At Eternity's Gate - 3 stars out of 10

At Eternity's Gate - 3 stars out of 10

“At Eternity’s Gate” didn’t resonate with me.  I suppose that it is appropriate to take an artsy approach to the final years of Vincent Van Gogh’s life but it left me craving a clear narrative.  This film is more about painting a picture than telling a story.  A series of one-on-one conversations reveal Van Gogh’s perspective of the world.  These are sandwiched between extended POV sequences of him walking through various landscapes.  It just reads as a very boring 110 minutes.  The main draw of the film should be Willem Dafoe’s Oscar-nominated performance but this was the biggest letdown of all.  He is a consistently great actor and this comes with a very high expectation.  When you throw in an Oscar nomination that bumped out Timothée Chalamet for “Beautiful Boy,” the expectation rises even higher!  It was amazing to watch Dafoe recreate Van Gogh’s masterpieces but his acting was just average.  I much prefer last year’s animated “Loving Vincent” to this film and feel that it better captures the essence of Van Gogh’s life.  “At Eternity’s Gate” will probably fall into obscurity after Dafoe misses out on the Oscar and that’s okay.  Even though I love his artistic style, I would never have a desire to watch this one again.

[Pictured: If only the entire film could be as captivating as every sequence in which Dafoe paints]

Can You Ever Forgive Me? - 8 stars out of 10

Can You Ever Forgive Me? - 8 stars out of 10

"Can You Ever Forgive Me?” is a completely unique film that follows a writer forges letters written by famous writers in order to make ends meet.  The story is fascinating and the fact that it is a true story is an added bonus!  And yet, the most impressive part of the film is that it defies our expectation of a Melissa McCarthy film.  She has made a career off of shock-value humor and silly characters (even earning her an Oscar nomination for “Bridesmaids”).  However, McCarthy transforms herself into a bitter, unhappy writer that is truly unrecognizable in comparison with the rest of her body of work.  Her performance is very good but it is this contrast that will leave an impression for anyone that has seen her in any other film.  This could be a turning point in her career as she has successfully proven herself as a serious performer, particularly with her emotional monologue toward the end.  She is complimented by fellow Oscar nominee Richard E. Grant.  Their love-hate relationship has great chemistry and helps to make each of their characters multi-dimensional.  The screenplay adds just enough comedy to keep this crime caper from becoming too serious.  “Can You Ever Forgive Me?” probably won’t bring home any Oscars but hopefully the nominations are enough to put it on film fans’ radars for years to come.

[Pictured: This film is a great combination of lightheartedness and intensity, particularly this scene which will make your heart pound]

Bohemian Rhapsody - 9 stars out of 10

Bohemian Rhapsody - 9 stars out of 10

I am thrilled with “Bohemian Rhapsody,” a film that properly honors my favorite rock band of all time.  The film has been criticized for historical inaccuracies and watering down some of the R-rated escapades of the band but everybody needs to cool their jets.  It was meant to be a tribute, not an expose, and if it’s good enough for Brian May and Roger Taylor then it’s good enough for me.  Remi Malek’s Oscar-worthy performance as Freddie Mercury is stunning.  Every movement and line of dialogue carefully considers the way that Freddie would have done it.  The place where I’m torn is the singing.  The Live Aid concert sequence is epic in proportion and the integration of Queen’s music into every scene makes it a strong contender for the Best Sound Mixing Oscar.  There’s just one problem – the voice that we are hearing is a combination of Malek, Mercury, and another singer.  I find it disingenuous any time that an actor lip-syncs because there are enough great singers out there that they should have to, but I’m torn in this particular situation.  Freddie had such a unique voice that it would have been impossible to find an actor with the correct ethnicity, flamboyancy, and a voice that could even come close to mimicking Freddie.  When combined with the fact that Malek would have been lip-syncing to his own voice during these sequences anyways, I would have been more upset if the vocals didn’t sound like Mercury than I am that they incorporated his original vocals into the final product.  Even though this film is about the band, it is clearly focused on Freddie as the rest of the band members receive virtually no character development or depth.  But these actors deliver where it counts, and that is in the many musical sequences that occur in arena, recording studios, and at home.  Gwilym Lee is a literal clone of Brian May as he shreds the famous guitar solos, Ben Hardy has the most depth as drummer Roger Taylor, and Joe Mazzello is mild-manner like the real-life John Deacon on bass.  To me, the true standout of the film is Lucy Boynton.  She stole the scene every time that she was onscreen and I probably would have given her a spot in this year’s fairly weak Best Supporting Actress category.   I'm happy that it received an oscar nomination for Best Film Editing.  There are so many musical sequences that they could easily get boring but each one is filmed with its own unique energy that keeps the film moving as we learn the history behind many of Queen's greatest hits.  There have been many complaints that the only way to explore Freddie’s exploits is with an R-rating but I greatly appreciated the tastefulness used in telling his story.  “Bohemian Rhapsody” takes a few historical liberties with the band’s story but it drives the main point home: Freddie Mercury was a visionary who died too young but made an impact on the musical world that will never be forgotten.

[Pictured: These actors emulate their characters so perfectly that you'll think that you are watching archival footage of the actual band]

The Favourite (2018) - 4 stars out of 10

The Favourite (2018) - 4 stars out of 10

"The Favourite” irked me.  This historical film portrays Queen Anne’s intimate relationship with two women with plenty of graphic content but there’s a problem… it is a very slim chance that this is actually true.  I understand taking a historical liberty here and there for dramatic effect, but it is an issue to center your entire plot around a likely historical inaccuracy and pretend that it is fact.  At its core, this is a story about two influential women taking advantage of their friendship with the queen in order to control Britain.  It’s a fascinating tale of female empowerment but it gets completely muddied by Deborah Davis’ concoction of a love triangle.  She conveniently left out any mention of Queen Anne’s close relationship with her husband, not even showing him as a character at any point in the film.  I’m actually pretty surprised that a woman wrote this screenplay.  The presentation of the story is disrespectful to women from start to finish and the entire film was predicated on shock-value dialogue.  Davis was passing out crude language like it’s candy.  Despite the shortcomings of the script, Olivia Colman, Rachel Weisz, and Emma Stone all put on masterful performances.  Each one brings depth and emotion to their character and it’s no surprise that they all received Oscar nominations.  It was also deserving of Oscar nominations for Production Design and Costume Design, but its nominations for Picture, Director, Screenplay, Cinematography, and Editing should have been split amongst the many superior films.  Overall, Yorgos Lanthimos’ direction didn’t impress me.  I liked the Tarantino-esque chapter stylization but it didn’t add much to the storytelling.  The best part of the movie was probably the score, which was a clever series of Baroque classics to transport us to the 1700’s.  In my opinion, the content of “The Favourite” makes it unwatchable.  I hope that it is somehow shut out at the Oscars so that it doesn’t receive any validation for its crude content.  I can’t think of a circumstance when I would ever want to watch this celebration of shock, even with its impressive acting and interesting “The grass is always greener on the other side” message.

[Pictured: Acting, costuming and set designs were great, but it was like putting lipstick on a pig when you consider the horrible screenplay and frustrating historical inaccuracy]

Roma (2018) - 10 stars out of 10

Roma (2018) - 10 stars out of 10

"Roma” is more than another Oscar contender.  It is a piece of artwork in motion.  The film is a continuous series of examples demonstrating how energy can be brought to the mundane through cinematic artistry.  We often praise a film for incorporating an impressive tracking shot into the story (“Atonement,” “Touch of Evil”), but Alfonso Cuarón delivers dozens of them.  The film is three-dimensional, not in the sense that we wear glasses but in the sense that we find ourselves surrounded by the film thanks to the filming techniques.  The scene where Yalitza Aparicio turns off the lights and the camera circles around the entire room, the delivery room scene where the action moves from the foreground to the background and back several times while the camera remains stationary, the scene where the camera moves up and down the beach, into the water, and back to the beach again - these are all examples of how we move with the characters or sit with them as we see the scenes develop from their perspective.  And all of these scenes last several minutes without a single camera cut.  I knew that I was in for a treat when the opening credits of the film rolled overtop of a tracking shot that continues into the opening scene for several minutes.  The simple “waves” of water flowing in and out of the picture seem like an unnecessary over-complication for a title sequence and yet, they perfectly foreshadow the film’s climax.  It seems like Cuarón intentionally chose the most challenging film techniques just to see if he could do them.  And he ended up mastering them.  The camera panning is like a well-choreographed dance and the film will most likely win the Oscar for Best Cinematography.  The film was shot in sequence and on location, adding to the realism of the story.  Cuarón built this story around his memories growing up in Mexico City and it was literally filmed across the street from Cuarón’s childhood home.  The setting’s basis in reality makes it beautifully vivid and an obvious Oscar nomination for Production Design.

If there was an award for “Best Background Ensemble,” this cast would certainly win.  With Cuarón‘s long shots, we are constantly seeing secondary and extra characters in the background doing exactly the right thing when the camera reaches them.  This promotes the organic feel of the film, as if the camera wasn’t even there and everybody acted out the entire scene in three dimensions.  One of the most surprising Oscar nominees for any film this year is Yalitza Aparicio.  Her performance is filled with subtle emotion instead of the bold, impassioned monologues that typically earn nominations.  Aparicio was cast without formal training or experience in acting, which helps to establish the timidity necessary for her character.  It gives her an authenticity that comes out most in the beach scene where in reality, like her character, she cannot swim.  It is pretty rare for a foreign film to earn an acting nomination and this performance is much different than the few instances where one has.  Marina de Tavira’s nomination was equally as surprising, though her character had some strong emotional moments.  Almost everything in this film is perfection.  Almost.  We all could have done without the unapologetic, extensive male nudity while demonstrating martial arts.  The scene itself is crucial to setting up the events of the film and the group martial arts scene, but it would have been equally effective (though admittedly less memorable) if he had been wearing underwear.  “Roma” reminds me of films like “Boyhood” in that you aren’t really going to stream this one a few times a year for entertainment.  It is more like an event in which you sit down and absorb the film.  It can be intimidating for audiences because a 2+ hour, black and white, foreign film with subtitles requires a large amount of concentration, even if the dialogue is very simple.  Still, it is worth your time to take in this visual masterpiece from Alfonso Cuarón.  You can isolate hundreds of 5-second clips from this film that read as individual works of art.  They so beautifully capture the joys and tragedies of life and when you string them all together, the experience is surreal.

[Pictured: They said that "Roma" was meant to be seen in the theater and not at home on Netflix.  But sometimes, you can have your cake and eat it, too!]

Visions (2015) - 8 stars out of 10

Visions (2015) - 8 stars out of 10

In a world where most horror films follow a certain equation, “Visions” reverses the equation in a way that I have never seen before.  This direct-to-video is quite impressive and deserves a theatrical run.  The film follows a pregnant mother who is haunted by a tragedy from her past.  Sounds pretty standard, but the delivery is magnificent.  The setting is interesting, tucked away in the mountains for a feeling of isolation but at a vineyard that has neighbors close enough that the main couple frequently interacts with others.  The mystery develops at a pace that keeps us interested but gives us time to question where the visions come from, what they mean, and how the house factors into them.  There are a few big clues throughout the film that could give it away but the script withholds one important piece of information that renders the clues useless.  This provides us with that great “A-ha!” moment at the end.  The way that every single clue lines up in the final sequence is sophisticated beyond most horror films.  This amazing story is accompanied by strong performances that bring it to life, particularly Isla Fisher in the lead role.  Her character feels real but her distress over her past makes us question if her visions are real.  She is joined by Anson Mount as her sympathetic husband and Joanna Cassidy as the token in-tune-with-the-supernatural-world character.  I was particularly impressed with Gillian Jacobs and her impassioned role.  Jim Parsons and Eva Longoria are there to add big names to the cast list but they don’t do much.  Overall, it’s easy to disregard “Visions” at first glance since it never appeared in US theaters.  However, don’t pass on this film just because you’ve never heard of it!  Once you give it a chance, you will find that its sophisticated concept and execution aspire beyond most big-budget horror films.  This is a must-see!

[Pictured: Isla Fisher brings intensity to this well-written story]

The Wife (2017) - 10 stars out of 10

The Wife (2017) - 10 stars out of 10

"And the Academy Award Goes To...”  At first, I was annoyed at the prospect of Glenn Close winning this year’s Best Actress Oscar over Lady Gaga.  “A Star Is Born” was an amazing film with Gaga commanding the screen and it seemed like Close would receive the Oscar merely because it was “her turn.”  And then I saw “The Wife.”  This is one of the best films of 2018 and I don’t know how it has been neglected on the awards circuit.  Glenn Close drives this film with her powerful performance, bringing both timidity and boldness to her character.  It has an amazing pace that builds to that moment when she will reach her boiling point.  And just when we think that we have her figured out, her character develops another layer in the final scene.  It is truly an Oscar-worthy achievement.  While she has been celebrated for this powerful portrayal, where is the acclaim for Jonathan Pryce’s extraordinary performance?  He has barely been acknowledged and yet, part of what makes this film so strong is the chemistry between these leads.  His character strengthens Close’s character, not to mention that he effectively earns our sympathy and disdain.  There was certainly room for him in the Supporting Actor category.  The casting of Annie Starke was wonderful as she perfectly embodied a young Glenn Close and her quality of acting helped to strengthen our attachment to Close with every flashback.  I also loved the use of Christian Slater’s character to gently push the buttons of the others.  He is outside of the main conflict and yet, he is the key element that pushes each character over the edge.  This amazing character development makes me believe that the screenplay was deserving of an Oscar nomination.  Outside of the excessive profanity (which was not always necessary for the characters to express their frustrations) and that awkward opening scene, this story develops perfectly.  I was particularly impressed with its ability to mask the twist until a few subtle insinuations that provide that jaw-dropping realization.  Again, there was definitely room for this film in the Adapted Screenplay category.  I watched “The Wife” out of skepticism for Glenn Close’s potential Oscar win but in the end, my skepticism shifted toward the awards shows and their lack of recognition for this incredible film.  This is one films that is not to be missed this awards season.

[Pictured: Every moment of this film is carefully constructed to eventually push each character to their limit]