The nominations for the French Cesars were announced, and a few of the titles I recognize and are on my list to see including I Lost My Body, By the Grace of God, and Portrait of A Lady On Fire. Another film that looks interesting is the movie An Officer and A Spy which centers around the Dreyfus Affair and stars the actor Jean Dujardin and Emmanuelle Seigner.
I have to say, the film and subject matter intrigues me very much, but I'm unsure where I stand on this issue of Polanski. I haven't seen any of his recent films beyond the 1980s, but not out of protest necessarily; I just haven't seen them yet. It's interesting, though, how so many actors have worked with him over the years since the scandal of the 1970s - Harrison Ford, Jodie Foster, Pierce Brosnan, Eva Green, Johnny Depp, etc. Why did they decide to work with Polanski? Do they have no moral convictions about working with an accused sexual predator? Surely that can't be the case. Alas, not everything is black and white.
The following films are ones I am adding to my "To-See" and "Maybe" lists. The ratings and synopsis below are from critics from RogerEbert.com Documentary The Amusement Park (documentary by George A. Romero) 4 stars. I really want to see this. A long-lost film by Romero that hasn't been seen in decades; a documentary about the elderly. International Only Cloud Knows 3 stars.The Chinese romantic-drama “Only Cloud Knows” is sappy, slow, and mostly effective. It’s also a notable change-up for director Xiaogang Feng (“Youth,” “I Am Not Madame Bovary”), the popular mainland filmmaker who’s sometimes called “China’s Spielberg” because of his melodramatic blockbusters’ inescapable popularity. I Wish I Knew 3 stars. Looks to be an interesting celebration of Shanghai filmed 10 years ago; "the filmmaker mixes at-length reminiscences with older residents with contemplative, beautifully framed views of sections of the municipality, taking in both its urban sprawl and some of the more distinguished details of its architecture."
Drama Clemency 4 stars. Set in a prison, Alfre Woodard plays a prison warden. Looks very good.
Three Christs 1.5 stars. Based on a true story of a psychiatrist and three patients who think they are Christ. An impressive cast includes Richard Gere, Bradley Whitford, and Juliana Margulies.
The Song of Names 3 stars. About a violin virtuoso; the span of his life from a young boy to an adult (Tim Roth) is covered. With Clive Owen as his friend. Looks good.
Little Women
4 stars. I haven't seen the other film versions and don't know the whole story but I'm definitely interested in Greta Gerwig's direction and performances.
The Last Full Measure 3 stars. This looks to be a really compelling drama, with a great cast: William Hurt, Christopher Plummer, Ed Harris, John Savage, Samuel L. Jackson and Peter Fonda is one of his last roles. "...covers the 1999 battle to obtain the Medal of Honor for deceased Air Force Airman William Pitsenbarger. Killed in combat in one of the bloodiest missions of the Vietnam War, Pitsenbarger saved many lives but was awarded what his family and the men he saved and served with considered a lesser commendation." The Wave Only 1.5 stars. Supposed to be a modern day Scrooge morality tale with some interesting cast members including Justin Long. I might try to see this on DVD.
Action/Thriller/Adventure Underwater 3 stars. Starring Kristen Stewart and is supposed to be a monster film crossed with a disaster film, like two "B" movies in one. Sounds like a dumb film but I might watch the DVD.
I've been wanting to see this movie forever, and finally did and really liked it! It reminded me of Dances with Wolves from 1990, primarily because it's about a white man raised by an indigenous tribe. Dustin Hoffman was an interesting choice to play this part. He was a big box office star from this time period, and he brings alot of that everyman essence to this part which I think is important for this role.
At the start of the film we meet Hoffman's character - a 120 year old man being interviewed by a reporter (William Hickey) interested in his long life and his supposed acquaintanceship with Civil War General Custer in the 1800s.
The old man lives in a nursing home; I have a relative who just moved into such a place, and they can be lonely places. I could understand why this old man would want to talk and tell his life story to someone who will listen. And he's had a long life, a really long life. He talks about being raised by a Cheyenne tribe, and later befriends historical figures Bill Hickock and General Custer. These sequences are episodic, but I really seeing him brush with historical figures. This was an idea that was used somewhat similarly later in the movie Forrest Gump, but I think works really good in this film.
I like how the old man narrates the movie throughout; this gave me the feeling that I was always being told the old man's story and not someone else's. He talks about the various "stages" of his life.... "My Indian Years", "My religious years", "My Outlaw Days", etc. Faye Dunaway has a small supporting part where she plays a religious man's wife who becomes a prostitute later on.
I couldn't believe that it was Richard Mulligan playing a dramatic role as General Custer; I only knew him for his comedy roles on TV but he is really good in this.
There is also great standout performance by a Native American actor in the film - Chief Dan George. His part is significant as Hoffman's father figure and wise mentor who has some interesting (and racy) dialogue. I imagine that the audience of 1970 would like his line where he says, "Does she show enthusiasm when you mount her?" (referring to Hoffman's spouse).
It's unfortunate that the movie's marketing posters (as shown above) make this movie to look like a comedy, with Dustin Hoffman made to look like Don Knotts in The Shakiest Gun in the West. This is a really profound drama (with occasional comic relief), that was ahead of its time showing the perspectives of both indigenous and white peoples. Equally unfortunate is the lack of accolades that year - no Oscars...not even a Best Picture nomination. In 1970, the big winner was "Patton", which was a more traditional war film with a hero that audiences could probably relate to more. Little Big Man was unfortunately overshadowed by it, and I don't think audiences were quite ready to embrace such a film yet. Not until Dances with Wolves 20 years later.
I also re-watched Midnight Cowboy which I haven't seen in more than 20 years but remember liking it overall, especially the chemistry of the two leads (Voight and Hoffman). I forgot that there was a sequence where they go to a hippy artists' party in New York, and there are some real cameos by Andy Warhol protégés. After attending a Warhol art exhibit recently, I've been reading some of his biographies and a book of his journal entries; interestingly in one entry he wrote that he wanted to do a cameo in Midnight Cowboy but couldn't do it because he was in the hospital recovering from a gunshot wound (in the summer of '68).
I loved seeing all the on-location scenes of New York; I kept my eye peeled for any interesting posters that would have been of the times. I saw one poster/billboard with Jonathan Winters on it. And another poster was a movie ad for "Doctor Doolittle" starring Rex Harrison, which was interesting. Flash forward 50 years and we have yet another remake of "Doolittle" in theaters starring Robert Downey Jr (I'm planning to skip since it doesn't look all that appealing to me).
Another scene in Midnight Cowboy that I had forgotten about happens at the end where Joe Buck beats the old man in his hotel room, almost killing him (his actual death isn't shown but it's implied he might have killed him). This makes me feel less sympathetic toward the character, and even reminded me of what Brad Pitt does at the end of Once Upon a Time in Hollywood (my least-favorite sequence in that movie); now I'm wondering if Tarantino intended that scene to be an homage to Midnight Cowboy.
The Oscar nominations were announced on Jan 13, and there were a few movies I saw (Harriet was the only film nominated that I saw and liked) but most I haven't seen yet. The Farewell was one of my favorite films of last year but was shut out.
Also many of the nominated films this year are biographical or about real people or have characters that are real people. The Irishman, Ford Vs. Ferrari, Richard Jewell, Jojo Rabbit, Bombshell, The Two Popes, Harriet, Rocketmann, the Mr. Rogers movie with Tom Hanks, and Judy with Renee Zellweger. Even Tarantino's fantasy movie had Sharon Tate as a prominent character, even though she lives at the end which is not true to life.
Biographical/historical films are among my favorite type of movie so I think this is great that biographicals are getting recognized.
Harriet was the movie I was most eager to see in 2019. Here is a big-screen movie about Harriet Tubman --- her story never told on the big screen feature before in over 100 years of film history. It was exciting to think about! In my opinion I feel this movie is one of the most important films of last year. I think we need a film like this more than ever, with so much ignorance of our past history and with all the racism that still exists to this day.
I went to see it in the theater to see Harriet and really enjoyed it. The one thing that I didn't like about it was that it was too short. This film deserves three or 3.5 hours in my opinion. Earlier in the year I sat through 3 hours of a Tarantino fantasy that skewed history, but here was a movie about one of the greatest people in history that could have been longer. I would watch a mini-series about Harriet if it were made; maybe one day. I do remember the tv film A Woman Called Moses but didn't have a chance to rewatch it yet.
My favorite parts of the movie involved the traitor who snitches on Harriet; I'm guessing this may have been a composite character but it I thought it really added to the drama and suspense. When Harriet makes it to Philadelphia her life takes on a new direction.
It's disappointing that Harriet wasn't nominated for Best Picture; up to 10 movies can be nominated nowadays, and only 9 made the cut this year, including Ford Vs Ferrari - really? Something is seriously wrong with this picture.
Back in 1993, I was in high school and had a black tutor, and we talked about the 65th Oscar nominations that were announced in February of 1993. He pointed out that Malcolm X only received two Oscar nominations (and later no wins) and saw something wrong with that picture -- and I'm feeling the same almost 30 years later.
“Harriet,” is the kind of historical epic that generally pleases motion picture academy voters (and one that defies cultural conventions predating film itself), got dinged in many reviews for being too formulaic. This is despite Cynthia Erivo’s astonishing, and Oscar-nominated, performance as a former slave turned verifiable action hero — a female character that somehow never made it to the center of a film before. It was never even discussed as a possibility for best picture, despite there being 10 slots available. If only filmmaker Kasi Lemmons had thought to follow Harriet in a single shot through a world war complete with cameos by British heartthrobs past and present; if only Tubman had been forced to have imaginary conversations with best friend Jefferson Davis. If only “Harriet” had been made and marketed by Netflix. Please do not willfully misunderstand. I’m not saying that “1917,” “Jojo Rabbit,” “The Irishman,” “Marriage Story” and “The Two Popes” are not great and/or awards-worthy films; I’m just saying that “formulaic” often wins big at the Oscars, but only when it’s a certain formula.
I think I understand her point. It seems like the movies that are being recognized this year for the major awards are more "showy" films. But really, Ford Vs Ferrari nominated for Best Picture? Even The Post was nominated for Best Picture a few years ago. I liked that movie alot. But it wasn't any more showy than Harriet.
And then there's Joker, a movie whose title conjures up memories of the comic book villain, my action figure I played with as a kid, my trading cards, Cesar Romero and Jack Nicholson's portrayals (and Heath Ledger's too). Many have pointed out that it's not really about "The Joker" from the comics or TV....It's more a satire in the same vein as Taxi Driver that has a message about today's society.
But come on. Joker. I can still hear Jack Nicholson in my mind say "You can call me....JOKER!...and as you can see I'm alot happier!" Not typically interested in comic book movies, I skipped the movie Joker when it first came out.
But then I heard filmmaker Michael Moore praising the film recently on his podcast recently, and he spoke with the director Todd Phillips. It turns out that they both have some similar connections going back almost 20 years, and I really enjoyed their conversation where they talk about their respective careers and movies in general.
Michael Moore talks about Joker and interviews director Todd Phillips in the clip below:
So I decided to give it a chance and watched Joker but I hated it. I didn't like the character, I didn't like the tie-ins with Batman characters. I didn't like Taxi Driver either so I probably should have known I wouldn't like this.
The the type of person that Joker is in the film might be the type that would shoot up an office building or a school.
It just seems so unnecessary to me to bring all the Batman lore and stuff, and there's no need to set in the 1980s either. Just set the movie in today's era. If you want to make a realistic movie, make it realistic. The moment you mention "Gotham City" or "Bruce Wayne" or "Wayne Manor", I'm rolling my eyes...
Which movie will be more remembered in 25 or 30 years? or 50 years? Joker or Harriet? Or both? Or neither?
I'm not sure how I feel about the movie "Judy". I read somewhere that Judy's family did not approve/endorse the film, and that Liza Minnelli never met Renee Zellweger and never gave her approval on the project.
Something about that seems unsettling to me...here we have the filmmakers devoting time and effort on a biographical film about a much-beloved celebrity, yet not even getting the approval of the family? Is it a movie critical of Judy -- or is it a celebration her life? What is the director aiming to do?
For example, the new movie "It's A Beautiful Day in the Neighborhood" - which features the character of Mr. Rogers - did get the approval of Rogers's family, and the director was upfront by aiming to make this a celebration of Rogers.
But with Judy, I wasn't sure what to expect. There are some darker moments depicted in the film - such as her dependency on drugs and personal difficulties with people - but I don't think the movie introduces anything new that hasn't been written about before.
Having seen the film, I see it as a celebration of her life, and a tribute to Judy, even though it only focuses on the last year of her life. A few flashbacks go back to the late 1930s when she was filming Wizard of Oz and some other MGM films, and the beginnings of her drug addiction.
But it's not really an all-encompassing life story. It would be interesting to see more of 1940s Judy during the MGM years, or 1950s Judy. Bobby Rivers recently wrote on his blog that the 2001 TV biopic was far superior, and was endorsed by the family.
Renee has been getting rave reviews for her performance in "Judy"; her acting is good but it is obvious to me that she is doing an impression of the Judy from interviews she gave on tv in the 1960s. Renee gives the character grandiosity, no question about that; I did get a sense that she was the most popular person in the world, and also got the sense that she was a very troubled person, insecure. But overall it is a rather average film. I think it should have been called "Judy in London", because the entire film is set there during Judy's tour during 1968 and 69, and also focuses on her relationship with her third husband Mickey Deans.
The best parts of the movie in my opinion are these scenes with Mickey and the scenes where she befriends a gay couple and spends time with them in their home. It's interesting to watch because you never expect a mega-superstar to mingle with fans like that.
There's one scene where Judy visits her twenty-something daughter Liza at a party; it's interesting but totally unnecessary. There's really no need for it because we never see Liza again in the film and it feels thrown in there. There is a character who is an assistant to Judy in London (played by Jessie Buckley), and I wish her character was explored a bit more. There are several scenes of singing and they are ok but I wish the film were a bit more compelling.
A much better film in my opinion is Factory Girl, which came out in 2006 but I only recently saw. Sienna Miller plays the artist Edie Sedwick who becomes famous simply by being associated with Andy Warhol in the 1960s. It's an great movie because both characters are explored while the focus remains on Edie's character. Like Judy Garland, Edie was troubled and addicted, but her fame was a different kind of fame, and the movie explores that. Afterwards, I wanted to find out more about the director and writer; the writer doesn't have too many other credits but the director was co-director on the Hearts of Darkness/Coppola documentary from 1991, which is really impressive. I read somewhere that he initially set out to do a Edie/Andy documentary but ended up doing a feature instead. Interestingly, in the end credits (and in the DVD's Special Features) are clips of interviews from people who knew Andy and Edie so this really give the movie an extra punch.
Bob Dylan is depicted as a character that is obviously based on him - but only the name is changed. (I read he was not a fan of this depiction).
Some of these personal details are dark and seemingly trashy or sleazy, however they are real-life details about celebrities that we can relate to and try to understand. The director does an amazing job of recreating Andy's art studio in New York. The costumes, makeup, and camera work / cinematography are really good; each shot looks really well-positioned and carefully crafted.
The movie only focuses on Edie's years in New York, and not her last years when she was institutionalized, although that might make for an interesting film or story as well, because she eventually marries someone she meets there (per the epilogue).
I suppose perhaps that Edie's last year was not unlike Judy's in some ways.
I recently watched The Farewell, which got great reviews last year and is commended as one of the top films to see of the year. I join in on the praises; I loved this film. I read that it is a semi autobiographical film about the writer-director Lulu Wang, and that the characters in the film are inspired by her and her relationships with her family and grandmother. The film is told from the main character's point of view (played by Awkwafina) and how she deals with accepting the sad news that her grandmother has a terminal illness.
A film about that alone would be enough to hold my interest, however the film is more complex and introduces many cultural complexities. The grandmother lives in China and speaks only Chinese, and fosters a strong family pride --- the actress who plays the grandmother is really fantastic, and deserves award recognition. In the film, you learn how this family's ways are very traditional, and how things are done in a traditional way -- for example how terminal illnesses are not talked about honestly and openly, and how secrets are kept.
These are relatable issues that many Americans or those in the West can understand if they have strong ethic family ties. I have some Eastern European in my family heritage and the immigrants and first-generation families were often very traditional just as this family. I liked all of the family dinner scenes, and seeing the family dynamics. There's one scene where the grandmother is commenting on how long a young couple about to married has been dating, and says (paraphrasing), "We can't let people know they've only been dating a few months...we have to say at least 6 months to a year....appearances matter...we can't have people talk about us".
That's just like in my family how older relatives think and behave. So concerned about what people think.
Awkwafina's character (an American) challenges some of this thinking, but also is respectful and goes along with some of it to keep the peace. I think that's the challenge that we need to face sometimes when it comes to family politics. I know that's what I have to do.
Kudos to the director and cinematography; I really like her style of directing and how realistic-looking the film is. This is the kind of movie that engages me and keeps me invested all the way through.
The Meddler is another very good movie about a family, directed by Lorene Scafaria. It's also semi-autobiographical - a mom-daughter movie because it primarily focuses on the mom (Susan Sarandon) and her daughter (Rose Byrne); the director has said in interviews that the characters and events are based on true situations of herself and her own mom, who moved closer to her in Los Angeles when she became widowed.
Susan Sarandon is great playing an Italian-American from New York - Marnie Minervini - she's more liberal than traditional -- the opposite of the grandmother in The Farewell. Marnie desperately wants to start a new life. To do new things. To experience things she's never done. She's curious about iPhones and iPads and technology and loves to talk to any stranger she meets.
The film is -- unfortunately in my opinion -- called "The Meddler" because that's how her daughter sees her, as a meddler; Marnie come across as being a busybody always calling/texting and wanting to spend time with her....when in fact, she's just lonely. My favorite sequence in the movie is a scene where they are together in a restaurant. The camera pans across several other tables with couples on dates until finally resting on the mom-daughter's table. I liked that because it expresses how the daughter wishes they both had separate lives apart from always hanging out together. That one shot really gets the point across well.
Eventually, by the end of the movie, that does happen - the mom does "get a life", and I liked seeing the evolution of her character. I liked the cop-boyfriend character played by JK Simmons who is really charming.
Another thing that I liked about the movie that is kind of different from other "movie moms" in the mom is independently wealthy, as a widow with an inheritance. So she basically has all the money she needs to live on for the rest of her life, a situation that is different from alot of other mom characters I've seen in movies; I can't think of another movie mom character quite like this one. The movie treats the mom respectfully and doesn't criticize her for having money....rather it explores what a person can do with their life and help their community to make it a better place if one were in her situation. She's not a woman who is using her money to exploit people, to do drugs, or to gamble it away.
It's a really interesting character, and a terrific performance by Susan Sarandon; I don't know why she was overlooked for award recognition that year. This is probably one of my favorites of all her movies and all roles. It's fantastic that she got to play this part.
And well-directed, too. Even-balanced showing us the mom's and daughter's perspectives.
As for the title, it's not the best title in my opinion - should have been called "Marnie and Lori". Or "Marnie's Adventures in Los Angeles". Or something similar. I think this film has the potential to become a real classic in years to come as more people see it.
So I did go to see the latest, and liked it, but didn't love it. It was OK. I thought it was better than the last. Spoilers ahead (don't read if you haven't seen yet).
My favorite parts are when C3P0 loses his memory and when Chewie gets Leah's medal at the end. I also liked seeing Han Solo (Harrison Ford) come back as a force ghost and I liked seeing Kylo Ren turn to the force/the good side. That was satisfying. Lando (Billy Dee Williams) was good to see but he's not really in it much. And I liked seeing the Emperor again revealing himself to be the mastermind.
There were alot of things I didn't understand about the movie. I watched Kevin Smith's review (below) and he had pretty much all of the same thoughts I had about things.
I didn't understand the "healing" powers that Rey and Kylo had, and didn't get all the mind-meld stuff and abilities to step into someone's space like when Rey destroy's Kylo's chambers with her lightsaber when she's not there.
Suppose I need to suspend my disbelief on some stuff, though. Oh well.
Now that the "Skywalker" trilogies are done, I'd still watch some other "Star Wars" universe movies.
- Would still like to see a "Solo: Part II" and show more of Jabba the Hutt
- Would like to see more Obi Wan Kenobi adventures
- Would like to see more of Yoda's life in-between Episodes III and V
- Would like to see a dramatization of Luke training Kylo
