, if her intended marries someone else Silver will turn into sea foam and die.

The story is perplexing and difficult to follow, yet something is mesmerizing and escapist about it.

I wonder if Smoczynska intended the film to make total sense or left it open to a bit of interpretation. The film is a mix of fairy tales and real-life experiences.

Some portions appear to be rather dream-like, for example, the nightclub singer has thoughts or visions involving Silver and Golden, but what is unclear is whether she is experiencing reality or imagination.

Props must be given to The Lure for originality alone. The film stirs up multiple genres and creates something truly unique.

In particular, the characters of Silver and Golden are transfixing, at times they are sweet and kind, then fangs come out at a moment’s notice revealing evil and a carnivorous bloodthirst revealing a grotesque, haunting countenance.

How Smoczynska created these characters is awe-inspiring and the up-and-coming director must have a wealth of imagination deep within.

On the other hand, the plot never really comes together enough to grab hold of the viewer in a riveting way.

While Silver and Golden are clever characters and we feel some empathy for them, I also never felt completely gripped by them either. I felt no connection to any of the supporting characters either.

Any attempt at figuring out the plot will only leave the viewer frustrated. I would advise taking The Lure as an experience, not a puzzle to unravel.

The Lure (2015) has elements of immeasurable fascination and an enormous creative edge. Attempts to create a unique fable meshed with a disturbing central theme are successful.

The overall story is way too confusing for the average user and ultimately ends up dragging towards the final portion with the final climax a wee bit unsatisfying.

A brave and inventive attempt at achieving something fresh and imaginative in cinema.

Jigsaw-2017

Jigsaw-2017

Director The Spierig Brothers

Starring Matt Passmore, Tobin Bell

Scott’s Review #739

Reviewed April 9, 2018

Grade: C-

As a fan of the horror genre, and specifically of the Saw film franchise, which debuted in brutal form in 2004 and was directed by James Wan, I am sad to say that it has sadly become a lesser version of what was once clever writing mixed with astounding, tortuous kills.

Jigsaw is the eighth installment in a series that has now run out of steam. It is simply riding on the coattails of what was once its glory days.

The 2017 film can only be appreciated by die-hard fans of the series; it will be unsuccessful in attracting new fans.

Admittedly, Jigsaw does begin significantly as the viewer is thrust into the midst of a compelling rooftop police chase that results in a fleeing criminal, Edgar Munsen, being shot by detectives.

Unknown if events are connected, the action shifts to a remote barn where (in typical Saw fashion) five individuals are held captive, each with a noose around their neck.

Throughout the film, we get backstories-stories of each victim as well as a connecting story of a pathologist, Logan Nelson (Matt Passmore), his sister, and the possibility that John Kramer has either returned from the grave or a copycat killer is on the loose, emulating his shenanigans.

The basic premise and tone of 2017’s Jigsaw are similar to those of the preceding seven installments. However, this version seems a bit watered down and glossy by comparison.

My recurring thought throughout the feature was a reminiscence of a horror version of a network episodic drama- think CBS’s Criminal Minds or the like. This is not a compliment.

The camera style is of a slick production with nary a raw or authentic moment- incredibly produced with good-looking people in peril.

Fans of the previous Saw films will undoubtedly expect the now-familiar twist towards the end of the film- a clever story turn to make one character revealed to be not what they appear to be or even in cahoots with the serial killer, “Jigsaw” (John Kramer).

This quality does surface in Jigsaw, but the surprise is so lame and inexplicable that it is hardly worth mentioning.  Suffice it to say the expected resurfacing of Kramer is an absolute sham. Instead, we are fed a less-than-satisfying riddle of one character faking his death and another sequence occurring ten years earlier.

This twist might be worth its salt if better written, but the reasoning seems thrown together without much thought to staying true to the characters or history.

Other familiar elements in Jigsaw abound, so a fan of Saw, Saw II, or Saw III will undoubtedly find tidbits that will satisfy them.

The film is like a trip to McDonald’s or a neighborhood burger joint- one will more or less get what is expected.

As the barn victims are given choices via a tape-recorded message by a sinister John Kramer voice, each is given a test and must ultimately confess their sins. As fans know, Saw victims are far from innocent and always harbor a neatly tucked away secret.

Such horrific acts like a haggard young mother smothering her screaming baby and framing her husband for the deed or a thief stealing a woman’s wallet and causing her to die when her asthma medicine is missing were thought of by the writers.

Another character once sold a motorcycle with a faulty brake line to an innocent man who later crashed and was killed. These aspects are the fun in a film like Jigsaw in that the tortures the victims endure have elements of “serves him or her right”.

Another solid point about Jigsaw is the kills, which is what fans of the Saw franchise have come to know and love.

In this one, we delightfully witness a victim’s leg severed, another impaled with needles, and yet another gleefully attempting to shoot one of the other victims trapped in the barn to allow her freedom, only to realize the gun is rigged to shoot herself instead.

These are fun moments that make Jigsaw less than all bad.

Having created the eighth version of a once great franchise that introduced the world to the term “torture horror”, by 2017 has grown ultimately stale and tired with a few glimpses of former glory created in the familiarity aspects.

All great things must end, and the Saw series has more than crumbled from its former days of glory.

Loving Vincent-2017

Loving Vincent-2017

Director Dorota Kobiela, Hugh Welchman

Voices Douglas Booth, Saoirse Ronan

Scott’s Review #738

Reviewed April 5, 2018

Grade: B+

Loving Vincent (2017) is a unique animated feature that is quite the artistic experience and vastly different from any typical film of this genre.

Being the first of its kind to be a wholly painted animated feature, hopefully, other films will follow suit, resulting in an exuberance in creativity.

While Vincent van Gogh’s biography is fascinating, the dramatic plot often left me wondering about the accuracy of all the details.

Still, the film is to be celebrated for its progressive and edgy nature.

Cleverly, the actors starring in the vehicle act while they are subsequently drawn so that the viewer can imagine the action as if it were a standard film since the drawings mirror the actors involved.

For example, Saoirse Ronan can clearly be distinguished as the daughter of a local boatman, who was rumored to be keeping close company with van Gogh before his death. We know it is the actress, but in painting form, eliciting a surreal experience.

The action begins one year following tortured artist, Vincent van Gogh’s, tragic suicide. Postman Joseph Roulin asks his son Armand to deliver Van Gogh’s last letter to his brother, Theo.

Suspicion surrounds the artist’s death as mere weeks earlier his mood was calm and level-headed, making his death cause for alarm. From this point, Armand traverses throughout France to spend time with those who had dealings with Van Gogh during the last days of his life.

Those characters include his doctor, an innkeeper, and others who may hold clues to his death’s mystery.

From a story perspective, Loving Vincent is a compelling piece as mystery and suspicion are cast around the actual death of the artist. This is not so much a whodunit as we know of the resulting suicide, however, the film casts some doubt about the why of that fateful night.

Did someone drive Van Gogh to take his own life suddenly? What was the romantic situation between either Marguerite or perhaps even Adeline? The supposed copying of Van Gogh’s art by his doctor, Dr. Paul Gachet, is fascinating.

Through these dramatic and intriguing facets, I began to wonder what was factual and what was not.

The brilliant part of Loving Vincent is the unusual and artistic method by which the film is created.

The fact that the film is about one of the most respected and appreciated artists of all time is no accident, and this perfectly encapsulates the overall tone of the film.

Throughout the one hour and thirty-four-minute duration of the film, I was continually enamored by its ” look.” Exquisite and quite beautiful, the filmmakers chose classically trained painters over traditional animators, and I feel this makes all the difference.

The use of actual Van Gogh paintings was an instrumental part of the film, which was modified to fit into the allotted screen room. The cast performed the film, as if it were a play, in front of a green screen, and then the painters created their magic—pretty incredible!

Also, mind-blowing uses colors to change the time of day (brightness and darkness), which results in a highly effective tone.

By creating a visual masterpiece of cinematic beauty, Loving Vincent (2017) is a feast for the eyes.

Although it is unclear whether the story is true to form or whether facts are embellished, the film succeeds as a work of art and provides a good glimpse into the life of one of the world’s most beloved and tortured artists.

Oscar Nominations: Best Animated Feature Film

Coco-2017

Coco-2017

Director Lee Unkrich

Voices Anthony Gonzalez, Benjamin Bratt

Scott’s Review #737

Reviewed April 4, 2018

Grade: B+

Winner of the 2017 Best Animated Feature Academy Award, Coco is an exuberant and colorful affair, filled with marvelous lighting and a Mexican cultural infusion that serves the film well, making it feel robust in its diversity and inclusion.

The overall theme of family, traditions, and musical celebration is apparent, making for good razzle-dazzle with lots of upbeat songs and dance.

Mixed in is a lovely inter-generational theme, where older folks are respected, something lacking in today’s real world.

Miguel Rivera is a twelve-year-old boy living in Mexico with his extended family, including his elderly great-grandmother, Coco, who is sadly suffering from intermittent dementia.

Through flashbacks, we learn that Coco’s father (Miguel’s great-great-grandfather) was an aspiring musician who abandoned the family for greener pastures.

Subsequently, the Rivera clan banned all music in favor of a modest shoe-making business.

As Miguel realizes his passion for music, he comes into conflict with his family, who have other aspirations for him. Miguel embarks on a fantastic journey to the magical and somewhat frightening land of his deceased ancestors, coinciding with the festive Day of the Dead celebration, a Mexican cultural tradition.

There, he realizes the true nature of his great-great-grandfather’s sudden departure.

Coco is a film that all family members can enjoy, and it is structured just that way. The blatant use of multiple generations greatly appeals to the idea of blending the family unit.

Pixar successfully sets all the correct elements in place for a successful film, and the well-written story only adds layers. The film is quite mainstream, yet appealing to the masses.

Perhaps very young viewers may become frightened by some of the skeleton-laced faces of Miguel’s ancestors in the other world where he visits. Still, these images are somewhat tame and mixed with vibrant colors and extraordinary production numbers.

These images are undoubtedly meant to entertain rather than frighten, and the creatures have a friendly vibe.

Having viewed the film on an airplane traveling cross-country (admittedly not the best way to watch a film), the lovely and touching musical number “Remember Me (Lullaby)” entranced me, so much so that I was moved to tears right on the plane.

How’s that for effectiveness?

The emotional impact of this song impressed me immensely about Coco, even when the story is occasionally secondary to the visual or musical elements.

In fact, the story began to lag slightly until the aforementioned big musical number came into play. The song really kicked the emotional action into high gear, and I became more enamored with the characters and their connections to one another.

Miguel and his relatives’ love became more apparent, and the conclusion is pleasing and satisfactory.

A slight miss in the film, corrected midway through, is Miguel’s bratty and entitled nature. He heaves sighs when he does not get his way, which seems more apparent early on and was quite the turn-off.

At first, I did not care for the character, yet I knew I was supposed to.

Thankfully, the character becomes the film’s hero and ultimately proves to be a sweet, likable person. I pondered, “Is that what kids like these days?”

Pixar does it again, creating a family-friendly experience with a positive yet non-cliched message of belonging, forgiveness, and the importance of family connections that feels fresh.

In current times of divisiveness, especially with immigration and other cultures being attacked, how appropriate is it to experience Coco (2017), a feel-good yet not contrived project?

Oscar Nominations: 2 wins-Best Original Song-“Remember Me” (won), Best Animated Feature Film (won)

Carmen Jones-1954

Carmen Jones-1954

Director Otto Preminger

Starring Dorothy Dandridge, Harry Belafonte

Scott’s Review #736

Reviewed April 3, 2018

Grade: B+

It was pretty taboo at the time of release (1954) because it featured an all-black cast with no white members. Carmen Jones is to be celebrated for contribution to film history for this groundbreaking feat alone.

Directed by Otto Preminger (who ironically is Caucasian),  the film features legendary actress Dorothy Dandridge in a Marilyn Monroe-style performance worthy of the talents of the stars.

The film is a musical with an inevitable tragedy at the conclusion.

The 1954 feature is based on a 1943 stage production of the same name, based on the music of the famous 1875 Georges Bizet production of Carmen. These facets add to the richness of the film as it is layered with good history, and the well-known tragic elements make the conclusion unsurprising.

Brazen and beautiful, Carmen is a seductress who works in a parachute factory in North Carolina during World War II. After trading fists with a co-worker, Carmen is jailed and assigned handsome Corporal Joe (Harry Belafonte) to escort her to the authorities.

While Carmen is not shy about pursuing the young man, his fiancee, virginal Cindy Lou, fumes and schemes to keep her man.

The result is a triangle. Carmen and Joe eventually fall madly in love, leaving poor Cindy Lou behind, but their love faces hurdles.

The somewhat lighthearted first portion of the film, with coquettish humor mixed in, is offset by a much darker path the film takes. As Carmen and Joe finally profess their love and share a night of passion, she leaves him in the middle of the night, unable to endure prison time.

This results in Joe being imprisoned as the couple ultimately cannot stay away from one another despite repeated obstacles to their happiness. An additional character, a boxer named Husky, with designs on Carmen, is introduced, complicating matters.

In sad form, much like the opera Carmen, the final scene is devastating and startling as Joe treads down a dark and gloomy path of destruction. The character of Joe is nuanced- at first, a “nice guy”; the character is an example of complexity and what a man will do for love.

The viewer wonders what will become of Joe and how he could risk his life performing an act in the heat of passion.

In 1954, what a profound and fantastic role for a female, let alone a black female. Typically cast in roles such as maids, servers, or even less glamorous parts, how wonderful for Dandridge to capture a challenging role of this caliber.

She is a vixen as she sinks her teeth into the meaty and flirtatious Carmen. Dandridge’s pizzazz, flare, and singing and dancing performances made her a star, and she is forever known as a groundbreaking talent.

There cannot be enough said about the importance of casting all-black actors in Carmen Jones. Monumental, of course, given the time. The result is a film of significance to black culture, showing that they no longer needed to appear in “white films” as supporting players but could carry a movie on their own.

How profound and remarkable this was!

My only criticism of the film is undoubtedly related to the progress made for black actors and characters, though there is still plenty more work.

At times, the filming feels a shade dated (presently, there are more great roles for black actors) and has a slightly grainy look.

Some of the supporting characters’ acting is also not the strongest, but as Carmen Jones is a historical film, liberties must be taken.

Thanks to the genius and the funding of Preminger, who needed to produce the film independently due to lack of interest, the result is a film that has gone down in history as worthy, edgy, and open-minded.

Wisely casting talented stars with great pipes, the film is a solid success.

Oscar Nominations: Best Actress-Dorothy Dandridge, Best Scoring of a Musical Picture