Spies in Disguise (2019)

Blue Sky animation studios has produced about one (count em) film I've enjoyed in their entire run. Now they have been bought out by Disney and will be folded into the Mouse House which I hope means Blue Sky will pretty much disappear and not that they will start to influence how Disney makes their animated movies. While lately I haven't been a big fan of what Disney and even their other division Pixar have done, I still have hopes they will return to making great films soon. The influence of Blue Sky not withstanding.

But I digress. I am here to review their latest (and second last as I understand it) animated feature Spies in Disguise a Bond spoof where the superspy is turned into a bird which naturally turns out to be the best thing that could happen to him and his spying career. Along the way he learns the meaning of friendship and trying something different. I know, I know. It is as predictable and as common as it sounds but coming from Blue Sky that is what we have come to expect. They aren't known for being revolutionary but for producing mass market, assembly line, cookie cutter crowd pleasers with no lasting impact. I mean does anyone truly have any nostalgic love for the Ice Age or Rio movies? No matter how many of them they make.

But it turns out Spies in Disguise is one of their more entertaining outings. Mostly it works due to the unending charm of its lead Will Smith who plays his self centered super spy with all the charisma he can muster. I'm sure he adlibbed some of the lines and some of his riffs end up being really funny. Holland's character is less successful but overall the film ends up being fun enough to suffer through.

As these animation studios seem want to do, Spies in Disguise sets up what could be a franchise and a series of spy/bird movies. I hope Disney shelves this stuff and just leave it at this. It really wasn't terrible so don't tempt fate. Focus instead on mining whatever talent was at Blue Sky and putting them to good use on the Disney aesthetic.

Spies in Disguise
Starring: Will Smith, Tom Holland, Rashida Jones, Ben Mendelson, Karen Gillan, DJ Khalid, Masi Oka, Reba McEntire, Rachel Brosnahan
Directors: Troy Quane, Nick Bruno
Writers: Brad Copeland, Lloyd Taylor

1917 (2019)

Gimmick movies can be tricky. Does the "gimmick" take away from the story or is it used as a tool to tell the story in a way that reveals something, that gets to the heart of the story in a way that couldn't have been done otherwise. I went into 1917, a movie shot to look like one long take in "real time," curious to see how I would respond to, well... another war movie with a similar story to others (the idea brings to mind Saving Private Ryan) that also uses a "gimmick" to get its story across. Fortunately I was impressed on all counts.

Sam Mendes has made some problematic films (American Beauty) and some beautiful ones (Road to Perdition) and the best Bond film of all time (Skyfall) so while I think he is very talented, I am not always drawn to what he does but when he touches on something I can embrace I often truly love it. I think here he has done something remarkable.

First of all I'll address the "one take" issue. Here I think the idea works wonders. By shooting the film in real time the film feels as if we are there with our protagonists, walking beside them, living their experiences. It brings the film a sense of intensity of being in the moment and drives forward the story. It also connects us to our two protagonists rooting the story in their first person experience. Mendes uses this tool very effectively to set us right into the story as we otherwise wouldn't. We live it with the leads.

But the film impressed me more than that. For me for a war movie to work it has to stare war in the face the show us the horror of it. 1917 doesn't try to glamorize war but makes these soldiers' experience feel honest. The characters confront death without confronting an evil it can be easily blamed away on. It explores the demons in us and the way he tackle them. I liked that the film didn't go where I thought it was going. Developments happen along the way which surprised me. I was riveted because I didn't know where the story would take me and it doesn't end as I would have expected. 1917 surprised me at turn after turn.

Mendes makes the most of his "one shot" gimmick visually as well. He has crafted a remarkably beautiful film. There are stunning sequences throughout as he finds ways to craft magnificent set pieces within his real time narrative. Mendes has told a fascinating story in a beautiful way and that is what we all hope for when we go to the movies.

I have to give a shout out to Andrew Scott, an actor who only appears for a minute or two but who is amazing every time I see him and here stole so much of the movie just in his brief moments.

1917
Starring: George MacKay, Dean-Charles Chapman, Mark Strong, Andrew Scott, Richard Madden, Colin Firth, Benedict Cumberbatch
Director: Sam Mendes
Writers: Krysty Wilson-Cairns, Sam Mendes

Uncut Gems (2019)

I loved the Safdies' last film Goodtimes. When the enthusiastic festival reactions came in for their follow up Uncut Gems I started to get excited to see what they would do next. Based on the potential I saw in their work I knew they'd deliver something great and the reaction seemed to confirm it.

I don't know what the hell happened.

As I watched Uncut Gems I kept trying to figure out what was missing for me. While I enjoy how the Safdies tell a story, from the way they frame their narrative, colour and light it, from the dialogue that comes fast and furious, building to a frenetic crescendo near the end which is the sort of scene I would normally eat up. But I wasn't. I was bored. I was frustrated. I struggled to figure out what wasn't working.

In the end I guess what it came down to is the story just wasn't compelling to me. The film never made me care about Sandler's character. Sandler plays an sadder version of the character he always plays and one that I had difficulty mustering any emotion for. His journey through a series of bad choices just wasn't compelling for me. I can admire his work as an actor here. I think his performance is overrated for sure but on a Sandler scale it's some of his better work. But again it wasn't enough to invest me.

At the start of the film he has a problem purely of his own making, a problem for which his solution is likely worse than the problem. But it's not just him. The film is filled with characters who make horrible choices, horror movie running up the stairs instead of out the door choices. Seriously most of the problems here could have been solved if people just acted rationally. Then we watch as that plays out and people scream "fuck you" at each other. I kept waiting for their to be a part of the film where I could begin to break through his shell of awfulness to get into the human underneath, but the film never allows that. It just keeps showing people be awful.

Maybe that's the point. Maybe they are just exploring how awful people can be. Perhaps. That's just not very interesting to me. Or the film never found a point in that which made it interesting for me. I can sit back now having seen it and appreciate the Safdie's skill as film makers but I can't bring myself to want to sit though Uncut Gems again.

Uncut Gems
Starring: Adam Sandler, Kevin Garnett, Idina Menzel, Lakeith Stanfield, Judd Hirsch, Julia Fox, The Weeknd, Eric Bogosian
Directors: Josh Safdie, Ben Safdie
Writers: Ronald Bronstein, Josh Safdie, Ben Safdie

A Hidden Life (2019)

There is a scene near the end of A Hidden Life that reminded me what makes auteur Terrence Malick such a remarkable film maker. He has the ability to communicate things so clearly and complexly to his audience without having to tell us. His work is the epitome of "show don't tell. " He crafts a small scene near the end of this epic film where everything is said without words, and we are to understand who we are and how we might be complicit in evil, and it is profound. 

Terrence Malick attempts to tell us the story of the life and death of real life hero Franz Jaegerstaetter, an Austrian conscientious objector who refused to swear allegiance to Hitler or fight in WWII on behalf of Germany. He portrays his idealistic pastoral life as some of the most gorgeous cinema you'll see all year. He fills his foggy mountains with a joy of innocence, love, and true spirit. Then he slowly begins to insert a sense of dread. His Franz begins to feel the pressures of the world come down on the life he has built and he faces a choice one that only he puts on himself. To the rest of his village and later his country, there is no choice. But he knows better and it is through his commitment to that choice that he transforms those around him.

But his power goes beyond that. Back to the scene I mentioned at the beginning. He is questioned by a nazi officer who implores him to see that his act of resistance accomplishes nothing, that in fact by not taking his place in the nazi order he is leaving space for someone worse to fill it. But Franz holds fast and as he is ushered out to his trial the officer uncomfortably sits in Franz' chair, wringing his hands, and we, like he, are fully aware that no matter how we convince ourselves of our justifications for our choices, we are complicit.

A Hidden Life is a powerful film of true beauty. Malick's work can often get lost in his excesses. A Hidden Life is truly long but there is little to no excess here. Each shot, scene, moment, word is powerful and beautiful. He moves us through Franz' peaceful world into the sinking fear as his world turns against him, and finally into the true horror of outright nazism, where he finds his resolve.

August Diehl is remarkable as Franz proving to us that such a man could be as strong as he is. Valerie Pachner as his wife Franziska is also strong as she is left to pick up all the pieces of continuing on in light of losing everything. Together they help build the world of A Hidden Life making it such a powerful story.

Perhaps it was Malick's desire to do right by the Jaegerstaetters which made A Hidden Life my favourite of his work. His lyrical style doesn't carry him away but keeps him connected instead to this story of the sacrifice of real heroes. And it is one of the most beautiful films you'll see this year.

A Hidden Life
Staring: August Diehl, Valerie Pachner, Michael Nyqyist, Mattias Schoenaerts, Bruno Ganz
Writer/Director: Terrence Malick

Little Women (2019)

When I was a teen I identified strongly with Laurie, because I too was in love with Jo and knew she was out of my reach. Honestly, like Laurie, I was in love with all the March sisters; how could you not? As I grew I came to see why Jo would never succumb to Laurie's charms and imagined I would be Bhaer and impress her enough, but I think most readers understand Jo's journey is her own and so much of the joy in this story is reveling in that understanding.

I think this may be the first filmed adaptation I have seen of the novel which gets the complicated nature of the characters and their relationships as much as I gleaned from the novel. I am a huge fan of Gillian Anderson's 1990s film version but I believe writer/director Gerwig has captured something remarkable here, a spark of writer Alcott's vision. As each moment would arrive, I would tingle with excitement, waiting to see if come to life. This is maybe the adaptation I have been waiting for.

Gerwig is rather bold in her take, deciding not to do a linear narrative and instead introduce her little women as adults who flash back to their childhood memories to explore who they are. It is in this use of memory that she gets deeper into the complex relationships between each of the figures. Jo and Amy's connections are so profoundly dissected through these moments, and their intricate love triangle with Laurie is played out so exquisitely, reaching places I haven't seen another adaptation accomplish.  I love that Beth's journey isn't sidetracked as here she is more central to the story than I have seen her before. Gerwig's Beth is the impetus for Jo writing Little Women. And Meg gets her relationship to be more honest, more than just a moral lesson for Jo to learn from. Gergwig gives each of her women a true arc, the time jumping allows this to all happen within the film's run time as we see their moments connect across the years.

But at the centre of Little Women remains Jo, and her conflict between pursuing her passion for writing and the pressure to fall in love has never been more satisfying as it is here. Gerwig doesn't make Jo unfeeling, she makes her complicated, difficult, and remarkable. Her love for Laurie and Amy and Bhaer and the rest of her family is all there and is all complex, as is her passion to be her own person. The film's use of her novel to make an deliciously ambiguous ending, and ending which may be dismissed as a modern feminist trope, I think it a brilliant way to balance the tension between our desire for romance (as well as Jo's real desire to be loved) and our modern understanding for gender justice. Gerwig plays with whether or not what we are seeing as the film comes to a close is in Jo's story or in Jo's real life. I like that we don't necessarily know.

Gerwig also brings into the story the novel's desire for justice. Very much a story of liberation for women the story brings in ideas of liberation generally as it is part of who these people are. The story is set during the civil war and the Marchs believe strongly in that justice, whether it is the liberation of the poor or the abolition of slavery, this is a family that inspires us to be better in our on time.

Gerwig fills her cast out with some of the most talented actors of the time. Saoirse Ronan is her usual strong and scene stealing presence at the heart of the story as Jo but for me is was Florence Pugh as Amy who stole the show. She takes this rich character and truly digs her teeth into her, making her the most realized I have ever seen her. Timothee Chalamet is also strong, as always, playing all the complications of Laurie beautifully, and Laura Dern's Marmee is a pillar of strength with vulnerability lying always underneath. But the whole cast is powerful (I mean... Streep and Cooper) and really they all lift each other up to make an amazing ensemble.

What the film does show is a loving and complicated family of women and their interdependent relationships, the story of the young man who falls so helpless in love with who that family is, and the way that family of women changes the world around them. Gerwig has made a truly beautiful film that makes us look at this story in new ways and experience it as something brand new.

Little Women
Starring: Saoirse Ronan, Florence Pugh, Timothee Chalamet, Emma Watson, Laura Dern, Eliza Scanlen, Meryl Streep, Chris Cooper, Bob Odenkirk, James Norton, Louis Garrel
Writer/Director: Greta Gerwig

The Two Popes (2019)

I love director Fernando Meirelles' City of God and his underrated Blindness. But as his story of Pope Benedict XVI and Pope Francis began I struggled to see how my interest in watching these men talk was going to be able to be sustained when I do not value either's view and in fact may believe their impact on the world is less than positive. It is a testament to Meirelles' skill as a film maker that I was entertained throughout despite feeling that he is a bit soft on them. I still came away thinking he was too kind to these men, the film wears its rose coloured glasses devoutly, but yet it still gave me a glimpse into the humanity of two very powerful people as well as into some of the inter-workings of the Catholic hierarchy in the modern age.

This isn't all do to Meirelles. Hopkins and Price (to no one's surprise) are masterful. Yes Price looks remarkably like Pope Francis but it is in the way they both make their Popes into real people that they bring a feeling of connection for the audience. Hopkins especially. The film posits Francis as the flawed hero of the story. Reform is the message of the movie and each of these to men is held up as the symbol of either tradition or progress meaning Benedict has the burden of overcoming our bias against his position. He handles this by giving one of his amazing, full performances. Price does so as well, getting into what makes his Francis flawed so he isn't just the perfect progressive voice of the future. The film ends on this rather gleeful moment of the two friends watching football together.

But I think this is emblematic of what I struggled with watching The Two Popes. The film is overly optimistic about this organization which controls so much wealth and so many people's lives, being on a good path and I worry the film doesn't explore how untrue that is. Francis' flaws are romanticized and much of what makes him truly problematic isn't explored, partially because to do that would make us also see those flaws in the Catholic Church itself. And this film is too much of a love letter to that institution, reframing it as a more human creation for sure, but ignoring much of what makes it a problem. Instead this film, in its loving portrait of these men, lulls us into a sense of comfort. I wish it had just been a bit more honest.

But what it does do is remarkable. Meirelles proves he can tell me a story I have little to no interest in and make me enjoy it and the two leads give outstanding performances which show they both still have it. So in that the film is a blessing.

The Two Popes
Starring: Anthony Hopkins, Jonathan Price
Director: Fernando Meirelles
Writer: Anthony McCarten

Cats (2019)

In one of my favourite movies ever, Six Degrees of Separation, the characters (one of whom is played by Ian McKellen) discuss why there should or shouldn't be a movie version of the musical Cats. Cats is a thing unlike anything other. Either you embrace it or you don't. Either you are okay with humanoid cat people dancing and singing without much plot beyond who gets into kitty heaven or you aren't. Either you get into it or you don't. I find most discussion about the movie nonsensical. Cats is Cats. Critiquing it for being absurd is admitting you just don't get it. It's fine if it's not for you. That's not the same thing as saying it's bad.

If there was to be a movie of Cats, this is what it should be. It recreates in the only cinematic way possible the spectacle of seeing humanoid cat dancers. It creates magical, and truly quite beautiful, litter filled London back streets for its stray cast. We move through each cat introducing itself in each lovely preposterous manner. The songs with their awkward but gorgeous TS Elliott lyrics comes to life and we get swept up in it. It is exactly what Cats is.

And much of it is brilliant. Ian McKellen's moments as Gus is an incredible walk on cameo, Jason Derulo sexes up the screen as the frisky Rum Tum Tugger, Idris Elba is surprisingly terrifying as Macavity, and Judi Dench brings a stately gravitas to Old Deuteronomy. Rebel Wilson and James Cordon are fun if their parts err a little too much on the silly side but as I type that I realize saying anything in this film is "silly" is also absurd. For me the only misstep is Jennifer Hudson as Grizabella, her one note acting paired with her million note singing throws the character even too far over the top for even this film. So much of the success of this "story" is based on our emotions for her character and all she can do is mope. A stronger actress here would have been warrented.

I don't recommend Cats unless you want to see Cats. It is truly on of the most polarizing pieces of pop theatre and most people don't get it, won't get it, and will miss out. For that special few who understand the glorious madness that is Cats, enjoy!

Cats
Starring: Judi Dench, Jennifer Hudson, Francesca Howard, Idris Elba, Robbie Fairchild, Laurie Davidson, James Cordon, Rebel Wilson, Jason Derulo, Taylor Swift, Les Twins, Ian McKellen
Director: Tom Hooper
Writers: Lee Hall, Tom Hooper