Greetings again from the darkness. Dramatic short films are challenged with generating an ultra-quick connection with viewers. German director Patrick Vollrath begins the film by showing a man anxiously pacing and buzzing the gate bell outside a suburban home. Our instincts that tell us he must be in some kind of trouble fade a bit when an 8 year old girl runs into his arms exclaiming “Daddy!”
Lea (newcomer Julia Pointer) clearly loves her father, and we quickly figure out this must be the scheduled every other weekend visit resulting from a recent divorce. Lea’s excitement is palpable as they stop off at a toy store where her dad tells her she can pick out any two items she wants. A simple gesture that’s probably repeated thousands of times each weekend, re-ignites the instincts we felt in the opening scene. Some “little” hints confirm our suspicion as the two hurriedly rush to an appointment at a government office and then on to the airport.
Simon Schwarz plays Michael Baumgartner, the dad who transitions from anxious to warm/loving to purely desperate. His performance, and that of young Ms. Pointer, are realistic and so spot on that we as viewers are sympathetic to both. It’s an exceptionally tense and dramatic half-hour reminding us that in a broken family, it’s rarely the case that “everything will be okay”, and sometimes things escalate into a literal tug-of-war that is heart-breaking. This is expert work from a filmmaker that understands the magic of short films, and it’s little wonder the film has been so well received at AFI, Cannes and numerous other festivals.
Greetings again from the darkness. With a Best Foreign Language Oscar for his previous film The Great Beauty(La grande bellezza), expectations were sky high for this one from writer/director Paolo Sorrentino. Cinematographer Luca Bigazzi is also back and the two create yet another artistic entrée that is a visual extravaganza, worthy of the admission price even if no dialogue existed. Combine the visual artistry with a commentary on age and emotions, and the result is a film that will either enchant or stultify … with probably no middle ground.
Michael Caine stars as Fred Ballinger, a renowned Orchestra conductor, who is vacationing at a stunning Swiss Alps spa with his daughter Lena (Rachel Weisz) and his long-time best friend, screenwriter Mick Boyd (Harvey Keitel). Fred, a self-professed retiree, is being pursued by Queen Elizabeth’s representative to perform one last concert. Fred is adamant in his refusal … for personal reasons we later learn are due to his nostalgic belief that his wife (no longer able to sing) is the only one who will sing his “simple” songs as long as he is alive. In the meantime, Mick is working with a group of ambitious young writers in an attempt to leave a legacy with his most important film ever. So you can already see that both men are working through their golden years in different ways.
Lena is devastated when her husband dumps her for a young pop singer (played by the real pop singer, Paloma Faith). Oh, one other detail … Lena’s husband is also Mick’s son (Ed Stoppard). This makes for some awkward (but entertaining) moments, and also leads to one of the film’s best scenes – Lena spilling her emotional guts to Fred while they are both covered in a mud bath. Director Sorrentino is a master at twisting these poignant moments with dashes of levity or irony. Another example is when Miss Universe (Romanian model Madalina Diana Ghenea) puts a condescending movie actor (Paul Dano) in his place with a devastating shift in tone and a comeback for the ages.
Sorrentino executes a couple of bizarre dream or fantasy sequences – one with Fred conducting a cow pasture (replete with cows and other bits of nature), and another with Mick being haunted in a meadow by all the female stars from his films (each in costume of their character). Suffice to say, this is not a conventional look at aging. What’s also clear is that Sorrentino believes our emotions drive our actions. The most jarring example is the aftermath when Mick’s long-time leading lady Brenda Morel (played by Jane Fonda) declines to appear in his latest film.
Even the most bizarre segments are presented with a visual artistry that forces our brains to process overtime. How about an obese Diego Maradona (played by Roly Serrano) repeatedly kicking tennis balls into the air? Or big time actor Jimmy Tree (Dano) struggling with his decision to sellout by appearing in a popular robot movie instead of pursuing his desire to be taken seriously as an actor? Or Lena bouncing back with a socially awkward mountain man? Or the seemingly minor role of a young masseuse (played by Luna Zimic Mijovic) who has us yearning for more? In addition to how each of these segments is startling to look at, Jane Fonda’s role has so many nuances that an entire movie could be made about her.
As with The Great Beauty, the film will have the most profound impact on those of us old enough to be looking through the binoculars and noticing how far away the past looks … and wondering just how long until “Life’s Last Day”.
Greetings again from the darkness. There was a time when movies were cultural trendsetters in such areas as speech, style and behavior. Somewhere along the way, a transition occurred, and these days movies are more a reflection of the times – showing us who we are and focusing mostly on what society focuses on. Oscar winning director Tom Hooper (The King’s Speech) capitalizes on the current movement to mainstream the LGBT community by telling the story of Einar Wegener/Lili Elbe, a transgender from more than 40 years before Dr. Renee Richards, and 75 years before Bruce/Caitlyn Jenner.
Lucida Coxon has adapted the 2000 novel from David Ebershoff, which is a fictionalized version of the 1933 “Man Into Woman” … the personal letters and diaries of Einar/Lili (edited by Niels Hoyer). The film opens in 1926 Copenhagen as successful landscape artist Einar Wegener and his struggling-to-gain-respect portrait artist wife Gerda appear to be happily married and quite attracted to each other. During this segment, Hooper and cinematographer Danny Cohen utilize a somewhat distracting quasi-fisheye lens that distorts most every shot … presumably making the point that this couple’s life is itself distorted. There is no shortage of foreshadowing despite the bohemian artist lifestyle. Einar doesn’t miss a chance to caress the silks and frills as he visits his ballet dancing friend Ulla (Amber Heard), and things escalate quickly once he poses in stockings for one of Gerda’s portraits.
The best and most interesting segment of the film is the middle as Einar begins to explore his Lili persona, and Gerda is diligent in her support … going as far as to encourage her husband to attend a party as Lili (introduced as Einar’s visiting cousin). The public interactions with their friends and acquaintances are a little difficult to accept, though the scenes with her initial male suitor Henrik (Ben Whishaw) make it clear this is a point of no return. Despite this, the times are such that Einar willingly attempts to repress the Lili side, and even visits multiple medical and psychological specialists. It’s this segment that reminds us how quickly the medical profession of the era overreacted by prescribing radiation, electrotherapy, and even by institutionalizing those who were so inclined.
Gerda and Einar/Lili “escape” to Paris, where it becomes obvious that it’s Lily who has been masquerading as Einar, rather than the other way. The duality of Einar/Lily soon dissolves and daily life is filled with lessons … such as a Paris peep show where hand and body movements become part of the transition. Eddie Redmayne (last year’s Oscar winner for The Theory of Everything) gives an extraordinary performance, and is at his best when exploring the subtle nuances of Lili. It’s crucial to note that while Redmayne’s performance is a physical marvel, it’s Alicia Vikander (A Royal Affair, Ex Machina) as Gerda who provides the real heart and soul of the story. Though the film glosses over some traits of the real life Gerda, Ms. Vikander is stunning in more than a few scenes, which in the hands of a lesser actress, could have proved cringe-inducing.
Adding some depth in limited roles are Matthias Schoenaerts (Rust and Bone) as Hans, Einar’s childhood friend all grown up, and Sebastian Koch (The Lives of Others) as the pioneering doctor who performs the sex reassignment surgeries that physically transition Einar into Lili. Even with the strong supporting cast, there is no mistaking this as anything other than a film that belongs to Mr. Redmayne and Ms. Vikander.
Director Hooper takes a very conventional approach to an unconventional story, and this “safe” direction seems designed to make the uncomfortable story more palatable for mainstream audiences (similar to how Brokeback Mountainhandled homosexuality). However, don’t mistake this for Tootsie or Mrs. Doubtfire. There are two serious stories here: the struggles of one person’s identity, and the corresponding challenges of a married couple. Hooper’s style is by no means cutting edge, but does feature one of the best lines of the year … “I’ve only liked a handful of people in my life, and you’ve been two of them.” This story has bounced around the movie world for awhile, and for many years was rumored to have Nicole Kidman in the Einar/Lili role. Your imagination can determine if that would have made for a better fit.
Greetings again from the darkness. I’m not one of those who subscribe to the belief that documentary films should present all sides to the story in a “just the facts, ma’am” style. In fact, I respect a filmmaker who is so passionate about a topic that he/she enthusiastically attempts to overwhelm the viewer with “proof” that their opinion is the definitive truth and no further debate is needed. Here, renowned director Michael Winterbottom (The Trip, 2010) supports comedian/actor/activist Russell Brand in his agenda to educate the masses on the evil of big banks and rich people, and the need for re-distribution of wealth.
Now that agenda may seem a bit odd coming from an admitted rich guy, but in fact, Brand’s professional success lends some credibility to his argument … or at least it’s a different approach than having a group of people living in poverty talk about how they got screwed by “the man”.
To say that Brand dumbs-down his explanation is certainly an understatement. To emphasize this, there are a couple of segments where he utilizes elementary level students to differentiate between rich and poor – what’s fair and what’s not. Concentrating mostly on the British economy, while also noting the similarities to the United States 2008 crash, Brand makes the argument that the turning point was approximately 35 years ago as Margaret Thatcher assumed power and Free Market Capitalism took over. It’s a bizarre point coming from a native of a country whose Monarchs (not known for their “fairness”) date back for centuries. However, this is an example of the keep-it-simple approach in getting the masses to join his quest.
Borrowing a page from Michael Moore’s long-successful script, Brand presents the big banks and the super rich as the villains of society. It’s a common theme and one that’s pretty easy to agree with … the banks were bailed out, and then proceeded to pay their upper management huge bonuses. The viable argument is, why don’t they pay “us” back? Brand attempts to follow Moore’s lead again (while referencing Joseph Campbell) by walking into the banks and asking to see the CEO’s. These attempts fall flat, and leave us with Brand wise-cracking while bystanders try to figure out if it’s all a prank.
The most effective sequences involve Brand walking the streets of Grays London where he was raised. His discussions with the locals are real, and infinitely more enlightening than his storming into bank lobbies. The statistics don’t lie – the rich are getting richer, while the rest of society struggles. George Carlin said it best … the poor are needed to keep the middle class motivated to work so the rich can benefit. Brand also rails against legal tax evasion via offshore accounts – especially in Grand Cayman. He lobbies for those accounts to be taxed and the money returned to the country of origin.
Most of Brand’s mission is preaching the importance of fairness, and the claim is made that by definition, capitalism is the inequality of power. Whether you agree with him or not, Brand is to be respected for using his celebrity status for a cause much more important than the best table in a restaurant, or courtside seats to a game. His simple-is-best approach carries right through to the end where he does offer up his list of recommendations to create a more fair system. If his simple and sometimes funny approach allows more people to enter into discussions, then his cause is worthwhile, even if his recommendations are a bit lacking in substance and depth.
Greetings again from the darkness. All we need is one more miracle. Having been beatified with one “confirmed” miracle, it’s that missing second one that stands between Mother Teresa and Sainthood. At times the film from director William Riead plays like a highlight reel for Mother Teresa’s induction into the Catholic Hall of Fame, as the dual emphasis is on all the good things she did for the poor, as well as the surprising sense of isolation and abandonment she felt most of her life.
The film is structured in flashback form as a priest played by Rutger Hauer is charged with researching the case for canonizing the late Mother Teresa. He crosses paths with Father Celeste van Exem (Max von Sydow), who shares the saved correspondence from Mother Teresa that provides the title of the movie. These very personal letters spanned 50 years and act much as a journal of her work and emotions.
Most of the movie takes us through the progression of Mother Teresa’s life. A slump-shouldered Juliet Stevenson portrays the nun as a woman on a mission from God … despite the obstacles from her detractors: jealous and disapproving nuns, many in the Catholic Church, and even some of the local citizens whom she desired to help. Her commitment to assist “the poorest of the poor” placed her in some tough situations and undesirable environments. She seemed to take on the suffering of those she was serving.
Given her proclamation that “It’s God’s will, not mine”, the Vatican approved her plan to go outside the Loreto Order to serve the poor. Two years later, her application for a new order was approved, resulting in the congregation of The Missionaries of Charity. Her mission then had structure and backing, and so began to make real progress.
Capturing the essence of this woman is what the film does best. We absolutely understand how she became “an icon of compassion for all religions” by giving “voice to the poor”. Perhaps, given the times we are in, this ability to serve multiple religions could itself by considered a miracle. As with any person who serves others, Mother Teresa had (and has) her detractors and critics. She (like her Catholic Church) opposed contraception … despite the needs within the community she served. Others accused her of mismanaging the millions in contributions, and spending too much effort recruiting new Catholics. Again, those accusations are not the purpose of the film, which instead profiles a woman who helped so many who otherwise would have been ignored in their misery.
As a Nobel Peace Prize winner in 1979, her commitment to the cause resulted in her most public recognition and brought her full circle from an early line of dialogue: “I may not be wanted here, but I am needed.” Regardless of the Catholic rule book requirements, it’s difficult to imagine a modern day person more worthy of being considered a Saint.
Greetings again from the darkness. Two Pixar films in one year? Earlier this year, the brilliant Inside Outreminded us just what sets Pixar apart from other animation studios … the film was intelligent, insightful, thoughtful, beautiful, funny and emotional enough to bring tears to the eyes of many parents. In other words, it’s a tough act to follow – even for Pixar!
Of course, 2015 was not intended to be a double-header for Pixar. The Good Dinosaurran into serious production and story issues at the same time the studio was going through layoffs and reorganization. So the six year project turned into eight, as a new creative team was brought in (led by director Peter Sohn), and the story and characters were re-worked and re-imagined. The finished product is likely the most staggeringly beautiful animation to ever hit the big screen, while at the same time being some of the darkest and bleakest material ever presented by Pixar.
The premise is pretty interesting: What would Earth be like if THE asteroid had missed, and the dinosaurs survived? That’s about as sciency as the story gets, other than it does portray nature as a colossal adversary (what’s with the hallucinogenic berries?). We first meet Momma and Poppa Apatosaurus as they work their corn fields (huh?) and wait for their baby eggs to hatch. The runt of the litter is Arlo, who just can’t keep up with his more active siblings and who feels inadequate in comparison to his majestic father.
Arlo and nature are responsible for the tragedy that sends Arlo off on a journey that features the full spectrum: the importance of family, the sadness of loss, the strength of friendship, and the self-discovery that leads to independence. While there are quite a few laughs along the way, the fear and isolation that Arlo experiences takes up most of the movie, and could leave all but the strongest kids feeling anything but upbeat and happy.
There is a life lesson about making one’s mark, and an oddball friendship between Arlo and young boy (named Spot??) who is wise to nature. But this one lacks the charm of most Pixar outings, while at the same time reaching technical levels that are breathtaking to behold. It’s difficult to imagine many kids wanting to watch this one again and again, but for all you Pixar nerds, you can rest easy … John Ratzenberger does make a vocal appearance.
Greetings again from the darkness. “Believe it or not”. That’s the catchphrase that Ripley’s used for its books, TV shows and museums, and it could just as easily describe this latest from award-winning documentarian Jeanie Finlay (The Great Hip Hop Hoax, 2013). When Elvis Presley died in 1977, legions of his emotionally distraught fans refused to believe he had truly left the building forever. This is the crazy story of how one music industry huckster cashed in on the opportunity by taking advantage of talented nice guy who just wanted to sing.
If you can play golf like (pre-scandal) Tiger Woods or throw a fastball like Nolan Ryan, then you have a chance to create a name for yourself. However, if you sing like Elvis (and even favor him physically), your music options are mostly relegated to being a sideshow act as an impersonator. That option was twisted a bit in 1979 by music producer Shelby Singleton, who had purchased Sun Records from Sam Phillips and relocated it to Nashville. Singleton contracted with Jimmy Ellis, a nice young man from rural Alabama whose singing voice was eerily similar to that of Elvis. But rather than impersonate Elvis, Ellis donned a bedazzled eye mask and assumed the public stage name of Orion – the title and character of Gail Brewer-Giorgo’s novel that explored what might have happened if Elvis had faked his own death to escape the claws of celebrity. Orion became a fantasy experience for those Elvis fans who wanted to believe their King was still alive.
Ms. Finlay’s film exposes yet another example of how cruel the music industry can be. Talent is no guarantee of success. Mr. Ellis definitely had talent, but his ambition and trusting nature allowed him to be exploited (along with Ms. Brewer-Giorgo) by Singleton, who paid him no royalties despite a hand full of charting singles, and some albums that found a market. To her credit, the filmmaker doesn’t dwell on the ugliness, instead using archival audio interview from Ellis (and plenty of his songs) and numerous talking head interviews from his son and those who were associated with the time period, to create a biography of a man who just wanted to sing and live a good life. Ellis may not have been The King, but he was the kind of guy it seems we would all like to call a friend … and listen to him sing as often as possible.
Greetings again from the darkness. You have surely seen more complex and intricate bank robbery movies, but it’s doubtful you’ve seen one more ambitious from a technical standpoint. In a remarkable achievement of commitment, planning, and technical execution (plus some good luck), director Sebastian Schipper and cinematographer Sturla Brandth Grovler deliver 2 hours and 14 minutes with a single take and a low budget. It’s a testament to the cast and crew, as well as the advancements in digital equipment (mobility and battery life).
Alfred Hitchcock’s Rope (1948) and last year’s Best Picture winner, Birdman or (The Unexpected Virtue of Ignorance), from Alejandro Gonzalez Inarritu, both utilized extended/seamless takes in fascinating manner; however, it’s Mr. Schipper’s film that takes us through multiple locations – a dance club, the streets of Berlin, the roof of a building, a local café, inside a stolen van, back to the dance club, through an inner city escape, and into a luxury hotel. That’s right … each of these puzzle pieces are generated without ever pausing the camera or editing a shot. You might expect nausea-inducing shaky cam, but instead it plays more like we viewers are along for the ride.
Beyond the technical goodies, we get two fine performances from Frederick Lau as the streetwise and smooth-talking Sonne, and especially Laia Costa as Victoria. The titular character is first spotted enjoying a sweaty dance to thumping club music before leaving the club and bumping into Sonne and his group of “real Berlin guys”. It all seems playful enough, but as the flirtations escalate between Victoria and Sonne, we sense things could become a bit more ominous. The first part of the film really allows us to get to know these two as they get to know each other. Victoria’s childhood story explains much about her reactions throughout the ordeal, and it’s also the point that we realize our infatuation with her is justified.
Things do in fact turn ominous for the group, and a criminal act conducted out of desperation leads to a few action-oriented sequences … each impressive in light of the single-shot approach. No CGI as a fallback and no carefully manipulated sets. Instead, the actors and camera must continue, no matter the glitches or obstacles that real time tosses in their path.
Run Lola Run(1998) may be the best comparison for the frantic pace, but in actuality, the film has no legitimate pairing given the 2 plus hours single shot approach. You may choose to see this for the technical achievement that it is, and the guess is you will be equally impressed with Ms. Costa.
Greetings again from the darkness. “Don’t tase me, bro”. In 2007, an incident at The University of Florida became a humorous viral sensation when a student, after asking John Kerry a question, was forcibly removed by police. His pleading became a catchphrase, but didn’t prevent his being hit with the Taser. Now comes this documentary from director Nick Berardini, and he pulls back the curtain on the ethics of Taser International Corporation, the safety of tasers, and the protocol and use of this weapon by police officers.
We learn Jack Cover invented the taser in 1969, and it was the Smith brothers (Rick and Tom) who founded the Taser International company in 1993, increased the voltage output, and began marketing heavily to police departments as a safe alternative to firearms. The Smith’s claim the taser is “the biggest revolution in law enforcement since the radio”, though they spend the bulk of the movie giving evasive answers to variations of the question, “Is the taser safe or potentially deadly?”
Director Berardini documents tragic events where police use of tasers ended with suspects dying. Doctors and lawyers chime in, but it’s the testimonies of Tom and Rick Smith themselves that provide a level of creepiness that would complement most any horror film. Actual video footage is shown of not just the Smith brothers numerous depositions, but also of some of the actual events. Two of the most devastating are a man at the Vancouver airport, and a young man stopped for speeding directly across the street from his own house. The latter died after being tased … while his parents looked on. Neither appeared to be an immediate threat to the police officers. The film recounts incidents where kids as young as 6 years old, and women in their 80’s have been hit with police tasers.
Reports show that more than 17,000 Law Enforcement Agencies utilize tasers, and one of the more interesting case studies is that of the Warren, Michigan Police Department. One of the early adopters of the weapon, this police department dropped the taser from use by their officers after a tragic incident. Since then, they have seen no increase in police injuries or shootings, drawing into question the company claim of a safer alternative.
At a minimum, the film should instigate further debates on two key issues: the safety of the weapons, and the training techniques and best use for police officers. The key concern seems to be a direct hit to the chest area which can immediately impact the victim’s heart. It’s frightening to think that police could be Taser-dependent or Taser-happy in using a weapon that may not be safe. We see some fascinating video of macho tough-guy cops being dropped immediately by one second (or less) tasers, but it’s the events with multiple prolonged zaps that seem to cause the biggest concern. Again … this research is necessary and should be done immediately, given the widespread use of Tasers.
As a side note, Taser International is still in the taser business, but their biggest revenue source is now police body cameras. Say what you will, but the company is certainly opportunistic.
Greetings again from the darkness. If a filmmaker is going to mess with the classics, there are two paths of creativity from which to choose: stay true to the original, or put a new spin on it. In this case, the classics in question are the nearly 200 year old novel from Mary Shelley (1818) and the nearly 85 year old movie from James Whale (1931). The filmmakers doing the messing are director Paul McGuigan (Lucky Number Slevin) and screenwriter Max Landis (son of director John). The spin they chose was (in theory) to tell the story from the perspective of Igor, the loyal assistant to Dr. Frankenstein.
It’s an interesting approach, but one that immediately presents a problem … since the title they chose was not “Igor”, but rather Victor Frankenstein. The film does begin with Igor’s backstory in the circus as a hunchbacked clown/amateur doctor, and the character does provide some early and late narration. The conundrum stems from the fact that pretty much everything else in the movie is centered on the mad scientist, rather than the skilled apprentice/partner.
Daniel Radcliffe plays Igor and James McAvoy plays Victor Frankenstein (not Fron-kin-steen, in a nod to Mel Brooks), and both actors seem to be doing everything possible to bring energy and enthusiasm to a movie that can’t seem to decide if it’s a reboot or a reimagination or simply an origin story. Radcliffe effectively uses his physicality as the circus clown who is so mistreated and misunderstood, and McAvoy is such a hyper-active mad scientist that I’m sure his fellow actors many times were inclined to advise “say it, don’t spray it”. McAvoy does seem to be having a grand old time playing the brilliant yet unhinged young doctor-to-be, and to his credit takes a much different approach than Colin Clive when he gets to the infamous line “It’s ALIVE!”
The best parts of the movie are the intricate and amazing sets, the monster himself (albeit too brief), and the expert use of classical music and film score. The circus sets are colorful and active, while Frankenstein’s soap factory home/laboratory is fascinating and creative, and the final Scotland castle on a cliff is breath-taking. Pulleys, chains and cranks are everywhere … as is an incredible amount of body parts, organs and fluids.
After a very well done circus opening, we are jarred with a seemingly out of place action sequence involving a slo-motion chase and fight scene that seems to be attempting to mimic some of the recent Sherlock Holmes movie stunts. Here they are unwelcome and ruin the flow. Another aspect that seems forced and unnecessary is a romantic interlude between Igor and a trapeze artist (played by Jessica Brown Findlay). It feels like an add-on to remind us that it’s supposed to be Igor’s story. Additionally, Andrew Scott plays an intriguing Scotland Yard Inspector who is every bit as obsessed with his faith-based beliefs as Victor is with his science-has-no-bounds stance. A story told from the Inspector’s perspective might have worked, but instead it comes across as another add-on. Another add-on is the filthy rich and very devious fellow med student (played by Freddie Fox) who agrees to fund the experiments, but mostly the character is an after-thought necessary to move the plot along. Wasted is the always menacing Charles Dance, who has but one scene as Victor’s strongly disapproving daddy.
A combination of the romance, minimal role of Igor in the grand finale, the medical school bumbling, the clunky Inspector involvement, and the all too brief monster appearance makes the film all but impossible for viewers to connect. They tell us twice “You know the story … a crack of lightning, a mad genius, and an unholy creation”, but the reality is, the fact that we know the story, makes this one all the more disappointing. It’s fun to look at, but is lacking the depth and soul that has allowed Shelley’s book to stand up over two centuries.
Greetings again from the darkness. Dramatic short films are challenged with generating an ultra-quick connection with viewers. German director Patrick Vollrath begins the film by showing a man anxiously pacing and buzzing the gate bell outside a suburban home. Our instincts that tell us he must be in some kind of trouble fade a bit when an 8 year old girl runs into his arms exclaiming “Daddy!”
Posted by David Ferguson 
Movie Reviews from the Dark 