More stories

  • in

    ‘Memory’ Review: Getting Too Old for This

    In this action thriller, Liam Neeson plays an assassin struggling with Alzheimer’s disease. It’s not as interesting as it sounds.The premise of “Memory,” the latest action thriller from the “Casino Royale” director Martin Campbell, is fascinating: Liam Neeson plays Alex Lewis, an aging assassin struggling with Alzheimer’s disease. As Alex seeks vengeance against a child trafficking operation in El Paso, he becomes increasingly unpredictable to the F.B.I. team tracking him, led by the contemplative agent Vincent Serra (Guy Pearce). Unique premise aside, “Memory” is an absurd slog. Its plot clichés and wooden performances are far more enduring than its narrative.This is a remake of the 2005 Belgian film “The Memory of a Killer,” which was a critical success. “Memory,” then, is yet another embarrassing American adaptation. It plays as if the worst episodes of “Law and Order: Special Victims Unit” have all been processed in a blender and then stretched to nearly two hours long. The script, by Dario Scardapane, is threadbare in some parts and redundant in others. Its treatment of female characters is, at best, bleak. There are multiple pauses for eye roll-inducing genre fare, like a violent police interrogation or a shot of the grizzled Agent Serra staring out a window and drinking scotch. The American characters are performed almost entirely by British or Australian actors, a choice that might be less noticeable in a film not set in Texas.Neeson is fine and gets to hit his standard action movie beats, like growling out threats and bedding a much younger woman. But he’s also surprisingly underutilized — the film shifts focus to Agent Serra early on, leaving Alex and his disability to languish in the shadows. Whatever appeal this film had in its original iteration has been sapped out, leaving a story that, when not completely vexing, is either mind-numbing or hilarious by accident.MemoryRated R for bullets in brains and damsels in distress. Running time: 1 hour 54 minutes. In theaters. More

  • in

    ‘I Love America’ Review: The Gauche Rituals of Modern Romance

    The determinedly uplifting comedy follows a 50-year-old French filmmaker as she dates in Los Angeles.After years of Americans having romantic epiphanies onscreen in Paris, “I Love America” returns the favor by setting Sophie Marceau loose on Tinder in Los Angeles. Marceau plays Lisa, a 50-year-old filmmaker and mother of two loving daughters who tries a personal reset by leaving France. Originally released in France, it’s a determinedly uplifting comedy of growth, based on the experiences of its director, Lisa Azuelos.The plot can be summed up in a group of keywords: dating scene, gay best friend, fish out of water, mommy issues, yoga humor. With the help of her trusty but heartbroken pal, Luka (Djanis Bouzyani), Lisa navigates the gauche rituals of modern American romance — we are told that the French don’t really do dates — but she finds a keeper, John (Colin Woodell), without much trouble.Clunky flashbacks reveal how Lisa’s aloof mom, a singer, dumped her at a boarding school, though she did have a groovy, disco-loving dad. (Azuelos’s mother was the singer and actress, Marie Laforêt, who died in 2019, and the flashbacks evoke some of Azuelos’s own childhood.) Lisa’s voice-over delivers pseudowisdom, and wedding crowd pleasers fill the soundtrack.Marceau beams with unshakable good vibes, like a lion in the sun, though that makes her woes feel not so woeful. But Azuelos’s film does glimpse moments that feel true to the sometimes strange complexity of emotions — Lisa and her sister bond over having strong sex drives after their mother’s death — and it has a certain through-the-looking-glass curiosity value for American audiences. Plus, legions of giggling, English-speaking schoolkids will be delighted by a scene that builds a punchline around the French word for seal.I Love AmericaNot rated. In French and English, with subtitles. Running time: 1 hour 42 minutes. Watch on Amazon. More

  • in

    ‘Vortex’ Review: A Split Screen and a Shared Fate

    Gaspar Noé’s new film chronicles the decline of an elderly couple in remorseless, mesmerizing detail.According to Philip Roth, “Old age isn’t a battle; old age is a massacre.” Affirming that grim insight, Gaspar Noé’s “Vortex” is a relentless chronicle of carnage. From opening scenes that include a vintage video of the eternally young Françoise Hardy singing “Mon amie la rose” — a minor-key meditation on the passage of time and the decay of youth — it’s obvious that there is only one way that this story of an elderly Parisian couple will end.Maybe that’s true of all stories. Plenty of movies set their characters on a path to the grave. But very few chart the course with such exquisite, excruciating attention to the minor indignities and existential terrors along the way. “Vortex” is not without intimations of grace and episodes of tenderness, but it also refuses any gesture of consolation. “Grandma and Grandpa have a new home,” a young boy remarks as his grandparents’ ashes are sealed into a wall of tombs. “It’s not a home,” his father corrects him. “Homes are for the living.”The home that the deceased shared, an apartment near the Stalingrad metro station in Paris, is a vivid presence throughout the film, most of which takes place within its book-stuffed rooms and narrow corridors. The husband and wife, whose names are never uttered — she is played by Françoise Lebrun, he by Dario Argento — have clearly been here for a long time. The art on the walls and the volumes stacked on every surface, even in the bathroom, testify to lives of political radicalism and intellectual engagement.She is a psychiatrist. He is a writer, working (in longhand and on a manual typewriter) on a book about cinema and dreams. Infirmity has taken a toll on both of them. He has heart trouble and survived a stroke a few years earlier. She seems to have Alzheimer’s, though the diagnosis remains unspoken. “It’s a very well-known disease,” her husband says. “Everyone knows how it goes.”In the abstract, maybe — and also in movies like “The Father,” “Still Alice” and “Amour,” a Paris-set tragedy that “Vortex” very much resembles — but Noé is less interested in clinical details than in sensations and states of consciousness. A prominent avatar of what’s sometimes called the New French Extremity, he has specialized in immersive spectacles of shock, cruelty and disorientation. His films (“Irreversible,” “Enter the Void” and “Climax,” among others) don’t merely traffic in explicit images of sex, violence, sexual violence and drug-induced frenzy. They push at the boundaries of audience experience and defy conventions of cinematic space and time, trying not to represent reality but rather to supplant it.“Every movie is a dream,” the husband in “Vortex” muses, and his elaborations on the idea might serve as a running commentary on the movie he’s in. (He also likes to quote Edgar Allan Poe, who asked, “Is all that we see or seem/But a dream within a dream?”) Argento, a venerable Italian horror auteur, speaks with some authority on the matter, since, like Noé, he is an uncompromising creator of cinematic nightmares. This one is all the more unsettling for being grounded in the mundane.After a brief prologue that consists of a scene of the couple sipping wine on their terrace and that luminous Françoise Hardy clip, the screen splits into two squares with rounded corners and a narrow gutter in the middle. Sometimes, when the husband and wife are together, the images overlap, presenting slightly different angles on the same action. More often, each spouse occupies a separate frame, and they move in counterpoint through familiar routines and periods of panic and confusion, a technique that emphasizes their isolation from each other even in their most intimate moments.When their son, Stéphane (Alex Lutz), comes to visit, alone or with their young grandson (Kylian Dheret), the rhythms become both calmer and more chaotic. Stéphane tries to be a reassuring, reasonable presence in his parents’ lives, but his own history of mental illness and drug addiction makes this difficult. Mom’s unpredictability and Dad’s stubbornness don’t help.Argento and Lebrun, who improvised most of their dialogue, are terrifyingly real — so much so that Lebrun has said that some viewers assumed she actually had Alzheimer’s. Argento speaks in fluent but heavily accented French, sometimes pausing and fumbling to find the right word. Lebrun uncannily conveys the sense of having lost her grip on language itself, pushing breath through her lips to summon words that never arrive. At other times, though, she is possessed of an almost maniacal clarity and sense of purpose. At one point, she energetically tidies up her husband’s desk, tearing up his newly written manuscript pages and trying to flush them down the toilet.Lebrun and Argento in the film. Her character seems to have Alzheimer’s, and infirmity has taken a toll on the couple.Utopia“You’re killing me,” he says when that happens. Now and then, she expresses a wish to die, but what is striking and finally heartbreaking is how alive they both are right until the end. They fight to hold onto the life they have made, refusing to consider moving into a care facility and leaving behind the stuff that has accumulated around them.All those books, papers, videocassettes and pictures aren’t just set decoration. They are, in a profound sense, what the movie is about, and what — in contemplating the deaths of two fictional characters — it is specifically mourning. What the couple represents is a culture, a sensibility, a romantic, idealistic set of aspirations and commitments that flourished in the decades of their youth and young adulthood.Lebrun and Argento, as Noé takes care to document in the opening titles, were born in the first half of the 1940s and came of age amid the turmoil and promise of postwar Europe. Both participated in the cultural flowering of that era — Lebrun starred in “The Mother and the Whore,” Jean Eustache’s post-1968 masterpiece; highlights of Argento’s extensive filmography include “Deep Red” (1976) and “Suspiria” (1977) — and carry some of its aura with them. But among the comforts “Vortex” refuses is the bittersweet balm of nostalgia. It’s a blunt reckoning with the inevitability of loss, including the loss of memory. We dream for a while, and then we sleep.VortexNot rated. In French, with subtitles. Running time: 2 hours 20 minutes. In theaters. More

  • in

    ‘Firebird’ Review: Square Jaws and Cold Shoulders

    In this clandestine romance, a Soviet soldier and pilot find love while stationed in Estonia in the 1970s.When finding love in a hopeless place, it’s hard to imagine better source material than a memoir by a former Soviet soldier, who recounted his affair with a pilot during the Cold War.“Firebird” is based on Sergey Fetisov’s story of his clandestine 1970s romance, and for it, the director Peeter Rebane has found faces that seem pulled from a Soviet propaganda poster. It’s a liaison of square jaws, square shoulders and square corners of starched uniforms. The film, written by Rebane and Tom Prior, who plays Sergey, is a bit square, too.Sergey, a private at the Haapsalu Air Force Base in Estonia, meets Roman (Oleg Zagorodnii), a hotshot pilot, while taking photographs for the military journal. Despite their grim surroundings — the undecorated barracks reverberate with the barks of orders — the pair have a tender courtship. They share a passion for photography, and Roman introduces Sergey to ballet. The consummation of their dewy-eyed affair is filmed with the same candlelit filter applied to the covers of romance novels. When the couple are reprimanded by their military superiors and pressured to separate, it comes as a surprise that they were ever trying to hide.Romances in cinema are animated by their ability to show the passing moments in conversation, the accidental gestures that signal interest. What is stultifying for this beautifully photographed, thoroughly handsome film (shot by the Estonian cinematographer Mait Maekivi) is that it lacks spontaneity in its moment-to-moment execution. Each line and image feels predetermined, as if Rebane and his characters had already decided this love story was a losing battle. There is loss, but little sense of risk.FirebirdRated R for sexual content and brief nudity. Running time: 1 hour 47 minutes. In theaters. More

  • in

    ‘Fiddler’s Journey to the Big Screen’ Review: Making a New Tradition

    Daniel Raim’s admiring documentary uses interviews and movie clips to detail the making of Norman Jewison’s beloved movie musical.Once, movies released on home media came with an ancillary disc holding a catalog of behind-the-scenes extras. Daniel Raim’s gleefully reverent documentary “Fiddler’s Journey to the Big Screen” has the feeling of such specials, mingling interviews and movie clips to chronicle the making of Norman Jewison’s 1971 musical movie and salute its enduring success.Despite his name and a lifelong interest in Judaism, Jewison is Protestant, and he worried that fact would preclude him from directing “Fiddler on the Roof.” Hollywood proved him wrong. Raim is interested in how Jewison sought to preserve the story’s essence while making creative updates, and in doing so “Fiddler’s Journey” touches on issues of Jewish representation but does not interrogate them.The documentary’s most moving segments involve music. Raim wisely works in many instances of “Fiddler” actors and music department members reciting lines or singing lyrics from the movie, often from memory. Raim intercuts these contemporary moments with the original scenes, accentuating how the power of cinema lies in its ability to endure even as its creators fade.Other making-of stories — perhaps most notably, “Hearts of Darkness: A Filmmaker’s Apocalypse” — show film sets as sites of chaos, mishaps and folly. Here was a production that instead came together under seemingly minor stress, with all of its players eager to bare their hearts for the camera.Fiddler’s Journey to the Big ScreenNot rated. Running time: 1 hour 28 minutes. In theaters. More

  • in

    ‘Los Conductos’ Review: Lost Souls Above Medellín

    A former cult member tries to restore his life.A couple of times in this short and occasionally exhilarating feature from Colombia, its director, Camilo Restrepo, contrives striking visual juxtapositions. His camera closes in on a dead man’s white shirt, soaked in blood, and focuses on the bullet hole in both the shirt and the man’s chest. It then cuts to a bright red motorcycle fuel tank and a gasoline nozzle going into it. The dark circular hood of a ceiling security camera is replaced by the sight of a gray balloon expanding while being filled with helium.What these connections add up to is … enigmatic. Shot on 16-millimeter film stock that seems as rich in specks and cracks as it is in color, “Los Conductos” takes a long way around in telling its story, one of loneliness, defiance and intractable yearning. Luis Felipe Lozano, an itinerant laborer and nonactor whom Restrepo met in 2013, plays Pinky, a character whose life is based on Lozano’s own. Circuitously, Pinky speaks in voice-over about falling in with a group of people “united by a sense of loss we felt in the world.” But for almost half of the movie, we see him alone. He gazes at Medellín from high ground; he steals a motorcycle; he wields a gun.It is only late in the movie that we piece together his involvement with a cult, and his subsequent desire to seek revenge against its leader, referred to as Father. Father seems, on closer scrutiny, to be nothing more than a ringleader of thieves; in one shot, he holds a messy ball of copper wire, obviously ripped out of stolen electronics.Like “Days of the Whale” (2020), Restrepo’s movie shows us a Medellín that’s far from action-movie drug cartel clichés. Out of Pinky’s marginalized life, Restrepo conjures a lush but nevertheless desolate cinematic atmosphere.Los ConductosNot rated. In Spanish, with subtitles. Running time: 1 hour 10 minutes. In theaters. More

  • in

    ‘Africa’ Review: Aging and its Discontents

    In Oren Gerner’s semi-fictional portrait of his family, a father grapples with retirement, poor health and a growing sense of obsolescence.In Oren Gerner’s “Africa,” a son observes as his father tries, futilely, to deny the inexorable advance of old age. Based on the real-life experiences of Gerner’s family and friends in the Israeli community settlement of Nirit, and starring the director’s parents and relatives as themselves, this docu-fictional drama finds Meir, Gerner’s 68-year-old father, at a painful crossroads.Meir is a reluctant retiree whose fragile pride is shattered when he loses his post as the organizer of the town’s annual ceremony to a group of teens. Bristling against a sense of obsolescence, he throws himself into building a bed for his grandson, undeterred by a heart condition that has rendered him frail.Enacting quotidian situations from their everyday lives, Meir and his therapist wife, Maya, offer quiet, unshowy performances — if you can call them that. Even when the writing is a bit forced — as in some brusque exchanges between Meir and his grandchildren, which underline generational differences rather pointedly — the old man conveys a genuine desperation. At times his wounded masculinity borders on the pathetic, particularly when he bickers with Maya, who exudes the infinite patience that only comes with a long, loving companionship.These unfiltered moments are occasionally undercut by Gerner’s tendency for broad-strokes affectation. The film’s title is one such unfounded flourish, drawn from the home videos of a family trip to Namibia, which Gerner weaves arbitrarily through the film. As for the Gerners’ own locale, the film never delves into cultural context, even when Meir discusses his time as a soldier or comments that he shares a birthday with his nation. The result is a bittersweet family portrait that, though relatable, lacks the specificity that makes for truly universal cinema.AfricaNot rated. In Hebrew, with subtitles. Running time: 1 hour 22 minutes. In theaters. More

  • in

    ‘Hatching’ Review: The Best-Laid Plans

    Scrambling creature feature with psycho-horror, this inventive oddity brings tween anxieties to monstrous life.Painted in gumdrop colors and faux good cheer, Hanna Bergholm’s “Hatching,” set in a leafy Finnish suburb, is a nightmare of puberty and poor parenting. Suffering from both is Tinja (a wonderful Siiri Solalinna), a 12-year-old gymnast and resentful collaborator in the manufactured perfection of “Lovely Everyday Life,” a relentlessly upbeat video blog maintained by her controlling, unnamed mother (Sophia Heikkila).When a frantic crow interrupts an afternoon’s filming — and destroys the family’s screamingly pink-patterned living-room — Mother reacts by swiftly snapping its neck. This sharp swerve from serene to shocking will recur throughout the film as Tinja, a milky mist gathering ominously behind her, finds an abandoned egg in the dead bird’s nest and hides it in her bedroom. It will grow startlingly large, finally hatching, tellingly, at the touch of her tears.What emerges is a freakish, gooey-feathered monstrosity, its pleading eyes and spindly legs in comical contrast to its ferociously-toothed beak. The disgusting creature’s devotion to Tinja, however, fills an emotional void in the needy girl, seeming to intuit — and, eventually, act on — her deepest anxieties. In the process, the beast becomes the physical manifestation of Tinja’s suppressed fury, an evil twin determined to bloodily erase every obstacle in the girl’s path to happiness.A sometimes uneasy merger of monster movie and psychological horror — with a dollop of social-media satire — this inventive first feature mines tween confusion (there are nods to both bulimia and menstruation) for grotesque fun. The film’s humor, however, doesn’t dilute the essential sadness at its core: that of a lonely girl so lacking a source of love that she’s forced to create her own.HatchingNot rated. In Finnish, with subtitles. Running time: 1 hour 26 minutes. In theaters. More