Blow the Man Down (2019)

 ☆ ☆ ½

Blow the Man Down (2019) – B. S. Cole & D. Krudy

Perhaps searching for a revelation from Amazon Prime (30 day free trial) is futile but this thriller was recommended on the internet – as a sort of Fargo for New England.  I suppose my NH upbringing also softened me up to choose this tale of small town Maine and two young women who get involved in murder there.  But apart from some snowy roads and colonial-styled houses, I didn’t recognise much (and the accents seemed a bit all over the place).  The drama itself was acceptable, although if you told me it was “made for TV” (as we understood this term in ye olden days), I wouldn’t have been surprised – except for the focus on prostitution (which might mean the title, taken from the seafaring tune, counts as a double entendre, sadly). There’s little action but there is family drama, some yearning to escape small town life, and a wry comedic ending featuring some otherwise nosy old women.  Not terrible but there are other choices out there.

A White, White Day (2019)

 ☆ ☆ ☆ ½

A White, White Day (2019) – H. Pálmason

Ingvar Sigurdsson stars as Ingimundur, a widower grandfather and ex-policeman, grieving for his recently deceased wife. He’s stoic and devotes himself to building a house in a remote and scenic part of the country (Iceland). Director Hlynur Pálmason employs static shots of this house at different times of the day and different seasons to convey the sense of time passing. There is some beautiful camerawork here and mesmerising shots and vistas. Ingimundur is seeing a psychologist (and not very forthcoming) but only gradually do we realise that he has been obsessing over some thoughts about his wife’s possible infidelity. The actions he takes are not rational but they are emotionally consistent. Call it toxic masculinity, if you will, and he is not the only man marred by this in the film.  It's slow cinema but eventually the film crescendos with violence, an awkward almost embarrassing violence (made more so because it’s witnessed by Ingimundur’s 8 year old granddaughter). The ending is open to interpretation but may suggest that for men of a certain constricted type, there may be no peace without a full-throttled defence of their (precarious) masculinity.

 

Synchronic (2019)

 ☆ ☆ ☆ ½

Synchronic (2019) – J. Benson & A. Moorhead

It must be challenging to think up good material, if you’ve decided to cultivate a certain kind of psychedelic WTF cinema (with or without twists in the plot). So, I must give credit to Justin Benson and Aaron Moorhead (directors of The Endless, 2017): they’ve come up with a fairly novel spin on an otherwise tired plot device (time travel).  And as with the best science fiction, fantasy, or horror films, these filmmakers take an outlandish premise and have their characters treat it as real, using logic and intelligence to deal with irrational events. However, there is a lot of half-baked philosophising here too and the film takes a long time to get to the good bits. Anthony Mackie (“Steve”) and Jamie Dornan (“Dennis”) play paramedics who encounter some grisly emergencies and begin to realise that they are all connected to a new designer drug, Synchronic. When Dennis’s 18-year-old daughter goes missing after taking the drug, Steve does some investigating of his own, including buying a smoke shop’s remaining supply and going on a few trips from/to their home base of New Orleans, in an effort to rescue her.  Ultimately, the central conceit works, although the emotional pay-off is muted at best – we don’t care enough about these guys to feel it – but they are our ticket to WTF-ness and it is worth the price of admission (this time).

 

The Whistlers (2019)

 ☆ ☆ ☆ ½

The Whistlers (2019) – C. Porumboiu

Although some have levelled charges against Romanian director Corneliu Porumboiu, suggesting that this film represents something of a sell-out, there’s still no denying that it is a witty take on the usual cat-and-mouse police-and-thieves thriller.  For one thing, the hero Cristi (Vlad Ivanov) is a paunchy middle-aged cop, hardly your typical lead, and we don’t know where his allegiance lies – is he corrupt or is he deep undercover? In order to communicate with the gang, he flies to the Canary Islands (specifically La Gomera) to learn a secret whistling language that no one else will understand. The island scenes provide a sunny contrast to the flashback (and flashforward) scenes back in grey and glum Bucharest. Of course, there are many double-crosses – at the start, we see Cristi being solicited by Gilda (a femme fatale name if ever there was one; Catriona Marlon) to help get her boyfriend Zsolt out of prison. Only later do we learn that he was framed and also that they had planned to betray Cristi and the boss Paco and escape with the money (hidden in mattresses).  None of this gives away too much of what is a non-linear plot that is only teasingly drip-fed (in named chapters) to viewers by Porumboiu.  The directorial choices bring a lot of sly chuckles, as they are often intentionally quirky or wrong. There are some great set-pieces here too and some clever shots – plus, the whistling itself is so weird. In the end, the film seems to tie up nicely with a bow on it, perhaps too cleverly for its own good and without much to say, but it’s a delightful genre exercise by a talented filmmaker (see also Police, Adjective, 2009, a more original take on the police procedural).  

 

Ham on Rye (2019)

 ☆ ☆ ☆ ½

Ham on Rye (2019) – T. Taormina

Not your typical teen film, although the boys and girls here do contemplate their future (heterosexual) relationships. In fact, the whole first half of the film seems geared toward seeing the numerous characters pair off at an unusual ceremony at the local deli – which seems to turn into something akin to a school dance. The girls and boys share their trepidation and excitement with each other as the ceremony approaches (and they are dressed not unlike for a prom).  There is a 70s feeling to the first half – so much so that the “slow dance” scene brought me back to my own awkward tween/early teen days. Painful for me (but glorious for others?). And once the successful teens have paired off and left the film (presumably for adulthood/college/their future), we see what happens to those who remain. The second half is downbeat, no longer dreamlike, but full of lost souls, those who are stuck in their lonely suburban town (signified by the strip mall). Throughout it all, it isn’t exactly clear where director Tyler Taormina’s sympathies lie. Is he championing the heteronormative past where the beautiful and popular succeed ahead of others? Or is his heart with those who didn’t fit in? (I suspect it is the latter but he doesn’t offer them much hope). Like all good films, there is enough ambiguity here and rippling implications (Is this about those who move vs. those who stay? The rich vs. the poor?) to make it a satisfying watch, despite its low budget.

The Truth (2019)

 ☆ ☆ ☆ ½

The Truth (2019) – H. Kore-eda

With his follow-up to Cannes winner Shoplifters (2018), Hirokazu Kore-eda chose to film in France with Catherine Deneuve and Juliette Binoche (and also Ethan Hawke).  True to form, it’s a family drama, although it also belongs to that well-trodden genre of films about film-making. Deneuve plays a grande dame of French cinema (an easy role for her, no doubt) but also egoistic, bitchy, and perhaps deep down insecure about getting older and losing her touch.  She's just published her memoirs (which might not be entirely truthful). Binoche plays her daughter, visiting from New York where she is a screenwriter and married to TV actor Hawke; they bring their young daughter who doesn’t remember her grandmother. Binoche harbours a lifetime of hurt, from perceived neglect by her mother (who chose to focus on acting over family). A lot of the film is spent on a set, where Deneuve is acting in a science fiction film about a daughter (Deneuve but also Ludivine Sagnier) who ages even while her mother stays young (a conceit involving living in outer space). Some emotional tension arises because the actress playing the mother (Manon Clavel) is known for her resemblance to one of Deneuve’s rivals (long since passed away) who was also a surrogate mother to Binoche.  As the film within a film is also about mother-daughter relationships, there are a lot of ripples in this pond (with the moral being that truth is a subjective affair).  And, as in his other films, Kore-eda manages to unfold events without clichés, gently observing his characters as they renew their feelings for each other. Perhaps things do feel a bit forced into a happy ending as the film winds down, but this is still both a consistent outing from the Japanese master and somehow also a classic French drama.

 

 

Family Romance, LLC (2019)

 ☆ ☆ ☆ ½

Family Romance, LLC (2019) – W. Herzog

When a student from his “Rogue Film School” told Herzog about his idea for a film based on the real Japanese company “Family Romance” which loans out trained actors to play the part of family members at various occasions, the famed director promptly decided to make the film himself. Moreover, he also served as his own director of photography, using a handheld 4K digital camera and shooting on location (and sometimes guerrilla style).  He claims that this got him back in the spirit of his early innovative films (such as Aguirre, the Wrath of God).  Perhaps, however, the real link to his oeuvre (which always blended fiction with reality) was the decision to cast the real owner of Family Romance (Yuichi Ishii) as his lead actor (playing himself) and to write the screenplay, based in part on Ishii’s business anecdotes and in part on his own fascination with Japan and more generally with the way that humans play roles in all aspects of their lives, blending “truth” or authenticity with lies (often white lies) and play-acting, for the benefit of relationships and others’ feelings. The central story is about Ishii being paid to play the role of a missing father to a young 12-year-old girl (Mahiro).  He tells her he has been away since the divorce but now wants to be a part of her life.  The mother gives Ishii enough background in order to play the role convincingly.  However, tension arises for Ishii as the girl opens up to him and starts to form a real bond.  He starts to imagine various ways that the relationship will have to end when the contract is up.  We also see various other assignments for Ishii and his company that allow Herzog to indulge his various interests (in a robot hotel or the making of a viral video celebrity). Indeed, one of the flaws of the film is that Herzog tends to impose himself on the project (albeit without his distinctive voiceover) rather than let the players speak for themselves. Perhaps we would have learned more from Ishii himself than from the words put in his mouth by Werner. The script itself doesn’t quite congeal as much as I would have hoped either. Nevertheless, the film did manage to tantalise this viewer by raising questions about fiction vs. reality, the accountant’s truth vs. ecstatic truth (see Herzog on Herzog), a Goffmanian dramaturgical perspective on self-presentation (“all the world’s a stage”), socialisation and relationships (how we learn to act from “role” models), etc. At the end, perhaps we may also wonder, alongside Ishii, whether anyone is really authentic, including our real family members!   

 

The Vast of Night (2019)

 ☆ ☆ ☆

The Vast of Night (2019) – A. Patterson

We are in the midst of an Amazon Prime (Australia) free trial and I have been searching for anything that looks decent (that I haven’t already seen).  This sci-fi flick set in the 1950s came recommended by various websites.  I suppose it does find ways to refresh a tired old premise (the sighting of UFOs in New Mexico) by more closely following the activities of the two lead characters: Fay (Sierra McCormick), the telephone switchboard operator in the small town, and Everett (Jake Horowitz), the local radio station’s evening DJ.  After hearing reports of strange electronic sounds and various sightings in the night sky, they ask listeners to call in to the radio show if they know anything.  A former military officer tells a strange tale (although not too strange to anyone who has heard of Area 51) and an shut-in old lady invites them to her house to reveal even more weirdness (possible abductions).  The whole film is packaged as a pseudo-Twilight Zone episode, which ends with the unexpected (or not) twist.  All said and done, this is diverting enough (mostly because we get to see life in the ‘50s in more detail than usual) but based on too many cliches of the genre to make it truly interesting (unless perhaps you are new to said genre).

  

Bombshell (2019)

 ☆ ☆ ☆ ½

Bombshell (2019) – J. Roach

Were there always this many films that offer a retelling of recent events using actors and Hollywood techniques?  I feel as though we are being asked to revisit and rethink what we know about history over and over again – is it Oliver Stone’s fault? Can we trust the retelling?  This time, it is the events at Fox News leading up to the sexual harassment lawsuit that was Roger Ailes’ downfall (and Bill O’Reilly’s too).  If I were living in America, I might be able to discern whether the film is telling the “truth” or not.  But at this point, I don’t know who Gretchen Carlson (Nicole Kidman) is and I’ve barely heard the name Megyn Kelly (Charlize Theron) and that is only because she moderated one of the 2016 Republican debates and got into a spat with Trump (which I read about in the media at the time).  The film covers that spat and Kelly’s complicated relationship with Fox and Ailes (played with fat-suit prosthetics by John Lithgow).  As the “me too” movement gains steam, Carlson sues Ailes and Kelly needs to decide where she stands.  Margot Robbie plays a new recruit who is also harassed by Ailes.  The film gets pretty depressing as the various bad behaviours are outlined and director Jay Roach does let us feel the shame and degradation and powerlessness of the women involved.  For that, its heart is in the right place and it is good to explore the terrible dynamics of this situation that women are too often placed in.  Perhaps it is empowering to see them confront their tormentors.  But this series of films featuring impersonations and restaging of current events is a weird genre and I worry sometimes that these deep fakes might begin to replace our actual history (at least in people’s memories). 

The Gentlemen (2019)

 ☆ ☆ ☆ ½

The Gentlemen (2019) – G. Ritchie

After a few duds, Guy Ritchie has gone back to his trademark formula (Lock, Stock etc.) to offer up this easy-going action flick that is, well, all style and not much substance.  Sometimes that’s what you want but it isn’t going to inspire any deep thinking.  Matthew McConaughey is an American expat who has set up a very large cannabis syndicate in the UK, which he now wishes to sell.  However, the potential buyer and the competition are not particularly trustworthy.  We learn this because the story is told in flashback by Hugh Grant who plays a private detective who has been following the action and is now prepared to blackmail McConaughey by exposing him to the press.  He reveals what he knows to McConaughey’s loyal deputy (Charlie Hunnam) and the plot moves back and forward between the flashbacks and the interaction between Grant and Hunnam. Colin Farrell is good in a small well-defined role. It’s all a bit of fun but laced with profanity and sometimes derogatory slurs for ethnic and sexual minorities (why include this, I always think – it undercuts the fun).  As usual, the plot clicks into place with a few surprises -- but are surprises surprising when you expect them?     

 

Ford v. Ferrari (2019)

 ☆ ☆ ☆ ½

Ford v. Ferrari (2019) – J. Mangold

There’s a lot of chest-thumping in Ford v. Ferrari – but what did you expect?  Matt Damon plays retired driver and race car designer/team leader Carroll Shelby and Christian Bale plays anti-social hotshot driver Ken Miles who team up to try to beat the Italians at the 1966 LeMans Grand Prix of Endurance (a 24-hour race).  I’m not into cars but nevertheless director James Mangold manages to pull all the strings to set up various tensions that keep the movie churning along:  underdog vs. Goliath, artistry vs. corporate manipulation, mano a mano.  Although Ferrari has to be beat, the real enemy here is Ford itself or at least their exec Leo Beebe (Josh Lucas) who doesn’t like Miles because he doesn’t project the right image to customers.  Lee Iacocca (yes him; Jon Bernthal) is in the Shelby/Miles camp but seems to have less power to influence Henry Ford II.  There’s a lot of back and forth over whether Miles will be able to drive for Ford or not.  And then there are the racing sequences which are in fact pretty good.  As usual, Bale loses himself in his character who does a lot of muttering while driving (in a Midlands accent that requires Bale to do something funny with his upper lip). Damon is, well, Damon.  The final coda feels tacked on and maybe should have been relegated to an onscreen postscript.  Fawning reviewers suggest that the film is a return to mainstream Hollywood filmmaking of yore (uh Rocky?), but your mileage (ha, ha) will depend on how much you enjoy this genre and its formula.

 

Motherless Brooklyn (2019)

 ☆ ☆ ☆ ½

Motherless Brooklyn (2019) – E. Norton

The structure of the old political film noir (corrupt officials are behind everything) is plain to see in the bones of Edward Norton’s second directorial effort.  However, Norton loses the bite of the best noir by slowing the pace and labouring over every moment.  Sure, the 1950s period details are perfect and the various players are well chosen – but everyone, particularly Norton, is given far too much screen time to try to dazzle us.  A crisper film that tightened some of the more extended scenes (Lionel’s night in the jazz club) and moved more efficiently from clue to clue would have been better.  Of course, the aim here may have been to replicate the woozy success of Chinatown, where the hero is lost in the labyrinth, unable to piece together the facts until it is too late.  Norton’s detective protagonist (Motherless Brooklyn/Lionel Essrog/Freakshow) is designed with built in “flaws” in that he has Tourette’s Syndrome (the film was apparently approved by a society of people with this disorder) – which makes his investigation all the more difficult (or maybe not; it feels mostly like a showcase for Norton to demonstrate his acting prowess not unlike other roles he has taken).  Bruce Willis is used for good effect in a small part, Willem Dafoe overdoes it a bit, and Alec Baldwin seems rather too subdued (a missed opportunity). But, for fans of the genre, this may still hit the spot, even if the ultimate feeling is one of disappointment.

 

Extra Ordinary (2019)

 ☆ ☆ ☆ ½

Extra Ordinary (2019) – M. Ahern & E. Loughman

 I’m sure this Irish horror-comedy is a cult classic in-the-making, particularly because it eschews gore and has a tender feeling for its misfit characters.  The comedy is goofy, sometimes adult, and often pretty funny.  The horror is not really to be taken seriously either.  The plot, for all its ridiculousness, fits together very neatly.  Maeve Higgins plays a driving school instructor with the ability to contact and exorcise unruly ghosts (the kind who possess recycling bins, for example); however, she doesn’t want to use her powers due to a tragedy in her past.  Yet when poor Martin Martin (Barry Ward) requires her assistance, not to exorcise his nagging ex-wife’s ghost but to rescue his teen daughter from becoming a virgin sacrifice in the Satanic rites of pompous muso Christian Winter (hilarious Will Forte), she yields.  What follows is a silly set of anecdotes as they exorcise and collect ectoplasm from ghosts around their community (cue character actors).  The finale employs real special effects to hit things home, sealing the deal.  Often these sorts of genre offerings flop somewhere along the line but happily this one holds together all the way through.  Recommended!

Star Wars Episode IX: The Rise of Skywalker (2019)

 ☆ ☆ ☆

Star Wars Episode IX: The Rise of Skywalker (2019) – J. J. Abrams

It is tempting to compare what director J. J. Abrams has delivered in this final instalment of the Star Wars saga to what could have been – and you would invariably be disappointed (as many or most viewers were).  Instead, it may be more fruitful to think about the pleasures that the film does offer.  So, if, like me, you saw the first Star Wars (Episode IV: A New Hope) when you were 9 or 10 years old, what would you be hoping for now? If you were the director, what would you include?  Abrams (born 1966) probably found himself exactly in this situation.  So, when he directed Episode VII: The Force Awakens, he set about recreating the plot of the 1977 film, albeit with new protagonists (Daisy Ridley as Rey is the new Luke etc.) but also bringing back the original actors from the first trilogy to play key cameo roles in the new film.  I enjoyed that “remake” myself.  But now, in his second go at Star Wars, could Abrams really use the same formula again?  The answer is yes.  So, we do see some older actors returning to reprise their roles (surprises included) and we get some nods to the past (Luke lifts his x-wing out of the swamp…finally) and some retreads (what! Another bar with aliens in it?).  The Rebels have to fight the Empire/First Order/Final Order all over again – and guess what? They win.  (Sorry for the spoiler).  As in the earlier films, generational conflict is the main subtext – we know that Kylo Ren (Adam Driver) is the son of Han Solo (Harrison Ford, appearing as a force ghost) and Princess Leia (Carrie Fisher appearing in footage found on the cutting room floor from Episode VII sadly repurposed).  He’s turned to the dark side and wants to take Rey with him – but will he prevail?  And what about Rey’s own family tree?  In this film, we do discover her lineage.  However, and here’s where we shouldn’t be tempted, not much tension or even exploration is made about these discoveries and conflicts.  They are just another cog in the plot mechanics, which, it must be said, move swiftly from one action sequence to another.  Truly, the art direction and special effects look amazing (the wreckage of the original Death Star!).  But, but, but, the result feels hollow inside (nowhere worse than the nonresponsive Carrie Fisher slotted into interactions with live actors), with the schematic plot structure designed only to connect the action sequences and to allow Abrams and his team to slot in the various required memes (“I’ve got a bad feeling about this”, death of pivotal characters, etc.).  I say this as someone for whom the original trilogy was something special (and who mostly skipped the prequel trilogy or forgot about it) – but how would children growing up now feel about these films? Would they love the new characters played by Oscar Isaac, John Boyega, and Daisy Ridley, as much as we loved Han, Leia, and Luke? I suspect not, but hey, it’s Disney’s franchise now and they certainly know how to make a buck.

The Good Liar (2019)

 ☆ ☆ ☆

The Good Liar (2019) – B. Condon

Given the presence of Helen Mirren and Ian McKellen, I had high hopes that this tale of an elderly con-man swindling (not quite so) defenceless old widows would have some spark to it.  The acting is indeed strong but somehow let down by Bill Condon’s middling direction which fails to fully grasp the darkness in the plot.  Things get very disturbing, yes, but I feel that the horror of the events depicted could have hit home more fully through some different choices; there is less edge here than expected and that may be a calculated choice to appeal to audiences who appreciate more comfortable film fare.  Of course, the plot does telegraph the fact that Mirren’s character is craftier than she appears – that’s part of the suspense, as we wait for her to turn the tables on McKellen.  But the deeper themes that arise from knowing the characters’ history don’t seem to me to be fully explored, leaving the actors, as great as they are, hanging out in a difficult position trying to reveal all this explication on their faces over some rather banal dialogue.  Don’t get me wrong, this is a perfectly passable evening’s entertainment – it’s just that I had hoped for more.

True Detective (Season 3, 2019)

 ☆ ☆ ☆ ½

True Detective (Season 3, 2019) – N. Pizzolatto

Watching the third season of True Detective has left me with an uneasy feeling.  Of course, any drama/thriller about abducted children is bound to do that -- and also raise questions about whether there is entertainment value to be found in such a horror.  Worse, the show seems to lean toward suggesting that there could be pedophile rings that include members of the rich and powerful in society, a conspiracy theory that has attracted attention with the rise of QAnon and similar groups that thrive on sowing discord and confusion. No need to add more fuel to that dumpster fire, please.  Points about the way that the rich can get a free pass are well taken however (especially as compared to the fates of those who are poor or stigmatised). The plot finds Wayne Hays (Mahershala Ali), a Vietnam vet turned police detective, stuck in a rut, reliving the same (child abduction) case over and over, beginning in 1980, then again in 1990 when the case is re-opened, and finally in 2015, when suffering from Alzheimer’s disease, he is interviewed about the case by, yes, a conspiracy theorist.  The bouts of dementia mean that Hays is partly living in the past in his memories, which viewers get to see, such that it is never entirely clear how objective our information is (although some scenes that do not involve Hays are included, so who knows?).  The cast is rounded out by his partner (Stephen Dorff), with whom there is conflict and camaraderie, and his wife (Carmen Ejogo), who writes a book about the case, raising concerns about conflicts of interest.  The writers slowly dole out the clues and character developments across the 8 episodes, often showing us consequences before we see their cause – but at the end of the day, the big reveal is somewhat less than it could have been and we are left with a fantasy finale that can’t possibly be true.  The strong acting carries the day but I left feeling rather dissatisfied…and uneasy.   

 

The Dead Don’t Die (2019)

☆ ☆ ☆ ½

The Dead Don’t Die (2019) – J. Jarmusch

No doubt some viewers came to this film expecting a Shaun of the Dead styled zom-com starring Bill Murray or perhaps even an actual horror film.  Instead, they got Jim Jarmusch’s droll take on the genre, which is closer to George Romero’s original blend of horror and social commentary but slowed way down and speckled with the director’s trademark ironic humour. I agree with those who said that the film seems to be rather pointless – most of the social commentary is reserved for a monologue from Tom Waits’ Hermit Bob at the very end (basically “humans suck”).  The rest of the film is just opportunities for Jarmusch’s friends (Adam Driver, Chloe Sevigny, Iggy Pop) to play at being zombies or to lovingly recreate and/or offer some references to the genre (aping Romero’s idea that consumerism = zombie-ism) or to cool culture (comic books, movies), set to a guitar-driven soundtrack by Jarmusch’s band SQÜRL (and the title country music song).  Tilda Swinton gives a very weird turn as a katana-wielding Scottish mortician.  It’s all pretty easy-going, nothing new on the zombie front, nor really on the social commentary front. Given the pessimism here (and some of the music), I guess you might call it a dirge.  No one exactly seems like they are having much fun (except Swinton), Bill Murray most of all.

Knives Out (2019)

☆ ☆ ☆ ½

Knives Out (2019) – R. Johnson

Undoubtedly, I had my expectations set too high for Knives Out.  I should have realised that there are essentially no really good adaptations of Agatha Christie (although this film is inspired by her rather than adapted from her) – gentle readers, correct me, if I am wrong. I do love the old mystery series (Sherlock Holmes, Charlie Chan, The Thin Man, etc.) but they rarely earn 4 stars or above. Of course, Knives Out does benefit from a strong cast (particularly Ana de Armas and Daniel Craig) and a particularly tricky plot that inverts the genre by giving away the culprit early on. There is a certain delicious appeal to finding out that all of the characters have guilty secrets or that one is physically incapable of lying – these set the terms of our contract with the genre. But the film’s intentions for comedy are perhaps not broad enough – the characterizations are almost funny but not quite. Perhaps too another run through the events of the evening from another perspective would have tripled the fun (especially if some filmic fat were edited out)? As it stands, it is no doubt enjoyable to watch Detective Benoit Blanc (Craig) piece together the clues of the case (and he may have a sequel in the works already) but I find myself counting the ways that the film might have been pushed just a bit further into greatness… that said, I am sure director Rian Johnson knows how to court mainstream success and I do not.

Color Out of Space (2019)

☆ ☆ ☆

Color Out of Space (2019) – R. Stanley

So, Nicolas Cage is making six movies a year these days?  He’s on a roll, a tear, and really is the go-to actor for over-the-top madness (still).  This version of the H. P. Lovecraft story is clearly designed as an acid trip (no need for actual drugs).  I had read the story a few years ago (and I’ve just scanned it again now) but had no specific memories of it. The film seems true to the story though we see more from the insider’s point-of-view perhaps. As usual with this sort of film, things start out rather ordinary: Cage playing Nathan Gardner is at home in rural Arkham (presumably New England) with his wife (Joelly Richardson) and three children, when a meteorite crashes in their front yard.  A hydrologist (Elliot Knight) surveying the area stops by to investigate, including visiting the home of the squatter (Tommy Chong – still smoking!). Gradually, some weird shit starts to happen (the youngest son seems zombified, Richardson starts to lose it).  Cage holds on, perhaps drinking too much, until things just completely melt down.  As does he.  As does the plot.  And the visuals.  But if this is your sort of thing, then perhaps this one is somewhat better than the usual crap out there aiming to be thrilling but ending up only incoherent).  The director is Richard Stanley, last seen getting fired from the Brando version of The Island of Dr. Moreau; apparently this is the first of an intended trilogy of Lovecraft adaptations.

The Chills: The Triumph and Tragedy of Martin Phillipps (2019)

☆ ☆ ☆

The Chills:  The Triumph and Tragedy of Martin Phillipps (2019) – J. Parnell & R. Curry

It must have been 1986 or 1987 when I first heard the Chills (courtesy of Karen Adams & Pung Van) amid the surge of Flying Nun bands from New Zealand that were flooding onto American college radio (our station being WCWM-FM in Williamsburg, VA).  Was it “Party in my Heart” or “House with 100 Rooms” or perhaps something more omnipresent such as “Pink Frost”? In any event, it wasn’t until 1990 and the Submarine Bells tour of the US that I first saw them live – in Minneapolis (but where? First Avenue, probably).  I do remember Mike Wolf and I and a few others had dinner with The Chills at the Sri Lanka Curry House – but Martin Phillipps, singer, guitarist, and songwriter, himself didn’t show.  Perhaps this could have offered some insight into the man then that it would take decades later and this documentary to reveal.  It seems that he had his problems and was not always good at dealing with other people, churning through dozens of bandmates over the years.  To their credit, the filmmakers (who wisely devote the majority of their interview time to Phillipps himself) don’t hide this fact – this isn’t a puff piece.  The film succeeds as it reviews the history of the band, its early local successes that grew into international success (with “Heavenly Pop Hit”) and a US major label contract before collapsing under the pressure that eventually resulted in  years of drug abuse for Phillipps.  Of course, he finally pulled himself together, got off of alcohol and drugs, and reignited the band (which had limped along all those years).  I recall a fantastic gig here in Melbourne around 2013 or 2014 that was a virtual greatest hits show – and then another tour on the back of the Silver Bullets album in 2015 or so in a bigger venue.  There has been a subsequent album (Snow Bound) and some songs from that one feature in the film.  Where the film doesn’t quite succeed is when it follows Phillipps to his GP for various treatments for Hepatitis C – sure, it humanises him but it isn’t as interesting as his musical pursuits.  And, in the end, it is Phillipps’ songwriting (then and now) that is the most inspiring part of his story – and I command you to stop everything and listen to The Chills now to recall (or discover) that fact.

Addendum: As someone who studies personality, I feel as though I should have included at least some commentary about how creativity may be associated with certain traits or that the ability to focus single-mindedly on a project may come at the detriment of social relationships but a) that would be a cliché and b) it probably isn't really true. That said, different forms of expression (i.e., different results) may be associated with different traits/experiences -- but you knew that.