The Old Man & the Gun (2018)

Robert Redford has said this will be his last film. I guess time will tell. If it is it is a pretty good swan song. Director David Lowrey’s rose coloured take on a real life career bank robber is charming and sweet and gives Redford a nice send off.

The role of career criminal Forrest Tucker isn’t an overly challenging one. Redford doesnt get any Oscar worth scenes. Instead its just an chance for him to be, to inhabit this character. A man nearing the end of his life, having made the choices he did and living with the consequences as best he can. There is something just satisfying about watching him make a connection at this stage of life and wrestle with how to integrate that into who he is.

Part of what makes this interesting is the way he interacts with those he comes across in this period; Sissy Spacey’s character, a woman also in the final chapters of her story figuring out how she is going to choose to life them, and Casey Affleck family man cop, trying to do the best he can for his career and his family. Tucker presents an interesting challenge for him and his morality.

The film doesn’t attempt to create any grand life lessons or even a climactic tragic moment. Instead it focuses on the little moments in these people’s lives. And in doing so it creates something.lovely. I dont have any idea just how close to true this based on true events sort of story is and I honestly don’t care. What I got out of it was about finding purpose and direction in a life that doesn’t always go how you think.

And to Redfrod, if this is the last role we see him it, it has been a real pleasure watching you all these years.

The Old Man & the Gun
Starring: Robert Redford, Sissy Spacek, Casey Affleck, Danny Glover, Tika Sumpter, Tom Waits
Writer/Director: David Lowery

Halloween (2018)

As I have been trying to process my feelings about the latest Halloween film I have come to realize that my problems with it arise more from my problems with its subset genre than with this specific film.

The film started out with a terribly ridiculous scene. It was well filmed and crafted specifically to be a catalyst for the kind of terror the film wants to evoke. But it was completely ridiculous. As I was watching it I thought there is no way this would ever happen. Two podcasters are let into an asylum, with a piece of evidence from a crime scene no less, and are allowed to interact with the inmates, but not just interact, scream at them without anyone interfering. I was flabbergasted at how far from realism the film was straying and it was only the first 5 minutes.

The film then shifted to a rather cool, retro opening title sequence which calmed me and made me put that initial crap behind me. But as the film’s story progressed I realized that the film wasn’t interested in telling anything real or honest. It was interested in falling back on the tropes of a sub-genre which its progenitor is credited to have started or at least popularized.

Halloween is full of all the cliches of the slasher genre from people running up the stairs, to making poor decisions, to punishing the sexually promiscuous, and exploiting gratuitous violence against women. None of this was done in an ironic or even self-aware manner. Insteaad it was all done in full embrace of the genre, a genre I struggle to appreciate on anything more than a surface level.

Let me make it clear it isn’t horror that I have a problem with, it is the way the slasher sub genre interprets horror which I find so deeply problematic. Even if we dont get into the socialiogical aspects of the sub genre I still have difficulty with it as the stories are usually told so poorly and structured so that its hard to believe them. Perhaps that is on purpose. The ideal of watching people get slashed to bits is disturbing to anyone other than a sociopath so perhaps making it unbelievable is a way we cope with it. But it the looses its interest for me, If a movie is going to be that silly then I don’t need to laugh at death that much.

I had high hopes for this sequel. I had thought it was going to take this story to a new place, one where things got turned on its head and offered us something different. Instead we got exactly what we would expect in every predictable moment. There is a “twist” part way though that is telegraphed from the very beginning and felt overly obvious. My hopes that this film as going to reinvent the series didn’t come to fruition. But it almost did...

As the film began to wrap up there was a bit of a turn as the women of the story who had been being hunted (or had they? It wasn’t really clear) turn the tables and become the hunters. The hunter becomes the prey. And I thought to myself, why didn’t they play this up? Why didn’t they make this movie? There is only a hint of it, the movie this could have been. And I think a part of me was even sadder about it not being that movie after seeing a little taste of it.

So what I will give the film is this. The 2018 Halloween is a very true to the series instalment which, if that is what you want, will deliver. But if you wanted something that took the series and the genre to a new level, you need to look elsewhere.

Halloween
Starring: Jamie Lee Curtis, Judy Greer, Andi Matichak, Will Patton, Nick Castle
Director: David Gordon Green
Writers: Jeff Fradley, Danny McBride, David Gordon Green

Mid90s (2018)

Jonah Hill channels his inner Sean Baker with his debut as writer/director, Mid90s. It is not the millennial nostalgia film it is being sold as. It is a hard hitting look at how poverty, racial tension, and toxic masculinity overlap and eat away at young men. Hill finds some optimism in all of this but he also doesn’t pull any punches. Mid90s ends up being a tougher watch than one would expect.

Filled with mostly unprofessional actors, Mid90s explores the youth of a poor kid in LA in the 1990s who is obsessed predictably with skating and rap and escaping the abusive home he comes from. While there isn’t a lot new in that story, what is there to appreciate is the fresh way Hill tells his story and films his cast who give raw, yet honest performances.

The story is rough and to be honest the misogyny and homophobia throughout was hard to sit through without the film calling it out. I get the authenticity of that but having some payoff where our hero escapes it a bit would have been welcome. Mid90s does look for hope and finds some in the end, making its romanticising of the toxic culture a bit disappointing.

However Mid90s does show a very promising debut for Hill in this role. He is taking on more interesting challenges as an actor lately and succeeding. Now seeing this he is becoming one of the more interesting people in Hollywood to watch.

Mid90s
Starring: Sunny Suljic, Lucas Hedges, Katherine Waterston
Writer/Director: Jonah Hill

Beautiful Boy (2018)

Told in small vignettes which don’t follow chronological order, Beautful Boy is a remarkably powerful film which doesn’t try to solve the problem it is exploring, instead just offers the audience a taste of what its real ice subjects endured. No one has answers, in fact the film  explores the desperation arising from never knowing what to do. And perhaps that is the honesty which opens the film to some very real pathos.

I often struggle to appreciate “based on real events” movies as they tend to sugar coat the experiences of their subjects. No one wants a movie made about them that makes them look bad. This film, based on two parallel memories, written by the father and son in question, and each of their experiences with the son’s addiction, feel like it breaks through that barrier to the us to a very honest experience.

The two leads are both on top of their game. Chalamet will clearly one day have an Oscar and Carell has moved far beyond his days as a comedies. Both give beautifully painful performances. Supporting them are the remarkable Moira Tierney and Amy Ryan who both match the leads in intensity and sincerity.

And director Van Groeningen, whose previous film Broken Circle Breakdown was a beautiful breakthrough, here finds a beautiful visual language to tell his story. He juggle the timelines and the points of view expertly, making Beautiful Boy a film to experience, not just watch.

For me it is the honesty the film conveys which made me embrace it. I didn’t feel I was being lead down some path, but let into a painful and still beautiful real life experience that is unfortunately not uncommon.


Beautiful Boy
Starring: Steve Carell, Timothee Chalamet, Maura Tierney, Amy Ryan
Director: Felix Van Groeningen
Writers: Luk Davies, Felix Van Groeningen

22 July (2018)

On July 22, 2011 a white supremacist planed a bomb in the Norwegian capital and then drove to a summer camp and killed a number of teens and adults during a shooting rampage. He killed a total of 77 people. Writer director Paul Greengrass, famous for the Bourne movies but also behind United 93, another film about a terrorist attack, crafted this examination of the event. Greengrass uses his signature "reality" style of film making to make this feel like the real events. But the authenticity he invokes isn't just stylistic. He spends significant time on the impact of such an event on individuals which lends the film a great deal of emotional punch.

Unlike United 93, which I felt sanitized and oversimplified the events, 22 July gets into the nitty gritty of human emotion in the wake of an attack like this. You might be surprised to find out the event itself (rendered devastatingly real even in its short sequence) is over within the first 20 minutes of the film. From there 22 July moves through the lives and emotions of the people affected, the surviving victims, their families, the public, the politicians responding, the lawyer appointed to defend the terrorist. And this is where the film finds its real strength.

22 July is difficult to watch, not solely for the violence of the specific day but for the way the violence continued after as the nation struggled to deal with the horror of men like this terrorist. Anders Danielsen Lie, so strong in the French film The Night Eats the World earlier this year, does an amazing job of playing the monster responsible in all his complexity. The rest of the cast also does an admirable job playing the people struggling to live, to survive, and to continue on in the wake of the tragedy.

22 July is a fascinating look at the many ways racist horror create violence and the ways that violence reverberates through cultures struggling to be something more. Greengrass' exploration is powerful, difficult, and important.

22 July
Starring: Anders Danielsen Lie
Writer/Director: Paul Greengrass

The Hate U Give (2018)

I wasn’t going to see The Hate U Give. It doesn’t have the hallmarks I am usually attracted to in a movie, especially one which tackles an issue. I usually prefer neuence, complexity. The Hate U Give from its young adult lit roots doesnt have the layering of Blindspotting or the irony of Sorry to Bother You. The Hate U Give is straight up sincerity. So when I did finally see it and it had the emotional impact it had, i was surprised, and schooled a bit.

The Hate U Give might be a bit “racism in American 101” but despite being basic it is powerful and hits all the important parts. It isn’t sloppy or lazy. It places racism right in your face and makes it impossible to look away. It simplifies things but perhaps that is necessary, since for so many the issue remains so difficult to grasp. The Hate U Give becomes a rallying cry that everyone needs to see.

And it is just a damn fine movie in its own right. A compelling story well crafted with a strong cast. Amanda Stenberg makes her star turn here showing us she is a force to be reckoned with. But the entire cast is strong making The Hate U Give a much better experience than it might have been.

I cried a number of times at The Hate U Give. It isn’t a manipulative crying movie. the power of the story just takes over. And in the end even if it was predictable, even if it was fairly straightforward, it was honest. And I got it.


The Hate U Give
Starring: Amanda Stenberg, Regina Hall, Russell Hornsby, KJ Apa, Algee Smith, Common, Anthony Mackie
Director: George Tillman Jr.
Writer: Audrey Wells

The Sisters Brothers (2018)

The Sisters Brothers finds a satisfying groove, walking a line between funny irreverency and dark pathos which works just right. A lot of this has to do with the chemistry between the titular brothers played by John C Reilly and Joaquin Phoenix supported in great characters performances by Jake Gyllenhaal and Riz Ahmed. It all comes together quite nicely and makes for an entertaining 2 hours.

Director Jacques Audiard doesn't over do anything, the violence or the humour or the drama. He chooses instead a fairly steady hand to tell this story of sympathetic killers chasing their prey. It could have been easy for this story to feel heavy handed, too silly, or even dry but Audiard strikes that balance. The script is clever and truly funny without, once again, overdoing it.

Filmed in the "spaghetti western" style by using European locals to represent the American old west, The Sisters Brothers feels mostly familiar yet manages to find its own unique voice. Audiard finds little moments to let something catch our eye, give his cast a chance to shine. Overall The Sisters Brothers works well.

The Sisters Brothers
Starring: John C Reilly, Joaquin Phoenix, Jake Gyllenhaal, Riz Ahmed
Director: Jacques Audiard
Writers: Thomas Bidegain, Jacques Audiard

Apostle (2018)

After The Raid movies I would see anything writer/director Gareth Evans puts out. It turns out he wanted to try horror next, but not just any horror, a visceral period piece filled with existential dread. Apostle follows a man already on the edge emotionally setting out to save his sister from a cult but it grows beyond that simple, somewhat done, premise to become something extraordinary both in its intensity (this is a film that doesn't pull punches) and its ambiguity (morality is shattered here).

Evans has a strength in making the violence in his films palpable. It isn't dismissive sort of violence. His audience feels each punch, and puncture, each death. With Apostle he ramps that up. The second half of the film can be terribly hard to watch. He doesn't let his audience of the hook. If you're going to watch a violent film you're going to feel it and it's going to hurt.

But the horror in this film isn't limited to the graphic nature of it. Apostle is disconcerting from the get go. This is a story of a cult. It's about how minds are manipulated, people controlled, and how power stems from that. But as the film goes on we learn more about what's happening here. It isn't just about a charismatic dictator. It's about the power he is battling to control and the power struggles which ensue over that. Apostle speaks to mankind's (specifically male) exploitation and failure to manage mother earth. How the battle for dominion over all things female including our feminization of nature poisons us and turns us into monsters.

Apostle is brutal, not just visually, but morally. It isn't very forgiving of its subjects or its audience. It is, as the best horror is, somewhat of an indictment of who we are, showing us how ugly we can be, and the true terror comes in seeing ourselves reflected back in that evil.

Apostle
Starring: Dan Stevens, Michael Sheen, Lucy Boynton, Mark Lewis-Jones, Paul Higgins, Bill Milner, Kristine Froseth, Sharon Morgan
Writer/Director: Gareth Evans

First Man (2018)

There was a time when we all knew and expected who was supposed to be at the centre of important stories. White men of exemplary decency who, often from supposedly "average" backgrounds, are thrust into extraordinary circumstances and they become our heroes. Their bravery made them heroes and we were all to wow at their honor and exceptionalism.

Most of this starts to feel a bit less relevant these days. But Hollywood is still making these sorts of stories. And we still see these stories as rather important. Because they are to remind us of what heroism is supposed to be, who is supposed to be important, and what we are supposed to aspire to, or perhaps more accurately admire dutifully from afar.

Director Damien Chazelle is an extraordinary film maker. His previous two films (Whiplash, La La Land) are both arguably masterpieces, and very personal examinations of young men's experiences. First Man attempts to be both that plus more. The approach in First Man is to make the story of the humankind's first steps on the Moon (and therefore anywhere other than Earth), the personal story of a man, and not just any man but the "everyman" that these sorts of stories are supposed to be about. But at the same time it is also about the greatness of mankind through exploring this historic event. The film makes no bones about whether or not landing on the moon was an amazing avhievment. Not by showing us but by telling us. More on that later.

This is where the film falls down for me. For me the story of this man as the centre of this achievement is a way of ignoring all that something like this would take, and all that it costs. The idea that this particular struggle (to get to the moon) is the one to highlight mankind's value is one that isn't questioned or examined. It is assumed. Almost all the assumptions in First Man are assumed. It doesn't take the time to convince us.

We've just seen Hollywood deconstruct this idea through the wonderful Hidden Figures. That film spoke to the idea of all that was going on behind such an achievement, the way many contributions were ignored or minimized, of how the nation watching all of this was struggling with its own demons. But here we are back to the exceptional man narrative forgetting all of that so we can once again centre Armstrong as the hero of the tale. The films doesn't want us to question the assumptions of the film. At one point a reporter is heard asking the question "is it worth the cost in money and lives?" But the film doesn't want to answer that. It prefers to dismiss the question in later off hand remarks and characters literally speaking the line that it is all worth it. Never showing us the benefits. Just trusting us to trust them that the benefits are there. Perhaps exploring the answer to that question, regardless of what that answer would be, would have been a more deeply satisfying movie.

Instead First Man is interested in what it takes to be the people who achieve this. The dedication, the sacrifice, the nobility is all on display. Armstrong is the prototype of the everyman this sort of ideology requires. And his wife, dutifully waiting behind and suffering strongly in silence is also admirable. Cause that's her role. First Man is a throw back to these sorts of stories, reinforcing the structure that celebrates this.

Chazelle accomplishes this beautifully. One cannot fairly criticize him for not making a breathtaking film which is visually stunning, intelligently structured for maximum impact, and exquisitely acted by a strong cast. Chazelle has an incredible talent for telling stories through the medium of film and First Man is another example of his power as a film maker.

But is the story up to his ambition and talent? We've seen this story before. As I've said the great man narrative has been done and we're starting to see film makers tell different stories. Does this one still hold power? In this case, for me, there was little here of any emotional power. Not due to Chazelle's efforts. There were times the sheer beauty of his work almost won me over. But I kept finding little to nothing of substance beneath all of Chazelle's glorious film making to make me care. What is here that we haven't seen before?

I'm not arguing that the race to the moon wasn't a valid exercize. I'm just saying it would have been nice for the film to make me care about the question, to care about the characters. I'm just not sure what First Man is about is enough to hold my passion no matter how lovely Chazelle makes it. I get that the Armstrong here is everything we are usually prepared to care about and admire in these movies. That's the way movies have been made for 100 years. I'm just not sure I'm prepared to care int he way I have been before.

Perhaps if you have a special passion for the stories of early astronauts, perhaps then First Man will offer you something more meaningful than it offered to me. I guess I've got to the point where I no longer feel the need to pretend like I am invested in these stories. Or I'm done convincing myself I have to be invested in these stories. Chazelle's job wasn't just to make a beautifully filmed story, but to make his audience feel it. I didn't feel it.

One might feel it. There are plenty of reasons why someone might feel a specific passion to be invested in this story. But, here is my critique, it's not really because of anything the film (in its script, direction, or performances) does. It's because we are supposed to. The film is designed to invoke the feelings we are conditioned to have during these sorts of stories. It doesn't necessarily invoke them itself.

For me First Man felt like a beautiful shallow thing. Shallow isn't always bad. But if the film is trying to not be shallow and it ends up feeling shallow, then perhaps it doesn't succeed. For me it didn't. It wasn't a terrible anything. It didn't grab me, make me care, or ignite any passion in me.

I will give Chazelle this. He gives us an amazing moon landing sequence. In fact it isn't until the last 10 minutes of the film where First Man truly came to life for me. Shot mostly in first person view, the moon landing is wonderfully executed and easily the most memorable part of the film. A film I spent 2 hours wading through to get here.

First Man 
Starring: Ryan Gosling, Claire Foy, Corey Stoll, Pablo Schreiber, Jason Clarke, Kyle Chandler, Lucas Hoss
Director: Damien Chazelle
Writer: Josh Singer

Bad Times at the El Royale (2018)

Writer/director Drew Goddard is a storyteller. His debut, deconstructionist horror film Cabin in the Woods, was refreshing and bold. Now he follows that up with a spin on the classic pulp fiction genre into which he breathes fresh air with Bad Times at the El Royale.

Plotted in that classic pulpy chopped up way, Goddard makes the most of the genre tropes by filming his story with restrained pacing, to milk each emotion out of each moment. His El Royale is one of those sets which is a character all to itself, like the Overlook Hotel. He follows the examples of master crime fiction by giving his story and multiple characters a healthy backstory so that what happens on this stormy night is full of the kind of gravitas this sort of caper requires. His collection of malcontents and misfits converge on the seedy location for a night few will survive. Goddard knows how to grip us, entertain us, and perhaps fill us with a bit of social commentary at the same time. All  of it comes together to make a sensational film.

His cast is very strong with Bridges headlining but Hamm, Johnson, and Pullman giving strong backup. And even though Hemsworth is once again seemingly cast just so he can strut around without a shirt on, he is also strong playing against type. Watch closely for a cameo by fellow writer/director Xavier Dolan. This is a character piece. Each one of the cast is essential and central to the narrative. But it is Cynthia Erivo who steals the show. As the struggling singer she is not just the heart of the movie but the soundtrack as well. You can read everything in her face. She is riveting throughout. She is a rising star and one to watch for sure.

Bad Times at the El Royale is pure pulpy magic, a truly entertaining and satisfying story, filled with all the tension, violence, and redemption this sort of story serves up. It makes me excited to see what sort of genre Goddard will take on next.

Bad Times at the El Royale
Starring: Jeff Bridges, Cynthia Erivo, Dakota Johnson, Lewis Pullman, John Hamm, Chris Hemsworth, Cailee Spaeny
Writer/Director: Drew Goddard

A Star is Born (2018)

In every iteration A Star is Born has been about a woman eclipsing a man. Each film examines the way this happens in its era. And perhaps a big part of what makes this version of the story work as well as it does is how well it nails the gender politics of our time and place.

Lady Gaga plays Ally in a manner which may not be as nuanced as a more seasoned actor may have played her. But she brings the necessary star essence to the role (as did the previous actors to take this spot in previous versions of the film such as Barbara Streisand and Judy Garland). Also she brings something else essential to the part, the spirit of a 21st century woman and all her values, struggles, angers, passions, strengths. When we meet Ally she is taking care of her father and his friends. She takes care of the gay men in the drag club she hangs out in. And then she takes care of Jack. She does it all while fighting to be an authentic artist at the same time.

Bradley Cooper's Jackson Maine is a wreck. The kind of wreck that you get to be as a famous powerful man who has experienced loss and everyone around you lets you wallow in it. Notice Ally still has to manage everyone else's lives but he gets to self-destruct. Jackson tries his best. Falls down a few times in his attempts to care for Ally, but is always given a second chance, and usually manages it the second time. A Star is Born is a beautiful portrait of how emotional labour is distributed. It's a tragedy and it's flawed. But it is the strength of the two actors who brings these characters to visceral life that makes it feel honest.

Cooper films his story like a pro, finding beautiful ways to show us each scene, each moment, create a real closeness between us and his subjects. Sometimes the story of their relationship feels a bit rushed. I didn't buy the progression completely. But Cooper makes his story a gorgeous one to watch. The music is alive and integral to the narrative. He has put together a very impressive debut.

A Star is Born becomes more than just its formula through their performances (and a strong supporting performance by Sam Elliot as well as - shockingly Andrew Dice Clay) and Cooper's loving direction. It is an emotional melodrama but it all comes together very well

And Shallow is one of the best songs to be written for a movie in a long time.

A Star is Born
Starring: Lady Gaga, Bradley Cooper, Sam Elliot, Andrew Dice Clay, Dave Chappelle, Anthony Ramos, Rafi Favron
Director: Bradley Cooper
Writers: Eric Roth, Will Fetters, Bradley Cooper

Venom (2018)

Venom, it turns out, is pure monster movie mayhem fun. Mostly due to a singularly entertaining performance by the indomitable Tom Hardy and partially due to the spirit of fun imbued by Zombieland director Ruben Fleischer. While the tone may be off-putting to those lulled into mediocrity by the current state of comic book films, I found it a refreshing fun night.

Venom's story is rather straight forward and follows the classic monster B-movie structure. But being simple doesn't mean it doesn't offer enough to entertain. Fleischer uses the tropes of the genre to give us a rocking good time. This sort of experimentation with expectations and genre is just what popcorn films need to be exciting again and Venom excites in its no holds barred madness. It's like a smack to the head for those thinking all superhero movies have to follow the same formula. Aping the classic Universal monster movies (certainly better than Tom Cruise's The Mummy did), Venom builds a thrill ride sort of adventure about a monster who may be what it takes to stop other monsters. Classic fun.

But the secret to what makes Venom truly work is Tom Hardy who owns this role. He plays two personalities as well as a hybrid with a mad clarity, giving each moment a distinctness and vitality which elevates the film and makes it all click.

For me Venom felt a bit tight and would love to have had it fleshed out even more. Perhaps we can see a bit more mayhem next time if audiences can embrace it enough for us to get more of the story of this Eddy Brock. I certainly would love to see what Hardy could do with more time to grow this character.

Venom
Starring: Tom Hardy, Michelle Williams, Riz Ahmed, Jenny Slate, Reid Scott
Director: Ruben Fleischer
Writers: Kelly Marcel, Jeff Pinkner, Scott Rosenberg,

Hold the Dark (2018)

What is truly unsettling about director Jeremy Saulnier's follow up to Green Room is how he refuses to hold your hand as you watch his film. He doesn't explain anything. Instead he just gives you glimpses and you are meant to put pieces together yourself. And the pieces may not all fit, which can lead to an interesting and welcome sense of dis-ease for audiences which are so used to having things spelled out word for word. Hold the Dark defies our expectations and offers something uncomfortable.

Jeffery Wright plays a naturalist clearly unsure of where his life has gone and what he wants to do about it, thrown into a situation far above his understanding. And we follow him into this darkness, gloriously shot so that it is both beautiful and terrifying. Hold the Dark is a mystery, not in a who-done-it way but in a what-am-I-seeing way. It is both lovely and unsettling.

Saulnier has crafted a thinking person's edge of your seat thriller. A good example of this strength here is how just over half way through he creates this set piece about a gun fight between a lone sniper and the police sent to bring him down. It's riveting. It's intense. It's emotional. Saulnier has a way of making violent films where you feel each excruciating moment.  His violence is never egregious, but always visceral.

One can't really explain what Hold the Dark is about for two reasons. First of all you need to experience this sort of story without expectations without preconceived notions. Second because much of what makes Hold the Dark so fascinating is talking about what it all means. This is something to watch, ruminate on, and discuss. This is the kind of movie I wish we saw more of.

Hold the Dark
Starring: Jeffrey Wright, Alexander Skarsgard, James Badge Dale, Riley Keough, Tantoo Cardinal
Director: Jeremy Saulnier
Writer: Macon Blair

The Children Act (2018)

As a lawyer, watching The Children Act, was surprisingly powerful. I hadn't expected this reaction to this film. Mostly I wanted to see it because I love watching Emma Thompson. But the film gripped me in a way I had no expected.

The Children Act was about, for me, the way the law impacts real people's lives. Often lawyers approach it from a very academic standpoint, discussing the principles and spouting platitudes. But the law is there for reasons and they are about how human beings interact with each other. The Children Act is about a judge, a woman who made her career, and her life, about the law, confronted with the fact that real people are living through her decisions, her actions.

The film isn't really about the issue at play.  The trailers focus on the issue of an almost adult child of Jehovah's Witnesses refusing the medical care he needs to survive. But that's not what this film is about. In fact The Children Act dismisses that issue early into the film. Instead it is about the life of that young man, the life of this judge, the lives of people interacting under the scope of the law.

All of that anchored by the completely competent and professional performances of Emma Thompson and Stanley Tucci, make The Children Act into something more than it might have been. I think for any thinking and feeling person this story will resonate. It has all the hallmarks of a good drama. But for lawyers I think it has an ever greater impact.

It is about why what we do is so important for us not to fuck it up. Something I wrestle with each and every day.

The Children Act
Starring: Emma Thompson, Stanley Tucci, Fionn Whitehead
Director: Richard Eyre
Writers: Ian McEwan

Colette (2018)

Colette has a delightfulness about it, inspired likely by its subject, a woman who lived mostly as she wanted, even when that was difficult, but managed with enough opportunity and privilege to be who she wanted to be in an age almost ready for her. Writer/director Walsh Westmoreland captures her adventurous and sweet spirit making a film which feels alive. It is just serious enough to capture the full gravitas of the story while being just joyous enough to capture her spirit.

Tales of men profiting off women and keeping women contained are commonplace as it has been so much of our human history. Westmoreland finds something charmingly refreshing in the tale of Colette that doesn't make it feel like just another women bucking her place in society story. Westmoreland succeeds mostly in how he finds balance. Colette (Keira Knightley) isn't the perfect proto-feminist, but she's manages to live as she wants. Her husband, Willy (Dominic West), isn't a total villain, and is often sympathetic despite some of his worst behaviors. Westmoreland seems to enjoy the ambiguity of human imperfections.

Colette feels like a celebration of the turn of the century modernist French liberation Colette became associated with, at least as seen through our 21st century eyes. Westmoreland makes it fun and playful with just a hint of tragedy and loss. His cast is all up for the task and he films his lush sets and delightfully costumed subjects lovingly. It all comes together in quite a nice enjoyable package that makes you want to read delicious literature and experiment. Exactly what the real writer Colette would likely have appreciated.

Colette
Starring: Keira Knightley, Dominic West, Eleanor Tomlinson, Fiona Shaw, Denise Gough
Director: Walsh Westmoreland
Writers: Richard Glatzer, Rebecca Lenkiewicz, Walsh Westmoreland

Life Itself (2018)

Director Lars Van Trier is my go to joke about bleakness in film but it seems like writer/director Dan Fogelman is gunning for the position. The creator of This is Us has jumped to the big screen with his awkwardly humerous treatise on morbidity and death, Life Itself. The opening of the film seems almost clever, for a moment, before it starts to fall apart in front of our eyes. So much of the film feels that way. It is like there is a good idea there (in this case the idea of exploring the unreliable narrator) which then gets abandoned for something schmaltzy yet strangely icky at the same time.

Fogelman appears to be attempting to be the romcom Tarantino and even references him explicitly a number of times throughout. Like Tarantino, Fogelman develops intricate and fascinating back stories for each of his characters giving us a story in a story in a story. But unlike Tarantino, who then gives his characters something to do, Fogelman abandons the characters as soon as their backstory is explained. For Oscar Isaac's character (the movie is sold on him as the star but he's only in it briefly) it is literally all about his back story and then he is ripped from us gratuitously.

Gratuitous is a very good word to describe all that is going on in Life Itself. Characters and ideas are presented and the ripped from us before they can have any real meaning. And it's all to get to this weird place at the end of identity and connection which falls completely flat due to how little identity and connection was able to be woven into this script due to its harshness.

Life Itself feels like it's an idea of a story instead of a story. Like it's a pantomime of realism instead of realism. There are many moments that seem filled with possibility which just get shut down before they can blossom. It's a Hallmark movie shown on the big screen.

Life Itself
Starring: Oscar Isaac, Annette Benning, Olivia Wilde, Mandy Patinkin, Oliva Cooke, Laia Costa, Antonio Banderas, Alex Monner, Jean Smart, Sergio Peris-Mencheta, Samuel L. Jackson
Writer/Director: Dan Fogelman