2016 Films, Amy Adams, Denis Villeneuve, Drama, Forest Whitaker, Jeremy Renner, Mark O'Brien, Michael Stuhlbarg, Science Fiction, Shawn Levy, Tzi Ma

Arrival-2016

Leave a comment

Arrival-2016

Director Denis Villeneuve

Starring Amy Adams, Jeremy Renner, Forest Whitaker

Scott’s Review #642

Reviewed May 9, 2017

Grade: B-

Arrival (2016) is the latest in a recent trend of science fiction-themed films garnering Academy Award praise, either for technical achievements or, in the case of Arrival, a surprising Best Picture nomination in addition to the more traditional awards notice for categories like sound effects and editing.

Traditionally, science fiction gets little or no recognition in significant categories; this makes the inclusion of films in the under-the-radar style with the big guns all the more surprising.

Similar in style to recent films such as Interstellar (2014) and Gravity (2013), Arrival ultimately proves a disappointment as a complete film, succeeding only in specific avenues like its musical score and a sort of surprise twist ending that the film presents, but at times is downright to say nothing of its tedious moments.

Needless to say, I wholeheartedly disagree with its Best Picture nomination.

I am not claiming to be the world’s greatest science fiction fan. At times, Arrival does have glimmers of success (mainly in the first act) and some high points in the vein of 2001: A Space Odyssey (1968), the greatest of the greats in the genre. However, the good moments ultimately fade as the story lumbers on, only to show a brief resurgence in the final act.

Sadly, the rest of the film is rather middling.

In a role seemingly written just for her, Amy Adams stars as Louise Banks, a linguist professor living and teaching in Massachusetts.

One day, a series of twelve extraterrestrial aircraft appeared across the world. Louise is summoned by an Army Colonel (Forest Whitaker) to travel to a remote area of Montana where one aircraft has taken up residence and assist a physicist, Ian Donnelly (Jeremy Renner), in communicating with the aliens.

Their goal is to determine why they have come to planet Earth.

Interspersed with the main story are strange flashbacks of a life Louise briefly spent with her daughter, who appears to have died of cancer as a teenager.

The film’s premise is reminiscent of another film named Contact, made in 1997, starring Jodie Foster.

The film seems to borrow aspects from several other famous science fiction films, such as the creepy, ominous score that harkens back to 2001: A Space Odyssey in its mysteriousness to the oddity of The Day the Earth Stood Still (1951).

So much so that the film reminds me too much of other films, it, therefore, has little identity, especially throughout the film’s mid-section.

Other than Louise’s character, there is no character development, and this is glaring among the male cast of top talents like Whitaker and Renner. The roles are glorified throwaway roles.

Except for Renner’s limited involvement in the film’s climactic “twist,” which admittedly barely raises the movie above mediocrity, neither character serves many purposes and could be played by any actor.

Whitaker’s G.T. Weber has little motivation other than convincing Louise to participate in the mission. The film also seems unsure whether to fully explore a romantic entanglement between Louise and Renner’s Ian.

Indeed, a flirtation exists on the surface, but the film never hits a home run with it. Couldn’t a meatier story be created for these two storied actors?

The unique extraterrestrial, a hybrid of tentacles, fingers, and funny eyes appearing as a pair humorously nicknamed Abbott and Costello, is impressive from an artistic perspective, and this does help the film.

The characters’ unsureness about whether Abbott and Costello are friends or foes is also slightly intriguing. However, the film’s main negative is that nothing much happens other than Louise’s repeated attempts to communicate, whimsically staring into the camera in wonderment and ultimately figuring out the alien’s messages and purpose.

Worthy of mention is a fantastic and ominous musical score that gives the film some climactic and dark elements that feel like its highlights. It adds chilling, practical elements, bringing the movie up a notch from complete blandness.

The film’s best part is its ending, which sent a chill down my spine. The unique and inspired big reveal made me a bit shiver.

This way, Arrival saves itself from being completely lackluster, but too little, too late. I would have preferred the film to balance the emotions, surprises, and thrills more rather than exist mainly as a tedious, uninteresting film.

Overall, the outcome of Arrival (2016) is more of a retread than anything new or original.

Oscar Nominations: 1 win-Best Picture, Best Director-Denis Villeneuve, Best Adapted Screenplay, Best Sound Editing (won), Best Sound Mixing, Best Production Design, Best Cinematography, Best Film Editing

2013 Films, Drama, German, Hanno Koffler, International, International Drama, LGBTQ+ Drama, LGBTQ+ Films, LGBTQ+ International, Max Riemelt, Stephan Lacant

Free Fall-2013

Leave a comment

Free Fall-2013

Director Stephan Lacant

Starring Hanno Koffler, Max Riemelt

Scott’s Review #641

Reviewed May 3, 2017

Grade: A-

Free Fall is a 2013 German-language film that is very reminiscent of the highly influential LGBT film, Brokeback Mountain (2005), only set in Germany- during present times.

The loneliness, struggles, and deceit that the characters face are similar in both films and both are arguably bleak as overall films. I, however, truly enjoyed this film and embraced the touching aspects and truthful writing.

In the case of Free Fall, as compared with Brokeback Mountain, only one of the male characters is a family man- coming to terms with his sexuality at very bad timing, while the other male character is more comfortable in his skin.

A case could be made that a similar characterization is apparent in Brokeback. In both films, a love story develops between two men, and outside forces thwart their happiness.

The film is a very good watch and the love scenes are particularly steamy and emotional.

Marc Borgmann is a young police officer, fresh out of the academy, living with his very pregnant girlfriend, Bettina. They are temporarily staying with Marc’s parents until the baby is born.

Seemingly happy, Marc befriends a recruit, Kay, and they begin a ritual of jogging together in the forest.

Both men are young and handsome and very masculine- an aspect in an LGBT film that I find as a positive. Kay is much more brazen about his sexuality than Marc, and they eventually fall in love with the added pressure of their very macho surroundings, and Marc’s pregnant girlfriend to contend with.

Free Fall, as the title implies, is not a cheerful, romantic film, as a whole- nor is it completely bleak either. Yes, the love affair between Marc and Kay has some happy moments, but more often than not they face some sort of peril and do not get much time to relax and enjoy each other.

As circumstances begin to unravel, Marc’s girlfriend slowly suspects something is going on with Marc, but when Kay is outed (the film suggests he purposely outs himself) during a gay nightclub raid, their lives spiral out of control.

The film itself is very realistic and does not come across as forced or plot-driven. The acting by both principal actors (Koffler and Riemelt) is quite strong and I buy their attraction instantly.

The scenes where Marc questions whether the pair are buddies while internally fighting his attraction for Kay are excellent and very passionate. The range of emotions on the face of the actor, Koffler, is excellent.

Passion is felt during every scene the pair share together.

The way many of the supporting characters are portrayed, however, is disappointing,  yet also a brutal strength of the film. Marc’s parents are quite unsympathetic to either Marc or Kay and are written as stereotypical, anti-progressive, and rigid.

When Marc’s mother catches Marc and Kay kissing, she coldly chastises Marc for being “raised better than that”. In her mind being gay is bad- the father wholeheartedly shares her beliefs.

Another of the cops in the police academy is written as homophobic, but the film wisely writes Marc and Kay exceptionally well, proudly with none of the unfair effeminate qualities films and television still seem to cling to.

The characters are not written for laughs, nor should they be. They are strong men.

The film wisely throws in a handful of supportive characters, like the police force as a whole- teaching and recognizing diversity and inclusion, and a fellow cop who is supportive of the situation with Marc and Kay, but most of the characters come across as harsh and unfeeling to same-sex attraction.

The conclusion of the film is slightly disappointing as the story ends abruptly and in a rather unsatisfying way- rumors of a proposed sequel have circulated the film.

Shot on a very small budget, the funding for a follow-up film must still be raised, which hopefully will occur. A nicer (and happier) ultimate resolution would be great.

American LGBT films, sometimes going too much the comical, or worse yet, the sappier route, can take a lesson from this treasure of a German-language film.

Free Fall (2012) is a humanistic, realistic, and brave film that I hope more people find themselves experiencing. The film will touch those who are either involved in or sympathetic towards the LGBT community.

2016 Films, Aaron Taylor-Johnson, Amy Adams, Andrea Riseborough, Armie Hammer, Isla Fisher, Jake Gyllenhaal, Laura Linney, Michael Shannon, Michael Sheen, Thriller, Tom Ford

Nocturnal Animals-2016

Leave a comment

Nocturnal Animals-2016

Director Tom Ford

Starring Amy Adams, Jake Gyllenhaal, Michael Shannon

Scott’s Review #640

Reviewed April 30, 2017

Grade: A-

Nocturnal Animals (2016) blurs the lines between fantasy and reality in a revenge-themed thriller directed by Tom Ford, in only his second directorial effort- 2009’s A Single Man was his first.

While not constantly hitting the mark and, at times, very difficult to follow, the film is unusual, mesmerizing, and lovely to look at from a visual perspective. Some scenes blur together splendidly, so they seem interposed—a brilliant touch.

David Lynch influences the film in tone and style.

Events are divided between “The Real World” and “The Novel”.

The film begins strangely as a bevy of nude, obese women prance and dance on video screens during an art exhibit opening.

The gallery is owned by Susan Morrow (Amy Adams), a successful woman living a glossy life in Los Angeles. We quickly learn that Susan is involved in a loveless marriage with hunky Hutton (Armie Hammer), a business person who is inattentive towards Susan.

Before Hutton, Susan was briefly married to Edward (Jake Gyllenhaal), a novelist who dedicates his latest manuscript to Susan, received via mail. As Susan reads the manuscript, she is transported down a dark path of memories and fantasies concerning Edward and their past.

The film’s locales are mainly between Los Angeles (the real world) and western Texas (where the novel occurs). This compelling aspect of the film separates the two worlds.

Los Angeles is featured mainly at nighttime as Susan, presumed to be suffering from insomnia, is compelled by her reading. She also rubs shoulders with sophisticated artist types and colleagues at her studio.

Conversely, western Texas is worlds apart from the Los Angeles setting—like night and day. In Texas, we are introduced to the protagonist of the story Susan reads.

Tony, traveling through Texas with his wife, Laura, and their daughter, India, are accosted and terrorized, bypassing local motorists.

Clearly from out of town, the family is stranded in the middle of nowhere and kept at bay by the rednecks- the story has a tragic ending. The stories intersect interestingly as we see the differing worlds.

The scenes in western Texas were frightening and tense—so much so that my heart beat quickly. I pictured myself as Tony in a situation of peril and danger.

As the family attempts to reason with the thugs, they get deeper and deeper into trouble. The feeling of being vulnerable and unsafe with no help around is tremendous in the film.

The acting in Nocturnal Animals is excellent overall, which is no surprise given the tremendous cast. Adams and Gyllenhaal are especially worthy of mention. Through flashbacks, we see their scenes and find them both sympathetic and vulnerable (at first— he is a sensitive writer, and she is a college girl with aspirations of love and family life.

As the plot thickens, both characters become more nuanced and complex- the subject of betrayal and revenge certainly comes into play, and both characters, now older and more pessimistic, intersect again as mature adults.

Michael Shannon, though believable as Detective Bobby Andes, assigned to Tony’s case and suffering from stage four lung cancer, is not the standout for me. I disagree with his Oscar nomination for Best Supporting Actor.

Indeed, it is an acceptable performance. I would have much rather Gyllenhaal or Aaron Taylor-Johnson (as one of the rednecks) be awarded the nomination.

I was reminded of David Lynch’s masterpiece, Mulholland Drive (2001), mainly during the Los Angeles scenes. The slick night air and the trials and tribulations of the wealthy mirrored each other quite readily.

The sequences contain a gothic, haunting, moody vibe.

The central theme of revenge is present in both worlds. Tony and Bobby seek revenge on the criminals in western Texas, while revenge also focuses on Los Angeles, though much more subtly.

A hint is given several times in Susan’s art gallery, where a large ” Revenge ” exhibit is a focal point. However, what the Los Angeles revenge is is not revealed until the very last scene.

One thing is sure about Nocturnal Animals- the film is dreamy, complex, and worthy of conversation.

Tom Ford is an up-and-coming director with visual sensibilities and a dream-like vision. I hope we see more from this fascinating director.

Oscar Nominations: Best Supporting Actor-Michael Shannon

1967 Films, Action, Akiko Wakabayashi, Bernard Lee, Charles Gray, Desmond Llewelyn, Donald Pleasance, James Bond, Karin Dor, Lewis Gilbert, Lois Maxwell, Sean Connery, Tetsurō Tamba, William Sylvester

You Only Live Twice-1967

Leave a comment

You Only Live Twice-1967

Director Lewis Gilbert

Starring Sean Connery, Akiko Wakabayashi

Scott’s Review #636

Reviewed April 23, 2017

Grade: B+

You Only Live Twice (1967) is the fifth in the James Bond film franchise and the fifth to star iconic Bond, Sean Connery, in the lead role.

Reportedly growing bored with the role and eager to move on to meatier acting challenges, Sean Connery is not quite as mesmerizing in the role this time around, but is still indisputably charismatic and sexy with his delivery of one-liners and various affairs with women.

You Only Live Twice is the last to feature Connery until he is coaxed back into the role four years later with 1971’s Diamonds Are Forever.

The film is not among my favorite Bond films of all time, nor is it even in the top ten, for that matter, but it is still quite an enjoyable watch, and the Japanese locales are undoubtedly the highlight.

The film as a whole suffers from a silly story, dated special effects, and a completely lackluster villain, but it does have Connery to rescue it and a nice little romance between Bond and the main girl, Aki, played by Japanese actress Akiko Wakabayashi- that is, until she is unceremoniously poisoned.

The plot involves the hijacking of an American NASA spacecraft by another mysterious spacecraft. The Americans suspect the Russians of the action, and the British suspect the Japanese since the aircraft landed in the Sea of Japan.

MI6 (Bond) fakes his death in Hong Kong and subsequently begins to investigate who is responsible. His search brings him to Tokyo, where he investigates Osato Chemicals and stumbles upon evidence.

He is aided by both Aki and Tiger Tanaka, leaders of the Japanese Secret Service. Soon, it is revealed that the mastermind is SPECTRE villain Ernst Stavro Blofeld, in this installment played by Donald Pleasence.

Mr. Bond must destroy his enemy and inevitably save the world from a global nuclear war.

Though a timely storyline since 1967 was in the midst of the Cold War, the plot seems somewhat forced and a bit uninteresting. The countries blame each other for the hijacked ship, but this comes across as extremely plot-driven and secondary.

The “swallowing” of the aircraft seems cheesy and preposterous, even given the year the film was made, and the writing is not as rich as in some of the preceding Bond films, like From Russia With Love or Thunderball.

The film also has an overall “cheap” look. However, the film does have plenty of positives worth mentioning.

The gadgets that James Bond fixture, Q (the MI6 technical wizard) creates are state-of-the-art and fun. The mini-flying helicopter Bond uses is creative and offers even more views.

Bond faking his death in the opening sequence is a treat (albeit having been done before), and ceremoniously being cast off into the sea in a coffin, only to be wearing a suit and an oxygen mask inside the casket, is clever and light.

Donald Pleasence, a storied, fantastic actor, is not well cast as the main villain, Stavros, and I am not entirely sure why. The fact that his face is not shown until the last act is not helpful, and the character (though seen in other Bond films) is not compelling and is underutilized.

I would have liked the character to be a bit more visible, though surprisingly, the character was highly influential in the 1990s spoof Austin Powers films. Adorable yet creepy is Stavros, only being seen clutching and stroking a gorgeous white cat.

As for the Bond women, the Aki mentioned above is the best of the bunch. Gone too soon in the story, she is replaced by Kissy Suzuki, who is rather unappealing. Mostly clad in a skimpy white bikini and heels, and wearing a black wig, the character is forgettable and serves no purpose.

Conversely, villainous Helga Brandt, SPECTRE assassin, is very well cast and shares good chemistry with Connery. After an unsuccessful attempt to kill Bond, she is fated with a date with killer Piranhas as payment for her failure.

You Only Live Twice (1967) has a myriad of ups and downs, but it is worth watching for fans of the franchise, and specifically, fans of the classic Bond films featuring Sean Connery.

Some will argue that the film feels dated and chauvinistic, and to some degree, they are correct, but it is also a large part of a treasured franchise and a fun experience.

2016 Films, Ben Whishaw, Colin Farrell, Comedy, Dark Comedy, Drama, John C. Reilly, Léa Seydoux, Olivia Colman, Rachel Weisz, Romantic Drama, Satire, Yorgos Lanthimos

The Lobster-2016

Leave a comment

The Lobster-2016

Director Yorgos Lanthimos

Starring Colin Farrell, Rachel Weisz

Scott’s Review #635

Reviewed April 20, 2017

Grade: A-

One thing is sure about the puzzling 2016 film The Lobster: It is a film worthy of discussion long after the end credits roll and will leave the viewer pondering its many facets—a great movie to dissect.

This in itself is worth recognition and praise for the power of the film- so many questions abound.

I was immediately struck by how heavily The Lobster contains primary subject matter influences from “message novels” (and films) such as Brave New World, 1984, and A Clockwork Orange, as well as creative, stylistic recent film influences from The Grand Budapest Hotel (2014) and the Moonrise Kingdom (2012).

The story begins outside of Dublin, where David (Colin Farrell) has recently been dumped by his wife in favor of another man.

Now single, he is whisked away by authorities to a luxurious hotel in the woods, where he (and the other guests) are given forty-five days to find a suitable romantic partner, or else they will be turned into an animal of their choice.

David is accompanied by his brother, now a dog, and has decided that he should be turned and that he will become a lobster because he loves the sea, and they tend to live to be over one hundred years old.

The hotel management adheres to strict rules- no masturbation, mandatory temptations by hotel employees, and a strange outdoor hunting game where the guests hunt other guests to win extra days extended to their stays.

As David befriends fellow hotel guests, he is conflicted and desperate to find a mate. Events take a surprising turn when circumstances allow the rules to change for him, and he becomes involved with a short-sighted woman (Weisz).

The film’s plot is strange beyond belief yet incredibly creative and thought-provoking. The subject matter is pure dystopian- a facility, presumably controlled by the government, with a rebel group intent on ruining the “status quo.”

Suddenly, an odd little secret romance between David and Shortsighted Woman appears, beginning only during the film’s final act.

One aspect of the film that I found interesting was the odd monotone dialogue the characters used. They were almost matter-of-fact in whatever they said, even while expressing anger.

This peculiarity perplexed me, but the more I think about it, the more this decision makes the film dark-humored and dry with wry wit.

Another interesting nuance to the film is the multitude of quirky characters, many of whom are mainly referred to by their nicknames. Lisping Man, Limping Man, and Nosebleed Woman, to name a few.

And what viewer would not spend the film’s duration imagining which animal he or she would desire to be turned into and why?

My favorite aspect of the film is the offbeat performance by Colin Farrell- typically a rugged sex symbol, he goes against the grain and plays a pudgy, socially awkward, insecure man, but all the while instilling the character with enough warmth and likability to make the character work- and his chemistry with Rachel Weisz is fantastic.

This turns the strange dark comedy into a peculiar romantic drama.

A beautiful forest becomes the backdrop for a large part of the film, as does the city of Dublin itself, contrasting the film in nuanced ways. Combined with the lavish hotel, the film achieves several different settings for the action, each meaningful in its own right.

Without giving anything away, the conclusion of the film- the final scene in particular- is gruesome in what goes through the viewer’s mind, and the resolution is unclear.

Does David do it, or doesn’t he? Much of the film is open to one’s interpretation and imagination.

Black humor and cynicism are significant components of The Lobster, a thinking man’s movie. I continue to think of this film as I write this review.

The film is filled with originality and thought, which is a tremendous positive. Confusing and mind-blowing? For sure. A run-of-the-mill film? Not.

The Lobster (2016) is a film that gives no answers and is not an easy watch but an achievement in film creativity- something sorely needed.

Oscar Nominations: Best Original Screenplay

2017 Films, Audra McDonald, Bill Condon, Children, Dan Stevens, Disney, Emma Thompson, Emma Watson, Ewan McGregor, Fantasy, Ian McKellen, Josh Gad, Kevin Kline, Luke Evans, Musical, Stanley Tucci

Beauty and the Beast-2017

Leave a comment

Beauty and the Beast-2017

Director Bill Condon

Starring Emma Watson, Dan Stevens

Scott’s Review #634

Reviewed April 18, 2017

Grade: A-

When I went to see the live-action version of the Disney animated classic Beauty and the Beast, which was released in the spring of 2017, I was unsure what to expect.

Would it be a cheesy or amateurish retread of the 1991 animated smash only with human beings? Why the lackluster March release date? Indeed, this is telling; otherwise, why not release the film in the coveted fourth quarter with potential Oscar buzz?

I do not have the answers to all these questions, but this version of Beauty and the Beast is enchanting, romantic, and lovely- a spring treat for the entire family to enjoy.

Our protagonist, Belle (producers wisely casting Harry Potter legend Emma Watson), is a kindly farm girl living with her father, Maurice (Kevin Kline),  in a quaint village outside of Paris.

Considered a bit odd by her village mates because she loves to read, she rebuffs the advances of the dashing soldier, Gaston (Luke Evans), because he is arrogant- the other village ladies (as well as Gaston’s gay companion, LeFou) flaunt over Gaston’s good looks.

When Maurice ventures into unknown parts and stumbles upon a dilapidated castle, he is locked up by a vicious beast. Having once been a handsome prince, he has since been cursed by a beggar woman.

The only way the beast can return to his former self is to find true love before a wilted rose loses all of its petals—enter Belle to the rescue. Belle convinces the Beast to let her stay in prison and release her father.

Will Beast and Belle fall madly in love?

Of course they will. The fated romance is part of what makes the film heartwarming and lovely.

The now-legendary classic fairy tale feels fresh and energized with the Disney-produced project. Director Bill Condon carefully and successfully crafts an honest effort, making sure that while providing a fairy tale happy ending, not to make the film seem contrived, overblown, or overdramatized.

I fell for the film hook, line, and sinker. It is an uplifting experience. The song and dance numbers abound with gusto and good costumes—my personal favorites are the rousing “Be Our Guest” and the sentimental “Beauty and the Beast.”

The crucial romance between Watson’s Belle and the Beast, earnestly played by Dan Stevens (of Downton Abbey fame), works in spades. Their chemistry feels authentic and passionate. As Belle is at first held captive by the misunderstood bad boy instead of Maurice, the pair at first loathe each other, but this is done with innocence and no malice.

Condon wonderfully exudes the right amount of slow build to make the pair beloved by audiences with the correct pacing.

The CGI in Beauty and the Beast is heavy, as expected. However, the Beast’s distraction is a bit confusing. Was the Beast a complete CGI creation save for the close-ups, or was Watson dancing with Stevens when filming commenced in certain scenes?

I am unsure.

The controversial “gay storyline”, which helped the film be banned in the southern United States and Russia, as well as other countries, is pure and utter rubbish.

The subject is explored extremely superficially and not worthy of all the fuss.

Worthier of mention is the tremendous diversity that is featured in the film, most notably in the opening sequence. Interracial couples appear in the form of Madame de Garderobe (Audra McDonald), the opera singer turned wardrobe, and Maestro Cadenza (Stanley Tucci), turned harpsichord.

On the gay issue, it is sweet that the implied gay character of LeFlou finds love with another man at the end of the film.

A minor complaint is the scattered authentic French accents of many of the household staff and village people, but Belle and Maurice speak in the British tongue. Being a fairy tale, liberties must be taken, and suspending disbelief is necessary, but this was noticed.

Beauty and the Beast (2017) is a lovely experience that combines fantastic musical numbers with romance, with a side of diversity thrown in for good measure.

Since the film will undoubtedly be seen by many youngsters and teens, this is a wonderful aspect of the film and, hopefully, a shining, positive example in filmmaking.

Oscar Nominations: Best Production Design, Best Costume Design

2015 Films, Andrew Garfield, Clancy Brown, Drama, Independent, Independent Drama, Laura Dern, Michael Shannon, Ramin Bahrani

99 Homes-2015

Leave a comment

99 Homes-2015

Director Ramin Bahrani

Starring Andrew Garfield, Michael Shannon

Scott’s Review #633

Reviewed April 13, 2017

Grade: B+

99 Homes is a 2015 independent film containing an underlying theme of morality as its central message, bubbling to the surface throughout the run.

Our main hero is faced with a major dilemma.

Set in 2010 amid the dark economic housing crisis where thousands of families lost their homes to foreclosure, the film is depressing but turns uplifting towards the end.

Reminiscent of The Big Short (2015) and Inside Job (2010) in subject matter, we witness a wonderful performance by Andrew Garfield in the lead role, with a worthy supporting turn by Michael Shannon as an opportunist.

Director Ramin Bahrani immediately creates tension with a taut musical score that bombards the screen. We see a poor victim of foreclosure, having shot himself to avoid the humiliation of being evicted from his home, followed by the introduction of a powerful real-estate mogul, Rick Carver.

Carver has wisely capitalized on the slew of Florida working-class families, living well beyond their means and novice homeowners, booted from their homes thanks to adjustable mortgages that they cannot afford to pay.

Andrew Garfield plays Dennis Nash, a struggling construction worker, raising his young son and presumably supporting his mother (Laura Dern).

They are fated to be evicted even though they have tried to win an extension with the court- months behind in their mortgage payments. They feel victimized and are forced to move to a seedy motel that houses many others in the same circumstances.

Desperate for work, Dennis ironically ends up working for Rick and becomes encased in the dishonest world of real estate scheming- manipulating banking and government rules at the expense of homeowners down on their luck.

The main point is the exploitation of the “working man” at the expense of “the man” and Rick is an example of this beast. Dennis represents the goodness of humanity as he wrestles with the moral repercussions of evicting families since he has met with similar circumstances.

Is the money worth the pain and the hardship he causes people? How is it Rick has no morals, but Dennis does? Will Dennis choose money and lose himself in the process? What would the viewer do?

Despite the morality questions, the film does play like a slick thriller, with a few slight contrivances and the “wrapped up in a neat bow” style ending.

This slightly makes the film lose its luster at times. It is implied that it ends happily for Dennis and that Rick gets his “just desserts”, but what about the characters kicked out of their homes?

Sadly, as in real life, they are largely forgotten by the end and play as footnotes in a larger story. Some follow-up as to what happens to them might have been nice.

99 Homes is a thinking man’s film and will undoubtedly leave the viewer asking what he or she would do in many situations that Dennis faces.

The emotions ooze from the face of Andrew Garfield as Bahrani uses many close-ups and enough cannot be said for Garfield’s bravura performance.

In one heart-wrenching scene, he is forced to evict a man and his wife and children from their home, the man is reduced to tears, comforted by his wife-Dennis is pained.

In another, an elderly man with nowhere to go is evicted, and defeated by the side of the road.

These scenes may have played as overwrought, but Garfield convincingly brings honesty and raw emotion to the work.

Laura Dern is good in her role as a young mother, Lynn,  to Garfield’s Dennis and I am perplexed why she was cast- she barely seems old enough to play convincingly as his Mom, but she does pull it off.

However, I could not help but desire more meat from this Oscar-nominated Actress- sure there is one great scene when Lynn realizes the extent of Dennis’s involvement with Rick, but I wanted more.

Still, the acting all around in this film is superb.

What left me so bothered by 99 Homes (2015) is that situations just like the ones that played out in the film are examples of countless real-life occurrences people experienced due to greed, dishonesty, and uncaring fellow human beings and that is a sad realization.

Director, Bharani, surrounded by a stellar cast, brings this realism to the big screen in raw, honest, storytelling.

Independent Spirit Award Nominations: Best Supporting Male-Michael Shannon

1964 Films, Agnes Moorehead, Bette Davis, Bruce Dern, Cecil Kellaway, George Kennedy, Joseph Cotten, Mary Astor, Olivia de Havilland, Robert Aldrich, Thriller, Victor Buono, Wesley Addy

Hush…Hush, Sweet Charlotte-1964

Leave a comment

Hush…Hush, Sweet Charlotte-1964

Director Robert Aldrich

Starring Bette Davis, Olivia de Havilland

Scott’s Review #632

Reviewed April 8, 2017

Grade: B+

The follow-up film, but not a direct sequel, to the surprise 1962 hit, What Ever Happened To Baby Jane? Hush…Hush, Sweet Charlotte (1964) is a psychological thriller directed by Robert Aldrich.

The film was intended to reunite Aldrich with stars Bette Davis and Joan Crawford. Crawford filmed several scenes, but the tension between the stars proved too much, and Crawford dropped out.

Olivia de Havilland took her place, and reportedly, the filmmakers scrambled to re-shoot the film nearly from scratch.

Shot in black and white, just like What Ever Happened To Baby Jane?, the film is very similar in style and tone, and, rather than Los Angeles as the setting, the setting is now the sprawling southern landscape of the deep south- Louisiana to be exact, a vast estate with a lavish mansion is the featured ominous setting.

The action begins in 1927 at a grand party at the well-to-do Hollis family mansion.

The night is fraught with tension, and secrets are harbored- most notably, southern belle Charlotte (Davis) and her married beau, John (Bruce Dern), plan to elope and steal away into the night together.

When John is threatened by Charlotte’s father, Sam (Victor Buono), he regrettably breaks up with Charlotte, destroying her. Later, John is decapitated and his hand severed, leaving all of the guests only to assume that Charlotte was murdered after she appears wearing a blood-soaked dress.

Due to a lack of evidence, Charlotte is set free.

The remainder of the film takes place during present times (1964) and in the same mansion, now slated to be demolished by the town in favor of a highway.

Charlotte is old and haggard, having lived a life of seclusion. Her father is long dead, and her only company is her dedicated and faithful housekeeper, Velma (Agnes Moorehead).

Frantic at the thought of leaving the safety of her estate, Charlotte asks her cousin Miriam (de Havilland) to visit. Events then become stranger and stranger as past secrets and jealousies are revealed.

Taking nothing away from the talents of Olivia de Havilland, I cannot help but imagine how much better Hush…Hush, Sweet Charlotte would have been if Joan Crawford had settled into the role of cousin Miriam.

The real-life rivalry between Crawford and Davis made What Ever Happened to Baby Jane? It is a compelling work, and the angry emotions are fresh and authentic.

Interestingly, the characters are reversed in this film—Davis plays the victimized Charlotte, while Crawford would have played the villainous Miriam, and the results would have been delicious.

The plot is decent, but nothing spectacular, and not nearly as splendid as What Ever Happened To Baby Jane? , although certain similarities abound between the two films: a giant mansion, black and white cinematography, a mentally unstable (or assumed to be) character, a character being either drugged or victimized, and two female characters who are related.

To compare the two films, which is impossible not to, What Ever Happened To Baby Jane? Wins in spades. It is the more compelling of the two films.

What sets Hush…Hush, Sweet Charlotte, well above mediocrity (with fewer actors, it may have been), is the casting of one of the greatest actresses to grace the big screen.

Bette Davis’s portrayal of the victimized Charlotte is fantastic. She encompasses vulnerability, anger, fear, and energy. Her facial expressions and those passionate eyes give so much to Charlotte.

The clever resolution to the film and the plot twist after the film is pretty well-written and surprising, given that the characters assumed to be involved in the murder are not as guilty as one might think, or at least not in the way one might think, and by the time the credits roll, the story has a satisfying, hopeful ending.

Another success of the film is its use of two gruesome scenes, which is surprising since the film predates the lifting of the film censorship rules.

When a severed head comes tumbling down the grand staircase of the mansion, it frightens and is not in the least campy or over-the-top. As John is hacked to death in the opening sequence, his hand is severed from his arm, and it dramatically tumbles to the floor.

The scenes resonate because they were rarely done in mainstream film as early as 1964.

Hush…Hush, Sweet Charlotte is a fantastic companion piece to the superior What Ever Happened To Baby Jane?

Watching back-to-back is a fantastic late-night viewing.

Successful to the film are top-notch talents such as de Havilland, Victor Buono, Bruce Dern, Agnes Moorehead, and the superior film queen, Bette Davis, which makes any film worth watching.

Oscar Nominations: Best Supporting Actress-Agnes Moorehead, Best Song-“Hush, Hush, Sweet Charlotte,” Best Music Score-Substantially Original, Best Art Direction, Black-and-White, Best Cinematography, Black-and-White, Best Costume Design, Black and White, Best Film Editing

1973 Films, Charles Gray, Comedy, Diane Keaton, Jackie Mason, John Beck, Science Fiction, Woody Allen

Sleeper-1973

Leave a comment

Sleeper-1973

Director Woody Allen

Starring Woody Allen, Diane Keaton

Scott’s Review #631

Reviewed April 5, 2017

Grade: B

One of the earliest of Woody Allen’s enormous list of films that he both directed and starred in, 1973’s Sleeper is a comedic, science-fiction film, and a blueprint for future Allen masterpieces, such as Manhattan (1979) and Annie Hall (1977).

While this film has moments of intelligence and clever dialogue, it too often teeters into straight-up slapstick and silliness, making it hard to hold in the same esteem as the aforementioned richer films.

Rather, it is a juvenile effort compared to the masterpieces that follow, but admittedly, it has some laughs and creative moments. Sleeper is the first of several to pair Allen with longtime co-star Diane Keaton.

Allen portrays Miles Monroe, a nerdy jazz musician and owner of the “Happy Carrot” health-food store in Greenwich Village, New York City, sometime in the then-present 1970s.

In the hospital for routine surgery, he is cryogenically frozen for two hundred years, waking up in an otherworldly police state and frazzled beyond belief.

The scientists who revive him are part of a rebellion and beg Miles to assist them as they are taken into police custody, pleading with him to search for a secret plan known only as the “Aries Project”.

Miles then poses as a robotic butler and goes to work for Luna (Keaton), a spoiled, bitchy, socialite. The duo ultimately bonded together and spent the rest of the film outrunning and outsmarting their pursuers.

Sleeper succeeds as a novel story, one filled with unique and interesting gadgets from a futuristic world, with clever, witty, crisp dialogue and odes to the past world, now deemed irrelevant.

Amusing are the scenes when scientists explain that natural foods and products, once thought to be healthy and natural, are not so much.

This makes the world Miles is used to seem silly and superfluous to them.

I also enjoyed the physical humor in the film, such as when Miles (as his robotic persona) serves dinner to a sophisticated group of Luna’s friends, accidentally destroying their expensive outerwear in a garbage incinerator and botching dinner.

As all of the attendees are high on hallucinogenic drugs (including Miles), they fail to realize that he is a human being- they dance with glee and stumble around in a haze, largely unaware of their surroundings.

This is one of the best scenes in the film.

The plot itself is fairly predictable, though, and almost forced. Miles and Luna are the couples we root for in the film, the introduction of a handsome rebel leader, Erno Windt (John Beck) doesn’t stand a chance and is somewhat of a foil for them.

Much of the time, the pair is on the run and sparring. The actors involved have wonderful chemistry with each other, but the central story is not the film’s strongest suit; rather, the weird and unique gadgets and intricacies are.

Albeit an introduction for anyone intrigued by the comic genius that is Woody Allen, other polished Allen gems are a better start than this early offering, but that is not to say Sleeper (1973) is not a good, entertaining film, with imagination, merely that it lacks all of the elements to rank it among other Woody Allen greats.

2011 Films, Drama, Engin Cert, German, International, International Drama, LGBTQ+ Drama, LGBTQ+ Films, LGBTQ+ International, Sinan Hancili, Tor Iben

The Visitor-2011

Leave a comment

The Visitor-2011

Director Tor Iben

Starring Sinan Hancili, Engin Cert

Scott’s Review #630

Reviewed April 4, 2017

Grade: B-

The Visitor is a 2011 LGBT-centered film that is set in Berlin, Germany but features mainly Turkish characters.

While the film tells a nice story and features some cool shots of the metropolitan city, it is rather amateurish in style.

The pieces of the film do not always come together or fit very well and there is no character development to speak of, but still, the film does have good intentions with a nice message and theme that deserves at least a few props.

The story involves a young male and female couple, Cibrial and Christine, who are dating. Cibrail works as a policeman and the pair seem to be in a happy relationship, enjoying walks and dinners together.

One day, when Christine’s gay cousin, Stefan, comes to town, the relationship between Cibrail and Christine sours. The cousin is openly gay and comfortable with his sexuality, while Cibrail secretly harbors feelings for the same sex, which he dares not tell Christine about, though she eventually catches on dramatically.

Stefan is looking for action, cruising the city and parks for sex and companionship, while Cibrail is both lustful and jealous of Stefan.

Many scenes involve Cibrail looking longingly at Stefan and fantasizing about him. In that regard, the film teeters on being quite steamy and features more than one nude shower scene- this smoldering element helps the film avoid complete doldrums.

Specifically, Cibrail showers alone during one scene, washing and presumably daydreaming about Stefan. But too many other scenes show a character jogging or walking around the park- too much like filler material.

The climax of the film is highly predictable as the two men find their way into each other’s arms, though the passion is not exactly evident to the audience.

The lack of buildup is a negative aspect of the film because there is very little rooting value and too many questions.

Is the film a love story? Is it supposed to be about Cibrail coming to terms with his sexuality? Why do we not see more of a blowup scene between Cibrail and Christine?

He simply moves out once she catches him in bed with Stefan and before we know it, Stefan and Cibrail passionately embrace and the film closes in celebration.

A side story involving a dead body found in the park- a park known for gay shenanigans- is included as Cibrail investigates the crime with his police partner, but this seems to have nothing to do with the main plot unless we are to suspect one of the two men as the killer, but this is hardly focused on.

Another shot of a gay pride parade in Berlin is included, but is this to make it known that The Visitor is a gay film?

Additionally, a statue of two men is shown in several scenes for seemingly no other reason than to reinforce that the film is gay-themed.

The Visitor is a simple story of two men finding each other, which is a nice message, but the film’s run time is a brief seventy minutes, hardly enough time for character development.

A muted, videotaped look does not help the film seem very professional, and seems downright amateurish as an entire film, so much so that I would not be surprised if a film student might have made The Visitor (2011).

2012 Films, Eamon Farren, Horror, Independent, Independent Horror, Jennifer Lynch, Vincent D'Onofrio

Chained-2012

Leave a comment

Chained-2012

Director Jennifer Lynch

Starring Vincent D’Onofrio

Scott’s Review #627

Reviewed March 24, 2017

Grade: B-

Chained is a 2012 independent horror film directed by Jennifer Lynch, who is the daughter of the brilliant film and television director, David Lynch.

His influence is readily felt throughout.

The film is an exercise in cerebral, psychological horror, and is quite mesmerizing for most of the experience. The ending, however, is the pits and takes away from the enjoyment of the rest of the film in its asinine, quickly wrapped-up, conclusion.

The film is set in an unknown area- all the audience knows is a  decrepit, isolated, cabin in the middle of nowhere and that the shack exists in somewhat proximity to a college town.

Since the film is shot in Canada that is a good enough locale for me to accept.

One day a seemingly happy husband drops off his wife and nine-year-old son at the movies but implores them to take a taxi home as the bus is too dangerous. When they heed his advice, they are accosted by a deranged serial killer, Bob (D’Onofrio), who drives a cab and whisks them away to his remote home.

After he kills the mother, he makes the son, whom he re-names Rabbit, his slave, reducing him to household chores and a somewhat accomplice to the subsequent victims he brings home.

As the years pass and Bob continues to kill, he is determined to have, a now mature, Rabbit, follow in his footsteps.

A large chunk of Chained (and the film is aptly named because Bob commonly keeps Rabbit chained) takes place in Bob’s lonely home and Bob and Rabbit are all each other have for support. Bob presumably earns a living by stealing the cash his victims carry.

Many scenes of a binding nature, albeit perverse, are featured as the two dole away the time between Bob’s kills, almost like a father and son.

Jennifer Lynch wisely moves the film at a slow pace for appropriate build-up.

Bob’s psychologically troubled childhood is told through flashbacks as he is victimized by his abusive father and forced to have sex with his mother, who blames him rather than her husband.

As a result, Bob hates women, and lures victim after victim into his cab and then slices and dices them back at his home.

Bob is sympathetic, like a wounded bird, and whether he rapes the victims before killing them is unclear, as much happens off-screen.

The cabin is purposely suffocating and when Bob teaches Rabbit intellectual facts and encourages him to read and study to become smart, it is a bonding experience.

Slowly, Bob trusts Rabbit more and more.

When Bob makes Rabbit pick out a young girl in a school yearbook to kill, the film kicks into high gear. Suddenly, it becomes vague whether Rabbit is loyal to Bob or still determined to escape. Will he help his intended victim instead of killing her?

David Lynch’s imprint is blatant in both the pacing of the film and more specifically in the low hum musical score, common in his films.

Daughter Jennifer knows her father’s techniques as they continually come into play. A nice homage to Mulholland Drive (1992) appears when a sweet older couple rides in the back of Bob’s cab, reminiscent of the older couple featured in Mulholland Drive.

The gloomy ambiance is highly effective in Chained and the relationship between Bob and Rabbit, not sexual or overly violent, becomes rather sweet in some moments.

The rushed conclusion of the film is disastrous and Lynch’s attempt at a twist goes haywire in the “makes sense” department.

After a compelling fight scene with Bob, Rabbit finally kills him, escapes his clutches, and returns to his father’s open arms (now newly re-married with another son) only to reveal to his father that he knows he orchestrated Rabbit and his mom’s abduction years ago and that Bob is Rabbit’s uncle!

To matters even more confusing, after a dramatic event, Rabbit is sent away yet again and returns to the cabin as his only safe place.

This final act is a real dog, makes little sense, and is tough to digest.

I will give some liberties to 2012’s Chained since the director is spawned from the great David Lynch and the mood and several characteristics mirror his work, but still with her unique vision an obvious characteristic.

Most of the film is a solid effort, but due to the ending of the film being such a letdown, the body of work seems incomplete.

2010 Films, Comedy, Doug Langway, Independent, Independent Comedy, LGBTQ+ Comedy, LGBTQ+ Films

BearCity-2010

Leave a comment

BearCity-2010

Director Douglas Langway

Starring Joe Conti, Stephen Guarino

Scott’s Review #626

Reviewed March 19, 2017

Grade: B

BearCity is a small, independent, LGBT, coming-of-age film that tells of a young man living in New York City, and his exploration of a sub-culture within the LGBT community and the subsequent romance that follows.

The film is a comedy and has a “Sex in the City” or “Queer as Folk” approach to its storytelling- a group of close-knit friends and raunchy and gratuitous to be sure.

The budget is very small and some aspects are rather amateurish, but the film is enjoyable, especially for those exposed to the LGBT lifestyle.

The film is not heavy nor are any of the characters dealing with “coming out” issues, but rather it is a fun sex comedy romp.

Our central character, Tyler (Joe Conti), is a young man in his twenties, an aspiring actor, who moves to New York City to pursue his career, with a mind for casual dating.

His roommates encourage him to date Abercrombie and Fitch types, but Tyler comes to realize he prefers “bear” types- mature, hairy men.

On the sly, he begins to pursue this subculture and makes many friends. The apple of his eye, handsome Roger (Gerald McCullough) is a popular mature man, distinguished in the bear circle, and risks his reputation with “the bears” by falling in love with Tyler.

The two men spend the greater part of the film conquering their respective fears and finding their way into each other’s arms in a predictable ending.

BearCity is a fun farce and nothing very heavy and the feature of a strong circle of friends is a nice, positive portrayal- all of the friends connect well and stick by each other through thick and thin.

Comical sub-plots abound such as one couple (Brent and Fred) awkward parlay into the world of threesomes with unsuccessful results.

Another bear who is unemployed, and grossly obese, decides to undergo weight loss surgery much to the chagrin of his hunky boyfriend.

The main story though belongs to Tyler and Roger and their inevitable reunion can be seen miles away. The film throws various hurdles in their ways, such as a third-person briefly dating Roger, or Roger’s commitment issues, but the climax of the film will be no surprise to anyone.

Tyler and Roger make a nice couple as a whole, but perplexing is how the film makes Roger the undisputed leader of the bear group when he is a lean, muscular man- not a “bear” at all!

This is odd to me, but BearCity is so light-hearted that I suppose I can let this detail slide in favor of a good romance.

Critically, the film is nice but quite amateurish, and super low-budget. The acting, especially by some of the supporting characters (the pre-surgery guy’s boyfriend is the most glaring example), is not great.

I half-expected him to accidentally look at the camera.

Additionally, the film has a low-budget look and feel, which on one level is fine, but combined with the not-so-stellar acting, enhances the inexperience of the cast and crew. The film is tough to take too seriously- if this is even the intention of the filmmakers.

The film is a logistical treat for anyone privy to popular gay hangouts in New York City- specifically The Eagle and The Ramrod, both locales are featured prominently, and the use of many real-life people who hang out at those establishments are used throughout the production.

BearCity (2010) is not a bad experience and a film that is light and comical within the LGBT community seems rather fresh compared to the myriad of dramatic and heavy films that exist.

At the same time, the film teeters towards goofy too much with more than one silly, sex-crazed, stereotypical gay man, that it almost gives a bad impression, so the film has mixed results for me.

2016 Films, Aaron Eckhart, Anna Gunn, Biography, Chris Bauer, Clint Eastwood, Drama, Jamey Sheridan, Katie Couric, Laura Linney, Tom Hanks, Valerie Mahaffey

Sully-2016

Leave a comment

Sully-2016

Director Clint Eastwood

Starring Tom Hanks, Aaron Eckhart

Scott’s Review #623

Reviewed March 10, 2017

Grade: B

I think most film critics would agree that each modern film directed by Clint Eastwood would accurately be described as a compelling film yet safe film, and the 2016 Eastwood offering, Sully, fits into both of these categories snugly- just as Sully feels like a snug film.

Everything seems to fit into a nice package when the credits roll.

While the film is sympathetic and has leanings of a character study, it is also shrouded in a wholesomeness that is incredibly safe and “Hollywood.”

This is not a knock or a detriment to the film, as it is very good, well-made, and has a high budget. However, edginess is not its forte, and it might have been better off with a bit more grit.

The actual film recounts the lively, perilous recent United Airways flight 1549, on which the now-famous Captain Sully successfully landed in New York’s frigid Hudson River one January morning.

Tom Hanks is the subdued and unassuming hero to perfection as his calm demeanor and grounded persona make him a likable chap, to say nothing of saving 155 lives aboard the would-be doomed flight that day.

Instead of going in a purely linear direction, building up the events (gravitating passengers, takeoff) in sequential order until the inevitable crash, Eastwood wisely decides to begin directly after the crash.

Captain Sully, clearly jarred by the events, is startled awake by nightmares. He dreams of crashing into midtown Manhattan instead of safely landing the jet.

The hero is beginning to suffer from symptoms of PTSD.

He is kept in New York City for days on both a press tour, interview after interview, as well as being questioned by The National Transportation Safety Board, who wonder why Captain Sully did not return to a nearby airport for an emergency landing as simulated computer recreations show that he could have.

This leads to both Sully and First Officer Jeff Skiles (Aaron Eckhart) being put under a microscope and questioned.

I was a bit caught off guard and got slightly bored, as the film takes about thirty minutes to focus on the actual crash or show an airplane scene rather than building up the events by concentrating on Sully and Skiles’s mental health. However, in retrospect, Eastwood made a wise decision.

The entire film is barely over ninety minutes total, so the action comes fast and furious mid-stream.

Still, the film is not quite all that it could have been. Despite the potentially horrific consequences faced by an airplane blowing both engines due to the flocks of birds, I never got many extremely perilous moments during the film.

While technically well done, the danger scenes as Sully navigates the plane into the river lack much in the way of the punch.

Sure, there are a few quick shots of passengers praying or appearing frightened, but we never get to know any of the passengers very well.

A “don’t blink or you might miss it” scene of an elderly mother and her daughter shopping for a snow globe at the airport or three men rushing to catch the plane to catch a golf game in Charlotte is not enough for the audience to become too enveloped in their characters.

They almost seem thrown at the last minute as a way of personalizing the passengers.

As I mentioned above, the film’s point surrounds Sully (and arguably it should; there is nothing wrong with that) and, to a lesser degree, Skiles. The supporting characters contain no character development, and even Skiles’s personal life is not explored well.

Scully’s wife is only seen through phone conversations (played by Laura Linney), and he is happily married with two daughters. There is a brief talk about money trouble, but the wife is underdeveloped.

Additionally, the NTSB agents are portrayed as quite antagonistic towards Sully and Skiles (rumors abound that this was embellished for movie making), which makes sense.

I enjoyed the ending of the film- in tandem with the credits rolling- of seeing not only the real-life Sully but his wife and the passengers and crew of the actual United Airlines Flight 1549 through interviews and photographs.

This offering in true-life biography films is now a standard feature to look forward to as it brings a humanistic conclusion to the story just watched.

The film’s focus centers on Captain Sully, which is fine by me- the man is a hero- but as a film, and more than a biography, it might have added depth to have richer supporting characters and a more substantial background of the man that is Sully.

A few rushed childhood aviator and battle plane scenes seemed somewhat out of place.

Still, the film is pleasant and immensely watchable. It will not set the world on fire or be remembered as much more than a decent film based on a true story.

Oscar Nominations: Best Sound Editing

2016 Films, Andrea Arnold, Drama, Independent, Independent Drama, Riley Keough, Sasha Lane, Shia LaBeouf

American Honey-2016

Leave a comment

American Honey-2016

Director Andrea Arnold

Starring Sasha Lane, Shia LaBeouf

Scott’s Review #622

Reviewed March 6, 2017

Grade: A-

American Honey (2016) is an unconventional coming-of-age drama that deserves kudos for being shot on a shoestring budget and having something of substance to tell.

The film is mainly shot outdoors in heat-drenched Oklahoma, Nebraska, and Kansas during the summer. It follows a group of rebellious, lonely teenagers who attempt to sell magazines as part of a shady con organization.

Their female leader uses cult-like rallying techniques to achieve loyalty.

The film is shot mainly with hand-held cameras and uses only natural light, which is an admirable feat in filmmaking.

The film’s central character is an eighteen-year-old girl named Star, played by novice actress Sasha Lane.

Saddled with a deadbeat boyfriend with two young kids that she is forced to care for, she takes food from dumpsters to survive.

One day, she is approached by a charismatic, handsome bad boy, Jake (Shia LaBeouf). Jake and a group of teenagers offer her a job in Kansas.

Hesitant but realizing her dead-end existence, she accepts the mysterious job and travels with other unsavory characters across the states, where they prey on wealthy, religious types willing to lend a hand under the guise of selling them magazines.

The central story envelopes Star, her romantic feelings for Jake, and the quandaries she faces on the road. She drinks, smokes, curses, and is sexually active, yet also savvy and wise beyond her years.

The audience wonders if she will continue this lifestyle and worries when she meets older men—all rather well-mannered and affluent.

Will they pay her for her magazines or some other form of entertainment? How will Star handle propositions and scrapes in and out of precarious situations? Throughout the film, Star grows up and becomes kind and confident.

American Honey is extremely lengthy at two hours and forty-three minutes long, especially given that the film is an independent feature and does not seem to contain many concrete plot points or much of a conclusion.

It seems to go on and on and on.

Despite this, the film never bored me. I was pretty enraptured by the antics of the story’s characters, and I found myself quite fond of the surprising love story shrouded in the hip-hop and rap soundtrack.

Star and Jake (thanks mainly to the talents of Lane and LaBeouf) have genuine chemistry and likability as a couple.

The mystery surrounding Star is we know nothing about her parents or family or how she came to this existence at such a young age. At one point, she does mention her mother dying of a meth overdose, but it is unclear whether she makes this story up for the benefit of a magazine sale or if it is the truth.

Star is rebellious but brilliant and capable, all the while exhibiting kindness to strange children and her “colleagues.”

Two key aspects of American Honey are interesting to note: the film uses almost all non-actors. Director Andrea Arnold scouted and offered roles to most of the kids at local malls or various hangouts, so the film has a powerful rawness and energy, given that it is largely improvised.

Also, the film is almost entirely shot using a hand-held camera or cellphone, which creates a shaky, documentary-style feel. However, these characteristics do not give American Honey an amateurish feel; instead, they give the film an authentic quality.

The left-of-the-center approach of featuring male frontal nudity and same-sex relations gives the film much credo as an alternative film- the teens also swear and use drugs quite a bit, which could turn some off.

Receiving a heap of 2016 Independent Film award nominations (but winning none), my reason for watching American Honey (2016) breathes some fresh air into the world of independent cinema, where sometimes too many big-name stars appear in the indies to garner some credibility.

Watching a film of novices or individuals with no acting aspirations creates a good story that is worth something. And kudos to Arnold for spinning such a fresh tale.

Independent Spirit Award Nominations: Best Feature, Best Director-Andrea Arnold, Best Female Lead-Sasha Lane, Best Supporting Male-Shia LaBeouf, Best Supporting Female-Riley Keough, Best Cinematography

1961 Films, Audrey Hepburn, Drama, Fay Bainter, James Garner, LGBTQ+ Drama, LGBTQ+ Films, Miriam Hopkins, Shirley MacLaine, Veronica Cartwright, William Wyler

The Children’s Hour-1961

Leave a comment

The Children’s Hour-1961

Director William Wyler

Starring Audrey Hepburn, Shirley MacLaine, James Garner

Scott’s Review #620

Reviewed March 3, 2017

Grade: B+

The Children’s Hour (1961) is one of the earliest films to center around an LGBTQ+ theme and the subsequent scandals the subject would provoke in the innocent year of 1961-pre Civil Rights and pre-Sexual Revolution.

However, since the film was made in the year that it was, homosexuality was presented as something dark and evil rather than something to be accepted or even embraced.

Still, the film and its director, William Wyler, are brave enough to recognize the topic. Still, they cannot create a compelling film rich with well-written characters and some soap opera-style drama.

The Children’s Hour is based on a play from 1934 and written by Lillian Hellman.

The setting appears to be New England, perhaps Connecticut or Massachusetts, though the film never identifies the exact area.

College friends Karen (Audrey Hepburn) and Martha (Shirley MacLaine) open a private all-girls boarding school catering to their affluent community. They run the school with Martha’s Aunt Lilly, a faded Broadway actress who often hen-pecks the women.

Karen has been dating handsome obstetrician Joe (James Garner) for two years. When he proposes marriage, she hesitantly accepts, which saddens Martha.

All the while, spoiled brat child Mary, furious over being punished by her teachers, plots revenge against Martha and Karen and embellishes a heated discussion between the ladies into a scandalous lie she whispers to her grandmother (Fay Bainter).

The grandmother promptly tells the parents of the other students, who remove their children from the school en masse. The lie is that Karen and Martha are lovers, and Mary witnessed the two women kissing.

Meanwhile, Mary is blackmailing a fellow student, Rosalie (Veronica Cartwright), over a stolen bracelet.

The town ostracizes Martha and Karen.

The Children’s Hour becomes even more compelling when one of the women begins to realize that she does indeed have homosexual feelings towards the other woman and has always harbored anger and resentment as well as feeling “different” from other women.

As well-written as the film is, the fact that the audience does not get to hear what Mary whispers to her grandmother is instead telling and prevents the film from being even more powerful than it is.

Also, the downbeat conclusion to the film sends a clear message that in 1961, audiences were not ready to accept lesbianism as anything to be normalized or to be proud of.

The decision was made to make it abundantly clear that one of the central characters is not a lesbian. Any uncertainty may have risked freaking out mainstream audiences at the time.

Since the traditional opposite-sex romance between Karen and Joe is at the forefront of the film, I did not witness much chemistry between actors Hepburn and Garner. Still, I might have been at the point of achieving a subliminal sexual complexity.

The Children’s Hour and William Wyler deserve heaps of praise for going so far as to suggest that censorship in film in 1961 would allow them to offer nuggets of progressivism mixed into a brave film.

Incidentally, Wyler made another version of this film in 1936 named These Three. Because of the Hays Code, any hint of lesbianism was forbidden, causing Wyler to create a standard story of a love triangle between the three, with both Martha and Karen pining after Joe.

What a difference a couple of decades make!

MacLaine and Hepburn must be credited with carrying the film and eliciting nice chemistry between the women. However, it is too subtle to be realized if the chemistry is of a friendship level or a sexual nature.

And I adore how Wyler makes both characters rather glamorous and avoids stereotypical characteristics.

Oscar Nominations: Best Supporting Actress-Fay Bainter, Best Sound, Best Art Direction, Black-and-White, Best Cinematography, Black-and-White, Best Costume Design, Black-and-White

2016 Films, Aldis Hodge, Biography, Drama, Glen Powell, Janelle Monáe, Jim Parsons, Kevin Costner, Kirsten Dunst, Mahershala Ali, Octavia Spencer, Saniyya Sidney, Taraji P. Henson, Theodore Melfi

Hidden Figures-2016

Leave a comment

Hidden Figures-2016

Director Theodore Melfi

Starring Taraji P. Henson, Janelle Monae, Octavia Spencer

Scott’s Review #619

Reviewed February 26, 2017

Grade: A-

Hidden Figures (2016) is a mainstream, “Hollywood” style film produced, written, and acted very well.

The film tells the story of three female African American mathematicians who faced many struggles and were somewhat overlooked in the early 1960s.

The women achieved historical success and allowed John Glenn to orbit planet Earth.

From a film perspective, the story is feel-good but not contrived. It feels quite fresh and features an excellent ensemble cast with good chemistry.

I enjoyed this film immensely.

Blessed with good smarts, Dorothy Vaughan (Spencer), Mary Jackson (Monae), and Katherine Johnson (Henson) were fortunate enough to work for the Langley Research Center – in 1961.

In those days, segregation still existed, and the women worked as temporary workers and used separate “colored” bathrooms and were largely excluded from the white workers.

The three women are best friends and drive to work together- each has an individual specialty, and the film focuses on each woman’s story.

The more prominent role and main story are about Katherine. Since the Russians had already achieved success in outer space, the race was on for the United States to follow suit. Katherine is assigned as a “computer” in the Space Task Group, led by Al Harrison (Kevin Costner).

Initially, Katherine is dismissed by her colleagues but eventually is accepted due to her smarts.

In subplots, Dorothy struggles to be given a Supervisory position. Mary aspires to be the first female engineer despite needing to enter an all-white school to take the necessary classes.

My favorite of the three performances is Taraji P. Henson.

The actress impresses with her spunky, well-mannered portrayal, specifically her fantastic scene when she has had enough of the segregation and difficulty performing her job.

She loses it in front of the entire team and rails against them- expecting to lose her job, instead, her boss Al, (a fantastic nice-guy role for Costner), sees her point and declares NASA will see no distinction of color.

Henson is the lead actress in the film and carries it well.

The chemistry between the three actresses makes Hidden Figures work so well and appear believable. The women always have each other’s backs and are friends outside of work, attending church and picnics together.

The film is wise to feature women’s lives outside of their professions.

A nice side story of single mother Katherine (her husband, who has died) meeting and being courted in lovely fashion by handsome National Guard member Jim Johnson (Mahershala Ali) is a sweet story, genuinely told.

The two also have nice chemistry together.

The film’s finale, as the attempted launch of John Glenn is met with problems, is compelling. Due to their genius of Katherine, she must save the day as Glenn trusts only her judgment and calculations of the ever-so-important numbers.

The scene is a “just desserts” moment for Katherine as the country rallies patriotically behind the events.

Hidden Figures plays it safe, and the actual struggles of the real women undoubtedly had darker and meaner situations, as the discrimination they faced had to have been more intense.

Still, the film strives to downplay some of the grit in favor of light-hearted, crowd-pleasing fare, but I fell for it hook, line, and sinker and enjoyed the film ride that I was given.

Oscar Nominations: Best Picture, Best Supporting Actress-Octavia Spencer, Best Adapted Screenplay

#2 Most Disturbing Film, 2008 Films, Cyrus Nowrasteh, Drama, International, International Drama, Persian, Shohreh Aghdashloo, Top 10 Most Disturbing Films

The Stoning of Soraya M.-2008

Leave a comment

The Stoning of Soraya M.-2008

Director Cyrus Nowrasteh

Starring Shohreh Aghdashloo

Top 10 Most Disturbing Films #2

Scott’s Review #618

Reviewed February 18, 2017

Grade: A

The Stoning of Soraya M. (2008) is a brutal film and one of the most disturbing films that I have ever seen. I have viewed the film a total of two times and that is enough for me.

The terrifying aspect of the film is that the story is true and the events depicted not only have happened to the woman featured but happen to women day in and day out in certain cultures.

The film is a frightening reminder of the atrocities of human suffering.

The film is an American Persian language film made in 2008. Academy Award nominee, Shohreh Aghdashloo, stars as a woman living in a remote village in Iran- the time is 1986.

Interestingly, the film begins following the events that conclude the story and works in reverse. A reporter who has car trouble and is lost in the village is taken by the aunt of Soraya (Aghdashloo) who must tell the journalist the painful story of a tragedy that befell poor Soraya the day before.

Soraya was brutally stoned to death, and wrongfully accused of adultery, and the journalist wisely records the aunt’s tale with his tape recorder. The journalist must then escape the village alive for Soraya’s story to be told to the masses.

From this point, the film transfers to several days earlier.

Soraya’s abusive husband, Ali, wishes to divorce Soraya so that he can marry a fourteen-year-old girl from the village. When she refuses, Ali uses manipulation and blackmail to turn many in the village against Soraya, including her two teenage sons.

Ali convinces everyone that Soraya has been unfaithful to him with a widower whom Soraya innocently works for. Ali is then granted his divorce and Soraya is sentenced to be stoned, as an example, in front of the entire village.

The message is clear- women are not equal to men and are not permitted to do the things that men can.

Throughout the film, we get to know Soraya and she does have her loyal female friends and supporters. Aghdashloo portrays Soraya with gusto and bravery and the fact that we care for the character so much makes the inevitable stoning sequence heartbreaking and painful to watch.

When Soraya is chained to a short pole and buried up to her neck so that she cannot move, the scene of her victimization is almost unbearable to watch. Ali and her sons are the first to cast the stones that strike her square in the head.

Director, Nowrasteh provides the stoning sequence with a dull, muted sound so that we almost experience the thuds of the rocks from Soraya’s perspective, making the scene all the more chilling.

The scene also goes on for seemingly an eternity as it takes a long time for Soraya to succumb to her many wounds. Needless to say, she is a bloody mess and unrecognizable.

This scene is not for the squeamish.

How disheartening to know that experiences like Soraya’s still occurring to this day in Iran and many other countries and there is not much that is done to help.

The Stoning of Soraya M. is based on a 1990 book, Le Femme Lapidee, written by Freidoune Sahebjam, who appears in the film as a journalist. The book has been banned in Iran.

The Stoning of Soraya M. (2008) is one of the most disturbing films that I have ever seen and as much as the message is tragic and painful, I never want to see this film again.

The pain rings too real and the thought fills me with sadness.

2016 Films, Ann Dowd, Comedy, Drama, Frank Langella, George MacKay, Independent, Independent Comedy, Independent Drama, Kathryn Hahn, Matt Ross, Nicholas Hamilton, Steve Zahn, Viggo Mortensen

Captain Fantastic-2016

Leave a comment

Captain Fantastic-2016

Director Matt Ross

Starring Viggo Mortensen

Scott’s Review #616

Reviewed February 10, 2017

Grade: B+

A thought-provoking story that raises a question of home-schooled, non-traditional book intelligence versus the lack of social norms and interactions and debates about which upbringings are more relevant, Captain Fantastic (2016) is a terrific film with a moral center.

The film, which stars Viggo Mortensen, is a family drama with a unique spin and edgy subject matter. Mortensen is not afraid to tackle complex and thoughtful roles.

Although it is perhaps not as gritty as it could have been and feels a bit safe, it still entertains and elicits thought, a critical aspect of film often lacking in modern cinema.

Director Matt Ross immediately treats us to aerial views of the green and mountainous Pacific Northwest, where a family of seven- one father and six children aged five to seventeen, silently prey on and kill a deer grazing in the forest. This is their dinner.

The family is unorthodox, to say the least.

Led by Ben Cash (Mortensen), he teaches the children how to fight, how to survive, and how to be ready for any situation. They are brilliant kids who can recite the Bill of Rights and the most complex literature.

Soon, it is revealed that their mother, Leslie, has committed suicide, and a battle ensues between her parents (Frank Langella and Ann Dowd), who is determined to bury her “properly” with a Christian funeral, and Ben and his children, who are determined to honor her last wishes for cremation.

Ben and the gang travel via their run-down school bus to New Mexico, meeting local townspeople as a battle of cultures occurs.

I commend Ross for creating a story that challenges the viewer to think, depending on the viewer’s religious or political views. There is a risk of people either loving or hating the film.

The film is skewed toward the left, as in the dinner and sleepover scenes with Ben’s sister. Her “Americanized” family is awkward, and the families have entirely different styles.

Ross makes it clear that Ben and his family are the intelligent ones, and his sister’s kids are pretty dumb, not even knowing what the Bill of Rights is and mindlessly playing violent video games.

The fact that they are a “typical American family” is sad and quite telling of wRoss’s perspective

Captain Fantastic wisely shows that either side is not perfect. His oldest son, Bodevan, blooming sexually, has an awkward encounter with a pretty girl, proposing marriage to her with her mother present because he knows no social norms.

A younger son is attracted to a “normal” life with his grandparents, who are a wealthy couple. The grandparents are not presented as bad people; instead, they want the best for their grandchildren and fear how their lives will turn out without better structure or what they perceive as a better upbringing.

Some of the kids blame Ben for their lack of social skills and being what they perceive as “freaks.”

The film does end safely as a happy medium is ultimately reached, but I never felt cheapened by this result. I found Captain Fantastic rich in intelligent writing and a challenging tale.

Many moments of “what would you do?” were brought to the forefront. Mortensen portrays Ben Cash flawlessly, mixing just the right vulnerability with the stubbornness of the character, and it is an excellent film for anyone fearing being intelligent is not cool because it is.

Oscar Nominations: Best Actor-Viggo Mortensen

Independent Spirit Award Nominations: Best Male Lead-Viggo Mortensen

2015 Films, Alexander Skarsgård, Bel Powley, Christopher Meloni, Comedy, Drama, Independent, Independent Drama, Kristen Wiig, Marielle Heller

The Diary of a Teenage Girl-2015

Leave a comment

The Diary of a Teenage Girl-2015

Director Marielle Heller

Starring Bel Powley, Alexander Skarsgard, Kristen Wiig

Scott’s Review #614

Reviewed February 2, 2017

Grade: A-

I was not sure what I expected from the Independent Spirit award-winning film, Diary of a Teenage Girl (2015).

I surmised that I would be treated to a light-hearted, yet well-written coming-of-age story, but the film is much darker than I would have thought, and this is a plus.

The film is edgy.

There is so much depth to the central characters and an incredibly complex performance by newcomer, Bel Powley in the title role.

Stars Kristen Wiig and Alexander Skarsgard also give tremendous performances.

The film is based on the graphic novel The Diary of a Teenage Girl: An Account in Words and Pictures by Phoebe Gloeckner.

Set in 1976 in San Francisco, a time filled with hippies, drugs, music, and life, fifteen-year-old Minnie, an aspiring comic book writer, is as insecure as any typical fifteen-year-old is.

With wide eyes and stringy hair, she is cute, but rather quirky looking, not the prettiest girl in her class, and records her deepest thoughts into a cassette recorder. Minnie is intelligent and worldly, accepting of alternative lifestyles and drugs.

She is wise well beyond her years.

Minnie’s mother Charlotte (Wiig), lives a bohemian lifestyle, constantly partying and losing jobs, and is divorced from Minnie’s and sister Gretel’s affluent, but mostly absent father, Pascal (Christopher Meloni).

The girls refer to him as “Pascal” instead of “Dad”, which he hates. Determined to lose her virginity, Minnie is man crazy and develops a sweet relationship with her mother’s boyfriend, Monroe (Skarsgard).

Things begin slowly but develop into a full-blown sexual relationship. A controversial piece to the story is that Monroe is thirty-five years old- Minnie is only fifteen. Both Monroe’s and Minnie’s feelings are challenged due to circumstances and Minnie’s emotions spiral out of control.

The subject matter of The Diary of a Teenage Girl will undoubtedly be off-putting for many folks as the actions are technically statutory rape.

The film never goes in that direction.

Rather, director Marielle Heller crafts a tender story of young love, and when there is too much drama comic relief is added.

Monroe is never the aggressor and Minnie is. She is a young girl who knows what she wants.

Since the director is female there is no hint of Minnie being taken advantage of or regretting her affair- the film is not about this.

Rather, it is about a young girl with blooming sexuality and emotions finding herself in the world. I admire this left-of-center approach to the story immensely.

Other aspects of the film may be too much for some. Minnie and her best friend pretend to be prostitutes and orally service two young men in the men’s room on a lark.

Later, Charlotte uses filthy language to describe Monroe’s and Minnie’s relationship.

The film is not safe, but daring and honest. I admire its courage.

Enough cannot be said for the three principal actors in Diary of a Teenage Girl. Bel Powley is a find!

Nominated for an Independent Spirit award, this amazing young actress should have been recognized by the Academy Awards, but she no doubt has many years and films ahead of her.

She is a “regular girl” type and reminds me of actress Lena Dunham in her looks and her rich delivery.

Kristen Wiig is fantastic and is evolving into a great dramatic actress. As Charlotte, Wiig is wonderfully insecure and an offbeat mother. She does not discipline, but rather befriends her daughters, showering them with hugs and kisses and giving vulnerable neediness to the character.

Wiig, dynamite in the comedy/drama The Skeleton Twins (2014), has embraced small, but important indie films, and kudos to her for this.

Lastly, Skarsgard, mainly known as HBO’s villainous Eric on True Blood, is as inspiring as Monroe.

Providing his character with sympathy and humanity (tough when having an affair with a teenage girl who also happens to be your girlfriend’s daughter), Skarsgard evokes so much emotion into the role that you almost root for Monroe and Minnie before remembering that she is too emotionally fragile.

Skarsgard is brilliant in Monroe’s breakdown scene. I hope audiences see him in more of these complex roles as he is far more than a hunky actor.

Diary of a Teenage Girl (2015) intersperses graphic novel/animated elements into the story told from the perspective of Minnie and the character narrates parts of the film.

This authentic story is not only for teenagers but for smart thinkers and anyone who has ever been over their heads in the emotions of love.

Independent Spirit Award Nominations: 1 win-Best Female Lead-Bel Powley, Best First Screenplay, Best First Feature (won)

2016 Films, Biography, Drama, Hugh Grant, Josh O'Connor, Meryl Streep, Rebecca Ferguson, Simon Helberg, Stephen Frears

Florence Foster Jenkins-2016

Leave a comment

Florence Foster Jenkins-2016

Director Stephen Frears

Starring Meryl Streep, Hugh Grant

Scott’s Review #613

Reviewed January 30, 2017

Grade: B

Director Stephen Frears loves to direct films starring vehicles for mature actresses. Judi Dench, Helen Mirren, and Meryl Streep have benefited vastly from his direction (all received Oscar nominations).

In Florence Foster Jenkins (2016), Frears crafts a warm-hearted tale about a famous real-life opera singer, the title character of whom is played by Meryl Streep.

The film is likable but not up to par with other Frears’ gems, specifically Philomena (2013) or The Queen (2006).

Given the subject matter, the film is too safe for my tastes and should have been darker.

Florence Foster Jenkins was a New York City socialite and heiress who flourished in 1944. She founded the Verdi Club and did a great deal of good for music, specifically opera, which she adored.

Her husband, Bayfield, played by Hugh Grant, nicknames her “Bunny.” He reveres her, but not physically—he resides elsewhere with a girlfriend.

This is due to Bunny being afflicted with long-term syphilis, causing her to be medicated and rendering her bald and unable to engage in sexual relations.

Bunny is a wretched, flat singer; despite her passion for singing, everyone convinces her how wonderful she is because she is so well-regarded in her social circle. Many people are paid off in exchange for their support.

Due to Bunny’s medication, it is assumed that she cannot hear properly, leaving her unaware of how badly she sings. Bunny is now determined to sing at Carnegie Hall, and Bayfield must scramble to make sure no critics are anywhere in sight for the big show, saving his wife from humiliation.

Any film starring Meryl Streep is assured to be fantastic from an acting standpoint, and, per usual, she does not disappoint. Streep envelopes the role of Bunny, giving her charm and a vulnerability that only Streep can do.

Although the character knows what she wants and is stubborn, she is also kind, and we see passion oozing from her pores.

Streep is the highlight and the draw of the film.

Hugh Grant deserves kudos, and I liked the chemistry between the two actors. Although seeking physical relations with another woman may make him appear a cad, Grant also gives Bayfield sensitivity and genuine care for his wife.

They have “an arrangement,” but he hides his girlfriend when Bunny shows up unexpectedly, not wanting Bunny to be embarrassed.

Grant’s and Streep’s scenes together are tender and believable.

Like Bunny’s pianist, McMoon, Simon Helberg also positively influences the film. Hired to accompany Bunny’s singing, he is initially appalled and bemused but finally understands Bunny, coming to love and respect her for who she is.

The character is clearly gay (the film never comes out and says this), but gay themes are common in Frears films, and it is a non-issue among the principal characters, excellent, but perhaps unrealistic for that time.

A flaw of the film is the lack of any purely great moments. I suppose the climax at Carnegie Hall should have been it, but I did not wholly buy the entire film.

Even the crowd’s laughter and mocking of Bunny seem to be done in a soft, light way.

Nonetheless, Florence Foster Jenkins (2016) is a decent offering, and Streep is the ultimate selling point.

The costumes are also great.

Oscar Nominations: Best Actress-Meryl Streep, Best Costume Design

2015 Films, Anthony LaPaglia, Australian, Craig Stott, Drama, Geoffrey Rush, Guy Pearce, International, International Drama, International Romance, LGBTQ+ Drama, LGBTQ+ Films, LGBTQ+ International, LGBTQ+ Romance, Neil Armfield, Romantic Drama, Ryan Corr, Sarah Snook

Holding the Man-2015

Leave a comment

Holding the Man-2015

Director Neil Armfield

Starring Ryan Corr, Craig Stott

Scott’s Review #612

Reviewed January 24, 2016

Grade: B+

Holding the Man (2015) is a brave love story centering on two young men and spanning fifteen years as the men begin as high school sweethearts and progress into adulthood and sadly both contract AIDS.

This is a pivotal aspect of the film as it is set during the 1970s and 1980s- a time when this disease was dreadful and more or less a death sentence.

The film is tender and poignant, but despite these characteristics, I felt something with more vigor was missing. I did not have the exact emotional reaction I thought I might have.

The film is set in Australia and adapted from a 1995 memoir of the same name.

The action begins in 1976 as we meet Tim and John, both high school students. They are from opposite social groups, Tim a theater student, and John captain of his soccer team.

Surprisingly, they connect romantically as Tim asks John out on a date.

The pair receive little hassle and are quite open with their relationship. Certainly, they face a bit of opposition from officials at the school, but this is not the main aspect that the film goes for.

Instead, the main problems come from John’s family- specifically, his father, but this is played safely. Tim’s family is much more accepting.

Over the next fifteen years, the couple encounters death directly when they are simultaneously told they have acquired HIV.

The film is mostly told chronologically but goes back and forth at times. Specifically, we are reminded of John’s youthful good looks in flashbacks, when he is close to death, bald and sickly looking.

The main point is the men’s enduring love for each other, which is a nice message.

Otherwise, the film (2015 and long since the AIDS plague), goes for a reminder of how harsh those times were for gay men, though there is a softness to the film that I felt instead of the brutal reality.

The actors playing John and Tim (Craig Stott and Ryan Corr, respectively) have decent chemistry, but this may have been stronger than my perception was, and the reason I did not feel emotionally invested in the film.

The film was nice and sweet-the romance part, but when one of the men succumbs to AIDS I should have been a puddle of tears and I just wasn’t.

I did enjoy how the film does not focus too much on the opposition by John’s father (Anthony LaPaglia). He would wish his son’s sexuality differently but is more concerned with how his son’s relationship with a male looks to Dad’s friends and neighbors.

The deeper story was the love between the men who knew no barriers.

It was nice to see Geoffrey Rush and Guy Pearce in supporting turns as a drama teacher (Rush) and as Tim’s father, Dick (Pearce). Both do well with limited roles and I adore how the film portrays Dick as a supportive father- even dancing a slow dance with his son at a wedding- free of embarrassment.

Also notable is the sweet ending where a photo of the real Tim and John is shown during a narrative from an interview with the real Tim before his death.

Holding the Man (2015) is a nice film, but does not have the power that other LGBT films in recent decades had. Brokeback Mountain (2006) immediately comes to mind as a similar film, but one that was more emotional and engaged me much more.

An honest effort, though.

2016 Films, Annette Bening, Billy Crudup, Comedy, Drama, Elle Fanning, Greta Gerwig, Independent, Independent Comedy, Independent Drama, Lucas Jade Zumann, Mike Mills

20th Century Women-2016

Leave a comment

20th Century Women-2016

Director Mike Mills

Starring Annette Benning, Greta Gerwig, Elle Fanning

Scott’s Review #611

Reviewed January 22, 2017

Grade: A-

Annette Benning shines in her leading role in 20th Century Women (2016), a film directed by Mike Mills, a formidable independent filmmaker whose credits include 2010’s Beginners and 2005’s Thumbsucker.

In 20th Century Women, Mills serves as director and writer, so the film is his vision.

All five principal characters are quirky and well-written, though Benning’s is the most nuanced and fascinating.

The time is 1979, Santa Barbara. Despite the image of Santa Barbara as a wealthy, grand town dripping with the rich and powerful (perhaps due to the sweeping 1980s daytime soap opera of the same name), Mills does not present this film as such.

He presents Santa Barbara as a more artsy town, at least where his characters are concerned.

Benning plays Dorothea Fields, a fifty-five-year-old divorced mother of a fifteen-year-old boy, Jaimie. She is a free spirit who allows two runaways to live with her: Abbie (Greta Gerwig), a twenty-five-year-old aspiring photographer with fuchsia-colored hair recovering from cervical cancer, and William (Billy Crudup), a handyman.

They are joined by Jaimie’s good friend, Julie (Elle Fanning), a depressed neighbor.

The film nicely explores each character’s trials and tribulations and their interactions with each other in a highly quirky manner, and we fall in love with each of them.

Dorothea enlists Abbie and Julie’s help to have a positive influence after he nearly dies after a foolish teenage prank.

Mills successfully gives the period a slice-of-life feel, heavily referencing punk rock and the political climate in the film. Bands such as Talking Heads and Black Flag focus on Dorothea’s striving to learn what young people like, to remain youthful, and to stay in touch with her charges.

Dorothea is a chain smoker, and many scenes feature her pondering a situation while taking long drags. I love this aspect of the film as it showcases Benning’s cerebral performance. She is a thoughtful woman who wants her son to grow up sane and productive since his father is absent.

Sex and feminism are significant themes in the film. Abbie loans Jaimie two books by female feminist authors to help him better understand women.

When he begins to discuss orgasms and a strange conversation about sex and virginity ensues during a dinner party Dorothea is hosting, the graphic detail is a bit too much for Dorothea.

She is a conflicted character- open-minded and caring; when it comes to her son, she has a more conservative edge while trying to remain open to his new experiences as a teen.

20th Century Women is strictly a character-driven film with enormous strength. Each character is in a different place in their lives, and I adore how the film gives a conclusion to each of the characters’ lives in the years to come.

Indeed, the film follows the “happily ever after” formula, but this does not bother me. Instead, the film is so well composed that the characters’ lives enrapture me.

Admittedly, the film is slow-moving at times, but this is due to the richness of the dialogue—nothing is rushed.

Kudos to the cast. Gerwig and Fanning are incredibly excellent. Fanning’s Julie is a unique character- her mother is a psychiatrist who forces her to attend group sessions that she holds. Julie has a step-sister with cerebral palsy, so Julie frequently sleeps at Dorothea’s house as a way to escape her life.

Sexual active, Julie has a pregnancy scare during the story.

A coming of age type film set in an enjoyable time, 20th Century Women (2016) showcases the talents of a stellar cast led by Benning, takes its audience into a wonderful, character-themed world, and discusses the lives of its intriguing characters with a clear portrayal of life in the late 1970s.

Oscar Nominations: Best Original Screenplay

Independent Spirit Award Nominations: Best Female Lead-Annette Bening, Best Screenplay

2015 Films, Alex Jennings, Biography, Claire Foy, Dominic Cooper, Drama, Jim Broadbent, Maggie Smith, Nicholas Hytner

The Lady in the Van-2015

Leave a comment

The Lady In The Van-2015

Director Nicholas Hytner

Starring Maggie Smith

Scott’s Review #610

Reviewed January 19, 2017

Grade: B

Maggie Smith can do no wrong and I will happily enjoy watching her in anything- anytime. Around in film since the 1950s this lady deserves a starring film role.

Utterly distinctive she is, as legendary actress Bette Davis was,  Smith has a style purely her own. Her facial expressions and exasperated gasps make her one of the great film stars.

The Lady in the Van (2015) is specifically made for her, but besides her talents, the movie is a decent offering, but very safe.

It lacks the depth that it could have had.

Written by Alan Bennett, the film tells the true story of Mary Sheperd, an elderly woman living in a broken-down van, who befriends Bennett and eventually lives in his driveway for fifteen years before her inevitable death.

Set in northern London, a quaint and gorgeous part of the world, Mary harbors a deep secret involving her van and is revealed to have been a star piano pupil in her day.

Smith has no qualms about playing unflattering characters.

Shepherd is grizzled, abrupt, and rude, but Smith puts a lot of heart into her too, so the audience senses her vulnerability and falls in love with her. With her sad protruding blue eyes, wrinkles for miles, and chirpy voice, Smith is fantastic at giving her all to the role.

The rest of the cast adequately play their roles but are limited and out-shadowed at every turn. Most notable is the wasted talents of Jim Broadbent, appearing in a small and quite meaningless role.

Besides Smith’s brilliant performance, The Lady in the Van lacks layers. The story is good, but we never see many of Mary’s struggles. How does she afford food? How is she not sick? The film skims over the darker elements of homelessness in favor of a lighthearted tale.

Fine, but what about her inevitable issues?

Other less important stories are mentioned but not fully explored. Alex speaks to what looks like his twin brother, but is it his alter ego?

Young men come and go at night, so the presumption is that Alex is gay, and in the end, we do see Alex living with a man, but why is this so vaguely written? Why mention it at all?

This story would have been interesting to delve deeper into given that the real Alex Bennett wrote the film.

Other side stories are introduced but remain on the surface. Alex’s mother suffers from Alzheimer’s, but this is not explored much, and Mary’s brother, who institutionalized her at a young age, offers no explanation as to why this was done she had a mental illness- but the brother’s motivations are not clear.

I wanted more from the supporting characters than was offered.

Still, the bottom line is that The Lady in the Van (2015) is a Maggie Smith film, and any in which she has the lead role, is pretty damned good for that reason alone.

2016 Films, Action, Ben Foster, Chris Pine, Dale Dickey, David Mackenzie, Drama, Independent, Independent Drama, Independent Western, Jeff Bridges, Marin Ireland, Western

Hell or High Water-2016

Leave a comment

Hell or High Water-2016

Director David Mackenzie

Starring Jeff Bridges, Chris Pine, Ben Foster

Scott’s Review #609

Reviewed January 16, 2017

Grade: B+

Hell or High Water (2016), a splendid tale of bank robbers chased by law enforcement officers in rural western Texas, is reminiscent of the Coen Brothers’ No Country for Old Men (2007) or a classic Sam Peckinpah film from the 1970s.

The film provides a good story with a morality tale, so the viewer is unsure who to root for—the good gr tad guys. This gives the film substance compared to the typical action-guy film, which is done to death.

Odd, quirky, minor characters are interspersed throughout the film, which adds comedy and a unique feel.

David Mackenzie directed the film, but up until now, it has been unknown to me.

Chris Pine and Ben Foster play Toby and Tanner, two brothers who embark on small-town bank robberies to save their recently deceased mother’s ranch.

Tanner (Foster) is the more seasoned criminal, having spent time in jail and being more volatile than his brother. Toby (Pine) is a family man with two kids and is more intelligent and sensible than his brother.

Two Texas Rangers, Marcus Hamilton (Bridges), a grizzled man weeks away from retirement, and his partner, Alberto Parker (Gil Birmingham), pursue them.

What I enjoyed most about this film is the authenticity of the setting.

The film was shot in New Mexico but meant to be in West Texas. This is believable, and the cinematography is gorgeous. The vastness of the land and the sticky desert heat are filmed very well.

Small-town Texas is portrayed as tiny characters introduced as townspeople, giving much credo to the film.

My favorites are the diner waitress-smitten with the handsome Toby (and her $200 tip), and t-bone waitress- grizzled and rude after forty-four years in the same place. Their sassy and abrasive behavior works and adds much to the film.

Dale Dickey is a treat in any film, and her turn as a bank employee is a joy.

How nice to see Chris Pine in a challenging role. His character is conflicted morally. Not wanting to hurt anyone, he struggles with the robberies and wants to do right by his kids and mother.

He is a decent man caught in uncertain circumstances, and Pine does an excellent job of portraying him, proving that the actor is becoming more than just a pretty face.

Bridges plays anger quite well, and it is nice to see the actor succeeding career-wise in his golden years. His Texas Ranger character is determined to uphold the law. Still, below the surface, he is more than a bit worried about his upcoming retirement, closing a chapter in his life that is undoubtedly important to him.

His relationship with his partner is jovial and buddy-like, but is there an underlying physical attraction between the men?

The film does not go there, but perhaps on a subconscious level, it is hinted at.

A fantastic scene laced with tension occurs near the film’s end when two of the main characters are killed. It is a stand-off of sorts atop a desert mountain ridge. One of the characters loses it, which results in a shoot-out and a shocking loss of life.

The scene is excellent in that it is a good, old-fashioned shoot ’em up done well.

Hell or High Water (2016) is a gritty action film with excellent elements, nice characterization, and clean fun. It’s a throwback to a long-time crime western without the standard stock characters.

This film is more layered than the traditional and intelligently written, achieving something unique.

Oscar Nominations: Best Picture, Best Supporting Actor-Jeff Bridges, Best Original Screenplay, Best Film Editing

Independent Spirit Award Nominations: 1 win-Best Supporting Male-Ben Foster (won), Best Screenplay, Best Editing

2016 Films, Aaron Eckhart, Action, Alon Abutbul, Angela Bassett, Babak Najafi, Gerard Butler, Jackie Earle Haley, Lowest Rated Films, Melissa Leo, Morgan Freeman, Patrick Kennedy, Political Thriller, Radha Mitchell, Robert Forster, Thriller

London Has Fallen-2016

Leave a comment

London Has Fallen-2016

Director Babak Najafi

Starring Gerard Butler, Aaron Eckhart

Scott’s Review #608

Reviewed January 13, 2017

Grade: D

Save for many enjoyable, incredible London shots of mostly aerial views, London Has Fallen (2016) is a complete drivel of an experience.

The film’s attempt at being a red-blooded, patriotic film comes across as insulting and racist, with a machismo that is cringe-worthy.

The dialogue is terrible, and the “us against them” mantra has been done to death in film, mainly in the 1980s and 1990s. To quote one reviewer, “London Has Fallen is Donald Trump in film form.”

I don’t understand how the film convinced such a talented cast to appear (it must have been money), and several parts are so small (Robert Forster, Melissa Leo, Jackie Earle Haley) that they are nearly glorified extras.

The plot is painfully contrived, to say nothing of the ludicrous nature of the entire story.

To retaliate against a drone strike killing a Pakistani leader, terrorists take advantage of the death of the UK Prime Minister to assassinate several world leaders who have gravitated to London to attend funeral services.

The President of the United States (played by Aaron Eckhart) is naturally in attendance, and his murder is thwarted by top Secret Service official Mike Banning (Gerard Butler), our film’s hero.

The rest of the film involves the President and Mike running throughout London, attempting to catch the terrorists and bring them to justice while avoiding death.

The London locales are superb, but sadly, they mainly appear at the film’s beginning and end. The London Eye, the Thames River, the Underground, and various metro stations are featured.

The numerous London bridges also get some exposure.

The best part is how the film showcases London’s vastness, not just the up-close shots of historic places like Westminster Abbey or Buckingham Palace.

Undoubtedly, London is known for those gems, but the aerial views give the viewer an appreciation of all London offers.

I loved only this aspect of the film.

The supporting roles are abysmal, and given the more artistic parts they’ve received in the past; one imagines the actors cringing as they read the scripts for some of them.

I hesitate to think what possessed Leo, Forster, and Haley to accept meaningless roles save for a hefty paycheck. Each played a member of the President’s staff and was reduced mainly to reactionary shots.

As an ill-fated Secret Service Director, Angela Bassett and Radha Mitchell, as Banning’s weary-looking, pregnant wife, get more screen time but are treated to equally uninteresting roles.

Overall, the performances are forgettable. Respectable actors Butler and Eckhart merely phone in their vapid, dull lines, failing to make any of them believable.

The film never bothers with character development or anything beyond fundamental good and evil roles. Every character is either 100% good or 100% bad.

It is made crystal clear that the Americans are the good guys, and the foreigners (all Middle Eastern or Asian actors, of course) are simply the bad guys.

The motivations of the “bad guys” are never explained, and one cheesy line after another is written for the “good guys.”

During the finale, Banning professes that “we have been here for thousands of years and always will be” as he beats a lousy guy senselessly. Good grief. I’ve seen better dialogue on a network television drama.

And there is never any doubt about how the film will end. There is an American mole who has used his power to enable all of the assassinations, but when the mole is revealed, it is a character we have never seen before, so who cares?

Indeed, the film will soon be forgotten for its poor story, cliche-ridden script, and numerous stereotypes, but the fantastic London shots were inspiring and lovely.

I would have been happy with one hour and forty minutes of those.

Welcome to my blog!1,531 reviews posted so far! I'm Scott Segrell and I reside in Stamford, CT. My site features hundreds of film reviews I have written since I launched the site in 2014. I hope you enjoy reading my latest reviews or searching for your own favorites to see if we agree. Please see my featured films of the month, and don't forget to utilize the tags and category links.