Blog Archive

Wednesday, February 26, 2025

The Best Movies of 2024: Larry's Top Ten and More

By Larry Lee

The voters in the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences have spoken, and their opinion of the best movies of 2024 are (in alphabetical order):

1.  Anora
2.  The Brutalist
3.  A Complete Unknown
4.  Conclave
5.  Dune, Part Two
6.  Emilia Pérez
7.  I’m Still Here
8.  Nickel Boys
9.  The Substance
10.  Wicked

Nine of the these are interesting and creditable films, and they are—for various reasons— worth seeing.  Their appearance on the Acadamy's coveted list is, in some part, attributable to the millions of dollars the studios have spent promoting their films as “important” and/or “noteworthy.”  Fair enough; the history of the Oscars teaches us that the “best” movie generally (but not always) exhibits some degree of social importance, some moral or historical gravitas, or some unusual creativity.  But judge for yourself; here are the last 11 winners:

2024:  Oppenheimer
2023:  Everything, Everywhere, All at Once
2022:  CODA
2021:  Nomadland
2020:  Parasite
2019:  Green Book
2018:  The Shape of Water
2017:  Moonlight
2016:  Spotlight
2015:  Birdman
2014:  12 Years a Slave


The one exception this year, for me, is Anora.  That it is the odds-on favorite to win the Best Picture Oscar is mysterious and confounding to me.  The movie addresses no issue of social importance (compare it to The Brutalist, Nickel Boys, or even The Substance), nor does it bear any apparent moral or historical gravitas (see A Complete Unknown, I’m Still Here, or Nickel Boys).  I also found it not particularly creative (compare it to Dune, Part Two, Emilia Pérez, or Wicked).  It was more like a long, shaggy dog story populated by unpleasant people.  It’s not really even a comedy, despite its occasional absurdist moments.  Perhaps we can understand the movie’s ascent as representative of the rise of Donald Trump and the values he represents.

Anora seemed to have little chance to actually win until controversy began to swirl around the then-front runner, Emilia Pérez, and its star, Karla Sofia Garcon.  Now the buzz in the mainstream media seems to be coalescing around Anora as the favorite.  If it wins, it will surely go down in history as the Best Picture winner with the most full-frontal nudity and simulated (one hopes) coitus, ever.  I was not impressed when I saw the movie when it was first released in November 2024. I found this seedy, sideways take on the hooker-with-the-heart-of-gold story unbelievable from the get-go.  Did Ani (BAFTA and Independent Spirit award winner Mikey Madison) really believe she could make a life with the brainless Ivan?  Did she really think his ultra-wealthy family would accept her?  Was she honestly offended when people called her a hooker?  I recently re-watched Anora and this second viewing confirmed my initial reaction.  Perhaps it is time to retire the story of the compassionate sex worker:  Claire Trevor in Stagecoach (1939), Melina Mercouri in Never on Sunday (1960), Shirley MacLaine in Irma la Douce (1963), Julia Roberts in Pretty Woman (1990).  It’s been done, and much better.

    [Editor's note: for an alternative perspective on Anora, compare Len's glowing review from last October.

A quick word on the other Oscar nominees that, while worth seeing, do not appear on my year end list:

Conclave   A handsomely staged, well-acted story of the horse trading that goes on behind the scenes when the cardinals gather to pick a new pope.  I loved this movie until the last 20 minutes.  No spoiler alert here because I’m not telling, but I felt the film went a bit off the rails at the end.  But still well worth seeing.     [Len Weiler's Review]

Wicked   I did not participate in the craze that accompanied Wicked on Broadway, so did not go into the film with the songs ringing in my head.  I must say I was a bit disappointed, as I found the songs not particularly memorable.  Ariana Grande and Cynthia Erivo are fine as the protagonists and the movie’s production values are suitably lavish, but I found the film tried just a bit too hard.  What shou
ld have been a light and airy soufflé instead felt just a bit on the heavy side after consumption.   

The Substance   This one creatively addresses Hollywood’s relentless pursuit of beauty and youth in women.  And maybe not just in Hollywood.  But what begins as an amusing cautionary tale turns into full-on horror in the end (think 1986’s The Fly, with Jeff Goldblum).  I very much liked this movie until the final 20 minutes when, for me, it jumped the shark.

Nickel Boys   Director RaMell Ross (winner of the Director’s Guild Award for first-time directors) has turned Colson Whitehead’s bestselling novel into a very creative film.  The story, about the oppressive and unrelenting injustice and cruelty of a juvenile facility housing mainly African-American boys and young men in the Deep South, is told mostly in point-of-view shots, as if one of the boys in the group is also holding the camera.  This brings us right into the action but at times makes the exposition vague.  But this is an important story, well told. 

Dune, Part Two   In another universe, this would be the odds-on favorite for the top prize.  Nuanced yet epic, terrific performances, addressing gigantic themes in a wholly-imagined fantasy world, there is really nothing bad to say about this movie.  I know science fiction is not really everyone’s bag, but this one is so good, it threatens to transcend the genre.  Caveat:  One should probably see Part One before seeing Part Two.

Studios usually hold back their most worthy films until the second half of a given calendar year, trying to maximize their golden statuette potential, which can lead to increased sales, profits, and fame.  It is no surprise, then, that most entries on my Half-Oscars™ list have been surpassed by year’s end.  To remind readers, here is my list of the top ten movies released in the first half of 2024:

1.  Civil War
2.  Origin
3.  One Life
4.  The Old Oak
5.  Wicked Little Letters
6.  Dune, Part Two
7.  Hit Man
8.  The Golden Years
9.  Bob Marley: One Love
10.  Driving Madeleine

As noted below, three of these movies showed staying power in my mind.  Before getting to my Top Ten, here are three more notable second-half films that just missed my top ten list:  

The Brutalist (still in theaters as of this writing) is so admirable, so sweeping, so, well, long.  Admirable, inasmuch as it was shot in VistaVision, a widescreen, analog film technology.  [Notable VistaVision films include The Ten Commandments (1956), Houseboat (1958), Vertigo (1958), and North By Northwest (1959)).]  Sweeping, in that old school, historical epic movie sort of way.  [Think Lawrence of Arabia (1962), Out of Africa (1985), The English Patient (1996), The Deer Hunter (1978) - all Best Picture Oscar winners.]  And yes, long:  3 hours and 34 minutes, with a 15-minute intermission.  (That The Brutalist is nominated for an Oscar for its film editing is amusing.  Did they edit it down from a 12-hour movie?)  Its length is all anyone seems to want to say about the movie, and that’s a shame; it’s like describing Wilt Chamberlain and focusing on his claim of having slept with 20,000 women without discussing his unmatched accomplishments as a basketball player.  Moreover, contrary to what many seem to think, the movie’s length is not disqualifying.  Gone with the Wind (1939) was 3 hours and 54 minutes long.  Lawrence of Arabia (1962), 3 hours, 47 minutes.  Ben Hur (1960), 3 hours, 43 minutes.  All took home the big award on Oscar night.  Think those are historical relics of a bygone era?  The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King won Best Picture in 2004, and was 3 hours, 21 minutes long.  I recommend you block out some time and treat yourself to an old-fashioned good time at the movies.

A Real Pain (Hulu, Prime rental) is in some ways the polar opposite of The Brutalist.  Clocking in at a brief 90 minutes, the film is about two very different cousins, so close in age they seem like brothers.  Once very close, their adult lives have diverged dramatically and they have grown apart.  After their beloved grandmother, a Holocaust survivor, passes away, they attempt to bridge the distance grown-up life has imposed on them by joining a tour visiting the Majdanek concentration/death camp.  Despite this background of great sorrow, the movie is sometimes funny, at times outrageous, and you will be touched by the end.  Also, your bottom will not be as sore as it will be after 214 minutes of Adrien Brody in The Brutalist.    

Even if, like me, the older you get, the less the coming-of-age genre of movies interests you, 2024’s My Old Ass (Prime) may change your mind.  The movie gives a nice twist to the coming-of-age genre, and boasts great performances by Audrey Plaza and Maisy Stella, who recently (and deservedly) won the Critics Choice Awards for Best Young Actor/Actress.  Stella plays a teenager named Elliott who tries some psychedelic mushrooms and sees her older, 39-year-old self, played by Aubry Plaza.  This one is full of surprises and feels different from your run-of-the-mill, coming-of-age story.        

All three movies are well worth your time and just barely missed making my top ten list.  But ten is ten, so here are my top ten movies of the year:

My Top Ten

10.  September 5  (available soon)  I think anyone who was at least 10 years old in 1972 will find this one fascinating, for who among us oldsters could forget the terrorist attack on Israeli athletes at the 1972 Munich Olympics.  We all followed it on our little TVs, often black and white ones, but now comes the behind-the-scenes look at how ABC Sports covered the attack, pivoting from covering sports to news with their video and transmission equipment seemingly from the Stone Age.  The story plays like an out-and-out thriller, although of course none of the camera operators or sound technicians were ever in any danger.  (OK, reporter Peter Jennings was pretty close to the danger zone.)  And like in so many movies about historical events, we know the outcome from the start, but it’s the journey that is so fascinating.   

9.  Exhibiting Forgiveness (Prime rental)   Trauma can lead to great art, but that is sometimes little solace to the person who experienced the trauma.  When one has been emotionally wounded by a loved one, should we assume that forgiveness is always possible?  People often have complicated, messy lives, and although we know that only those without sin should throw stones, is that really realistic?  And aside from the family drama, this movie shows something that is notoriously hard to portray:  an artist’s creative process.  I saw this in the theater and although it does not show up on anyone’s top ten list, ignore Hollywood’s publicity machine and remember that only dead fish always swim with the current.  Fascinating and moving.  

8.  Emilia Pérez (Netflix)   So a few Islamophobic and racist tweets in a movie star’s past Twitter account pop up, and a movie’s Oscar chances go down the toilet.  Well, for the movie’s lead actress, anyway.  But it would be a shame for the entire movie, and Zoe Sandaña’s performance, to be flushed as well.  I mean, people still go see Mel Gibson movies, despite his being a virulent and violent antisemite.  (Google it.)  Or see Mark Wahlberg’s movies despite his previous raced-based assault on an Asian-American.  (Ditto.)  So perhaps we should cut Karla Sofia Gascón some slack: as a transexual, we can assume she has experienced her share of focused hate and marginalization.  But her personal journey, whatever it was, doesn’t really detract from the creative audacity of French director Jacques Audiard’s movie about a Mexican cartel boss who wishes to escape his violent past and transition into a woman.  But although you can take the boy out of the country, can you take the country out of the boy (even if he is now a girl)?  Can she really escape her violent past?  The seemingly gritty tale is told in Spanish, complete with splashy musical numbers and dance routines that sometimes recall Busby Berkeley from Hollywood’s misty, long-ago past.  Up until those tweets surfaced, Emilia Pérez was the odds-on favorite for the Best Picture Oscar.  It still easily makes my Top Ten for 2024.

7.  Origin (Hulu, Prime rental)  If one could be shielded from the hum of the Hollywood publicity machine, it would be easy to see that many worthy films get no publicity, no buzz, no push, and are just quietly released and then predictably fall through the proverbial cracks.  Here is one.  Director Ava DuVernay has crafted an unusual movie with a compelling premise: that when one group in society disadvantages another group, it is less helpful to think of it as racism and better understood as the maintenance of a caste system.  But whether or not you are convinced by the intriguing argument, the movie—based loosely on the best-selling book by Isabel Wilkerson—is a wonderful, explanatory narrative/documentary hybrid, weaving together stories of Wilkerson’s personal stories of loss, the treatment of African-Americans in America’s Deep South during the Jim Crow Era, the treatment of Jews in Nazi Germany, and finally the Dalits (so-called “untouchables”) in India.  Along the way, there are small but great performances by Jon Bernthal, Audra McDonald, Nick Offerman (in a MAGA hat!), Niecy Nash, Vera Farmiga, and others. Although this movie was released in January 2024, it is well worth a look.

6.  One Life (Paramount+, Prime rental)   This was the only movie that activated my tear ducts so perhaps it should be #1 on my list.  It’s a shame the film came out so early in the year (I saw it in May), for Anthony Hopkins would surely have been considered for his seventh Oscar nomination and third Oscar win had the studio opted for a Thanksgiving or Christmas release.  This holdover from my Half-Oscars™ list survives the onslaught of late-season Oscar bait by relating the true story of a single, otherwise unremarkable person, and the profound and continuing effect he had on the lives of complete strangers.  At a time when the world is turning meaner, and the national ethos is trending towards the idea of “Every Man for Himself,” to see someone wholly reject that idea is emotionally satisfying.

5.  The Goldman Case (Prime rental)   This movie had only a limited theatrical run but deserved so much more.  I love a good courtroom drama (Absence of Malice, A Few Good Men, even, or especially, My Cousin Vinny), and it’s really interesting to see how a foreign courtroom works (see, e.g., last year’s Anatomy of a Fall).  This one has the additional spice of being based on a true story.  In our current political climate, where the radical actors all seem to be white nationalists and neo-fascists, it’s easy to forget that not so long ago, radicals from the other side of the political spectrum dominated the news.  Pierre Goldman, the son of Polish Jews who fought in the Polish Resistance, was a radical communist who refused compulsory military service in France, traveled to Cuba to hear Castro speak, and later fought with guerillas in Venezuela.  Back in France, he committed three robberies to raise money for his cause but was apprehended and convicted of those crimes, which he did not deny.  He was also tried for two murders committed during a robbery of a pharmacy, crimes he vehemently denied committing.  
This movie is the story of his trial for those murders and shows Goldman as an intense and articulate advocate for himself and for his version of social justice. 

4.  I’m Still Here  (still in theaters)  We in America have had access to some very good movies about the military dictatorships in Argentina (Argentina 1985 (2002, Prime), The Secret in Their Eyes (2009, Prime rental)), and Chile (Chile ’76 (2022, Prime rental), The House of the Spirits (1993, Prime rental), Missing (1982, but not available*).  But until now, not about Brazil.  Director Walter Salles, who as a boy knew the family that forms the heart of this movie, said that he could not have made this movie until the present day due to the past political climate in Brazil.  I assume he means under the presidency of President Jair Bolsonaro, a favorite of Donald Trump.  That newfound freedom of speech in Brazil is itself a reason to rejoice, even if the movie were not very good.  But it is good.  Very good.  The portrayal of life in the 1970s, with its fashions, haircuts, faded photographs and grainy home movies, was impressive and immersive.  The seeming ease with which director Salles conveys the emotional closeness of parents and their children, relying on the small moments they share, rings true and suggests the director is personally familiar with such relationships.  Fernanda Torres, recently the Golden Globe winner for Best Actress in a drama, is touching, empathetic, yet forceful as the matriarch of a family who suffers an unimaginable loss.  She provides a master class in moving on with one’s life while never forgetting the past.  Her mother, Fernanda Montenegro, was nominated for the Best Actress Oscar for her work in 1998’s Central Station (also directed by Walter Salles) and makes a brief but moving appearance near the end of the film.   [Len Weiler's Review]

* Side note:  Missing was directed by world cinema master Costa-Gavras (Z (1969), a 2-time Oscar winning movie), starred Jack Lemmon and Sissy Spacek, and was nominated for the Best Picture Oscar in a time when the Academy nominated only five movies a year for the honor.  (The other nominees that year were Gandhi (the winner), E.T. the Extra-Terrestrial, Tootsie, and The Verdict.  Other movies released that year were Das Boot, My Favorite Year, Victor/Victoria, An Officer and a Gentleman, Blade Runner, and Sophie’s Choice.  It was a very good year.)  Missing was also nominated for Best Actor (Jack Lemmon), and won an Oscar for its screenplay.  It is a tragedy that this movie is not available to stream anywhere.  It makes me long for a Blockbuster video store.   

3.  Seed of the Sacred Fig (still in theaters) This is a remarkable movie, especially when you consider that it was filmed in secret in Iran.  People associated with the film are now being persecuted in their home country for their participation in the filming, although director Mohammad Rasoulof successfully fled Iran after learning he would be taken into custody for his “criminal convictions,” connected to his previous films and activism, and would be required to serve 8 years in prison.  The movie, in Farsi, but submitted by Germany for consideration for the International Feature Film Oscar, is an indictment of the Islamic Revolutionary Court that sentenced Rasoulof, showing how the court is the target of dissatisfaction and destabilization in Iranian society, and how regular people keep the government’s oppression machine chugging along by just continuing to do their job.  In this case, the regular person is a low-level judge who continues to make rulings he assumes the government wants instead of independently dispensing justice.  Consequences for his actions appear not at work but in the bosom of his once-loving family, completely unbalancing his life and mind.  Recommended.    

2.  Civil War (Max, Prime rental)   This was a tough movie to watch when it was released in April; 2024 but has acquired new resonance with the election of Donald Trump.  It asks a pertinent question:  How should we react if a president doesn’t leave office, violently suppresses civil dissent, co-opts the Department of Justice, the judiciary, and the U.S. Military?  How would you react?  In this amazing (and, hopefully, not prescient) movie, director Alex Garland (Men, Annihilation, Ex Machina) gives us an idea of what our world would look like in those circumstances.  Many of the critical background facts of the story are revealed only obliquely or even not at all; this aspect of the movie has led to some criticism of it by commenters.  Yes, we don’t really know why California and Texas seceded from the United States and joined together to form an army called The Western Forces to fight the rest of the country.  But I reject the criticism and maintain that it is enough to learn our country is at war with itself.  Instead of focusing on the cause of the rift, the story instead zeroes in on Lee (Kirsten Dunst), a war photographer, and Joel (Wagner Moura), a journalist, as they attempt to make their way from New York City to Washington D.C. to interview and photograph the President (Nick Offerman), who we learn is in his “third term.”  (Sound familiar?)  The Interstate 95 corridor has been decimated by war, requiring the duo to detour into Pennsylvania and West Virginia, where they get an up close and personal look at how the civil war has affected people in the country.  But as we all found out in other times of disaster and unrest, the beast that lives inside many of us can easily escape if we are not diligent in maintaining respect for all people and do the hard work to ensure peace and prosperity in our country.  Witness Hurricane Katrina.  The Watts Riots.  Kent State.  Central High School in Little Rock.  And more recently, Charlottesville.  And January 6th at the Capitol.  This movie is sometimes hard to watch, contains violence of a very real sort (i.e., not cartoon or superhero violence), but is important and fascinating.  And despite its failure to appear on many other Top Ten lists, I believe it is destined to become a classic.  I hope it is not for the wrong reasons.    [Len Weiler's Review]

1.  A Complete Unknown (still in theaters)   This movie is far and away the most popular movie in my age group, and I admit age may have something to do with that.  Many of us remember when Bob Dylan went electric!  But be that as it may, the movie beautifully portrays the pivotal early years of one of the most important musicians in American history. Director James Mangold (Walk the Line, Ford v. Ferrari, Logan) does a wonderful job recreating the look of the early 1960s in lower Manhattan, as well as the innocence of the early folk music scene that flourished there.  Portraying real-life people in the movies can be difficult:  do you mimic the real person, or try and capture their essence?  Actor Timothée Chalamet does both; he looks and sounds like Dylan, but we also feel his ambivalence with fame, his emotional discomfort in social situations, and his grating unhappiness with those who would put limits on his creativity.  Edward Norton, who is good in every movie he is in (see American History X (1998), Fight Club (1999), The Score (2001), 25th Hour (2002), The Italian Job (2003), The Illusionist (2006), The Painted Veil (2006) The Bourne Legacy (2012), any number of Wes Anderson movies), continues to impress with his portrayal of Pete Seeger.  Newcomer Monica Barbaro (from Mill Valley!) is terrific as Joan Baez, and pretty much everyone else in the movie is spot on.  This movie captures my top spot because I cannot think of a movie that enjoyed more.  Go see A Complete Unknown!         [Len Weiler's Review]

A Few Overlooked Films

And speaking of complete unknowns, here are three fairly unknown movies that I quite liked:  

Knox Goes Away (2024, Max) According to the World Health Organization, there are 55 million people in the world suffering from dementia, and there are 10 million new cases every year.  Sooner or later, the condition will—statistically speaking—affect a working hit man.  That idea is this movie.  Handled with nuance and skill by director and principal star Michael Keaton, this is a twisty, clever little movie with a satisfying ending.

Marguerite’s Theorem (2023, Prime rental)  There are now enough movies about mathematical geniuses and how the world is unkind to them that I suppose it is now a trope.  (A Beautiful Mind (2001, John Nash), The Imitation Game (2014, Alan Turing), The Theory of Everything (2014, Stephen Hawking).)  Here’s a fetching one about a fictional mathematical genius who makes a critical error in an important proof, has her world fall down all around her, and how she tries to claw her way back to respectability in academia.  (Spoiler alert:  playing mah jong is part of that journey.)  Interesting and entertaining, and a great performance by newcomer Ella Rumph, who won several “best new actress” awards in film festivals across Europe.

Lee (2024, Hulu, Prime rental)    This one came and went in theaters with dismaying quickness.  That’s hard to understand, as it told a compelling true story—about the life of former fashion model-turned-war photographer Lee Miller—and starred Oscar-winner Kate Winslet (The Reader (2008)), in her finest work of late.  And that is saying something, as she has an impressive 7 Oscar nominations next to her name.  She is ably supported by comedic actor (and Berkeley High grad!) Andy Samberg in a rare dramatic role, Oscar winner Marion Cotillard (La Vie en Rose (2008)), and Oscar nominee Andrea Riseborough (To Leslie (2022)).


Tuesday, January 21, 2025

I’m Still Here [original title: Ainda Estou Aqui] (2024): Don’t Give Up


by Len Weiler

The new Brazilian film I’m Still Here is a tremendous hit in Brazil, where it opened three months ago. It is a beautifully made, deeply resonant movie that relates a sad, poignant and ultimately uplifting true story. The movie features memorable performances all around, and most particularly that of its star, Fernanda Torres, who just recently won the 2025 Golden Globe award for Best Female Actress in a drama and is increasingly being mentioned as a possible nominee for best actress at the upcoming 97th Academy Awards. The film itself, I’m Still Here, is Brazil’s entry in the Best Int’l Feature category for the upcoming 97th Academy Awards;  it has been shortlisted [top15 candidates out of 85 films submitted] and is considered likely to be one of the final five nominees to be announced on January 23rd. Not only is this a wonderful, engaging movie, it also happens to be a quite timely, relevant one - a cautionary tale for those concerned about the fate of democratic governments around the world and especially in Brazil itself. [1/23/2025 update: The final Academy Awards nominees have just been announced. Torres HAS been nominated for the best actress Oscar; and I’m Still Here has been nominated in two categories: for best movie of the year and for best international film.]

Background: As you may recall, in 1964, a coup d’état replaced Brazil’s elected civilian government with a military dictatorship [the “Junta”] that ruled the country for over two decades, bringing with it a period of harsh repression for anyone who opposed its rule or its policies. The Junta censored all media and arrested, tortured and frequently killed and “disappeared” perceived dissidents. It was not until 1985 that a civil government was restored. More recently however, despite having deposed their right-wing, Junta admiring, President Jair Bolsonaro a couple years ago - via a democratic election in October 2022 - many in Brazil still fear a resurgent anti-democracy movement there. With good reason: Bolsonaro has never conceded defeat and shortly after he lost the election, his supporters stormed the national government’s headquarters in Brasilia, seeking to  instigate a new military coup d’état to return him to power. They failed.  Just a few months ago, federal police arrested a group of supporters for plotting to kill his successor, then President-elect Lula, just a few days before his Lula's inauguration. Around the same time  Bolsonaro and thirty-six cronies were arrested for plotting the attempted 2022 coup, following a two-year investigation. 

The good news is that more than 3 million Brazilians (and counting) had seen I’m Still Here as of the end of 2024. And Brazilian social media is buzzing with appreciation for the movie and its depiction of what it was like during the Junta period; it is seen as a needed tonic against fuzzy memories and an ongoing disinformation campaign that suggests times weren’t so bad and actually were pretty good under the dictatorship. 

As I’ve noted, I’m Still Here is a true story - about a prominent family, who became victims of the Junta’s violent repression. It is based on a memoir, also titled Ainda Estou Aqui (I’m Still Here), published in 2015 by the popular and prolific Brazilian author Marcelo Paiva.  Marcello was one of five children of Rubens and Eunice Paiva. He was 11 at the time the movie’s story begins. His four sisters - Vera (“Veroca”), Eliana, Ana Lucia (“Nalu”), and Beatriz (“Babiu”) - ranged in age from 17 to 10. Marcelo decided to write about his family’s history when his mother was in her eighties and losing her memory. The story in the book and the film is told as an intimate portrayal of the Paiva family, largely from her point of view.  

I’m Still Here opens during the Christmas season in late 1970. The Paivas live in a lovely house situated on Ipanema beach in Rio di Janeiro. Rubens (Selton Mello), the father, is an engineer. He had been an activist in labor causes and an elected member of Brazil’s Chamber of Deputies before he was removed when the Junta came to power. Since then, Rubens has been prudently apolitical, although still socially connected with liberal friends. Eunice (Fernanda Torres)  is a cosmopolitan woman with a lifelong love of reading and literature, with several esteemed novelists and other writers in her social circle.  She is also a loving, devoted mother to her large family. After eighteen years of marriage, it’s obvious that Rubens and Eunice remain very much in love.  

The kids and some friends are having fun, playing volleyball on the beach. Eventually they return to the house, where, in addition to their parents, other family members are present, and dinner preparations are under way. There’s a lot of talking, both earnest and jolly. Much of the movie’s first act takes place at the Paivas' home, a welcoming place where friends liked to gather. As a teen, the director of I’m Still Here was friendly with the Paiva kids and spent a lot of enjoyable time there. He remembers it as “a house where the doors and windows were always open, where different age groups mingled – remarkable in a country under dictatorship. For the adolescent I was, this contrast was striking.”  One can feel his affection for the family and their place in the way the home is portrayed in the film.  It’s a vision that serves, too, as a striking contrast to the subsequent events in the family’s story.  

That director is Walter Salles, whose acclaimed prior work includes  Central Station (1998) - nominated for two Oscars, [Best International Film and Best Actress], winner of the top prize at the prestigious Berlin Int’l Film Festival  as well as numerous other accolades - and The Motorcycle Diaries (2004), nominated for scores of international  honors, winning awards for best picture or best international film at BAFTA, Cannes, San Sebastian, and other festivals.  I’m Still Here is Salles’s first new feature film in a dozen years and is, for me, at least as excellent as those two earlier works.  Currently, it’s shortlisted [top15 candidates out of 85 submitted films] for the Oscars’ "Best International Film" award – with the final five nominees (this movie is considered a top candidate) to be announced on January 23rd. 

The idyllic family life of the Paiva family is violently upended on January 20, 1971, when a platoon of six armed men suddenly arrive at their home and demand that Rubens come with them at once for a “deposition”.  There’s clearly no way to refuse, so he goes off with two of them, promising to be back as soon as possible.  The other four men stay at the home with Eunice and the five kids, effectively guarding them, although claiming this is standard procedure.  A couple days later, Eunice and Eliana are taken into custody, again without any prior notice. A frantic Eunice pleads with them not to take Eliana, but her pleas are unavailing. Mother and daughter are taken to the headquarters of the Junta’s secret police, and separated. Eunice is imprisoned and interrogated for twelve days. Questions about her daughter’s fate and the situation of the rest of her family are ignored. Instead, she is asked repeatedly to name left-wing “terrorists. Only upon her release does she learn that Eliana and her other children are okay. They receive no information about Rubens, however.  They will never see him again.

The rest of I’m Still Here is about the aftermath. How Eunice tries to hold things together, care for the family, retain some hope for Rubens return, and press the authorities for answers. It‘s the story of her remarkable perseverance and resilience. And of how she eventually reinvents herself, moving the family back to her hometown of Sao Paolo, continuing to care for the children as a single parent, enrolling in law school, and all the while leading the fight for release of information about Rubens and others like him, then, as a lawyer, advocating for the poor.  

It is an exceptional story about an extraordinary woman, a true heroine. It’s told without mawkish sentimentality or overdone melodrama, because the truth needs no exaggeration. It is heartrending and deeply affecting enough.  Surprisingly, what could have been a deeply depressing account winds up being an inspiring one – a story of perseverance as resistance … and triumph.  I’m Still Here works as cinema because of the talents of  Walter Salles and his team, and especially because of the thoroughly credible, deeply committed, brilliant performance of its lead performer, Fernanda Torres. I can’t say enough good things about her. Like how she portrays and evinces so many emotions, often several at once - romantic love, maternal love, longing, worry, anger, fear, determination, relief, joy, pride, pain, grief and more: wit, intelligence, restraint, compassion.  She makes this very demanding role seems so effortless. 

There’s more – for which Torres doesn’t get the credit. But her mother does. That would be Fernanda Montenegro, who plays Eunice in her late eighties near the end of the picture, at a 2014 family reunion. The character has had Alzheimer’s for a decade at this point and does not participate much in the festivities – but there’s a part of Eunice still in evidence – the pride with which she holds herself and the way her eyes react when she recognizes a photograph of Rubens in a TV report.  Montenegro is a much-lauded actress in her own right, at one time referred to as “The First Lady of Brazilian Theater”.  Perhaps her most famous role was in Salles’s Central Station for which she received an Oscar nomination for Best Actress, along with numerous other awards.

Speaking of the awards circuit, things seem to be picking up for I’m Still Here. At the Venice Film Festival in August it won the coveted SIGNIS award (see below); then in October it won the Audience Award for Global Cinema at the Mill Valley FF; and just a week ago it picked up the award for Best Foreign Language Feature at the Palm Springs Int’l Film Festival.  I’ve mentioned that Torres just won the 2025 Best Actress award at the Golden Globes. We’ll know within a couple days whether she gets nominated in the same category at the Academy Awards, as she ought to be. [1/23/25 update: As noted above, Torres has been nominated for the best actress; and this movie has been nominated for best picture and for best international film of the year.]

I want to end by quoting from the citation accompanying the SIGNIS award in Venice, given for the movie’s “profound portrayal of resilience, heartbreak and civil commitment.”

Salles transforms a cry of denunciation into a song of hope. … Eunice’s resilience and her refusal to be silenced become a beacon not just for Brazil but for all nations grappling with the legacy of authoritarianism.

 [T]he film is a historical recounting and a powerful commentary on the present. With global democracy increasingly at risk, the film serves as a reminder of the fragility of freedom and the importance of standing up against oppression, even in the face of overwhelming odds.

Amen.

2 hours 16 minutes

Grade: A

Currently being rolled out to theaters in select cities. Currently showing in New York City, L.A., Chicago, and a few other cities. In Northern CA, I’m Still Here opens 1/24/25 at the AMC Kabuki in SF, and Smith Rafael Film Center in San Rafael; 1/31/25 at Rialto Elmwood in Berkeley and the Orinda Theater;  2/7/25 in Davis, Sacramento, San Jose, Santa Clara, and Sebastopol.   Check HERE  to find opening dates and theaters near you.  


Friday, January 10, 2025

The Room Next Door (2024): Just Being There

The Room Next Door is Pedro Almodóvar’s first feature film in English. It also may be his simplest film in terms of plot, with very few characters, and thus very little of the interweaving of individual histories and personal crises that characterize most of his recent movies. More traditionally for him, it’s about two women, starring Oscar-winners Tilda Swinton and Julianne Moore as close friends from way back, reconnecting for an epic personal journey. Moore plays Ingrid, a successful autofiction novelist; Swinton is Martha, a renowned war reporter for the NY Times. 

Those who’ve followed my writing here in Notes on Films know my reverence for Almodóvar, one of the greatest filmmakers of our time. While The Room Next Door  is not your typical Almodóvar story, there’s no mistaking his imprint when it comes to the stunning look of this film. The colors and color combinations - the women’s clothing, the art on the walls, the furniture, even the actresses’ lipstick choices all earn an impressive WOW!  It is a resplendent visual mis en scene typical of Almodóvar’s recent work and clearly  attributable to the auteur himself, as neither his cinematographer, Eduard Grau, nor his art director, Gabriel Liste. had ever worked with him before. 

Ingrid and Martha haven’t seen one another for several years and have lost touch during that time.  When Ingrid hears from a mutual friend that Martha is been ill and is in hospital with cancer, she rushes to the hospital to see her. Martha is happy to see her old friend, and the two easily renew their old friendship. Martha explains that her cancer is inoperable, but there’s a new experimental treatment that her physician believes to be quite promising. Initially, she’s cautiously hopeful, but it’s a hope tempered with skepticism.  

Not long after, it turns out her skepticism was warranted. Martha desperately fears what comes next: not
death itself; she has prepared herself for that working in war zones throughout her career. It is the forfeit of personal integrity, the loss of agency over her body that terrifies her, becoming subject to a system dedicated to keeping her alive for as long as possible, despite what she expects will be an increasingly degrading physical and mental degeneration, and regardless of her wishes. 

Martha cannot and will not tolerate that. Instead, she has an alternative plan: to end her life on her own terms. While she has an adult daughter, they’ve been estranged for years. She has no husband, no other family. But making the arrangements is not a problem, she tells Ingrid; she can do that herself, she’s already started.  Where she needs help is that she doesn’t want to die alone; she wants a friend to be with her. Not to administer the lethal drug, nor to sit at her bedside holding her hand. But to accompany her in her last days, to ease her soul, so to speak (not that she speaks in those terms). As she explains to Ingrid, whom she asks to be that someone, she would just like to know there’s someone in the room next door.

Even so, what a thing to ask! As the first portion of the film comes to a close, Ingrid – who has a just written a book about her own fear of death - struggles to decide if she can agree. Eventually (as you’d suppose - there would not be a movie otherwise), she does. 

Martha has rented a beautiful, luxurious, isolated home in the woods near Woodstock, NY.  where the rest of the story plays out. Ingrid accompanies her there.  The second act of the movie is about that how that experience works out for both. It’s a time of long conversations, during which the two women discuss everything under the sun – homing in on their personal histories and in Martha’s case her regrets. A couple of subsidiary plots are introduced, although they don’t amount to much.  

One relates to Martha’s daughter, Michelle. Martha acknowledges being an emotionally distant mother during Michelle’s youth; as well as physically distant much of the time, due to her frequent and often extended, work-related travels. Despite Michelle’s persistent questioning, Martha never told her about her father, and this withholding became a major issue leading to her alienation. She does, however, relate the story to Ingrid, which Almodovar presents as a sort-of flashback.  

Another subsidiary plot is a source of amusement to the two women: back when both were working for the same magazine, Martha and Ingrid each had affairs with the same guy, Damian (John Turturro), although not at the same time. Ingrid is still friends with Damian, though they have not been lovers for ages. Whatever Damian used to do for a living, nowadays he seems to be some sort of public intellectual. Why is he in the film? Because Damian holds such a despairingly gloomy, unshakably critical view of humanity. He is one of those folks who would never bring a child into the world because people have fucked it up so irretrievably, what with environmental degradation and climate change. Almodóvar, despite making a film about facing death, presents a more optimistic view - represented by Ingrid’s compassion and humanity.

A key theme of The Room Next Door is the human capacity for empathy and compassion toward others. Almodóvar extolls this:  “Providing company …  simply being there, in pain and in pleasure … is a quality superior to the great feelings such as love, friendship, or brotherhood. Being there, with silent, supportive, human understanding, is at times the most we can do for other people. … The Room Next Door shows a character, Ingrid, who learns to fully be alongside Martha.” 

Ingrid’s determination to be there with Martha is not easy, nor is it a mere favor or a simple act of fellowship. It is a mitzvah – allowing Martha to face death not alone but with a companion who cares, is a comfort and a witness, a friend who honors her choice and her humanity.  Like other acts of compassion, this has its rewards for Ingrid as well. She learns more about herself than she might have expected - about courage, fidelity, character, and the beauty of life.  For Ingrid, the way Martha approaches her mortality becomes a life affirming experience.   

So, a related motif in The Room Next Door is an exploration of true friendship.  Says Almodóvar, “This is the process about which the film talks, the friendship regained by the two women, which is sublimated into an emotion similar to love, but without love’s inconveniences, during the weeks they share in the House in the Woods - a place, like a limbo, that lies between real existence and the beyond.”

 These meditations on the right to die, the value of empathy and the special qualities of friendship are part of what makes The Room Next Door interesting and worth visiting. But unfortunately, the single-mindedness of his pedagogic approach to the material also lessens the movie’s appeal. Much of Martha’s story is told to us by Martha herself via long soliloquies about her relationship with Michelle, about the path of her medical treatment, about her reasons for preferring suicide to the alternatives, and so on. This is, of course,  a violation of a prime rule of fiction, most particularly in theater and cinema: Show us, don’t tell us. A related problem is the way that Martha tells us her story, the language that she uses. While straightforward, her speeches are unduly prosaic, lifeless, inelegant. Swinton is a fabulous actress and surely does her best, but more often than not can’t find the life in the words she has been given. Moore fares better, because her role is more reactive – listening, asking questions, and responding – often non-verbally.

It's hard know to what degree Almodóvar’s script, an adaptation of the novel What Are You Going Through by Sigrid Nunez, suffered from the fact that it’s his first in English, but I suspect that’s a big part of the problem. The bottom line is that The Room Next Door is not one the maestro’s best pictures.  In fact, looking back at the thirteen  feature films Almodóvar has written and directed over the past thirty years, I’d have to rate it near the bottom, certainly deeper and prettier than I’m So Excited (2013), but no more entertaining. One must keep in mind, that I’m comparing The Room Next Door to other  Almodóvar films, most of which are quite exceptional.  This one is certainly worth watching, for it’s delving into interesting themes, for its stunning visual beauty, and for the chance to see two great actresses at work – especially Julianne Moore in this case.

1 hour 47 minutes

Grade B / B-

Beginning a rolling theatrical release over the next several weeks.  In the SF Bay Area, opening today January 10 at The Realto Elmwood (Berkeley), Smith Rafael Film Center (San Rafael), and Alamo Drafthouse (San Francisco); opening January 17 in numerous Northern California theaters, including AMC Metreon in SF and also in Orinda, Emeryville, Pleasant hill, Daly City, Redwood City, Santa Rosa, Davis and Sacramento. Click HERE to find a theater near you.


Sunday, January 5, 2025

A Complete Unknown (2024): Look Out Kid, It's Something You Did

                         by Len Weiler                       

A Complete Unknown is the eagerly awaited biopic about Bob Dylan and the incredible creative arc of his first years in New York City and his early rise to fame. The movie is by turns informative, evocative, dramatic and musically dazzling, featuring a fabulous performance by Timothee Chalamet as Bob Dylan. Definitely worth seeing.

First, an apology. When I started on this project, I intended to write a fairly short, capsule review. I failed. Instead, what follows is on the long-ish side. Hopefully you will find it interesting.  

I’ve been a Dylan fan since sometime in late 1963, when I was 14. On a day trip with my family to New Hope, Pennsylvania – then something of an artists’ colony – we stopped at a coffee house where a folk  trio (very hip, I thought) was singing one of his early songs.  I think it was Don’t Think Twice, It’s All Right, or maybe A Hard Rain’s a-Gonna Fall. They introduced the song with some superlatives about this absolutely amazing musician/songwriter called Bob Dylan.  I was already taken with Blowin’ in the Wind - a huge hit for Peter, Paul and Mary that summer, and I probably had heard their version of Don’t Think Twice, too. But I had never heard about Dylan before. Shortly thereafter I bought The Freewheelin’ Bob Dylan album and was totally sold. 

I became more intrigued reading the exuberant liner notes on the Freewheelin’ album, written by the already legendary record producer John Hammond – legendary because of his discovery and/or promotion of esteemed musical artists such as Billie Holiday, Count Basie, Benny Goodman, Count Basie, Pete Seeger, Big Joe Turner, the previously neglected delta blues great Robert Johnson and later on Aretha Franklin, Bruce Springsteen, Leonard Cohen and more. Here is how those notes began:

        Of all the emergent singers of folk songs in the continuing renascence of that self-assertive tradition, none has equaled Bob Dylan’s singularity of impact. As Harry Jackson, a cowboy singer and a painter, has exclaimed: "He's so goddamned real it's unbelievable!" The irrepressible reality of Bob Dylan is a compound of spontaneity, candor, slicing wit and an uncommonly perceptive eye and ear for the way many of us constrict our capacity for living while a few of us don't.

        Not yet twenty-two at the time of this album’s release, Dylan is growing at a swift, experience-hungry rate. In these performances, there is already a marked change from his first album, and there will surely be many further dimensions of Dylan to come. What makes this collection particularly arresting that it consists in large part of Dylan's own compositions The resurgence of topical folk songs has become a pervasive part of the folk movement among city singers, but few of the young bards so far have demonstrated a knowledge of the difference between well-intentioned pamphleteering and the creation of a valid musical experience. Dylan has. As the highly critical editors of "Little Sandy Review" have noted, "...right now, he is certainly our finest contemporary folk song writer. Nobody else really even comes close."

        The details of Dylan's biography [are] he was born on May 24, 1941, in Duluth, Minnesota. His experience with adjusting himself to new sights and sounds started early. During his first nineteen years, he lived in Gallup, New Mexico: Cheyenne, South Dakota; Sioux Falls, South Dakota; Phillipsburg, Kansas; Hibbing, Minnesota (where he was graduated from high school), and Minneapolis (where he spent a restless six months at the University of Minnesota).

As A Complete Unknown points out, Hammond and many others were taken in by the romantic, yet bogus backstory young Bob was spreading about himself as an itinerant musician soaking up influences by hoboing around the country. This myth making was an early example of his gushing imagination and fervid aspiration. The accurate part is that he was rapidly soaking up musical influences and styles like a sponge.

When Dylan first started out singing in the coffee houses and clubs of Greenwich Village in 1961, as a complete unknown not yet twenty years old, he – like most folksingers then – sung mostly traditional songs, what we might now call Americana. On his self-titled first album, recorded in 1961 and released in March 1962, only two of the 13 songs were penned by Dylan. The rest were folk standards like Man of Constant Sorrow, Baby Let Me Follow You Down, and House Of The Rising Sun. Of the two originals, only Song to Woody is featured in A Complete Unknown, near the outset as Dylan sits by the bedside of his ailing idol, Woody Guthrie [Scoot McNairy], who’s slowly dying with Huntington’s Disease.

Around this time, Dylan began writing his own songs; in fact, he soon was writing at an astounding pace.  Not just a lot of songs, but a lot of GREAT ones. Some say he was touched by God or some other cosmic energy source. The immensity and quality of his output amazed his peers and is still remarkable in retrospect. A Complete Unknown shows us this fervid period in Dylan’s life but doesn’t try to explain it. It’s probably inexplicable. Let me illustrate what we’re talking about.

Starting with The Freewheelin’ Bob Dylan (his second album) from May1963 through his 6th album Highway 61 Revisited in August 1965 – that's five albums in less than two and a half years - Dylan  recorded and released 54 original songs, between 20 and 30 of which are now generally considered to be classics – depending on your definition of the term and your taste.  This amazing period forms a major part of the story arc covered in A Complete Unknown. Among those classics are these (those underlined are sung by Chalamet as Dylan in the movie):

Blowing In The Wind, Girl From The North Country, Masters Of WarA Hard Rain's a-Gonna Fall, Don't Think Twice It's All Right, The Times They Are a-Changing, With God On Our Side, Only A Pawn In Their Game, Boots Of Spanish Leather, All I Really Want To Do, Chimes Of Freedom, My Back Pages, It Ain’t Me Babe, Subterranean Homesick Blues, She Belongs to Me,  Maggie’s Farm, Love Minus Zero/No Limit,  Mr Tambourine Man, It’s All Over Now Baby Blue, Like A Rolling Stone, Ballad Of A Thin Man, Highway 61 Revisited, Desolation Row.

So yeah, if you are a fan of Dylan’s early songs or are curious about what the fuss was/is all about, you’ll get a terrific sampling in A Complete Unknown. The movie’s climax comes at 1965's Newport Folk Festival – when Dylan sent shockwaves through the purist folk music world by appearing with an electric guitar and a blues-rock band, singing Maggie’s Farm and Like a Rolling Stone (see below). But his story certainly did not end there. The following year, he released the double album Blonde On Blonde, with songs like Rainy Day Women, Visions of Johanna, Just Like A Woman, and Sad Eyed Lady of the Lowlands; then the year after that, 1967, came John Wesley Harding (which some have argued is his best album) featuring stuff like I Dreamed I Saw St Augustine, Dear Landlord, I’ll Be Your Baby Tonight, and a little thing called All Along the Watchtower. I could go on, but I think you get my gist.

Apart from the focus on early Dylan, one of the things A Complete Unknown does well is to provide a credible illustration of sort-of what Greenwich Village and it’s folk music scene looked and felt like in that distinctly different era sixty years gone. The cold war. The JFK assassination. The flowering of the civil rights movement. MLK’s “I have a dream” speech.  

And the movie gives us a chance also to meet some of the folks that Dylan was hanging with back in the day. Like Pete Seeger, superbly played by Edward Norton. A prominent figure in and promoter of the folk music scene and a storied musician in his own right, Seeger was one of several influential figures enthralled with the increasingly charismatic young Bob Dylan, and he played a significant role in promoting him as a talent to watch. This included first inviting him to perform at the Newport Folk Festival in 1963. Norton captures Seeger’s singing style and mannerisms perfectly, as well as his great chagrin when Dylan famously “goes electric” at the 1965 festival.

Or like Dylan’s girlfriend Suze Rotolo. Curiously (to me at least), Suze is renamed Sylvie Russo in the movie supposedly because Dylan himself insisted that the character not be named Suze Rotolo, out of respect for the fact that Ms. Rotolo  was not a “public person’ – even though she died in 2011 and everyone knows who ‘Sylvie’ is supposed to be. Suze/Sylvie is played by Elle Fanning, who doesn’t look at all like Suze Rotolo or even Italian, but she does a nice job nonetheless.  Suze was featured on the cover of The Freewheelin’ Bob Dylan, walking down a Village street arm-in-arm with Bob. She was also a political activist, considered a major influence on Dylan’s turn toward political and socially conscious songs. As he became more and more famous, Dylan began hanging out with other women too, which eventually led to Suze/Sylvie breaking up with him.

One of these other women was Joan Baez – already a successful folk music artist and performer – labeled "The Queen of Folk". She was important to Dylan romantically, but not just that. Baez promoted his songs, including several on her albums and in concert performances.  In July 1963, when both were  performers at the Newport Folk Festival, Baez invited Dylan onstage to sing his With God on Our Side with her. She soon invited him to join her tour, introducing Dylan to her vast audience.  Baez is played in A Complete Unknown by Monica Barbaro. Here may be a good place to note that all of the actors with singing parts in the film do their own vocals. Barbaro is a good actress and did a fine job as Baez; and, while she doesn’t have the high, crystalline soprano of Baez, she has a lovely singing voice. 

Dylan’s relationship with the women in his life, as depicted in this biopic, establishes pretty clearly that despite (or maybe because of) his incredible talent, he could be – at least at the time of his meteoric rise to fame – not only extremely self-centered but inconsiderate to those around him and a jerk as a boyfriend.

[Interestingly, one woman we do not meet in A Complete Unknown is Sara Lownds, with whom Dylan was involved by the time of the film's climax and who became his wife not long after.  But leaving her out makes cinematic sense. A romantic triangle is one thing, a quadrangle is an angle too far.  Lownds was a big part of Dylan’s life going forward and would have to be a central character in any sequel (unlikely).]

As I’ve mentioned, the culminating moment in A Complete Unknown occurs on the final night of the1965 Newport Folk Festival. That’s when Bob Dylan – by then the most prominent, creative “folk singer” of the day and the  headliner who will close the show – took the stage at the world’s most important folk music festival and played an electric guitar, fronting a band with electrified instruments: electric lead guitar, electric bass, electric organ, etc.  OMG! they are not playing acoustic!    

It was dramatic in real life and made doubly so in the movie, which goes a bit overboard in fictionalizing what happened and how.  For example, when Dylan and his band launch into I Ain’t Gonna Work On Maggie’s Farm the crowd goes wild with anger, dismay, and astonishment – loudly booing, even throwing things at Dylan on stage. Backstage, the festival bigwigs are acting just as surprised and going nuts too.  Did they not notice that the stage was clearly and purposefully set up for a band with electric instruments?  At the actual 1965 event, there was some booing for sure, but also applause - with several fans shouting for Dylan to play the rock hit Like A Rolling Stone.  

Despite these quibbles, as a dramatic conclusion to a strong biopic about the early years of one of the greatest popular musicians and poets of the age, the scene works just fine. And it makes for a good story that captures the impact of the moment. So, I have no issue with director James Mangold’s exercise of poetic license. 

The real problem in 1965 wasn’t that Dylan had changed, of course. The problem was that the folk movement had painted itself into a corner with its insistence on only acoustic music.  Dylan had already largely quit writing so-called protest songs in favor of a wider, often satirical social commentary, as well as love songs, poetic reflections, and a variety of other, far less constraining topics. Take, for example, my favorite lines from Mr. Tambourine Man, written in early 1964, and recorded with him accompanying himself with acoustic guitar and harmonica:

Take me disappearin’ through the smoke rings of my mind 
Down the foggy ruins of time, far past the frozen leaves 
The haunted, frightened trees, out to the windy beach 
Far from the twisted reach of crazy sorrow
 
Yes, to dance beneath the diamond sky with one hand waving free
Silhouetted by the sea, circled by the circus sands
With all memory and fate driven deep beneath the waves 
Let me forget about today until tomorrow.

Protest? No.    Political? No.   Topical? No.         Personal, poetical, and universal? Absolutely!  Did Tambourine Man also make a damn good rock song? The Byrds successfully thought so.

Complete Unknown is a wonderful movie. It’s a joy. And it’s a time capsule. For those relatively unfamiliar with Bob Dylan’s music or, for that matter, with his origin story, it’s an education, and it may be a revelation. It’s got to be a high point in Timothee Chalamet’s already distinguished acting career.  Unless you have to, don’t wait for the streaming release, which may be months away and likely to be an inferior experience compared to the big screen; this one is worth a trip to your local cinema [assuming it’s equipped with decent sound].  

[Also, if you’ve seen A Complete Unknown already and/or are interested in seeing more about Dylan’s life or seeing a film containing all of Dylan’s performances (complete) at the 1963, 1964, and 1965 Newport Folk Festivals, drop me a line and I’ll help you do just that.]  

2 hours 20 minutes                        Rated R - for language

Grade: A

In wide theatrical release.   



Monday, December 16, 2024

Nightbitch (2024): Amy Adams Struggles To Hold It Together

Since her break-out supporting role as Ashley in 2005’s Junebug and her leading role in 2007’s Disney hit Enchanted, Amy Adams has been an actress worth watching.  From Sunshine Cleaning and Doubt in 2008 through The Fighter (2010), Her and American Hustle in 2013, Arrival (2016) and even Vice (2018) and Hillbilly Elegy (2020) she enlivens every character she takes on, whether it’s a leading role or a supporting one. She’s the lead in the new picture, Nightbitch, and the best thing about it. 

An adaptation of the 2021 novel by Rachel Yoder, Nightbitch is written and directed by Marielle Heller,  Heller has previously directed three excellent feature films: The Diary of A Teenage Girl (2015), which she co-wrote; Can You Ever Forgive Me (2018); and A Beautiful Day in the Neighborhood (2019). She also filmed the live Broadway production of Heidi Shreck’s What the Constitution Means to Me for Amazon Prime Video (where it’s still available).

Nightbitch concerns an artist [Adams] who has suspended her career to devote herself to motherhood.  This is not exactly working out for her.  While there is some sweetness to her relationship with her toddler son, the job is tedious and often deadly boring, messy, frustrating, isolating, and never-ending, plus (for the most part) thankless. Emphasizing the dehumanizing effect of her new role, the character is nameless – listed in the credits simply as “Mother”. Her little boy is referred to as “Son’. Her husband [“Husband”], played by Scoot McNairy, is of no help at all - well-meaning but self-absorbed and largely unaware of all the above adjectives describing Mother’s stay-at home life.  In stereotypical fashion, Husband assumes all is just fine at home and sees his contribution to the family’s happiness entirely in his role as the breadwinner.

If you’ve heard anything about Nightbitch, it’s surely that Adam’s character – unable to express her primal needs during the long imprisonment in dull motherhood - turns into a dog at night, running around the neighborhood with canine abandonment.  The film does provide us ample visual evidence of this, but is this body-horror truly happening? Many reviewers report her transformation as real, but I very much doubt that it’s intended to be taken literally. It’s not realism, but Mother’s magical thinking, a visualization of her desperation – and a sign of how Mother’s situation may be threatening her sanity. These scenes are analogous to several other moments in the film  where someone – Husband in one example, a lady at the supermarket in another - makes an inane comment, and Mother brazenly, angrily reacts as she’d really like to, before the movie abruptly flashes back to the polite socially acceptable  response she actually gives.  If you have seen the movie, or plan to, you can judge for yourself.

From the double entendre title to the scenes of Mother’s seeming transformations, there is a certain weirdness to Nightbitch, to be sure. But it’s done with panache and humor.  More than anything, it is designed as comedic – and it is often very funny.   Adams carries the film on her shoulders and she’s excellent. But without a lot of support from the screenplay, it’s a heavy lift. 

Generally, the production takes itself too seriously, harping on a message that is worthwhile to remember,  but hardly new or surprising.  The intended point of the picture’s dramatically negative, if often amusing, depictions of the everyday difficulties faced by stay-at home moms like Mother, is to prompt more discussion about the burdens and sacrifices involved. This theme – and the promotion of the film as an “important” provocative touchstone – reminds me of the 2018 film Tully, with Charlize Theron as a mom at her wits end with a new baby and two other young children, who hires a mysterious night nanny to help her cope. [Read our review of Tully.]  The problem with both of these pictures is that their concentration on the import of their stories takes precedence over the rendering of their stories.  This is a departure from Heller's more successful approach in her earlier features.

One important example of this in Nightbitch is the absence of real characters. Aside from the bona fide hardships and frustrations she experiences as the mother of a toddler, Mother herself is largely unknown to us. She seems to have no actual friends. The other toddler moms she occasionally meets, her former art gallery colleagues, and even Husband – all are hollow stereotypes. Her connection with Husband – whether pre-natal or post-natal - is not fleshed out at all; so even that relationship has no depth. Literally all we know about them is what I’ve already described. He doesn’t seem to take much notice of her angst or increasingly odd behavior, being too wrapped up in whatever he does in his work life. And she says nothing to him about the weirdness she’s going through (or anything else, really) - which only serves to provide some defense to the charge that he is clueless. 

With a little more attention to the basics, Nightbitch could have been a much stronger movie. Still, as I’ve said, Amy Adams is always worth watching – and it’s interesting to see her in a very different manifestation than we are used to. Despite my complaints, the movie IS, as noted, entertaining and often quite amusing. 

1 hour 39 minutes Rated R

Grade: B

In wide theatrical release. Streaming date currently unknown.