Movies

Subterms

    More stories

    • 63 Shares129 Views

      in Movies

      ‘The Vourdalak’ Review: Blood Relations

      by

      An endangered French aristocrat is stranded with a benighted rural family in this tragicomic fairy tale.Patriarchy first enslaves, then noisily devours in “The Vourdalak,” a gloomy Gothic folk tale with a robust literary and cinematic provenance.Adapting an 1839 novella by A.K. Tolstoy, the director, Adrien Beau, and Hadrien Bouvier have concocted a quaintly comic throwback to the vampire movies of yesteryear. Traversing a war-ravaged Eastern Europe, an effete French nobleman, the Marquis d’Urfé (Kacey Mottet-Klein), is set upon by bandits and forced to seek shelter in a forbidding manor house. The family inside is welcoming, if oddly secretive, anxiously awaiting the return of their father, Gorcha, who left to fight marauding Turks. There’s a domineering elder brother (Grégoire Colin), his cross-dressing sibling (Vassili Schneider), and their beautiful, lovelorn sister (Ariane Labed) who likes to eat worms and haunt the edge of a nearby cliff. The Marquis is instantly smitten.Viewed through the horrified eyes of our powdered and painted hero, the return of Gorcha — who is now clearly, terrifyingly nonhuman — is irresistibly funny. Far from the niceties of the French court, the Marquis is ill-equipped to process his hosts’ rough peculiarities and baffled by their meek subservience to Gorcha’s commands. They know what their father has become, but, trapped by love and filial duty, they seem incapable of fleeing their ghastly fates.Washed in a mood of misery and unease, this bizarre debut feature gains heft from David Chizallet’s often lovely photography and a sound design that prioritizes slurping and chomping. The actors are above reproach; but the movie’s star is inarguably the cadaverous marionette, voiced by Beau, that plays Gorcha. Its creepily insinuating presence — and hilarious involvement in a cringe-inducing sex scene — cements “The Vourdalak” as an endearing oddity. Surrender to its vintage vibe and its emotional kick may surprise you.The VourdalakNot rated. In French, with subtitles. Running time: 1 hour 31 minutes. In theaters. More

    • 50 Shares189 Views

      in Movies

      ‘Music’ Review: Oedipus Rocks

      by

      An ethereal, experimental new drama retells the story of the mythical Greek hero.“Music” is a contemporary retelling of the Oedipus legend, though the parallels between the director Angela Schanelec’s experimental drama and the original Greek myth are elusive by design.In the beginning of the film, a crew of young people pull up to a craggy Grecian coastline, among them Jon (Aliocha Schneider), whose feet, like Sophocles’ hero, are scraped and bloodied. While there, Jon accidentally knocks one of his companions into a rock. The friend, Lucian (Theodore Vrachas), hits his head, and Jon goes to prison for his crime. Upon his release, he reunites with a willowy woman, Iro (Agathe Bonitzer), with whom he starts a family.All of this unfolds with little to no dialogue. The biggest plot points are choreographed like somber dances, gestural fragments in a loosely bound narrative that employs booming, baroque music (and later, modern indie ballads) to sculpt its emotions.The Oedipus myth provides footholds with which to make sense of these ethereal proceedings, though it’s clear Schanelec is interested only in the contours of story: More powerful, for instance, are the supple ways the hands of two lovers touch for the first time; the way a father gazes beholding his child.“Music” follows “I Was at Home, But…” (2020), Schanelec’s similarly mysterious riff on “Hamlet,” but there’s a crucial difference separating this new film from not just the previous one, but possibly all of Schanelec’s earlier work.We eventually discover who Jon’s parents are, but the film’s most significant revision of the original story takes mercy on Jon. He is never told the truth, and this blissful, productive ignorance pervades the second, radiant half of the film, which is set in Berlin, where Jon’s musical gifts are foregrounded. Hope was never something that I associated with Schanelec’s typically dour films, yet here, from the darkness of a timeless tragedy emerges light.MusicNot rated. In Greek, with subtitles. Running time: 1 hour 48 minutes. In theaters. More

    • 150 Shares199 Views

      in Movies

      Review: In ‘June Zero,’ There Are Many Ways to See the Past

      by

      Jake Paltrow’s film braids three fictional stories around the 1962 execution of Adolf Eichmann, the Nazi official and war criminal.In 1960, Israeli agents smuggled the Nazi official Adolf Eichmann from Buenos Aires to Jerusalem to stand trial for his role in the Holocaust. Rather than focus on the operation, or on Eichmann’s notorious defense, “June Zero” thoughtfully braids three stories that relate to the events around Eichmann’s execution by hanging in 1962.Jake Paltrow’s film, which premiered at festivals in 2022, might sound like an exercise in hagiography: Drawing on actual accounts, it’s framed by the tale of David, a plucky Israeli teenager who finds himself involved in Eichmann’s fate. But the shifting story, written by Paltrow and Tom Shoval, complicates the act of commemoration and dwells on the moral quandaries and uncomfortable resonances that result from the events.David (Noam Ovadia, a nervy newcomer) is pushed to work in a factory after trouble in school. His boss, Shlomi (Tzahi Grad), a brutal former soldier, is secretly custom-building an oven for the government to cremate Eichmann’s remains, and their plan is played in the movie for unease as much as for suspense.At the same time, Eichmann’s guard in jail, Haim (Yoav Levi), nearly goes mad from his assignment to protect the Nazi. The spotlight then leaps to Poland, where a tour guide (Tom Hagi), a Holocaust survivor, spars with the trip organizer (Joy Rieger), weighing the necessary rituals of remembrance against the risks of being trapped by the past.Concluding with David’s role in Eichmann’s disposal, “June Zero” sticks to its characters’ specific experiences of these events. But the resourceful narrative, with some surprising grace notes, tends to invite questioning and reflection.June ZeroNot rated. In Hebrew and Spanish, with subtitles. Running time: 1 hour 45 minutes. In theaters. More

    • 100 Shares159 Views

      in Movies

      ‘Fancy Dance’ Review: The Search for a Sister

      by

      This debut feature about a missing woman on an Oklahoma reservation is an imperfect but palpably emotional portrait of desperation and hard-won hope.“Fancy Dance,” the debut feature film from Erica Tremblay, begins where most films of its ilk might find their story’s second act. Tawi, a mother of a teenage daughter, has been missing for weeks. Search parties have been combing the fields, and her sister, Jax (Lily Gladstone), has struggled to get the F.B.I. to assist.The ghost of Tawi, in other words, is a fixture from the start and hovers over the film. The empty space of her — we glimpse her only in photos and fliers — is intentional: This story about the search for a missing woman on the Seneca-Cayuga reservation of Oklahoma is not a mystery thriller, and the film is not meant to milk dramatic tension from her disappearance. Rather, Tawi’s case is all too common, and the entry point to what is ultimately a portrait of desperation, poverty and hard-won hope.Hope, or the illusion of it, is worth fighting for because of Roki (Isabel Deroy-Olson), Tawi’s daughter, whom Jax has been taking care of since Tawi went missing. The two are close, forcing Jax between two poles: the hardened exterior that reservation life necessitates (Gladstone is imperfect, but well suited to Jax’s steel-encased tenderness) and the desire to preserve Roki’s innocence. Even as they commit petty crimes to scrounge up cash and continue the search, Jax assures Roki that her mother will be at the upcoming annual powwow, where there is a mother-daughter dance.Tremblay’s film is not always graceful — the dialogue and acting can be stilted, and one hopes for a little more formal rigor — but it’s a strong debut undergirded by a palpably real emotional core and an un-showy sense of the reality of reservation life. Jax is often confronted by a push and pull in the same room: those ready to pounce and those offering to help. Each stance is born out of the same understanding — that the world is harsh, and not everyone can survive it.Fancy DanceRated R for language, some drug content and sexual material. Running time: 1 hour 30 minutes. In theaters. More

    • 75 Shares169 Views

      in Movies

      ‘Daddio’ Review: Two for the Road

      by

      Sean Penn and Dakota Johnson outclass a humdrum script as two people who talk — and talk — in a New York City taxicab.Handicapped by more than a terrible title, Christy Hall’s “Daddio,” set almost entirely inside a New York City taxicab, tries too hard and lasts too long. A synthetic encounter between a gabby cabby and his self-possessed female passenger, the movie is a claustrophobic two-hander oxygenated in part by Phedon Papamichael’s sleekly gorgeous cinematography.The star power of its leads, Sean Penn and Dakota Johnson, doesn’t hurt either. Injecting nuance and emotional depth into Hall’s uninspired script, the two turn a threatened slog into a mildly enjoyable journey. Penn plays Clark, a tough, salt-of-the-earth type (he actually talks about salt at one point) whose roughened hands and veined forearms are catnip to the camera. Johnson is his last fare of the night, a sophisticated young woman traveling from Kennedy Airport to midtown Manhattan. He calls her Girlie.He is very nosy. When not railing against credit cards and rideshare apps, he peppers his passenger with increasingly personal questions. Initially guarded, Girlie slowly warms to this drive-by philosopher. Through the barriers of age, gender, class and education, their revelations grow more intimate — sometimes implausibly so, as when Clark shares a distasteful anecdote about his first wife, along with his thoughts on what married men want in a mistress. (Hint: It’s not love.) Not that Girlie is clutching her pearls; rather, she’s surreptitiously sexting her tongue-lolling lover.Somehow, Penn never allows Clark’s inappropriateness to become predatory, and Johnson’s marvelously expressive features reveal details the dialogue declines to provide. Yet if there’s a finer point to any of this — beyond yes, talking to strangers is sometimes beneficial — it eluded me. I did, though, appreciate Hall’s choice to flash some texts directly onto the movie screen: Squinting at characters’ smartphones is one of my least favorite activities. Along with listening to gossipy cabdrivers.DaddioRated R for bared breasts and barroom language. Running time: 1 hour 41 minutes. In theaters. More

    • 125 Shares119 Views

      in Movies

      ‘Chronicles of a Wandering Saint’ Review: Are the Meek Blessed?

      by

      It’s clear that Rita’s life in rural Argentina could use a bit of magic. But her willingness to bend the truth to achieve it heralds disaster.“How do I know if something is a miracle?” This is the question that Rita (Mónica Villa), a 60-something Catholic woman living in rural Argentina, poses to a search engine — though deep down, she already knows the answer. A statue that Rita found while tending to her duties as the local chapel keeper isn’t the long-lost figure of St. Rita. But it’d be a miracle if it were, and miracles mean glory, attention and prestige in her small town.Rita’s simple life — scrubbing pews, tolerating the pretenses of other church volunteers, coming home to her spacey but loyal husband, Norberto (Horacio Marassi) — could use a bit of magic. Yet this desire, and her willingness to bend the truth to achieve it, herald disaster.Directed by Tomás Gómez Bustillo, “Chronicles of a Wandering Saint” begins as a slow-moving scammer comedy. Halfway through, the film receives a jolt, and Rita’s drab surroundings take on an enchanted quality that places the film within the robust tradition of Latin American magical realism.The visually elegant film can also be overly precious and whimsical, though that might be a virtue by some measures. In this regard it shares DNA with the laconic comedies of Aki Kaurismaki. The superior second half, in which Rita’s reality is upended, eases into a realm of fantasy that is admirable — and more effective — because of its uncanny, inventive minimalism.That miracles happen under the most banal circumstances is a bit of a cliché, but the film tackles this conceit with the kind of originality and intelligence that makes you forget there’s a blueprint in the first place.Chronicles of a Wandering SaintNot rated. In Spanish, with subtitles. Running time: 1 hour 24 minutes. In theaters. More

    • 113 Shares189 Views

      in Movies

      ‘Fahrenheit 9/11’ at 20: Revisiting the Fear and Anger

      by

      Michael Moore’s hit documentary isn’t a prosecutor’s brief but a political and emotional appeal, rooted in the ways in which the country’s burdens are unequally borne.Michael Moore’s 2004 documentary “Fahrenheit 9/11” opens with a dazed look at the 2000 presidential election, when it seemed that Vice President Al Gore might defeat George W. Bush, then the governor of Texas. “Was it all just a dream?” Moore’s voice-over intones, before going on to chronicle Bush’s first year in office, the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, and wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.The opening might remind some viewers of witnessing election night 2016 and Donald Trump’s surprise victory, but that’s only one echo of several in Moore’s blockbuster documentary. Twenty years ago, “Fahrenheit 9/11” landed in an era facing similar challenges to today: wars abroad that divide people at home, worries that the country was losing sight of long-cherished principles, fears about presidential abuses of power. It felt like a do-or-die moment, much as 2024 does, and Moore embraced the roles of truth-teller, fire-starter, satirist, confidant, and man-of-the-people bullhorn.The movie was a popular phenomenon: It became the top-grossing documentary domestically, according to Box Office Mojo, making $119 million. This was years before streamers pumped out hours and hours of nonfiction features and series. Controversy erupted even before it was released, when Disney tried to block its distribution out of political concerns. After a Palme d’Or win in Cannes, a June release followed.The groundswell showed that Moore was tuning into a national mood. As Bush sought re-election in the thick of the Iraq occupation and terrorism alerts, Moore’s film vented about the toll of the Iraq War and the administration’s overall response to the 9/11 attacks. (Cue the infamous Aug. 6, 2001, C.I.A. warning to Bush: “Bin Laden Determined to Strike in U.S.”) Whipping up sympathy and outrage over the deaths of young U.S. soldiers and Iraqis, and the perceptions of Bush as out of touch, Moore stirs up a potent cocktail of damning news clips, filmed confrontations and tag-alongs, and plain old ridicule (for instance, Attorney General John Ashcroft bellowing a patriotic song of his own composition).It’s all less preachy than polemical, with doses of Mark Twain showmanship and heartstring-pulling. Moore’s feature managed to capture a popular political narrative about recent U.S. history without feeling out of date as soon as it was released. It’s a feat that today’s constant EKG of social media response has made more difficult (along with evolving trends in how movies are made and released). In a time before YouTube, Moore’s documentary performed a service in surfacing footage of casualties or abuses in Iraq, or insensitive presidential gaffes, that was not always available to see.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 113 Shares149 Views

      in Movies

      Alec Baldwin’s Long Journey to Court After ‘Rust’ Shooting

      by

      It’s been a challenge to follow the case. Here are its many twists and turns. The actor Alec Baldwin is scheduled to go on trial next month for involuntary manslaughter in Santa Fe, N.M.Baldwin’s long journey to the courtroom started on Oct. 21, 2021, on the set of the western movie “Rust,” when the gun he was holding while blocking out a shot discharged, firing a live round that injured the movie’s director, Joel Souza, and killed its cinematographer, Halyna Hutchins.It was an almost unimaginable tragedy, but Baldwin soon found himself in legal jeopardy, too. The subsequent saga has amounted to a high-stakes version of a familiar Baldwin ritual: He does or says something controversial; then, in an attempt to be understood, he doubles down on whatever he said or did, inviting further scrutiny; finally, feeling victimized and aggrieved, he vows to stop engaging with the media. He was in this third stage by the time I started reporting a few months ago. To trace the improbable arc of his prosecution, I interviewed more than 30 people in New York and Santa Fe, reviewed numerous public court filings, police records and videos, and obtained additional documents under New Mexico’s freedom-of-information act.It’s been a challenge to follow the case through all of its many twists and turns. Here’s what you need to know as the trial approaches.Troubling details quickly emerged about the film’s set.The shooting occurred at 1:46 p.m. at the Bonanza Creek Ranch, a family-owned Old West movie set about 20 miles southeast of Santa Fe. We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More