Blog Archive

Wednesday, December 20, 2017

Call Me By Your Name (2017): A Summer of Love

A beautifully evoked, lusciously rendered story of a young man’s first true romance and of his coming of age sexually, emotionally and otherwise, Call Me By Your Name is an elegant, winsome movie, by Italian director Luca Guadagnino [I Am Love (2010), A Bigger Splash (2015)], with an intelligent, intimate screenplay by James Ivory [A Room With A View (1985), Howard’s End (1992)]. It is based on Andre Aciman’s heralded novel by the same name, published in 2007, which took the form of a man’s recollection or reminiscence from twenty years on of a particularly formative experience of his youth. The movie does not adopt the first-person perspective per se, but retains the feel and subjectivity of a remembrance.   

It’s the summer of 1983. The boy is Elio (Timothée Chalamet, also featured in this season’s critically praised Lady Bird), a precocious seventeen-year-old child in an accomplished, rather international family – American father (Michael Stuhlgard), British-Italian mother (Amira Cazar) – summering at their family estate in bucolic Northern Italy. It is a warm, lush place abounding with beautiful, friendly people and gorgeous natural scenery. A nice place to film a love story and a perfect place to fall in love.

Professor Perlman, Elio’s father, is a historian of classical art, who hosts a young assistant every summer; and this year it’s an American graduate student named Oliver, played by Armie Hammer [ The Man From Uncle (2015), Nocturnal Animals (2016)]. Oliver is bright, charming, easygoing in a very American manner, and very, very beautiful. Yes, even an old heterosexual male like me cannot help but notice how hunky and gorgeous this guy is. The ladies in the movie certainly notice.  And so too does Elio. Although there’s something like a ten-year age difference between them, he and Oliver strike up a friendship. Then it turns into something else – something very hot and very special.

One of the cool things about Call Me By Your Name is the way that it treats Elio’s attraction to Oliver (and vice versa) as a completely natural thing - not something shameful, tawdry, or particularly unusual. None of the principal characters explicitly or implicitly suggests otherwise – not even Elio’s parents. Even so, it’s 1983 and Oliver and Elio understand that in the little Italian village nearby many folks would be disapproving of an openly gay relationship – so they carefully avoid public kissing, hand-holding or other displays of affection (an acknowledgement of religious and cultural attitudes – not legal ones. Same-sex sexual practices have been legal throughout Italy since the late 19th century).

The film is neither lascivious nor polemical. It’s just a fine rendering of a traditional love story, about a special moment of sexual awakening and the twining of two souls.  While it does not shy away from depicting the physical nature of the resulting relationship, it does this much like any film about heterosexual love would these days – there’s skin, there’s touching and intimacy of the R-rated variety, not NC-17 or pornographic.

What is unusual, in my experience anyway, is that the film is about a boy’s sexual awakening. More films than I can count have been advertised on the theme of a female’s sexual awakening -  no doubt appealing to the prurient interest of male producers or directors who presume the public (or at least teen boys and young men) will pay to see that sort of thing. But outside the confines of so-called gay cinema, the first rousing of sexual love in a young guy – particularly homosexual love – has been pretty uncommon in a commercial film. Slowly, but clearly, the times they are a’changin’.   

(I should note here that it is not at all clear in Call Me By Your Name whether Elio or Oliver is gay or if one or both are bisexual. We know that both have been involved with the opposite sex. I’m not sure it matters.)

As I’ve already said, this picture is beautiful to watch. It was shot entirely on location and the scenic locale surely helps: the deep blue of Lago de Garda; afternoon sun over a sparkling pond; bicycling through an ancient, colonnaded ochre and straw-colored village; young folks lounging on the grass by the villa pool, itself set against a lush green forest; casual family breakfast out on the tiled patio under a leafy bower; and so forth. Much credit is due to the director of photography, Sayombhu Mukdeeprom, who was able to capture the golden Lombardy summer light of these and other scenes so gloriously. The interior scenes initially look and feel claustrophobic with the suppressed, burgeoning passion (and related anguish) experienced by Elio, and then intimately erotic once this blossoms into a fulfilled love. The feel and pace of the film as a whole is unhurried and pleasantly langorous, allowing the story and the relationship to build bit by bit.

Director Guadagnino considers Call Me By Your Name to be the final segment of a trilogy of pictures commencing with I Am Love and A Bigger Splash. “What links these three films”, he says, “is the revelation of desire.” In the first two, following desire resulted in some dark and/or regrettable outcomes; but here the consequence is more positive. This movie is a “beautiful acknowledgement of how you change when you love someone positively”, Guadagnino adds.

Key to the movie’s success is the lovely, complicated performance by Timothee Chalamet as Elio. It’s a difficult role, as Elio is a complex character, whose circumstances and emotions are in a state of flux. He’s a teen sullenly facing a summer away from his friends; he’s also an inquisitive intellect; a musical prodigy; and a cosseted only child; and as the action advances he struggles with a confusing newfound desire is flooded and nearly overwhelmed by love’s rapture; and eventually must face it’s loss. He embodies the character so completely, we believe Chalamet IS Elio It’s a far bigger and more challenging part and a character totally removed from his pretentious “Kyle” in Lady Bird. Definitely an award-worthy piece of work, it is worth seeing Call Me By Your Name for Chalamet alone.

With all the above going for it, I must admit that I never fully engaged with Call Me By Your Name on an emotional level. As I watched, I always felt like an observer. I suspect that this has to do with Guadagnino’s directorial style – as I felt similarly about the otherwise excellent I Am Love, too. I admired both movies, but I never fell all the way in with them. I can’t quite put my finger on why this is.

With this new picture, however, a couple of other reasons for my emotional remove do stand out. The biggest one has to do with co-star Armie Hammer. He’s been getting a fair amount of praise for his work in Call Me By Your Name including nominations for best supporting actor by the Golden Globes and others. And taking on this role was a courageous thing for Hammer.  Yet when Josh Duboff of Vanity Fair started his profile of the actor with this line: “Armie Hammer is the sort of actor who, at all times, looks like he’s stepped out of a cologne advertisement”, I think he hit the nail on the head. He’s pretty, but he’s bland, anodyne. Most egregiously for an actor in a meaty role like Oliver, he has little in the way of emotional expression. As the socially comfortable, attractive guy he’s fine – his manner, body language and attitude are perfect. But as a guy who, to his own astonishment is falling into a passionate love affair with a relative kid, and who is experiencing one of the most meaningful moments in his life – he falls flat, he’s just too, um, did I already say bland? The screenplay has him acting as a mentor of sorts to Elio – very caring and sensitive, and sharing in the exultation of love; but watching Hammer, I never felt he was fully there, and certainly never believed for a moment that he was flooded with love, passion or any other significant emotional response. Chalamont has to act for both of them!

A lesser flaw, but still an important one for me, has to do with the music. Most of the soundtrack in Call Me By Your Name is great and appropriate for the time, place and circumstances – including classical music from composers like J.S. Bach, Eric Satie, Maurice Ravel, and John Adams. At one point the pop/dance song “Love My Way” by the Psychedelic Furs shows up, just right for the time and the situation (it was an international hit in 1982). But director Guadagnino is also a big fan of singer–songwriter Sufjan Stevens, and so chose to include three of his songs as well, two of which were written expressly for the film. That was three too many. Guadagnino says, “I think Sufjan’s songs add another voice to the film. They are kind of like a narration without narration.” Therein lies the problem. The “other voice” is not the director’s voice, nor the screenwriter’s voice. All three songs felt totally out of synch with the film musically, lyrically and emotionally. All three were jarringly off – thus interfering with the mood which had been carefully constructed by the rest of the creative team.  (Even the last one, called Visions of Gideon, which played over the closing credits, was annoyingly anachronistic with its refrain of “Is it a video?”)  


So it’s not perfect. That said, Call Me By Your Name is a beautiful film that deserves to be seen: a lovely movie about falling heart and soul in love, that fell a little short of grabbing my heart and soul.

2 hours 12 minutes
Grade B+

Currently in very limited release; Opening in select additional theaters around the country December 22, 2017.

Friday, December 15, 2017

Lady Bird (2017): Portrait of A (young) Lady

[Over the last three or four weeks, I have been asked my opinion of two current films more than any others. They are Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri (a.k.a. Three Billboards) and Lady Bird.  As I am pretty backed up with movies to see and write about at the moment, here is a relatively short (for me) review of Lady Bird. My review of ThreeBillboards was published a couple days ago.)

As you know, I am a big fan of bildungsroman movies. Well, the good ones, anyway, such as  Rebel Without A Cause (1955),  The 400 Blows (1959), American Graffiti (1973), Girl, Interrupted (1999), Stand By Me (1986), the recent Boyhood (2014) and Moonlight (2016), among others. Despite my relatively advanced age, there’s a part of me that still identifies with that period of life where I’m trying to figure out who I am, be responsible, socially and sexually connect without embarrassing myself – in short, how to be an adult. We’ve all been through it in one form or another.

Two new movies out this season are candidates for the Society of Great Coming-of-age Films: Call Me By Your Name (written by James Ivory, directed by Luca Guadagnino), which will be the subject of my next review, and Lady Bird, written and directed by Greta Gerwig, the subject of this one. 


Let me start by saying I’ve been a fan of Greta Gerwig for years. She’s one of those special actors who, in a variety of different roles, manages to completely and credibly inhabit her character and at the same time remain herself – like Dianne Keaton did in the late 1970s (e.g. Annie Hall).  Neither Keaton nor Gerwig plays her actual self, of course, but a character with certain recognizable, trademark qualities – a look, an attitude.  In Gerwig’s case these qualities include total sincerity, an endearing awkwardness, and a relatable girl-next-door style of “everyman”. Gerwig has been co-author of some of her best films as an actress, including Frances Ha (2012) and Mistress America (2015). But she stays behind the camera in Lady Bird.

This makes sense, particularly since Lady Bird is a semi-kinda-sorta autobiographical depiction of a high school senior in 2002 Sacramento, California (Gerwig’s hometown) and Gerwig is now 34. It was a bit of a gamble, in fact, that she cast Saoirse Ronan, who was 22 when the picture was filmed, to play the 17 to 18-year-old protaganist. Ronan [Hanna (2011), Brooklyn (2015)] does a great job inhabiting the persona of young Christine (who calls herself Lady Bird) as she navigates the perilous waters of an adolescent on the verge of adulthood, and the age issue did not come up for this viewer. To the extent that she represents a version of the teenage Gerwig, the shoe fits quite well – the behavioral resemblance is clear and fine. The seamless way she does this reminded me of how smoothly Owen Wilson was able to meld so many Woody Allen characteristics into his role as Gil in Midnight In Paris (2011), without ever crossing into caricature. 

The story arc is not unusual for this sort of film, except perhaps for the fact that Gerwig makes no effort to throw any sensationalistic adventures into the story. Instead she concentrates on the subjective emotional experiences of a teen going through relatively commonplace events (which in her hands become captivatingly fresh) – first sex, quarrels with her mother, finding a boyfriend, trying to fit in, trying to be different, the desire to be loved and accepted for who she is - whatever that means, hoping to get into the right college. What makes Lady Bird special – and it is special – has to do with Gerwig’s witty, true-to-life, sometimes excruciating, always believable screenplay; her deft touch as a director – for pacing, tone, dialogue, movement; and some great performances by her talented cast.

Saoirse (pronounced Sur-sha) Ronan is, as I’ve said, excellent – ok, I’ll say it, just perfect – in the title role as a girl filled with yearning, ambition, insecurity, and a mess of contradictions. She’s so endearing that even when she acts badly – which she surely does at times – we love and forgive her. Wouldn’t surprise me at all if Ronan gets an Oscar nomination (The Golden Globes and Screen Actors Guild have already done so).

She is abetted by the supporting work of Laurie Metcalf, best known for her role as Jackie, the neurotic sister on Roseanne (1988 – 97), as Lady Bird’s mother – who also happens to be neurotic in a bitter, nothing-is-ever-good-enough way. And she has a lot on her plate to worry about, including but by no means limited to her frequently exasperating daughter. Lady Bird’s teen self-absorption pushes Mom’s buttons and vice versa, all of which leads both to some of the funniest and some of the most heartbreaking scenes in the movie. Through all of this, Metcalf brings a total truth to her intense, anxious character. This, too, is a likely award winning performance.

The rest of the ensemble is also excellent. Lucas Hedges [Manchester By The Sea (2016), Three Billboards (2017)] plays Danny, a popular boy with whom Lady Bird forms a special connection, threatened for some fundamental reasons; Timothée Chalamet [Call Me By Your Name (2017)] is Kyle, a self-consciously hip guy in an underground-styled band, to whom Lady Bird attaches herself; Beanie Feldstein (great name, what?) as Lady Bird’s not hip, but quite loyal BFF, and 86-year old Lois Smith (who shines so brightly in 2017’s most unheralded great movie, Valerie Prime) as Sister Sarah Joan, a school counselor who provides a bit of comfort and wisdom to Lady Bird, when she needs it most.

Having read A O Scott’s NY Times review in which he praises Lady Bird and concludes that it is “perfect”, I was expecting some sort of knock-your-socks-off picture and so, for the first few minutes, I was a bit underwhelmed. Lady Bird is not flashy or hyper-stylish. Its excellence lies in its sincerity, its honest portrayal of the travails of late adolescence, it’s beautiful performances, and its lovely evocation of a special time and place for writer/director Gerwig – Sacramento as she experienced it herself as a high school senior.

This is a small but delicious film that sticks to your ribs.

94 minutes
Grade: A+
In general release.