Monthly Archives: July 2019

2018 Films, Biography, Independent, Independent Thriller, Thriller

Lizzie-2018

Leave a comment

Lizzie-2018

Director Craig Macneill

Starring Chloë Sevigny, Kristen Stewart

Scott’s Review #925

Reviewed July 31, 2019

Grade: B+

Lizzie (2018) is an odd and macabre interpretation of the life and times of the infamous Lizzie Borden, who was accused and acquitted of hacking her father and stepmother to bits with a deadly ax.

This offering is shrouded in controversy because of inaccuracies and interpretations of the events, specifically Borden’s sexuality, which is called into question. The film is quiet and a tad too slow, but it thunders to a grand climax, more than making up for any negatives.

The casting of its leads is perfect and key to success.

Thirty-two-year-old Lizzie (Chloë Sevigny) lives with her domineering and affluent father, Andrew (Jamey Sheridan), and rigid stepmother, Abby (Fiona Shaw).

Despising both, she lives out a lonely and depressing existence, her only outlet being occasional evenings at the theater. When an Irish immigrant, Bridget Sullivan (Kristen Stewart), moves into the Borden residence to work as a servant, the women form a strong bond, especially after Andrew abuses her.

Sevigny, one of my favorite modern actresses, possesses an astounding range in the myriad of characters she has played in her long career.

Debuting to the masses in the critically acclaimed and depressing Boys Don’t Cry (1999), she has churned out a multitude of independent features portraying one oddball character after another and deserves the strong influence she has achieved over the years.

Director Craig Macneill makes interesting choices with his film, which may or may not please audiences expecting a numbers horror offering. He dives into psychological thriller territory with more of a character study approach that provides layers to the finished product.

Sevigny is center stage, and plenty of camera close-up shots offer an introspective analysis of her feelings rather than from her parents’ perspective. Instead of a crazed killer spontaneously committing the crime, she is careful and calculating in her plan.

Macneill presents Lizzie as the victim and Andrew and Abby as the villains. This is to assume that Borden committed the crimes, which the film never doubts.

Historically, people assume that this is the truth, but Lizzie was set free by a jury refusing to believe a woman of such means would commit such a heinous crime. I wonder if Macneill directed the film with a bit of a smirk at this ridiculous decision of the times when the woman enjoyed the murders.

At the end of the film, what happened to Lizzie and Bridget is explained, which is a good decision and wraps the film up nicely.

Powerful is the quiet subtext that gives a moody and foreboding quality. I adore slow-moving films provided the reward is worth the wait and Lizzie sucker punches once the events begin rolling along.

Another positive is the gnawing feeling of terrible things about to happen but unsure when or how the attacks will occur. Most viewers watching this film will know the context and the reported murders committed.

The atmospheric additions succeed as the late eighteenth-century costumes and daily living are believable. The lavish Borden house is well-kept and brightly lit, offering a friendly New England feel.

Finally, the creaks and noises throughout the house perfectly encompass the danger lurking behind corners, and the fun is in wondering when Lizzie will strike.

Since the film moves back and forth through time, we know she will strike.

The film’s best work is in the relationship between Lizzie and Bridget. Sevigny and Stewart dazzle together with an unleashed chemistry that nearly rivals a similar dynamic seen in 2003’s Monster.

As with Aline Wuornos and Selby, Lizzie is dominant, and Bridget is submissive, following her lead. Both women share a lesbian relationship, and neither pair achieves happiness after the film.

A film sure to fly under the radar and likely to be forgotten before long, Lizzie (2018) is worth the effort. A spooky and controversial interpretation of the events leading up to, during, and after one of the most notorious crimes in United States history is dissected and analyzed from a human perspective.

Macneill makes Borden less maniacal and more sympathetic than some may prefer. He does a fine job and deserves praise for a rich story.

2019 Films, Comedy, Drama, Independent, Independent Comedy, Independent Drama

Gloria Bell-2019

Leave a comment

Gloria Bell-2019

Director Sebastian Lelio

Starring Julianne Moore, John Turturro

Scott’s Review #924

Reviewed July 29, 2019

Grade: B+

An English remake of the successful 2013 Chilean film, titled Gloria, Gloria Bell (2019) stars Julianne Moore, and the setting is relocated to Los Angeles.

The film is directed by Sebastian Lelio, fresh off a Best Foreign Language Film win for A Fantastic Woman (2017), and both movies contain similar themes of oppression and loneliness.

Preferring the original by only a hair, Gloria Bell is nonetheless a worthy offering with Moore perfectly cast in the title role.

Middle-aged divorcee Gloria Bell (Moore) resides in Los Angeles, working an office job of some respectability, but is unfulfilled. She spends many nights at a nightclub, where she is considered a regular.

The club caters to middle-aged singles who dance and drink while looking for love. When she meets Arnold (John Turturro) one evening and they share a night of passion, the pair begin dating.

However, Gloria realizes that he still supports his ex-wife and grown daughters, which limits his time and commitment to her, leaving her frustrated.

Moore is honest and understated in her performance, and the highlight of the film.

With another casting choice, the character might not have worked so well. She is full of life, singing in her car, attending laughter therapy, and smoking pot in her apartment. She has a warm yet limited relationship with her millennial kids and her ex-husband and his new wife.

Moore gives the character an earnestness and likability that work and get the audience on her side during her trials and tribulations.

This is not to say that Gloria doesn’t occasionally frustrate the audience.

After inviting Arnold to meet the whole crew over dinner and wine at her son’s house, what begins as a meet-and-greet quickly turns into a reminiscing trip down memory lane and whimsical looks at Gloria and her ex’s wedding pictures.

Her disregard for Arnold’s feelings is disappointing, but there is no bad intention behind it.

Gloria has baggage and is caught up in the moment, simply reliving a happier time at the expense of the current moment.

Arnold has his demons and is both likable and unlikable to the audience. Tending to bail on Gloria when either his family requires his assistance or he feels left out, he hardly exhibits grown man behavior or anyone Gloria would want to date.

The first red flag is his confession of being enamored of Gloria over their first dinner date. From there, his on-again-off-again presence makes him the odd man out. Lelio intends to make Gloria the sympathetic one. It’s her movie after all.

Watching A Fantastic Woman sequentially is a wise idea. Numerous comparisons are apparent, beginning with the feelings shared by both central characters.

Both are searching for happiness, but are unsure of how to attain it, especially given that they once had it and it was taken away from them.

Scenes of both characters driving in their cars and singing songs are included, and the look of both films is the same.

Very few comparisons or contrasts can be made between Gloria of 2013 and Gloria Bell of 2019, as both are above average, except that the character is slightly more vivacious in the former than in the latter.

This could be attributed to the Chilean and South American free-thinking and sexual openness compared to the more reserved American way of thinking, but this is merely a suggestion.

It is interesting to note how Lelio remade his film only six years later, rather than another director putting their stamp on it.

Gloria Bell (2019) paints a vivid portrait of a modern woman dealt a bad hand who struggles to find happiness and fulfillment in any way she knows how.

Thanks in large part to Moore’s portrayal and filling the character with kindness and care, she wins over the audience. The character is written as intelligent and interesting, and not desperate in any way for a man; he needs to be the right man.

2019 Films, Horror

Pet Sematary-2019

Leave a comment

Pet Sematary-2019

Director Kevin Kolsch, Dennis Widmyer

Starring Jason Clarke, John Lithgow

Scott’s Review #923

Reviewed July 26, 2019

Grade: B

In the age of movie remakes, especially within the horror genre, it was only a matter of time before Pet Sematary, first released in 1989, would resurface with its fangs bared.

Paramount Pictures presents Pet Sematary (2019), a by-the-numbers affair that’s perfect for viewing on a late Saturday night.

It is an improvement over the disappointing ’89 version, but hardly recreates the genre, feeling more like a remake than offering much in the way of new storytelling or frightening effects.

The conclusion is somewhat disappointing, offering a hybrid of slasher and zombie genres.

To compare either film to the chilling and suspenseful page-turner written by esteemed novelist Stephen King would be ridiculous. The book is a quick read that will leave its reader breathless and scared, perhaps even fearing their pets, so the bar is set way too high for a cinematic offering to match up with.

The book delves much more into the feelings and emotions of all the principal characters, something that is severely limited in the film.

The Creed family, consisting of Louis (Jason Clarke), Rachel (Amy Seimetz), and their children, Ellie and Gage, relocates from bustling Boston, Massachusetts, to rural Maine, allowing Louis the opportunity to practice medicine at a university hospital.

Their friendly neighbor Jud Crandall (John Lithgow) befriends Ellie after she stumbles across a funeral procession of children taking a deceased dog to a cemetery called Pet Sematary.

He warns her and Rachel that the woods are dangerous. When tragedy strikes the family, the cemetery unleashes a supernatural force contained in an ancient burial ground that sits beside it.

The first half of the film is superior to the second as the buildup offers more perilous moments than when all hell breaks loose. Mysterious is when an accident victim in Louis’s care dies and begins to show up in his visions, warning him of something sinister.

The victim is mangled and bloody, and quite frightening are these foreboding scenes. When a curious Ellie traipses throughout the woods with curious wondermen, the audience is nervous about what (or who) she might stumble upon.

The film also earns praise for the suspenseful birthday party scene, which culminates in a grisly death. The scene begins cheerfully with lively party music and festive balloons amid a warm summer afternoon in Maine.

In a clear example of foreshadowing, earlier in the film, Louis curses the truck drivers who drive recklessly past his house at high speed. Excitedly running after their cat named Church, Ellie and Gage pay no attention to the looming truck with the texting driver until it is too late.

The scene drips with good terror.

After the speeding tractor-trailer, the predictability of the surface strikes down one family member. Jud has already warned Louis that “sometimes dead is better”, but we know Louis will surrender to temptation out of desperation and tempt the evil spirits.

When the once-dead character returns with a droopy eye and calm, devious demeanor, the film becomes a standard slasher film and is no longer as compelling.

The final thirty minutes feel very rushed, as if the careful pacing of the buildup is all for naught.

As in most horror films, now deemed a cliché, the last sequence often allows for a sequel if box-office profits are substantial enough. I do not recall a similar ending in the chilling novel or any reference to the family living out their days as a family of the undead.

The apparent attempt at a zombie reference was unsatisfying and much different from what I expected.

From a casting point of view, Jason Clarke (usually cast in supporting roles) gives a strong performance as the main character. He is a good father figure and provides charisma to the film. Well-mannered but also somewhat outdoorsy and a “regular joe,” he is intelligent and humorous with the kids.

The child actors are fine, but hardly the main attraction, and Seimetz as the mother, Rachel, is not the best casting choice.

She plays the challenging role much too brooding and angry for my taste, especially given that she is written as the most sympathetic of all the characters.

Pet Sematary (2019) is a satisfactory horror offering with a solid first half that teeters into difficult-to-believe territory rather quickly.

A stalwart veteran like Lithgow helps immensely, lending the film some respectability, and a child actor cast in a pivotal role is enough to avoid ruining the experience.

There is little reason to see the film a second time, but it is recommended to snuggle with the King novel for some good scares.

1960 Films, Art, Horror, International, International Horror, Italian, Italian Horror

Eyes Without a Face-1960

Leave a comment

Eyes Without a Face-1960

Director Georges Franju

Starring Pierre Brasseur, Alida Valli

Scott’s Review #922

Reviewed July 23, 2019

Grade: A

Eyes Without a Face (1960) is a macabre and twisted French-Italian horror film co-written and directed by Georges Franju. It is based on Jean Redon’s novel, which is the same name.

The film cover art (see above) is flawless and terrifying. It induces the creeps by only giving a glimpse, causing the recipient to be curious and attempt to analyze the meaning.

The film is nestled into a short one-hour and thirty-minute package that is time to scare the audience to death with many fantastic and gruesome elements, severely limiting the gore, which only adds to the horrific nature.

Because of its subject matter, the film was highly controversial in 1960 and was subsequently either loved or reviled by its audiences.

Eyes Without a Face is riveting because the audience empathizes with the characters and takes action to correct their wrongs despite the main character’s undeniable crazyness.

The complex emotions of guilt and obsession are commonalities, making it a layered and complex horror film that appears on many Top Ten genre lists.

The film is not for the faint of heart.

Doctor Genessier (Pierre Brassier) is a brilliant and successful physician who specializes in plastic surgery. After a vicious car accident that he is to blame for, he attempts to repair the ruined face of his daughter, Christiane (Edith Scob), a victim of the wreck.

But his plan to give his daughter her looks back involves kidnapping young girls and removing their faces. He is aided in his machinations by his assistant, Louise (Alida Valli), who kidnaps the young woman and helps him in the laboratory, acting as a surrogate mother to Christiane.

Louise aids Génessier partly because he helps restore her damaged face in events before the film begins.

Scob is the stand-out character, containing an innocent and quietly melancholy existence as she is the apparent victim of the story. Her defeated posture, while resiliently hopeful and demure, is complex for an actress to carry, and she defines grace and poise.

Brasseur and Valli each deliver the goods in different ways. Valli, haunting in her best horror effort Suspiria (1977), is mesmerized by her doctor and savior so that the relationship is almost cult-like.

Brasseur is strangely heroic, as he steals lives to save lives, so his character is extraordinarily complex.

The surgery scenes are chilling, featuring white, starchy uniforms worn by a doctor, assistant, and victim. The scenes could almost be mechanical tutorials offered to first-rate medical students with scholarly intentions. If this were not a horror film, the look would be documentary-style.

Genessier calmly cuts an entire circular length of his victim as a hint of blood slowly oozes down the sides of her face in an almost tender fashion.

The film, made in 1960, is not the 1980s slasher film image that encompasses non-horror film-goers’ preconceptions. It has a gorgeous texture.

The best scene occurs when one of Genessier’s victims, lying on a gurney, comes to and gazes at a figure leaning close to her. The camera turns to the figure, revealing a blurry but recognizable image of Christiane sans the face-like mask she usually wears throughout the film.

As the victim shrieks in horror, Christiane slowly backs away from her amid a feeling of pain and heartbreak, remembering how much of a freak she must appear to others. The scene is sad and grotesque at the same time.

Horror films often get bad raps, but poetic and stylized horror films are a diamond in the rough.

Eyes Without a Face (1960) achieves its place in the cinematic archives with brilliant black and white cinematography entrenched in a Gothic, chilling story with characters whose motivations can be dissected and studied long after the film ends.

This keeps the viewer thinking and deserves repeated viewings to capture all the gems it offers.

1970 Films, Comedy, Fantasy, Musical, Musical Comedy

On a Clear Day You Can See Forever-1970

Leave a comment

On a Clear Day You Can See Forever-1970

Director Vincente Minnelli

Starring Barbra Streisand, Yves Montand

Scott’s Review #921 

Reviewed July 19, 2019

Grade: B+

On a Clear Day You Can See Forever (1970) is a very obscure film that deserves better than to be relegated to the unknown.

Released during a time when the Hollywood musical had lost its luster, it feels like a last-gasp effort to keep the genre alive, serving as a star vehicle for Barbra Streisand.

The film suffers from severe editing problems with a large portion being cut, so much so that the result is a choppy and disjointed feel, tough to follow as is, but left untouched, the film could have been a creative masterpiece.

In a particularly convoluted plot that spans two time periods, chain-smoking New Yorker Daisy Gamble (Streisand) is convinced by her uptight fiancé Warren (Larry Blyden) to attend a class taught by Marc Cabot (Yves Montand), a psychiatrist.

When Cabot accidentally hypnotizes her, he realizes she speaks in the voice of an early-nineteenth-century woman named Melinda, and he becomes obsessed with her as she teeters between two existences.

The screenplay was written by Alan Jay Lerner and adapted from his book for the 1965 stage production.

Film director Vincente Minnelli fuses fantasy with a musical to create an extremely left-of-center experimental piece; this is not your standard 1950s or 1960s MGM experience with merry or clap-along tunes.

Some of the more memorable numbers include “On a Clear Day,” a reprise at the end of the film, “He Isn’t You,” and “Love with All the Trimmings.”

Casting Streisand is a monumental choice as she carries the film on her shoulders. Belting out numbers is the singer-turned-actress’s forte, and she never disappoints.

She is fascinating to watch in the neurotic role as she smokes and prances around, usually in a tizzy or a state of peril (self-induced).

The performance stands out as a different style from many of her other films, and she has never portrayed a livelier character. Streisand overcomes a few challenges of the film, winning in spades.

She shares little to no chemistry with co-star Montand, who is not only too old for her but also not the greatest actor. If the film’s intent, which I suspect, was to make the pair the main draw, then this failed.

Streisand’s chemistry with John Richardson, who plays Sir Robert Tentrees to her Melinda in the other time period, excites her. The duo smolders with passion, but sadly, most of the nineteenth-century scenes are sacrificed, leaving most of it a jumbled mess.

Much more interesting would have been to leave the entire film intact.

An oddity is Jack Nicholson’s almost nonexistent role as Tad Pringle, a mostly non-described brother of Daisy’s. Is he also her neighbor?

In 1970, Nicholson was only on the cusp of super-stardom, and it is questionable whether some of his parts were left on the cutting-room floor, but the limited character is strange and unsatisfying. In another role, there would have been some possibility of romantic entanglement.

Throughout the film, I wondered how On a Clear Day You Can See Forever might have worked with someone other than Streisand in the roles.

I kept ruminating on how good Liza Minnelli might have been in the roles, given her non-classic looks (like Streisand) and bombastic voice. Her high-drama flair and capable New York style would have made the results enjoyable, but Streisand hits it out of the park.

On a Clear Day You Can See Forever (1970) is a brave attempt at something fantastical, brimming with potential, but ultimately feels cluttered and messy.

With a delicious leading lady whom the camera adores and enough creative sets and rigorous energy to keep one guessing, the film stumbles with many problems and leaves viewers incomplete.

2018 Films, Documentary

Free Solo-2018

Leave a comment

Free Solo-2018

Director Jimmy Chin, Elizabeth Chai Vasarhelyi

Starring Alex Honnold

Scott’s Review #920

Reviewed July 17, 2019

Grade: B

Free Solo (2018) is a documentary that takes a standard approach, offering a traditional yet informative piece about the perils and triumphs of rock climbing.

More precisely, free soloing is dangerous because it involves the lack of ropes or safety harnesses. One false misstep can (and has) resulted in death.

The film balances the featured daredevil’s humanistic approach with his girlfriend and camera crew’s perspectives.

Having personally scolded the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences (in my mind anyway) for omitting the wonderful Won’t You Be My Neighbor? (2018) from the five documentary nominees, a “WTF” moment on nomination day, Free Solo would not be my choice as the winner, with RBG getting the honor from the choices provided.

Given the current state of United States political affairs, RBG is the timelier and more important of the bunch, but Free Solo has been crowned the champion.

The likable young man at the forefront of the feature is Alex Honnold, a modest athlete from the West Coast of the United States in his early twenties.

He has a low-key, almost morose personality. He shuns organized holidays like Halloween because he “doesn’t want someone else telling him when to have fun.” He is thoughtful, introspective, and even a bit odd, having sought climbing at a young age and never looking back.

It is apparent that he is not necessarily seeking fame and fortune but has nonetheless become respected in his chosen profession, explaining that it is more a calling than any attempt to show off or boast of his achievements.

As he admits to always wanting to climb the dangerously steep and world-famous rock, the 3,000-foot El Capitan in Yosemite National Park, without a rope, he is also concerned about the pressure of performing for camera crews and the responsibility that entails.

The documentary stresses this point as Alex bails from the climb on his first attempt.

Throughout the documentary, the filmmakers focus on tidbits of the story told by his loved ones, specifically his girlfriend and mother, who offer their perspectives on his dangerous activities.

This is a nice added touch. It gives the story heart and layers, making it more humanistic than simply watching an unknown person rock climb for an hour and a half.

The audience gets to know Alex throughout the piece, making us care more about his peril as he attempts to triumph.

The production is superlative and quite engaging, especially throughout the climbing sequences. Vast shots of the fantastic views from the giant rock are plentiful and astounding, making the viewer feel as if they are also climbing the treacherous monument but breathing a sigh of relief when realizing the safety of a sofa or chair is the preferred option.

Seriously though, the camera work is a massive appeal of Free Solo and undoubtedly the primary reason it won the Oscar statuette.

The negatives to Free Solo are only slight, perhaps due to my lack of appeal to rock climbing. During the documentary, I kept asking myself why Alex would attempt to achieve the feat and its possible purpose.

From that angle, my attention tended to wander occasionally so that the target audience would be people passionate about adventurous experiences.

Secondly, there was nary a doubt in my mind that the final moments would result in Alex successfully reaching the pinnacle of his career safely despite the concerns of the crew that he could fall to his death at any moment. Sensible reasoning assured me the project would not have been released if tragedy had occurred.

Free Solo (2018) offers a solid and conventional documentary with enough outdoor sequences amid the standard interviews to satisfy all. The finale, while predictable in showing Alex’s successful climb to Mount, is photographed exceptionally well and professional in spirit.

The documentary suffers from some predictability issues and a lack of a real cliffhanger (pun intended), but it feels fresh and celebrates the human spirit in a big way.

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

2018 Films, Thriller

Bad Times at the El Royale-2018

Leave a comment

Bad Times at the El Royale-2018

Director Drew Goddard

Starring Jeff Bridges, Cynthia Erivo, Dakota Johnson

Scott’s Review #919

Reviewed July 10, 2019

Grade: A-

Bad Times at the El Royale (2018), directed by Drew Goddard, known for crafting the horror film The Cabin in the Woods (2012), is a gem that crosses multiple genres with sound results.

With Bad Times, he assumes writing and production duties for the thriller and steals a page from the Quentin Tarantino playbook, most notably from The Hateful Eight (2015).

The resulting feature is clever, perverse, and mysterious. It is a fantastic, edge-of-your-seat experience and a must-see for Tarantino fans.

Set in 1969, the film focuses on seven strangers of different backgrounds who go to a seedy and remote hotel on the California/Nevada border. Each harbors its share of dark secrets, culminating during a deadly macabre showdown one dark and stormy night.

In many ways, each character seeks redemption or forgiveness for a past indiscretion or is otherwise protecting someone or something else. A large sum of money is also in play for the greedier characters to tussle over.

The seven players are as follows: Jeff Bridges plays catholic priest Donald “Dock” O’Kelly, Cynthia Erivo plays struggling soul singer Darlene Sweet, and Dakota Johnson portrays Emily Summerspring, a hippie trying to save her younger sister, Rose, who is devoted to and mesmerized by sadistic cult leader Billy Lee (Chris Hemsworth).

Finally, Jon Hamm plays Dwight Broadbeck, a vacuum salesman who may have a secret identity, and hotel clerk Miles Miller (Lewis Pullman), who runs the hotel alone.

As events roll along, the complexities of the characters grow, which is my favorite aspect of the film. There are so many twists and turns involving the characters’ backstories and motivations that surprises are in store.

Some characters have strange connections to each other, while others meet for the first time and their lives intersect in interesting ways.

The dynamic between all the actors works tremendously well, with the standouts being Bridges and Erivo, who share tremendous chemistry and are the most interesting characters, to mention get the most screen time.

Their characters forge a bond during their lengthy scenes while never wholly trusting each other. Erivo, as Darlene, gets to showcase her wonderful singing voice. The highlight is the grand hotel room sequence as she belts out “This Old Heart of Mine (Is Weak for You).”

Old and burdened with memory loss, Bridges successfully grants more sympathy to his character than he deserves.

The film loses momentum towards the end when introducing the miscast Hemsworth, who is pretty but not the most remarkable acting talent. The actor overacts, playing Billy Lee as sinister and one-dimensional rather than infusing complexities into the character, which doesn’t work.

A better casting choice (and Tarantino mainstays) would have been Leonardo DiCaprio or Brad Pitt, and either actor would have assuredly brought more depth to the role.

Comparisons must be made to The Hateful Eight and the comedy Clue (1985). Godard divides the film into chapters like the former, mostly entitled as the hotel room numbers. With each subsequent room, the events going on in that room and its inhabitants are explored.

As in both films, he brings several mysterious characters with connections together. In Clue, secret passageways that lead to various parts of a building are featured, offering layers of possibilities.

The hotel itself is styled and dressed brilliantly, nearly a character with glossy decals and shiny trimmings but with a solemn and melancholy gloominess. The establishment has seen its share of heartbreak, schemes, and even death. Clever is the division of the hotel into either the sunny and cheerful “California” section or the less posh “Nevada” section, purple and costing one dollar less.

The viewer is sucked into its web within the first sequence when a man is shown hiding money under the floorboards and then subsequently shot to death.

Despite being labeled a Tarantino rip-off, this does not bother me as I was enthralled with the characters, the details, and the vast nuances offered.

Unfortunately, the film was a box-office disappointment, suffering from a lack of awards buzz and a lofty running time. Bad Times at El Royale (2018) will entertain, intrigue, and keep one guessing until the credits roll.

Be prepared for a bloody good time!

1959 Films, Drama

Imitation of Life-1959

Leave a comment

Imitation of Life-1959

Director Douglas Sirk

Starring Lana Turner, Juanita Moore

Scott’s Review #918

Reviewed July 9, 2019

Grade: A-

The original film production, made in 1934, is based on a 1933 novel by Fannie Hurst. Imitation of Life (1959) is a relevant dissection of race relations, class systems, and gender roles, all of which still feel timely decades later.

The film is a fresh, progressive effort that sometimes teeters too much into soap opera land but is an important story to be exposed to.

The dynamics between the central characters in deliciously raw scenes are the most significant part of the film.

Lora Meredith (Lana Turner) is a widowed, stylish New York woman with dreams of becoming a Broadway star. One day, she meets a lovely black woman, Annie Johnson (Moore), on the beach, and the women become fast friends, each having a daughter around the same age.

The women decide to move in together for financial reasons and to further Lora’s chances for success in the entertainment industry. Lora begins a casual romance with handsome Steve Archer (John Gavin).

Eleven years pass, and Lora is now a big star, living in a luxurious New York house and flocking to film locales in Italy. Annie continues to live with her, serving as her housekeeper and confidante.

The girls are now teenagers with issues of their own. Susie (Sandra Dee) has developed feelings for her mother’s boyfriend, while Sarah Jane (Susan Kohner), of mixed-race ethnicity, is ashamed of her black heritage and frequently can pass for white.

The trials and tribulations of all are played out throughout the film.

Imitation of Life has two key distinctions and focuses on each separately. Since the time of the story is said to be 1947 and the picture was released in 1959, before the Civil Rights movement of the 1960s, the racial story is very poignant and truthful and the main draw.

Sarah Jane is embarrassed to be black, and her eventual abandonment of both her life in New York and of her mother can be deemed reprehensible if not for the times. Her regrets come too little too late, but Kohner nonetheless infuses much sympathy into her complex role.

The second central aspect of Imitation of Life is more mainstream and dramatic, easily more accessible to the public than the former. This is why some misunderstood or even dismissed the film as melodramatic.

Lora is glamorous, well-dressed, always stylish, and poised, and soon, Susie grows jealous and resentful of Lora’s achievements and the attention she receives from men at every turn.

This invokes a female rivalry with pure 1950s Hollywood glitz. It seems manipulative and naughty, using bright colors, dazzling costumes, and flair to promote excess drama.

As tremendous as Kohner is, Juanita Moore knocks it out of the park and does the best acting job out of all the principal performers. Her frequent dramatic scenes are filled with emotional bombast without the actress ever going over the top.

Instead, she keeps her composure, earning her well-earned Best Actress Oscar nomination for no other scene than the heartbreaking mother/daughter showdown in a California hotel room.

When Moore’s Annie is mistaken for Sarah Jane’s maid instead of her mother, the pain and worry can be seen as she realizes she has lost what she knew of her daughter for good. She returns to New York an older woman with a broken heart and spirit, both defeated and deflated.

The last sequence is challenging to watch as tragic results and a coldness encompass the film.

The prevalence of more than one suitor for Lora and the implication that she could have up to three, including her agent Allen and playwright David, while Annie has none, is absorbing.

This point is slightly bothersome, and a missed opportunity—or at least the potential for one—as a male companion for Annie might have changed her life forever.

The film is faithful to the novel, but how wonderful it is to imagine Annie being treated to a more admirable life while finding true love.

Imitation of Life (1959) is a film treasure with subtle and not-so-subtle nuances and bold, powerful story-telling enveloping the entire experience.

Although the film suffers from a sometimes too sudsy mass appeal approach and too much focus on melodrama, it nonetheless does not abandon its social issues theme, especially given the harsh treatment of minorities during this period.

No other film deals with the psychological turmoil of mixed race like Imitation of Life does.

Oscar Nominations: Best Supporting Actress-Susan Kohner, Juanita Moore

1965 Films, Comedy, Romantic Comedy

Do Not Disturb-1965

Leave a comment

Do Not Disturb-1965

Director Ralph Levy, George Marshall

Starring Doris Day, Rod Taylor

Scott’s Review #917

Reviewed July 8, 2019

Grade: C+

Singer and actress Doris Day put her stamp on the romantic comedy genre during the 1960s, becoming synonymous with wholesome film characters. She had spunk and charm and always wore sensible shoes.

Do Not Disturb (1965) is a lightweight, forgettable work with a silly premise, a juvenile script, and a meandering plot.

The film is somewhat saved by the interesting locales of London and Kent, England, but those seeking better quality should seek out the gems The Man Who Knew Too Much (1956) and Pillow Talk (1959).

Day and Rod Taylor star as Janet and Mike Harper, an American couple who relocate to England as part of a transfer for the company he works for. They immediately disagree over where to live; Mike prefers the excitement of London, but Janet favors the rustic quality of Kent.

After she gets them a house thirty miles outside London, the plan backfires when the couple grows further apart due to Mike’s need to commute to London every day. Lonesome and isolated, Janet worries incessantly that Mike is having an affair with his new secretary, Claire Hackett (Maureen McGivney).

Prompted by her busybody landlord, Vanessa Courtwright (Hermione Baddeley), Janet meets an Italian antique dealer, Paul Bellari (Sergio Fantoni), who she hires to redecorate her house. The antics begin with Mike spending more time with Claire, Janet, and Paul in equally close quarters.

Janet and Mike may be innocent, but Paul and Claire could have designs on their potential mates, especially as the foursome faces one compromising situation after another.

The heart of an authentic romantic comedy is good, old-fashioned chemistry between the leads, and Taylor and Day exhibit adequate sparkle but hardly sizzle.

Mediocrity in the setup and writing can be forgiven if other elements, like crackling moments, exist, but those are rare in Do Not Disturb.

Some Like It Hot (1959) embodies a great comedy with romantic wrappings featuring fantastic leads Jack Lemmon and Marilyn Monroe. Still, the former does not come close to finding its footing amid cliche after cliche.

The film is plot-driven and heavy on story-dictated situations rather than character development. The ending is predictable. The jokes fall flat or feel distinctly canned and cheap, and the laughs never catch on.

During a tepid sequence, Janet and Paul visit a remote town to look at antiques. She ends up drinking too much bubbly and becomes drunk and foolhardy.

What should have been comic relief does little to further the plot or flesh out the characters.

Director Ralph Levy makes little effort to steer the film beyond a slick mainstream “affair” despite the release year being 1965 when more edgy works replaced the polished and familiar.

Rather than dare to go to a less-than-cheery place and perhaps decide to have Janet or Mike cheat on their significant others, Levy chooses not to go there, instead attempting to satisfy those seeking a happily-ever-after wrapping.

Not to be entirely negative, Do Not Disturb features remarkable and stunning locale sequences of bustling metropolitan London, quaint English cottages, and wilderness, oozing with culture and sophistication as well as down-home comforts and rich flavor.

The combination of an American couple thrust into a different setting with a new set of rules and regulations to follow makes the film fun and offers a sprinkle of good scenery.

Do Not Disturb (1965) is a mid-1960s mainstream release buried among nests of other similar-themed but better-written films. Even appealing and bankable stars of the time like Taylor and Day could not succeed in spicing up tired gimmicks and plot devices.

The film will forever be relegated to the romantic comedy shelves, teetering on the brink of obscurity.

2019 Films, Adventure, Super Hero

Spider-Man: Far From Home-2019

Leave a comment

Spider-Man: Far From Home-2019

Director Jon Watts

Starring Tom Holland, Jake Gyllenhaal, Samuel L. Jackson

Scott’s Review #916

Reviewed July 5, 2019

Grade: B

Having not seen the first two installments of the latest Spider-Man franchise, nor with any prior knowledge of the Avengers franchise or the cross-sectional connections of the characters to other films, I walked into Spider-Man: Far From Home (2019) with little expectation.

And an admittedly limited understanding of the Marvel universe altogether.

The film is no better or worse than a summer popcorn flick with enough adventure and lovely locales to keep a non-super-hero buff entertained for over two hours without fidgeting too much.

The film begins with a nod to a past film, where a mysterious “Blip” occurred, erasing people for five years, and then returning them to normalcy, with no aging.

Shots of various Avengers characters, including Tony Stark (Iron Man), who have died, appear on the screen amid a musical tribute to Whitney Houston’s “I Will Always Love You.”

Peter Parker (Spider-Man) (Tom Holland) still mourns his mentor as he embarks on a two-week European vacation with his classmates as part of a school trip. He plans to confess his love for MJ (Zendaya) atop the Eiffel Tower in Paris.

Peter’s Aunt May (now reduced in age and sexy with the casting of Marisa Tomei) quickly packs his Spider-Man suit as Nick Fury (Samuel L. Jackson), a former director of S.H.I.E.L.D. attempts to enlist Peter’s help on a mission and provide him with Stark’s special glasses, named E.D.I.T.H. which possess all the databases of Stark Industries.

Quentin Beck/Mysterio (Jake Gyllenhaal), a master of Illusions, is recruited to help Spider-Man and serve as a fabulous Uncle figure.

These events all happen as Peter travels abroad.

The film is undeniably light and fun, with a bright and safe ambiance. The perilous scenes are not particularly scary or dangerous, despite the characters being at risk of death.

The teen romance angle enhances this assessment as it is a central component of the film, even as much as the adventure and superhero antics are.

Even before the teenage classmates traverse Europe, a triangle develops between Peter, MJ, and Peter’s hunky high school football rival, as does love at thirty-five thousand feet between lovebirds Ned and Betty Brant.

Tom Holland is very well cast in the lead role and is charismatic and believable. Charming with youthful innocence, he is part nerd and part hero, yet always empathetic and benevolent without feeling forced.

As a viewer unfamiliar with the first two chapters, I was immediately catapulted into his world of teen angst, romance, and his responsibility of saving the world. The young actor could have a promising future ahead of him if he avoids typecasting and chooses well-chosen roles.

The guts of the film, meaning the action sequences and the standard genre elements, are palpable and worthy of admiration on their own merits.

The visual effects are tremendous and crowd-pleasing, especially whenever Mysterio is involved. With a twisting, tornado-like blue and green swirling motion, he flies in and out of sequences with enough pizzazz to put the Wicked Witch of the West to shame.

Similarly, the gusty, unnatural storm, Earth Elemental, and the dangerous Fire provide magical and atmospheric power that enhances the film’s look.

Comedy, rather than dark and foreboding scenes, appears to be the filmmakers’ goal with this project.

As class trip chaperones and the students’ teachers, the comic duo of Julius Dell and Roger Harrington trade barbs with themselves and the kids, part bumbling and part incompetent, always offering comic moments of relief.

When Harold “Happy” Hogan becomes smitten with Aunt May, his awkwardness is cute and fresh rather than sappy and clichéd. The supporting characters have the substance to do so, but I would have preferred a bit more darkness or gloominess.

The sequences that raise Spider-Man: Far from Home above mediocrity are the excellent and plentiful European scenes, a feast of riches for this fan of world travel and culture.

The canals of Venice and the magnificence of Prague are nearly rivaled by the sophistication of London and the history of Berlin. Sadly, the film does not culminate in Paris as I had hoped and was hinted at, causing a slight hiccup in my vicarious travel pleasures.

Spider-Man: Far From Home (2019) is a film perfectly crafted for summer, and it was fittingly viewed on a scorching hot July day.

The film is not a masterpiece, sticking to a tried-and-true formula and limiting the dangerous possibilities when one threatens to destroy the world in favor of humor.

The cast is likable, the villain is compelling, and the romance showcases more than just the main couple, being careful not to limit the cash cow of special effects and adventure that the film provides in abundance.

2018 Films, Biography, Drama

First Man-2018

Leave a comment

First Man-2018

Director Damien Chazelle

Starring Ryan Gosling, Claire Foy

Scott’s Review #915

Reviewed July 4, 2019

Grade: B+

First Man (2018) is a reteaming of efforts by director Damien Chazelle and actor Ryan Gosling, following the 2016 critical and commercial smash hit La La Land.

The former could not be more different from the latter, and the direction is unrecognizable for those expecting a comparison. First Man is a mainstream Hollywood production with good camerawork and edgy quality.

The necessary full-throttle action approach is interspersed nicely with a personal family story and humanistic spin that is never too sappy nor forced.

The focus of the story is on Neil Armstrong (Gosling) and the events leading up to the historic Apollo 11 mission, which made him the first United States astronaut to walk on the moon.

Buzzy Aldrin (Corey Stoll), the second man to walk on the moon, is featured to a lesser degree, and his character is portrayed as self-centered and complex, though screen time is limited.

The overall message is of the triumphs and the costs to families, the astronauts, and the country during an already tumultuous decade in history.

The events of the film begin in 1961, as we see Armstrong as a young NASA test pilot struggling with mishaps due to his problems, and culminate in 1969 after the successful mission concludes.

Chazelle wisely balances human and personal scenes with the inevitable rocket take-offs and outer space problems that the astronauts face.

Both segments turn out well and keep the action moving, allowing for tender moments between the characters, mainly showcasing the relationship between Neil and his wife, Janet (Claire Foy).

Lacking (thankfully) are the scenes of machismo or “guy talk” that sometimes accompany films in this genre.

During one of the first scenes, the audience quickly witnesses the couple’s two-and-a-half-year-old daughter Karen retching and suffering from learning disabilities, only to promptly die from a brain tumor, forever destroying the couple.

This critical aspect reoccurs as Neil imagines his daughter playing with neighborhood kids and enjoying life.

In a wonderful moment, he tearfully drops Karen’s tiny bracelet into a giant crater, hoping to keep her memory alive forever.

These additions give the film a character-driven quality.

Worthy of analysis before and after viewing the film is the young director’s decision to tackle such a project, heartily appealing to the mainstream audience undoubtedly in mind.

Legendary director Clint Eastwood was initially slated to direct, and the historically rich story seems right up his alley.

It’s interesting to wonder if, during the 1990s, Tom Hanks might have been cast as Armstrong in his younger days, playing a similar part in Ron Howard’s 1995 film Apollo 13.

Well-known character actors appear in supporting roles, fleshing out the production and further adding name and face recognition. Kyle Chandler, Jason Clarke, and Ciaran Hinds appear as astronauts or various NASA Chiefs. Viewers who may not be able to name the actors will certainly recognize them as actors seen in other films.

This only brings First Man to the big leagues with a hearty and talented central cast.

Gosling and Foy are the main draws, and both actors were mentioned as possibilities for Oscar nominations throughout awards season, but a slot in the big race did not come to fruition.

While the film drew a couple of nominations for Best Editing and Best Score, a Best Picture nomination was not to be, probably due to the film not being as big a blockbuster success as expected.

The film is also more brooding and less patriotic than a Howard or Eastwood production would have been.

To expand on this, First Man came under attack by Senator Marco Rubio from Florida and President Donald Trump for Chazelle’s decision to omit any mention of the famous planting of the American Flag on the moon by Armstrong and Aldrin.

Chazelle refused to admit that this was a political statement, instead insisting that he chose to focus more on the lesser-known aspects of the moon landing rather than facts that everybody already knew.

Young director Damien Chazelle proves to be a multi-faceted filmmaker by changing course and creating a historic biopic that is quite different from a story of singing and dancing in Los Angeles.

He proves to be no one-trick pony and gets the job done, creating a brave and robust effort that does not limit action at the hands of humanity, successfully weaving a good dose of both.

First Man (2018) may not be a classic in the making, but it deserves to be seen.

Oscar Nominations: 1 win- Best Sound Editing, Best Sound Mixing, Best Production Design, Best Visual Effects (won)

1958 Films, Film noir, Thriller

Touch of Evil-1958

Leave a comment

Touch of Evil-1958

Director Orson Welles

Starring Charlton Heston, Janet Leigh

Scott’s Review #914

Reviewed July 2, 2019

Grade: A

Touch of Evil (1958) is a film noir directed by the legendary influential Hollywood director Orson Welles.

The film contains suspense, drama, and mystery but is to be mainly praised for visual treats to enhance the cinematic experience. The dark and foreboding thriller was revolutionary for the time of release and influenced many films of similar ilk in the years to come.

Robust and fraught with tension, the experience is marvelous and worthy of study for its many nuances.

Welles directs the work, stars in, and writes the screenplay, so his entire being is invested in the production and execution.

Known mainly for the legendary Citizen Kane (1940), a film that arguably changed the course of cinema with its direction and cinematography, Touch of Evil explores a different genre entirely. However, it keeps the excellent aspects of Welles’s loftier film intact, including the black-and-white element, resulting in a grand and dangerous crime-infused classic.

The screenplay was loosely based on the novel Badge of Evil by Whit Masterson.

The tension is ample from the onset as the humidity-drenched Mexico-United States border is the focal point. A car driven by a young couple is laced with a bomb and detonates as soon as they cross into U.S. territory.

In a hint of irony, Newlyweds Miguel “Mike” Vargas (Charlton Heston), a drug enforcement official in the Mexican government, and his wife Susie (Janet Leigh) pass the car several times on foot before the explosion.

An investigation ensues with the introduction of other characters, including Police Chief Pete Gould (Harry Shannon), District Attorney Adair (Ray Collins), and police captain Hank Quinlan (Welles), with a prime suspect being Sanchez, a young Mexican secretly married to the victim’s daughter.

Typical in the film noir genre, events are not what they seem like as layers of the plot slowly unravel. The heavyset and disheveled Captain nostalgically visits a brothel run by Tanya (Marlene Dietrich), who barely recognizes him because he’s gained so much weight since their last meeting.

Vargas forsakes his bride to spearhead the investigation but soon locks horns with corpulent Quinlan, and the duo begins to feud. Could Quinlan or Vargas have something to do with the car bombing, or could other supporting characters be behind or involved in the shenanigans?

This is an excellent part of Touch of Evil, as the film leaves the viewer guessing.

Heston and Leigh are the lead couple, and their chemistry is apparent from the first scene in which they appear together. Sexy and mysterious, she hunkers down in a dump fraught with peril while he attempts to solve the crime and keep his girl safe.

Outside factors play a significant role in keeping the lovers apart. Although Heston’s portrayal of a Mexican man is quite the stretch, the audience will nestle comfortably into the events as they reveal deeper layers.

Once a handsome man, Wells is not afraid to let it all hang out as the fat and racist Quinlan becomes one of the greatest and most complicated screen villains as his true colors emerge.

As the film’s title boldly suggests, does his character contain complexities that make him evil and keep some sympathies, or does he wreak havoc on all he touches with his devious nature only the tip of the iceberg?

Viewers await the final act to have several questions answered as motivations are finally revealed.

Touch of Evil (1958) provided delicious and pulsating material for filmmakers clever enough to study its intricacies, notably Roman Polanski for Chinatown (1974).

Nuggets were also thrown the way of Alfred Hitchcock, who got the idea for Leigh to appear in Psycho (1960) two years later, catapulting her character alone in a hotel peril and mixing in a weird hotel clerk.

The power the film had to hatch other great films from its ingenuity is the most fun part of watching it repeatedly.