“Oh Mercy!” – Movie Review

The first week at the 57th New York Film Festival, I attended the North American premiere of the new French crime drama by Arnaud Desplechin, “Oh Mercy!” (AKA “Roubaix, une lumière”).  

Synopsis

Can a police chief solve the case of an elderly woman who was murdered?

Story

Northern France is the home to Roubaix, a hardscrabble city where nothing good ever happens.  This makes it the perfect place for Captain Yacoub Daoud (Roschdy Zem) to police – especially considering he grew up there.  A French-Algerian, he understands Roubaix perfectly. In one neighborhood, Lucette (Marie Frandsen), an 83 year old woman has just died – but in this case, it doesn’t appear to have come from natural causes.  Based on the forensic evidence, it suggests she was murdered. Ligature marks around the woman’s neck seem to indicate she was strangled. Why and by whom? 

During the investigation, Lucette’s neighbors become “persons of interest”; Claude (Léa Seydoux) and Marie (Sara Forestier) are roommates.  These two young women live in an apartment a couple of doors down. When other leads turn up empty, the police start to concentrate on Claude and Marie.  Both women are brought into police headquarters for questioning where they are interrogated separately. Each woman seems to want to implicate the other; while both women obviously want to avoid prison, Claude has a major stake in the outcome of this case – she has a six year old son currently living in a foster home and is worried she may never see him again.

After spending the night incarcerated, the two women are questioned together in order to reconcile their stories.  It eventually comes out that Marie is in love with Claude, who cannot reciprocate Marie’s affection. Whatever degree of participation either one had in this crime, Marie does not want to be separated from Claude, no matter what.  In order to iron out matters, Daoud and his colleagues take Claude and Marie back to the scene of the crime in order to show the police what each did and how it was done. But when the two quibble over details in the story and it becomes unclear what the truth is, can the police hold them accountable?  

Review

Two years ago, Desplechin’s “Ismael’s Ghosts” played at the New York Film Festival; it was a sometimes entertaining hit-or-miss movie but a story in which the director seemed to be quite comfortable.  An unusual turn for Desplechin, “Oh Mercy!” is well-told in terms of displaying police procedures and humanizing the police captain in charge of the investigation.  However, given that it is based on a true story, it might be the case that the director tried too hard to stick to the facts and sacrificed some of the drama that could have made the film a more engaging experience for viewers.  

What might have enhanced “Oh Mercy!” a bit more could have been learning about the two suspects.  Instead, we see this story through the eyes of Capt. Douad and we learn whatever he learns when it happens; maybe this is to keep it a mystery to the audience as well as the police.  Also, perhaps to illustrate Douad’s versatility, we see him investigating other crimes in the area; there’s a considerable amount of screen time spent on this when the time could have been better spent with background information about the two suspects.  The other things Douad is concurrently working on seem a distraction.     

Following the screening, there was an interview with director Arnaud Desplechin.  Desplechin said the reason why he decided to make “Oh, Mercy!” is because his last few movies have been extreme fiction and he wanted to change by doing something that was based on true events.  He originally got the idea by watching a documentary about this murder case, which occurred in his hometown over a dozen years ago. In making this film, he went back to watch Hitchcock’s “The Wrong Man” and relied heavily on it for making “Oh, Mercy!”.  Roubaix, a rough neighborhood in northern France, is where his parents still live; he used visiting his parents as a ruse in order to research this picture.

“Liberté” – Movie Review

On the opening weekend of the 57th New York Film Festival, I attended the U.S. premiere of the new historical drama, “Liberté”, written and directed by Albert Serra.

Synopsis

During the 18th century, libertine members of the French upper crust gather in a forest clearing overnight to have an orgy.  

Review

Normally, there is a detailed story description following the synopsis in these movie reviews.  There is no such story description here because there’s literally nothing to describe; the synopsis pretty much says it all.  Above and beyond that, there’s no plot, no structure, no story. Combine that with the fact that the sex in these scenes is more weird than erotic and you wind up with a pretty boring movie.  “Liberte” serves as an excellent reminder that if you’re going to throw an orgy, make sure you hire a good caterer – because after the unusual sex, there’s nothing much that’s of interest here. 

The fact that it’s outdoors at night obviously poses a problem; everything is so dark that it’s sometimes difficult to discern exactly what is going on.  Come to think of it, at times, that might actually be a blessing. Some shots are better left unseen. When you have a movie as wild and unconventional as this one certainly is, you can be forgiven for assuming some of the action is crazier than what is actually happening in any given scene.  It’s one thing to be unorthodox and unconventional, but by the time the film has concluded, you had better make sure that the audience will feel that it was worth putting up with.        

Following the screening, there was an interview with director Albert Serra.  Talking about the shoot itself, Serra said that the schedule was difficult for many people.  Since the movie takes place overnight, they had to film from 9:00PM until 5:00AM. He tried to make an avant-garde movie that felt something like a psychedelic trip.  The film was shot using three cameras and all of the actors were present for every day of the shoot but not all of them were necessarily used. This wound up creating a great deal of tension on the set.  Serra added that this motion picture was about a group of lost people who alternate between being exhibitionists and voyeurs. 

“Portrait Of A Lady On Fire”– Movie Review

On the opening weekend of the 57th New York Film Festival, I attended the New York premiere of the drama “Portrait Of A Lady On Fire”, directed by Céline Sciamma and starring Adèle Haenel and Noemie Merlant.  

Synopsis

When an artist is hired to paint a portrait of a woman who’s about to be married, what will happen when the two women wind up falling in love with each other?

Story

In late 18th century France, Marianne (Merlant), an artist, is hired to paint a portrait.  Héloïse (Haenel) is about to be married to a man in Milan – a man whom she’s never met nor is in love with.  Employed by the mother of Héloïse, Marianne must travel by boat to their mansion at a remote location in Brittany where she learns there’s a catch and it’s a big one:  Héloïse must never know her portrait is being painted. Instead, the story Héloïse is told by her mother is that Marianne is being enlisted to act as her companion – someone to accompany her during long walks on the beach.  

With this highly restrictive condition in mind, Marianne must surreptitiously set up an easel in her room and be careful to hide it should Héloïse visit.  While they embark on their daily constitutionals, Marianne is careful to take note of various details about Héloïse – her hair, her hand placement while sitting and most notably, the sadness that is unavoidably visible in her eyes.  When Marianne can sneak in a quick sketch, she does so – otherwise, she just has to memorize how Héloïse looks in a given instance. This causes some unintentionally awkward moments when Héloïse catches Marianne eyeballing her.  

When Marianne confesses the truth to Héloïse and finally shows her the finished portrait, Héloïse is displeased by her dour countenance.  As a result, Marianne destroys the painting. Héloïse’s mother must leave for a few days, so she orders Marianne to re-paint the portrait; it must be finished by her return and if she likes it, Marianne will be paid.  But in the days while the two women are alone, a mutual attraction develops and they engage in a sexual relationship.  Given that these women are in love, will Héloïse refuse to marry and instead take up with Marianne or will Héloïse abandon her and proceed with the nuptials?                 

Review

In “Portrait Of A Lady On Fire” (an excellent title only fully appreciated once you experience the movie), director Céline Sciamma brilliantly displays her skills as a visual storyteller.  Among the best examples comes early in the film when Héloïse’s face is treated as a big reveal for both the audience and for Marianne.  Other small things like placement of a mirror in a particular shot or the progress of the portrait which helps to illustrate the passage of time.  While her screenplay was deservedly winner of the Best Screenplay award at this year’s Cannes Film Festival, Sciamma’s directing choices should not be overlooked.

The ending of “Portrait Of A Lady On Fire” is nothing short of stirring; by the time the closing credits start, you feel utterly destroyed.  This is a tragic love story – there is a death, but of a romance, not of a person.  It is also about sacrifice over selfishness, to the detriment of one’s soul.  This is a film that will stay with you for days and days wondering what would have happened to these women if their story took place in the 21st century.  Ultimately, that is the real story: the social pressure that inhibits the so-called “forbidden” romance.      

Following the screening, there was an interview with director Céline Sciamma and the film’s stars, Adèle Haenel and Noemie Merlant.  Sciamma said that the last shot of the movie – which was particularly impactful – was actually done during the middle of their shoot.  Her intent was to show a tragic love story but with a feeling of joy at the end. Haenel mentioned that during filming, she experimented with delivering her lines using different inflections to see which worked best.  Merlant noted that the various subtle gestures and glances of her character were not of her own invention; instead, they were explicitly written in the shooting script.  

“Motherless Brooklyn”– Movie Review

On the closing night of the 57th New York Film Festival, I attended the New York Premiere of the new crime drama by Edward Norton, “Motherless Brooklyn”. 

Synopsis

When a private investigator turns up dead, one of his associates investigates the murder – but when he finds out what’s behind it all, his life changes forever.

Story

Lionel (Norton) is haunted by the death of his friend, mentor and employer Frank (Bruce Willis).  Particularly troubling to Lionel is the fact that Frank expected him to be his backup, but Lionel was unsuccessful in saving Frank from being murdered.  Having worked for him as a private investigator, Lionel has learned enough skills from Frank to go out on his own and make an attempt at solving the murder.  Exactly who killed Frank and why?  Despite suffering from a severe case of Tourette Syndrome, Lionel is determined that he would not rest until he got the answers.

Following various leads takes Lionel to a curious path:  New York City real estate.  He meets Laura (Gugu Mbatha-Raw), a beautiful young woman who works as an assistant to an activist fighting the real estate changes forcing low-income people in many neighborhoods to move.  These changes are being brought about by the city’s powerful Borough Authority chief Moses Randolph (Alec Baldwin); Randolph is developing not only the infrastructure around the city but also performing massive renovations on affordable buildings in low-income areas, rendering them available only to wealthier New Yorkers. 

The deeper that Lionel insists on digging into Randolph’s organization, the more corruption he uncovers.  Many city politicians are on the take and Randolph is even manipulating his own down-on-his-luck brother Paul (Willem Dafoe) into working with him.  Upon learning that Laura is endangered because of her connection to the community activists, Lionel must try to protect her.  When Lionel discovers that Randolph had a hand in Frank’s death, will he be able to bring such a powerful man to justice or will he need to cultivate his own set of furtive connections that will topple over Randolph’s empire?         

Review

The story goes that Edward Norton spent about a decade of his life trying to get “Motherless Brooklyn” made.  While we can all be glad that he finally got it out of his system, let’s hope he will now move on to bigger and better projects.  Despite an incredible cast, Norton’s movie (adapted from the novel by Jonathan Lethem) is a little too reminiscent of “Chinatown” – and the comparison is inevitable.  The differences, of course, are that this is set in the 1950’s in Brooklyn while “Chinatown” is 1930’s Los Angeles.  Another difference is that “Chinatown” is a far superior film. 

One hardly knows where to begin when it comes to scrutinizing “Motherless Brooklyn”.  It’s too long, too complicated and Norton’s performance as a private investigator suffering from Tourette Syndrome is downright distracting – and detracts from the movie itself.  Let’s start with the length:  at two and a half hours, it only adds to the feeling that this is some kind of self-indulgent vanity project for the filmmaker.  He simply did not know where or how to edit this down to a more reasonable length.  Part of why it may be so long conveniently segues to the other problem:  the story is so byzantine that you might have a substantial challenge finding your way through.  Lastly, Norton may have thought that playing someone with such an obvious affliction would fast-track him to an acting award.  Bad reason to take on a role. 

What, if anything, did “Motherless Brooklyn” get right?  For one thing, Baldwin’s character of Moses Randolph does a fairly accurate job of portraying the real-life person on whom it is based – none other than the late Robert Moses, the so-called “master builder” of New York City; many of his designs for city planning were based on biased socio-economic and racist rationale.  Also, the production design should be rightly credited; they were able to get the look of 1950’s New York City fairly well.  Prior to the screening, Norton and much of the cast introduced the film; in doing so, he properly acknowledged the death of FDNY Firefighter Michael Davidson, who perished while battling a blaze in a Harlem building used as a setting in the movie.    

“The Whistlers”– Movie Review

This past weekend at the 57th New York Film Festival, I attended the New York Premiere of “The Whistlers”, a new Romanian crime drama.

Synopsis

When a dirty cop tries to get a corrupt businessman out of prison, will he be able to learn an unusual communication method in order to do so?

Story

When Cristi (Vlad Ivanov) arrives in The Canary Islands, he has no idea what he’s in for on his current mission:  he must get Zsolt out of prison back in his home of Romania. Zsolt ostensibly runs a mattress factory, but in reality, his business is used to launder drug money from Venezuela.  One of the mattresses has 30 million euros buried in it and many people are desperate to get their hands on that mattress – or more specifically, the money on the inside. Paco is one such person; he’s a mobster from Mexico to whom the money was initially intended to be funneled.  He’s now concerned that Zsolt is holding out on him – trying to keep the money for himself. Additionally, other people may get their hands on this valuable mattress before Paco himself does.

Gilda greets Cristi upon his arrival.  These two have quite a past with each other.  All of that is over now – at least for the time being.  She informs him that in order to successfully carry out this mission, he must learn a secret way of communication that is specific to a tribe there on The Canary Islands:  whistling. Cristi needs to get up to speed on this whistling language as soon as possible. The reason why is simple: they need a “coded” language in which to communicate with each other so that no one – especially the police – will understand what they’re up to.  But with a woman like Gilda, there’s always more than meets the eye.  

While there may be an overall plan to get Paco his money, Gilda has her own plan.  She’s going to run off with the mattress herself and live off its contents. Cristi is included as part of her scheme. This is a particularly dangerous plan when you’re dealing with someone like Paco; if you take his money, he’s going to kill you.  Furthermore, the police are aware of this situation and want to prevent both Zsolt and Paco from getting their hands on the money – they have assigned Cristi to this case, not knowing that he’s also working with Gilda and others. Can Gilda and Cristi escape with the mattress or will Paco’s team get to them first?               

Review

“The Whistlers” is difficult to follow for a number of reasons.  One has to do with the fact that it has a very complicated structure; the usage of flashbacks can be a bit confusing as well because it’s easy to mix up the time frame when a particular action took place.  The plot is rather difficult to distinguish; you would practically need a whiteboard with diagrams in order to explain it and even then it might be confusing. Also, there are many characters introduced throughout and it can be quite the challenge to keep track of them; in addition, a number of them wind up being double/triple/quadruple-crossed.  

For some, this may be part of the charm of the movie.  If you want the story told in a way that is easier to comprehend and not terribly convoluted, then “The Whistlers” may not be for you.  Too bad. So many other aspects of the film are quite promising. First off, the premise is compelling; set in the Canary Islands, the story of The Whistlers is largely unknown to most people.  Second, there’s a very unusual but nevertheless satisfying ending that takes place in Singapore’s Gardens By The Bay. In between, however, there are too many other actions that have to be processed by the viewer so as to render the film almost passive aggressive.        

Following the screening, there was an interview with director Corneliu Porumboiu.  Porumboiu originally got the idea for “The Whistlers” about a decade ago; on a vacation in France after finishing an earlier film, he saw a documentary on television about The Whistlers on the Canary Islands.  The story stuck with him for quite a while as he tried to figure out how to make a movie about this. In preparation, he watched many classic noir films to get pointers on how to tell this story; he specifically cited “The Big Sleep” and “Double Indemnity” among many others.  The cast had to learn this whistling technique; to this end, they got a teacher from the islands to visit them in Bucharest for two weeks – after that, the remaining lessons were conducted via Skype.

“Parasite”– Movie Review

This past weekend at the 57th New York Film Festival, I attended the New York Premiere of “Parasite”, directed by Bong Joon Ho. 

Synopsis

When a poor family becomes employed by a wealthy family, what impact will this have on both families?   

Story

In Korea, The Kim family is very poor and The Park family is quite wealthy.  They don’t yet know each other, but soon, their lives will intersect in a way none of them could possibly predict. Currently, The Kim family collectively work folding boxes for a large pizza chain; they do not make much money, especially when many of their boxes are rejected for being sub-standard.  The son Ki-woo is rather bright; a good student, he wasn’t able to go to college because it was beyond what the family could afford. His friend Min is luckier; he’s in college and works as a tutor for Da-hye, The Parks’ daughter. Unfortunately, he has to study abroad and can no longer tutor her, so he recommends Ki-woo for the job.

The Parks also have a young son, Da-song, who likes to draw and paint pictures.  Mrs. Park wants to hire an art teacher for him as she believes him to be a prodigy; Ki-woo recommends his sister Ki-jung, but doesn’t tell Mrs. Park they’re related.  Mrs. Park hires Ki-jung and is quite pleased with the results. When Mr. Park has to fire his chauffeur, he seeks desperately for a replacement. Ki-jung is more than happy to recommend someone – but unknown to Mr. Park, she is recommending her father, Ki-taek.  Overall, Mr. Park is quite pleased with Ki-taek so he hires him full-time as the new family driver. Eventually, Ki-taek is able to convince Mrs. Park that their long-time housekeeper is suffering from a contagious disease and the entire family is in serious danger.  Mrs. Park unceremoniously fires her housekeeper as a result; when the family now looks to hire a new housekeeper, Ki-taek refers Mr. Park to Chung-sook … who just so happens to be Ki-taek’s wife (but Mr. Park doesn’t need to know that). Chung-sook, of course, is hired, too.

By now, the entire Kim family is working for the entire Park family in one form or another.  Life is good for both families. The Kims feel that what The Parks don’t know won’t hurt them.  On the day of their little boy’s birthday, The Parks decide to take a family camping trip; with the entire Park family away for the day and not returning until sometime tomorrow, The Kims take this opportunity to have the run of their house.  They enjoy all of the amenities, including drinking The Parks liquor and eating their food.  In the midst of their bacchanalia, The Kims are interrupted by a guest: the housekeeper who was fired in favor of Mrs. Kim – she claims that in the chaos of her dismissal, there was something she forgot and must retrieve immediately. Against her better judgment, Mrs. Kim lets her in – but it is only then that she learns of the insidious secret the housekeeper has been keeping from The Parks.  However, the housekeeper also learns of The Kims’ secret and threatens to reveal to The Parks that they have been hoodwinked by this family. Since The Kims hope to keep their jobs, can they find a way to keep the housekeeper from ratting them out to The Parks?

Review

Earlier this year, “Parasite” won the Cannes Film Festival’s coveted Palme d’Or award.  It’s easy to understand why it won after seeing the film because it’s so unusual, most people probably have never seen anything quite like it before.  But there’s a major caveat: the movie may not be for everyone. The reason why is because “Parasite” starts off appearing to be a lighthearted comedy but it makes an abrupt tonal change; in the third act, it becomes not merely serious, but also sinister, violent and ultimately extremely troubling.  This unexpected turn is something that may not be appreciated by some viewers as the sudden shift can be quite unsettling.

For all of its laughs, “Parasite” confronts a very serious subject:  it’s the economy, stupid. The risk it takes is assuming a firm political stance, one that some might regard as socialist.  Conspicuous consumption, the movie seems to state, is unacceptable while others are suffering. If that’s the case, then it would appear that Bong Joon Ho and Bernie Sanders would get along just fine, thank you:  they share the same mindset that capitalism is only working for the very wealthy. The rich family comes off as being blithely unaware of the situation the poor family is in and as a result, lack compassion for them.  On the other hand, the poor family can’t quite wrap their head around the indifference the wealthy family has for them, and as a result resents them.               

Following the screening, there was an interview with director Bong Joon Ho and some of the cast (one of whom brought out a basketful of peaches – you’ll have to see the movie to understand that joke).  The director said that he considers “Parasite” to be something of a sequel to one of his previous films, “Host”; he came up with the idea for this during post-production of “Snowpiercer”. Director Bong said that we don’t pay attention to the rich and poor neighbors we see around us all of the time, so that is what he wanted to be the focus of the movie.  He wanted the film to reflect on the increasing gap between the rich and the poor, which is not just happening in Korea, but all around the world.   

“Marriage Story”– Movie Review

This past week at the Centerpiece Screening of The 57th New York Film Festival, I attended the New York premiere of the new comedy-drama by Noah Baumbach, “Marriage Story”, starring Scarlett Johansson and Adam Driver. 

Synopsis

When a married couple decides to divorce, how will they handle custody of their young son when the two live on different coasts?

Story

Nicole and Charlie  (Johansson and Driver) have long seemed to be madly in love with each other.  She was a Hollywood actress whose career was on the rise when she met Charlie, a New York City based playwright-director; when they got married, she agreed to move to New York City, where they eventually had a son, Henry (Azhy Robertson).  Together, they worked on plays at his theater company while they balanced their mutual career and family life.  For a time, all seemed well.  Until it suddenly wasn’t.  Now they are mutually resolved to end their union. 

The problem, of course, is exactly how to do this.  One matter complicating things, of course is custody of Henry.  But there’s more to this.  Nicole wants to resume her acting career, which means returning to Los Angeles.  This would be a particular hardship for Charlie, since he’s pretty dug-in in New York City.  Between his own theater company and upcoming projects, it’s unclear how they would manage joint custody of Henry when the two parents are 3,000 miles apart.  Although they initially agreed upon doing this without legal representation, Nicole winds up hiring a lawyer (Laura Dern), a successful divorce attorney who knows how to get the best deal for her client.

To his credit, Charlie is reluctant to hire his own representation, but when he sees how tough Nicole’s attorney is, he winds up hiring his own lawyer (Alan Alda), who is less expensive than a superstar like Nicole’s lawyer – and also less aggressive, too.  The wear and tear of constantly travelling coast-to-coast is finally taking its toll on Charlie.  When he experiences his lawyer as ineffective, he finally relents and hires a real pit bull (Ray Liotta), who’s plenty expensive, but should be worth every penny.  Although both parents have Henry’s best interests at heart, only one parent can prevail – but which one will it be?

Review

Over the years that this blog has been doing reviews, it has been an unmitigated pleasure to watch Noah Baumbach develop as a filmmaker (examples here).  It can now be stated without equivocation that with “Marriage Story”, Baumbach has finally come into his own.    Not only is this his best work, but quite possibly, he has accomplished the impossible:  he has made the perfect motion picture.  This is one of those rare movies that fires on all cylinders all at once and successfully accomplishes the delicate balance between comedy and tragedy. 

Baumbach has written his screenplay with great care, showing that he is a keen observer not only of human behavior but also has an ear for how people speak; the dialog never has a false note.  Additionally, the shot choices he makes never have a forced quality to them; they all seem natural and organic yet clever in his way of visually telling his story.  Not to be overlooked or understated are the performances by the entire cast; if it was possible to give an ensemble award to actors, then certainly “Marriage Story” would be worth of consideration.       

The movie is not unlike life itself in that it alternates between comedy and tragedy and sometimes is both at the same time.  It is a heartbreakingly beautiful story tenderly told about how imperfect and cruel and silly people can be and yet we plug away anyway trying to be the best person we can be, despite our various shortcomings.  This is a film that will stick with you for a while because it impeccably captures the human condition.  “Marriage Story” opens in theaters in early November, then will be released on Netflix about a month later.     

“Joker”– Movie Review

This week at the 57th New York Film Festival, I attended the New York Premiere of “Joker”, directed by Todd Phillips and starring Joaquin Phoenix.

Synopsis

When an unbalanced man faces multiple misfortunes over a short period of time, what impact will he have on society when his violent impulses emerge?

 

Story

In the 1980’s, Gotham City is a wreck:  the streets reek because they’re filled with garbage, the economy is bad, people are having trouble either finding work or keeping the job they do have and crime is increasingly rampant.  For these reasons and more, it seems the perfect place for someone like Arthur Fleck (Phoenix) to make his home. Arthur, who lives with his mother, is an aspiring stand-up comedian; while he pursues his dream in comedy clubs at night, his subsistence job is to work as a party clown for different events:  birthday parties, children’s wards at hospitals, etc. 

But that’s only what Arthur deals with on the surface.  Below that is a deeply troubled man with a tendency toward violence; a brain injury causes him to burst into laughter at inappropriate moments.  When Arthur is given a handgun after he’s mugged, he takes out his frustration on some bullies on the subway, killing them. Arthur winds up suffering one challenge after another:  first, he loses his job. Then, when budget cuts in Gotham City cause him to lose his social programs like therapy and access to psychotropic and neuropsychiatric medication, his mental and emotional problems worsen.  Finally, his mother is hospitalized with a stroke.

Perhaps the only respite Arthur has at this point is watching television; he’s particularly fond of a late night talk show hosted by Murray Franklin (Robert De Niro).  When Franklin is sent a video of Arthur bombing during his stand-up routine at a comedy club, he plays it on his show in order to ridicule Arthur. Since his audience’s reaction to it is favorable, Franklin books Arthur on the show to do his material.  But by now, Arthur is in such a serious state of mental decline that he has become very dark and violent. He insists on making his appearance on the show with bizarre clown make-up on his face and wearing an odd getup. Although Franklin’s staff has reservations about letting Arthur on the air, Franklin advocates for him – but exactly what will be the upshot of this dangerous decision?           

 

Review

“Joker” is definitely not for the faint of heart – nor is it for the kids.  This is strictly for adult fans of the Batman comic books and/or movies. If you have children (or know someone who does), seeing this film will likely just serve to confuse them or give them nightmares.  Even at that, some adults might find it rather disturbing as well. That being said, “Joker” did win The Golden Lion Award for Best Film at this year’s Venice Film festival. Its star, Joaquin Phoenix, was nominated for Best Actor at that festival but did not win.  His performance in this motion picture is extraordinary – and equally as disturbing as the picture itself.

Taking a bigger picture view of “Joker”, it really seems to be about the dissolution of normal society when all normal safeguards fall by the wayside.  This is particularly seen when Gotham has budget cuts and Arthur’s therapist and medicine are denied him for an extended period of time. His mental health further degrades when major setbacks in his life occur and he becomes ill-equipped to handle them.  Ultimately, it is an indictment of society as a whole when its most vulnerable members are allowed to slip through the cracks. The people are not at fault, the causes are what are to blame instead. 

Following the screening, there was an interview with director Todd Phillips, star Joaquin Phoenix, Producer Emma Tillinger Koskoff, Production Designer Mark Friedberg and Cinematographer Lawrence Sher.  Phillips acknowledges that this is a complicated movie, but he didn’t expect the level of discourse “Joker” has received even before its official release. He found that people are commenting on it without ever having seen the film (or in some cases, committing to not even see it at all when released).  The director considers the story a character study of a villain with whom we are all familiar and is associated with mayhem and chaos. What we know about The Joker is that in the original story, he got his white face by being dunked in acid; Phillips decided that this approach would not work for his motion picture because it wasn’t terribly realistic – as a result, he decided to make The Joker a clown instead. 

“Synonyms”– Movie Review

During the opening weekend of the 57th New York Film Festival, I attended the U.S. premiere of the new French/Israeli drama, “Synonyms”. 

Synopsis

When a young man leaves his home in Israel to live in France, will he be able to successfully assimilate?

Story

Yoav (Tom Mercier) has done his duty as an Israeli citizen.  Having finished his military service, he flees his home country for France.  He is not doing this because he needs a vacation, nor is he necessarily doing it because it’s been his life’s dream.  He’s doing it in order to renounce his Israeli heritage. Completely fed up with Israel, he vows never again to speak Hebrew; from now on, he will only speak French.  So, with a French-Hebrew dictionary in hand to help him with his translations, he secures a temporary apartment in Paris where he will stay until he can find something more permanent.  This is where his problems begin.

Awaking the next morning in his empty apartment, Yoav wriggles out of his sleeping bag, leaving it – along with his backpack, clothes and wallet – in the living-room while he takes a shower.  A few minutes later, he returns to find that all of his personal items have disappeared and the front door is opened. Unclothed, he first runs down the stairs to try to find the thief; unsuccessful, he then knocks on door after door of his neighbors’ apartments plaintively seeking help.  Failing to get assistance, he returns to his apartment and slumps in the bathtub, fainting.  

Shortly thereafter, his neighbors, Emile and Caroline (Quentin Dolmaire and Louise Chevillotte) happen into Yoav’s apartment.  Finding him unconscious in the bathtub, they take him back to their place and let him rest in their bed; when he eventually awakens, Emile gives him money and some clothes in order to help get Yoav settled.  Over time, Yoav develops a friendship with this couple and they become very close. Understanding Yoav’s desire to become a Frenchman, Emile recommends something of an unorthodox solution: Yoav can acquire his much sought-after citizenship by marrying Emile’s girlfriend, Caroline.  Will Yoav take him up on this offer? And even if he does, what will this do to their friendship?   

Review

The frenetic nature of “Synonyms” may accurately portray the personality of its protagonist Yoav, but it can prove somewhat tiresome for the viewer.  Not to mention obnoxious. While Mercier gives an impressive performance insofar as his physicality is concerned (he certainly doesn’t mind being naked in front of the camera), he comes across as too unusual a character to garner much in the way of sympathy or compassion when life seems to smack him down at every opportunity.  It’s not that you don’t root for Yoav or hope for him to fail, it’s that you wind up completely giving up on Yoav and don’t root for him at all.      

There were technical problems with “Synonyms” as well – or at least in the copy shown at this screening.  This had to do with the English subtitles. First of all, the subtitles are in white, which can be frustrating for the viewer; when the subtitles appear over a light background, they can be hard (if not impossible) to read.  A better choice would have been to either display the subtitles in yellow or to place a dark outline around each letter in the subtitle to facilitate reading. The other problem was that they periodically appeared to be out of synch.   For example, a character would say a line, the subtitle would appear, then he would say his next line and the same subtitle would display again. 

Following the screening, there was an interview with director Nadav Lapid.  Lapid admitted that “Synonyms” is semi-autobiographical; a citizen of Israel, he spent two and a half years living in Paris as a younger man, which is where he acquired his appreciation for filmmaking.  After initially completing his obligatory military service, Lapid remained in Tel Aviv, where he began to write novels. Over time, he felt incapacitated by Israel and eventually fled to France only to find himself surrounded by some very bad people.  Discovering filmmaking, he decided that this was the most essential way to express himself.  

“Pain And Glory”– Movie Review

On the opening weekend at the 57th New York Film Festival, I attended the New York premiere of the latest drama by Spanish director Pedro Almodóvar, “Pain And Glory”, starring Antonio Banderas.

Synopsis

When an aging film director is in physical and mental decline, he reflects on his life and prepares for whatever future remains.

 

Story

It has been a while since director Salvador Mallo (Banderas) has made a film.  With age and declining health, his spark of creativity appears to have been extinguished.  Although he has done some writing, it’s nothing that he feels comfortable with expanding into a long-form screenplay.  Falling into despair, he recalls his modest upbringing and his close relationship with his mother (Penélope Cruz); despite being poor, he was happy as a child with a simple life where he excelled in his studies as well as being a singer in the church choir.  Tutoring an illiterate young man, he considers a career as a teacher.

Mallo gets some good news – or at least something which most directors would consider good news:  One of his best films from decades ago has been restored and new screenings are scheduled; he and the star, Alberto Crespo (Asier Etxeandia), have been scheduled to attend one of the screenings in order to do a question and answer session with the audience.  This proves problematic for Mallo since he and Crespo had a falling out after the movie’s release regarding Mallo’s dislike of Crespo’s performance in the motion picture. In order to appear at the screening, the two men must negotiate a truce.  

When Mallo develops a chronic cough, he is particularly concerned since his coughs sound as though he is choking, even though he’s not trying to swallow any food.  This has been an ongoing problem which he has been diligently ignoring, hoping it would disappear on its own. Eventually, his long-time agent and friend takes him to see a doctor, who recommends further tests; at this point, the agent is now worried that the diagnosis might be some form of throat cancer.  Once Mallo gets the results of his tests, how will this impact his remaining time on earth? 

Review

There are a number of filmmakers who, at some point in their career, attempt to make a movie that is either autobiographical or semi-autobiographical (last year’s “Roma” would be a good example).  Apparently, Pedro Almodóvar feels as though his own time has come for this. While an interesting and entertaining film, it does at times come across as a little self-indulgent. The so-called “tortured artist” thing has been done so many times and when it is clearly a mirror image of its creator, then even more self-indulgent.  No doubt, Almodóvar’s name should be included among the best of contemporary directors, just don’t ask people to feel too sorry for you.

At this year’s Cannes Film Festival, Banderas won the Best Actor award for his portrayal of Mallo.  After seeing this movie, it is clear why. He does a brilliant job of playing this aging character with various physical and psychological maladies, which drives him to self-medication.   Another reason why Banderas’ acting is award-worthy is due to the fact that he is playing a gay man who has a scene where he has to passionately kiss a former lover of his. Since it’s fairly well-known that Banderas is straight, you would have to be an incredible actor to successfully play this in a realistic fashion. 

Following the screening, there was an interview with director Pedro Almodóvar and star Antonio Banderas.  Almodóvar confessed that while the movie is based on his own life experience, it is intermingled with some fiction.  Banderas said that he found the rehearsal period with the director to be extremely helpful; he mentioned that a few years back, he had a heart attack and that informed his performance for the scenes with the character’s own health issues.  Prior to the screening, Almodóvar introduced the film as well as his actor; by way of introducing Banderas, he said, “If I am Scorsese, [Banderas] is my De Niro”.