Category Archives: Movie

Sympathy for Academy Awards Voters

Posted on by
1
Academy Award, Oscar

I’m sure glad I don’t have to pick the Best Picture winner in this year’s Academy Awards pool of ten. The four nominees we’ve seen are excellent films with brilliant acting, interesting stories, and cinematic flourishes. Assuming votes are cast based on people’s true assessment of excellence, not corporate loyalties, they have their job cut out for them.

We skipped Anora when it was in the local theater because the preview was so off-putting. Now that was a mistake. Several of the others haven’t come to Princeton yet. But here’s what we’ve seen.

The Brutalist—a moving story about mid-twentieth century Jew (Adrian Brody), whose excellence as an architect doesn’t protect him from the Nazis. He survives to create a new life and new work with his wife (Felicity Jones) about twenty miles from where I live in a fictional version of Doylestown, Pa. What happens to him thereafter makes you wonder whether the movie title refers to his architectural style or certain characters in the film.

A Complete Unknown—Bob Dylan’s career up until the legendary set he did at the Newport Folk Festival about which much has been said and written. The producers made the excellent decision to include lots of music, and Timothée Chalamet sings the songs himself. A wonderful trip into forests of nostalgia—for the music, for the times, for the hope embedded therein.

Conclave—based on a novel by the excellent Robert Harris (my review of his Precipice is here), with a can’t-go-wrong cast of Ralph Fiennes, Stanley Tucci, John Lithgow, and Isabella Rossellini. It’s about the election of a new pope (awkward timing) and the ostensibly stodgy proceedings that result in earthquakes.

Dune: Part Two—Loved the books; so willing to cut the movie some slack with respect to Austin Butler’s alien makeup. The acting and scenery were fantastic. Ditto the special effects which were so good they were distracting. (How’d they DO that?!) Timothée Chalamet again, Zendaya, Rebecca Ferguson, and Javier Bardem.

Coming soon: The Nickel Boys. Looking forward to it!

Did U Miss It? Knox Goes Away

Posted on by

Based on an enthusiastic family recommendation, we streamed (Amazon Prime, I think) the neo-noir thriller Knox Goes Away, starring Michael Keaton, his directorial debut (trailer). It’s the story of a killer-for-hire facing a fatal diagnosis and his attempts to impart a final set of life lessons to his estranged adult son. The son wants to be nothing like his father, but, as it turns out, he has lots to learn about himself and his father.

The plot is clever (written by Gregory Poirier), and you learn that whoever gives Knox and his partner Tom Muncie (played by Ray McKinnon) their assassination assignments picks low-life targets: traffickers, abusers, and the like. In doing bad, they are eliminating worse, or at least the story tries to make their activities as justifiable as possible. Thin. But when Knox messes up, the police are onto him, and what follows is a high-stakes cat-and-mouse-game. The bickering between Detective Emily Ikari (Suzy Nakamura) and one of the detectives she oversees (John Hoogenakker) are priceless.

Keaton plays the struggling Knox to perfection, and the rest of the cast is definitely up to snuff (sorry), including his son, Miles (James Marsden), and the shady guys Knox relies on: the fence Philo Jones (Dennis Dugan) and the old-time thief Xavier Crane, called “X,” played by a hard-(for me)-to-recognize Al Pacino.

We enjoyed the neo-noir touches—the dreamy jazz trumpet, the urban night, the shadowy settings, the slightly tawdry femme fatale, the ambiguous morality. A number of film critics were quite positive (Variety, New York Times, Los Angeles Times), but others who praised it nevertheless discounted their ratings. A couple apparently just didn’t “get it.” That may account for a short in-theater run. See it and decide for yourself.

Rotten Tomatoes Critics’ Rating: 65%; Audiences: 84%

Watch it on Amazon Prime here.

Looking for a Weekend Movie?

Posted on by

Here are brief takes on four films we’ve seen lately. All have good points. The one I enjoyed most is first.

The Cowboy and the Queen
You may have seen previous coverage of horse whisperer Monty Roberts. Now you see him in a reflective mood, looking back over the shape of his career. Son of an abusive dad, he was determined not to follow that path (trailer). By watching horses in the wild, he began to understand how they communicated, and he adopted their approach in his training. “Breaking horses,” he says, amounts to breaking their spirit; they’re abused until they give up. He doesn’t do it that way. So, where does the Queen come in? We’re talking about Elizabeth II, late monarch of Britain, who read articles about Roberts and wanted him to coach some of her equerries in his methods. Like most traditional U.S. horsemen, they were skeptical. They relied on using their aggressive techniques for a week or two until the horse would accept a saddle and, ultimately, a rider. Roberts could achieve this in less than twenty minutes. The Queen comes across beautifully, and so does the cowboy! A real feel-good film. For a fictional take on humane horse-training, there’s the wonderful 2018 film, The Rider.

The Critic
You can’t fault Ian McKellan’s portrayal of an odious 1930s theater critic for a dying London newspaper (trailer). He delights in skewering the shows and performers he reviews, and, although at first I found him a nice contrast to the starchy newspaper publisher, when he roped an ambitious female lead into his manipulative schemes, I gave up on him. The performances are all good, but he’s no hero.
Rotten Tomatoes Critics’ Rating: 47%; Audiences: 73%.

Between the Temples
Ben Gottlieb (Jason Schwartzman) is the nebbishy cantor of a synagogue with a transparently ambitious rabbi (trailer). Through stress and anxiety, he’s lost his voice and is near suicide. Coming to his rescue (in more ways than one) is Mrs. Kessler (Carol Kane), his elementary school choral teacher. No one in their families is sure what the relationship is, exactly, they just know they don’t like it. Some good jokes, some outlandish family behavior. A pleasant film with a few slow spots.
Rotten Tomatoes Critics’ Rating: 85%; Audiences: 41%.

Skincare
This thriller loosely inspired by a true story, centers on a Hollywood entrepreneur who has developed her own line of facial products, using European (fancy!) ingredients (trailer). Her struggling business faces an existential crisis when a competitor moves in across the street. Violence ensues (nothing too graphic). Entertaining, and Elizabeth Banks is perfect as the increasingly frantic beauty maven. Coincidentally, I recently read a short piece about her in The New Yorker, where she talked about difficulty getting parts in her early career, in part because “I wasn’t pretty enough.” In this film, she’s a knockout!
Rotten Tomatoes Critics’ Rating: 65%; Audiences: 64%.

The Dark Side of The Movies

Posted on by

It’s week four in our six-week zoom course on neo-noir cinema, a tour through a half-dozen of the best/most interesting/groundbreaking films in this genre, and we’re leaving bloody footprints in our wake. Having to watch a movie for “homework” is the best! So, you may wonder, what distinguishes neo-noir from plain old noir?

A few things, but as in all classification schemes involving creative endeavors, the edges blur a bit. The original noir genre includes black and white films produced mostly in the 1940s and 1950s. They involved a femme fatale, some mystery or crime or double-dealing, a hard-to-impress detective trying to work it out, and a lonely, jazzy trumpet. In fact, the sound track alone could send shivers up your back. If that didn’t, the cynicism would. Often urban. The top 5, says Rotten Tomatoes? Laura, Shadow of a Doubt, The Maltese Falcon, The Third Man, and Sunset Boulevard.

Neo-noir, then, is number one, more recent. These films are in living color, they often still involve a femme fatale, crime, a jaded detective/investigator, and some thematic music that may branch out a bit. The cynicism and double-dealing are still there, of course, and the violence is heightened.

So far we’ve seen The Conversation (1974), which was both more and less than I remembered. Gene Hackman is a professional eavesdropper who doesn’t like what he hears. You may mis-identify the femme fatale, and I could have done without the toilet that explodes in a bloodbath worthy of The Shining. I think that was a hallucination. Directed by Francis Ford Coppola with a fine, understated performance by John Cazale—reason enough to see it again. Not to mention a young Harrison Ford.

Next: Body Heat (1981).No question that Kathleen Turner is the femme fatale here or that the double-dealing involves her lover (William Hurt) and husband (Richard Crenna). Sexy stuff directed by Lawrence Kasdan.

The Coen Brothers first feature film, Blood Simple (1984) was next. Frances McDormand as the put-upon wife never realizes she’s a femme fatale, despite the body count evidence. The extent to which the characters misunderstand what’s going on has definite comic moments.

Last night we did our homework and watched L.A. Confidential (1997). It has it all, FF, crime, double-dealing, rampant cynicism, and appreciably more violence than the others. Russell Crowe, Kevin Spacey, and Guy Pearce are great as cops trying to figure out what side of the law they’re on. Directed by Curtis Hanson.

Two more to go!

Weekend Movie Pick: Coup!

Posted on by

My ideal moviegoing situation is to know nothing, literally not one thing, about a movie before I see it. Too often, previews either show all best jokes (Thelma, a case in point) or set up impressions that don’t fit the actual film. Sadly, my preferred state of blissful ignorance is hard to achieve.

Thus, I was delighted to see Coup!, a dark comedy about which I knew nothing and had not detected any buzz, written and directed by Joseph Schuman and Austin Stark (trailer). The anxiety I felt in the first half-hour or so was strictly the result of the puzzling situation the characters were in, not any trailer-review-celluloid mismatch. So, in case you’re spoiler-averse like me, I should stop here, except to say, see it!

In case you do like a little info, however, I’ll say that it’s set on an island near New York City during the deadly 1919 Spanish Influenza pandemic. A wealthy family living in isolation on the island is determined that they won’t be among its victims. They’re living in perfect isolation. But hey, nothing’s perfect, is it? And, they need a new cook.

The man they hire we know is not who or what they think he is. Still, times are hard, the island is isolated (the ferries stop!) and there aren’t a lot of choices. The wealthy homeowner is a muckracking journalist and a hypocrite, sending editorial salvos toward President Wilson for not taking more drastic anti-influenza measures. He pretends to be facing the peril shoulder-to-shoulder with his brethren in the City, when really, he’s safely in his mansion, miles away. He, his lovely wife, and children are going it alone—that is, with their three servants and new cook. They’re vegetarian, its nearly winter, and when the markets close . . . well, life is hard and getting harder by the meal.

There’s a lightheartedness to their dire situation and the infectious smile of Peter Sarsgaard (the iconoclast cook) somehow makes everything better. Great acting all around The journalist is played by Billy Magnusson, and Sarah Gadon plays his wife. The maid (Skye P. Marshall) and chauffeur (Faran Tahir) gradually (and charmingly) get drawn into the cook’s schemes, and only the housekeeper (Kristine Nielsen) is onto him. Now, how to get rid of her? Hmmm.

I thought it was a lot of fun and, in light of our recent covid trials, provides some food for thought, too.

Rotten Tomatoes critics’ rating: 78%; audiences: 94%.

Weekend Movies? Fun, but not Must-Sees

Posted on by

The Widow Clicquot

We liked the movie The Widow Clicquot, because, well—France, champagne, why not? You know, the orange label (trailer). The scenery was beautiful, and the film was directed by Thomas Q. Napper. Though the predictable plot didn’t break any new ground, it lulls you into a deep sense of enjoyment. In the early 1800s, the unexpectedly widowed Barbe-Nicole Clicquot (Haley Bennett) can either give up or resolve to implement the vision of her late, adored husband (Tom Sturridge) as to how a champagne winery should operate. The odds are against her.

Rotten Tomatoes critics rating: 85%; audiences: 85%.

Thelma

It’s exhilarating to see June Squibb, as an irrepressible 93-year-old woman doing her thing, not to mention the last performance of the late Richard Roundtree (trailer). Both of them made the film worthwhile, though it was a little disappointing that director Josh Margolin didn’t stretch them beyond the predictable. In the story, grandma Thelma is bilked out of $10,000 by a scammer pretending to be her grandson (Fred Hechinger). How she resolves to get her money back and becomes a superannuated action hero to try, is the plot. I must say that, although there are comic moments, having seen most of them in multiple viewings of the film’s trailer, not much was left to discover! Parker Posey, as Thelma’s daughter, is a terrifying helicopter mom. But, if you’re feeling old and cranky, it’s a good one.

Rotten Tomatoes critics rating: 99%; audiences: 83%.

A Pair of Weekend Movie Picks

Posted on by

Sometimes you can pretty much figure out who would like a particular film, but in this case, with these two films, the audience is pretty broad, leaving out only the devotees of slasher films. Neither produces any real plot surprises, but both are more than satisfying.

Ghostlight

Ghostlight, written by Kelly O’Sullivan and directed by her and Alex Thompson (trailer), is the story of a sad, frustrated construction worker increasingly disconnected from his wife and daughter who rediscovers what’s missing in his life and how to talk about it by unexpectedly—and totally uncharacteristically—involving himself in a community theater production of Romeo and Juliet. At least at first, he can talk to his fellow amateur thespians (super cast!) more honestly than he can to his veering-off-the-rails daughter or his wife, equally adrift.

His cast of theatre colleagues is charming, and the hard-won results will make you, in the end, feel pretty good. Most amazing is that the man (Keith Kupferer), his near-delinquent daughter (Kathleen Melien Kupferer), and his wife (Tara Mallen) are played by a real-life husband, wife, and daughter. Awesome. The ghostlight is a long-standing theater tradition of keeping a bare bulb burning center stage throughout the night. In this case, the ghostlight demonstrates that, despite the darkness, there’s always a spark of light.

Rotten Tomatoes critics’ rating: 100%!!; audiences 97%.

Fly Me to the Moon

OK, I admit, at first the idea of creating a fake moon landing back in 1969 (trailer), just in case the real one flubbed, struck me as a way to feed the various conspiracy theories that Neil Armstrong and crew didn’t ever actually land on the moon. But the movie’s way better than that. Directed by Greg Berlanti, with a script from Rose Gilroy, it has plenty of nostalgic Cocoa Beach fun. Scarlett Johansson as a fearless and inveterate publicist and Channing Tatum as the buttoned-up launch director at the Kennedy Space Center are involved in a clash of goals and personalities that you know will end up just the way they ought to. Woody Harrelson is as sly as ever. My cats were impressed that it took three felines to carry out the essential kittycat role.

Rotten Tomatoes critics’ rating: 65% (lighten up, guys!); audiences 91%.

Enjoy!

Weekend Movie Pick?? Firebrand

Posted on by

It’s hard for me to dislike a movie about the Tudors. But not impossible. Firebrand, the new movie about Henry VIII’s sixth and last wife, Katherine Parr, directed by Karim Aïnouz (trailer), could have almost as accurately been called The Somnambulist. The fact that four separate women are credited with the screenwriting could be part of the problem: no one vision dominates.

Alicia Vikander walks through her role as Katherine, never making a convincing queen, almost never showing much emotion. She’s married to a mercurial and dangerous man. Powerful people, including the reactionary Bishop Gardiner (played by Simon Russell Beale) oppose her liberal religious beliefs and want to bring her down. Yet she seems strangely unmovable.

Just about the only time she gets her emotions up is when she’s pleading with her friend, Protestant reformer Anne Askew (Erin Doherty), to flee England. Anne, one of England’s earliest female poets, was tortured and burned at the stake for her religious preaching. She does have fire and wit, and what ignites her passion is her belief that common people should be able to read the Bible in English for themselves, rather than be dependent on priests to translate the Latin and tell them what scripture says and means. The contrast between her and the impassive Catherine couldn’t be greater.

So let’s talk about Jude Law, who plays Henry VIII. Corpulent and capricious, he held my gaze every time he was on screen. I could not find the familiar actor in the appearance or increasingly paranoid behavior of this character. If Vikander is not a convincing royal personage, he embodies his position absolutely. He is a king.

Some aspects of the movie are historically accurate, such as Catherine’s close relationships with Henry’s children: Mary (daughter of Catherine of Aragon, Henry’s first wife); Elizabeth (daughter of Anne Boleyn, his second), and Edward (son of Jane Seymour). It acknowledges her authorship of prayer books—the first Englishwoman to have books published under her own name. A prayer she utters in support of Henry, ended up in the Church of England’s Book of Common Prayer where it remains today.

Alas, some aspects of the story are not historically accurate, including the dramatic yet unconvincing final scene, and a number of episodes created in the hope of increasing the film’s suspense. Given that so much is at stake for the people and causes of England at this time, it’s surprising that the movie, when Henry isn’t in it, is so turgid. Much is made cinematically about Henry’s ulcerating leg wound. Gruesome, but not suspenseful. I can’t recommend this, despite Law’s wonderful performance. Coming to streaming soon; that might be a good choice.

Rotten Tomatoes critics’ rating: 54%; audiences: 69% (and that may be for the costumes).

Weekend Movie Pick: Wildcat

Posted on by

The award-winning author Flannery O’Connor is something of an acquired taste. You may be familiar with her Southern Gothic stories, her preoccupation with religion, especially Roman Catholicism (she attended mass daily), her deep understanding of human nature and its propensity to darkness and violence, and her startling candor. She said, for example, “The truth does not change according to our ability to stomach it.” Lastly, we recall her suffering with the crippling autoimmune condition systemic lupus erythematosus, which took her father’s life, and whose inevitable difficult progression she knew all too well.

O’Connor died at age 39. Now she comes blazing back to life in this bracing movie directed and co-written (with Shelby Gaines) by Ethan Hawke and starring his daughter, Maya Hawke, as O’Connor and Laura Linney as her mother, Regina (trailer), both of whom do brilliant work here. Flannery lived with her mother almost all of her life, and their relationship was obviously pivotal to the author’s view of human nature and its shortcomings.

O’Connor never gave her stories’ characters an easy way out, they never defaulted to a formulaic happy ending or an excess of sentimentality. What comes through in the stories is how strongly she rejected the shallow “niceness” of the people around her. Under her characters’ good manners and professed propriety, she saw a core of racism and religious hypocrisy. Her own mother was the epitome of Southern graciousness and, naturally, did not understand Flannery’s writing at all.

The film weaves together scenes from O’Connor’s life and relationships with dramatized excerpts from her stories. (It helps probably to be somewhat familiar with the actual stories, but works, regardless.) Interestingly, the mostly awful male characters in these recreations are played by a succession of actors, whereas Hawke and Linney play the sparring (mostly) female characters. They approach each of these fictional relationships fresh and without condescension. Relationships are complicated; you can love and despise a person at the same time.

Critic Jeffrey M. Anderson wrote, “This fine depiction of a great author avoids typical biopic trappings, instead concentrating on the rhythms of the artistic process and capturing O’Connor’s voice in a visual way.” Some critics object to the intrusion of the stories in the narrative of her life, but to me they illustrate so much, so effectively, showing us what she thought and found important.

Below left is a photo of the Little Library outside O’Connor’s childhood home on Lafayette Square in Savannah, which we visited a few years ago. She loved birds, especially peacocks, and raised many of them. The movie scenes take place at the Iowa Writers’ Workshop, in New York with her publisher, and mostly around Milledgeville, Georgia, where the family relocated when she was a teenager. We visited the house (below right) and museum in Milledgeville last year.

Rotten Tomatoes critics’ rating: 56%; audiences 74%.

bookshare, Flannery O'Connor, peacock
Bookshare box outside Flannery O’Connor’s girlhood home with an adored peacock (photo: Vicki Weisfeld)

Hollywood’s Role in Cybersecurity

Posted on by

Television and movies may have a role in juicing Americans’ current tepid interest regarding cybersecurity. “When it comes to cybersecurity, getting the public to listen isn’t just a public service, it’s a necessity,” says the online security newsletter The Cipher Brief. A recent summit of its Cyber Initiatives Group included a top US cybersecurity expert and a Hollywood producer with a CIA background to explore this topic.

Why the urgency? Last month, big chunks of the nation’s health care system were booted offline in a pair of ransomware attacks, disrupting health care for millions. In the past few years, there’s been a steady stream of attacks on municipalities, hospitals, and pieces of our basic infrastructure, which Wired magazine calls a “ransomware epidemic.” We’ve read about dangers hackers pose to the electric grid, energy pipelines, water supplies, and many other essentials of daily life. These attacks may seem abstract—that is, until they affect us personally and then, possibly, catastrophically.

As the online organization cyberforpeople believes, “Basic security literacy is absent for the majority of digital citizens,” which is why its mission is to raise cyber literacy—making security issues “much more approachable and understandable by everyone.

The idea of a cybersecurity-Hollywood connection is not new; the site’s list of the eight best cybersecurity movies dates back to 1983’s War Games. Another cybersecurity site, SecureBlitz, has not only a more Hollywood-friendly name, but a list of 25 “best movies,” hardly any of which I’ve seen and I’m interested in this stuff!

If you saw the 2023 Netflix movie, Leave the World Behind, said CypherBrief panelist Col. Candice Frost (Ret.), you saw yet another dimension of cybersecurity. It’s an apocalyptic vision that goes beyond the risks of hacking to explore the impact of actual electronic warfare, driven by capabilities she says are already available.

While it may be desirable to take this issue on as a creative challenge, Hollywood corporations already are active in the cybersecurity arena, when it comes to protecting their own intellectual property and digital assets. They learned from SONY Picture’s bitter experience in a notorious 2014 hacking incident most probably engineered by North Korea.

Also on the CyberBrief program was former CIA analyst and director of Global Intelligence and Risk Analysis for The Walt Disney Company, Rodney Faraon. He believes entertainment media can be a strong driver of the national dialogue. If we want to create a culture that prioritizes information security, “then we have to actually be part of the popular culture.”

The goal here should be two-fold: supporting more authentic scripts focused on cybersecurity, and increasing attention to the information security risks that are part of everyday life, which can be woven into the background of other stories. Such a contextual approach gradually builds wider understanding of this complex and fast-changing issue.