Journey’s End (2017)

Tags

Drama, History, War

(I wrote this in the style of Robert Service, one of my favorite poets, who wrote several poems inspired by his time as an ambulance driver in World War I.)

There’s a time in the life of a soldier entrenched
When he cannot endure anymore,
When his teeth are like glass having been so long clenched
And he’s numb to the screams and the gore,

When his mind barely registers pleasure or pain
And his nerve’s on the edge of a knife,
When his soul is unlikely to wash out the stain
Of the ongoing ending of life,

When the order to “Go” couldn’t move his clay feet
Even if he had will to obey,
When war seems no more than the grinding of meat
For some heinous, infernal buffet.

At times such as these, when one’s mettle and wits
Have been wrung further than they extend,
The heroes decide alongside hypocrites
How they choose to meet their journey’s end.
_________________________________

MPA rating:  R (I consider it a light R, for a few violent moments and occasional F words)

Though it may seem I’m destined to only post on holidays, I am trying to get to a more consistent schedule. It seemed only fitting to review a war movie on Veteran’s Day, and a World War I movie seemed even more fitting, considering the significance of November 11, when the armistice ending that terrible war was signed. Journey’s End brings the desperation of that war to life in a wholly compelling way, making it a must-watch for anyone interested in WWI.

Based on a 1928 play by war veteran R. C. Sherriff, which has already been adapted four other times, Journey’s End doesn’t try to provide a sweeping look at the whole war, instead focusing on a single week in March of 1918, as British troops braced themselves for an expected German offensive. Fresh-faced 2^nd Lieutenant Raleigh (Asa Butterfield) asks to be assigned to Company C, commanded by his former school friend Captain Stanhope (a tortured Sam Claflin). He finds his old pal changed by the horrors of war, and his initial opinion of a war raid as “exciting” is quickly sobered by experiencing them firsthand.

What Journey’s End does best is capture snapshots of the feeling of trench warfare, albeit mainly from an officer’s perspective. We feel the tension of soldiers wishing something would happen, followed by the grim resignment of being chosen for that something; the seeming indifference of superior officers; the conflict of different coping mechanisms; the helplessness of men at the end of their own rope having to comfort others at the end of theirs; and the mental anguish of wishing someone both “goodbye” and “good luck,” possibly for the last time. Plenty of small details add to the realism, such as the men getting a dose of rum and emptying their bladders before going “over the top.”

The obvious comparison for me in appraising a WWI movie is judging it next to last year’s 1917, and, while Journey’s End can’t quite compare on technical proficiency, it surpasses the newer film in characterization, with Paul Bettany’s personable second-in-command being a particular light among the dull grays of the trenches. In addition to the acting, the cinematography is also excellent, though, with a few comparatively short tracking shots bringing 1917 to mind. War films can be hard to sit through, but those like Journey’s End are a constant reminder of how lucky we are to be able to sit around on couches watching movies when we could just as easily have been down to our last nerve in muddy trenches, but for the distance of 100 years. To all veterans, thank you!

Best line: (Bettany’s Lieutenant Osborne, writing home) “There is a job to be done. It ought never to have arisen, but that is not the point. I have had so very much out of life, but all these youngsters do not realize how unlucky they are, so new are they to their very existence.”

Rank:  List Runner-Up

© 2020 S.G. Liput
701 Followers and Counting!

42 (2013)

Tags

Biopic, Drama, History

Hate has a sound, neither quiet nor calm.
It’s harsh as a screaming match, loud as a bomb.
It hides where it can, but when called to resist,
It bursts on the scene, and it cannot be missed.

By fruits, you shall know it, by fire and fear,
By people too busy condemning to hear,
By pointing of fingers and counting of sins,
And seeing, not people, but labels and skins.

But how does one fight it? More fire and fear?
More yelling in hopes that bystanders will hear?
No mind has been changed meeting rancor with wrath,
But by the more difficult, opposite path.
_______________________

MPA rating:  PG-13 (mainly for multiple racial slurs and a few profanities)

Like so many others, I was heartbroken at the news of Chadwick Boseman’s passing on August 28, the very day that MLB was celebrating a belated Jackie Robinson Day, since it’s the day Robinson and Branch Rickey first met. The premature loss of a talented actor who played so many African-American icons has prompted a resurgence of regard for his past work, and it seemed only right to revisit 42, the story of baseball trailblazer Jackie Robinson. I had seen it years ago and, not being a baseball fan, vaguely logged it in the “good, not great” category, but I recall my dad really liking it and watching it several times. Now rewatching it with my mom, I enjoyed even more this true story that has become timelier with age.

Aside from his history book summary, I wasn’t very familiar with Jackie Robinson’s story, but I was pleased when some further reading revealed how historically accurate much of 42 is, from individual lines of dialogue to the shared Methodist faith of Robinson (Boseman) and Dodgers owner Branch Rickey (Harrison Ford). It would have been so easy to turn the colorful Rickey into a mere caricature or lose the nuance of Robinson’s restraint. Yet both Ford and Boseman do outstanding work here, filling both characters with a realistic dynamism, Ford trying to disappear behind facial prosthetics and a Southern growl and Boseman embodying Christ-like nobility. The film itself might have been too pedestrian to be an awards contender, but I rather wish that the two of them could have gotten a nomination or two for their performances. In light of Boseman’s death, lines like “He was made to last” have also taken on a more bittersweet tone than before.

Perhaps the film’s themes are a bit on-the-nose at times, such as one mocked scene where a hesitant white boy starts yelling slurs at Jackie when he sees his father do the same. Yet I don’t doubt that such interactions do serve to perpetuate prejudices. That same boy is later shown looking regretful when he sees Jackie’s teammate Pee Wee Reese (Lucas Black, grown up since Tokyo Drift) put an arm around Jackie on the field. I know it feels a little manufactured since the kid probably would have been raised to be used to such language, but it still serves as an example of how children can be shaped by what they see and hear. Bigotry or its opposite don’t come from society as a whole, at least not anymore, but from individual interactions that shape how we view each other, so the film’s message still rings true.

At a time when racial disparities and injustices have come to the forefront of national debate, 42 feels like a shining example of how to combat racism on a one-on-one level. While Robinson later assisted Martin Luther King, Jr. in the civil rights movement, he epitomized King’s principle of nonviolence on the field, having “the guts not to fight back”, as Rickey tells him, even while being lobbed by blatant abuse. I loved the perceptive line “Echo a curse with a curse, and they’ll hear only yours,” while the alternative plays out beautifully when Robinson’s hesitant teammates take his side over the sneering vitriol of an opposing team’s manager (Alan Tudyk). Turning the other cheek has gone out of fashion in our modern society, but the stronger the contrast between offender and victim, the more support there will be from good people to address such indignities. In every new or daring pursuit, there must always be a first, and, as the first, Jackie Robinson did untold good in moving the sport of baseball and the country closer to its ideals.

Best line: (Jackie Robinson) “You want a player who doesn’t have the guts to fight back?”
(Branch Rickey) “No. No. I want a player who’s got the guts not to fight back. People aren’t gonna like this. They’re gonna do anything to get you to react. Echo a curse with a curse, and they’ll hear only yours. Follow a blow with a blow, and they’ll say, “The Negro lost his temper,” that “The Negro does not belong.” Your enemy will be out in force… and you cannot meet him on his own low ground. We win with hitting, running, fielding, only that. We win if the world is convinced of two things: that you are a fine gentleman and a great baseball player. Like our Savior… you gotta have the guts… to turn the other cheek. Can you do it?”
(Jackie) “You give me a uniform… you give me a, heh, number on my back… and I’ll give you the guts.”

Rank:  List-Worthy

© 2020 S.G. Liput
699 Followers and Counting

Henry V (1989)

Tags

Drama, History, War

It seems the English language is intent on, over time,
Discarding excess letters, which are just an uphill climb.
In Milton’s and in Shakespeare’s era, words were often longer,
So literarians believe their eloquence was stronger.
Yet, slowly we have shed the eths and ests that ended verbs
And kicked the gifts of diction to their metaphoric curbs.
Not “dost” but “do,” not “thou” but “you,” not “wherefore,” no, but “why,”
And going back in time to read can make you want to die.

Yet, even now the language still is mutating in place,
With idioms and acronyms it can’t help but embrace.
The letter-shedding carries on with “YOLO”, “app,” and “ref”
And “LOL, JK, IDK WTF.”
Abbreviations have their place; archaic words as well;
For me, too much of either one is glossolalic hell.
So savor language while you can, for generations hence
May not know what the heck we’re saying when it’s in past tense.
________________________

MPA rating: PG-13 (for battlefield violence)

Since it’s been hard fitting this blog into my busy schedule of work and college, I’ve decided to try to shorten my reviews so I don’t end up posting only twice a month. Let’s start the compressed reviews with Shakespeare, shall we? I am not a fan of William Shakespeare. I’ve read Julius Caesar, Macbeth, and a few sonnets, and that’s quite enough for me. Even so, I feel I need to be familiar with his work, if only to be prepared for when I some day get on Jeopardy. So surely watching Henry V is better than reading it, right? I think so, at least, especially when brought to life by the accomplished Kenneth Branagh, who both directed this 1989 epic and played the title character.

Knowing nothing of the original play, I was intrigued by the framing device of a one-man Chorus (Derek Jacobi) providing an introduction and occasional commentary throughout. Branagh is intense and committed as the young King Henry, who sets out on a supposedly justified war to claim kingship of France, and he delivers the big speeches with enough stirring authority that you can believe the patriotism he inspires in his men. I recognize that Shakespeare’s poetry-flecked prose is eloquence epitomized, but the simple fact is that it was a constant effort to understand what was being said, which would have been even harder without captions. The action on-screen made it clearer at least, so perhaps it would be easier to read the play now that I know what happens. Plus, the presence of seasoned thespians elevated the production even more, such as Brian Blessed, Ian Holm, Paul Scofield, and even early roles for Christian Bale and Emma Thompson (who married Branagh the same year).

Henry V might well be one of the finest faithful Shakespeare adaptations; I just haven’t seen many others to give it due comparison. Branagh’s treatment, though, is certainly praiseworthy, and one climactic tracking shot after the Battle of Agincourt was awe-inspiring to behold. You can’t do that on any stage, after all. With its nearly three-hour runtime, I was tempted to give up, but I typically try to finish any movie I start, and I’m glad I did. (Still not a Shakespeare fan, though.)

Best line: (Henry, addressing the troops) “And Crispin Crispian shall ne’er go by from this day until the ending of the world but we in it shall be remembered. We few, we happy few, we band of brothers, for he today who sheds his blood with me shall be my brother. Be he ne’er so vile, this day shall gentle his condition, and gentlemen in England now abed shall think themselves acursed they were not here, and hold their manhoods cheap whilst any speaks, that fought with us upon St. Crispin’s day!”

 

Rank: Honorable Mention

 

© 2020 S.G. Liput
697 Followers and Counting

Harriet (2019)

Tags

Drama, History

Harriet, oh Harriet,
What daring feats you managed!
Your life was like a chariot
To bear the disadvantaged.

You fled the yoke of slavery
To Northern sanctuary,
And yet displayed your bravery
By seeking more to carry.

You earned the trade name “Moses” and
Freed slaves without the pleading.
You knew what God opposes and
Agreed to do the leading.

Harriet, oh Harriet,
What lives you liberated!
The weight, you knew to carry it,
And free whom God created.
_____________________

MPA rating: PG-13

My apologies for the long delay. After getting through NaPoWriMo, I didn’t anticipate taking a two-week break, but school, work, and adopting a new cat kept me busy. Anyway, it’s time to get back into movie mode, starting with a wonderful biopic from last year. The story of famed abolitionist and Underground Railroad conductor Harriet Tubman has been long overdue for the big-screen treatment, and Harriet does her tale justice.

Making a name for herself on the stage, including the Broadway production of The Color Purple, Cynthia Erivo may only have three films to her name, but this (her third) is undoubtedly a star-making role. The film follows Harriet’s life from her time as a Maryland slave named Minty, captive to the Ross family, to her daring escape northward to her repeated journeys back to help other fugitive slaves reach freedom. Harriet’s indomitable courage and faith in God carried her through heartache and danger, and although she suffers from fainting spells, they turn out to be visions from God. She manages both the ferocity of the big moments, like a face-off with her former master (Joe Alwyn), and the sensitivity of small ones, as when she hops over the Pennsylvania border into sunlit freedom.

Harriet is notable for me because, for the first time, I actually know someone who was an extra in it, and I was able to spot her on a few occasions after she described which scenes she was in. It might not be like knowing a movie star, but it certainly felt cool to me being able to point at the screen and say “I know her!” Beyond the title role and the extras, the secondary cast does good work as well, including Leslie Odom Jr. of Hamilton and Janelle Monáe of Hidden Figures. And while the horrors of slavery could have warranted an R rating, like 12 Years a Slave, Harriet manages enough restraint to be more accessible as a history lesson suitable for older kids as well.

Common complaints I’ve read include that Harriet is too formulaic or that it treats her fainting spells as a superpower, granting her warnings and visions from God. The latter has a basis in history, and as for the former, I don’t mind a “predictable” story if it’s well told. Not being familiar with all the details of Tubman’s life, there were still moments that surprised me and kept me invested. It was also fascinating to watch elements of history I hadn’t thought of, such as how the Fugitive Slave Act of 1850 affected the efforts of Tubman and the Underground Railroad.

Although I’m not black, the story of the Underground Railroad, freeing souls in bondage, resonates strongly with me; it’s why I think Operation Underground Railroad today is such a laudable charity, since slavery is still very much alive today. So many biopics leave me with a lowered opinion of a figure I’d thought I liked (The Theory of Everything, Ray), but Harriet made me admire her even more as an American hero. From the period detail to the stirring Oscar-nominated credits song “Stand Up” (partly written and sung by Erivo herself), Harriet is exactly the kind of biopic I most enjoy.

Best line: (Harriet, to her former master) “God don’t mean people to own people, Gideon! Our time is near!”

 

Rank: List-Worthy

 

© 2020 S.G. Liput
685 Followers and Counting

The Aeronauts (2019)

Tags

Drama, History, Thriller

(Today’s NaPoWriMo prompt was to review something not usually reviewed, so I decided to provide some thoughts on gravity – the force, not the movie.)

Dear readers, I had overheard the stories about gravity
Long before I put myself at risk to feel it fully.
I didn’t think it quite deserved the talk of its depravity,
But now I can confirm that it’s a mean and selfish bully.

Of all four fundamental forces, gravity’s the only type
That visibly affects mankind and all that it attracts.
It strikes with every trip and fall and when the fruits of trees are ripe,
And tortures people on the scales with inconvenient facts.

It’s true it keeps us on the ground instead of floating into space,
But never has it once allowed a flexible exception.
It’s so obsessed with physics’ laws that when we climb above our place,
It tugs and tells the ground to give a less-than-soft reception.

Though gravity will have its way, its power is not absolute;
A bit of caution and respect can keep its pull at bay.
Few acts of nature are as quick to prophesy and persecute,
But gravity’s control will fade the more we disobey.
____________________

MPA rating: PG-13

I love a good historical adventure drama, and The Aeronauts on Amazon Prime had my attention right from its first trailer. Eddie Redmayne plays James Glaisher, a scientist intent on proving his hypothesis that studying the atmosphere can allow the weather to be predicted, but as with so many 19^th-century visionaries in film, his theories are ridiculed by the Royal Society of London. (Seriously, Hollywood apparently thinks the Royal Society was so narrow-minded, it’s a wonder that anything was discovered at all. I’m sure such disbelief did happen, but I’m noticing it so frequently in these kinds of movies that the villainizing for villainizing’s sake is starting to annoy me.) To prove his ideas, he enlists the aid of the only aeronaut willing to risk such a venture high into the atmosphere, a woman named Amelia (Felicity Jones), whose balloon takes them on a dangerous upward journey.

There’s a lot to like about The Aeronauts, not least of which are the visual wonders the pair encounter, from swarms of butterflies fluttering along air currents to the rainbows backed by mountainous clouds. As they get higher, the danger sets in as Glaisher especially struggles with the rarefied air and extreme cold. The high-altitude thrills keep the adventure from boredom, and regular flashbacks provide steady doses of character development along the way. Both actors do a fine job as well, reuniting without the romance five years after their pairing in The Theory of Everything, and it was nice to see Himesh Patel from Yesterday as a scientist friend of James’.

Yet for all its quality, The Aeronauts feels somehow lacking. Perhaps it’s because of its tenuous claim to being based off a true story. James Glaisher indeed made a historic balloon flight, but it was with a man named Henry Coxwell, making Amelia a composite character of other female balloonists who, while a laudable figure, feels shoehorned into the story. Certain elements do strain believability and historical accuracy, but The Aeronauts still does its best to build a grand scientific adventure on its half-fabricated foundation. It entertains doing just that, which is good enough for me.

Best line: (Amelia Wren) “You don’t change the world simply by looking at it, you change it through the way you choose to live in it.”

 

Rank: List Runner-Up

 

© 2020 S.G. Liput
684 Followers and Counting

The Irishman (2019)

Tags

Drama, History, Netflix

Some people rebel for as long as they can;
They buck every trend and defy every plan.
But others are quiet and willing and pleased
To do as they’re told, keep the masters appeased,
And these are the ones you must watch and beware,
The don’t-rock-the-boat-ers, who heed but don’t care,
For with the right orders behind such as they,
The renegades pale next to those who obey.
_____________________

MPAA rating: R

After over a week of delay, I’m finally getting to the last of 2019’s Best Picture nominees, which just so happens to be the last one I saw and the least good, in my opinion. I’ll freely admit that I have little love for the gangster genre or for Martin Scorsese’s films (honestly, Hugo is the only one I’ve cared to see), and The Irishman did nothing to remedy that opinion. There’s a fine film somewhere in it, but you’ll likely fall asleep before you get to it.

The three-and-a-half-hour plot plays out as a mob epic, spanning decades and following the life of ex-GI Frank Sheeran (Robert De Niro), an Irish meat delivery driver, who happens to meet Russell Bufalino (Joe Pesci) and from there becomes gradually introduced to the shady but profitable world of organized crime. Settling into a job of “painting houses” or murder for hire, Frank proves to be a talented hitman and eventually becomes the body guard and right-hand man of Teamster leader Jimmy Hoffa (Al Pacino). Yet, as Hoffa’s interests begin to stray from those of the mob families, Frank feels his loyalties torn and must figure out how to live with his decision.

Based on the nonfiction book I Heard You Paint Houses, The Irishman feels detailed and comprehensive in its depiction of the Philadelphia underworld and certainly believable in showing how a nobody like Frank could rise through the ranks. The Oscar-nominated effects used to de-age the three main characters are also highly convincing, an illusion broken only by the knowledge of what they actually look like right now. And of course, it certainly has star power, further aided by the presence of Ray Romano, Harvey Keitel, and Bobby Cannavale, who all fit their unscrupulous characters to a T. It’s not quite as violent as I feared from Scorsese, but it feels like he’s definitely in his comfort zone.

Yet, for all of its seemingly lofty ambition, The Irishman, put simply, drags. Even watching on Netflix from home, you’d have to be truly fascinated by the gangster genre (or just feel obligated to get through it, in my case) to watch the whole thing in one sitting, and I can’t help but think it would have been better served as a miniseries. Just like with Peter Jackson and The Hobbit trilogy, there comes a time when a director becomes so enamored with his subject matter that he can’t bear to edit it properly. It’s a quality production from beginning to end; there’s just too much in between them.

In addition, while the acting was good overall and both Pacino and Pesci snagged Supporting Actor nominations, I can see why De Niro was not similarly honored. Beyond the oddness of an Italian actor playing an Irishman surrounded by Italians, the role of Frank Sheeran is fairly one-note until the very end, always doing what’s expected of him and letting himself be controlled by his bosses and his temper. De Niro gives a solid performance but doesn’t give Frank enough depth, just as The Irishman is a decent gangster movie but fails to distinguish itself among the rest of the genre. I liked aspects of the production, such as Frank’s narration and the labels thrown up to introduce certain characters and the usually violent ways they died, which strengthened the theme of the gangster life being ultimately hollow, but there’s little reason that I would watch The Irishman again, at least not all at once.

Best line: (Whispers DiTullio) “To tell you the truth, I’m a little concerned.”
(Frank Sheeran, narrating) “Whenever anybody says they’re a little concerned, they’re very concerned.”
(Whispers) “As a matter of fact, I’m really more than a little concerned. “
(Frank, narrating) “And when they say they’re more than a little concerned, they’re desperate.”

 

Rank: Dishonorable Mention

 

© 2020 S.G. Liput
669 Followers and Counting

 

Ford v Ferrari (2019)

Tags

Drama, History, Sports

The engines start,
The motors roar;
They tear apart
Their brief rapport.
Upon their tails
And on all sides,
The cause of fails
In patience rides.
The bends are aced,
And straightaways
See dust and haste
And sing their praise.
And time slows down
While speed ticks up,
The goal no crown,
Award, or cup.
Instead, the flag,
The finish line,
The right to brag,
The chance to shine,
And here it comes
The dream ahead,
As straight now as an arrowhead,
The end of a road of adrenaline dread,
To which all the hopes of a lifetime have led,
Victory, the alpha’s zed!
___________________________________-

MPA ranking: PG-13 (for language)

I have a confession to make: I have very close to zero interest in cars and racing, which seems like it would be a prerequisite to enjoy a movie about said topics. Yet Ford v Ferrari comes closer than I’d expected in making such subjects interesting to someone like me, who never even knew Ford and Ferrari had a rivalry.

The story focuses on the efforts of two racing legends working toward creating a Ford that can compete with Ferrari and win the 24-hour race of Le Mans. (Another name for the film in Europe is Le Mans ’66.) Matt Damon plays Carroll Shelby, the first American to win Le Mans, whose racing days are behind him but who is recruited by Ford’s Lee Iacocca (Jon Bernthal) to redesign the GT40. His first choice for a driver is Ken Miles (Christian Bale), whose volatile passion and lack of tact put him at odds with the Ford Motor Company’s executives.

Ford v Ferrari is an easy movie to like and has been called a destined favorite for many Father’s Days to come. Luckily, while racing itself is the climax, there’s a lot more going on than just racing. In particular, the engineering efforts by Shelby’s crew recall the problem-solving tone of Hidden Figures, and Shelby’s conflicts with Ford executives make a case for trusting the doers over the corporate meddlers. Then there’s the illuminating of a lesser-known slice of history regarding Ford’s attempted buyout of Ferrari, as well as the heartwarming bond between Miles and his son (Noah Jupe of A Quiet Place). All in all, it comes together quite nicely, and even non-racing fans like me had plenty to cheer for during the big race.

I liked Ford v Ferrari more than I expected, but it’s still a film for which I don’t feel much passion. Its 2½-hour length could have benefited from editing, and the ultimate ending is more downbeat than the rest. It strikes me as a good film that probably wouldn’t have gotten a Best Picture nomination if the Academy had the old rules keeping it to five nominees, but there’s nothing wrong with that. Damon and especially Bale (getting to use his British accent) deliver excellent performances and standout scenes, especially when Shelby explains to Henry Ford II (Tracy Letts) why he should let him continue on the project after an initial failure. The plot offers dream-chasing uplift and an easygoing sense of fun that made me forget I don’t care for racing movies. That, to me, makes it the best kind of racing movie.

Best line: (Shelby) “When I was 10 years old, my Pops said, ‘Son, it’s a truly lucky man who knows what he wants to do in this world. ‘Cause that man will never work a day in his life.’”

 

Rank: List Runner-Up

 

© 2020 S.G. Liput
661 Followers and Counting

 

Once Upon a Time in Hollywood (2019)

Tags

Comedy, Drama, History, Thriller

A fairy tale, as you’re aware,
Can happen almost anywhere,
In magic kingdoms, foreign strands,
Or city streets in local lands.

It may be grim and end in tears,
To make more prudent those with ears,
But too much dark and dire can be
Too kindred to reality.

Imagination is the rule
For fairy tales, carefree or cruel,
And I, for one, prefer the kind
That plants a smile in my mind.
_____________________

MPA rating: R

I’ve never had much interest in Quentin Tarantino’s films. When a director is known for violence and cursing, I tend to steer clear, and if it weren’t for Regal Theatres’ deal for all the Best Picture nominees, I probably wouldn’t have bothered with Once upon a Time in Hollywood. In the case of Pulp Fiction, the only other Tarantino film I’ve seen, I came to the conclusion that I liked how he presented the content but not the content itself, and his latest film fits that description, though to a lesser degree. Pulp Fiction at least felt daring and inventive; Once upon a Time in Hollywood buries its lack of substance under charisma and polish, which just isn’t enough.

Leonardo DiCaprio stars as Rick Dalton, a washed-up TV actor whose big Western role in the show Bounty Law is behind him, leaving him in fear of a lackluster future of guest spots and Spaghetti Westerns. Brad Pitt is Cliff Booth, his easygoing friend/driver/stunt double who may or may not have killed his wife. (He’s the most likable character, so I guess we’re not supposed to care about the answer?) In 1969, Dalton lives next door to successful director Roman Polanski (Rafal Zawierucha) and his wife Sharon Tate (a radiant Margot Robbie), while the Manson Family cult bides its time at nearby Spahn Ranch.

All of that information is simply the set-up, but the bulk of the film is made up of rambling vignettes that could have been episodes in a mini-series. Dalton puts his full effort into an important guest role, Booth makes an unnerving visit to Spahn Ranch, Tate enjoys her success as an actress, and much of it is good-natured and entertaining. I especially liked a few scenes between Dalton and a precocious young co-star who gives him the encouragement he needs, and the Oscar-winning production design certainly looks great, capturing the hippie presence and Hollywood glamour of L.A. in the 1960s. All the actors seem to comfortably fit their characters to a T, particularly Pitt, though I’m not sure what was so worthy of a Best Supporting Actor Oscar.

Yet for all its attention to capturing the period, the plot is annoyingly hollow. Tarantino rarely holds back on the profanity, but his trademark violence is thankfully restrained for most of the film. However, the “grand” finale, offering a what-if scenario of the Manson murders, is so over-the-top (flamethrower, anyone?) that I lost respect for much of what came before. By the end, nothing is resolved with Rick and Cliff’s relationship and the “What now?” feeling that preceded the climax, and the “happy” ending just felt weird, making me wonder what the point of all this was, except for an indulgent walk down memory lane.

As I said, I’m no Tarantino expert, but his historically based films seem to thrive on redirected violence. In the case of this film, the Manson Family were such horrible human beings that we’re supposed to get satisfaction at their own violence being perpetrated back at them, which is a morally repugnant idea. Glorifying others’ suffering, however deserved it may be, isn’t something to enjoy, and the film’s climax is a jarring set piece that ruined its entertainment value for me. I suspect that Tarantino is simply not for me, even if I can recognize the cinematic skill on display, though even his famed talent for dialogue seems uninspired for the most part. Once Upon a Time in Hollywood is the kind of film that has a few great scenes but is far from a great whole.

Best line: (Narrator) “When you come to the end of the line, with a buddy who is more than a brother and a little less than a wife, getting blind drunk together is really the only way to say farewell.”

 

Rank: Dishonorable Mention

 

© 2020 S.G. Liput
660 Followers and Counting

Tolkien (2019)

Tags

Biopic, Drama, History, War

A story’s source is not alone
The man who put his pen to page,
But every seed his life had sown
Within that man at every age,
His greatest fear, his cruelest pain,
His deepest love, his darkest stain:
These seeds were sown into his brain,
His heart and soul until they bore
A fruit we’d never seen before.
And so, in turn, that story’s sown
More seeds that yet remain unknown.
______________________

MPAA rating: PG-13

As a devoted fan of The Lord of the Rings, I was eagerly awaiting this biopic of J.R.R. Tolkien (played earnestly by Nicholas Hoult), hoping that it would provide some insight into the source of one of fiction’s greatest stories (and my favorite movie of all time). The acting is on point, the period setting is splendidly polished, the emotions are effectively conveyed, and yet Tolkien doesn’t do more than the minimum of what I expected.

There’s nothing particularly wrong with how Tolkien’s early life is recounted, and it actually enlightened me to quite a bit of his history. It covers his courtship of Edith Bratt (Lily Collins), his long-standing love of languages, and his friendships with three other boys who together formed the T.C.B.S., or Tea Club and Barrovian Society, a creative fraternity that clearly echoes the “Seize the day” mentality of Dead Poets Society. The film goes back and forth between these early years and his horrific time during the Battle of the Somme, where he suffers from trench fever and hallucinates fantasy figures on the battlefield.

It’s all a solid, respectable attempt at providing background for Tolkien the great author, but it also feels manufactured in how it tries to provide context for Tolkien’s works. Early scenes of his youth in bucolic Birmingham do well to remind viewers of the Shire without making it overly clear, but other references aren’t as subtle. (Though I agree with the statement from one of his friends about Wagner’s Ring Cycle that it shouldn’t take six hours to tell a story about a magic ring; it actually takes 9+ hours.) It’s only a matter of time before the T.C.B.S. is referred to as a “fellowship,” and the surreal hallucinations Tolkien has amidst the horrors of World War I serve no discernible purpose but as references to his fantasy and excuses to include some special effects. It also stumbles at times in the presentation of events, such as when Tolkien’s mother suddenly dies with no explanation at all.

I also would have liked more references to Tolkien’s Catholic faith and how it shaped his work, something which director Dome Karukoski supposedly filmed but removed due to test audience feedback. There are welcome touches, such as the inclusion of a crucifix in Tolkien’s battlefield visions, but the film definitely prefers its romantic side, as when Tolkien is told by his friend and guardian Father Francis (Colm Meaney) to stop seeing Edith until he was 21. This is true, but the film’s Tolkien later insists it was a mistake, while the real-life Tolkien said he didn’t regret the decision.

In its elegant presentation and clear fondness for its subject, Tolkien is a respectable, well-acted biopic that does most of what it sets out to do. Considering the exceptional man and story of its inspiration, though, one would hope it could have been a little more than that.

Best line: (Edith, on Tolkien’s regard for languages) “Things aren’t beautiful because of how they sound. They’re beautiful because of what they mean.”

 

Rank: List Runner-Up

 

© 2019 S.G. Liput
644 Followers and Counting

 

2019 Blindspot Pick #6: Amadeus (1984)

Tags

Biopic, Drama, History, Musical

How must it be to be a genius,
Masterpieces to be mined
In the mind,
Unrefined,
And so gradually defined
In an act of new creation
Not unlike how God designed?

Oh, to birth such instant classics,
Such a rare, eternal prize!
Oh, what highs
In human eyes,
We crave as we mythologize,
And what despair we suffer when
Our limits cut us down to size.

Comparisons are no avail
If we’re defined by how we fail.
______________________

MPAA rating: PG for the original, R for the Director’s Cut, due to brief language and nudity

For me, Amadeus is the perfect candidate for a Blindspot pick. I’ve been putting it off for far too long, even getting it from the library a while ago and letting it sit around until I had to return it. On top of that, I kept being reminded of it; the recent anime Steins;Gate 0 had an AI called Amadeus and explicitly referenced the rivalry between Mozart and Salieri, and I also just rediscovered the classic ‘80s tune “Rock Me Amadeus” by Falco, inspired by this film. I even got a recent Final Jeopardy question wrong because I didn’t realize Amadeus was based on a play, making it perfect for MovieRob’s Genre Grandeur this month as well. Thus, at long last, it seemed only right to watch the Best Picture of 1984, since I was clearly being pointed toward it.

Winner of eight Oscars, Amadeus is a powerhouse for both acting and music. For his role of Salieri, F. Murray Abraham deservingly won the Oscar for Best Actor, ironically defeating Tom Hulce as his unwitting rival Mozart. Salieri is a tortured soul, deranged and aged far past his prime when the film opens in 1823, and tells a priest of how his classical musical career was overshadowed by the flippant but undeniable talent of Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart. Hulce portrays Mozart as a frivolous man-child, a “creature” as Salieri refers to him, whose high-pitched laugh grows increasingly annoying, yet the elder composer recognizes Mozart’s gift and blames God for leaving Salieri so comparatively untalented. Both performances are brilliantly nuanced, especially by the tragic end, but the Academy chose right that year.

Yet the music is just as much a character as the dueling composers. As Salieri points out early on, everyone recognizes Mozart’s best work, and his best work is put on full display, with even extended stage performances from opera like The Magic Flute and Don Giovanni. (I watched Milos Forman’s Director’s Cut.) Lovers of classical music will revel in the score, but even non-fans will likely appreciate watching the inception of masterpieces that have stood the test of time.

While I recognize the film as a magnum opus for everyone involved, there’s something that bugs me and keeps it from ranking among my favorites. It may seem shallow or unsympathetic, but as I watched Salieri spiral into a tortured wretch of envy, cursing God for giving Mozart the talent he craved for himself, I just wanted to slap him and say “Get over it!” It’s drama, and I know such unbridled jealousy does happen, but I hate when people compare themselves to others because no matter how good you are at anything, there will always be someone better. Salieri had a high-profile position, money, and respect, and instead of viewing Mozart as a colleague, however vulgar he may have been, he made him the source of an inferiority complex, ultimately contributing to his ruin, for which Salieri received nothing but guilt. He may have blamed God, but the fault was his own. It’s a marvelously complicated portrayal of destructive envy that nonetheless frustrated me almost as much as Mozart’s laugh.

Looking back, 1984 was undoubtedly one of the big movie years in history, and it says a lot that Amadeus was able to sweep the Oscars that year, winning Best Picture, Actor, Director, Adapted Screenplay, Art Direction, Costume Design, Makeup, and Sound. Impeccably mounted in its 18^th/19^th-century setting, it’s an overly long but outstanding period piece conveying a historic rivalry that, while fictionalized, still resonates.

Best line: (Salieri) “All I wanted was to sing to God. He gave me that longing… and then made me mute. Why? Tell me that. If He didn’t want me to praise Him with music, why implant the desire, like a lust in my body, and then deny me the talent?”

 

Rank:  List Runner-Up

 

© 2019 S.G. Liput
642 Followers and Counting