Monthly Archives: June 2019

1932 Films, Drama, Favorite Film of the Year

Shanghai Express-1932

Leave a comment

Shanghai Express-1932

Director Josef Von Sternberg

Starring Marlene Dietrich, Clive Brook

Scott’s Review #913

Reviewed June 29, 2019

Grade: A-

A film way ahead of its time and firmly affixed to the female perspective, Shanghai Express (1932) is riddled with drama, intrigue, and adventure, culminating in a slightly too tidy ending.

Forgetting that slight embrace with the traditional been there, done that film climax, the story has layers of interesting tidbits and will assuredly keep audiences on their toes.

Marlene Dietrich sizzles in the lead role and benefits from the film’s being made before the American code, which put restrictions on pictures and watered down many.

With flashes of a story like Murder on the Orient Express, Shanghai Express gets off to a strong start as a group of strangers of differing backgrounds begin to board the self-titled train from Istanbul, Turkey, through civil war-torn China.

This stir is caused by the presence of Shanghai Lily (Dietrich), a woman of questionable morals, with her sidekick Hui Fei (Anna May Wong) in tow.

Lily reconnects with her former flame, Captain Donald Harvey (Clive Brook), as passengers shun her and political matters reach the boiling point, leading Lily to prove her undying love for Donald.

Considering that the film was made in 1932, the plot and surrounding elements all resound as female-driven, which is both courageous and forceful.

Dietrich is glamorous and photographs beautifully, with no better example than the scene when she trembles and shivers in fear as she clings to a cigarette, her character deep in thought and anxiety.

The image and lighting were so powerful that they became the cover art for the promotional photograph. A promiscuous woman who is never ashamed of who she is, Lily proudly proclaims the immortal line, “It took more than one man to change my name to Shanghai Lily.”

The mysterious and deadly Hui Fei, Anna May Wong, nearly overshadows Dietrich. With her exotic demeanor, the audience is perplexed by her, not knowing much about her, and longing for more exposure and reveals.

Hui Fei comes full tilt during the final act but remains an elusive character. Throughout the film’s short runtime, which is one hour and thirty-two minutes, I found myself thinking about Hui Fei continuously, wanting more explanation about her life, her background, and how she came to be associated with Shanghai Lily.

The film’s atmosphere is a championed success. The roaring engines of the fast-moving train, mixed with the bells and dazzling, luxurious train cars, make the background details tremendously important, keeping the fast-paced action ongoing and crackling.

The supporting characters like judgmental Christian missionary Mr. Carmichael (Lawrence Grant), who at first condemns the two as “fallen women,” and the boarding housekeeper Mrs. Haggerty (Louise Closser Hale) with her strictness for discipline and cleanliness, add life and an excellent comic balance to the heavy drama.

Shanghai Express’s tremendous attributes, cagey female characters, and perspective have such strong appeal that they ultimately lead to a glaring letdown at the end of the film.

Understood is how Lily is madly in love with Donald, and the physical tension they share throughout the film is palpable and noticeable. She is willing to agree to go with the film’s villain, the dastardly Chang (Warner Oland), to his palace, presumably for sex or to become his kept woman, all in the name of her love for Donald.

Lily and Donald find their way to a strong embrace as the film ends, but this feels contrived given the immense other qualities.

Lovely is having the experience of viewing a film that is not too distant from celebrating its one-hundredth anniversary and noticing aspects highly influential to other films.

Thanks to Dietrich’s fantastic performance and cleverly written characters, the film is a high achievement and should be exposed to young film fans studying in film school as evidence of an early treasure.

Shanghai Express (1932) is a cinematic success with complexities and voracious theater.

Oscar Nominations: 1 win– Outstanding Production, Best Director-Josef Von Sternberg, Best Cinematography (won)

2017 Films, Comedy, Dark Comedy, Drama, Independent, Independent Comedy, Independent Drama

Oh Lucy!-2017

Leave a comment

Oh, Lucy! -2017

Director Atsuko Hirayanagi

Starring Shinobu Terajima, Josh Hartnett

Scott’s Review #912

Reviewed June 20, 2019

Grade: B+

Japanese culture meets American culture, which is the underlying component of Oh Lucy! (2017), a fascinating dark comedy and feature film debut by female director Atsuko Hirayanagi.

The film was once short but progressed into a full-length project, deservedly receiving Film Independent nominations for Best Female Lead and Best First Feature.

The co-settings of Tokyo and Los Angeles and the tremendous performance by star Shinobu Terajima make this a worthy watch.

Middle-aged Setsuko (Terajima) lives an unfulfilled daily existence in Tokyo, working a drab office job and living in a cluttered one-bedroom apartment riddled with comforting junk.

She wears a protective mouth cover, which is common in her city, to avoid breathing in bad air and to avoid chain smoke. She is unpopular at work and wishes to date more but is unlucky in love.

One day, she is convinced by her niece Mika (Shiori Kutsuna) to take English lessons and falls for her handsome instructor, John (Josh Hartnett), who nicknames her “Lucy,” making her don a blonde wig and talks “American.”

A classmate, “Tom” (Koji Yakusho), seems interested in “Lucy.”

When Mika runs off with John to Los Angeles, prompting Setsuko and her bitchy sister Ayako (Kaho Minami) to follow suit, concerned for her safety, the adventure begins.

Setsuko and Mika compete for positions with John. Still, her vacation from her dreary job and growing obsession with him energize her as a rivalry between Setsuko and Ayako hits full throttle.

Setsuko begins to exhibit bizarre and unbecoming behavior.

The film delves into an interesting characteristic among Japanese females: rivalry, as the subject matter is heavily female-centered.

The trio of Setsuko, Ayako, and Mika are family and love each other unconditionally, but do they like each other?

Immediately, we learn that Setsuko stole Ayako’s boyfriend long ago, or so she claims. Eventually, Setsuko tries to steal Ayako’s man, so there is a recurring conflict between the two women.

We assume Ayako has a rebellious streak, just like Setsuko did at her age.

Despite the triangle of drama and issues, the main story and focal point belong to Setsuko and her infatuation with John. From the first moment they embrace part of a teacher-student dynamic, Setsuko is hooked. She longs to remain in his arms until he insists she let go.

This is a key moment when intrigue looms. Does she feel more comfortable and confident in her blonde wig and new persona? Does this give her the courage and the guts to flee her boring life for a chance at love in Los Angeles?

John loves Mika, but more importantly, despite her best efforts, he has no feelings for Setsuko. In a pivotal and hilarious scene, John and Setsuko smoke marijuana as he teaches her how to drive in a deserted parking lot.

As they feel the effects of the drug, Setsuko comes on to John, and before he knows it, they have sex. This only deepens her obsession with him as she decides to get the same tattoo as he has.

He realizes she may not be stable as the audience, still enamored with the character, begins to pity her.

Hirayanagi is careful not to make her film a downer, and she does a fantastic job. When Setsuko returns to her meager existence in Tokyo, she is unceremoniously fired from the job she despises but has held for decades.

Is she devastated or liberated? Perhaps a bit of each, but she has reached her breaking point and succumbs to sadness, longing for John.

Fortunately, a surprise appearance by an unexpected character uplifts her spirits and the entire film.

Oh, Lucy! (2017) is an excellent example of an independent film from an inexperienced director who is laden with good qualities. A wounded main character who is sympathetic to viewers leads a dynamic story of loneliness and melancholia, but also with witty dialogue, crackling humor, and a multicultural approach.

A hybrid Japanese and American film with location sequences in both areas, the film will satisfy those seeking an intelligent, quick-witted experience.

Independent Spirit Award Nominations: Best Female Lead-Shinobu Terajima, Best First Feature

1964 Films, French, International, International Musical, International Romance, Musical

The Umbrellas of Cherbourg-1964

Leave a comment

The Umbrellas of Cherbourg-1964

Director Jacques Demy

Starring Catherine Deneuve, Nino Castelnuovo

Scott’s Review #911

Reviewed June 17, 2019

Grade: A

The Umbrellas of Cherbourg (1964), translated in French as Les Parapluies de Cherbourg, is a daring film. It is unique in that all dialogue is sung recitatively, like an opera or a stage musical.

But wait, there’s more.

The film has colorful and dazzling set designs that enrich the entire experience amid the lovely French culture and atmosphere. Interspersing a melody, the result is a stoic treasure.

The film received an Oscar nomination for Best Foreign Language Film and several other nominations.

The film is divided into three parts and progresses chronologically over six years. Part One is The Departure; Part Two is The Absence and Part Three is The Return, each representing a meaningful part of the story.

Madame Emery (Anne Vernon) and her sixteen-year-old daughter Genevieve (Deneuve) own a struggling umbrella boutique in Cherbourg, France. Genevieve falls in love with Guy (Castelnuovo), a local mechanic, and they have sex the night before he is drafted to war, resulting in an unexpected pregnancy.

Madame Emery and Genevieve must decide what options are best when she is courted by wealthy jeweler Roland (Marc Michel), unaware of her pregnancy. Genevieve and Guy continue to write letters to each other as she softens towards Roland and makes a decision.

An injured Guy returns from the war, and events kick into high gear as the love birds face an uncertain future amid surrounding barriers to their happiness.

To embrace the flavor and pacing of the film takes a few minutes of patience- like some viewers becoming accustomed to sub-titles in general, which the film also possesses, the singing is initially quite jarring but before long is to be embraced and appreciated for its unique nature.

To stress the point, the film is not a standard musical. Songs are mixed in with conventional dialogue, and each line is sung.

With this role, Deneuve gained wider recognition beyond a French audience already familiar with her work. She shines brightly in the lead role and never looks lovelier. The young lady, hardly appearing to be just sixteen (in truth, she was twenty-one), carries the film with a chic and sophisticated style, ideally in tune with the 1960s.

Her magnificent grace and elegance make her the primary reason to tune in. She sings her lines flawlessly and with unforced precision.

The story is unequivocally a basic one of a girl meets a boy, the boy is drafted into the army, the girl becomes pregnant, the girl meets another suitor, and the boy returns home as conflict arises.

The magic is what director Jacques Demy does with the piece.

Everyday life is presented in situational scenes, adding substance and commonalities. Genevieve and Guy are in love and face external and internal obstacles. At the same time, Madeleine (Ellen Farner), a quiet young woman who looks after Guy’s aunt, is secretly in love with Guy, as she adds a secret weapon to the film.

The audience cares for the characters, especially Genevieve and Guy, but the supporting characters add a robust quality worthy of mention.

Anne Vernon is pivotal as Madame Emery. She is stylish and lavish, concerned for her daughter’s well-being, and slyly sees opportunities to save her boutique. Guy’s sickly Aunt Elise provides security and love to those who heed her advice.

Actress Mireille Perrey plays her.

The vivid colors and sets make The Umbrellas of Cherbourg challenging to forget. Stark and florescent painted pinks, greens, and blues, mainly on the walls, provide zest and flavor, a grand style all its own.

The bright, crisp designs evoke a lavish Hollywood musical with a cultured French twist. The result is perfect, and one can easily immerse themselves in the singing and the artistry.

The recurring main song “I Will Wait for You” (the central theme, also known as “Devant le garage”) is delicious and emotional as it appears in many poignant scenes.

Those seeking a charismatic and distinctive experience with nuances and a hint of experimentation will undoubtedly enjoy this fruity and tasty treat.

With a French atmosphere for miles, the film encompasses all that is good and cultured about French cinema.

The Umbrellas of Cherbourg (1964) will entertain and unabashedly knock your socks off with something grand and sizzling flavor.

Oscar Nominations: Best Foreign Language Film, Best Story and Screenplay Written Directly for the Screen, Best Song-“I Will Wait for You,” Best Music Score-Substantially Original, Best Scoring of Music-Adaptation or Treatment

1957 Films, Drama

12 Angry Men-1957

Leave a comment

12 Angry Men-1957

Director Sidney Lumet

Starring Henry Fonda, Lee J. Cobb

Scott’s Review #910

Reviewed June 14, 2019

Grade: A

A fond memory of Junior High School was reading the play and then being treated to a viewing of the film version of 12 Angry Men (1957), a bristling and suffocating film that infuses progressive thought and thinking for oneself in animosity.

A valuable lesson for a teenager to learn, or anyone else, the film is essential, providing life lessons and tremendous drama, holding up well and still brimming with texture.

The film begins as the audience is introduced to twelve men as they deliberate the conviction or acquittal of a defendant based on reasonable doubt. The defendant is an eighteen-year-old Puerto Rican male living in a poor neighborhood, accused of fatally stabbing his father.

The witnesses are an older man and a lady who lives across the street. The juror’s instructions are evident; if there is any reasonable doubt, they return a verdict of not guilty. If found guilty, the accused will receive a death sentence.

Henry Fonda plays Juror # Eight, who initially is the only juror to vote “not guilty” when the others assuredly vote “guilty.” He adamantly questions how reliable the two witnesses are and disagrees with the argument that the knife used in the death is an obscure brand as he produces an identical knife of his own.

Juror # Eight can convince one juror to change his vote, allowing discussions and analysis to reconvene, much to the chagrin of a few men, especially Juror # 3 (Lee J. Cobb), the main antagonist.

Director Sidney Lumet provides a dynamic atmosphere in his debut film with astounding results. The black and white cinematography is brilliantly mixed with the humidity of a scorching New York summer day as the one set used is claustrophobic, bringing the audience into the action and suffocating along with the men.

As tensions mount and one juror attempts to kill another juror out of rage, a thunderstorm erupts outside, breaking the heat and changing the momentum in the jury room as the tide slowly turns in a different direction.

The story is wonderfully written as each juror’s backstory is slowly revealed, providing insight into why each man may think the way he does or perhaps have preconceived notions about the accused instead of giving him a fair shake.

Juror #3 is a bully estranged from his son, while Juror # 7 mistrusts “foreigners.” Some of the others “go with the flow,” intimidated by conflicts, and afraid to ruffle feathers.

12 Angry Men teaches the utmost importance of the power of change against all odds. By standing by his convictions, Juror # 8 influenced the other jurors to see what they were either unable to see or refused to see.

He forces them to question their morals and values.

By the time the film has concluded, the audience is smacked across the face with tremendous impact, perhaps questioning their views.

This is an example of the power of cinema.

Like the stage version, the plot requires the audience to think and determine along with the characters, the power of reason, and intense dialogue.

The fact that all the jurors are white males is never lost on me, but neither does it detract from my enjoyment. This is how things were done decades ago.

Fonda is charismatic and brilliant in the lead role.

12 Angry Men (1957) is a timeless story told and retold wonderfully on the live stage. Lumet brings the production to the big screen powerfully and effectively by using cinematic elements to produce the proper emotions from his audience.

The film holds up very well as, sadly, many of the stereotypes and beliefs that the jurors possess are still held by many Americans.

On the more positive scale, people with strong and empathetic wills, like Juror # 8, also exist and unquestionably influence more than they lose.

Oscar Nominations: Best Motion Picture, Best Director-Sidney Lumet, Best Screenplay Based on Material from Another Medium

1960 Films, Thriller

Midnight Lace-1960

Leave a comment

Midnight Lace-1960

Director David Miller

Starring Doris Day, Rex Harrison

Scott’s Review #909

Reviewed June 13, 2019

Grade: B+

Midnight Lace (1960) is a straightforward psychological thriller made in cinematic history when the genre increased in popularity.

The film was influenced by the Alfred Hitchcock craze, which was front and center at this time, and a robust departure for its lead, Doris Day, who until this time mainly was nestled securely in the romantic comedy domain.

The film is a good watch and a challenging role for Day, who proves she has the acting chops to carry the movie.

Day portrays Kit, an American heiress, newly married to British financier Tony (Rex Harrison), residing together in London. When she is terrorized by an odd voice in a London park one misty night, her panic is dismissed as rubbish, and pranksters have their way with her.

When the threats return and escalate with telephone calls, Tony alerts the authorities, who question whether Kit may be imagining things or creating a panic to gain attention from her husband.

Tony, in turn, begins to ask the same questions.

Day, an American sweetheart and forever good girl was brave enough to tackle a role that was left of center for her. Despite her acceptable acting and impressive range during scenes of peril, Doris Day is still Doris Day, and it is tough to shake the image of her playing herself.

Attractive, Day is not the sexpot type, so a few scenes of her being flirty by attempting to seduce Tony with sexy nighties do not work so well. Day has never looked lovelier than she does in this picture.

The plot rolls along with fantastic glossy production values, and I never found myself tuning out or wondering when the film would end.

The drama heightens minute by minute, turning into a whodunit, while the film wisely never disqualifies whether Kit could be staging the shenanigans herself.

Did she fall into a bus, or was she pushed? Why did she hire someone to call her? Is the menacing voice disguised? The questions become more frequent as the film progresses, which is what good thrillers should do.

I figured out only half of the big reveal, but the other half caught me off guard, and the finale was climactic and satisfying.

The film belongs to Day, but the additions of Harrison and the legendary Myrna Loy add class and flavor to a movie that could have been dismissed as only cliched in lesser hands.

Harrison is effective as the concerned but stoic husband, and the audience wonders if Tony is involved in Kit’s stalking or if he is a caring man.

Does the subplot of a discovered embezzler in Tony’s company have anything to do with it? If so, how are the stories connected?

Handsome John Gavin, a Rock Hudson type who became famous for Psycho (1960), is a welcome addition as contractor Brian. He shows up at the right time to save Kit, making him a prime suspect.

Loy plays Kit’s Aunt Bea, who comes to town for a visit; the part is nothing special, but seeing the actress in whatever role she tackles is lovely.

Finally, Malcolm Stanley (Roddy McDowell) adds drama as a money-hungry man and son of Kit’s maid.

Characters are added to the story as potential suspects.

The viewer is treated to their share of exterior shots of London, which provides the film with enough British flavor, almost to forget that Day is American. With the additions of Scotland Yard and an Inspector, the British culture is firmly placed, adding a wonderful British element.

Tony and Kit are rich, so their lavish home and exclusive neighborhood are finely placed on display.

The film’s title is represented in a cute scene when Kit seductively holds up a sexy outfit she purchased for Tony. The scene seems straight out of the 1980s slick television movie thriller genre and is primed for the Lifetime television network.

This is not a criticism because the title works well and holds tantalizing darkness.

Midnight Lace (1960) is a nearly forgotten film that is a fine watch and a lovely tribute to Doris Day’s talents. She makes the film her own and is the main reason to watch it.

Though she does not sing or play the girl next door, she does turn in an above-average performance, showing her range as an actress. The rest of the film’s trimmings, especially the locale and the supporting actors, benefit the viewing pleasure the film possesses.

Oscar Nominations: Best Costume Design, Color

1957 Films, Best Picture Oscar Winners, Drama, Epic, War

The Bridge on the River Kwai- 1957

Leave a comment

The Bridge on the River Kwai- 1957

Director David Lean

Starring William Holden, Alec Guinness 

Scott’s Review #908

Reviewed June 11, 2019

Grade: A

The Bridge on the River Kwai (1957) is a war film that is an example of character-driven storytelling from each person’s perspective.

Films of this genre frequently do not steer too far from the straight and narrow, showcasing the war event perspective. This often becomes larger than the humanity piece. A key point is the American, British, and Japanese points of view, which turn the grand epic experience into a more personal one.

The film was awarded numerous Oscar nominations, culminating with the Best Picture of the Year victory.

The time is early 1943 amid the powerful and destructive World War II when a group of British prisoners of war (POW) arrives at a Japanese camp. Colonel Saito (Sessue Hayakawa) commands all prisoners, regardless of rank, to begin work on a railway bridge that will connect Bangkok with Rangoon.

Lieutenant Colonel Nicholson (Alec Guinness), the British commanding officer, refuses manual labor, and a battle of wills erupts between the two men. Meanwhile, Commander Shears (William Holden), an American also being held at the same camp, vows to destroy the bridge to avoid a court martial.

The complexities of the relationships between the men are the main draw and an aspect that can be discussed at length. Each possesses a firm motivation, but the emotions teeter back and forth as they face various conflicts.

Each of the three principles is an analytical juggernaut in the human spirit, ranging from courageous, cowardly, and even evil. We are supposed to root for Shears and supposed to not root for Saito, but why is that not so cut and dry?

Is Shears too revenge-minded? We cheer Nicholson’s resilience, but is he too stubborn for his own good?

The film’s whistling work theme nearly became famous when the film was initially released in 1957. Ominous and peppered with a macabre depression, the prisoners go about their work in a near ode to Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs’ cheerier “Whistle While You Work” anthem.

As they continue to build the bridge dutifully, the audience feels a sense of dread and a foreboding atmosphere. What will ultimately happen? When two prisoners are shot dead while attempting to escape, the film takes a different turn.

Given that David Lean, responsible for such epic masterpieces as Lawrence of Arabia (1962) and A Passage to India (1984), directs The Bridge on the River Kwai, should be telling as far as the sweeping exterior landscape treats in store for the viewer.

The lavish Asian landscape, so picturesque and beautiful, is peaceful amid the chaos and vile treatment of the prisoners. This imbalance is wonderfully rich and poignant against the robust storytelling.

The climax is bombastic (literally!) and a nail-biting experience resulting in a stabbing, an explosion, and a heap of tension. A train carrying important dignitaries and soldiers is racing towards the newly constructed bridge as one man is intent on detonating a bomb and destroying another race against time to prevent the bloodbath.

The suspense, action, and cinematic skill are front and center during the final act.

Deserving of each one of the accolades reaped on The Bridge on the River Kwai (1957), the film is the thinking man’s war film.

Layered with an underlying humanistic approach and little violence given the subject matter, one can sink into empathy for each point of view presented instead of being force-fed a one-dimensional message film.

Fine acting and gorgeous cinematography make this film one to be forever remembered.

Oscar Nominations: 7 wins-Best Motion Picture (won), Best Director-David Lean (won), Best Actor-Alec Guinness (won), Best Supporting Actor-Sessue Hayakawa, Best Screenplay Based on Material from Another Medium (won), Best Scoring (won), Best Cinematography (won), Best Film Editing (won)

1959 Films, Comedy, Romantic Comedy

Pillow Talk-1959

Leave a comment

Pillow Talk-1959

Director Michael Gordon

Starring Rock Hudson, Doris Day

Scott’s Review #907

Reviewed June 6, 2019

Grade: B+

Pillow Talk (1959) is the ultimate in romantic comedies from the age of innocence in cinema.

In 1959, pictures were still wholesome and safe, providing happy stories and charming characters. The film is a lovely and enchanting experience with intelligent characters and fantastic chemistry among its leads.

Combined with a good romance and comic elements, it makes for a fun watch that still feels fresh and bright decades later.

Doris Day and Rock Hudson smolder as singles living in Manhattan.

Day plays Jan Morrow, a perky, independent interior decorator who dates frequently but has not yet found love. Hudson plays Brad Allen, a talented, creative Broadway composer and playboy who lives in a nearby apartment building.

Jan is frustrated by a party line that allows her to hear Brad’s endless phone conversations with the women in his life. He is annoyed by her prim and proper, holier-than-thou attitude. They bicker on the phone but have not met.

Through their mutual yet unknown-to-them acquaintance, Jonathan Forbes (Tony Randall), Brad realizes who Jan is, which leads to hilarity as he fakes a Texan accent and invents a new persona: Rex Stetson, a wealthy Texas rancher.

He succeeds in wooing Jan, who falls madly in love with him while unaware of his identity. Events culminate in the inevitable big reveal when the couple vacations at Jonathan’s cabin in nearby Connecticut.

Rock Hudson oozes masculinity and charisma, and nearly every woman he meets falls madly in love with him. Hudson’s sexual preferences are hidden from the public but well-known within the film industry, so one wonders if a few comical situations were added as an inside joke.

One can speculate if these additions were made with or without the star’s knowledge; rumors abound that Hudson reportedly carried on an affair with actor Nick Adams (Tony) during filming.

A recurring theme involves Brad mistakenly walking into an obstetrician’s office (twice!) and the doctor and nurse assuming he may be the first man to become pregnant as they attempt to locate him when he keeps disappearing.

Later, Brad attempts to trick Jan into believing Rex might be a homosexual because of his love for effeminate things.

The supporting players bring wit to Pillow Talk and are key to the film’s enjoyment. Randall, as Jonathan, is not quite the nice guy, but not entirely the foil. As he has designs for Jan, he warns Brad to keep away.

His intention, which fails, is to woo her with money, but Jan seeks true love.

Thelma Ritter’s performance as Alma, Jan’s boozy housekeeper, is delicious. She adds necessary comic timing and sardonic humor. We crackle with delight when she ultimately finds love with the elevator operator.

The lavish set design is flawless. It brightens the film while adding the luxurious style and sophistication that only New York City apartment living can bring. The combined sets of Brad’s and Jan’s apartments are gorgeous.

With bright colors and 1950s-style furniture, one can easily imagine how beautiful it would be to live in an apartment of this brilliance—I know this viewer did!

A Doris Day film would not be complete without several songs that the singer/actress performs. “Pillow Talk” during the opening credits, “Roly Poly” in the piano bar with Blackwell and Hudson, and “Possess Me” on the drive up to Jonathan’s cabin.

Pillow Talk (1959) is an example of a rich romantic comedy with significant elements. It is a bit of a fantasy and a bit silly, but it contains style, sophistication, and humor.

The film was an enormous success and was deemed “the feel-good film of the year” in many circles. Following the film, Hudson’s career was relaunched after a snag years earlier.

Oscar Nominations: 1 win-Best Actress-Doris Day, Best Supporting Actress-Thelma Ritter, Best Story and Screenplay Written Directly for the Screen (won), Best Scoring of a Dramatic or Comedy Picture, Best Art Direction, Color

2019 Films, Biography, Drama, Musical, Musical Drama

Rocketman-2019

Leave a comment

Rocketman-2019

Director Dexter Fletcher

Starring Taron Egerton, Jamie Bell

Scott’s Review #906

Reviewed June 5, 2019

Grade: A

Following the unexpected success of 2018’s rock biography Bohemian Rhapsody comes the similarly themed Rocketman (2019).

This time, the subject at hand is Elton John, rather than Freddie Mercury, but both storied figures share unquestionable comparisons, as their successes, failures, and struggles are well-documented.

Both films take their names from popular title songs, and both feature the same director, Dexter Fletcher.

Freddie Mercury and Elton John are both larger-than-life onstage personas, yet both reportedly suffered from shyness, creating characters to portray that helped ease their difficulties.

Rocketman gets the slight edge over Bohemian Rhapsody when comparing the two, with experimental and psychedelic sequences making the experience more left of center than the latter and lacking a hefty feel-good component.

I would venture to assess that Rocketman has darker overtones.

The film opens impressively as an adult, successful Elton John (Taron Egerton) attends a support group therapy session in rehab, begrudgingly. This scene will recur throughout the film as John slowly reveals more to the group about his childhood, rise to fame, and struggles with numerous demons.

This is key to the enjoyment of the film, as it frequently backtracks in time, allowing us to see John’s development both as a musician and on a personal level.

Many scenes unfold like a Broadway play, which is an ingenious approach, not only a treat for fans of John’s vast catalog of songs but also immensely creative from a cinematic perspective.

At the film’s high point, the scenes are not only showy but also propel the direction of the film, rather than slowing down the events.

Fantastic are the offerings of hit songs like “Tiny Dancer”, as shown during John’s first trip to Los Angeles, where he is forced to witness the then-crush, Bernie Taupin (Jamie Bell), take up with a supermodel at an LSD-infused Hollywood party.

The musical numbers offer glimpses into the mind and heart of Elton and other characters through song. A teary number occurs early on when a pained, boyish Elton is learning to play the piano, facing struggles at home.

When the song begins, it is Elton’s tune to carry, but then his father sings a few lines, followed by his mother and then his grandmother. Each person offers their perspective based on the lyrics they are singing.

The beauty of this scene is powerful and sets the tone for the scenes to follow.

Rocketman is an emotionally charged film, evoking laughter and tears throughout its duration. Thanks to Egerton, who carries the film, the audience cares for him as a human being instead of a larger-than-life rock star.

We feel his pain, cry his tears, and smile during rare moments when he is content. He faces insecurity, sex addiction, drug and alcohol addiction, and an eating disorder. Through Egerton, we face the battles alongside him.

Elton John serves as Executive Producer of the film, providing a measure of truth and honesty in storytelling, something Bohemian Rhapsody was accused of not containing. John’s parents are portrayed accurately and decidedly, and both mother and father are dastardly, nearly ruining Elton’s self-esteem for life.

Dallas Bryce-Howard, as his mother, is happy to capitalize financially on his fame, but sticks a dagger in his heart when she professes he will never be loved since he is a gay man.

His father is nearly as bad. Abandoning his loveless marriage to Elton’s mother, he eventually finds happiness with another woman and produces two boys. He can never love his eldest son, despite Elton’s efforts to reconnect.

To add insult to injury, his father asks him to cross out the words “to Dad” on an album autograph, instead requesting that it be given to a colleague. Elton is devastated.

Events are not all dire and dreary, as with his parents and a major suicide attempt. Happier times are shown, and his grandmother (wonderfully played by Gemma Jones) remains an ardent supporter.

His relationship with Taupin is one of the most benevolent and life-long causes of trust and respect, and once his act is cleaned up, Elton can appreciate the finer things in life more completely.

Egerton performs beautifully in both acting and singing capabilities, but lacks the singing chops that Elton John has. The decision was made not to have Egerton lip-sync, which deserves its measure of praise.

It’s interesting to wonder what the opposite choice would have resulted in. Like with Bohemian Rhapsody, we are left with a brilliant portrayal of John by Egerton.

Watched in tandem with Bohemian Rhapsody, a great idea given the back-to-back releases, is one recommendation for comparison’s sake.

Offering a more creative experience, again, the musical numbers are superb. Both switching through the back and forth timelines, Rocketman (2019) squeaks out the victory for me, and doesn’t the victor get the spoils?

If Rami Malek won the coveted Best Actor Oscar statuette, what would that mean for the tremendous turn that Egerton gives?

Oscar Nominations: 1 win-Best Original Song-“(I’m Gonna) Love Me Again (won)

2018 Films, Comedy, Drama

Tully-2018

Leave a comment

Tully-2018

Director Jason Reitman

Starring Charlize Theron, Mackenzie Davis

Scott’s Review #905

Reviewed June 2, 2019

Grade: B

Tully, a 2018 film release, received wide recognition primarily due to a Golden Globe nomination for Best Actress in a Comedy, achieved by its star, Charlize Theron.

The actress carries the film and delivers an excellent performance, a great example of casting.

The film is targeted at a specific audience: females with newborn babies, mothers of children with behavioral issues, or women who have experienced something similar in their lifetime.

As such, the perspective is clearly from the female point of view, and men may not find much, if anything, to relate to. Nonetheless, the film is a worthy watch, though I’m not sure I’d classify it firmly in the comedy category. This may have more to do with who directed it.

Jason Reitman, famous for his creations Juno (2007) and Young Adult (2011), is known for coming-of-age films with dark edges. Nonetheless, I’d carefully teeter the movie more into the drama genre than straight comedy.

We meet a very pregnant Marlo (Theron) as she is about to give birth to her third child, the implication being that it is an unplanned pregnancy. She is already frazzled by her other two children, one of whom is Jonah, who has a developmental disorder, causing stress.

Her world consists of battles with Jonah’s school, her absent-minded husband Drew (Ron Livingston), and her brother Craig (Mark Duplass), who has married an affluent woman and tries to help Marlo.

Craig offers to pay for a night nanny, which would allow Marlo to be quiet, and she finally accepts. She meets the bizarre Tully (Mackenzie Davis), who slowly changes her life.

Theron reportedly gained over fifty pounds in preparation for the role and completely immersed herself in the part. Ordinarily, a gorgeous woman and an astounding actor, she is convincing as the tired and unfulfilled suburban mother.

Haggard, going through her day-to-day routines, reveals that she yearns to be young again. She finally revisits her old stomping grounds in Brooklyn, where her passion is awakened in New York.

Theron not only transforms her appearance but also portrays an enormous amount of emotion teetering between a responsible mother and a flighty middle-aged woman.

To say that Tully is a “woman’s film”, a phrase I dislike, is not entirely fair, but women will likely relate to the film the most. Men are not written exceptionally well; we see Drew meandering around the house, mostly staying in the bedroom, oblivious to his surroundings.

He is somewhat aware that a night nanny exists, but is more concerned with playing video games or traveling for work than with who is raising his child. He loves his family, yet is somewhat only half there, and his motivations and feelings are never explored very well.

The writing of this character perplexed me, or rather, I wondered why the character was written this way, to begin with.

As events progress, Tully serves up a brilliant twist ending, blurring the lines between fantasy and reality in a daring way.

The character of Tully becomes a godsend for Marlo. Suddenly, she is inspired by the younger woman who has her whole life ahead of her. Could Marlo be a bit jealous of the young and thin nanny? Tully inspires Marlo, but could she not be all that she seems? The final reveal leaves questions dangling over the viewer.

Is Tully all in Marlo’s head? Is it merely a coincidence that Marlo’s maiden name is Tully, or the reason for the nanny in the first place?

Tully (2018) plays like a female-centered coming-of-age story, ideally suited for women over 30. Others can enjoy it as the story has layers and borders on a character study, but the target audience is clear.

The surprise ending is tremendous and raises the film way above mediocrity; otherwise, it’s a traditional genre film.

Theron’s performance also adds an immeasurable amount to the film.