Movies

Subterms

    More stories

    • 138 Shares199 Views

      in Movies

      Vangelis, Composer Best Known for ‘Chariots of Fire,’ Dies at 79

      by

      A master of the synthesizer, he won an Oscar for that film’s score, and his memorable theme song became a No. 1 pop hit.Vangelis, the Greek film composer and synthesizer virtuoso whose soaring music for “Chariots of Fire,” the 1981 movie about two British runners in the 1924 Summer Olympics in Paris, won the Academy Award for best original score, died on Tuesday in Paris. He was 79.The cause was heart failure, said Lefteris Zermas, a frequent collaborator.A self-taught musician, Vangelis (pronounced vang-GHELL-iss), who was born Evangelos Odysseas Papathanassiou, recorded solo albums and wrote music for television and for films including “Blade Runner” (1982), “Missing” (1982) and “1492: Conquest of Paradise” (1992). But he remains best known for scoring “Chariots of Fire.”The most familiar part of that score — modern electronic music composed for a period film — was heard during the opening credits: a blend of acoustic piano and synthesizer that provided lush, pulsating accompaniment to the sight of about two dozen young men running in slow motion on a nearly empty beach, mud splattering their white shirts and shorts, pain and exhilaration creasing their faces.Vangelis’s music became as popular as the film itself, directed by Hugh Hudson, which won four Oscars, including best picture.The opening song, also called “Chariots of Fire,” was released as a single and spent 28 weeks on the Billboard Hot 100 chart, including a week at No. 1. The soundtrack album remained on the Billboard 200 chart for 30 weeks and spent four weeks in the top spot.Vangelis said the score immediately came to him as he watched the film in partly edited form.“I try to put myself in the situation and feel it,” he told The Washington Post in 1981. “I’m a runner at the time, or in the stadium, or alone in the dressing room … and then I compose … and the moment is fruitful and honest, I think.”Vangelis recorded a track with 25 children from the Orleans Infant School in Twickenham, England, for a 1979 single, “The Long March.”Fred Mott/Getty ImagesHe was working at the time in his London studio with a Yamaha CS-80 synthesizer.“It’s the most important synthesizer in my career and the best analog synthesizer design there has ever been,” he told Prog, an alternative music website, in 2016, adding, “It’s the only synthesizer I could describe as being a real instrument.”For “Blade Runner,” a science-fiction film noir set in a futuristic Los Angeles, Vangelis created a score to match the director Ridley Scott’s dystopian vision. He augmented the CS-80 synthesizer, which produced the sounds of horns and bass, with an electric piano and a second synthesizer that emulated strings.“What interested me the most for this film was the atmosphere and the general feeling, rather than the distinct themes,” he said on a fan site, Nemo Studios, named for the studio in London that he built and for many years worked out of. “The visual atmosphere of the film is unique, and it is that I tried to enhance as much as I could.”The “Blade Runner” soundtrack album was not released until 1994, but it was well received. Zac Johnson of Allmusic wrote that “the listener can almost hear the indifferent winds blowing through the neon and metal landscapes of Los Angeles in 2019.”Vangelis at the French Culture Ministry in Paris in 1992.Georges Bendrihem/Agence France-Presse — Getty ImagesVangelis was born on March 29, 1943, in Agria, Greece, and grew up in Athens. He started playing piano at 4 and gave his first public performance two years later. He did not have much training and never learned to read music.“Music goes through me,” he told The Associated Press in 1982. “It’s not by me.”In the 1960s, he played organ with the Forminx, a Greek rock band. He left Greece for Paris in 1967 after the military coup there.Vangelis was a founder of Aphrodite’s Child, a progressive rock band that had hit singles in Europe and enjoyed some success on FM radio in the United States. The band released a few albums, including “666,” which was inspired by the Book of Revelations. When Aphrodite’s Child broke up, he moved to London in 1974.In the 1970s he began composing music for television shows like the French documentary series “L’Apocalypse des Animaux” (1973), as well as working on solo albums and film projects. Music from his album “China” was used by Mr. Scott in the memorable 1979 “Share the Fantasy” commercial for Chanel No. 5.He also became friendly with Jon Anderson, the lead vocalist of the British prog-rock band Yes. Vangelis was invited to replace the keyboardist Rick Wakeman when he left the band, but he turned down the offer. He and Mr. Anderson subsequently collaborated, as Jon and Vangelis, on four albums, including “The Friends of Mr. Cairo,” between 1980 and 1991.Vangelis’s music was also heard on the scientist Carl Sagan’s 1980 TV series, “Cosmos.”Information on survivors was not immediately available.Among the films Vangelis scored after “Chariots of Fire” were “Antarctica” (1983), a Japanese movie about scientists on an expedition; “The Bounty” (1984), with Anthony Hopkins and Mel Gibson; Oliver Stone’s “Alexander” (2004), about the Macedonian king; and “El Greco” (2007), a Greek film about the artist.He also composed music for spectacles like the 2000 and 2004 Olympics and the 2002 World Cup. And in 2001 he recorded a choral symphony, “Mythodea,” which he had adapted from earlier work, at the Temple of Zeus in Athens to commemorate NASA’s Odyssey mission to Mars.“I made up the name Mythodea from the words myth and ode,” Vangelis said in an interview for NASA’s website in 2001. “And I felt in it a kind of shared or common path with NASA’s current exploration of the planet. Whatever we use as a key — music, mythology, science, mathematics, astronomy — we are all working to decode the mystery of creation, searching for our deepest roots.”Vangelis performed in concert with a choir in Rotterdam, the Netherlands, in 1991.Rob Verhorst/Redferns) More

    • 75 Shares129 Views

      in Movies

      ‘Men’ | Anatomy of a Scene

      by

      Film directors walk viewers through one scene of their movies, showing the magic, motives and the mistakes from behind the camera.Film directors walk viewers through one scene of their movies, showing the magic, motives and the mistakes from behind the camera. More

    • 125 Shares189 Views

      in Movies

      ‘Cyber Hell’ Review: When Chat Rooms Become Sites of Exploitation

      by

      This true-crime documentary, subtitled “Exposing an Internet Horror,” recounts a South Korean case in which chat room operators blackmailed young women into sending explicit videos.A true-crime yarn replete with staged re-enactments, “Cyber Hell: Exposing an Internet Horror” joins a growing subgenre of streaming documentaries depicting nightmares of the digital realm. Only this time, the central offense is not cryptocurrency fraud or a dating hoax but a series of sex crimes, including the trade of child sexual abuse imagery.The movie (on Netflix) zeroes in on a South Korean case in which online chat room operators coerced young women, including minors, into making and sending sexually explicit videos. Over several years beginning around 2018, the scheme occurred on the encrypted messaging service Telegram, where a ring of users lured women with phishing links or the promise of jobs before blackmailing them into supplying pornographic and dehumanizing images.Through interviews with journalists and police, the documentary details the search for two core perpetrators of the scheme who used the aliases “Baksa” and “GodGod.” The men, who exploited dozens of young women and shared the footage with paying customers, often referred to their victims as “slaves.”It’s a harrowing case of violence against women and the way technology facilitates heinous crime. But like many other documentaries of this sort, little attention is paid to the digital networks that served as avenues for the exploitation. Instead, the director Choi Jin-seong dedicates the movie’s overlong run time to dogging the men’s movements. What could have been an urgent inquiry into the systems enabling sex criminals becomes something more pedestrian — a stylized replay of a game of cat and mouse.Cyber Hell: Exposing an Internet HorrorNot rated. In Korean, with subtitles. Running time: 1 hour 45 minutes. Watch on Netflix. More

    • 175 Shares199 Views

      in Movies

      Tom Cruise Aims to Fly High at the Box Office With ‘Top Gun: Maverick’

      by

      The helicopter had the star’s name painted on it, the letters coming into focus as it landed on the retired aircraft carrier, which was adorned for the occasion with an expansive red carpet and a smattering of fighter jets. Tom Cruise. Top Gun. Maverick.It couldn’t have been anyone else.Decked out in a slim-fitting suit, his hair a little shaggier and his face a little craggier than when he first played Lt. Pete “Maverick” Mitchell more than three decades ago, Mr. Cruise took the stage on the U.S.S. Midway while Harold Faltermeyer’s iconic theme music played in the background.Gesturing to the spectacle around him, including the crowd of fans and media members, Mr. Cruise said: “This moment right here, to see everybody at this time, no masks. Everyone. This is, this is pretty epic.”Tom Cruise arrived at the world premiere of “Top Gun: Maverick” in a helicopter that he landed on an aircraft carrier in San Diego.Robyn Beck/Agence France-Presse — Getty ImagesIt also felt like a time capsule. The three-hour promotional escapade — which included a batch of F-18 fighter jets executing a flyover to the sound of a Lady Gaga song from the film — harkened back to the halcyon days of Hollywood glamour. Days when Disney didn’t think twice about shuttling an aircraft carrier from San Diego to Hawaii for the premiere of Michael Bay’s “Pearl Harbor” in 2001. Or when the same studio built a 500-seat theater at the Kennedy Space Center in Cape Canaveral, Fla., for the premiere of “Armageddon.” That kind of extravagance seems almost unthinkable today, when the streaming algorithm and its accompanying digital marketing efforts have replaced the old-fashioned boots-on-the-ground publicity tour with stars circumnavigating the globe, and studios spending millions to turn movie openings into cultural events.Making these events go were the film’s megastars. In Hollywood, stardom has an elastic definition. There are screen legends who are not box office stars. A global movie star is someone whose name is the draw. They have broad appeal, transcending language, international borders and generational differences. In short, they can get people of all ages into theaters around the world by virtue of their screen personas.They are the kind of stars — like Arnold Schwarzenegger and Sylvester Stallone — that box office blockbusters were built around for decades.And they are the kind of stars who no longer really exist. Actors like Dwayne Johnson, Zendaya, Tom Holland, Ryan Reynolds and Chris Pratt are ultra successful but they are also either closely tied to a specific franchise or superhero film or have yet to prove that multigenerational appeal.Now, it’s the characters that count. Three actors have portrayed Spider-Man and six have donned the Batman cowl for the big screen. Audiences have shown up for all of them. The Avengers may unite to huge box office returns but how much does it matter who’s wearing the tights?Yet there is Mr. Cruise, trundling along as if the world hasn’t changed at all. For him, in many ways, it hasn’t. He was 24 when “Top Gun” made him box office royalty and he has basically stayed there since, outlasting his contemporaries. He’s the last remaining global star who still only makes movies for movie theaters. He hasn’t ventured into streaming. He hasn’t signed up for a limited series. He hasn’t started his own tequila brand.The Great ReadMore fascinating tales you can’t help but read all the way to the end.A small Colorado town maintains the country’s only public outdoor funeral pyre. One man saw it as his own perfect ending.The singer-songwriter Ethel Cain has an elaborate vision of becoming a different kind of pop star. She’s doing it from rural Alabama.The #MeToo movement has swept through Hollywood studios and corporate boardrooms. But it has struggled to take root in places like the insular underground tattoo industry.Instead, his promotional tour for “Top Gun: Maverick,” which opens on May 27, will last close to three weeks and extend from Mexico City to Japan with a stop in Cannes for the annual film festival. In London, he walked the red carpet with the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge. (The tour would have been longer and more expansive if Covid protocols didn’t make things so complicated and if he wasn’t in the middle of finishing two “Mission Impossible” movies.)The actor still commands first dollar gross, which means that in addition to a significant upfront fee, he receives a percentage of the box office gross from the moment the film hits theaters. He is one of the last stars in Hollywood to earn such a sweetheart deal, buoyed by the fact that his 44 films have brought in $4.4 billion at the box office in the United States and Canada alone, according to Box Office Mojo. (Most stars today are paid a salary up front, with bonuses if a film makes certain amounts at the box office.) So if his movies hit, Mr. Cruise makes money. And right now, Hollywood is in dire need of a hit.Audiences have started creeping back to theaters since the pandemic closed them in 2020. The box office analyst David Gross said that the major Hollywood studios were expected to release roughly 108 films theatrically this year, a 22 percent drop from 2019. Total box office numbers for the year still remain down some 40 percent but the recent performances of “The Batman,” and “Doctor Strange in the Multiverse of Madness” have theater owners optimistic that the audience demand is still there. The question is whether the business still works for anything other than special effects-laden superhero movies.“They just don’t make movies like this anymore,” Brian Robbins, the new chief executive of Paramount Pictures, the studio that financed and produced the $170 million “Top Gun: Maverick,” said in an interview. “This isn’t a big visual effects movie. Tom really trained these actors to be able to fly and perform in real F-18s. No one’s ever done what they’ve done in this movie practically. Its got scale and scope, and it’s also a really emotional movie. That’s not typically what we see in big tent-pole movies today.”A big box office showing for “Top Gun: Maverick,” would depend in no small part on the over-40 crowd. They are the moviegoers who most fondly recall the original “Top Gun” from 36 years ago — and they are the ones who have been the most reluctant to return to cinemas.To reinforce his commitment to the industry, Mr. Cruise sent a video message to theater operators at their annual conference in Las Vegas late last month. From the set of “Mission Impossible” in South Africa, standing atop an airborne biplane, Mr. Cruise introduced new footage from his spy movie and the first public screening of “Top Gun: Maverick.” “Let’s go have a great summer,” he said, before his director, flying his own biplane next to Mr. Cruise, shouted “action” and the two planes tore off across the sky.The release of “Top Gun: Maverick” was delayed because of the pandemic, but Mr. Cruise said putting it on a streaming platform was never an option.Paramount Pictures“Top Gun: Maverick” finished production in 2020 but its release was delayed for two years because of the pandemic. Mr. Cruise declined to comment for this article. But when asked during an interview on the stage of the Cannes Film Festival on Wednesday (where eight fighter jets coursed across the skyline, blowing red and blue smoke to match the colors of the French flag) whether there was ever talk of turning the film into a streaming release, Mr. Cruise swatted the idea away. “That was never going to happen,” he said to applause.Now, theater owners across the country are keeping their fingers crossed that Mr. Cruise’s million-watt smile and his commitment to doing his own stunts — no matter the cost or the fact that he will turn 60 in July — will bring moviegoers back to theaters for what they hope will be a long and fruitful summer.“There’s been a lot of questions about the older audience and their affinity of going back to the theatrical experience,” Rolando Rodriguez, the chief executive of the Wisconsin-based Marcus Theatres, the fourth-largest theater chain in the country, said in an interview. “‘Top Gun’ is certainly going to bring out the audience of 40 and over and momentum builds momentum.”Audiences have remained loyal to Mr. Cruise through his offscreen controversies — his connection to Scientology, the infamous couch-jumping interview on “Oprah,” his failed marriages, including to the actress Katie Holmes. And he has remained focused on the process of making movies and then promoting them to as many people as possible — often through very controlled public appearances where he is unlikely to face any uncomfortable questions about his personal life that could embarrass him or turn off moviegoers.“He eats, sleeps and dreams this job,” said Wyck Godfrey, the former president of production for Paramount. “There is nothing else that takes his attention away. He outworks everyone else. He knows every detail.”The question now, in the world of streaming and superhero intellectual property, is does it still matter?‘We Don’t Create Movie Stars Anymore’In the 1980s, Mr. Cruise starred in a string of hits including, clockwise from top left, “Taps,” “Risky Business,” “Cocktail,” “Top Gun,” “Rain Man” and “The Color of Money,” cementing him as a bona fide movie star.Mr. Cruise came of age in Hollywood in the shadow of movie stars like Mr. Schwarzenegger and Mr. Stallone, where the name above the title meant everything. Show up to see Mr. Schwarzenegger play a cyborg assassin? Sure. How about a cop forced to play with kindergartners? Absolutely. What about a twin separated at birth from an unlikely Danny DeVito? Why not? In those days, the genre didn’t matter. Moviegoers showed up for the actors.That is not the case today.“We don’t create movie stars anymore,” said Mr. Godfrey, adding that studios have been pulling back on marketing and publicity commitments for years. “As a result, there are less and less meaningful names who will help open a movie.”Mr. Robbins agreed that it was much more difficult today to become a global star in the vein of Mr. Cruise, not because of the studios’ commitments but rather the state of the industry.“It’s Batman. It’s Spiderman. It’s very different,” he said in an interview from Cannes. “And it’s not just because a lot of these characters are hidden by a mask and tights and a cape. It’s a very different type of filmmaking. And the world is different because of streaming, and all of the other content, the fight for attention is just much more fierce than ever before. Thirty-six years ago when ‘Top Gun’ came out, there was no streaming, there was no cellphone. There was no internet. We went to the theater to be entertained. There’s just so much choice now.”The entertainment world has undergone seismic change. But Mr. Cruise’s success also owes a debt to his tirelessness. Will Smith, in his 2021 memoir, affectionately called Mr. Cruise a “cyborg” when it came to his endurance on the promotional circuit. Reminiscing about his own efforts to reach the pinnacle of stardom, Mr. Smith said that whenever he’d land in a country to hype a new movie, he would ask the local executives for Mr. Cruise’s promotional schedule, which often included four-and-a-half-hour stretches on a red carpet. “And I vowed to do two hours more than whatever he did in every country,” Mr. Smith wrote.Mr. Cruise tirelessly promotes his films, often through public appearances that are tightly controlled.Emmanuel Wong/Getty ImagesMr. Smith wasn’t the only one to notice. Studio executives have come to rely on Mr. Cruise’s commitment to promotion as his superpower.“He’s one of a dying breed that will literally work the world and treat the world as though each region is massively important. Because it is,” said Chris Aronson, Paramount’s president of domestic distribution. “So many others roll their eyes. ‘I don’t want to do that.’ With Tom, it’s always built in. It’s a massive undertaking. But it pays off. It’s why he has legions of fans around the world.”Some would argue that the age of the movie star died when the Marvel Cinematic Universe took over pop culture and movies based on known intellectual property seemed to be the only way to get large numbers of people into theaters. Mr. Cruise has not been immune to these changes.In the past decade, Mr. Cruise starred in original titles like “American Made,” “Oblivion,” and “Edge of Tomorrow”— all movies that played up his action bona fides. None were hits. His reboot of “The Mummy,” which was supposed to jump start Universal Pictures’ monster movie series, was a disappointment for the studio, generating only $80 million in domestic receipts. The series never took off.Mr. Cruise has had box-office success playing the homicide investigator Jack Reacher and in the “Mission: Impossible” series.Chiabella JamesBut while not taking part in any superhero franchises, Mr. Cruise has managed to capitalize on intellectual property that he’s already successfully exploited. Roles like the homicide investigator Jack Reacher, and the secret agent Ethan Hunt in “Mission Impossible,” have performed well at the box office. He’s hoping to pull that off again with “Top Gun: Maverick.”“I think there is so much choice in the world right now with the amount of content that is produced that every movie has turned into a bull’s-eye movie,” said David Ellison, chief executive of Skydance, the producer of “Top Gun: Maverick” and a number of other films with Mr. Cruise. “The opportunity to have something work and be anything less than A-plus is simply not the marketplace that we’re living in.”Glen Powell, one of Mr. Cruise’s co-stars in “Top Gun: Maverick,” cites him as one of the reasons he pursued acting. Mr. Cruise is also the reason Mr. Powell is in the film. Mr. Powell initially tried out for the role of Rooster, the tough guy son of Maverick’s former wingman Goose — a part that went to Miles Teller. Disappointed when he was offered the role of the cocksure daredevil Hangman instead, Mr. Powell only took the part after Mr. Cruise gave him some advice: Don’t pick the best parts, pick the best movies and make the parts the best you can.“I will never forget that moment,” Mr. Powell said in an interview. “He asked me, ‘What kind of career do you want?’ And I’m like, ‘You man, I’m trying to be you.’”Mr. Cruise’s 44 films have made more than $4 billion at the Canadian and U.S. box offices.Isa Foltin/Getty ImagesAs such, he’s studied Mr. Cruise’s career and is trying to emulate it. He’s shied away from the superhero genre, so far, and has some theories on what makes Mr. Cruise unique.“He is the guy that’s not trying to occupy the I.P. He’s trying to tell a compelling story that just ends up becoming the I.P. because it’s so good,” Mr. Powell said. He sees a substantive difference there — the difference between going to the movies to see Tom Cruise, the movie star, or going to see other I.P. Or, as Mr. Powell puts it: “There’s a difference between stepping into fandom rather than creating your own fandom.”He knows he’s learned from the master. “Even if I pick up a little of what Tom taught me,” he said, “I’m going to be way more prepared than any other actor out there.”He might. Or he might be learning from an outdated playbook.There is a moment in “Top Gun: Maverick” where Ed Harris, playing Maverick’s superior, tells him, “The end is inevitable. Your kind is headed to extinction.”And Mr. Cruise, still holding on to that brash self-confidence that made him a movie star four decades ago, grins at him and replies, “Maybe so, sir. But not today.”There are plenty of people in the movie industry who hope he’s right. More

    • 88 Shares129 Views

      in Movies

      ‘Hold Your Fire’ Review: Ending a Siege

      by

      A new documentary directed by Stefan Forbes centers on a 1973 hostage negotiation led by a police officer known for his pioneering techniques.“Hold Your Fire,” a new documentary directed by Stefan Forbes, centers on Harvey Schlossberg, a police officer whose pioneering negotiation techniques helped end one of the longest hostage sieges in the history of the New York City Police Department.In January 1973, an attempted robbery at a sporting goods store in Brooklyn quickly escalated, and the film suggests that Schlossberg’s intervention may have saved the lives of the four young Black men at the center of the conflict.Led by Shu’aib Raheem, the four young men planned to steal guns to arm themselves against attacks from Nation of Islam members, who had been targeting Sunni Muslims. The police assumed them to be part of the Black Liberation Army and surrounded the store, starting a 47-hour confrontation. Tensions increased after a shootout led to the death of an officer, leaving his colleagues eager for retribution.In the film, Schlossberg is presented as a savior who, with the support of Patrick Murphy, the police commissioner, turns the officers away from violence. But through interviews with lawyers, police officers, hostages and the men involved in the robbery, what emerges is a kaleidoscopic narrative that lays bare the disconnect between the officers and the communities they serve.Only after Black community members rise up in protest, in response to officers threatening to drive a tank into the store, are Schlossberg’s de-escalation tactics implemented. The film’s intention may have been to highlight the negotiator’s achievement, but it appears that it was public pressure, as much as his influence, that prevented more bloodshed.Hold Your FireNot rated. Running time: 1 hour 33 minutes. In theaters and available to rent or buy on Apple TV, Google Play and other streaming platforms and pay TV operators. More

    • 113 Shares119 Views

      in Movies

      ‘Cane Fire’ Review: Here Am I, Your Plundered Island

      by

      Burning resentment at colonial exploitation on Kauai, seen through the veil of history’s smoke.The documentary “Cane Fire” begins with a reference to a lost silent film of the same name, made by the director Lois Weber in 1934. Her pre-Hays-Code melodrama followed a doomed romance between a plantation owner and one of his workers, and ended with its spurned heroine burning the fields of her former lover. In the new documentary, the director, Anthony Banua-Simon, explains in voice-over that the original film was shot on the Hawaiian island of Kauai, and that his great-grandfather was one of the Filipino plantation workers hired as an extra.In the spirit of this opening acknowledgment, Banua-Simon’s version of “Cane Fire” uses his own family history to demonstrate Kauai’s legacy of plantation colonialism. Woven into this record, archival footage shows how Hollywood beckoned to tourists with its romantic vision of Bali Hai — a paradise where visitors are kings and locals are set dressing.Banua-Simon interviews relatives who still live in Kauai, along with their neighbors and co-workers. Through these conversations, he chronicles exploitation that spans generations. In the film, locals explain that while sugar plantation workers once organized unions, their descendants now break their backs to fuel Kauai’s tourist and real estate industries.The cinematography is often grainy, and occasionally Banua-Simon’s choice of interview subjects feels unfocused or repetitive. But there is tremendous educational and moral value in his overview of the history of Kauai. He has a strong grasp of how industries mutate, replicating their practices of exploitation like a cancer. The context he provides in voice-over and through archival footage lends power to his interviews, suggesting the generations of exhaustion that underlie simple statements of frustration and grief.Cane FireNot rated. Running time: 1 hour 30 minutes. In theaters. More

    • 100 Shares149 Views

      in Movies

      ‘The Valet’ Review: A Crowd Pleasing Buddy Comedy

      by

      What seems like a standard rom-com takes a spin in a different direction.In “The Valet” the eponymous main character, Antonio (Eugenio Derbez, “CODA”), gets tangled up in the unraveling of an affair between a Hollywood leading lady Olivia Allan (Samara Weaving) and her married real estate tycoon boyfriend Vincent (Max Greenfield). On its face, the film seems like standard rom-com fare: The unlikely guy somehow gets the girl way out of his league.But thankfully the director Richard Wong and the screenwriters Bob Fisher and Rob Greenberg avoid that formula, instead serving up a thoughtful buddy comedy about a middle-aged Mexican American immigrant man and a Hollywood leading lady who are both still figuring life out. It’s a welcome addition to the platonic rom-com genre trend.Much like the French film from which it is adapted, “The Valet” dutifully roasts the awful behavior of the superrich elites toward the waiters and yes, the valets, who make their lifestyles possible, not to mention the army of handlers (Alex Fernandez), private investigators (Ravi Patel and John Pirruccello) and assistants (Tiana Okoye) who do their dirty work. Seeing Antonio traversing Los Angeles’s East-West class divide on his bicycle fortifies the film while also linking viewers to the myriad ways Antonio’s family, friends and neighbors also fortify him. (In this respect, it echoes Patricia Cardoso’s 2002 groundbreaking Los Angeles-set “Real Women Have Curves,” starring America Ferrera.) And Carmen Salinas, in her final film appearance, endears as Antonio’s mother, Cecilia, the sex-positive rock of the family.“The Valet” takes care to give its many supporting players their moments in the sun, but this contributes to the bulk of Antonio’s arc getting stuffed, perhaps a bit too hastily, into the final act of the film. Still, “The Valet” is an earnest crowd pleaser that unabashedly celebrates the bonds of a Latino family in a tight-knit neighborhood with rom-com aplomb.The ValetRated PG-13 for language of a vroom vroom nature. Running time: 1 hour 58 minutes. Watch on Hulu. More

    • 113 Shares99 Views

      in Movies

      David Fincher Tries Animation in ‘Love, Death + Robots’

      by

      The director made his first animated short for the new season of this Netflix anthology. “It was an incredibly freeing, eye-opening, mind-expanding way to interface with a story,” he said.Before David Fincher became an A-list director and multiple Oscar and Emmy nominee — lauded for of-the-moment films like “Fight Club” and “The Social Network” and the TV series “House of Cards” and “Mindhunter” — he was one of the co-founders of the production company Propaganda Films. Propaganda was known for its visually dazzling TV commercials and music videos, and Fincher honed his craft in dozens of miniature movies made in myriad styles.Yet until recently, he had never directed animation, even though he loves the medium so much that he signed on a few years ago to be an executive producer of the Netflix anthology animation series “Love, Death + Robots,” which returns for its third season on Friday.“Love, Death + Robots” sprung from the ashes of a project Fincher had been developing with the “Deadpool” director Tim Miller since the late 2000s: a revival of “Heavy Metal,” the animated movie series inspired by the adults-only science-fiction and fantasy comics magazine. The first season of “Love, Death + Robots” debuted in 2019, featuring 18 episodes (ranging in length from 6 to 17 minutes) that adapted short stories by genre favorites like Peter F. Hamilton, John Scalzi and Joe Lansdale. An eight-episode second season followed in 2021.Fincher, left, directed the short under Covid protocols. “I didn’t quite realize how much I communicate through my face,” he said.NetflixDespite his involvement, Fincher never made a short of his own until Season 3, when he and the screenwriter Andrew Kevin Walker (who wrote Fincher’s crime thriller “Seven”) tackled a tale by the British science-fiction author Neal Asher called “Bad Travelling.” Set on the high seas on a distant planet, the story follows a merchant ship as it is tormented by a giant, intelligent crab that manipulates the crew members and then eliminates them one by one. Fincher described the short as “like a David Lean movie crossed with ‘Ten Little Indians.’”“Bad Travelling” was made via motion-capture, a computer-aided style of animation in which actors perform on a set and their facial expressions and gestures are mapped directly onto their animated characters. Fincher worked closely with Miller (who co-founded Blur Studio, the special effects and animation company that produced “Bad Travelling”) and Jennifer Yuh Nelson, an artist and filmmaker (“Kung Fu Panda 2”), who is the supervising director for “Love, Death + Robots.”In a video interview last week, Fincher discussed the challenges and pleasures of making “Bad Travelling” and the series as a whole, and how he carried his detail-oriented directorial approach to this new medium. These are edited excerpts from the conversation.Including this volume’s episodes, there have now been three Neal Asher stories adapted for “Love, Death + Robots.” What is it about Asher that suits this show?Well, “Bad Travelling” was part of our original pitch to do this. We’ve had these giant four-foot by six-foot blown-up copies of really beautiful production art sitting around in the conference room for, good God, 12 years or something. Finally, somebody had to make it. That honor fell to me.Neal is a favorite of Tim’s, and Tim does most of our curation. He has a list of, like, 350 short stories he’s always wanted to see animated. Neal was one of the first examples that Tim brought up to me of the kind of stuff that’s available out there, to say, “OK, I think this is sustainable.”“Bad Travelling” was made with motion-capture, a computer-aided style of animation in which actors’ facial expressions and gestures are mapped onto their characters. NetflixThat’s an instructive way to think about this series: not just as an anthology of adult animation but also as an anthology of science-fiction stories of varying lengths and approaches.It’s a very difficult thing to write a short story. It’s an art in and of itself to, in the broadest of brushstrokes, bring a reader into an already populated world, make us understand as much as we need to know about the geopolitics or whatever, and then get on with it. It’s what I’ve done making television commercials. That’s a great sandbox to do something with one idea for 30 seconds or two ideas for 60 seconds. I’ve done music videos, which is like a mélange of ideas that should hopefully hang together in some abstract way over 3 to 4 minutes.The most difficult thing is to acknowledge the integers. When you have 19 minutes, it’s a very different thing than when you have 22 minutes. You have to force yourself with this material to be terse.Does your job as a director change, depending on what you’re making?I think any card-carrying member of the D.G.A. knows the acknowledged formula: You want to come into every scene as late as possible, get out as soon as possible and make your point. That can be applied to a lot of different kinds of directing. You can bore people at 30 seconds. I’ve done that. You can thrill people at 2 hours and 45 minutes, and you can bore people at 2 hours and 45 minutes. I’ve done both of those.I don’t see any of this stuff as slumming. I don’t think of directing television commercials or directing television episodes as a lesser form of directing. And to be honest, that has made my shows like “House of Cards” and “Mindhunter” slightly more expensive than the normal for television programing. Most people think of television as, you know, 7 to 10 days of shooting, to produce an hourlong episode. I’ve yet to be able to do it in that time frame. I’m a slow learner, I admit it.What did you learn from directing animation?When I’m setting up to do a master, I’m thinking in terms of, “If this is going to be an over-the shoulder shot, I either have to get this person away from the door frame, or I have to tell the key grip to go get a chain saw.” But in [computer-generated imagery], that kind of stuff doesn’t enter into it. The space is entirely plastic. It was an incredibly freeing, eye-opening, mind-expanding way to interface with a story because so much of live-action storytelling is enduring or working around practical things.Of course, when you can change anything at a later date, you also have to ask yourself, “How far am I going to kick this can?” You can open up these files and go, “I want the chin to do this, and I want the ears here.” You can modify all this stuff ad infinitum. For somebody who likes to polish as much as I do, at some point they just have to pull it from your cold, dead hands.Early production art for the short “felt ‘Thief of Baghdad’-adjacent,” Fincher said. “I felt the world itself needed to be a little less phantasmagoric and a little more ‘Deadliest Catch.’”NetflixWith motion capture, is part of your job as a director also to convince the actors that they’re really on a ship, in fear for their lives?Even though you have people in skintight Lycra with Ping-Pong balls hanging off them, you still have to say things like, “OK, in this scene it is the sunset of the third day.” I was working with people from all different kinds of performance-based acting — we had musicians, we had singers. It was an interesting group. And they had no issue being in a leotard, going: “OK, so then I’m fighting the giant crab over here. How big is it? Like two Range Rovers side by side? Where are the eyes? The eyes are on stalks?” You’re attempting to impart this thing that’s totally ridiculous.But honestly, none of that was as difficult for me as being in the middle of Covid and wearing glasses with goggles and a mask and visor. I didn’t quite realize how much I communicate through my face — a lot of director-actor relationships aren’t about giving a line reading but through the way that you interact and the nonverbal cues. The pandemic gear got in the way of all that.How much input did you have on the visual design? Was there any illustrator or director you were looking to for inspiration?Tim and Blur had been working on the story for a long time, and they had a lot of production art that felt “Thief of Baghdad”-adjacent. I felt the world itself needed to be a little less phantasmagoric and a little more “Deadliest Catch.” My whole thing was I wanted the people to be at risk of being washed off the deck at any moment. They’re either going to get chewed apart by these blunt-nosed sharks, or they’re going to be dismembered by these pincers of these giant crustaceans.It must be easier to rip characters apart and spill their guts when you’re working in animation.Yes, and on the water! Like Jim Cameron and Kevin Costner will tell you, there are such things as forces of nature. If you ever do a story that takes place on the high seas, do it in C.G., because you’re not going to be chasing the sun, and you won’t be worried about people being crushed between boats or drowning. And you’ll never be waiting around for the wave machine.Is there anyone you’d like to bring into the fold if you get to make a Season 4?There are a lot, but look, this show takes a while. This episode I did took, like, 18 months. We originally started off wanting to do this with Ridley Scott, Jim Cameron, Zack Snyder, Gore Verbinski. So many friends of mine I went to and asked, “Would you want to do something like this?,” and they were like, “Yes!” But the reality is that the only way this show is affordable is if the people who are making it don’t mind losing the money they could be making doing something else.Are we hoping that the world embraces this show on a heretofore unseen level, making it a no-brainer to increase the subsidy for it? Yeah, that would be great. Until that happens, it’s hard to get the director of “Avatar” or the director of “Pirates of the Caribbean” to drop everything they’re doing and come and play with us. More