Saturday, 23 November 2024

Thelma (Josh Margolin, 2024)

After she is the victim of a phone scam, 93-year-old Thelma (June Squibb) goes on the trial of the perpetrators.



When I read the premise for this movie, I saw it going in either of two directions: A full-on genre parody or a straight action/vigilante movie.


While aware of the genre it is drawing on, Thelma’s forte is understatement - it grounds itself in the realities of being 93 in the 2020s.


Obstacles are as mundane as tripping on a fallen lamp or slipping while climbing stairs.


The stakes are so small but relatable: She wants to remain independent, and her quest is ultimately about our heroine proving she has control of her life choices.


Richard Roundtree plays Ben, an old friend who has moved into a retirement community. He has accepted his age in a way that Thelma has not.

Roundtree’s recent passing adds an additional poignancy as the characters reckon with ageing and loneliness.


It is a credit to the movie that it never comes off as sentimental or maudlin.


This is an action thriller, first and foremost.


The film’s style does not lean into overt choices.

The editing is fast but does not try to overwhelm the viewer or the tone of the story.


It is a subtle evocation of the action film’s key feature: forward momentum.


Our heroes are on a quest and the film is focused on that mission as they work through every obstacle.


June Squibb is magnificent. She brings an integrity and sense of purpose. She can be ridiculous (one suspense scene is triggered when she thinks she recognises a stranger and then goes through a long list of who this person might be).


While it has fun with the characters’ various physical impairments, the film never feels like it is demeaning its protagonists.


It is a story about people’s fear of losing agency and being seen as unproductive members of society. While Thelma’s fear of irrelevance is foregrounded, her grandson Danny (Fred Hechinger) is tormented by his inability to fit in.


He has no job or qualifications; he does not even have a driver’s licence. He thinks he is worthless. 


By the end of the movie, our heroine has learned to accept what she cannot control and to ask for help.


As someone with a physical disability, it is rare that I feel any great affinity for any characters I see onscreen. This is especially true of action movies.


Thelma was one of the few action movies where I felt a connection and understanding of what the character was going through - Thelma’s lack of balance and fear of falling hit close to home.


And it was not just in terms of the character - the film’s message is ultimately a challenge to the way we value people.


One of the saddest aspects of contemporary life is the way people are valued according to their potential economic productivity.


Thelma rebukes that idea.


It also uses the title character to dismiss the idea of rugged individualism. This is a key theme to American action movies, but one of the delights of Thelma is how the character’s single-minded crusade brings her to the point of disaster.


When she learns to accept help, she is able to finally achieve her goal - and end the film with both her independence, and a community that can support her.


My favourite movie of the year.


If you are new to this blog, I also co-host a podcast on James Bond, The James Bond Cocktail Hour

You can subscribe on Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts.

Friday, 22 November 2024

OUT NOW: Terrifier 3 (Damien Leone, 2024)

Art the Clown (David Howard Thornton) returns from the dead to attack his old nemesis Sienna Shaw (Lauren LaVera).


I caught Terrifier 2 a few weeks ago. While the runtime was ridiculous, there is a pleasing homemade quality to the whole enterprise.

 

David Howard Thornton‘s performance as Art the Clown is eye-catching. Art is always playing to an audience (mostly himself and/or whoever is unlucky enough to be in close proximity.


He is matched by Lauren LaVera as lead final girl Sienna.


While her costume helps (she spends most of the movie in a homemade suit of armour and wings), she is as iconic as Art himself. She also brings a pathos and charisma that the movie needs. 


Maybe it is an expectation related to the genre but there is too much runway for the story we have. Bloated as it is, the appealing leads are almost enough to carry it home.

Flaws aside, I was curious to see what Art and Sienna got up to in their second face-off.


Terrifier 3 ended up being the first movie I saw in theatres after Trump was elected.


The irony was not lost - a foe thought vanquished returns at Christmas to enact even greater horrors on the world. 


We will have to wait till January 20 to see what Il Douche actually does (my guess? Worse than last time).


Watching Terrifier 3, the film felt like a pitch-black joke, throwing up a bloody middle finger to the idea that anything can get better.


The film’s opening set piece is a brutal throwing down of the gauntlet. In this universe, nothing is sacred or protected.


Maybe that is why I felt so unmoved by it.


Coming a few days after the US election, Art’s debasement of bodies and social mores felt like an exorcism.


By the luck of its release date, this film felt like a vehicle for this particular moment.


This movie is mean. Terrifier 3 leans into the idea of destroying symbols of Christmas - it treatings the season and everything around it as a taboo that must be shattered into a million bloody pieces.


The most significant way it does this is by having Art kill kids.


As with every slasher, we get Art tearing (often literally) through horny 20-somethings, but the film shows no compunction about turning its antagonist on a group of moppets waiting to see Santa Clause.


We only see a flash of one of these victims onscreen, but it comes right at the start of the movie. From there on in, there is an underlying sense of danger to Art’s reappearances.


He has shown no compunction about killing adults before, but the filmmakers use the Christmas setting to up the ante.


The stakes are raised when the film cuts to Sienna, and she is paired with younger cousin Gabbie (Antonella Rose). After Art has blown up a mall full of moppets, it is not clear if his veteran nemesis will be able to protect the young girl.


As with Terrifier 2, LaVera brings such a pathos and earnestness to the role that she anchors her section of the film.  


Physically and psychologically traumatised from her triumph in the previous instalment, Sienna is at a low ebb. 


No longer a warrior Angel, Sienna becomes a Christlike figure (at least in terms of the punishments Art has contrived for her)


Somehow the movie  is also - relatively - lighter in tone, compared with its predecessors:Art the Clown’s bashful reaction when he overhears a true crime podcaster gush about wanting to meet him; the mall scene where Art stands in for Santa and starts handing out gifts.


There is a mordant edge to the film that somehow manages to offset the brutality.


The scene which best epitomises this tone (and the best scene in the movie) is Art’s confrontation with a drunken Santa (Daniel Roebuck) and his friend at an empty bar. 


Art’s childlike glee at ‘recognising’ St Nick; Clint Howard’s sozzled performance as a human echo; the slow ramp from childish to fatal pranks. It is tense and funny in a way that feels more sustained than any other scene in the film.

 

The violence is graphic and occasionally unique: Art kills people with guns, bombs, a freeze ray and whatever else he can find.


There is no nuance or real subtext. Art is Bugs Bunny with Will E. Coyote’s arsenal. He just wants to mess with people, or mess them up, or turn them into messes.


The ending is a familiar convention from a thousand slashers - the villain is in the wind and our heroine is barely alive. Generally slasher endings operate like a final jolt for the audience, a final scare that undoes the seeming restoration of order.


Even without the knowledge that a sequel is in the works, Terrifier 3’s finale feels like a cliffhanger for something even more unhinged.


Art has broken all rules of god and man. What lies beyond for the diabolical trickster to debase?


Related


Silent Night, Deadly Night


If you are new to this blog, I also co-host a podcast on James Bond, The James Bond Cocktail Hour

You can subscribe on Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts.

Wednesday, 20 November 2024

The Boys in the Boat (George Clooney, 2023)

The story of the Washington University swim team and their journey to gold at the 1936 Olympic Games.


At the end of 2022, I was looking for some kind of project to build the blog around some kind of theme. Inspired by a tossed-off comment on the Blank Check podcast, I decided to review the directorial career of George Clooney.


Over the first quarter of the next year, I went through his directorial efforts up until 2021’s The Tender Bar. 


It was a bad idea.


Not a waste of time - it was interesting to write about Suburbicon - but I cannot see myself watching any of these movies again.


At the time, I ran out of juice. Those last couple of reviews are pretty short, and the gaps between them grew longer. By the end, I just ran out of stuff to write about.


There was no sense of growth or change.


Watching every movie I felt like I was hitting the same problems - the inability to focus on a single idea; the inconsistent tone; the underlying vacuousness.


Directing is about making choices, and it seemed as if in the early part of his career, Clooney the director never had a firm grasp on what he wanted to convey.


Looking back on what I can remember of his films, it feels like Suburbicon broke something in Clooney. In the movies before that, he was willing to try things, either in terms of scope, genre or style.


Suburbicon bombed, and with his next two films, Clooney appeared to retreat to something less ambitious. 


Both The Midnight Sky and The Tender Bar are sombre dramas - they are not fully successful, but I was shocked by how relatively disciplined they were. Rather than a buffet of conflicting tones, genres and aesthetic decisions, these more recent films show a filmmaker who is trying to approach his subjects in a more straightforward way.

Well, you have to give him credit for trying, I guess.


This is the kind of ‘based on a true’ story picture that my grandfather would take me to.


I am totally partial to these kinds of sports stories - there is an in-built structure to an underdog story that should work every time.


Somehow, Boys in the Boat found a way to bungle it.

This movie has no angle on its subject.


It took almost the length of the movie for me to figure it out.


Before the race, the coach gives a speech telling the rowers to focus on what brought them here, and what they had to overcome.


That speech highlighted what was missing from this movie.


At no point do we feel the effort or the obstacles this team has had to overcome.

There are a few moments toward the end where the filmmaking chooses to get close to the athletes, to exaggerate and focus on the sheer effort and exertion of the race, but they are fleeting.


When they win, there is a swell of music but no sense of catharsis.

e get glimpses of potential conflict, and obstacles,, but the film is in no need to arrange them into a narrative that would resemble a story.


Lead player Callum Turner is a bit of a blank slate.


His story has some familiar building blocks - a poor student who takes to the rowing team because it will solve his financial troubles.


We see him living in an encampment and having to visit a soup kitchen, but there is nothing to pull at the heartstrings.


The Boys In The Boat is not a great movie. It is not even uniquely terrible.


But while watching, it made me want to circle back to the Clooney miniseries.


What I take away from watching his work is that George Clooney likes to direct movies.  That is the clearest thing I can take as far as a personal modus operandi.


I think he has good taste as an actor and I can appreciate that he has ideas about the world.


There is a distinction between Clooney the performer and Clooney the director.


As an actor and movie star, I can lock onto Clooney. He is the smartest guy in the room with a hidden frailty. He is a fine comedian and willing to play supporting roles to others.


In contrast to his onscreen and public personae, as a director, Clooney projects nothing.


No themes, no specific tone, no sense of creative intelligence.


Watching Clooney the filmmaker, I was reminded of a quote about the boxer Archie Moore - at light heavyweight, he was a god, as a heavy weight, he was mortal.


This is not a new revelation but Clooney’s filmography reminded me that filmmaking is a human endeavour. 


Not everyone is Spielberg (or, since it is Clooney, Soderbergh).


Some filmmakers do not have a firm idea of what they want to work on. They do not have a specific or defined vision.


Some filmmakers do not even have a specific incoherence in terms of a worldview or personal obsessions.


George Clooney is one of those filmmakers.


I don't even want to dismiss Clooney completely. Filmmaking is such a convergence of collaboration, subject matter and time. 


He is still a big Hollywood star (a white, male one at that), so he will probably get more chances. The odds are in his favour that he might make something I connect with. He might even find a unique lane as a filmmaker.


I guess this is a long way of saying that I will be reviewing whatever he commits to next. Great.





If you are new to this blog, I also co-host a podcast on James Bond, The James Bond Cocktail Hour

You can subscribe on iTunes, or wherever you get your podcasts.