Search
Search results
Matthew Krueger (10051 KP) rated The War of the Roses (1989) in Movies
May 4, 2021
Love Hurts
The War of the Roses- is a funny drama. Micheal Douglas, Kathleen Turner and Danny DeVito are all excellent in this.
The plot: After 17 years of marriage, Barbara (Kathleen Turner) and Oliver Rose (Michael Douglas) want out. The trouble is, neither one wants to part with their opulent home. So begins a long war between husband and wife, reaching farcical heights that leave much of the house -- not to mention their lives -- in shambles. The couple's children (Sean Astin, Heather Fairfield) watch in horror while lawyer Gavin D'Amato (Danny DeVito) tries his best to stem the bloodshed.
Its a good film.
The plot: After 17 years of marriage, Barbara (Kathleen Turner) and Oliver Rose (Michael Douglas) want out. The trouble is, neither one wants to part with their opulent home. So begins a long war between husband and wife, reaching farcical heights that leave much of the house -- not to mention their lives -- in shambles. The couple's children (Sean Astin, Heather Fairfield) watch in horror while lawyer Gavin D'Amato (Danny DeVito) tries his best to stem the bloodshed.
Its a good film.
Leanne Crabtree (480 KP) rated Daylighters (The Morganville Vampires, #15) in Books
Jan 11, 2021
It's the end.
I feel kinda sad that this is the last time that I will ever read about Claire, Shane, Eve, Michael, Amelie, Oliver, Myrnin and the rest of Morganville. Over the last fifteen books the little town and it's residents have grown on me.
I've always loved Myrnin and I think I love him a little more after this. He's definitely memorable with his crazy fashion sense and his lab. The other thing that I loved in this book was the Glass House, it's always had a personality but the way it went about helping the gang in this one *grins*
I'm glad that everything worked out in the end, both for the humans and the vampires. A nice ending to the series.
I feel kinda sad that this is the last time that I will ever read about Claire, Shane, Eve, Michael, Amelie, Oliver, Myrnin and the rest of Morganville. Over the last fifteen books the little town and it's residents have grown on me.
I've always loved Myrnin and I think I love him a little more after this. He's definitely memorable with his crazy fashion sense and his lab. The other thing that I loved in this book was the Glass House, it's always had a personality but the way it went about helping the gang in this one *grins*
I'm glad that everything worked out in the end, both for the humans and the vampires. A nice ending to the series.
Gareth von Kallenbach (965 KP) rated Year One (2009) in Movies
Aug 9, 2019
I had no idea what to expect with “Year One”. Would it be another flop like “Nacho Libre”? How does Michael Cera fit into this kind of film? Could this be unexpected comedy gold reminiscent of the 1981 Mel Brook’s classic “History of the World: Part I”?
“Year One” follows the journey of two cavemen, Zed (Jack Black) and Oh (Michael Cera), through a comedic adaptation of early mankind. Zed and Oh are lowly members of their tribe rebuffed by the women they desire. Desperate to be something more Zed consumes the forbidden fruit from the tree of knowledge and is immediately out casted from his tribe. Oh joins Zed and the two begin a trip encountering fractured Biblical stories and characters.
Eventually our heroes are led into the lecherous city of Sodom, where they find the tribe and their ladyloves have been taken as slaves. As the two attempt to free the women from a life of slavery eccentric vaguely plotted comedy ensues.
The cast, filled with the usual silly suspects, includes Paul Rudd as Abel, Christopher Mintz-Plasse as Issac, and Vinnie Jones as Sargon. But do not expect their normal brand of comedy because it has been replaced with visually graphic potty humor.
The sets and costumes are well created but near impossible to notice when there is a pile of sheep innards being interpreted by Oliver Platt, who plays the High Priest. The few interesting one-liners fail to save “Year One” from an aura similar to “Austin Powers in Goldmember“.
Why after great films like “School of Rock” and “Be Kind Rewind” is Jack Black purposely trying to end his career? Moreover, why has he decided to take Michael Cera with him? As for Michael Cera this awful sort of humor is not going to lead him out of the valley of “Juno” fandom.
The flick is better than “Nacho Libre”, but it is not comedy gold. If you enjoy simple potty humor you should definitely see the film, but if not plan to borrow the DVD from a friend only to be happy you did not purchase it.
“Year One” follows the journey of two cavemen, Zed (Jack Black) and Oh (Michael Cera), through a comedic adaptation of early mankind. Zed and Oh are lowly members of their tribe rebuffed by the women they desire. Desperate to be something more Zed consumes the forbidden fruit from the tree of knowledge and is immediately out casted from his tribe. Oh joins Zed and the two begin a trip encountering fractured Biblical stories and characters.
Eventually our heroes are led into the lecherous city of Sodom, where they find the tribe and their ladyloves have been taken as slaves. As the two attempt to free the women from a life of slavery eccentric vaguely plotted comedy ensues.
The cast, filled with the usual silly suspects, includes Paul Rudd as Abel, Christopher Mintz-Plasse as Issac, and Vinnie Jones as Sargon. But do not expect their normal brand of comedy because it has been replaced with visually graphic potty humor.
The sets and costumes are well created but near impossible to notice when there is a pile of sheep innards being interpreted by Oliver Platt, who plays the High Priest. The few interesting one-liners fail to save “Year One” from an aura similar to “Austin Powers in Goldmember“.
Why after great films like “School of Rock” and “Be Kind Rewind” is Jack Black purposely trying to end his career? Moreover, why has he decided to take Michael Cera with him? As for Michael Cera this awful sort of humor is not going to lead him out of the valley of “Juno” fandom.
The flick is better than “Nacho Libre”, but it is not comedy gold. If you enjoy simple potty humor you should definitely see the film, but if not plan to borrow the DVD from a friend only to be happy you did not purchase it.
Rachel King (13 KP) rated Kiss of Death (The Morganville Vampires, #8) in Books
Feb 11, 2019
I think Rachel Caine could make a trip to the grocery store intoxicating, as long as it took place in Morganville. Kiss of Death introduced a wide variety of variables to play with by allowing the residents of Glass House a road trip outside of town, in the company of the less-than-companionable Oliver. Little did they know that they would not be truly leaving Morganville's craziness behind. From a near-death experience at a late-night truck stop to the destruction of Eve's beloved vehicle, from the surprising usefulness of Eve's brother Jason to the after-effects of Bishop's passage through Texas, Claire, Eve, Shane, and Michael were forced to fight for their lives and freedom from cover to cover, with barely enough time to throw out a few Buffy-esque quips to keep me laughing as I read as fast as I could.
The progression of the various relationships of the main characters were quite interesting. Eve and Michael's relationship is filled with angst and stress over their biological differences, but ironically still makes for typical young love issues. Shane and Claire's relationship lacks the drama of Eve and Michael's, but provides a solid foundation for the two in the midst of the chaos of their lives without becoming sickly sweet. Eve's brother Jason also seems to be in pursuit of redemption with the relationship he has with Eve, even despite his ignoble views about life in Morganville. The reader even gets a broader view of Oliver that shows he may actually have some concern for the lowly humans.
The town of Blacke and its inhabitants could possibly add a new dimension to the series that I hope to see in the next book, Ghost Town (Morganville Vampires, Book 9).
The progression of the various relationships of the main characters were quite interesting. Eve and Michael's relationship is filled with angst and stress over their biological differences, but ironically still makes for typical young love issues. Shane and Claire's relationship lacks the drama of Eve and Michael's, but provides a solid foundation for the two in the midst of the chaos of their lives without becoming sickly sweet. Eve's brother Jason also seems to be in pursuit of redemption with the relationship he has with Eve, even despite his ignoble views about life in Morganville. The reader even gets a broader view of Oliver that shows he may actually have some concern for the lowly humans.
The town of Blacke and its inhabitants could possibly add a new dimension to the series that I hope to see in the next book, Ghost Town (Morganville Vampires, Book 9).
JT (287 KP) rated Frost/Nixon (2008) in Movies
Mar 10, 2020
"Hello, Good Evening and Welcome”, David Frost’s suave and debonair talk show host, up against Richard Nixon a President draped in controversy while all the while standing firm in his beliefs.
It’s a political boxing match, and quite literally a no holds barred, gloves off interview that pushed the images and personalities of both men to breaking point.
Michael Sheen is fast becoming the go to guy for character transformations, having already stepped into the shoes of such iconic characters like Brian Clough, Tony Blair and Kenneth Williams. Here though it’s his David Frost that he nails without so much as a shake of his perfectly styled hair.
Not to be out done, Frank Langella portrays Nixon to almost perfection. Nixon was a man seemingly on his knees after the Watergate scandal all but ended his reign as President of the United States. He quickly resigned and was pardoned by new President Gerald Ford.
A lucky escape one might say, but Nixon felt he’d still done nothing wrong and was prepared to go on national TV to prove it, although he never expected anyone quite like David Frost.
Director Ron Howard acts like an off screen promoter as he builds the characters up from the beginning, looking at each sides battle plan as they tried to second guess questions and topics that might arise during four separate interviews to be blended into one.
The supporting cast are brilliant also, with Kevin Bacon, Matthew Macfadyen, Sam Rockwell and Oliver Platt all giving assured performances.
It’s a very well scripted and expertly directed film that will be easy for all to follow.
It’s a political boxing match, and quite literally a no holds barred, gloves off interview that pushed the images and personalities of both men to breaking point.
Michael Sheen is fast becoming the go to guy for character transformations, having already stepped into the shoes of such iconic characters like Brian Clough, Tony Blair and Kenneth Williams. Here though it’s his David Frost that he nails without so much as a shake of his perfectly styled hair.
Not to be out done, Frank Langella portrays Nixon to almost perfection. Nixon was a man seemingly on his knees after the Watergate scandal all but ended his reign as President of the United States. He quickly resigned and was pardoned by new President Gerald Ford.
A lucky escape one might say, but Nixon felt he’d still done nothing wrong and was prepared to go on national TV to prove it, although he never expected anyone quite like David Frost.
Director Ron Howard acts like an off screen promoter as he builds the characters up from the beginning, looking at each sides battle plan as they tried to second guess questions and topics that might arise during four separate interviews to be blended into one.
The supporting cast are brilliant also, with Kevin Bacon, Matthew Macfadyen, Sam Rockwell and Oliver Platt all giving assured performances.
It’s a very well scripted and expertly directed film that will be easy for all to follow.
Rachel King (13 KP) rated Feast of Fools (The Morganville Vampires, #4) in Books
Feb 11, 2019
This book picks up right where the previous one left off, right in the middle of the action. I love when books do that. I flew through this book as quickly as the previous three, barely taking time to eat or sleep. I would compare the infamous Mr. Bishop to Dracula - minus the romantic leanings. Nothing about him is remotely appealing, and he has no interest in making himself appealing, unlike the other two power players in town, Oliver and Amelie. Lots of subplots are developed, but this one felt like more time could have been devoted to these other elements and lengthened the novel a bit without sacrificing the quality of the text, such as exploring how Claire could wield the power of Glass House, the effect that Michael had on others when he performed, Claire's problem with her professor, or even Claire's parents reaction to the truth about Morganville. It feels as if there are too many characters in the script and not enough pages to give them all adequate time in the spotlight. I find the character of Myrnin even more fascinating in this book - he seems sort of like the dark town jester. I was also disappointed in Claire's lack of interest in her classes, given that she was so happy about her schedule change in the last book. The funeral of Eve's father seemed forced, like it was inserted in the plot as an afterthought, especially since we did not see her mother at the ball at the end of the book, even though it seems logical that Mrs. Rosser would try to use the occasion to make a specticle of herself, not unlike Monica Morrell. Wow, so I had alot of nit-picky things to say about this book, but I still really enjoyed it and I really like this series, especially the character of Claire, who has more courage and daring than anyone in the book. I look forward to the next one, Lord of Misrule.
Rachel King (13 KP) rated Ghost Town in Books
Feb 11, 2019
I have to say, I really hope this series never truly ends, because I don't think I could ever get tired of reading about the escapades of Claire and friends in the supernatural town of Morganville, Texas.
In this book, Rachel Caine uses a unique form of mass amnesia to show the reader what Morganville was like before Claire showed up, including many of the different characters that play a part in the series. After Claire is forced to fix the machine that protects the town -- which proves once again how big her brain really is -- amnesia and Myrnin-style craziness erupt in Morganville. Claire, of course, is the only one who correctly guesses the source of the madness, though the more people forget, the harder it is for her to get to the machine and find a way to repair it.
If a giant broken machine is not enough to keep Claire busy, Amelie and Oliver are also in a power struggle for control of the town that not even mass amnesia can stop. The power struggle also reveals an interesting twist in their relationship that could be useful in future plots. Allegiances are also revealed, as well as the roles that a few of the vampires play under each of the two heads' discretion. One abhorred character is also conveniently killed off in the middle of this power struggle.
The mass amnesia also shows how some of the characters are predisposed to behaving a certain way, even if they can not remember certain things about themselves. Michael and Eve still have chemistry, as do Shane and Claire, and Monica is still the same - though a younger, flouncier version.
For the most part, the way the book ends is almost exactly how I predicted it would be, except for one crucial detail that made my jaw drop in shock. I really need to get my hands on the next book, Bite Club.
In this book, Rachel Caine uses a unique form of mass amnesia to show the reader what Morganville was like before Claire showed up, including many of the different characters that play a part in the series. After Claire is forced to fix the machine that protects the town -- which proves once again how big her brain really is -- amnesia and Myrnin-style craziness erupt in Morganville. Claire, of course, is the only one who correctly guesses the source of the madness, though the more people forget, the harder it is for her to get to the machine and find a way to repair it.
If a giant broken machine is not enough to keep Claire busy, Amelie and Oliver are also in a power struggle for control of the town that not even mass amnesia can stop. The power struggle also reveals an interesting twist in their relationship that could be useful in future plots. Allegiances are also revealed, as well as the roles that a few of the vampires play under each of the two heads' discretion. One abhorred character is also conveniently killed off in the middle of this power struggle.
The mass amnesia also shows how some of the characters are predisposed to behaving a certain way, even if they can not remember certain things about themselves. Michael and Eve still have chemistry, as do Shane and Claire, and Monica is still the same - though a younger, flouncier version.
For the most part, the way the book ends is almost exactly how I predicted it would be, except for one crucial detail that made my jaw drop in shock. I really need to get my hands on the next book, Bite Club.
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated Taken 3 (2015) in Movies
Jun 11, 2019
Impossible to recommend
The first Taken propelled Liam Neeson to action man stardom and became one of the most surprising hits of 2009. Its successor to some extent managed to capture the same thrilling suspense despite its ridiculous 12A certification.
Despite Neeson’s efforts to shut the series down, he decided to return as Bryan Mills for his final outing, Taken 3, but can it hold a candle to its predecessors?
No is the short answer. Everything from Neeson’s phoned-in performance to the horrific camerawork and poor special effects ensure it becomes the first turkey of 2015, and by the end, you’ll wish it was you being taken – out of the cinema.
Taken 3 follows Mills as he tries to evade the LAPD after he is wrongly accused of killing his wife Lenny – played by Famke Janssen who wasliamneeson clearly more interested in the paycheque than anything else.
This is the first problem with the film. Showing the killing of Janssen’s character in the trailer makes the audience all too aware of where the film is going – destroying any suspense that you would expect from the murder of a series’ main character.
Maggie Grace returns as Kim, now looking like the world’s oldest teenager and is the only actor to leave the film with their reputation intact. Her performance is decent but the hammy, almost comedic dialogue she is given to work with spoils her credibility.
Taken-3-Movie-PosterA new addition is Forest Whitaker who plays the detective tasked with bringing Mills in, Franck Dotzler, though he again gives a career-worst performance.
As with its predecessor, Taken 3 suffers from a ridiculous 12A certification which means that Neeson is only able to look vaguely menacing. The action which was such an integral part of the first film is completely lost and becomes repetitive after seeing the 15th punch in a row.
Unfortunately, Oliver Megaton’s uninspiring direction only worsens things. Taking lessons from the Michael Bay school of cinematography, everything is ridiculously shaky, devoid of any suspense or tension at all.
The final act of Taken 3’s 109 minute running time alleviates the offerings somewhat but there’s a twist you can see coming from a mile away.
Overall, Neeson’s performances have always bettered some of the more average films of his career, but by the time the end credits role here it feels like Liam himself is fed up. From an incomprehensible script to bland performances, Taken 3 is a dire film which simply is impossible to give a recommendation.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2015/01/09/impossible-to-recommend-taken-3-review/
Despite Neeson’s efforts to shut the series down, he decided to return as Bryan Mills for his final outing, Taken 3, but can it hold a candle to its predecessors?
No is the short answer. Everything from Neeson’s phoned-in performance to the horrific camerawork and poor special effects ensure it becomes the first turkey of 2015, and by the end, you’ll wish it was you being taken – out of the cinema.
Taken 3 follows Mills as he tries to evade the LAPD after he is wrongly accused of killing his wife Lenny – played by Famke Janssen who wasliamneeson clearly more interested in the paycheque than anything else.
This is the first problem with the film. Showing the killing of Janssen’s character in the trailer makes the audience all too aware of where the film is going – destroying any suspense that you would expect from the murder of a series’ main character.
Maggie Grace returns as Kim, now looking like the world’s oldest teenager and is the only actor to leave the film with their reputation intact. Her performance is decent but the hammy, almost comedic dialogue she is given to work with spoils her credibility.
Taken-3-Movie-PosterA new addition is Forest Whitaker who plays the detective tasked with bringing Mills in, Franck Dotzler, though he again gives a career-worst performance.
As with its predecessor, Taken 3 suffers from a ridiculous 12A certification which means that Neeson is only able to look vaguely menacing. The action which was such an integral part of the first film is completely lost and becomes repetitive after seeing the 15th punch in a row.
Unfortunately, Oliver Megaton’s uninspiring direction only worsens things. Taking lessons from the Michael Bay school of cinematography, everything is ridiculously shaky, devoid of any suspense or tension at all.
The final act of Taken 3’s 109 minute running time alleviates the offerings somewhat but there’s a twist you can see coming from a mile away.
Overall, Neeson’s performances have always bettered some of the more average films of his career, but by the time the end credits role here it feels like Liam himself is fed up. From an incomprehensible script to bland performances, Taken 3 is a dire film which simply is impossible to give a recommendation.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2015/01/09/impossible-to-recommend-taken-3-review/
RəX Regent (349 KP) rated Wall Street (1987) in Movies
Feb 19, 2019
When looking to review a film like this, there are two distinct points of view to take in to a account:
The first being the contemporary context. That being that this was made in 1987, at the height of the Wall Street boom and that, at the time, this must have been a revelation for so many people, who still had either faith or ignorance about the financial institutions which had metamorphosed into the corrupt capitalist cancer which we all know today.
The later half of the 80’s was to herald the fall of the Gordon Gecco’s and this film, whilst reflecting its time, was also ushering in an era of doom for Wall Street, as well as the continuing propagation of this corruption which would lead to the 2008 crash which are still reeling from today.
So given that like so many films which have essentially whistle blown in there own time, Psycho (1960) also springs to mind, the impact is lessened by thirty years of dilution, in which case it would be unfair to judge the film harshly on the fact that it does not really tell us anything new today.
But when it comes to judging how well the film was made, that is surly timeless.
And considering that Oliver Stone put this together, I was disappointed. The characters where not only dislikable, which I am sure was intentional, they were also poorly written. People just come and go throughout and with the exceptions of Michael Douglas’ Gorden Gecco, Charlie Sheen’s Bud Fox and his real life father, Martin Sheen as Bud’s blue collar dad, the rest of the cast seemed to be wasted.
The plot was all over the place, inconstant and littered with goofs and continuity errors right from the get-go. In fact, it only took a few minutes before I was aghast that a film which begins in 1985 made a reference to Gecco’s ruthlessness by stating that he made money out of the Challenger disaster, which did not occur until January 1986!
Charlie Sheen’s character is difficult to sympathise with, not only because he is trying to be the villain, yet of course he finds his soul by the end, but that he is so utterly naive that it is beyond belief!
It is never clear how much money is being made, who has what or what the real gains or losses are by the end, to the point that whist it is implied that Sheen will be jailed for his insider trading, the film ends before he enters the court and Gecco, who has been recorded by Sheen confessing to his involvement, is never resolved at all!
By the end I was really annoyed by how shallow and lackadaisical the script was, seemingly only really interested in showing the power hungry greed of Wall Street traders at this time.
“Greed is good”.
Well, Mr Stone, so is some exposition.
The first being the contemporary context. That being that this was made in 1987, at the height of the Wall Street boom and that, at the time, this must have been a revelation for so many people, who still had either faith or ignorance about the financial institutions which had metamorphosed into the corrupt capitalist cancer which we all know today.
The later half of the 80’s was to herald the fall of the Gordon Gecco’s and this film, whilst reflecting its time, was also ushering in an era of doom for Wall Street, as well as the continuing propagation of this corruption which would lead to the 2008 crash which are still reeling from today.
So given that like so many films which have essentially whistle blown in there own time, Psycho (1960) also springs to mind, the impact is lessened by thirty years of dilution, in which case it would be unfair to judge the film harshly on the fact that it does not really tell us anything new today.
But when it comes to judging how well the film was made, that is surly timeless.
And considering that Oliver Stone put this together, I was disappointed. The characters where not only dislikable, which I am sure was intentional, they were also poorly written. People just come and go throughout and with the exceptions of Michael Douglas’ Gorden Gecco, Charlie Sheen’s Bud Fox and his real life father, Martin Sheen as Bud’s blue collar dad, the rest of the cast seemed to be wasted.
The plot was all over the place, inconstant and littered with goofs and continuity errors right from the get-go. In fact, it only took a few minutes before I was aghast that a film which begins in 1985 made a reference to Gecco’s ruthlessness by stating that he made money out of the Challenger disaster, which did not occur until January 1986!
Charlie Sheen’s character is difficult to sympathise with, not only because he is trying to be the villain, yet of course he finds his soul by the end, but that he is so utterly naive that it is beyond belief!
It is never clear how much money is being made, who has what or what the real gains or losses are by the end, to the point that whist it is implied that Sheen will be jailed for his insider trading, the film ends before he enters the court and Gecco, who has been recorded by Sheen confessing to his involvement, is never resolved at all!
By the end I was really annoyed by how shallow and lackadaisical the script was, seemingly only really interested in showing the power hungry greed of Wall Street traders at this time.
“Greed is good”.
Well, Mr Stone, so is some exposition.
Kirk Bage (1775 KP) rated Call Me by Your Name (2017) in Movies
Mar 3, 2020
There are a swathe of European film-makers like Luca Guadagnino and Paolo Sorrentino that have the skill to make every image they print to film look like a work of art, giving you the feeling you are on the most idyllic holiday you ever had. Watching a largely silent image of a beautiful lake or a tree in the breeze, or an al fresco dinner where family and friends talk freely whilst the wine and olive oil flow is a treat I am not immune to.
Continuing to catch up on Oscar nominated films of recent years I have missed, I went on holiday in 1982 Italy for 2 hours last night. There was culture, architecture, piano music, food, nature, and a big peachy dollop of sensuality – thinly veiled as dramatic cinema. It washed over me like a daydream! And if I say nothing really happens, I wouldn’t necessarily call it a criticism. It ambles along at such a languid pace at times, with such little conflict or incident, but to call it insignificant would be a disservice to the power of love at its palpable heart.
Essentially, it is a right of passage movie, that defies gloriously every hollywood habit of over egging the souffle. For minutes on end we watch Elio, the formidable natural talent of Timothée Chalamet, read a book, go for a swim, ride a bike, play the piano, or fuck some fruit, as he gradually descends into obsession, and ultimately love, for the older Armie Hammer as the aloof and seemingly worldly Oliver, his father’s research assistant for the Summer.
It feels for a long, long time like you might not care, such a tale of rich privilege as it is; but, by the final moments you do realise you have been drawn into the depth of feeling that is often hidden in plain sight, and that you may after all relate to the heartbreak contained in loving an idea of love and passion that is never attainable in reality. The self discovery of a passion within you as a life force is a melancholy reward in and of itself.
I know already that I must return to this film from time to time in a variety of moods, because it has a depth of subtlety that may catch me differently every time; and that is its main power. The key to which is Chalamet. His eyes and body language are so filled with hidden wonders that his words don’t always convey, that his work seems more like a strange dance than your average screen performance, that often simply takes the script and merely reads it aloud.
The remarkable career of Michael Stuhlbarg, as Elio’s father, is also noteworthy here. Take a look at how many great films he has now been a part of and gasp to think, oh wow, that is the same guy! His paternal speech to Elio at the end of this film was a highlight for me. Such gorgeous writing, that combines character with wisdom and weakness in a tapestry of care and regret. Just wonderful.
You know, I came into writing this review feeling that I had found the experience quite disposable and slight. That clearly isn’t the case. This is obviously a film you must watch again, meeting it where it wants to meet you. Not to mention I have always been a Sufjan Stevens fan, and found his contribution to the musical landscape near perfect. In conclusion, there is a banquet here masquerading as a taste of something sweet brushing the lips. I will be back for a second bite in time.
Continuing to catch up on Oscar nominated films of recent years I have missed, I went on holiday in 1982 Italy for 2 hours last night. There was culture, architecture, piano music, food, nature, and a big peachy dollop of sensuality – thinly veiled as dramatic cinema. It washed over me like a daydream! And if I say nothing really happens, I wouldn’t necessarily call it a criticism. It ambles along at such a languid pace at times, with such little conflict or incident, but to call it insignificant would be a disservice to the power of love at its palpable heart.
Essentially, it is a right of passage movie, that defies gloriously every hollywood habit of over egging the souffle. For minutes on end we watch Elio, the formidable natural talent of Timothée Chalamet, read a book, go for a swim, ride a bike, play the piano, or fuck some fruit, as he gradually descends into obsession, and ultimately love, for the older Armie Hammer as the aloof and seemingly worldly Oliver, his father’s research assistant for the Summer.
It feels for a long, long time like you might not care, such a tale of rich privilege as it is; but, by the final moments you do realise you have been drawn into the depth of feeling that is often hidden in plain sight, and that you may after all relate to the heartbreak contained in loving an idea of love and passion that is never attainable in reality. The self discovery of a passion within you as a life force is a melancholy reward in and of itself.
I know already that I must return to this film from time to time in a variety of moods, because it has a depth of subtlety that may catch me differently every time; and that is its main power. The key to which is Chalamet. His eyes and body language are so filled with hidden wonders that his words don’t always convey, that his work seems more like a strange dance than your average screen performance, that often simply takes the script and merely reads it aloud.
The remarkable career of Michael Stuhlbarg, as Elio’s father, is also noteworthy here. Take a look at how many great films he has now been a part of and gasp to think, oh wow, that is the same guy! His paternal speech to Elio at the end of this film was a highlight for me. Such gorgeous writing, that combines character with wisdom and weakness in a tapestry of care and regret. Just wonderful.
You know, I came into writing this review feeling that I had found the experience quite disposable and slight. That clearly isn’t the case. This is obviously a film you must watch again, meeting it where it wants to meet you. Not to mention I have always been a Sufjan Stevens fan, and found his contribution to the musical landscape near perfect. In conclusion, there is a banquet here masquerading as a taste of something sweet brushing the lips. I will be back for a second bite in time.