Category: Arts and Entertainment

This category is about arts and entertainment.

Review: ‘The Northman,’ starring Alexander Skarsgård, Nicole Kidman, Claes Bang, Anya Taylor-Joy, Ethan Hawke, Björk and Willem Dafoe

April 16, 2022

by Carla Hay

Alexander Skarsgård and Anya Taylor-Joy as Olga in “The Northman” (Photo by Aidan Monaghan/Focus Features)

“The Northman”

Directed by Robert Eggers

Culture Representation: Taking place in Northern and Eastern Europe, from the years 894 to approximately 919, the fantasy action film “The Northman” features an all-white cast of characters representing the working-class, middle-class and royalty.

Culture Clash: In this Viking version of “Hamlet,” an exiled prince seeks to avenge the murder of his father, who was killed by the father’s brother.

Culture Audience: “The Northman” will appeal primarily to fans of the movie’s all-star cast, filmmaker Robert Eggers and Viking stories that are gory but realistically violent.

Oscar Novak, Ethan Hawke and Nicole Kidman in “The Northman” (Photo by Aidan Monaghan/Focus Features)

Brutally violent but artistically stunning, “The Northman” brings harsh realism and dreamy mythology to this Viking story that inspired William Shakespeare’s “Hamlet.” It cannot be said enough times as a warning: “The Northman” is not for viewers who are easily offended by on-screen depictions of bloody gore and sadistic violence. There are scenes in this movie that can best be described as downright filthy—and not just because these scenes have people covered in dirt, blood and other grime. There’s a filth of the mind that plagues many of the characters in “The Northman,” where murder, rape, torture and other assaults are a way of life to conquer and subjugate others.

American filmmaker Robert Eggers has made a career out of exploring the dark side of humanity in the movies that he writes and directs. His feature films—beginning with 2015’s “The Witch” and 2019’s “The Lighthouse”—have a rare combination of taking place in an otherworldly atmosphere while depicting people and events as if they are historically accurate. “The Witch” and “The Lighthouse” are defined by elements of horror, while “The Northman” (Eggers’ third feature film, which he co-wrote with Sjón) can be defined by elements of tragedy. “The Northman” is also a movie about Vikings, vengeance and violence.

Shakespeare’s “Hamlet” play was itself based on the medieval Scandinavian legend of Amleth, the story of a prince who vows to get deadly revenge for the murder of his father, who was betrayed and killed by the father’s brother. “The Northman” weaves into the story aspects of Scandinavian folklore, the occult and the effects of hallucinogenic drugs. The end result is an immersive cinematic experience that is both menacing and magical.

“The Northman” begins in the year 894, on the fictitious Scottish island kingdom of Hrafnsey, which is close to Orkney Island and Shetland Island. Hrafnsey is ruled by King Aurvandil War-Raven (played by Ethan Hawke), a confident leader who has just returned to the land after about three months away from home. King Aurvandil has a happy family life with his wife Queen Gudrún (played by Nicole Kidman) and their son Amleth (played by Oscar Novak), who’s about 10 or 11 years old when the story begins.

“The Lighthouse” co-star Willem Dafoe has a small role in “The Northman” as a court jester named Heimir the Fool. King Aurvandil is amused by Heimir’s talents, while the king’s jealous younger brother Fjölnir (played by Claes Bang) is dismissive and condescending to Heimir. The scene with the brothers’ two very different reactions to Heimir are meant to show their contrasting personalities and how they interact with people.

King Aurvandil is fixated on the idea that Amleth should be ready to lead Hrafnsey, because the king has a premonition that he will die soon. Aurvandil does not know when he will die, but he is certain of how he will die: “I must die by the sword. I will die in honor,” he says. Gudrún doesn’t like to hear Aurvandil talk this way, and she insists that Amleth is too young to learn about royal adult responsibilities. Nevertheless, Aurvandil and Amleth do a male-bonding ritual around a campfire together, where a shaman leads the father and son to enact various wolf mannerisms while proving that they’re still human.

Although the king is beloved by many of his subjects, there is a cabal of people waiting to betray him. Leading this traitorous group is Fjölnir, who is cruel, power-mad and ruthless. One day, when King Aurvandil and Amleth are spending some father-son time in a forest, Fjölnir and about a dozen of his cronies ambush the king and viciously murder him, while Amleth witnesses everything.

Amleth manages to hide and escape, but not before using a knife to cut off the nose of a brute named Finnr (played by Eldar Skar), who later lies to everyone by saying that he killed Amleth. For the rest of the movie, Finnr is known as Finnr the Nose-Stub. Amleth runs back home, only to find out that Fjölnir and his gang are plundering the land, invading homes, and letting everyone know that the king is dead and Fjölnir is now in charge. One of the last things that a terrified Amleth sees before he runs away from Hrafnsey is his mother being kidnapped by Fjölnir’s cronies.

The movie then fast-forwards about 20 years later. Amleth (played by Alexander Skarsgård) is now a strapping, angry man, who has joined a group of marauding killers hired to help conquer villages in Eastern Europe. Those who are not killed in these villages are held captive as slaves. “The Northman” has several of these invasion scenes that are not for the faint of heart. Amleth has become extremely jaded and callous in all the violence and murders he commits as a berserker warrior.

However, Amleth soon has a vision of a mystic named Seeress (played by Björk), who reminds Amleth that his immediate purpose in life is to avenge his father’s death. This sets Amleth on a path to disguise himself as a slave and go on a slave ship heading to Iceland. It’s on this ship that he meets Olga of the Birch Forest (played by Anya Taylor-Joy, the breakout star of “The Witch”), an enslaved Slavic devotee of the mystic arts. In other words, Olga is a witch. Amleth and Olga have a mutual attraction to each other that goes exactly where you think it’s going to go.

Amleth is going to Iceland, because it’s where Fjölnir has now settled with Amleth’s mother Gudrún, who is now Fjölnir’s wife. Fjölnir and Gudrún have two sons together: brash young adult Thórir the Proud (played by Gustav Lindh) and obedient pre-teen Gunnar (played by Elliot Rose), who have been brought up in a life of royal privilege. For all of his flaws and evil deeds, Fjölnir loves his sons immensely and will do anything to protect them. Considering how Gudrún ended up with Fjölnir, she is treated just like a trophy wife.

“The Northman” often has simplistic and cliché dialogue, but the cast members’ performances are mostly convincing. Skarsgård and Bang have a great deal of physicality in their roles as Amleth and Fjölnir, which play out in the expected “protagonist versus antagonist” ways. What they both bring to these characters is an added level of emotional depth that becomes more compelling when this nephew and uncle, who are sworn enemies, actually have something in common: their love of family as their biggest emotional vulnerability.

Kidman struggles with sticking to the same accent (sometimes she sounds Scottish, Nordic, Icelandic or various combinations of all three), but her overall performance as Gudrún is riveting, because Gudrún is the most complicated character in the story. Taylor-Joy is perfectly cast as the cunning and (literally) bewitching Olga. The rest of the cast members are serviceable in their roles.

Aside from the disturbing violence, “The Northman” will leave an impact on viewers because of how it creates a world caught in between medieval truths and timeless mythology. There are haunting and compelling scenes involving pagan rituals, ascending into heavenly spaces, and transforming someone’s interior body into some kind of mystical realm, with entrails snaking around like winding tree branches. “The Northman” also has more than a few nods to psychedelia, including Olga’s psychedelic mushrooms that are used as a weapon in this family feud.

“The Northman” greatly benefits from the almost-hypnotic cinematography of Jarin Blaschke, a longtime collaborator of Eggers. Whether or not people enjoy Eggers’ movies (which sometimes drag with slow pacing), there’s no denying that these films have top-notch cinematography. Viewers who can withstand the relentless onslaught of violence in “The Northman” can also appreciate that even amid the murder and mayhem, there are still glimmers of hope for humanity.

Focus Features will release “The Northman” in U.S. cinemas on April 22, 2022.

Review: ‘Room 203,’ starring Francesca Xuereb, Viktoria Vinyarska, Eric Wiegand and Scott Gremillion

April 15, 2022

by Carla Hay

Francesca Xuereb and Viktoria Vinyarska in “Room 203” (Photo courtesy of Vertical Entertainment)

“Room 203”

Directed by Brian Jagger

Culture Representation: Taking place in the fictional U.S. city of Quincy, the horror flick “Room 203” features a predominantly white cast of characters (with some African Americans and Asians) representing the working-class and middle-class.

Culture Clash: Two young women, who’ve been best friends since childhood, become roommates, and find out that their rented apartment is haunted.

Culture Audience: “Room 203” will appeal primarily to people who don’t mind watching formulaic horror movies that take too long to get to anything that can be considered “scary.”

Eric Wiegand and Francesca Xuereb in “Room 203” (Photo courtesy of Vertical Entertainment)

“Room 203” had the potential to be a better horror movie, but this uninspired clunker goes downhill into a quicksand of stereotypes about a home that’s haunted by an evil spirit. Some of the technical aspects of the movie, such as the production design and the musical score, are up to basic horror movie standards. However, the movie’s screenplay and pacing have too many areas that drag with monotony and unanswered questions. Any real scares don’t happen until the last third of the film, but these terror scenes are completely formulaic and look like ripoff versions of better horror movies.

Directed by Brian Jagger, “Room 203” is based on Nanami Kamon’s Japanese novel of the same name. Jagger, John Poliquin and Nick Richey wrote the “Room 203” screenplay. It’s yet another movie about people who find out their home is haunted, and they didn’t bother to get any background information about the place before they moved in.

Even after strange things start happening in the home, it takes too long for anyone in “Room 203” to do a basic Internet search to get background information about the place. Even worse: One of the residents who’s being haunted is an aspiring journalist. It just means that she’s got lousy investigative/research skills if she’s so slow to think about doing something as simple as an Internet search on the history of the home. Maybe she should think about finding another career instead of journalism.

“Room 203” is set in a fictional U.S. city called Quincy in an unnamed state. (“Room 203” was actually filmed in Shreveport, Louisiana.) Near the beginning of the movie, wannabe journalist Kim White (played by Francesca Xuereb), who’s in her late teens, is about to move in with her longtime best friend Izzy Davis (played by Viktoria Vinyarska), in their first apartment together. Izzy is an aspiring actress who is grieving over the death of her mother Liana, who passed away not too long ago from an accidental drug overdose.

Kim’s parents Samuel White (played by Patrick Kirton) and Ann White (played by Susan Kirton) are reluctantly driving Kim to this apartment. Samuel and Ann don’t approve of Izzy, because they think she’s a bad influence on Kim. In the car, Samuel warns Kim: “You’re making a big mistake.” Ann, who’s driving, chimes in: “You step out that door, don’t come back to us asking for help.” Izzy isn’t a bad person, but there are obvious signs that she abuses alcohol. It’s also revealed that after Izzy’s mother died, Izzy tried to commit suicide.

The movie opens with a scene that leaves no mystery whatsoever about what will happen to anyone who ends up in Room 203 in the apartment building where Kim and Izzy are going to live. It’s actually an unnecessary introduction because it foreshadows too much what will eventually happen in the movie. A young contractor employee named Chad (played by Jeroen Frank Kales) is renovating Room 203, when he notices that there’s a hole in the wall with plaster dripping down from it.

When he puts one of his hands in the hole, Chad has trouble pulling his hand out. When he does, it has a bloody scrape on it. He also finds a brass necklace hidden in this hole. Chad’s supervisor Bob (played by Terry J. Nelson) shows up and tells him something about this particular apartment unit: “The tenants never stay long, and that hole is always there.”

The supervisor continues, “I did hear this story. That cavity in the wall? It’s alive. It’s waiting. It’s hungry. And if you stare at it long enough, it becomes a glory hole.” He means the last sentence as a joke, but you can bet that the rest of what he said has some truth in it because this is a horror movie. Of course, Room 203 in this apartment is where Kim and Izzy will be living.

Later that evening, Chad gives the necklace to his girlfriend Lena (played by Cameron Inman), during a romantic nighttime rendezvous in Room 203, long after his co-workers have left for the day. Immediately after Chad puts the necklace on Lena, she starts making a choking sound. She then breaks a beer bottle nearby and uses the broken bottle to slit her throat, while a horrified Chad calls for help. Chad and Lena are never seen or mentioned in the movie again.

An untold number of days later, Izzy and Kim move in together at this cursed apartment. They meet their creepy middle-aged landlord Ronan (played by Scott Gremillion), who never cracks a smile, and he speaks to people in a condescending way. Ronan spends most of his screen time giving these two young women menacing looks when he’s seen lurking around. It makes it all the more obvious in this poorly written film that Ronan is probably up to no good.

Ronan tells these new tenants that the three of them are the only people who live on the floor, which he says is the last floor in the building to be renovated. Throughout the movie, no other tenants are seen in the building. Any sensible person in this living situation would want to find out why no one else is living in this very large building, but these dimwitted new residents never ask.

On the day that Izzy and Kim move into this building, Ronan does mention that it used to be a commerce building with a bank on the first floor, and the building’s other floors were converted to apartment units during the Great Depression. Ronan also barks out a list of apartment resident rules: No smoking, no loud noises after 9 p.m., no cats, no dogs. And residents absolutely cannot go in the basement. As soon as he says the rule about the basement, you just know that at some point in the movie, someone is going to break that rule.

Because Kim and Izzy have no credit history, Ronan also tells them that they have to pay all of their tenant expenses in cash, including the first and last month’s rent and a deposit for damages. This “cash only” policy is worth it to Kim and Izzy though, because this apartment is renting for a price they can afford. And the apartment comes fully furnished.

Room 203 has a large stained-glass window with religious imagery that depicts battle scenes. When Izzy walks over to touch the stained glass, Ronan angrily orders Izzy and Kim to never touch the stained glass because it’s a historical building, and there better not be any damages. And it’s yet another point in the movie where you know that rule will eventually be broken too. “Room 203” has absolutely no subtlety at all.

You know what happens next: After Kim and Izzy start living in Room 203, eerie and spooky things start to happen. Izzy finds the cursed necklace that caused Lena to kill herself. And before you know it, Izzy starts acting strange. More than once, Kim finds Izzy walking around in a daze, holding a circular music box that has figures of a man and a woman in a dance embrace inside the box. In one scene, while Izzy is in this trance, Kim finds Izzy with blood dripping down her forehead from a head wound.

Soon after moving in, Kim discovers the hole in the wall. She also starts to have nightmares about it, such as seeing a black bird flying out of the hole and coming to attack her. All of the “scares” in this movie are stereotypical and quite boring. Kim also appears to hear voices coming out of the hole in the wall, which eventually gets covered up with wallpaper. Not that it’s going to stop the obvious evil spirit lurking in the room.

“Room 203” drags the story out with a lot of scenes showing Kim and Izzy pursuing their career choices and meeting potential love interests. Soon after they become roommates, Kim and Izzy hang out at a bar, where they meet two guys who are a few years older: Steve (played by Sam A. Coleman) and Tony (played Quinn Nehr), who have a flirtatious conversation with Kim and Izzy.

However, Steve gets inappropriate when he starts rubbing Kim’s leg with his hand without her consent, and he ignores her request to stop. When Steve calls Kim a “bitch,” Izzy gets angry and punches Steve hard enough to knock him to the ground. Izzy, Tony and Kim then quickly leave the bar and go back to Izzy and Kim’s apartment.

Kim calls it a night and goes to bed. Tony and Izzy are attracted to each other, so they start kissing. Tony thinks it will lead to sex with Izzy, but she’s so drunk that she passes out. A disappointed Tony stays in the apartment and ends up in the bathroom, where out of nowhere, a knife gets plunged into his abdomen.

The next morning, Kim and Izzy don’t see Tony, so they both assume that he left the night before. There’s no sign of Tony’s blood in the bathroom, or no explanation for what happened to Tony’s dead body. Tony is never mentioned again in the movie. It’s an example of how substandard “Room 203” is when it comes to its screenplay.

Kim has enrolled as a journalism student at Quincy College of the Arts, where she meets a fellow student named Ian (played by Eric Wiegand), who is friendly, respectful and a little on the nerdy side. Ian is also a journalism major. He wants his specialty to be video journalism, while Kim wants to be a journalist with written work. Ian and Kim predictably start dating each other.

Meanwhile, Izzy (who’s openly bisexual or queer) meets a woman named Sandy (played by Bria Fleming) in a bar, and they start dating casually. Sandy just happens to be a casting agent assistant, so she helps Izzy land an audition. “Room 203” never actually shows Izzy doing this audition or going on any casting calls, but Izzy does mention to Kim what she’s doing to try to find work as an actress.

Another time-wasting subplot to the movie is when Kim gets a school assignment to do an analytical profile on someone, so she chooses to write about Izzy (without using Izzy’s name or asking Izzy’s permission) in an essay called “Those Left Behind” It’s a psychological profile of someone grieving the death of a loved one from an overdose. This essay has a lot of personal details about what Izzy is experiencing.

What does all of this have to do with the horror story? Almost nothing, but these are examples of how “Room 203” gets sidetracked with a lot of filler instead of focusing on what should have happened earlier in the movie: Kim finding out the history of Room 203 and why it appears to be haunted. The explanation is extremely unsurprising and underwhelming. It all just leads to a hokey showdown that looks like a mundane retread of other climactic scenes in dozens of other horror flicks.

The performances in “Room 203” range from average to unimpressively amateurish. Wiegand (who has the best acting skills in the movie) and Xuereb share some good scenes together, as Kim and Ian’s budding romance looks very believable. Xuereb and Vinyarska aren’t entirely convincing as longtime best friends Kim and Izzy, but that has a lot to do with some of the cringeworthy dialogue that the cast members have to say. As for Gremillion’s portrayal of the mysterious and perpetually scowling Ronan, it’s the worst performance in the movie. Gremillion’s acting (which alternates between being hammy and stiff) in “Room 203” is likely to elicit some unintended laughs from viewers at how Ronan looks constipated instead of terrifying.

“Room 203” isn’t a completely horrible movie. It just doesn’t do anything that’s original or very thrilling. The apartment basement is predictably dark, dingy and has flickering lights, which are really just strobe light effects. Places that are supposed to be “scary” are just poorly lit. Worst of all, the story behind the evil spirit is very muddled and vague. And it just makes “Room 203” a time-wasting horror disappointment when the movie never bothers to explain the origins of the demonic ghost that’s causing all of the terror.

Vertical Entertainment released “Room 203” in select U.S. cinemas, on digital and VOD on April 15, 2022.

Review: ‘Ultrasound,’ starring Vincent Kartheiser, Chelsea Lopez, Breeda Wool, Tunde Adebimpe, Rainey Qualley and Bob Stephenson

April 14, 2022

by Carla Hay

Breeda Wool and Vincent Kartheiser in “Ultrasound” (Photo courtesy of Magnet Releasing)

“Ultrasound”

Directed by Rob Schroeder

Culture Representation: Taking place in an unnamed U.S. city, the sci-fi drama film “Ultrasound” features a group of almost all white people (with one African America and one Asian person) representing the working-class and middle-class.

Culture Clash: An unsuspecting man becomes part of a secretive scientific experiment that involves two separate pregnancies by two different women 

Culture Audience: “Ultrasound” will appeal primarily to people who are fans of the “Generous Bosom” comic book series and people who enjoy mind-bending sci-fi mysteries.

Rainey Qualley and Chris Gartin in “Ultrasound” (Photo courtesy of Magnet Releasing)

“Ultrasound” falters with some erratic storytelling, but the cast members’ commendable performances and the movie’s willingness to take chances make it worth watching for people interested in unconventional sci-fi movies. Ultimately, “Ultrasound” is best appreciated by people who don’t mind movies that play tricks on what this story is really about, because the movie’s plot is a mystery that takes its time to reveal its true purpose. Viewers also have to suspend some disbelief when some of the movie’s characters make decisions that are outside the norm of what most people are expected to do.

Directed by Rob Schroeder, “Ultrasound” is based on Conor Stechschulte’s “Generous Bosom” comic book series, which Stechschulte adapted into the “Ultrasound” screenplay. “Ultrasound,” which is Schroeder’s feature-film directorial debut, had its world premiere at the 2021 Tribeca Film Festival in New York City. It’s a movie where a lot of strange things happen that aren’t supposed to make much sense until the final third of the movie where secrets are revealed.

“Ultrasound,” which takes place in an unnamed U.S. city, opens with a scene of a bachelor in his early 40s named Glen (played by Vincent Kartheiser), whose car has broken down in a remote area at night. Glen goes to the nearest house, where a married couple named Arthur “Art” Thomas (played by Bob Stephenson) and Cyndi Thomas (played by Chelsea Lopez) live, so that he can find out where is the closest place to get auto repairs. Glen doesn’t use his phone to get that information.

Upon arriving at Art and Cyndi’s house, Glen meets them for the first time and sees that these two spouses have a very awkward, tension-filled dynamic between them. Art is very talkative and extremely friendly, while Cyndi is quiet and withdrawn. Art tells Glen that the nearest auto repair shop is currently closed. Glen tells Art that Glen has AAA insurance, but Art says that AAA will just tow Glen’s car to Pickton, a city that is 30 miles away. Pickton is also where the nearest motel is, according to Art.

Art is so open and inviting to this total stranger, he immediately offers a room in the house as a place for Glen to stay for the night. Art doesn’t just offer. He insists that Glen stay overnight at the house. Cyndi tells Glen that Art is on anti-depressant medication because he’s had depression for years. Art cheerfully admits to it and says that he always feels better after taking his medication.

And then, things get weird. Art tells Glen that the room where Glen will be staying is the same room where Cyndi sleeps, and that Glen will have to share the bed with her. Art says that is Glen’s only option if he wants to sleep over at the house. Glen is extremely uncomfortable about it, but he doesn’t want to be rude, so he doesn’t exactly get up and leave, which is what a lot of people would do. Apparently, Glen would rather not sleep in his car for the night.

Instead, Glen stays in the room with Cyndi, and they both strike up a conversation that starts off awkwardly. Slowly but surely, it becomes apparent why Glen wasn’t completely opposed to this bedroom arrangement: He’s attracted to Cyndi, who’s a little bit flirtatious with him. In continuing her pattern of divulging too much information to a stranger, Cyndi tells Glen that she’s unhappily married to Art.

Cyndi also mentions that the couple’s big age difference (Art is about 15 to 20 years older than Cyndi) is one of the reasons why their marriage has become unbearable to her. Art and Cyndi met when she was 17, and Art used to be one of her high school teachers. Art and Cyndi got married when she was 19. Cyndi tells Glen that she says she now regrets marrying Art.

Cyndi sadly mentions that if she could go back in time, she would tell her younger self before marrying Art: “What the fuck are you doing, throwing your life away, you fucking moron!” Cyndi adds, “But there’s an energy when people throw away things that people think are important … When you’re done, that energy drains out of you.”

Now that Cyndi has essentially announced to Glen that she’s a lonely and needy wife, the stage has been set for Glen to decide if he’s going to act on his attraction to Cyndi and have sex with her. This sexual one-night stand seems to be something that Art and Cyndi are expecting will happen. At first, Glen thinks that Art and Cyndi are a swinger couple, and it’s a setup so that Art can watch Glen have sex with Cyndi. When he asks Cyndi about it, she denies that Art will be watching whatever happens between her and Glen.

Cyndi and Glen end up having sex, but it’s not shown in the movie. The next time that viewers see Glen, he’s at his home (where he lives alone), and his car has long since been repaired. He found out that the car broke down because it had flat tires that were punctured by what objects that appeared to be nails. And then something unexpected happens to Glen: He gets an unannounced visit from Art.

Glen is so caught off-guard by seeing Art, he refuses to let Art in the house. Glen is suspicious because he doesn’t know how Art got his home address. Art is vague and won’t say how he found out where Glen lives, but Art insists on coming into the house because he tells Glen that he has something important to show Glen. Eventually, Glen lets Art into his home because he can see that Art won’t go away until Art gets what he wants from this unwelcome visit.

Inside the house, Art shows Glen a video on Art’s phone of a baby ultrasound. Art tells Glen that Cyndi is pregnant, and that this ultrasound is of the baby growing inside of Cyndi. And then, Art drops a bombshell: He says that Glen is the father of this baby. At first Glen denies it, but Art says that Glen is the only person who could be the father because Glen is the only man who had sex with Cyndi in the time period where the baby was conceived. Art says that he and Cyndi are willing to do DNA tests to prove Glen’s paternity.

After Glen gets the news that he’s going to be a father, he reconnects with Cyndi, who seems very happy about the pregnancy. Glen tells Cyndi that he wants to be involved with raising this child, even though Glen still feels mistrust and resentment (mostly toward Art) because Glen thinks he was “tricked” into getting Cyndi pregnant. He should’ve thought of that before he had unprotected sex with a stranger.

Meanwhile, another pregnancy issue is shown in “Ultrasound.” Katie (played by Rainey Qualley) is the pregnant, younger mistress of a married politician named Alex Harris (played by Chris Gartin), who is currently up for re-election for an unnamed political office. Katie and Alex’s affair and the pregnancy are both secrets.

Alex has paid for Katie to move to the city where he lives, but he’s been mostly ignoring her. Alex insists that Katie not venture out much from the apartment that he’s renting for her. This semi-confinement is starting to make Katie feel restless and disrespected. “Ultrasound” has a series of phone calls and encounters between Katie and Alex to show what happens in their relationship.

The rest of “Ultrasound” has a lot of spoiler information, but it’s enough to say that Glen and Cyndi end up in a mysterious scientific research lab, where they are forced to undergo experiments and interrogations. Glen is also injured and has to use a wheelchair. The leader of this “research study” is a determined scientist named Dr. Conners (played by Tunde Adebimpe), who is adamant that all of his subordinates follow his rules.

In this “research study,” the two female subordinates who work the most with Dr. Conners are named Shannon (played by Breeda Wool) and Julie (played by Porter Duong), who have very different approaches to their job. Julie is very obedient and never questions what Dr. Conners has to say. Shannon, who does a lot of the research interviews of Glen and Chelsea, has her doubts about the ethics of this “research study,” and she sometimes openly defies Dr. Conners’ orders.

“Ultrasound” takes viewers down a proverbial rabbit hole, where the story has some twists and turns—some of which are more unpredictable than others. Schroeder’s direction maintains a tense level of viewer anticipation and curiosity to see what will happen next. However, enough bizarre things happen where confused viewers of “Ultrasound” might not want to stick around until the end of the movie to find out what it all means.

All of the cast members are convincing in their performances, but Kartheiser and Wool stand out because their characters are the ones who say and do the things that are the most interesting. Glen and Shannon have aspects of their personalities that show they’re independent-minded and are willing to ask questions if things around them start to look suspicious. The ending of “Ultrasound” is a bit jumbled and messy, but it least answers a lot of questions about what these characters have experienced and what might happen to them next.

Magnet Releasing released “Ultrasound” in select U.S. cinemas, on digital and VOD on March 11, 2022.

Review: ‘The Torch’ (2022), starring Buddy Guy and Quinn Sullivan

April 13, 2022

by Carla Hay

Quinn Sullivan and Buddy Guy in “The Torch” (Photo by Chuck Lanza/IFC Films)

“The Torch” (2022)

Directed by Jim Farrell

Culture Representation: Taking place in various parts of the world, the documentary film “The Torch” features a group of predominantly white people (with a few African Americans and one Latino), mostly musicians, discussions the life and legacy of blues legend Buddy Guy.

Culture Clash: Guy encountered racism and other obstacles in his road to success, as white artists who copied his style achieved more fame and fortune than he did.

Culture Audience: “The Torch” will appeal primarily to people who are fans of Guy, blues music and blues-influenced music.

Buddy Guy in “The Torch” (Photo courtesy of IFC Films)

The documentary “The Torch” breaks no new ground in telling Buddy Guy’s story, but it’s worth seeing for the concert scenes. The film editing is uneven, and the movie needed more diverse interviews. Viewers will probably like the movie more if they know in advance that this movie is more about Guy’s influence on other artists rather than keeping the entire documentary focused on being a biography about Guy. It’s why his protégé Quinn Sullivan shares top billing for this movie and gets almost as much screen time as Guy.

Directed by Jim Farrell, “The Torch” has a title that obviously refers to the phrase “passing the torch.” However, based on what’s in this documentary, the filmmakers want people to believe that Guy’s influence is mostly among white people. That’s because almost everyone interviewed in the documentary is white, except for Guy, Carlos Santana, Ric “Jazz” Hall (a longtime guitarist in Guy’s band) and a Mississippi up-and-coming blues artist named Christone “Kingfish” Ingram.

The other people interviewed in the documentary are Sullivan, Jonny Lang, Derek Trucks, Joe Bonamassa, Carmen Vandenberg, Susan Tedeschi, songwriter/producer Tom Hambridge, Damn Right Blues Band keyboardist Marty Sammon and Feduccia Farm owner Craig Feduccia. Quinn Sullivan’s parents (Carol Sullivan and Terry Sullivan) are interviewed, but do not appear on camera. Instead, their comments are heard in voiceovers.

The irony of it all is that pioneer blues artists such as Guy were often ripped off and overshadowed by white people in the music industry. This documentary comes dangerously close to sidelining Guy in a movie that’s supposed to be mainly about him, because a lot of screen time is given to white artists praising Guy and talking about how he influenced them. At one point in “The Torch,” it starts to look like a biography of Quinn Sullivan. Fortunately, the documentary does not veer too far off from being about Guy. However, “The Torch” filmmakers should have made more of an effort to include more diverse perspectives, in terms of race and musical genres, because Guy’s influence isn’t just with white artists who play bluesy rock.

Born on July 30, 1936, in Lettsworth, Louisiana, Guy grew up financially deprived on a plantation. He relocated to Chicago in 1957, and he became known as one of the greats in the influential Chicago blues scene, along with Muddy Waters, Howlin’ Wolf, Bo Diddley, Little Walter, Willie Dixon, Otis Rush and Junior Wells. Guy and all of these artists in some way influenced much of what can be heard in R&B and rock and roll in the 1950s, 1960s and 1970s, which in turn influenced much of today’s music and beyond.

Most blues music aficionados know that Guy wasn’t an overnight sensation. He worked for years as a studio session musician and a semi-pro touring musician before he could quit his day job and become a professional musician. In “The Torch,” Guy says it wasn’t until 1967, when he was 30 or 31, when he was able to start making a living wage from music. He credits Dick Waterman (an influential writer, promoter and photographer in the Chicago blues scene) as being the person who gave Guy his first real big break.

Chess Records founder Marshall Chess was also influential in Guy’s career. In “The Torch,” Guy chokes up a little and gets teary-eyed when he remembers Chess telling him about the British blues-rock supergroup Cream (led by Eric Clapton) in the late 1960s, and Chess giving Guy credit for Cream’s style. Guy remembers Chess telling him: “You’ve been trying to play this [music] all the time, and we were calling it junk. Now, you can come in the studio and do what you want.” According to Guy, he responded to Chess by saying, “I’m a little late.” (In other words: “What took you so long?”)

“The Torch” also includes footage of the recording of Quinn Sullivan’s 2017 “Midnight Highway” album, which was produced by Hambridge. A guitar prodigy, Quinn was discovered by Guy in 2007, when Quinn was 8 years old, and Quinn’s father brought him to a Guy concert at Zeiterion Performing Arts Center in New Bedford, Massachusetts. As the story goes, Quinn’s father Terry contacted Guy’s guitar tech at the time to ask if it was possible for Quinn to possibly perform with Guy. This guitar tech told Guy about Quinn being an outstanding guitar player who was at the show, so Guy spontaneously invited Quinn on stage to perform as a guest.

Needless to say, Guy was extremely impressed by Quinn’s virtuoso guitar playing at such a young age. (The documentary includes archival footage of this fateful performance.) Quinn has been in Guy’s world ever since. Several people in the documentary compliment Guy for being a kind and generous artist, who always likes to help other artists and who is an exceptional mentor to younger musicians.

And who had a profound influence on Guy when he was a young musician? He mentions blues vanguard John Lee Hooker, whom he describes as his idol. In “The Torch,” Guy shares a story about how when he met Hooker for the first time, he didn’t recognize him because Hooker had a stutter that Guy did not expect. Guy, who also mentions Muddy Waters as a big influence, shares a story about how Waters once gave Guy a sandwich when Waters saw that Guy was literally a starving musician. Guy says that he was so star-struck and grateful, he told Waters, “If you’re hungry, I’m full.”

“The Torch” is at its best with the concert scenes, since much of what is in the documentary includes exclusive footage of Guy on tour. (Most of the footage was filmed in 2016 and 2017. “The Torch” had its world premiere at the 2019 Chicago International Film Festival.) Not much is revealed about Guy’s touring life behind the scenes, so just expect the on-stage footage to be the documentary’s main coverage of his life on tour. These live performances show why Guy is a legend and has a creative spark that a lot of artists who are decades younger don’t really have.

IFC Films released “The Torch” in select U.S. cinemas, on digital and VOD on March 18, 2022.

Review: ‘Father Stu,’ starring Mark Wahlberg

April 12, 2022

by Carla Hay

Mark Wahlberg in “Father Stu” (Photo by Karen Ballard/Columbia Pictures)

“Father Stu”

Directed by Rosalind Ross

Culture Representation: Taking place from the mid-1990s to late 2000s in Los Angeles and Helena, Montana, the dramatic film “Father Stu” features a cast of predominantly white characters (with a few African Americans, Latinos and Asians) representing the working-class and middle-class.

Culture Clash: A washed-up amateur boxer, who has a history of committing violence and other crimes, moves from Montana to Los Angeles to become an actor, but he ends up becoming a priest. 

Culture Audience: “Father Stu” will appeal primarily to fans of star Mark Wahlberg and people who like formulaic dramas about toxic masculinity where men are excused and forgiven for things that women would not be allowed to get away with as easily.

Jacki Weaver, Mark Wahlberg and Mel Gibson in “Father Stu” (Photo by Karen Ballard/Columbia Pictures)

Boring and predictable, “Father Stu” is yet another film in Mark Wahlberg’s long list of one-note movies where he plays a foul-mouthed jerk who’s promoted as heroic. It’s another “toxic male who needs to be redeemed” story that does nothing new or clever. This tired retread has the word “flop” written all over it.

“Father Stu” is the feature-film debut of writer/director Rosalind Ross, who pollutes this movie with a lot of corny dialogue and cringeworthy scenarios. “Father Stu” is based on a true story, but so much of this biographical film looks phony because of the contrived ways that the characters speak and act. And the movie looks like it was made by people who’ve seen too many outdated TV-movie dramas and decided to rehash and dump the same formulas into this dreadful dud.

In “Father Stu,” Wahlberg (who is one of the movie’s producers) plays Stuart “Stu” Long, an aggressively obnoxious loser who decides to commit to Catholicism and becomes a priest after experiencing a health crisis. The movie takes place from the mid-1990s to the late 2000s, when the real Long was in his early 30s to mid-40s, although Wahlberg never looks convincing as someone in his 30s.

“Father Stu” starts off in Stu’s hometown of Helena, Montana, where he is an amateur boxer who’s never made it into the big leagues. While in his early 30s, Stu is seen in a doctor’s appointment with his devoted and sometimes sarcastic mother Kathleen Long (played by Jacki Weaver), when they get some bad news: The doctor says that Stu’s boxing injuries are life-threatening, and he will die if he doesn’t quit boxing.

Stu takes his anger out on his mother, by berating her for having him at this doctor’s appointment where Stu got news that he didn’t want to hear. When she tactfully tells Stu that she’s heard about an oil rig job that’s hiring, Stu snaps at her: “I ain’t doing no blue-collar bullshit!” Meanwhile, Stu (who is a bachelor with no children) hasn’t really figured out what he’s going to do to earn an income.

Even though “Father Stu” is written and directed by a woman, this stale excuse for a movie repeats all the clichés of misogynistic movies where women with significant speaking roles only exist as a banal “mother” or “love interest,” rarely with fully formed personalities. In these sexist movies, all of the action revolves around men, and the women are just there to react to whatever the men do. And that’s exactly what happens in “Father Stu.”

Soon after his boxing career ends, Stu decides he wants to move to Los Angeles and become an actor. (In real life, Stuart Long moved to Los Angeles in 1987, when he was 24.) Before Stu moves to L.A., he visits the grave of his younger brother Stephen Long, who died in 1971, at the age of 5 years old. (Stephen’s death is eventually talked about in more details.) It’s at this point, in this movie’s graveyard scene, that you know the filmmakers are going to use this tragic death as a way to garner sympathy for Stu and all the offensive and selfish things that he does.

While a drunken Stu is at the grave, he hallucinates seeing himself as a boy of about 9 or 10 years old (played by Tenz McCall), in a hokey moment that’s supposed to make viewers literally see Stu’s inner child. The adult Stu gets angry and punches a nearby statue of Jesus Christ. And just at that moment, a police car drives up. Viewers don’t see what happened between Stu and any cop on the scene, but it’s shown later that Stu was arrested for resisting arrest. The movie goes out of its way to erase or gloss over any crimes that he commits.

Instead, Stu is presented as someone who goes through life insulting others and who doesn’t hesitate to bully people to get what he wants. The movie tries to excuse his awfulness by showing that Stu comes from an emotionally damaged family: Stu’s younger brother died tragically, and Stu’s parents are estranged from each other. Stu is infuriated at his father for being what Stu calls a “deadbeat dad.” Stu is a lot more like his father than Stu would care to admit.

Stu’s father William “Bill” Long (played by Mel Gibson) is a truck driver, who passed on a lot of his bad personality traits to Stu. They are both crude, ill-tempered and quick to instigate fights where they curse at people or get violent. (And yes, you can do a countdown to the inevitable scene where Stu gets in a bar fight.) Stu’s mother Kathleen has gotten fed up with Bill, so they are no longer living together.

As an example of how “Father Stu” rips off familiar territory, Gibson and Wahlberg did another version of this “rude father and son” schtick in the 2017 annoying comedy film “Daddy’s Home 2.” Gibson is also probably in “Father Stu” because of his romantic relationship with “Father Stu” writer/director Ross. The couple began dating in 2014.

One thing that Stu’s parents both agree on is that Stu’s goal of becoming a professional actor is a foolish and unlikely dream. And sure enough, when Stu moves to L.A. and makes the rounds at talent agencies, he’s rejected. Viewers don’t see a lot of these rejections, but Stu mentions it in a scene where a lecherous male agent sexually propositions Stu when the two of them are alone together in the agent’s office. An angry Stu then roughs up this sexual predator and breaks a video camera in the office before slamming the door when he leaves.

Stu can’t get work as an actor, so he takes a job working behind the meat counter at a grocery store. In his desperate attempts to break into showbiz and make connections, Stu has an irritating and unprofessional habit of asking customers while he’s working if they’re in the entertainment business. It’s at this grocery store where he meets Carmen (played by Teresa Ruiz), a devoutly religious Catholic who becomes Stu’s love interest before he becomes a priest. It’s infatuation at first sight for Stu, who tries to flirt with Carmen when they first meet, but she’s not impressed.

“I didn’t catch your name,” Stu tells Carmen before she walks away. “You’re not much of a fisherman,” Carmen says coyly, as if she thinks it’s hilarious to make a reference to the phrase “fisherman’s catch.” This is the type of dumb dialogue in “Father Stu” that will have audiences rolling their eyes at how cornball this movie is.

Carmen left behind a church flyer with the store manager, so that’s how Stu finds out where Carmen goes to church. Soon enough, Stu shows up at the church like a stalker, and that’s how he discovers that Carmen is a Sunday school teacher at this Catholic church. At this point in Stu’s life, he’s a lapsed Catholic. Guess who’s going to be a regular attendee of this church? Guess who’s now going to want to look like a devoted Catholic? It’s Stu’s way of trying to charm Carmen into dating him.

Stu tells people that Carmen is “the love of his life” and his “future wife” shortly after meeting her. One of these people is the church’s Father Garcia (played by Carlos Leal), who is skeptical about Stu’s interest in Catholicism, but nevertheless has to listen to Stu’s rambling, self-indulgent diatribes when Stu does confessionals with Father Garcia. These confession scenes are very tiresome and have all the emotional resonance of air being let out of a windbag.

Carmen slowly falls for Stu, but then he gets into a horrific motorcycle accident where he is struck by a car and nearly dies. During his recovery, Stu and Carmen begin a sexual relationship, and she seriously starts to think that they will get married. But not so fast, Carmen. Stu has a religious epiphany and tells Carmen that he wants to become a priest during a conversation that she thought would be a marriage proposal to her. None of this is spoiler information, of course, because anyone who’s aware of this movie’s title should know what Stu’s vocation ends up being.

Carmen doesn’t take the news well at all. “You’re setting yourself up for failure,” Carmen tells Stu. She also calls Stu “delusional,” as she tearfully ends this conversation. But Carmen’s feelings are sidelined because the movie is on a mission to show the dubious redemption of Stu, as he goes from being a rough-talking hooligan to a rough-talking priest.

Stu’s father Bill also thinks Stu’s decision to become a priest is some kind of pathetic joke, just like the line that Bill delivers when he hears the news. Bill reacts to the news of Stu wanting to join the Roman Catholic priesthood by saying: “It’s like Hitler asking to join the ADL [Anti-Defamation League].” Considering that Gibson nearly ruined his career and permanently tarnished his reputation with his anti-Semitic rant during his 2006 arrest for drunk driving, it’s in very bad taste to have him tell a Hitler “joke” in a movie.

“Father Stu” then has numerous trite scenes where Stu is shown as a seminary “misfit” who’s determined to prove his naysayers wrong. Among those who don’t think that Stu has what it takes to become a priest is an uptight and pious seminary student (played by Cody Fern), who is the opposite of Stu in almost every way. Predictably, these two are forced to share the same sleeping quarters when they’re assigned to be roommates in their seminary.

Stu also shows that he’s racist against black people, when he expresses some bigoted points of view while interacting with an African American seminary student named Ham (played by Aaron Moten), who is a lot more patient with Stu than Stu deserves. Ham is essentially one of many characters who let Stu walk all over them and manipulate them. When Stu first meets Ham, he ridicules Ham for his name. Stu is so ignorant, he thinks the name Ham is some kind of “ethnic” thing.

Later, when Stu gets Ham to play basketball with him in their free time, Stu mocks Ham for not being as good at basketball as Stu expected. Stu literally says in the movie that he thinks Ham should be better at basketball because Ham is black. The scene is played for laughs, but it’s a putrid, tone-deaf scene where Stu never gets called out for his racism.

In addition to having a roommate that he despises, Stu also contends with a supervising teacher named Monsignor Kelly (played by Malcolm McDowell), who is a stereotypical stern priest who wants everyone to be as strictly religious as he is. Not surprisingly, Monsignor Kelly doubts that Stu is really serious about becoming a priest, so the two men inevitably clash with each other.

Time and time again, “Father Stu” spins Stu’s boorishness as being a freewheeling rogue who’s an underdog and underestimated by people around him. However, it just exposes the sexism in many aspects of society. After all, women who are this loathsome and violent probably wouldn’t be allowed to become Catholic nuns. And if they did, they certainly don’t get movies made about them.

“Father Stu” is essentially a vanity showcase for Wahlberg to play the same type of character that he’s been playing for years: cranky, argumentative and quick to step on people to get what he wants. Everyone else in “Father Stu” is just a two-dimensional sidekick in this tedious parade of enabling toxic masculinity, where the man who’s supposed to be redeemed gets many chances to turn his life around, while audiences are supposed to be cheering for him every step of the way. Needless to say, nothing about this movie is award-worthy, and lot of it is just a chore to watch.

Of course, the redemption of Stu also comes with a life-threatening disease: inclusion body myositis, so that audiences can feel even more sympathy for him. Unfortunately, in “Father Stu,” this disease is used as just another plot device to prop up Stu’s redemption arc. “Father Stu” is essentially a half-baked project that looks like a second-rate TV-movie. It certainly isn’t worth watching for the price of a movie ticket.

Columbia Pictures will release “Father Stu” in U.S. cinemas on April 13, 2022.

UPDATE: A new, PG-13 version of “Father Stu” will be released under the title “Father Stu: Reborn” in U.S. cinemas on December 9, 2022. The original version of “Father Stu” is rated R.

Review: ‘Navalny,’ starring Alexei Navalny

April 10, 2022

by Carla Hay

Alexei Navalny in “Navalny” (Photo courtesy of Warner Bros. Pictures)

“Navalny”

Directed by Daniel Roher

Some language in Russian with subtitles

Culture Representation: Taking place from 2018 to 2021, in Russia, Germany and Austria, the documentary film “Navalny” features an all-white group of political workers, journalists, investigators and family members who are connected in some way to Russian activist/politician Alexei Navalny.

Culture Clash: Navalny, who has been an outspoken critic/opponent of Russian president Valdimir Putin, launches an investigation to find out who poisoned Navalny in 2020, and he returns from exile to Russia, knowing that he is certain to be imprisoned. 

Culture Audience: “Navalny” will appeal primarily to people who are interested in documentaries about international politics, corruption and charismatic public figures.

Alexei Navalny and Maria Pevchikh in “Navalny” (Photo courtesy of Warner Bros. Pictures)

Although the story of Russian political activist Alexei Navalny has been widely reported in the news, the documentary “Navalny” is a wild and intriguing look at what went on behind the scenes when he tried to find out who poisoned him in 2020. Directed by Canadian filmmaker Daniel Rohrer, “Navalny” (which was filmed from 2018 to 2021) gives an up-close-and-personal view of Navalny and people in his inner circle, through interviews and other candid footage. It’s not only an enthralling story of an aspiring Russian politician but it’s also a gripping exposé of a Russian government’s response to outspoken critics. “Navalny” had its world premiere at the 2022 Sundance Film Festival, where it won the U.S. Documentary Audience Award and the Festival Favorite Award.

Navalny (who founded the Russian-based group Anti-Corruption Foundation) has no shortage of passion for the causes that he believes in, but he also has no shortage of ego. There are moments when he acts like he’s a rock star of Russian politics. While the Vladimir Putin-led Russian government portrays Navalny as a traitorous villain, and others see Navalny as a heroic martyr, what emerges in this documentary is a portrait of someone is who neither as dastardly nor as noble as some of the labels that have been thrust upon him. He comes across as shrewd, charismatic and hungry for power so that he can carry out what he says is his agenda: bringing true democracy and more equality to the people of Russia, especially the underprivileged.

These platitudes are often given by people who want to be in political leadership roles. But Navalny—an attorney who has never held an elected political office in the Russian federal government—claims that he really is interested in politics for all the right reasons. At the time this documentary was filmed, he was the leader of the Russia of the Future party. Navalny’s past attempts to run for various political offices have been interrupted by his numerous arrests. The documentary briefly mentions the controversy of his past association with anti-immigrant, white Russian national groups, whom Navalny now denounces. He says his past alignment with these bigoted groups was to open a dialogue with them.

As a political opponent to Russian president Putin, Navalny became very popular, as evidenced by his ability to draw huge crowds and by gaining millions of followers on social media. But a plane flight from Tomsk to Moscow on August 20, 2020, changed all of that momentum, when Navalny was poisoned with Novichok and nearly died while on that plane, which made an emergency landing in Omsk so he could get medical treatment. An investigation determined that Navalny had been poisoned in Novosibirsk, Russia, before he boarded the plane.

In the documentary, Navalny says that before this attempted murder happened to him, he thought that the more famous he became, the safer he would be from any dangerous attack because it would be made more public. “I was wrong,” he deadpans in the movie. In the beginning of the documentary, director Roher can be heard asking Navalny, “If you were killed, what message would you like to leave behind for the Russian people?” Navalny replies, “Oh, come on, Daniel. No way. It’s like a movie for the case of my death. Let it be movie No. 2. Let’s make a thriller out of this movie.”

Indeed, this documentary has many twists and turns into Navalny’s personal investigation into who poisoned him. This attempted murder was a crime that he always suspected was ordered by Putin. What was revealed in this investigation has already been reported, but seeing it unfold in this documentary is nothing short of fascinating.

Along the way, various people are featured in the documentary who are close to Navalny, including Navalny’s loyal wife Yulia Navalnaya and daughter Dasha Navalnaya, who was in her late teens at the time this documentary was filmed. Dasha comments on the poisoning of her father: “It was surreal. It was like [something in] a book.”

Later in the documentary, Dasha says of the burden that her father’s notoriety has placed on the family: “Since I was 13 years old, I’ve thought about what I would do if my dad was killed.” The movie also shows Yulia’s successful efforts to get her husband out of the hospital where he was taken after being poisoned, because the hospital had “more police and government agents than doctors.” He was safely transferred to a hospital in Germany.

“Navalny” gives an insightful look at the employees in Alexei Navalny’s trusted inner circle. Press secretary Kira Yarmysh is often the voice of reason among some of the chaos. Chief of staff Leonid Volkov is the steadfast right-hand man who carries out the leader’s commands but also has to make split-second decisions on his own. Maria Pevchikh, the Anti-Corruption Foundation’s chief investigator, is fiercely protective of her boss and sometimes combative. During the investigation, Pevchikh has to compromise and reluctantly agrees not share certain information with Alexei Navalny, so as not to taint his bias as a victim.

Also crucial to the investigation is a group based in Vienna, Austria, called Bellingcat, led by chief investigator Christo Grozev, who calls Bellingcat a bunch of “data nerds.” It was through Bellingcat’s sleuthing using technology (and some good old-fashioned phone calls) that essential clues were uncovered. The documentary also includes a few journalists (such as CNN’s Tim Lister and Der Spiegel’s Fidelius Schmid) who also investigated the poisoning.

“Navalny” is essential viewing for anyone interested in international politics. Viewers who see this movie can expect to go through a rollercoaster of emotions. And although the investigation does yield answers, “Navalny” is the type of documentary that concludes with a very “to be continued” tone, because events in Alexei Navalny’s life and in Russian politics are still making history.

Warner Bros. Pictures and Fathom Events will release “Navalny” in U.S. cinemas for a limited engagement on April 11 and April 12, 2022. CNN and CNN+ will premiere “Navalny” on April 24, 2022. HBO Max will premiere the movie on May 26, 2022.

UPDATE: “Navalny” will be re-released in select U.S. cinemas for a limited engagement, from February 24 to March 2, 2023.

February 16, 2024 UPDATE: Alexei Navalny died in a Russian prison on February 16, 2024. He was 47. Russian officials claim that he died after losing consciousness from feeling sick. Several of Nalvany’s loved ones and associates have gone on record to say that they think he was murdered.

Review: ‘Measure of Revenge,’ starring Melissa Leo and Bella Thorne

April 9, 2022

by Carla Hay

Bella Thorne and Melissa Leo in “Measure of Revenge” (Photo courtesy of Vertical Entertainment)

“Measure of Revenge”

Directed by Peyfa

Culture Representation: Taking place in New York City, the dramatic film “Measure of Revenge” features a predominantly white cast of characters (with some African Americans and Latinos) representing the working-class, middle-class and criminal underground.

Culture Clash: A fairly well-known Broadway actress is out for deadly revenge against the people who supplied a dangerous drug to her musician son and his pregnant girlfriend, who both died from an overdose of this drug. 

Culture Audience: “Measure of Revenge” will appeal primarily to fans of mindless vigilante movies, because nothing about this movie is appealing, interesting or well-done.

Jake Weary and Melissa Leo in “Measure of Revenge” (Photo courtesy of Vertical Entertainment)

The crime drama “Measure of Revenge” is such an atrocious dud, no one wants to be listed as the movie’s screenwriter. And it’s easy to see why. It’s a heinous story about a Broadway actress who becomes a murderous vigilante on a rampage because she wants revenge for the drug overdose deaths of her musician son and his pregnant girlfriend. Directed by Peyfa (the alias of Peter Wong), “Measure of Revenge” is nothing but a complete embarrassment to everyone involved in making this pathetic excuse of a movie. “Measure of Revenge” was filmed on location in New York City, which is probably the only thing that looks authentic in this very awkwardly acted and fake-looking film.

What makes “Measure of Revenge” so cringeworthy is that the movie tries to look artsy by throwing in various themes and characters from William Shakespeare plays. “Measure of Revenge” sullies, trashes and insults Shakespeare’s legacy in ways that are even more offensive than the phony-looking murders that take place in the movie. Believe it or not, the unhinged vigilante in “Measure of Revenge” commits one of her murders during an intermission for a play where she’s performing on stage as the Ghost in “Hamlet,” without bothering to change her clothes or disguise herself during the murder. She then goes back to her dressing room, as if no one would notice that she committed the murder while decked out in the same costume and makeup as she wore on stage in front of an audience.

Get used to a lot of this type of silly nonsense in “Measure of Revenge,” which is a movie that’s hard to watch not just because it’s so moronic, but also because it takes itself so seriously. Maybe the filmmakers thought that having an Oscar-winning actress in the cast (Melissa Leo) would automatically improve the movie’s quality. Wrong. Leo gives a lackluster performance as vigilante actress Lillian Cooper, who doesn’t garner much sympathy for her vengeful actions because they’re so ludicrously stupid.

During the course of the story, Lillian appears in various revisionist productions of Shakespeare plays that wouldn’t be worthy of a Broadway stage in real life and certainly wouldn’t pass muster in any reputable performing arts school. In other words, expect to see amateurish, almost laughable versions of “Macbeth” and “Hamlet” in “Measure of Revenge.” The movie’s horrible ending takes this Shakespeare theme to an idiotic and corny level that proves that there was no hope in redeeming this creatively bankrupt flop.

In the beginning of “Measure of Revenge,” Lillian (who’s a widow) happily welcomes her wayward son Curtis Cooper (played by Jake Weary) into her apartment, where he will be staying with her after getting out of rehab for addictions to drugs and alcohol. Curtis is a semi-famous musician/lead singer of a rock band called Red Drums. Curtis’ addictions have caused the band to cancel an upcoming tour.

Curtis’ rehab counselor Mike (played by Michael Gruenglas), who drops Curtis off at Lillian’s home, gives her this advice about Curtis: “Don’t let him out of your sight. The first few days [out of rehab] can be very delicate.” Curtis’ father/Lillian’s husband Raphael Cooper died in 1997, at the age of 36, long before Curtis grew up to become a famous musician.

Lillian’s home (which looks like a two-bedroom apartment) is about to get more crowded, because Curtis’ loving and supportive girlfriend Olivia (played by Jasmine Carmichael), who’s a nurse, is moving into Lillian’s place too. And soon afterward, Lillian finds out that Olivia is pregnant and that Curtis plans to propose marriage to Olivia. Curtis shows Lillian the engagement ring. Lillian approves of these marriage plans.

However, Curtis’ life after rehab isn’t going that smoothly. One day, Lillian is in a diner to meet Curtis for lunch. She looks out the window and sees Curtis in an angry confrontation with some of his band mates. She can’t hear what the argument is about, but she sees Curtis hit one of the men with the guitar that Curtis is carrying. When Curtis goes in the diner, all he will say to Lillian about his band situation is this: “I can’t go back to that world right now. It’s not for me.”

Not long after that, Lillian’s world is shattered when she comes home to find Curtis and Olivia dead. The medical examiner reports list the official cause of their deaths as an accidental overdose of a drug called PMA, which is described as being like Ecstasy (MDMA), but more toxic. Of course, Lillian doesn’t believe the overdoses were accidental. She’s certain that Curtis and Olivia were murdered, or at least that whoever supplied the drugs should be held responsible for these deaths. The police—including a dismissive cop named Detective Eaton (played by Michael Potts)—are of no help, so Lillian decides to take matters into her own hands.

Along the way, Lillian encounters a jaded photographer named Taz (played by Bella Thorne, giving a very stiff performance), who sells drugs, including PMA. Taz knew Curtis because she did album covers and portrait photography for him and his band. Lillian goes back and forth on whether or not she can trust Taz, who has a gun and gets menacing when Lillian tries to threaten her with a knife.

Taz knows a lot more than she’s telling, but she still gives Lillian enough information to point Lillian in the direction of the people who are Taz’s PMA suppliers. Lillian also has conflicts with Red Drums manager Billy (played by Ivan Martin); band member Ronin (played by Benedict Samuel); record company executive Claude (played by Kevin Corrigan); and a drug lord named The Gardener (played by Jamie Jackson), who has that nickname because he slit a man’s throat using gardening tools. Predictably, not everyone Lillian comes in contact with makes it out alive.

“Measure of Revenge” also has a love quadrangle as a weak subplot. Lillian finds out that before Curtis and Olivia became an official couple, Olivia was romantically involved with Ronin, but Olivia cheated on Ronin with Curtis. Meanwhile, Taz had her own secret affair going on with Curtis when he was dating Olivia. It’s all just another sordid aspect to this cheap and tacky movie.

During her murder spree, Lillian finds time to still do her Shakespeare plays, including her role as the Ghost in “Hamlet.” (And fittingly, early on in the movie, Lillian plays one of the three witches in “Macbeth.”) She also become increasingly disturbed and starts having hallucinations, such as thinking that she’s Gertrude from “Hamlet.” Not surprisingly, Lillian gets no enjoyment or satisfaction from her sloppy and dimwitted crimes. The same can be said for anyone who experiences “Measure of Revenge,” a sloppy and dimwitted crime against cinema.

Vertical Entertainment released “Measure of Revenge” in select U.S. cinemas, on digital and VOD on March 18, 2022.

Review: ‘Move Me’ (2022), starring Kelsey Peterson

April 9, 2022

by Carla Hay

Kelsey Peterson in “Move Me” (Photo by Brennan Vance/Submerged Film)

“Move Me” (2022)

Directed by Kelsey Peterson and Daniel Klein

Culture Representation: Taking place in Minneapolis, Los Angeles, and Madeline Island, Wisconsin, the documentary film “Move Me” features a group of almost all white people (and one person of Indian heritage) from the middle-class discussing the life of Kelsey Peterson, whose legs became paralyzed from a diving accident in 2012, when she was 27 years old.

Culture Clash: Peterson, who was an aspiring dancer when she became paralyzed, contemplates being part of a risky clinical trial to regain her muscle nerve sensations, and she becomes involved in a performing arts production called “A Cripple’s Dance.” 

Culture Audience: “Move Me” will appeal primarily to people who are interested in a true and inspirational story about adjusting to life using a wheelchair and how to overcome personal challenges and crises.

Kelsey Peterson in “Move Me” (Photo by Brennan Vance/Submerged Film)

On July 3, 2012, when Kelsey Peterson was 27 years old, she made a decision that would change her life: While she was drunk on a boat during a party, she dived into Wisconsin’s Lake Superior, and hit the ground. This fateful dive would leave her with quadriplegia, paralyzed from the waist down and with her arms partially paralyzed. Although this terrible accident changed her life, it does not define who Peterson is as a person.

If there’s any takeaway from Peterson’s biographical documentary “Move Me,” which Peterson co-directed Daniel Klein, it’s that people’s true characters should not be defined by their physical abilities but how they live their lives. It’s a story that takes a realistic look at adjusting to life after paraplegia, although it’s told from a very privileged perspective of people who have the health insurance and the resources for ongoing medical care. “Move Me” had its world premiere at the 2022 Full Frame Documentary Film Festival before its New York premiere at the 2022 ReelAbilities Film Festival.

Peterson is not famous, but she opened up for this documentary (her feature-film debut as a director and producer) to share her story about how she is living as someone who happens to use a wheelchair after losing the ability to walk. Peterson is mostly optimistic, but she understandably still struggles to come to terms with not being able to move around like she was able to do before her diving accident. “Move Me” is not a preachy film, but it’s a candid story about one person’s journey in facing harsh realities as a person with a disability and making decisions on how to move forward without falling into self-pitying traps.

“Move Me” is a look into a specific time in Peterson’s life, when she is considering being a participant in an experimental clinical trial to regain sensations in her paralyzed muscle nerves. During the movie, she also becomes a dance performer in local production called “A Cripple’s Dance,” which stars people who use wheelchairs, along with people who have the ability to dance with their legs. Before her diving accident, Peterson had dreams of becoming a professional dancer.

“Move Me” opens with voiceover narration from Peterson, who says about the ability to move her muscles that are now paralyzed: “I spend a lot of time imagining moving and remembering that feeling. I wonder if it would be easier not remembering the life that I miss and the life that I want. It’s like this hidden prick on your heart.”

She continues, “I used to be Kelsey, the dancer. Now, I’m Kelsey, the girl in the wheelchair … Yeah, I’m in a wheelchair, but I just get put in this box, like this one-dimensional character. It’s like I’m being underestimated or something.”

During various parts of the movie, Peterson show glimmers of hope that medical technology might improve so that one day, she might regain the ability to move parts of her body that now have paralysis. She’s realistic in accepting the medical diagnosis that she will probably never walk again without using some kind of physical aid. However, Peterson is fairly certain that there might be a time when she can regain feeling in parts of her body that are now numb with paralysis.

Peterson expresses curiosity and fear about a clinical trial in Minneapolis to get an electronic simulation implant to regain sensations in paralyzed muscles for people with quadriplegia. It’s a risky clinical trial where positive results are not guaranteed. Peterson worries out loud, “What if something goes wrong?”

During the documentary, Peterson interviews two middle-aged women who have participated in the clinical trial. A clinical trial participant named Kathy Allen, who is interviewed in person, is forthright in telling Peterson that the biggest improvement that Allen experienced was that it now takes her less time (an average of 30 minutes, compared to an average 60 minutes) to complete the bowel movement process. Allen says to Peterson about the clinical trial, “I don’t want to sound like an infomercial, but do it!”

The other participant who talks about the clinical trial is named Sandra, who is interviewed over the phone and whose last name is not revealed in the documentary. Sandra said that one of the best results of the clinical trial was that she was able to regain the ability to experience sexual orgasms, which she compares to feeling like a “balloon pop” since she has been paralyzed. Peterson is especially happy to hear about this result, because she says that just because she uses a wheelchair, it doesn’t mean that she’s lost her sex drive. However, Peterson reveals that after she was paralyzed, she didn’t have sex for five years.

Peterson also speaks with a man in his 20s named Xander Mozejewski, who did not participate in this particular clinical trial for electronic simulation implants, but he participated in a similar clinical trial. Mozejewski tells Peterson that he had mixed results: At first, he actually regained his ability to stand, but some apparent side effects included excruciating pain in his legs. Mozejewski’s story seems to make Peterson even more concerned about whether or not she should be part of the clinical trial that she is considering.

“Move Me” also chronicles Peterson’s participation in “A Cripple’s Dance,” a production conceived and directed by musician Gabriel “Gabe” Rodreick, a hippie-ish friend of Peterson’s who uses the stage name Freaque and who also happens to use a wheelchair. He explains that he chose to use the word “cripple” in the production title, to take back the derogatory meaning for the word and put it in a positive context. Gabe, his father Matthew Rodreick and Gabe’s stepmother Kristin Rodreick Wilson are also featured in the documentary.

Peterson is also shown briefly with several of her female personal care assistants, whose names are listed in the documentary as Jenn O’Reilly, Dhanyella “Nella” Kurchek, Avaline “Avi” Marshall and Christi Adaline. Peterson is also seen during a medical check-up with Dr. Arun Idiculla. Peterson is friendly and upbeat with all of them. And she doesn’t hide the process of what wheelchair-using people have to do to take care of certain bodily functions. There’s a scene in the movie that shows Peterson (who’s fully dressed) using a tube inserted through her abdomen to urinate.

In “Move Me,” Peterson is at her most emotionally vulnerable when she’s with her parents: Spence Peterson and Tori Moore. The documentary includes home video footage (mostly taken by Kelsey’s mother) of when Kelsey was a child and a teenager. In one of the home video clips, Spence is seen playing with two boy toddlers who appear to be Kelsey’s older brothers. If Kelsey has any siblings, they are not mentioned in the documentary and perhaps chose not to participate.

By her own admission, Kelsey is a “daddy’s girl.” She says, “My dad was that guy who brought joy and fun.” He sang and played guitar and passed on a love of music to Kelsey, who knew from an early age that she wanted to be a dancer. In the documentary, Kelsey’s mother says that Kelsey was in the hospital after the diving accident, Kelsey was very much in denial that her paralysis. “She thought she was going to walk out of there in three months,” says Moore.

Spence remembers that when he would visit Kelsey in the hospital, “She’d have a smile on her face … I think she was faking it for me.” Moore replies, “She definitely was,” as Spence’s drops his head in disappointment.” Later, he comments in an emotional moment on Kelsey’s paralysis, “It’s frustrating, because I can’t fix it. Daddies like to fix stuff. I can’t fix it.”

Another scene in the movie shows the heartbreak and guilt over the accident. Kelsey and her father Spence are on the phone when he scolds her about what caused the accident: “You drank too much, and you didn’t use good judgment.” Kelsey (who no doubt feels worse about the accident than anyone else) gets tearful when she says, “Dad, you have to forgive me though!” Spence replies, “Honey, I always forgive you. You can still be angry about something and forgive somebody for whatever’s happened.”

It’s in these moments that “Move Me” are at its most poignant, because the documentary shows the reality that living with a disability can be more painful psychologically than physically. In this documentary, Kelsey admirably also reveals what it’s like to deal with the extra level of trauma of knowing that her actions caused the accident, not because of someone else’s actions and not because she was born with quadriplegia. She says at one point about having to use a wheelchair: “This chair puts up a wall between me and the people I love sometimes.”

“Move Me” has recurring themes and discussions of coping with disappointments when life doesn’t turn out the way you thought it would. Kelsey also shares her feelings about how people treated her differently after she began using a wheelchair, such as strangers being less willing to make eye contact with her. And the movie takes a heartbreaking turn when it’s revealed that Spence has Stage 4 lung cancer.

“Move Me” isn’t a pity party, but the documentary could have used more self-awareness in acknowledging that having personal care assistants and the type of care that comes with health insurance can make a big difference in people’s recoveries. Wheelchair-using people who are financially deprived and/or don’t have health insurance aren’t as lucky. The movie also could have used some more interview perspectives, other than Kelsey’s family members, a few close friends and the three clinical trial participants she interviewed. However, the filmmakers should be commended for not overstuffing this documentary with talking heads and keeping the focus intimate and personal.

The technical aspects of “Move Me” are competently handled and include some nice artistic shots of blue fabric that is used in “A Cripple’s Dance.” The fabric is supposed to represent water in the performance. Whether not viewers can relate to Kelsey’s struggles, “Move Me” is a documentary that is completely engaging and often inspiring, because as a director and as a biographical film subject, she comes across as authentic and honest about showing this part of her life.

UPDATE: The PBS series “Independent Lens” will premiere “Move Me” on November 7, 2022.

Review: ‘Sonic the Hedgehog 2,’ starring James Marsden, Jim Carrey and the voices of Ben Schwartz and Idris Elba

April 9, 2022

by Carla Hay

James Marsden, Tika Sumpter and Sonic (voiced by Ben Schwartz) in “Sonic the Hedgehog 2” (Photo courtesy of Paramount Pictures and Sega of America)

“Sonic the Hedgehog 2”

Directed by Jeff Fowler

Culture Representation: Taking place in Green Hills, Montana; Oahu, Hawaii; Seattle and various parts of the universe, the live-action/animated adventure film “Sonic the Hedgehog 2” features a nearly predominantly white cast of characters (with some African Americans and Asians) and representing the working-class and middle-class, along with some outer-space creatures.

Culture Clash: Sonic the Hedgehog battles again against the evil Dr. Robotnik, who wants to take over the world and gets help from Knuckles the Echidna, who is searching for the all-powerful Master Emerald.

Culture Audience: “Sonic the Hedgehog 2” will appeal primarily to fans of the video-game franchise and people who like high-energy, comedic adventures that combine live action and animation.

Jim Carrey and Knuckles (voiced by Idris Elba) in “Sonic the Hedgehog 2” (Photo courtesy of Paramount Pictures and Sega of America)

“Sonic the Hedgehog 2” does almost everything a sequel is supposed to do in being an improvement from its predecessor. While 2020’s “Sonic the Hedgehog” movie looked like a middling TV special, 2022’s “Sonic the Hedgehog 2” has a much more engaging story and more impressive visuals that are worthy of a movie theater experience. “Sonic the Hedgehog” panders mostly to children, while “Sonic the Hedgehog 2” is an adventure story with wider appeal to many generations. To enjoy “Sonic the Hedgehog 2,” you don’t have to be a video game player, and you don’t have to be familiar with Sega Genesis’ “Sonic the Hedgehog” video games on which these movies are based.

Several of the chief filmmakers from the “Sonic the Hedgehog” movie (including director Jeff Fowler) have returned for “Sonic the Hedgehog 2.” Pat Casey and Josh Miller, who wrote the “Sonic the Hedgehog” screenplay, are joined by John Whittington for the “Sonic the Hedgehog 2” screenplay. “Sonic the Hedgehog 2” has an obvious bigger budget than its predecessor, since the visual effects are far superior to what was in the first “Sonic the Hedgehog” movie. What hasn’t changed is that Sonic (voiced skillfully by Ben Schwartz)—a talking blue hedgehog who can run at supersonic speeds—is still a brash and wisecracking character with an unwavering purpose of doing good in the world.

Thankfully, “Sonic the Hedgehog 2” avoids the pitfall that a lot of sequels make when they assume that everyone watching a movie sequel has already seen any preceding movie in the series. It’s easy to understand “Sonic the Hedgehog 2” without seeing the first “Sonic the Hedgehog” movie. “Sonic the Hedgehog 2” also picks up where “Sonic the Hedgehog” left off: The evil Dr. Robotnik (played by Jim Carrey), Sonic’s chief nemesis, has been banished to the Mushroom Planet, where he has been isolation for the past 243 days.

The first “Sonic the Hedgehog” movie showed how Sonic was raised in another dimension by a female guardian owl called Longclaw (voiced by Donna Jay Fulks), a benevolent and wise character. When an apocalyptic disaster struck happened, Longclaw saved Sonic by opening up a portal to Earth and telling him that Earth would be Sonic’s permanent home. Longclaw also gave Sonic a bag of magical gold rings which could open portals and do other magic.

In the first “Sonic the Hedgehog” movie, Sonic settled in with happily married couple Tom Wachowski (played by James Marsden) and Maddie Wachowski (played by Tika Sumpter) in the fictional city of Green Hills, Montana. Tom is the sheriff of Green Hills, while Maddie is a veterinarian. Tom and Maddie also have a (non-talking) Golden Retriever named Ozzy, who is a friend to Sonic.

In the beginning of “Sonic the Hedgehog 2,” Sonic (who acts and talks like a human teenager) has been “adopted” by Tom and Maddie. Sonic sees himself as a hero who is on a mission to fight crime, just like Tom. However, Sonic’s efforts often lead to a lot of unintended wreckage.

The movie’s opening scene shows Sonic in Seattle, as he interferes in an armored car robbery taking place at night. When Sonic shows up, the car driver, who’s been taken hostage in the back, asks Sonic: “Why don’t you let the police handle it?” Sonic replies confidently, “Because that’s not what heroes do!”

It leads to a high-speed chase and car crashes, but thankfully no fatalities. The robbers are apprehended, but the Seattle Police Department is annoyed that Sonic’s excessive eagerness to stop the robbery and catch the criminals resulted in thousands of dollars in damages. All of this wreckage makes the news, so Tom inevitably finds that Sonic snuck out that night and went all the way to Seattle to be involved in these crime-stopping shenanigans.

Tom takes Sonic on a fishing trip on a small boat, where he lectures Sonic about being too reckless in Sonic’s attempts to be a big hero. Sonic gets defensive and says, “You’re supposed to be my friend, not my dad.” Tom looks a little hurt and miffed, but he and Sonic agree to a compromise that Sonic should be more careful if he ever gets involved in any more crime busting.

Sonic won’t have long to wait before he gets involved in something bigger than stopping an armored car robbery. Back on the Mushroom Planet, Dr. Robotnik has been biding his time by experimenting with mushroom juice. He says out loud to himself, “I’ve been striving to make funghi a functional drink of choice, with limited success.”

Dr. Robotnik has kept one of Sonic’s quills, which he finds out has magical energy, so Dr. Robotnik uses the quill as a conduit that summons up a portal that goes to another dimension. Just as Dr. Robotnik declares that he’s about to leave this “shiitake planet” (pun intended by the filmmakers), Echidna soldiers fly through the portal to the Mushroom Planet. The soldiers are soon followed by their red-colored leader: Knuckles the Echinda, who has superstrength in his fists. Knuckles (voiced by Idris Elba) is the guardian of the Master Emerald, a gemstone that controls the Chaos Emeralds, but Knuckles has lost the Master Emerald and is searching for it.

When Knuckles tells Dr. Robotnik about his quest, the evil doctor seizes the opportunity to get Knuckles’ help in going back to Earth to get revenge on Sonic and take over Earth. When Knuckles sees that Dr. Robotnik has Sonic’s glowing quill, Knuckles asks Dr. Robotnik where he got the quill. Dr. Robotnik says that he got it from Earth. “I’d be happy to show you the way,” Dr. Robotnik sneers before he and Knuckles enter the portal to go to Earth.

Eventually, Dr. Robotnik and Knuckles decide to team up so that they can both get what they want: Knuckles wants the Master Emerald to restore power to his tribe, while Dr. Robotnik wants revenge on Sonic and to take over Earth. Of course, a double crosser such as Dr. Robotnik can’t completely be trusted, but Knuckles needs Dr. Robotnik’s vast knowledge of Earth, which is a completely unknown and foreign planet to Knuckles.

Meanwhile, Tom and Maddie are leaving Sonic at home to take a trip to Oahu, Hawaii, for the wedding of Maddie’s older sister Rachel (played by Natasha Rothwell), a single mother who clashed with Tom in the first “Sonic the Hedgehog” movie. Rachel is marrying a man named Randall (played by Shemar Moore), who is completely devoted to her. Rachel’s daughter Jojo (played by Melody Nosipho Niemann), who’s about 11 or 12 years old, is the wedding’s ring bearer. Maddie is Rachel’s maid of honor.

Because of this trip, Sonic and his human family are not together as often as they were in the first “Sonic the Hedgehog” movie. It’s a refreshing departure that frees up Sonic to have some adventures on his own. While Maddie and Tom are in Oahu, Sonic is at home in Green Hills with the family dog Ozzy when Dr. Robotnik shows up at the door.

In “Sonic the Hedgehog 2,” Sonic also meets a new ally coming from another universe: Miles “Tails” Prower (voiced by Colleen O’Shaughnessey), an adolescent, two-tailed yellow fox who hero worships Sonic. Tails becomes a major asset in the battle against Knuckles and Dr. Robotnik.

Two supporting characters from the first “Sonic the Hedgehog” movie return in this sequel and continue their roles as being some of the comic relief: Stone (played by Lee Majdoub), a former government agent, is an obsessively loyal assistant to Dr. Robotnik. Wade Whipple (played by Adam Pally) is the deputy sheriff of Green Hills. Both are essentially buffoon characters. Stone is seen working as a barista at a place called the Mean Bean Coffee Co. when he ecstatically finds out that Dr. Robotnik has returned to Earth.

The “race against time quest” in this movie takes Sonic to various places, ranging from a dive bar filled with Russian-speaking, rough-and-tumble characters; a ski slope for an adrenaline-packed chase on snowboards; and Oahu for the wedding. Because “Sonic the Hedgehog” has a lot of comedy, you can bet that there will be mishaps that this wedding, where Rachel hilariously turns into a “bridezilla” when things go wrong.

“Sonic the Hedgehog 2” seems to be more mindful than the first “Sonic” movie that much of this movie franchises’ target audience consists of adults who remember when the “Sonic the Hedgehog” video games first became popular in the early 1990s. Therefore, this sequel has more pop-culture jokes that adults are more likely than children to understand. The wedding scenes are almost a spoof of wedding scenes in romantic comedies, while Rachel turning into a “bridezilla” will look familiar to anyone who knows about the reality series “Bridezillas.”

At one point in the movie, it’s mentioned that owls and echidnas have been fighting each other for centuries. Sonic then quips, “Like Vin Diesel and the Rock.” In another scene, Dr. Robotnik tells Knuckles of their shaky alliance: “You’re as useful to me now like a backstage pass to Limp Bizkit.” People who know about rock band Limp Bizkit’s peak popularity in the late 1990s/early 2000s are most likely to understand that joke. Carrey’s gleefully over-the-top performance as Dr. Robotnik is reminiscent of his rubber-faced, mugging-for-the-camera roles that made him a star in the 1990s.

Sometimes, sequels can be hindered by introducing too many new characters in the story. However, Knuckles is a welcome addition, since his character is one of the best things about “Sonic the Hedgehog 2,” with Elba diving into the role with gusto. Knuckles is a pompous know-it-all who feels out of his element because he doesn’t know much about Earth. Much of the comedy about Knuckles is when his ignorance about Earth is showing, and he tries to hide his embarrassment with more ego posturing.

The character of Tails also brings some more personality to this movie franchise. Tails is the perfect complement to Sonic, who likes feeling as if he can mentor someone. Depending on your perspective, O’Shaughnessey’s voice makes Tails sound androgynous or like a boy whose voice hasn’t reach puberty yet. The movie has a mid-credits scene that shows another well-known character from the “Sonic the Hedgehog” video games will be introduced in the third “Sonic the Hedgehog” movie.

The pace of “Sonic the Hedgehog 2” is very energetic without rushing the plot too much. “Sonic the Hedgehog 2” is a two-hour movie that could have edited out about 15 minutes, but the two-hour runtime will fly by pretty quickly because the movie doesn’t get too boring. This is not a movie with any big plot twists or major surprises, but it fulfills its purpose of being family-friendly entertainment that might pleasantly surprise viewers who normally don’t care about movies based on video games.

Paramount Pictures released “Sonic the Hedgehog 2” in U.S. cinemas on April 8, 2022. The movie will be released on digital, VOD and Paramount+ on May 24, 2022. “Sonic the Hedgehog 2” is set for release on 4K Ultra HD, Blu-ray and DVD on August 9, 2022.

Review: ‘Mothering Sunday,’ starring Odessa Young, Josh O’Connor, Ṣọpẹ Dìrísù, Glenda Jackson, Olivia Colman and Colin Firth

April 8, 2022

by Carla Hay

Odessa Young and Josh O’Connor in “Mothering Sunday” (Photo by Jamie D. Ramsay/Sony Pictures Classics)

“Mothering Sunday”

Directed by Eva Husson

Culture Representation: Taking place in unnamed parts of England from 1918 through the 1980s, the dramatic film “Mothering Sunday” features a nearly all-white cast of characters (with one black person) representing the working-class, middle-class and wealthy.

Culture Clash: A woman’s journey as a maid and as a successful author are shown at various points in her life, which includes impactful love affairs that she had with two very different men.

Culture Audience: “Mothering Sunday” will appeal primarily to people interested in artsy British movies that have very good acting but with slow pacing that might frustrate some viewers.

Ṣọpẹ́ Dìrísù and Odessa Young in “Mothering Sunday” (Photo by Robert Viglasky/Sony Pictures Classics)

“Mothering Sunday” can be too pretentious for its own good, but the cast members’ thoughtful performances enrich the quality of this slow-paced film. Viewers must also be willing to tolerate the movie’s non-chronological storytelling of love, tragedy and hope. Because the movie’s story spans several decades (from 1918 to the 1980s) and has a timeline that jumps all over the place, “Mothering Sunday” requires a viewer’s full attention to keep track of which period of time is happening for the film’s protagonist in her youth.

Directed by Eva Husson, “Mothering Sunday” (which takes place in unnamed parts of England) touches on issues of upward mobility, inner turmoil, and how social class affects the decisions people make in love and marriage. Alice Birch adapted the “Mothering Sunday” screenplay from Graham Swift’s 2016 novel of the same name. “Mothering Sunday” made the rounds at several major festivals in 2021, including the Cannes Film Festival (where the movie had its world premiere), the Toronto International Film Festival and BFI London Film Festival. Cinematically, the movie is sumptuous to look at, but following the story will test the patience of people with short attention spans or those who have no interest in British period dramas.

“Mothering Sunday” depicts parts of the adult life of Jane Fairchild, who goes from being a maid to becoming an award-winning, famous author whose specialty is fiction writing. That transformation isn’t shown right away, as Jane’s life is revealed in scenes that can best be compared to a patchwork quilt. Most of the movie shows Jane in her 20s (played by Odessa Young) in the 1920s, while there are a few, very brief scenes of Jane in her 80s (played by Glenda Jackson) in the 1980s. Jackson’s scenes as Jane get only about five minutes of screen time in the movie. “Mothering Sunday” only shows Jane in these two decades.

The story is told in a non-linear way in the movie, but there are visual clues (such as Jane’s hairstyles) to show what period of time in her life is being depicted in each scene of her youth. It’s eventually revealed that Jane is an orphan who has no known relatives. She was abandoned by her single mother at an orphanage when she was a baby or a toddler. Jane’s childhood is never really shown or explained in great detail, but she’s grown up to be an introverted loner.

Somehow, when Jane was in her late teens in 1918, she ended up working as a house maid for a wealthy married couple named Godfrey Niven (played by Colin Firth) and Clarrie Niven (played by Olivia Colman), who live on an estate called Beachwood House. Much of the movie takes place in 1924, when Jane has been employed by the Nivens for six years. At this point in her life, Jane doesn’t see herself as being anything but part of society’s working class, until she has a forbidden love affair that changes her life.

This romance is the catalyst for much of what happens in the story and why Jane decides to transform herself into becoming a writer. The man whom she falls in love with is Paul Sheringham (played by Tom O’Connor), the son of wealthy spouses Mr. and Mrs. Sheringham (played by Craig Crosbie and Emily Woof), who don’t have first names in the movie. In 1924, Paul is in law school but he’s not particularly passionate about becoming an attorney. He’s chosen this profession because it’s expected of him.

Paul’s two older brothers Dick and Freddy no longer live in the family mansion. “Mothering Sunday” opens with a voiceover narration that essentially tells that the Niven family and Sheringham family have both experienced the tragic deaths of their young adult sons. World War I is one reason, but there are other reasons for these untimely deaths. Jane can be heard saying, “Once upon a time, before the boys were killed,” as a horse is shown running in an open field.

Paul can then be heard telling Jane that his family used to own a thoroughbred racing horse named Fandango. Paul says there was a family joke about the horse where “Ma and Pa owned the head and the body. Dick, Freddy and I had a leg each.” Jane then asks, “What about the fourth leg?” Paul replies, “Ah, the fourth leg. That was always the question, Jane.” Toward the end of the movie, this fourth leg is mentioned again in a way that will either make viewers roll their eyes in ridicule or possibly bring viewers to tears.

The title of “Mothering Sunday” comes from a pivotal Mothering Sunday (the British version of Mother’s Day) in 1924. Godfrey (who is kind, respectful and optimistic) generously decides to give Jane the day off from work, even though she doesn’t have a mother in her life, and Jane isn’t a mother. Jane’s closest female friend is the Niven family cook: Milly (played by Patsy Ferran), who has a bubbly personality but is a little shy when it comes to dating and romance. Milly and Jane spend part of this day off together.

It just so happens that on this day, Paul will have the mansion all to himself. And so, he calls the Niven home, knowing that Jane will answer the phone, to tell her to come over so they can have a sexual tryst. Jane pretends it’s a wrong number when Clarrie asks who called. The movie never details how long Paul and Jane have been having these secret hookups, but there’s a flashback scene that shows the day that Paul and Jane met, which was in 1918, shortly after she began working for the Niven family.

Paul and Jane tell each other that they are each other’s best friend. They’re keeping their romance a secret not just because they come from different social classes but also because Paul is expected to marry someone in his social circle: a spoiled heiress named Emma Hobday (played by Emma D’Arcy), whose parents—Giles Hobday (played by Simon Shepherd) and Sylvia Hobday (played by Caroline Harker)—are good friends of the Sheringham spouses and the Niven spouses. Paul doesn’t love Emma, but he feels obligated to marry her to please both sets of parents and to produce heirs from this marriage.

The Niven spouses have a tension-filled marriage because Clarrie is in a deep depression over the death of her son James, who was nearly engaged to Emma before James was tragically killed in combat during World War I. James and Paul were close friends, so Paul opens up a little bit to Jane about how James’ death affected him. Emma’s thoughts about James’ death are never shown in the movie, which portrays Emma as one-dimensional and someone who pouts a lot.

Clarrie’s grief sometimes comes out in angry spurts. She often acts irritable with her husband Godfrey and insults him in public. When she’s not acting cranky and annoyed with the world, Clarrie is withdrawn and quiet. Clarrie also acts resentful if she sees other people being what she thinks is being too happy for her comfort level. However, there’s a pivotal moment between Clarrie and Jane later in the movie that shows Clarrie’s hostile exterior is really just a mask for being heartbroken. This moment between Clarrie and Jane is one of the best scenes in “Mothering Sunday.”

Fans of Oscar-winning stars Colman and Firth might be disappointed to know that Colman and Firth don’t have as much screen time in “Mothering Sunday” as their top billing would suggest. Firth and Colman are each in the movie for about 15 minutes. However, they make the most of their screen time in portraying these contrasting and conflicted spouses.

Jane and Paul’s secret love affair is about more than just sex. They connect on an intellectual level. Jane loves to read and often sneaks into the Niven family library to read their books. Paul and Jane also bond on an emotional level, because they both feel like misfits in their environment, where they are expected to live a certain way because of society’s stereotypes for people of certain social classes.

Although there are full-frontal nude scenes (male and female) in “Mothering Sunday,” they are more about natural intimacy than eroticism. The sex scenes are actually very tame, but the full-frontal nudity is the adult-oriented content that will make parents of underage children decide if they think if it’s appropriate for their children to watch this movie. It’s implied throughout “Mothering Sunday” that Paul is Jane’s first true love.

Viewers can speculate that the movie has more male nudity than female nudity because “Mother Sunday” has a “female gaze” from a woman director. However, it can just as easily be interpreted that because these trysts happen in the Sheringham home, Paul simply feels more comfortable walking around fully naked in family house. In comparison, Jane is a little more guarded because she would suffer worse consequences than Paul if she and Paul got caught.

On the Mothering Sunday that changes Jane’s life, Paul has decided to have a tryst with Jane while Emma, his parents and Emma’s parents are waiting for him to arrive at a luncheon that all six of them are supposed to have together. Paul is going to the luncheon, but he knows he’s going to be late. What happens that day is revealed slowly revealed in flashbacks.

“Mothering Sunday” doesn’t handle the transition very well in showing Jane’s life after she decides to become a professional writer. The introduction to this part of her life is non-chronological and it’s rushed into the movie in an abrupt manner. It’s in this part of Jane’s life that she is involved in another meaningful love affair.

His name is Donald (played by Ṣọpẹ Dìrísù), and he is also a published author. When Donald and Jane first met (which is shown in a flashback scene), she hadn’t yet become a professional writer. She was working in a bookstore, he was a customer, and they had an instant rapport. Jane and Donald are both loyal and supportive partners to each other. In contrast to Jane’s secretive relationship with Paul, the relationship between Donald and Jane is out in the open. However, the movie never addresses the fact that Jane and Donald are in an interracial relationship in the 1920s.

This lack of acknowledgement of this couple’s racial differences implies that they are living in a part of England where interracial relationships were more accepted than in other parts of England. Still, it does come across as very phony and willfully ignorant that the movie never shows Donald and Jane experiencing or talking about any prejudice from other people because of the couple’s interracial relationship. Even in the most open-minded and progressive areas of England, a black man and a white woman in a romantic relationship would still cause problems for this type of interracial couple in the 1920s.

There are other large gaps in Jane’s life that aren’t adequately explained. Viewers never get to see if Jane went through any struggles as a writer before she had her first book published. Donald and Jane’s courtship is also a big mystery. The movie jumps from Donald and Jane being close to getting married, to a flashback scene to how they met, to Donald proposing marriage and Jane’s response.

Throughout this movie’s very messy and haphazard timeline, Young gives a consistently transfixing performance as Jane, who is an interesting contrast of being verbally articulate yet hard-to-read with her inner emotions. O’Connor also handles his role with aplomb to show that Paul is not just another spoiled rich kid, although Paul sometimes acts that way. Dìrísù doesn’t have much to do in the movie, because Donald is a very underdeveloped character.

Viewers might be bored with a lot of characters in “Mothering Sunday,” but Jane remains an interesting enigma whose life journey can inspire a lot of curiosity. Jane has been taught for most of her life to repress her emotions, so when she discovers that she is an artist who wants to express her emotions through her writing, it’s a metamorphosis that is thrilling to behold. And most audiences will be rooting for an orphan who grew up not knowing any parental love and is trying to find true love and a family of her own.

Unfortunately, because the movie frequently interrupts itself with flashbacks, viewers of “Mothering Sunday” never get a full picture of Jane blossoming as an artist. She’s certainly someone who has a lot of things that happen to her, but there should have been more in the movie that showed Jane being more of an active doer in her life, instead of someone passively reacting to whatever life threw her way. Someone like Jane doesn’t become a famous and highly respected author just by “luck.”

“Mothering Sunday” has a lot of scenes of people smoking cigarettes as they look out windows or stare off into space, looking pensive or worried. It’s not a movie that presents the story in a particularly exciting or straightforward way. But for people who like emotional nuance and characters that are like puzzles to be solved, there’s plenty to appreciate about “Mothering Sunday.” Just make sure you watch the movie when there’s very little chance that you’ll fall asleep, because a lot of how this story is presented can be snoozeworthy.

Sony Pictures Classics released “Mothering Sunday” in select U.S. cinemas on March 25, 2022. The movie’s release expanded in the U.S. on April 8, 2022. “Mothering Sunday” was released in the United Kingdom and other countries in Europe in 2021.

Copyright 2017-2024 Culture Mix
CULTURE MIX