"Martin Eden" -- Movie Review

This week at the Lincoln Center Virtual Cinema, I streamed the Italian film “Martin Eden”, which appeared at The 57^th New York Film Festival.

Synopsis

When an uneducated man aspires to become a writer, will making his dream come true lead to happiness?

Story

As a ruggedly handsome man, Martin Eden (Luca Marinelli) has absolutely no problem attracting women.  But as a travelling sailor in Italy, he has trouble keeping them.  So, he is forever single, never burdened with a serious relationship.  That changes one day when his shipmate Arturo is bullied by one of the other crew members; Eden springs into action and comes to his aid, subduing the bully and saving his friend.  Unbeknownst to Eden, this will wind up having some long-term benefits when Arturo introduces him to his wealthy family, who effusively thanks him for saving Arturo from a beating.

An added bonus to meeting Arturo’s family is an introduction to his sister Elena (Jessica Cressy) – a beautiful, erudite young woman who is instantly drawn to Eden.  This turns out to be something of a watershed moment for Eden because he’s smitten; the two begin to spend a great deal of time together and it is not long before Eden proclaims his love for Elena.  But the class difference proves to be too much of an obstacle to overcome; even Eden himself admits that she is brilliant.  Elena encourages Eden to seek further education, but his rudimentary scholastic capabilities prove to be a considerable shortcoming. 

Eden confesses to Elena that he wishes to become a writer.  When he attains questionable fame for being mistaken as a socialist, she rejects him for being shamed by her family.  Eventually, Eden gets recognized for his writing ability and obtains celebrity by having many books published.  Over time, he becomes even more entrenched into his beliefs about how all workers are essentially enslaved by the free market economy and his political philosophies are his greater identity than as a writer.  When Elena suddenly returns and admits she made a mistake by shunning him, will Eden resume his relationship with his one true love?

Review

This movie version of Jack London’s novel is utterly unfocused, inarticulate and overwrought; as a result, it misses an opportunity to make a significant impact on an audience.  Speaking of overwrought, the performance by Luca Marinelli as the eponymous protagonist goes the full spectrum from nuanced to scenery-chewing so much so that it is absolutely alarming.  “Martin Eden” had a chance to be something groundbreakingly special, but blew it so badly that it’s almost embarrassing.  At least director Pietro Marcello gave us some lovely shots of scenery (especially at the end).

At over two hours, “Martin Eden” seems to meander and might have benefited from some “tough love” editing; as it stands, it comes across as somewhat self-indulgent – but perhaps we can at least be thankful that it’s not a three hour ego-fest.  The point of the movie – which may differ from that of the novel on which it is based – seems to be that success will destroy you and that it is its own form of death (if not corporeally, at least spiritually).  However, the fact that the character of Eden himself seems to be ambiguous about his own political beliefs fails to make that connection.

What challenges belief is Eden’s sudden realization that Elena only now loves him for his renown as an author, despite the fact that she snubbed him when he was perceived as a socialist.  The scene comes across less as a realistic revelation than as a drug-induced fever dream by Eden.  His rejection of Elena is understandable but the manner in which it is done is anything but.  In the hands of someone better at shaping a narrative, the film version of “Martin Eden” had the potential of something spectacular.  Instead, it is nothing less than a shallow attempt at artistic relevance.  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

"French Exit" -- Movie Review

 

On the closing night of the Virtual 58^th New York Film Festival, I streamed the World Premiere of a new comedy-drama, “French Exit”, starring Michelle Pfeiffer.

Synopsis

When a dowager loses all her money, she and her son head to Paris – but can they make a go of it?

Story

Frances (Michelle Pfeiffer) has just gotten the worst possible news.  The inheritance she’s been living on since the death of her wealthy husband is quickly running out; pretty soon, she’s going to be completely broke.  This will also negatively impact her adult son Malcolm (Lucas Hedges), who lives with her.  Malcolm and his girlfriend Susan (Imogen Poots) were thinking about getting married, but that doesn’t look like it’s in the cards now.  The plan forward is for Frances to raise some much-needed cash by selling her art, jewelry and Manhattan mansion.    

While ridding herself of many of her material possessions, Frances confides to her friend Joan (Susan Coyne) about her predicament.  When Joan realizes that Frances will soon be homeless, she offers Frances her apartment in Paris, which she hasn’t used in a long time.  With no better offers on the table, Frances takes up Joan’s generous proposal.  When Frances informs Malcolm, he finds that he is now forced to break up with Susan, who is understandably furious.  Soon, Frances and Malcolm set sail to France to carve out a new life. 

During the cruise, Malcolm befriends Madeleine (Danielle Macdonald), who works on the ship as a fortune teller.  Although her ethics are notoriously suspect, she does seem to have one redeeming feature:  she has formed a connection with Small Frank, Frances’ black cat.  This comes in handy once Frances and Malcolm settle into their new apartment because Small Frank runs away; Frances gets an idea to reach out to Madeleine to use her talents as a clairvoyant to help locate the cat.  But when Frances is forced to reveal the true importance of Small Frank, will finding her pet really be the best outcome for Frances?    

Review

The movie “French Exit” takes its title from the novel on which it was based, authored by Patrick DeWitt, who also wrote the screenplay.  The title of both is derived from a phrase that means “to make an early exit without saying goodbye”.  If you’ve read the book, you’ll understand the title better, as you will if you see this screen adaptation.  As for the film itself, it’s a mildly entertaining bunch of oddball characters, but the comedic portions of the movie aren’t truly deserving of a laugh and the dialog is a bit wanting.  The attempted humor doesn’t come so much from jokes as it does from the characters in wacky situations.

“French Exit” ultimately morphs into something of an ensemble piece-cum-drawing-room comedy.  The characters of Frances and Malcolm are its main focus – and at that, mainly Frances.  At times, it feels like Malcolm is only around so that Frances doesn’t have to go through this entire adventure completely alone and gives her someone with whom to talk.  Primarily, it is Frances’ story, but Malcolm’s story – which is only fully explored in the third act – is essential to the movie as a whole and is handled as something of a reveal late in the game. 

Pfeiffer’s performance is what keeps you hanging in there – as Frances, she’s not exactly the most sympathetic character in the world.  In fact, at times, you might even find yourself rooting against her because she comes across as so cold, cruel and dispassionate.  It is the fact that despite this, Malcolm’s lack of harshness towards her makes you think that if you hang in there long enough, you will eventually find a likeable human being.  That said, you’ll be in for quite a long wait.  Director Azazel Jacobs succeeds in providing the audience with “geo porn” – i.e., beautiful shots of Paris that will make you want to visit if you’ve never been and make you want to return if you already have.        

 

 

 

 

"Undine" -- Movie Review

 

On the closing weekend of the Virtual 58^th New York Film Festival, I streamed the new romantic drama from Germany, “Undine”, directed by Christian Petzold. 

Synopsis

When a mysterious woman’s love affair abruptly ends, will she be able to take revenge on her ex even though she’s found someone new? 

Story

Undine (Paula Beer) is having coffee with her boyfriend Johannes (Jacob Matschenz) when he breaks the news to her that he’s leaving her for another woman.  This is bad news not only for Undine herself, but also for Johannes, against whom she promises to seek some form of retribution.  She has to go to work but warns him to stay right where he is until she returns.  Her job is that of a tour guide who explains Berlin’s history and architecture to tourists.  Unfortunately, when she goes back, Johannes is nowhere to be found. 

While searching for him in the café, Undine is approached by Christoph (Franz Rogowski), one of the people in the group who heard Undine’s lecture earlier.  In an awkward “meet cute” that winds up trashing the café, Christoph asks her out on a date.  Despite the clumsiness, Undine agrees to go out with him and they wind up spending a great deal of time together.  Eventually, things turn romantic and they become a couple.  Things are going quite well until one night when Undine receives a phone call from Christoph, accusing her of cheating on him.  Convinced he is right, he curtly hangs up on her.

The next morning, feeling things unresolved, Undine goes to meet Christoph at his job – only to learn that there was a terrible accident and he was taken to the hospital.  Undine rushes to the hospital to visit Christoph at the hospital, where she discovers that Christoph is in a coma from which he may never awaken.  Upset over the fact that she has lost yet another lover, Undine uses this opportunity to make good on her threat and seek vengeance on Johannes.  But can she carry out her plan – and if she does, will she be held accountable for her deed?     

Review

“Undine” is based on a character in Greek mythology – Undine, a spiritual woman of the water who turns human only after she falls in love with a man who will die if he betrays her.  This movie has a rather preternatural quality to it, so know that it won’t be either a typical romantic story or a full-on science fiction fable either.  Instead, it focuses on unusual characters doing unusual things all against the backdrop of a love story.  If you’re in the mood for something non-traditional, this may just be the motion picture for you.

The performances in “Undine” are quite good – you really believe that Undine and Christoph have a legitimate attraction to each other; perhaps that’s because the same two actors played romantic interests in a previous Petzold film, “Transit”.  Both Beer and Rogowski genuinely do seem to have a chemistry between each other.  When they have an argument over the telephone, you truly worry that this may very well be the end of what came across (to the audience, at least) as a perfect relationship and you’re rooting for the relationship, not necessarily either character.        

One of the more remarkable things about “Undine” include the type and variety of the visual images Petzold is able to capture by way of telling this phantasmagorical story.  At points in the movie, you get a sense of a dreamlike quality to the whole yarn – in large part, due to the trancelike imagery.  This is something that’s a key to the film’s success – if you’re going to depict a tale that has some degree of a mythical quality to it, then you better make sure that parts do in fact feel other-worldly.  Where Petzold succeeds is in his ability to traverse between naturalism and supernaturalism.             

 

 

 

 

"American Utopia" -- Movie Review

  

This weekend at the Virtual 58^th New York Film Festival, I streamed the new HBO documentary, “American Utopia”, starring David Byrne and directed by Spike Lee.

Synopsis

The Broadway staging of the musical “David Byrne’s American Utopia” as shot by director Spike Lee.

Review

The Talking Heads first showed up on my radar way back in the late 1970’s, as a college freshman.  Back then, my enjoyment of the band’s music came largely because I found David Byrne to be delightfully silly.  Decades later, approaching The Medicare Generation, I still find Byrne to be delightfully silly.  But also, more profound than originally perceived in my callow youth.  Whether Byrne’s depth came through his maturity or mine is almost irrelevant; the point is that it is there to be experienced.  Although I missed “American Utopia” when it was originally on the Broadway stage, we can consider ourselves fortunate that it was recorded for all to enjoy.

If you are (were?) a fan of “The Talking Heads” and expecting a greatest hits performance in “American Utopia”, then you will be sorely disappointed.  In that case, you might be better off renting Jonathan Demme’s excellent “Stop Making Sense” to see Byrne in his clownishly oversized suit.  However, in doing so, you will miss a truly great performance by a brilliant creative mind in music.  It turns out that David Byrne still has plenty to say and there are many out there who are eager to listen.  One of the more fascinating things that are discovered in this documentary is both Byrne’s humor and his expertise as a monologist.

In “American Utopia” (a bitterly ironic title if there ever was one), you will find such classics as “Once In A Lifetime” (a personal favorite), “Burning Down The House” (which appeared to have the greatest crowd response) and “Road To Nowhere”, which closes out the performance.  Others may be somewhat lesser known (at least to the casual music fan), but it is the performance art and the staging are what make them noteworthy.  Also, Byrne’s ability to tell stories and introduce the songs provide a greater context and insight into each one. 

As for Spike Lee’s direction, it is almost flawless.  Lee never allows this documentary to feel in the least bit static; he shoots from many different camera angles and incorporates them well.  Some overhead shots are reminiscent of the late Busby Berkeley.  However, if there is one criticism, it would be the fact that there aren’t enough crowd reaction shots included during the performances.  The audience is clearly exuberant (at least, those in the orchestra seats appear to be) as they are standing throughout many of the songs.  But it’s not until the performance of “Burning Down The House” that we realize there haven’t been any reaction shots up to that point.

Byrne is not at all shy when it comes to getting political.  He talks about participating in a voter registration program and is disappointed when he reports that only 55% of eligible voters actually turn out to cast a vote for national elections and when it comes to local elections, there is a woeful turnout of only 20%.  Later in the show, Byrne performs a protest song by Janelle Monáe which is about the many African-Americans who have died over the years due to police brutality.  The moment brings a serious note into an otherwise fun experience but fails to completely interrupt the performance. 

For many years, Byrne has seemed like a distant, almost reluctant celebrity.  In his oddball creativity, he didn’t seem like one with whom a normal conversation could be had.  One of the achievements in this documentary is the fact that it humanizes him completely.  Byrne tells his own story – he is a naturalized American citizen who was brought to this country by his parents who immigrated from Scotland.  He describes how this shaped his viewpoint as an American and exclaims that America’s diversity is what has already made it great.            

 

 

 

"The Salt Of Tears" -- Movie Review

This week at the Virtual 58^th New York Film Festival, I streamed the new French drama, “The Salt Of Tears”.

Synopsis

After breaking a few hearts, what happens when a ladies man actually falls in love? 

Story

Luc (Logann Antuofermo) aspires to be an even better carpenter than his father – that’s why he’s headed off to a noted carpentry school in Paris.  While there for a few days, he’ll take a test in the hope that he will earn admission.  But besides his serious professional ambitions, Luc also has an avocation:  he’s a bit of a scoundrel.  Fashioning himself as a bit of a Casanova, he’s something of a love-‘em-and-leave-‘em type.  The only reason why Luc is able to get away with this is because he’s young and handsome; he can pretty much get any woman he wants and make them feel lucky.

During his time in Paris, Luc picks up Djemila (Oulaya Amamra) at a bus stop.  Flattered by the attention, she’s extremely responsive to his advances.  They see each other these few days and have an intense affair, the upshot of which is Djemila falling in love with Luc; when he leaves to return to his father’s house, Luc makes plans with Djemila to hook up at some point down the road.  But when the day comes, he carelessly stands her up because he has run into Geneviève (Louise Chevillotte), an old girlfriend from high school.  When Luc learns he’s been accepted to the school in Paris, he leaves Geneviève behind – even though she informs him that she’s pregnant with his baby.

Going to school in Paris, Luc eventually meets his match.  When set up on a double-date, he is introduced to Betsy (Souheila Yacoub), an attractive young nurse who works at a hospital near his school.  After a short but intense period of dating, they agree to move in with each other.  Things are going well until the day he picks up Betsy after work and she introduces him to Paco (Martin Mesnier), a co-worker who suddenly finds himself with nowhere to stay when he’s evicted by his landlord.  Reluctantly, Luc agrees to allow Paco to move in with them.  But while Luc is at school, is Betsy having a secret affair with Paco?          

Review

“The Salt Of Tears” (AKA, “Le sel des larmes”) was shot in black and white – whether this was done to make the film more or less romantic may very well depend on your own personal viewpoint of the movie.  As you play along with this motion picture and just let it wash all over you, it can be difficult to predict exactly where it is going.  While the story itself is satisfying, its ending is a little less so, leaving us with more questions than answers about where Luc is going after the picture’s conclusion.  Although this is a bit frustrating, it doesn’t seriously detract from the overall work.

It would be inaccurate to put “The Salt Of Tears” into the genre of Romance because the protagonist of this story, Luc, is far too selfish to be able to actually fall in love – although he does manage to con other women into falling in love with him.  While this film will inevitably be characterized as more of a Drama, perhaps more precisely, it’s a Tragedy because the protagonist eventually finds himself in a truly tragic situation in the end.  The way Luc engages these women, there’s no sense of fun – maybe cruelty is the more exact term, although we’re never quite sure why he does this. 

This film is rather short – under two hours.  Normally, the concise style of storytelling is more of a positive than a negative, but in this case, it may be that the brevity hurts “The Salt Of Tears”.  Another ten minutes at the end would have been useful to provide more of a sense of resolution.  One might be left to feel that by the time the credits roll, these characters are merely left to float aimlessly in space.  Not providing one more scene or two is a cop-out in storytelling; it’s lazy.  Here, the director is asking the audience to do his job by writing their own end to the movie.  This lack of creativity damages what is otherwise a decent motion picture.       

 

 

"Hopper/Welles" -- Movie Review

 

This week at the Virtual 58^th New York Film Festival, I streamed “Hopper/Welles”, a documentary directed by Orson Welles and starring both Welles and Dennis Hopper. 

Synopsis

Orson Welles directs an extended conversation with actor/director Dennis Hopper 

Story

In 1970, actor/director Dennis Hopper and actor/director Orson Welles were at vastly different points in their respective career.  Hopper had just come off his phenomenally successful directorial debut “Easy Rider”, while Welles was several decades removed from his hit, “Citizen Kane”.  “Easy Rider” was praised as the voice of a new generation of filmmakers; “Citizen Kane” became a classic because it was believed to have changed the vocabulary of filmmaking.  Welles, fascinated having heard about this up-and-coming cinematic genius, wanted to meet him in person.

By now, Hopper was well under way working on what would be his next effort, “The Last Movie”.  Nevertheless, he was summoned by Welles to fly to Los Angeles and visit Welles at his home.  Following their dinner, Welles has some of the other guests set up cameras and lights around Hopper and he begins filming the conversation between the two notables.  What at times seems like a chat between a pair of long-time friends occasionally comes off as more of an interrogation of Hopper by Welles.  Perhaps a ploy to see if the legend could intimidate the neophyte.

Hopper admits that regardless of any film’s outcome, just having made one is in itself an astounding accomplishment, given all of the obstacles facing filmmakers.  But the two men do not only talk about filmmaking.  Welles changes up the topics frequently, as if trying to see whether or not Hopper would swing and miss at a curveball.  Together, they cover politics, magic, popular culture and many other subjects.  Hopper consistently fascinates and even infuriates Welles with a number of his viewpoints.  These two apparently find each other to be very entertaining.   

Review

If you are a true film buff – here, defined as someone who not only watches a wide variety of movies but also appreciates film history and its place within the context of societal history – then “Hopper/Welles” is a no-brainer must-see.  Both of these icons are seen having a wide-ranging (or what some might less generously describe as rambling) conversation over the course of an evening.  That they touch on so many different subjects – one organically flowing into another – is a tribute to their awe-inspiring intellect.  It is a blessing to cinephiles that this was recorded for posterity.

Technically speaking, the film is shot in black-and-white in a standard 4:3 aspect ratio, appropriate for the time; the producers who restored this recording chose (appropriately) not to try to stretch it into a 16:9 widescreen aspect ratio.  The lighting is as unembellished as you can possibly get:  Welles uses a combination of the natural light from a nearby fireplace along with lanterns that are strategically positioned throughout Welles’ living-room.  As far as the sound is concerned, it is varied and inconsistent; despite the fact that Hopper is heard quite clearly, one must occasionally strain to hear Welles’ end of the conversation as he is not always near a microphone, apparently. 

Parts of this documentary have a somewhat prescient quality.  For example, at one point, Hopper happens to mention that he has a love of politics and current events, adding that he loves watching the news on television so much, he wishes there was a television network that was all-news 24/7.  A decade later, he would get his wish when CNN went on the air.  Later, Welles asks Hopper if, as a filmmaker, he could have the power to change society to the point that he could start a revolution.  Hopper seems to think of it in terms of a military revolution, but Welles appears to correct him by saying he meant a political revolution, adding that the revolutions are not carried out by the military but by the poor and working class.    

"Nomadland" -- Movie Review

On the second weekend of the 58^th Virtual New York Film Festival, I streamed the new drama by Chloé Zhao, “Nomadland” – the festival’s Centerpiece screening, starring Frances McDormand.

Synopsis

After losing everything late in life, a woman sets out on a nomadic existence throughout America’s southwest. 

Story

In 2011, Empire, Nevada suffered a devastating loss from which it never quite recovered.  Empire was a company town – the sheetrock company employed almost all of its residents.  Eventually, however, it became a victim of the recession and the company went out of business.  As a result, most of the town found themselves unemployed; with no local prospects for new employment opportunities, they abandoned the town in droves – even the United States Post Office gave up on Empire when it dropped the town’s ZIP code.  Empire effectively fell off the map as its population scattered to the four winds. 

Fern (McDormand) was one of those who felt the impact the hardest.  She had spent a number of years employed by this now-defunct company – so was her husband, until his death.  With no job and no husband, there was no reason left for her to stick around Empire, so she modified her modest van – which would now serve as not only her transportation, but also her home – and set out to see if she could start a new life all by herself.  Taking part-time or temporary jobs – many of which were seasonal in nature – was how she scraped out a subsistence. 

Working at an Amazon fulfillment center during the holidays was the best paying job she would get over the course of the year.  Eventually, Fern discovered that there were other people like her in similarly dire situations in their life.  Realizing there was strength in numbers, she would join these people – a tribe who considered themselves nomads because they lived in either vans or Recreational Vehicles and had no fixed address because they were constantly moving around the country.  One of these people was Dave (David Strathairn), whose adult son invited him to live with his own family.  When Dave reluctantly agrees, he invites Fern to join him.  Would Fern be willing to return to a life of somewhat normalcy or would she prefer instead to remain a nomad?

Review

In the nearly two hours of “Nomadland”, writer/director Chloé Zhao does a heroic job of filling every moment of her movie with more heart and humanity than one might think imaginable.  Assisting her in this endeavor is the film’s star, Frances McDormand, who also served as producer.  In this understated performance, McDormand is likely headed towards another nomination for her acting – and she may very well win.  “Nomadland” is an extraordinary story about America in the era of The Great Recession and how this country let down its most loyal and hardest workers. 

In the post-World War II era, Italian filmmakers like Luchino Visconti made popular what was then a new genre of film called neorealism.  A salient argument could be made that “Nomadland” is an American form of neorealism, not only because it is about the country’s poor and working class but also because many in the cast (aside from McDormand and Strathairn, of course) are not professional actors.  With the deeply personal stories that are told in this motion picture, at times it feels like a road picture as documentary; this movie reminds us of the many unseen in America who have fallen through the holes of a social safety net that have always been illusory. 

Like any good director, Zhao has an amazing eye for visual imagery – whether still or moving.  “Nomadland” has sharply contrasting shots that are at times stark and at other times rich and full of life.  While there are some that have maintained that the movie is life-affirming, perhaps a more accurate description might be that it is in fact existentialist in nature.  By its end, one is left heartbroken and devastated, left to wonder what the point of it all is when a lifetime of positive social contributions goes without thanks or reward.      

"On The Rocks" -- Movie Review

 

This week at the Virtual 58th New York Film Festival, I streamed the comedy, “On The Rocks”, written and directed by Sofia Coppola and starring Bill Murray.

Synopsis

Is Laura’s husband having an affair?  No worries!  Her father Felix is here to play detective with her.

Story

With her 40th birthday soon approaching,  Laura (Rashida Jones) is starting to suspect that her husband of a decade, Dean (Marlon Wayans), is cheating on her.  He is frequently out of town on business trips accompanied by people from his office.  At a corporate function, she meets one of his co-workers – Fiona (Jessica Henwick), a beautiful young woman who Laura soon learns accompanies Dean on all of his business trips.  Immediately upon meeting Fiona, Laura is convinced that Dean is having an affair with her. 

Distraught over her marriage potentially being over, Laura can’t even continue writing her book.  Just when she feels she’s at the end of her rope, her gadabout playboy father Felix (Murray) returns into her life.  Despite conflicted feelings, Laura welcomes Felix back and confides in him about her concerns.  Based on everything she tells Felix, he suspects her worst fears are true – and he would know since Laura’s parents divorced long ago because Felix was having an affair.  Felix decides he’ll save the day and assists Laura in tailing Dean while he’s in town so they can catch him in the act.

When Dean goes on a business trip and misses Laura’s birthday, she informs Felix, who nevertheless tries to help her celebrate.  Suddenly, Dean has to go on a trip to Mexico (with Fiona, of course); once Felix learns of this, he arranges to go to Mexico with Laura so they can keep tabs on Dean.  But when things don’t work out as planned, Laura confronts Felix and returns home by herself.  She and Dean have a talk where she informs him that she has suspected him of cheating on her with Fiona.  Will this be the end of their marriage or can they work things out?       

Review

“On The Rocks” is pleasant, entertaining and amusing – thematically and somewhat tonally, it is sometimes reminiscent of an old Woody Allen film (“Manhattan Murder Mystery” is the one that comes immediately to mind).  But it’s not really all that funny.  Even Bill Murray seems to have occasionally taken it down a notch or two – although he does have his moments where you see the happy-go-lucky character at which he excels.  Arguably, Jenny Slate – who has a small role as one of Laura’s friends – is funnier than Murray.  Although it can be a fun movie, don't expect a raucous laugh riot. 

One of the major issues with the film is the fact that at the outset, you never quite believe that Dean is actually cheating on Laura.  This is important because without sharing Laura’s suspicions, the audience is left to just go along for the ride and hope that Murray can somehow manage to salvage things by being his typical crazy self.  If this was an acting choice by Murray, it didn’t serve the movie well; on the other hand, if this was direction from Coppola, then she’s guilty of sabotaging her own motion picture. 

When you’re in the mood for a light movie that’s not too demanding, “On The Rocks” would be a fine choice.  Just be sure to manage your expectations.  Forty-somethings might be able to relate to the angst of marriage-career-parenthood overwhelming you and arousing your deepest insecurities.  Another aspect that the film touches on is the struggle of an adult offspring trying to reconcile with a parent, especially when there are many unresolved issues from the past.  It’s just that with a cast as good as this, there is a continual yearning for something better.      

"MLK/FBI" -- Movie Review

 

During the first full week of The 58th New York FilmFestival, I streamed the documentary MLK/FBI.

Synopsis

How did the FBI – and in particular, J. Edgar Hoover -- try to destroy the pacifist work of social activist Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr.?

Story

Exactly who was Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.?  Was he a threat to the security of The United States of America?  Or was he simply a civil rights leader and pacifist who merely advocated for the freedom and equality of his fellow African-Americans in the United States?  Perhaps the answer to that question may lie in where your political preferences reside.  In the 1950’s and 1960’s, many white Americans saw him as a threat who showed little (if any) respect to America for what it had given his people up until that point. 

Rev. King began as a civil rights leader in 1955, as a 27 year old man.  By 1964, he had won The Nobel Peace Prize  In between, the FBI saw him as a threat to American security because they believed him to be a communist.  Why was Rev. King a communist?  Apparently, it was because he believed that he and his fellow African-Americans deserving of equality in this country.  During the 1950’s, The Communist Party was also advocating for racial equality; as a result, many Americans saw that as a threat. 

Hoover, despite his own personal indiscretions, was far from done with King.  He had the FBI wiretap Rev. King and many of his associates.  By doing so, he managed to discover that King had been disloyal to his wife; Hoover’s goal was then to prove that through these recordings, Dr. King had no business being the moral leader of the Black people of this country.  King proved to be an even greater threat to this country in 1967 when he finally started to speak out against the war in Vietnam.  By 1968, he had been assassinated.  Did the FBI have a role in this?     

Review

If you are able to watch MLK/FBI and not feel a distinct sense of outrage, then you are without a doubt a better person than most of us.  Dr. Martin Luther King was a human being.  He was not a saint.  He was not a god.  He was a human being like the rest of us – and like the rest of us human beings, he was flawed.  Despite that, however, J. Edgar Hoover, the head of the FBI and (like the rest of us, a flawed human being) targeted him in the 1960’s as a danger to the rest of the United States of America simply because he was a human being who happened to make the egregious mistake of having been born with a black skin. 

MLK/FBI is a documentary that gives no quarter to either side – although it does concede to the fact that some of the FBI files are not yet available to the general public (nor will they be until the year 2027).  Whether these files will reveal anything new or not can only be a matter of mere speculation at this point.  However, what is clear is that the FBI sought to criminalize MLK as soon as possible; starting in 1955, Hoover experienced him as a threat to American security simply because King advocated equality for the African American community.

What makes MLK/FBI an important and necessary documentary is the fact that it is a historical document of how villainized an American hero was simply because he advocated for equality.  That’s it.  That’s the reason why it deserves to be watched.  Is it really all that remarkable that Dr. King was made out to be a villain because he was a pacifist?  Consider the execution of George Floyd.  Was his murder much different from the assassination of Dr. King?  The filmmakers make it crystal clear:  in a certain segment of America, African-Americans are undeserving of fairness.  And that is why you need to watch this film.     

 

 

"All In" -- Movie Review

 

On the opening weekend of The 58^th New York Film Festival, I streamed the new Amazon documentary, “All In: The Fight for Democracy”, featuring Stacey Abrams.

Synopsis

Stacey Abrams chronicles her campaign for Georgia Governor and illustrates how her loss follows a pattern of voter suppression.

Story

In 2018, Democrat Stacey Abrams declared her candidacy for Governor of the state of Georgia.  Previously, she had served in the state’s House Of Representatives, eventually becoming the House minority leader.  Her opponent was Republican Brian Kemp, the Georgia Secretary Of State, who was in charge of all elections that took place throughout the state.  As it became clear through the campaign that Abrams was earning a huge following, it is believed Kemp grew so concerned he might lose that he may have used his influence to interfere with the election.

Manipulation of elections and preventing prospective voters from casting a ballot is nothing new in elections – especially in the United States.  Once slavery ended, southern states looked for ways to keep African Americans from voting; one way was via a poll tax in order to discourage the Black vote.  Since may of them lived in poverty, they would be forced to make a choice:  either pay money to vote or use that money to buy food.  It was not until the 1960's that President Johnson -- with the help of Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr. -- that the Voting Rights Act was made law.    

Years later, this bigotry remained intact but more insidious.  Nothing set this off more than the election of Barack Obama as President of the United States.  Seeing how the demographics of the nation was changing, local governments gerrymandered their congressional districts in such a way that Democrats – and especially minorities – would be under-represented.  This was exacerbated when the Supreme Court effectively blew up the Voting Rights Act, which allowed many states – including a number of northern states – to conduct similar re-districting.    

Review

Watching “All In:  The Fight For Democracy” is infuriating, disquieting and depressing.  It’s infuriating because it makes painfully clear Abrams had the election stolen from her.  Disquieting because the voter suppression prevalent during the Jim Crow era was not only alive and well but also expanding in its geography and sophistication.  It’s ultimately depressing because on the weekend of Ruth Bader Ginsberg’s death, it reminds us how the Supreme Court gutted the Voting Rights Act, setting the stage for the gerrymandering in the United States. 

Ultimately, you feel pride and immense inspiration to vote.  It’s hard to watch this documentary dispassionately; as an American, it stirs up so many emotions simultaneously – and that’s part of what makes “All In” so effective.  What’s alarming is how ill prepared our nation is if there’s a large voter turnout; we see both Abrams and Kemp (who eventually went on to win) encounter difficulties when trying to vote.  Many Georgia residents had to wait in line for hours to vote because of a combination of high volume and defective voting machines. 

As to the documentary itself, it is well structured; it lays out a clear story and tells it in a compelling fashion, resulting in a resolution.  The filmmakers did an outstanding job of telling multiple tales concurrently:  that of Abrams herself intertwined with racism, sexism and an explanation of how elections are stolen – in ways both obvious and subtle.  Both stories are so layered and complex, it is a tribute to the movie’s directors, Liz Garbus and Lisa Cortés.  By the end of the film, if you don’t feel moved to vote, then what will it take?