jcnsoflorida

(2019) This film is better on 2nd viewing. The dialogue is rapid at times and the narrative a bit confusing. (It isn't really but I admit those are the reasons I liked it better the 2nd time around.) Gilda was THE film that enshrined Rita in the goddess pantheon. She was not this good before or after, but she didn't need to be. A performance like this in a movie like this is guaranteed admission to goddesshood forever. Gilda has many elements of film noir but deviates from that genre in some ways. The strange love triangle strangely intimates Rita's real life in its turbulence. If you're not a film buff, skip it. But if you know you're opinionated about movies, this is one to fight over.

Stunning chamber dinner party movie that's not QUITE Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf but brilliantly written, no one likes the ending (we're not supposed to) but overall effect is it just kind of sears the screen and your mind, simultaneously. The cast is superb. For all its intensity, the movie has plenty of humor (which helps us viewers) and it never really takes the easy or predictable path. I don't know anyone as rich as most of the characters but everyone seems real, flawed, but real and we come to feel like we DO know these people, all of them. Mike White (writer) and Miguel Arteta (director) did Laura Dern/HBO series Enlightened which was canceled after season 1 because it bothered people. Right. OK, yeah.

One of the great American films of the 70s and would be generally recognized as such if it weren't so confusing. Hackman as a private detective with problems of his own (naturally) and a simple new case (find the runaway girl). He finds the girl easily but complications ensue. If you watch this film pay very close attention to everything. One of its charms --and frustrations-- is that nothing is as it seems. Everyone in it is 'acting' in their perceived self-interest but their perceptions about that are mostly wrong. Hackman is terrific. The film has a zillion things going for it but might be as flawed as its subject matter. Set in LA and the Florida Keys it's a sunny but blindingly bleak view of the mid-70s. Stunning work by Arthur Penn.

I will admit I did not much care for Il Sorpasso for approximately the first half. It took a long time for me to get into, maybe in part because it is so unlike Italian art films of the 60s. But around that halfway point (for me, anyway) there was a tonal shift and I gradually saw what its admirers see in it. From the DVD's Criterion Collection supplements I learned that it influenced Easy Rider and Sideways, and no doubt many other road pictures. Also as a portrait of early 60s Italy it is more thoughtful than it seems at first. So, for this viewer it required some patience but it turned out to be worth it. Unusual and recommended.

Starts out like a boring action movie. But pay attention because it doesn't stay boring. Kudos to DP Alex Catalan for the chiaroscuro photography. The film actually references Caravaggio so probably Director Rodriguez is a fan too. Catalan also photographed Rodriguez's more recent Marshland, which is great. So, Unit 7 seems pretty simple, on the surface, but it's one of those movies where texture matters a lot. The characters are believable. Some say it's based on a true story but who knows? There probably was an effort to 'clean up' Sevilla before the 1992 World's Fair. Did it play out like this? As I said, who knows? But this is a well-made film.

Arguably, a masterpiece. Hung on a clichéd story of 2 teen sisters murdered, and 2 detectives look for whodunit. It plays out slowly but the texture is stunningly vivid. Superb photography, memorable acting, music that asks questions, simmering political undertones. Suffice it to say there's a helluva lot going on in this picture and the more you know about Spain the more you'll know. But how knowable is Spain? As I said, this is slow for a thriller but there is existential mystery and tension. The crime may be solved, so future murders won't happen, maybe. But is there any other consequence? The similarity to True Detective season 1 is uncanny. TD was first broadcast in January 2014; Marshland was released in Spain in September 2014. Even if the latter is just a Spanish take on TD, I can see why it swept the 2015 Goyas (Spain's Oscar equivalent). It was made with Spain blood.

I can understand a viewer having a meh reaction to this but I like it sort of. Not totally sure why. The b-&-w photography is nice, and unusual these days. The main actors are interesting (most are actors). Special mention to Mouglalis who is a sort of younger black-haired Cate Blanchett type, i.e., neurotic but can't take your eyes off her. The film does have a Godardy New Wavey thing going on but very low-key so you can ignore that if you want to. In fact this is not a film that forces much of anything down your throat. It doesn't beg to be liked. It's not cryptic. It's pretty much what you get is what you see. Youngish urbanites in Paris, doing OK except when they aren't.

I'm an American w/ some familiarity w/ Antwerp and I enjoyed seeing it on film. The influence of Rosemary's Baby is obvious. While this is not in the same league, it does have some things going for it: good photography and music and 2 good leads: Schoenaerts and Eline Kuppens. (I'm not sure how good Schoenaerts is but he's nude 5 minutes after it begins so I can forgive a lot.) Probably the weak link here is the screenplay. The ending makes no sense whatsoever but getting there was enjoyable enough that I didn't much care. Atmospherics, mood, that kind of thing can be incredibly important in a film and Left Bank is quite good in the mood department. It helps too, of course, that the film is anchored by 2 strong performances.

This is a veritable remake of The Postman Always Rings Twice but it has new and interesting things to say. The noticeable nods to The Merchant of Four Seasons (Fassbinder) are handled cleverly too. There are only 3 characters of any importance and the actors are very good. Director Petzold expertly creates and maintains tension where we kind of know what will happen but we also kind of don't. This tension is crucial to the film. We've seen this story before. But we haven't. These characters and their situation are similar. But different. The character Ali was brought to Germany at age 2 but he might be the first 'non-religious' Muslim I've seen in a European film. So, just 3 main characters but they are more complicated than they seem at first. I am writing in 2015. Director Petzold is not young. I will definitely 'catch up' w/ his films.

The Merchant of Four Seasons received all major W German film awards for 1971 but it took a couple of more years for Fassbinder to break through internationally. TM4S is a fairly simple story but it can be difficult or painful to watch due to the subject matter: class prejudices, domestic violence, infidelity, family discord, depression and self-destructive behavior. In other words it presents a bleak view of the world and its human inhabitants. I believe there's an undercurrent of cutting humor throughout although it's interesting that no examples spring to mind and it's not campy. I saw TM4S in the mid-70s and in 2015 didn't remember much at all (other than not liking it), which suggests I repressed a lot that first time. I now think it's the first of a few masterpieces by a director whose importance will certainly endure.

I'm not a big fan of 'issue' documentaries because they are usually boring and preachy. Why do I like this one so much? Archival footage of Bobby plus participation by two generations of Kennedys was certainly moving, for me. The film covers a lot of ground but it never seems scattershot; on the contrary, a word I'd use to describe it is 'incisive'. I'm a Floridian and I have some doubts about the farmworkers' focus on Publix. But this film takes on very important issues and the way it presents them is vivid and smart. It's never boring and it is well put together. I liked it enough to watch it again. Highly recommended, for everyone.

OMG this movie is so LGBT it really should be categorized as gay-themed. Probably the gayest mainstream film of the mid-1960s. And let's not forget, Burton and O'Toole were A-list actors then. True, their characters indulge in wenching (gotta love that word) at the beginning of the film but fasten the leather straps for the unbelievable 180 when Beck becomes Big Churchy Prig like overnight (Beck goes to bat over a sex-abuser priest because churchy authority must trump earthy) and Hen is just CRUSHED.... This is as gay as it gets, dear readers. Probably historically totally inaccurate. And it seems the filmmakers couldn't care less about anyone's approval. All the Catholic stuff (costumes, rituals, etc.) is totally gayicized, (which is not hard to do). A strangely fun movie and screamingly essential for all LGBTs.

I saw this when it was first released in the US and wanted to see how much I remembered (not much!). My reaction this time: positive but tempered. It's politically correct and perhaps the most valuable thing about it is its youthful energy and idealism. It's very much of its time. My favorite element is the music which is pop and contemporary but also very Greek. Also, the character played by Trintignant-- obviously central to the film-- keeps us wondering which side he's on. That's welcome because everyone else is good or bad, i.e., boring. One of the 2 main villains is a gay pederast. I don't mind gay villains now and then, but was startled by the gratuitously mean way it was handled. Political correctness has changed a bit.

The tiny subplot referencing Shiite terrorists is not funny in this 21st century but if you can forgive that, this is an 80s treasure in any language. Great performances from all the women, with Carmen Maura in the lead. Women on the Verge is one of Almodovar's best and most beloved, bursting with good energy, bright colors and sad love songs, it's a celebration of life and movies and an 89-minute trip to big city Spain. The narrative is a bit complicated and fast-paced, and American viewers are unlikely to catch everything on first viewing, but relax and have fun. You'll probably want to see this classic 80s comedy more than once.

Nytimes describes director Ozon's oeuvre as uneven and, while I agree, this is one of his better outings. It's slowish and without much drama but I believe all that's intentional. One of the many fascinating things about Jeune & jolie, for me, is how clearly it is not aimed at American auds, who would certainly expect more drama from the material Almost comically absent from J & j is antihero Isabelle's school life. She attends a good Paris secondary school but we never see her study. Maybe she doesn't need to. In any case, the film is obviously not about her formal education. Others have mentioned Belle de Jour. Yes! B j (the film) is almost 50 years old, so why not another take? Look at how they are alike and different. No surrealism in this latter-day version but the languidness is purposeful. Why? Ozon wrote and directed, and if we put aside our expectations and constantly wonder why he makes the choices he makes here, we won't get many answers. But we do have an understated film --IsaBelle de Jour?-- that is not easy to dismiss. Underrated, too.

This is a review of all 4.5 hours, for which I dutifully stayed awake. I'm a fan of director Soderbergh, and suppose there's a certain integrity to his evenhanded approach here to the polarizing Mr. Che, but to describe this picture (a la nytimes) as "emotionally distant" is putting it mildly. Despite a reference to executions, Mr. Che comes across as mostly a good, committed sort of guy (M.D.!) who tried to make the world a better place but had a very rough time in Part Two. Mr. Del Toro won Best Actor at Cannes for this. He looks Che-esque throughout and clearly he studied WWCD (What Would Che Do). But basically after 4.5 hours the viewer has sat through 2 guerilla wars and, in my case, not learned anything, certainly nothing about Mr. Che. Maybe there are other reasons to see it. I'm not trying to dissuade anyone.

Will there be a better summing-up of the early years of AIDS from a New York perspective? I'm pretty sure, No. I find this better than Angels in America, because AA tried awfully hard for poetry. My friends died young. It was not poetic. The Normal Heart is a tough movie, not real poetic. Not for everyone. The message is most vividly imparted by the main character (gay), his older brother and a doctor (both hetero): When your community is in crisis (especially!), don't wait to become perfect. Don't hope and wait for everyone's acceptance and approval. Do what needs to be done. Yes, this movie is flawed. It's also honest and important. If you're at all interested in the early 80s AIDS crisis you must see The Normal Heart.

This did not win any major awards and did not even nab important nominations. Arty and at times slow moving, it's a Victorian period piece/slice of Charles Dickens biopic. I think what I found so stunning is the texture, and the levels of meaning. The main character is not Dickens, not really. The film raises all sorts of moral issues and doesn't come down clearly on them. And it is definitely a portrait of society at that time and place. The acting is amazing all around. What are we to make of the apparently mostly true story? What indeed? If but only if you're in the mood for something complicated and challenging you should see it.

Knowing of its cable provenance I rented this with mild trepidation. It bears a few telltale signs of Cable Drama 101 but manages at least partly to transcend. Mirren is superb as always and near the end even looked a little like Vivian Leigh. (Some credit due to costumes and makeup). Kudos to her for baring her breasts. The interesting surprise here is Olivier Martinez who is better than Warren Beatty in the 1961 original. WB was derailed by the Italian accent with which El Martinez has no problem. Also, Martinez is the right age for the part; WB was young and up-and-coming, wrong for the story. Both Mirren and Martinez seem to have been aware of the cable tendency towards obviousness because the best thing about the remake is the fact that they do bring layers and subtlety to their respective performances. Enough years have elapsed to make this is a period film, whereas the 1961 version was not. Any period film also has to finesse the sensibility of the time when it was made. This remake portrays the period fairly well and in some ways takes a rather fresh approach. Despite its shortcomings you too might find yourself liking it more than you thought you would. (2014)

While I feel ambivalent about this one, it is, overall, a pleasant enough ambivalence. Jones is interesting in the lead, and it is, after all, her film (which she co-wrote). The LA setting is handled well. There are some draggy moments but the film taps into the zeitgeist without seeming to try too hard at that. It is funny and it is sad. Is any of that new? Not really but the mix at least feels kind of fresh. If you go into this one without sky-high expectations you'll find ample stuff to like. Fun supporting roles. And a recognition of the bittersweet way things are. Romcoms are tough. This is no surefire classic and I wouldn't call it a date movie. Probably the best can be said is that it's not bad.

I haven't seen all of Von Trier's films. 'Melancholia' is probably the most accessible (and my favorite, so far). Nympho Vols I & II are not must-sees, but worth seeing. I have a mild preference for Vol. II mainly because Stacy Martin isn't in it much. The 'Joe' character is played mostly by Charlotte G in Vol. II, so fans of CG might share my preference. Viewers of so-called art films often think like they're not supposed to find humor in them. Nympho challenges that notion. In my view there is some humor in this film, most of it intentional. There is also joy in experimentation. Could be that's one of the things that makes it an art film.

I think it would be impossible to write a spoiler for La GB because the story basically goes nowhere but it is a trippy ride to nowhere. The brilliant photography just keeps you watching no matter what. Similar subject matter to La Dolce Vita but the central character in La GB is much older, and not Marcello. Does it herald a new wave of Italian cinema? I wish but it's a little premature to say that. I like the fact that it is highly ambitious and at the same time inconclusive, but not everyone will admire that juxtaposition. A minor criticism: the birds-on-terrace scene near the end felt CGI and out of place. Nevertheless, if I had a list of 10 Best of 2013 La GB would definitely be on it.

I'm aware of criticisms people have of this movie. I even agree with some of them. And yet, I'm sure I'll remember it for a long time and I'll remember liking it a lot. Yes, it's melodramatic. Yes, it has 1 or 2 bits that are trashier than necessary. (Hey, I like a trashy bit now and then.) Are the characters likable? I think so but when did that become the No. 1 criterion for evaluating a drama? Disclosure: I'm originally from a few miles where this was actually filmed. I feel like I know this movie. The cast spans all ages and I find it especially gratifying to watch emerging stars, there are a couple of those in this. The film deals with serious subjects but it's not a message film. Makes you think but does not --would not-- tell you what to think. Contemporary midwestern noir. Click on the trailer and decide whether to watch the whole film. Many of you will wanna watch.

I always assumed director Joseph Losey was British (he was a blacklisted American). To further confuse matters (and me) 'Mr. Klein' is in French and it offers a profound and disturbing glimpse into 1942 France, sliding into semi-totalitarianism. Not a pretty picture; rather a blandly terrifying or terrifyingly bland one. The film is frequently and aptly described as Kafkaesque. It raises questions that it deliberately does not answer. Another reviewer pointed out thematic similarities to Bergman's 'The Serpent's Egg'. I agree, and both are very good. To be honest, I need to see 'Mr. Klein' again but it is upsetting enough that I have to defer that awhile. And probably after another viewing I'll still be confused. Delon at 41 is beginning to lose his looks in this but it's an excellent performance. Recommended though somber and not easy.

I can see why this was controversial, and no doubt it would be if it were released now (2013). It's stunningly unlike Gone with the Wind. The style is extreme Southern Gothic, (not to be confused with camp). Some shades of Tennessee Williams but goes beyond where he dared. The dialogue is a bit difficult, and DVD has no English subtitles, but you'll be rewarded if you stick with it. (No need to understand every word). I agree that Tarantino was influenced by it but his approach to the subject matter is very different. Mandingo stands on its own as a major work of the 1970s and it's certainly a film that deserves to be better known. Striking photography and music throughout. This film panders to no one, nor does it simplistically tell the viewer what to think about anything. We have the feeling we're on our own with this. Maybe it's no accident that that feels liberating. Fasten your seat belts and see it.