Showing posts with label movie reviews. Show all posts
Showing posts with label movie reviews. Show all posts

Thursday, July 14, 2022

"Top Gun: Maverick" and The Week in Reviews

[I review the movie "Top Gun: Maverick," as well as the TV series "WeCrashed," and "The Andy Warhol Diaries." The Book of the Week is "Trailed: One Woman's Quest to Solve the Shenandoah Murders" by Kathryn Miles]


Top Gun: Maverick (2022)


Thirty-six years later, Pete "Maverick" Mitchell is back and still pushing the envelope.

I have to confess at the outset that I have been a big Tom Cruise fan from the very beginning, ever since I saw him playing the bad guy, or kid, in "Taps." That was only his second movie, but I knew he had something special.  This was before he danced in his undies in "Risky Business," before "Mission Impossible," before "You complete me."  I knew he had that star quality early on, and he was a handsome devil too!  I have been a fan ever since, despite Scientology, despite his occasional irritability with reporters who ask him questions he doesn't like (don't ask about Nicole!), despite my disappointment when I found out he was short. 

I have seen every movie Tom has ever made (I get to call him Tom because I have been a fan for so long), so naturally I had to see this one.  Not to mention, I had heard it was really good.  

It's been 36 years since the first "Top Gun," so you might want to watch that one again before seeing this sequel.  But if, like me, you aren't going to, here is a bit of a synopsis: 

U.S. Naval Aviator Pete "Maverick" Mitchell (Cruise) and LTJG Nick "Goose" Bradshaw (Anthony Edwards), stationed in the Indian Ocean, fly the F-14A Tomcats.  They are sent to attend TOPGUN, the Naval Fighter Weapons School in San Diego, where Maverick turns out to be a bit of a, er, maverick, and flies recklessly, putting him at odds with the other pilots, especially his fellow pilot, the Iceman (Val Kilmer). Goose dies in an accident for which Maverick is blamed and later cleared but he feels guilty and considers quitting.  But we know he won't, because he's Tom Cruise, I mean, Maverick.  He eventually redeems himself during a tense international crisis where amazing aerial acrobatics occur and, at the end, when given a choice of assignments, Maverick chooses to become a TOPGUN instructor.  

So...now you are caught up.

What's next for our Maverick?

Over thirty years later, Pete has shown himself to be a top aviator.  He is now a test pilot but in true Maverick fashion he has pushed the envelope once again, and instead of being disciplined, he is sent back to TOPGUN, this time to help the new and young fighter pilots complete a very difficult mission.

One of the enemies of the U.S. (you can pick which one) is working on a uranium enrichment plant and that's a no-no so we have to take it out.  However, it's in a very difficult place, between two mountains with all kinds of rockets and faster jets protecting it, so the Iceman, who is now Maverick's friend and an Admiral, has called upon Maverick to train and decide which of the best of these best young pilots is up to the task.  However, there is a slight problem.  One of the pilots is Rooster (Miles Teller), who just happens to be Goose's son, and he has not forgiven Maverick for the death of his Dad.

I probably didn't really need to give you a synopsis of the first one. With a screenplay by Ehren Kruger, Eric Warren Singer and Christopher McQuarrie and direction by Joseph Kosinski, this is basically a 21st Century rehash of it: two brash, young pilots once again competing against each other, throwing smack around, just as Maverick and Iceman had done, but this time it's Rooster and Hangman (Glen Powell). There is also the requisite romance for Maverick and, once again, a beach volleyball game under the guise of team building, but we all know it's just a way to see those handsome, fit bodies running around on the beach. The "Danger Zone" theme music is even on hand. 

I have to admit that this is not necessarily my kind of movie.  

I am not particularly into military stuff or airplanes, and I definitely am not into macho posturing and overdramatic dialogue like "The end is inevitable, Maverick.  Your kind is headed for extinction." "Maybe so, sir. But not today." There is a lot of that. There is also the requisite romance with the beautiful Penny (Jennifer Connelly), because Tom has to have someone to flash those pearly whites at and there are also some far-fetched plot choices.  But I give the film props for its depiction of friendship and loyalty, and I have to say, despite my reservations during some of the film, the last thirty minutes, as the pilots tried to complete their mission, was heart pumping and exciting due to the aerial acrobatics, slick editing and "practical effects." That made up for any criticism I had before that. And it didn't hurt when Tom showed up in his Navy whites. That was spectacular too! 

When I use the term "practical effects," I am referring to the fact that most of those exciting aerial sequences were actually real planes flying around with the actors in the cockpits, though they were not flying the planes. It was not CGI. Tom is known for doing his own stunts and required the actors to have grueling training to take part and it certainly worked.  It's very much a "you are there" feeling during those scenes.

Speaking of Tom, he just doesn't seem to age, and it is mind bloggling that he is still doing his own stunts at 60.  Nor does Jennifer Connolly look any older than I remember her from her earlier films.  Sadly, she doesn't have much to do here except look beautiful and flirt with Tom, but she is still a welcome presence. I am always glad when 50-year-old actresses get work and actors like Tom romance age-appropriate women. Miles Teller and Glenn Powell do a good job of picking up the reins left by the young Cruise and Val Kilmer.  And speaking of Kilmer, so glad to see him here but bittersweet considering what has happened to him.  

Rosy the Reviewer says...I usually hate sequels but I'm going to give this one a break because, for one thing, it's been 36 years, and for another, the editing and aerial sequences lived up to the hype. I was on the edge of my seat. (in theatres)


***Now Streaming***


WeCrashed (2022)


The story of the rise and fall of WeWork.

I feel like I am the only one in the world who didn't know about WeWork but this eight-part miniseries created by Drew Crevello and Lee Eisenberg now streaming on Apple+ gave me an education in a most enjoyable way.

WeWork was a company that offered coworking space and under the leadership of Adam and Rebekah Neumann, was valued at $47 billion in 2019 before famously crashing.  Based on the podcast "WeCrashed: The Rise and Fall of WeWork" by Wondery, the series stars Jared Leto and Anne Hathaway as the Neumanns, two narcissists who through shear force of will made WeWork work...until it didn't.

Adam Neumann's gift was to talk so much and so fast that he would get his way.  He was one of those people so sure of himself that he was able to convince everyone else he knew what he was doing.  He thought big and went for it.  Rebekah was more of a whiney New Age girl who wanted to "elevate the world's consciousness." She also wanted to be an actress, so Adam bought her a theatre.  Then she wanted to have a more important role in the company so Adam gave her the title of Chief Branding Officer.  Then she wanted to start a school so... voila!  The two were madly in love but they were also madly mad and that was ultimately what brought them down.  That and some under the desk machinations.

Jared Leto as Adam Neumann is just astounding. He never ceases to amaze me. Is there nothing Jared Leto can't do when it comes to acting?  He was unrecognizable in "The House of Gucci" - in a good way - and here he embodies Adam Neumann in looks and accent.  But just saying that doesn't seem like enough.  Whatever Jared Leto does he goes all in and I go with him.  Hathaway is also wonderful here playing a rather unlikable character but making her real and vulnerable.  The acting alone is the reason to watch this miniseries but the story  is also fascinating.  It's an inside look into the world of startups and how quickly it can all go wrong.

Rosy the Reviewer says...at times this show was above my mental pay grade when it came to the ins and outs of the business financial world e.g. IPO's, S-1's, etc. but that doesn't mean I didn't enjoy it.  I did.  The story is engrossing and the acting is phenomenal. (Apple+)


The Andy Warhol Diaries (2022)



Andy Warhol speaking from the grave.

Does anyone remember what happened to artist Andy Warhol after he was famously shot in 1968? I realized watching this six-part mini-series that I really didn't.  I didn't have the slightest idea what he was up to after that.  And he was up to a lot.

One of our most successful contemporary artists, Warhol was famous for his Campbell's soup cans and portraits of celebrities. He embraced silkscreening, film, photography and sculpture and commented on celebrity culture through his work. He said "In the future, everyone will be world famous for 15 minutes," a profound statement considering he said that before the rise of the Internet where that has actually happened.  But for all of his fame, Warhol remained a rather enigmatic figure, more of an observer than a participant, but after the shooting, Warhol was feeling vulnerable and less relevant, so he started to reinvent himself in some very odd and interesting ways.

This docuseries directed by Andrew Rossi does a brief overview of Andy's early life and then concentrates on his life after the shooting. Often thought to be asexual, the series explores Warhol's long-term relationship with Jed Johnson, which eventually failed, and then his obsession with Paramount executive Jon Gould.  Andy explored the club scene, modeling, drag, went on "Saturday Night Live" and "The Love Boat," forged a relationship with the young artist Basquiat and took on his last commission honoring The Last Supper, all in the shadow of the AIDS epidemic.  And then Andy died unexpectedly at the age of 58.  And no, he didn't die of AIDS.

Practically everything in this docuseries was news to me, and I was actually a Warhol fan. From executive producer Ryan Murphy and based on the 1989 book edited by Pat Hackett, Andy "narrates" his own diary entries as his personal life plays out on screen with additional insight provided by experts, associates and others who knew him. Andy's "voice" is actually produced through artificial intelligence (voiced by Bill Irwin) and the use of AI was approved by the Andy Warhol Foundation, something which the series is careful to remind us during each episode.

Does this series shed light on the real Andy Warhol?  Maybe not.  But hearing his own words is probably as close as we will get.

Rosy the Reviewer says...whether you were a fan of Andy Warhol or not, this is a fascinating documentary focusing on a fascinating life played out during that fascinating time called The 80's. (Netflix)


***The Book of the Week***


Trailed: One Woman's Quest to Solve the Shenandoah Murders by Kathryn Miles (2022)

The true crime story of the unsolved murders of Lollie Winans and Julie Williams, who were both murdered in the Shenandoah National Park in 1996.

Lollie Winans and Julie Williams were two young women who met and fell in love over their mutual love of backpacking in the wilderness.  In May of 1996, the two went on a week-long backpacking trip to the Shenandoah National Park where they pitched their tent in a remote spot. When the pair did not return home as planned, park rangers discovered their campsite, their tent slashed and the women dead in their sleeping bags.

Miles, an award-winning journalist and outdoorsperson herself, became obsessed with the case, and during her research, uncovered conflicting evidence, a botched investigation and a suspect who was hounded his whole life as the person who murdered Lollie and Julie. Miles became convinced he didn't do it. Then who did?  Along with her one-woman investigation, Miles does a good job of presenting Lollie's and Julie's stories. You care about these women and you want to find out why they were murdered.

It's difficult to believe that as late as the 1990's there were still laws in the books in many states against homosexuality.  Was the murder of Lollie and Julie a hate crime?

Rosy the Reviewer says...if you like true crime nonfiction, this is for you.  It's a page-turner.


Thanks for reading!

See you again soon!

If you enjoyed this post, feel free to like it and share it on Facebook, Twitter, or other sites; email it to your friends and/or follow me on Facebook at https://www.facebook.com/rosythereviewer 

And next time you are wondering whether or not to watch a particular film, check out my reviews on IMDB (The International Movie Database). Go to IMDB.com, find the movie you are interested in.  Scroll over to the right of the synopsis to where it says "Critic Reviews" - Click on that and if I have reviewed that film, you will find Rosy the Reviewer alphabetically on the list (NOTE:  IMDB keeps moving stuff around so if you don't find "Critics Reviews" where I am sending you, look around.  It's worth it)!

(NOTE:  If you are looking for a particular movie or series, check out this cool site: JustWatch.  It tells you where you can access all TV series and movies)

 

Tuesday, June 21, 2022

"Good Luck To You, Leo Grande" and the Week in Reviews

[I review the new Hulu film, "Good Luck To You, Leo Grande" as well as  "Blacklight" and an anime classic that somehow I missed, "Spirited Away."  The Book of the Week is “Truly, Madly: Vivien Leigh, Laurence Olivier and the Romance of the Century” by Stephen Galloway]


Good Luck To You, Leo Grande (2022)





Widow and ex-school teacher Nancy Stokes (Emma Thompson) hires a young sex worker so she can experience some good sex!

I never thought I would ever say a movie that is all about sex was sweet but I am going to say it. This film was sweet.  But it was also charming and wonderful.

Widow Nancy was married for 31 years and the sex was the slam-bam-thank-you- ma'am variety and she had never experienced an orgasm.  Her husband was also the only man she had ever been with. Oh, she has had opportunities to be with other men since her husband's death but they were all old.  She doesn't want old, she wants to be with a young man and to experience some good sex.  So she hires a young handsome (and I DO mean handsome) sex worker named Leo Grande (Daryl McCormack) to learn about the joys of sex. So she books a lovely London hotel room, meets Leo and is then utterly terrified and wondering what she has done.  Over the course of four meetings, Leo is patient, non-judgmental and amazingly understanding as Nancy works through her fears and old beliefs and patterns.

This film, written by Katy Brand and directed by Sophie Hyde, is what the Brits call a two-hander. It's just two people, Nancy and Leo, meeting over the course of a few weeks and Nancy trying to get up the courage to try all of the sex situations she has on her list.  So they talk...and talk...and talk.  But don't get me wrong. It is not boring.  In fact, it's quite wonderful.

Emma as Nancy displays the whole range of emotions that a woman of a certain age might feel meeting a gorgeous and very young kind man, a woman trying to spread her wings and, uh, have an orgasm.  Thompson is a wonder of an actress and is at the top of her game. But McCormack holds his own.  As I said, he is gorgeous so just watching him gave me a bit of a flutter.  But he is also a good actor who shows vulnerability and kindness.

Yes, it's all about sex, but there is much more.  The film also deals with aging, body image, self-empowerment, not to mention a plug for legalizing sex work but all-in-all, it's a lovely, er, satisfying film experience that is not to be missed.  And I predict a long successful career for McCormack...as an actor!

Rosy the Reviewer says...no matter how you feel about a movie about sex, this one will make you smile.(Hulu)


Blacklight (2022)


Liam Neeson is a deep cover FBI operative with a shadowy past and when his past catches up with him, he has to save his family.

Okay, I know, I know. How many iterations of “Taken” is Liam going to star in? But you know what? I don’t care. He has “a very particular set of skills” that I like, so they could film him putting on his shoes and I would watch. Yes, you might think he is getting a bit long in the tooth for this stuff but, c’mon, look at that movie poster. He’s still got it. He is such a nice big tall man and with that Irish lilt in his voice…sigh. What woman wouldn’t want to…well, you know…ahem…be rescued by him? Yes, you will chuckle at some of the really serious lines he delivers but I believe everything he says and does.
Anyway, this time Liam plays Travis Block, a deep cover FBI agent with some OCD, a penchant for Bud Lights and the desire to retire and become a good grandpa. His job is rescuing other deep cover agents who have lost it or gone rogue. But when Sofia Flores, a progressive politician who is running for Congress and who looks just like Alexandra Ocasio-Cortez, is mowed down in a hit and run and one of Block’s operatives contacts a reporter with information about it that implicates the FBI, Block discovers corruption at the FBI (I guess the FBI didn't like progressives). He confronts his boss, who he thought was his friend and mentor, but it doesn’t go well and then his daughter and granddaughter disappear – IT’S GAME ON!
Written by Nick May and Mark Williams (from a story by Brandon Reevis) and directed by Williams, this has all of the usual Liam Neeson thriller tropes: ominous music, rather unbelievable fist fights, guns, car chases - though I had never seen a Dodge Charger chasing a garbage truck before - and Liam using his “particular skills” to nail the bad guys – all the usual stuff you have come to expect in these Liam Neeson thrillers, though in light of recent events, the gun fight was rather stomach churning.

Rosy the Reviewer says...is it a good movie? Not really but if you enjoy Liam in his predictable troubled hero role and want to see the bad guys get what's coming to them, you will probably like this. (On DVD, Apple+ and for rent on most platforms)



Spirited Away (2001)


A ten-year-old girl finds herself in a strange fantasy world.

I have to confess a little crack in Rosy the Reviewer’s movie cred. I just don’t understand how I missed this one. I mean, I worked my way through all of “The 1001 Movies You Must See Before You Die” book, and I guess I thought I had seen this one, but when it came to my attention recently as the most celebrated animated film of all time, I had to ask myself, “Had I?”
I had not.
When I say the most celebrated animated film ever, I’m not kidding. It was not only Japan’s highest grossing film of all time, it is considered by some the greatest animated film ever. It is #6 on IMDB’s “1001 Greatest Films of All Time” and won the Oscar for Best Animated feature film in 2001, the only non-English animated film to have done so and it was hand-drawn as opposed to all of the computer generated films we now have.
Written and directed by Hayao Miyazaki and dubbed in English, it tells the story of 10-year-old Chihiro (voice of Daveigh Chase) who is on her way to her new home in the suburbs with her parents when they take a wrong turn and discover a mysterious tunnel. They explore the tunnel and find themselves in what looks like an abandoned amusement park. Chihiro’s parents discover a food shop that is open, the counter filled with food. Her parents stuff themselves with the food (Chihiro isn’t hungry) and are turned into pigs, and it’s all one crazy adventure after another for Chihiro as she makes her way around this strange fantasy world, “Alice in Wonderland” style.
This is one of those animated films that will appeal to all ages. Kids will enjoy it because there are all kinds of wild shape-shifting creatures and a lesson about friendship. Adults can get into the deeper messages of western consumerism and the environment as well as the beauty of the animation itself and be blown away by the fact that it was so meticulously hand drawn frame by frame.
Rosy the Reviewer says…I am not usually a huge animation fan but this is a very special film that everyone should see. Am I glad I finally saw this? Yes! You will be too!
(Available on DVD, on HBO Max and for rent on most platforms)


***The Book of the Week***


Truly, Madly: Vivien Leigh, Laurence Olivier and the Romance of the Century by Stephen Galloway (2022)


American audiences probably know Vivien Leigh as Scarlett O’Hara in “Gone With the Wind” and possibly also as Blanche Du Bois in “A Streetcar Named Desire (she won Oscars for both performances)” and Laurence Olivier gained widespread acclaim as a movie actor as Maxim de Winter in “Rebecca” and as Heathcliff in “Wuthering Heights,” but what Americans might not know is before that, they were both British stage actors, most notably Olivier, who brought Shakespeare to the masses.
But perhaps what made them even more famous was their epic love affair and the aftermath.
When the two met, they fell “truly, madly” in love. Unfortunately, they were both married to other people, and in those days, a woman, unless she could prove abuse or abandonment, could not get a divorce without her husband’s permission. Yes, you heard me. And Vivien’s husband was not about to give her a divorce. But Olivier and Leigh couldn’t live without each other and eventually did marry. They lived and worked together for 20 years hoping to become the British version of Lunt and Fontaine until Vivien’s mental illness drove them apart.
Though Galloway’s prose is at times a bit overly dramatic, the Olivier and Leigh love story was a dramatic one and he includes new research, unpublished correspondence and interviews with family and friends and lots of behind the scenes anecdotes. It’s juicy.
Rosy the Reviewer says…if you are fans of Leigh and Olivier or want to know more about them or you miss The Golden Age of Hollywood, this is for you! And here’s a fun fact. My little beloved poodle, Tarquin, was named after Olivier’s son!
(Check it out at your local library)!


(Tarquin as Romeo)

Thanks for reading!

See you again soon!

If you enjoyed this post, feel free to like it and share it on Facebook, Twitter, or other sites; email it to your friends and/or follow me on Facebook at https://www.facebook.com/rosythereviewer 

And next time you are wondering whether or not to watch a particular film, check out my reviews on IMDB (The International Movie Database). Go to IMDB.com, find the movie you are interested in.  Scroll over to the right of the synopsis to where it says "Critic Reviews" - Click on that and if I have reviewed that film, you will find Rosy the Reviewer alphabetically on the list (NOTE:  IMDB keeps moving stuff around so if you don't find "Critics Reviews" where I am sending you, look around.  It's worth it)!

(NOTE:  If you are looking for a particular movie or series, check out this cool site: JustWatch.  It tells you where you can access all TV series and movies)

Wednesday, March 9, 2022

The Road to the 2022 Oscars, Part 3: Which Film Will Win Best Picture?

[I review Best Picture nominees "West Side Story," "Belfast," "Nightmare Alley" and "Drive My Car"]

If like me, you participate in Academy Award competitions or you just want to be knowledgable around the proverbial water cooler or at cocktail parties, I feel it is my duty as Rosy the Reviewer, that critic you have come to count on for true, reliable (and often all about me) reviews, to review as many of the Best Picture nominees as possible before the event on March 27. So here we go.

And the nominees are...


Dune

The Power of the Dog

Don't Look Up 

Licorice Pizza

King Richard

CODA


As well as "West Side Story," "Nightmare Alley," "Belfast" and "Drive My Car," which I am reviewing here.

With the four reviews in this post, I have now reviewed all of the nominees (click on the links above for my earlier reviews) except "Dune" and "Licorice Pizza," but that's okay, because they are not going to win anyway (but if I watch them between now and the awards on March 27, I will probably review them, so watch this space, and if you didn't see "The Road to the 2022 Oscars, Pt. 1 and Pt. 2," here they are)

I could go into the whole issue of there being ten Best Picture nominees (which I don't agree with and don't get me started), but I won't so let's get on with it.



West Side Story (2021)


Stephen Spielberg decided he needed to remake "West Side Story."  Oh, no he didn't!

When I first heard that Steven Spielberg was remaking "West Side Story," my first thought was "Whaaaaat?"  Why?  Because number one, I hate remakes of perfectly wonderful films, and number two, you can't remake perfection.  I mean, the 1961 film was directed by Jerome Robbins, a king of Broadway musicals and Robert Wise, Hollywood royalty, and the film won Best Picture along with nine other Oscars. With music by Leonard Bernstein and lyrics by a very young Stephen Sondheim and choreography by Robbins, it also was the film version of a play that changed the face of musicals. So, I said out loud (I do that sometimes), Mr. Spielberg, don't mess with "West Side Story," and I decided to boycott it, which wasn't difficult since there was that little thing called the pandemic, so going to a movie theatre was no longer my idea of fun.  And it actually looks like the public agreed with me because the box office for this remake was disappointing.  

But then the Academy Award nominations came out and the film was nominated for Best Picture, not to mention nominations in several other categories, and it is also streaming for free on HBO Max and Disney+ so I decided I needed to do my due diligence as a critic. So here I am.  Despite my misgivings, I did go into watching the film with an open mind.  I really wanted it to be good. I really did. It wasn't. 

As a bit of background, back in the 50's, it was Robbins' original idea to make a contemporary musical play about Romeo and Juliet. So Romeo and Juliet became Tony and Maria, and the Capulets and Montagues became two rival gangs - the Sharks (the Puerto Rican gang) and the Jets (the white American gang) - both fighting for turf on the Upper West Side of New York City. The play was a smash on Broadway and the 1961 film adaptation won Best Picture and nine other Oscars, the most ever for a musical. The music, lyrics and choreography were all new and exciting, and it was unusual for a musical to deal with real life issues like race and immigration. This musical heralded the modern world. 

In this version (screenplay by Tony Kushner), Maria (newcomer Rachel Zegler) lives with her brother, Bernardo (David Alvarez) and his girlfriend, Anita (Ariana DeBose, nominated for an Oscar for Best Supporting Actress). Tony (Ansel Elgort) is just out of prison and is living in the basement of Doc's general store under the watchful eye of Valentina (Rita Moreno), Doc's widow.  And like the original, Tony and Maria meet at a dance, fall in love and all hell breaks loose from there. But in the meantime, there is that sublime music and fantastic dancing. 

When you try to remake a classic film, you run the risk of the remake being compared to the original, and in this case, since the 1961 film was so iconic, that couldn't be helped.

First of all, I can't quibble with the production values.  As in any Spielberg film, they were wonderful, though I missed some of the set design I have come to associate with the film, such as the underground parking garage.  And the acting was mostly fine, though I think that Elgort was miscast. He underplays too much, and I just didn't feel any passion coming from him. Likewise, there was something about the Riff character (Mike Faist) that didn't do it for me. However, I commend Spielberg for hiring an all hispanic cast to play the Puerto Rican characters, something that was not the case in the original. Also everyone did their own singing, again not the case in the original, but that's about all the props I can give this film that to me was not a satisfying film experience.  

So what went wrong?  

The opening was not at all inspiring. I know Spielberg was making a point about gentrification as the camera panned over the rubble of reconstruction.  But I missed the ominous whistling in the opening of the original. There was a little of it, but it was really down-played.  I also missed the underground parking garage where the Jets sang "When You're a Jet" with the finger-snapping choreography.  I mean, how many of us haven't copied that hopping and snapping down a deserted street late at night?  Duh-duh-da-da-da, duh-duh-da-da-da...

And what the heck was Rita Moreno doing in this film?  I guess I can answer my own question.  Spielberg created that character for her to play to give this remake an authentic feel.  See?  There she is, the original Anita.  Okay, I get it but when she sang "Somewhere," one of the most beautiful and romantic songs in the film, one that Tony and Maria are supposed to sing together, well, I lost my...well...you know. And to make matters worse, Moreno can't really sing. That beautiful song was just lost. 

Those all might seem like small things but put all together, I just couldn't buy this remake.  It lacked passion and it just didn't come together for me.

Okay, so Spielberg wanted to remake a classic film.  But why? He didn't really do anything new with it. It was fairly faithful to the original.  It was still in the 1950's. Why not update it?  Adapt it for the present day? Make it shorter? He did add some realism, making a stronger case for the immigration and racial issues in the story as well as adding the rise of gentrification, but even with that, the film lacked energy. 

Can you tell I am upset? I just can't fathom why Spielberg would want to take this on and think he could make it better. The only positive I can see in this new version is bringing this wonderful story, music and choreography to a younger generation who might have overlooked the original, but then I would say, "You have to see the original."

I was twelve when I saw the original film.  I was smitten with every moment of it, and I cried my eyes out at the end.  Did I cry at the end of this one?  Well, I did a bit, but it was an emotional response to the music which reminded me that seeing this film back in the early 60's was the beginning of my teen years, a time long gone. I was also reminded that my young daughter starred as Maria in a high school version of the play, another time that is long gone. My daughter is now 37 and lives in another state.  So there is a lot of emotion around this film, a reminder to me that time has moved on. But this story and the music - timeless.  I just wish Spielberg had done a better job with it.

Rosy the Reviewer says...it's not going to win Best Picture so see the original instead.                                                                                      (Streaming on HBO Max and Disney+)



Belfast (2021)

Actor/Writer/Director Kenneth Branagh's coming-of-age tale of his childhood in Belfast in the 1960's.

As the camera pans over a modern day Belfast in living color, it slowly fades to black and white and we find ourselves in 1969 Belfast at the beginning of The Troubles.  

Now if you don't know what The Troubles were you need to bone up, but basically it was a time where Northern Ireland was engulfed in a conflict that appeared to be between the Catholics and the Protestants, though it wasn't really a religious war.  It was a nationalistic conflict between those who wanted Northern Ireland to leave the United Kingdom and those who wanted to stay, and since those who wanted to stay were mostly Protestants and were in the majority and those who wanted out - the Irish Nationalists and Republicans - were mostly Catholic and the minority, the conflict appeared to be a religious war. But it was indeed a war.  The Protestants took advantage of their majority and many made life miserable for the Catholics. Anyway, like I said, you need to bone up on that part, because the film takes place during The Troubles and it is always in the background.  It plays a major role, but the film is not really about that. It's really about family. It's Branagh's personal story of his childhood, a love letter to Belfast and the adult world seen through the eyes of a nine-year-old boy. 

As the film begins, we meet nine-year-old Buddy (Jude Hill), running up the street of his neighborhood, carefree, until a mob appears, reminding us of the time and place he lives in. He lives in Belfast with his mother (Caitriona Balfe) and brother, Will (Lewis McAskie).  His Dad (Jamie Dornan) is also around but works in England, so he is gone for weeks at a time, putting a strain on his parents marriage. They struggle over his Dad's desire to move to England because opportunities are better there and his mother's desire to stay.  But Buddy also has Granny (Judy Dench) and Pop (Ciaran Hinds) who live nearby, and the entire neighborhood is his playground, Protestants and Catholics living peacably together and everyone looking out for everyone else. Buddy plays with his friends, has a crush on a girl, goes to the pictures to see "Chitty Chitty Bang Bang," a typical life for a young boy except there is always that ever present war playing out around him. (I couldn't help but wonder if that scene of the family enjoying "Chitty Chitty Bang Bang" was the moment Branagh decided to become and actor)!

I usually have an aversion to overly precocious child actors but young Jude Hill is a wonderful young actor and, well, adorable.  I couldn't take my eyes off of his face.  Jamie Dornan has come a long way since he used to tie up Dakota Johnson in the Fifty Shades of Grey films and is a fine actor.  There is one scene in this film where Dornan's character comes to a realization and it plays out slowly on his face, one of those "a picture is worth a thousand words" moments.  Likewise, veteran actors Judy Dench and Ciaran Hinds can always be counted on to bring in wonderful performances and this film is no exception.  It's also refreshing to see actors allowing themselves to age naturally, unlike American actors.  Let's just say we are not supposed to look like Jane Fonda when we are 84.  But the main revelation for me was Caitriona Balfe, who I did not recognize at first, even though I had watched several seasons of "Outlander."  As Claire in "Outlander," I actually thought she wasn't a very good actress.  I found her to be stiff and overly formal, but here she shines as a woman fighting for her marriage, torn between her love of her husband and her desire to stay in Ireland. She is also gorgeous.  Just ask Hubby.

Rosy the Reviewer says...a sweet and poignant little film with a great Van Morrison soundtrack, but not likely to win Best Picture.                              (on DVD and for rent on Apple+, Amazon Prime and Vudu)



Nightmare Alley (2021)

An ambitious con-man running from his past hooks up with an unethical psychologist.

Stanton Carlisle (Bradley Cooper) is a mysterious film noir figure running from what appears to be a murder. In fact, in true film noir fashion, he is a man of few words.  He says nothing for the first 11 minutes of this film. He joins up with a carnival where he meets Clem (Willem Dafoe), whose "act" is a geek show. So what is a geek show, you ask?  Let's just say the "ew factor" is very high.  It's an act in which a man bites the head off of a live chicken and eats it.  Clem seeks out alcoholics with troubled pasts to be his geeks, luring them in with promises of a temporary job, then regularly giving them opium-laced alcohol to keep them in line. So right there, you know this film is going to be dark.  They don't call this genre film noir for nothing. And yes, it shows the guy biting the head off of the chicken.  I just hope there is a disclaimer at the end of the film saying no chickens were hurt during the making of this film.

I can't help but wonder how the word "geek" came to be used for socially inept people when it was originally a guy biting the heads off of chickens. And who are these people who would pay to see such an act? But I digress.

Stan also meets "Madame Zeena (Toni Collette)" and her alcoholic husband, Pete (David Strathairn). Zeena is a so-called clairvoyant who with the help of her husband uses coded language to read the audience. Oh, the tricks of the carny trade that you can learn in this film.  Pete has a whole book with the coded language and he begins teaching tricks to Stan. But Stan is an ambitious guy. He is also a murderer. He kills Pete, steals his book and runs off with Molly (Rooney Mara), another carnival performer he has fallen in love with. 

A couple of years later, Stan is in Buffalo and has reinvented himself as a medium and has a successful nightclub act with the help of Molly, who uses the coded language from Pete's book to feed him clues.  All is going well for Stan until he meets psychologist Dr. Lilith Ritter (Cate Blanchett), who has figured out his act and is impressed with his skills.  However, she is not what you would call an ethical doctor.  Many of the Buffalo elite have been her patients and she has tapes of all of their sessions. The two join forces to con the rich out of their money.  But Stan is a loser and it doesn't go well for him.

Directed by Guillermo del Toro, who won the 2018 Best Director Oscar for "The Shape of Water  (the film also won Best Picture)," this is a remake of the 1947 film from the book by William Lindsay Gresham (del Toro also wrote the screenplay with Kim Morgan). The film has an all-star cast and breathtaking production design thanks to Tamara Deverell.  It felt like a film noir movie from the Golden Age of Hollywood - think "The Postman Always Rings Twice" or "Double Indemnity," with a little bit of Tod Browning's "Freaks" thrown in -  but at two and a half hours, it's just too long, though I have to say that Hubby stayed awake the entire time which says something about how mesmerizing this film is. And it didn't fall under my usual aversion to remakes since I had not seen the original and, anyway, remaking something after almost 75 years doesn't bother me as much (but don't mess with "West Side Story" - see review above).

I have never been a big Bradley Cooper fan.  Not sure why, but he is outstanding here.  His Stan is malevolent and self-serving but just sensitive and inept enough for you to care what happens to him.  Blanchett is her throaty-voiced, vampy self whom we have come to expect and Mara Rooney is the one person who seems to have a soul.  Ron PerlmanRichard Jenkins and Mary Steenburgen also make appearances.

I have to say that I knew how it all would end about halfway through the film, because I have this theory that appears to work almost every time.  If there is a plot element that is odd or a character, especially one played by a big name but the character doesn't appear to have much to do, that plot element will figure prominently at some point or that character will be the one who did it.  Anyway, even though I figured it out, that did not dampen my enjoyment of this film, if enjoy is the right word.  The film is very dark and there are not many redeemable characters but it is a satisfying, if too long, movie experience.

Rosy the Reviewer says...film noir at its finest, but again, not likely to win Best Picture.                                                                                            (streaming on HBO, HBO Max, Disney+ and Hulu) 



Drive My Car (2021)


After his wife's unexpected death, a reknowned actor and director travels to Hiroshima to direct a play and discovers not only his wife's secrets but comes to grips with his grief.

When one of the main plot elements is a man's wife dying and she doesn't die until an hour into the film, you know it's going to be a long movie. And this one is at a whopping three hours.

Actor and theater director Yūsuke Kafuku (Hidetoshi Nishijima), who is preparing to star in Chekhov's "Uncle Vanya," is married to Oto (Reika Kirishima), a screenwriter who seems to have her most creativity right after sex. One day, as Yūsuke is leaving for work, Oto tells him she wants to talk to him later that evening. But Yūsuke returns home late to find Oto dead from a brain hemorrhage. Two years later, Yūsuke has given up acting but accepts a residency in Hiroshima, where he will direct a multilingual adaptation of "Uncle Vanya".  Because of his glaucoma, the theater company requires that Yūsuke not drive but be chauffeured in his own car, his beloved red 1987 Saab 900 Trubo. He objects at first, but relents after meeting young Misaki Watari (Toko Miura), who proves herself to be a good driver. Over the course of the film, secrets are revealed in that car and Yusuke and Misaki bond, him sharing his guilt over his wife's death and she over the guilt she feels about her mother's death and each helps the other with their grief.

After the death of Oto, the car serves as a haven for Yusuke as he drives around listening to a tape of Oto reading him his lines when he was preparing to star in "Uncle Vanya." Later, it's a safe place for Yusuke and Misaki to share their stories.

If you are not a Chekhov fan or someone who enjoys the acting process, this might be a slog for you. The last half of the film consists of rehearsals for the play where not much happens. Even I, who does enjoy Chekhov and have dabbled in acting, found this to be tremendously tedious. 

I know this film, directed by Ryusuke Hamaguchi with a screenplay by Hamaguchi and Takamasa Oe (based on a short story by Haruki Murakami), is all about collaboration and the creative process and life and death and the kitchen sink, it just went on so long I had to fast forward through some of it. Why do movies have to be so long to get the point across? Since this was not the only film I have seen recently that exceeds two hours by a mile, I am starting to think that our contemporary directors are having difficulty editing themselves, that every single filmed moment is important to them. They can't stand to let any of it go onto the cutting room floor. But let me say - less is more!

However, I must be alone in my views, because this film is the first Japanese film to ever be nominated for an Oscar for Best Picture, and it has also been nominated for Best International Feature (the category used to be called Best Foreign Film). Only a few films made in other countries have had that distinction, "Parasite," a film from South Korea, was one of them, a surprise win for 2020's Best Picture AND Best International Feature.  I really liked "Parasite."  I did not like this film.

But like "Parasite," will this film also have the distinction of winning Best Picture and Best International Feature?

Rosy the Reviewer says...No.                                                                         (In Japanese with English subtitles now streaming on HBO Max)


My Prediction for the Best Picture Oscar?  

Though it's not my favorite movie of the year nor is it my favorite Jane Campion film, I believe the winner will be:

"The Power of the Dog"

(though "CODA" could be a spoiler)


Thanks for reading!

See you again soon!

If you enjoyed this post, feel free to like it and share it on Facebook, Twitter, or other sites; email it to your friends and/or follow me on Facebook at https://www.facebook.com/rosythereviewer 

And next time you are wondering whether or not to watch a particular film, check out my reviews on IMDB (The International Movie Database). Go to IMDB.com, find the movie you are interested in.  Scroll over to the right of the synopsis to where it says "Critic Reviews" - Click on that and if I have reviewed that film, you will find Rosy the Reviewer alphabetically on the list (NOTE:  IMDB keeps moving stuff around so if you don't find "Critics Reviews" where I am sending you, look around.  It's worth it)!

(NOTE:  If you are looking for a particular movie or series, check out this cool site: JustWatch.  It tells you where you can access all TV series and movies)