Bride of Frankenstein-1935

Bride of Frankenstein-1935

Director James Whale

Starring Boris Karloff, Elsa Lanchester

Scott’s Review #825

Reviewed October 31, 2018

Grade: A-

After four long years as director, James Whale finally agreed to follow up on and resurrect his character, The Monster. Fortunately, Boris Karloff also returned to the role he made famous. In this installment, he meets a mate played by the gorgeous Elsa Manchester.

Critics argue that the sequel is superior to the original, but I am not so sure of that; I slightly prefer Frankenstein. Still, the aptly titled Bride of Frankenstein (1935) is a fantastic effort and a memorable classic in and of itself.

The plot picks up where the original Frankenstein ended and includes a sub-plot from the 1818 Mary Shelley novel. Having learned his lesson about the drawbacks of creating life, Dr. Frankenstein (Colin Clive) is coerced into making a female mate for the Monster.

Much of the action follows the Monster, who is on the run from hunters as he encounters devious and kindly individuals. In clever form, Manchester plays the “Bride” and Mary Shelley, who is heralded for her masterful writing.

The main difference between Frankenstein and Bride of Frankenstein is that the Monster is more developed from a character perspective. Even more empathetic and now uttering some dialogue, the pained character contains more profound moments and a damaged quality.

Karloff reportedly despised this aspect, preferring that his character be more ambivalent, using grunts and facial expressions more than words, but to me, the development works well.

As the Monster traverses the forest looking for shelter while being pursued in a witch hunt style, a lovely sequence occurs between the Monster and a lonely blind man. Attracted by the gorgeous sounds of a violin playing “Ave Maria”, the blind hermit befriends the Monster and teaches him a few words like “friend”.

Harboring no ill will towards the Creature, the old hermit feels blessed and thanks God for sending him a friend. The tender moment is then shattered when a fire burns down the cottage.

The constant theme of loneliness and despair continues what Frankenstein did and is more in line with Shelley’s novel. The Creature is a tortured soul yearning for love and affection yet suffering from a temper. He is childlike and struggles to know the difference between right and wrong.

Like Frankenstein, the sequel contains high-quality special effects and ambiance. With a storm raging (naturally), the thunder and lightning qualities add so much to a horror film, filling it with suspense and a particular science fiction element.

When the Bride is hoisted to the sky and struck by lightning, the scene is both campy and terrifying.

How delicious a character is Manchester as The Monster’s Bride? The character is forever recognizable in pop culture with her statuesque seven-foot height (the actress used stilts), white-streaked hairdo, macabre white gown, and jerky, animal-like head movements.

Timeless in characterization, the beautiful woman possesses a macabre yet humorous quality. The moment she becomes alert, sees the monster, and shrieks is a memorable moment in film history.

Throughout cinematic history, few sequels ever live up to their predecessors, but Bride comes close.

Easily able to be watched in tandem with Frankenstein and perfect for a bit of Saturday afternoon nostalgia, Bride of Frankenstein (1935) is a wonderful trip down memory lane to a time when horror was as thrilling in simple black and white as it is with all the frills added.

Thanks to Whale’s brilliant direction, both films are legendary in their inspiration and achievements.

Oscar Nominations: Best Sound Recording

It Happened One Night-1934

It Happened One Night-1934

Director Frank Capra

Starring Clark Gable, Claudette Colbert

Scott’s Review #824

Reviewed October 25, 2018

Grade: A-

Perhaps the film that best defines the early cinematic romantic comedy and certainly the one most modern genre films can learn from, It Happened One Night (1934) is a lively, fun romp.

The film carted away the Best Picture, Best Director, Best Actor, and Best Actress Academy Awards, a rare feat, and defined what romantic tension and thoughtful dialogue should be in a quality picture. All the elements sparkle into an excellent classic film watch.

Ellie Andrews (Colbert) is a pampered socialite who recently disobeyed her overbearing and wealthy father by eloping with a blue-collar pilot who is feared to be after her money.

Determined, Ellie escapes her father’s clutches and hops on a Greyhound bus headed from Florida to New York, where her husband is. When she crosses paths with an out-of-work journalist, Peter Warne (Gable), they each find an opportunity to use the other to their advantage.

The pair’s adventures along the East Coast lead to antics and schemes as they fall madly in love with one another.

It Happened One Night successfully mixes a good romance with some screwball comedy without ever becoming silly or trite.

The film also serves as a good old-fashioned adventure story as Peter and Ellie face one hurdle after another on their trek north.

Pleasing is how the duo slowly finds romance but first begins as irritants towards each other. The chemistry between the actors is superb and never seems forced or contrived.

Frank Capra, a famous director with successes throughout the 1930s, culminating with the holiday favorite It’s a Wonderful Life (1946), had several Oscar-winning films during the decade.

It Happened One Night seems to have inspired most of them, and the acting, absurd situations, dialogue, and direction all successfully come together.

Shot in black and white and the Motion Picture Production Code, which heavily restricted details deemed too violent or sexual, It Happened One Night pushed the envelope quite a bit.

This is to the film’s credit- who can forget the adorable yet provocative scene in which Ellie shows her shapely legs to enable the duo to catch a ride? The lovable scene, non-risque in today’s modern world, was anything but in 1934.

An interesting, at that time unique, point is that supporting characters are more layered than is typical in romantic comedies. Danker, whom Peter and Ellie hitch a ride with, is seemingly a decent man but ultimately attempts to steal their luggage.

Later, Ellie’s preposterous father turns out to be a decent man, so the film also contains a few character surprises.

While not quite a pure masterpiece, It Happened One Night (1934) is nonetheless an inspired legendary film that can be viewed and enjoyed for the period in which it was made.

The film stands out among the similarly themed romantic comedies of the 1930s and 1940s and is a teachable moment for all filmmakers who explore the same genre territory.

Oscar Nominations: 5 wins– Outstanding Production (won), Best Director (won), Best Actor-Clark Gable (won), Best Actress-Claudette Colbert (won), Best Adaptation (won)

Halloween-2018

Halloween-2018

Director David Gordon Green

Starring Jamie Lee Curtis, Judy Greer

Scott’s Review #823

Reviewed October 23, 2018

Grade: B+

Let’s be honest—nobody will ever be able to top or recreate the iconic 1978 masterpiece Halloween, so any real attempt is a moot point.

Throughout the subsequent decades, many sequels or remakes have emerged, largely disappointing or turning the franchise into a joke.

With the latest incarnation of Halloween (2018), director David Gordon Green gets it right by creating a follow-up to the original, skipping all the other films. Scoring Jamie Lee Curtis as Laurie is a significant win and seemingly dozens of neat references to the original gem.

Set forty years to the day (Halloween Eve and Halloween, naturally!), the audience is first given a summary of killer Michael Myers’ (Nick Castle) time spent in Smith Grove Sanitarium once captured following the 1978 Haddonfield killing spree.

Two journalists visit Myers in captivity and attempt to make him speak after forty years of silence by mentioning Laurie Strode and showing him his notorious Halloween mask.

Conveniently, he will be transferred to a maximum-security prison the following day. We know that Meyers will escape.

Meanwhile, Laurie has been living with post-traumatic stress disorder since her attack and lives in a constant state of paranoia.

With two failed marriages and a daughter, Karen (Judy Greer), who is traumatized by her mother’s anxiety, Laurie’s life has not been easy. As an aside, I love how Laurie dons the same hairstyle she had at age seventeen.

While she awaits Michael’s inevitable return, Laurie’s secluded house is peppered with traps and guns, allowing her to be at the ready at any moment. Despite her problems, Laurie is close to her granddaughter, Allyson (Andi Matichak).

When the inevitable happens, and Michael escapes, presumably by causing a bus accident off-screen, the action truly begins. The coincidence of this happening on Halloween night is to be expected and embraced.

Audiences who see the film are certainly not new to the genre. The target audience is the crowd that either grew up with the original or was introduced to it later.

Therefore, the film is wise not to try to reinvent the wheel, giving fans what they expect. The opening graphics (the eerie orange writing and the glowing jack-o-lantern) are intact, as is the “introducing” credit for its heroine—in this case, Matichak.

There are several certainties about a horror film like Halloween. We know there will be “kills,” and an inevitable showdown between Laurie and Michael Myers will conclude the film.

The fun is in the trip we take to get there. Who will be slashed and how? A butcher knife? Other Halloween delights?

Since there are arguably three female leads and three generations of Strodes, will the film make one of them feel Michael’s deadly wrath?

Halloween works; a significant reason is the countless nods to its past. Many scenes pay homage to attention-paying fans, creating riches and nostalgic memories.

Allyson’s boyfriend’s father’s name is Lonnie—undoubtedly the kid Dr. Loomis scared away from the Myers’ house forty years ago. Then there is a neighbor woman wearing curlers and slicing a sandwich with a butcher knife, from whom Michael steals the knife, an ode to Halloween II (1981).

Finally, as Allyson sits in the back of her class and glances out the window, she sees not Michael, but Laurie standing across the street, staring at her.

These gems are in large part thanks to clever writing and study.

There are a couple of negatives to mention. I am not crazy about Judy Greer’s casting as Jamie Lee Curtis’s daughter. The actresses look nothing alike, and Curtis does not seem old enough to be Greer’s mother.

Furthermore, attempts to add some comic relief moments—two bumbling police officers talking about brownies, Allyson’s goofy father, and the salty tongue of the kid one of the babysitters sits for—do not work.

How great would it have been to include P.J. Soles, Nancy Loomis, or Kyle Richards in cameos? Since Curtis and Castle returned, I wanted more familiar faces.

In wise form, Gordon Green leaves the window open for a potential sequel, so stay for the end credits. My wish would be for this to parlay to the aftereffects of the killings on the same night, which Halloween II (1981) did so successfully.

The possibilities are endless if the box office returns are strong enough and Curtis is on board for another installment.

Frankenstein-1931

Frankenstein-1931

Director James Whale

Starring Colin Clive, Boris Karloff

Scott’s Review #822

Reviewed October 22, 2018

Grade: A

Those of us who treasure cinematic brilliance in films of the past need to look no further than Frankenstein (1931), a masterpiece in the horror genre.

Some consider it the greatest horror film ever made. The still frightening work is based on the legendary 1818 Mary Shelley novel.

Highly influential to later groupings of horror film sub-genres, the importance of this film must never be forgotten.

In a small European village, a scientist named Henry Frankenstein (Colin Clive) is determined to create human life by stealing fresh body parts from cemeteries and using electrical shock as part of his creation.

He convinces his assistant, Fritz (Dwight Frye), to steal a human brain from a former professor’s laboratory. Due to a clumsy mistake, Fritz must steal the brain of a criminal rather than a “normal” human being, the result being dire when Frankenstein’s monster is created.

The creation of the monster (and no, the monster’s name is not Frankenstein, as some might assume) is astounding, especially given the period of the early 1930s.

With a flattop, heavy eyelids, protruding neck terminals, and his hulking physique, he is a frightening figure with a yearning, childlike nature. The monster’s innocence makes him so tragic.

A compelling scene occurs when the audience sees the monster turn around and face the camera.

What separates Frankenstein from many other horror films is the underlying sadness and empathy we feel toward the monster. The “villain” in most horror films is clearly defined, but who is the villain in Frankenstein?

How can it be the monster when he, unaware of his strength, drowns a young child? We root for the beast when he hangs the dastardly dwarf, and we hate the town of peasants who seek revenge on the monster.

The complexities in this film are endless.

The main character is an interesting study. Title billed: the character is a genius while also teetering on the brink of madness- he is not the film’s hero, nor is he entirely sympathetic.

He is the ruin of a monster who has feelings and sadness in him. Frankenstein’s fiancée, Elizabeth (Mae Clark), is concerned for him, which adds a nurturing element to the dynamic. The intent is for the audience not to despise Frankenstein but to be enthralled with his complexities.

The term “monster film” can conjure feelings of silliness or over-the-top acting, but Frankenstein is more artistic than goofy.

The famous line “It’s alive!” was paid tribute to in later years, but an equally spectacular horror film, Rosemary’s Baby (1968), when Rosemary feels her haunted baby kick. To say nothing of the tribute Mel Brook’s classic Young Frankenstein (1974) paid to the original.

Given that the film was made in 1931, the effects and lighting techniques are beyond impressive. The overall tone of the film is stylistic, with a prevalent fairy-tale beauty unlike any films made at the time, save for perhaps Dracula, the 1931 horror-vampire masterpiece.

Frankenstein and Dracula would make a delicious double feature on Saturday evenings. Director James Whale creates a magical environment, holding up thriving generation after generation, never seeming dated.

Frankenstein (1931) was followed by numerous sequels, the best of which is Bride of Frankenstein (1935). Undoubtedly, the film influenced campy yet influential monster films to follow- most notably the “Hammer Horror films” of the same tone.

Despite teetering on the one-hundred-year-old mark, the brilliant film is timeless and must be introduced to young filmmakers everywhere (especially in the horror genre).

Split-2016

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.

Oliver & Company-1988

Oliver & Company-1988

Director George Scribner

Voices Joey Lawrence, Natalie Gregory, Billy Joel

Scott’s Review #818

Reviewed October 8, 2018

Grade: B

Oliver & Company (1988) is a darling animated film released by Walt Disney Pictures, the 27th Disney feature film produced.

The film is based on Charles Dickens’s novel Oliver Twist, but Oliver is now a homeless kitten who joins a gang of dogs, and the setting shifts from London to the dangerous streets of New York City in the present day.

We meet Oliver (Joey Lawrence) as he huddles with other homeless kittens in a cardboard box, chilly from a driving New York rain.

As all of the other kittens are snatched up by adoring animal lovers, Oliver is inexplicably left on his own.

He eventually meets up with Dodger (Billy Joel), a mongrel with street smarts, and the duo steals hot dogs from an abrasive food vendor.

When Dodger swindles Oliver out of his share, the kitten follows the dog to a barge, which turns out to be the hideout of Fagin (Dom DeLuise), a human pickpocket. Fagin houses a gang of assorted dogs as loan shark Sykes bullies him.

As Oliver bonds with the miscreants, his life suddenly takes a positive turn when he is rescued from the streets by a kindly, wealthy little girl named Jenny and her bumbling butler, Winston.

Jenny’s parents are on holiday in Europe, leaving her and Winston running the house.

Along for the ride is Jenny’s sophisticated and spoiled pet poodle, Georgette (Bette Midler), who takes a dislike to Oliver.

By the 1980s, Disney films were hardly the hot commodity they once were, and the small budget is evidence of that. Oliver & Company is not on par with classic, lovely offerings such as Pinocchio (1940), Fantasia (1940), or Dumbo (1941).

The film has a severe and decidedly “1980s quality”, mostly due to the upbeat soundtrack, which decades later makes the film feel rather dated.

Speaking of the soundtrack, the highlight is a treat entitled “Why Should I Worry?”, a tune sung by the ensemble cast and impossible not to hum along to.

The film features an array of famous voices that are perfectly cast.

The filmmakers wisely cast plenty of native New Yorkers, which results in a huge measure of authenticity. Brazen voices like Midler’s, Joel’s, and Cheech Marin’s, as feisty chihuahua Tito give credibility to their characters.

The odd romantic pairing of Georgette and Tito, on the surface completely mismatched, gives a good dose of comic relief to the story.

The story written for Oliver & Company is the best part of the entire production.  Anyone familiar with the famous Dickens novel or Oliver! (1968), the most famous of the film incarnations, knows how the story will end.

This did not hinder my enjoyment of the animated film, though, which was a compelling and charming experience. Sykes makes a great villain, drawn with a long face and enormous chin, interesting, but not too scary to frighten young children.

One conspicuous omission is the elimination of the important character of Nancy. As fans know, Nancy played a vital role in the original story. Perplexing is the decision not to include her, but perhaps her ultimate death would have made the story too dark, so this can be overlooked.

Surely not the best in the Disney bunch, Oliver & Company (1988) is nonetheless a decent offering, sadly overlooked by fans and critics alike.

The film is nearly forgotten and suffers from a dated quality, if not for the widespread knowledge of the classic novel. The film is not one of the storied Disney treasures, nor should it be dismissed altogether.

The result is a darling, innocent experience meant for pure enjoyment.

Fahrenheit 11/9-2018

Fahrenheit 11/9-2018

Director Michael Moore

Starring Michael Moore

Scott’s Review #817

Reviewed October 5, 2018

Grade: B+

Controversial filmmaker Michael Moore, who has been at the helm of other topical and lively works, does it again with a politically charged documentary, Fahrenheit 11/9 (2018).

Known for other substantial offerings like Roger and Me (1989), Bowling for Columbine (2002), and Fahrenheit 9/11 (2004), the left-wing activist continues his aggressive and thought-provoking ways with an excellent effort.

After the gloomy and divisive 2016 United States Presidential election, it seems inevitable for Moore to create another politically infused documentary.

This critical point in history is the primary focus of his work. Moore asks and analyzes two crucial questions: How did we get here, and how do we get out? In pure Michael Moore controversy, he adds a couple of expletives for good measure.

The documentary itself begins with the surprising, and (to most), now dire buildup to the 2016 election with clips of Hillary Clinton’s assured victory and election night festivities interspersed with the expected loss of Donald Trump.

The Republican Party was not crazy about Trump as a candidate, and the unexpected victory due to the electoral college rule left the United States shocked, appalled, and in a state of peril.

Moore does not simply create a documentary about the election, though. Instead, he crosses into territory including the creation of a dictator (Trump) and how this man’s rise to the presidency mirrors Adolf Hitler’s rise to power in 1930s Germany.

Hitler used a sense of fear and populism among the German people to his advantage and successfully created an “us versus them” mentality.

Trump is doing the same with sour and hateful propaganda.

As many of Moore’s other documentaries do, Fahrenheit 11/9 feels very personal to Moore. It spends a lot of time exploring the poisoned water situation in Flint, Michigan (Moore’s hometown), and the ensuing cover-up by the Governor of Michigan, Rick Snyder.

The largely working-class city (already decimated by numerous GM layoffs) faced a public health emergency due to lead contamination.

So that the subject matter is not completely dour and depressing (though admittedly, I was depressed watching most of the documentary for personal reasons), Moore gleefully adds some humor.

As a camera shot of the director lumbering towards the Snyder headquarters to confront him about the poisoned Flint water and the governor’s reported cover-up, a Snyder employee refuses to drink the water Moore insists is directly from Flint and therefore must be safe.

Moore later waters the lawn of the Governor’s home with a giant fire hose when Snyder refuses to be interviewed.

As liberal-minded as Moore is, he is not afraid to call out members of his party- the Democrats. He shames President Obama for once appearing in Flint, which was viewed as a “saving grace” for the city folks, only to pretend to drink a glass of Flint water while insisting it was safe to drink.

Moore surmises that this stunt turned off the people of Flint, who stayed home on election day, causing Clinton to lose the state of Michigan.

Moore has perhaps never made a more relevant or emotional documentary than he has with Fahrenheit 11/9 (2018). In a tumultuous time in the United States’ history, his documentary is quite opportune to implore people to care about what is happening.

With the 2018 mid-term elections looming, the country is again at the forefront of a pivotal moment in history. Moore’s timing is flawless.

Faces Places-2017

Faces Places-2017

Director Agnes Varda, JR

Scott’s Review #816

Reviewed October 3, 2018

Grade: B+

Fans of French culture, landscape, and sophistication will assuredly enjoy Faces Places (2017), a documentary that explores art and creativity.

With humorous and touching moments, the work explores the friendship between two artists of vastly different ages.

Some scenes of Paris, especially the French countryside, make this a personal treat.

The documentary begins by showing its two main characters, thirty-something JR and eighty-something Agnes Varda, who do not know one another beforehand and miss each other in a coffee shop.

Both share their passion for images expressed in different ways—photography and cinema. They each enjoy expressing ordinary people’s stories by creating lavish portraits and exhibiting them in houses, barns, and the like.

Both Varda and JR co-directed this documentary.

When I decided to view Faces Places, I did so with the anticipation that I would be treated to sightseeing-type glimpses of Paris and the surrounding areas—possibly even the south of France, Niece, or Burgundy!

Paris gets short shrift, but this can be forgiven as rural France (not known as a tourist hotbed) is featured mainly. We experience many local French people living ordinary lives but bringing something treasured to the film.

As Agnes and JR cavort around the rural roads in his pickup truck, they stop in small towns where they have heard of an interesting story.

In one town, a farmer works alone and supports his village—a superhero of sorts. In another town, Varga and JR honor an old woman who has lived in the same house for decades by brandishing her portrait on the exterior of her house. The woman is tearful and emotionally touched.

The dynamic between Agnes and JR is the high point of the documentary.

With more than one generation between them, they begin as acquaintances, but their bond flourishes and grows as the documentary moves along.

Think of the relationship between Ruth Gordon and Bud Cort in the 1971 masterpiece Harold and Maude, save for the romantic element. In a touching moment, JR introduces Agnes to his quite elderly grandmother, and the two women hit it off tremendously.

Varda is particularly interesting because of her contribution to the 1950s French New Wave cinema.

Her usage of location sequences and non-professional actors was unconventional at the time and highly influential. In a tender scene, Varda attempts to visit friend Jean-Luc Godard, but he refuses to see her, evidently now living as a recluse.

Faces Places (2017) is a rich and soulful experience with enough imagination and creativity to inspire viewers.

Although the documentary does not offer as much of the vast French landscape as I had anticipated, it does offer a lesson in the importance of life.

With a startlingly connected duo contributing a whimsical approach to their passion, the result is an inspirational journey everyone can enjoy.

Oscar Nominations: Best Documentary-Feature

Independent Spirit Award Nominations: Best Documentary Feature (won)

The Insult-2017

The Insult-2017

Director Ziad Doueiri

Starring Adel Karam, Kamel El Basha

Scott’s Review #815

Reviewed October 1, 2018

Grade: B

A Lebanese film nominated for the Best Foreign Language Film Academy award, The Insult (2017) offers its audience what I would categorize as a message film.

A battle of cultures and religions leads to chaos and controversy, culminating in an embattled court case as we also get to know supporting characters.

While the film is above average, it is also too glossy and sometimes plays out more like a television series- with dramatic effects and plot developments for miles.

Still, the film is a worthy watch.

The main character, Tony Hanna (Adel Karam), lives with his pregnant wife, Shirine, in a small Lebanese village. Tony works as an automobile mechanic but is a proud member of the Christian community, attending rallies and events.

His village employs Palestinian refugees to perform maintenance repairs, which irritates Tony. When a verbal altercation with middle-aged refugee Yasser (Kamel El Basha) occurs over a broken gutter, a failed apology results in physical violence as the situation rapidly escalates.

The courtroom drama, while compelling, seems a very familiar story.

Other recent foreign-language films, such as A Separation (2011) and Gett: The Trial of Vivian Amsalem (2014), use similar plot devices of family conflict that end up in the courtroom.

Those films are better written and feel more authentic and raw than The Insult. Throughout the film, I kept telling myself I was not watching a Middle Eastern version of Law & Order, but that is what it felt like.

I felt little sympathy for Tony, and I was unsure if we were supposed to feel anything for him. With his brooding nature and populist attitude, he is initially written as downright unlikeable.

I assume the intent was to soften the character over the film’s length when he briefly comes to Yasser’s aid and helps start the man’s car. However, Tony soon reverts to his original stubborn nature.

Yasser is a much more likable fellow, albeit with a temper. Hurling curse words at Tony is why the tension between the two men begins in the first place, and attempted apologies only lead to miscommunication between everyone.

But Yasser gets my vote for the most compassionate character.

In the supporting roles, an interesting (though perhaps not completely necessary) side story exists as the embattled lawyers are revealed to be father and daughter.

The major problem with The Insult is that the entire story seems plot-driven, and each step is created to create a way to build or add tension.

For example, a speeding motorcycle angrily side-swipes Tony and his wife.  The partners are then in peril because their daughter is born prematurely due to stress.

Situations and tensions could have been quickly resolved or smoothed under different circumstances. Therefore, despite some good drama, the tone of the films feels less than authentic and manipulative.

Still, the writing team introduces the audience to the turbulent world of Middle Eastern politics in a way that undoubtedly results in thought-provoking views and exposure to opposing ideas.

The film also provides a distinct hopeful slant at the conclusion to avoid sending a dour message. The direction is that people can come together as one peaceful group, but it will not be easy.

The Insult (2017) is not a bad watch. It compels the viewer to witness a fascinating story of differing cultures and warring religious beliefs churning two men inside out when faced with conflict.

The film also does a fine job of emitting a peaceful message of coming together as human beings.

An overall rating of “B” is a nice score. Still, given the dozens of potential Best Foreign Language finalists, I am not sure the film entirely “cuts the mustard” for me- indeed, there were superior entries.

But then, this Oscar category’s nominating process has always been a mystery.

Oscar Nominations: Best Foreign Language Film