Sunday, March 3, 2024

AFTERSHOCK: a few words in appreciation of "Oppenheimer"

 

"OPPENHEIMER"
Written, Produced and Directed by Christopher Nolan
**** (four stars)
RATED R

To begin, I saw this film opening weekend as the world seemingly was caught up in the throes of "BarbieHeimer," as Christopher Nolan's latest epic shared the same debut weekend as Director Greta Gerwig's exceedingly anticipated "Barbie." 

As we all know now, the counter programming paid off even greater than I would imagine anyone had hoped or anticipated as both films are nominated for Oscars (shame on the Academy for not nominating Gerwig for Best Director as "Barbie" clearly did not direct itself--and furthermore, if there are going to be 10 nominees, then I feel that the Best Director section should follow suit accordingly...but I digress...) and each film set their respective box office charts afire and then some. I did not write a review for "Oppenheimer" at that time because life, such as it is and as it was in the Summer of 2023, was fraught with too much of itself for me to  find the proper time and space to sit, ruminate and compose a posting that could represent what was a demonstrably overwhelming experience. 

That being said, I have recently watched the film for a second time and am also already finding myself returning for a third viewing and it remains as voluminous of an experience as that first time. Yet, for these subsequent screenings at home, I am able to utilize the gift of subtitles to assist me with the cavalcade of names and locations that evaded me the first time. Additionally, I regret, especially as Christopher Nolan remans one of my favorite current filmmakers and his films exist as true cinematic events, this film just might be the last time I attend a Nolan film in the movie theater as his already controversial sound mixes inspired me to wear ear plugs at the movies for the first time and even then, the film was unbearably, unpleasantly loud and therefore, more than distracting.

With that admission out of the way, I now feel free to express that out of a filmography whose artistic consistency is of an uncommonly high quality, Christopher Nolan's "Oppenheimer" has amassed what I feel is his greatest achievement to date, clearly one of 2023's best films as well as one of the top films of this current decade in cinema. It is a work that has only grown in its power with subsequent viewings as it is one that transcends mere biopic and becomes a morality play about the nature of humanity in its clash between inspiration and hubris combined with the dire warning that our own potential extinction will undoubtedly arrive at our own hands. 

Our thirst for knowledge and discovery runs up against our equal sense of self importance, self preservation, competition, avarice, exploitation, a disregard for anything beyond our own personal desires, and quest for absolute power consequences be damned all fuels Nolan's standard non-linear narrative (or dual narrative) and simultaneously tight and sprawling screenplay into a cinematic canvas that suggests an amalgamation of Milos Forman's "Amadeus" (1984), Oliver Stone's "JFK" (1993), 1970's conspiracy thrillers, most notably Francis Ford Coppola's "The Conversation" (1974) and the likes of Terrence Malick and Stanley Kubrick at their most esoteric, with the superlative aid of Cinematographer Hoyte van Hoytema's visual sheen and Composer Ludvig Goransson's pulsating, urgently paranoid score. 

At the core rests Cillian Murphy in the titular role as he delivers his career best performance to date, so impressive as to how interior of a performance it actually is (he constantly made me think of a hybrid of David Bowie--the alien-esque eyes--and David Byrne--the physicality). Additionally, Robert Downey Jr. as Oppenheimer's adversary Admiral Lewis Strauss, has raised his own bar in an already impressive filmography with his career best performance to date. With Murphy, I felt that Christopher Nolan firmly placed us within a exceptional mindset that was also neither here nor there as this interpretation of the theoretical physicist was that of a restless mind speeding with such alacrity that again, consequences, whether personal or global, were never fixated upon in the present moment as he was always thinking about what could be instead of what actually is

After watching the film again, I believe that any confusion that I felt within that first viewing concerning the aforementioned cavalcade of names, dates, locations, etc...was purposeful due to the fever dream pacing of this hurtling three hour film as it never finds moments of rest, as we are also dealing with a figure wrestling with anxiety and mental health issues running dangerously against his incredible intelligence. There is no time to slow down, so we hang on tightly, intensity building wondering if what we are seeing and hearing is indeed actually happening as our planet teeters on its own conclusion.   

Christopher Nolan once remarked that he feels his films are building blocks towards each other and to that end, "Oppenheimer" is yet another character study of a taciturn, obsessive man yet this film, above all of the others within his oeuvre is his most Herculean.  

YOUR INHERENT BAD PERSONALITY: a review of "Shortcomings"

 

"SHORTCOMINGS"
Based upon the graphic novel Shortcomings by Adrian Tomine
Screenplay Written by Adrian Tomine
Directed by Randall Park
** (two stars)
RATED R

"The world is full of angry young men
Chip on the shoulder
An ideal in their head
The world is full of angry young men
Who think life owes them something
But you only get out what goes in..."
-"The World Is Full Of Angry Young Men"
music and lyrics by Colin Moulding
performed by XTC 

What we have right now is one of this near miss films. One that has a tremendous amount going for its success but in some ways, never quite becomes what it could potentially be. In the case of this film, its own title could not be more apt.

Director/Actor Randall Park's "Shortcomings," his directorial debut feature, is a more than amiable film, as it contains a generous spirit, a sometimes wicked sense of humor and most certainly a point of view and cultural representation that was more than refreshing to view. And still, it all seemed to be a bit anti-septic, too clean, a little pat and not as emotionally urgent as it suggested. Don't  get me wrong, "Shortcomings" is not a bad film in the least and my reaction to it is not even negative as all of the ingredients are right there in front of us. It just all felt to be a bit...underprepared, therefore making the film in its entirety unable to quite reach its peak.     

Set in present day Berkely, Randall Park's "Shortcomings" stars Justin H. Min as Ben Tagawa, a misanthropic film school dropout and aspiring filmmaker who manages a failing arthouse movie theater and lives with his girlfriend, Miko (Ally Maki), w ho herself works for an Asian American film festival. With a lack of mobility, which in turns fuels his lack of inspiration, Ben goes about his days and nights sardonically attacking any and everything he feels deserving of his scorn--which even includes aspects of his own Asian American community--and often alongside his best friend, the equally sardonic Alice (Sherry Cola).

After yet another romantic fight, Miko announces that she has accepted a three month internship in New York City, which Ben accepts. Yet, as Ben remains dismissive of Miko's choices, desires and ambitions, she soon suggests that they they take a break from each other...which leaves Ben with an opportunity to make romantic inroads with first, Autumn (Tavi Gevinson), a performance artists Ben hires to work in the theater ticket booth and later, Sasha (Debby Ryan), a grad student.

Ultimately, Ben's life remains unfulfilled and stagnant as he struggles to find his own niche and pathway to a future he fears is evading right in front of his eyes.

Certainly we are more than familiar with the young adult coming of age film which often houses the subtext of the (usually male) unhospitable cynic who arrives at some sort of awakening to either, the error of his ways, or the realization that life cannot advance if he continues in this manner. Randall Park's "Shortcomings" is precisely that film and while it is well made, intentioned and filled with a good nature, it doesn't go as  far as it conceivably could or take avenues that could help to differentiate it from other films in this subgenre. 

What Park does achieve is to create a narrative that is largely unseen, the contemporary Asian American or even more specifically, the Americanized Asian experience in the 21st century, as we have witnessed in Writer/Director Lulu Wang's beautiful "The Farewell" (2019) and Director Lee Sung Jin's rapacious television series "Beef" (2023) as well as Co- Writer/Director Domee Shi's "Turning Red" (2022), her outstanding ode to the adolescent Chinese-Canadian experience. 

"Shortcomings" takes on the stereotypes contained within a perception of Asian exceptionalism, as the film gently satirizes in its opening scenes which Park then, places us squarely into the stagnant life of Ben Tagawa. Inhospitable, clearly depressed, armed with a quickfire anger, consumed with a vague anti-Asian self hatred and a sexual preference for White women despite his relationship with Miko, and a verbal mean streak that lashes outwardly often and to the increased detriment of his dwindling social circle, Park's film always remains critical of his while always allowing us to understand his interior plight, for who among us has not felt lost at some stage in our lives and in doing so, we empathize with his existential crisis even as we, and his friends, retreat from him. 

Despite the refreshing representation perspective on what is typically viewed through a White male gaze, "Shortcomings" also feels not too far removed from any of those cinematic stories. On one hand, Randall Park is suggesting that ethnicity does not escape ennui but just as a film on its own feet, we are not seeing anything that we haven't already experienced (and exceedingly better) than in say Director Stephen Frears' seminal "High Fidelity" (2000) for instance. 

In fact, "Shortcomings" feels very much like a less profane version of Writer/Director Kevin Smith's early classics like "Clerks" (1994) or "Chasing Amy" (1997) and is very much in line with a series of films released during the 1990's (often featuring Eric Stoltz in some capacity), including Writer/ Director Noah Baumbach's "Kicking And Screaming" (1995) and "Mr. Jealousy" (1997), Director Rory Kelly's "Sleep With Me" (1994), and Director Michael Steinberg's "Bodies, Rest and Motion" (1993) yet unlike all of those films, "Shortcomings" feels a little bland, as if Park was not quite ready or willing to delve deeper into more emotionally uncomfortable waters therefore making his film exist as something more than superficial, which is a shame, as this type of story sits in my cinematic wheelhouse and would always love to gather a new angle.

As a more recent comparison,  Randall Park's "Shortcomings" is really not terribly far removed thematically from Director Alexander Payne's excellent "The Holdovers" (2023) but as I think about both of those films, I wonder if a shift in its storytelling perspective could have made a significant difference as there was one crucial element that I could not take my eyes away from: the friendship between Ben and Alice. The concept of the deep waters of a platonic friendship is not typically something that I can instantly recall as being the heart of a film, especially as movies lean into the romantic. I have long expressed that for as many films that explore falling in love or the will they/won't they dynamic, I long to see more films about staying in love or  in this case, exploring love that will not fall into a kiss but contains the same passionate and painful emotional territories.

With "Shortcomings," I actually felt that the love story of Ben and Miko was the least interesting piece of the film as the most interesting dynamic for me was between Ben and Alice, which we really do not get enough off as the film is focused upon Ben's tribulations. While Ben and Alice (as she is a lesbian), will not fall into a kiss or into bed, there is a history to their union that captivated me and made me feel that if Park shifted his lens, we could still have everything that already exists within the film but with a more poignant and potent emotional core as Ben and Alice's friendship is really the love story of the film that Ben's emotional stability hinges upon.

Just think, what if we knew more about how Ben and Alice met, and what Alice's life, hopes and foibles actually are on equal footing with Ben's? Then, we could explore the ebbs and flows, peaks and valleys of their relationship and what happens when one outgrows the other, when what was completely intertwined begins to unravel, when one begins to advance while the other remains in place, when trust  is eroded, when was was hilarious for both becomes so just for one, when love remains but is changing for no other reason than just growing up. Absolutely all of that is bubbling under the surface of "Shortcomings" but is never confronted, making for muted opportunity in making something truly memorable and greater in its emotional resonance.  

Randall Park's "Shortcomings" is a decent first feature, welcoming in its approach, briskly paced, light upon its feet and never overstays or overplays a moment. But, I just wanted more. Here's hoping that Randall Park's second feature film reaches that next bar.

Monday, January 29, 2024

KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF: a review of "The Book Of Clarence"

 

"THE BOOK OF CLARENCE"
Written, Produced and Directed by Jeymes Samuel
***1/2 (three and a half stars)
RATED PG 13

There is always something about LaKeith Stanfield that makes me feel that he is just this far over his head, out of his depth, and quite possibly, he is just not going to make it.

There is this certain vulnerability, or innocence or the combination of guile and guilessness that feels to be a natural part of his overall essence that I somehow feel protective of him, worried about him and the predicaments he finds himself engulfed in through his characters. To refresh, remember him as the philosophical stoner Darius from television's "Atlanta" (2016-2022), who finds himself trapped in a sinister mansion in the terrifying episode "Teddy Perkins." Or further still, his doomed status as a brain transplanted victim in Writer/Director Jordan Peele's "Get Out" (2017) as well as his equally ill fated status at the conclusion of Writer/Director Boots Riley's "Sorry To Bother You" (2018).

From being submerged in inner conflict as an FBI informant infiltrating the Illinois chapter of the Black Panther Party in Writer/Director Shaka King's "Judas and the Black Messiah" (2021) to potentially enduring a broken heart from Issa Rae in Writer/Director Stella Meghie's "The Photograph" (2020), LaKeith Stanfield's characters over and again take truly precarious risks that he may not emerge from unscathed, which makes him absolutely perfect as our conduit into the biblical satire "The Book Of Clarence" from Writer/Director/Composer Jeymes Samuel as his role as the titular Clarence runs a path adjacent to Jesus Christ himself...which should, of course, signal to you his chances for evading dire consequences. 

As for the film itself, while not sent over the top by any means, it is a film that I have not been able to shake since having seen it for it is haunting in its resonance, provocations and realizations when confronting lifelong perceptions of the Christ parable, religious teachings and the existing parallels to our present day that we may not think of. 

Opening in A.D. 33 Lower Jerusalem, Jeymes Samuel's "The Book Of Clarence," finds Clarence (LaKeith Stanfield) and best friend Elijah (RJ Cyler) losing a chariot race against Mary Magdalene (Teyana Taylor), placing them both into mortal danger with loan shark Jedediah the Terrible (Eric Kofi-Abrefa) who has vowed to kill them both in 30 days unless full debts are paid. 

Pondering his quandary, Clarence soon happens upon the idea of posing as a fake messiah to capitalize upon the growing fandom surrounding Jesus Christ (Nicholas Pinnock) and his twelve apostles, which includes Clarence's twin brother Thomas (also portrayed by Stanfield), with whom he shares a family conflict and estrangement.

To Clarence's surprise, his scheme--unlike all of his other schemes--begins to catch fire and soon, he is perceived as being precisely what he is not...which of course, draws the attention of the Romans, already in pursuit of Christ and anyone who proclaims themselves as being a messiah. To Clarence's even greater surprise, his scheme becomes the catalyst for deeper personal discovery and ascension, from being selfish to becoming selfless, from being personally driven to community bonding, to finding a greater understanding as to what divinity is and can be.

On paper, Jeymes Samuel's "The Book Of Clarence" could be regarded as a sort of spiritual successor to what is now considered to be the greatest Biblical satire, Director Terry Jones' "Monty Python's Life Of Brian" (1979). While Samuel does share a similar approach that is not too far removed from playwright Tom Stoppard's "Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead" (1966), what Samuel has conceived is more gently anarchistic, a slyer aesthetic that is also demonstrably sincere in its emotional stakes and core, thus grounding the proceedings with a proper pathos and social critique.

"The Book Of Clarence" possesses a streak that is playful as when Clarence gets an idea, a light bulb appears above his head and during a trip to an opium den, customers are literally floating in the air after each puff. Yet, overall, Samuel's depiction is decidedly matter of fact as he draws distinct parallels between the past and present, making for an eternal human struggle that hasn't changed terribly much in over 2000 years. The caste system and hierarchies based upon social class, race and ethnicities are in full effect as is racial profiling, Black execution at the hands of White authority leading to a power structure where the desire of those in power attempts to create an existence wholly designed to eradicate those they feel beneath themselves yet is consistently undercut by the persistence of the joy and community of Black unity.

To that end, it is through his depictions where Jeymes Samuel challenges viewer's thinking, especially as we are drowning in a time where nuance is increasingly non-existent and choices are binary. We are given a cinematic vision where Jesus Christ, all of his disciples plus the majority of the inhabitants of Lower Jerusalem are all Black people, completely clashing against the imagery of the long haired, blue eyed White Jesus, imagery which Samuel tackles in the film as well.

Clarence is the engine within this story and the conceit of the character is compelling. To have a poor Black man, one who is a bit of a scoundrel, jobless aside from drug peddling, who thieves honey wine from the Romans and who lives with his Mother (portrayed by Marianne Jean-Baptiste) instead of on his own volition as the hero in a Biblical tale might feel antithetical to some but for me, it makes the trajectory of the story carry a greater meaning...for who among us is without fault or tribulations? 

Despite Clarence's often questionable to nefarious choices, notably posing as a messiah, Samuel is wise enough to showcase how that does not suggest Clarence has a lack of character, substance or virtuousness. His feud with brother Thomas stems from the forsaking of family to leave an ailing parent to follow Christ. Clarence's devotion to his Mother, friends and community is pure. He is sweetly--and dangerously--in love with Varinia (Anna Diop), the sister of Jedediah the Terrible. Yet, most of all, Clarence is an atheist. 

The soul of Jeymes Samuel's "The Book Of Clarence" is one that challenges Clarence, as well as all of us in the audience, to think about what exactly God and divinity is or isn't, what it can or cannot be and is it something to find or to be attained or is it always elusive or does it exist at all. This makes for an experience I feel that anyone could fine value within regardless of what one's spiritual or religious beliefs happen to be. Which then takes us to the heart within the soul of the film: the concepts of "knowledge" and "belief," and how they conflict and intersect.

Now, according to the Oxford dictionary, "Knowledge" is defined as "facts, information and skills acquired by a person through experience or education; the theoretical or practical understanding of a subject" while "Belief" is defined as "an acceptance that is statement is true or that something exists."  

This dichotomy fuels Clarence's conflict with Thomas, and with all of us regarding our individual relationships with religion and spirituality, for how can one believe when one does not know and how can one know when one hasn't experienced what really cannot be experienced? Thomas believes yet he is firm in the knowledge of his faith. Clarence, however, is absolutely certain he knows all there is to know until his odyssey truly begins with his ruse as a false messiah and what he believes is confronted, altered and changed...entirely based upon his new knowledge

Throughout the film, Jeymes Samuel argues that knowledge and belief are not mutually exclusive concepts but ones that are consistently aligned and therefore, symbiotic. Clarence's journey takes him upon a trajectory that runs concurrently to Jesus Christ's, even forging relationships with Barabbas the Immortal (Omar Sy), Pontius Pilate (James McAvoy), experiencing what he once thought impossible--most crucially, within himself--to climactic and tragic consequences of which we all know the story.  

In the here and now, our relationships with religion and spirituality are based upon the stories we have been told and taught, a process formulating a belief system as we were not in existence at the time of Christ (if he ever existed as some question) so we are not armed with any first hand knowledge. Our beliefs may or may not transition into knowledge or better yet, a hybrid of the two, until we each have experienced life and the living experience. Clarence's journey is our own in that regard and with that in mind, God and divinity, Samuel seems to be extolling does indeed exist because we are all here in this world together...for it is within our sense of humanity that we attempt to understand what existence is  within our respective places in the universe.

LaKeith Stanfield meets every moment within "The Book Of Clarence" with an unforced, naturally magnetic presence that we are willing to follow him anywhere he travels no matter how ridiculous, romantic, wrenching, miraculous and impossible his experiences are and become. And again, I felt protective of him as the story was barreling towards an obvious conclusion.  

Clarence's final moments on screen, as conveyed through LaKeith Stanfield's emotive, honest performance, are a wonder. Stanfield again shows all of us that he has been through it, he has seen, he has experienced and through his sympathetic, haunted eyes and the emotionally altered breaths he elicits...

...we believe.

Saturday, January 20, 2024

THE ENTIRETY OF ME: a review of "American Fiction"

 
"AMERICAN FICTION"
Based upon the novel Erasure by Perceval 
Written For The Screen and Directed by Cord Jefferson
**** (four stars)
RATED R

The painful feeling of aloneness in being Black in America. 

Late in "American Fiction," the filmmaking debut of Writer/Director Cord Jefferson, there is a moment between two characters where one makes an admission so grounded, so filled with a deeply knowing resignation that not only informed the character, the film as a whole but reflected within myself sitting in the audience. It was a moment of sincere and severe recognition that spoke to a grave realty and a certain inevitability. In myself, I felt the echo of this character's closing statement, "...it makes me sad." 

Cord Jefferson's "American Fiction" is unquestionably one of 2023's finest films. What exists as a pointed satire about the perceptions of race mass produced for public consumption--this time, the publishing industry--Jefferson surprised me by essentially creating a dual narrative where one comments upon the other while being firmly cojoined. I would not be surprised if some viewers may wonder during the film's running time, if Jefferson had lost its narrative threads, trading or favoring one element for another. On the contrary, one element would be unable to exist without the other as they simultaneously inform and enhance each narrative. There are many moments within "American Fiction" that struck me with grim hilarity but yes, it made me feel very sad, very often for Jefferson truly found a distinctive tone when confronting the perceived inherent virtuousness of White people which conflicts with the perceived inherent monstrosities of Black people and the constant existential ache it leaves behind.  

"American Fiction" stars the brilliant Jeffrey Wright as Thelonious "Monk" Ellison, author and professor who finds himself at a pivotal crossroads. While his novels are critically acclaimed, they are low sellers and his latest manuscript has not been accepted by publishers under the criticism that his work has been deemed to be "not Black enough." Meanwhile, Monk's University places him upon a temporary leave due to his uncompromising teaching philosophy regrading the exploration of race issues in literature and encourages him to attend a literary conference and perhaps reunite with his estranged family back home in Boston...to which Monk grudgingly accepts. 

While in Boston, Monk indeed attends the conference at which he is dismayed and disgusted during a greatly attended seminar starring bestselling author Sintara Golden (Issa Rae), whose latest chronicle of Black life is the smash hit We's Lives In Da Ghetto. To the literary critics and the audience, Golden's novel is a stirring, brutally honest exploration of African-American culture while Monk is horrified at the novel's cartoonish pandering and the continued perpetuation of cultural stereotypes. 

Exasperated at the reality of his manuscript's rejection and consumed with personal and professional fury at the existence of material like Sintara Golden's latest work, Monk crafts his own "Blaxploitation" manuscript entitled My Pafology under the pseudonym of Stagg R. Leigh, an escaped fugitive. Not only is the book quickly snapped up by publishers, it subsequently becomes a critically acclaimed novel and national bestseller...all to Monk's incredulity, deepening shame and upended sense of morality.

In my recent, and negative, review of Writer/Director Emerald Fennell's "Saltburn" (2023), I derided the film for its utter lack of originality as it was essentially a copycat of Writer/Director Anthony Minghella's "The Talented Mr. Ripley" (1999), without any sense of a new or honest perspective to make the work stand on its own cinematic feet. Granted, I was a bit worried about "American Fiction" as the first trailers made me utter to myself, "I loved this film when Spike Lee did it over 20 years ago."  

Spike Lee's "Bamboozled" (2000), his incendiary satire about an African-American, Harvard educated television executive played by Damon Wayans who, out of frustration with his inability to shepherd television programs with positive Black imagery on air, creates a modern day minstrel show starring Black actors in Blackface which becomes a national sensation. It is a Molotov cocktail of a film. One of Lee's brashest, boldest, most uncompromising and righteously enraged efforts. It is also in the top three of my favorite films from the decade of 2000-2009. So, certainly, as Cord Jefferson's "American Fiction" was upcoming, I was interested but I was also deeply skeptical.

I needed not have worried whatsoever as Cord Jefferson has created a film that works in tandem with Spike Lee's film while extending itself into its own cinematic space with a perspective all of its own. Jefferson's satire wisely does not approach the more visually hallucinogenic texture of Lee's "Bamboozled" but that does not suggest that the cinematic teeth of "American Fiction" are not bared. Jefferson helms a more muted, recognizable world where the satire exists in a matter of fact fashion, thus making the extremes that much more distinctive in their scathing humor and unquestionable sorrow. 

I enjoyed how as Monk is crafting My Pafology, his crass, cultural stereotypes characters physically walk around the room with him, verbally guiding him into how they would speak, act and think in order to match with already existing and so-called "authentic" tropes of the Black trauma porn he despises. I laughed hard at a commercial splicing together key tragic moments in existing Black cinema advertising Black excellence upon an Oprah styled television network. And of course, the exceedingly uncomfortable cringe humor of non-White characters coaching Monk on his "Blackness" in order to court White publishers, and subsequently, White film producers, in his guise as Stagg R. Leigh. Every satirical arrow hits its target perfectly in its ridiculousness and cultural cruelty as this is indeed how we as Black people are seen within the context of a larger White environment, and more pointedly, in a supposedly liberal White environment.  

Where Cord Jefferson's "American Fiction" really finds its wings is when the story extends itself into what is essentially the film's core: Monk's family. Through Monk, we meet his Mother Agnes (Leslie Uggams), declining in health due to Alzheimer's disease, his sister Lisa (Tracee Ellis Ross), a physician, his long estranged brother Cliff (Sterling K. Brown), housekeeper Lorraine (Myra Lucretia Taylor) and the memory of his Father who committed suicide seven years earlier. 

Monk is a naturally interior soul, yet one who, over time, has built higher, thicker emotional walls which threaten to consume him in his own anger, however correct his anger is. Monk is wise enough to know that in America, as a Black man, he isn't allowed or afforded the opportunity top express his deepest emotions, especially his anger outwardly. He clearly works through any sense of self analysis within his published novels, and to a extent within his teaching, but as his novels are not largely read and the scrutiny of the University system stifles him, Monk's sense of aloneness leads to isolation, self imposed and otherwise. The unjust nature of what is accepted within White society regarding the lives of Black people only compounds his aloneness/isolation further, thus increasing his anger. 

Regarding Monk's personal life, Cord Jefferson smartly does not judge Monk's reticence and further, reluctance to reunite with his family or the missteps he makes with Coraline (Erika Alexander), a family neighbor with whom Monk strikes up a romance. "American Fiction" gracefully and unapologetically invites us into interior world of a Black man in ways typically unseen within television and feature films and how refreshing and even healing it was to see and to know that me and people like myself were being seen in return. 

I have expressed this sentiment time and again upon this site that representation matters, and that within the representation, viewers can see that (in this case) Black people matter...that I matter. It is painful to note that even now in the 21st century, we as Black people still have to assert that we are fully dimensional human beings and not the stereotypes that continue to permeate American culture. 

Cord Jefferson's "American Fiction" inspires the viewer to come for the satire and to stay for the empathetic story of a loving yet fractured and gradually disintegrating/evolving Black family with explorations of adult Black siblinghood, on going generational Black family trauma with issues of mental illness, repression, and addictions that arrive via the self medications that arises from enduring the aforementioned generational and racial trauma, an exploration of Black manhood, sexuality and the difficulties of attaining and delivering intimacy as the social/emotional growth and development of Black males is not valued in America. 

A sequence where Monk, at long last, confronts Sintara Golden is a scorcher! One filled with smart, sharp dialogue that was so strong that this one scene could have easily spiraled off into its own film a la Director Louis Malle's "My Dinner With Andre" (1981)! Jefferey Wright and Issa Rae worked at the top of their respective games in this quietly blistering sequence as their characters passionately debated each other over issues of cultural and personal integrity, complicity into continued perpetuation of negative Black stereotypes for personal gain, the heights and fallacies of White gatekeeper run industries (publishing, television, Hollywood films) and most importantly, between the two of them, precisely who is being dishonest as they are both knowingly playing the game at the expense of Black people. 

And then, a White person enters the room. Debate ended, never to be continued. 

As stated, the dual narratives of "American Fiction" work together as each one is the backdrop and often catalyst for the other. Key decisions Monk engages himself with within the publishing world over the course of the film are clearly motivated by events in his personal life and therefore, the consequences exacerbate his personal relationships. And since Monk is so emotionally isolated, both personally and racially, he has nowhere to go...a quandary I feel a powerful connection with and I would argue most Black Americans, especially those who happen to exist in largely White spaces like myself as I happen to be the one and only Black male at the business at which I am employed, making me constantly hyperaware of behaviors and perceptions that are assumed, unasked for and ever present regardless of the content of my character and quality of my work. 

And there is no one to confide in because how do I begin to explain my inner world when the perception is the reality and the reality is unknown?   

What is fiction within Cord Jefferson's "American Fiction"? Jefferson asks of every viewer to regard Monk and all of the characters through a lens of what is honestly recognizable and therefore, realistic when it comes to how Black people are viewed. When saying that we exist in equality is taken as a threat to others not being allowed to exist. When the perceptions that live inside one's mind carry more realistic weight than the person standing directly in front of them, a person never allowed the chance to be seen, known, understood, and empathized with as a fellow human being. 

Yes...it makes me sad. Because if it hasn't happened by now in 2024, will it ever? Cord Jefferson's "American Fiction" is a plea as well as a demand to finally confront the fiction so we can finally engage with the reality and hopefully, no one need feel to exist in undeserved aloneness. 

Monday, January 8, 2024

EMPTY MANSION: a review of "Saltburn"

 

"SALTBURN"
Written, Produced and Directed by Emerald Fennell
*1/2 (one ad a half stars)
RATED R

I would give this film points for trying...but honestly, did it?

By this point in 2024, almost 130 years into the history of cinema, it would be extremely hard pressed into seeing anything that could be presented as completely "original"--the very type of film that has essentially been unseen. This feeling seems to be especially true these days with the prevalence of sequels, prequels, reboots, re-imaginings and so on.  

However, I have extremely often been more than ready to proclaim something as being or feeling "original" and I know that I will do so again. I firmly believe that so many times over, filmmakers and cinematic storytellers are able to harness a specific artistry that allows them to combine so many elements, from the familiar to the unfamiliar, that once completed, we are given something that looks, sounds and feels unlike anything else. Or.. the originality in question arrives completely from a filmmaker's distinctive, idiosyncratic voice, taking the overly familiar and making everything feel fresh because of their specific worldview. 

Granted, wat is original to someone may be well worn to another, so what I am speaking about may not be the easiest thing to relay. But, in essence, when it comes to being original in film, you know it when you see it and you really know it when you don't. 

For my cinematic sensibilities Emerald Fennell's "Saltburn," her dark, psychological, erotic thriller falls sharply within the latter category. It is a stylish, slow burner that works itself up into sequences of demented frenzy while simultaneously not feeling in any bit of a hurry to get anywhere significant...until it does, and then, it's a mad dash to the point of being absolutely ridiculous as sheer logic is tossed out of the window in order to keep the so-called shocks coming. Beyond all of that, Fennell has helmed a work that is not remotely original in any conceivable way while also not possessing a point of view about its characters, its location or anything suggesting that Fennell thought beyond the superficial. As I say from time to time, I see these things so you don't have to. "Saltburn" is not the worst film I have seen in a while by any means. I have seen much worse. But, we have all seen better...as has Emerald Fennell. So much so, this film feels nearly copied from one exceedingly better film in particular.   

Set during the early 2000's, Emerald Fennell's "Saltburn" stars Barry Keoghan as Oliver Quick, an Oxford student enrolled on scholarship and all but ostracized by his wealthy classmates. Infatuated, and soon obsessed, with Felix Catton (Jacob Elordi) his gorgeous, popular and yes, exceedingly wealthy classmate, Oliver initiates a "meet cute" (via a broken down bicycle) and afterwards a friendship.

During their budding friendship, Oliver shares stories of his dire home life, including mental illness, substance abuse and his Father's sudden death, to which Felix grows increasingly empathetic, to the point where he invites Oliver to stay with him and his family upon their massive estate, Saltburn.  

Upon arrival at the estate, Oliver Quick is quickly introduced to the eclectic cast of characters in residence including: Felix's parents, Sir James Catton (Richard E. Grant) and Lady Elspeth Catton (Rosamund Pike), his sister, Venetia (Alison Oliver), Felix's African-American cousin and Oliver's Oxford nemesis, Farleigh Start (Archie Madekwe) and "Poor Dear" Pamela (Carey Mulligan), Elspeth's friend and "hanger on."  

As the summer wears on and Oliver and Felix's friendship grows closer, Oliver also begins to insinuate himself within the family, much to Farleigh's chagrin and intensifying suspicion towards Oliver's true intentions. Which by now might begin to sound more than a little familiar...

Back in the Winter of 1999, I remember going to a doctor's appointment and while we were getting ourselves re-acquainted, she happened to off handedly mention, "I saw the absolute worst movie last night." Of course, my curiosity was piqued. I asked her what film she saw and when she told me, I was genuinely stunned as I had seen the same film and found it to being exceptional. Asking why her reaction was so strongly negative, she responded, "I hated it because it had absolutely no redeeming social value whatsoever." 

The film in question was Anthony Minghella's "The Talented Mr. Ripley" (1999). And my doctor's takeaway from her viewing experience essentially mirrors my own concerning Emerald Fennell's 'Saltburn."

Now, to be clear, my reaction has really nothing to do with being remotely offended by anything in the film's content as I do not offend easily. My reaction is based in several issues, including how little Fennell gave any thought to her film other than copying "The Talented Mr. Ripley" whole cloth. 

Yes, "Saltburn" is a stylish, at times opulent looking film. Emerald Fennel clearly knows how to construct her world, at least, through her visual and cinematic aesthetic. The film houses some clever dialogue, good performances overall and a chilly shell this side of Stanley Kubrick. And yet, the Fennell crawls trough her story until it feels that even she has had enough of the proceedings as the last, say 35-40 minutes of this two hour plus film crams so many "plot twists" at such a speed as to incur whiplash. Logical storytelling steps never appear at all, most crucially as the story spirals into darkness. Situations and consequences bear no weight and everything seems to come to pass with surprising ease that runs in conflict with the supposed complexities of the plot. 

One giant misstep is the casting of Barry Keoghan as the 18-20 year old Oliver Quick. This is not due to any lack of skill as he throws himself into the part and is game for anything required of him. It is the fact that he is visibly too old for the role! Yes, when Fennell clouds him in mood lighting or darkness, Keoghan's boyish features are identifiable. But, when he hits broad daylight! Wow. I honestly haven't seen casting for teen age/young adult characters this egregious since the...ahem...senior class of T-Birds and Pink Ladies of Rydell High sang themselves through the school hallways in Randal Kleiser's "Grease" (1978)!! This quality was so distracting that I was more than ready to experience a plot twist like the one found Jaume Collet-Serra's grotesque "Orphan" (2009), but "Saltburn" isn't as daring as it thinks it is because when it is all said and done, we have seen it all before and better.

Back to this theme of what makes a film "original." If you are familiar with Minghella's "The Talented Mr. Ripley," as well as the 1955 Patricia Highsmith novel from which the film is based, of course, we know that this story did not necessarily originate a plot starring a parasitic interloper infiltrating high society. Whatever emotions derived from Minghella's film arrive because he, his actors and his cinematic team, and most importantly, his first rate screenplay, ensured that for whatever any familiarity, he needed to dig deeply and create full, rich characters to allow the story to feel anew, especially when the setting of Italy contained major significance. Minghella strongly understood that the characters and the location needed to inform each other therefore, deepening our understanding of each element. We understood precisely why Jude Law's character was so magnetic and where Matt Damon's character's sociopathic tendencies developed and how the setting of Italy influenced each. 

Returning to my comparison to Stanley Kubrick, whose "The Shining" (1980) clearly feels to be a key influence in Fennell's "Saltburn," all the way to the garden maze on the estate grounds. After 44 years, we all know and can still feel the cruel, cold dread of the Overlook Hotel as we remember every nook, cranny and carpet pattern plus its own entity and how it related to that film's core characters.

More recently, we have Alexander Payne's superb "The Holdovers" (2023), a film that feels fresh due to the depths of the screenplay, attention to the layers of the characters and how they all connect and relate to the Barton boarding school. The setting and characters are inseparable from each other.

Unfortunately, there is no such detail or resonance to nearly any one moment in Emerald Fennell's "Saltburn." It is as if Fennell figured that whomever would potentially see her film would not have any knowledge of "The Talented Mr. Ripley," so what would it bother to lift the plot for herself? Just tweak the proceedings with the hollow flash and style that went out of fashion with Bret Easton Ellis novels, a red herring of a mystery that ultimately never comes to pass, and thunderously plunk in three scenes (involving a bathtub, a gravesite and the finale, respectively) which are solely designed to get viewers talking with an aghast "Can you believe it?!" demeanor and let's call it a movie. 

But since Fennell's film possesses no insight into human nature, the Saltburn estate is as indistinguishable from any remote English mansion or prep school or Hogwarts, and essentially only exists to get people talking about those aforementioned three scenes, then how could it have any redeeming social value? These scenes, these "shocking scenes" are attached to nothing tangible making them wasted opportunities to update the conceit of the story or the lives of the characters.    

Emerald Fennel's "Saltburn" is a resoundingly disappointing film that is completely devoid of character. And that's because she never bothered to write any.

Sunday, December 31, 2023

SHE'S ALIVE...ALIVE!!!!: a review of "Poor Things"

 

"POOR THINGS"
Based upon the novel Poor Things by Alasdair Grey
Screenplay Written by Tony McNamara
Directed by Yorgos Lanthimos
**** (four stars)
RATED R

This is why we go to the movies!!!!

Dear readers, of course we all understand that the movies are a form of escapism. A place to go to evade the pressures of life for at least 2 hours and fall into another world. But for me, as I have stated before upon this blogsite, at their absolute finest, the movies are unquestionably an art form in which a roomful of strangers can experience together, therefore, undertaking a shared journey directly into what could be considered as dreams due to their transportive nature combined with the imagery upon the silver screen. When a movie operates at its peak, the experience for me is the sort where I can almost forget that I am sitting inside of a movie theater and the film itself graduates from images conveyed through artistry and craftsmanship and becomes an experience that pulsates with life. The film exists as its own state of being

Yorgos Lanthimos' "Poor Things" is exactly the type of film that whisked me from reality into its own fantastical world while reflecting its orgiastic, propulsive vision back to our real world via a force that lifted me. It is an electric film starring a go-for-broke Emma Stone in her finest cinematic hour to date, it also represents Yorgos Lanthimos delivering his best work since the defiant, unforgiving satire and Orwellian surrealism of "The Lobster" (2016), itself a film I placed at #4 on my personal favorite films of the decade between 2010-2019. For me, "Poor Things" is not only equal to "The Lobster." It is not only 2023's top film. It is a work that sits in that rarefied air of Daniel Kwan & Daniel Scheinert's "Everything Everywhere All At Once" (2022) as one of the best films of our current cinematic decade.   

Set in Victorian London, Yorgos Lanthimos' "Poor Things" weaves the tale of Bella Baxter (Emma Stone), the adult appearing yet developmentally infantized ward of the disfigured surgeon Dr. Godwin Baxter (Willem Dafoe). Upon taking on an assistant in medical student Max McCandles (Ramy Youssef), Godwin--whom Bella refers to as "God"--reveals that Bella is the result of his medical experiments as she was formed by harvesting the body of an impregnated young woman who had committed suicide, replacing her adult brain with the brain of the unborn child and then, re-animating her. 

The body of an adult woman powered by the gradually then rapidly developing brain of a child and further, Bella is studied by Max, who soon grows affection for her and wishes to marry her.  While  Bella accepts Max's proposal, she hungrily craves the freedom to explore and investigate the world beyond Godwin's mansion and grounds. Her desires are soon met by the arrival of attorney Duncan Wedderburn (Mark Ruffalo), with whom she has a tryst and soon abandons Dr. Godwin and Max and begins an odyssey that takes her across the continents and an evolution into her new self made existence socially, philosophically, intellectually, and sexually. 

Untethered to a past she cannot remember and societal rules and norms that are in essence meaningless, Bella Baxter's journey from infancy to liberation is a cinematic feast in Yorgos Lanthimos' "Poor Things." The production and audio visual landscape--presented superbly through Lanthimos's team including Cinematographer Robbie Ryan, Costume Designer Holly Waddington and Composer Jerskin Fendrix--suggests everything from the meticulousness of Wes Anderson films, the phantasmagorical surrealism of Terry Gilliam films combined with the art of Salvador Dali and Hieronymous Bosch and the clinical precision of Stanley Kubrick films while firmly extending the cinematic language developed by Lanthimos in past films, especially "The Lobster," which this film shares conceptual and thematic connective tissue.

Evoking Bella's world, which exists somewhere between dreams and the strands leading to the depths of nightmares, Lanthimos envisions his most rapturous and lushly presented landscape to date. I cannot stress enough, this is a HARD R rated film that is by turns grotesque, disturbing, occasionally gory, sexually graphic--dear readers, I cannot recall seeing a film this sexually extreme since Alfonso Cuaron's "Y Tu Mama Tambien" (2001)--and decidedly grim. 

That being said, it is also quite often very funny and I am also surprised as to how joyously playful it is! Nothing ever feels labored and everyone looks to be having a blast while building and existing in this impossible world!  And why not? Mark Ruffalo especially looks to be thrilled with being unleashed from the Marvel films for this stretch. Willem Dafoe extends far beyond what could have existed solely as a mad scientist role. From leading actors through supporting players, Yorgos Lanthimos is the filmmaker who treats his cast as they superlative gifts that they are and in turn gifts them with a story and characters they can run with. 

As with Yorgos Lanthimos' past films, there cannot be anything tentative in a film like this. You will either go with its flow or you will not. There is no middle ground.  With regards to the journey of "Poor Things," we are given something that is a blending of Mary Shelley's Frankenstein; or The Modern Prometheus (published 1818) and Voltaire's Candide (1759)--which itself birthed Christian Marquand's vulgar, picaresque sex fueled travails in the awful "Candy"(1968) and did indeed pop into my mind as I watched--and through its conceits, conceptions, inspirations and surrealisms, Lanthimos conjured up a veritable wave of a film experience to ride and he found a champion to lead the way in Emma Stone. 

Emma Stone is a revelation, As Bella, she completely commits and delivers a fearless performance that is completely unfiltered or steeped in self conscious vanity or ego. Much like the film itself, Emma Stone is working in a state of being as Bella. I just didn't really see a performance, so to speak. As Bella, Emma Stone...simply...IS! For the first third of the film or so, during which Lanthimos presents in striking black and white cinematography, Bella is depicted as being in her infant/toddler/preschooler phase of life despite the adult female form she embodies. I instantly was taken aback by the sheer physicality of Stone's work as she truly appeared to be an infant from her facial expressions, vocalizations, and especially the movements of her limbs. Honestly, as someone who is surrounded by children every day in my real world role as a preschool teacher, Stone was pitch perfect! How she walked, tumbles, grabbed, ate and reacted to the world in which she is learning...for the second time, unbeknownst to her initially.

And certainly, that is the key to the character...the way in. How would she--or all of us, for that matter--interact with an existence that we do not and could not know? Emma Stone's brilliance is that she not only richly depicts how Bella is engaging the world she is investigating, her ability to transfer that feeling to us int he audience is paramount, for then, we are firmly inside of Bella's experiences, giving us the ability to potentially remember or to reflect or to even imagine what was this feeling like for the very first time.

When Bella masturbates for the first time, thus unlocking a sexual awakening and curiosity, that first moment...honestly, it almost felt as if Emma Stone was making that discovery for herself as authentically as she rendered the emotions! While this moment leads itself to hysterical sequences, we are also walking through the door with Bella to a rediscovering of her own womanhood ad complete self, which then gives the film progressively deeper layers of poignancy, pathos and even a moral rage at the world in which Bella--and all women--exist. But...most importantly, a world that Bella does not remember and so, it possesses no meaning. 

With the exception of perhaps the kindly Max, the men in the world of "Poor Things" all exist to attempt to mold Bella Baxter into whichever image they happen to deem and often to unsuccessful effect. For if the world is wholly anew to Bella, and she is operating as a child, Bella's world view exists completely through her own desires. If she wants it, then so be it. If she doesn't, also so be it. She is completely of her own mind and it is unchanged, even as it develops and expands with knowledge of the world as it works and how it exists through its unfairness, inequalities and horrors. 

Bella Baxter's formidable qualities are forged through her untainted innocence which becomes the world's upending sense of anarchy as she is unable of being manipulated or controlled and again, Emma Stone's outstanding work showcases this character at every developmental stage (which I am still marveling at how she pulled this feat off--as I am certain the film was shot out of sequence per the norm). 

All of this being stated, this does lead to what I am certain would be a powerful debate between viewers, especially within a 2023 where we live in a country where women are not allowed to have full agency over their own bodies. For what does it have to take to have that agency...to be free? How should we feel about Bella's pilgrimage or sense of liberation? Is it liberation if a woman needs to live, commit suicide and be re-animated with the mind of a baby to experience the world all over again to finally claim the agency she should morally possess at birth? It is impossible for one film to contain an actual answer to that question but it is presented and it exists for us to question and debate as we drink up every moment that Yorgos Lanthimos elicits.

And again, this is exactly what the movies are for!!! Not disposable, forgettable visual baubles to never fully digest. Yorgos Lanthimos' "Poor Things" takes the eternal coming of age story yet injects a creepiness that bridges Grimm's fairy tales to body horror and still emerges through to the other side with a life affirming vibrancy and vivaciousness that celebrates the sense of discovery that is inherent with living life. 

There is nothing here that is disposable or remotely forgettable. Yorgos Lanthimos' "Poor Things" is grand, exhilarating, rapturous cinema. 

Saturday, December 30, 2023

HAPPY 14TH BIRTHDAY TO SAVAGE CINEMA!!!!!

 

I am learning how to be more gentle with myself. 

I am learning how to re-create my own sense of happiness. 

I am learning to try and accept when changes happen knowing that everything cannot remain exactly the same forever. 

I am learning these things and so much more, especially today as Savage Cinema reaches its 14th birthday.

Dear readers, it was 14 years ago, as I sat in my parents' Chicago home basement, when this blogsite was born and I hit "PUBLISH" for the very first time. And once this posting is published, I would have performed this feat 856 times...and to that accomplishment, I should see it  as the accomplishment that it is...and I should be able to hold some pride in this accomplishment.

As I have written about over these last four years, and as you can witness from the decreased pace of new postings, Savage Cinema has slowed down due to personal, mental health issues which arose during the pandemic as well as how the movie industry itself has changed since the pandemic, from the types of movies being shown in theaters, to my home base of Madison, WI  losing essentially every movie theater we had ever since my arrival in this city 36 years ago.

Yet, I still love and believe in the art and artistry of the movies. And in doing so, I still love writing about them and I need to rediscover that belief in my abilities with writing about the movies, even if my output has slowed or if my confidence has waned due to my out put slowing. A vicious cycle...

Yet, through everything, year and year, you have been there for me when new postings arrive and I thank you. I thank you for your support, for your faith, for you just sending me any words at all showing me that you have read what I have written and messages have been received. 

It has existed for so long that it feels foolish to end it now...even if postings do not arrive as quickly or as frequently as in ears past. And here is where I need to be gentle with myself.

Every review written and posted is an accomplishment, it is a victory. Every single one. I need to claim ownership of this truth...plus the most important one...

I am a writer and this is my art. And I am still a writer and this is still my art even when I am not producing anything or if I go quiet. As I am gentle with myself, I remain grateful to all of you who have ever been with me upon this journey. I don't wish to write in a vacuum for I have always wanted this space to be a point to start conversations about the movies and the subject matter contained within them. 

My thankfulness is as bottomless as always. Thank you for allowing me to reach 14 years of this endeavor. 

I hope that you will remain with me for even more.