Quick takes on 5 films

I’m a little torn on Judy, starring Renee Zellweger. I was wanting a true biopic about Judy Garland, but instead the film focuses on her final year of life, with a few flashbacks to her early career working for Louis B Mayer at MGM, as she prepared for The Wizard of Oz. In 1968 or 69, Garland is broke and in debt. No one in the USA wants to hire her, what with her reputation for not showing up on time and being hard to work with. With no prospects and the very real possibility of losing her kids to her ex-husband, she signs on for a series of shows in London, where she is still very popular. With most of the film looking at her as an aging, bankrupt star, struggling with addiction, it is a very good picture, just not what I expected. Zellweger gives it her all, and there are moments when the camera is in just the right spot that you forget that it isn’t Garland herself in front of you. It does a great job of showing Judy as a woman who loved to please the crowd, often to the detriment of her own health, but also a person with very real demons that, in the end, she wasn’t able to shake. ★★★

Some books just don’t translate well on screen. By all accounts, The Goldfinch is a fantastic read, but the movie, while it has a few nice moments, never realizes its grand expectations. After a short, cryptic narration, the film becomes a flashback when Theo was a young teenager. He’s one of a few survivors after a terrorist has blown up an art museum in New York. His mother is killed, and with no other family (his deadbeat Dad has disappeared), he goes to live with a classmate’s family. He is treated kindly, and just as he starts to feel at ease, his Dad shows up and takes him off to live in Nevada, where the only saving grace is an immigrant friend he makes, Boris. Theo’s time with his alcoholic, abusive father is awful, until finally Theo runs away and makes his way to New York alone. The title comes from a piece of art, once thought destroyed in the bombing, which Theo has secretly kept it in hiding all these years. Unfortunately the end of the film is very weird, doesn’t fit at all with the rest of the picture. The movie features good acting by Ansel Elgort in the lead, supported by Nicole Kidman, Sarah Paulson, Jeffrey Wright, and Luke Wilson, but good actors can’t save the subpar script. I stuck through the film hoping all the pieces would come together in the end, but they never add up to anything grand. ★½

BrightBurn is a low budget sci-fi horror film with some big names behind it. It is about a husband and wife, Kyle and Tori (David Denman, Roy from The Office fame, and Elizabeth Banks), who want a baby but have been unable to conceive. Their prayers seem to be answered when an alien spacecraft crashes outside their rural farm, housing a baby, Superman-style. They raise Brandon as their own, and 11 years later, he seems to be a normal boy. However, when the buried spaceship comes alive, it brings out a sinister side of Brandon, and also seems to awaken his superpowers. Let’s just say, he’s not a good guy. Brandon gives in to his anger too easily and starts killing. It’s a decent horror flick, though it does fall into the trap of many low budget such films and really ratchets up the gore in the latter third of the flick. The film is produced by James Gunn of Guardians of the Galaxy fame, and takes place in the same world as one of his early pre-fame pictures, 2010’s Super. ★★½

Ever wonder where the term “Stockholm syndrome” came from? The film Stockholm answers your question. As it states in the opening credits, this movie is based on an absurd but true story. Lars Nystrom is a not-very-bright crook when he walks into a bank one day, not to rob it, but to use the hostages as leverage to free his buddy from jail. The cops do just that, but soon become wise that Lars’ bark is a lot worse than his bite, and that he has no intention to hurt those with him. Ethan Hawke plays an over-the-top robber, with a fine supporting cast including Noomi Rapace as Bianca, one of the hostages. That duo make the film, because as a picture, it is just average. It is worth watching for those acting chops though. In my opinion, Hawke has really upped his game these last few years; it’s getting to the point where I will watch anything with him. ★★★

Speaking of watching anything with him. Joaquin Phoenix is very picky about what he’s in, and they aren’t always good films, but his performances are always spot on. Joker is his latest. An origin story of how one of the greatest comic villains came to be, Phoenix plays a man, Arthur, and his descent into madness (which isn’t a long trip). We’ve seen it done before, like Jack Nicholson’s version in 1989’s Batman, but the Joker isn’t falling into a vat of acid this time. In fact, this is one of the most believable ways it could happen. Arthur is a man who the system has let down. Suffering from mental health problems due to abuse as a child, unable to get his meds or therapy due to cuts to social programs by the city, and plagued by a disorder in which he laughs uncontrollably when he’s nervous, Arthur certainly feels like the world is out to get him. When he finally snaps, it seems like that was the only outcome you could expect. I loved the film. It isn’t related to the current DC Universe films and stands by itself, but I hope a sequel gets made to see Phoenix’s Joker go up against the Bat. ★★★★