Category: Review

Reviews from all of the movies we have seen lately, including everything in theaters and on DVD.

SLIFF 2017 Review – SURVIVING HOME


SURVIVING HOME screens Saturday, November 11th at 12:30pm st The Tivoli Theater (6350 Delmar) as part of this year’s St. Louis International Film Festival. C0-directors Jillian Moul and Matthew Moul will be in attendance. Ticket information can be found HERE

In honor of Veterans Day, SLIFF offers a free screening of SURVIVING HOME, an intimate documentary that follows four veterans over an eight-year period as they rebuild their lives after war. Interwoven with their stories are veterans’ voices from across the United States. The film’s principal subjects had vastly different combat experiences and challenges, and they’ve taken equally diverse paths on their difficult journeys to recovery. A World War II vet is part of a generation that stoically resists talking about their experiences. A Vietnam vet becomes a Buddhist monk in an attempt to reconcile his guilt over the people he killed. A severely burned Persian Gulf and Iraq War vet, who lost an arm on his fourth tour of duty, still wishes he could go back into combat. And a female Iraq War vet suffers less from the trauma of war than from the sexual assault she experienced at the hands of her “brothers.” Through perseverance, humor, inner reflection, strength, and a determination to help others, these vets overcome many obstacles, but the road ahead continues to bend in unexpected ways. Their unique paths of healing and discovery shed light on the long-term burdens of war and reveal the miraculous power of the human spirit.


Review of SURVIVING HOME by Stephen Tronicek:

What happens to people when they get home from the military or the Army? What happens when those profoundly attached to stressful experiences return to common society? Many films of this day attempt to answer this question, as more and more is brought to light about the way that the stressful environment of war can affect people. Thank You For Your Service, American Sniper, and The Hurt Locker have all included ideas of this, attempting to show the audience the flaws of our handling of these broken men and women. While those films may be admirable attempts to depict this issue, this film being about real people and about real situations hits profoundly hard.

SURVIVING HOME is beautiful in a way, a cry for understanding from those who have suffered at the hands of PTSD and other more physical scars. A cry for understanding for the people who actually go to war, presented in a way that makes it almost impossible to seem jingoistic because it presents simply the truth, flaws and all. Whereas fictional stories, such as the films mentioned before, are in some way forced to frame the events of war in a specific way, most stepping into either the reality that war is a nightmare or the idea that war is noble. Surviving Home, being a documentary, seems to frame it a little bit of both. Military life can be a rich, fulfilling option for many, but is a living nightmare for many people, both in the war and outside of the war.

The subjects, as often in a good documentary, are really incredible. Robert Henline is a wonderful, funny, man burned but strong. The documentary focusses mainly on his story of overcoming the wounds that he has both physically and mentally. There is also the story of a woman, whose wife is not given military benefits and her fight to gain those benefits. These are combined with different other stories about attempting to become people again. They all take pride in their service and want to think that all of it is noble, but they understand the violence that they imparted to others and how this broke them down. It is this understanding that makes the film so beautiful and encouraging.

SURVIVING HOME is an enriching documentary, reaching the types of sad and sentimental heights of something like the work of Spielberg. It reaffirms some hope in the frustrating darkness of the issues that it is covering. If you have the time, I’d gladly hope for you to see it and gain some more respect for the people who have served our country.

MURDER ON THE ORIENT EXPRESS – Review

Judi Dench, left, and Olivia Colman star in Twentieth Century Fox’s “Murder on the Orient Express.” Photo Credit: Nicola Dove; TM & © 2017 Twentieth Century Fox Film Corporation. All Rights Reserved. Not for sale or duplication.

MURDER ON THE ORIENT EXPRESS, Kenneth Branagh’s new film adaptation of the classic Agatha Christie mystery, offers a certain amount of lavish period style and mystery fun but does not measure up to the 1974 version, directed by Sidney Lumet and featuring an all-star cast. Branagh’s film also has a star-packed cast and Branagh, who plays detective Hercule Poirot as well as directs, sports an astonishing two-stage mustache that might be worth the ticket price alone.

Based on the famous Agatha Christie mystery featuring her Belgian detective, Hercule Poirot, the 1974 film version had an all-star cast with Albert Finney, Lauren Bacall, Martin Balsam,

Ingrid Bergman, Jacqueline Bisset, Sean Connery, John Gielgud, Wendy Hiller, Anthony Perkins,, Vanessa Redgrave, Richard Widmark, and Michael York. Branagh’s film is also star-packed, with Penelope Cruz, Willem Dafoe, Johnny Depp, Judi Dench, Josh Gad, Derek Jacobi, Leslie Odom Jr., Michelle Pfeiffer, and Daisy Ridley.

The story takes place in 1935 aboard the legendary Orient Express, as the luxury train makes its way from Istanbul to Paris, carrying all manner of exotic, intriguing, international passengers, including the famous and fussy Belgian detective Hercule Poirot. It is the dead of winter and traveling through mountainous Eastern Europe, the train gets stuck in the snow. As they wait for rescue, a passenger turns up dead, and the detective is on the case to solve the murder.

Part of the appeal of this mystery lies in Christie’s skill creating a cast of memorable international characters. At first, they all seem like familiar types but secrets are revealed as the story unfolds, making them all likely suspects for the murder. Johnny Depp plays the victim, wealthy American ex-gangster Mr. Ratchet, the part played by Richard Widmark in the 1974 film. Ratchet tells everyone he is an antiques dealer but the bullying, scar-faced man is clearly is something more sinister. Depp plays Ratchet with an overwhelming sense of menace and none of the charm Widmark added. Ratchet is traveling with two employees, an assistant/accountant Hector McQueen (Josh Gad) and English manservant Masterman (Derek Jacobi).

Among the passengers are a loud, talkative wealthy widow, Mrs Hubbard (Michelle Pfeiffer), deeply religious Pilar Estravados (Penelope Cruz) who was a missionary in the novel, a German who seems a fan of Nazi ideas, Professor Hardman (Willem Dafoe), an English governess Mary Debenham (Daisy Ridley) and Dr. Arbuthnot (Leslie Odom, Jr.), a black man whose presence upsets the Nazi-leaning professor. There are also a few European aristocrats aboard, Princess Natalia Dragomiroff (Judi Dench), a Russian royal living in exile after the Revolution, accompanied by her maid/companion Hildegarde Schmidt (Olivia Colman), and a hot-tempered young Hungarian ballet dancer Count Andrenyi (dancer Sergei Polunin, in his acting debut) and his beautiful wife, Countess Andrenyi (Lucy Boynton). In the novel, the Count is a diplomat who is traveling with diplomatic immunity, although why the dancer and his wife have that status is unclear. Also aboard are the young manager of the Orient Express line, Bouc (Tom Bateman), who is a personal friend of Poirot, the train conductor Pierre Michel (Marwan Kenzari) and a new character added, Biniamino Marquez (Manuel Garcia-Rulfo), who is supposed to be a red herring, as if the plot didn’t have enough of those already.

That is a lot of characters to introduce but the clever plot does that through Poirot’s interrogations and investigation, with suspicion falling on one and then another until the final moments. Branagh and screenwriter Michael Green were wise enough not to mess with the basics of Agatha Christie’s plot, but the story is updated by adding some diversity to the characters and some details that recognize the growing Nazi influence in Europe at the time the story takes place.

 

Reportedly, screenwriter Green is an Agatha Christie fan, and he was already working on the script when Branagh was brought in to direct. Whether Branagh is a Christie fan is less clear. In the film’s production notes, Branagh said he was drawn to the story because “it’s much more an emotional experience than people might imagine. This goes deeper because, it explores grief, and loss, and revenge, with sophistication and soul.” Still, Christie fans will be relieved that the main story remains intact.

Much of the film’s appeal is the spectacular visual lavishness, packed with exotic locations, evocative sets, breathtaking locations, and gorgeous costumes. Part of the film’s period allure is the idea of luxury train travel. These characters, wealthy people or their employees, are traveling first-class on the legendary Orient Express, a train famous for its luxury, in an era where that was more expected but is now only found on private jets. Business class just doesn’t measure up.

Not surprisingly, the film looks splendid, and should be in line for some art direction nominations come awards season. It lavishes on the costumes and works hard to create period atmosphere with a plethora of details. This opulent effort succeeds at first but once the train is stuck in the snow, on a trestle and approaching a tunnel, the magic of the period feel diminishes. The passengers are in a precarious place indeed, physically as well as psychologically. The location adds some visual dynamic but it really seems to distract from the mystery, serving to cover a lack of psychological tension that the director should be building.

Where the film falls short is in how director/star Branagh handles this classic mystery. Christie’s story is packed with suspense and colorful characters but Branagh puts all the focus on his role as Poirot. The the other characters, each of whom seem likely suspects in the book and earlier film, are barely sketched out in this one. In the 1974 film, each actor gets their moment to shine and create a fascinating, unique character. Branagh plays favorites, giving some actors that luxury, notably Gad and Ridley, but others much less. Dame Judi Dench gets a little chance to round out her imperious princess, but other characters remain two-dimensional shadows passing through.

Branagh also creates more of a sense of melancholy than mystery, seizing on the characters’ tragic histories more than the whodunit. The film’s pacing seems slow, and director’s attempts to open up the action from the confines of the train, moving some interrogations outside in the snow,feel more like distractions than additions. In this version, the train has been derailed, not merely snowbound, and is struck on a bridge above a deep mountain gorge and just in front of tunnel. Branagh adds scenes where the detective interrogates passengers in an open luggage car perched precariously on the bridge high above the gorge. That scene, plus adding a little action chase, seem more suited to Sherlock Holmes than Hercule Poirot.

Introducing a new audience to Agatha Christie’s classic murder mystery is an admirable goal. Christie’s clever mystery remains strong enough that those not familiar with the novel or the earlier film will be entertained and surprised. But for those who know the tale, Branagh could have spent less time on his mustache and character, and more on building suspense and on leaving room for the other characters.

RATING: 3 1/2 out of 5 stars

 

WONDERSTRUCK – Review

Millicent Simmonds as Rose in WONDERSTRUCK. Photo credit: Myles Aronowitz. Courtesy of Amazon Studios and Roadside Attractions ©

WONDERSTRUCK is a beautiful clockwork creation filled with intricate, delicate details, but a film where the parts are greater than the sum of the whole. Like an elaborate cuckoo clock or a old-fashioned doll’s house, it is packed to the roof with little flourishes and charmingly magical images that matter more than the story they are decorating.

Director Todd Haynes’ mystery/drama is divided into two stories of runaway children on a quest, one set in the 1920s and the other in the 1970s, but both taking place in New York and often in the same locations. In this adaptation of Brian Selznick’s young adult novel, the two children have their own mysteries to solve but the additional mystery is what links their two stories besides location. Brian Selznick, who also wrote this screenplay, wrote the novel that was the basis of Martin Scorsese’s film HUGO, and this story also has a little of the same child’s magical-world feel and sense of wonder.

The 1920s story, presented as a black-and-white silent movie, tells the story of Rose (Millicent Simmons), a 12-year-old deaf girl who seems obsessed with a famous silent movie star Lillian Mayhew (Julianne Moore), pasting clippings about her from fan magazines into a scrapbook. After a confrontation with her stern father (James Urbaniak), Rose runs away from her comfortable but confining suburban New Jersey home to look for the actress in New York, where she is starring in a play at a Manhattan theater. In the 1970s story, ten-year-old Ben (Oakes Fegley) runs away from his rural Minnesota home after the death of his mother (Michelle Williams) and following a freak accident that left him deaf, in search of the father he never knew, a quest that also takes him to New York.

The film alternates between the two children’s journeys, which have several parallels. Both Rose and Ben are lonely and are dreamers seeking something more in their lives. Each child’s search takes them to some of the same Manhattan locations, particularly the American Museum of Natural History. Both characters are deaf but neither knows sign language, so navigating the city alone is particularly fraught, yet both find allies along the way. The parallel stories also both touch on bits of New York history in their time periods.

The silent 1920s story is the stronger of the two by far, thanks in large part to the performance of Millicent Simmons, who is herself deaf, as the spunky Rose. Simmons has remarkable screen presence and has no trouble transmitting critical information visually, through small gestures, posture, expression or even a glance. She conveys a mix of touching lonesomeness, sweetness and determination that is irresistible. Haynes shows impressive skill in silent movie visual storytelling, conveying ideas, feelings and plot points clearly without excessive title cards.

The 1970s story is less effective and less polished as storytelling, although it does a good job of capturing both the gritty feel of New York in the ’70s and the charm of an old corner bookstore. Oakes Fegley does a good job with his role as Ben but the plot is far more clunky in the 1970s story. The plot is packed with details and seemingly-meaningful iconography (paper boats, Ziggy Stardust, shooting stars) that ultimately lead nowhere. Several scenes, particularly between him and Jaden Michael as a boy who befriends him, seem contrived and force the young actors into unconvincing dialog and moments that do not feel true. The fault is not in the young actors but an awkward script and direction that seems more intent on hurrying along to the next visual wonder.

 

A story featuring deaf children is a welcome thing. The film does offer a bit of history and some advocacy for the deaf. The stronger 1920s silent movie story highlights how deaf people were treated in an earlier era, shut off from society and isolated, even in an affluent family like Rose’s. The film also touches on the fight for advances like the transition from lip-reading to the use of sign-language, and continues that thread into the story that takes place 50 years later, showing changes in the lives of deaf people.

As worthy as that is, the plot of the stories themselves are not the strongest (although the 1920s story is much better than the overstuffed, less-believable 1970s story) and the mysteries they pose are not very hard to figure out. But it does not matter much, as the plots mostly exist as a vehicle for a little focus on the deaf, and as an excuse to explore little historical tidbits and to immerse the audience in the time periods.

The major appeal of WONDERSTUCK is likely its intricate, delicate beauty, the studiously accurate period recreations and all the lavish little historic details embedded in the beautifully photographed images. Story definitely takes a backseat in this very pretty film, filled with a history buff’s banquet of near-forgotten bits of New York history. Among the historic delights are a museum exhibition on the pre-cursor to museums, the cabinet of curiosities, displayed at the American Museum of Natural History, a room-filling model of Manhattan created for a World’s Fair and preserved in the 1970s, and even the 1970s blackout.

There is a precious, doll-house feel to much of the movie, as lovely as it is and as worthy as the social commentary is. Haynes seems to be reaching for Wes Anderson charm and whimsy but doesn’t quite achieve it. Still, it is lovely to look at, and the little bits of history are delightful.

WONDERSTRUCK offers a myriad of visual delights and a complete immersion in two time periods, but it is more a tour of wondrous sights than great storytelling.

RATING: 3 out of 5 stars

DADDY’S HOME 2 – Review

 

The holiday movie season is in full swing this weekend with a yuletime-set sequel to a recent raucous comedy…again. Yes, it was barely ten days ago when a really early cinema gift arrived at the multiplex, BAD MOMS CHRISTMAS. Well there are a couple of differences, this new flick is a follow-up to a 2015 release rather than the more recent, just over a year old BAD MOMS. Plus the matriarchs’ antics are a tad more adult-themed, since both films garnered much-deserved “R” ratings for raunch. The new arrival is the more “family friendly” PG-13 (it might be even more wholesome than the first one, since there’s less talk of fertility). However both recent installment deal with the chaos and conflict initiated by the visit of the grandparents (Moms had one grandpop’ while this one doesn’t have a granny’ till the last moments). So, put those shopping lists away and take a break with DADDY’S HOME 2.

 

Just as with the last scenes of the first flick, things are going well with biological papa Dusty (Mark Wahlberg) and stepdad Brad (Will Ferrell). Brad’s still raising Dusty’s kids, Megan (Scarlett Estevez) and Dylan (Owen Vacero), plus he and Sara (Linda Cardellini) have their own toddler son, Griff. Down the street from them Dusty shares his mini-castle with new wife Karen (Alessandra Ambrosio) and her daughter from a previous marriage Adrianna (Didi Costine). With Christmas just days away, he’s stressed by the visit from his estranged father. It just so happens that Brad’s pop is flying in on the same day, so they both head to the airport. Dusty spots his father, macho, womanizing ex-astronaut Kurt (Mel Gibson) first coming down the escalator from the gate. After a strained reunion , the two are both uncomfortable by the PDA-filled greetings between Brad and his dad, Don (John Lithgow). As the big day approaches, Kurt suggests they rent a huge place where both families can bond (Dusty questions his pop’s true motives). Soon everyone is settling in at a rustic estate nestled in a snowy, picture-perfect forest. Of course the harmony doesn’t last. Parenting styles are questioned, while Dusty and Sara don’t understand why Brad hasn’t noticed that is father is …off (mom stayed behind to nurse her sick brother…okay). Eventually an all-out family war breaks out with Brad calling in the big guns, namely Karen’s ex the hulking Roger (John Cena). Will all these squabbles make this the worst Christmas ever?

 

 

Once again, Ferrell and Wahlberg are a pretty terrific team. Ferrell’s Brad is still an over-emotional mess (his attempts to stifle a sob are a thing of beauty), whenever he’s not a joyous wide-eyed “man-child”. Wahlberg’s toned down the intimidating glares, but is still an expert straight-man to Ferrell. These two apples don’t fall far from the trees. Lithgow is a bouncing sprite, his Don’s an over-sharing ray of sunshine until his secret is finally revealed during an awkward “improv” game. It’s been a while since Gibson has done a flat-out comedy, and he attacks this role with gusto. With his charcoal-gray pompadour and blazing eyes, Kurt is a human wrecking ball disguised as a unrepentent “tom cat”. Cardellini gets to show off her comedy chops more this time out, especially as she deals with the impossibly perfect Karen (just what is she jotting down in that lil’ note book). Plus the kids generate a good deal of laughs. Vaccaro is still an endearing sweet nerd. New addition Costine is a dead-eyed preteen nightmare as she walks all over Dusty. The wild card is Estevez as a pint-sized hellion in the great tradition of Margaret O’Brien in MEET ME IN ST. LOUIS. This little spitfire steals scenes effortlessly. Though he doesn’t show up till late in the action, Cena is all hard muscled charm with a heart always melting at the sight of his little girl.

 

Director Sean Anders returns along with his writing partners to see that this follow-up adheres closely to the comic beats of the original. Though Thomas Haden Church as Brad’s crude boss and Hannibal Buress don’t return, the great pairing of Gibson and Lithgow more than makes up for their absence. There are a couple of clever “call-backs” to slapstick bits as Brad “dies” once more and a defective snow-blower rather than a cycle wreak havoc (I can’t imagine their auto insurance premiums). Anders can’t avoid the dreaded third act lull (the flick could use a good 6 or 7 minute trim), and the final sequence set at a multiplex feels a bit too much like “product placement” (reminding me of the big musical number in MAC AND ME set at a certain fast food burger place). Happily there’s nice wink at unorthodox holiday-set action flicks (like the first DIE HARD and..ahem..LETHAL WEAPON), as they sit down to watch a bullet-ridden blockbuster. There are yuletide film staple situations (decorating, snow slides, shopping and a live nativity) as everyone lumbers toward an inevitable happy ending of reconciliation and mutual understanding (along with a fun cameo for a final gag). But when the jokes really connect, they hit hard (the running thermostat stuff’s pretty funny). That along with the gorgeous East Coast winter locales makes DADDY’S HOME 2 a pretty good stocking stuffer, and not a lump of coal.

3.5 Out of 5

 

 

 

SLIFF 2017 Review – FACES PLACES

FACES PLACES screens at Plaza Frontenac Cinema (Lindbergh Blvd. and Clayton Rd, Frontenac, MO 63131) as part of this year’s St. Louis International Film Festival. Showings are Thursday, Nov. 9 at 4:30pm (purchase tickets HERE) and Sunday, Nov. 12 at 3pm (purchase tickets HERE).

 

What a charmer! Legendary French film director Agnes Varda and muralist/photographer JR take us on the most appealing of road trips. Varda is a founder of the French New Wave avant-garde film movement still actively making films, while artist JR specializes in placing giant photographic images on buildings and other surprising outdoor locations. At the time the film was shot, Varda was 88-years-old and JR was 33, she’s a tiny woman while he’s a tall man, yet they make a perfect team is this often comic but also though-provoking exploration of rural France. In FACES PLACES (Visage Village), they travel around France meeting ordinary people, taking photos, and turning them into striking giant photo art works plastered on walls and other large surfaces.

The van this unlikely pair travel in looks like a giant camera, and serves as a mobile photo booth that prints out large posters suitable for plastering on walls. The van attracts attention and also adds a touch of whimsy for the project. Although Varda, a short, round older woman, and JR, a tall, thin young man, look mismatched, they are the perfect team for this project. As they roll along on this road trip, the filmmaker and the artist joke, tease, debate artistic choices, and talk about life, art, and memories. In their travels, they also meet an array of ordinary people who have their own unique and fascinating stories.

The film has a stronger narrative line than one might expect, and one has to credit the legendary Varda for that. The director’s skills remain intact and her eye and instinct for interesting story in unexpected places is unerring. The film is a visual treat throughout, with well-framed and scenic shot after shot.

The murals they produce use photos of people with a connection to the building or outdoor location where the image will be placed. The images embody some of the human history of the place but they also have a good dose of whimsy and playfulness. JR’s previous projects include close-ups of eyes on round industrial storage tanks and other startling images. A similar sense of playing with perception fills the images Varda and JR create together.

But it is the entertaining, thoughtful interactions between these two that make this film so appealing and enjoyable. The back-and-forth banter between the two is warm, amusing, and insightful, as the two agree and disagree on artistic choices. Both share personal stories and indulge in impulsive, playful adventures. JR’s respect and affection towards the legendary Varda is touching, like a grandson’s, but Varda’s warmth and encouragement towards JR is just as appealing. One gets the sense these two have been friends forever but in fact met shortly before filming started. Clearly, the two just clicked, and that translated to magic and fun on-screen.

Filled with surprising and unexpectedly beautiful images of people and places, FACES PLACES is a perfect little gem of a film, a pleasant way to spend a couple of hours, on the road with two fascinating and ever-curious people as they see what is around the next bend, in life and on the road. There is one word for this film: Wonderful!

 

SLIFF 2017 Review – HEAL THE LIVING

HEAL THE LIVING (Reparer les vivants) will screen at Plaza Frontenac Cinema (Lindbergh Blvd. and Clayton Rd, Frontenac, MO 63131) as part of this year’s St. Louis International Film Festival. Showings are Thursday, Nov. 9 at 6:40pm (purchase tickets HERE) and Friday, Nov. 10 at 9:30pm (purchase tickets HERE).

 

Three narrative threads built around the issue of organ transplantation – parents facing with the accidental death of their teen-aged son, the medical staff of a transplant team, and a middle-aged female musician dying of heart failure – are woven together in French director Katell Quillevere’s medical drama HEAL THE LIVING (Reparer les vivants). This is the third and most polished of her films, her previous works being SUZANNE and LOVE LIKE POISON.

In part, HEAL THE LIVING is a medical procedural, like countless television or movie dramas, but what sets it apart is its fuller emotional portrait of the patients and their families involved in this dramatic story, and its lush cinematic approach to the subject. Thankfully, that cinematic quality is less in the foreground in the surgical scenes, which are handled with taste and a minimum of blood, but it comes to the fore in depicted the rich inner lives of the people involved.

Emmanuel Seigner plays Marianne, a woman who gets the phone call every parent fears, that her 17-year-old son Simon (Gabin Verdet) has been in a car crash and is in the hospital near death. Once the teen is declared brain-dead, the doctors move into a new phase. Tahar Rahim plays Thomas Remige, the sensitive coordinator of organ donations who has the difficult job of talking to Marianne and her estranged husband Vincent (Kool Shen) about organ donation.

Fine acting, stunning photography, and music by Alexandre Desplat support the heart-wrenching emotion at the heart of this skillfully-told medical drama. Quillevere’s drama, which follows the donor and his family, the medical team, and the recipient and her family in turns, is full of emotion – human warmth, unspeakable pain, compassion, longing and loss – and is both beautifully acted and filmed.

The director treats both families with equal measures of care and compassion, but what reveals where her own heart lies on the subject of organ donation is how she depicts the medical staff. HEAL THE LIVING paints an ideal, perhaps idealized, picture of organ donation. The doctors and the staff handling the donation process are caring and sensitive, giving the grieving family the space to make their decision, and even carrying out the parents’ final request during transplant surgery. One can not imagine a more perfect medical experience for both families at that tragic time for one of them. Tahar Rahim as the coordinator who handles organ donation is the very paragon of flawlessly sensitivity to the grieving donor family, even challenging surgeons in the operating room. One hopes that organ donation is always handled with the degree of sensitivity shown in this film.

The moving, striking photography is one of the most unexpected aspects of this film, and is particularly strong in the first segment. That segment opens with handsome 17-year-old Simon climbing out of his girlfriend’s bedroom window, and follows him as he goes on a late-night bicycle tour of his city with friends, and then joins them in early morning surfing. The photography of the waves and water is beautifully shot by Tom Harari, symbolizing life and death, and foreshadowing what is to come. On the way home, the friend who is driving drifts off in a reverie about the ocean, until the devastating car crash jolts him awake.

The director blends the three stories well. Simon’s mother gets the call from the hospital, where her son is in a coma, and contacts her estranged husband. When Simon is declared brain-dead, his distraught parents are asked about organ donation. To give us an emotional breather from this heartbreaking situation, the director shifts the film’s focus then to the medical team, whom we follow as they go about their work, a segment that includes little touches to humanize them as well.

A third theme is added when we switch to the story of Claire (Anne Dorval), a successful musician who is facing heart-failure in middle-age. Her illness has forced her to stop working but she is coping with emotional support from her two caring college-aged sons, and a lover with whom she re-connects. Still, she is conflicted about her diagnosis and the prospect of going on the waiting list for a heart.

The acting and character development are strong, adding greatly to the emotionally power and individuality of the personal stories involved. Dorval, as the conflicted musician, is particularly strong, but all the cast are good.

The dedication of the film suggests a personal reason the director aims to promote the idea of organ donation, and to reassure and encourage donors, by painting as rosy a picture of the doctors and the process as possible. There are always more people waiting for organs than donor organs available. Whether the process is always as ideal as depicted in this drama is another matter but you have to give the director credit for making a touching, moving and cinematic film from a subject that has been handled with far less style, or compassion for donor families, in the past. It would be nice if HEAL THE LIVING became a guideline for medical personnel to handle the donors’ families with as much compassion and human gentleness as shown in this film.

 

SLIFF 2017 Review – THE TESTAMENT

THE TESTAMENT will screen at Plaza Frontenac Cinema (Lindbergh Blvd. and Clayton Rd, Frontenac, MO 63131) as part of this year’s St. Louis International Film Festival. Showings are Monday, Nov. 6 at 7pm (purchase tickets HERE) and Thursday, Nov. 9 at 2:15pm (purchase tickets HERE).

In the taut Israeli-Austrian thriller/mystery THE TESTAMENT, focuses on Dr. Yoel Halberstam (Ori Pfeffer), an Israeli historian with the Jerusalem Holocaust Institute, who is leading a high-profile court battle to preserve a site in Austria where 200 Jewish forced laborers were massacred and buried in March 1945. But the Israeli team working to preserve the site are racing a ticking clock, as the Austrian town of Lendsdorf is preparing to build on the site and is demanding proof of a mass grave before halting that plan. The problem is that witnesses are few and no one knows the exact location of the mass grave. Halberstam must find it before the deadline set by the court runs out. Unless the mass grave is found, the building plan will go ahead and the site will be obliterated.

This gripping Israeli – Austrian mystery/drama THE TESTAMENT debuted at the Venice Film Festival. Halberstam is an Orthodox Jew who lives for his work, and is known for his commitment to truth and his exacting research. But the solution to this puzzle keeps eluding him. One reason is that an earlier attempt to bring this crime to light, one made soon after the war, resulted in the assassination of one witness, and the rest have gone into hiding. While going through some classified testaments taken for that earlier investigation, Halberstam is startled to find his own mother’s name.

His mother (Rivka Gur) had always refused to talk about the war and a drive to know the truth leads Yoel to use his access to restricted files to find out more, despite the ethical questions raised. As the historian digs deeper, he discovers his mother is not who they always believed she was. The discovery is shattering for her son and the secret leads him to questions nearly everything about his life. Still, Yoel’s compulsion to find the truth has, no matter the consequences, unexpectedly brings new information and a new view of the mystery of the mass grave that might help solve the puzzle.

Director Amichai Greenberg brings a fresh look at the Holocaust by focusing on this personal story and raising questions about identity. The mystery is tense and well-paced, and woven in well with an exploration of matters of identity, secrets buried in wartime, and lingering fears of survivors who are forever marked by their experience. The photography is striking, often visually beautiful, and the film contrasts modern architecture of locations against a mystery about the past. The contrasts between the past and present world course through this exploration of truth and identity.

Yoel’s focus on his work and even his Orthodox faith have narrowed his view of life and even his awareness of the modern world. Known for his passion for the truth, Yoel has devoted his life to his work, neglecting his family to the point that his wife divorced him. Yoel lives with his elderly mother and his married sister who chides him for his neglect of his personal life. The historian struggles to make time to help his son prepare for his upcoming Bar Mitzvah but has trouble connecting with the boy.

The acting is superb in this thought-provoking drama. Pfeffer does as excellent job as Yoel, wrestling with his conflicted feelings and with the mental puzzle of the mystery that confronts him. Yoel’s mother Fanya, played well by Rivka Gur, dodges her son’s questions about the war, mostly by simply ignoring them. She’s in poor health which makes pressing her difficult, and Yoel’s frustration is palpable.

His discovery about his mother brings into question his assumptions about his own identity and causes him to reassess his personal life. While the personal crisis sends him reeling, he ultimately must re-focuses on the task at hand.

THE TESTAMENT is an intriguing mystery and a different kind of Holocaust tale, as well as a thoughtful exploration of the nature of identity.

 

SLIFF 2017 Review- THE WOMAN WHO LEFT

 

THE WOMAN WHO LEFT screens as part of the 26th Annual Whitaker St. Louis International Film Festival on Thursday, November 9 at 7:30 PM at Landmark’s Tivoli Theatre. Ticket information can be found HERE

THE WOMAN WHO LEFT is a sprawling epic dealing with revenge and redemption, second chances and missed opportunities, inspired by the works of Leo Tolstoy. Ah, but here’s the twist: the setting is the Philippines circa 1997, when the local news was filled with horrific tales of kidnapping and extortion, along with the return of Hong Kong to China. But this is a more personal story centering on middle-aged Horacia (Charo Santos-Concio), now in year thirty of her long prison sentence after being convicted of murder. She’s settled into her fate, becoming a mentor/ teacher to the other inmates. One day she is shocked when her the warden tell her that she’s free. Horacia’s close friend and cell mate Petra confessed to the murder. She had been hired by Horacia’s spurned former lover Rodrigo Santiago to commit the crime and frame her. Horacia implores the warden not to speak of her release, then hops on a bus to her old home. After finding out that her husband has passed away she re-connects with her daughter. When she’s told that her son has gone missing, Horacia travels to another village to continue the search for him. Seems that Santiago is living in the same village, which sets her on a path of revenge. Along that path, Horacia befriends an aged street vendor, an eccentric homeless woman, and an epileptic transvestite prostitute.

Director/screenwriter Lav Diaz captures the raw, gritty feel of life on the streets with wide-angle camera work (in shimmering silver black and white), unadorned by background music, replaced by the near-constant flow of scooters and motorbikes. Said camera is “locked down” for most scenes, letting the dialogue flow naturally during long uncut sequences, making the film feel more like a play (or two, since the film clocks in at just under four hours). Diaz also gets wonderful, compelling, natural performances from Santo-Concio and the heart-breaking John Lloyd-Cruz as the tormented street-walker Hollanda. With the script’s twists and turns (and quirky detours), THE WOMAN WHO LEFT is an engaging tropical island spin on crime and punishment.

SLIFF 2017 Review – POP AYE


POP AYE screens Thursday, Nov. 9 at 9:00pm and Friday, Nov. 10 at 7:05pm as part of this year’s St. Louis International Film Festival Both screenings are at The Plaza Frontenac Cinema (210 Plaza Frontenac St. Louis , MO 63131). Ticket information for the Nov. 9 screening can be found HERE. Ticket information for the Nov. 10 screening can be found HERE

In “Pop Aye,” a successful Bangkok architect in the midst of a midlife crisis is reunited with an elephant he knew growing up. The two embark on a road trip to the man’s childhood home in the idyllic Thai countryside. Along the way, they meet a colorful cast of characters that includes a pair of nonplussed local police officers, a forlorn transgender sex worker, and a mysteriously wise drifter. As the encounters mount and the bond between man and elephant deepens, filmmaker Kirsten Tan weaves a strikingly universal tale in a feature debut that won prizes (and hearts) at the Sundance and Rotterdam film festivals. “Filmmaker Kirsten Tan riffs on the tropes of both the buddy film and the road trip movie in her absurd yet subtly observed feature debut,” writes the Washington Post, which hails “Pop Aye” as “the thinking person’s feel-good film of the summer: Much is communicated nonverbally (or, at most, with sparse dialogue). The palpable bromance — if that’s even the right word for this interspecies relationship — is visible in each trunk nuzzle.”


Review of POP AYE by Cary Paller:

Sometimes the best films just let the story unfold from beginning to end.  There is no hidden agenda or a false narrative to surprise the audience with a big revelation at the end.  POP AYE is a film that relies on an introspective story.  For a very subtle film it felt like there was a lot more going on than there really was.  Writer/Director Kristen Tan did a wonderful job of keeping the film centered, grounded and low key without losing its undercurrent of what could happen next.  With practical locations giving the film a realistic, low budget look, I am sure they had no real budget to speak of, you cannot help but get sucked into the story.  It is in nature that everybody can find their way.  Thaneth Warakulnukroh plays Thana a man drifting in life without purpose.  Living a life that lacks fulfillment.  Till he comes across an Elephant from better times in his life.  His portrayal of a man at a crossroads is very thought provoking.  Seeing the elephant named POP AYE gives him some hope and drive that his listless existence was missing.  Of course not a lot is said but you can see it in his eyes. He is full of reflection which gives the  film something that a film like “Operation; Dumbo Drop” does not have.  Which is a sense real adventure without feeling it has to come to silly jokes or child’s play but in the end you forget the movie almost instantly.Being able to tell a good story without relying on action or special effects is becoming a challenge now a days.  Kristen Tan deserves whatever praise she can get for making a film that feels like an old fashion road movie without the slapstick and chase scenes.  I really enjoyed watching it. It was such a beautiful movie if I may say. It was patient and it did not waver from the path it was meant to be on.  I look forward to future projects from her.

SLIFF 2017 Review – DIM THE FLUORESCENTS


DIM THE FLUORESCENTS screens Tuesday, Nov. 7 at 9:30pm and Sunday, Nov. 12 at 8:00pm as part of this year’s St. Louis International Film Festival Both screenings are at The Plaza Frontenac Cinema (210 Plaza Frontenac St. Louis , MO 63131). Ticket information for the 11/7 screening can be found HERE. Ticket information for the 11/12 screening can be found HERE.

Struggling actor Audrey (Claire Armstrong) and aspiring playwright Lillian (Naomi Skwarna) pour all of their creative energy into the only paying work they can find: corporate role-playing demonstrations. When they book the biggest gig of their careers at a hotel conference, work commences on their most ambitious production to date, and the ensuing tensions threaten to derail both the production and their friendship. As wryly funny as it is unexpectedly poignant, “Dim the Fluorescents” — winner of the Grand Jury Award for Best Narrative Feature at the Slamdance Film Festival — is a one-of-a-kind portrait of the artistic life in the unlikeliest of settings. “‘Dim the Fluorescents’ is the kind of dynamic, entertaining debut feature that hopefully puts its cast and crew on the map,” says the Film Stage. “Director Daniel Warth and co-writer Miles Barstead have put together a film that crackles with energy…. It’s a film about the struggle of making a living in the creative arts that’s bursting with creativity, zig-zagging from one tone, style, or form to the next at a moment’s notice.”


Review of DIM THE FLUORESCENTS by Stephen Tronicek:

Daniel Warth’s Dim The Fluorescents may just be the best film you will see at the film festival. On one hand that might sound declarative, on the other dismissive of the other great films of the festival including Black Cop and My Entire High School SInking into the Sea, but it is quite difficult to imagine there being a more affecting and well-crafted work as Warth’s exploration of depression, artistry, and love. The last ten minutes are enough to leave one speechless, a culmination of all the raw emotions that the film has been poking around, suddenly coming up to the surface in a grandstanding and perfectly scathing sequence. Much like the rest of the film, the lifeblood of this sequence is the two perfect actresses at the center of the production.

Dim The Fluorescents is about a playwright, Lillian, and her roommate Audrey, an actress. Together they for the best acting scenario team, going around to companies on HR days and crafting masterful interludes about leadership, sexual harassment, and accidents in the workplace. They both want to be more though, but for some reason seem to be working against themselves, dependent on both each other, but also the comfortable life they live.

It is in these character dynamics that Dim The Fluorescents thrives. The actresses playing the two leads here Claire Armstrong (Audrey) and Naomi Skwarna (Lillian) are so impressive that they rachet you into your seat and force you to experience the consistently engaging and tragically sublime emotions of the piece. Much like Black Cop, the filmmakers seem to understand that while the naturalistic acting that filmmaking uses can be easily used to capture the more subtle emotions that can be found in the mundane way that people act around each other, sometimes the more explicit acting that can be found in the theatre can be useful in the creation of dramatic crescendo and crescendo this film does. As mentioned before, the last ten minutes are a daze, an acting tour de force that leaves you so numbed up in astonishment that there’s hardly any doubt that it won’t be one of the headlining acting moments of the year. If the Oscars even dared consider a film like Dim The Fluorescents it’d be difficult to imagine any other actresses other than Armstrong and Skwarna winning the top prize. They, along with a great script by Miles Barstead and Daniel Warth, pummel you into a sobbing mess. I’ve seen the film twice and both times I have been left utterly amazed.

Dim The Fluorescents is just about as honest, emotionally, of a film as one can find about trying to be an artist, populated by what seem to be some of the best artists working today. It is an utterly wonderful, comedic, crushing, gorgeous experience, one that this critic hopes you don’t miss out on.