KPK on the CINEMA (30): The Films of JUNE 2014

.

> JUNE 2014: 35 films reviewed here: from a desperate and compelling Romanian drama about the fierceness of a mother’s love, to a live-action comic book about a brooding mutant confronting his private grief while kicking ass. That’s a lot of movie-watching in one month! You will note many more 2½ star films here than usual. I’m generally not a happy camper when a movie drops below 3 stars. Life is too short, and there are too many wonderful films to waste time on efforts that amount to half a great movie. That’s what happens when you take chances, or try to fill in the holes in your cinema education. In June of 2014, I did both. Yet- look at all the 4 to 5 star films! There always seems to be more great cinema to see.

(Ratings are on a 5 star scale. Note that a classic only becomes a classic after a decade or more.)

(Titles in purple have been expanded for Flix Pix columns.)

> This month I try to offer some insight into:

CHILD’S POSE (2013)+
LIKE SOMEONE IN LOVE (2012)+
WAITING FOR ARMAGEDDON (2010)***
X2: X-MEN UNITED (2013)*+
A FIELD IN ENGLAND (2013)**+
GOOD HAIR (2009)*
ENOUGH SAID (2013)+
FREE ANGELA and All Political Prisoners (2012)+
LAST DAYS (2005)+
HER (2013)+
TIM’S VERMEER (2013)+
THE NINTH GATE (1999)+
NOISES OFF (1992)+
THE COMANCHEROS (1961)
MOULIN ROUGE (1952)+
KINGPIN (1996)*
THE COURT MARTIAL OF BILLY MITCHELL (1955)*
THE PATIENCE STONE (2012)
DERSU UZALA (1975)*
ERNEST & CELESTINE (2012)+
THE KILLING OF SISTER GEORGE (1968)+
BURN (2012)*****
MILLION DOLLAR HOTEL (2000)+
CAHILL U.S. MARSHALL (1973)*
MALIFICENT (2014)*
3 IDIOTS (2009)
THE BOOK THIEF (2013)**
THE FAR COUNTRY (1954)*
THE LONG WALK HOME (1990)+
TOTAL ECLIPSE (1995)+
ANYTHING ELSE (2003)+
THE MATCHMAKER (2010)+
FRONTRUNNERS (2008)*
DEVO LIVE in the Land of the Rising Sun (2003)**
THE WOLVERINE (2013)*

– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –

CHILD’S POSE (2013) ****+

> Certainly the best Romanian film I have ever seen, this somber rumination on the ferocity of a mother’s love for an ungrateful child was a powerful and visceral experience to watch.

. It’s a tragedy: A man overtakes a car on the highway, accidentally killing a child. There is plenty of fault to go around: the car being overtaken sped up just to be an asshole, the child should never have been trying to cross the freeway in the first place, perhaps he should have been better supervised and the driver should not have been so impatient- but this makes nothing easier for anyone. The traumatized man is bitterly contemptuous of his rich, hyper-meddling mother, even as she does everything she can to protect him from the consequences of his actions by trying to bribe witnesses into changing their testimony.

. Mature actress Luminita Gheorghiu in the lead is just riveting in a role that could have been very annoying to watch. One never has a strong sense of where this narrative is heading- it is both unpredictable and believable and makes one realize just how unsatisfyingly superficial most of the mainstream movies from that hit our cineplexes are. The raw emotion of CHILD’S POSE is tough to take, but it’s oh so rewarding in the end.

– Just fine, fine filmmaking! I only wish I fully understood the title…

LIKE SOMEONE IN LOVE (2012) **+

Slickly packaged Japanese story of a deepening friendship between a man and his hired “companion”. I was really enjoying it, until it suddenly ended as soon as events got really interesting. What’s with that? The Japanese certainly have a different artistic ethic than we in the west, but geez! How about giving a film an ending? Is that too much to ask? Apparently.

WAITING FOR ARMAGEDDON (2010) *******

This lo-fi doc on Christian fundamentalism in America, was pretty much what I expected: scary stuff! This brand of Christianity is just… evil! It’s anti-intellectual, anti-science claptrap that takes faith to its silliest extremes, and reveals its proponents as simpletons coming from a place of fear and insecurity fed by a woeful under-education. Scarier still- the power these morons wield in the United States is mortifying! These virulent ignoramuses have the ears of presidents, senators, congresspeople, governors, mayors, municipal school boards and Faux “News” zombies who have been taught to believe that questioning virtually anything is an act of heresy, not a quest for truth and understanding. Horrifying!

X2: X-MEN UNITED (2013) ***+

I was slow to warm to this X-Men franchise, but with fine action directors like Bryan Singer at the helm, one can be guaranteed a bit of slick fun, at very least. There is a lot of real acting talent in these silly things too, from Halle Barry to Hugh Jackman. Not to mention Ian McKellen (Gandalf!), Anna Paquin, Alan Cumming, Brian Cox and Patrick (“Make it so!”) Stewart. I enjoyed it. It was diverting fun. I am warming to the comic book mutant silliness. The new one (DAYS OF FUTURE PAST) is generating positive buzz…

A FIELD IN ENGLAND (2013) ****+

> There is a civil war erupting in 17th century England.

. It is a brutal scene of chaos and death. We meet a group of men on the fringes of the battle, deserters madly scrambling for their lives across an overgrown field. Once out of harm’s way, they form an alliance and go in search of the succor of a rumored alehouse, but things go awry when they are captured en route by a powerful and mysterious alchemist who has a task for them. The motley crew becomes conscripted labor, set immediately to work digging for a treasure the shaman is convinced is buried somewhere in that field.

. This experimental-narrative from Ben Wheatley just knocked my sox off! I will immediately check out his two previous efforts (SIGHTSEERS and KILL LIST) to see if this bizarre stunner is the rule or the exception. The last time I remember being so bowled-over by the startling originality of a film must have been BRAND UPON THE BRAIN, my introduction to unique Canadian artist Guy Maddin.  (See my similarly experimental review at:)

https://lastcre8iveiconoclast.wordpress.com/2011/02/20/quiet-in-the-back-13-you-see-3815-films-you-think-youve-seen-it-all-review-of-guy-maddins-brand-upon-the-brain/

. Yes, there are strange forces at work in the fairy circle, ringed by hallucinogenic mushrooms whose ingestion turns the whole cinematic expedition into an indescribable psychedelic lunacy that goes so far as to enter the realm of experimental film when reality seems to break down into an extended vacation from normalcy. The crazier this flick got, the more I squealed with delight. A FIELD IN ENGLAND is certainly not for everyone, but as with BRAND UPON THE BRAIN, its rewards (for the initiated) are delights to be treasured.

– Talk about original! Whoo-ee!

GOOD HAIR (2009) *******

> Thoughtful funnyman Chris Rock was horrified when his preschool daughter asked him tearfully: “Daddy, why do I have bad hair”?

. It set off a spark in his imagination, and the result is this comic look at what turns out to be a serious subject: standards of beauty within the black community in America. Just why would a beautiful young girl be distressed about the natural frizz of her gorgeous nappy hair? Why does this population, comprising only 12 percent of the population, use 80% of all the hair products sold in the country? Why have so many black folks bought into a white-imposed icon of beauty: the long wavy hair of glamorous supermodels?

. When I learned how much black women frequently spend on hair extensions and wigs, and how they share toxic straightening treatments trying to attain this standard of beauty, I was just flabbergasted. So was Chris Rock. In GOOD HAIR, he travels the world to get at what’s behind this issue, from a Harlem barber shop to the ashrams of India, where average people shave their hair by the millions to show humility before God, then leave it to be collected by Asian businessmen who then ship it to America for this 12% of the market, earning a fortune and making human hair India’s greatest export. Maya Angelou and Al Sharpton even weigh in on the matter!

– I will never look at a black person’s hair again, without thinking of this surprisingly informative and predictably entertaining film, and wondering to myself.

ENOUGH SAID (2013) ***+

> The first time you see the wonderful James Gandolfini on screen in this film, you are seized with the sadness of his loss.

. Fortunately, the film is so good that you manage to forget about this and enjoy the great acting in a fairly conventional and predictable film… until the end, when the sadness returns, because the big lunk stepped so far outside of Tony Soprano in his final film, he reminded us that despite having played an iconic character, he was an actor in the true sense, and could probably play just about anything that was presented to him. His onscreen chemistry with Julia Louis-Dreyfus was magical indeed, and looked more like love and attraction than acting. She was a revelation to me, because not having seen her in ‘The New Adventures of Old Christine’ or her HBO series ‘Veep’, I had her in a box as Elaine, Seinfield’s gal-pal, thinking of her as more comedienne than actress. I sure was wrong about that. This actress was very nuanced and human in this- warm, vulnerable and lovable.

. On the down side, we’ve certainly seen this formula before: a character knows what the right thing to do is, but it’s a hard thing for them to do. They like the status quo and don’t want to rock the boat, but they know they are playing with fire by not choosing the righteous path, and sure enough- things get ugly when the truth is revealed and they pay a very big price.

– No, ENOUGH SAID didn’t break any new ground as a romantic comedy, but it was heartwarming, nurturing fun and another example of why we need more women sitting in the director’s chair.

FREE ANGELA AND ALL POLITICAL PRISONERS (2012) ***+

I once casually met Angela Davis, in passing at a party, during the time she was teaching at UC Santa Cruz, and I didn’t realize at the time what an amazing historical figure I was meeting. I remember thing she seemed smart and attractive. After seeing this interesting and informative documentary about her struggles, I am really impressed. Great archival footage really brings her compelling story alive. It leaves some big questions unanswered, but what’s here is fascinating.

LAST DAYS (2005) **+

Gus Van Sant’s dreamy, measured rumination on the life and death of Nirvana frontman Kurt Cobain, fictionalized here with his usual detached languor. This filmmaker often makes us feel like voyeurs, watching people when they don’t know they’re being watched. I can’t imagine why the gay love scene was here for example, except in that capacity. Gus always seems to supply himself twink eye candy to ogle during each project. Here we get Lucas Haas (WITNESS, as a young boy) and young actor Michael Pitt (Boardwalk Empire) in the lead, who was the best thing about this less-than-successful attempt to get inside the mind of a rock star who is deteriorating within and crumbling to dust before our eyes. But the film is as dreary and listless as the main character. There are a few great scenes here, but a few great scenes do not a great movie make.

HER (2013) ****+

> Spike Jonez is a friggin’ genius.

. Okay, ETERNAL SUNSHINE OF THE SPOTLESS MIND didn’t work at all for me, but BEING JOHN MALKOVICH, ADAPTATION and the wonderful WHERE THE WILD THINGS ARE all clearly demonstrate what a startlingly original voice this unique film artist has. And Spike is at the top of his form here. In the first ten minutes of HER, Spike has more to say about the way we live our lives than lesser directors could fit in an entire film. Here, he is interested in the possible near-future of human relations and how media shapes our identities, in the light of recent cataclysmic upheavals in technology.

. HER starts out with flair and panache, delivering a palate of beautiful, rich colors in a gauzy Hallmark card look that speaks of a prosperous future. Theodore (the always exceptional Joaquin Phoenix), has a job writing personal letters for people who are either too busy or inarticulate to write them themselves. A soulful but lonely single man, Theo still pines for the intimacy he experienced with his estranged wife, who is still waiting for him to sign the divorce papers. Early on, there is a riotously funny scene where Theo’s attempts at phone sex garner him far more than he bargained for. Much of the film is funny while at the same time, kind of sad and wistful. The excellent soundtrack accentuates this beautifully.

. Enter the perfect, sultry, beguiling voice of Scarlet Johansson as OS-1: the first individually personalized artificially intelligent operating system that quickly becomes more than just a virtual personal secretary to Theo. There appears to be chemistry between this being of corporeal flesh and this ever-evolving set of algorithms, expressed in ones and zeroes. Theodore gets something from this program (who dubbed herself “Samantha” after reading a book of baby names in a fraction of a second), that he doesn’t get from real live people. Something is going on here. Is it… could it be… love? Theodore and Samantha begin to “date”. (They are not alone, as it turns. Lots of people are doing it.) But Theo soon finds that he is way out of his league with an arguably sentient being that can evolve in days more than humans could in millennia. Samantha, unfortunately, is just as out of reach as Theo’s ex-wife.

. But wait. Theo has this friend, see? And this friend is the delightful, the delicious, the alluring Amy Adams. Her marriage is on the rocks. Is it possible for Theo to hook up with a real live woman, or will the unattainable ideal of Samantha prove too desirable to resist?

– Wonderful filmmaking! See it.

TIM’S VERMEER (2013) ***+

> Tim is not an artist.

. He’s a technician, made successful by his innovations in video imaging. But Tim has a fascination with art- or one artist anyway. Johannes Vermeer (1632–1675) was a celebrated Dutch artist, perhaps best remembered for “Girl With the Pearl Earring”, and renowned for turning the art world on its ear with a level of photo-realism in his paintings that had never been seen before. Modern scholars look at the extraordinary detail in his work and are forced to speculate that perhaps the celebrated artist used available technology of the era (the camera obscura was a very popular novelty at the time), to “paint with light” as he did. Using only the tools available at the time, Tim designs and builds a small mirrored device that seems to do the trick, and he becomes obsessed with painting his own “Vermeer”, despite having never picked up a paintbrush.

. Tim spends years of his life on the project, and apparently big wads of cash as well, recreating the room used in Vermeer’s masterwork “The Music Lesson” down to the smallest detail. The work is all so tedious, he teeters on abandoning this project several times, but Tim is a driven man. When he realizes it is by far the most difficult thing he’s ever attempted, he becomes all the more determined to see it through. As a portrait of a man obsessed, this fine doc feels like it could have been made by the great Werner Herzog. (Bet the great German moviemaker would love this film!) And the result of his grueling efforts? STUNNING! His copy of Vermeer’s painting has to be seen to be believed!

– Was the famous painter, like Tim, more technician than artist? Looks like this could very well be the case! Fascinating.

THE NINTH GATE (1999) **+

The occasionally brilliant Roman Polanski (director of THE PIANIST and CHINATOWN), made this piece of turgid silliness, revisiting similar ground to his classic ROSEMARY’S BABY. Johnny Depp clearly has fun playing a shady rare book dealer who is more than a bit of a scoundrel. Sexy, husky-voiced milf Lena Olin chews up the scenery in her customary role of dangerous femme fatale. Here, it is all about three rare books that wealthy zealot Frank Langella believes can be used to summon Lucifer, who purportedly drew some of the frightening and enigmatic illustrations himself! It’s diverting- not as bad as it is reputed to be/not as good as it should have been, with all this great talent in the mix.

NOISES OFF (1992) **+

> This Peter Bogdanovich film version of the long-running backstage farce proves definitively that not every good play is a candidate for a good movie.

. Even this wonderful cast (Christopher Reeve, Marilu Henner, Carol Burnett and more), all working their hardest, could not bring cinematic life to this highly-orchestrated piece of theatrical mayhem. Despite occasional laugh-out-loud bits that hint at the gem this property could be, most of this was a clumsy dud. Pieces that might have seemed very clever and funny live, seem like calculated clockwork here, somehow devoid of any humor, but playing more like a ballet mécanique.

. The central conceit is a fun formula: we see a bombastic director (an energetic Michael Caine), directing a motley cast in the American premiere of a popular British sex farce. The device? We see it from three perspectives: during rehearsals, where despite the anarchy, we catch glimpses of how beautifully this silly play could work- then again during the early previews when things begin to fall apart at the seams, with a fractious cast of bickering actors- and finally part-way into the tour, in Baltimore where things really begin to go haywire. In this kind of comedy, one can count on the fact that everything that can possibly go wrong goes wrong in spades. TV funnyman John Ritter (Three’s Company), fares the best here, managing to make his comic bits work almost as well as they may have onstage. Denholm Elliot is a hoot as a nearly deaf actor that the rest of the cast has to work hard to keep sober.

. Light fun/some laughs- even some big ones, but ultimately a fail.

– Remember the film versions of THE FANTASTICS and A CHORUS LINE: wonderful theatrical experiences that just did not translate to the silver screen. Pity.

THE COMANCHEROS (1961) ******

> Classic director Michael Curtiz does it again- reminding us why the American western can be a truly great genre.

. John Wayne is simply wonderful here, as a tough Texas Ranger pursuing an escaped fugitive, wanted for killing a man in a duel. Problem is, this gambling dandy (played by a familiar Stuart Whitman), keeps slipping out of the big man’s grasp. Eventually, Wayne is sent undercover, posing as a gunrunner in an attempt to find the lair of the “Comancheros”, a group of bandits that have begun arming the local Indians and thus shifting the balance of power with the settlers. It’s great fun watching “the Duke” (tender, tough, witty!), pretending to be this criminal character, so at odds with his carefully crafted persona. While in this undercover guise, whom should he encounter but his escapee? Will his nemesis blow his cover by revealing his true identity? Not a chance.

. This is essentially an “unlikely buddy” film. We watch the inevitable bonding between the former foes, until the man he pursued becomes an important ally. But there’s a problem- a moral conundrum: this Texas Ranger took his oath seriously. He plays things by the book. So how will he convince himself to let his prisoner simply go free, as though there were not a noose waiting for him in Louisiana?

. Fine acting, sharp script, eye-popping cinematography, nasty bad guys, exciting action sequences, a great score by Leonard Bernstein and a satisfying ending. What more could you want in a classic western?

– Five stars!

MOULIN ROUGE (1952) **+

> When I saw that this was a John Huston film, starring the great Jose Ferrer as diminutive French sensation Toulouse Lautrec, that was enough for me.

. Unfortunately, it was not enough to make a good film. For a project with so much going for it: fine lead actor, accomplished director, vivid location, great subject- this MOULIN ROGUE failed badly. The art direction, costuming and lighting were all excellent, even if the street locations looked too much like the backlot of a film studio and not much like the actual streets of Paris. Nonetheless, the sense of time and place were expertly established, particularly in the scenes that took place inside the celebrated nightspot of the title.

. But Mr. Ferrer was stiff and wooden in the early scenes as an improbably lovestruck cynical curmudgeon- a big man trapped in a shortened body. His street-tough romantic foil, actress Colette Marchand, gave one of the most overblown, ham-fisted performances I have seen this side of a silent movie. Her brazen histrionics simply destroyed every scene she was in. It was painful to watch. Zsa Zsa Gabor was here as well, and just awful- as a chanteuse who burns through one man after another. In two musical numbers, she delivers the most cringe-worthy lip-synching job I’ve ever seen onscreen. We cannot believe for a second that that voice came from that person, especially as when she speaks, it is very hard to follow what Zsa Zsa is trying to say.

. There is a point in the middle of this film when the jilted artist gives up on suicide and moves on beyond his broken heart, and the film threatens to come to life. Here, there is a very cool extended montage showcasing Lautrec’s beautiful and evocative paintings, which clearly reveals the breathtaking scope of the artist’s talent. But then things get murky again, when the proud man is too thick and bullheaded to accept a second chance at love. Then he dies. THE END.

. Okay. Occasionally diverting, it’s still clearly the weakest John Huston film I’ve ever endured. One gets the distinct impression that this movie was more commerce than art for the great director- something to keep the money flowing in, while he could ready great projects like BEAT THE DEVIL, THE AFRICAN QUEEN or the truly impressive MOBY DICK.

– Somehow, it still feels like there’s a great movie waiting to be made on this subject. The recent Baz Luhrmann embarrassment was obviously not it. But neither was this John Huston failure…

KINGPIN (1996) *******

How many testicular injury jokes can one (or in this case, two) filmmakers cram into a single movie? Watch KINGPIN and find out! The Farley brothers have some fun here with the genre of sports comedy, in this case with the unlikely focus on professional bowling. Expect lots of crude and occasionally funny action and good turns from Woody Harrelson in the days before he showed us he had serious acting chops, and Randy Quaid before he went batshit crazy and became a tax fugitive from the federal government. Not the comedy classic it’s purported to be, but some fun nonetheless.

THE COURT MARTIAL OF BILLY MITCHELL (1955) *******

A low-key Gary Cooper seems tired and ill-at-ease in this Otto Preminger biography of rebellious officer Brigadier General William Mitchell of the pre-Air Force “Air Service”, a man who intentionally invited his own court martial in order to bring public attention to the dangerous aircraft that his men were still using, and the need to look forward to the inevitable future of airpower. It’s all pretty formal stuff that never really catches fire until near the end, when special prosecutor Rod Steiger is brought in to sink Admiral Mitchell’s case, and put the final nails in his coffin. This COURT MARTIAL is serviceable, not inspired.

THE PATIENCE STONE (2012) ********

> Adapted from his novel, Afghan director Atiq Rahini crafted this powerful look at the plight of women in Muslim culture that packs a real wallop.

. Somehow, the title suggested lighter fare. This film is tough and can be slow going. Its rewards are subtle and emergent with time.

. A Muslim woman living in an undetermined country in the Middle East wracked by the spasms of civil war, faces unimaginable trials when her husband is injured by a bullet to the neck that renders him unable to speak or move. Disempowered in this fundamentalist culture, she is not used to making decisions on her own, or doing anything without her husband’s permission. Worse, without her husband at her side, everything she says or does is suspect. There is no place in her society as de facto head of the household. The mullah who comes to offer solace is no help at all. Her only family has moved away, leaving no forwarding address. They have no savings and she’s quickly running out of money, with two young children to feed. What will she do?

. As she grows increasingly desperate, she begins to talk to her ostensively comatose husband in a way she never had before- telling him intimate secrets from her life that he had no inkling of. He becomes her “patience stone”, an object that sits impassively, listening to all your troubles and secrets and absorbing them before suddenly shattering, and relieving you of the burdens they carry. It’s a potent parable that comes true in a startling and exciting way.

. In writing this review, I realized that I shortchanged this film. I originally rated it 3½ stars, but it is apparently one of those truly compelling films that grows on you. I now realize it was the toughness of the reality that put me off. One is not always in the mood to be exposed to difficult truths.

– THE PATIENCE STONE required my patience, for which I was rewarded. Four stars.

DERSU UZALA (1975) *****

> I saw this Akira Kurosawa film in its arthouse heyday, as a very young man, when I traveled long distances with my peers to see great double bills of films that were often so far out of the mainstream as to be all but invisible to the average filmgoer.

. Now that they get new life on DVD, many of these films are considered classics.

. This Best Foreign Film Oscar winner- the story of a 1902 Russian topographic survey in the great wilderness of the Sino-Russian border, is just such a film. I am ashamed to admit that I hated it at the time. How completely wrong could I possibly have been?! Of course I wasn’t being fair to the movie. I knew it was not right to judge a film I slept through large chunks of! (I partied my youth away. Must have needed the rest!) But when I realized it was a Kurosawa film, I knew I had to give it another shot.

. Glad I did.

. One star? Try five! DERSU UZALA is an absolutely compelling ethnographic study of clashing cultures, man against nature, insidious imperialism and the bonds of friendship. It has scope and detail. Dersu himself is an unforgettable character of almost mythological proportions. It’s drama of the highest order. If I had a boychild, my partner would have to talk me out of naming him “Dersu Uzala Keelan”!

– See this wonder of a film!

ERNEST & CELESTINE (2012) ****+

> Taken from a series of French children’s storybooks, this is the kind of animation referred to using adjectives like: “sweet” or “gentle”, “quaint” or “charming”, “heartwarming” or “delightful”…

. Glad to report, it is all of the above!

. I just adored ERNEST & CELESTINE from start to finish. This was clever fun, wistfully illustrated- very inventive in showing the parallel worlds of the bears who live at street-level, and the mice who thrive in the underworld below. It didn’t hurt that this English language version of the Oscar-nominated film was voiced by the excellent Forest Whitaker, and 14-year old Mackenzie Foy, who was absolutely perfect as his unlikely friend little Celestine the mouse. (Also featuring stellar vocal turns by Paul Giamatti, William H. Macy and great dame Lauren Bacall!) It’s simple as pie- didn’t need to be complex; short and succinct- didn’t need to be epic length, visually fanciful and wryly funny throughout.

– Unless you are a totally miserable curmudgeon who hates the world and everybody in it- this delight’s for you!

THE KILLING OF SISTER GEORGE (1968) **+

> Very curious, that in the Netflix description of this breakthrough film, they totally omit the very pertinent fact that this is a gay-themed film about a lesbian couple in Britain of the 1960’s, that was so shockingly taboo when it was released in the U.S. that it was one of the few films awarded the poisonous “X” rating.

(MIDNIGHT COWBOY, A CLOCKWORK ORANGE and Ralph Bakshi’s animated HEAVY TRAFFIC shared this dubious distinction.)

. Now that the mindless hysteria about gay issues is a fever that’s begun to break in America, there is very little in this film that hints at the shock, moral indignation and outrage that originally greeted it. There is one romantic kiss, some kinky roleplaying, a fondled breast… that’s about it. “Sister George” of the title is a character in a long-running U.K. soap opera, played by a bitter, angry, alcoholic older woman (Beryl Reid) who carries on a long term relationship with her young, childlike “flatmate” (Susanna York), until her world begins to fall apart when there is a crisis on the set. Her cloying TV character begins to wear on viewers and her personal behavior grows increasingly appalling and intolerable. As a result, Sister George is written out of the plot in no subtle, ambiguous way: as the result of a head-on collision with a lorry.

. And good riddance! The main character as played by Ms. Reid is nasty, rude, insulting, insensitive, arrogant, bitter, and self-loathing. We are not given much to like here, except that she can be a witty drunk and does share brief moments of playful intimacy with the lover she otherwise treats like shit. This character is so grating and unpleasant, it’s hard to see why a desirable stunner like Susanna York (or millions of TV viewers), would be interested in her. We certainly aren’t. The only clue to what keeps these two together can be found in the kinkiest passage, when the older crone “punishes” her subservient mistress by insisting she eat the butt of a half-smoked cigar. It’s pretty sick stuff- kind of hard to watch. It’s supposed to be a humiliation, but the young waif pretends to like the act and find it sexually stimulating. Sister George (as she is even called in her private life), is livid. That’s not how the game is supposed to work. It’s an improvisation that breaks the rules of their relationship.

. THE KILLING OF SISTER GEORGE is misrepresented as a comedy. Like hell it is! The ending, if appropriate, is a total bummer. The major characters here all lead mostly miserable lives. What’s funny about that? I recall seeing this film covered in the excellent cultural documentary THE CELLULOID CLOSET, a film about Holly-wood’s skewered depictions of gay people and the lives they lead. I seem to remember this title being held up as a prime example of the unspoken rule that all gay characters must be depicted as unhappy, tortured and remorseful. Bingo.

. No, I didn’t think much of this film, but as a heterosexual male who fell hopelessly in lust with droolingly sexy Susannah York from the classic films TOM JONES and A MAN FOR ALL SEASONS, it’s hard to complain that she spends so much time in this film lying about in her underwear- even going topless in one scene, where an unctuous older woman is seducing her by playing with the comely actress’s pert nipples…

– Yow! From this perspective, it’s easy to see what Sister George saw in Susannah York!

BURN (2012) *******

Acerbic comedian and vocal proponent for our nation’s firefighters, Dennis Leary produced this tough look at America’s busiest fire department. It’s a rather sad window into one year in the life of a group of dedicated firemen, as they risk life and health nightly to extinguish a seemingly never-ending rash of fires among the 80,000 abandoned buildings in the increasingly hollowed-out shell that once was thriving Detroit. Facing record-high injuries from responding to the record number of fires, the new fire chief comes to a startling and controversial decision: Fuck it. If there’s no one in the burning structures, and the conflagration doesn’t threaten adjacent properties or utilities, then he decides to just let the fires burn. Under fire from all sides (bad pun!), he comes to the inescapable conclusion that his hands are tied: until these many thousands of derelict buildings are razed to the ground, all the department will be doing is “managing the misery”. And miserable it is. Miserable and very, very sad.

MILLION DOLLAR HOTEL (2000) **+

> Did Izzy kill himself when he jumped off the roof of the Million Dollar Hotel, or was he pushed by one of the mentally marginal tenants?

. Occasionally great America-loving German filmmaker Wim Wenders is capable of making truly great films. (Remember PARIS TEXIS, the beautiful PINA, the soulful BUENA VISTA SOCIAL CLUB and his masterpiece WINGS OF DESIRE?) This is truly not one of them. From a story by Bono (yes, that Bono), with collaborator Nicholas Kline, that seems to try much too hard to be weird for weirdness sake.

. In the lead, Jeremy Davies (so amazing in Herzog’s far-superior RESCUE DAWN), is absolutely wasted- his considerable talent trivialized by his unfortunate performance here. (After all, this guy seared his way into our memory as the cowardly G.I. in SAVING PRIVATE RYAN. That was the work of a muscular talent!) Mr. Davies is a fine actor, I’m sure he was giving the great, kooky director what he wanted. (I can hear Wim now, giving direction on set: “Weirder, Jeremy! Much, much weirder!”) Playing goofily “retarded” sure doesn’t work for him here. (Their term, not mine) It’s just pathetic to watch, and it makes one cringe with embarrassment. His romantic foil Milla Jovovich, (THE MESSENGER: THE STORY OF JOAN OF ARC), fares much better. She smolders and burns her way through a compelling performance. (Or perhaps, it’s just that she is so very beautiful: the camera loves that face, and so do I!) The film also perks up every time Mel Gibson pops in, in a broad comic role as a stiff, strange, unhinged rouge CIA operative who used to have a third arm growing out of his back. Yeah, weird. He relentlessly investigates Izzy’s death for his detached, privileged father who cannot accept what Gibson suspects: that his son’s death was a suicide.

. The artificially eccentric denizens of the namesake hotel seem too contrived and extreme to be believable. Incomprehensible dialogue is mixed in with otherwise sparkling conversation. Some cool cinematography here, with rich, saturated colors and expressive lighting and camera angles. Occasional flashes of actual comedy break through.

– It gets better toward the end, when the central mystery of Izzy’s death is revealed, but I might have been better served to get outside for some fresh air and exercise!

CAHILL U.S. MARSHALL (1973) *******

> I am really enjoying catching up on these old western chestnuts.

. I watched them as a kid- if that’s what was playing at the local cinema. It’s nice to see how very wrong I was about John Wayne as an actor. Sure, the big man had a limited range, (all the way from A to B), but he was very good at what he did. Unfortunately, this latter-day Wayne western lacks the luster of the cowboy films of his heyday.

. It’s all very Hollywood: packaged, calculated, sentimental. Here, it’s a family affair: Cahill is an absent father, too busy chasing bad guys to be there for his boys very much, and he pays the price when, strong-armed by a typically nasty George Kennedy, they become involved in a bank heist. These well-bred young men know that four falsely accused men are waiting for their morning appointment with the gallows in their stead, but to exonerate the innocent they must confess their own guilt. Good setup!

. This being near the end of the cowboy era, we get some navel-gazing that is very rare for the genre. At one point, the tough, bullish Marshall asks forgiveness from his embittered older son, saying: “Even grown men need understanding.” And the Duke pulls it off.

– CAHILL U.S. MARSHALL is not a bona fide classic, but a good watch.

MALIFICENT (2014) *******

> I like this revived genre: re-imagined fairy tales like JACK THE GIANT KILLER, ENCHANTED, or SNOW WHITE AND THE HUNTSMAN. I often wondered why this rich vein of world folklore was so seldom mined for fresh material.

. The visual world of cinema arts has blossomed- gotten so vibrant that using today’s technology, virtually anything that can be imagined, can be actualized. (Visionary director James Cameron knows this well: people can hardly wait to see the next installment of AVATAR to see what wonders he has in store for us!) As in Broadway sensation WICKED, MALIFICENT revisits the story of Sleeping Beauty from the perspective of the wicked villainess.

. “Malificent” is the winged creature that places the curse upon the innocent maiden who becomes the Sleeping Beauty. Outside of Angelina Jolie’s cold, acidic heroine, the art direction is the real star here, and despite being so derivative of earlier Disney fantasies that it feels like cannibalism, this film is rich and colorful and magical in its own right. Yeah Angelina is good- she seems born to play the role. (With such world-class cheekbones, you’d think they wouldn’t feel the need to resort to prosthetics!) But her icy detachment worked at odds with the ironic sympathy we are supposed to feel for her, as the egregiously wronged being seeking revenge on a cad.

. One big flaw in the storytelling comes early on, when her boyhood suitor morphs from a sweet, noble youth to a terrible asshole in a few unconvincing scenes. It’s all done with voiceover, really and it’s problematic, because it makes one feel there was some sort of bridge scene that ended up on the cutting room floor, completely depriving this pivotal character of a credible backstory.

– Outside of these minor flaws, this film is often a blast to watch, and there is much to enjoy in this handsome fantasy.

3 IDIOTS (2009) *******

> Can’t say I am a fan of Bollywood…

. I would compare these films to opera, in that the conventions are so unreal and artificial, that to enjoy either requires the willing suspension of disbelief. These sub continental affairs are so over-the-top, sentimental and silly, that I just cannot take them seriously as an art form. All that being said- I enjoyed this one: the biggest box office success in the history of Bollywood.

. As in KITES, slick production values serve a solid story about three engineering students and their dynamic classmate “Rancho”, who helps everyone he encounters see life fresh, new ways. 3 IDIOTS is predictable fun, dotted with the usual sappy musical numbers- poppy love songs accompanied by large casts of actors dancing in the rain, or the flood, or the garden hose, or under a waterfall, or in a sea of tears. And there is a tidal wave of tears here! I counted ten characters who got weepy at some point in their narrative (!!!) including every one of the major male characters. Indian men are allowed to cry in the movies? (I wonder if they’re allowed to do that shit in real life…) Who woulda thunk it?

. Like most of Bollywood projects, 3 IDIOTS is too long for a comedy, and too contrived to be effective when tragedy strikes, but it does have something important to say about the excessive parental pressure on children to excel academically, that is so pronounced in Indian society as to be a common source of suicide.

– In this way, 3 IDIOTS actually has something pertinent to say.

THE BOOK THIEF (2013) ********

There have been so many World War II Nazi-themed movies, it’s nice to encounter an angle we haven’t yet seen, beaten into submission. Taken from the popular book, this film tells a compelling story about a young German girl named Liesel who falls in love with books right about the time her youth group is busily burning them. Or rather: “Death” tells the story, as unseen narrator- both fresh and appropriate. Liesel lives with her adoptive parents (fine turns from Emily Watson and the always wonderful Geoffrey Rush), who secretly harbor a fugitive Jew in their home. The girl takes to “borrowing” books to share with their shut-in refugee. The ghost of Anne Frank haunts this film. It’s fine storytelling, with people you care about, and despite the inherent sentimentality of telling a sweet tale of survival in the context of a massive disaster like the Holocaust, the impact of tragedy feels very stark indeed. With stunning production values that make the film gorgeous to watch, and a lush score by the wonderful John Williams that makes it gorgeous to listen to, THE BOOK THIEF is fine stuff.

THE FAR COUNTRY (1954) *******

In the Pacific Northwest of the 1800’s, Jimmy Stewart (in his fourth western with director Anthony Mann), plays a morally impaired rouge cowboy on the lam for the murder of deserters from his cattle drive. Walter Brennan, very familiar from TV’s THE REAL McCOY’S (“Gosh dern it, Pepita!”), is his sunny but loose-lipped sidekick, who dreams of settling-down with Jimmy on a spread in Utah. (Shades of Steinbeck’s OF MICE AND MEN.) But they run afoul of a corrupt lawman who steals everything they own. We can feel the showdown coming, and see Jimmy Stewart growing a conscience before our very eyes. Good. Not the best of its genre by a good stretch, but good.

THE LONG WALK HOME (1990) ***+

A morally indignant Sissy Spacek and an understated Whoopi Goldberg anchor this film about relations in Montgomery Alabama in the aftermath of Rosa Parks’ resonant act of simple defiance. The societal struggles are mirrored in the happy, suburban family structure of a white family, thrown into chaos when the compliant wife has an awakening that sets her in direct opposition to her husband’s tacit acceptance of racism and segregation, when she starts helping with the impromptu carpool that forms to keep the boycott going. Pretty good stuff, doesn’t pull its punches. Prepare to hear the historical term “nigger” bandied about a lot, and it’s ugly- very, very ugly. THE LONG WALK HOME is educational, enlightening, enraging and entertaining.

TOTAL ECLIPSE (1995) **+

A young, babyfaced Leo DiCaprio plays iconoclastic poet Arthur Rambaud, to David Thewlis’s older mentor, fellow poet Paul Verlaine. Rambaud is depicted as brilliant but erratic and unpredictable, and the two men soon form a carnal bond that brings Verlaine’s world and tempestuous marriage into turmoil and crisis. Great subject: tepid film. Mr. Thewlis suffers from some pretty painful overacting that makes him entirely unbelievable as the older Verlaine. Leo hints at the talent he was later to develop. The problem lies in the script by Christopher Hampton, taken from his 1967 play. It’s spotty and disjointed and episodic, and we never feel we really get to know these two historic figures as real humans- just as tragic, self-destructive icons. We get a lot of self-indulgence and senseless bickering, which gets tedious fast. And for some reason the sex scenes just seem ridiculous. I didn’t see two lovers loving each other, I saw Leonardo DiCaprio and David Thewlis making out, and it just seemed… just wrong.

ANYTHING ELSE (2003) **+

> I am inclined to love Woody Allen movies, so I still found stuff to enjoy in this, possibly his weakest comedy.

. Especially because he was in it, and a played someone capable of outlandish acts we’ve never thought Woody capable of, like bashing in the windshield of some thug’s car that had just stolen his parking space. It’s nice to see Woody playing at least a little bit of a “character”. The trouble here is that the script felt like a throwaway- a kind of rehash or stringing together of old notes that didn’t make it to earlier screenplays. Woody’s character often seems little more than a platform for delivering old vaudeville jokes to his younger comedian protégé.

. The deal-breaker: I didn’t care a fig for bland Jason Biggs in the lead, playing the token Woody Allen substitute that he has in all of his films- even the ones he is in! (Someone playing the Woody that Woody can’t play any more, now that he’s too old.) And even though I find Christina Ricci very appealing, her character is too shrill to be very enjoyable here- even though she has some of the funniest throwaway lines of the movie, and sometimes seemed to be the only one onscreen who remembered they were supposed to be in a comedy. An appealing couple, Biggs and Ricci were not.

. But I enjoy what Woody does so much, that half a good Woody Allen movie is good enough for me, I guess…

– As long as he doesn’t make a habit of it.

THE MATCHMAKER (2010) ***+

This is a very interesting Israeli film about a man with a clouded past, running an underground gambling ring in Tel Aviv during the Six Day War, while maintaining cover as a matchmaker. He takes a young boy in to help him recruit lonely hearts in the park, and becomes the kid’s mentor in the process. It’s a good character. The matchmaker seems an affable, soft-spoken man with a horrible past. He’s a small-time criminal who nonetheless cares about the people he genuinely wants to help in his public persona. He looks like he’s been through hell, and came out believing in love. We see him through the boy’s eyes, until a disgruntled client begins to raise certain questions to the local police… THE MATCHMAKER is a very enjoyable, humanist film. I loved the way you didn’t have a clear bead on where it was going. I cared about the people, believed in the time and place and appreciated the gentleness of this sweet film.

FRONTRUNNERS (2008) *******

This savvy documentary looks at a student-body election in the most exclusive and prestigious charter school in America: New York’s Stuyvesant High School. FRONRUNNERS has deceptively much to say. Though covering the microcosm of high school politics, the correlation between real world politics is unmistakable. Is politics all about character and leadership, or charm and beauty? Good question!

DEVO: LIVE in the Land of the Rising Sun (2003) ********

This document of the unique 80’s band, regrouping for a tour of Japan long after their commercial heyday, shows what a kick-ass unit they were, before the deaths of the drummer and guitarist put an end to the unit. Japan is a country that truly “gets” Devo: a high-concept art-band with serious social criticism buried in every song, for those with an ear to hear. The central concept: getting stupider by the day, man has stopped evolving, and in fact, has begun to devolve. I hear you guys! Sure seems that way to me! Every Spudboy is older and wiser here- it’s not the young Devo of “ARE WE NOT MEN”, their first Brian Eno produced album. But when these guys played their old material, it sounded fresh and vital and just as exciting as the day it was released. These old dudes just ripped! And the Japanese throngs swayed in grinning ecstasy. Me too!

THE WOLVERINE (2013) *******

Another fun, high-energy installment in the inherently silly superhero genre. There are some great stunt sequences in this X-MEN spinoff that is set in Japan, where our reluctant anti-hero confronts bad guys and a cool silver robot, while romancing beauty and regaining his mojo after the death of his ladylove. Hugh Jackman is really a very good actor, and he elevates these films the way Daniel Craig does in the 007 franchise. Me entertained. (Viewer’s NOTE: For those of you who hit ‘eject’ and move-on to the next thing as soon as the closing credits begin to roll: don’t! There is a hidden coda here, setting up future conflict and offering a pertinent twist… or two.)

*

Hope that wasn’t all to exhausting. I’ll try to have less to say next month… but I wouldn’t bet on it. Until then:

Viva Cinema, connoisseurs of fine films!

*** * ***

© Kevin Paul Keelan and lastcre8iveiconoclast, 2021. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this blog’s author is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Kevin Paul Keelan and lastcre8iveiconoclast with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.