Movies

Subterms

    More stories

    • 63 Shares159 Views

      in Movies

      ‘Spaceman’ Review: What Happened Here?

      by

      Adam Sandler and Carey Mulligan star in a baffling Netflix misfire about a man in, well, space.When was the last time you looked at the exquisite list of synonyms for the word “baffled”? They may be among the best in the English language: puzzled, nonplused, discombobulated, flummoxed, stumped, fogged, wildered, buffaloed. They’re delicious, delightful, full of consonants, evocative of a very particular feeling: you’re presented with something that seems as though it should be clear, but you can’t make it make sense.The occasion for my bout of word nerdery is the Adam Sandler movie “Spaceman,” and for that I thank the film. It is not a particularly confusing movie on its own, in part because we’ve seen its likes before: a spaceman, alone in the inky blackness, goes a little nuts, and also gains clarity on his life back on earth. What’s flummoxing about “Spaceman” isn’t what it is, but why it is.Some bad movies were never going to be good (“Argylle”). Other bad movies never even tried (“Madame Web”). But “Spaceman” is that exquisite rare third thing — an awful movie, a very bad movie indeed, whose lousiness was almost certainly not apparent while it was in production.Every sign points toward, if not a masterpiece, at least a pretty interesting genre experiment. The film has Sandler, whose acting chops are often underrated, in a dramatic role as the titular spaceman, whose name is Jakub. It has the great Carey Mulligan, who is currently up for a best actress Oscar, playing his estranged, pregnant wife Lenka. It is scored by the ubiquitous Max Richter. Its director, Johan Renck, also directed the outstanding mini-series “Chernobyl,” among the best television made in the past decade. And though it’s the screenwriter Colby Day’s first major feature, it’s based on Jaroslav Kalfar’s novel “Spaceman of Bohemia,” which won praise from science fiction critics.I haven’t read Kalfar’s book, but a critic at The Guardian called it “‘Solaris’ with laughs,” which gives me a clue as to what may have gone awry. There’s some “Solaris” swimming around inside “Spaceman,” and also some “Gravity,” some “Interstellar,” some “First Man,” some “Ad Astra.” What there aren’t are laughs.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 Shares99 Views

      in Movies

      ‘Outlaw Posse’ Review: Van Peebles Is Back With a Western

      by

      Two decades after his previous Black western, Mario Van Peebles is back in the saddle again. This time, his son, Mandela, is with him.The wacky, low-budget quest “Outlaw Posse” by the writer-director Mario Van Peebles is not a direct sequel to his innovative Black western “Posse,” from 1993. It’s a companion piece, built in the same universe, that is equally indebted to the history of Black cowboys and the need for restorative justice in America.As Chief, an outlaw hiding in Mexico, the playful Van Peebles wears a dark-colored cowboy outfit similar to the one he sported in “Posse,” and mirroring what his father, Melvin Van Peebles, wore in his 1971 Blaxploitation flick “Sweet Sweetback’s Baadasssss Song.” That film was the first father-son pairing between them; it’s fitting to see Mandela Van Peebles now teaming with his dad as Decker, the estranged son of Chief.Like “Posse,” “Outlaw Posse” concerns a cache of gold commandeered by a Black soldier. Set in 1908, the gold was stolen by Chief from the Confederate government decades ago for the purpose of reparations. A malicious squad of white men, led by the sadistic, one-handed Angel (William Mapother), is pursuing Chief’s ragtag gang across Montana.Angel takes Decker’s family hostage, forcing him to infiltrate his dad’s band of outlaws and report back. Along the way, historical figures like Stagecoach Mary (an underused Whoopi Goldberg) and funny characters like Horatio (Cedric the Entertainer) appear.In direct conversation with cinema’s many spaghetti westerns, Van Peebles’s shaggy script relies on winking nods and plentiful shootouts in lieu of production value. “Outlaw Posse” may not be innovative, but its regard for family affairs is worth treasuring.Outlaw PosseRated R for sweetback content, language and brief partial nudity. Running time: 1 hour 48 minutes. In theaters. More

    • 113 Shares189 Views

      in Movies

      ‘Dune: Part Two’: Here’s Everything You Need to Know

      by

      Before you see the second film in Denis Villeneuve’s adaptation of the sci-fi epic, try this refresher on spice, the Imperium and the Kwisatz Haderach.Since the weird, wild universe of “Dune” emerged from the pages of Frank Herbert’s novel in 1965, filmmakers have yearned to bring it to the screen. In the 1970s, Alejandro Jodorowsky was thwarted in his attempt to turn his elaborate vision into cinematic reality. In 1984, David Lynch was forced to cram volumes of lore into two hours, and the result was an ugly-beautiful disaster. In the latest foray, Denis Villeneuve has created an engrossing, believable world, smartly dividing the first book in the series into two parts. “Dune: Part One” was a critical and box office hit when it was released in 2021, and now “Part Two,” which opens in theaters nationwide on Friday, is poised to pick up where the last film left off. Here’s a primer to bring you up to speed.Where are we?In the film, Paul Atreides becomes a member of the Fremen, a native people of the planet Arrakis living mostly in its hidden corners. Niko Tavernise/Warner Bros.“Dune” is set about 20,000 years in the future, and much of the series takes place on the desert planet of Arrakis. Part of the galactic empire of the Imperium, which is ruled by the Padishah Emperor Shaddam, Arrakis is vital because it offers a necessary resource — spice — that exists nowhere else. In “Part One,” the emperor transferred control of Arrakis from the brutes of House Harkonnen to their longtime foes, House Atreides. But the gift was a trap, something Duke Leto Atreides suspected but hoped to turn to his advantage by establishing an alliance with the Fremen, a native people of Arrakis who live mostly in its hidden corners. Before Leto’s plans could bear fruit, the emperor secretly sent his elite force to aid Baron Vladimir Harkonnen (Stellan Skarsgard) in regaining control of the planet and in destroying Leto’s troops and family. (In the process, Leto died.)Why is spice so important?“Part Two” opens with the words “Power over spice is power over all.” After a religious revolt against robots millenniums before the start of the series, the use of intelligent machines was banned. People have since relied on preternatural abilities that are developed through training and the use of psychotropic drugs such as spice, which can expand consciousness and extend life. The resource is particularly crucial to the navigators, who enable interstellar travel.What’s the deal with Paul Atreides?Paul Atreides battling Feyd-Rautha Harkonnen (Austin Butler) to determine who will control the spice — and the universe.Niko Tavernise/Warner Bros.Paul Atreides (Timothée Chalamet) is the son of Leto and his concubine, Lady Jessica (Rebecca Ferguson), who is a member of the Bene Gesserit, a mystical sisterhood that surreptitiously manipulates the levers of power. It has been seeding self-serving myths and conducting a breeding program for generations. The relationship between Leto and Jessica had been arranged in hopes that she would give birth to a daughter who could then conceive the Kwisatz Haderach — a male Bene Gesserit with “a mind powerful enough to bridge all space and time.” Instead, Jessica bore Leto the son he desired. (A Bene Gesserit can control everything that goes on in her body.)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 Shares149 Views

      in Television

      The Comedy, and the Horror, of the Infertility Plot

      by

      Onscreen, assisted reproductive technology is a double-edged device, representing women’s empowerment, or their exploitation.“Scrambled” is a romantic comedy about a woman who falls in love with her decision to freeze her eggs. Nellie, a 34-year-old perma-bridesmaid, is wasted and alone at yet another wedding when she is struck by the fear that her fertility may peak before her romantic situation is resolved.The conventional romantic comedy may culminate in marriage, but “Scrambled” leads Nellie toward a procedure that extends the timeline of her own marriage plot. Nellie (Leah McKendrick, who also writes and directs the film) gets her happy ending from an embryology lab. “You were no accident,” she tells one of her cryogenically preserved eggs. “You were one of the most intentional things that I have ever done.”Reproductive technologies are increasingly assisting in human conception (even as the Alabama Supreme Court has complicated their use), and they have become familiar narrative devices, too. Their meaning is double-edged. “Scrambled,” with its oddball cheer, gives fertility treatments an empowering gloss. But an emerging horror genre sharpens the same technologies into instruments of exploitation, turning clinics into torture chambers and doctors into demons. The deus ex machina of assisted reproduction can be a blessing or a curse, depending on the god who sent the machine.After swigging from the sentimental techno-optimism of “Scrambled,” I chased it with a wave of recent downers: I watched “False Positive,” the 2021 horror movie in which Lucy (Ilana Glazer) is subdued by a creepy fertility clinic; “Dead Ringers,” the 2023 limited series in which Rachel Weisz plays a pair of twin gynecologists; and “American Horror Story: Delicate,” the latest installment of the FX horror anthology series about an actress (Emma Roberts) who attempts to secure a baby and an Oscar with the help of her ambiguously sinister publicist (Kim Kardashian).As I watched these horror stories, I found myself counting their clichés on both hands. In the standard fertility-horror plot, a wealthy white couple will report to a an experimental clinic. Its staff will forgo scrubs for bespoke costumes resembling clerics or Stepford wives. An inscrutable and potentially supernatural ultrasound reading will occur. A woman will struggle to conceive, and this difficulty will be blamed on her careerism. She will be instructed to ingest strange tinctures and coached to mistrust her own mind. Her terror will be dismissed as “pregnancy brain” or “hormones.” Her pain will be denied. Her male partner will collude with a male doctor behind her back. Her female friend will be in on it, too. In the end, her pregnancy will be simulated, sabotaged or terminated without her knowledge or consent.In “American Horror Story: Delicate,” an actress (Emma Roberts, right) attempts to secure a baby and an Oscar with the help of her sinister publicist (Kim Kardashian, left).Eric Liebowitz/FXWe 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

    • 150 Shares129 Views

      in Movies

      Micheline Presle, Actress Known for ‘Devil in the Flesh,’ Dies at 101

      by

      A link to France’s first golden age of cinema, she drew international attention for a 1947 film that created a scandal in France and was banned in Britain for years.Micheline Presle, a subtle and elegant actress who was a last link to the first golden age of French cinema, died on Feb. 21 in Nogent-sur-Marne, a suburb of Paris. She was 101.Her death, at the Maison des Artistes, a retirement home for artists partly funded by the government, was confirmed by her son-in-law, Olivier Bomsel.Ms. Presle (pronounced prell) was the final survivor of a trio of actresses — Danièlle Darrieux and Michèle Morgan were the other two — who were already stars in France by the outbreak of World War II, and who defined a certain style of French femininity, both at home and abroad. Ms. Presle’s subtle facial expressions conjured a wide range of human emotions, particularly in two films that, by critical consent, she never surpassed, “Le Diable au Corps,” or “Devil in the Flesh” (1947), and “Boule de Suif” (1945).A poster for “Le Diable au Corps,” known in English as “Devil in The Flesh,” featuring Ms. Presle and Gerard Philipe. The film was, one critic said, “the major work of her career.”Everette CollectionBoth of those films were based on masterpieces of French literature: The first was adapted from a novel by the brilliant but short-lived author Raymond Radiguet; the second from two short stories by Guy de Maupassant. These subtle and complex tales drew on Ms. Presle’s versatility.“Le Diable au Corps” depicted the passionate affair between a young woman, played by Ms. Presle, whose husband was away fighting in the trenches in World War I, and a teenage schoolboy, played by the very young Gérard Philipe, who during his brief career was both France’s leading heartthrob and its greatest actor.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 Shares109 Views

      in Movies

      ‘Code 8: Part II’ Review: Helping a Child in Danger

      by

      In this Netflix sequel, the acting cousins Robbie and Stephen Amell again play gruff men of action — physical and psychic — navigating an urban dystopia.If you didn’t see the 2019 movie “Code 8,” but for some reason decide to take a chance on the sequel, fear not: “Code 8: Part II” begins with a vivid account of a not-too-distant-future where 4 percent of people “possess superhuman abilities” and an authoritarian police force leans hard on robots both two- and four-legged.Having more or less caught you up, the movie, directed by Jeff Chan and streaming on Netflix, once again presents Connor (Robbie Amell), the first movie’s protagonist, now leaving prison and rebuffing his former partner in crime, Garrett (Stephen Amell). (They are real-life cousins, in case you were wondering.)Both are stuck in Lincoln City, a setting as bleak as any other sci-fi hellhole, wherein every day is a day without sunshine.The new story proper begins with Tarak (Sammy Azero), a young criminal who’s trying to help his teenage sister, Pav (Sirena Gulamgaus), find a better life. He steals a bag of money from a couple of corrupt cops and is pursued by a robot police dog in a chase scene that’s brisk, legible and passably tense. He doesn’t get away, and Pav goes on the run. Guess which adult helps her out?Along with a bunch of other contemporary sci-fi tropes (“designer drugs” also feature in this dystopia) we’ve got a child in danger — a child with, naturally, emerging powers of her own. Pav’s talent initially manifests itself by making the TV go wonky when there’s something on it she doesn’t like.In the end, even genre fans with relaxed standards might try to similarly rebel against this insipid offering.Code 8: Part IINot rated. Running time: 1 hour 40 minutes. Watch on Netflix. More

    • 100 Shares159 Views

      in Movies

      Dan Lin Is Named Netflix’s Top Movie Executive

      by

      The producer behind the streaming company’s new live-actor remake of “Avatar: The Last Airbender” will replace Scott Stuber.Netflix said on Wednesday that the producer Dan Lin would replace Scott Stuber as the streaming company’s top film executive.Mr. Stuber was the head of Netflix Film for seven years before announcing last month that he would be leaving. During his tenure, he brought a bevy of Oscar-winning filmmakers to Netflix and helped the company push the rest of the entertainment industry into the streaming era.Mr. Lin, 50, who was once the senior vice president of production at Warner Bros., is the founder of Rideback Productions, which was behind Netflix’s recent live-action remake of “Avatar: The Last Airbender.” He was also a producer of the Oscar-nominated film “The Two Popes” for the streaming service, and has produced the “It” and “Lego” movie franchises. He will report to Bela Bajaria, Netflix’s chief content officer.“While I’ve been approached many times during my past 15 years at Rideback, I could truly never imagine leaving until Bela reached out with this incredible opportunity,” Mr. Lin said in a statement.The son of Taiwanese immigrants, Mr. Lin is part of the new guard of producers who have built companies that tap into the times, notably inclusion. He is known in Hollywood as a strong executive with great relationships. And his ability to toggle between all-audience blockbusters like “Aladdin” and prestige pictures like “The Two Popes” suggests he has the skills to oversee Netflix’s varied film slate. He’s currently producing the live-action version of “Lilo & Stitch” for Walt Disney.Most recently, Mr. Lin’s name had been bandied for the job running DC Studios for Warner Bros. (That role was eventually split between the filmmaker James Gunn and the producer Peter Safran.)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 Shares139 Views

      in Movies

      Sex and Silence: What This Awards Season Tells Us About Hollywood

      by

      Whether it’s the return of steamy scenes or the lack of political speeches, the road to the Oscars holds a lot of clues about the state of the industry.We’re heading into the final stretch of this awards season, but you needn’t wait until the Oscars on March 10 to begin drawing conclusions about what’s transpired.To me, awards season has always offered a useful opportunity to take the film industry’s temperature. What can be gleaned about Hollywood’s current state from the movies and moments that have factored into this year’s race? Here are a few of the telling trends I’ve noticed so far.Prestige cinema has become less chaste.Paul Mescal, left, and Andrew Scott in “All of Us Strangers.”Searchlight PicturesOne of the first films I watched last year was “Passages,” a bisexual love-triangle drama that features one of the most bracing sex scenes I’ve ever seen in a movie. That encounter between two men (played by Ben Whishaw and Franz Rogowski) is revealing not simply because the actors strip down to so little, but because over the course of this surprisingly lengthy and explicit scene, we come to know so much more about the characters from the power dynamics they negotiate while making love.Though I assumed “Passages” would be an anomaly, 2023 proved to be a sexually forthright movie year, producing a crop of awards contenders more interested in the joys of sex than any recent season I can remember. Emma Stone spent much of “Poor Things” on an uninhibited journey of desire, convening with a series of men in a way that surely tested the boundaries of the movie’s R rating. In “All of Us Strangers,” the sexual chemistry between Andrew Scott and Paul Mescal was so potent that I felt myself blushing. Even the director Christopher Nolan broke with convention, filming the first sex scenes of his career for “Oppenheimer.”If there had been a chill in the air while Hollywood learned how to navigate the new inclusion of intimacy coordinators on set, that’s gone now: Movie stars and prestige filmmakers are once again game for the sort of sex scenes that had lately been consigned to premium television. When I spoke with the “Poor Things” director Yorgos Lanthimos in November, he sounded hopeful that attitudes had changed.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