Best Picture Winners I don't like: Grand Hotel and Green Book, plus Round Midnight

I recently caught up with two Best Picture Winners for the first time; both of them I didn't like!

Grand Hotel is a movie I've known about forever but never saw --- finally I had a chance to watch recently, but realized I wasn't missing much. I felt the characters were introduced to the audience too quickly and I kept trying to follow with what everyone's purpose in the hotel was. Joan Crawford shows up as a stenographer/reporter needing to interview Wallace Beery for some reason but gets distracted for about 20 minutes fighting off flirtatious advances from John Barrymore's character. Beery has a German accent in this film and his character is different from other tough-guy roles I've seen him in. Lionel Barrymore comically plays a doctor but is ultimately un-interesting. Greta Garbo also shows up but also was really un-interesting to me.

This movie didn't work for me! Apparently it was turned into a musical about 30 years ago but I can't imagine how better or worse it would be with songs. 

I also did not like Green Book.  I didn't find the Viggo Mortensen character very likeable or believable at any stage of the film. At the very start of the movie he is shown throwing two glasses in his garbage can at home because two Black workers drank from them. If he hates Black people so much I can't believe that he would ever take the job as a driver for Mahershala Ali's jazz musician character, which is almost made to be slightly comical when more seriousness should have placed on his character, I felt. And the movie should have focused more on him instead.  

The movie as a whole just didn't work for me. The blogger and former TV personality Bobby Rivers wrote about Green Book and I tend to agree with his assessment; he explains a bit better than I can - Blog post from Bobby Rivers' blog talks about Green Book

I also recently watched another movie about a Jazz player and his white friend -  Round Midnight - it's been on my "to-see" list for years and I finally watched it for the first time, and I liked it. Liked it much better than Green Book. Like Green Book, Round Midnight is also about a Black jazz musician (Dexter Gordon) in the 1950s-early 60s era, but in a different country and in a neighborhood with less racial prejudice. Instead of at the prime of his career, Dexter Gordon is at the end of his career - and life. He's a heavy drinker. 

The film shows how he befriends a white Parisian man who has idolized him all his life. When they meet and become friends, the white man becomes his caretaker and lets him live in his home with his daughter.

It's similar to Green Book in that it is ultimately a bout how an artist inspires another man's life. But in Round Midnight there's lots of jazz and musical performances from start to finish. I was convinced that Dexter Gordon was this jazz musician in Paris, and that he really was an alcoholic. It was almost difficult to watch because I really felt I was watching a real person disintegrate on film. 

1917 (2019) and some interesting articles about the Oscars

Last weekend I did go to see this and it was good; I liked it, even though it reminded me of Saving Private Ryan at times, but I like this movie much better. I'm not sure the "long take" style was absolutely necessary, but I did like this style because you feel like you're right there with the characters and see their point of view. I wish more movies were shot like this, actually. I don't think it's as easy to do as imagined.  My friend I was with said afterwards that it reminded him of Paths of Glory, a WWI film with Kirk Douglas (I haven't seen it yet). Both films might make for a good double feature.

It may win some Oscars this weekend and I think they'd be deserving. The set direction was very impressive.

Spoiler alert (skip this next paragraph if you haven't seen it). My main problem with the film is that I found it totally unbelievable that the things that the soldier carried in his pocket would survive everything he endured, including the trench collapse and the escape down the river (and the waterfall drop). No way the maps and letters and photos he had would survive after being water-soaked for so long, in my opinion. Unless they were in a steel case of some kind, but I missed that.

Also I liked seeing some soldiers of color in the film, though their appearances were brief. There was a Sikh soldier with a very small part and some speaking lines, which I appreciated seeing on film. His scene happens on the back of a truck which is one of my favorite parts. I like that scene because it shows the experience of one soldier - grieving the death of his friend -  coming into contact with another group with established comradery. Then he needs to jumps off the truck and we never see the others again.

It's a bit of an episodic film, and I liked that knowing that the film is based on the memories of director Sam Mendes' grandfather.

This is a good article from NBC News about the WWI contributions of Sikh soldiers.
Other bloggers who recently tackled this film
Just a Cineast - blog post
Two Dollar Cinema - blog post
Bobby Rivers - blog post

Cliched Monologues - blog post

Some other interesting articles I read recently:

Brutally Honest Oscar Ballot: '1917' Is "Gimmicky," Renée Zellweger "Nailed It"
(The Hollywood Reporter)
A male member of the Academy's producers branch, granted anonymity to speak freely, shares which films earned his precious vote (and why).

The Oscars' 'Harriet Tubman problem'
(CNN.com Opinions)
Joaquin Phoenix's impassioned BAFTA acceptance speech, in which he criticized the lack of diversity in filmmaking, showed the persistence of structural racism. Phoenix implicated himself before an overwhelmingly white, and largely stunned, audience -- and cast a strong spotlight on the lack of racial diversity in the nominations for this weekend's Academy Awards.

Oscar Nominations, Joker (2019), and Harriet (2019)

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.

A couple of notable things I noticed: Netflix had a ton of nominated films; this article from Wired talks about that https://www.wired.com/story/oscar-nominations-netflix/

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.

In a recent commentary, Mary McNamara of the LA Times observed:

“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?

Judy (2019) and Factory Girl (2004)

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.

Additional articles:

https://www.vanityfair.com/style/2017/12/andy-warhol-and-edie-sedgwick-a-brief-white-hot-and-totally-doomed-romance

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/profiles/edie-sedgwick-the-life-and-death-of-the-sixties-star-431412.html

https://www.npr.org/2014/02/02/251651304/a-suburban-teen-saw-the-sparkle-of-edie-but-not-the-pain

The Farewell (2019) and The Meddler (2016)

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.

More thoughts on these films:

Cinemascope blog (The Farewell) post here

Star Wars: The Rise of Skywalker (2019)

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

Cats (2019) and Scrooge (1970)

This past holiday season I watched two musicals set in London.

Scrooge was good; I had never seen this version in its fullness. My favorite part was when Scrooge dies and goes to the underworld and sees Marley again and the devil's slaves bring him his chains. I don't think that is depicted in another other version. I really like the songs including Thank you very Much and December the 25th. Albert Finney was really good and miserly, and I was impressed with the dialogue written by Leslie Bricusse; some expressions I had never heard of such as "prevaricating fraud" and Scrooge is described as "parsimonious" (obnoxious). I liked Alec Guiness as Marley and it occurred to me that he played a spirit ghost long before he did in Return of the Jedi as Obi Wan Kenobi.

It was only made as recently as 1970, but something about it feels so old-fashioned. Maybe that's a good thing, since it's set in the 19th Century anyhow. But everything from the expressions used to the costumes to the toys in the store (below) - everything feels so old-fashioned.

I liked Cats but didn't love it; it probably won't become a favorite of mine. It has a "modern" feel even though it could just as easily have taken place 100 years ago.

I never saw the original show so I don't know what changed. Almost every cat gets their own song and has their own personality, and I liked that; I liked Jennifer Hudson singing "Memory" . There are some dumb jokes, like when Rebel Wilson's cat says to the cockroach, "don't get cocky!' and in another scene says "watch out for the crazy cat lady". She and James Cordin seem to ad-lib some stuff and that's okay but felt the movie could have had more punch to it, and the cats seem to keep changing size; at first they seem like the size of real cats but then they seem to shrink down at times. Also I didn't like the garbage and cockroach scenes. I saw this in one of those "dine-in" theaters and you don't want to see that while eating.

I'd like to see a "making of" documentary about this movie and see how they added in the special effects; every tail and ear moves and wiggles and it's pretty cool. All the actors could have just worn suits and masks.

The Peanut Butter Falcon (2019)

I just watched this movie and really enjoyed it. Somewhere I read that it's a "modern day Huck Finn story", and I didn't really get it until I saw the movie, but now I get it - two characters on a boat, an adventure, bonding, etc. Shia LaBeouf plays a crab fisherman who becomes a fugitive - and meets up with a young man with Down Syndrome also on the run; I don't know that actor's name but his performance is very good as well as Shia's - I don't normally care for him, but this is the first time he impressed me. I like the setting - the outer banks of North Carolina. I'm more of an urban person, but I often feel in another lifetime I probably lived in a rural shack like some of the characters in the movie. This movie reminded me of Into the Wild (2007) another movie I really enjoyed; it has a similar sense of adventure and uncertainty of outcome. I also was kind of reminded of Nebraska (2013) and how the father & son travel together. The dad in that movie - Bruce Dern - has a small part in this movie, too.

What also made me think about was how many adults with DS don't have biological families to call their own, which can be very hard to deal with especially around the holidays. But as the movie affirms, your friends are the family you choose (Bruce Dern's character says that, actually). And the film is about three people who become friends and start a new life.

It's a really well made film. The writing, direction, photography and music is really commendable.  With Dakota Johnson, John Hawkes, and Thomas Haden Church.

Supplemental articles:

How the directors came up with the idea for the film and cast the lead actor
https://deadline.com/2019/11/roadsides-peanut-butter-falcon-took-unique-flight-path-to-screen-the-contenders-l-a-1202775598/

During a new interview, the director of “Peanut Butter Falcon” revealed he was offered more money to replace the movie’s lead actor, who has Down syndrome, for someone able-bodied with a “more marketable face,” highlighting the discrimination disabled actors face in Hollywood.
https://themighty.com/2019/10/peanut-butter-falcon-james-nilson-down-symdrome/

Semana Santa (2015)

Dali (Anajosé Aldrete Echevarria) and her 8 year old son Pepe take a beach vacation with Dali's boyfriend, Chavez.

I like how this film starts off with a promising family trip, but slowly disintegrates. I grew up with a single mother, so I could relate somewhat to the boy character, who often wants to do his own thing and meet other people his age instead of spending time with mom all the time. The mother really smothers her boy, which made me cringe.

Chavez is eventually tempted (unfortunately) to go off and spend a night with two single women looking for some fun on another beach, spoiling Dali's vacation.

Meanwhile the boy goes off and does his own thing; he's a confused kid. In one scene he finds a wallet filled with money and uses it to buy horse rides and candy, and hides the rest of the money.

I also liked the scene where Dali meets a charming American man (David Thornton) who treats her better than Chavez.

Spider-Man: Into the Spiderverse (2018)

I have never seen any of the other Spider Man movies but I wanted to see this one, mainly because of its acclaim and Oscar win for Best Animated Feature. It was OK. I did have some knowledge of the superhero's origin (from the 70s TV show and 80s cartoon), but I didn't realize there were so many other comic versions ("Noir Spiderman", "Pig Spiderman", etc); the main character is a teenage Spiderman name Miles; he has his own comic series as well.

All of these characters manage to meet each other by way of a portal created by a bad guy who wants to use it for his own purposes. How he made the portal is beyond me, but with comics, anything is possible.

The Spider-heroes team up to fight the villains who control the portal to their own dimensions -- if they don't defeat them, they are stuck and can never go home to their own universe.  It's a fast-moving movie, and lost some of the details on first watch.

I probably would have enjoyed this movie more if I had more familiarity with all of the other characters, but I got a good sense of them from this film. Not sure if I'm going to go back and watch all of the other Spider Man movies; there's been 7 of them since 2002.

For another post on this movie, and for way more Spider-Man on film coverage, check out the blog Flights, Tights, and Movie Nights.

Once Upon a Time in Hollywood (2019) Spoiler warning

Of the films I've seen by Quentin Tarantino, the one that I like most is Jackie Brown (1997); it was fictional but didn't present a revised history of true events like some of his later films did.

So I'm among those who have a problem with the ending of his new movie.

For the most part I like every other thing about it: the story, the setting, the two main characters are interesting (the fading western star and his stunt double) and their lives and careers at the end of 1960s Hollywood. I like how Pitt and DiCaprio are shown in unglamourous moments, and pondering the future of their careers apart from the television shows they were so used to.  In perhaps one of my favorite scenes, DiCaprio takes a lunch break (while filming a western tv show) to read a book, and meets another actor - a young child star who is also reading, and they stop to form an interesting bond before their scene together.

I liked the recreation of 1969 era Hollywood, and enjoyed all of the music and film references as well. My friend who is older knew pretty much every actual actor and film mentioned.

There is an actor who portrays Steve McQueen, and he looks just like him; it was at the moment where I really felt transported into this world and captivated.

So I didn't have a problem with how the fictional characters brush with real-life characters.

But the ending of the film bothered me because it isn't true to history of who was killed and who wasn't killed in real life. Spoiler - Sharon Tate doesn't die; she lives on. It's basically Tarantino's fantasy alternate universe now, as if he jumped into a time machine like in Back to the Future and altered events.

As a viewer I felt like I'm being asked to buy into this imaginative world in which the real-life victims were never murdered, and the actual killers are the ones who get killed. I'm supposed to be entertained by that?

There's something to that ending that I think Tarantino is trying to say but I'm not sure I fully understand. Maybe I'm not meant to understand. Maybe the ending is a dream that Dicaprio is having? That might make more sense interpreted that way.

A new post from A Shroud of Thoughts is a lovely tribute to Sharon Tate, reminding us she was a real person. I knew who she was going into to see the movie, and knew what happened to her. But no doubt, others may watch this film and have no idea. This recent post talks about who's real and who's fake in the film.

The real Sharon Tate may have lived in a "fictional"/ "dreamland" of Hollywood, but she was still a real person, and her life deserves respect. Or maybe a biographical film of her own one day.

Meanwhile, I won't write off Tarantino entirely yet. I will check out some of his additional interviews to better understand what he's trying to say with his film.

The fact that he made a film that has got me thinking after it's over may mean that it's a great film after all.

Here are some of the blogs I recently read for some other perspectives.
- The Collider   Matt has some problems with the ending which I agree with.
- Cinematic Corner - Sati has the same problems that I have with the movie and also talked about audience reaction in her theater.
- Live for Films  Adam echoes some other critics who call it "a love letter to Hollywood… to film making… and to film lovers"; in Amanda's review, she criticized the many female characters whose sole purpose is to react to the men around them.
- From the Front Row  - "Going into a Quentin Tarantino movie, one usually has a certain set of expectations: there will be copious amounts of violence, creative (and constant) use of curse words, extensive references to older films, and lately, a new spin on familiar history."

Bobby Rivers, a teenager in 1969, has a few questions for Tarantino (me, too - the same).
Brian Camp, in his recent post, also was around in '69 and remembers some of the other films of that era.

Keith and the Movies posted about some criticisms of the film:

The author of this Variety article called this "the first dramatic feature about the Manson murders that has a happy ending. Good for him, I guess. And good for us. At least, if you believe that movies should be fairy tales." "Quentin makes the trashing of history look hip....that Sharon Tate “lives” is supposed to send us out on a feel-good cloud (when, in fact, it’s arguably a trivialization of her memory)" - I agree with that.

Blog post by Lazarus' Lair

---

Videos

In this interview (below) from the Cannes Film Festival, Tarantino compares his film to the work of director Claude Lelouch.

Tarantino and the main cast talk to Entertainment Weekly (below)



Below: Cinemablend talks to Quentin Tarantino for about 20 minutes here (Cinemablend is biased and loves Tarantino). In the interview, Tarantino knows his history, and all, but doesn't really talk about the ending.

Toy Story 4 (2019)

I went to see it because I was a very big fan of the last movie, and wanted to see/hear the new characters. I heard that Mel Brooks, Carol Burnett, Carl Reiner, and Betty White were lending their voices, and that seemed pretty cool. But honestly their cameos were so short that it was a little disappointing. I did like the adventure story and rescue that took place in the antique store. And some of the new toys were cool (a pair of carnival dolls are voiced by the comic duo of Key and Peele and they are funny).

There was an extended sequence having to do with trash cans, but none of the characters brought up the scary incinerator experience in the last movie -- probably too traumatic for anyone to rehash. I liked the Randy Newman song "I Won't Let You Throw Yourself Away" that played during the sequence. I'd recommend it, but I didn't think it was a good as the last one.

Coco (2017)

Dia de Los Muertos is Spanish for Day of the Dead, and always is celebrated in the two days after Halloween. Originating in Mexico and celebrated around the world today, it is a multi-day commemoration to celebrate the multitude of ways the living and dead can connect --

•     by telling stories about loved ones in our lives that are no longer with us
•     by displaying their photos on an "ofrenda" (elaborately decorated altars with flowers and candles and cherished family mementos)
•     by celebrating life with delicious food, brightly colored decorations, and festive gatherings.

Examples of food that are enjoyed include "pan de muertos" (bread of the dead), which is a tasty baked sweet roll, and atole, a hot drink of masa, water, cinnamon, sugar, and vanilla.

Coco is a fantastic movie that captures of the essence of why people celebrate Day of the Dead. It's an animated music-filled comedy adventure, which takes place on Dia de Los Muertos in a town in Mexico. The story focuses on young, aspiring musician Miguel who manages to "cross over" into the land of the dead; he also meets his ancestors who he knows about from the photos on his family's ofrenda and from the stories that have been passed from generation to generation. His oldest living relative is his great-grandmother Coco.

I first watched this on DVD in 2018, and now enjoy watching this movie every year or so because it not only helps me understand why families celebrate Dia De Los Muertos but also reminds me of my own relatives and loved ones that have passed away and that I miss. 

It stirs my imagination and makes me think of what the afterlife could be like. It also gives me some encouragement that injustices that aren't settled on Earth can be worked out in the afterlife, and subsequently resolved on Earth. I'm referring to the character of De La Cruz the world-beloved singer that has evil secrets that should be exposed. 

I highly recommend this movie if you haven't seen it. (Available on Disney+, DVD/Blu-Ray, and may be available from your local library). 

Surrender to the Void blog here

A Slate Article here "A Gringo’s Guide to Coco"

An article from Mental Floss blog here - "11 Facts About Día de los Muertos "

Another post from Order of the Good Death here - "Your Guide to the Movie Coco"

Phantom Thread (2017) and Satan's Brew (1976)

Phantom Thread is a very beautifully made film with a wonderful music score and great performances. Daniel Day Lewis stars as a dress designer Reynolds Woodcock, and describes himself as a "confirmed bachelor". Leslie Manville (so good in Another Year) plays his sister and business partner. A relationship starts between Reynolds and a new young woman (Vicky Krieps), which stirs some jealously in the sister character. Strange occurrences develop throughout the film and there's some mystery as to what's happening and why. It's not an easy film to encapsulate, but the two main characters are very interesting; Reynolds is very obsessive, while the young woman wants to break him of his mold; in one scene she wants to go out dancing on New Year's Eve, but he wants to stay in and work. What would happen with the sister character kept me guessing as well. The relationship in the movie is an unusual one to say the least, and was sort of reminded of a film that I've blogged about numerous times in the past, Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf?

I also attended a local screening of a German-language film Satan's Brew (1976) directed by Rainer Werner Fassbinder, a very dark and bizarre comedy-mystery, which reminded me somewhat of Phantom Thread. The main character in the picture (Kurt Raab, star of Why Does Herr H Run Amok) is also an obsessive artist - a writer - who channels the German poet Stefan George to great lengths, to the point of even dressing like him and acting like him. I saw similarities between him and PT's Reynolds Woodcock, both controlling men with an unusual marriage relationship. Like that film, this film is also a mystery, and the truth is hidden from the audience until the very end. It's also has some elements that may be considered offensive to some, as the main character is so despicable; he's a womanizing, scheming, manipulative, greedy, selfish, rude, lewd, tactless pig, so it's not a film for everyone.

Another review of the film Satan's Brew from the blog Surrender to the Void

Endless Poetry (2017) and Wind River (2017)

Two of my favorite films from last year were not nominated for any Oscars this year, but to me they really had a impact. 

Endless Poetry (2017, French-Chilean) was released last year and is the latest film from Alejandro Jodorowsky (El Topo, Santa Sangre). I absolutely loved this film because it struck me in a very personal way. It is partially an autobiographical film about Jodorowsky, and stars his son, Adan Jodorowsky.. The film begins with the young Alejandro learning about life and his passions - he loves poetry and art, but his father wants him to be a doctor. Throughout the film Adam meets some very interesting people - other artists, poets, performers, puppeteers - and he develops his creative talents. The ending moved me tremendously, as the son makes peace with his father and tells him that if it weren't for him, he would have never discovered his true calling. It reminded of my recent reconnection with my own birth father after 27 years in 2016.

Here is a review of this film from the blog Surrender the Void.

I also was really moved by the film Wind River (2017). It's a murder mystery done very effectively and is very engaging, with great scenery and a music score co-composed by Nick Cave.

The Rotten Tomatoes capsule summary of the film -

Wind River is a chilling thriller that follows a rookie FBI agent (Elizabeth Olsen) who teams up with a local game tracker with deep community ties and a haunted past (Jeremy Renner) to investigate the murder of a local girl on a remote Native American Reservation in the hopes of solving her mysterious death.

It was written and directed by Taylor Sheridan, who also wrote Sicario, if you enjoyed that film, you may also enjoy this one as well, and I recommend it.

Lady Bird (2017), Francis Ha (2012), and Mistress America (2014)

Francis Ha is an independent comedy that's filmed in black-and-white--I'm not sure why exactly the director chose black and white, but I like it, and generally I find any modern-day black and white film to be interesting. If I had to guess, I'd say that director Noah Baumbauch wanted to go for a classic movie look, which is OK by me. It's also considered Greta Gerwig's breakthrough role and perhaps the one that got her the most attention, maybe at least from independent film fans. The director had previously worked with her on the film "Greenberg" which I haven't seen yet. Francis Ha puts Greta in the lead, in a comedic role, and it's a simple film, basically just following her character around as she spends time with her friends and romantic interest (Adam Driver) and finding work as a dancer in New York. She also manages to get away and fly to Paris on vacation for two days. Who does that? Francis does. I actually knew someone who did that---go on some overseas trip for a weekend and come back, so I guess it's not entirely implausible. Francis is an interesting character, and funny because Greta is really funny. "Modern Love" by David Bowie is this movie's theme song. A blogger (can't remember who) wrote that they hated this movie, but I don't know why. I liked it alot.

Mistress America is the next film by Baumbach, and also stars Greta in the lead. Her character is almost the same as Frances, and when I watch this movie I think of this as the sequel. I really love this movie and liked it even better than Francis. We first meet the character of Tracy, played by Lola Kirke, who is starting her first year of college. She wants to be a writer. She doesn't know a soul, but she has a relative in New York played by Greta whom she befriends; Greta shows her New York. I love her character because she wants to do so much with her life; teach exercise/spinning classes, open her own restaurant. She has lots of dreams. I love her character because even though she's about 10 years older than Zoe, she's still looking to find her place in the world. The movie has a great soundtrack (You Could’ve Been A Lady by Hot Chocolate is this movie's theme song) and I love the writing. Greta is really kooky but likeable. Another review of this film from the blog Cinema Scope here.

Lady Bird is Greta's first directorial film, and she wrote it is as well (but doesn't star in it). It's semi-autobiographical, though. The lead role is played by Siaorse Ronan, who plays a teenager in high school who is coming of age, and the film focuses in on her last year of high school, climaxing in the senior prom. She has a best friend - I don't know the name of the actress - who decides not to go to the prom and feels like an outcast. I really liked this character, but I liked Siaorse's character too, as she deals with her family, her mom (Laurie Metcalf) and religious/Catholic traditions, and her romance with someone who may not be right for her. The film has a light comedic tone throughout, and reminded me of a John Hughes film of the 1980s like Pretty in Pink or Sixteen Candles; it just seemed to have a similar tone. Also, I imagined this character to be a younger "Frances Ha".

Even though all three of these films are not officially connected with each other, I like to think of them as a trilogy, with Lady Bird being the first movie. Francis Ha would be the second, and Mistress America the third.

If you've seen all 3, what do you think? Do you also see a connection with the three in a similar way?

The Shape of Water (2017) - an original story or an adapted story?

Last summer I saw a trailer for the film The Shape of Water, which really piqued my interest, as it seemed to be a mysterious and visually intriguing movie, with actors I really enjoy (Sally Hawkins and Octavia Spencer).

I watched the film in December, and though I found it watchable for the most part, I didn't think it was very a original story; as it was essentially a new twist on an old tale. One thing that especially didn't sit with me well was the dialogue; it felt as if the actors were all using language and speaking as if it were modern times and not early 1960s, and that was a bit distracting. I imagined what the film would be like if it were in a foreign language with subtitles, or set in another country, as it may have worked for me a bit better.

I was surprised that the film received so many Oscar nominations this year; it may win some technical awards, and possibly best picture, director, actress, and possibly Best Original Screenplay - emphasis on "Original".

Leading up to the Awards ceremony, there's been some controversy surrounding the film, with questions being raised as to whether the filmmakers are guilty of plagiarizing the story from another work - a play called Let Me Hear You Whisper by Paul Zindel. The play was also made into two films - 1969 version and a 1990 version. 

I was not familiar with the story or the films, but people who have been pointing out the similarities on Twitter and other social media since last summer. In this article from Hollywood Nerd, the similarities are pointed out, and they are remarkable.  There's also some people who are questioning that director Guillermo del Toro was influenced to write the film based on a story idea he heard from  novelist Daniel Kraus who may have been familiar with the Zindel story (article here). A few other similar court cases about plagiarism are noted in this article here.

According to a recent Deadline article, del Toro claims he's never seen nor heard of the original play, which may be true but quite a coincidence because the two stories are so similar. One would think that at least a credit such as "Inspired by a Story by Paul Zindel" would be appropriate. If the film wins Best Picture, I may be a bit miffed not so much because of this controversy, but because I still feel that in 1992, Beauty and the Beast should have won the Best Picture Oscar, and feel that was a far better fairy tale film.

Interstellar (2014), Solaris (1972), and Star Wars: The Last Jedi (2017)

This past summer I was able to catch up with two science fiction films that played here in Chicago in 35 MM at the Music Box Theater. The first was Andrei Tarkovsky's Solaris a very slow paced and mysterious film set on a space station where members of the crew succumb to the planet Solaris' control of their minds. It was a visually beautiful film to watch, but felt long; I may need to watch it again a second time to fully comprehend its meaning. Christopher Nolan's Interstellar, also set in the future, left me with a bleak feeling at the end, as most of the characters in the film fell prey to a great deception. I also felt a bit exhausted at the end of it as well. Visually, the film was also beautiful to watch, with stunning visuals. It's another film that I may need to watch again to pay more attention to details, as I feel much went over my head, but I feel I caught the main ideas throughout. In, both films, the comic relief was limited.

Which brings us to one of the year's most anticipated films, Star Wars: The Last Jedi. "Part 8" in the Star Wars saga, this film has its share of suspense and surprises, but perhaps what surprised me the most was the amount of comedy in the film; this film contains probably the most comic relief of all of the Star Wars films put together, which seems unusual since this film was meant to answer some serious questions about the fates of some of the best-known characters in the series such as Luke Skywalker and Princess Leia. Whenever an actual Star Wars film's comedic tone would fit well in Mel Brooks' Spaceballs (1987), something seems a little out-of-place.

I can only imagine what Interstellar and Solaris would be like with the amount of comedy that was in The Last Jedi.

Blade Runner 2049 (2017)

I went to see this film over the weekend but I was not blown away by it. I thought it was okay, especially the visual effects and sets. I liked the protagonist's quest to solve the mystery of the film, which pretty much remains a mystery up until the very last minute, and even when its over there are unanswered questions.  I was left to wonder if there will be additional films in this series, and whether I would be interested in the characters enough to want to see additional films in a possible series (I might skip them if they come out). The original Blade Runner from 1982 was a great film that stood alone well by itself, and in my opinion this new film isn't necessary. There were also some awkward comedic moments in the film, especially with Harrison Ford's character Deckart, who has been in hiding for 30 years since the original film's ending. You would never expect a futuristic thriller like this have "cameos" by Elvis and Frank Sinatra, but they do appear, and it's feels awkward. Also, a few more familiar faces from the 1982 film make short appearances in this movie, but they probably didn't need to be in it, really. The movie is long, almost 3 hours. I wouldn't recommend unless you are a huge fan of the first film and absolutely want to see more to this story. This is the kind of film where you really should see the first movie to understand the second.

Quest: A Portrait of An American Family (2017)

The Rainey family 

I had a chance to watch this documentary, first screened at the Sundance Film Festival earlier this year, at a screening in downtown Chicago this past summer at the Siskel Film Center. The film was shot over 8 years in Philadelphia and focuses on an inner city family's music studio; the official website describes the studio as "a creative sanctuary from the strife that grips their neighborhood".  The filmmakers document a number of musical artists who work in the studio run by Christopher "Quest" Rainey and his wife "Ma Quest". Their daughter becomes a victim of gun violence during the course of the documentary's filming, which shifts the tone of the film but is never exploitative; rather, it's incredibly moving and ultimately inspiring portrait of a family's journey. 

The director and editor were present at the screening for a post-film Q&A. They said that the film will have more screenings throughout the US and even will be broadcast on public television next year.

Highly recommended if you have a chance to see it.

The film's website is here:
http://quest-documentary.com