Recent Movies
Showing posts with label Biography. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Biography. Show all posts

Boy Erased (2018)

Boy Erased (2018)

Cast
  • Lucas Hedges as Jared Eamons
  • Nicole Kidman as Nancy Eamons
  • Russell Crowe as Marshall Eamons
  • Joel Edgerton as Victor Sykes
  • Xavier Dolan as Jon
  • Troye Sivan as Gary
  • Joy Jacobson as Brandy Vidler
Director
  • Joel Edgerton
Writer (based on the memoir by)
  • Garrard Conley
Writer
  • Joel Edgerton
Cinematographer
  • Eduard Grau
Editor
  • Jay Rabinowitz
Composer
  • Danny Bensi
  • Saunder Jurriaans
Drama
Rated R for sexual content including an assault, some language and brief drug use.
114 minutes



Released only months ago, Desiree Akhavan’s powerful period drama “The Miseducation of Cameron Post” is about a young woman who survives a Christian “ex-gay” conversion therapy camp she is forced to attend, after getting caught making out with a female classmate on prom night. Adapted from Emily Danforth’s YA novel, the title character of Akhavan’s film (played by Chloë Grace Moretz) has a strong conviction of self: we can detect only a faint amount of uncertainty seeping into her conscience while she grows into her sexual identity and wrestles with the traumatizing rituals of the Evangelical camp she bides her time to get out of.
On the heels of Akhavan’s film comes Joel Edgerton’s poignant, similarly themed “Boy Erased,” adapted by Edgerton from Garrard Conley’s memoir with the same name. Quite different in tone, structure and narrative goals, the two films surely don’t need to be compared just because they share a common topic. But the proximity of their release dates almost begs a side-by-side consideration. In that, it’s worth noting that Jared Eamons, the struggling teen at the heart of Edgerton’s film, doesn’t initially exude the same self-assurance Cameron Post does. In fact, Jared’s coming out journey, as charted in “Boy Erased,” aligns more closely with an LGBTQ person’s inner negotiation that Akhavan, who identifies as bisexual, talked about during a post-screening Q&A of her film earlier this year in New York. Akhavan said many people in the LGBTQ community come to a decisive realization in their own time, that the portion of the world that doesn’t accept them is wrong and they themselves are right.

Jared, portrayed with startling nuance and complexity by Lucas Hedges (“Manchester by the Sea”), finds himself in the thick of the aforementioned reconciliation Akhavan articulated. The son of a Baptist pastor being raised in a small, conservative town, the college-aged Jared is told by almost everyone around him that there is something wrong with him; that he won’t be loved by God unless he beats his homosexual urges. A kindly doctor (in a memorable cameo by veteran actor Cherry Jones) happens to be the only grown-up who privately tells Jared that he is a perfectly healthy and normal teenage boy. And yet, Jared gets denied his true identity by almost everyone else. When a soul-crushing sexual assault, the details of which he can’t bear to share with his parents but we learn as part of the film’s steady supply of flashbacks, forces him to come out to his family, his authoritative father Marshall (Russell Crowe) and initially obedient mother Nancy (Nicole Kidman) register him to a conversion program run by the impassioned, self-appointed therapist Victor Sykes (Joel Edgerton). Once under the daily, 9-to-5 control of the villainous Sykes at his Love in Action facility, the young men and women give up their phones and their larger freedoms, not permitted to discuss the details of their “therapy” with their guardians, who dutifully wait at a nearby hotel.

What Cameron Post, a skeptic from the get-go, figures out swiftly with the help of some equally strong-willed allies—that she has to pretend and play along for a while— Jared has a significantly more difficult time with, particularly due to a lack of guiding voices around him. An exception to this is his fellow camp inmate Gary (Troye Sivan, also the co-composer of the film’s gloomy original track “Revelation”), who tells Jared to fake his way through the program until he safely gets out. The alternative is ugly: the undesirable fate of being stuck with Sykes’ program full-time for a whole year is one Jared is determined to avoid. As he works his way through the emotionally manipulative curriculum and builds his family tree to look for the sources of his “sin” (that’s what Sykes calls it), heartbreaking suicides unsurprisingly occur just as they do in “Cameron Post.” To the script’s fault, the secondary members of Love in Action (one played by filmmaker Xavier Dolan), get little time of their own in “Boy Erased.” Still, the later one of the suicides especially leaves the audience heartsick—the episode creeps up after we watch the ill-fated character selflessly lend a helping hand to a vulnerable Jared, when he desperately calls his mother for help in a moment of deep crisis. In this impressively shot, escalating scene, Edgerton captures the panic-inducing entrapment of Jared with startling tension. For a few moments during that sequence, “Boy Erased” almost feels like a thriller.

And yet, the most emotionally arresting moments of “Boy Erased” are delivered through quieter scenes between Jared and his parents. In various over-the-top, true-to-character costumes, the predictably excellent and heavily made-up Nicole Kidman brings forward Nancy’s inner dilemma as a sweet, religious woman, who eventually leans into her motherly love, intuition and common sense with confidence. In an exceptionally measured performance that reminds us the fine actor that he really is (we almost forgot between misfires like “Les Misérables” and “The Mummy”), the scene-stealing Russell Crowe leaves a haunting impression as a conservative but soft-edged father, who is asked to question his bigoted values at last. In navigating the delicate storylines of Jared’s parents, Edgerton mostly does a decent job, conveying that they act out of misguided love and circumstantial concern. While left a bit on the surface and cut brief, the eventually rewarding transformation of Nancy and Marshall is what sets “Boy Erased” apart. However imperfect, Edgerton’s film aims to intimately speak with parents like them and, who knows, perhaps to even change their hearts for the better.


Fighting with My Family (2019)

Fighting with My Family (2019)

Cast
  • Florence Pugh as Saraya 'Paige' Knight
  • Lena Headey as Julia 'Sweet Saraya' Knight
  • Nick Frost as Patrick 'Rowdy Ricky Knight' Knight
  • Jack Lowden as Zak 'Zodiac' Knight
  • Vince Vaughn as Jake Roberts
  • Thea Trinidad as April 'AJ Lee' Brooks
  • Aqueela Zoll as Kirsten
  • Ellie Gonsalves as Maddison
  • Leah Harvey as Hannah
  • Dwayne Johnson as The Rock
Director
  • Stephen Merchant
Writer
  • Stephen Merchant
Cinematography
  • Remi Adefarasin
Comedy, Drama
Rated PG-13 for crude and sexual material, language throughout, some violence and drug content.
108 minutes
 
 
Can you smeeelll what the Stephen Merchant is cooking? Yes, while “Fighting with My Family” boasts a guru-presence cameo by Dwayne Johnson, a whole lot of funny talent performing athletic slapstick, and even some laugh-out-loud shade at Vin Diesel, the key to WWE Studios’ best film yet is the co-creator behind shows like "Hello Ladies" and “The Office.” Merchant’s mind for sharp dialogue and character-based comedy proves to be an essential muscle for this feel-good true story, which tells of how WWE superstar Paige came from a completely lovable wrestling clan and rose to international stardom. 

When Saraya Knight and her brother Zak are shown tussling as kids, their parents intervene—to correct the chokehold to make it more effective. Their home proves to be a charming atmosphere, where the parents, former-convict and current teddy bear Ricky (Nick Frost) and force of nature Julia (Lena Headey), love each other deeply. The family shares this positive atmosphere in their wrestling gym and indie wrestling league in their working-class English town, where they teach a band of excitable young kids how to pin, bounce off the ropes, etc. The two stars are the now-grown Knight children, Saraya (Florence Pugh), her jet-black hair and lip ring as definitive as her shyness and shortness, and the slightly hot-headed Zac (Jack Lowden). The Knight clan sees each other as equals, and when they do fight, it’s the good kind. 


One of the film's funniest scenes is early on, when the Knights meet the parents of Kirsten (Aqueela Zoll), Zac’s girlfriend. With Kirsten’s dad played by the comparably demure Merchant, the Knight family are true bulls in a china shop of delicate upper-class niceties. To watch Merchant interact with them is especially funny, while highlighting how this family has their own language, and that they can’t help but be themselves. Most of all, they’re proud of where they’ve come from. It makes for a very warming ensemble comedy, the quartet’s chemistry making a vivid nest that Saraya soon leaves when she gets a shot at professional wrestling. 


Saraya's steady ascent to WWE stardom with blood, sweat, tears, and personal branding (where she changes her stage name from Britani to Paige) then presents Merchant with a narrative challenge he doesn’t entirely pin down—how do you show a character’s progress arc in an industry where everything is fixed, not faked? He finds a solution in part by not forgetting about Zac when he doesn’t make the cut, and putting a lot of dramatic screen-time into Paige’s weaknesses—that she isn’t as strong as some of the other women, which her coach Hutch (played with tough love by Vince Vaughn) reminds her about. Worst of all, she gets stage fright when it comes to the essential act of talking trash in the ring. Pugh and Lowden’s full-bodied dramatic performances express the complete frustration and isolation within these shortcomings, representing hard-working people who are tempted to give up on a dream for many reasons. This eventually makes for moments in which the film, as unabashedly formulaic as it is, can be genuinely inspiring. 


But in spite of the many montages that show what wrestling requires physically, this movie is honestly about successfully branding yourself to superstardom, which WWE seems to be in denial of in pursuit of a classic athletic success narrative. Even though there’s a sense of those who simply do and do not have what Vaughn calls “spark,” there’s little explanation of that, blurring the potential of being able to root for someone to have “it,” whatever that is. The movie goes so far as to make its pivotal match seem like a fight won purely by strength, even though The Rock himself shared during the Sundance Q&A that while Saraya's first big match (known at that point as Paige) did have the same winner, he did tell her the result the night before, which the script avoids. It’s artifice in awkward denial of itself, and it cheapens the hard work of people like Paige, as much as we see her and her peers throw every part of themselves into this entertainment.


Packaged in part as a look back on executive producer Dwayne Johnson’s own success, the film begins with old wrestling footage of him as The Rock, and then jokes at the end about how he created himself a career outside of wrestling. It calls to mind how Johnson became a superstar by branding himself as down-to-Earth on- and off-screen, making him one of the most inspirational superstars you can follow on Instagram. You get a comforting sense that the WWE is following his lead: even though “Fighting with My Family” is undoubtedly about branding the WWE as a fantasy factory, its biggest strengths are its wit and surprisingly big heart, celebrating underdogs who rumble for what they love.


Operations Finale (2018) - Film Review

Operation Finale (2018)


 
Fifteen years after the end of World War II, Israel’s intelligence agency Mossad and security agency Shin Bet — led by the tireless and heroic agent Peter Malkin (Isaac) — launched a daring top-secret raid to capture the notorious Eichmann (Kingsley), who had been reported dead in the chaos following Nazi Germany’s collapse but was, in fact, living and working in a suburb of Buenos Aires, Argentina under an assumed identity along with his wife and two sons. Monitoring his daily routine, Malkin and his operatives plot and execute the abduction under the cover of darkness just a few feet from Eichmann’s home. Determined to sneak him out of Argentina to stand trial in Israel, Malkin and Eichmann engage in an intense and gripping game of cat-and-mouse.

On the surface, Operation Finale is the type of mid-range adult drama everyone saying we’re not getting enough of these days- a movie that largely understands it’s not going to play when Oscar season comes but is committed to bringing its best to the table.
The film boasts slick direction from Chris Weitz, who does a yeoman’s job more often than not even though he doesn’t get mentioned alongside big-name directors very often.

However, Operation Finale is really a two-hander between its double above the title leads.  The thrill in this thriller doesn’t come from the capture or the other less than accurate embellishments that the film turns to late to jog the adrenaline, but rather these two sitting in a bare room and attempting to gain a mental edge on the other with the highest personal stakes imaginable in a contest that will ultimately do much to define the history of their respective peoples.  It’s worth the price of admission.

The film tries very hard but ultimately fails at getting inside the head of Eichmann, offering up two different narrative flourishes in an attempt to do so that don’t make a ton of sense in context.  The way the Nazi-hunters (fairly quickly) get him to drop his cover story and admit he’s Eichmann hinges on deliberately misstating his SS ID number continuously until he pridefully or anal-retentively corrects them.
More curiously, the setup for those Isaac/Kingsley 1:1s is an apparently fictional need to get Eichmann to sign a letter stating he’s voluntarily going to Israel to stand trial.  While it proves to be the key attraction of the movie, its denouement still doesn’t quite seem like something a canny bastard like Eichmann would have done.

The supporting cast gets pretty short shrift overall, with talented performers like Melanie Laurent not given much to do.  Weitz and screenwriter Matthew Orton also jazzed up history a bit to make things more exciting in other fairly obvious ways besides the aforementioned letter, particularly the climactic airport shenanigans that are actually rooted in truth but which are strangely made less believable by how they choose to present the cause of the delay.  Of course, Argo was my favorite movie of its year, so…

Operation Finale is a competently delivered historical drama that really comes to life when Oscar Isaac and Ben Kingsley go head to head with the mind games.







#REVIEWSATURDAY - WON'T YOU BE MY NEIGHBOR (2018) - FILM REVIEW

Won't You Be My Neighbor? (2018)




“Won’t You Be My Neighbor?” presents the history of Fred McFeely Rogers, Presbyterian minister, children’s advocate and the most beloved Republican since Abe Lincoln. Like Honest Abe, Mr. Rogers was known for wearing a specific article of clothing and his ability to sweet talk a Congressman or two. From 1968 to 2001, Mr. Rogers kept millions of little ones out of their parents’ hair by offering a half hour program designed to counter the cartoon violence and frenetic pacing of practically every other kids’ show on the air. On PBS, he sang, offered advice and worked a cat puppet whose feline vocal tic drove my mother absolutely insane. 15 years after his death, the heroic endeavors of Fred Rogers are finally being celebrated on the big screen.

One of the many “stand up and cheer” moments in Morgan Neville’s enchanting documentary, at least for me, is when cellist Yo-Yo Ma describes his first meeting with the man who will forever be known as the proprietor of “Mister Rogers’ Neighborhood.” “He scared the hell out of me,” says Ma. I felt vindicated, because when I was a kid, Mr. Rogers terrified me too. He made me nervous, a condition exacerbated by my cousin telling me that he was actually a serial killer. According to her, Mr. Rogers lured people on his show and then decapitated them with the Museum-Go-Round.


Whatever Mr. Rogers was up to, watching his show made me uneasy; he was just too mild-mannered, too quiet and too calm. That felt odd, because the environment of my upbringing was anything but calm and quiet. My sister thought he was magical, though, proving that old adage about girls figuring out things long before boys do. Eventually, I came around to her way of thinking, and it only took 24 years before I realized just what it was that made Mr. Rogers so beloved and so effective.

More on that later. “Won’t You Be My Neighbor?” puts to rest many of the most common rumors about Mr. Rogers. It does so in the same blunt yet understated way that its subject dealt out information to kids. The “torso full of tattoos” rumor is addressed by showing Mr. Rogers swimming his daily mile in the local pool. To my chagrin, there’s no mention of on-set violence featuring buildings from the Land of Make Believe, but the film makes up for that by revealing the inspiration for the puppet who lived inside the Museum-Go-Round. It’s a hilarious moment that shows that respectable Mr. Rogers could also be mischievous—and petty!

Rather than rely on celebrities or viewers espousing what Mr. Rogers meant to them, “Won’t You Be My Neighbor?” makes judicious use of a few people closest to the man or his neighborhood. These include his wife, Joanne and their children plus castmembers David “Mr. McFeely” Newell, François “Officer Clemmons” Clemmons and Joe “Handyman” Negri. Negri in particular makes the neighborhood set sound like a riotous party, but everyone leans into the idea that, under Mr. Rogers' sweet exterior was a true radical. And maybe even a clairvoyant: In a clip from the Neighborhood’s first week on the air, the Land of Make Believe’s “benevolent monarch” puppet King Friday XIII issues a proclamation to build a wall to keep “undesirables” out!

“Won’t You Be My Neighbor?” makes this “he’s a radical” idea credible. After all, a troublemaking idea existed in the titular song that Mr. Rogers sang to the kiddies at the beginning of each show. Here was a White man inviting everyone to live in his ‘hood, regardless of color. “I have always wanted to have a neighbor just like you,” he sings, a sentiment that wasn’t shared by most Americans in the still-segregated era when "Mister Rogers’ Neighborhood" premiered. (Eddie Murphy’s brilliant parody, “Mister Robinson’s Neighborhood,” excerpted here in a brief clip, seizes upon this “Fear of a Black Neighbor” notion and runs with it.) But Mr. Rogers’ true genius was showing by example, and Neville highlights two memorable instances of this.

The first is Mr. Rogers’ early appearance before Congress on behalf of funding for LBJ’s newest creation, the Public Broadcasting System. Facing an adversarial Senator Pastore, who had already made up his mind to pan PBS, Mr. Rogers makes his argument by simply reciting the words to a song he had written for his show. Pastore folds immediately. “You’ve just earned your $20 million,” he says. You wouldn’t buy this in a Jimmy Stewart movie—and God help us if this had to play out in today’s Washington D.C.—yet you can find this fascinating footage on YouTube.

The second instance of Mr. Rogers leading by example occurs with the character of Officer Clemmons. As an African-American, Clemmons was at first hesitant to play a cop on the show, but he realizes the importance of kids of color seeing a friendly, familiar-looking face as law enforcement. Even more importantly, he participates in a bit where Mr. Rogers basically gives the finger to the notion of segregated swimming pools by inviting Clemmons to join him in a very small wading pool. Neville intercuts this scene from the show with footage of White lifeguards pouring bleach into a pool where Black kids were swimming.

Clemmons also figures in an incident where Mr. Rogers wasn’t so enlightened. Someone from the show discovered that the then-closeted at work Clemmons had been to a gay bar. “I had a good time!” says Clemmons, who was then told that any future bar visits would result in his termination from the show. I can only imagine which Land of Make Believe puppet got tasked with informing Clemmons that Mister Roger’s Neighborhood did not have a Castro District. (I hope it was Henrietta Pussycat saying “meow meow gay bar meow meow nuh-uh meow meow fired!”) But at least Clemmons informs us that Mr. Rogers “eventually came around” to acceptance.

“Love is at the root of everything,” Mr. Rogers tells us in an early clip, “or lack of it.” Like his fellow puppeteer and PBS colleague Jim Henson, Fred Rogers used puppets to deliver much of his message. His first puppet, Daniel Striped Tiger, serves as an animated avatar between segments because, as Mrs. Rogers points out, Daniel was an evocation of her husband’s childhood feelings of insecurity and his need to be loved. It’s hinted that Mr. Rogers was bullied as a heavyset kid—he was called “fat Freddie” and picked on, which may have led to his insistence in adulthood that a child’s feelings were as important as any adult’s. Folks are quick to point out, however, that while Daniel represents innocence, Mr. Rogers also does the voice of King Friday XIII, who clearly represents that adult need to always get one’s way.

Looking at “Mister Rogers’ Neighborhood” with adult eyes is rather fascinating. You notice that there’s a clear distinction between imagination and reality—we’re never lead to believe that the puppet segments are anything but pretend, for example. Mr. Rogers never talks down to his viewers, nor does he really sugarcoat uncomfortable things like anger or death. He’s very matter of fact, and his manner was deliberate, constant and repetitive. Which leads me to my moment of Mr. Rogers clarity.

Many years ago, I’d come home from my Wall Street job in a state of great agitation and upset. I was stressed out, worn out and miserable beyond measure. I absent-mindedly turned on the television and went into the kitchen to make dinner. For some reason, my TV was on PBS and I could hear Mr. Rogers talking from the other room. Despite paying only half an ear’s worth of attention, I suddenly realized what it was that earned the undying love of kids like my sister: Mr. Rogers made you feel like someone gave a damn about you. He said you were special. He did NOT, as the jackasses at Fox News and the Wall Street Journal claimed in hideous failure-blaming articles, promise you success or glory. He just told you that, no matter what you looked like, how able you were or how much money you had, that you had value.

I stood in my kitchen listening to this message, which I of course should have already known as an adult,  and I started to cry. I tell you this because I had the same reaction at the end of “Won’t You Be My Neighbor?” I sat in the critics’ screening room holding my notepad up to my face so that nobody would know I was sobbing. Now, if someone like me, whose childhood memories of Mr. Rogers involve rumored mass murder sprees, could have this reaction, you can only imagine what this film will do to you if you’ve always loved this man. Bring Kleenex. Lots of it.




An exploration of the life, lessons, and legacy of iconic children's television host, Fred Rogers.

Director:

 
 

Official Sites:

Official site

Country:

Language:

Release Date:

8 June 2018 (USA)  »

Company Credits

Production Co:

FRENCH BIO DRAMA AT MIDNIGHT - RODIN (2018) - FILM REVIEW

Rodin (2017)




To be caught up in the world of sculpting is a special thrill that “Rodin” offers, as much as “sculpting” and “thrill” might seem like contradictory words. Writer/director Jacques Doillon achieves this by focusing on a mascot for passion of the art form, Auguste Rodin, known for starting modern sculpture. Through his intense eyes, presented with the face of Vincent Lindon, the careful shaping of stagnant figures can be vigorous, sexy, and when this movie is especially good, hypnotic. 


Starting at his middle-age (and pointing out that he didn’t excel at his craft until after his 40’s), “Rodin” is no plain biopic, and it certainly doesn’t require knowledge of his work to get hooked on the film. It’s in fact best when it does away with historical details and feels like a film about an artist and their art form, who just happened to exist. Doillon’s script initially focuses on Rodin’s time crafting a piece on Dante’s Comedy, but it expands to his cameos from other famous artists: Monet, Cezanne, and Victor Hugo are just a few fellow creatives who are thrown into the mix. The story later tells of how Rodin’s sculpture of Balzac, deemed unflattering however honest, forced the sculptor to reckon with failure.

Lindon brings the same workmanlike energy that he had recently in “The Measure of a Man,” when he played a grounded, blue-collar man, who cared deeply about getting a job. But he neatly takes that gaze he brought to desperate Skype interviews to the intensity of a wild artist who thinks visually. From the start, Rodin and his other sculptors talk about the the art form as if it always involved five senses, and that they were capturing a moment of movement. It’s an exciting notion, even just to hear people talk about this stagnant art form with such passion, and Lindon vividly portrays a genius for that way of thinking.

As a narcissist who loves studying women’s bodies and making them pose, his relationship with them (all, seemingly) is chaotic. He has a life partner named Rose (Severine Caneele) who he has but discarded by the beginning to fool around with a rising young artist named Camille Claudel (Izia Higelin), thinking she will be his ultimate muse, and that her desire to marry him can be delayed. She does indeed inspire him, and they have excellent chemistry that makes this a horny movie about sculpting, but a plot thread of competitiveness arises as the apprentice threatens to beat the master. The two lovers ultimately create art that is evidence of their tumultuous passion. Rodin may initially treat her like just another muse, but Higelin, and Doillon, clearly do not.

Doillon’s filmmaking perfectly matches the passion of Rodin, like a musician biopic that feels like one of their songs. When he rushes out of one room to the next, the camera goes with him, and when he fixates on his sculpture, the gaze is still. The movie isn’t locked into his point-of-view so much as his energy, and it makes us all the more attentive that the camera is focused more on the expressions of the humans, not the famous sculptures they’re looking at.

And just as true to a film about a sculptor, Doillon continues the dedication to the practical tools of his craft, like camera framing and the placement of his actors within the frame. It’s not overly-precise but full of life, just like how the whites and grays of Rodin’s studio pop in a way such a color palette rarely does. With breathless compositions of Doillon’s own, the art forms of sculpture and film become one.

The film should almost come with an asterisk; yes, it’s all about Rodin, but Rodin as a subject is relatively incurious. On paper, he’s another macho rock star with clear talent and repetitive vices, looking for his next big hit. But this real life figure’s story isn’t singlehandedly what makes “Rodin” so enrapturing: it’s Doillon’s messy, non-precious handling as a screenwriter, and the gorgeous images he sculpts himself as a director. And it’s in the way Lindon shows a constant fire in his soul to create beauty. “Rodin” quietly defies biopic convention by showing that a great biopic does not need a great hero, so much as a vision and an immense passion.  



An account of the famous French sculptor's romance with Camille Claudel.

Director:

Writer:

Stars:


Country:

| |

Language:

Release Date:

24 May 2017 (France)  »

Also Known As:

Роден  »

Company Credits

Production Co:


THE MERCY (2018) - FILM REVIEW

The Mercy (2018)


The incredible story of amateur sailor Donald Crowhurst and his solo attempt to circumnavigate the globe. The struggles he confronted on the journey while his family awaited his return is one of the most enduring mysteries of recent times.

Director:

Writer:

Stars:


The incredible story of Donald Crowhurst , an amateur sailor who competed in the 1968 Sunday Times Golden Globe Race in the hope of becoming the first person in history to single-handedly circumnavigate the globe without stopping. With an unfinished boat and his business and house on the line, Donald leaves his wife, Clare and their children behind, hesitantly embarking on an adventure on his boat the Teignmouth Electron. The story of Crowhurst's dangerous solo voyage and the struggles he confronted on the epic journey while his family awaited his return is one of the most enduring mysteries of recent times.

Country:

Release Date:

2018 (USA)  »

Also Known As:

Deep Water  »

Filming Locations:

 »

Company Credits

Production Co:

,  »
Show more on  »

Technical Specs

Runtime:

Aspect Ratio:

2.35 : 1

Did You Know?

Trivia

One of two biopics about Donald Crowhurst slated for release in the UK only a few weeks apart. The other, the independently produced Crowhurst (2017), starring Justin Salinger as Donald Crowhurst, was finished earlier, but the distributor of The Mercy bought it and delayed its release until a month after that of this film.

A handsome period bio-drama about the doomed final voyage of yachtsman and fraudster Donald Crowhurst, The Mercy comes with an illustrious Britfilm pedigree. The director is James Marsh, whose credits include Oscar-winning documentary Man on Wire and acclaimed Stephen Hawking biopic The Theory of Everything. Colin Firth and Rachel Weisz headline the cast. And yet this unresolved maritime mystery feels oddly flat and functional, diluting a tragic tale full of unanswered questions into an anodyne middlebrow weepie. It opens on U.K. and Irish screens later this week, with a staggered global rollout to follow.

With its evergreen dramatic themes of grand ambition, financial desperation and human folly, Crowhurst’s story has already inspired stage plays, novels, poems, documentaries and even operas. Another big-screen treatment of the same story, Simon Rumley’s indie psycho-thriller Crowhurst, is also set to bow in the coming months. In a bold tactical move, The Mercy co-producers Studiocanal have also bought the rights to Rumley’s film, agreeing to release it soon after their bigger-budget rival version plays in theaters.
In 1968, Britain's Sunday Times newspaper launches its Golden Globe Race offering big cash prizes for the first ever single-handed, around-the-world, non-stop sailing voyage. Both the first and the fastest competitors will win £5000 each, the equivalent of around $80,000 today. An amateur sailor with four young children and mounting debts, Crowhurst (Firth) signs up for the race, hoping to reverse his bad luck and promote his current venture, an electronic nautical navigation device. Striking a high-stakes funding deal with businessman Stanley Best (Ken Stott), he sets to work preparing an innovative triple-hulled yacht for the race, the Teignmouth Electron.

Despite his own last-minute doubts, the reservations of wife Clare (Weisz) and ominous technical issues with his experimental boat, Crowhurst finally sets out to sea in late October. But his plans unravel almost immediately, falling far behind the competition. In an increasingly desperate state, with no hope of winning, he makes the fateful decision to abandon the race, lingering off the coast of South America and filing fake journey logs charting his fictional progress. He even makes landfall in Argentina, breaking the rules of the race, a detour that Marsh turns into a welcome injection of farcical human drama.
By early July 1969, after eight months of almost total solitude, and facing near certain financial ruin if he returns to Britain, Crowhurst suffers some kind of mental breakdown. He begins writing florid, delusional, quasi-religious screeds in his journals, one of which provides The Mercy with its title. His disappearance on the lonely high seas, most likely a suicide, is presented by Marsh in a suitably vague, symbolic manner. His unmanned yacht was found intact and adrift in the Atlantic on July 10,1969, but his fate remains an unsolved mystery almost half a century later.

Peppered with tender flashbacks to conversations between Crowhurst and his family, The Mercy frames this story primarily as a heart-tugging personal tragedy. Which of course it was, on one level, but Marsh’s conventional bio-drama approach does not yield great rewards cinematically. A bolder retelling of these strange events might have found richer psychological, political or social dimensions to Crowhurst’s disastrous failed mission.

To his credit, Marsh moves the story along at a breezy pace and milks maximum eerie effect from the sense-warping oddness of being out alone on the vast ocean, assailed by a constant soundtrack of creaks and cracks and slapping waves. In a departure from Rumley’s film, which had strong psychological horror undertones, The Mercy depicts Crowhurst’s descent into hallucinatory madness in relatively restrained, poetic terms. But while the two pictures vary wildly in tone and style, both ultimately struggle to resolve the same dilemma: There is little inherently dramatic about watching one man going progressively insane inside the cramped cabin of a sailing boat.

Firth’s performance, reliably solid but low on emotional intensity, only reinforces this general flatness of mood. David Thewlis brings some much-needed comic fizz as Crowhurst’s bumptious press agent, but Weisz’s acting skills are shamefully underused in her handful of bland vignettes as a passive, dutiful spouse.
The Mercy makes Crowhurst more hero than anti-hero, laying the brunt of blame for his death on arm-twisting business partners and sensation-hungry media vultures rather than on his own reckless adventurism. “Last week you were selling hope, now you are selling blame,” Clare angrily berates reporters when tragedy strikes. This soapy, simplistic line encapsulates a key problem of Marsh’s film, which constantly seeks the dry land of moral clarity where there is only an unfathomable ocean of uncertainty.



WINCHESTER (2018) - FILM REVIEW

Winchester (2018)

 
 

Eccentric firearm heiress believes she is haunted by the souls of people killed by the Winchester repeating rifle.

Writers:

(re-writes), (re-writes) | 1 more credit »

Stars:

, ,
 
Inspired by true events. On an isolated stretch of land 50 miles outside of San Francisco sits the most haunted house in the world. Built by Sarah Winchester, (Academy Award®-winner Helen Mirren) heiress to the Winchester fortune, it is a house that knows no end. Constructed in an incessant twenty-four hour a day, seven day a week mania for decades, it stands seven stories tall and contains hundreds of rooms. To the outsider it looks like a monstrous monument to a disturbed woman's madness. But Sarah is not building for herself, for her niece (Sarah Snook) or for the brilliant Doctor Eric Price (Jason Clarke) whom she has summoned to the house. She is building a prison, an asylum for hundreds of vengeful ghosts, and the most terrifying among them have a score to settle with the Winchesters. 
 

Official Sites:

Country:

|

Language:

Release Date:

2 February 2018 (USA)  »

Also Known As:

The 13th Hour  »

Filming Locations:

 »

Box Office

Opening Weekend USA:

$9,307,626, 4 February 2018, Wide Release

Gross USA:

$9,307,626, 4 February 2018
See more on IMDbPro »

Company Credits

Production Co:

,  
 
The first few jump scares seem to set the tone for the cheesy but fun ghost story "Winchester." These eye-roll-inducing shocks bring to mind the humor in the films of horror-comedy gods Peter Jackson and Sam Raimi, both of whom infuse slapstick humor into otherwise by-the-number shock scares. Still, it's hard to know if you're supposed to laugh at the first few ghosts that appear in "Winchester," a period film set in a haunted San Jose mansion just before the Great Earthquake of 1906. The finger that suddenly appears out of a hole in the wall? Or the kid armed with a pitchfork? Or how about that one stray roller skate? Are any of these things supposed to be funny?

Most signs initially point to "yes." Brotherly director duo Michael and Peter Spierig ("Predestination," "Daybreakers") and their co-writer Tom Vaughan leave many suspicious little bread crumbs throughout laudanum-addicted psychiatrist Eric Price's (Jason Clarke) investigation into the sanity of Winchester rifle heiress Sarah Winchester (Helen Mirren). Maybe you see the signs, too: a familiar face here, a telling coincidence there, or just the generally peculiar (and forceful) reversal of expected roles between Eric's doctor and Sarah's patient. Regardless of how actively disoriented you are by them: the first few jump scares are fittingly misleading. They suggest you're either about to see a tongue-in-cheek, or earnestly dumb cash-in on the post-"Insidious"/"The Conjuring" trend of jump-scare-intensive, sub-"Poltergiest III" haunted house films. Thankfully, while "Winchester" is definitely trashy and fairly dumb, the Spierigs are also sincere and technically accomplished enough to lean into their story's tackiest elements and carry them off with gusto.

Like "The Exorcist" before it, "Winchester" follows a head-shrinker of little faith who eventually abandons his doubts and embraces his latent superstitions. Unlike "The Exorcist," "Winchester" is completely corny. Case in point: Eric lost his wife under mysterious circumstances and now literally carries that baggage with him everywhere in the form of a rifle cartridge he engraved with the words "Together Forever." Eric's past is a weakness that Sarah and her otherworldly tormentors prey upon. But it's nothing compared to Sarah's preposterous but almost true backstory: she's using a $20 million inheritance to build a house whose design is dictated to her whenever she's possessed by visiting spirits at the stroke of midnight. Each new room in the Winchester mansion is made to look just like the room where the next random visiting ghost died. Unfortunately, the Winchester company thinks Sarah is too crazy to continue being their leader, and now want a doctor to confirm what they already know.

While "Winchester" is loosely based on a true story, the film is never too close to reality. Eric ultimately must resolve his residual dead-wife-related guilt if he's going to overcome his skepticism about Sarah's ghost situation. This suggests that the only surprise "Winchester" holds for viewers is waiting to see whether the Spierigs and Vaughan will attempt an elaborate twist ending, as the screenwriters of "Jigsaw," the Spierigs' last film, did, or just confirm what you probably already know about Sarah's paranormal situation. The cynic in me repeatedly wondered: is Sarah lying because the filmmakers are nuts, or is she telling the truth because they're that creatively bankrupt?

Thankfully, "Winchester" leveled my unfair expectations simply by being silly and fun. Most of the film is genuinely atmospheric, thanks especially to the omnipresent construction noises (hammers on chisels, saws through planks) that surround the house. And there are some well-choreographed setpieces, particularly the one where a rifle slowly but surely fires right next to Mirren's head. Clarke gives one of his best performances to date, and even the expository dialogue is florid enough to be enjoyable. Finally: who could resist an eccentrically baroque haunted house brought to life without computer-generated imagery? What "Winchester" lacks in originality its creators make up for in execution.


Thanks for reading and have fun watching movies.
 

THE KIDNAPPING OF 16 YEARS OLD JOHN PAUL GETT III - ALL THE MONEY IN THE WORLD - FILM REVIEW

All the Money in the World (2017)


 
The story of the kidnapping of 16-year-old John Paul Getty III and the desperate attempt by his devoted mother to convince his billionaire grandfather Jean Paul Getty to pay the ransom.

Director:

Writers:

, (based on the book by)

Stars:



Rome, 1973. Masked men kidnap a teenage boy named John Paul Getty III (Charlie Plummer). His grandfather, Jean Paul Getty (Christopher Plummer), is the richest man in the world, a billionaire oil magnate, but he's notoriously miserly. His favorite grandson's abduction is not reason enough for him to part with any of his fortune. All the Money in the World (2017) follows Gail, (Michelle Williams), Paul's devoted, strong-willed mother, who unlike Getty, has consistently chosen her children over his fortune. Her son's life in the balance with time running out, she attempts to sway Getty even as her son's mob captors become increasingly more determined, volatile and brutal. When Getty sends his enigmatic security man Fletcher Chace (Mark Wahlberg) to look after his interests, he and Gail become unlikely allies in this race against time that ultimately reveals the true and lasting value of love over money.

Country:

Language:

Release Date:

25 December 2017 (USA)  »

Also Known As:

Todo el dinero del mundo  »

Filming Locations:

 »

Box Office

Opening Weekend USA:

$5,584,684, 31 December 2017, Wide Release

Gross USA:

$14,342,632, 1 January 2018

Cumulative Worldwide Gross:

$16,042,632, 1 January 2018

Company Credits

Show more on  »

Technical Specs

Runtime:

Sound Mix:

Color:

Aspect Ratio:

2.39 : 1

Did You Know?

Trivia

For the opening sequence director Ridley Scott rehashed a segment of Federico Fellini's La Dolce Vita (1960). See more »

Connections

Referenced in Good Morning Britain: Episode dated 9 November 2017 (2017) See more »

Soundtracks

Tarantella
Written by Alan Lomax
Performed by Domenica Arlotta and Giuseppe Buieti
Courtesy of Rounder Records
A Division of Concord Music 



“All the Money in the World” is brutal and funny in the darkest way. The dark humor comes from John Paul Getty’s attitude toward his fortune. He’s so miserly he makes Ebenezer Scrooge look generous. Naturally, he’s the real target here; he would have to be, considering Gail is just another middle class single woman who barely has two nickels to rub together, thanks to her decision to decline Getty family funds in exchange for keeping custody of her kids after divorcing the old man’s drug addicted son. “All the Money in the World” would be ten minutes long if grandpa would just pay what the criminals are asking for the release of his grandson—$17 million—instead of hemming and hawing and trying to get the price down. 

Grandpa has reasons for haggling—not good ones, but reasons. Ultimately, though, he just seems like he’s not wired right. His grandson’s opening narration suggests that rich people aren’t actually like you and me—that money has deformed their minds—but the elder Getty’s behavior is so repugnant on so many levels, and so profoundly dislocated from anything resembling empathy, that money alone doesn’t strike me as the best explanation for his actions. I don’t know if this is an unresolved complication, a basic failing of the screenplay, or a dimension that Scott and/or Plummer added to the role during shooting. 

If the latter, however, what’s onscreen is more interesting than the younger Getty’s diagnosis, because it means we’re watching an emotionally stunted and perhaps mentally ill person with access to billions allow a blood relative to suffer just so that he can save a few bucks. In other words, it’s not the money, it’s him. To most of us, the stated ransom is an unimaginably huge amount, but to somebody like Getty, it’s the equivalent of the coins hidden under sofa cushions. We’d do whatever it took to save a loved one in similar circumstances, but John Paul the First has such an oversized dealmaker’s ego that he won’t take out his checkbook unless the terms are just right.
Gail’s tactical restraint when confronted with her former father-in-law’s iciness is commendable, and Williams plays it just right, letting us see Gail’s anger and frustration while making us believe that she could tamp it down out of sight when dealing with the elder Getty and his associates. What astonishing discipline this woman had! The old cheapskate acts as if this is all just a large-scale version of saving eight bucks buying a statue at a flea market. John Paul III could be murdered or tortured as a result of the stubbornness of an old man who prides himself on never meeting the first offer, and trying to save money on everything, even a transaction as basic as sending out laundry while staying in a five-star hotel (he washes and dries his own sheets to shave a few bucks off his tab). 

Scott is relatively restrained here, letting his stars carry the day and declining to unleash the full force of his directorial power except in a handful of intricate setpieces (I won’t specify which ones here, because I doubt anyone but students of the Getty family history know all the details, and a couple of them are genuinely surprising). A certain monotony sets in during the middle section, which replays too many similar beats too close together—if the script were looking to combine or cut incidents, this would’ve been the place to do it—but on the whole this is a more-than-solid effort. 
It’s also a throwback of sorts. Adapted by screenwriter David Scarpa from John Pearson's 1995 book Painfully Rich: The Outrageous Fortunes and Misfortunes of the Heirs of J. Paul Getty, it has a welcome 1970s flavor, by which I mean that it’s about recognizable human beings dealing with tense situations that feel real because they happened. The story is told in classically shaped scenes with beginnings, middles and ends, and shot mostly in real locations. The wide-format cinematography creates tension by shoving characters off to one side or boxing them inside doorways or windows and letting you wonder what unseen threats might be lurking in the rest of the frame. 

As is often the case in his non-science fiction movies, Scott splits the difference between overwhelming, almost tactile-seeming realness, and pure, uncut Hollywood fantasy, and you just have to roll with it. There’s a standard disclaimer at the end of the film, stating that certain liberties were taken with the historical record. I’d imagine that a lot of them had to do with placing Gail and her partner in misery, Getty's business manager and former CIA operative Fletcher Chase (Mark Wahlberg, who isn’t terrible but does not radiate intelligence and ultimately makes no particular impression). The movie often puts the duo at the sites of dangerous activities that they probably didn’t get anywhere near in real life.  

The film is a testament to the awesome work ethic of its 80-year old but still apparently tireless director, who fired Kevin Spacey, the actor who had originally played Getty, a month before the scheduled release date, after Spacey was accused of multiple accounts of sexual misconduct, deleted all of his footage, reshot the affected scenes with Plummer in the role and dropped them into the finished movie. This is not the best place to get into the particulars of the production—they’ll be nothing more than a footnote or asterisk in a couple of decades anyway—but they’re worth noting because the end product is much better than anyone could have expected, considering the challenges faced and met by all involved. 

In fact I wouldn’t be surprised if Plummer got another Oscar for this part. If he does, it shouldn’t be seen merely as an acknowledgment of good work under weird and unfortunate circumstances, but as recognition of how precise and fearless he is. There is nothing likable about the elder Getty, indeed very little that’s recognizable as anything but evidence of profound, maddening dysfunction. Plummer embodies the character so completely that his Getty transcends the movie he’s in, and starts to seem emblematic of the times in which the film was released, an era when money seems to matter more than mercy. 


Thanks for reading and have fun watching movies.
 
Copyright © 2017. MOVIETOWN
Blogger Templates