Thursday, 29 December 2022

Unorthodox (Netflix, 2020)

Fleeing her home in Williamsburg, New York City, ultra-orthodox Jewish woman Esty Shapiro (Shira Haas) tries to make a new life for herself in Berlin.


While Esty focuses on applying to a musical conservatory, her husband Yanky (Amit Rahav) and his cousin Moishe (Jeff Wilbusch) arrive to bring her back home at all costs…


I do not binge TV. But I watched all four episodes of Unorthodox in one sitting. I actually went back and did a re-watch, I liked it that much.


A big part of the series’ success is lead actress Shira Haas. 


Open yet guarded, world-weary yet naive, Haas’s performance is a marvel.


There are so many different levels to Esty, in terms of her beliefs and how she acts.


The essential problem she faces is that people expect her to fit a box, with no exceptions for who she is.


There are so many powerful moments where Esty is positioned in wide or long shots that highlight how small and isolated she is, and Haas keeps your attention with a vulnerability and steel that keeps shifting and changing as the character works out who she is and wants to be. 


Unlike Esty, her husband Yanky is unable to see the world without positioning himself at the centre of it. Amit Rahav plays Yanky with a timid lack of centre - the character is still a child, struggling to work out how to deal with a situation that does not fit his assumptions of how life is supposed to go. 


His cousin Moishe is a hypocrite, happily acting as a hatchet man against Esty while treating the trip as a chance to indulge his vices. If the series has a villain he is it, and Wilbusch gives the character an arrogance and physicality which is terrifying.


What I liked about the way the filmmakers approach Esty’s storyline in Berlin is how they play with expectations around these kinds of narratives.


Combining elements of a coming-of-age story with stranger in a strange land and a competition narrative, the movie avoids familiar plot turns and pat conclusions


While the story is based around Esty leaving her community, the filmmakers do not present them as villains - what becomes obvious as the show heads into its home stretch is that Esty’s personal circumstances were at the root of her oppression - a combination of familial breakdown and being surrounded by people who are more concerned with dogma than supporting her.


The flashback structure helps to balance between the oppression Esty experiences with her desire - in the present - to express her cultural identity on her own terms.


You can see this in the way she argues with Yanky and his mother in the past, with how she defends herself to people in the present. She tells one character that she is not a baby factory, but when offered the option chooses not to have an abortion.


The show is ultimately about Esty’s ability to make choices for herself.


The only character who comes off as a villain is Moishe, and even in his case he is defined by his contradictions between his double standard for Esty and his own behaviour.


Rather like Edge of Seventeen and Starter for Ten, I really liked how dark the show was willing to go in terms of the fallout of its character’s actions: the sequence where Esty plays piano for her new friends is absolutely excruciating.


Tamar Amit-Joseph plays Yael, an Israeli musician who decides to be honest with Esty about her musical abilities - it is a brutal scene, even though it is clearly not malicious. This scene is also important because it ultimately reflects how her friends are willing to be honest with her, even if it hurts her.


This scene is re-contextualised by the later revelation that Esty's family had lied to her about her mother's exclusion.


Why I appreciate the series' aversion to cliche, I was expecting Yael to offer some kind of acknowledgement to Esty after her audition, but this does not happen.


Multifaceted and empathetic, and anchored by Haas’s superb performance, Unorthodox is terrific.


Wednesday, 28 December 2022

Canydman (Bernard Rose, 1992)

As part of her studies of urban legends, post-graduate student Helen (Virginia Madsen) is investigating story of Candyman (Tony Todd), a hook-handed ghost who haunts the social housing complex, Cabrini-Green.


Helen’s intrusion puts her in the sights of the phantom, who sees her as the perfect vehicle for perpetuating his legend…



Sometimes I like to track movies by their critical reception. It is a perverse tactic because I find it harder to come up with my own ideas about the movie.


Sometimes I like to track movies by their critical reception. It is a perverse tactic because I find it harder to come up with my own ideas about the movie.


I was really looking forward to the remake of Candyman. I had only seen pieces of the original years ago so it wasn’t a factor. I was more interested because I loved the director’s last movie. Nia DaCosta’s Little Woods was one of my favourite movies from whatever year it came out in - it felt like a modern noir, and it dealt with serious economic and social issues with subtlety and nuance. 


I bring up that balance of genre and social content because those two things seem to be the focus of the critiques of Candyman 2021 - at least the ones I read. 


It made me more curious to check back in to where it all began, in 1992.


Based on a short story by Clive Barker (Hellraiser) and moved to an American setting, Candyman has elements which are reminiscent of a slasher but its themes and baroque style, it is closer to a modern gothic.


First, a pretty superficial thought: Candyman is well-crafted. 


There is such a sense of precision to the aesthetic choices, its composition and sound design, and the way tension escalates through the movie, particularly in its first half.


The second half of the movie gets a bit more into the grand guignol.


I thought the movie would be about a spectral figure haunting Helen because her apartment building was built over the scene of his murder - the building is revealed to have originally been a public housing project, like Cabrini-Green. I kept expecting some kind of Poltergeist-style reveal about her building.


But no. I guess Candyman is sustained by the fear of the people who live at Cabrini Green - maybe it is whoever is in proximity?


Helen thinks she knows what she is doing, but she is completely out of her depth. 


The first time I watched it, there was a point midway through where it felt like the movie became blunt, when Tony Todd re-appears and begins rampaging through the movie.

 

This time, that chaotic turn felt more shocking.


The scene where she wakes up in Anne-Marie McCoy’s (Vanessa Estelle Williams) apartment is horrifying - the discovery of the dead dog; the empty cot; the terrified mother attacking her…


The movie has done such a good job of lulling you into a specific sense of suspense AND stasis, that the escalation of violence is genuinely distrubing.


There is something to be critiqued in the movie’s focus on Helen - from what I hear, last year’s version of Candyman is closer to what I thought this movie would be.


The third act is based around Candyman’s attempts to convince Helen to join him, as a replacement for his lost love. 


Candyman is ultimately more concerned with finding ways to maintain the fear the residents of Cabrini Green have for him, and Helen has to make the ultimate sacrifice to foil his plans.


Ironically, Helen’s sacrifice leads to her own immortality as she takes Candyman’s place as a spectre haunting those who wronged her - although the ending makes me wonder if her new status as Candyman’s successor will be short-lived.

The Taking of Pelham 123 (Joseph Sargent, 1974)

A group of robbers hijack a New York subway car and demand the city pay them a ransom or else they will kill the passengers.

It falls to veteran subway cop Lt. Garber (Walter Matthau) to outwit the hostage-takers before they carry out their threat...


Ending on Walter Matthau’s deadpan face, The Taking of Pelham 123 is a rare movie that does not put a hair wrong.


I have wanted to see this movie for years, and it upsets me that it took this long.


Funny, tense and immersive in its world-building, it is a movie that you want to marinate in. You feel like you are taking a trip into a functioning, tangible world.


New York was heading toward the images of ‘Fear City’ that came to define it in the seventies, and that image is pervasive in Pelham. There is a grimy, lived-in quality to the settings - amplified by the use of real locations - and a great cast of character actors reinforce that sense of specificity.


While the movie builds tension like a well-oiled machine, that sense of suspense is matched by its sense of humour.


The jokes are great - Matthau realising his commanding officer is black; the payoff when Matthau finally meets the undercover cop on the train. They are a great relief from the tension and further serve to illustrate character and a sense of place.


The performances are all terrific. Matthau's world-weary, whip-smart detective is matched Robert Shaw, as the lead hijacker, who is all smug, simmering menace. While he is not likeable, the movie manages the trick of aligning the viewer with both protagonist and antagonist as they try to outmanoeuvre each other.


The movie it reminded me of the most was Die Hard, down to the smug, professional Euro-villain. 


Backed by a swaggering, off-kilter score by David Shire, The Taking of Pelham 123 is solid gold entertainment. Accept no remakes.

Tuesday, 27 December 2022

Violent Night (Tommy Wirkola, 2022)

 When a group of mercenaries take over a wealthy family’s estate on Christmas Eve, it falls to an unlikely hero (David Harbour) to rescue the hostages and rediscover the true meaning of the season…



A one-joke premise usually spells disaster, but Tommy Wirkola’s movie remembers that the key to a good Christmas movie is caring about people.


While it is filled with references to late 80s-early 90s Christmas movies, and features plenty of ironic repurposing of Christmas iconography (including the casting of the Vacation series’ Beverly D’Angelo), Violent Night refuses to wink at the audience and sticking to being an earnest story about a depressed Santa rediscovering his Christmas spirit with the help of a little girl (Leah Brady’s Trudy) who still believes in him.


The plot mechanics are pure Die Hard, down to Dominc Lewis’s score, which recalls the work of the late Michael Kamen. 


The film’s pilfering is unabashed and served with a macabre twist - there is an entire set piece inspired by Home Alone that is hilariously violent.


In the lead role, David Harbour is perfect. With his heavy brow and lumbring physicality, he manages to capture the film’s tone with an existential weight that sells his ultimate redemption.


A fun slice of holiday mayhem, Violent Night is worth a look.

Monday, 26 December 2022

OUT NOW: I Wanna Dance with Somebody

A musical bio-pic covering the life of musical superstar Whitney Houston (Naomi Ackie).


When I heard this movie was not good, I thought it might be a good exercise in unpicking the reasons it does not work. Or maybe I would love it.

Sadly, I Wanna Dance with Somebody is just very unexceptional. It is bad, but not in a singular way.

I cannot analyse Naomi Ackie's performance, and it is no fault of the actress - the film is in such a hurry to tick off the next significant/famous moment that there is no room for character or drama. For Ackie, there are no standout scenes or sequences where we get to see this character develop. 

The only standout thing about the movie is how much ground it is trying to cover. It might be one of the busiest biopics I have ever seen, in terms of cutting quickly between snippets of scenes. 

We get important moments - the first time Whitney meets Robyn Crawford (Nafessa Williams); her audition for Clive Davis (Stanley Tucci); her first encounter with Bobby Brown... - but they are all crammed in with no sense of rhythm or structure.  

To crib from the title of one of Houston's movies, this movie is never concerned with exhaling.

And while it covers important milestones in Houston's life, there is an overriding sense that events have been smoothed out.

Houston's drug abuse is tangential up until the third act, but the way it is reintroduced is so abrupt that it feels like scenes are missing. And because the movie is sliced like confetti, there is no sense of Houston's fall.

This movie does not want to focus on the back half of Houston's life - the drugs, the poor performances, the reality show with Bobby Brown - and there is an argument to be made to cast her whole life as a tragedy.

But the film never commits to any position on Houston's life. A version which focused on Houston's rise and fall would be cliche - but it would be a story. This movie is content to be a vague highlight reel, with characters who exist solely to restate events like quotes from a history book.

There are a few nuggets of gold - Nafessa Williams is good as Robyn, the clear eye in the centre of the storm, and Tamara Tunie is under-utilised as the controlling matriarch Cissy.

But this is overlong and formless. 

Related

Whitney: Can I Be Me

Whitney (2018)

Saturday, 24 December 2022

Glass Onion (Rian Johnson, 2022)

 Tech billionaire Miles Bron (Edward Norton) invites a group of friends/associates to his island home to take part in a game: solving his own murder.


Among the guests is detective Benoit Blanc (Daniel Craig), who is sure that something else is going on beneath the surface…





When Elon Musk took over Twitter, Rian Johnson and his collaborators must have been rubbing their hands with glee - or vindication.


The most surprising thing about Glass Onion is that it is hiding no surprises. 


The characters are obsessed with putting on facades of themselves and their relationships with each other, but ultimately there is nothing revelatory or complicated about them - they are bound by greed and fear.


Tech bro Bron is clearly a moron from the outset, and the big rug pull of the movie is that he is not hiding any depth or intellect. He is just a rich idiot.


The title should be the clue. I am not a Beatles obsessive so I had to look it up, but the original song is John Lennon’s satirical response to fans reading too deeply into the band’s lyrics.


Fundamentally the movie is about the ways in which wealth creates value judgments about a person’s abilities and exceptionalism.


And the way he is undone is not some great mind game or scheme.


Despite the surface flash (including celebrity cameos!), this movie might be more compact than its predecessor.


The flashback-within-flashback-within-flashback structure feels like a joke - a narrative framework teasing a depth that is ultimately a ruse.


There is something about Rian Johnson’s movies that has never quite sat with me - there is an overt sense of the writer’s hand, pushing characters together. I am not saying that he is not a good writer - I just feel like there are points where it is so precise in construction that I start seeing the plumbing. 


Maybe that is why this movie went down so easy - the big reveal that there is nothing to reveal feels more impressive.


Craig’s accent is all over the place - there are times where it doesn’t matter, and other points where it does. It ends up being value-neutral to the overall experience. 


While the original was a two-hander between Craig and Ana de Armas, this time Craig is paired with Janelle Monáe.


Monáe is well cast - she gives the character a stillness and economy of motion which adds a welcome note of danger and mystery to the first half of the movie. 


She also handles the role of Andi‘s twin sister Helen, which is in a completely different register.


Andi is all internal - her face is an unreadable mask. 


Monáe manages the transition well - there is something eternally withdrawn and hidden about Monáe, and that works for the mysterious Andi and her sister, who is navigating these circles for the first time.


If there is any justice in this world, Monáe keeps getting leading roles - she is a genuine movie star and you cannot take your eyes off her.


A game supporting cast (Kate Hudson is hilarious as the most honest of Bron’s sycophantic acolytes) and some great locations add to the fun.


It might be less original than its predecessor, but this feels like it is in a different sub-genre from Knives Out.


The best compliment I can give this movie is that I am very curious about its sequel, and where Johnson goes next.

Tuesday, 20 December 2022

The House that Joel built: Lethal Weapon and Die Hard

On the latest episode of The James Bond Cocktail Hour podcast, we join in the festive cheer with a discussion of the two franchises which dominated the scene while James Bond was in hibernation from 1989 to 1995: 

Lethal Weapon and Die Hard!


Because of the parameters of our miniseries, we only focus on the first three instalments of each franchise.

This episode is more about laying out the context of the early nineties, and the era in which Bond's hiatus took place.


Check out the episode at the link below, and let us know what you think!