Movies

Subterms

    More stories

    • 100 Shares185 Views

      in Movies

      ‘Tyler Perry’s Straw’ Review: The Accidental Bank Robber

      by

      A single mom in Atlanta (Taraji P. Henson) is having a very, very, very bad day.In “Tyler Perry’s Straw,” Janiyah (Taraji P. Henson), a single mom in Atlanta, is having a very, very, very bad day. Her morning was already ragged when the writer-director piles onto her woes a demeaning landlord, a bullying boss, a distant school administrator, a line of disgruntled grocery customers and a road-raging, off-duty police officer. Did we mention that Janiyah winds up in the wrong office at the wrong time in the wrong state of mind?As detectives arrive to a bloody crime scene at the grocery store where she clerks, Janiyah is across the parking lot at her bank, trying to cash her paycheck. Only she doesn’t have identification, and the teller is being a stickler. Soon, Janiyah is waving a gun, something is flashing red in her daughter’s see-through backpack and she has made hostages of the bank employees and a handful of aging customers. Sherri Shepherd portrays Nicole, the branch manager who tries to diffuse the situation, having amped it by telling the police that Janiyah has a bomb.Teyana Taylor (“A Thousand and One”) brings fierce focus to a deteriorating situation as Detective Kay Raymond. The security footage at the grocery store didn’t lie, but Detective Raymond intuits something more has sent Janiyah to the desperate standoff. She steps in as a negotiator.Perry, an unapologetic purveyor of melodrama, mercilessly teases the tension. Will Janiyah hurt the hostages? Will the authorities make a sad situation worse? The ending is perhaps too twisting for its own good. But Henson — so deeply committed to her character’s emotional cratering — still makes us care.StrawNot rated. Running time: 1 hour 45 minutes. Watch on Netflix. More

    • 138 Shares98 Views

      in Movies

      Philippe Labro Dies at 88; Restless Chronicler of the French Condition

      by

      As an author (often blurring the boundaries between fiction and nonfiction), a film director, a lyricist and a host of TV and radio shows, he sought to capture his epoch.Philippe Labro, a prolific journalist, author, movie director and songwriter whose lyrical prose, boundless curiosity and oft-repeated determination to “forage in deep waters” offered France a sweeping image of itself over several decades, died on Monday in Paris. He was 88.His death, in the Pitié Salpêtrière hospital, was caused by lymphoma of the brain, which was diagnosed in April, said Anne Boy, his longtime assistant. Mr. Labro lived in Paris.A restless spirit, notebook always at his side, convinced that journalism was an exercise in unrelenting observation, Mr. Labro pursued a lifelong quest to capture his epoch by any means. “He wrote our popular, French, and universal history,” President Emmanuel Macron said in a tribute on X, “from Algeria to America” and from Herman Melville to Johnny Hallyday, the French rock ’n’ roll superstar.In 24 books, including novels and essays; seven movies; lyrics to popular songs; and several television and radio shows, Mr. Labro probed the enigma of existence. No one medium sufficed. Truth, he believed, lurked between fact and fiction, and so he refused to be confined by one or the other. Quoting Einstein, he called life a “dance to a mysterious tune, intoned in the distance by an invisible piper.” That piper was his muse.Mr. Labro arrived as a guest for an official state dinner with President Joseph R. Biden Jr. and the first lady, Jill Biden, at the Élysée Palace in Paris in June 2024.Christophe Petit Tesson/EPA, via ShutterstockMr. Labro also liked Victor Hugo’s observation that “nothing is more imminent than the impossible.” He had good reason. It was in the United States, on Nov. 22, 1963, that Mr. Labro, then 27, achieved fame as the first French newspaper correspondent on the scene in the immediate aftermath of President John F. Kennedy’s assassination in Dallas.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

    • 75 Shares167 Views

      in Movies

      Chefs Pick Their Favorite Food Films

      by

      Nancy Silverton, Daniela Soto-Innes and more talk about the movies that have inspired and continue to reignite their love of cooking.The rigor and schedule of professional cooking don’t allow for many movie nights, but that’s not to say chefs don’t find inspiration on the big screen. When we asked a handful of food-world figures about the films that make them want to cook or eat or both, they spoke about narratives that remind them of the joy of a leisurely meal, food’s ability to comfort and what drove them to cook in the first place. Here, 11 chefs discuss the food films, old and new, that still excite them.From left: Philippe Noiret, Ugo Tognazzi and Andréa Ferréo in the 1973 film “La Grande Bouffe,” directed by Marco Ferreri.Collection Christophel/Alamy Ruth Rogers, 76, chef and owner of the River Café, London: “La Grande Bouffe” (1973)I saw this film when I was living in Paris, in 1973. We were there because Richard [the architect Richard Rogers, Ruth’s late husband] was building the Pompidou Center. The movie was quite controversial when it came out. It’s about a group of friends who decide they’re going to eat themselves to death. They get together and start to binge. These four men just absolutely love to eat; it’s their great thing in life. My husband and I loved this movie, so we decided to judge people on whether or not the film made them hungry or disgusted. We, of course, were hungry. Years later, I was having lunch with Francis Ford Coppola, and he told me it was his favorite food movie too.Kel Mitchell, left, and Kenan Thompson in the 1997 film “Good Burger,” directed by Brian Robbins.© Paramount/Everett CollectionCharlie Mitchell, 32, chef of Saga, New York City: “Good Burger” (1997)I watched “Good Burger” again this year. I’m from Detroit but I live in New York City, and when I’m homesick I usually get nostalgic for food, music or films. I must’ve been in elementary school the first time I saw it, probably on VHS. I always connected with the character [Ed (played by Kel Mitchell), a cashier at the burger restaurant where the film is set]. He’s in his own world, and he creates this sauce that everyone loves. I felt like I was the only person in my friend group and community who was interested in food at a young age: Everyone was loving Dragon Ball Z and I enjoyed cooking dinner for my mom or cooking with my grandmother on the weekend. So “Good Burger” was about connecting with that character who was in his own world having so much fun cooking.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

    • 163 Shares98 Views

      in Movies

      ‘Sunlight’ Review: A Man Wakes Up in a Camper, Monkey at the Wheel

      by

      In Nina Conti’s absurdist love story, a radio host and a new friend have nowhere to go but up.When it comes to monkey costumes, you can keep your “Better Man” biopic C.G.I. Nina Conti’s “Sunlight” brings its own bizarro, handmade appeal: A gnarly love story that starts with a guy waking up in an RV driven by a simian-suited stranger. It’s a movie within the indie subgenre of comic encounters between lost outsiders, but powered by its own fringe logic of attraction and rebellion.The stranger in the toylike disguise turns out to be a woman (Conti) fleeing her manipulative stepfather, who took over her mother’s motel. That’s where she found Roy (Shenoah Allen) after a failed suicide attempt in his room. Her name, we eventually learn, is Jane. The RV actually belongs to Roy, a mild-mannered radio host burdened by a hectoring mom and tough memories of his deceased father.Not exactly a meet-cute, but their cracked road trip never loses its warmth under the New Mexico sun. The big question looms: Just who is Jane, and why the blank-eyed monkey suit? But we also wonder how Roy got to his wit’s end. “Sunlight” essentially follows two people helping each other extract and preserve what’s left of their sanity and will to live.Conti bases Jane’s furry alter-ego on her monkey ventriloquist act, part of her career in British TV and theater. A little of “Sunlight,” which she directs and co-wrote with Allen, goes a long way. But there’s still something to seeing a performer go for broke, purging a character’s shame and despair through a screwy, confessional sense of humor.SunlightNot rated. Running time: 1 hour 36 minutes. In theaters. More

    • 88 Shares177 Views

      in Movies

      ‘The Ritual’ Review: An Exorcism to Forget

      by

      Al Pacino speaks in an exaggerated accent and Dan Stevens looks overly concerned in this movie directed by David Midell.When a movie begins by announcing that “The following is based on true events,” the intent, one presumes, is to get the viewer to sit up and get ready.It doesn’t help when the true events contain well-worn genre elements, as is the case with “The Ritual,” an exorcism story directed by David Midell. The trailer for this movie says that it tells “the true story that inspired ‘The Exorcist.’” And indeed, we have several elements remembered from that picture: a young woman possessed; a young priest who is having trouble with his faith; and an imposing older priest whose conviction carries the day.Did I say imposing? In William Friedkin’s 1973 movie, Father Merrin (Max von Sydow), casting a long shadow and speaking in stentorian tones, was immediately formidable. Here, two priests in a small town in Iowa in 1928 are enlisted to perform the exorcism. As Father Theophilus, a hunched Al Pacino speaks in an exaggerated accent that wavers between Crazy Guggenheim and “It’s-a me, Mario.” As the younger priest, Father Joseph, Dan Stevens doesn’t have much to do besides look extremely concerned.The movie doesn’t serve its actresses particularly well either. During her possession scenes, Emma (Abigail Cowen) is obliged to contort herself and froth at the mouth, while Mother Superior (Patricia Heaton) is called upon to furrow her brow a lot. Topping it all off is a deliberately shaky and agitated shooting and cutting style that heightens nothing. Just watch “The Exorcist” again.The RitualNot rated. Running time: 1 hour 38 minutes. In theaters. More

    • 150 Shares167 Views

      in Movies

      George Romero’s Daughter, Ex-Wife and Widow Take On His Zombie Movie Legacy

      by

      When George Romero died from lung cancer in 2017, he left behind several ideas and screenplays for zombie movies.One was a treatment, “Twilight of the Dead,” and his widow, Suzanne Desrocher-Romero, described it as a “summing up” of the franchise, an ending to what began with “Night of the Living Dead” in 1968 and continued for five decades and six flesh-gnawing movies.George Romero was the rare artist who invented a major modern monster, one whose popularity rivals that of vampires and ghosts. The popularity of the TV series “The Last of Us” or the highly anticipated arrival of a new entry in the “28 Days Later” series this month tells us that the zombie is not going to end anytime soon. Its whole thing, after all, is to keep coming back.But what about the Romero zombie? The original strain. What will happen to this fabled creature now that its creator is gone?Three women in the Romero family are grappling with their memories of him at the same time as they’re trying to answer this question. His director daughter, his producer ex-wife and his producer widow are each developing movies with a distinct vision of the future of the undead. They don’t exactly share the same vision even as they’re pressing forward. The Romero zombie is very much alive — and very messy.Clockwise from top left, the original “Night of the Living Dead,” “Martin,” “Land of the Dead” and “Dawn of the Dead.”We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 113 Shares108 Views

      in Movies

      ‘The Life of Chuck’ Review: Don’t Worry, Be Happy

      by

      Tom Hiddleston dances his way through a movie about death and dystopia, based on a Stephen King story, that has an incongruous feel-good vibe.It’s the end of the world as we know it, or at least that’s how it seems in “The Life of Chuck.” A strange, feel-good fantasy about the end times, the movie traces a loose network of characters going about life while facing multiple personal and planetary catastrophes. When the story opens, Earth’s big clock, a.k.a. life itself, seems close to running out: Cataclysmic disasters, both natural and otherwise, are raging worldwide, species are rapidly going extinct, people are checking out and the internet is about to do the same. That’s bad, though given our enduring connectivity issues, it can also seem like just another day on Planet Reality.“The Life of Chuck” is a curious movie, starting with its relatively relaxed, almost blasé attitude toward extinction of any kind. It uneasily mixes moods and tones, softens tragedies with smiles and foregrounds a title character — Chuck, an accountant with a tragic past, played as an adult by Tom Hiddleston — who has a tenuous hold on both the story and your interest. Chuck is present from the start but only comes to something like life midway through. He has a kid and is happily married, at least according to the narrator (Nick Offerman), whose dry, lightly detached voice-over winds throughout. That the narrator proves to be a more vivid presence than Chuck is another oddity, one that’s presumably unintentional.Written and directed by Mike Flanagan, the movie is based on a vaporous three-part novella by Stephen King, also titled “The Life of Chuck,” that’s included in the author’s 2020 collection “If It Bleeds.” Flanagan’s adaptation is scrupulously, unwisely faithful to the source material. As in King’s tale, the movie unfolds in three sections in reverse chronological order. Also as in the original, Chuck first appears on a billboard that doesn’t seem to be selling anything. It just features a photo of a suited Chuck at a desk smiling out at the world, a mug in one hand, a pencil in the other. “39 Great Years!,” the billboard reads. “Thanks Chuck!”The billboard catches the eye of the movie’s most fully realized character, Marty (Chiwetel Ejiofor), the focal point of the disaster-ridden inaugural chapter. A schoolteacher whose slight connection to Chuck emerges much later, Marty is dutifully plugging away in class despite the world’s looming end. “I contain multitudes,” one of his students unpersuasively reads from the Walt Whitman poem “Song of Myself.” Given everyone’s palpable listlessness, Marty’s included, T.S. Eliot’s “The Hollow Men” would probably have been too on the nose: “This is the way the world ends / Not with a bang but a whimper.”A sensitive, appealing performer, Ejiofor is a master of melancholy, and he gets the movie off to a fine start. His soft face and large, plaintive eyes naturally draw you to him, but even when they water, as directors like them to do, it’s Ejiofor’s talent for emotional nuance and depth that holds your gaze. That skill is particularly useful for characters as vaguely conceived as Marty, a nice, lonely guy who’s still close to his ex, Felicia (Karen Gillan). There’s not much to either character or their relationship, but Ejiofor fills in Marty with dabs of personality and a sense of decency that suggests that while humanity is lost, not every individual is. It’s too bad the movie doesn’t stick with Marty, who warms it up appreciably.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 Shares137 Views

      in Movies

      ‘I Don’t Understand You’ Review: Murder and Mayhem in Italy

      by

      The film follows dads-to-be Dom (Nick Kroll) and Cole (Andrew Rannells) as they make a series of disastrously wrong turns during their anniversary trip.Dolly Parton has often joked that gay people deserve the right to legally marry and “suffer just like us heterosexuals.” That cheeky spirit of equal-opportunity relationship struggles underpins the film “I Don’t Understand You.”Written and directed by real-life husbands David Joseph Craig and Brian Crano, the film follows dads-to-be Dom (Nick Kroll) and Cole (Andrew Rannells) as they make a series of disastrously wrong turns during an anniversary trip to rural Italy that could threaten their chances of adopting a child. Intercultural misunderstandings lead to chaos and eventual bloodshed. If only they’d done their homework before boarding the plane.Like the unhinged 2023 gay comedy “Down Low,” this movie uses accidental murder as a darkly comic device. Lines like “What’s my hair doing?” and “I don’t want to break her stemware” — uttered after serious transgressions — land with snappy comedic timing. But this plays like a bloated “Saturday Night Live” sketch, the increasingly implausible plot getting out of step with a sincere story about queer parenthood. In trying to be both subversive and sincere, “I Don’t Understand You” ends up not quite pulling off either.One recurring idea is that Dom and Cole may fear homophobia more than they actually encounter it — self-preservation is their sharpest weapon. Even if they don’t realize it, their suffering isn’t because they’re gay. The couple is suffering because, unlike in queer films of decades past, they actually have the freedom to screw things up.I Don’t Understand YouRated R for murderous farce and meltdown-level expletives. Running time: 1 hour 36 minutes. In theaters. More