All you need to know to understand this wonderful, poignant tale of life in Georgia (as in former Soviet Union) is in the credits; a special thanks to the choreographer, who couldn’t be named, but without whom the movie couldn’t have been made. That statement, which comes after the story, crystallizes it all.
Writer/director Levan Akin and newcomers Levan Gelbakhiani and Bachi Valishvili picked up a pile of well-deserved awards for their efforts. The two leads not only deliver sweetly nuanced performances, they can also dance…like, seriously dance.
This is a paced film that slowly unfolds and ultimately builds to its climax in the final few minutes of film. Sustaining that, and building the tension as it moves along is all very subtle, but effective. And without that effort, the final scene would have been cheap theatrics rather than an unequivocal statement. Forgetting the character relationships that need to be established, the audience needs that time and day-in-the-life moments to learn some history and culture to put it all in context.
This was a perfect film for Pride month, absolutely. But it’s also a great view into a world few will have experienced, even while presenting universal emotions and struggles.
I’ve been talking up Dark for a while now. And having rewatched it from front to back again, I plan on continuing.
The series starts as a fairly standard mystery and then rapidly evolves. By episode 1.3 you have some sense of the complexity. By the end of the first series your brain is likely bleeding. In the second series it only gets more complex and convoluted and yet…. either it was all planned brilliantly or retcon’d seamlessly because on every major point it holds together. There are some minor bits and pieces that are left hanging or glossed (and yes, I look at you episode 2.4). And I admit there is one choice in the series 2 finale that makes me grind my teeth as it wasn’t necessary for plot, but simply contrived to get a visual and then they got stuck with it. Then, at the end of series 2, you’ve taken a hard left turn.
But the big events, the important confluences, all work as one.
And here we are at the completion of the tale, series 3; it makes the first two runs look simple…in fact, the penultimate episode left me exhausted. More importantly, the finale brings it all together in a fair way, given the story that’s been laid out before us–the clues are all there. Even the title finally gets an explanation.
Ultimately, this is one of the best attempts to both philosophically attack and support a deterministic universe. There are characters on both sides fighting to defend and break it. And not a one of them is telling the truth. We know that early on, but never actually find solid ground till the end, when their intentions are truly revealed. Sure the science is, at best, fantastical at times, but not all of it. Some is well-established theory, and the mix of the two allows you to swallow the conceits in full; even when they get it horribly wrong.
One of the aspects that makes this series work is their, mostly, amazing casting. Only This is Us has come close to the need and quality of finding actors to portray characters at different ages. And, honestly, Dark has done it better. Some of the actors you will swear are the same person, just aged. It helps tremendously with keeping track of the story and the credibility of the plot. They also weren’t afraid to try new ways to work with the audience visually. Each series experiments with new visual cues and approaches to help you navigate the insanity. Series 3 even uses more than one approach over the eight episodes.
City of Angels is a richly appointed and complex tale of murder, espionage, love, and religious devotion (as well as religious hypocrisy), with a good helping of prejudice and capitalism thrown in. It is also topical and historically well done, resulting in a beautiful and brutal series.
Natalie Dormer (Patient Zero) is a revelation in 3 of the 4 characters (she really can’t pull of the white Mexican well). It is obvious why she took the role. Likewise Nathan Lane (Carrie Pilby), who gets to play to all his strengths from wry humor to deep pathos. Bouncing between them is Daniel Zovatto (Lady Bird), who serves as the main spine for the series. From the opening scene, he is the man in the balance trapped between outcomes. But until the moments, he is stuck in the gray. We watch him struggle to be part of some world, any world, where he fits and can live with the choices. And it is a compelling tension.
A number of driving roles keep it all moving as well. Rory Kinnear (Years and Years), in particular, has a many layered story to navigate. Through him we see duality in detail: humanity and the inhumane. It is done without any nod and wink, nor any apology. And Michael Gladis (Extant) provides a suitably vile and craven political climber in a world that he wants to crush before it crushes him. Even Zovatto’s screen brother, Johnathan Nieves (See You Yesterday), brings in a set of layers born of hopelessness and anger. It’s a little one-note, but it doesn’t lack credibility even when his ultimate choices are a little forced. There are some nice treats along the way too, like Patty Lupone (Last Christmas) in concert and Brian Dennehy’s (The Seagull) final effort before his passing in April (though he may have other footage still to come in a couple projects).
This time in LA, the lead-up to WWII, has been often visited, but rarely with the kind of scope this series pulls off. Usually you get hyper-focused stories, like Zoot Suit, or Chinatown, or any number of mystery/suspense/noir stories that pull apart the high and low of society, or the gay and straight. City of Angels navigates all of these aspects, and then some. And it does so in a way that makes sense and shows the connecting threads. For that alone, it is worth seeing.
However, while I loved seeing a different take on the era, I have to admit that I was also somewhat upset that it removed primary responsibility for the horrors from the humans. Dormer’s character, as the sweet-tongued devil in many guises, becomes the main impetus for all the action. She really does much more than talk to make it all happen, which is where the trouble lies.
In addition, there is a challenge with the plot decisions that bothered me. While the presentation of how LGBTQ people were treated and viewed in the era is relatively, sadly accurate, the series also has no LGBTQ character who isn’t, for lack of a better word, evil. Not just tragic, but actively doing wrong. That feels a shame in a story as big as this and one that has so many levels of detail. And particularly wrong during Pride Month. It isn’t that the characters aren’t human, they just all feel irredeemable.
But, ultimately, this show is so on target for the current situation across the country, the awakening and mobilization of frustration and anger, that it’s uncanny and upsetting. All in an intentional way. City of Angels marks a brick in the path that leads to its own historical volatile times, but it is also a reflection of the powder keg that is today. It insists we look not only at the past but at how we want to navigate the future. And it also forces us to admit the perils of not paying attention to those lessons. Despite its slightly rushed wrap-up and some of the dangling threads, this is a definite must-see for our times and, should these times move on, a must-see for the historic scope and lessons of the past; and yes it’s entertaining as well.
Up front, I am not and never was an Office fan. The humor just never worked for me…not that I hadn’t lived the cube-life at points, and not that I hadn’t seen a good deal of the truth in the satire. However, mean humor just doesn’t entertain me, it angers me. So, sort of counter-productive. Because of that, it was with trepidation that I entered into the world of Space Force. And it was pure stubbornness that I delayed and delayed this write up trying to watch more of the show even though it left me empty of joy.
What made The Office work was its core truth and that its audience knew, and had internalized, that truth. This satire has none of that advantage. It needed to find something more human for us to latch onto. Frankly, it reminds me of a lot of the issues Avenue 5 has.
The fact is, at least in this household, that despite a cast packed with talent, the show feels surprisingly lifeless. It has moments, but because it isn’t in a familiar setting, and because its inception itself feels like a national joke (something they lean into), it’s hard to relate to or support the characters. We may understand the military, but most of us don’t live it, unlike office life. In other words, we can’t quite grasp all of the intent and, frankly, based on some of the people I know, I know they got a lot of it completely wrong.
With all that said, I couldn’t make it past the second episode, even with John Malkovich (Velvet Buzzsaw) chewing up the scenery in a most satisfactory way. I tried. You may find it more to your liking than I did…humor is highly individual, afterall.
A fantasy about capricious gods and untrustworthy humans, even if there is a modicum of redemption, isn’t a great foundation for a tale. At least not an escapist tale. When the script, effects, and wire-work are also weak, it only makes it harder to enjoy. Add to these challenges the halting and rough rhythm of the story and I’m left scratching my head that this was from director and co-writer Kaige Chen. I guess everyone gets one wrong at some point.
Jang Dong-Gun, Hiroyuki Sanada (Life), Cecilia Cheung, and Ye Liu are the high points, such as they are. Each has moments that are satisfying, despite so many more that are not. These are all solid actors, but they can’t overcome the leaps, gaps, and forced aspects of the story.
After a bit of searching I found, perhaps, the reason for the issues. Most fantasies of this type are long..often over two hours long while this was only 1:40. As it turns out, I think my copy was the US released theatrical version which apparently was heavily edited. The extra scenes were on the disc, but at the time I saw no reason to torture myself any more by viewing them. But now I realize it may have filled in some of the plot leaps.
Now, this excuse uncovered doesn’t forgive the general concerns, but it may have smoothed out some of the aspects that were exacerbated by it. If you are compelled to see the movie, make sure you’re seeing the original version. But, either way, this was pretty much a disappointing miss for me.
I know, I know. This has been on my list for years, but I hadn’t gotten to it until now. And it was entertaining, if a little out of time (especially one or two very un-woke scenes that couldn’t be done now).
I have to admit, I’ve no idea what attracted director/writer Richard Lowenstein to adapt this odd travelogue of life through the eyes of a slacker. Especially as his main focus has been music videos for years. But something about the story spoke to him. I can’t say the characters or story spoke much to me, but the presentation and path of the story kept me mostly entertained.
Noah Taylor (Free Fire) plays it all with a flat, who cares sort of attitude, even while clearly wishing there was something more. And in his wake drift several people who keep washing up on his shores, for better or worse. Emily Hamilton, Romane Bohringer, and Brett Stewart continually bounce off Taylor’s character, changing with each encounter, even as he remains primarily unaffected and unchanged. But Taylor watches and clearly considers each evolution even when he’s unsure in what way to react to it all.
It has a resolution of sorts. It isn’t overly satisfying, or wasn’t for me, but the journey was amusing, if both dark and a little gratuitously violent at times. And I didn’t feel like it ever got to any substantial point (even if I did see the visual joke and commentary). This is definitely a movie that many will enjoy and just as many will find inscrutable. You’re just going to have to make up your own mind.
I know it’s a classic, but it no longer (if it ever) works. It comes close, but refuses to gel. Generally, the world agreed that director Jean-Pierre Melville and writer/adapter Jean Cocteau’s collaboration yielded an imperfect translation to screen. It made “classic” status as part of their bodies of work, not this particular work itself.
In all honesty, this wasn’t the movie I had intended to see. Way back in 1995 I was lucky enough to see Indiscretions on Broadway. That was an adaptation of Cocteau’s earlier tale and film, Les Parents Terrible. A story that was a much more interesting, funny, sad, and dark tale of familial life and emotional incest. Over the intervening years, somehow the two titles got munged in my head and I ended up queuing Les Enfants. The two are not comparable.
None of the cast in this film really had much of a career. There is the nice curio that Cocteau himself provides the narrator’s voice-over. But nothing much else about the movie stands out as a reason to recommend it. Save your time and find some other french cinema of the era to sate your education and/or curiosity. Or, if you want, something newer that reflects that era, like The Dreamers.
Like loving family, watching this film is a bit of an act of faith. Elyse Friedman’s script feels like it is going nowhere fun or interesting for the first 3/4 of the story…and then it all comes together in both expected and unexpected ways.
Matthew Perry serves as the reluctant patriarch for his younger, orphaned sibs: Ben Foster (Leave No Trace) and Ginnifer Goodwin (Zootopia). The three form a very broken triangle of humanity and reaction to grief. And, along the way, they find a way forward.
There are also some nice side performances by the three wives of the piece: Lauren Graham (Zoey’s Extraordinary Playlist) as Perry’s wife, Zoë Kravitz (High Fidelity) as Foster’s, and Hilary Swank (I Am Mother) as the neighbor.’s For Kravitz, it was also one of her earliest roles.
Director Craig Lucas, really much better known for his writing (Prelude to a Kiss, Longtime Companion), handles the oddities and extremes of the story fairly well. Some of the comedy is a little pushed, but mostly it is kept to just this side of uncomfortably real. And he manages to overcome some of the incomplete aspects of the script; the dangling threads of ideas. But, despite getting the relationships and characters nailed down nicely, Friedman’s script has issues. The title and opening explanation, in particular, lay out some very specific plot points that never get taken up. It is a complete mis-lead who’s resolution was either left on the cutting room floor or simply lost in revision and never fully corrected in the final cut for some reason.
Even with the weaknesses, if you trust it, the movie pays off. But, like family, unconditional trust can be tough at times. I’m sure neither Lucas or Friedman intended a physical metaphor for their tale, but they got one anyway.
There is nothing quite like a well-controlled French farce to help put a smile on your face. And director and writer Francis Veber (Dinner for Schmucks, La Cage Aux Folles) certainly understands farce. His main strength is almost always going for the understated response from his main characters, while allowing the peripheral ones to go broad. It keeps the entire story from ever getting too shrill or ridiculous, even when it is outlandish or ridiculous.
He also has a great touch for casting. Gad Elmaleh (Mood Indigo) is wonderfully comfortable with his life and choices, even when offered something much more. And Alice Taglioni and Kristin Scott Thomas (Tomb Raider), as pawns turned queens, provide some great moments as well as implying some deep backstories that we never really get to learn about directly.
There are many other amusing, smaller roles, some created by faces you’ll recognize from French and International cinema. They all add sparkle and entertainment, pushing the story along with many laughs.
For a bit of warm escape, this is a great choice…and also a good one to share with someone you care about. Pop the corn, pour the libations, and curl up together on the couch for a good laugh.
This skews rather young, but with some good moments, some (though not all) incredible animation, and a truly not-American story. Which is part of both its interest and charm. It isn’t a simple tale nor one that follows the standard Hollywood tropes. And, as a first feature by Yu Yang, it’s rather ambitious and delivers in a bit of an uneven way. But it kept me watching.
I also found little entertainment difference between the subtitled and dub versions. In fact, there is an interesting advantage to the dub. Even while watching the dub version, I kept the English subtitles on as they were often quite different from the spoken dialogue. Not just subtle differences…plot differences. It all added a whole other layer of intrigue for me. The legends and culture upon which the story is based have no touchstone in Western myth. The conflict in translation is fascinating.
And, as it turns out, this is the first part of a longer story…the next piece gets laid out during the credits. I actually hope the other parts are forthcoming. I’m curious to see how they can keep it all going now that they’ve laid out their origin story.