This Norwegian import scored high with critics AND audiences on the ubiquitous Rotten Tomatoes rating scale. With a 98% critical approval (out of 61 critics surveyed) and an 82% audience approval rating, I must be missing something. The only audience posting that matched my reaction to this film was from one David L. who wrote: The main character’s compelling enough that I saw the movie all the way through but really, it was about a day in the life of an addict & the pains he caused others because of his addiction, and that’s about it (and I had to hunt for that).
In my humble opinion Norwegian film-maker Joachim Trier deserves credit for attempting to show the causes that lead Anders (Anders Danielson Lie) into a dark, spiralling drug addiction by showing one day in his bleak, existential. lonely existence. Perhaps if I could relate to his condition or the reasons for it, I might have able to find the film “compelling” , “harrowing”, “engrossing”, “gripping” or any of the other adjectives used to describe it in reviews.
As it is, I was distinctly underwhelmed by the film. My loss?
Recently I read a glowing article about actor/musician Jamie Foxx in the paper. (Yes, I still read newspapers in the coffeeshop.) The article mentioned a Grammy-nominated album, a new movie and even a game show he is hosting.
But nowhere does it mention a movie called Sleepless. That’s not surprising.
Frankly, I hadn’t even heard of the movie until I spotted it in the DVD section of the library.
Adapted from a French thriller called Nuit Blancheby Andrea Berloff (one of the Oscar-winning screenwriters of Straight Outta Compton), Sleepless features Jamie as Vincent Downs, a Las Vegas cop with connections.(I refer to the performer by his first name because calling him Mr. Foxx sounds like an X-rated version of a Wes Anderson film).
He and his partner (played by rap star T.I.) are in possession of cocaine originally belonging to club owner/crook Stanley Rubino (played by an almost unrecognizable Dermot Mulroney – hey, I said almost unrecognizable.) Mr. Rubino is under pressure to recover the shipment since he promised to sell the drugs to a mobster named Novak (Scoot McNairy, who usually plays a good guy, so he is taking liberal advantage of the opportunity to play an especially nasty villain.)
With so much on the line (no pun intended) Mr. Rubino kidnaps Jamie’s, I mean, Vincent’s teen-age son (Octavius J. Johnson) to make sure that Vincent returns his cocaine. Plucky young Internal Affairs officer Jennifer Bryant (Michelle Monaghan) is convinced Jamie’s character is dirty and is determined to get the goods on him. Meanwhile, Vincent’s ex (Gabrielle Union) keeps phoning from the hospital, where she works as a nurse, wondering where Junior is, because Jamie, I mean Vincent, doesn’t want to admit her son has been kidnapped.
The critical collective at the rottentomatoes.com gave this movie a wan 2i%. Audience “reviewers” scored it slightly higher at 36%. Obviously, they were not impressed either.
I blush to admit I actually liked the first 2/3 of the movie. Swiss/German director Baram bo Odar keeps putting the screws on our anti-hero to see which way he’ll jump. It reminded me of the final scenes of (the much better rated) 1995 flick GetShorty when all the pieces of Elmore Leonard’s jigsaw puzzle plot start to come together.
Unfortunately, something happens in Sleepless and I blame suits-in-the-editing-room or one of the performers using their clout to change the screenplay because at some point, this wannabe thriller falls as flat as a gateau in the oven. (I can almost hear the conversation now,”That may be what they do in Europe, Bo, but in America, audiences want action – y’know, fistfights, car chases, lots of guns …. “)
Y’think movie producers would learn something after the box office fails of American remakes of European hits like The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo and Let The Right One In or even the U.K. TV hit Broadchurch but judging from the fate of this pic apparently not.
But you already know that if you have seen Wendy and Lucy and Meek’s Cut-Off. If you are a newcomer to her highly personal and (some might say) idiosyncratic art Certain Women may not be the best introduction. See the two films above first and then see Certain Women and you should feel right at home.
You may have read about the slow food movement. Well, Reichardt’s films are what has been called “slow cinema”. And she determines the pace. (She has edited, written and directed all of the films listed above.)
Based on a series of short stories by Montana author Maile Meloy (sister of Colin Meloy of The Decemberists, by the way) Certain Women offers low key character studies of four women (Michelle Williams, Kristen Stewart, Laura Dern and Lily Gladstone), their humdrum existences, frustrations and small victories.
Reichardt’s films, like the slow food movement perhaps, are an acquired taste. The film recived a 92% per cent critical approval on the rottentomatoes.com site but fared less successfully among the audience reviewers (RT Audience Critic Phillip Price wrote in part “… There is a fine line between being understated and simply being uninteresting …. “
But as Ms. Reichardt told Nigel Smith of “theguardian.com”‘: “It all just seems everything is getting faster. Faster, faster, faster – we all want things faster. I guess there is a part of me that likes the pull against that … “
Okay, I know how I started writing about a 2010 movie based on a 2001 novel but I am not sure why I am posting an entry in my blog about them.
I guess it all started when I watched the Brit TV series based on the Jack Taylor novels by Irish writer Ken Bruen (an appreciation of Mr. Bruen’s unique – to me – prose style appears elsewhere in this blog.)
I noticed a second hand copy of London Boulevard at a book sale and since I had become an aficionado of Mr. Bruen’s works I picked it up. Okay, it wasn’t a Jack Taylor novel but the protagonist, a wary, volatile ex-con named Mitchell, his run-ins with former criminal associates, his relationship with mentally unstable sister, Briony, his reluctant affair with the aging but still alluring reclusive actress Lillian Palmer and her enigmatic butler, Jordan. held my attention.
Then I became aware of a movie adapted from the novel. Since it was written by William Monahan, the Oscar-winning screenwriter who adapted the Asian box office hit Infernal Affairs for the Martin Scorsese-directed North American cinematic success The Departed (one of my favorite films) I had high hopes when the acclaimed screenwriter chose London Boulevard as his directorial debut.
Imagine my surprise when I looked closer at the back of the DVD dust cover and saw that Colin Farrell and Keira Knightley had been cast in leading roles. While reading the novel I kept picturing Liam Neeson and Helen Mirren or Charlotte Rampling in the roles. (On the other hand, the casting of Anna Friel as Briony and Ray Winstone as Mitchell’s criminal nemesis, Gant, was spot-on.)
I understand the need to attract “name” stars to secure investors. However, the casting – and rewriting – completely destroys Mr. Bruen’s original intent: to write a British version of Sunset Boulevard, or, as it says on the front cover of the novel, “a dark twist on a classic story.” Imagine a version geared to a youthful demographic directed by Zack Snyder and starring, say, Scarlett Johansson as Ms. Palmer (renamed “Lily”) and one of the Hemsworth boys as Mitchell (MC Mitch?)
Mr. Monahan’s second attempt at directing, the dismal Mojave. didn’t fare much better (24% Audience Rating). Perhaps Peter Howell of Toronto’s Globe & Mail (quoted on RT) says it best: “Writer/director William Monahan won an Oscar for penning The Departed and he obviously needs the discipline Martin Scorsese brought to that picture.”
Black Pond may be one of the polarizing films of this or any other year.
Peter Bradshaw of The Guardian calls it: ” … really good: haunting, melancholy and strange.”
Mary F., one of the Audience reviewers at rottentomatoes.com, says Black Pond is “Possibly the worst film I’ve ever watched.”
Will Sharpe co-directed and co-edited Black Pond with music video vet Tom Kingsley. The duo shared a BAFTA nomination with producer Sarah Brocklehurst, in 2012, for Outstanding Debut by a British Writer, Director or Producer. (BAFTA stands for British Academy of Film & Television Arts and is widely regarded as the U.K. equivalent of an Oscar).
Briefly, the film is about an odd, dysfunctional family who befriend a sad, eccentric loner, Blake (Colin Hurley) with an unexpected result.
After the “unexpected result” (no spoilers here!) the Brit tabloids label them “a family of killers” and worse. Even though they have not killed (or even hurt) anyone. Chris Langham (who plays the father, Tom Thompson), knows about the power of the press from firsthand experience. His career in his native Britain came to a screeching halt after being booked (and serving some jail time) on rather unsavory charges.(Langham claims he was researching a role.) Obviously, there is real-life irony in the way Langham as Tom says “Obviously I lost my job because of the publicity.”
Amanda Hadingue, who plays Sophie, the mother of the family, is a wannabe poetess with a thing for John Clare. (If English poet John Clare is unfamiliar to North American readers, don’t feel bad. I had to look him up on Wikipedia, too.) It seems that Tom is unwittingly dim about his wife’s avocation. (“You want to throw my poems in the recycling!” Sophie exclaims.)
Anna O’Grady (Katie) and Helen Cripps (Jess) are cast as the two feuding sisters of the family. (“Katie has a thing for the wounded … Jess has a thing for being wounded,” Mom explains to Blake.) Ms. Cripps wears a perpetually bemused expression through much of the film (I get the feeling Jess has grown up with that expression on her face, surrounded by the weirdness of her family and, well, life , in general, which can be fairly strange by itself.)
The film is a mix of bone-dry and (often) pitch black wit, almost hallucinatory animation, dream sequences and profound philosophizing (“Very deep. Very deep indeed” says one of the characters admiringly.) The humor is very dry. So dry that it may leave some American viewers parched. It is, after all, a film that is, to quote one Brit paper, “intensely English”. Fortunately, I watch a lot of British shows on Netflix and/or PBS but even so I had to watch this eccentric low budget import twice (okay, I don’t have a life) to fully appreciate its quirky charms.
A three-legged canine named Bonzo plays the family’s three-legged dog, Boy. (Talk about Method acting. Of course, what Bonzo really wants to do is write and direct.) And why is the dog called Boy? (“When I first brought him home, I said,’Here, boy’ and he responded right away,” explains Tom.)
Sharpe (who wrote the screenplay) plays Tim Tanaka, a friend of the family. (“I think he’s just a bloke with too much time on his hands,” says Tom.) British television personality Simon Amstell plays a quack psychiatrist (“I’m not qualified but who are you?,” he states cheerfully in an online ad, ” Treatments are free. My parents are dead.”)
The cast delivers their lines with poker-faced perfection, some of it in ” Office”-style interviews, supposedly filmed after the family’s brush with the law. ( “The Office” was originally a U.K. series before it was adapted for American audiences.)
The film received a limited theatrical release and is not for everyone but I was intrigued enough to keep an eye open for Sharpe and Kingsley’s sophomore release, 2016’s Darkest Universe.
Variety magazine says Black Pond “could become a cult item.” Judging from the young hipsters on Tumblr, it is already a cult film.
One could wish that Sharpe and Kingsley’s third film would be more accessible for a global audience but I can hear the pair snickering at such a comment: “Accessible? We thought Black Pond was accessible. You should see some of the scenes we left out!”
Even seasoned film critic Sean Axmaker doesn’t know quite what to make of Winnipeg (Manitoba, Canada) based filmmaker Guy Maddin’s The Forbidden Room.
All he knows is that on an instinctual and aesthetic (I’ve always wanted to use that word in a sentence) level, he likes it (I think): “Maddin makes no effort to make sense of any of it, or even worry about any kind of dramatic closure. It’s all about the texture, the weirdness, the quality of the cinematic moment. This is not for audiences who demand story and character and narrative logic.”
Predictably some of the audience critics at rottentomatoes.com did not share his, uh, enthusiasm. A “reviewer” who calls himself K Nife Churchkey wrote: “I feel I should review this simply to counteract the acclaim this film has received thus far. This film is an annoying mess …” (The film scored a 95% critical approval rating – 54 critics rated it Fresh, 3 critics went for Rotten)
Another audience reviewer (Kristi Moore, who gave the film two and a half stars) opined: ‘I’ve never done acid but Forbidden Room is what I think it would be like if I ever did”
The thought of viewing it on drugs crossed my mind. I haven’t taken anything stronger than Aspirin for several decades now but Ms. Moore’s comment does remind meof a friend of mine back in the day who claimed he would go to see a movie twice – once to see it stoned and again to see it straight. (He would have loved this film, although whether he would have to see it twice is debatable.)
There is something hallucinatory about the film – a series of unresolved stories flash across the screen – a submarine crew fights to stay alive; a lumberjack attempts to rescue a kidnapped woman; a man murders a servant because he forgot his wife’s birthday (Men! Do not try this at home) – over a dozen tales and all served up like a series of lost silent films so badly scratched and degraded that even the Criterion Collection wouldn’t touch them.
Shot in Montreal and Paris, the film features the cream of French-Canadian (Roy Dupuis, Sophie Desmarais, Caroline Dhavernas) and European talent (filmmaker/actor Mathieu Amalric, the terminally weird Udo Kier, the always intriguing Charlotte Rampling, the enigmatic Maria de Medeiros). all of whom enter the esoteric spirit of the project with freak flags flying.
David Lynch may be an auteur – they would have to think of a whole new five-dollar term to describe Guy Maddin.
In case you are not familiar with Hartley’s work (heresy for any self-respecting cinephile back in the nineties) he was a name to know in the burgeoning independent film movement.
I even rented The Unbelievable Truth starring the late (and, in my opinion, great) Adrienne Shelley just to see what all the fuss was about.
A check on the Net reveals Hartley is still a critics’ favorite, judging from the response to Ned Rifle (released earlier this year and scoring 81% on the rottentomatoes.com website.)
Speaking of that recent Hartley effort, it is apparently part of a trilogy by the film-maker that began with Henry Fool (1998) and continued with 2007’s Fay Grim.
I vaguely remember renting Henry Fool at my local video store. I seem to recall it is about the relationship between an unassuming garbage collector, Simon Grim (James Urbaniak), who lives with his mother and highly libidinal sister, Fay (Parker Posey) , and a scruffy, egotistical wannabe poet named (you guessed it) Henry Fool (Thomas Jay Ryan). Turns out Simon is the one who becomes a world famous poet. I can empathize with the late Roger Ebert who, in a 1998 review of the film. wrote “I wonder if the fault is in myself. I don’t think this is a bad film, but after seeing it twice I’m unable to respond to it in any clear way. Things happen, and I don’t know what they mean, and I have a feeling that in Hartley’s view, they need not mean anything.” Frankly, I rented it because Parker Posey (her real name) is in it. I have had a film lovers’ crush on Ms. Posey ever since I saw her breakthrough role in 1995’s Party Girl. She has 92 TV and film credits on her resume, according to imdb, so I won’t list all of them but my favorites include The Anniversary Party, The Daytrippers, all the films she has made with satiric mastermind Christopher Guest (like Best in Show and Waiting for Guffman, for example) and her arc as Eli Gold’s ex on TV’s The Good Wife. She occasionally goes mainstream (Superman Returns, the failed TV series The Return of Jezebel James) but her best work (in my opinion) is in indie films.
Anyway, Henry Fool climaxes with Henry and Fay hooking up and Fay Grim (currently on Netflix) opens with Fay talking to a teacher who has busted Fay’s 14 year old son, Ned (Liam Aiken) for possession of a pornographic movieola (which he has received anonymously in the mail.) Hartley has had almost a decade to come up with a backstory for Henry so now he is a former government agent who has travelled all over Europe, Latin America and the Middle East with dogged CIA agent Fulbright (Jeff Goldblum, indulging in every quirky mannerism in his playbook) in hot pursuit. Fay hasn’t seen Henry in seven years and, with Simon (Urbaniuk) in jail for aiding and abetting Henry in his escape, Fay worries that Ned doesn’t have a proper male role model. This leads to a very convoluted plot which may be a satire of espionage movies. Writer/director Hartley seems to take his plot machinations seriously at some point and the ending is rather sobering (to say the least).
Ned Rifle, the third film in the trilogy (also on Netflix), starts in a lighter vein and ends on a somber note as well. In the process. Hartley adds a new player, Aubrey Plaza, to his ensemble ( another of my favorite performers. Don’t get me started). Strangely enough, I didn’t become a fan via her best-known role (TV’s Parks and Recreation.) It was an odd little indie film, 2012’s Safety Not Guaranteed, that made me a believer. I even watched Life After Beth and part of The To-Do List (although that movie was too much even for a newly minted Aubrey apostle to watch all the way through.) At any rate, Ms. Plaza, with her trademark deadpan delivery, seems tailormade made for the dry wit and eccentric dialogue that is part of Hartley’s signature style.
In Ned Rifle‘s opening scenes, we learn Ned is now 18 (and still played by Liam Aiken) and planning to leave the Witness Protection Program where he has been living with Rev. Gardner (longtime Hartley vet Martin Donovan) and his family since his mom (Parker Posey, remarkably cheerful, considering Fay is serving a life sentence) was busted as an international terrorist. Ned’s first move: kill the man who ruined his mom’s life i.e. Henry. He first calls on his Uncle Simon (again played by Urbaniuk) who has discarded a career in serious literature to become a stand-up comic (“Only now,after all this heartbreak and controversy, am I able to confront my inner clown.”) Ms. Plaza, portraying a troubled, possibly psychotic young woman named Susan, keeps popping up along the way until Ned reluctantly takes her along on the journey to find his father (Henry, still depicted by Thomas Jay Ryan) . Ned wants to murder him. Susan has her own agenda.
Ironically, this may be Hartley’s most accessible film to date. FITZROY on rottentomatoes.com wrote of Hartley’s Ned Rifle : “…. Not really sure what it is. I just liked all of it ….” and that typifies my reaction as well. As long as there are well-heeled fans and investors to fund his films ( Ned Rifle appears to be crowdsourced) it seems apparent that Hartley will continue to make his idiosyncratic little flicks. Like Simon in Ned Rifle he doesn’t seem to care whether he is popular or not.