Documentary Films and Programs

Subterms

    Latest story

    113 Shares56 Views

    ‘Pets’ Is the Rare Documentary for Children, About Children

    by

    The movie, directed by Bryce Dallas Howard, celebrates animals while planting a seed of interest in rescue operations.Most documentaries are not really aimed at children. The film world seems to think they are only interested in animated movies about, frequently, talking pets. If a documentary is for families, on the other hand, there’s a good chance it involves wildlife.But “Pets” (on Disney+) remixes all of that: It’s a documentary about the title subjects and their humans, aimed at and largely populated by children. Directed by Bryce Dallas Howard, it’s a sweet-tempered film that celebrates the animals we love and seems to have a secondary purpose, too: to convince viewers to support and even develop a love for animal rescue.Howard accomplishes this by taking a kind of segmented approach. Adorable children give studio interviews about their own pets — their names, their characteristics, the ways they seem to understand the children’s emotions. These are interspersed with home videos, largely the kind of vertical ones you might catch on a social media feed: dogs doing tricks, cats smirking, pigs waddling around and so on. Then there’s a series of mini-documentaries about people who work with animals, especially rescues or otherwise traumatized creatures. Among those subjects are Sterling “TrapKing” Davis, a rapper who is a contagiously enthusiastic cat guy; Rodney Stotts, a master falconer who dedicates his work to both the birds and local children; and Shinobu Takahashi, who runs the no-kill shelter Dog Duca in Nagoya, Japan.I don’t think anyone inclined to watch “Pets” really needs convincing that animals are cool and that we should like them. But this focus on rescuing those that are, for whatever reason, in harm’s way is rather lovely. And to Howard’s credit, the theme is integrated seamlessly into the celebration of life alongside animals, which might broaden the viewership but certainly will plant a seed of interest in youthful viewers.What struck me about the movie was an influence I have not often considered when thinking about documentaries. The segmented structure and varied style in “Pets” felt familiar, and about halfway through I realized I was thinking of “Sesame Street,” on which generations of kids have been raised. That show also has its own varied style and structure, broken up by different types of filmmaking, like interviews with children, fun kid-on-the-street clips and short documentaries about ordinary things that are somehow fascinating, including observational footage from factories that make crayons or saxophones.Kids are actually interested in the real world around them, the ordinary things they encounter, and curious about how everything works. Documentaries are good at feeding that curiosity, at giving children a peek into worlds they can’t necessarily access on their own. “Pets” is engineered to make a child not just want a pet if they don’t have one, but also want to find one that needs a home and some love. And in that way, “Pets” serves up both entertainment and something for its young audience to consider. More

    More stories

    • 150 Shares59 Views

      in Movies

      ‘One to One: John & Yoko’ Review: A Year in the Life

      by

      Kevin Macdonald’s immersive documentary follows the couple from their heady first days in New York to their galvanizing concert at Madison Square Garden in 1972.That John Lennon contained multitudes and mysteries was clear to anyone who listened to him when he was in the Beatles and after he discovered himself anew with Yoko Ono, who united with him mind, body and soul. They first met in 1966, kept in touch and finally shared a long night that ended with their making love at dawn. “It was very beautiful,” Lennon later said. They were still together in 1980 when he was fatally shot in New York. He was only 40. In the years since his death, Ono — who turned 92 in February and has retreated from public view — has helped keep him vividly present through her art, music and activism.Lennon and sometimes Ono are exhilaratingly present in “One to One: John & Yoko,” a documentary flooded with music and feeling that revisits a narrow if eventful period in the couple’s life. Directed by Kevin Macdonald and heroically edited by Sam Rice-Edwards (who’s also the co-director), the movie focuses on the early 1970s when Lennon and Ono were living in a modest apartment in the West Village amid clutter, clouds of smoke (cigarette and otherwise) and a hardworking television. “I just like TV,” an offscreen Lennon says in the documentary. “Whatever it is,” he adds, “that’s the image of ourselves that we’re portraying.”The image of Lennon and Ono in “One to One” is of an appealing, loving, creatively — and politically — fired-up couple who have happily lost and found themselves in the ferment of New York. By the time they landed in the city in 1971, Lennon and Ono were married, and the Beatles were no more. (The group made it legal in 1974.) When the couple met in 1966 it had been at one of her gallery shows. There, Lennon climbed a ladder featured in one of Ono’s artworks to read a single word that she had scribbled on the ceiling: “Yes.” Perhaps it was prophetic: They were married to other people, but soon said yes to each other, leading to a lot of ugliness directed at Ono, who was wrongly blamed for the Beatles’ breakup.For “One to One,” Macdonald has drawn from a wealth of engrossing, at times arresting archival material, including footage of Lennon and Ono at home, as well as never-before-released phone calls, for a movie that is as busy and as populated as their lives appeared to be. Allen Ginsberg pops up here, once while reciting best practices for anal hygiene. So do Angela Davis, Phil Spector, George Wallace and Jerry Rubin, who spoke about revolution alongside Lennon and Ono on “The Mike Douglas Show” in an eye-popping 1972 clip. Cinephile alert! The blond guest in that snippet is the filmmaker Barbara Loden, whose “Wanda” opened the year before. Lennon was right: TV was worth watching then.In making the documentary, Macdonald et al. have taken an immersive rather than an instructional approach, one that plunges viewers into a rushing stream of moving and still images, among them home movies, concert footage, news reports and far too many period commercials. There are no original voice-overs or talking-head interviews to help guide the way, and most of the text onscreen is transcripts of the phone calls. There are, less happily and helpfully, far too many shots of a re-creation of their apartment made specifically for the movie. (Ono and Lennon’s son, Sean Ono Lennon, served as the music producer.)The thread that winds throughout “One to One” is the Aug. 30, 1972, concert of the movie’s title that Lennon and Ono coordinated at Madison Square Garden alongside the likes of Stevie Wonder and Roberta Flack. Earlier that year, the television reporter Geraldo Rivera had shocked the viewing public with a harrowing expose of the Willowbrook State School on Staten Island, an institution for people with developmental disabilities where the children’s ward was crowded with grimly neglected boys and girls. Horrified, Lennon and Ono helped organize the event (they performed twice that day) to raise money for the children; it was, as the movie puts it, “the only full-length concert John gave after leaving the Beatles.”We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 88 Shares75 Views

      in Movies

      Is Yoko Ono Finally Getting Her Moment?

      by

      A new biography and film about Yoko Ono offer more opportunities to assess her contributions to culture. Two pop music critics debate if they’re worthy of their subject.LINDSAY ZOLADZ Are we living through a Yokossance? Though the 92-year-old conceptual artist, musician and Beatle widow Yoko Ono has spent much of the past decade far from the public eye dealing with health issues, each year seems to bring a new opportunity to reassess her contributions to culture.In the 2020s alone, there has been a tribute album, a small shelf’s worth of biographies and, just last year, a blockbuster, career-spanning show of her artwork at London’s Tate Modern. (That retrospective, “Yoko Ono: Music of the Mind,” comes to Chicago in October.) All of that followed Peter Jackson’s long-awaited 2021 Beatles documentary “Get Back,” which reignited debates about Ono’s influence on the band she was unfairly accused of “breaking up.”David Sheff, a longtime friend of Ono’s who is best known for writing a memoir about his son’s struggles with addiction, “Beautiful Boy” (Ono gave him permission to title it after a John Lennon song), argues strongly against that assumption in his new biography, “Yoko.” He even takes it a step further, proposing that “it’s possible that the band stayed together longer than they would have because of Yoko,” since she gave Lennon several years of relative groundedness during which the Beatles made “Let It Be” and “Abbey Road.” “During the writing and recording of those albums, John had a foot out the door,” Sheff writes. “If he hadn’t had Yoko, the other foot might have followed sooner than it did.”We get extended glimpses of Ono and Lennon a few years later in “One to One: John & Yoko,” Kevin Macdonald’s forthcoming documentary that focuses on a well-told chapter of their story, their time living in New York City in the early 1970s.“Yoko Ono: Music of the Mind,” on display in Germany last September. The retrospective comes to Chicago in October.Martin Meissner/Associated PressI’m curious, Jon: Did either Sheff’s biography or Macdonald’s film add anything to your understanding of Ono? I’m also thinking of an essay that our colleague Amanda Hess wrote in 2021 about Ono’s transfixing presence in “Get Back.” She said she had observed the slow evolution of Ono from “a cultural villain” into “a kind of folk hero.” Do you think that shift is now fully complete?We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 138 Shares58 Views

      in Movies

      “Thank You Very Much” Looks at the Life of Andy Kaufman

      by

      “Thank You Very Much,” directed by Alex Braverman, uses archival footage and interviews to explore the appeal of a stand-up who didn’t tell jokes.A documentary subject like the comic Andy Kaufman, who died in 1984, has got to be both a dream and a nightmare for a filmmaker. Archival footage is usually used to suggest a glimpse into who someone “really” was, but Kaufman’s public appearances almost always involved him playing some kind of character, like the sweetly hapless Foreign Man (who evolved into Latka Gravas on “Taxi”) or the abrasively awful nightclub singer Tony Clifton. Kaufman suggested — and friends concur in “Thank You Very Much” (available to rent or buy on most major platforms) — that he was always playing a character, even if that character was a guy named Andy Kaufman. Trying to get at the “real” guy in this case seems quixotic.“Thank You Very Much,” directed by Alex Braverman, features several friends of Kaufman’s musing on who the real Andy was, and taps into elements of his childhood to explain some of his obsessions. But understanding the real Andy is not the ultimate point of this film. Instead, Braverman seems to be roving in search of the source of Kaufman’s appeal: Why did fans want to watch someone who was so often deliberately off-putting and exasperating? Kaufman’s act didn’t involve telling jokes (“I’ve never told a joke in my life, really,” he once said) and often seemed designed to push audiences as far as possible to see if and when they’d break.When, beginning in 1979, he started performatively wrestling women and spouting misogynistic garbage, it was awfully hard to tell whether he was satirizing women, feminists, misogynists, wrestlers or all of the above. His is not the kind of comedy you just chuckle at and move on. Today we might call him a troll.As “Thank You Very Much” shows, Kaufman was a comedian of the uncomfortable, the absurd, the confusing and at times the excruciatingly boring. Braverman wisely does not try to imitate Kaufman’s style in the film, instead opting to explore his career through old footage and conversations with people who knew him, like Lorne Michaels, Kaufman’s father (in archival interviews), the comedian Bob Zmuda and the musician Laurie Anderson (in new takes).We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 125 Shares106 Views

      in Movies

      ‘Henry Fonda for President’ Review: A Legend and His Contradictions

      by

      Fonda was the embodiment of America, the director Alexander Horwath posits in this documentary.Henry Fonda was inarguably one of the greatest actors ever produced by the United States. The Austrian filmmaker Alexander Horwath pushes this self-evident truth further in his purposefully expansive documentary “Henry Fonda for President.” The movie convincingly posits that Fonda was, cinematically, the embodiment of America itself.Horwath has gathered a vast amount of archival material from film, television, radio and more to make his case. We hear not just from Fonda himself, but from Peter and Jane, the Fonda children who followed in Henry’s professional footsteps.But the fulcrum from which Horwath mostly focuses his view of Fonda is a 1981 interview with the journalist Lawrence Grobel for Playboy magazine; Horwath plays sections of the tape throughout. Fonda sounds in rough shape, his distinctive Midwestern twang subsumed by rasp. He’s also in a bad mood. His crankiness is bracing and sad. He would die the next year.The movie travels across the United States, taking us to significant places in both Fonda’s life and filmography, beginning with the actual village of Fonda in upstate New York. Henry was a descendant of that town’s founder, who was killed and scalped in a raid by the Mohawk tribe there.Horwath concludes that Fonda is playing his own ancestor in John Ford’s “Drums Along the Mohawk.” The documentary later shows Robert De Niro’s mohawk haircut in “Taxi Driver,” threading that with an old TV ad in which Fonda extols the virtues of a viewer toy to that film’s co-star Jodie Foster. These connections have plentiful entertainment value, but Howarth knows they signify more than just trivia: Their threads make up the fabric of American culture, such as it is.Henry Fonda for PresidentNot rated. Running time: 3 hours 4 minutes. In theaters. More

    • 113 Shares86 Views

      in Movies

      At New Directors/New Films, the Faces Tell the Story

      by

      They’re the great cinematic landscape in stories as diverse as “Familiar Touch,” about dementia, and “Timestamp,” about Ukrainian schoolchildren.In “Familiar Touch,” Kathleen Chalfant plays a woman whose inner life alternately burns bright and suddenly dims. Her character, Ruth, has an inviting smile and natural physical grace, though at times she falters midstep. A former cook and a cookbook author now in her 80s, she lives alone in a pleasant modern home cluttered with shelves of books and just-so personal touches that convey the passage of time in a full, well-lived life. Ruth seems thoroughly at ease in her own skin when she first appears, bustling in her kitchen. She’s preparing lunch for a visitor who, you soon learn, is the son she no longer recognizes.Written and directed by Sarah Friedland, “Familiar Touch” is the opening-night selection Wednesday in the New Directors/New Films festival and a terrific leadoff for the annual event. Ruth’s openly loving and hurting son soon hurries her to his car — she thinks that they’re en route to a hotel — and into an assisted living facility. There, she settles into a new reality as she struggles with her memory, connects with other residents and finds support among the staff. In Chalfant’s mesmerizing, eloquently expressive face, you see both Ruth’s piercing loss and a soul safely settling into the eternal now as her past, present and future fade away.Kathleen Chalfant as a woman with dementia in “Familiar Touch.”Armchair Poetics LLCChalfant’s is just one of the memorable faces in the annual New Directors/New Films series, a collaboration of Film at Lincoln Center and the Museum of Modern Art that gathers movies from around the world. Established in 1972, the event was designed to draw attention to the kind of nonmainstream work that didn’t always make it into commercial theaters. That’s one reason that I always look forward to it; the other is that its programmers take film seriously. That’s clear throughout the lineup, which could use more genre variety, yet, at its finest, offers you personal, thoughtful, imaginative, adult work of the kind that plays in art houses and on more adventurous streamers. These are movies made and chosen by people who love the art.That love is also evident in the great diversity of men, women and children in the program, a variety that underscores the centrality of the human face as the great cinematic landscape. This year, partly because of the dystopian chatter about A.I., I was struck anew by the deep, signifying power of smiles, frowns and sneers, and how watching movies usually means watching other people. No matter if their directors tug at your heart (as in the documentary “Timestamp”) or keep you at an intellectual distance (the drama “Drowning Dry”), these movies present an astonishment of humanity. In selection after selection, old and young visages, some untroubled and others wrenched in pain, bring you face-to-face with the world.“Timestamp” follows Ukrainian classes near the front and in the center of the country.2Brave Productions/a_Bahn/Rinkel DocsWe are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 75 Shares159 Views

      in Movies

      How to Live in the Mall

      by

      Want your living space a stone’s throw from the Aéropostale and Hot Topic? A new documentary, “Secret Mall Apartment,” will show you the way.When the artist Michael Townsend first told the documentarian Jeremy Workman about the time he and his friends lived in a secret apartment tucked inside the Providence Place Mall, Workman thought he was being punked. Then Townsend pulled out a cracked iPad to show Workman some grainy video. “I just was dumbfounded and blown away,” Workman said in a video interview alongside Townsend. “Then I was, like, instantly, ‘I got to figure out how I could convince him to let me make a documentary on this.’”The result is the new film “Secret Mall Apartment,” which recounts how, between 2003 and 2007, eight artists created a homey apartment in an abandoned space in a shopping center. Using footage the residents had filmed on a tiny camera, Workman places the stunt in the context of the rapid gentrification happening at the top of the 21st century while at the same time relying on some heist-movie conventions. So how did they do it? Here are six steps.1. Find an abandoned space.The Providence Place Mall, in Rhode Island, home to an architectural anomaly, an unused space that caught the eye of an artist while construction was going on.Jeremy WorkmanWhen the mall was being built, Townsend noticed what he called a “nowhere space,” an “anomaly in the architecture” that served no purpose. So when Townsend and his friends decided to camp out at the mall after seeing an ad teasing that the place was so well stocked that it had everything a person needed to live, he sought out that corner as a place to sleep. How did Townsend clock it in the first place? He credited that to a fixation with the notion of space that arose as the mall was going up, part of the gentrification of his Providence, R.I., neighborhood that also resulted in the artists’ space where he lived being demolished.“It’s not just losing the home, it’s also losing historical vertebrae of the neighborhood,” Townsend said. As for the mall, “You couldn’t help but internalize that there was a lot of dead space in that structure,” he said. And thus, the notion of an apartment was born.2. Get a couch.“If you can pick one thing you’re going to move into a space, I’d pick a couch over a mattress, any day,” Michael Townsend said of the apartment where, from left, Colin Bliss and Greta Scheing are relaxing.Michael TownsendWe are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 125 Shares165 Views

      in Movies

      10 Wild Clips to Help You Understand Andy Kaufman’s Greatness

      by

      The standup, who’s the subject of a new documentary, expanded the ambition of comedy. These videos show how far ahead of his time he was.Andy Kaufman became one of the most influential comedians ever in a brief amount of time — really only a decade, from his first national television appearance to his death from lung cancer in 1984 at 35. In between, his comic stunts blurred the lines of reality and fiction and found a variety of ways to provoke audiences and upend expectations, while doing more than any club performer to expand the conceptual ambition of comedy, turning stand-up into performance art. What makes this even more remarkable is that he did almost none of it via regular roles in movies or high-profile television, with the exception of the sitcom “Taxi.”And yet, Kaufman and his many characters were a constant presence in popular culture, clubs and wrestling matches and on talk and variety shows, many of which are long forgotten. These bits have lived on the internet, divorced from the context in which they appeared. Now on YouTube, the Andy Kaufman rabbit hole is deep and packed with pleasures. A new documentary on his life, “Thank You Very Much,” was made by artists who clearly spent a long time exploring it. Here are 10 of the best examples that show how Kaufman broke from the past and anticipated the future.Foreign ManThe first Kaufman character to break out was the tentative, thick-accented immigrant from the Caspian Sea known as Foreign Man, an antecedent to Borat but sweeter, more sensitive and deluded. He mangled Borscht Belt jokes that fizzle like this one-liner: “My wife’s cooking is so bad, it’s terrible.” Before he turned into Latka Gravas on “Taxi,” Foreign Man showed up in short sets on shows like “Van Dyke and Company.” In one of the first, Foreign Man loses a Fonzie look-alike contest, becoming upset at Dick Van Dyke, who, unlike some television hosts who interacted with him (see Dinah Shore), clearly delights in Kaufman. To make things right, the host offers him the opportunity to tell some jokes. Playing an overly enthusiastic innocent with a shaky grasp on English and an even looser grasp on American humor, Kaufman fumbles through some bits and a terrible Ed McMahon impression. Somehow his errors endear him to the audience. Kaufman’s large, anime-like eyes do a lot of the work.Celebrity InterviewerSilence. Kaufman uses it as well as any comedian, building suspense, tension and most of all, awkwardness. On his ABC special taped in 1977 but broadcast two years later, he used that technique magnificently in a spoof of a disastrous talk-show interview that anticipated everything from “The Eric Andre Show” to “Between Two Ferns.” As the host, looking down on his guest, the “Laverne & Shirley” star Cindy Williams, from a desk towering high above her, (a disparity he would take to more extreme heights later in his career), he stops talking entirely, and the banter ends. Then the camera moves from him to her and back again, unease building. It’s almost a minute of dead air but seems much longer. Then he asks: “You have hobbies? You have any diseases?”Bongo PlayerWe are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 138 Shares156 Views

      in Movies

      ‘Secret Mall Apartment’ and the Case for Art in Unexpected Places

      by

      Jeremy Workman’s documentary looks back at a project that may sound like a joke but had serious underpinnings.What is art? Everyone has a different definition, not just at this moment in history but across eras. Art is a pretty picture. Art is what’s in a museum. Art is what makes us human. Art is something to sell, or buy, or make, or make fun of. Art is everything, or nothing at all.Defining art isn’t the stated aim of “Secret Mall Apartment” (in theaters), Jeremy Workman’s new documentary about artists who in 2003 managed to create and live undetected for four years in an apartment nestled in a shopping mall in Providence, R.I. That sounds bizarre because it is.Inspired by a commercial for the mall, Providence Place, in which a mother claims she wishes she could live there because it would make shopping so convenient, the artists found an empty, secluded space away from the retail corridors and planned a kind of performance art happening: They’d live there for a week, documenting it, subtly poking fun at developers’ obsessions with so-called underutilized spaces.It seems like a practical joke, but the context was deadly serious, as Workman shows by structuring the film akin to a spiderweb. At the center is the mall apartment itself and the reasons the artists ended up staying several years. This story is built out with interviews with the participants — many of whom had never revealed their involvement — and with footage they shot on the tiny digital cameras we used to tote around back in the mid-aughts, small enough to fit in an Altoids tin.Sprawling from this central story — full of funny anecdotes about almost getting caught and their solutions to problems like an undetectable wall — is a sober set of concerns. Chief among them is the way that city officials and developers were addressing urban decay in Providence, and how the centerpiece of their solution was meant to be the mall. Workman makes ample use of news video to demonstrate how locals talked about the project at the time, including working-class residents who noted that the planned shops and the positioning of the mall entrance away from the less affluent part of the city signaled that it wasn’t meant for them at all. He also enlists a crew to construct a full-scale model of the apartment so that the original dwellers can experience it again.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More