I’ve seen a lot of Steven Soderbergh’s filmography (Erin B, Traffic, the Oceans films, etc), but with a prolific career like his, there’s a lot I haven’t too. Starting today off with his first film: Sex, Lies, and Videotape, from 1989. Ann (Andie MacDowell) is sexually frustrated in her marriage to John (Peter Gallagher), and she suspects his lack of interest in her stems from an affair. John refuses to admit it, but he is in fact cheating, with Ann’s younger sister Cynthia (Laura San Giacomo) of all people. Ann is afraid to confront her husband, as he’s the only breadwinner and Ann is completely dependent on him. She finds solace in the most unlikely of people though: an old friend of John’s, Graham (James Spader), has moved back to the area. Graham too is suffering from lack of intimate relationships in his life, and his only release is to interview women about their sexual experiences, taping it for later viewing. Graham and Ann form a tentative friendship, and through his blatant talk of sex, Ann comes to realize the sad situation she is in. The film is rough around the edges, and was I’m sure much more startling with its sex talk in 1989 than it is today, but I couldn’t help but get pulled in to root for Ann’s fight for happiness. ★★★½

King of the Hill came a couple years later, and is the coming-of-age story of a boy named Aaron. In St Louis in 1933, the city, like the country, is struggling through the Great Depression. Aaron and his brother Sullivan’s dad is a German immigrant who can’t land a steady job, and their mom has been sick with tuberculosis. The family has lost their home and has been living in a rundown old hotel, and even there, are months behind on their pay. Events snowball when Dad gets an opportunity for a sales run covering a few states, taking him away from home for awhile, and Mom gets put in a sanitarium to recover from her sickness. Sullivan is shipped off to live with an uncle, leaving Aaron alone in the hotel room. He continues to go to school (he is close to graduating from the 8th grade), but has to also deal with starvation, the local cop who wants to clear out the “dregs of society,” a hotel manager who wants to kick him out, as well as having to navigate girls, friends, and all the normal things a young teen has to deal with. Maybe not the best acting around, but it is wonderfully shot with a real gritty feeling of the desolate times Aaron found himself in, and varied characters that interweave in and out of his life. Surprising to see some very young versions of Adrien Brody, Katherine Heigl, and Lauryn Hill back before they were famous, as little more than kids themselves. ★★★★

Schizopolis is considered one of Soderbergh’s “duds,” but I have to say, I enjoyed it a whole lot. It is an off-the-wall comedy revolving around 2 characters, both portrayed by Soderbergh himself. Fletcher Munson works for a self help/religious guru named T Azimuth Schwitters (with obvious parallels to L Ron Hubbard). Fletcher doesn’t know that his wife is sleeping with another man, dentist Jeffrey Korchek. Korchek and Munson, being played by the same actor, obviously look identical, but that’s just the tip of the iceberg on the humor. Later on, Korchek falls in love-at-first-sight with a woman (which he names “Attractive Women # 2”) who happens to look exactly like Munson’s wife/his sex partner. Too bad he’s already asked her to leave Fletcher and move in with him… And did I mention the exterminator going around sleeping with all the women on the street? Or the short interludes of a naked man, clothed only in a T-shirt, being chased by men in white coats? Or that conversations often lapse into other languages (without subtitles) or even 1984-style doublespeak? Somehow this movie bombed, but I laughed out loud throughout the whole thing. It’s Soderbergh’s humor, unchecked, and it’s great stuff. ★★★½

I usually do these films in order of release, but I’m saving the 4+ hour epic for last. So next up is 2013’s Behind the Candelabra, telling the story of the last 10 years of famed pianist Liberace’s life. The movie is told from the perspective of one of his lovers, Scott Thorson (Matt Damon). Liberace (Michael Douglas) seems to have a thing for young blond men, and is instantly smitten by the 18-year-old Thorson when they meet. Liberace persuades him to move in, and spends lavishly on anything to make him happy. After a few years, when Liberace is getting plastic surgery to keep himself looking younger, he gets Thorson to have work done too. No expense is spared. But as the years go by, Liberace starts to want a younger, fresher face to smile at. This is a better-than-average biopic, with lots of insights into Liberace’s life. I have no idea how accurate it is, but they do a good job of painting him as a man who craves attention and lives for the spotlight, casting off things that no longer do it for him, while trying to maintain his persona as a lady’s man, even when he is as gay as they come. Strong acting from the 2 leads too. ★★★

The aforementioned epic is 2008’s Che, a 257 minute film made up of 2 parts, telling the story and life of revolutionary Ernesto “Che” Guevara, as portrayed by Benicia del Toro. Part One begins with his meeting of Fidel Castro in Mexico, and their journey to Cuba to fight against its USA-backed president and dictator Fulgencio Batista. It’s not a linear story; it is more about moments here and there over a 3 year period from 1955 – 1958, as Castro’s movement gains support. Guevara is painted as a fair man who fights for the people. He has no tolerance for theft or brutality, but has a singular goal of taking down the regime that is hurting the country’s people. The first part culminates in Guevara’s leading the fight to take the city of Santa Clara. Interspersed throughout are scenes from 1964, where Guevara is being interviewed by an American (journalist Lisa Howard), and also his speech on the floor of the United Nations.

Part Two jumps ahead a couple years to 1966. Guevara has found running a country much less glamorous than fighting for one. After a failed attempt at revolution in the Congo (never mentioned in the movie, only his year-long absence), Guevara sneaks into Bolivia to attempt to take down the government there. But things do not go as well for him as they did in Cuba. In Cuba, he and his troops starved, and were outnumbered, but they still had the will of the people on their side. Guevara does not have that luxury in Bolivia; the local people may not love their leaders, but they see Guevara and his fellow Cubans as outsiders, and aren’t rushing to join his cause. Also, the Bolivian government is getting a lot of help from the USA, who doesn’t want to see a repeat of Cuba with a Communist regime put in place. To make matters worse, Guevara has to fight his own body, as his asthma finally catches up to him when he has to abandon a camp quickly and leaves behind his medicine. From very early in Part Two, you see the writing on the wall, and it is a long descent towards the end of Guevara’s fight. Intriguing film. It’s overall length will probably turn a lot of people off, but it’s a fascinating look at a person who continues to be seen as a hero and a villain. I enjoyed the second half more than the first. ★★★½

• TV series currently watching: Silicon Valley (season 1)
• Book currently reading: Redwood by Mark Danielewski

Mass is an emotionally charged film about an uncomfortable subject: school shootings. But it does something that most films don’t touch, which is giving us the perspective of the parents of the killer, not just the parents of the victims. Taking place almost entirely in the back room of a church where the two sets of parents have come to meet, the events take place 6 years after the shooting. The meeting is meant as part of the healing process, ant it is obvious from the beginning that both couples are still carrying a lot of anger and hurt. In these situations, we want to defile the perpetrator’s parents, but in this film, they seem like good people. They struggle with what they could have done differently, and try to reconcile the monster their son is named in the media with the good boy they remember. The victim’s parents just want answers: they want to know how and why the other’s son came to school to kill that day. I’m torn on this movie. On one hand, it has four tremendous performances by very good actors (Reed Birney, Ann Dowd, Jason Isaacs, and Martha Plimpton), and while there definitely great moments that take place, there’s also a lot of reiteration and oftentimes awkward dialogue. Some of that is purposefully so, as the characters are feeling each other out, but even later on, I kept thinking, “Real people don’t talk like this.” A solid effort though from first-time director Fran Kranz. ★★★½

Beans is a coming-of-age film wrapped inside a true life crisis. In Quebec in 1990, a land dispute took place where a developer wanted to build a golf course on the Mohawk people’s ancient land. This lead to barricades, protests, and a 77 day standoff between local police (and later the Canadian army), and the Mohawk people. It is in this charged environment that Tekehentahkwa, or Beans as she tells “white people” to call her, is trying to find her way. Beans has the grades to go to a good high school, and wants to attend a prestigious school in Montreal the next year, but she gets pushback from many amongst her people, including her own father, who feel she should stay local. Like most preteens, Beans looks up to an older girl named April, but April is perhaps not the best influence. Emulating April, Beans starts dressing older, cussing, and doing pranks with the older boys. She’s having a good time, until those times when she has to go into town with her family, and sees the hate aimed towards the Mohawk people; the white townsfolk start with taunts and later turn violent towards her and her family. The performances in this film from the unknown actors are hit-and-miss, but Kiawenti:io Tarbell as Beans is very good, and, using a lot of actual footage from those 77 days, the film is eye opening about the hate that come out when people feel wronged or are inconvenienced. I’d never heard of this event, and while I could use the excuse that I was only 10 when it happened, let’s be honest: most of us only see things that happen in our country. Even if this went down now, I’d probably only read the headline and move on. Shame on me. ★★★½

Not often that I watch a Wes Anderson film that doesn’t do something for me, but that’s the case with his newest, The French Dispatch. The film sets up with the death of the editor of the magazine The French Dispatch, and it was his dying wish that the popular newspaper close up with one final issue, to be made up of 4 articles. The film is the story of these 4 articles, so it is more of an anthology film. The three main stories that make up the movie are that of an artist struggling to get his work noticed while he is in jail; a group of student protestors; and a kidnapping plot involving the police chief’s son. Anderson pulls out all the stops, and the movie is a non-stop carousel of big names and faces; even the minor roles are a lot of big stars. Super fans of his work will dig the continuation of his trademarked style, but for me, it was way too much. He chose to go style of substance in this film, and it bombards the viewer from the opening scene. I like his movies that blend his style with a heart-warming message or great plot, but this film is really light on any of that. It seems like it’s the result of an artist making a film for himself, and everyone else can enjoy it or not; makes no difference to him. ★½

A Hero is the latest from another great director, albeit a much lesser known one outside of world cinema circles. Asghar Farhadi has made some good ones, but A Hero doesn’t quite reach the heights of some of those others. This one follows a man named Rahim who is in prison for debts (a common-enough reason in Iran). On a 2 day leave, his girlfriend shows him a purse she found on the street recently, with 17 gold coins inside. The money would be enough to pay back half of Rahim’s debt, and he hopes to beg for a chance to get out of jail and start earning to pay back the rest. However, when he takes the gold to a dealer, the amount is only half of what he was expecting. Knowing that will not be enough, and wracked with guilt that someone is missing the large sum of money, Rahim decides to find its owner. He is able to do so, and the story gets out to the press. The local newspapers and TV hail Rahim as a hero, a noble person willing to forgo his freedom for a stranger, but over time, Rahim is forced to tell more and more lies to keep the story straight. A charity organization, who initially raises money for Rahim’s debt, starts poking wholes in his story. It would be easy to make Rahim out as a good guy with bad luck, or a thief with a heart of gold, but Farhadi chooses to paint a much murkier picture. Rahim is both: sometimes he makes good decisions, and sometimes poor, and oftentimes it is the most inconsequential lies that come back to bite him. Great acting and a subtle story, but not as moving as this director’s other big hits. ★★★½

I saw Spencer for one reason alone: Kristen Stewart’s performance. I used to think nothing of her, but starting with Assayas’ Clouds of Sils Maria, I started to change my mind. I expected a tremendous rendition, and I got it. Stewart plays the iconic Princess Dianna, in a fictional story of a Christmas weekend in 1990. Dianna arrives to an estate in rural England on Christmas Eve, late to the party as always, and the film follows her throughout the weekend as she becomes unhinged under the insurmountable pressures of her current position. The house is fully aware of the affair going on between her husband Charles and his then-mistress Camilla. On top of that, every servant in the house seems to be a spy for Charles and the Queen, and no one seems to be on Dianna’s side. No one, that is, except her two sons, and her lone trustworthy servant, her private dresser Maggie (the always brilliant Sally Hawkins). When Maggie is sent away, by Charles or someone else intent on torturing Dianna, she is left alone. Dianna begins to hallucinate about Anne Boleyn, the famous former queen who was beheaded when her husband King Henry VIII wanted a new wife. Seeing corrections between Anne and herself, Dianna’s already unstable mind (she is shown struggling with self mutilation, bulimia, etc) lurches further down. This is not a straight forward biopic; it flows in a fantasy, often dreamlike state, especially towards the end. The audience scores are quite a bit lower than the critics, but I have to agree with the critics on this one. Incredible, moving picture, and Stewart would get my vote for the Oscar this year. ★★★★½

• TV series currently watching: Silicon Valley (season 1)
• Book currently reading: Redwood by Mark Danielewski

French director Jacques Rivette hails from the French New Wave era, but is not as famous some of his contemporaries like Godard and Truffaut. I heard about him in passing, where an article mentioned his film Out 1, one of the longest movies ever released, at nearly 13 hours long. I’m not ambitious enough to start there, so today I’m looking at 5 other films of his.

Rivette started filming Paris Belongs to Us before his fellow New Wave’rs, but they got theirs released first, and Rivette’s picture wasn’t released until 1961. The movie follows a college student named Anne, who starts hanging out with her older brother Pierre and his friends. They are an artistic, bohemian group, mourning the loss of friend Juan, who recently committed suicide. No one knows why, but there are whispers that his girlfriend, American Terry, knows something. Terry has moved on awfully quickly, now dating another in the group, aspiring theater director Gérard. Gérard is putting together a production of Shakespeare’s Pericles, in which Anne finds herself performing. As she gets to know everyone, including another former boyfriend of Terry, fellow American Philip, a growing sense of doom settles on her and the group. When together, they speak of art and politics and society, but when she meets each individually, the viewer sees that they all share a foreboding gloom. Anne begins to be worried for Gérard, thinking that Terry brings death to her partners. What started as a simple drama turns into a subtly thrilling mystery. When Philip, who is paranoid of a secret agency hunting and killing his friends, starts talking to Anne, even the viewer starts to wonder who’s next to go. ★★★★

Celine and Julie Go Boating continues the mystery-esque approach, but adds in a lot of silliness. Julie is a redhead sitting on a bench in the park reading about magic spells when she spies a hot mess of a woman hurrying by, dropping items from her bulging sack. Julie picks up the stuff and follows, and ends up meeting Celine. Right away, the two girls hit if off, and Celine moves in to Julie’s apartment. For awhile, the two are content with messing with each other’s lives: Celine puts on a red wig and stands in for her with Julie’s boyfriend; Julie goes to Celine’s childhood home and pretends to be Celine to her former nursemaid. Lots of laughs. But the big mystery in the film revolves around an old secluded mansion. It was this house that Celine was running from in the beginning, and each of the girls has gone again since. When one enters, they relive a day in the life of a nanny. At the end of the day, the child mysteriously dies, and the person who entered is expelled from the house to become herself again. They are left in a daze, with no initial memories of the events in the house, but if they later suck on a candy found in their mouth upon exit, their memories return. Celine and Julie are dead set on finding the murderer of the little girl and stopping it, saving her in the process, even if those inside the house are just a bunch of ghosts. It’s a genre shifting drama/comedy/mystery/fantasy. I dug a lot of it, but the two female leads are just too foolish at times. You can tell that a lot of the dialogue and antics are improvised, and the movie gives off a feeling of just a couple actresses having a good time with the camera turned on. I could have done without all the silliness, especially when they are in the house together in the end to finally save the girl. Less goofiness and more story would have been better. ★★★

Definitely starting to get a feel for Rivette’s style. Duelle continues the trend, and again is heavy on the mystery, with an even larger fantastical element. Unfortunately, it starts out giving the viewer nothing, and I was left wondering what the hell was going on for a long time. It begins with Leni, a woman shrouded in dark, visiting a hotel late at night looking for a man named Christie. The hotel worker, Lucie, points Leni to a nearby nightclub. Meanwhile, Leni’s polar opposite, a blond bombshell decked out in light colored clothes named Viva, is also asking around for Christie. It turns out Christie died about a year ago, so both women are starting out with those he hung out with. What are they looking for? And when people starting dying, who is the murderer and what is the urgency with Leni and Viva? The film finally explains some at the 60 minute mark, when we learn that Leni is a goddess of the moon and Viva a goddess of the sun, and gave us the rest of the info at 90 minutes, that they are seeking a jewel held by Christie a year ago which would grant one of the goddesses a chance to stay on Earth longer than their 40 day timeline. I think I would have rated this movie a lot higher had I had some clue what was going on for so long. It’s almost worthy of a re-watch; I think knowing how it all fits together would make the whole thing more enjoyable. Despite all my negative thoughts here, the noir-like feel and sense of doom that pervades the film from start to finish create a wonderful cinematic atmosphere. I just should have read a quick synopsis instead of going in blind. ★★★½

Holy shit is Noroît one of the dumbest movies I think I’ve ever seen. The basics are thus: Morag (Geraldine Chaplin) swears revenge over the death of her brother Shane. He was killed by a local band of pirates, headed by a woman with witch-like powers named Giulia (Bernadette Lafont). To fulfill her goal, Morag first hires a spy, and later infiltrates the group herself, posing as a bodyguard. Once in, she goes about killing those closest to Giulia, before setting her sites on Giulia herself. Fairly straight forward plot, but the film is as wonky as they come. Overly melodramatic, with long scenes without dialogue as the characters prance about on screen, and even the sword and knife fights are ridiculously farfetched. It’s like Rivette told everyone to ham it up, and they couldn’t be too over the top. I got an hour in, and then started skipping ahead just to see if Morag met her goal or not. Complete opposite to the above films as far as entertaining goes. ½

When Merry-Go-Round started, I thought, “Here we go again…” It shows on screen the musician duo playing the soundtrack of the film (scenes further on cut to them again and again when they play), and this was the case in Noroît too; in that film, the music of the film was performed by musicians set up in the corner of the stage, in a sort of breaking-the-fourth-wall kind of ploy. But thankfully Merry-Go-Round is a much different movie than Noroît. I was hooked from the beginning. Parisian Elizabeth has invited her boyfriend Ben from New York and sister Leo from Rome to Paris, while she sells their father’s estate there. He was killed in plane crash 4 years ago, under mysterious circumstances. Ben and Leo arrive, having never met, but Elizabeth isn’t there. Clues lead them out to the country, but they seem to be one step behind the elusive Elizabeth. When they do find her, she states that she thinks her and Leo’s father never died, but that he set up the crash to avoid paying back debts. Rumor has it that he is sitting on 4 million in ill-gotten cash, and now he is trying to “come back from the dead,” now that his debtors are no longer looking for him. But with that kind of money involved, a lot of people are interested. The film involves a lot of characters, and we don’t know who’s on who’s side. It’s very intriguing for awhile, but it does start to peter out; it seems Ben and Leo are continually hunting somebody or something and never getting anywhere. After about 45 minutes, I also came to the realization that this was nothing more than a trumped up B movie. And then it got weird too. Intermittently we see scenes of Ben running through a forest; later scenes he is being chased by dogs; later still, they jump the shark and he is being run down by a knight in armor on horseback. What is going on?! Lot’s a good mystery in this film, but by the end, so much flip-flopping was going on that I became thoroughly lost, and honestly I had almost stopped caring. ★★½

• TV series currently watching: The Great (season 2)
• Book currently reading: Dragons of Autumn Twilight by Weis & Hickman

The Tragedy of Macbeth is a new adaptation of the classic Shakespeare play. It features an all-star cast led by Denzel Washington and Frances McDormand, and Joel Coen (the first time one of the Coen brothers has done a solo project without the other). I won’t rehash the Macbeth story, you’ve either heard it before or don’t care at this point. This version forgoes realism for a more dream-like approach. It is shot in stark black and white, with a cloudy atmosphere and stage-like scenes. The foreboding soundtrack enhances the dreamlike feeling, creating an almost nightmarish impression. Great atmosphere and great acting, so great movie, right? Wrong. I could not get into this one, and I know that leaves me in the minority, looking at the glowing reviews. I much preferred the realistic approach (Polanski’s version takes the cake in my book). 30 minutes in, I started looking at my watch. 50 minutes in, I started counting down to the end of the film. The ending is exciting enough, but doesn’t save the picture for my tastes. ★★

Les nôtres (Our Own) is a French Canadian film about a small community rocked by a teenage pregnancy. The small town of Sainte-Adeline is the kind of place where everyone knows everyone, and they are all a tight-nit group, especially after a warehouse disaster 5 years prior killed a handful of them. The popular mayor, Jean-Marc, has just unveiled a memorial park to those killed. Isabelle is one of the woman working in Jean-Marc’s office, and it is her daughter, Magalie, who becomes pregnant. Magalie, just 13 years old, refuses to name the father, but when the news spreads, which it does like wildfire in this small town, suspicion immediately falls on fellow teen Manuel. Manuel and his brother are adopted immigrants, children to none other than the popular mayor and his wife. But, known only to Magalie and the viewer, the father is actually the mayor himself. This is one of those films which, while good, had the potential to be great, but doesn’t quite pull it off. It touches on a lot of subjects, including predatory grooming, teen bullying, racism, etc, but doesn’t examine any of the topics closely enough, and nothing gets resolved by the end. That’s probably the director’s intent: that Magalie navigates all these problems her own way, but I wanted more. Émilie Bierre’s performance as Magalie is quite good though. ★★½

After my initial surprise that I’m Your Man is in German (I saw actor Dan Stevens and assumed English; who knew he was fluent in German too?!), I settled in to watch a “sci fi drama.” Alma is an archaeologist and long-time single woman who has devoted her life to her work. She doesn’t seem to need or desire a relationship, which makes it all the more surprising that she has agreed to personally review an android romantic partner for 3 weeks. She’s been nudged by her boss, who is on the ethics committee tasked with the job of determining if the robots should be given human rights. Alma wants no part of it, but knows her boss can open up funding for her projects, so she has agreed. Her 3 week companion is named Thomas, and he has been programed and built to be her ideal man. Initially Alma wants nothing to do with him, leaving him alone for hours on end while she works or does errands, but over time, she does begin to open up to him. The movie is light on the sci-fi and heavy on the rom-com, with humor provided by Tom’s deadpan delivery of uncomfortable and ill-timed questions and observations. I didn’t laugh for a long time in this movie (we’ve all seen movies about humanoid robots saying the wrong thing at the wrong time for comedic effect; that schtick’s been done a million times), but like Alma, I grew to like Tom over time and warmed up to him. The movie is much less about Tom and his rights, which are hardly mentioned after the introduction, and more about Alma coming to terms with her chosen loneliness. Decent enough flick, but not all that memorable once the credits roll. ★★½

I’m not sure what I was expecting from Bergman Island, but it certainly wasn’t what I got. The plot is simple: a married couple, each a filmmaker, goes to Fårö, the island inhabited by the great filmmaker Ingmar Bergman, and also the location where he shot some of his most famous films. As in real life, the old Bergman properties are vacation destinations for writers, artists, and directors, who go for the peaceful environment and the hope that some lasting influence of Bergman’s greatness may seep from the very stones. Tony is a celebrated writer/director and is quickly churning out his latest screenplay, but his wife Chris has hit serious writer’s block, and is struggling for a conclusion to her latest idea. While Tony enjoys the touristy aspects of the island, Chris wanders off for more of self-guided walking tour, meeting local inhabitants and other artist types who have come to the island seeking a muse. As the film progresses, reality and fantasy collide, as Chris shares her idea and we get a film-within-a-film. Unfortunately the whole thing is pretty boring. The movie can’t decide if it wants to pander to Bergman fans, sharing little tidbits of knowledge about his life and career, or break down even basic knowledge of his films for the uninitiated. I’ve seen nearly 40 Bergman films, and picked up on just about every reference they dropped, but a lot of it just comes off as pretentious pseudo intellectual fluff. And there is zero resolution to either story, for both Tony and Chris or for the characters in Chris’s story. ★½

After so many middling movies today, I was hoping Ema would send me off with something better. Ultimately not so, but at least it is more exciting. The rare film out of Chile, this movie focuses on married couple Ema and her older husband Gaston. Ema is a popular dancer and the lead in choreographer Gaston’s troupe, but on a personal level, the two have perhaps the most toxic relationship I’ve ever seen. They can’t have a conversation without it resorting to terrible insults; Gaston in particular tries to think of the most vile things he can say to hurt Ema, and he has ample ammunition. The couple had adopted a 10-year-old named Polo, because Ema had always wanted a child but Gaston proved sterile. But Polo, either a bad kid or a product of bad fostering before coming to the new family, was a problem child and did a terrible thing: setting fire to Ema’s sister’s hair and burning her face. Gaston convinced Ema to give Polo back to the adoption agency, but now relishes in reminding her that she failed Polo and will never be a mother now. Riddled with guilt, Ema has a plan. She learns who has adopted Polo now, and sets out to bring down the new parents. She separately goes to each, and begins a sexual affair with each of them, both the husband and the wife. How it all plays out is grotesquely brilliant. The sex scenes are definitely NSFW, but it is hard to argue that it isn’t an arresting film. Ema is a women willing to do anything it takes to get to Polo again, and she’ll hurt anyone in her way. The film oozes sex, pain, heartache, and, if you’re lucky, redemption. ★★★

• TV series currently watching: Star Wars Rebels (season 2)
• Book currently reading: Dragons of Autumn Twilight by Weis & Hickman

When some of my friends read that I’ve never seen a single Rambo film all the way through, I’m probably going to get some flack. I know these aren’t necessarily “great cinema,” but they are undoubtably popular. And after so many slow dramas and foreign films lately, I’m hankering for some mindless action.

So obviously I wrote the above intro before watching any of these. The first Rambo film, 1982’s First Blood, has plenty of action, but it is far from mindless. Honestly, I was surprised at how unexpectedly emotional it is. John Rambo is a Vietnam vet still struggling to find his way in a country where he oftentimes feels like an outsider. He’s homeless and wandering along the west coast when he goes through the tiny town of Hope, Washington. There, he runs afoul of the local sheriff, Will Teasle (the late great Brian Dennehy). Will is a good sheriff and loves his town and its people, but he has little sympathy for a man who fought in a war he didn’t believe in, and wants Rambo to skip out of town as fast as his legs can carry him. When Rambo resists, Will arrests him, and he and his boys treat him a bit rough at the police station. This treatment gives Rambo flashbacks to his torture at the hands of the Vietnamese during his capture there, and Rambo lashes out. He beats up a few officers on his way out the door, and they give chase, leading up into the woods outside of town. When one officer ends up dead (from Rambo purely defending himself), Will calls in the state police and the national guard to hunt Rambo down. Rambo has one defendant through this: his former military commander, Sam Trautman. Trautman tries to get Will to back off, telling him that Rambo was the best Green Beret they ever had, and that he will take a lot of men with him if he is pursued to the end. Will can’t let it go. Great action, but as I said, I lot more emotion than I was expecting too. John Rambo is a man trained to fight, and without that, he’s found little purpose in his life. In addition to those chasing him, he has to combat his inner demons if he’s ever going to find peace. ★★★★★

As a kid, I remember the jokes pointed at the sequel’s title, with the unwieldy name of Rambo: First Blood Part II. That aside, this film picks up shortly after the conclusion of the first. Having turned himself in, Rambo is serving jail time in a labor group when he is visiting by Trautman. Trautman has a new mission for him: a top-secret reconnaissance trip into Vietnam to look for proof of still-held American POW’s. All he is supposed to do is get pictures and get out, and let the higher-ups negotiate to get them freed. Of course, this is Rambo we are talking about, and a simple camera op is not what he is all about. He gets into the camp and does indeed find Americans being held and tortured, and escapes with one man. While being pursued, they are ready to get picked up by the escape helicopter when the team leader, a sniveling mercenary named Murdock, calls in to abort the mission, abandoning Rambo and his escapee to the Vietnam soldiers and their Russian backers. Murdock was hoping to not find evidence of American POW’s, so as to not ruffle feathers in the USA, and thinks it better to let them all be killed. Rambo isn’t going to go down so easy. This sequel has less emotional nuance but maybe even better action than the first. In true sequel fashion, they up the explosion and body count to insane levels, and even introduce a (short-lived) romance for Rambo. Check your plausibility levels at the door, and sit back and enjoy. ★★★★

Now we’re talking. Rambo III displays the kind of no-nonsense, no cerebrum needed type of action flick that I was looking forward to in this franchise. There’s no love interest, no emotional attachment, no higher-leveling thinking needed; Rambo is just here to kick ass. Trading the forests of Vietnam for the deserts of Afghanistan, Rambo goes in to rescue Trautman, who has been captured by Soviets while training Mujahideen resistance fighters during the Afghan War. The big bad Soviet commander is a sadist who loves torturing his prisoners, which makes him Rambo’s number one nemesis in this go-around. This movie received fairly poor reviews when it came out in 1988, and it isn’t as good as the two previous, but if you know what you are wanting when you go into it, it is pretty enjoyable. Yes, the ridiculous factor is up to level 10 now (a bad guy is hung and then his body explodes!), but if you don’t want a stupid action movie, then go watch something else. ★★★½

It took 20 years to make another film. The fourth film in the franchise takes the simple name Rambo, and was released in 2008. It finds John Rambo living back in Thailand, where he was at the onset of the previous movie. He hates war, and because that’s the only thing he’s ever been good at, he hates himself too. He lives a solitary life, alone, trafficking people up and down the river and capturing snakes for the locals for money. One day, he is approached by a group of missionaries who want transportation up the river into Burma, which has been going through a deadly civil war. Initially reluctant, Rambo eventually agrees. He sneaks them in under cover of darkness and returns back to Thailand. A week later, he learns of the capture of that group; the American church’s head pastor has hired a band of mercenaries to get into Burma and get them out. Rambo has little faith that they can do it, but he joins up. I think he was just looking for some meaning in his life again, but he goes and does what he does best. This is by far the most gruesome of the Rambo movies. It depicts war atrocities in Burma including killing of civilians, rape, torture, etc. And with modern day computer-aided enhancements, the gore level is kicked up to extreme levels. No real story here, no character development, but it is undoubtably exciting from start to finish, and its 90 minute runtime passed in an instant for me. ★★★★

Rambo: Last Blood is the last film made to date, just released in 2019. After returning to his family ranch in Arizona at the conclusion of the last film, Rambo has finally find a semblance of peace in his life. He cares for horses, and looks after Maria, an old friend, and her granddaughter Gabriela. Rambo has been Gabriela’s surrogate father figure for 10+ years, since her father abandoned her after the death of her mother. Now that she is getting ready to go to college, she wants to look up her birth father and find out why he left all those years ago. Against Rambo’s and her grandmother’s wishes, Gabriela drives south to Mexico and looks him up. He rebuffs her, as Rambo knew he would, but before Gabriela can return home, she is kidnapped by a sex trafficking ring. The next morning, Rambo puts two and two together, and heads south to find the girl. Initially beaten up by the sex traffickers, Rambo heals up and gets Gabriela out. A turn of events leads him to lure the head of the sex ring to his Arizona ranch, which Rambo has prepared Home Alone-style with deadly booby traps. Though I did like the development of Rambo’s character, the overall arc from where he started in the first film, I found this movie to be the weakest of the series. It devolves into a bloody war of attrition in the end, and doesn’t have the satisfying conclusion that the fourth Rambo film gave us. ★★½

• TV series currently watching: Dexter New Blood (miniseries)
• Book currently reading: Cloud Cuckoo Land by Anthony Doerr

Yasujirō Ozu is a highly recognized director who, for my tastes, has had more average films than great ones. I’m beginning with one of his from the silent era, A Story of Floating Weeds. When most people hear “silent film” they think slapstick comedy, and there is a lot of that in this genre, since the visual gags can help carry the picture, but this particular film has a lot of heart too. It is about a traveling acting troupe who comes to a tiny town for a set of performances. The shows start off rocky and get worse when rains settle in, forcing low crowds and cancellations, but that is fine with the head of the group, Kihachi. He’s got other business in the town too: visiting his old mistress and seeing his son, who is now all grown up. The boy, Shinkichi, doesn’t know Kihachi is his father, only thinking him as a kind uncle who would visit every few years. Kihachi visiting his old flame makes his current mistress, a fellow actress, jealous, and she gets a younger member of the troupe to flirt with Shinkichi for some revenge. All plays out well in the end, though Kihachi does need to come clean for healing to begin. A fine film, and one that Ozu remade 25 years later, one that I’ll visit at some point in the future. ★★★½

Moving on to “talkies” with some Ozu films from the later 30s through the 50s. The Only Son was his first sound film, released in 1936. In a rural town, a young boy, Ryosuke, shows promise in grade school, but his single mother wasn’t planning on sending him on to middle school, as she just doesn’t have the money. His elementary teacher visits though, and persuades her to do so, as Ryosuke’s future will be a lot brighter with higher education. She vows to work hard so that Ryosuke can go to school in Tokyo. When we see them next, he is a grown man and his mother is coming to visit him in Tokyo for the first time. She’s struggled her whole life, but fulfilled her vow. When she gets to Tokyo, she finds that Ryosuke’s life has not been easy, despite his education. He got married, had a child, and is struggling to pay bills from his low-paying job as a night school teacher. For awhile, Ryosuke and his mom put on airs and try to pretend all is well, but it is obvious that she is disappointed in how his life is turning out, and he is ashamed that he didn’t amount to more. However, we soon learn that monetary success isn’t the only way to measure achievement. Beautiful film, and though it is Ozu’s first talkie, you can immediately see his mastery over both sound and silence, letting scenes breathe and not hurrying through the motions. Its pace may challenge some, but it isn’t a long movie and I loved it. ★★★★

There Was a Father has a very similar plot element to the above film, but this time it is a single father instead of a mother. Shuhei is a teacher raising a boy on his own, but quits teaching when a student accidentally drowns on his watch while on a school trip to a river. Shuhei becomes a laborer to pay for his son’s schooling, and as the years pass, the boy, Ryohei, goes to high school and then college, becoming a teacher himself. Like the above film, the two family members spend their entire lives apart; Shuhei works hard and never misses a day, only making the train trip to see his son here and there. Released in 1942, this sense of “doing your best for the greater good, even to the detriment of personal relationships” was applauded during Japan’s war times. Maybe because it was too similar in feel to The Only Son, which I’d just viewed, or perhaps it just wasn’t as good, but I wasn’t feeling it. ★★½

It’s very odd how some of these Ozu films just resonate with me. Such is the case with Late Spring, a quiet film (aren’t all Ozu movies?) about a single father, Shukichi, who raises a daughter, Noriko, to adulthood. She’s 27, and while their neighbors and friends all agree she should be married by now, Noriku has no desire to do so. She adores her father and wishes to stay in his household forever. With urging from an aunt (with a huge matchmaker syndrome), Shukichi devises a plan to get Noriku hitched: he tells her that he would like to remarry, but that he can’t do so with his daughter living under his roof. She takes the news hard, but wants to please her father and ultimately see him happy, so she agrees to find a man. Long, thoughtful takes, lovely scenes, and sharp dialogue all contribute to a joyful, moving experience. There’s also some sharp humor that often came out of nowhere, which was a pleasant surprise. Like I’ve said before, Ozu’s pacing may test some (and even me at times, despite my patience when it comes to movies), but this one’s a good one. ★★★★½

Much like two of the above films are similar, so too are Late Spring and Early Summer. This one also revolves around an unmarried daughter, with the same actress (Setsuko Hara) playing a character of the same name, Noriko. The 28-year-old Noriko has a loving family and an extended set of friends, some married and some single, and they all tease each other. Her parents though are done teasing: they want to see her married. They start to set her up with a single, never-married man, but they wonder if his age (40) will turn her off. Meanwhile, Noriko may find love in an old friendship, a person she never considered before. There are some truly great moments in this film; touching scenes that will move you as only the great films can. However, there are also some silly moments, attempts at brevity provided by various family members (but usually involving the two youngest boys), that come off as distracting and unneeded. I would have preferred to trim the fat and make a more direct family drama. It would have been more of a tear-jerker and a better piece on the whole. ★★★

• TV series currently watching: Top of the Lake (season 1)
• Book currently reading: Cloud Cuckoo Land by Anthony Doerr

Asia is a very nice little film out of Israel, focusing on a mother-daughter relationship. Victoria, Vika to her friends and family, is a 16- or 17-year-old girl with a wild streak. She is being raised by her single mother Asia, who also likes to party. Asia had Vika when she was very young and is still in her mid-30s herself. She’s a loving mom, and works hard as a nurse, but is maybe a bit too loose in her parenting, oftentimes taking the path of “friend” instead of “parent.” Vika likes to skateboard but has been having a hard time with her balance lately. When Asia takes her to the doctor, they receive the heard-rending diagnosis of ALS. The doc says Vika could still life years, but unfortunately the disease hits quickly, and it isn’t long before she is confined to a wheelchair. Wonderful acting from both women, and a great story about love, care, and growing up, and not just from the teenager. ★★★

The Lost Daughter (actress Maggie Gyllenhaal’s directorial debut) stars Olivia Colman as Leda, a middle-aged woman on vacation in Greece. She’s there alone and looking to have a relaxing working vacation (she’s a college professor and well respected in her field for her research), but those plans go awry when the beach resort she frequents is bombarded by a large and rambunctious local family. The curious and nosy Leda focuses most on Nina (Dakota Johnson), a young mother who seems to have little patience for her daughter. The little girl’s doll goes missing, throwing the whole family in a tizzy, but it was Leda who took the doll, because it reminded her of her own little girls. We start to see flashbacks of a younger Leda raising two girls, and Leda too was often very distracted and uncaring towards the girls, only playing with them with it was convenient for herself. The full picture of Leda’s life plays out over the course of the film, leading to feelings of guilt but also acceptance of who she is as an adult. Strong acting from Colman, Johnson, and Jesse Buckley as the younger Leda, and smaller roles for Ed Harris and Peter Sarsgaard. The acting is the best part of the film, as the story itself is on the weaker side. Leda is a complicated woman, and a self-proclaimed selfish person, and it’s hard to root for selfish people. Much of her anguish is self inflicted. ★★½

Blue Bayou is the latest in a string of films I’ve seen in the last few months to shine a light on the current immigration problems facing our nation. Down near New Orleans, Antonio LeBlanc talks like a country boy, dresses like a country boy, but a look at his face tells you he was born somewhere else. Adopted by American parents and legally brought here from Korea at the age of three, Antonio is married and has a child on the way when he is targeted for deportation. He checks a lot of the boxes that ICE is looking for: he is no longer here legally since he turned 18 and never got a green card, and he is a convicted felon for stealing a motorcycle when he was young and stupid. It doesn’t matter that he doesn’t even speak Korean and only knows America as home, nor that his adoption was legal and that he is married now with a family, the government wants him gone. As he gets a lawyer and tries to fight the system, Antonio once again turns to crime to try to come up with the funds to support his case. At the same time, his wife is dealing with an ex-husband who did something wrong in the past but who is trying to make amends so he can see his daughter more, a daughter who only knows Antonio as dad. Lots to unpack there, and it is a solid film with great performances from Justin Chon (who also wrote and directed, this being his followup to 2017’s standout Gook) and Alicia Vikander. A couple knocks against the film are it sometimes tries too hard to tug at the heartstrings, when the story itself does a good enough job on its own, and from a production standpoint, there are way too many hairs in the gate on different scenes. Pretty tough to forgive this in this day and age; I’ve seen less hairs in films from the 30s. Ever heard of check the gate? Minor quibble, but it was distracting. Still, its an eye-opening piece about a problem facing a lot of young adults who didn’t even know they weren’t here legally after being adopted as children. ★★★½

Disney does it again with Encanto, a charming family film taking place in South America. The Madrigal family was saved by a miracle 2 generations ago, when a young wife with three newborn babes fled death and destruction in their previous village. While the husband sacrificed himself so his family could escape, the rest of the family made it out safely and started a new village in the mountains. A magic house named the Encanto sprang from the earth, and since then, every new child born into the family has had some magical gift. One has enormous strength, one can control the weather, one can shape change, and so on. That is, until Mirabel. At her coming-of-age party, she did not receive a gift, and now, 10 years later, she’s the only young woman in the family without a magical gift. But that doesn’t mean that everyone else is happy instead of her. The family is cracking at its seams, and so if the magical house that has blessed them all these years. Mirabel takes it upon herself to find out why, and hopefully make things right before the magic in the village disappears. It’s from Disney, so you can expect plenty of bright, beautiful colors, and the movie delivers. It is also extremely funny for all ages. The only knock maybe is the soundtrack, which does have a couple standouts, but seemed a bit weak as a whole, with less catchy, memorable tunes than what they typically deliver. Still, very fun film with a high rewatchability factor. ★★★★

The Dry is an Australian film starring Eric Bana (who gets to use his native accent; usually we see him mask it in Hollywood films). He plays a federal agent named Aaron who leaves the big city to return to the tiny town of his birth after his childhood best friend, Luke, murdered his wife and son before killing himself. After the funeral, Luke’s parents approach Aaron about investing the murder-suicide, as they simply cannot believe Luke would have done this terrible deed. Aaron goes around town asking questions, meets up with an old flame, and starts unearthing secrets long kept buried. In flashbacks, we see Aaron’s teenage years in the town, and the mysterious circumstances that led to the death of a girl back then too. In that death, it seems Aaron gave Luke an alibi, but the town didn’t really believe it, and there are people still who don’t want to see Aaron poking around in the present. This film has the feel of a classic mystery drama, light on thrills but heavy on riddles. The clear picture of both the present and past crimes doesn’t open up until the very end, and it is a fun ride to get there. ★★★½

• TV series currently watching: Wakefield (miniseries)
• Book currently reading: Cloud Cuckoo Land by Anthony Doerr

One Sings the Other Doesn’t is a not-so-subtle feminist film about a friendship between two women during the women’s rights movement in France of the 1960s-70s. When the film begins, Pauline is a teenager who is ready to unshackle herself from her parents. While roaming stores one day, she wanders into a photographer’s shop and recognizes an old neighbor amongst the photos. Turns out the girl, Suzanne, is the photographer’s mistress. Kicked out by her parents when she got pregnant as a teen, she now has a second kid with this man and has a third on the way. When Suzanne and Pauline get together to reminisce, Suzanne admits she is scared to death to have the third baby, as she is dirt poor as it is, and her man will never leave his wife for her. Pauline begs money from her parents and gives it to Suzanne to get an abortion. 10 years go by before they meet again, and they’ve individually grown up to be staunch supporters of woman’s rights, going to rallies not much different than are still being held today, with chants of “my body my choice,” etc. Pauline, who now goes by the name Apple (Pomme in French), followed her childhood dream and sings in an avant-garde sort of group, always about furthering women’s causes. The two continue to stay in touch over the rest of the film, even when one travels far away. The movie is very well shot, but a bit too political for my tastes. I’d rather a filmmaker not be coy and just say what it is (à la Goddard’s political films) that try to pretend there’s a story there when there really isn’t. ★★

Vagabond is light years better. Released in 1985, it follows a young woman who has clearly chosen a homeless lifestyle. The movie begins with her dead body being found by a passerby, and then backtracks to see her final weeks up to that point. A road movie without a road, this film follows Mona around the area as she bounces from place to place. Sometimes she finds an abandoned house, sometimes she’ll sleep with a man to get a bed or couch on a cold night, but more often she’ll pitch a tent in some field somewhere. It’s a dangerous life, and she faces all kinds of hazards on the way, but the film is clear: this is her choice. When Mona finds the occasional kind person who doesn’t want something in return, she’ll tell them what she left behind: a job and the probability of a secure future. But she didn’t want that, she wanted to be free. The blue collar worker in me wants to see Mona as nothing but the dregs of society, as she scoffs at work, even turning down a longterm, safe place to stay when it means she’ll have to work the farm, but you can’t help but cheer her decision to live her life her way. The story is told several ways: we see Mona move about and interact with others, but we also have intermittent interviews by police with those she ran into, and sometimes people will even break the fourth wall in mid-scene and tell the viewer their thoughts on Mona at the time. Knowing the end she meets is a harsh thought throughout. It’s a brilliant film, which leaves a lasting image. ★★★★★

Jacquot de Nantes is part drama, part documentary, about the young life of Agnes Varda’s husband, Jacques Demy. As he neared death in 1990 (at the time they said it was cancer, years later Varda admitted it was AIDS), Demy was telling stories of his childhood and Varda said it would make a good movie. As he was too weak to make it, he got Varda to do it instead. The film plays out as a love story, with scenes showing him as a little boy up through high school, as he fell in love with cinema, started making his own small films in the attic of his house, and so on, all against the backdrop of World War II in his French town of Nantes. Much of the film is shown in black and white, but in scenes that were particularly inspiring to the young Jacquot, they were shown in color, and often we’d get the corresponding scene from the films he made as an adult. For example, when his aunt visits the family and talks about her love of gambling, we see a short scene from Demy’s film Bay of Angels, showing Jeanne Moreau gambling away. Interspersed throughout are interviews of present-day Demy, discussing various moments that we are seeing on camera. A wonderful ode and send-off to Varda’s husband; he died 10 days after shooting wrapped and never saw the final product. ★★★½

If Jacquot de Nantes is a love story to Varda’s husband, One Hundred and One Nights is a love story to her passion of film. The premise is that of an aging film star with the congruous name of Simon Cinema (played by Michel Piccoli) who, nearing his 100th birthday, hires a young beautiful film student named Camille (Julie Gayet) to spend a couple hours a day just talking film, to keep his mind fresh. The overall plot of the film involves Cinema’s vast estate without an heir, and Camille’s idea to “bring back” his long-lost grandson Vincent (setting up on imposter to play the part) in order to get access to Cinema’s money to fund her filmmaker boyfriend’s films. That’s the comedic aspect of the movie, and it’s a bit zany, but the truly great part of this movie is the discussion of great films. Cinema (the person) and Camille love film and reference it non-stop. Along the way, they are visited by a who’s who of European cinema stars: Marcello Mastroianni, Anouk Amiée, Alain Delon, Jeanne Moreau, Hanna Schygulla, Gérard Depardieu, Jean-Paul Belmondo, Catherine Deneuve, and many more, and even some cameos for American viewers (Harrison Ford, Robert De Niro, and a blink-and-you’ll-miss-him Clint Eastwood). As the stories fly, we see clips of so many great films from the 30’s to present. If I had seen this movie 5 years ago, before I really got into classic films and especially European classics, all of it would have gone over my head, but now, though I’ve maybe seen only half the films they talk about or show, at least I’m familiar with all the directors and actors they share stories about. Based on the story of this movie, it’s nothing special, but all of the actors in it, all the behind-the-scene stories, the totality of it all makes this an irresistible and engrossing picture. ★★★★

• TV series currently watching: Stargirl (season 2)
• Book currently reading: Boundless by RA Salvatore

Swan Song (a much different one) takes place in the near future, and stars Mahershala Ali as Cameron, a dying husband and father, who has kept his condition from his family. His wife Poppy is only recently getting over a 2 year depression after the death of her twin brother, and Cameron doesn’t want to send her back down that spiral. Instead, Cameron has turned to a controversial new science that will replace him with an exact clone, a “new” Cameron who will be a physical copy with all of his memories, who can step into his role without his family or job knowing any difference (no one will be made aware of the swap; even the new Cameron will think he is the real thing). Cameron is hesitant to do it, but as his condition gets worse, and Poppy announces she is pregnant again, he decides to have it done. However, when he comes face to face with himself, he can’t help but feel jealous that this man, even if it just a new Cameron, will be sleeping with his wife, raising their kids, etc. It’s a sci-fi movie with a lot of introspection, and gave off an Ex Machina kind of vibe. Excellent cast too, with Ali, Naomie Harris, Glenn Close, and Awkwafina, as another terminal patient who previously went through the process. ★★★½

The Last Duel is a much better movie than that other Ridley Scott film of 2021. Based on a true story, it is the tale of a woman, Marguerite de Carrouges, who was raped in the 14th century. She accuses Jacques Le Gris, a former friend of her husband Jean de Carrouges, but he denies the charges. To let God show who is right, Jean challenges Jacques to a public duel. It sounds cut and dry, but the film is anything but. The movie is split up into three parts. Chapter One is “The Truth According to Jean de Carrouges,” and begins with battles shared by he and Jacques, and what lead to the deterioration of their friendship. Jean is painted as a hard but fair man, who has little patience for the court but has supreme faith in his king and country. Chapter Two is Jacques Le Gris’s truth, and of course much of the blame of their failing friendship is laid on Jean. Even in his own truth, Jacques is not painted as a good man. The final chapter is of course the one truth who matters most: Marguerite’s. In each chapter, the unfolding of the rape and its ramifications are very different. The film can’t help but be a little repetitious, since you see some events three times (albeit from different perspectives), but the director does a good job of only revisiting key moments that paint the picture as a whole. I have no idea how accurate the actual story is, but some of the details, especially how women were treated and how voiceless they were, should be enraging to all modern viewers. ★★★★

Two good movies, unfortunately followed by a couple duds. The Card Counter has a strong cast including Oscar Isaac and Tye Sheridan (and a completely miscast Tiffany Haddish; I’m sorry, she’s just not good in serious roles) and focuses around a man with the not-so-subtle name of William Tell. Tell is a former soldier who went to military jail for his role in the Abu Ghraib prisoner torture scandal. A very smart man, he taught himself how to count cards in jail, and is now a gambler. He mostly sticks to himself until he crosses paths with a young man named Cirk. Cirk’s father was in Tell’s unit, but the father was unable to escape his demons after his own release from jail. He ultimately killed himself, and Cirk is out to get revenge on the private contractor who trained Tell and Cirk’s father in those torture techniques, but who got off scott free when the scandal broke. Tell decides to try to raise money in his gambling to help Cirk set his life straight and convince him to give up on his vendetta. I don’t mind a slow movie as long as something comes of it. Nothing does in this one. I think it is trying to deliver some deep introspective thoughts but it went over my head. Great acting from Isaac, and there’s a strong sense of trepidation pervading in the first half of the film, but it doesn’t lead to anything. ★½

I don’t give up on many movies, but I had to turn off Holler about 40 minutes in. It’s about a small-town girl and her brother struggling to get by on their own. Raising themselves while their mom is in jail, Ruth and Blaze only have each other. Ruth is smart but college seems like a pipe dream until her brother secretly mails in an application for her, and she is accepted. But in a house where they are facing eviction and all the utilities have already been shut off, they have no money to send her. So they team up on a scrap metal crew, working for a man who has no problems breaking into vacant buildings to gut. Again, I don’t know how it turned out, but honestly I don’t care. I don’t know if the no-name actors are really bad, or if it is just the terrible script and dialogue, but the lines are delivered so woodenly that it felt like a bad school play. No investment in the characters, and I have a hard time rooting for people who do stupid shit and use the excuse “I’m poor.” ½

During a large portion of Small Engine Repair, and I’m talking nearly an hour of its 103 minute runtime, I was wondering if it was going anywhere at all. The setting is thus: a trio of life-long friends from working class New Hampshire have been through all of life’s ups and downs together, and there have been a lot more downs. Frankie spent some time in jail, while his wife ran around on him, leaving their daughter Crystal to be looked after by Frankie’s buddies Terry and Packie. The three of them have been friends since grade school, and have the stereotypical rough-and-tumble attitudes of the blue collar class. This gets them in a bar fight one night, and they storm off mad at each other. Three months later, Frankie lures the two to his workshop one afternoon, ostensibly for drinking and hanging out, to make up, but Frankie has a more sinister motive, and he’ll need his friends more than ever to bring his plans to fruition. The payoff isn’t worth all the set up it takes to get there, but it isn’t a terrible movie. Jon Bernthal plays Terry and he’s perfect for roles like this. Unfortunately as a whole though, it’s not the kind of movie that you’ll remember when it’s over. ★★

• TV series currently watching: The Doom Patrol (season 3)
• Book currently reading: Boundless by RA Salvatore

I recently got a bug to visit more films from the Merchant Ivory team, from the late 80s and early 90s. At this time, the production company was churning out films, and while James Ivory had directed the vast majority of this team’s movies to this point, they now turned to others for a few productions. Based on a book producer Ismail Merchant had previously read, The Deceivers was directed by Nicholas Meyer and stars a young pre-Bond Pierce Brosnan. Supposedly based on a true story, it takes place in 1825 in India, and is about the uncovering of a local cult who has been robbing and murdering for years. Captain William Savage is a young idealist officer in the East India Company who will not ignore what is going on around him, even when ordered to do so. He goes undercover to join the cult, and ends up doing some awful thing while with them, before he is able to bring them down in the end. The movie is a lot like your typical 80s cop films, albeit in a much different setting obviously. The film received fairly poor reviews when it came out in 1988, but honestly I didn’t think it was horrible. The story isn’t new, but there’s good action, well developed characters, and I was wrapped up in the telling of the tale. What more could you ask? ★★½

The Perfect Murder was released the same year. Directed by Zafar Hai and starring a young Stellan Skarsgård (in only his second English language film I believe), this one is sort of a comedy murder whodunit. You know you are in for some cheesy jokes right from the beginning when “perfect murder” isn’t a murder at all, but an attack, and “perfect” applies only because the victim’s name is Mr Perfect. Perfect is a rich man’s secretary, and the wealthy boss is all over the police to find who attacked his man (and he insists in calling it a murder, since that was obviously the intent). The local police in India bring in a crime forensics expert from Sweden, and supposed hilarity ensues. Supposed because you won’t laugh as much as they want you do. Lots of dad jokes and a mildly interesting murder plot can only take you so far. ★★

James Ivory came back to direct Mr & Mrs Bridge, and with him (and an all-star cast), they righted this ship for me. This is a wonderful portrait of a family in upper middle class Kansas City in the 1930s and 40s. Walter Gene Bridge is a rags to riches lawyer, who came from a humble background to build a successful firm. He’s been married for all of his adult life to India Bridge, and together, they’ve raised 2 daughters and a son. Though they didn’t come from money, the parents share old school values, which are at odds with their increasingly worldly kids, especially the wild eldest daughter. Between the parents is a bit of a rift as well; Walter is all business all the time, and India, as she sees her kids falling in love, and friends sharing tales of love and life, she realizes that her and Walter have little romance in their life anymore. This isn’t a hard-hitting film; it is a subtle piece about changing times, changing relationships, and the changing of the individual. The two leads are Joanne Woodward and Paul Newman, with supporting roles from Kyra Sedgwick, Simon Callow, Blythe Danner, and Robert Sean Leonard, one year removed from his breakout role in Dead Poets Society. Newman and, in particular, Woodward shine, as you’d expect. ★★★★

Fresh off acting in the above film, Simon Callow took the director’s chair for The Ballad of the Sad Cafe, which remains his only directed film to this day. The film stars Vanessa Redgrave as Miss Amelia, a country girl who runs an empty cafe in a tiny town in Georgia. She makes moonshine outside the town where no one can see her operation, and brings it in to sell to workers at the end of the day, which seems to be her only source of income. Amelia is despondent about her life until Lymon shows up. Lymon is a stunted man with a hunchback, and claims to be a distant relation. Despite his physical impairments, he is full of energy and always cheery, and his relentless energy naturally buoys Amelia and makes him popular to the townsfolk. He gets her to clean up the cafe and start serving booze by the glass, as well as food for families. It becomes an instant success. This newfound boon is put in danger when Amelia’s no-good ex-husband (Keith Carradine), who’s been away serving time in jail, shows up wanting to put Amelia in her place, after she mistreated him during their short time together. The movie has some quirky, funny moments in the first half or so, but is otherwise a hot mess. Some weird twists and turns, and you never get any kind of idea of what makes the three main characters tick. The finale is a clusterfuck that makes absolutely no sense. Redgrave gives it her all, but the talent is wasted here. ★½

The Remains of the Day is the most celebrated film out of today’s batch, receiving 8 Oscar nominations when it was released in 1993 (including Best Actor/Actress for Anthony Hopkins and Emma Thompson, best director for Ivory, and Best Picture; many had been nominated/won the previous year for Ivory’s Howards End). The movie takes place in both the late 50s and, in flashbacks, the mid to late 30s. In the former, Mr Stevens is head butler to an American, Jack Lewis, who lives at the vast Darlington Estate. Lewis recently purchased the estate and saved it from the wrecking ball, as the property had been sitting vacant due to a sordid past. The past, as we soon learn, involved the former Lord Darlington, and Stevens original employer. Lord Darlington had some German friends before the war, and went out of his way to broker peace between Germany, France, and England, with many dignitaries from all those countries visiting Darlington. After the war, Darlington was accused of treason, leading to the house’s current predicament. Stevens oversaw everything as the head butler, and he often butted heads with the head housekeeper, Ms Kenton. It is this relationship that is front and center to the film. They clash a lot in the early going when Ms Kenton is hired, but often only because they each have the best intentions over the welfare and upkeep of the estate. In the later timeline, Stevens is on his way to see Kenton, years after she left Darlington, in hopes of bringing her back on board. This is not a film for the average moviegoer, as while on the surface not much happens, the devil is in the details as they say. The wordplay, the glances, and the inner turmoil of our characters are what drives this movie, and it is wonderfully acted by the leads. Ultimately nothing happens as you’d expect, and sometimes those make the most memorable films. ★★★½

• TV series currently watching: Supergirl (season 6)
• Book currently reading: Boundless by RA Salvatore