The Color Purple

I'm just now realizing I was WAY underdressed for the screening. This is embarrassing.

Movie: The Color Purple

Running Times: 2:33

Nominated for: Supporting Actress

How I watched: AMC A List

When it had me: I want to say Fancy Pants, but before then

When it lost me: Many times

What systems does it challenge: White Supremacy, Patriarchy

First I have to make the awful admission that I have never seen the original version of this movie. Huge blind spot in my movie history. But with that being said I got to judge this as its own thing without prior knowledge, and it wasn't super great.

Secondly, I have to make the awful admission that I don't like musicals, despite having a degree in theatrical arts. Many a musical has won me over, but its just not my preferred method of story telling. So that didn't help this movie a bit.

The tone was all over the place in this film and nothing felt cohesive. Despite amazing performances from an ensemble cast brimming with talent, this movie just felt like a weird hodge podge. The style of song and dance didn't feel cohesive. The crushing tragedy of the story did not lend itself to upbeat dance numbers. Some scenes were heartfelt and moving, others sort of cartoonish.

Danielle Brooks was fine but not even the best performance in the movie, I'd say. I'm looking forward to going back and watching the original movie; I think it will be a better match for me.

The Teachers' Lounge

Movie: The Teachers' Lounge

Running Times: 1:38

Nominated for: International Feature

How I watched: Laemmle

When it had me: A teacher fighting for student rights

When it lost me: Not until the end

What systems does it challenge: Good question

This movie was an interesting look at trust and discipline. It moved along at a really nice clip and the acting was really good. In it a school is struggling with a theft problem and keeps finding out that catching a criminal sometimes impacts the rights of everyone else.

The struggle is between following a strict "zero tolerance" policy versus using a more nuanced approach that allows you to center your primary objective: benefiting the community.

I was really interested in following where the twists and turns would take me until the end when some of the behavior of characters seemed to get exaggerated beyond what was believable. It spun out a bit and didn't leave me feeling satisfied. Still, it gave me a lot to think about, so I'll credit it for that.

To Kill A Tiger

 

No tigers are harmed! In fact, there are no tigers in the movie. But the film maker asked everyone not to share images from the movie in order to protect the family so just look at this scary, adorable baby!

 

Movie: To Kill A Tiger

Running Times: 2:05

Nominated for: Documentary Feature

How I watched: Laemmle

When it had me: Support for Victims

When it lost me: Nope

What systems does it challenge: Toxic Masculinity, Misogyny

Here's a fun story about the screening. This movie was hard to find. I saw it was playing at the Laemmle but they literally only had one screening time listed. I thought that was a mistake but I grabbed a friend and showed up at the theatre. It was almost sold out because it turns out it also had a Q & A with the director. So we sat in the front row, which turned out to be very close in this theatre, and then got to have the film maker and interviewer practically sit on our laps after the movie! Exciting!

Also? I don't read up on what the movies are before I go. I like the surprise. Before it started there was a content warning about sexual assault. I told my friend, "Uh oh, it's not about tigers." But on the inside I was panicking, thinking, "Am I going to be sobbing directly into the lap of the director after this?"

To Kill a Tiger is a survivor's story. A young woman in India who has a father that will fight for her (an extremely rare occurrence) and she has access (yay!) to a fairly unfriendly justice system (boo!).

This movie felt like a tide turning. There are so many people willing to fight for justice and healing and reform of misogynistic societies. It is good and heart warming and hopeful to see this in action. But, of course, it is an extremely slow turning of the tide. There is push back from traumatized elders, lazy thinkers, well meaning nay-sayers, men who don't want to give up any power, outdated modes of thinking and laws that fail to understand the psychology of trauma. 

The changes that need to come won't happen without a prolonged and vigorous fight on many levels. However, this movie gave me hope, so I did not embarrass myself while sitting three feet from the interviewer from the Vanity Fair. Thank goodness.

Rustin

Movie: Rustin

Running Times: 1:48

Nominated for: Actor

How I watched: Netflix

When it had me: Planning Civil Rights actions

When it lost me: It didn't

What systems does it challenge: Racism, Homophobia

This film is the argument for intersectionalism. It's about Bayard Rustin, a good friend to Martin Luther King, Jr. and activist for civil rights. He had the idea for the March on Washington but got sidelined for being gay. White Supremacy, as a system, really wants to push us to tackle big problems one at a time. Then they ask all the oppressed people to compete with each other about who gets to go first and hopefully the in fighting will distract everyone from getting any work done. Rustin, played by Colman Domingo, kept himself in the fight as long as he could. I appreciated that the movie highlighted how the women of the movement repeatedly complained about being marginalized in the process; another layer of arguments for an intersectional approach.

I think Colman Domingo tends toward some real overacting at times but that could be because I first saw him on a bad zombie series. This role in Rustin feels made for him and he does a fantastic job. I love watching the planning of these Civil Rights moments; seeing how resourceful and tenacious these leaders were in the face of endless obstacles is inspiring. This was a really good, under-two-hour watch.

Nyad

 

Just look at these badass women!

Movie: Nyad

Running Times: 2:00

Nominated for: Actress, Supporting Actress

How I watched: Netflix

When it had me: Annette Bening

When it lost me: I wondered how accurate it was

What systems does it challenge: Self limitation, abuse

Annette Bening embodied this passionate and sometimes insane character of Diana Nyad in such a stunning and somehow effortless manner. Nyad seeks the impossible swim with a faith that is inspiring and uplifting and also with a tenacity that sometimes feels sad and terrifying. I WANT her to make it AND I WANT her to stop! 

That creates a really great tension in this film for both the viewer and for her foil character, Bonnie, played by Jodie Foster, who is also nominated. When your friend is a rabid, highly motivated visionary, what is the best way to support them? What counts as support and what becomes dangerous enabling? 

I appreciated how the film wove into its narrative the abuse Nyad suffered at the hands of her childhood swim coach. In her loneliest, most sensory deprived moments these memories literally emerge from the depths and demand her attention. Its poetic and real. Survivors of abuse are often labeled as too much. They feel too much, "dwell on the past" too much, react too strongly and are labeled irrational. I want to be done with the era of dismissing women as crazy and embrace finding out where their mania comes from.

Also? Can we normalize a little bit of mania? Because Annette Bening and Jodie Foster gave us mania that is cute as hell and I wouldn't change it a bit.

 

 

The Boy and the Heron

Here's my silly little brain cells trying to figure out something about Mark Hamill and some sort of time travel?

 

Movie: The Boy and the Heron

Running Times: 2:04

Nominated for: Animated Feature

How I watched: AMC A List

When it had me: Beautiful Animation, I love birds!

When it lost me: Maybe I don't love this bird?

What systems does it challenge: I really don't know anymore

 

I used to shy away from Miyazaki. The world loved him and I just didn't get it. But I worked really hard on becoming a better person and now I am happy to report, I am able to enjoy many of his films. So I was excited to enjoy this one. And I did for about half of the film. Then I got lost and bored and I missed my cats and wanted to go home.

So what went wrong? Early on I was captivated by the beautiful imagery, in particular the nature aspects. Birds and hillsides, vistas and gorgeous water. So lovely and meditative! The wild characters were fun and I was invested on joining a boy on his quest. 

The metaphors for dealing with grief and grappling with identity in adolescence and the struggle for new beginnings were powerful and poignant. I was enjoying new worlds that opened up along the way. 

However, at some point the rules of the world became over burdensome for me and the whole thing tumbled like a house of cards. Like, one minute I was deeply enjoying the film and the next I was completely confused and done. I don't know how it fell apart so fast but suddenly the goals of the character were unclear to me, the metaphors no longer made sense and I felt like I couldn't even connect it to the movie I started out watching.

This is based on a well known book in Japan so I'm guessing that part of the problem was trying to fit so much of a written story into a two hour film. It tends to over complicate things. I've made great strides in my life but I still only got half of it! Oh well, room for improvement.

The big question: Does this win because Miyazaki is getting old or does the award got to Spiderman: Across the Spiderverse? Probably this one.

Napoleon

Movie: Napoleon

Running Time: 2:38 (sad face)

Nominated for: Costumes, Production Design, Visual Effects

How I watched: AMC A List

When it had me: Battle of Austerlitz

When it lost me: uhhh...the trailer?

What systems does it challenge: Historical Accuracy

This one is risky to take on as my second review because I don't really think it deserves many nominations. But, I mean, probably the sound design or VFX might be a standout when all is said and done. Me and Ridley Scott are kind of fighting. Don't mention it to him, he'll act like he doesn't know. Typical.

In interviews when Napoleon came out, Ridley Scott "observed" that in the time it took Martin Scorsese to make Killers of the Flower Moon, he had made four films. Maybe he wasn't trying to put any value assessment on that, but it sure sounded like a dick thing to say. There were several times during Napoloeon that my thoughts intruded right into the viewing and suggested loudly for all my brain to hear that maybe Scott should take a little more time on each of his films.

Joaquin Phoenix is a great actor and wasn't bad but his very mumbly American voice was such a weird choice for a famous Frenchman. In reality Josephine was 6 years his senior rather than 14 years his junior. Vanessa Kirby's acting was strong but it might have been a different dynamic on screen for this grown man with mommy issues to be with an older woman.

Let's talk gore! I love horror movies but not typically because of the gore. There was nasty blood and guts all over the battle scenes. I think it was what stood out the most to me during the battles. The BEST battle was Austerlitz and it featured a whole awesome trap set up that wasn't even real, which is disappointing. Still, it was cool to watch.

There was solid technical film making going on throughout. Costumes were great, production design was amazing, sound was good. I even saw it on a IMAX screen so I felt like I was giving it every chance to win me over.

I mostly didn't care all that much through a lot of this film. I'll take Marty's slow and deliberate approach over this any day.

Double Feature: The Holdovers and May December

 

Movie: The Holdovers and May December

Running Times: 2:13 (ok) and 1:53 (better)

Nominated for: Best Picture, Actor, Supporting Actress, Original Screenplay, Editing and Original Screenplay

How I watched: AMC A List and Netflix

When it had me: Nostalgia

When it lost me: Nostalgia

What systems does it challenge: Academia and Pedophilia? This is getting confusing

Ok, I may regret this but I crammed these two movies together for a reason. Both placed themselves solidly within an era and committed to the bit.

The Holdovers IS 1970. The trailer was made with shaky sound and out of date fonts. The movie even began with the old blue and white screen with the rating listed. That jaunty letter R brought back so many memories! Alexander Payne really commits to this movie being a time capsule. I imagine those of us that remember the 70s will feel that kind of warm embrace that reliving a certain time can bring. I wonder how it lands with younger audiences? It's hard for me to guess, since I was the youngest audience member the day I went.

May December is technically set in 2015 but it revolves around a Mary Kay Latourneau stand-in played by Julianne Moore who was convicted of rape of a 7th grader in 1992. And the movie feels very much stuck in 1992. The characters in may ways have never been able to leave that initial criminal act behind them and the movie honors that by being stuck in time as well. Despite Julianne Moore's character going to jail, the couple's love appears to transcend their 23 year age difference and they have gone on to raise a family together. Now they are faced with an actress who wishes to learn about their lives so she can portray the sex offender in a new TV movie. May December uses the soft focus of vaseline on camera lenses and super melodramatic music to keep you firmly stuck in the past.

In The Holdovers, the time machine works. It's cohesive and sets the scene for the type of movie we might have seen back then. Movie stars were rougher and less glamourous and Paul Giamatti delivers as a curmedgeonly (even that apt descriptor feels out of the past) teacher nicknamed Walleyeye with his hyperhydrosis and sweat that stinks like fish. The story itself is simple and entirely predictable but hits all the right notes of comedy and poignancy. The acting is really stellar from all of the three main characters, Giamatti, Da'Vine Joy Randolph and Dominic Sessa, in his first role ever. The movie didn't challenge but it didn't disappoint and it's big delivery was the perfection of the time capsule.

By contrast, May December felt completely disjointed and confusing because of its time slip. Soft focus TV melodrama is a bold choice, considering it isn't all that pleasant to watch. Even when you are nailing it, it doesn't feel like quality film making. What was pleasant was the feeling of danger that pulsed beneath the surface of the film. Whether we were watching an adult trying to process the abuse he suffered at the hands of his beloved or watching Natalie Portman embody a cannabalistic actress getting ready to tear apart a family in order to pick the bones clean, I had the sense that anything could go seriously wrong at any moment. 

I don't know that I was satisified by how it delivered on that sense of impending doom but the tension was good. The greatest thing going for the film was the acting. Julianne Moore created a wacky but believable psychological study and then Natalie Portman slowly transformed herself into that same mold and that was something cool to watch. The worst thing going for the movie was that after I watched it I read about its dark and campy humor. Humor? Comedy? Oh. I did not get that from watching it. At all. I thought maybe I just flubbed the ball on that one but I've checked with several other people who missed it as well. That seems like a bad thing for the audience to misunderstand.

In a head to head, The Holdovers wins this match up by a mile.

Zone of Interest

Literally convinced I just saw this bistro set at Ikea. That seems like the least important piece in this frame and yet, every similarity they drew between myself and the Nazis cut a little deeper, so why not make me feel like we shop at the same stores?

Movie: The Zone of Interest

Running Times: 1:46

Nominated for: Best Picture, Director, Adapted Screenplay, International Feature, Sound

How I watched: AMC A List

When it had me: Sound. Design.

When it lost me: I was in and out

What systems does it challenge: War Crimes, Dehumanizing your enemy

I didn't understand this film until I was writing my Nomination Day post and I realized that it's a horror film. The whole reality of the movie had sort of glanced off of me until that moment. If you don't know, it's about a family that lives in a beautiful home that shares its garden wall with Auschwitz.

The look of the film is startling. For a movie about the past it was crisp, sharp, shiny and new. 6K detail on a house that I swear has current Ikea pieces in it. It doesn't feel like then, it feels like now.

The entire film is in the sound design. That's where the truth is told. It's alarmingly well done.

I felt profoundly uncomfortable watching this film. The lack of plot felt laggy but it also gave me plenty of time to reflect, to see myself in these people, to ask myself what's on the other side of my garden wall. I didn't like any of these avenues of thought then and I don't like them now.

I'm embarrassed to admit I nodded off at an incredibly important bit of the film. I'm writing this, I'm in control, so I don't have to report to you how I messed up this screening but I feel like we've become close enough that I owe you my honesty. Mere hours after I wrote about how "I'm-such-a-fancy-coffee-drinker-now-I-don't-fall-asleep-during-movies-anymore" I actually fell asleep and missed the ending of this movie which I have since read about and man it sounds powerful!

This movie made me feel a LOT of difficult things and I'm still navigating it but I have much respect for someone who set out to curate this experience for viewers in such a precise way. I don't know if I'll ever decide I liked this film but I can say it is a powerful piece of art.

***It's going to get spoiler-y from here on out. Sort of. It's too much to read before you go see it. I'm about to have a mental breakdown of sorts. In the continued interest of me staying honest, I'll share it with you. But just watch the movie first.

I thought it was an interesting premise and couldn't wait to see where Jonathan Glazer went with the idea of the home outside the camp. Nowhere. He goes nowhere. And while I was watching the movie it bothered me. Aren't you going to make a point about this juxtaposition? 

But the point is in the mundane. The point is that the immeasurable and monstrous cruelty taking place on the other side of that wall, which countless other movies have pushed us to understand, is practically an afterthought to these people who like garden parties and canoe trips down the river. But you know what? I like garden parties and canoe trips and I allow myself to enjoy those things while bombs rain down on children in Syria and the Gaza strip. How is my indifference to suffering and my incredible ability to just get on with my life any better than the fucking Nazi commander of a concentration camp? We ALL get desensitized to constant noise around us as it disappears into the background. That's a feature of human ears. But what do we do when we become numb to the pain of others and can no longer hear them cry out for aid? Is there any hope for humanity at all? Can we learn kindness? Because we aren't born with it. Fuck! (deep breath) In the end, I have to console myself that I am not the deliberate cause of any of the suffering in the world so I guess I am a little better than a Nazi commander. And since I can't concern myself with what is happening over every garden wall, I guess I had better get really focused on my own and be determined about making my own Zone of Interest a better place for everyone around me.

Past Lives

Look at Greta! She knows something we don't. Like how this movie can be so damn captivating!

Movie: Past Lives

Running Times: 1:46

Nominated for: Best Picture, Original Screenplay

How I watched: Prime

When it had me: Immediately

When it lost me: It didn't

What systems does it challenge: Romance Movies

Past Lives is so masterful at nailing small moments and big authenticity. It is an exceedingly intimate movie that manages to keep you so in the moment with each of its characters that you feel a part of every emotional epiphany and each fraught choice. Some movies may be more cinematic, sprawling, audacious but there's so many ways to get lost in those big movies; I don't know where to look on screen, I've lost the narrative or I don't know what the point is.

What was special about this movie was Celine Song's ability to keep me completely "in it" in every moment. I never felt lost or confused and conversely, I never felt badgered or babied. Also, I mentioned authenticity. The movie feels so pitch perfect; nothing is forced, contrived, overstated or overacted. It really is a gem.

So it's labeled a romance and I get that but for me it's a lot more about questions of evolving desires, evolving personas, and what it feels like when your dreams can be realized and when they cannot. I'd say this one should be looked at for editing as well as direction and acting but I'm sure it's not flashy enough for that.

Maestro

 

I'm not obsessed with Carey Mulligan! You are!

 

Movie: Maestro

Running Times: 2:09 (I would have cut at least 12 minutes)

Nominated for: Best Picture, Actress, Cinematography, Hair and Make Up, Sound

How I watched: Netflix

When it had me: First Black and White shot

When it lost me: Third Act

What systems does it challenge: Traditional marriage? Celebrity

Every year there is a biopic and every year I groan. I find biopics awkward and unsatisfying. It always feels like a vehicle for a star to wow us with their likeness or their ability to disappear into their real life counterpart. I think actors love to do it but it rarely makes a good film.

So Maestro blew me away because it felt very different. From the first black and white shot I sat up and took notice. I couldn't quite tell what I was looking at in that first shot as Leonard Bernstein gets the call that he will get to conduct. The lighting is gorgeous and the framing is mysterious. My eyes were engaged and I had questions. Director Bradley Cooper came to play. That shot transitions into dynamic movement and we magically transport through the halls and down to the hall. I felt swept off my feet and surprised. It happens a few times.

Maestro is shot on film using both Black and White and Color. I didn't feel like every shot in the film was cinematic glory but it happened often enough that I was duly impressed from a relatively new director.

The story that encompasses so many eras in his life, actually revolves around the tension of a beautiful partnership with a wife who tries to share him with not only the world, as is common with performers and celebrities, but also with his many sanctioned affairs.

The movie becomes more about his wife Felicia, as it is her arc that drives it. Cooper's Lenny is who he is for the most part; dynamic, lively, distractable, joyous and creative. Felicia who wholly accepts her husband as a bisexual man has no desire to own him and cut him off from the other half of his attractions in the world. She endeavors to allow his full embrace of living and loving and then shoulder the burden of the difficulties that arise.

I was blown away by the beauty and the folly of such a generous position for a soul mate to take. The progressive and pioneering sort of person who can say confidently that they don't need a cookie cutter existence and they don't care what the Joneses are doing. I was equally swept off my feet by her gorgeous love as I was by some of Cooper's transitions.

Ultimately, I was kind of devastated by the fact that the arrangement, perhaps inevitably, favored one spouse over the other and led to some deeply sad outcomes. The movie haunted me. I spent a couple of days just thinking about Felicia Bernstein and how incredible she was.

Maestro completely engaged me in a way that is unusual in this genre. What a delightful surprise! I've been feeling kind of bad for Bradley because it feels like no one is talking about this movie or giving it any buzz for any of the awards but his second film got five nominations so, I guess he'll be ok.

Anatomy of a Fall

I figured we'd go wintery today since I'm posting from an Atmospheric River.

Movie: Anatomy of a Fall

Running Times: 2:32

Nominated for: Best Picture, Director, Actress, Original Screenplay, Editing

How I watched: AMC A List

When it had me: Possible Murder!

When it lost me: Despite the length, I don't believe it did

What systems does it challenge: Systems of Justice

 

This movie has it all! Mystery, Crime, Darkness, Ambiguous Morals, A Child's Uncertain Future, Parenting Problems, Police Procedural, Courtroom Drama. The only thing missing for me was just a touch of the paranormal! Ok, not really, it didn't need it.

Anatomy of a Fall keeps you so engaged as the facts of the case develop and a family goes deeper into the trauma of criminal justice. The acting is top notch and there is snow so it's very pretty in that exotic way that quiet, wintery landscapes really wow a Southern Californian like myself.

I kept thinking about this movie for weeks after I saw it. That's my number one indicator that something was really quality; it didn't just distract me for the few hours that I sat in front of it, but it made me reflect on deeper issues, ask bigger questions or confront new perspectives.

I've been deep diving on true crime podcasts and TV lately and confronting over and over again how law enforcement often just picks a perp and then refuses to actually investigate, instead building a case in spite of the evidence. I've been forced to face the lie of justice in white society (we tend to be the only ones privileged enough to hold onto our naivete on that front) and see that it's all a sham a good percentage (most?) of the time. This movie was perfectly timed for me to take another look at a simple question: how can you ever know the truth of a situation?

American Fiction

Actual footage of me wondering if I can learn to be a great screenwriter just by watching this movie over and over again.

Movie: American Fiction

Running Times: 1:57 (Give it an Oscar for that!)

Nominated for: Best Picture, Actor, Supporting Actor, Adapted Screenplay, Original Score

How I watched: AMC A List

When it had me: From the Trailer

When it lost me: Never

What systems does it challenge: Celebrity, "Invisible" Racism

The trailer for American Fiction looked like a laugh riot but the film was surprisingly more nuanced and deep than that. That's not to say I was disappointed, the comedy was there and just as good as I had hoped but there was also so much thoughtful musing on identity, family, stereotypes and self discovery.

In the movie, Monk is a struggling author who chooses to invent an alter ego that can pander to the masses in order to raise the money needed to help out his family.

The relationships in this film felt so authentic. A perfect mix of awkwardness and comfort, of rising to the occasion and falling short. The real life messiness of Monk's personal drama is so stable and grounding and provides the perfect launching pad for the other half of the movie with its wild plot and ridiculous characters all fawning over the latest viral moment. It was a revelation to see a movie that handled both aspects so well. I'm trying hard to think of the last time I saw this kind of mix and I'm not sure. Maybe The Big Sick.

The performances were solid across the board from an incredible ensemble cast. This should be the screenwriting award, for sure. It has moments that take you completely by surprise, it resists predictable turns and continually subverts your expectations. It treats each character as a human, both good and bad and resists scapegoating anyone as a villain. Can you tell I'm jealous? If only I could write a screenplay one tenth this good!

One of the best pictures of the year. There are a lot of nominees that I wouldn't universally recommend. Poor Things is great but definitely not everyone's cup of tea. American Fiction I would recommend to anyone.