When I read through my 100 books list, it was lacking quite a few classics, because it only focused on 20th Century reads. In the last couple years since finishing that goal, I’ve gone on to read some of the great Russian classics by Dostoevsky and Tolstoy, including his War and Peace. Loved it, so of course I needed to find a film version. Many point to the Soviet era film series, directed by Sergei Bondarchuk, as the best of them. A 4 parter, totaling over 7 hours in length, it is considered one of the grandest epics ever produced, on a scale that could not be duplicated today (or ever). Filmed from 1961 – 1967, and aired between ’66-67, it even had the Soviet army offering over 10,000 soldiers as extras played in the battle scenes. At the height of the Cold War, they wanted to prove they could outdo Hollywood. So let’s get to this grandeur!

Obviously it was going to be hard to translate 1000 pages to film. The first thing I noticed is, while there is some voice over/narration to hear some thoughts from the characters, we don’t get to really see what makes each individual tick, like the book does. All well and good, as it still does its best to stay as faithful to the source as possible. The film opens by introducing the setting: Russia is getting ready to go to war in eastern Europe against Napolean. Some of the main players are introduced. Pierre, the illegitimate son of Count Bezuhkov, is partying it up, even as his father lies on his deathbed. When Pierre’s father dies and Pierre’s claim to his fortune is legitimized (a lengthy section of the book detailing others’ attempts to get that fortune is left out), he does not go to war. Pierre’s friend Andrei Bolkonsky does though, leaving behind his pregnant wife in the care of his stern father and loving sister. We see a couple huge battles involving Russia, Austria, and France, made all the more glorious since there are no (ahem.. Middle Earth style) CGI combatants to fill the screen: there are thousands of real people fighting across a sweeping landscape. Russia is losing the battle, but thanks to the bravery of a single detachment holding the line, the army is able to withdraw without being wiped out. Andrei is knocked out and feared dead, but he is able to make it home in time to see his wife die in childbirth. Meanwhile, Pierre is tricked into marrying the beautiful Hélène, who only wants him for his money, and proceeds to cheat on him right away with womanizer Fyodor Dolokhov. Pierre challenges Fyodor to a duel and wounds him. Pierre fights with Hélène, who says she will only divorce him if he leaves her a fortune; he yells at her to get out.

In part 2, 4 years later, the war has ended and Russia is at peace. This part focuses mostly on Natasha Rostova. Only a girl in the first part, she is now a beautiful young woman and looking to marry (the movie glosses over her clandestine childhood promise to marry her cousin). At her first ball, Pierre introduces her to Andrei and they fall instantly in love. After a short courtship, he proposes, but instantly regrets it, seeing that he loved the idea of her more than Natasha herself. He gives himself some time by proposing they postpone their nuptials by one year, giving her time to grow and see if she still loves him. They will even keep their engagement a secret from society. Over that year, Natasha is wooed by Hélèna’s brother Anatole, who is as rotten as she. He only sees Natasha privately, and makes promises to her that he cannot keep; unbeknownst to her and only whispered in private circles, Anatole is already married to a poor girl back west. On the night that Anatole and Natasha are supposed to elope, thankfully news gets out, and Pierre is able to swoop in and prevent her from making a huge mistake. He confesses to Natasha that he loves her too, and if not for his marriage, he would care for her. The episode ends with another outbreak of war, as Napolean’s army invades Russia.

The third part is the shortest at 80 minutes, and deals mostly with the Battle of Borodino in 1812. After a short introduction where we see Andrei’s father die, leaving his unmarried sister Maria as “head of house” in Andrei’s absence (unlike the book, the movie doesn’t delve into that weird relationship between Maria/Andrei/Prince Bolkonsky). Then we get to the battle. Pierre has had enough watching from the sidelines, and with the battle pitched so close to Moscow, he goes to see if he can help in some way. While the soldiers initially laugh at him in his dinner coat and top hat, he ends up buoying their spirits when the fighting gets tough. While Pierre finds himself at a redoubt holding the French at bay all day and night, Andrei’s unit, held in reserve throughout the day but never sent it, ends up wounded when an artillery shell hits nearby. In the medical tent, Andrei sees Anatole, and wonders why this man who seemed to have no honor is there fighting. Anatole ends up having a leg amputated. While both sides suffer terrible losses, the Russian army is forced to retreat, leaving Moscow unprotected, which is how part 4 opens up. If you have time, look up this battle, as it is a fascinating turn in Napolean’s empire, and one of the bloodiest, with over 100,000 troops on each side. It is a classic example of “winning the battle, but losing the war.” Napoleon never recovered from the losses in his Russian campaign. Combined with the stretching of his supply lines so far into Russia, and with winter approaching, it was the beginning of the end of Napoleon’s reign.

I’ll leave the final episode for you to view if you are interested to see how it all ends. What becomes of Pierre when he stays behind in Moscow while the French burn and pillage it, and afterwards, with the news of Hélène’s death? Does Andrei recover from his wounds, and what of Natasha? Inasmuch as a film, even a 7-hour-long one, can cover such a huge novel, this one does a very good job. On its own accord, it is fantastic cinema, with a monumental scope. Necessarily it focuses on the above mentioned characters, relegating a host of others (the book has one of the largest cast of any novel I’ve ever read) to periphery status, or not mentioned at all. The book still reigns supreme, but the movie is good on its own. ★★★★

The Unthinkable, out of Sweden, starts out with a lot of promise. After a (rather lengthy) introduction to our characters, the action picks up in present day when things start going haywire around the country. First, a few bridges are blown up, and there are rumors that it is an attack from a terrorist organization. With misinformation flying though, no one knows what is really going on. The next day, phones and the energy grid start acting up too. Cars are banging into each other, birds are falling dead out of the sky, and in the midst of it all, our main character is having a love affair with an old flame, while his conspiracy theory father thinks the country is being attacked by the Russians. Sounds great right? Unfortunately the film devolves into a bad made-for-tv drama, albeit one with a decent budget, where the subplot overshadows what’s really going on, and the promise of the start of the film fails to realize. Poor acting, and the cinematography seems to get worse as the movie goes along, until it even starts to look like a cheap soap. Or maybe it was from the beginning, and I just didn’t realize it? ★

Annette is a very odd film, and it isn’t going to be for everyone. I’m a musical junky, and it isn’t even for me apparently! It’s a sung-through rock opera, starring Adam Driver and Marion Cotillard as Henry and Ann. Henry is a foul-mouthed, offensive stand-up comic, and Ann is a respected opera singer. This unlikely duo are dating, and early in the film, announce that they are having a baby. Unfortunately their storybook relationship hits a roadblock. Six women come forward to accuse Henry of abuse in past relationships, and those accusations derail his career, even while Ann’s skyrockets. To maybe rekindle the fire in their relationship, the two go on a yacht trip, but events take a morbid turn, ending in Ann’s death. As it turns out, their young child Annette (portrayed by a Pinocchio-like mannequin…) has an amazing voice of her own, and Henry takes her on the road, to great acclaim. But will he ever be free of Ann’s ghost? Often silly, at times grotesque, and always weird, this is just a very strange film. As I said, I love a good musical, but to make a good one, you need catchy tunes that stick in your head. While the acting is good here (I’m a big Driver fan), the songs are just not up to snuff. The tunes lack good choruses to sing along to, and there were only like 2 or 3 that I even found enjoyable. And not to nit-pick, but while the movie is sung-through, a lot of it is just dialogue put to music. Much different than, say, Rent or Jesus Christ Superstar. Kudos for doing something outside the box though. ★★

OK… I put Till Death on my watchlist because the premise sounded interesting. When it came time to watch, I saw that it starred Megan Fox, and almost didn’t bother. Quite possibly one of the worst actresses to ever grace film. But I bit the bullet and watched it anyway, and you know what? It wasn’t awful. Megan plays a woman named Emma, who’s been cheating on her ultra-wealthy husband. Emma is surprised with a weekend away at their lakehouse in the middle of winter, but awakens the first morning handcuffed to her husband, who proceeds to kill himself in front of her with a handgun. Before his planned suicide, he had set up his cheating girl with little way to help herself out of this mess. Dragging around her dead husband, Emma has to try to find a way out of the isolated area, and it doesn’t help when some criminals come along with intent to kill. Yes, it sounds terrible. But if you check your expectations at the door, there are some fun parts. It’s entirely cliche, and has every thriller film trope in the book (including seeing the token black character die pretty early on, and he was one of the only decent actors!), but I didn’t hate it. It’s 88 minutes of silly, unbelievable action, and there are far worse examples of this kind of film out there. ★★½

Undine is the latest from German director Christian Petzold, and carries over the same two stars from his previous film, Transit. Paula Beer (who I always like) plays Undine, a mysterious woman, and a character that will leave you wondering what is going on, unless you read the Rotten Tomatoes blurb (which I recommend, it doesn’t spoil it). The film opens with her getting dumped by her current boyfriend, and her final response to him being that, if he goes through with the breakup, she’ll have to kill him. Jealous, jilted lover, or something more? Soon after though, Undine meets Christoph (Franz Rogowski), and for both, it is love at first sight. Things go well at first, but Undine seems inexplicably worried whenever something goes wrong around her, like a figurine falling and breaking. She obviously sees some kind of portent in these otherwise innocuous events. The mystery deepens when Christoph, who is an underwater welder/repairer, finds Undine’s name written under a bridge, and she seems at ease deep underwater, even without a suit. The film lives up to its fantasy setting at the end, and while it won’t answer all of your questions, the performances and sense of both love and trepidation definitely hit their marks. A bit out there, and I really dug it. ★★★½

Vivo is a cute, animated film from Sony Pictures. Lin-Manuel Miranda stars as the title character, a kinkajou who is a street performer in Cuba with his owner, Andrés. Andrés receives news that his long-ago love, Marta (Gloria Estefan), is giving a final performance in Miami before retirement. He never told her that he loved her before she left for the USA to further her career all those years ago, and wants to go sing her a song to tell her how he felt. Unfortunately he dies in his sleep before he can make the trip. Vivo decides to take it upon himself to do accomplish the task. He smuggles himself to the Florida Keys in the luggage of Andrés niece, Rosa (Zoe Saldana), who had come to Cuba with her mother for the funeral. Once across the sea, Rosa and Vivo team up to get to the concert so that Marta can learn of Andrés’ message of love. Of course there are obstacles and escapades along the way. Colorful, bright, and gorgeous, the animation is spot on and fun to watch, and the songs are catchy. I think this film is more geared towards the younger crowd than a true “all family” experience, but I did enjoy it overall, even if it did start to drag a bit in the middle, with some filler to extend the story a bit. ★★★

• TV series currently watching: Sweet Tooth (season 1)
• Book currently reading: Into the Forest by Mark Danielewski

A couple months ago I started getting into some Agnès Varda films, which I found hit or miss. Today I’m going to write about some of her documentaries, and a couple films interrelating to those docs. That’ll make sense if you read through. I’m starting off with Daguerréotypes, a 1976 picture about the people working on Rue Daguerre, the street where Varda lived. This movie works kinda backwards. We see the people working first without knowing who they are: interacting with customers and whatnot. Later, there are some quick interviews about the how’s and the why’s the people work there. Later still, there are more in-depth questions, and we learn how the couples met (most of the shops have spouses working together), and we really get to know them. I think building the movie this way was a wonderful idea. If the film had started with those last interviews, it may have been boring, but by the time we get to them, I wanted to know more about these people living, working, coming, and going on this quaint, bustling little street in Paris. ★★★★

Mur Murs (literally “wall walls” in French, but a better translation would be “mural murals”), from 1980, visits the famous murals of Los Angeles. Varda starts in Venice, and then works her way around the city, interviewing the artists and community leaders about the art representing them on the building facades. She spends a lot of time on the minority groups represented, especially hispanic and black, touching on gang influence as well as a host of other topics. Some of the best interviews are with the business owners who commissioned some of the work for the sides of their buildings. There’s some beautiful art on display, and Varda always gives credit to the artist of each painting, but the film ran long for me. I’m not a big art lover anyway, and after awhile, it all started to run together on me. Still, a pleasant viewing. ★★★

Documenteur: An Emotion Picture is a companion film to Mur Murs, with a lot of those murals showing up throughout this picture. In fact, it begins at the same mural that was the closing shot of the previous film. This movie follows a French woman named Emilie, who is living in LA and trying to get by as a single mother with her son. Her marriage has recently ended, but we don’t know how or why, only that she is now alone. Emilie has been relying on friends for places to stay, but she has overstayed her welcome, and so she and her son have to find a place of their own. Not being able to afford much, they end up in a rundown tiny apartment in a not-so-great area of town. They furnish it with tables and chairs left out in the trash by their neighbors. There’s not much of a plot here, it’s just poor old Emilie and her listless son, trying to pick up the pieces and start anew. Besides the physical setting, there are other comparisons to Mur Murs as well. In once scene of Murs, a painter noted that while his mural mirrored the street behind him, there were no people on his painting; it was an empty street. That sense of loneliness and isolationism permeates this film. Some people will really dig this sparse picture, but it wasn’t for me. ★½

Jane B par Agnès V is another documentary, with Agnès interviewing her good friend Jane Birkin. Birkin was a big name in the 60’s and 70’s, but in 1988, she had just turned 40, and was not handling it well, wondering where her career would go as she got up there in years. This movie takes a peak at that vulnerability, while also freelancing in a way, to show off Birkin’s skills. For instance, if she or Agnès mentions a possible movie scene, the film cuts to Jane acting it out, in costume and on location, as needed, sort of like a “what if?” sequence. And towards the end, someone mentions the possibility of Jane playing other famous Jane’s, so we see scenes of her as Calamity Jane, Tarzan’s Jane, and Joan of Arc. Sometimes playful, sometimes introspective, it’s a solid doc about a person who loves attention, maybe craves it, but doesn’t always like the aspects that go with it. My only knock against the film is it can come off a bit pretentious at times, but with 2 powerhouse women who are fully aware of their skills, I guess that’s to be expected. ★★

While filming the above movie, Jane brought up an idea she had for a new film, about a teenager and adult woman who fall in love with each other. Agnès loved the risqué idea, and they took a break from Jane B par Agnès V to write it together and film it, with Varda directing. In Kung-Fu Master! (called Le petit amour in France), Jane plays a version of herself, with her real-life kids and parents cast as her family. In the film, Mary-Jane is smitten by a friend of her daughter’s, Julien (portrayed by Agnès’ real-life son, Mathieu Demy). Julien is only 14 or 15, but the 40-year-old Mary-Jane falls for him hard, and starts finding excuses to be near him. For instance, she hunts down a video game arcade further away from school which has his favorite game, the title of the film, just so the two can be together without risk of Mary-Jane’s daughter or someone else seeing them. Their relationship really goes up a notch when Mary-Jane takes her toddler daughter on a vacation and brings Julien along, to a remote island where no one can interrupt. Reality of course crashes down on them when they return, and we learn that while Mary-Jane was very much in love, Julien was just a typical horny teenager. Though on screen, we only see hugs and kisses, we know what is going on, making the whole thing very uncomfortable to watch. It’s a good movie, but its taboo subject matter is hard to stomach, otherwise I’d rate it higher. ★★★

• TV series currently watching: Star Wars The Clone Wars (season 6)
• Book currently reading: Into the Forest by Mark Danielewski

Over the last couple years, I’ve been working my way through the Merchant Ivory films (see a quick blurb about them here and here), after having started with a couple film adaptations of books I had read. Continuing in that endeavor, I’ve got five more up today, starting with 1975’s Autobiography of a Princess. Part fiction, part documentary, this short film (about an hour) has just two actors: Madhur Jaffrey plays an Indian princess living in England in the 70s, who is visited by an old friend of her father’s, Cyril (the incomparable James Mason). The two get together every year to reminisce about old times, and watch home videos of their time in India. The movies they watch, and commentary on, are of true maharajas and dignitaries from India. It is a fascinating glimpse into a way of life that no longer exists, and ultimately it shows the disparity in how that era is remembered. The princess recalls her father fondly and talks of him in glowing terms, but Cyril, an employee and English tutor to the man, remembers him much differently, dashing her reveries with a contemporary adult’s perspective. I was enchanted the whole way through. ★★★★

The Courtesans of Bombay is cut from the same cloth. This time, the focus is on people living in an enclosed compound in Bombay, filled with woman who have dreams (or at least, once had dreams) of making it big in the local film and entertainment industry. Instead, they find themselves dancing for men during the day, and (implied) prostituting at night. Again, just a handful of professional actors, including a man playing the rent collector in the compound, and another portraying an older lady and former courtesan, but everyone else in the movie are real residents of the apartments. They are interviewed, and their stories told, through the lens of a “fictional” setting. No real plot to speak of, other than the tales told by the actors, so the movie comes off as more of a straight documentary as compared to the film above. There are some good moments, but being not a huge fan of docs, I wasn’t as engrossed. ★★½

The Bostonians, based on the famous Henry James book (which I, ahem, did not enjoy so much), is a fairly faithful adaptation of the book. But unlike the novel, I liked the movie quite a bit. Madeleine Potter is Verena, a beautiful young woman with charisma and a knack for public speaking, who has been made the poster girl for the women’s rights movement. She catches the eye of Olive (Vanessa Redgrave), who takes Verena into her circle. Like the book, Olive’s lesbianism is implied but never confirmed. Olive’s main competition for Verena’s attention is Basil Ransom (Christopher Reeve), a southerner who doesn’t care a whit for women’s rights; he wants to marry Verena to quiet her voice and make her a housewife. Like the other Merchant Ivory films taking place in this era, this movie is beautifully filmed and visually gorgeous, and the trio of main actors are all spot-on in their portrayals here. Redgrave, already established in the industry, is marvelous, and Reeve, who already had three Superman movies under his belt by 1984, is solid too. Minor supporting roles for Jessica Tandy, Linda Hunt, and Wallace Shawn round out the all-star cast. ★★★½

I read four EM Forster novels during my 100 book quest (and enjoyed 3 of the 4 immensely), but did not read Maurice, published posthumously due to its content. The eponymous Maurice (James Wilby) is a young man at Cambridge in the early 20th century when we get to know him. He becomes good friends with a rich student from a storied family there, Clive (Hugh Grant, in one of his first films and his first leading role). The two begin to show physical affection for each other, until Clive admits to Maurice that he is in love with him. Maurice is at first repulsed, due to the era’s religious and legal ramifications of homosexuality, but he slowly begins to reciprocate. However, Clive doesn’t want to ever allow their relationship to go too far, knowing that his family has high expectations for him in the future, and he can’t do anything to mess that up. After a few years, Clive begins to distance himself from Maurice, and even gets married, leaving Maurice in limbo. Maurice is left to find his own path on his own. It’s a very daring film for when it was made (1987). While the acting is superb and the sets are dazzling, as you’d expect from a Merchant Ivory production, I didn’t quite connect to the sometimes aimless-feeling story. Maurice’s life just sort of meanders along, and as a viewer, I started to feel as lost as he was. ★★½

Ismail Merchant stepped out of the producer role and directed his first film 1993. In Custody is about a college teacher, Deven, who’s real passion is preserving the Urdu language, especially its poetry, which he sees dying out and little discussed. With backing from a couple colleagues, he sets out to interview Nur Shahjenabadi, one of Urdu’s most famous poets. When he gets to Nur’s mansion though, he finds a household in chaos. Nur’s first wife and much-younger second wife are at odds, and Nur has surrounded himself with admirers and sycophants who praise his every word and entice him to spend money on lavish parties and booze. Nur has gotten old and fat, and Deven’s hero has become a drunken sot. Deven purchases a cheap tape recorder, not even knowing how to properly use it, and tries to record Nur reading some of his own poetry, for posterity’s sake, but his attempts are met with disaster in the tumultuous house. The film is obviously a metaphor for the changing times in India, with the Urdu language lovers (Deven, Nur, and others in the film) unable to grasp modern technology, while the younger generation doesn’t seem to care about the past. A fair enough movie, though the whole subplot of Deven trying to get his hands on a working tape recorder, and the problems that come with it, dragged on for far too long. I think it was meant to be humorous, but whole sections should have ended up on the cutting room floor. The movie does have a nice, poignant ending, signifying the end of an era. ★★★

• TV series currently watching: Godless (miniseries)
• Book currently reading: Children of Dune by Frank Herbert

CODA, which stands for child of deaf adults, follows a high school senior named Ruby. The only one in her family who can hear, she interprets for her deaf parents, Frank and Jackie, and brother Leo. Frank is a third generation fisherman, and Leo is following in the family business as well, but Ruby has to go along to interpret for the fish buyers at market, rising every morning at 3am to fish with family, before going to high school from there. She’s faced a lifetime of bullying because of her deaf family and the smell of fish the follows her around. Her biggest joy in life is singing, something that her family obviously does not understand. When her choir teacher recognizes real talent in her and pushes her to audition for Berklee College of Music, Ruby is torn between pursuing her own dreams, and fear of abandoning her parents when they need her most, as an interpreter for their new fishing business which is just getting started. It’s a wonderful film, about the struggles of the deaf in a hearing world, the toll it can take on family members, and the love that still binds them together. The actors of the family, Troy Kotsur, Marlee Matlin, and Daniel Durant, are all deaf in real life, and give amazing performances top to bottom. ★★★★½

Wet Season is a quiet, subdued film, of the like that you’d normally see out of China, though this one comes from Singapore (a country with a very high percentage of people of Chinese descent, including this film’s director). The main character is a late 30’s high school teacher who’s been struggling with infertility with her oft-absent husband. At home, she takes care of the house, including her husband’s father, who is bed- and wheelchair-ridden after a stroke. Her life is a dreary routine until she starts tutoring a young man in her class. The student has a big crush on her, and she doesn’t do anything to quash the feelings. In fact, she lets them continue, maybe subconsciously, for some excitement in her life. When she sees her husband outside his work one afternoon with another woman, this surprises no one but her. But she uses this knowledge to ramp up her relationship with the student. The movie is filmed in a wonderful way, everything speaks to great cinema here, but the story falls flat, with few surprises, and it feels too contrived at the end. Despite some great moments and fine acting, it adds up to just a hair above average for me.  ★★★

Riders of Justice is a Danish film starring the great Mads Mikkelsen as Markus, a husband and father, called home from fighting in Afghanistan when his wife is killed in a train accident. He is approached by a nerdy scientist named Otto with news that the train collision was no accident. Otto was on that train too, and in fact, had let Markus’ wife sit in his spot on the crowded train; had he not, he would have died instead of the wife. Otto is a mathematician, and does not believe in coincidences. He saw a shadowy figure get off the train just before the accident, and recruits his friends, who are trained in computers and facial recognition, to find out who the mystery man is. Armed with the knowledge that it was a local biker gang leader’s brother, and their target was an informer killed on that train, they go to Markus for justice. Markus is all too willing and able to kill some bad guys that the government can’t charge. Some great action scenes, with lots of levity in the form of the bumbling trio of computer nerds, it’s a fun and unexpectedly different kind of picture. ★★★½

Non-Fiction is one of Olivier Assayas’ more recent films, a director whom I enjoy quite a bit. This film didn’t do it for me though. The film has a thin plot involving a few love triangles, a “who’s sleeping with who” kind of thing, but mostly, it is just a commentary on the evolution of how people now get their information, and specifically, in regards to the decline of the printed book. And by commentary, I mean very literally, as the majority of the movie is people sitting around socially, having conversations. Talking about how no one reads books anymore, the importance of online presences, etc. In all walks of life. As interesting as some of the chats are, it’s all pretty dry stuff. The characters are, for the most part, well thought and intelligent people, and they are able to engage in thought-provoking dialogue. Whether that is your cup or tea or not will determine if you like the movie. I prefer a little more action, even in my dramas. ★★

Peter Rabbit 2 on the other hand gives you exactly what you are expecting: no more, no less. The followup to the surprise hit a couple years ago (which I wasn’t going to bother with, but ending up watching on a cruise ship back in 2018 and enjoying), it brings back the gang for another hoppy adventure. After Bea has written a book about Peter and his friends, a book that is gaining traction, she is approached by a publisher who wants to commercialize it. Teased with dollar signs, Bea is prompted to “modernize” Peter, and the company begins a campaign to portray him as a bad boy. Peter Rabbit doesn’t like it at all, and runs away, only to end up with a new set of friends who aren’t such a great influence. Family friendly fun, which will elicit plenty of chuckles from both adults and kids. Not great cinema or anything, but it will make you smile. ★★½

• TV series currently watching: Stranger Things (season 2)
• Book currently reading: Children of Dune by Frank Herbert

After reviewing Criterion’s World Cinema Project sets one and two, today I’m back to look at their most recent release. Lucía, released in Cuba in 1968, tells the stories of three women who share the name, at 3 moments of political unrest in the country. It starts in 1895 during Cuba’s war of independence from Spain. Lucía meets Rafael, a man who purports to not be interested in the politics or the war, but he seems a bit too interested in Lucía’s family’s coffee plantation in the mountains, where freedom fighters, including Lucía’s brother, are based. The second segment takes place in the early 1930s, and Lucía and her mom are in the Florida Keys while the country is facing new unrest. There are uprisings in Havana against President Machado. In the keys, Lucía meets Aldo, a fighter recovering in a boathouse on her family’s land. He goes back to Cuba when he is well, and Lucía follows him there. When Machado is removed from power, Aldo is left wondering what they were fighting for. The final act takes us up the 1960s and the reformations under Castro’s communist government. This version of Lucía is newly married to Tomás, but finds that marriage is not what she expected. The conservative Tomás doesn’t want her to work, and is jealous if any men come around, so he forbids her to leave their house. As part Casto’s plans, all residents must learn to read and write, so a literacy teacher is sent to live with the newlyweds, which sends Tomás up the wall. All of the segments are united in the idea that the country comes first, above personal relationships, but it doesn’t come off as pure propaganda. I enjoyed the first part the most; the second segment felt a bit rushed, almost as if it could have been stretched out and made a whole movie on its own; the third was just OK. ★★★

After the Curfew, from 1958 in Indonesia, shows a man picking up the pieces of his life after his country has just gained their independence from the Dutch in 1949. Iskandar was a freedom fighter during the conflict and has been away for five years, just now returning to his fiancee Norma, and trying to pick up where he left off. He’s having a hard time doing so. After Norma has already waited five years, Iskandar is anxious to get a job so he has money to marry and support her, but he doesn’t seem suited to anything after the life of a soldier. First his soon-to-be father-in-law hires him, but Iskandar flames out on his first day. He then tries approaching his friends from combat, but they either don’t have anything for him right away, or are facing their own demons. Ultimately, after so many years of a soldier’s life, can Iskandar go back to a quiet existence? A good film, even if I think it borrows a little too hard from Hollywood noir, rather than try to find its own footing. ★★½

Pixote (out of Brazil) follows a young boy led down a life of crime. Pixote seems like a good kid hanging around the wrong crowd, and in the beginning of the film, he is rounded up with a bunch of street kids and sent to a juvenile hall. Inside, he starts his true descent, from the influence of both the older boys, and from the sadistic guards. The guards use the boys for sport, obviously on the down low, keeping it from the state inspectors when they come around. After a boy is killed and his gay boyfriend framed for the murder, Pixote and a couple of the others decide they’ve had enough, and escape. Life on the outside isn’t any better. They begin stealing, but are just scraping by. They try to run drugs, and are double crossed. In the end, Pixote ends up alone, having committed heinous crimes from which he will not be able to escape. The movie unfolds without a clear story; it proceeds in an almost documentary-like way and events just sort of happen along the way. Honestly for awhile I was wondering where all this was going, but the end did give us insight into Pixote’s soul, and it made it all the better. ★★★½

Dos monjes (Two Monks) is from the early sound film era, released in Mexico in 1934. The setting is a monastery, where Javier is sick and been lashing out verbally in his illness. The prior asks a new monk, Juan, to go and check on Javier, and when they see each other, Javier attacks him and beats him with a cross. The other monks are aghast at the sacrilege. Afterwards, Javier begs the prior to hear his story. He tells a tale of his younger days, when he fell in love with a woman, only to see her in a stolen moment with Juan, Javier’s supposed best friend. After he heals, Juan tells the prior his side of the story. He doesn’t deny his actions all those years ago, but definitely puts it in a different context. The movie was OK, but honestly the acting was terrible. It suffered from the same problem that a lot of early talkies did, in that the actors were carryovers from the silent era and were not well adapted to the new format. I couldn’t get past the acting either, even though the story was pretty good. ★★

Soleil Ô (Oh, Sun) was the first of these films today that I really enjoyed. The overarching plot is about an African immigrant from Mauritania who goes to Paris for better opportunities. However, all he is faced with is discrimination and hardship. An educated man, he tries to land several jobs in accounting, but often doesn’t make it past the front desk to an actual interviewer. After a couple days of rejections, he starts paying more attention to those around him, and starts noticing how other immigrants are facing problems too. Even what white friends he does make treat him in a condescending manner. Interspersed throughout are documentary-like interviews, and you can tell the director was heavily influenced by the French New Wave. Like a lot of films of the New Wave, the movie is a bit light on narrative, but gosh it goes along great, with a quick pace, biting commentary, and moments of sad humor (if that makes sense) as you can’t help but chuckle at the complete ignorance of the Parisians depicted in the movie. There’s a scene where a white woman is flirting with our main character (only because she’s heard about black men’s prowess in bed), and the stares the couple is receiving from passersby are ridiculous. And I had to think, were the streetwalkers actors or real citizens? With the film’s low budget and time, I almost have to think the latter. ★★★★

Downpour is another good one. It’s about a new teacher, Mr Hekmati, newly hired to a school in a poorer area. The film starts off on shaky ground (for my taste), with Mr Hekmati moving into his new place with all his worldly belongings on a cart, and the slapstick-ish humor that ensues on the busy street. I thought, “This is supposed to be great international cinema?” But 30 minutes in, once Mr Hekmati meets the beautiful older sister of one of his students, the movie takes off. Atefeh is the only working member of the family, trying to care for her younger brother. She’s supposed to marry the town butcher, one of the few wealthy members of the village, but he (Rahim) is a brute. When Rahim catches Mr Hekmati making eyes at Atefeh, he beats the teacher up. Mr Hekmati decides to toughen himself up and starts working out. Once he feels ready, he challenges Rahim, only to get his rear handed to him again. Afterwards, he tries his best to stay away from Atefeh, but the heart wants what it wants. The film is fun and endearing at the same time, but there’s also a lot of political innuendo, which I’m sure got the director in trouble in 1970s Iran. Atefeh is a working woman, and often goes around unveiled. There’s also a constant stream of spying: children and adults are always peaking in windows at our main characters as they go about their business, which I’m sure alludes to the government’s leaders watching their populace. Great movie, with an ending that some may find unsatisfying, but which I found perfectly fitting. ★★★★

• TV series currently watching: Star Trek Lower Decks (season 1)
• Book currently reading: Timeless by RA Salvatore

Here Today, written and directed by Billy Crystal, stars himself as Charlie Burns, an aging, legend comedic writer, who is starting to struggle with dementia. He lives alone after his wife died long ago, and he has a strained relationship with his two adult kids. Charlie finds an unlikely friend in Emma (Tiffany Haddish) when they randomly meet one day. Though of different generations and with different tastes in life, they hit it off and an improbable friendship ensues. Though Charlie hasn’t told anyone about his condition, Emma is the first to see it for what it is, and takes it upon herself to be there for him, as he has to step away from work and is approaching needing a caregiver. The movie tends towards the cliche, and while few would ever say Crystal is an amazing actor, he is (in my eyes) a comedy star, and his delivery is still as good today as it ever was. The comedy is the best part of this film, with Crystal and Haddish two stars that know how tell a joke. The drama of the film is what it is: not stellar, but jut enough to pass the time. ★★½

Dream Horse is exactly what I expected, and that’s not a good thing. It is the based-on-a-true story about a small town which pools its finances to breed and train a race horse. Led by a former pigeon breeder and a man who had some experience in horse ownership syndicates, the group of men and women, from a down-and-out town where people have been struggling just to make ends meet, are able to achieve glory and raise everyone’s spirits when Dream Alliance goes on to beat all expectations. Despite a couple well-known names (Toni Collette and Damian Lewis) and a few other recognizable faces, the film is overly sappy and entirely predictable. Not nearly as good as some other horse films like Hidalgo or Seabiscuit. ★½

Ed Helms and Patti Harrison play Matt and Anna, two people at two different points in their life. Matt is in his mid-40s, successful in business but single in his personal life, after a previous long relationship fizzled. But he wants to have a baby before he gets too old, so he has interviewed women to become a surrogate for him, and has chosen Anna. Anna is in her mid-20s, also single, after having been dumped by her latest boyfriend. She’s smart, but got pregnant in high school, which prevented her from going on to college. She gave that baby up for adoption, and is now hoping to use Matt’s surrogate money to get her life back on track. This unlikely duo form a strong friendship over the 9 months of the pregnancy, and while not a traditional couple, they are in it together, just not “together together.” Quirky funny movie with heart, and a heartwarming story that I thoroughly liked. Ed Helms is able to tone down his goofiness just enough to pull it off, and Patti Harrison, whom I was previously unfamiliar with, is charming as Anna. ★★★★

Slalom is a French film about a 15-year-old girl, Lyz, with dreams of skiing in the Olympics. She’s convinced her single mother to send her to a private school with a celebrated skiing coach on staff. Fred has a reputation for being extremely hard on his athletes, but he’s supposed to be one of the best. Perhaps seeing something in her, Fred does push Lyz hard. She is berated for being out of shape, not fast enough, not dedicated enough, etc. But she also gets better. Things are going well until one night, when the two are alone, Fred makes a sexual advance. The young and impressional Lyz, who has little sexual experience, becomes infatuated with her teacher. As their relationship progresses, she continues to win competitions. The clandestine relationship doesn’t even stop when other students begin to notice. Noée Abita is incredible as the teenage Lyz (she’s in her early 20’s), but it goes without saying: this film is extremely hard to watch. And I can’t shake the feeling that, while it purports to empower Lyz’s voice, the movie feels exploitive, latching onto the Me Too movement to grab critics’ attention. ★★

Cousins is a beautiful, remarkable film out of New Zealand, taking a rare look at the indigenous Maori people. It begins with a look at Mata, a homeless woman suffering from mental illness. We don’t know who she is yet, but as the movie progresses, we learn about how she got to where she is, and the family who is still searching for her. Her cousins are Missy and Makareta. Missy stayed on their ancestral lands and raised a sprawling family of her own, while Makareta is a lawyer in the present, fighting the New Zealand government for the rights to said lands. The movie is told over several timelines: the present, described above; as well as when the cousins were close as kids; and also when they were teenagers, and how Mata became separated from the other two. The story unfolds as a bit of a mystery, as we know from the beginning that Mata is struggling on her own in the present and want to know why, but what makes this such a memorable film is how it is told. It takes its time, and develops in a lyrical, almost poetic way. It leans heavily on the Maori culture and its familial ties, as well as their love of the land their ancestors have always lived on. One of the best movies I’ve seen in quite some time. ★★★★★

• TV series currently watching: Raised by Wolves (season 1)
• Book currently reading: Timeless by RA Salvatore

A Quiet Place Part II follows up from the wildly successful film from a couple years ago. It begins with a flashback, to “Day 1,” that is, the day the aliens came to Earth and started killing everyone. That first 15 minutes left my heart pounding, and thankfully it settles down just a bit for a little while afterwards; I’m not sure the old ticker could have taken it otherwise. With her husband dead and the farm in tatters at the end of the first movie, Evelyn and her three children (two kids and a baby) head off to find a new place to live. They are armed with the secret of how to kill the monsters, but they are still very much alone. They are able to stumble upon an old friend of Evelyn’s husband, Emmett, who is himself alone now after his kid and wife have died. The group of them end up separated through various means, and the rest of the film is the heart-stopping adventures they have before the end. It is all very exciting, but I couldn’t help but think it has the feel of “been there, done that.” The first movie was so fresh and different, and while this one is certainly good (I know, I’m making it sound like it isn’t), it isn’t *as* good. I looked up my rating on the first, 4 1/2 according to my letterboxd, so I’m going with 4 here. ★★★★

Recently read the book (and the first sequel, with more to follow), and with a new film version on the horizon, I thought I should revisit the heavily reviled Dune from 1984, directed by David Lynch. I saw this movie as a kid in the late 80s, at a time when I thought nothing was better than Star Wars and was big into anything sci-fi, and while I didn’t remember much, I remember hating it. But I really liked the book when I read it back in February, and wanted to give the movie another chance. I’m glad I did. The story of Paul Atreides and his prophesied rise to God-like status over the desert world of Arrakis, this movie has Lynch’s strange, otherworldly fingerprints all over it. I can see why die-hard fans of the novel might not like it, as there are plenty of changes. To give Lynch a pass, you have to admit that the book is nearly impossible to show on screen the way it is written, with so much internal dialogue driving the story (Lynch chooses to give us the thoughts through whispered narration, which is weird at first but I got used to it). While I’ll wait to see how the new movie handles it, I can’t say this wasn’t done horribly. While I did like the book, I’m not a super fan, and the changes made didn’t bother me all that much. How else do you fit a long, complex book into a 2 hour movie? A cast chuck full of recognizable names from the 80s and today helps for sure. And the look and feel of the picture is definitely alien. I really liked it. Not cinematic perfection by any measure, but it is enjoyable and definitely better than all the hate it received when it came out. ★★★½

The opening scene of The Killing of Two Lovers has a man, with a gun, standing over a bed with two sleeping adults, and the viewer thinks, “Oh man! The title is going down right now!” It doesn’t, as the man puts the gun away and flees the house, running a couple blocks down to his own house, where he is living with his aging father. The man is David, and his story unfolds as the movie goes along. We learn that the couple in bed was David’s wife, Nikki, and her new boyfriend, a man she has not told David about. David and Nikki are on a trial separation, and while David has been led to believe that they can work things out and get back together, both for their previous love and for the well being of their 4 kids (which David obviously cherishes, and is a good father), you get the feeling that Nikki isn’t as willing as David to make things work. The film is a quiet portrayal of a marriage on the rocks, with many of their spats going down in public in their tiny rural town, where everyone knows everyone’s business. The suspenseful scenes, like the one that kicked off the film, happen here and there, and when they come, they hit the viewer just as hard as any action film could. Really nicely done indie film with wonderfully subtle camerawork. New writer/director Robert Machoian has a good eye for setting up long steady shots and letting the actors flow in and around the scenes, with the camera being merely a spectator. I liked this one a lot. ★★★★

The Green Knight is a new take on the old (14th century) tale, with actor Dev Patel in the role of Sir Gawain. I have some knowledge of this story, having read Tolkien’s version many years ago, and I was excited to see it on screen. Gawain is the son of King Arthur’s sister Morgan le Fay, and has dreams of joining the round table with the other knights of Arthur’s court. When a mysterious Green Knight comes to the hall and asks for anyone to challenge him, Gawain jumps at the chance to prove himself. The Green Knight promises to give Gawain the opportunity to hit him without retaliation, but that in a year, Gawain must meet him at the Green Chapel for the Green Knight to return the hit in kind. Thinking he has a clear victory, Gawain beheads the Green Knight. To his chagrin, the Green Knight rises, picks up his own head, and reminds Gawain to meet him in a year. The film of course jumps over that year, and the rest of the movie is about the journey Gawain takes to his supposed death. His travels are the stuff of myth and legend, full of dreamlike encounters and fantastical adventures. As such, the movie is a bit out there. There are moments that I found spell-binding, and others that dragged on a little too long for my taste. Overall, I did enjoy it, but I suspect the average moviegoer would be bored out of their mind. It’s a very esoteric, thoughtful picture. ★★★

The Suicide Squad is the latest DC film in their (continued? Seems like they don’t even know anymore) universe. It is a standalone film, semi-related to the first Suicide Squad film, in that it has a few of the same characters/actors, but has a new director at the helm in James Gunn. The move was the right one, as he righted this ship. After very quickly rehashing the concept of a super team of villains and crooks brought together to do good, or else the government explodes a micro-bomb implanted in their brains, the bad guys head out. Their mission is to infiltrate the South American nation of Corto Maltese in order to destroy the site of some top-secret experiments, now under some bad control after a military coup in the country. The team is made up of one military hero, Colonel Rick Flag, who is there to keep an eye on the baddies: Harley Quinn, Blackguard, TDK, Javelin, Cpt Boomerang, Weasel, Savant, and Mongal. They get to the beach and are immediately attacked by an awaiting force. Lots of blood and death later, where it doesn’t go good for our anti-heroes, we see that there is a second team who arrive to a different beach down the coast. The first being just a distraction, this second team is made up of Bloodsport, Peacemaker, King Shark, Polka-dot man, and Ratcatcher 2. With the first team taking all of the attention, the second group is able to infiltrate the nation and continue the mission. This movie is a riot. Heavy on the not-for-family laughs, with the gore way over the top, I laughed throughout and enjoyed the story too, even if it is a bit expected. After almost being cancelled, Gunn is back on track, and this film is fun even if you don’t know anything about superheroes/supervillains or any of the other previous DC films. ★★★★½

• TV series currently watching: Star Wars The Clone Wars (season 5)
• Book currently reading: One Rainy Day in May by Mark Z Danielewski

Percy (aka Percy vs Goliath) is about as dry of a film as they come. Based on a true story, it is about a farmer named Percy Schmeiser who is targeted by Monsanto for growing genetically enhanced canola on his farm. A third generation farmer, Percy saved his seed every year for the next season. In 1997, some seed blew onto his farm, either from wind or a mistake by a neighbor, and the canola that grew from it was resistant to Monsantos Roundup weedkiller. Percy was unaware of the enhanced nature of the crop, and just counted his blessings that it was growing so well, and used the proceeds again the next year. Monsanto however did catch wind of it, and sued him for patent infringement, though it seemed that Percy didn’t purposefully circumvent them. Percy hired a small-town lawyer to represent him, and he gets backing from groups fighting Monsanto and its genetically enhanced (GMO) crops. Doesn’t do much good, as Percy keeps losing, but he continues battling all the way to the Supreme Court. This film suffers from the same fate that too many factual movies do: heavy on facts, light on drama, and the acting is very wooden. Christopher Walken plays Percy, the lawyer is Zach Braff, and Christina Ricci is the environmental advocate, and none of them are any good in this picture. They all deliver dialogue like they are reading a section in high school lit class. ★½

Undergods is a very interesting film, and one where style maybe exceeds the other aspects of the movie. A not-quite-anthology film, as the various stories inside it are, for the most part, peripherally related. The film starts with a couple goofy characters driving a dilapidated truck through a bleak, dystopian city landscape, picking up the occasional dead body off the road, while other dead-eyed pedestrians mope around. As we see later, these two are much alike the “bring out your dead” duo from Monty Python fame, as they aren’t too concerned with how dead their passengers are. We get a bit of the story of these two, as well as other tales told by them: a married couple living in a high-rise all by themselves, until a visiter wrestles himself into the wife’s bed; a double cross by an inventor to a greedy businessman; and a new couple who find that the wife’s first husband, missing for many years, has suddenly reappeared in the house, but yet won’t say a word, just staring off into space, while the house goes nuts around him. The storytelling is a bit uneven, but through it all is a sense of the modern world going to shit, almost as if the buildings themselves are crumbling as fast as the minds of the people that live in them. It is a dreamy, nightmarish movie with an almost Twilight Zone kind of feel, and if you are into dystopian films (like me), you’ll probably find enough to enjoy. ★★★½

There Is No Evil is also an anthology film, this one out of Iran. There are four different tales dealing with the current death penalty there. In the first, we are introduced to a good man, who is a loving husband and wife. He works hard at a long unknown job, picks up the family, and then goes to his aging mom’s apartment to care for her. Arriving home late at night, he squeezes in a few hours of sleep before getting up early to do it all again. This time, we see his job, and it is built for anything but a nice guy. The second story follows a young man completing his 2 year compulsory military service. He’s been assigned to execution detail, but is looking for a way out, as he can’t bring himself to kill a man. The third tale is also about a man finishing his required military duty. He’s on a 3 day leave, and plans to use it to propose to his long-time girlfriend. He finds her family in mourning, for a family friend who’s been killed by the police as a political dissenter. Unfortunately for our young man, he has ties with the recently deceased. The final episode is about a college girl returning to Iran from either Europe or USA, where her father has been raising her and she’s getting ready to follow his steps to med school. She’s in Iran to visit her uncle, but he has a secret that he’s kept from her all these years, and it may change her life. Though not a thriller, there’s a lot of suspense in all four stories, with tight moods set by the music and pace of the camera, and the for the most part, the film is solid (though the last segment was definitely the weakest). Director Mohammad Rasoulof has faced plenty of criticism in his home country. He’s been arrested several times for his movies, for their stances against the government. This particular movie was filmed in secret and has been banned in Iran, landing Rasoulof in yet more trouble. ★★★

True Mothers, out of Japan, is about a couple and their adoption of a young boy. The movie begins with the boy, Asato, in Kindergarten, getting in trouble for supposedly pushing another kid on the playground. We then get a flashback to when his parents, Satoko and Kiyokazu, were struggling to have a child. They turn to adoption, and a program called Baby Baton, which unites young women who cannot care for a child, with established couples who have the means to do so. Back to the present, the married couple are visited by a young woman claiming to be Asato’s birth mother, Hikari, and while it has been 5 years, the couple doesn’t recognize her and refuses to believe her. The next flashback tells us Hikari’s story. Pregnant at 14, she wanted to keep her baby, but her parents refused and sent her to Baby Baton, a secluded resort-like house with other teens like herself, where girls can have babies in secret before resuming their lives. After a quick scene in the present again, we continue Hikari’s life after the adoption, where she finally runs away from home and returns to Baby Baton in hopes of helping girls like herself. Later, she gets a job, trying to put together a life without the baby she misses. The movie is thoughtful and heartfelt, but a bit too slow, even for my patient senses, and isn’t as deep as I think the filmmakers hoped it’d be. ★★

You Will Die at Twenty, out of the country of Sudan, presents a very interesting premise. Muzamil has just been born, and his parents take him to the local sheik for a blessing. Unfortunately at the ceremony, the sheik interprets the death of a performer as an omen that Muzamil will die at the age of 20. Unable to cope with the fear of death in the house, Muzamil’s father, Alnour, abandons the family and goes to work in other lands, promising to send money back home (which he does). Muzamil is thus raised by his mother, Sakina, alone. Fear of losing her son leads her to be extremely protective of him; Muzamil does not get to go and play with others his age, and grows up in secluded house. Finally as a teen, he is at last sent to school after the teacher/village religious leader implores Sakina to let him learn the Quran (“school” isn’t what we traditionally think of, it is mostly memorizing the Quran and doesn’t teach math or geography or other “worldly” things). In this sheltered life, Muzamil finally gets glimpses of the world outside his village when he meets Sulaiman. Sulaiman comes from the area, but spent his life traveling the world around. He drinks, sleeps with a woman not his wife, and leads what the others in the village consider an evil, immoral life. But he is the only person to encourage Muzamil to live his life, rather than only focus on his death, as the others in his life do. ★★★½

• TV series currently watching: Loki (season 1)
• Book currently reading: One Rainy Day in May by Mark Z Danielewski

The heralded Hong Kong filmmaker Wong Kar-wai has been on my radar for awhile, and I’m excited to finally check off most of his films thanks to the excellent, recently released Criterion set. His first picture was As Tears Go By, released in 1988. It follows a small-time mob enforcer named Wah, who exudes cool in his every mannerism. In the hierarchal system, Wah is a mid-level “big brother” to Fly, who has none of Wah’s skills or charisma, but he dreams of being a big shot. However, Fly can’t help but always get into trouble with other members in the gang, and while higher ups would frown on Fly being killed, that doesn’t stop him from getting beat up a lot. Wah is always there to rescue him though, that is, until Wah falls for a woman. Ngor is a distant relative who comes to stay with Wah for a short time so she can see a local doctor, and Wah is smitten right away. When she returns home, Wah tries to go back to his life on the streets, but misses her too much. He finally goes to Ngor to resume their relationship, but is called back when Fly gets in over his head once again. Who he ends up with is the big climax in the film. This movie has some great scenes and some beautiful, colorful camerawork, so there are, I think, glimpses of what is to come, but it comes off as a rather forgettable 80s Hong Kong action film. But everyone starts somewhere! ★★½

Days of Being Wild followed in 1990. Taking place in the 60s, there are a few main characters, but they all revolve around Yuddy, an aimless 20-something with serious attachment issues. He woos women, sleeps with them for a time, and then discards them. The first of these in the film is Li-zhen. She sees through Yuddy’s nature from the start but can’t resist him when he turns on the charm. When his appeal fades, Li-zhen leaves him, but misses him terribly afterwards. While she is moping around, Yuddy is already onto the next girl, a dancer named Mimi. She falls for him hard too, but unlike Li-zhen, Mimi is unable to walk away on her own when Yuddy drops the flirtatious act, and demeans herself to keep him in her life. You think through all of this that Yuddy is just a bad dude, but we learn later that his attachment issues stem from being abandoned by his birth mother, and being raised by a fairly careless adoptive mother, a former prostitute. Lots of good stuff to unwrap here, and all of it is shot amazingly well. The colors pop, the smoke seems to waft through the screen, and the sweat pouring from the actors, with fans blowing in a failed attempt to stave off the humidity, all create vivid moments that permeate every scene. ★★★½

The flashes of brilliance in the first two films come to the fore in Chungking Express. A movie of two parts, the first half follows a police officer who’s just been dumped by his longtime girlfriend. He mopes around, missing her, but is drawn to a woman wearing a bright blonde wig and sunglasses, even inside (because it’s always sunny in the land of cool?). Little does the cop know that she’s been putting together a drug smuggling operation, but her mules escaped out on her with the goods, leaving her in tons of trouble with her higher-ups. The second part of the film focuses on another cop, and he’s been dumped too. He’s also taking it rough, wallowing in his dreary, dirty apartment when he isn’t working. While on his beat, he visits a food stand every day, and has caught the eye of a young worker there, Faye. One day the food stand is given a letter for the cop from his ex-girlfriend, returning the keys to his apartment. Faye holds on to them, and starts visiting his apartment while he’s working. She cleans it up, replacing tattered towels and sheets with new ones. In his depressed haze, the cop doesn’t immediately see the changes that come, but his mood does improve. A dazzling film with beautiful characters, gorgeously shot scenes, and a fun soundtrack of pop hits from several eras. There’s deeper meaning here too, like the first cop’s obsession with buying canned pineapple that expires on May 1. Ostensibly because his ex liked pineapple, it is hard not to see the correlation with the impending handover of Hong Kong from Britain to China, and the sense of foreboding that is coming with it. Just about the perfect movie, it’s fun, funny, romantic, suspenseful, and engaging from beginning to end. ★★★★★

There are many films where you are having a great viewing experience until a letdown in the end (cough, Come True), but rarely does it happen the other way around. I was not into Fallen Angels for a good portion of the movie, in fact, until nearly the final minutes. It’s not that it’s a bad movie by any stretch. I liken it a bit to Chungking Express on LSD. Again, two seemingly unrelated stories (though a bit more tied together than the previous film), but this time, we are heavier on art (big time visual splendor from start to finish) and lighter on plot. In the first half, a hitman and his partner plan and execute (see what I did there?) attacks on underground gambling rings. The girl partner wants more than a professional relationship, but the man is all business with her. In the second half, a seemingly crazy, mute man, on the run from the police, tries different trades as a form of business, but has a hard time taking “no” for an answer. He forces a family to eat ice cream all night in his ice cream van, forcibly cuts the hair and shaves a man who only wanted a little off the top, etc. The man has an on-again, off-again relationship with a bizarre woman, who he enjoys consoling when she needs a good cry. This film is a crazy, chaotic blur, with a lot of funny moments, but for much of the picture, I felt there was too much going on for me to keep track of everything. But then the denouement came, and it tied it all together beautifully. I was in the 2 star range until the last minutes, and then suddenly I wanted to start back at the beginning and watch it all again! ★★★★

Some criticisms of Wong’s films were that they were “too pretty” and viewers forgave some things due to visual spectacularity of it all. Maybe to thumb his nose at those detractors, Happy Together starts in black and white, and even then, it is still beautiful. It is about a gay couple who are in a perpetual circle of breaking up and getting back together (haven’t we all had one of those?). Ho Po-Wing is all emotion and definitely the more unstable of the couple, while Lai Yiu-Fai is more composed and analytical. In their most recent attempt to “start over,” they’ve tried for a new locale; they’ve moved from Hong Kong to Argentina. They’ve barely arrived there when they break up again, and some time later, they are each stuck in Buenos Aires with no money to return home. Yiu-Fai is working at a crappy job, and Po-Wing has become a prostitute of sorts, hanging with older men in exchange for money and favors. One of these men beats him up pretty badly one night, and Yiu-Fai feels sorry for him, allowing him back into his life while he recovers. But once Wo-Ping is better, he goes back to his violent behaviors. Yiu-Fai has to make his own decision on where his life will take him, and if he has the courage to finally leave Wo-Ping for good. On its own merits, I think the movie is just ok. Certainly not bad, but I don’t think it left a lasting impression on me. However, as a commentary on the upcoming reunion of China and Hong Kong (the movie was released in May 1997, just weeks before the June handover), it is much more important. Are we talking about a couple being happy together, or “one country, two systems”? My rating is based on the film itself, but you can spend a lot of time analyzing various aspects of it and thinking about the bigger picture going on politically. ★★★

In the Mood for Love is a love story, or at least, Wong’s version of a love story, and a semi-sequel to Days of Being Wild. Chow Mo-wan and Su Li-zhen (Yuddy’s first girlfriend in the above film) separately move into adjoining apartments on the same day. Their respective spouses are rarely home: Mrs Chow works late hours at her job, and Mr Su is often out of town on business. As such, each is often alone in their apartments at night, and pass each other on the way to the local noodle stand for dinner. After a time, Mo-wan invites Li-zhen to dinner. You would think this is the start of an affair, and in a way it is, but it comes out of an unlikely event. At dinner, the duo share with each other that they, each, have come to the realization that their spouses are having an affair with each other. Mo-wan and Li-zhen then begin spending more time with each, at first as a support system over this shared hurt, and later, as something more, as they develop feelings for each other as well. However, in typical Wong fashion, much of their relationship remains enigmatic to the viewer. We don’t know how far they go physically, and the ending doesn’t provide much satisfaction, at least, not one if you are looking for a happy life for all involved. In ends as real life often does, without tidy conclusions. I love this picture. It is true heartfelt love story, achingly so, and mesmerizing from the opening moments. For a long while, the film has a bit of a chaotic feeling with very quick scenes and lots of dialogue, and before you know it, half the movie is over. But I think all those little moments give the viewer an in-depth look at our two main characters. Also really enjoyed how we never see their spouses. When they are in the scene, we only see the backs of their heads, or they are talking from off camera. The focus is always on Mo-wan and Li-zhen and that’s always the centerpiece for the viewer. ★★★★½

2046 is more of a direct sequel to In the Mood for Love, so there will be some spoilers here for the previous film. At first, you don’t realize it is a sequel, because it starts in the year 2046. A voiceover tells you that people go to 2046 to find lost loved ones, and no one ever returns. No one except the person speaking. We soon learn that the whole concept of 2046 is actually a science fiction novel written by Mo-wan. After being unable to hook up with Li-zhen at the end of the previous film, he’s pretty much given up on love, and lives life as a playboy, bouncing from girl to girl. One girl he takes home one night is Lulu, who happens to be one and the same as Mimi from Days of Being Wild. When she’s sleeping, Mo-wan finds her apartment key, apartment # 2046, which is the same one he and Li-zhen had rented during their affair. He goes to the building and ends up moving in next door, to # 2047. As the movie progresses, he spies in on the various people who live in # 2046, the latest being a prostitute named Bai Ling. Mo-wan woos her to start a regular affair, but when Ling starts to really fall in love with him, he dumps her. In various spots in the film, we see the shape of 2046 in Mo-wan’s head, including his alter-ego as he searches for someone to love him and leave 2046 with him. All of the references to the coldness of 2046, a place that people can’t escape, reference again the relations between Hong Kong and China. As 1997 approached, Wong made movies about the impending sense of trepidation. 2046 is the final year of the current 50 year “experiment” of one country, two systems. Once again, the citizens will, rightly, have some apprehension as that year approaches. Without the context of the previous films in this trilogy, 2046 is still a solid movie on its own merits. Factoring in those movies, this becomes pure perfection. ★★★★★

• TV series currently watching: The Handmaid’s Tale (season 4)
• Book currently reading: The Elfstones of Shannara by Terry Brooks