More stories

  • in

    6 Faces of Diana, Princess of Wales, to Stream Online

    The film “Spencer” is the latest in a long line of TV and movie depictions of Diana. Here’s a selection.LONDON — Nearly 25 years after her death, Diana, Princess of Wales, remains a fixture in British culture and on screens both sides of the pond.Her life is often remembered as tragic: an unhappy marriage to Prince Charles, a complex private life hounded by paparazzi, a shocking death in a car crash at the age of 36. But she was also, truly, beloved, earning the moniker “the people’s princess” for her charity work and candor.This complexity has inspired countless television and film adaptations of her life. The latest, in theaters Friday, is “Spencer.” Starring Kristen Stewart as Diana and directed by Pablo Larraín, the film takes place over one Christmas holiday with the royal family, as Diana’s marriage (and possibly her mental health) unravel. Each Diana production — made in every decade since she became a public figure — takes a different perspective on the princess. Here’s a list of six varied examples, all available to watch online.‘Diana: Her True Story’ (1993)Serena Scott Thomas in “Diana: Her True Story,” which aired on NBC in 1993.NBCIn the early 1990s, U.S. television networks scrambled to make small-screen movies depicting Charles and Diana’s much-publicized unhappy marriage.Andrew Morton’s explosive biography “Diana: Her True Story” was published in 1992, and a year later NBC aired a movie adaptation of the book, starring Serena Scott Thomas as Diana and David Threlfall as Charles.This is a soapy rendering of Diana’s marriage, but the plot generally sticks to the story that “The Crown” later explored with more nuance, and the differences between the couple are evident from the start. Charles is explicit that he doesn’t see love as a prerequisite for marriage, seeing it as a “partnership.” Scott Thomas’s Diana, meanwhile, believes that her role is to support her husband and that, with time, she can make Charles love her.Scott Thomas doesn’t quite embody Diana’s looks or mannerisms, but she does capture the personable nature that made her so popular. Her portrayal of the princess is sympathetic and she frequently reacts to Charles’s mistreatment, screaming at him after she finds a photograph of Camilla on their honeymoon and throwing herself down the stairs while pregnant with her first child. Sticking to revelations in Morton’s book, Diana’s struggle with an eating disorder is also depicted. (Stream via Amazon Prime Video; rent or buy on Amazon.)‘Diana: The Musical’ (2021)In Netflix’s “Diana: The Musical,” Jeanna de Waal plays the princess. Netflix“Diana: The Musical,” written by Joe DiPietro and Bon Jovi’s David Bryan, had its Broadway run swiftly shuttered because of the pandemic. Earlier this year a filmed version landed on Netflix.Starting with her initial courtship of Prince Charles, the two-hour musical flies through notable events in Diana’s life at a dizzying pace. There are numbers on her paparazzi intrusion (with lyrics like “Ain’t nothin’ like the hunt, Ain’t nothin’ like the thrill. Find the right bird, Then go in for the kill”) and contrasting Diana’s common touch with the public with the royal family’s stuffiness (“All right, I’m no intellect,” she sings while watching a cello performance with Charles. “But maybe there’s a discotheque, where the prince could hear some Prince and we’d all get funkadelic.”)This version of Diana (played by Jeanna de Waal) is particularly one-dimensional. There isn’t much of an opportunity to dwell on her emotions, or provide insight on her mental state, and the filmed musical was not well received. “This is a Rocky Horror Picture Show of cluelessness and misjudged Judy Garlandification,” wrote Peter Bradshaw in The Guardian. (Stream on Netflix.)‘King Charles III’ (2017)Katie Brayben plays the ghost of Diana in “King Charles III.”BBCBased on the play of the same name by Mike Bartlett, “King Charles III” is set following the death of Queen Elizabeth II and sees Charles (Tim Pigott-Smith) grappling with the death of his mother and his transition to king.In the vein of a Shakespearean tragedy, the ghost of Diana (Katie Brayben) appears several times in the made-for-TV movie. Always kept distant from other characters and wearing white, she reassures a stubborn Charles (“You think I didn’t love you. It’s not true”) and a pained William, upset at his rebellious father (“You’re now the man I never lived to see”).The ghost of Diana sparked a British tabloid storm, particularly when it was set to be broadcast soon after Prince Harry spoke about the impact losing his mother had on his mental health. Bartlett defended her inclusion: “It’s a genuine investigation of what it is to be that family and in that role in the country,” he told the TV magazine Radio Times. “Diana is part of that.” (Rent or buy on Amazon and iTunes.)‘The Crown’ (2020)When we meet Emma Corrin’s Diana in Season 4 of “The Crown,” she is a teenager.NetflixThe posters for the fourth season of “The Crown” marked the show’s arrival in the 1980s by sandwiching the face of the queen (now played by Olivia Colman) between two new characters: Margaret Thatcher (Gillian Anderson) and Diana (a newcomer, Emma Corrin).We meet Diana as a teenager, and while Corrin perfectly captures the future princess’s look and subtle mannerisms, the show also emphasizes the down-to-earth quality that made Diana so popular with the public through scenes of her roller skating through the palace and going out dancing with friends.We see her struggling with an eating disorder, and with feeling isolated from Charles and the rest of his family, as well as with the complicated social rules around interacting with royalty.Corrin received a Golden Globe for her portrayal, and as is typical on “The Crown,” the role of Diana will be taken over by a new actress, Elizabeth Debicki, for the show’s fifth season.Five Movies to Watch This WinterCard 1 of 51. “The Power of the Dog”: More

  • in

    Who Are The Eternals?: Your Questions Answered

    Who are they? How long have they been here? Where do they fit in the Marvel Cinematic Universe? We have answers.“Eternals,” the latest addition to the Marvel Cinematic Universe, is a two-and-a-half-hour epic that introduces nearly a dozen new characters, hops back and forth through time over thousands of years, and begins with an opening text crawl that reveals a previously unknown origin of the human species. Even the most ardent MCU fan may be perplexed.For some back story on Marvel’s newest heroes, from their comic origins to their movie powers, here’s a brief guide.The ComicThe Eternals comic debuted in 1976 after its writer, Jack Kirby, returned to Marvel following a five-year stint at DC. The comic is widely considered a thematic continuation of a group of stories he had worked on at DC that mixed science fiction and myth and were known as the “Fourth World.” But since Kirby could no longer use the same characters from his time at DC, he created new ones for Marvel.The Eternals reveals that thousands of years ago, a group of giant extraterrestrials known as the Celestials came to Earth and experimented on apes to create three new species: humans, Eternals and Deviants. The Eternals are an immortal race of beautiful superpowered beings, and the Deviants are ugly, unstable creatures that resent their creators. The series follows the conflicts that arise when the Celestials return to Earth to judge whether their creations are worthy of life. The Eternals was not a particularly successful series at the time, and it was canceled after 19 issues.The FilmChloé Zhao’s movie (which drops the “The”) makes some key adjustments to Eternals lore: The Celestials are responsible for all intelligent life in the universe, and they created the Deviants to protect humans from predators. The Deviants rebelled, so the Eternals were created to fight the Deviants and help guide humanity in its evolution. Set after the events of “Avengers: Endgame,” the film reveals flashbacks to how the Eternals interacted with humans over the course of history while in the present, they try to stop a cataclysmic event from destroying the Earth.An idea featured in the original Eternals comic and in the film is that the Eternals are secretly the inspiration for humanity’s greatest myths. Many of the characters have names resembling mythological figures, and in the film, Ikaris (Richard Madden) even says he’s responsible for creating the Icarus story (though he also gets mistaken for another modern mythic figure: Superman).The character Kingo using his powers of cosmic energy in “Eternals.”Marvel/DisneyThe Characters and Their PowersThe movie features 10 Eternals, including Ikaris, who can fly and shoot laser beams out of his eyes; Sersi (Gemma Chan), who can transmute matter into other forms; Sprite (Lia McHugh), an eternally adolescent girl who can create illusions; and Thena (Angelina Jolie), a skilled warrior who can conjure weapons out of energy. The leader of the Eternals is Ajak (Salma Hayek), the only one who can communicate with the Celestials. All these characters were introduced in Kirby’s initial run on The Eternals, albeit with some notable differences. Ajak, Sprite and their teammate Makkari (Lauren Ridloff), male characters in the comic, were changed to female for the film. The cast is also more diverse than their characters’ original depictions.While the Eternals have had a relatively small cultural footprint compared to other Marvel superheroes, they count at least one infamous villain among their ranks: Thanos, who previously menaced the MCU for the last decade, is a mix of Eternal and Deviant in the comics.Additional CharactersSpoiler alert: The remainder of this article includes revelations about characters that appear in the post-credits scenes of “Eternals.” For those who have seen the film and are curious about who these characters are, read on.“Eternals” briefly introduces two other notable Marvel characters in its post-credits scenes. Eros (Harry Styles) appears aboard the Eternals’ ship at the end of the film, revealing he is Thanos’s brother. Eros is a fellow Eternal who is mostly known for being a womanizing, carefree party boy. In the comics, he teamed up with various heroes to take down his genocidal brother and joined the Avengers for a time, but he tends to be invested in more worldly pleasures.Additionally, Dane Whitman (Kit Harington), who previously appeared to be Sersi’s non-superpowered boyfriend, is seen opening a box containing a sword at the end of the film. In the comics, Whitman is a scientist who discovers that his uncle Nathan is secretly a medieval-themed villain known as the Black Knight. On his death bed, Nathan asks Whitman to take up the mantle of the Black Knight and use his weapons and research for good rather than evil. Whitman has been a member of the Avengers, and he most commonly wields a magic sword known as the Ebony Blade. More

  • in

    Kristen Stewart’s Princess Diaries

    Kristen Stewart has sometimes been accused of just playing variations on herself, as if that isn’t half the reason we’re drawn to movie stars. In “Twilight” (2008), she brought a specific and sullen appeal to a heroine conceived as a blank slate for female readers; later, in “Personal Shopper” (2017), when Stewart traded her polo shirts for a rich client’s shimmering dress, you could see both the star and the character regarding her new look in the mirror: Is this me? Could I make it me?At first, her new drama “Spencer” would appear to be a sop for the sort of moviegoer who’d demand a more rigorous transformation from the “Twilight” actress: Directed by Pablo Larraín (“Jackie”), the movie is a psychological portrait of Princess Diana as she unravels, then rallies, over a three-day Christmas holiday. Instead of hiring a British actress, Larraín chose Stewart, a contemporary figure of California cool who met me on the day of our interview wearing a brick-red pinstripe suit, her jacket sleeves rolled up to reveal a small constellation of tattoos.The 31-year-old actress who sat opposite me on a balcony at the Sunset Tower Hotel in West Hollywood may not have looked like the obvious pick to play the people’s princess, but a funny thing happens as you watch “Spencer”: The distance that initially seemed so vast between the two women will close to the point where it seems like the canniest casting ever. Stewart, after all, knows a thing or two about a life lived in the public eye, the scrutiny leveled at a high-profile romance, and the private moments snatched away by paparazzi.Stewart gave her all to the movie, studying Diana’s posture, mannerisms and accent; the resulting performance, potent and provocative, has thrust her to the front of this year’s crop of best-actress Oscar contenders. “I used to think that I needed spontaneity and anxiety to propel me into something truthful and that if I had too much control over it, it was immediately going to become fabricated,” Stewart said. “I just didn’t have the confidence to hold that and be like, ‘No, you can design something.’”But Larraín had that confidence in her.“She’s like an actress from the ’50s or ’60s,” the director said. “What she’s doing for the story can be at a very grounded character level, but it’s elevated to a poetic level that creates an enormous amount of mystery and intrigue. And that’s probably the best cocktail you could ever find for a performance on camera.”Stewart as Princess Diana (opposite Laura Benson) in a scene from “Spencer.”NeonStewart knew that taking on “Spencer” would be a challenge, and in the days leading up to the shoot, she even developed lockjaw as she ceaselessly practiced her British accent. But once she was on set, finally channeling Diana, her fears melted away: “At the end of week one, I was like, ‘This is the best thing I’ve ever done. This is the most alive I’ve ever felt.’”Here are edited excerpts from our conversation.What was your first impression when Pablo pitched “Spencer” to you?He was so sure that I should do this, and I thought that was audacious and crazy because it just doesn’t seem like the most instinctive, immediate choice.Did he tell you why it had to be you?He was like, “There’s something about Diana that we’ll never know. You make me feel like that. I’ve seen your work, and I never really know what you’re thinking.” And I feel that way about Diana as well. Even though I feel this overwhelming attraction to her spirit and her energy, there’s something that’s disarming about her. I want to hang out with her. I want to race her down a long hallway. I want to, like, meet her kid.Still, was it a natural step to say yes to this movie?The only reason that you work as an actor for this long is to try and outdo yourself every time. This one was just the proper step up that I couldn’t really say no to. It was ambitious and attractive, and I was like, “If I can’t do that, then I’ll just stop and direct movies instead.” And it’s fun to imagine a larger conversation. It’s fun to imagine if you’re capable of holding that.What emerged of Diana as you researched her?There were so many layers to read. There were so many ways in which she tried to reveal herself, that weren’t necessarily in the form of a direct sentence. She wasn’t allowed to be like, “I’m dying, and he doesn’t love me.” I think the way she expressed herself is so interesting because there are so many lenses between you and that communication.It’s like, to not acknowledge that every single person in the world is sitting here on this balcony with us is wild. We have to pretend they’re not because we’re being nice to each other. Which is nice! But also, we’re talking to everyone in the whole world right now.And I’m asking you to be vulnerable with me, as though what you say won’t be chopped up, reblogged and retweeted by people who aren’t here.You roll the dice, definitely. One could write a very long paper on the exchange between a journalist and an actor. That’s obviously not why we’re here, but yeah.Though Stewart knows something of what Diana experienced with paparazzi, the actress said she was never told “to sit and stay in the way that was so damaging and dishonest.”Ryan Pfluger for The New York TimesBut it kind of is. Diana had to be incredibly savvy about her image and the way it was used, while still radiating utter authenticity. Actors are required to do the same.Every way that we reach out toward each other has to be designed from an interior place. Therefore, it’s a form of manipulation. You want someone to understand you; you want to make someone feel the way that you feel. It’s sad to think about her in general because she’s just the most coveted, loved and also rejected, self-hating person. Those things shouldn’t go together.Unless some of it is cause and some of it is effect. Do we respond to her in a way that causes a little bit of that? When she’s called the people’s princess, does that imply a form of ownership?Of course, which I think she probably tried to cultivate. I think she had to reach out to get any sort of warm acceptance, when obviously at home she felt invisible and unheard and stifled and cold. She was looking sort of everywhere she could for that kind of love. She was the first royal in the entire history of them to reach out and touch people physically, in their face, without gloves on. That rocked people to their core.How did you square some of her contradictions?There were people that were like, “She would never use profanity.” And then other memories would be like, “Oh, gosh, she just came in swearing.” So you can’t know her. With famous people, you hear someone go, “I met them once and they’re not very nice,” but it’s like, “Were you asking them how their day went when they were coming out of the pisser? Maybe they weren’t nice to you in that moment.” People love to have one experience sort of sum up an entire human’s personality. You just have to take everyone’s perspective and shove them together and kind of figure out your own.You’re clearly speaking from personal experience. But in other interviews I’ve read, you demur when asked to draw a direct line between your time in the public eye and Diana’s.Five Movies to Watch This WinterCard 1 of 51. “The Power of the Dog”: More

  • in

    ‘Love Hard’ Review: Seeking Connection, Not Perfection

    When a perennially single journalist travels across the country to meet her dream guy, she finds she’s been catfished.“Love Hard,” directed by Hernán Jiménez, centers on Natalie (Nina Dobrev), a Los Angeles journalist who chronicles her unlucky dating encounters for a digital publication. When she matches with her dream guy on the East Coast, Tag (Darren Barnet), she decides on a whim to surprise him for the holidays.Things take a turn when Natalie discovers she’s been catfished by Josh (Jimmy O. Yang), Tag’s childhood friend. To make it up to her, Josh offers to help set her up with Tag.The film, streaming on Netflix, explores the pitfalls of online dating and how focusing on physical appearance can backfire. It’s a message reinforced throughout the movie, including with a derisive comment describing “Love Actually” as “a movie about people falling in love based on how they look.”Josh, the catfisher, is a refreshing romantic comedy protagonist. He’s a Chinese American candle-maker living in his family’s basement whose passions and traumas viewers get to know throughout the film. Yang delivers some funny one-liners, such as when he quips that, in some cultures, “height and facial symmetry are repulsive.” And Josh’s competitive dynamic with his brother gives viewers a reason to root for him.But Dobrev’s character is underdeveloped. We learn that she has an unhealthy attachment to perfection and is stuck in a narrative reinforced by her day job. It is Josh that propels her story forward, and she ends up serving as a prop for his becoming. In presenting a female character who is attractive, but bereft of substance, the movie subverts its own premise.It brings to mind the observation by bell hooks, in her seminal book “All About Love,” that while women are often the practitioners of love, men get to theorize about it. This idea is reinforced by an interaction between Natalie and her boss. When she asks to take a break from writing about disaster dates and asks instead to write her New York love story, he responds, “You’ve got to leave the serious stuff to real journalists, like Steve.”Love HardNot rated. Running time: 1 hour 44 minutes. Watch on Netflix. More

  • in

    Review: ‘The Visitor’ Lags Behind the Times

    The new musical, based on the 2008 film and delayed by the pandemic, debuts at the Public Theater. But its story of a white professor helping immigrants feels out of step with the moment.What comes to mind when you think about immigration, ICE and deportation? I’m willing to bet more than a few George Washingtons that it’s not “musical.” Perhaps it is doable to respect the politics around these issues and the immigrants trying to build a life in the United States in this format, but it’s tough. Which is why the new musical “The Visitor” feels so obtuse and helplessly dated.Dated because it is based on Tom McCarthy’s 2008 film, a well-meaning artifact of the post-9/11 years about a couple of undocumented immigrants helping a white middle-aged professor get a new lease on life. The film resonated in a time before we had a president who fiercely fought to keep immigrants out, and before calls for diversity echoed throughout our institutions.In the film, an economics professor named Walter Vale travels to New York City from Connecticut to attend a conference, but while there, he finds a young couple living in his long-neglected apartment: Tarek, a drummer originally from Syria, and Zainab, a Senegalese jewelry designer. He lets them stay, and Tarek teaches him the drums. They live there until Tarek is unfairly picked up by the police for an infraction he didn’t commit and put in a detention center for being undocumented.The musical, which opened on Thursday at the Public Theater, is directed by Daniel Sullivan and has a book by Kwame Kwei-Armah and Brian Yorkey, who also wrote the lyrics. Tom Kitt (who also teamed up with Yorkey for the Pulitzer Prize-winning “Next to Normal”) adds music to this story, which arrives onstage with only minor changes.Long in the works, “The Visitor” was scheduled to begin its performances in March 2020 — practically a century ago in Pandemic Time. To stage the project now without a more significant overhaul of the story was a bold choice, especially with masking and quarantining coinciding with a reckoning about how people of color and their stories are — or, more often, are not — represented in theater and the arts.That’s not to say there haven’t been any modifications. First, previews were pushed back a week last month after cast members raised issues around depictions of race and representation. Then the departure of one of the leads, Ari’el Stachel, was announced in what the theater called “a mutual decision,” and last-minute edits were made in an attempt to refigure the way whiteness was centered in the production.David Hyde Pierce stars as Walter, a widower whose career and emotional life are as stagnant as a glass of lukewarm milk. Ahmad Maksoud, who was Stachel’s understudy, takes on the charming Tarek, and Alysha Deslorieux is the firm and guarded Zainab. Jacqueline Antaramian rounds out the central cast as Mouna, Tarek’s concerned mother.Alysha Deslorieux, left, as Zainab and Jacqueline Antaramian as Mouna in the 90-minute show.Sara Krulwich/The New York TimesHyde Pierce delivers the most subdued version of his usual awkward nebbish with the occasional cantankerous quip. (“Wake up, you little snot rags,” he thinks while teaching his students in an early scene.) But there isn’t much setup for Walter; perhaps intentionally, given how much the show goes on to focus on its white protagonist.Part of it is Sullivan’s brusque direction, which speeds through some character-building dialogue then lingers on scenes that have the clunkiest exposition. And it’s also partly because of the congested score. While the film is quiet and pensive, the show is overstuffed — with seemingly every second of its 90 minutes filled with music.Kitt’s music has a generic pop sound that sometimes works, as in “Drum Circle,” a Disney-esque tune chock-full of lively, layered percussion; and “Heart in Your Hands,” a rather maudlin song with angelic harmonies. (Kitt’s score, particularly “Heart,” is further enlivened by Jessica Paz and Sun Hee Kil’s ethereal sound design.) But most of the time it doesn’t work; upbeat songs or soft, slowed-down percussion feel at odds with the heavy subject matter.This is especially baffling in the energetic “World Between Two Worlds” number, in which detained immigrants perform a “Stomp”-style stepping and clapping routine that abruptly ends when a guard takes one of them away. That said, at least the show moves; Lorin Latarro’s choreography animates even the most mundane scenes, say, in a classroom or on a New York City street. (The ensemble members enter and exit via doorways and a balcony platform in David Zinn’s confined set design of oppressively gray walls that transform into various spaces and institutions that may exclude individuals — an apt metaphor.)Yorkey’s clunky lyrics are what ultimately do the songs in; some are attempts to add introspection to a deeply withdrawn protagonist with a wooden disposition. So we’re treated to obvious lines like, “Here I am in a suit at this conference,” or clichés like, “Find the rhythm within,” and, “You join the [drum] circle and it joins you.”Hyde Pierce speak-sings his way through the score, or spastically works himself up into the bravado needed for the nauseatingly cheesy “Better Angels,” which is meant to be a triumphant showstopper. As Tarek, Maksoud gives an earnest performance but never seems to plumb any emotional depths — or vocal ones either. Deslorieux has the strongest voice of the main cast, crooning with delicate rolling r’s for her character’s accent. As Mouna, Antaramian’s voice is inconsistent, and she has a loose grasp on her character’s accent.Maksoud with ensemble members in the musical. The ensemble etches “small but remarkable performance moments, even in the background and during the fleeting transitional numbers,” our critic writes.Sara Krulwich/The New York TimesThe ensemble, however, often upstages the main cast members, etching small but remarkable performance moments, even in the background and during the fleeting transitional numbers.In one, Katie Terza nearly blows off the walls of the Public with a brief yet transcendent Arabic song, and the professional drummer Takafumi Nikaido (also the production’s djembe coach) could easily steal the entire production.The few attempts at nuance — a comment from Walter showing how he’s also guilty of racial stereotypes, a mention of him as a white savior, and an added back story about Zainab’s abuse-ridden immigration journey — cannot change the story that’s being told or how uncomfortably it sits in our current moment. Even with the additions, the immigrant characters still ultimately function as markers of Walter’s emotional growth and development; they have bits of personality and back stories but can’t stand on their own in a plot without him.So what does one do with a work of art that, by the time of its premiere, has already been outpaced by the moment? How can you contemporize a work whose very conceit — its whole plot, its central perspective — will land like a well-meaning but ignorant cousin’s comment in a conscientious cultural conversation?These questions, of course, are larger than what the Public has on its stage right now. “The Visitor” proves that we can’t always pick up exactly where we left off. Sometimes that’s a good thing.The VisitorThrough Dec. 5 at the Public Theater, Manhattan; publictheater.org. Running time: 1 hour 30 minutes. More

  • in

    ‘North by Current’ Review: The Mornings After a Family Nightmare

    In this documentary, the filmmaker Angelo Madsen Minax reckons with the loss of his niece, his vibrant sister’s rocky recoveries and being transgender in a traditional, Mormon environment.“How did you become who you became?” asks Angelo Madsen Minax in the opening voice-over to “North by Current.” It’s one of many searching questions in Minax’s restless personal essay film about his family, himself and the ways in which we understand each other. Interlacing his visits to his folks in a Michigan lumber town with his reflections, the filmmaker reckons with the unfathomable loss of his niece, his vibrant sister’s rocky recoveries and being transgender in a traditional, Mormon environment.Any one of these subjects would be enough for a single film, but part of Minax’s point and method is how these experiences can illuminate one other. About ten years ago, his sister’s toddler daughter, Kalla, was found dead, a tragedy compounded by allegations of child abuse. But instead of a whodunit unraveling some fixed truth, Minax confronts the grief and guilt felt by all involved, even as he works through his own hurt over his parents’ evolving treatment of his identity.There’s an alchemy to what he accomplishes here, threading everyday scenes of parenting with fugues of home video and classic rock, and a bold double voice-over: his own, and a wise child persona that offers a cosmic perspective. This kind of personal film has often been attempted (even before “Tarnation” made waves), but rarely with this insight. Minax succeeds, even as he includes a deeply conflicting revelation about himself that he could do more to address. Out of the fractured family documentary, what emerges finally is a drama of self-realization.North by CurrentNot rated. Running time: 1 hour 26 minutes. Watch on PBS platforms. More

  • in

    ‘Hive’ Review: In the Aftermath of War, a Survivor Finds Herself

    In a tough, taut drama, the director Blerta Basholli explores the lives of women whose husbands went missing in the Kosovo War.The spare, tightly wound drama “Hive” opens with the movie equivalent of a hand grabbing your throat. An unsmiling woman with a hard, monumental profile stands alone next to a truck. People mill around nearby, murmuring indistinctly. Abruptly, the woman ducks under some police tape and into the truck, where she hastily begins unzipping one white body bag after another and just as quickly scanning their contents, her nose wrinkling at the exposed bundles of tattered clothing, remnants of missing persons. She’s soon ejected by a worker, but her search continues.The woman, Fahrije (Yllka Gashi), is looking for her husband, one of the missing, who disappeared years ago during the Kosovo War. Now, with her two children and a disabled father-in-law, she struggles to keep the family going. She labors with the beehives that her husband once managed, selling jars of honey at a local market. Sales are modest and sometimes close to nonexistent, but the bees are her only means of scraping together a meager living. Every so often, she meets up with a women’s collective whose members face the same hurdles under the unhelpful watch of the town’s men. And she keeps looking for her husband — a haunting, troubling phantom.A liberation story told with easy naturalism and broad political strokes, “Hive” tracks Fahrije on her path to independence. (It’s based on the experiences of an Albanian Kosovo woman of the same name.) Like its protagonist, the movie is stern, direct and attentive to ordinary life. The writer-director Blerta Basholli doesn’t bludgeon you with the character’s miseries, or hold your emotions hostage. Fahrije isn’t lovable; sometimes she’s scarcely likable, which means she’s more of a human being than an emblem of virtuous suffering. She has her charms, though these tend to emerge in the intimacies she shares with her family and female friends like Naza (a piquant Kumrije Hoxha).With her husband presumably dead but with no corpse in the graveyard, Fahrije is stuck in a cruel limbo, an uncertain status shared by others in the collective. Prevailing norms mean that these women aren’t allowed to remarry, and they’re not allowed to do much of anything else, other than care for their families, socialize with other presumptive widows and display subservience to men. Even Fahrije’s more seemingly innocuous efforts to support her family — selling her husband’s old table saw, for one — are treated like scandalous affronts to him, their life and their world. She’s shamed at home and in public, harassed and demoralized, simply for stepping into the role of provider.Basholli doesn’t revisit the Kosovo War in documentary detail or dig into its geopolitical backdrop; she also doesn’t illuminate the cultural and social practices that so harshly circumscribe the lives of these widows. She isn’t interested in partisan politics, nor is she waving any obvious flags. Instead she concentrates on the textures, gestures and practices of everyday life, lingering over how Fahrije tends the hives, tries to fix a leaking faucet, bathes her son, feeds her family and painstakingly processes ajvar, a hot pepper sauce that she cooks, bottles and hopes to sell. Yet in focusing on this one woman, Basholli is making an argument about what types of war stories are worth telling.There’s little doubt where Fahrije is headed, and the movie sometimes tries a bit too strenuously to brighten her difficult journey. Even so, “Hive” seizes and holds your interest simply through the drama created by sympathetic characters trying to surmount awful, unfair hurdles. Mostly, though, what holds you rapt is Gashi’s powerful, physically grounded performance, which lyrically articulates her taciturn character’s inner workings. Together, the performer and her director reveal the arc of a life through Fahrije’s gestures and in the hard lines of her jaw, in her unsmiling lips and in her quickly lowered gaze. And while the character’s stoicism seems like an unbreachable wall, these two women dismantle — and rebuild it — to stirring effect.HiveNot rated. In Albanian, with subtitles. Running time: 1 hour 24 minutes. In theaters. More

  • in

    ‘A Man Named Scott’ Review: Bending Genres, Coping With Struggles

    This film about Kid Cudi is that rare musician-focused documentary, one as sensitive, fully formed and noble in its intentions as the artist himself.In “A Man Named Scott,” a documentary about Kid Cudi, the genre-defying rapper’s longtime friend, Shia LaBeouf, and one of his superfans, Timothée Chalamet, are among the men who say Cudi helped them open up emotionally. They acknowledge Cudi for reshaping hip-hop on his own terms.But the director Robert Alexander’s documentary doesn’t only remind you that the artist (whose real name is Scott Mescudi) revolutionized the genre, softening its conventional definition of masculinity by simply being himself. The film additionally presents a moving rumination on art and individuality, and the invaluable connection between both.Through the biographical self-reflective framework of the doc, Alexander leads the viewer to examine art from a psychological and representational perspective. The significance of Black visibility in the arts is a prominent thread, and watching Willow Smith dance like no one is watching to one of her favorite Cudi songs, “Sky Might Fall,” expresses Cudi’s profound influence on the youth who were led by him in their own dismantling of social constructs.More broadly, this is a film about the music that makes us, but Alexander poses a fundamental concern as he explores that topic: What toll does the development of this work take on its creator?Cudi opens up about his struggles. Actually, he divulges a lot — though he stops short of detailing the process of making his 2015 album Speedin’ Bullet 2 Heaven,” admitting it was “a really dark time” for him. Thanks to its perceptive insights and a range of interviewees, from fellow industry professionals to a clinical psychologist, “A Man Named Scott” is that rare musician-focused doc, one as sensitive, fully formed and noble in its intentions as Cudi himself.A Man Named ScottNot rated. Running time: 1 hour 35 minutes. Watch on Amazon. More