All posts by scottmet99

1996 Films, British, Drama, LGBTQ+ Drama, LGBTQ+ Films

Beautiful Thing-1996

August 20, 2017 scottmet99 Leave a comment

Beautiful Thing-1996

Director Hettie MacDonald

Starring Glen Berry, Scott Neal

Scott’s Review #675

Reviewed August 20, 2017

Grade: B

Based on the play of the same name, Beautiful Thing is a heartwarming 1996 British LGBT film written by Jonathan Harvey and directed by Hettie MacDonald.

Incorporating music from the Mamas and the Papas, and specifically Mama Cass, the film undoubtedly was groundbreaking upon release in the 1990s due to its taboo (at that time) gay romance, but in the year 2017, this film suffers a bit from both a dated feeling and a play it safe vibe.

The action, just like a play would, takes place almost entirely within a working-class London apartment building in the present times.

The lead character is Jamie (Glen Berry), a high school student, intrigued by his male classmate and neighbor, Ste (Scott Neal). He also must keep an eye on his flighty mother, Sandra, who changes boyfriends like the weather, and aspires to open her pub- she is currently dating neighbor and understanding hippie, Tony.

Ste is the other central character. Shyer than Jamie, he has a difficult upbringing, living next door to Jamie with an abusive father and brother. Ste and Jamie eventually bond and a secret love story begins as the young men conceal their relationship from everyone else.

In the mix is a vivacious black teenage neighbor girl, Leah, who is obsessed with Mama Cass’s records, which her grandmother owns and frequently plays. Leah and Sandra are engaged in a lightweight feud, in large part because Sandra believes Leah is a bad influence on Jamie.

Keeping in close mind when Beautiful Thing (1996) was made, the film deserves an enormous amount of praise for, at the time, simply existing when LGBT films were hardly the norm.

Watching in 2017, though, the film loses a bit when compared with subsequent LGBT releases that broke more barriers with their mainstream viewership and much darker themes (LGBT masterpieces like 2006’s Brokeback Mountain and 2016’s Moonlight immediately come to mind).

Beautiful Thing also contains a safer, lightweight touch than the aforementioned films, making it now seem too much like fluff.

Director, MacDonald, mixes in humor so that while the message of a same-sex relationship is important, it is softened a bit by the comedy.

Specifically, the sidekick character of Leah lightens the message. The supporting characters may get a bit too much screen time. Sandra’s giggle-worthy job interview attempting to do “respectable work” in an office environment, or her man-hungry escapades, take away from the main story.

I also never felt any real threats or danger to the same-sex relationship. Sure, there is some brief disapproval, and a quick mention of Jamie not liking football (a negative gay stereotype that is unnecessary) combined with Ste’s abuse at the hands of his family, but even that is not perceived as a major obstacle to their, at that time anyway, shocking relationship.

On the other hand, the chemistry between the two leads (Berry and Neal) is wonderful and the best aspect of the film. Both actors convey the emotions of the characters perfectly- both coming into their sexuality, Berry’s Jamie is the more confident one, asking Neal’s Ste, in a sweet scene, whether he has ever been kissed.

This leads to a sleepover that is innocent and tender rather than steamy or sexual. I completely buy the characters as young lovers, coming to terms with their own identities while supporting the needs of the other, and becoming a good team.

The final scene, naturally accompanied by a Cass Elliot song “Dream A Little Dream Of Me”, is a touching, wonderful scene. Jamie and Ste dance together in broad daylight, for their entire complex to see, and subsequently are circled by both supporters and the curious.

As their show of support, Sandra and Leah join the boys and end their dispute.

Beautiful Thing (1996) offers a heartwarming conclusion to a fine, yet lightweight by modern standards, LGBT romantic film.

2016 Films, Documentary

I Am Not Your Negro-2016

August 19, 2017 scottmet99 Leave a comment

I Am Not Your Negro-2016

Director-Raoul Peck

Starring-Samuel L. Jackson

Scott’s Review #674

Reviewed August 19, 2017

Grade: B

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

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

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

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

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

The documentary itself teeters around the discussion and back-story of all the leaders mentioned. Lots of location shots are used, as well as speeches made by and old footage of each of the men.

A high point is interviewed by Baldwin himself, and his insight about his own racial experiences, both positive and negative. Each of the leaders, King, X, and Evers receive roughly the same amount of screen time and the best part is Baldwin’s dealings with each man.

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

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

A startling admission comes from Baldwin himself. Having been an enormous John Wayne fan as a child, and reveling in the joy of his films, it was a harsh reality to understand that the Indians in Wayne films, seen as the “bad guys”, were Black Americans- therefore himself. Certain films Baldwin watched were viewed through the innocent eyes of a child- real life was harsher.

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

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

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

Oscar Nominations: Best Documentary-Feature

Independent Spirit Award Nominations: Best Documentary Feature

2016 Films, Drama, International, International Drama

Tanna-2016

August 18, 2017 scottmet99 Leave a comment

Tanna-2016

Director-Bentley Dean, Martin Butler

Starring-Mungau Dain, Marie Wawa

Scott’s Review #673

Reviewed August 18, 2017

Grade: A

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

A marvelous work in every way, the crowning achievement is how this particular film was made.

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

Tanna is shot in the Nauvhal and Nafe languages.

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

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

As the movie opens, we are immediately exposed to a tribal community going about their daily life- they wash, hunt, and wander through the jungles exploring their natural surroundings.

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

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

A traditional rule of the tribe is arranged marriage, which becomes a major problem for Dain and Wawa as their love blossoms. When a neighboring tribe attacks the Shaman over a dispute regarding bad crops, Dain wants revenge. When cooler heads prevail, the leaders of each tribe decide that Wawa will marry a member of the other tribe, which leaves her and Dain distraught and desperate- their love is then tested ultimately.

The individuals who play both “Dain” and “Wawa” offer authenticity and truth that astounds as reportedly, in addition to never having acted, neither had never seen a camera before, but both pour their souls into the characters they portray.

This also goes for the little sister of Wawa, who is a goldmine in her honest portrayal. All the performances are rich.

Visually, Tanna is just breathtaking. The exotic lushness of the green jungles mixed with the gorgeous running streams and waterfalls are one thing, but the oozing volcano that inhabits the island is both colorful and picturesque during the night scenes.

The entire film is shot outdoors and is captured incredibly well. In this way, the film immerses the audience wholly in the tribal world.

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

The film is a romantic tragedy of epic proportions and the doomed couple share everlasting love and a bond that can never be broken. The truth in this tale is genuine as the couple must agonize over a decision to either remain together or risk the threat of Dain’s life and Wawa’s freedom if they return to their native village.

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

Sadly, films similar in both richness and honesty are rarely made in modern times, but that just makes Tanna stand out as a treasure in beauty and thought.

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

Oscar Nominations: Best Foreign Language Film

2017 Films, Horror

Annabelle: Creation-2017

August 17, 2017 scottmet99 Leave a comment

Annabelle: Creation-2017

Director-David F. Sandberg

Starring-Talitha Bateman, Lulu Wilson

Scott’s Review #672

Reviewed August 17, 2017

Grade: B+

Annabelle: Creation is a prequel to the successful 2014 horror film, entitled Annabelle, and the fourth installment in a total of the popular The Conjuring series.

Over just a few years these films have become well-crafted, intertwined stories in the modern supernatural horror genre.

As a comparison to another latter-day horror franchise, Saw, Annabelle/The Conjuring elicits more of the classic spook factor rather than the gore associated with the Saw franchise.

Set somewhere in the desert and mountainous region of California, the time is 1943. Dollmaker Samuel Mullins (Anthony LaPaglia) and his wife Esther (Miranda Otto) live a cheerful existence with their young daughter, Annabelle, who they nickname Bee.

The family attends church services regularly and engages in cute games of hiding and seeking in their vast farmhouse and land. When one sunny day Bee is struck and killed by a passing car, the couple is devastated beyond repair.

Twelve years later, a group of orphans led by Sister Charlotte (Stephanie Sigman), are invited by Mr. Mullins (Mrs. Mullins now bed-ridden due to a mysterious accident) to spend some time at the farmhouse when their orphanage shuts down.

The six orphans, led by best friends Janice (Talitha Bateman), and Linda (Lulu Wilson) embark on the quiet farmhouse and immediately are met by strange goings-on, most notably a life-sized doll living inside a forbidden room, which Janice inevitably stumbles upon out of curiosity.

Stricken with polio, Janice has been left a cripple, unable to move around very well.

As Janice discovers the creepy doll, or shall we say, Janice awakens the doll from a strange closet covered with bible verses, the doll begins to terrorize the girls and wreaks havoc on Janice and Linda in particular.

The doll is inhabited by an evil entity and the peculiar circumstances following Annabelle’s death years earlier rise to the surface as secrets are revealed and demons seek refuge in the farmhouse.

Annabelle: Creation is quite well made and inundated with scary elements of surprise. The farmhouse, in particular, is a fantastic setting for a horror film- the remote locale, the eerie quiet, the dark, unfamiliar layout of the house, all come to fruition throughout the film.

Specifically, a scarecrow, a stairwell chair-lift, and the years between 1943 and 1955 are of special importance.

Besides the common horror elements that the film uses to its advantage, the film is just downright scary and tense. On plenty of occasions the cameras are positioned as such so that a figure or object could easily be lurking behind a particular character, but out of sight from the audience.

Sometimes nothing will appear and the scene goes on, but other times a scare occurs that makes us jump out of our seats- this is good, classic, horror at its finest- one knows not what is, or could, be coming next.

I did not find Annabelle: Creation predictable in the slightest, which makes the film succeed.

As if I was not entertained enough throughout the film, the final set of scenes, now some twelve years after 1955, brings us to the very beginning of 2014’s Annabelle, as we witness the very first scenes of that picture, now making perfect sense and weaving the two films together in a compelling fashion.

Apt viewers will remember that Annabelle begins with a horrific home invasion scene, brilliantly crafted and shot. Now, the storyline will make more sense and an “oh wow” moment will be experienced.

Certainly, I was left with a couple of slight gripes about Annabelle: Creation. The character’s appearances are quite modern-day, not the clothes per se, but the hairstyles, mannerisms, and figures of speech- I never, for a second, believed the time of the mid-1950s.

To build on this point, and at the risk of an honest historical inaccuracy critique, a black orphan would never have resided with white orphans, let alone be one of the “popular girls”, nor would the orphans ever have been led by a sexy, Indian nun wearing heavy mascara.

I get that the filmmakers deemed inclusiveness a higher priority over historical accuracy, but these details are noticed and readily apparent to me as not having existed if the film were “real life”.

Furthermore, the point was repeatedly hammered home that the film was a huge supporter of Christianity and went out of its way to promote the goodness of religion over evil.

Annabelle: Creation reaffirms my belief that good, old-fashioned horror films can still be successfully made in the modern era, using elements firmly etched in the genre, but used in a modern, scary, and sinister way.

Here’s to hoping the creators think of another good idea and make another segment in this thrilling dual franchise.

2016 Films, Documentary, International, International Documentary

Fire At Sea-2016

August 12, 2017 scottmet99 Leave a comment

Fire at Sea-2016

Director-Gianfranco Rosi

Scott’s Review #671

Reviewed August 12, 2017

Grade: B+

Fire at Sea was honored with a coveted 2017 Best Documentary Feature Oscar award nomination, but despite this high achievement, was met with largely negative reviews from its viewers- this is not as surprising as it might seem.

Furthermore, the documentary was also the Italian entry for the Best Foreign Language film category but was not chosen. In this way, the piece is rather a hybrid between a “typical” film and a documentary, making it all the more unique in itself.

The lackluster comments are undoubtedly due to both the very slow pace and the way the documentary is jagged- interspersing snippets of the story not seeming to go together with the main message.

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

But it is an important film.

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

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

After a slightly tedious start, I began to become immersed in the various stories and began to appreciate the slow pace- I found this calming.

We see snippets of the ordinary daily events of the residents: a young boy and his friend carve a face out of cactus plants, later the boy experiences an eye exam and is told he needs glasses- later we see a lengthy scene merely of his family eating pasta.

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

Admittedly, I began to wonder what a young boy preparing a sling-shot, or a grandmother preparing sauce had to do with the main content of the documentary- that of migrants coming to the island.

Then I realized that director Gianfranco Rosi is telling a human story and witnessing the ordinary Lampedusa citizens going about their lives is in strong contrast to the fleeing and terrified migrants.

I was able to put all the pieces together.

Told without narration and with the dialogue in Italian containing sub-titles, additional unique aspects to the project, Fire At Sea is unusual, but I admired its important message.

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

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

His long, yet powerful account will move one to tears.

This testimonial by the doctor speaks volumes regarding the current influx of needy individuals, mainly from Syria, who need help from both neighboring countries and countries far away.

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

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

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

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

Fire at Sea, the title a World War II reference to the fiery waters that the residents could see from a far distance during that time, is a story that is worth watching. It provides a lesson in kindness and good decency and a reminder that some people are just good, generous souls, all but willing to help those in need.

We can all learn from this documentary.

Oscar Nominations: Best Documentary-Feature

2005 Films, Drama, German, International, International Drama

Punish Me-2005

August 9, 2017 scottmet99 Leave a comment

Punish Me-2005

Director Angelina Maccarone

Starring Maron Kroymann, Kostja Ullman

Scott’s Review #670

Reviewed August 9, 2017

Grade: A-

Punish Me (sometimes titled Hounded) is a provocative 2005 German-language film that pushes boundaries and titillates the viewer with its racy themes of masochism and pedophilia that will be way too much for your average viewer to marinate and digest.

Some may be completely turned off (rather than on) by this film. However, for the edgy thinker, the film is quite the find. Unique, extreme, and thoughtful, Punish Me is an experience to remember.

Shot entirely in black and white (rare for twenty-first-century cinema) the film appears bleak and harsh, cold almost- and that is no doubt an intentional measure.

The grizzled German landscape (the city is unidentified), gives the film interesting and effective cinematography, transforming the black and white colors exceptionally well, whether the scene is set in daylight or nighttime. Something about the black-and-white decision is genius.

Elsa Seifert (Maren Kroymann) is a fifty-year-old probation officer. Married and raising a teenage daughter, she appears to live a stable, middle-class existence. When one of her charges, Jan (Kostja Ullman), a sixteen-year-old, handsome young man, gives pursuit of her, their relationship turns into an obsessive, lustful situation for both.

Jan, you see, likes to be sexually beaten, and, at first, hesitant, Elsa slowly gets immersed in Jan’s world. When other characters begin to catch wind of the situation between Jan and Elsa, the film becomes intense.

Astounding to me is the fact that Punish Me is directed by a woman, Angelina Maccarone. This both surprises and impresses me. Thought-provoking is the female perspective in the film.

Elsa is not an unhappy woman- though she nervously chain-smokes in almost every scene.

She initially has no intention of being sucked into Jan’s eccentricities. As she awkwardly spanks him in their first steamy, sexual encounter, she is gentle, yet she quickly intensifies.

Is she insecure with her middle-aged body? She gets carried away by Jan’s charms, putting both her career and her husband at risk.

Can she stop herself before it’s too late?

One wonders a few things- How would this film feel if it were directed by a man? Maccarone centers the perspective on Elsa more than she does Jan- or are we to assume that Jan, at sixteen, is merely experimenting with his sexuality and therefore not the more interesting character?

This was my determination. Elsa has way more to lose than Jan does. We are not sure why Jan is so troubled, to begin with, or why he likes to be beaten- was he abused by his parents? sexually or otherwise? What deep-rooted issues does Elsa have?

I imagined the complexities offered had the film gone something like this- Elsa is a male character. Would the man-on-boy be too much? Is female on boy safer?

One wonders, but if Elsa was a male and Jan a female, I do not think the film would be half as controversial or daring. It would seem more exploitative or dare I say, conventional.

Instead, Maccarone turns the film into a psychoanalytical feast as we wonder what makes both Elsa and Jan tick and why they enjoy the discipline scene. Perhaps there is no clearly defined answer.

The supporting characters are not explored very well, other than a fellow troubled girl that Jan beds, commenting that she is too fat (she is not), or Elsa’s husband is revealed to have once had an affair with another woman pronouncing “it was only sex, not love”.

From this, one concludes that Elsa and her husband will reunite and resume their middle-class life together, but what will become of Jan?

Thanks to effortless direction and good choices by Maccarone, she makes Punish Me (2005) an examine-worthy look at sexuality, desire, and emotions.

Many will loathe the film or not bother to give it the time of day based on the subject matter, but the film is a treat for the creative cinematic lover and lovers of analysis.

2016 Films, Documentary

13th-2016

August 5, 2017 scottmet99 Leave a comment

13th-2016

Director-Ava DuVernay

Scott’s Review #669

Reviewed August 5, 2017

Grade: B+

Hot on the heels of her successful feature film Selma (2014), director Ava DuVernay follows up with another race relations piece- this time with an informative documentary entitled 13th, after the Thirteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America, freeing slaves and banning slavery.

The documentary, however, brings to the surface, loopholes to the constitution, and how progress has been too slow for black people following the Civil war and into modern times.

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

The United States prison system is examined throughout the documentary and gets off to a compelling start as we hear an audio clip of former President Barack Obama informed us that the United States has five percent of the population of the world yet twenty-five percent of the worlds prisoners, a direct message to those convinced that the United States is the greatest country in the world.

This powerful message sets 13th off right as we begin a journey into why the statistic exists.

I thoroughly enjoyed the high production values that the documentary offers, including modern graphics as the numbers of the incarcerated blacks, came on screen in an edgy way.

13th does not feel dated or monotone as some documentaries do. Rather, it feels creative and nuanced with interviews and news clips of events such as the Civil Rights movement to Depression-era footage and very modern-day footage so that over a hundred years of history is represented.

A great add-on to 13th is the chronological path through history that the viewer experiences, beginning with the Civil War and ending with 2017- with the unpopular Donald Trump as President of the United States.

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

DuVernay’s major point of her documentary is that many political figures use “scare tactics” to influence voters to vote a certain way and throughout history, voters have fallen for this measure time and time again.

She wisely goes through history and dissects several presidents’ terms and individual campaign messages. Nixon, Reagan, Clinton, Bush Sr., and Obama are heavily featured.

I loved this aspect since it was like a fresh history lesson for me and how the times have not only changed but in some ways stayed the same.

13th avoids being too preachy, and, to its credit, presents “both sides of the aisle”. Some feel that political figures tough take on crime is not meant to repress minorities- a few of these folks are interviewed and given time to explain their viewpoints, but the film is largely left-leaning in tone and views- the negative portrayals of Trump, Nixon, and Reagan, are proof of this.

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

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

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

Oscar Nominations: Best Documentary-Feature

Independent Spirit Award Nominations: Best Documentary Feature

2016 Films, Best International Film Oscar Winners, Drama, International, International Drama

The Salesman-2016

August 2, 2017 scottmet99 Leave a comment

The Salesman-2016

Director-Asghar Farhadi

Starring-Shahab Hosseini, Taraneh Alidoosti

Scott’s Review #668

Reviewed August 2, 2017

Grade: A

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The audience is left with a powerful and intriguing mystery to absorb and unravel. Throughout most of the film, questions are brought to the surface to be thought through. Who was the intruder? Will Emad exact revenge? What happened?

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

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

Compelling and the pure genius of the film is how the viewer’s loyalties will not only be divided by character but will also change within an actual scene.

In one tense sequence, a heroic character becomes the villain and slowly returns to being the hero again-talk about a topsy turvy experience! The Salesman is smothered with a roller coaster of emotions and feelings.

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

A special mention must be given to the other actors involved in the film. The Salesman is fraught with great performances big and small. In addition to the leads (Hosseini and Alidoosti), the supporting cast exudes immeasurable talent. Farid Sajadhosseini as “the Man” is simply astounding in his performance and his family members, appearing largely in the conclusion of the film, deserve much praise.

These small characters appear in the most pivotal time of the film and give it the needed acting chops required to pull off the result.

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

I cannot wait for his next film.

Oscar Nominations: Best Foreign Language Film (won)

1962 Films, Action, Bernard Lee, James Bond, Lois Maxwell, Sean Connery, Terence Young, Ursula Andress

Dr. No-1962

July 27, 2017 scottmet99 Leave a comment

Dr. No-1962

Director Terence Young

Starring Sean Connery, Ursula Andress

Scott’s Review #667

Reviewed July 27, 2017

Grade: A-

Watching the 1962 film that launched the James Bond franchise into the legendary status that it has since become, Dr. No is rich in history and is a blueprint of what the Bond films would encompass in the decades to follow.

Admittedly more basic in comparison to the more sophisticated and fleshed-out chapters to come, the film is nonetheless a superb entry in the franchise and a chapter to be cherished on its own merits.

Charismatic Sean Connery, soon to forever be identified in the role of James Bond, fills the role with a suave, masculine, confidence oozing from the screen in every scene. Hiss’s performance in the role is so seamless, that one might assume he had been playing Bond for years, rather than being a novice.

And who can forget the character’s first entrance- in a casino, confidently gambling, and introducing himself to Sylvia Trench, a character originally slated to be his steady girlfriend?

The film version of Dr. No is adapted from the first Ian Fleming spy novel of the same name, which is clever. As the years have gone by, the Bond films were modified a great deal from the originally written pages, so it is cool and original to have the film closely mirror the book.

Lacking a hefty budget, the action mainly takes place in both London and Jamaica and at Crab Key, a fictional island off of Jamaica.

When Strangways, a British Intelligence Chief, is killed and his body taken by assassins known as “the Three Blind Mice”, who also steal files related to Crab Key island, and a mysterious man named “Dr. No”, Bond is summoned to his superior’s (M) office in London and tasked with determining whether the incident has anything to do with radio interference of missiles launching in Cape Canaveral.

Naturally, it does and the adventure sets off a series of dramatic events involving henchmen, scrapes with death, and Bond’s bedding of more than one beautiful woman, before facing the ultimate showdown with the creepy title character., who is missing both hands.

Notable and distinguishable to the film are the fabulous, chirpy, child-like songs featured in the film. From the tuneful, harmonic, nursery rhyme, “Three Blind Mice”, sung calypso style, to the sexy and playful, “Under the Mango Tree”, both are light, yet filled with necessary mystery too.

The fact that the former is featured at the beginning of the film and implies that the same villains are joyfully singing the happy tune, is a good indicator.

Dr. No is also inspired by the introduction of the crime organization, SPECTRE, which any Bond aficionado knows very well is a staple of the franchise.

Joseph Wiseman, like Dr. No, is well cast, though sadly, we only see him in the latter part of the film. Much more character potential is left untouched, though the mystique of knowing the man exists, but not what he looks like is worth mentioning.

Admittedly, rather silly is the assumption that the audience will not be witty enough to realize that both the characters of Dr. No and Miss Taro (a villainous secretary) are Caucasian actors wearing unconvincing makeup.

Why the choice was made not to cast authentically ethnic actors is unclear. My guess is the powers that be wanted to go a safer route due to the uncertainty of the franchise at that time.

Still, for a first try, Dr. No gets it just about right.

What woman in 1962 was sexier or cast more perfectly than Ursula Andress as the gorgeous and fiery sex kitten, Honey Ryder? This casting was spot on and who can forget her sultry introduction to the film as she emerges from the roaring waves on the beach in a scantily clad bathing suit?

The set designs and locales also work well in the film. Contemporary is the set pieces, specifically the spacious prison apartment Bond and Honey briefly reside in. Sleek and sophisticated, the sofa, rug, and tables all exude luxury and class.

Dr. No (1962) is a worthy film on its own merits and a fantastic introduction to the world of James Bond and the many trademark elements and nuances that the films contain.

2017 Films, Action, War

Dunkirk-2017

July 24, 2017 scottmet99 Leave a comment

Dunkirk-2017

Director-Christopher Nolan

Starring-Fionn Whitehead, Tom Hardy

Scott’s Review #666

Reviewed July 24, 2017

Grade: A

Of the hundreds of war films that have been made over the years, most have a similar style with either a clear patriotic slant or, of a questioning/message type nature.

Regardless, most have a certain blueprint from the story to the visuals to the direction- and rarely stray from this. The genre is not my particular favorite as the machismo is usually overdone and too many of the films turn into standard “guy films”, or the “good guys versus the bad guys”.

Finally, along comes a film like Dunkirk that gives the stale genre a good, swift, kicks in the ass.

The story is both simple, and historical.

In 1940, Nazi Germany, having successfully invaded France, pushes thousands of French and British soldiers to a seaside town named Dunkirk.

With slim hopes of rescue or survival, the soldiers are sitting ducks for the raid of German fighter planes, which drop bombs both on the soldiers and rescue ships. In parallel stories, a kindly British civilian (Mark Rylance) and his son sail to Dunkirk to help rescue the soldiers, and two British fighter pilots chase the German fighter planes, attempting to thwart their deadly intentions.

One will immediately be struck by the pacing of the film as it is non-stop action from start to close. The action, combined with very little dialogue, and an eerie musical score, are what make the film feel so unique and fresh.

Directed by Christopher Nolan, (The Dark Knight trilogy and Inception) critics are heralding this film as his greatest work yet- I tend to agree. Scenes involving such differing musical scores as screechy violins mixed with thunderous, heavy beats, really shake up the film and keep the audience on their toes as to what is coming next.

An interesting facet to the film, and certainly done on purpose, is that the backstories of the characters are not revealed- we know very little about any of them. Do they have families? Are they married? This is a beautiful decision by the screenwriters and by Nolan.

For instance, the very first scenes involve a disheveled private, named Tommy (Fionn Whitehead). Panicked, he runs through the streets in pursuit of the beach, where he meets a fellow soldier named Gibson, who is burying another soldier in the sand.

Together, they find a wounded soldier and carry him to a departing ship- the men never speak, but communicate through their eyes and gestures-it is a powerful series of scenes.

Another positive to Dunkirk is the anonymity of the enemy. The German soldiers are never shown. Certainly, we see many scenes of the fighter planes overhead, pummeling the soldiers with bombs, and pulsating gunfire in various scenes, but the mystique of the enemy troops is a constant throughout the film.

The faceless component to the villains adds terror and haunting uncertainty. In this way, the film adds to the confusion of the audience about where the enemy may be, at any given moment.

The visuals and the vastness of the ocean side beach, forefront throughout the entire film, at one hour and forty-six minutes relatively brief for a war film, elicits both beauty and a terrible gloominess.

Scenes of the vastness of the beach peppered with thousands of cold and hungry men are both pathetic and powerful.

The best scenes take place on Mr. Dawson’s (Rylance) mariner boat. Aided by his son Peter, and Peter’s frightened schoolmate, the trio head for dangerous Dunkirk to help rescue, but en-route pick up a shell-shocked soldier determined to stay as far away from Dunkirk as possible.

This leads to compelling drama and deep characterization of all the central characters.

Many list 1998’s Saving Private Ryan as tops in the modern war genre, but Dunkirk may very well rival that film in intensity and musical effectiveness. Dunkirk also contains shockingly little bloodshed or dismembered soldiers- it does not need this to tell a powerful story.

At times emotional, the film is always intense and never lets go of its audience from the very first frame. A war film for the history books and a lesson in film creativity and thoughtfulness.

Oscar Nominations: Best Picture, Best Director-Christopher Nolan, Best Original Score, Best Sound Editing (won), Best Sound Mixing (won), Best Production Design, Best Cinematography, Best Film Editing (won)

2016 Films, Drama, LGBTQ+ Drama, LGBTQ+ Films

Closet Monster-2016

July 23, 2017 scottmet99 Leave a comment

Closet Monster-2016

Director-Stephen Dunn

Starring-Connor Jessup, Aaron Abrams

Scott’s Review #665

Reviewed July 23, 2017

Grade: B

Closet Monster is a 2016 Canadian LGBT drama that had the honor of being featured at the Toronto International Film Festival, where it was crowned the Best Canadian Drama winner.

Upstart director, Stephen Dunn, directs the film and adds some interesting visual techniques as well as some images. The story is a compelling coming-of-age piece, but the film as a whole is uneven at times, mainly with some character underdevelopment.

Still, for the subject matter, a nice film for LGBT teenagers to be exposed to.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

For the most part a careful character, he is surrounded by a world of chaos and disorder and uses escapism (his fantasies and secluded tree-house) to get through life. In this way, Oscar is a very strong and well-written character.

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

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

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

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

Better development would be recommended for these characters as I found their motives either unclear or perplexing. Why did they split in the first place?

Dunn is great at making Closet Monster an atypical film. He does not pepper the story with predictability or tried and true story points when it comes to same-sex romance, which is a brave choice.

Rather he fills the film with non-cliche moments. Closet Monster is a worthy entry in the LGBT film category and a must-see for those struggling with identity issues- the film acts as a form of therapy.

1979 Films, Beverly D'Angelo, Milos Forman, Musical, Treat Williams

Hair-1979

July 14, 2017 scottmet99 Leave a comment

Hair-1979

Director Milos Forman

Starring Treat Williams, John Savage, Beverly D’Angelo

Scott’s Review #664

Reviewed July 14, 2017

Grade: B+

Hair is a 1979 musical film that, in addition to catchy singing and dance numbers, possesses quite a serious theme- that of the Vietnam War.

This film is not your traditional Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer style musical prevalent in the 1950s. Rather, the entire experience is a unique one with an underlying dark tone and is presumably a message film with a liberal slant.

Made in 1979, set in the late 1960s, Hair centers primarily around two young men, along with a bevy of hippie friends, while most of the action is set in New York City.

Despite the time, the film does not always succeed in the authenticity category- many of the costumes and hairstyles scream the late 1970’s. The film also has the late 1970s “look”, on the cusp of the 1980s with poofy hair associated with the times.

This forces the viewer to escape into a world largely of make-believe.

Claude (John Savage) is a naïve young man from folksy Oklahoma, having lived a sheltered and religious life, proper and away from big city living. He is drafted and sent to the Big Apple, where he will wait for the assignment.

Charismatic Berger (Treat Williams) and company befriend Claude after he gives them spare change, soon becoming the best of friends. Claude falls in love with socialite Sheila Franklin (Beverly D’Angelo) in town from neighboring Westchester County, NY and a love story ensues.

When Claude, Berger, and company interrupt a lavish dinner party hosted by Sheila’s parents, a hilarious yet informative scene develops. While Sheila secretly is gleeful at the arrival of her new friends, Sheila’s parents are none too pleased, which results in a standoff between Berger and Sheila’s family.

Partly comical, this scene also displays the severe class distinctions between many of the characters.

The rest of the film centers on the friend’s antics involving drug use, and relationship trials and tribulations, and culminates in a cross-country drive to desperately see Claude before he is shipped to Vietnam.

Multiple scenes involve songs concerning the turbulent race issues of the times- my personal favorites are the opening number, “Aquarius” and the scandalous, “Black Boys” and “White Boys”, performed by Nell Carter.

Never one to be disappointed with a film set in Manhattan, Hair is a film basking in fantasy and the entire production seems to be one big dream as the carefully crafted musical numbers interspersed with the more dramatic elements.

Still, much of the film consists of the group prancing around Manhattan, and wonderful areas such as Washington Square Park are featured as well as several changes of seasons, giving the film a slice-of-life feel.

My favorite performance is that of Treat Williams as Berger. Part showman, part jokester, and part earnest, he fills the role with dynamic energy that comes full circle in the last act when he drastically changes his appearance for the sake of a friend.

The ending of the film is melancholy and an inevitable reminder of the coldness and finality of war about human life.

The encompassing song is “Let the Sunshine In”, a powerful and worthy conclusion to the film as the gang visits Arlington National Cemetery, to join an anti-war peace rally and say goodbye to a friend.

The film version of Hair (1979) may be drastically changed from the stage musical version, a version I shamefully have yet to see, but on its own merits, the film is a poignant, powerful, and wholly entertaining musical adventure.

1998 Films, Drama, Independent, Independent Drama, LGBTQ+ Drama, LGBTQ+ Films

In the Flesh-1998

July 9, 2017 scottmet99 Leave a comment

In the Flesh-1998

Director Ben Taylor

Starring Dane Ritter, Ed Corbin

Scott’s Review #663

Reviewed July 10, 2017

Grade: B

In the Flesh is a steamy, pre-Brokeback Mountain, LGBT film from 1998. The budget for this film is very small and the acting is quite wooden.

My initial reaction was that In the Flesh is a terrible film, yet something sucked me in as a fan, whether the crime theme or the romance (or both).

The atmosphere is quite dreamlike and moody, which I find appealing and the addition of a whodunit murder mystery amid the romantic drama is highly appealing- therefore I hesitantly recommend this film for perhaps a late-night adult viewing.

But be prepared for endless plot holes and unnecessary subplots.

Oliver Beck (Dane Ritter) is a handsome college student who works as a hustler in a dive bar named The Blue Boy in Atlanta, Georgia. He has his share of loyal, older men who use his services and adore him, especially a lonely man named Mac- a barfly at the watering hole.

When closeted Detective Philip Kursch (Ed Corbin) begins an undercover assignment to bust a drug ring at The Blue Boy, their lives intersect, as Philip falls in love with Oliver and investigates his past.

As the drug investigation seems to be quickly forgotten, a murder mystery develops when Mac is murdered at the ATM- Oliver looks on, panics, and speeds away. When Philip covers Oliver as an alibi, the plot thickens.

Other side stories like a flashback sequence involving Oliver’s past- while driving drunk he killed his best childhood friend, the introduction of his sometime boss and girlfriend, Chloe, and his caring for Lisa, his sister, addicted to heroin- are brought to the table, but really have little to do with the main story and only confuse the plot.

The most compelling element is the relationship between Oliver and Philip and their dysfunctional love story, but many questions abound. Is Philip secretly married or dating a female? We know nothing about his personal life.

Oliver, hustling and hating every minute of it, merely as a way to support Lisa’s habit is ridiculous- why not get her help?

Neither actor Ed Corbin nor Dane Ritter will ever be accused of being the world’s greatest actor, and can hardly act their way out of a paper bag. Both actor’s performances are wooden and unemotional, even when emotion is required in the scene.

Still, oddly this somewhat works in the film.

Regardless of In the Flesh being riddled with plot holes and sub-par acting, the film has some charm.

The moody Atlanta nights, rife with sex and secrets, are quite appealing. A murderer on the loose and disguised save for a green watch is intriguing.

The film also has a mysterious, almost haunting nature, and the muted camera work, whether intentional or the result of a poor DVD copy, works very well.

Since the time is 1998, a time when more and more LGBT films were beginning to be made, but not overly so, In the Flesh and its director, Ben Taylor, deserve credit for even being able to get this film produced and made.

The mainstream success of the LGBT juggernaut, Brokeback Mountain (2006), undoubtedly helped, albeit in a small way, by this film.

Though, strangely, I never noticed the two main characters ever kiss- too soon for 1998?

Not the finest acting nor the best-written screenplay, In the Flesh (1998), is a bare-bones film that will be enjoyed largely by an LGBT audience seeking a peek into a time when these types of films were not running aplenty and typically made in the independent film venue.

2016 Films, Documentary

Life, Animated-2016

July 9, 2017 scottmet99 Leave a comment

Life, Animated-2016

Director-Roger Ross Williams

Starring-Owen Suskind, Ron Suskind

Scott’s Review #662

Reviewed July 9, 2017

Grade: B+

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

As a teenager, Owen sadly was tormented by school bullies, which caused him a setback. Fortunately, through his creative mind, he began to write stories and come up with his characters as a sense of relief from everyday stress.

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

The documentary wisely does not state that Disney films will cure anyone with autism, but rather Owen’s love of these films served as a stimulus to bring him back to life. Presumably, any autistic child could find a source or something he or she loves, to help build self-esteem and achieve skills.

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

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

Life, Animated received a 2016 Best Documentary Oscar nomination.

Oscar Nominations: Best Documentary-Feature

1961 Films, Horror

Homicidal-1961

July 8, 2017 scottmet99 Leave a comment

Homicidal-1961

Director William Castle

Starring Jean Arless, Patricia Bresling

Scott’s Review #661

Reviewed July 8, 2017

Grade: A-

Homicidal is a 1961 horror film, shot in black and white, that is a direct homage to the successful Psycho, made only a year earlier.

While some would argue Homicidal is a direct rip-off of Psycho, I see the film as containing elements of Psycho but twisted around so that its own unique story is created.

Regardless, Homicidal is a fantastic, edge-of-your-seat film, that never drags or slows down, and the film deserves recognition.

The surprise ending is terrific.

The story gets off to an intriguing start as a tall, leggy, blonde woman confidently walks into a local California hotel to request a room.

There is something mysterious about the woman. She appears to be a woman of some wealth and convinces a young bellboy to marry her for $2,000.

Hesitant, but also enamored by the woman, he accompanies her to the local justice of the peace, who marries them in the middle of the night. The woman (Emily) then savagely bludgeons the justice of the peace and flees the scene.

Later, she brags about the murder of a mute and sickly old woman named Helga, who she is caring for.

From this point, other characters in the small town are introduced and we slowly learn more and more about the intriguing Emily (Jean Arless).

Flower shop owner, Miriam (Patricia Breslin) and her brother Warren are central to the story as Warren will inherit a fortune on his twenty-first birthday, which is the next day. Miriam’s boyfriend, Karl, is the local pharmacist, who Emily appears to fancy.

All of these characters come into play as the intriguing plot develops. Is Warren’s inheritance a motivating factor? Will he be killed? Why isn’t his sister, Miriam receiving any money? Could she be secretly plotting something?

The comparisons to Psycho are endless.

The gender-bending twist during the final act is the most obvious one- Arless deserves kudos for tackling both roles in a wonderful, compelling fashion.

The fact that Arless resembles Psycho actress Janet Leigh is another similarity. Otherwise, Miriam and Karl resemble characters from Psycho and Helga could be a dead ringer for Mother Bates. Even some of the sets, specifically a staircase, resemble the one in Psycho.

Director, William Castle, brilliantly adds a gimmick to Homicidal that works very well- as the film is about to reach its shocking climax, the action suddenly stops and the introduction of a “fright break” ensues.

At this point, Castle gives the audience forty-five seconds to leave the room to avoid what is to come next-we see the clock countdown in real time. What a fantastic idea!

Throughout the film, I noticed some of the actors, most notably Jean Arless, playing their roles in a slightly melodramatic way. Suddenly, there is a knock at the door, or a car drives up, and the character quickly turns their head in a fast movement, to look in an almost cartoonish way.

Rather than see this as a negative, this style of acting works for me and adds a bit of humor to the film.

Another positive is the way the film is gruesome in several parts. As a character descends the staircase from a stairlift, the image of the body is shrouded in dark shadows. When the dismembered head topples down the staircase, it is macabre and effective.

The justice of the peace death scene is also well done and will please horror fans with its hefty bloodletting. Surprisingly, only two murders occur.

Certainly not as crafty, and containing a smaller budget (though Psycho was also small), Homicidal is quite a solid effort in a B-movie way.

Success is largely due to the fantastic direction of William Castle, who carves a similar story to Psycho, but in a different way so that his film does not feel like a carbon copy.

Homicidal (1961) is a film for fans of classic, solid, horror films.

1968 Films, Action, Steve McQueen

Bullitt-1968

July 7, 2017 scottmet99 Leave a comment

Bullitt-1968

Director Peter Yates

Starring Steve McQueen, Robert Vaughn

Scott’s Review #660

Reviewed July 7, 2017

Grade: B+

Bullitt (1968) is one of the ultimate “guy movies”, hardly a stretch considering it stars the “regular guy” hero of the time, Steve McQueen.

With his macho, tough-guy persona and his cool, confident swagger, he was a marquee hero during the late 1960s and into the 1970s.

While the film is rife with machismo stereotypes and is not exactly a women’s lib film, it is also a good old-fashioned action thriller with plenty of chase and fight scenes to make most guys (and some girls) happy.

The story is not too thought-provoking, but the film works as escapist fare and is an example of good late 1960s cinema.

Set in San Francisco, Lieutenant Frank Bullitt (Steve McQueen) is assigned to watch a Chicago gangster, Johnny Ross, over a long weekend, before the criminal is set to testify against his brother on Monday morning.

Robert Vaughn plays ambitious politician, Walter Chalmers, who is determined to see the case go off without a hitch and see convictions in the organized crime syndicate.

Predictably, the weekend does not go as planned and Ross is attacked by hitmen. This, in turn, sets off a cat-and-mouse game of deception and intrigue. As expected, the action is virtually non-stop with many action sequences lighting up the screen.

The plot of Bullitt does not matter and, one does not need to completely understand what is going on to enjoy the film for what it is. The intent of a film like Bullitt is not good story-telling, but rather good action.

This is not meant as a put-down, but rather good, honest critiquing. One can simply sit back, relax, and enjoy the testosterone-laden affair.

Bullitt contains some riveting scenes that raise it above an average, middling, action flick. The muscle car chase involving a then state-of-the-art and flashy Ford Mustang and Dodge Charger is fantastic and one of the high points of the film.

The quick and edgy camera angles as the cars zip down the windy and narrow San Francisco roads make for compelling tension.

Will one of the cars careen off the side of the road or blow up in an explosion? Since one of the cars holds Frank Bullitt and the other car is the bad guy, it is not tough to guess how the sequence will end.

But it’s good fun all the same and well filmed.

The other spectacular sequence is the finale- as Frank and company overtake a busy San Francisco airport in pursuit of a baddie about to board a transcontinental flight, the chase sequence leads them throughout the airport, onto a taxiing plane, and finally onto the runway, as a plane is about to take off.

It is action at its finest and also a treat for the viewer in that it brings us back to airport days, pre-9/11 when airports were just different. The luxurious flight crew, the innocence, and the glamour- all a distant memory.

The scene is such that it shows all of the airport elements- the people, the employees, the airport, and the planes, giving it a slice-of-life feel, circa late 1960’s airport days.

Appealing is the period in which the film is made. 1968, was a great time for film, Bullitt capitalized on the newly liberal use of blood that films were able to show, so in this way, Bullitt is an influential action film.

Dozens of imitators (some admittedly with superior writing) followed, including classics Dirty Harry and The French Connection. These contain the same basic blueprint that Bullitt has.

A negative to Bullitt is the trite way in which women are portrayed. Female characters are written as dutiful nurses, gasping in fear and helplessly running away when an assailant runs rampant in the hospital, praying for a man to save the day.

Or, they are written, in the case of Bullitt’s girlfriend, as a gorgeous yet insignificant character, given a laughable scene in which she questions whether or not she knows Frank after witnessing the violence in his job- hello?

He is in the San Francisco Police Department after all.

Bullitt is a meat-and-potatoes kind of film-making. An early entry into what would become the raw 1970s and the slick formulaic 1980s action genre, the film deserves credit for being at the front of the pack in style and influence.

The story and character development are secondary to other aspects of the film and Bullitt (1968) is just fine as escapism fare.

Oscar Nominations: 1 win-Best Sound, Best Film Editing (won)

2017 Films, Drama, Period Drama

The Beguiled-2017

July 4, 2017 scottmet99 Leave a comment

The Beguiled-2017

Director-Sofia Coppola

Starring-Nicole Kidman, Colin Farrell

Scott’s Review #659

Reviewed July 4, 2017

Grade: A-

A remake of the 1971 film (also adapted from an earlier novel) starring Clint Eastwood, The Beguiled is a 2017 release directed by Sofia Coppola (Lost in Translation), a director ready to burst onto the front lines.

Coppola carefully chooses her films, but each one is different from the others and The Beguiled is no different. A piece fraught with atmosphere and tension, Coppola does wonder from a directing standpoint.

The story has tons of unchartered potential and drags at times, but overall The Beguiled is a hit if nothing more than to look at in wonderment.

The film gets off to a moody start as we follow a young girl, eerily humming as she picks mushrooms, along a deserted southern road. It is Civil War times (1864), and the setting is a mostly deserted all-girls boarding school in southern Virginia.

The girl (Amy) is startled when she discovers an injured, handsome Union Army soldier, Corporal John McBurney (Farrell). Sympathetic, Amy helps the soldier back to the school, led by the headmistress, Martha Farnsworth (Kidman).

Slowly, the females in the school become enamored with John as they develop rivalries with each other to gain the upper hand for his affections.

There is something so sinister and wickedly foreboding about almost every scene as we shrink at the thought that something bad will happen at any moment- sometimes it does and sometimes it does not.

Almost like a horror film would, the camera angles are such that something or someone is bound to suddenly leap out and grab a character.

The colors are muted and almost pastel and there is commonly fog floating through the exterior scenes. Coppola does a fantastic job of portraying a deserted southern landscape. The lighting of the film is also intriguing as lit candles serve to enhance the dimness and the final dinner scene (poison mushrooms anyone?) is gloomy and Shakespearean.

Beyond the look of the film, The Beguiled is well-acted. With heavyweights like Farrell, Kidman, and frequent Coppola star, Kirsten Dunst, as the vulnerable and unhappy teacher, Miss Morrow, the acting is stellar and believable. The audience is unsure if John is manipulating the women for his gain or if he has developed feelings for any (or all) of them.

The lovesick teen, Alicia (Elle Fanning), with hormones raging, sets her sights on John almost from the beginning, sneaking out of musical lessons, to kiss an unconscious John goodnight.

The story, while compelling, is quite slow-moving and left with oodles of possibilities when the conclusion finally happens. Other than the tart, Alicia, the endless romantic potential could have been reached with both Miss Morrow and Miss Farnsworth.

I was left wondering throughout the film when a romance would develop between Martha and John, but only towards the end of the film was this ever addressed and barely skirted over, as they take charge and stoic Martha slowly began to let her guard down.

In this way, the film could have added some further romantic complications and beefed up the very short running time of ninety-three minutes.

As Nicole Kidman is one of my favorite film stars of all time (she can tell a story by facial expressions alone), she has wisely begun to choose fantastic supporting roles as she ages in Hollywood (2016’s Lion immediately comes to mind).

Dunst has aged gracefully into a middle-aged actress chomping at the bit for meaty roles, and Colin Farrell is as ruggedly handsome as ever sprouting a dark and bushy beard for most of the role. The acting in The Beguiled is fantastic.

The Beguiled is a film to watch if only to escape to the joys of great, atmospheric, film-making, and to appreciate the wonderful talents of one of the few prominent female director’s of today (hopefully the mega success of 2017’s female-directed Wonder Woman will begin to change this).

The story has a few issues, but overall The Beguiled is worth the money spent.

1970 Films, Drama, Leonard Frey, LGBTQ+ Drama, LGBTQ+ Films, Scott's Top 100 Films, William Friedkin

The Boys in the Band-1970

July 4, 2017 scottmet99 Leave a comment

The Boys in the Band-1970

Director William Friedkin

Starring Kenneth Nelson, Frederick Combs

Top 100 Films #80

Scott’s Review #658

Reviewed July 4, 2017

Grade: A

An excellent counterpart to the equally brilliant, and equally unpleasant, Who’s Afraid of Virginia Woolf? (1966) The Boys in the Band is also a stage production made into a feature film.

As such, shot very much like a play and seemingly in one long take, the film is highly effective and delicious in wit and dark humor. With a macabre and bitter element, the characters snipe and ridicule each other during a birthday party.

The Boys in the Band is a groundbreaking film on many levels as it is one of the first LGBTQ+ films to feature gay characters in prominent roles. Furthermore, it has the dubious honor of being the first film to use the word “cunt”.

Regardless, the film is fantastic and a must-see for anyone intrigued by LGBTQ+ film history. All of the actors appeared in the stage production and reprised their roles for the film version.

The setting is the Upper East Side of Manhattan in the late 1960s.

Michael, a writer, is hosting a birthday party for his good friend, Harold. When Michael receives an urgent call from his straight and married college chum, Alan, he begrudgingly invites him over at the risk of having his lifestyle exposed.

One by one, the guests arrive for the party. Emory is quite effeminate and loud, Hank and Larry are masculine and a couple, but with monogamy issues and Hank’s marriage as obstacles.

Bernard, a black bookstore clerk is an amiable, nice guy.

“Cowboy”, a dim-witted hustler, and Harold, the sarcastic, bitter, guest of honor, round out the attendees.

As the night wears on, the party turns into a free form of insults, bad feelings, and vicious conversation. Alan and Emory get into a fistfight, and later a hurtful telephone game forces everyone to call the one person they truly love which results in anxiety and sadness for most of the guests.

The key aspect of The Boys in the Band is that it is shot like a play would be, with a highly effective result. In this way, especially mid-way through the film when the guests are all in the same closed room, the action becomes suffocating and stifling as the fangs are bared by a few of the guests.

Director, Friedkin, uses many close-ups of his characters to further portray their raw emotions.

My favorite characters are Alan and Hank as these characters are the most complex.

Both are married, and both hit it off famously, although Alan’s sexuality is never completely revealed. He is married but troubled, and the audience never learns why, although we could wager a guess that he is, indeed, conflicted by his sexuality.

What will become of him? Will he accept his sexuality or live a repressed existence?

Hank, during a divorce from his wife, lives with Larry as a couple. Hank is complex because he is transitioning from a straight life to a gay lifestyle and that must have been very difficult in the late 1960’s- for this reason, I find the character of Hank quite brave.

The film does not explore this angle as much as it could have, but a character such as Hank fleshes out the cast in a positive way. Alan and Hank are multi-dimensional characters whereas some of the others contain gay stereotypes.

I would have enjoyed a deeper dive into the personal lives of some of the characters, but the film is really about the emotions many of the characters possess and feelings of love, some unrequited, and there are too many characters for each to receive his due focus.

Plus, the main focus of the film is the back-and-forth banter between the characters.

1967 Films, Drama, Lee Grant, Patty Duke, Sharon Tate

Valley of the Dolls-1967

July 3, 2017 scottmet99 Leave a comment

Valley of the Dolls-1967

Director Mark Robson

Starring Barbara Parkins, Patty Duke, Sharon Tate

Scott’s Review #657

Reviewed July 3, 2017

Grade: A-

Based on the best-selling novel written by Jacqueline Susann a year earlier, the film version of Valley of the Dolls has become rather a cult classic in the years following release- it has earned the dubious description of “it’s so bad it’s good”.

The film dives headfirst into the soapy and dramatic world of Hollywood and Broadway and the trials and tribulations that three young women encounter as they try to “make it” in the backstabbing business.

The film teeters on camp, but is a favorite of mine, as I love the theme of aspiring stars in La La land. The set design and groovy styles of the late 1960s are also noteworthy.

Bored with her life in sleepy New England, Anne Welles decides to move to the bright lights of Manhattan seeking fame, fortune, and excitement.

After she lands a secretarial job for an entertainment lawyer, who handles temperamental Broadway star Helen Lawson (Susan Hayward), Anne meets and befriends two other struggling young actresses.

Neely O’Hara (Patty Duke) is a vivacious, gifted singer, and Jennifer North (Sharon Tate) is a gorgeous blonde with limited talent but looks to die for.

The three women wrestle with the ups and downs of show business as they each achieve various levels of success and failure.

The film centers on both the love and the losses of each woman and at times the film is rather soap opera-like, especially the bitchy feud between Neely and Helen, but the film is a fun, entertaining experience.

Various men come in and out of the lives of the trio. The “dolls” referenced in the title are a nickname for pills that the girls readily pop and alcohol is also used in the film.

One interesting aspect of the film that I am fond of is that the three women are vastly different from one another.

Anne is the most sensible of the three and arguably the most intelligent. Neely is wild, reckless, and constantly battles drugs and alcohol, yet she is both the most successful and the most talented. Jennifer is gorgeous but lacks the talent or the vigor to succeed in Hollywood.

Two of the three women do not experience happy endings to their respective stories.

Some are admittedly a bit uneven, especially the performance of Duke as Neely. She plays the role wildly over the top, especially during her shrieking, drug-saddled tirades, but rather than find the performance irritating (some certainly might), I find the role loud, bombastic, yet sympathetic.

We root for Neely because she has talent despite her shortcomings and she is a likable character to me as I want her to find happiness.

Also playing up the camp is Hayward, as she fills Helen with fire, spite, and gusto, doing everything to make the audience view her as a queen bitch. Helen was scheduled to be played by illustrious star Judy Garland (she would have been perfect!) but was reportedly fired for showing up for work drunk.

An enjoyable aspect of Valley of the Dolls is the humor, though sadly the laughs are not always intentional. The finale involves a catfight between Neely and Helen in the classy ladies’ room of a famed theater.

With sheer delight, Neely yanks off Helen’s bright orange wig to reveal her natural head of hair. In campy fashion, Helen’s real hair is perfectly fine- more shocking would have been if she were bald or had thinning hair, but her hair is bleached blonde and full.

In melodramatic fashion, Helen waltzes out of the theater sans wig.

Valley of the Dolls is a late-night treat that can be enjoyed and not taken overly seriously- the film differs vastly from the actual novel and even the time (the 1960s versus the 1940s through the 1960s) is changed.

The film was followed by a much more campy and satirical film, Beyond the Valley of the Dolls, made in 1970 and directed by Russ Meyer.

Oscar Nominations: Best Original Song Score or Adaptation Score

1979 Films, Clint Eastwood, Crime Thriller, Don Siegel, Thriller

Escape from Alcatraz-1979

July 2, 2017 scottmet99 Leave a comment

Escape from Alcatraz-1979

Director Don Siegel

Starring Clint Eastwood

Scott’s Review #656

Reviewed July 2, 2017

Grade: B+

Made during the heyday (the 1970s and the early 1980s) of a slew of action and thriller-type films to star popular actor, Clint Eastwood, Escape from Alcatraz is a gritty, guy-focused film with not one single female character insight.

The film is directed by Don Siegel, who also directed Eastwood in several previous films, most notably, Dirty Harry in 1971, and contains a grittiness frequently used in this genre of film during the period.

Reminiscent in style of 1975’s One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest in its authority repressing and taking advantage of the victimized common man, the film itself is also a good historical account of one of the most famous prison escapes ever achieved, in 1962.

Having recently visited the long since shut down Alcatraz prison near San Francisco, California, the film was wonderful to watch at this time as much of it was shot inside and around the actual prison grounds.

We immediately meet Frank Morris (Eastwood) as he is unceremoniously led to the infamous Alcatraz prison on a stormy, chilly night in foggy San Francisco. The dark, harsh weather perfectly sets the tone for the dreary prison experience he will face.

Morris is stripped, searched, intimidated by the warden and the guards, and paraded around naked, finally taken to his tiny cell, where he will presumably spend the rest of his life.

The film does not reveal what crimes Morris has committed to warrant his tenure in Alcatraz this way the character is more sympathetic.

Slowly, Morris befriends other inmates and formulates an idea to escape the impossible prison by digging through the cement walls with spoons and escaping through pipes.

The other inmates featured in the film are the Anglin brothers, in for robbery, a kindly older man named Doc, who fervently paints the time away, nervous Charlie Butts, and English, an intelligent black man serving two life sentences for killing two white men in self-defense.

All of these men in some way aid Morris in his escape from the torturous Alcatraz.

A side story involves a bully named Wolf, who has designs on Morris from day one. Whether Wolf is actually gay or merely a menace is unknown and not explored. Throughout the film, Wolf and Morris fight and spend time in solitary confinement and their rivalry is an interesting sub-plot.

The film wants the viewer to be on the side of the prisoners and I am not sure if in real life the prisoners would be as sympathetic as portrayed in the film. Most of them seem to be confined to Alcatraz for robberies or crimes they did not commit or circumstances deeming the crimes inevitable in some way.

Furthering a liberal slant to the film is the friendship between Morris and English. An interracial friendship between the men reveals that our hero Morris is progressive-thinking and a “good guy”.

Conversely, most of the guards and certainly the Warden (Patrick McGoohan) are written as terrible, unsympathetic people. When an inmate drops dead of a heart attack, the warden coldly remarks “Some men are destined never to leave Alcatraz alive”.

The Warden is the foil of the film and in the final scene, the Warden gets a bit of comeuppance when a mocking souvenir is left for him.

To further compare Escape from Alcatraz to One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest, the Warden is a similar character to the infamous Nurse Ratched in their mutual, diabolical sadism.

I am unsure if in “real life” the distinctions between the prisoners and the authority figures were so black and white, but it sure makes for good film drama. It is “the heroes versus the villains” but in reverse.

The inevitable escape sequence is predictable but highly compelling as Morris and Company enact their escape plot during an overnight.

The usage of papier-mache dolls to fool the guards is heavily dramatic and compelling.

Escape from Alcatraz (1979) is not high art but works as a historical account of a real-life incident in one of the most discussed prisons in United States history.

The film is also a perfect starring vehicle for Eastwood as he is well cast in the gritty, yet likable role of prisoner Morris.

The film is a good, solid, late 1970s thriller.

1954 Films, Joan Crawford, Nicholas Ray, Western

Johnny Guitar-1954

June 15, 2017 scottmet99 Leave a comment

Johnny Guitar-1954

Director Nicholas Ray

Starring Joan Crawford, Sterling Hayden

Scott’s Review #655

Reviewed June 15, 2017

Grade: B-

Johnny Guitar (1954) is an interesting film to review for a few reasons, but most distinct is for its challenging of the traditional mold of the classic western- front and center is an aggressive and strong-willed woman, and a saloon owner no less, who is engaged in an antagonistic feud with another woman-with a similar disposition.

Of course, since the film stars legendary screen actress, Joan Crawford, she ought to be a strong character.

The writing of the film is not brilliant and other Western stereotypes abound, but Johnny Guitar is a decent watch for Crawford.

In the middle of an Arizona cattle town, circa the Wild West days, Vienna (Crawford) is a gorgeous and brazen woman, who owns the local watering hole, frequented by less-than-savory men.

Vienna welcomes the men mostly because one of them is a former boyfriend. The rest of the town, led by Emma Small (Mercedes McCambridge), despises Vienna and her support of the incoming railroad, sure to make Vienna rich.

After a bank robbery, Vienna is pursued by Emma and the town into a standoff, in which lynchings, shootings, and fires encompass the rest of the film.

Mixed in with the drama is a romance between Vienna and handsome guitarist, Johnny Guitar (Sterling Hayden), and some musical numbers, but mostly the film is a shoot ’em up led by women.

Let’s take the good with the bad surrounding the film- any picture starring Joan Crawford gets some credit in my book and the role of Vienna is certainly unchartered territory for the glamorous star. Tough-talking, gun-slinging, and with a short hairdo, rumors abounded that the character of Vienna was gay and in love with her arch-enemy Emma.

Perhaps, decades later, this might have transpired, but this was 1950s Hollywood, after all. No, Crawford still dazzles with heavy makeup and bright red lips and is ever so feminine despite the masculine outfit.

Clever, especially for 1954 westerns, is having a tough female character in the central role, and this bolsters Johnny Guitar above middling. Typically a genre that sticks to the tried and true, the main female rivalry between Vienna and Emma is the best part of the film, but sadly the back story is never fully explored.

Why do they hate each other? Were they in love with the same man? Is their hatred simply because they are the only women in the town?

The chase scene and the climax of the film are also quite good. How delightful to see Crawford prancing around in peril, riding a horse, and swimming in a creek.

The film turns into a good, old-fashioned adventure, and the cinematography and exterior sets are not bad.

Two aspects of Johnny Guitar stood out to me as negatives. The romance between Vienna and Johnny Guitar does not work. For starters, Crawford seems much too old for Hayden as Johnny and I never felt any chemistry between the characters- the back story scene with the reveal that they were once an “item” is weak.

Besides Emma, there are no other female characters at all (a coincidence?), which is a strange aspect of the film. Does one wonder if this was Crawford’s demand? (but I digress).

The romance between the duo is lackluster, though admittedly, I did feel a rooting factor for them as the final chapter commenced and the pair was in danger.

The storytelling is only mediocre as I never felt invested in the writing and the entire script feels silly and cheap. The story is laid out in a basic way- Vienna is told by (arguably) the leader of the town, Ward Bond, to close up shop and leave town within twenty-four hours or else there will be hell to pay.

When some of the men rob a bank and plan to depart for California, Vienna is blamed for a sloppy contrived plot device and is set to be hanged.

The script is not the high point of the film.

For a gender-bending experience and the fabulous addition of Ms. Crawford, Johnny Guitar is worth a watch, but do not expect a masterpiece in storytelling or to be dazzled by character development.

Fans of the classic Western may be disappointed.

2015 Films, Drama, Independent, Independent Drama

I Smile Back-2015

June 13, 2017 scottmet99 Leave a comment

I Smile Back-2015

Director-Adam Salky

Starring-Sarah Silverman

Scott’s Review #654

Reviewed June 13, 2017

Grade: B+

As a fan of Sarah Silverman, the comedienne, I was anxious to see the 2015 film, I Smile Back, which garnered her a Screen Actors Guild Award nomination.

Silverman tackles a heavily dramatic role in a film that teeters on being a pure “downer”. Many fans expecting the actress’s comic wit to be featured need not see the film.

Rather, I embraced the performance and found the film to be an independent film treat, in large part thanks to Silverman’s powerful performance. She nails the part and carries the film to success.

I Smile Back is a very small film that I wished had garnered more viewers.

Laney Brooks (Silverman) appears to have it all. She lives an affluent existence in Westchester County, NY with her handsome husband, Bruce (Josh Charles), and their two young children.

With a gorgeous house, dinner parties, and friends, who could ask for anything more? Bored and troubled by a tough childhood and “daddy issues”, Laney tends to drink too much, abuse drugs and prescription pills, carry on an affair with her best friend’s husband, all while managing to successfully run a household.

As she gradually begins to spiral down a darker path, Laney sees her perfect world slowly begin to crumble around her.

My question throughout the entire film was, “Are we supposed to root for Laney or dislike her?”

Certainly, director Adam Salky does not make it easy to like her. In addition to her substance abuse use (or over-use), Laney is rather selfish. From the small scenes when Laney drops off her kids from school and is annoyed when the crossing guard and a teacher refuse to give her special treatment, she mutters insults under her breathe as she grabs a cigarette and heads for her scandalous rendezvous.

But when she is put in great peril later in the film, following one of her benders, I could not help but feel deep sympathy for her. In this way, the film is a bit unclear of what the audience should feel.

This leads me to conclude without a doubt that the film belongs to Silverman. What impressed me most is how believable she is in most scenes. She packs creative lunches for her kids and plays fun birthday cake decorating games with them, but in the next breathe snorts cocaine and rails at a neighbor lady for not celebrating Thanksgiving. Thanks to Silverman, she plays these scenes with gusto.

Some critics have complained about the script, but I find no real fault in it. Not the strongest element, it is fine, nonetheless. I Smile Back is a low-budget indie drama that serves its purpose- it does not delve too deeply into the how’s and why’s of her addiction, and a nice scene with Laney’s father (Chris Sarandon) offers no concrete evidence of why this man drove her to drugs by his abandonment, but the film seems to be more about proving a good performance by Silverman than anything else.

Sarah Silverman commands great respect with her dark portrayal in I Smile Back.

This role, combined with her recent turn in Showtime’s Masters of Sex television series, portraying a pregnant lesbian in the 1960s, proves that she has what it takes to compete with the great dramatic actresses of today.

She is certainly much more than a stand-up comic. Here’s to hoping for more drama from this talented lady in the years ahead.

2016 Films, Drama, International, International Drama

A Man Called Ove-2016

June 12, 2017 scottmet99 Leave a comment

A Man Called Ove-2016

Director-Hannes Holm

Starring-Rolf Lassgard

Scott’s Review #653

Reviewed June 12, 2017

Grade: A

A Man Called Ove is a wonderful 2016 Swedish film, honored with a Best Foreign Language Film Oscar nomination, that is just a darling watch-in fact, the film is wonderful.

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

The film is magical in a sense.

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

Ove (Rolf Lassgard) is a fifty-nine-year-old curmudgeon living in suburban Sweden. He is the keeper of law and order in his quaint, little community of bungalows, regularly ridiculing rule breakers and the oblivious with torrents of shouts and insults. He despises several of his neighbors including a beautiful cat that saunters around the complex as if she owns the place.

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

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

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

A Man Called Ove is not exactly dark, but certainly not trivial or fluff either. I found the film rich with great writing and character development.

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

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

Later, when Sonja’s story is wholly explored, we come to a new appreciation for Ove and why he is the way he is in present times- we understand him better and the character develops.

Some of the paths that life takes Ove and Sonja are tear-inducing and emotional, largely due to the character and personality that Sonja possesses. On the heels of the Ove and Sonja back-story, we are treated to scenes of Ove and his father, in the past.

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

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

A perfect balance of drama, comedy, churning emotions, and heartbreaking honesty, A Man Called Ove is a pure treat in modern cinema and is highly recommended for those seeking a treasure with a full array of characteristics.

Oscar Nominations: Best Foreign Language Film

2016 Films, Drama

Fences-2016

June 11, 2017 scottmet99 Leave a comment

Fences-2016

Director-Denzel Washington

Starring-Denzel Washington, Viola Davis

Scott’s Review #652

Reviewed June 11, 2017

Grade: B+

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

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

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

Set in 1950’s Pittsburgh, Troy Maxson (Washington) is a struggling fifty-three-year-old black man, working as a trash collector alongside his best friend, Jim Bono. Married to Rose (Davis), they share a teenage son, Cory, an aspiring high school football player.

In the mix are Troy’s younger brother, a mentally impaired World War II veteran, and Troy’s older son, Lyons, a fledgling musician. Everyone lives in a close-knit community and there is a sense of comradery, though the principal characters are frequently at odds with each other as dramatic situations slowly arise.

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

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

Fences at its core is a family drama and the story offers tons of conflict. Almost all of the action takes place in the Maxson family home- a two-story brick house- and scenes frequently play out in the backyard. In this way, the film stays very true to its roots as a stage production, which is good and bad.

The film feels like a play, so therefore I found myself fantasizing about how good the production would be on the stage rather than on the screen, especially since some of the actors (namely Washington and Davis) starred in that version. What a blessing and a curse.

The film feels a bit too limiting at times and contains a glossy “Hollywood look” to it. This is all well and good, but the stage version would undoubtedly be more bare-bones, giving the production more of a raw feel- especially important in several key dramatic scenes between Troy and Rose.

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

I found Troy’s repeated verbal rampages and stories irritating after a while, and began to wonder, “why should we root for this man?”

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

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

I would have preferred an edgier film than the final result of Fences brings to the big screen, but the wonderful performances more than compensated for what the film otherwise lacks in darkness. At times too safe and slightly watered down, the stage version may be the one to see.

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

2016 Films, Biography, Drama, War

Hacksaw Ridge-2016

June 9, 2017 scottmet99 Leave a comment

Hacksaw Ridge-2016

Director-Mel Gibson

Starring-Andrew Garfield

Scott’s Review #651

Reviewed June 9, 2017

Grade: B+

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

The film received several Academy Award nominations, including Best Picture, Best Director, and Best Actor (Andrew Garfield). While the film has a few minor flaws, and despite being yet another exhausting war film, Hacksaw Ridge is quite powerful, mostly because of the warmth and convictions that Garfield breathes into the central character, and real-life hero, Desmond Doss.

The film also leans anti-war and pacifistic, needed components in these troubled times.

During World War II, Desmond is a young man living in Virginia. With a brother around the same age, they deal with an abusive, alcoholic father and a passive mother. Desmond realizes he has a talent for medical care and, after falling in love with a small-town nurse, he decides to enlist in the Army as a non-combat medic.

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

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

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

He saves the real gore for later in the film.

The film during the earlier portions has a very mainstream, safe feel to it and I found more than a couple of aspects to nitpick. Desmond’s fellow training recruits are laced with too often used stereotypical, stock characters- the brooding one, the cocky one nicknamed “Hollywood” for his good looks and tendency to walk around naked, the funny one, the strange one, the list goes on and on.

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

Some of the jokes used are cheap one-liners like, “we are not in Kansas anymore, Dorothy” to describe new surroundings- Duh?

Additionally, there is glaring machismo in the first half that is a negative to the film and it makes the film feel like nothing more than the standard fare.

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

Technically speaking, the cinematography and camera work is shaky and move very quickly, causing an effective shift from the sun and peace of the United States to the dark and fog of unfamiliar territory.

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

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

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

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

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

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

Welcome to my blog! 1,425 + reviews posted so far! My name is Scott Segrell and I reside in Stamford, CT. My blog is a diverse site featuring tons of film reviews I have written since I launched my site in 2014. I hope you enjoy perusing the site for latest or greatest films or to search for your own favorites to see how we compare. Please take a look at my featured sections at the top of the page which change often! Utilize the tags and category links.