Tag: Historical

That Thing You Do! Does it Well

That Thing You Do!

The review:

Tom Hanks’s That Thing You Do is a gentle pleasure of a movie from start to finish, capturing all that was shiny about 1964.* In this breezy movie, Tom Everett Scott (Guy Patterson) is the anchor to the Wonder’s skyrocketing fame, while Johnathon Schaech (Jimmy) is a “serious” musician teed up to have problems with fame.** Liv Tyler’s big speech falls flat, which I’m blaming on the writing and not the performance,*** and there are a few things that cause discomfort in 2020,**** but overall, this movie is a good distraction.

The verdit: Good

Cost: $3.99 via Google Play
Where watched: at home (as a palate cleanser after watching Monster. I had no idea I would get to see Charlize Theron twice in one night. She plays a girlfriend.)

Consider also watching:

Further sentences:

*This is a baby boomer nostalgia film for sure. Which doesn’t keep it from still being fun.
**More fun than the both of them: Steve Zahn as Lenny the guitarist.
***This is a male-centered film.
****There’s a little bit of Magical Negro going on with Bill Cobbs’s Del Paxton, and Obba Babatundé’s Lamarr would have been nice to have something to do besides be the cheerful servant.

Questions:

  • How long will that song be stuck in your head?
  • Which is your favorite time the Wonders (or the Oneders) perform “That Thing You Do”?

Favorite IMDB trivia item:

Including full versions, alternative versions, live versions and snippets, the song “That Thing You Do” is heard eleven times in the movie.

Other reviews:

That Thing You Do!

Monster: Great Performances!

Monster

The review:

In Monster, Patty Jenkins directs Charlize Theron to an Oscar-winning performance, but also provides a nuanced portrait of a serial killer. Aside from Theron’s full command of the screen,* Christina Ricci turns in a masterful performance as Selby.** Many things disturbed me about this film,*** but in the good kind of way that means I’m not ignoring depressing things about real life.

The verdict: Recommended

Cost: free via Roku (with ads)
Where watched: at home

Consider also watching:

Further sentences:

*I loved her can-do spirit when she was feeling up and the contrasting low points. Theron’s physicality was great too, the way she captured Aileen’s reach out/pull back energy.
**The unsure ingenue-type who also was a bit whiny and I never really understood why SHE didn’t go and get a job. What a fun performance!
***The low prices for sex acts, for one. The number of men depicted who are willing to pay for sex. The casual discarding of women who are sex workers.

Questions:

  • What kind of world would we have to live in so none of the events of this movie would take place?
  • Did you find Aileen to be a likable character? Why or why not?

Favorite IMDB trivia item:

Charlize Theron said in an interview that she was confused when Patty Jenkins approached her for the role. “Why me?” she asked the director. “These are usually the [roles] that I have to go out there and sweat blood and kill somebody for.” Jenkins’ reply was “Honestly, I just looked at you, and I looked at everybody else, and I said to myself, ‘I could kick the other actors’ asses. You, I’m not so sure.'”

Other reviews:

Monster

Lady Macbeth: Great Acting; Good Scenery

Lady Macbeth

The review:

William Oldroyd’s Lady Macbeth is a great opportunity for Florence Pugh to dazzle you with her acting, and for Ari Wegner to dazzle you with his cinematography. It was one of those movies where early on I didn’t go for a plot turn,* and thus didn’t believe the rest of the movie was possible. It was also fairly unpleasant subject matter** which made for a tedious viewing experience punctuated with great sweeping views of the English landscape.

The verdict: Skip

Unless watching for Florence Pugh’s acting.

Cost: Free via Kanopy, the library streaming service
Where watched: at home.

Consider watching instead:

Further sentences:

*And worse, the turn in plot had me asking, “Did a man direct this film?” He did, as it turned out, but a woman wrote it.
**To be fair, they gave me fair warning with the title. It’s not like Mr. Macbeth was a cheery cruise ship director-type. And I read a synopsis of the 1865 novella the movie is based on,*** and this seems to be a much briefer portrait.
***Lady Macbeth of the Mtsensk District by Nikolai Leskov.

Questions:

  • Did I miss a switch from revulsion to attraction? Did you see it?
  • What do you think happened after the film ended?

Favorite IMDB trivia item:

iFeatures is a joint collaboration between the BBC and the BFI. Every year, they produce three feature films for £350,000 as a springboard for first-time directors. Lady Macbeth (2016) was chosen out of over 300 applicants.

It looks like Oldroyd hasn’t directed anything since, which is too bad. I would be willing to watch something else he directed.

Lady Macbeth

Jezebel is Full of Range (and an Epidemic)

Jezebel

The review:

William Wyler’s Jezebel is an excellent movie for showing off Bette Davis’s range. Aside from Davis, it’s fun to watch Fay Bainter as the ever worried, silent-suffering Aunt Belle Massey as well as to see 1850s New Orleans society mores.* I wasn’t fully convinced by the transformation,*** but was all in on the journey to get there.

The verdict: Good

Cost: Free via TV Time Feature Films which is a Roku Channel that has TONS of old movies!
Where watched: at home

Consider also watching:

Further sentences

*I thought I was headed in for a film full of shaming and was delighted to discover a more nuanced narrative.**
**Less delightful: the many “happy slaves” portrayed in this movie. That element has not aged well.
***I also wasn’t convinced that I was supposed to be convinced.

Questions:

  • Was Julie’s transformation complete, or was she still working an angle?
  • What other 1930s films do you enjoy? Filmspotting recently did a starter pack.

Favorite IMDB trivia item:

Fay Bainter became the first actor to receive nominations in the Lead and Supporting acting categories, being nominated for Best Actress for White Banners (1938) and for Best Supporting Actress for Jezebel (1938).

(I also enjoyed her as the mom in State Fair!)

Jezebel

The Greatest Showman is Perfect Pandemic Viewing

The Greatest Showman

The review:

The overlap of the Venn Diagram of Michael Gracey’s The Greatest Showman and the actual facts of P.T. Barnum’s life is probably a slim sliver, but that does not take away from the fact that this is a very good movie musical.* Casting the living greatest showman (Hugh Jackman) helps, but so do the dance numbers** and the songs, many of which have a meter that is designed to pep the most lugubrious of people. The visual styling*** is also great and everyone turns in excellent performances.****

The verdict: Good

The verdict during a pandemic: Recommended

Cost: free from the Multnomah County Library (one of two DVDs I checked out before the library closed for pandemic purposes*****)
Where watched: at home.

Consider also watching:

  • The Music Man
  • Sound of Music
  • Seven Brides for Seven Brothers
  • Singing in the Rain
  • Mary Poppins
  • Mary Poppins Returns

Further sentences:

*Particularly when quarantined due to a pandemic. The hopeful and stalwart songs are just right for our times.
**”Rewrite the stars” has catapulted to my top-ten list of musical numbers.
***My copy had a making-of feature which explained why there were paintings of the film shown during the credits. This was a feature that made me like the film even more. The story behind the story is also inspiring.
****If I were an actor, I would aspire to Michele Williams interesting and varied career, and I also am interested in the turns Zac Efron takes. Long after I’ve forgotten the details of the film, Keala Settle will remain the thing I love about this movie.
*****I stayed away from this due to tepid reviews, and I’m kind of glad. It was the movie I needed right now.

Questions:

  • What’s a movie that came to you at just the right time?
  • What’s the most important element in a musical?

Favorite IMDB trivia item:

According to Hugh Jackman, the film’s nine-year development process from conception to completion was, in part, due to studios’ unwillingness to take a risk on an original musical. What finally sold the deal at 20th Century Fox was the future Oscar-nominated song “This is Me”, which had literally been written by Benj Pasek and Justin Paul during the two-hour flight to the studio meeting where the film was greenlit.

The Greatest Showman

Emma. is Period Perfect

Emma.

The review:

Autumn de Wilde’s Emma. is a dressed up in confectionery shop color, which shows off the transformation of Emma as she takes on a friend in order to add another match to her successes. Anya Taylor-Joy’s deft performance shows the evolution of Emma, ably aided by perfect supporting performances especially Mia Goth as Harriet and Johnny Flynn as Mr. Knightley.* This is not a period film where we get to know the servants as the focus is singularly on Emma’s circle, but it’s a funny film** and it has a lot of feeling in places,*** not to mention a gorgeous soundtrack.

The verdict: Recommended

Cost: $6.00
Where watched: Laurelhurst Theater (last movie in the theater prior to coronovirus shutdowns.)

Consider also watching:

Further sentences:

*Wondering who Johnny Flynn was, I found he starred in the Netflix comedy Love Sick, which I am currently enjoying quite a lot.
**Bill Nighy as Mr. Woodhouse is always good for a laugh.
***Including one point where the audience gasped aloud.

Questions:

  • What do you think is the key element of success when adapting Emma?
  • How badly do you want to visit that hat shop?

Favorite IMDB item:

The film’s title unconventionally has a period at the end. The director has stated in multiple interviews it is to signify the movie as a “period piece” set in the original era.

Other reviews:

Emma.

Richard Jewell Includes Good Acting, Director Opinions

Richard Jewell

The review:

Clint Eastwood’s Richard Jewell is a little too clear about the director’s feelings about the media and the F.B.I.,* but what this film does well is ably recreate the somewhat claustrophobic circumstances Richard Jewell is reduced to when the tables are turned on him.** I was excited to see Paul Walter Hauser as the titular character and I thought it was unfortunate he didn’t make the cut for Best Actor.*** The rest of the cast was also good and I like that Jewell’s sad-but-true story got movie status.

The verdict: Good

Cost: $6.00
Where watched: Jubitz Theater (The audience included five other women and one man, which I thought was an interesting distribution. Also, the man would not stop talking to his movie-going companion. This is the second Jubitz feature in a row where the audience gets a D for etiquette)

Consider also watching these other Clint Eastwood films:

Further sentences:

*Both are bad. Very bad. Very, very bad. You can’t believe how bad they are. Although you can when you watch this movie because both institutions might as well have had a neon arrow saying BAD pointing at them through the duration of the film.
**I’ve lived in apartment complexes like the one depicted in the film and while they are fine places to live, they can seem dark and claustrophobic, especially when you spend most of your day in them.
***He was great at still being sympathetic and likable even while being off-putting and making not good choices. That’s a high tightrope to walk. Nomination-wise, I would have subbed him in for Johnathan Pryce’s Pope Francis.

Questions:

  • What do you remember about the 1996 Summer Olympics?
  • Kathy Bates’s Best Supporting Actress nomination. Deserved? Yea or nay?

Favorite IMDB trivia item:

All of the Atlanta Olympic Games logos in the film are missing the 5 rings. The International Olympic Committee denied the use of the rings for copyright protection and to “protect the use of the iconic emblem”.

Other reviews:

Richard Jewell

Ford v Ferrari Zooms and Drags

(The cars make that zooming sound repeatedly. The plot drags.)

Ford v Ferrari

The review:

James Mangold gives us a male gaze turned inward* with Ford v Ferrari and also spends a lot time filmsplaining.** If you can get past the very long plot*** it might be worth watching for Matt Damon’s controlled Carroll Shelby and Christian Bale’s puckish Ken Miles, plus Noah Jupe’s second very good performance in 2019.**** I found this to be overly tedious and exactly the film I was not at all interested in, but because it got a best picture nomination, I did my due diligence.

The Verdict: Skip

(Unless racing floats your boat in which case you’ve probably already seen this.)

Cost: $9.25 (but free due to gift card)
Where watched: Regal Cascade (a new theater for me!)

Consider watching instead:

Further sentences:

*While the male gaze tends to objectify women, the male gaze turned inward seems to think that everything men does is incredibly fascinating. Which is not the case.
**Flimsplaining. When a movie does this:
—-Character 1: I’m going to run the Quarter 30 in August
—-Character 2: But 500 men tried to run the Quarter 30 in August last year and all of them have failed! For you to do so would set a world record, bring you fame and fortune, and it would mean you can finally marry Lucille! You’re amazing, man, but I don’t know if it can be done.
—-Next scene: Character 1 runs the Quarter 30 in August.
***The cast of characters has to be assembled, the car has to be built, men in suits must be argued with, the qualifying race has to be won, the actual race has to be raced, and then instead of being over, the film keeps going.
****The first was in Honey Boy. This movie required him to pretend to watch a lot of things and he wasn’t the greatest at that acting task. But when interacting with people, he was great.

Questions:

  • Would you ever take a ride in a race car, as Henry Ford II did?
  • Can you think of a female-focused car racing movie?
  • What worked well for you in this film?

Favorite IMDB trivia item:

Matt Damon and Christian Bale agreed that the brawl between their respective characters was the most fun scene to film. Both have experience with extensively choreographed fight scenes that take weeks to learn so it was a positive change that they only had to rehearse the brawl for twenty minutes and weren’t required to look lethal while doing it.

Other reviews:

Ford v Ferrari

1917: Does the Movie Deserve Accolades?

1917

The review:

Sam Mendes’s 1917 is vacuuming up all the praise and it’s very good at being a tense war movie that is crafted as if it was filmed in one shot.* And yet, when we step a bit back from the cinematography shenanigans, is there enough story? I’m feeling torn, but I can tell you that I enjoyed both Dean-Charles Chapman** and George MacKay, *** I found one scene late at night in a town unbelievable, and I thought the depictions of rats was on point.****

The verdict: Good

(There will be much grumbling if this wins Best Picture. Not Green Book levels of grumbling—there will be no assigned reading—but grumbling nevertheless)

Cost: $9.50
Where watched: Cinema 21 with Matt, who enjoyed it.
(Also, I noticed for the first time a private screening area in the balcony.)

Consider also watching:

Further sentences:

*It was not.
**Although the preview clued me in about him
***He was the oldest son of Viggo Mortenson in Captain Fantastic
****Also, I’m quite happy to have avoided service during the Great War.

Questions:

  • What other movie razzle-dazzle (more easily created with CGI) do you want to see come back?
  • What would you lean on to get through fighting a terrible war?

Favorite IMDB trivia item:

Mendes says his grandfather Alfred, who entered WWI in 1916 as a 17-year-old, did indeed carry messages through no-man’s land, as per the mission in this film. His advantage was that he was only 5’4″ tall, and was often hidden by the battleground’s winter mist that usually hung as high as 6 feet. And after soldiering for two years in the muddy trenches, grandfather Alfred had a lifelong habit of constantly washing his hands. Yet, he never talked about his wartime experience until he was in his 70s.

(Short people for the win!)

Other reviews:

1917

Rocketman is Mostly a Disappointment

Rocketman

The review:

I had high hopes that Rocketman, Dexter Fletcher’s biopic of Elton John was going to bypass a lot of the biopic dreck and do something unusual* and these hopes were smashed on the shores of the very crowded Biopic Beach. So it is that we get much too many scenes of rock star excess** plus the movie’s jukebox musical format made everything confusing.*** I did enjoy the costumes (which are the usual perk of the biopic) and Taron Egerton’s performance, including watching his hair thin and recede.

The verdict: skip

(or watch it for the clothing)

Cost: $1.25 via Redbox
Where watched: at home (first movie of 2020!)

Consider watching instead:

Further sentences:

*This was primarily because of the interesting levitation shown during the preview. I thought there would be more magical realism in the movie. While I think the levitation did nicely get across the feeling of “that was the night that everything started and everyone there knew it” there wasn’t much magical realism in this movie.
**Props for showing some bulimia to augment the standard drug/alcohol tropes. Eating disorders often go along with addiction and it is very rare to see a portrayal of a man with an eating disorder.
***The jukebox musical format worked better in Blinded by the Light where the songs of a singer were sung and danced to by people who are not the artist who produced the music. When Taron Egerton breaks into Saturday Night’s Alright for Fighting” while playing at the bar as a teenager and all the patrons start dancing I am perplexed. Is the movie saying that song was written then? Before he met Bernie Taupin? Also, the framing device of Elton John’s story being told while in rehab is not used constantly enough. It was distracting.

Questions:

  • What’s your favorite biopic and why?
  • What films best use the jukebox musical format?

Favorite IMDB trivia item:

Bryce Dallas Howard is eight years older than Taron Egerton, who plays the adult version of her son. The age difference is of course explicable because the movie starts by depicting Elton John as a much younger child; the age difference between Howard and the children who play John at younger ages is a much more normal one for a mother and son.
(One again, I did not recognize Bryce Dallas Howard. She is so good at disappearing into her characters)

Other reviews:

Rocketman