Movies

Subterms

    More stories

    • 125 Shares99 Views

      in Movies

      Five Sci-Fi Classics, One Summer: How 1982 Shaped Our Present

      by

      Five Sci-Fi Classics, One Summer: How 1982 Shaped Our Present“Blade Runner,” “E.T.,” “Tron,” “The Wrath of Khan” and “The Thing” all arrived that one season 40 years ago to become indelible and influential.The future is now: The photographer Sinna Nasseri captured images of present-day New York City as it might have been predicted by science fiction films of the 1980s. Above, a replica of the DeLorean from “Back to the Future” was on display in Times Square. Listen to This ArticleTo hear more audio stories from publications like The New York Times, download Audm for iPhone or Android.At the end of Christian Nyby’s 1951 sci-fi chiller “The Thing from Another World” — about an Arctic expedition whose members are stealthily decimated by an accidentally defrosted alien monster — a traumatized journalist takes to the airwaves to deliver an urgent warning. “Watch the skies,” he insists breathlessly, hinting at the possibility of a full-on invasion in the final lines. “Keep looking. Keep watching the skies.”This plea for eagle-eyed vigilance suited the postwar era of Pax Americana, in which economic prosperity was leveraged against a creeping paranoia — of threats coming from above or within. The final lines of movie were prescient about the rise of the American science-fiction film, out of the B-movie trenches in the 1950s and into the firmament of the industry’s A-list several decades later.The peak of this trajectory came in the summer of 1982, in which five authentic genre classics premiered within a one-month span. After its June 4, 1982, opening, “Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan,” set an unexpected record by grossing about $14 million on its first weekend. Seven days later, Steven Spielberg’s “E.T.: The Extra-Terrestrial” debuted to $11 million but proved to have stubby, little box office legs, eventually grossing more than half a billion dollars worldwide. June 25 brought the competing releases of Ridley Scott’s ambitious tech-noir thriller “Blade Runner” and John Carpenter’s R-rated remake of “The Thing,” visions several shades darker than “E.T.”; both flopped as a prelude to their future cult devotion. On July 9, Disney’s technologically groundbreaking “Tron,” set in a virtual universe of video-game software, completed the quintet.Not all of these movies were created equal artistically, but taken together, they made a compelling case for the increasing thematic flexibility of their genre. The range of tones and styles on display was remarkable, from family-friendly fantasy to gory horror. Whether giving a dated prime-time space opera new panache or recasting 1940s noir in postmodernist monochrome, the filmmakers (and special-effects technicians) of the summer of ’82 created a sublime season of sci-fi that looks, 40 years later, like the primal scene for many Hollywood blockbusters being made — or remade and remodeled — today. How could five such indelible movies arrive at the same time?Whether the summer of ’82 represented the gentrification of cinematic sci-fi or its artistic apex, the genre’s synthesis of spectacle and sociology had been underway for some time. Following the pulp fictions of the ’50s, if there was one movie that represented a great leap forward for cinematic science fiction, it was Stanley Kubrick’s epically scaled, narratively opaque 1968 film “2001: A Space Odyssey,” which not only featured a massive, mysterious monolith but also came to resemble one in the eyes of critics and audiences alike.The film’s grandeur was undeniable, and so was its gravitas: It was an epic punctuated with a question mark. Almost a decade later, “Star Wars” used a similar array of special effects to cultivate more weightless sensations. In lieu of Kubrick’s anxious allegory about humans outsmarted and destroyed by their own technology, George Lucas put escapism on the table — “a long time ago, in a galaxy far, far away” — and staged a reassuringly Manichaean battle between good and evil, with very fine aliens on both sides.The same year as “Star Wars,” Spielberg’s “Close Encounters of the Third Kind” rekindled the paranoid alien-invasion vibes of the ’50s with an optimistic twist. The film had originally been titled “Watch the Skies” in homage to Nyby’s classic, but it was an invitation to a more benevolent form of stargazing: Its climactic light show was as patriotic as Fourth of July fireworks, with a distinctly countercultural message worthy of Woodstock: Make love, not war (of the worlds).What united “Star Wars” and “Close Encounters,” beyond their makers’ shared sense of genre history (and mechanics), were their direct appeals to both children and the inner children of grown-ups everywhere. In The New Yorker, the influential and acerbic critic Pauline Kael carped that George Lucas was “in the toy business.” Like the scientist at the end of “The Thing From Another World,” she was raising the alarm about what she saw as a powerful, pernicious influence: the infantilization of the mass audience by special-effects spectacle.Yet even Kael submitted to the shamelessly populist charms of “E.T.,” which she described as being “bathed in warmth.” She wrote that the film, about the intimate friendship between a 10-year-old boy and a benign, petlike thing from another world, “reminds you of the goofiest dreams you had as a kid.”What The Times Said About These Five Movies in 1982Card 1 of 5Blade Runner. More

    • 88 Shares149 Views

      in Movies

      ‘Memory Box’ Review: Reanimating a Painful Past

      by

      In this ambitious, intergenerational drama, a teenager in Montreal discovers her mother’s diaries and photos from her adolescent years in a war-torn Lebanon.There’s a moment in “Memory Box” when Alex (Paloma Vauthier), a Lebanese teenager in Montreal, finds a series of old photos of her mother, Maia, walking through the streets of Beirut as a girl. Alex snaps pictures of them with her iPhone, then scrolls through them rapidly, so that the photos come to magical life, the still images becoming a movie.Such beautiful, séance-like moments abound in Joana Hadjithomas and Khalil Joreige’s drama, about the new lives that memories — even traumatic ones — can take when passed down through generations. On a snowy Christmas morning, Maia (Rim Turki) receives a box full of diaries, photos and tapes she had sent to a friend in Paris in the 1980s, documenting her adolescence in the shadow of the Lebanese Civil War.When Alex, defying her mother and grandmother’s orders, rummages through the box, she finds an entire life that Maia has never shared with her.The relationship between mother and daughter is rather thinly etched — there’s a little too much going on in this ambitious, intergenerational film — but Hadjithomas and Joreige deftly use Maia’s archive to weave together past and present. Her notebooks and cassettes are based on Hadjithomas’s real-life correspondences and Joreige’s photographs of Beirut. As Alex sifts through the items, the directors recreate the transporting workings of memory: Grainy photos turn into buoyant stop-motion animations that lead us into pop-scored flashback sequences.But when Maia excitedly develops a roll of film from 25 years ago, the pictures show up blank. Memories, whether human or technological, have their limits. But in sharing them, as “Memory Box” movingly demonstrates, we can discover them anew.Memory BoxNot rated. In English, French and Arabic, with subtitles. Running time: 1 hour 42 minutes. In theaters. More

    • 125 Shares99 Views

      in Movies

      ‘I Love My Dad’ Review: A Father Catfishes His Son

      by

      This comedy is a daddy-issues movie with a queasy premise truly made for these times.In his comedy, his writing and his social media presence, Patton Oswalt proves that nerdiness needn’t be a social liability. But in his most memorable screen roles — his disturbed, obsessive sports follower in “Big Fan” (2009), his withdrawn, physically challenged model-maker in “Young Adult” (2011) — he digs deep into the darker heart of dorkiness, if you will. His work in “I Love My Dad,” which won the audience award and the narrative feature award at this year’s South by Southwest Film Festival, is similarly committed, and, where it can be, acute. Too bad the performance isn’t in a better movie.While Oswalt’s character, Chuck, is a competent gamer and enjoys singing Cure songs at karaoke bars, his primary trait isn’t nerdiness so much as neediness. A pathological liar and an often absentee dad who has been letting his son, Franklin, down for decades, he nevertheless insists on connection.Franklin, now in his 20s and played by the movie’s writer-director, James Morosoni, has not been thriving. A stay in a vaguely sketched recovery facility spurs him to sever harmful relationships. So he blocks his dad on social media.This sends Chuck into a panic. In a diner he encounters Becca (Claudia Sulewski), a young waitress. Chuck invents a new social media account for her, through which he catfishes his lonely son, who immediately takes a liking to her.All of the uncomfortable scenarios you could possibly imagine then ensue. In real life, being defrauded in this way is, one presumes, exhilarating. At least during the period in which you’re falling for the con. And then, of course, it’s excruciating in hindsight. Since the audience is in on the scheme from the start, what we get is excruciating, uncut. But not too excruciating, because Franklin is such a drab cipher it’s hard to work up much empathy for him.The ostensibly comedic highlights include shots of Oswalt and Morosoni sloppily open-mouthed kissing. This, you see, contrasts the fantasy Franklin’s experiencing against the reality of what would be happening if … well, you get the idea. The remainder of the movie is a wait for the other narrative shoe to drop. After it does, a thoroughly improbable coda reminds us, once again, that in showbiz, it’s all about hope.This is the second indulgent and unaffecting daddy-issue movie of the summer — the first was “My Dead Dad.” One prays that there will not be a third.I Love My DadRated R for language, themes, inappropriate sloppy kissing. Running time: 1 hour 36 minutes. In theaters. More

    • 63 Shares179 Views

      in Movies

      ‘Claydream’ Review: Same Mold Story

      by

      In this documentary, Will Vinton, the animation visionary who gave life to the California Raisins and the Noid, gets a tribute.Will Vinton (1947-2018) wasn’t the first person to toy with clay figures in stop-motion animation, but his fingerprints are on some of the most famous and successful uses of the technique. He shared an Oscar for a short, “Closed Mondays,” in 1975. His studio’s 1980s commercials with the California Raisins and Domino’s Pizza’s Noid helped turn those characters into pop-culture phenomena. He trademarked the term Claymation. In the 1990s, Vinton worked advertising magic again with computer-animated talking M&M’s.He was also, judging from “Claydream,” a documentary from Marq Evans, the sort of visionary whose big dreams, business sense and intrafamilial skills did not always operate on equivalent levels. “He had trouble expressing emotions when it wasn’t with clay,” says Mary McDonald-Lewis, identified as a friend of Vinton’s, in the film. His twisted character Wilshire Pig did not catch on like Mickey Mouse. The movie opens by teasing a legal battle between Vinton and the Nike founder Phil Knight, who has been described as having forced him out of what was then called Will Vinton Studios in 2003.The career-highlights structure is perhaps overly familiar, but “Claydream” benefits from extensive interviews with Vinton and his many associates, and from the fact that Claymation is an engaging onscreen subject. Reading a history of Will Vinton Studios would not have the impact of getting to see the sometimes-ribald early shorts Vinton made in Berkeley, Calif., or of hearing old answering-machine messages left for Vinton by Michael Jackson, who eventually played a Raisin. Evans has made a lively and illuminating tribute, and not always an unduly flattering one.ClaydreamNot rated. Running time: 1 hour 36 minutes. In theaters. More

    • 100 Shares149 Views

      in Movies

      ‘Gone in the Night’ Review: Double-Booked and Double-Crossed

      by

      In Eli Horowitz’s horror film, Winona Ryder plays a woman who sets out to solve the mystery of a jilting.When did the horror of a double-booked vacation rental become a thing? It is the hook for two new releases, “Barbarian,” premiering later this month, and “Gone in the Night,” directed by Eli Horowitz and starring Winona Ryder and Dermot Mulroney. In Horowitz’s deft thriller (co-written with Matthew Derby), Ryder plays Kath, whose younger lover, Max (John Gallagher Jr.), disappears into that titular night.As they pull into a secluded cabin, it’s clear someone else is already there — another, younger couple. Were any of us met with the aggressive disdain Al (Owen Teague) shows the pair, we’d hop back into our vintage Volvo and high-tail it home, dark roads be damned. But no. After some prickly negotiating facilitated by Al’s girlfriend, Greta (Brianne Tju digging deep into the guile), Kath and Max stay. Soon enough, things turn frisky and weird. As the adult in the room (aging is a theme), Kath heads to bed. When she awakes, she learns from a sullen Al that Max and Greta are gone.After being stung, then furious, Kath starts to wonder how this abandonment could have happened. Her need to know leads her to the cabin’s owner, Barlow (an attractively grizzled Mulroney). They make a likable pair as they set out to solve the mystery of a jilting. Twists galore follow, the torque of which surprises again and again. In an amusing feint at the frenzied finale, the filmmakers leap, with the help of Ryder’s nuance and aplomb, from one contemporary fable to another, also born out of culturally shaped cravings.Gone in the NightRated R for rough language and some bloodletting moments. Running time: 1 hour 30 minutes. Rent or buy on Apple TV, Google Play and other streaming platforms and pay TV operators. More

    • 138 Shares189 Views

      in Movies

      How the Indian Action Spectacular ‘RRR’ Became a Smash in America

      by

      The unusual decision to rerelease the film a few weeks after its initial run has drawn enthusiastic audiences even though it’s available on Netflix.The Telugu-language Indian action spectacular “RRR,” or “Rise, Roar, Revolt,” was already a worldwide box office winner when it was released in March, grossing $65 million during its opening weekend. But it took an unusual second release for the period epic from the director S.S. Rajamouli to become a word-of-mouth smash across the United States. Now in its 10th week, it’s the rare Indian hit to catch on with American viewers outside the Indian diaspora, thanks to the unusual decision to relaunch the film weeks after it had already played across the country on 1,200 screens.Set in Delhi during the early 1920s, “RRR” follows two patriotic but philosophically opposed men (Ram Charan and N.T. Rama Rao Jr.) as they first clash with each other, then team up to rescue a kidnapped girl (Twinkle Sharma) from a pair of sadistic British colonial officials (Alison Doody and Ray Stevenson).A Hindi-language version made for the Bollywood market has been available to Netflix subscribers since May and was among the service’s Top 10 most watched titles in America for nine consecutive weeks. But even with simultaneous streaming, the movie has now grossed $14 million at the American box office and played in 175 additional theaters across 34 states. By contrast, the Telugu-language crime drama “Pushpa: The Rise — Part 1,” the highest-earning Indian movie of last year, made only $1.32 million during its American release.The president of the distributor Variance Films, Dylan Marchetti, estimates that most of the “RRR” ticket buyers had never before seen a production from Tollywood, the film industry that caters to audiences in Andhra Pradesh and Telangana, where Telugu is the main language.The story of how “RRR” broke through in the U.S. involves a rare relaunch — sold to moviegoers as an “encoRRRe” — by Variance in conjunction with an independent consultant, Josh Hurtado, and Sarigama Cinemas, the movie’s original distributor.Marchetti, who had previously booked contemporary Indian movies at the now-closed ImaginAsian theater in Manhattan, saw the film’s potential crossover appeal after repeatedly watching it with enthusiastic audiences in March. Hurtado, the main consultant at the independently run Potentate Films, also felt the movie had universal appeal. He had previously helped international film festivals program the South Indian hitmaker Rajamouli’s surreal 2012 action fantasy “Eega” (Telugu for “The Fly”). Together, the two contacted Sarigama Cinemas to collaborate on a one-night-only theatrical revival of “RRR.”They hoped that the event would create what Marchetti called “new evangelists” who could widen the movie’s reach from a few hundred fans to tens of thousands across the country, with some help from social media and the hashtag #encoRRRe. The ticket sales for those June 1 screenings were so impressive that Marchetti and Hurtado soon expanded their encoRRRe plans.The response was never a given. Most new Indian movies are not marketed to American viewers beyond those who speak the film’s language, and most such films are already screened at national chains like AMC and Cinemark. Many American programmers and exhibitors also still face significant financial pressure created by the pandemic. “Independent theaters are hurting right now,” Marchetti said, “some very badly.”After some negotiations with Sarigama Cinemas, Hurtado and Marchetti spent a hectic month planning the rerelease. Some American programmers and exhibitors were sold on “RRR” just because of Hurtado and Marchetti’s pitch. Beth Barrett, for instance, screened the movie on June 1 at the Seattle International Film Festival Cinema Uptown.“RRR,” with Rama Rao, was a theatrical hit even though it was available simultaneously on Netflix.DVV Entertainment“SIFF is known for always being up to try something new,” Barrett said. “And our audience is always up for an event screening, so we booked the screening based on Dylan’s enthusiasm and the trailer he sent over, plus his decades of amazingly eclectic audience-friendly taste.”Gregory Laemmle, the president of the West Coast theater chain that bears his name, attended the Seattle screening after booking “RRR” at three of the Laemmle Theaters’ California locations. (“RRR” has since gone on to play at five Laemmle theaters.) Laemmle was already a believer, sight unseen, thanks partly to Marchetti’s recommendation and partly to enthusiastic social media responses from the initial release. Ticket sales at Laemmle theaters were high enough to warrant a weeklong engagement, which began June 3. “But after seeing the movie, I knew that I would need to clear space for that run to play” longer, Laemmle said.Cristina Cacioppo programmed “RRR” at the Nitehawk Prospect Park in Brooklyn, where it drew enthusiastic moviegoers in the 20-to-30 age range, most from outside the Indian diaspora. “There was an overall wave of joy throughout,” Cacioppo said by email, adding later. “You could feel the room smiling, the jaws dropping.”Jake Isgar at the Alamo Drafthouse chain said there were at least 10 rounds of spontaneous applause from a packed screening in San Francisco. “This movie is great on whatever-sized screen you watch, but it’s next-level in a full theater with a rabid audience,” he added.Hurtado said that many encoRRRe attendees praise the film for the same reasons that had previously dissuaded them from watching new Indian movies: “long run times, song and dance numbers, and ridiculous action” he said. “People come out saying they wish that this three-hour movie were longer.”Marchetti has also found that “RRR” has become a “gateway drug” for new Indian movie fans. Some film programmers, like Isgar, have been so inspired by the audience response that they’ve booked a few future screenings of new Indian movies, like the Hindi-language superhero fantasy “Brahmastra Part One: Shiva” as well as repertory titles like Rajamouli’s “Eega.”Indian moviegoers already know about Rajamouli’s knack for maximalist action and imaginative set pieces, many of which are built around dynamic special effects and choreography. The musical number “Naatu Naatu” (Telugu for “Native Native”) from “RRR” has also become a viral hit thanks to Charan and Rama Rao’s playful syncopated dance moves and infectious singing. (Chandrabose wrote the lyrics while M.M. Keeravani composed the music.) Instagram playback singers Ankita and Antara Nandy’s loving re-enactment of the musical number has been viewed more than 130,000 times.In a recent Zoom interview, Rajamouli recalled seeing Indian audiences cheer the “Naatu Naatu” scene on opening night but said he wasn’t sure how the scene would be received outside the country. “Indian filmmaking has some exclusive styles,” Rajamouli said. “Song and dance, for example. It can be very tacky, if used just for the sake of it. But can be very dramatic and compelling” if used strategically. Still, Rajamouli knew that “Naatu Naatu” would be a hit as soon as he cast Charan and Rama Rao, who both had worked with Rajamouli on earlier hits.In hindsight, Rajamouli’s breakthrough with Western audiences seems almost inevitable after the recent global success of his two-part “Baahubali” historic epics from 2015 and 2017, the latter of which ultimately grossed an unprecedented $20 million in the United States. Rajamouli hopes to adapt a movie version of the Sanskrit epic poem “The Mahabharata” — with Telugu dialogue, because “I think in Telugu” — but not any time soon. “I have a long way to go before I feel I can take on such a project,” he said.Meanwhile, Marchetti and Hurtado continue to arrange “RRR” screenings in the United States, including at theaters in West Virginia and Hawaii. Marchetti compared the American release of new Indian movies to a continuing celebration, with companies like Variance and Potentate Films helping pass out invitations. “The party may have started earlier and without you,” Marchetti said. “But it’s a good party, whether you show up or not, and you can still show up at any time.” More

    • 125 Shares199 Views

      in Movies

      At the BlackStar Film Festival, a Revelatory Understanding of Cinema

      by

      Specializing in work by Black, brown and Indigenous directors, the annual Philadelphia event showcases experimental work from around the world.Don’t call it the Black Sundance.Though it was dubbed that by Ebony magazine, the BlackStar Film Festival, now in its 11th year, is a cultural institution all its own. Sharing a similar focus on independent cinema with its Park City counterpart, BlackStar — kicking off on Wednesday in Philadelphia with a slate of 77 features and shorts from all over the world — partly distinguishes itself from other festivals with its emphasis on work made exclusively by “Black, brown and Indigenous artists.” But as a regular of the festival, I’ve always been struck by its ambitious bridging of cultural specificity, social justice and the avant-garde, making it an exciting, expansive and revelatory cinematic experience.Founded by Maori Karmael Holmes in 2012, it was conceived as a one-off event to showcase Black films that hadn’t been screened in the Philadelphia area. “I had just moved back from Los Angeles and felt like there was a gap in Philly for these particular works,” Holmes told me. “And I started collecting films that hadn’t been shown in the area that had been made in 2011 or 2012, and very quickly had a list of 30 films, so I pivoted to making this a film festival.”Holmes, who now serves as artistic director and chief executive of BlackStar Projects, the organization behind the festival, explained, “It was just meant to be this one-time celebration.” But more than 1,500 people showed up, and after the festival was mentioned by Ebony as well as the director Ava DuVernay, in a New York Times interview, “suddenly, we had outsized attention, and people asked, ‘When’s the next one?’”The gathering quickly earned a reputation as the go-to festival for emerging and established Black experimental filmmakers. Terence Nance, perhaps more than any other director, knows this. The creator of the genre-bending TV series “Random Acts of Flyness,” his features and shorts have been shown at the festival every year since its start.“I would say BlackStar has been foundational for me,” Nance told me. “Before the pandemic, it was that yearly summer touch point in Philly for those of us interested in the project of Black cinema to get together, kick it and watch things that are pursuing a Black cinema language, ethos and way of being. That just doesn’t exist anywhere else and on this scale.”A scene from “Vortex,” the new short by Rikki Wright and Terence Nance.via BlackStar ProjectsBut it is also an opportunity to share new works and receive critical feedback, making it a rare space for filmmakers of color, especially those pushing the boundaries of their form. An experimental short by Nance and the director Rikki Wright, titled “Vortex,” will have its debut at the festival this year. “People will tell you your film was amazing but also what did not work,” Nance explained. “There, I think that it is possible to enter those conversations safely, or maybe an even better word is with love. I think that’s how communities refine and stick to each other.”The festival, named for the Pan-Africanist Marcus Garvey’s international shipping line, offers audiences unique access to deeply political and highly experimental films from all over the African diaspora. “Something that I’m really proud of is the global outlook that BlackStar has,” the festival’s director, Nehad Khader, said. “We’re interested in Black American stories, but we’re also really interested in Black stories from the continent and the Caribbean, Latin America and Canada.” And though the festival has always featured filmmakers of color (Khader is a Palestinian American director herself), their inclusion is now an explicit part of the selection process. (The organization received 1,200 submissions this year alone.)“BlackStar started with a focus on Black cinema and then expanded into brown and Indigenous cinema as well,” Khader noted. “Now we don’t just have Black stories from Asia and the Arab world, but also Indigenous stories from Australia and Peru. This comes from an ethos that we are the global majority. We think about ourselves in this way.”This year’s program includes films that are both socially relevant and fantastic, futuristic and familial.Mahamat-Saleh Haroun’s “Lingui, the Sacred Bonds,” for instance, is a tender, intimate Chadian drama about a single mother, Amina (Achouackh Abakar Souleymane), and her struggle to help her 15-year-old daughter, Maria (Rihane Khalil Alio), get a safe abortion in a country where it is illegal. While the film speaks to a larger battle over reproductive rights, it is also a warm, tightly woven narrative that transports us to the outskirts of Chad’s capital, N’Djamena, and shows us the vibrancy and vulnerability of female life in this majority Muslim country. “Haroun has a gift for distilling volumes of meaning in his direct, lucid, balanced visuals,” Manohla Dargis wrote in her review in February, “which he uses to complement and illuminate the minimalist, naturalistic dialogue.”Thelonious Monk as seen in “Rewind & Play,” from Alain Gomis.via BlackStar ProjectsIn many ways, the documentary “Rewind & Play” by the French filmmaker Alain Gomis seems like it would be all dialogue. That’s because of its premise: In 1969, the great bebop pianist Thelonious Monk was interviewed for hours under the hot lights at a Paris television studio by a fellow musician, Henri Renaud. But rather than reproduce the false sense of camaraderie that Renaud strove for, Gomis blends the original footage with outtakes from the archives to both expand our appreciation of Monk’s genius as well as critique how the white Renaud (and thus mass media) sought to shape and create stereotypical representations of the Black avant-garde. Gomis reveals how Monk’s silence (the one time he shares his opinion, Renaud tells the producer, “I think it’s best if we erase it”) functioned as a strategy to circumvent Renaud’s racialized gaze and assert Monk’s agency and artistry beyond it.Experimentation dominates “One Take Grace,” the documentary debut from the South African actor and director Lindiwe Matshikiza. The film is the outgrowth of a decade-long collaboration with a 58-year-old Black South African domestic worker, Mothiba Grace Bapela. Following Bapela’s daily labor, uncovering her past trauma, and exploring her aspirations to be an actor herself, the film uses different lenses, including a fisheye, to reveal the rituals and rules that govern Bapela’s life. The result: a dynamic, curious and insightful portrait of a charismatic figure who might ordinarily be overlooked. Similar themes of visibility and gender inform the “Locomote” shorts program, which includes the trans activist Elle Moxley’s political coming-of-age story, “Black Beauty,” and Simone Leigh and Madeleine Hunt-Ehrlich’s experimental “Conspiracy,” set in Leigh’s studio on the eve of her landmark exhibition in the United States Pavilion at the 2022 Venice Biennale.“One Take Grace” is the result of a collaboration between the director Lindiwe Matshikiza and a South African domestic worker, Mothiba Grace Bapela.via BlackStar ProjectsSuch diversity in geography, genre and narrative style is one of the main reasons the Nigerian British filmmaker Jenn Nkiru, best known for directing Beyoncé’s Grammy Award-winning video “Brown Skin Girl,” routinely makes the pilgrimage to BlackStar. Another is the sense of community it fosters, rendering it more of what she calls “a big, beautiful family reunion.” She said, “Even though it’s a festival, there’s such a level of concern for people’s work and welfare, and that’s very indicative to me of what I imagine Black filmmaking is.”This will be the festival premiere of her “Out / Side of Time,” a short about a fictional Black family in the 19th-century community of Seneca Village in New York City. Originally commissioned by the Metropolitan Museum of Art for “Before Yesterday We Could Fly: An Afrofuturist Period Room,” it stands out for its format as a five-channel black-and-white video playing on what looks like a 1950s television set. At BlackStar, Nkiru’s nonlinear, intergenerational story will be part of a larger conversation about form, temporality and the visual language of contemporary Black cinema.“I find that BlackStar is very experimental in what it showcases and what it celebrates,” she said, adding later, that’s “important because it serves as a reminder of the potentiality of Black cinema and of what we can do, not just in our art making but also in our nation-building as well.”The BlackStar Film Festival runs Wednesday through Sunday in Philadelphia. For more information, go to blackstarfest.org. More

    • 113 Shares189 Views

      in Movies

      ‘Exposing Muybridge’ Review: Putting a Cinematic Pioneer in Focus

      by

      A documentary of the 19th-century photographer Eadweard Muybridge’s legacy shows the enduring fascination of his work.“Exposing Muybridge,” a documentary on the art and science of the pioneering photographer Eadweard Muybridge, trots into release less than two weeks after Jordan Peele’s “Nope” put a new spotlight on Muybridge’s proto-cinematic images of horses in motion.The documentary, written and directed by Marc Shaffer, is in some ways a standard, PBS-ready biographical survey in which talking heads relate the highlights of Muybridge’s career. By comparison, Thom Andersen’s “Eadweard Muybridge, Zoopraxographer,” from 1975, made more innovative use of Muybridge’s photographs for visual and storytelling purposes. Still, Shaffer devotes time to aspects of Muybridge’s legacy that don’t make all the standard rundowns.Before Muybridge turned his attention to motion, the movie notes, he shot landscapes in the West. Shaffer trails the photographers Byron Wolfe and Mark Klett to Tenaya Lake in Yosemite National Park in California, where they try to locate Muybridge’s original vantage point. They also analyze photographs of the same location by the 20th-century photographers Edward Weston and Ansel Adams, to shed light on Muybridge’s distinctive eye as an artist.Others share views on Muybridge’s eccentricities. The actor Gary Oldman, a collector of Muybridge’s work who has been involved in trying to make a Muybridge biopic, comes off as a serious enthusiast when expounding on the photographer’s motives and photographs. The biographer Marta Braun and the art historian Amy Werbel challenge the idea that Muybridge’s motion studies at the University of Pennsylvania should count as scientific, in line with the university’s ostensible expectations. The film historian Tom Gunning suggests that Muybridge was, unwittingly, something of a Surrealist forebear.While starchy in presentation, “Exposing Muybridge” makes clear that its subject’s images still have a lot to show us.Exposing MuybridgeNot rated. Running time: 1 hour 28 minutes. Rent or buy on Apple TV, Google Play and other streaming platforms and pay TV operators. More