drama Archives – Page 47 of 84

Review: ‘The Humans’ (2021), starring Richard Jenkins, Amy Schumer, Steven Yeun, Beanie Feldstein, June Squibb and Jayne Houdyshell

November 23, 2021

by Carla Hay

Pictured clockwise, from bottom left: Steven Yeun, Beanie Feldstein, June Squibb, Richard Jenkins, Jayne Houdyshell and Amy Schumer in “The Humans” (Photo courtesy of A24)

“The Humans” (2021)

Directed by Stephen Karam

Culture Representation: Taking place in New York City, the dramatic film “The Humans” features a predominantly white cast of characters (with one Asian person) representing the working-class and middle-class.

Culture Clash: A Thanksgiving family gathering in a creaky New York City apartment brings out various levels of tension and secrets.

Culture Audience: “The Humans” will appeal primarily to people who are interested in watching movies adapted from stage plays and movies about family gatherings that show realistic conversations.

Amy Schumer in “The Humans” (Photo courtesy of A24)

“The Humans” will keep viewers guessing on what terrible things might happen at an often-uncomfortable family reunion during Thanksgiving. It’s not a horror movie, but it’s a well-acted study of psychological turmoil. “The Humans” movie is the feature-film directorial debut of Stephen Karam, who adapted the movie from his Tony-winning play of the same name. Don’t expect any major plot twists to happen. This dialogue-heavy movie puts more emphasis on the characters’ interactions and creating an uneasy mood.

If watching “The Humans” makes some viewers feel slightly claustrophobic, that’s clearly the intention. The entire film takes place in one location: a drab New York City duplex apartment in a shabby building. It’s the type of apartment that’s probably overpriced just because it’s in Manhattan’s Chinatown, which has undergone various degrees of gentrification. The apartment has several rooms but still seems cramped and unsettling when the Blake family (the clan at the center of the story) gathers for this Thanksgiving dinner.

The two residents of the apartment are Brigid Blake (played by Beanie Feldstein) and her boyfriend Richard (played by Steven Yeun), who have recently moved into this duplex. Their move is so recent, their new home is still mostly unfurnished. Brigid, who is in her late 20s, is an unemployed classical musician/composer who is looking for work in her chosen profession. Richard, who is 35, is studying to be a social worker.

The other family members who are at this Thanksgiving gathering have all traveled from Pennsylvania. Brigid’s older sister Aimee (played by Amy Schumer) lives in Philadelphia. Brigid and Aimee’s parents are Erik Blake (played by Richard Jenkins) and Deirdre Blake (played by Jayne Houdyshell), who both still live in Scranton, where they raised Brigid and Aimee. Erik’s mother, who’s nicknamed Momo (played by June Squibb), uses a wheelchair and has dementia.

Momo lives with Erik and Deirdre, who is Momo’s primary caretaker while also holding down a job as an office manager. Later on in the movie, Deirdre mentions that she’s been at the same company for 40 years and started working there not long after she graduated from high school. Deirdre expresses some resentment that she’s been passed over for promotions. She complains that she now reports to two guys in their 20s who make a lot more money than she does, just because they have fancy college degrees.

Erik has also been a longtime staffer at his place of employment. For the past 28 years, he’s been working as a maintenance custodian at a Catholic school. As one of the perks of the job, when Aimee and Brigid were children, he was able to enroll them in the school without having to pay tuition. Erik and Deirdre are planning to build a lake house for their retirement. Construction on the house has been stalled due to various issues, but Erik tells the family that things are back on track to finish building the house.

Aimee, who is openly a lesbian or a queer woman, is experiencing some setbacks in her career and personal life. She’s heartbroken over a recent breakup with a girlfriend named Carol, who is not seen in the movie, but who talks to Aimee on the phone during one of the movie’s heart-wrenching scenes. Aimee also tells the family that she’s being ousted from her corporate job because she took too much personal time off from work.

Aimee needed the time off to deal with her medical issues: Aimee has kidney dysplasia and colitis. She hasn’t told her parents yet that she has to make a decision on whether or not to get surgery. Aimee confides in Brigid that she’s afraid that no one will want to date her after the surgery. Brigid gives Aimee a pep talk and tells her that Aimee is attractive and a great catch.

“The Humans” moves along at a slow pace where not much happens except people talking. However, throughout the movie, there are things that literally go bump in the night—specifically, loud thumps that can be heard from the apartment upstairs. The noise unnerves Erik the most. Several times during the movie, Brigid has to assure him that the noise is coming from a harmless elderly woman who lives upstairs.

Out of all the family members gathered for this Thanksgiving, Erik is the one who seems to be the most restless and on edge. He sometimes goes to the windows (which do not have drapes or blinds) to look out, as if he’s certain that people might be looking in on them. This old, creaky building also has problems with its electricity and plumbing. You can easily predict what will happen at one point with the electricity.

“The Humans” might give the impression that it’s going to turn into a haunted house movie. “The Humans” has some “jump scares,” but it’s best if people know in advance not to expect “The Humans” to be a horror film. There’s a feeling of foreboding and dread throughout the film, but it’s mainly from these family members dealing with and confronting their insecurities and secrets.

For example, there are various resentments that certain family members have toward each other. Brigid feels that her mother Deirdre is overly critical of her, while Deirdre resents that bossy Brigid always acts like talkative Deirdre is an embarrassment to the family. Erik and Deirdre are very religious, so they’d prefer that Richard and Brigid live together as a married couple. Brigid seems to want to eventually get married, but it’s a sensitive topic for her because she thinks that she and Richard should be more financially stable before thinking about marriage.

Erik and Deirdre accept Aimee’s sexuality, but they don’t discuss Aimee’s love life at length in the way that they talk about Brigid’s love life. These parents don’t really come right out and say it, but they show through their words and actions that they’re more invested in who Brigid’s life partner will be because they think that because Brigid is heterosexual, she’s more likely to get married and have children.

Erik is more judgmental than Deirdre, when it comes to what other people experience in life. For example, Erik believes that therapy is self-indulgent, and he thinks that he personally never needs therapy in his life. At one point during the dinner, when someone reveals getting treatment in the past for depression, Erik insensitively says that religion has been his own “anti-depressant.”

How religious is Erik? He has a figurine of the Virgin Mary that he has carried with him for this Thanksgiving dinner. And it should come as no surprise that he’s the one who leads the prayer before they begin their Thanksgiving meal. Erik believes in having a traditional patriarchal role for his family. And usually, when someone is this self-righteous in a movie, that person is probably the one who has the biggest secrets to hide.

This is Richard’s first Thanksgiving with the family, so he has the “outsider” role in the movie. He tries to keep the peace when certain family members start to bicker with each other. Richard has some secrets too that eventually come out in the dinner conversation.

As an example of how cheerful Richard wants this family gathering to be, he has a device that can project visual images onto any wall. He chooses to project the image of a cozy, burning fireplace. When it’s projected on the wall, it looks like a real fireplace, and it gives the drab and nearly empty room a warmer ambience.

Brigid, who is somewhat of a control freak, turns off the device because she thinks that having a fake fireplace looks tacky. Richard disagrees and wants to keep some kind of ambience projection image going in the room, to make the room look lived-in and not so barren. Observant viewers will notice that this back-and-forth between Brigid and Richard about whether or not to use this device in the room is not just about any power struggles in their relationship. It’s also about Brigid showing defiance about Erik’s expressed disapproval of the shabby condition of the apartment building.

Erik isn’t shy about telling Brigid that he thinks her choice to live in New York City is somewhat foolish, when she can have bigger and better living space in Scranton for a fraction of the cost of living expenses in New York City. It’s implied that Erik and Brigid have had ongoing disagreements about where she lives. She lives in New York City because she loves it and knows that she will have better career opportunities in New York, but Erik sees it as Brigid turning her back on her Scranton roots. Erik also doesn’t understand why Aimee wants to live in a big city like Philadelphia, although Erik is much more disapproving of Brigid living in New York City.

At first, Richard and Erik have some unspoken awkwardness between them, because Erik doesn’t know Richard very well and isn’t quite sure how much Richard might be a threat to Erik’s influence over the family. However, Richard is very mild-mannered and a people pleaser. Erik starts to warm up to Richard when he sees that Richard has no intention of being the most dominant person in this family.

But some things are really bothering Erik. And little, by little, he begins to reveal what those things are. Erik starts off by telling everyone that he’s been having nightmares of being chased in a tunnel. Richard then confesses that he’s also had a recurring nightmare: falling through an ice cream cone made of grass. Richard is also a sci-fi enthusiast, so he shares a theory of what outer-space aliens must think about human beings on Earth. This theory ties into the main theme of this movie.

Every movie about a family Thanksgiving dinner seems to have it share of family squabbles. “The Humans” is no exception. Much of this discord has to do with family members not feeling respected or heard. For example, an emotional blow-up happens after Brigid shares her disappointment over getting constant rejections for a grant and because her job search hasn’t been going well. Erik replies flippantly, “Well, you can always work in retail.” That comment sets off an argument between certain members of the family.

And what is Momo doing during all of this family drama? She doesn’t say much, but there’s a moment during the dinner when her memory seems very sharp. It gives the other family members some hope that maybe her dementia hasn’t gotten worse. How long that hope lasts is shown in the movie.

Because “The Humans” is more of a “slice of life” film instead of an event-filled movie, some viewers might feel disappointed that the movie isn’t a mystery thriller. The film’s music, cinematography and editing certainly give the impression that something terrifying and possibly supernatural could happen at any moment. However, viewers should know in advance that this movie has several scenes that show mundane activities, such as family members trying to navigate Momo’s wheelchair in narrow doorways, or people making small talk about repairs that need to be done in the apartment.

The main reason to see “The Humans” is for noteworthy performances by the cast members, who bring a lot of authenticity to their roles. The conversations between these family members are at their best when they’re about showing their vulnerabilities and not trying to put up a façade that life is perfect. And that seems to be the point of this movie: It’s easy to blame others for causing misery. It’s a lot harder to admit that people are sometimes their own worst enemies.

A24 will release “The Humans” in select U.S. cinemas and on Showtime on November 24, 2021.

Review: ‘House of Gucci,’ starring Lady Gaga, Adam Driver, Jared Leto, Jeremy Irons and Al Pacino

November 22, 2021

by Carla Hay

“House of Gucci”

Directed by Ridley Scott

Culture Representation: Taking place from 1978 to 1997, mostly in Italy and New York City, the dramatic film “House of Gucci” features a predominantly white cast of characters (with one Latina and a few Asians) representing the middle-class and wealthy.

Culture Clash: After middle-class Patrizia Reggiani marries into the wealthy Gucci family, family members start to battle over the Gucci empire of luxury goods, resulting in one of the family members getting murdered.

Culture Audience: “House of Gucci” will appeal primarily to fans of the movie’s star-studded cast, the Gucci brand and tawdry true crime movies.

Jeremy Irons in “House of Gucci” (Photo courtesy of Metro Goldwyn Mayer Pictures)

Just like a fake Gucci item, “House of Gucci” is a tacky sham that quickly falls apart. Don’t be fooled into thinking this is a high-quality movie, just because of the celebrity names and Oscar pedigrees of the movie’s headlining stars and director. The movie looks good, when it comes to production design, costume design, makeup and hairstyling. But the screenplay is atrocious, the acting is uneven, and director Ridley Scott helmed “House of Gucci” like it’s an idiotic melodrama made for mediocre television, but with a much higher budget than most TV-movies will ever have. (“House of Gucci” even has some laughably bad freeze-frame shots as lazy ways of putting emphasis on a particular emotion.)

It’s all the more reason for viewers to be disappointed that several Oscar winners and Oscar nominees have stepped into this “smoke and mirrors” cesspool of a movie. We all know that the fashion industry is all about image and how someone looks on the outside. That doesn’t mean that a movie about the Gucci empire’s biggest scandal needs to be shallow and superficial too.

The weakest link in “House of Gucci” is the screenplay, written by Becky Johnston and Roberto Bentivegna. They adapted the screenplay from Sara Gay Forden’s 2000 book “The House of Gucci: A Sensational Story of Murder, Madness, Glamour and Greed.” The “House of Gucci” movie is slipshod in certain details, by getting some basic facts wrong about this notorious murder case. And many parts of this movie are surprisingly dull. Don’t expect there to be any riveting scenes of a murder trial in “House of Gucci.” There aren’t any. There’s a poorly written, anti-climactic courtroom scene that’s rushed into the movie.

The Gucci murder case involved a complex group of real-life people, who are mostly reduced to caricatures in the movie. However, a few of the “House of Gucci” cast members make the film watchable because of their performances: Lady Gaga, Jeremy Irons and Jared Leto. They stand out for completely different reasons.

Lady Gaga is compelling to watch as the scheming Patrizia Reggiani, who was at the center of the Gucci scandal because Reggiani was convicted of masterminding a murder plot. The details of the Gucci murder case are well-documented, but in case anyone reading this review doesn’t know anything about the case before seeing the movie, this review won’t reveal who was murdered. (Although it’s pretty obvious, when you consider who would have to die for Reggiani to inherit a large share of the Gucci fortune.)

Lady Gaga’s performance as Patrizia Reggiani takes a deep dive into campiness, occasionally comes up for air in earnestness, and sometimes lounges around in limpness. Overall, Lady Gaga has the type of on-screen magnetism that even when Patrizia is doing awful things, it’s with the type of villainous charisma where you know this character is capable of convincing some people that she did very bad things for very good reasons.

A campy performance isn’t necessarily a problem if the rest of the actors are on the same wavelength. Unfortunately, “House of Gucci” director Scott failed to bring a cohesive tone to this movie. Other “House of Gucci” actors give performances that are not campy at all but come across as if they truly believe this is a serious, artsy drama worthy of the highest accolades in the movie industry in every top-level category.

That’s the kind of performance that Adam Driver gives in “House of Gucci,” where he portrays Patrizia’s beleagured husband Maurizio Gucci. Maurizio met Patrizia when he was a law student and had no intention of joining the family business. Driver’s portrayal of Maurizio has the type of personality transformation that actors usually relish.

Maurizio goes from being mild-mannered and easily manipulated when he meets Patrizia while he was in law school to becoming a ruthless and recklessly spending businessman who casts Patrizia aside when he decides to move in with his mistress Paola Franchi (played by Camille Cottin) and divorce Patrizia. Their divorce became final in 1994.

“House of Gucci” makes it look like Maurizio abandoned not only Patrizia but essentially neglected their daughter Alessandra after the divorce. The three actresses who portray Alessandra in “House of Gucci” are Nicole Bani Sarkute (Alessandra at 3 years old); Mia McGovern Zaini (Alessandra at 9 years old); and Clelia Rossi Marcelli (teenage Alessandra).

In reality, Patrizia and Maurizio had two children together: daughters Alessandra (born in 1976) and Allegra, born in 1981. The erasure of Allegra from the movie is just one of the many details that “House of Gucci” gets wrong. The movie also changes the timeline of when Patrizia and Maurizio met and got married. In the beginning of the movie, Patrizia meets Maurizio in 1978. In real life, Patrizia and Maurizio met in 1970 and got married in 1972.

In the “House of Gucci” movie version of Patrizia’s life in 1978, she was working as an office manager for her stepfather’s truck transportation business in Milan, Italy. Patrizia and Maurizio meet at a nightclub party of one of his friends. Maurizio is standing behind the bar, and Patrizia mistakes him for the bartender, so she asks him to fix her a drink. Maurizio thinks that she’s confident and sexy. He tells her that she reminds him of Elizabeth Taylor.

Patrizia seems much more interested in Maurizio when he mentions that his last name is Gucci. Patrizia asks Maurizio if he wants to dance. He says no. The scene then cuts to Patrizia and Maurizio dancing together on the dance floor. Patrizia’s persuasive personality sets the tone for much of their relationship.

It seems like the “House of Gucci” filmmakers decided to change this couple’s courtship to take place in the late 1970s solely for the purpose of having disco music in the movie’s scenes that depict the early years of their relationship. After all, Lady Gaga looks better twirling or slow dancing on a 1978 dance floor where there’s a disco ball and Studio 54-type of partiers, instead of a scene at a 1970 party that would probably have to be staged with a bunch of rich-looking hippies.

Therefore, the “House of Gucci” soundtrack serves up its share of disco music, such as Donna Summer’s “I Feel Love,” Donna Summer’s “Bad Girls,” Blondie’s “Heart of Glass” and Donna Summer’s “On the Radio.” Later, when the movie’s timeline goes into the 1980s, the soundtrack features songs such as the Eurythmics hits “Sweet Dreams (Are Made of This)” and “Here Comes the Rain Again.” The soundtrack songs often blare in “House of Gucci” in music-video-styled sequences that further cheapen the look of the movie.

The first sign that Patrizia is willing to do whatever it takes to get what she wants is when she stalks Maurizio on campus at his law school. She follows him into a library and pretends to “coincidentally” run into him again. This scene is like something right out of a Lifetime movie. Maurizio has no idea that he’s being targeted, so he goes along with Patrizia’s seduction and is eventually convinced that their relationship is true love.

Irons gives an understated and believable performance as Rodolfo Gucci, Maurizio’s widower father, who is the only Gucci family member who holds on to his dignity in this movie. Rodolfo is immediately suspicious of Patrizia and her intentions for his only child. Rodolfo doesn’t come right out and use the words “gold digger” when he warns Maurizio not to marry Patrizia, but Rodolfo expresses his concerns that Patrizia is not a woman of substance and that she seems to be latching on to Maurizio because of the Gucci family fortune.

Even though Rodolfo vehemently disapproves of Patrizia, it turns out that Rodolfo and Patrizia actually agree on something: They both think that Maurizio should go into the Gucci family business. However, Maurizio’s refusal to follow his father’s wishes leads to him being estranged from Rodolfo for a while.

Maurizio is kicked out of the family home and cut off from his family’s financial support. With nowhere else to go, Maurizio moves in with Patrizia and her parents. Maurizio gets a job working for Patrizia’s stepfather Fernando (played by Vincent Riotta), who’s depicted in the movie as someone who engages in shady business practices.

To put an emphasis on how much Maurizio is estranged from his former life, when Patrizia and Maurizio get married in a church, the movie makes a point of showing that the pews on the bride’s side of the aisle are filled with her family members and friends, while the pews on the groom’s side of the aisle are almost empty. George Michael’s 1987 song “Faith” is played in the movie’s soundtrack after Patrizia and Maurizio exchange vows and walk happily out of the church. This soundtrack choice is an example of more of the movie’s carelessness with details, because the wedding took place years before “Faith” was released and before Michael was even a pop star.

Meanwhile, Rodolfo’s older brother Aldo Gucci (played by Al Pacino, hamming it up in the type of moody roles he’s been doing recently) doesn’t trust Aldo’s dimwitted son Paolo (played by Leto) to be in charge of any part of the family business. Aldo reaches out to Maurizio to come back to the family fold, but Maurizio still hesitates. Patrizia eventually joins forces with Aldo to persuade Maurizio to reconcile with his family and become part of the Gucci business empire. Maurizio eventually agrees, because at this point in his life, he still wants to please Patrizia. For a while, Patrizia and Maurizio made their home base in New York City during Maurizio’s rise in the Gucci business.

More scheming and manipulations ensue, exactly like how you expect them to play out in a movie that is plagued with clumsy clichés. Patrizia and Maurizio are not shown having any meaningful conversations that are not about his family, money or business. In other words, the movie falls short of convincing viewers that Maurizio and Patrizia had a deep emotional love that would make him blind to her gold-digging ways.

Maurizio and Patrizia have a passionate sex life in the beginning of their relationship, so the movie implies that lust, not love, was what really brought this couple together. The sex scenes in “House of Gucci” aren’t very sexy because they look more like parodies of soap-opera-styled sex. Items on tables are shoved aside and crash on the floor to make room on the table for whatever sex act occurs. Any vigorous thrusting doesn’t look erotic but looks more like someone having a robotic workout routine at a gym. And the orgasms sound very fake.

It’s not much of a surprise that “House of Gucci” is a very “straight male gaze” movie where only women’s nude private parts are shown, not men’s nude private parts. And speaking of people in “House of Gucci” in various states of undress, this movie has a semi-obsession with Patrizia being seen in bathtubs or saunas. Apparently, the filmmakers want viewers to think that life is supposed to be more luxurious if you take baths instead of showers.

The supporting characters in “House of Gucci” are either over-the-top ridiculous (Salma Hayek as Giuseppina “Pina” Auriemma, a self-described psychic who befriends Patrizia), or bland as bland as can be (Jack Huston as Gucci financial advisor Domenico De Sole; Reeve Carney as fashion designer Tom Ford) with no intriguing personalities. Pina is a stereotypical con artist who gives vague predictions to Patrizia (“I see a big fortune coming your way”) and mystical-sounding advice, such as telling Patrizia that Patrizia should wear more red for “protection” and more green for “cleansing.”

The fashion industry is a mere backdrop to the betrayals and lies that usually originate from Patrizia and spread like a virus to other members of the Gucci family. For example, “House of Gucci” wastes an opportunity to give a fascinating insider’s look at the Gucci empire. Instead, the movie gives trite portrayals of the massive reinvention that the Gucci brand underwent from the 1970s to the 1990s. The movie serves up a fast-food version of what happened on the business side of the Gucci story.

“House of Gucci” unrealistically makes it look like it was only Patrizia who had the business sense to tell the family in the 1980s that it was devaluing the Gucci name by licensing the brand to cheap-quality merchandise, and that they needed to go back to Gucci being synonymous with luxury. The Gucci brand was then repositioned as “hip/trendy” (not old-fashioned) luxury. For all of her supposed business skills, Patrizia isn’t actually showing doing any real work as a so-called Gucci powerhouse. According to this movie, all she seems to be good at doing is telling people what to do.

The “House of Gucci” role of fashion designer Ford, a native of Texas who is credited with helping further reinvent the Gucci brand in the 1990s, is literally a walk-on role: The most memorable things that he does in the movie is give the traditional end-of-show designer stroll on a runway after showing a collection, and when Ford reads a newspaper article that praises him, he walks out of the room to say that he can’t wait to call his mother.

At no point in the movie is anyone in the Gucci empire shown having a strong relationship with Ford, even though he was a driving force at Gucci, where he worked from 1990 to 2004, with most of those years spent as Gucci’s creative director. There are some hints that De Sole had his own agendas and ambitions, but the character is written in a completely boring and hollow way. Unless you’re a fashion aficionado who knows about De Sole and his further ascent in the Gucci empire, you might have a hard time remembering his name after watching this movie.

“House of Gucci” is also problematic in how it portrays women, because the three female characters with the most prominent speaking roles are either villains (Patrizia and Pina) or a mistress (Paola). Vogue magazine editorial executive Anna Wintour (played by Catherine Walker), actress Sophia Loren (played by Mãdãlina Ghenea) and Paolo’s wife Jenny Gucci (played by Florence Andrews) have meaningless cameos in “House of Gucci.” Even back in the 1970s to 1990s, when this movie takes place, women were so much more important in the fashion industry than what “House of Gucci” makes it look like.

Out of all the portrayals of the Gucci men in “House of Gucci,” Leto’s performance as Paolo is the flashiest one. Much of the performance’s standout qualities have to do with the top-notch prosthetics that Leto wears to make him look like a completely different person who is heavier and older than Leto’s real physical appearance. However, Leto does show some actor panache by having an amusing Italian accent, and he plays Paolo’s buffoon role to the hilt, bringing some intentional comedic moments.

Leto’s performance is only marred by some silly-looking scenes, such as when Paolo does an awkward dance of jubilation with Patrizia when she deceives aspiring fashion designer Paolo into thinking that his horrendous fashions are fabulous and worthy of being part of the Gucci brand. It’s the type of scene that looks like something Steve Martin and Dan Aykroyd would’ve rejected for their Two Wild and Crazy Guys act on “Saturday Night Live.” Paolo’s words and actions get more cartoonish as the movie goes along. A low point is when Paolo urinates on a Gucci scarf in a fit of anger.

Unfortunately, the best performance efforts by the “House of Gucci” cast members can’t overcome the very cringeworthy screenplay that ruins this movie. In one scene, when Patrizia and Maurizio have an argument, she chokes up with tears and says: “I had no idea I married a monster.” He replies coldly, “You didn’t. You married a Gucci.” In another scene, Pina snarls at someone, “Don’t fuck this up, ’cause I’ll put a spell on you!” In another scene, Paolo says, “Never confuse shit with chocolate. They may look the same, but they’re very different. Trust me, I know!”

The Paolo character might want to warn people not to confuse defecation with chocolate, but viewers should be warned not to confuse “House of Gucci” with being a superb film. For a movie that’s supposed to be about a haute couture/luxury fashion brand, it wallows in the muck of cheap gimmicks, sloppy screenwriting and a lack of self-awareness about how horrendous the worst parts are. The end result is a tawdry mess. And you can’t erase the stink from that.

Metro Goldwyn Mayer Pictures will release “House of Gucci” in U.S. cinemas on November 24, 2021. “House of Gucci” is set for release on digital and VOD on February 1, 2022. The movie’s release date on Blu-ray and DVD is on February 22, 2022.

Review: ‘King Richard,’ starring Will Smith

November 21, 2021

by Carla Hay

“King Richard”

Directed by Reinaldo Marcus Green

Culture Representation: Taking place in the early-to-mid-1990s, mainly in California and Florida, the dramatic film “King Richard” features a cast of African American and white characters (with a few Latinos) representing the working-class, middle-class and wealthy.

Culture Clash: Coming from an underprivileged background, Richard “Richie” Williams becomes the first tennis coach of his daughters Venus and Serena, but his unorthodox methods often clash with the traditions of the elite world of tennis.

Culture Audience: “King Richard” will appeal primarily to people who are fans of star Will Smith and the real-life Venus Williams and Serena Williams, as well as people who are interested in well-acted sports movies about people who triumph against the odds.

Saniyya Sidney, Demi Singleton, Will Smith and Tony Goldwyn in King Richard” (Photo by Chiabella James/Warner Bros. Pictures)

The dramatic film “King Richard” is both a tribute and a feel-good Hollywood version of how Richard “Richie” Williams guided his daughters Venus and Serena to tennis superstardom. The movie is set in the early-to-mid-1990s, at the beginning of Venus’ and Serena’s tennis careers. The tennis matches in the story focus more on Venus’ rise to tennis glory, since her championships came before Serena’s.

In the role of Richard Williams, Will Smith gives a very charismatic performance as a flawed but loving and determined father. The movie shows in abundance how Richard Williams’ stubbornness was both an asset and a liability when he became the person who had the biggest impact on Venus’ and Serena’s respective tennis careers. As it stands, this movie is told from Richard’s male and very domineering perspective.

What saves this movie from being unchecked worship of patriarchy is that it gives credit to Oracene “Brandy” Williams (Venus and Serena’s mother, winningly played by Aunjanue Ellis) as being an underrated, positive force in the family. Oracene (who was a nurse when this story took place) was the one who held the family together in their toughest times. She was also the intelligence behind some of the crucial decisions that were made when Venus and Serena were underage children. If Richard was the “king” of the family, then Oracene was undoubtedly the “queen.”

Directed by Reinaldo Marcus Green and written by Zach Baylin, “King Richard” doesn’t shy away from some of the controversial aspects of Richard Williams’ life, nor does the movie portray him as saintly. But the title of the movie says it all: The intention of “King Richard” is to give Richard Williams the same level of respect as the tennis stars who are treated as sports royalty. It’s a bit of a stretch, considering that Richard wasn’t the only coach that Venus and Serena ever had.

The movie acknowledges that Venus (played by Saniyya Sidney) and Serena (played by Demi Singleton) had plenty of other people who helped them along the way. There are moments when “King Richard” puts Richard Williams a little too much on a pedestal for being a “prophet” who predicted, when Venus and Serena were in elementary school, that Venus and Serena would become phenomenal tennis champs. Much ado is made about his 78-page plan where he made these predictions. The movie also depicts how Richard filmed homemade videos as electronic press kits to promote Venus and Serena.

Lots of parents have grandiose plans for their children, but it helps if those kids have the talent for whatever the parents are motivating them to do. This movie could have had a little more insight into the talent that makes Venus and Serena so special, as well as more information on when they started showing an interest in tennis. “King Richard” starts off with Venus at approximately age 11 and Serena at approximately age 10, with Richard as their “tough love” coach, already practicing on run-down tennis courts in their working-class hometown of Compton, California. At the time, Richard worked the night shift as a security guard.

The movie makes it look like all Richard had to do in the earliest days of their tennis career was to get Venus and Serena to practice a lot, in order to put the two sisters on the path to becoming great tennis players. But did Venus and Serena start with that passion for tennis, or were they pushed into it? The movie never says, because Richard (as the protagonist) is the main focus of the story. (It should be noted that Smith is also one of the producers of “King Richard.”) There are countless tennis parents who do the same things that Richard did to prepare their kids to become professional tennis players, but we don’t hear about them because their tennis kids just aren’t talented.

In the movie, Oracene (who was a widow when she married Richard in 1980) is the one who tells Richard that practicing on inferior tennis courts with substandard tennis rackets would get Venus and Serena nowhere, no matter how much hard work they did. Oracene is the one who motivates Richard to make the right connections in the elite world of tennis, where you need the kind of money that’s required to pay for training and entry fees into top tennis tournaments. However, the Williams family couldn’t afford these fees at the time. It’s at this point in the movie that Richard starts to transform himself into a maverick wheeler dealer in the tennis world.

He’s an unlikely tennis maverick. From the opening scene, the movie makes it clear that Richard’s English grammar skills aren’t very good, and he comes from a rough-and-tumble background. In a voiceover, Richard describes the type of upbringing he had: “Tennis was not a game peoples played. We was too busy running from the [Ku Klux] Klan.” (Richard was born in 1942 in Shreveport, Louisiana.)

Later in the movie, Richard tells his daughters: “When I was your age, I had to fight someone every day,” which is why he says that doesn’t get as fazed by setbacks as other people might be. The issues of racial differences and social-class inequalities are ever-present in the movie because a huge part of Venus’ and Serena’s success story is about how they became champions in a sport that’s been accessible mainly to white people who can afford it.

The Williams family members who are also depicted in the movie are Oracene’s three daughters from her first marriage: Tunde Price (played by Mikayla Bartholomew), Isha Price (played by Daniele Lawson) and Lyndrea Price (played Layla Crawford). (In real life, Venus, Serena and Isha are among the executive producers of “King Richard.”) When this movie takes place, the Williams household consists of Richard, Oracene, Venus, Serena, Tunde, Isha and Lyndrea. The girls are seen being being playful and happy around each other, doing things such as karaoke-type talent shows in their home when they spend time together.

However, “King Richard” has fairly shallow portrayals of Tunde, Isha and Lyndrea as nothing but characters whose main purpose in life is to agree with Richard and cheer on Venus and Serena when needed. In a household of five sisters, the sisters are never seen arguing with each other, or having jealousy issues because a parent seems to favor one child over another. This lack of sibling conflict is very unrealistic. The movie doesn’t seem to want to acknowledge that Richard’s single-minded focus on making Venus and Serena tennis champs surely came at a cost to his relationship with his stepdaughters, who must have felt treated differently by him.

Even in the best of circumstances, “King Richard” makes it look like Richard didn’t think his stepdaughters were worthy of the same type of attention that he was giving to Venus and Serena. Richard briefly mentions that he thinks that his other daughters in the household are “future doctors and lawyers,” but if he spent any time supporting his stepdaughters’ career goals, the movie never shows it and never shows what those goals were. “King Richard” doesn’t make an effort to distinguish the personalities of Tunde, Isha and Lyndrea, because the movie just makes them background characters in the Richard Williams show.

The only time Richard is showing individual “protective dad” attention to one of his stepdaughters is in an early scene in the movie where 16-year-old Tunde is watching Venus and Serena practice on a Compton tennis court. Richard and his other stepdaughters are there too. Some guys in their 20s are nearby. One of them, who’s named Bells (played by Craig Tate), tries to flirtatiously talk to Tunde, who seems uncomfortable with his attention. She quickly walks away from Bells when Richard sees what’s going on and tells her to get away from this leering stranger. Richard steps in and orders Bells to leave Tunde alone because she’s only 16 and not interested in dating him.

In response, Bells turns into a thug and punches Richard hard enough for Richard to fall to the ground. Richard gets up and walks away, but all five of the girls have witnessed this assault while waiting in Richard’s Volkswagen van. When he gets in the van and he’s asked if he’s okay, that’s when Richard says he had to fight someone every day when he was the same ages as his daughters. “And I didn’t have no daddy to stand in the way,” he adds. “They’re going to respect y’all.”

It won’t be the last time Richard takes a beating. He gets beat up physically, emotionally and mentally in various ways during his unstoppable efforts to make Venus and Serena among the greatest tennis players of all time. He gets plenty of rejections, of course. And he’s openly ridiculed for his decision to take Venus and Serena out of junior league tennis tournaments, so that Venus and Serena could focus on their education and go directly to the professional leagues. He often annoys people with his blunt approach, because he can be arrogant.

Richard is not a smooth talker, but the one characteristic that defines Richard in his key to his success is persistence. He’s well-aware that he doesn’t come from an educated, privileged and well-connected background. But that’s exactly why he’s so hungry for the success that he wants for Venus and Serena. He’s also fiercely proud and supportive of Venus and Serena, even if they lose a match. At least that’s how the movie portrays him.

Because of Richard’s persuasive finagling, Venus and Serena sign on with their first professional coach: Paul Cohen (played by Tony Goldwyn), who agrees to coach Venus and Serena for free because he believes in their talent and wants a cut of any prize money they will eventually win. For a while, Oracene helped RIchard with coaching duties for Serena when Cohen initially said he would only coach one of the sisters for free, and Richard decided it would be Venus. Later, Venus and Serena sign on with coach Rick Macci (played by Jon Bernthal), who agrees to relocate the entire Williams household to Macci’s home base in Florida’s Palm Beach County, where he pays for all of their living expenses and buys them the house where they live.

Macci is also motivated by getting a percentage of the millions that he thinks Venus and Serena will eventually earn. At the time, the Rick Macci International Tennis Academy (in Delray Beach, Florida) was best known for training tennis star Jennifer Capriati (played by Jessica Wacnik), who was an idol of Venus and Serena. Macci is shocked and dismayed when the investment he thought he made in Venus and Serena as future junior league champs turns out to be funding for Venus and Serena to not go on the junior league circuit after all.

It’s because Richard didn’t want his future tennis champs to get burned out on the junior league circuit. Richard tells Macci of this plan after Richard got what he wanted in their contract. Richard made the then-controversial and unheard-of decision to take Venus and Serena out of the junior leagues (the traditional route for tennis players to turn pro), so they could go to school like “normal kids” while training to go straight into the professional leagues.

Richard is further convinced he made the right decision when he sees the scandalous downfall of Capriati, beginning with her 1994 arrest for marijuana possession. The arrest exposed many of Capriati’s personal problems, which she has since largely blamed on the pressures and burnout of her junior league tennis career. Many people doubted that Venus and Serena could turn pro in their mid-teens, but Venus and Serena proved the naysayers wrong.

In addition to Capriati, other real-life tennis players are depicted by actors in brief appearances in the movie. They include John McEnroe (played by Christopher Wallinger), Pete Sampras (played by Chase Del Rey) and Arantxa Sánchez Vicario (played by Marcela Zacarias), who is Venus’ opponent in the movie’s big tennis showdown. McEnroe and Sampras are seen training with Cohen during one of Richard’s first meetings with the coach. Don’t expect any of these other tennis stars to have any meaningful lines of dialogue in the movie. Each person only says a few sentences.

In the movie, Richard is depicted as being a proverbial “helicopter dad” who hovers during practice and tries to tell coaches Cohen and Macci how to do their jobs. The movie demonstrates in these scenes that these coaches only tolerated Richard because of Venus’ and Serena’s talent, not because these coaches genuinely liked Richard as a friend or respected him as a business person. Macci, who’s more emotional than Cohen, isn’t afraid to express his anger at feeling deceived or frustrated by Richard. Both coaches are the friendliest to Richard when it’s about how they can make money off of Venus and Serena.

The movie tends to gloss over the fact that for all of Richard’s big talk, what really opened important doors for Venus and Serena were the money and connections of coaches such as Cohen and Macci. Richard was a package deal with Venus and Serena. We’ll never know how differently Richard might have been treated by some of these people if Venus and Serena weren’t his underage children at the start of their tennis careers.

In other words, if Venus and Serena weren’t underage children under Richard’s legal control, would he have been as successful in launching their careers? The movie implies the answer: Probably not, because less people in the tennis industry would’ve tolerated him and his admittedly alienating ways.

However, it’s precisely because Richard was the father of Venus and Serena that he protected them in ways that many coaches or managers probably would not have protected them. The issue of race cannot be underestimated because Venus and Serena got “real talk” from Richard about the racism they would experience in the sport of tennis, which has a reputation for being elitist and catering mainly to white people. As such, one of the movie’s obvious “Oscar bait” clips is a scene where a tearful Richard tells Venus in a pep talk about her groundbreaking role in professional tennis: “You’re not just going to be representing you. You’re going to be representing every little black girl on Earth!”

Venus and Serena are portrayed as polite, hardworking children who have no other interests besides tennis and hanging out with their sisters. In the movie, Richard is shown discouraging Venus and Serena from getting too close to kids outside of their family. When Richard wants a “yes” answer from his daughters, they answer, “Yes, Daddy,” like robotic kids on command. Richard expects Venus and Serena to tell him he’s their best friend when he asks. Venus complies with the answer Richard wants to hear, but Serena says Venus is her best friend first.

It’s all played for laughs and feel-good cheer. But some of this banter just seems a little too phony, giving the impression that a lot of the real story is left out about how Richard would lose his temper and say harmful things to Venus and Serena. It’s hard to believe this movie’s rosy portrayal that Richard never really yelled hurtful things to Venus and Serena, when every hard-driving, tough-talking coach does that one point or another to people whom the coach is training. The perspectives of Venus and Serena are not given much importance in this movie, except when it comes to how they’re going to win tennis matches.

For example, viewers never learn what Venus and Serena liked to study in school or what types of friends they made in school, even if the movie makes it look like Richard was the type of father who didn’t want his underage daughters to invite any friends to visit them in their home. The movie never shows how the family celebrated milestones such as Venus’ and Serena’s birthdays, or when they graduated from middle school to high school. It’s a strange omission, considering that in real life, Richard got a lot of criticism precisely because he wanted Venus and Serena to have “normal” school experiences at that age instead of going on tennis tours.

The movie’s erasure of Venus’ and Serena’s childhood experiences that aren’t related to tennis or family all goes back to the patriarchal purpose of the movie: Showing how Richard programmed Venus and Serena on how to be tennis champs, not how to prepare them for life after tennis. There have been several documentaries about Venus and Serena where the two sisters openly admit that they will have a difficult time dealing with life when they both retire from tennis.

And how hard was Richard on Venus and Serena? The movie hints that people had concerns. There’s a scene where a police officer and a government social worker go to the Williams home in Compton to investigate a complaint that Venus and Serena were being abused because of all the rigorous training that Richard made them do.

Richard and Oracene are naturally insulted and defensive. They deny any abuse, and nothing comes of the complaint. The movie makes it look like a jealous neighbor named Ms. Strickland (played by Erika Ringor) is behind the complaint, but you have to wonder if that neighbor character was created in the movie as a villainous stand-in for well-meaning people in real life who had concerns about Richard’s parenting skills.

Whether or not there was any abuse, the family did have serious problems, which is acknowledged in one of the movie’s best scenes. It’s when Oracene confronts Richard for letting his ego stifle Venus’ wishes to play in the professional leagues at the age of 14. Oracene and Richard have an argument, which leads to Oracene verbally ripping into Richard for abandoning the family he had with his first wife and not seeming to care about having a relationship with the children he left behind in the divorce. (Richard had five biological kids and one stepchild with his first wife Betty Johnson, to whom he was married from 1965 to 1973.)

During this argument, Oracene reminds Richard that he’s had a string of failed businesses because he gave up too quickly when things got a little too hard for him. It’s easy to read between the lines, even though the movie doesn’t come right out and say it: Venus and Serena were Richard’s last-ditch attempt to get rich after he failed at starting his own businesses. He needed their talent because his own skills as an entrepreneur were questionable at best.

In the movie’s zeal to put Richard on a “prophet pedestal” and to make Oracene and Richard look like a loving couple that will stay together “’til death do us part,” the movie’s epilogue leaves out this reality: Richard and Oracene divorced in 2002. In 2010, Richard married his third wife Lakeisha Juanita Graham (who’s young enough to be his daughter), they had a son, and then the marriage ended in divorce in 2017. Maybe the “King Richard” filmmakers think that the public shouldn’t care about these details of Richard being a failure as a husband because Venus and Serena turned out to be rich and famous.

Despite the flaws in the movie’s screenplay, “King Richard” has exemplary acting from Smith, who gives one of his best movie performances as the gruff but compelling Richard. Sidney’s portrayal of Venus gets more of an emotional journey than Singleton’s portrayal of Serena, who is mostly in Venus’ shadow at this point in the sisters’ lives. (In real life, Serena would later emerge has having a more assertive personality than Venus.)

In the movie, Richard explains to Serena that he planned for Venus to become a star first. Richard predicts Venus will be ranked No. 1 in the world before Serena achieves that same goal, but Serena will eventually be considered by many to be the “greatest of all time” in tennis. He tells Serena: “I knew you was rough, you was tough, and you was a fighter.”

Sidney and Singleton both adeptly handle the movie’s tennis-playing scenes. A big highlight of the movie is an emotionally gripping, climactic scene at the 1994 Bank of the West Classic tournament in Oakland, California. One of the movie’s strengths is that it doesn’t fall into the usual clichés of how sports dramas usually end. However, the tropes of a “tough love” father/coach are played to the hilt.

As a sports movie, “King Richard” might disappoint some viewers who are expecting more screen time devoted to tennis matches. But more tennis matches on screen should be expected if Venus and Serena were the central characters. “King Richard” never lets you forget that the central character is someone who was never a pro tennis player: Richard Williams. However, the movie has the grace to admit that Venus and Serena turned out to be extraordinary people because of their mother Oracene too.

Warner Bros. Pictures released “King Richard” in U.S. cinemas and on HBO Max on November 19, 2021.

Review: ‘C’mon C’mon,’ starring Joaquin Phoenix, Gaby Hoffmann and Woody Norman

November 19, 2021

by Carla Hay

“C’mon C’mon”

Directed by Mike Mills

Culture Representation: Taking place in various U.S. cities (including Los Angeles, New York City and New Orleans), the dramatic film “C’mon C’mon” features a predominantly white cast of characters (with a few African Americans and Latinos) representing the working-class and middle-class.

Culture Clash: A never-married, middle-aged bachelor, who works as a radio producer, finds out for the first time in his life what it feels like to be a parent when he takes care of his estranged sister’s 9-year-old son for an extended period of time.

Culture Audience: “C’mon C’mon” will appeal primarily to people who are interested in watching emotionally intimate, well-acted movies about family relationships.

Woody Norman and Gaby Hoffmann in “C’mon C’mon” (Photo by Tobin Yelland/A24)

What does “family” mean to you? The answer depends on who’s answering the question. The dramatic film “C’mon C’mon” (written and directed by Mike Mills) is an emotional portrait of three family members coming to terms with their individual identities and what the concept of “family” means to them. The movie also takes an equally impactful, broader look at children’s various perspectives of the world, because the male lead character (who’s a radio producer) travels across the U.S. to interview children about the world for his radio show.

As the three family members who go through various ups and downs in the story, Joaquin Phoenix, Gaby Hoffmann and Woody Norman give noteworthy performances that will make more than a few viewers shed some tears, but not in a manipulative, melodramatic way. The acting in the movie looks natural and somewhat effortless. In some ways, “C’mon C’mon” is a road trip movie, but the real journey is how the three main characters discover new things about each other and themselves.

“C’mon C’mon,” whose cinematography is entirely in black and white, was filmed from November 2019 to January 2020, before the COVID-19 virus infection rate turned into a pandemic. However, the movie seemingly aims not to identify the story by any particular year in the early 21st century. “C’mon C’mon” made the rounds at a few film festivals (such as the Telluride Film Festival, Chicago International Film Festival and New York Film Festival), because of the movie’s pedigree as an awards contender. The entire story of “C’mon C’mon” takes a low-key approach, so don’t expect extreme plot developments or surprising twists to happen.

In the movie, Phoenix is a radio producer named Johnny, who lives in New York City, but he travels a lot because of his job. Johnny is a never-married bachelor in his 40s, he has no children, and he’s currently not dating anyone. Later on in the film, it’s revealed that Johnny hasn’t had a special love in his life for quite some time. He’s essentially “married” to his work. He’s good at his job, but he doesn’t seem emotionally attached to anyone. That’s about to change.

Johnny is currently working on a series that interviews children from all over the United States. In the interviews, Johnny asks them things such as “What do you think about the future?” or “What scares you?” or “What makes you angry?” Sometimes, the children are interviewed with their parents in the room, while other times no adults are in the room except Johnny and a co-worker. Throughout the movie, various children are shown being interviewed by Johnny. Most times, they appear on screen, but other times, Johnny is seen playing back snippets of these audio interviews.

“C’mon C’mon” opens in Detroit, where Johnny is doing some of these interviews. A 13-year-old girl who’s being interviewed says that adults have to pay more attention to what’s around them. Throughout the movie, many of the children’s comments express a hopeful but concerned outlook on life. Many of the kids worry about some of the problems that they have to deal with (a decaying environment, racism, economic insecurities) that they think will become heavier burdens when they are adults.

One day, when he’s in a hotel room, Johnny gets a call from his estranged younger sister Viv (played by Hoffmann), who is is only sibling. Viv, who is a single mother living in Los Angeles, has called to tell Johnny that she needs him to come to Los Angeles to temporarily take care of her 9-year-old son Jesse (played by Norman), who barely knows Johnny. Viv explains that Jesse’s father Paul (played by Scoot McNairy), who moved to Oakland (which is about 370 miles north of Los Angeles), is going through some personal issues, and Viv wants to be there for Paul. Viv and Paul (who were never married) are no longer a couple, and she has sole custody of Jesse.

The conversation is polite but strained. There’s obvious tension between Johnny and Viv, which they don’t want to get into over the phone. However, it’s revealed in this phone call that Johnny and Viv have some lingering resentment toward each other over their mother, who died about a year ago after an extended period of being in ill health. Eventually, viewers find out that Johnny and Viv disagreed over how their mother should be cared for in her final months of life and whether or not taking her off of life support should be an option.

Johnny agrees to put some of his work on hold to go to Los Angeles and look after Jesse. When he arrives at Viv’s home, Jesse is shy with Johnny, an uncle he hasn’t seen for years. However, Jesse is aware that Viv and Johnny have barely spoken to each other and have had an estranged relationship for quite some time. And this family discord isn’t just because of Johnny and Viv’s mother.

The tension between Viv and Johnny is also because Johnny disapproves of Paul. Not everything about Viv and Paul’s history with each other is revealed, but enough comes out in conversations for viewers to find out why Johnny considers Paul to be a disruptive force in their family. It’s implied that Johnny never really thought that Paul was good enough for Viv, especially because of the emotional pain she went through by being in a relationship with Paul.

Paul has bipolar disorder, which is not specifically said out loud in the movie, but it’s implied based on his symptoms and other clues in the movie. For example, Jesse has a children’s book called “The Bipolar Bear Family: When a Parent Has Bipolar Disorder,” written by Angela Ann Holloway. Paul has been in a psychiatric facility before to get treatment for his mental illness.

Paul apparently doesn’t have any close relatives who can look after him, because Viv seems to be the only person in his life who’s taken on the responsibility of getting him the treatment that he needs. And because Paul and Viv were never married and are no longer a couple, it explains the murky situation that comes about when Viv has to make certain decisions about Paul’s medical care. Paul is shown briefly in the movie in present-day scenes and in flashbacks.

Paul is a symphony musician, who moved to the San Francisco Bay Area because he wanted to work for the San Francisco Symphony Orchestra. As Viv explains to Johnny, “the transition fucked him up,” and Paul is having some kind of breakdown. Viv needs to go to the San Francisco Bay Area to see about convincing Paul to check himself into another mental health facility again. She would rather that he get treatment voluntarily, because she doesn’t want to be the one to force him into an involuntary admission to a psychiatric institution.

Meanwhile, Jesse is aware that his father has bioplar disorder, but no one in the family has ever told him any specific details about why Paul’s illness is severe enough that he has to get in-patient treatment for it. (The word “suicidal” is never mentioned to Jesse, but it’s implied that Paul has been a danger to himself.) All Jesse knows is that his father sometimes has to go into a hospital when he has another episode that needs treatment. The stigma of mental illness is realistically portrayed in “C’mon C’mon,” as something that family members feel secret guilt or shame about, because they often try to hide or deny the illness.

During the course of the movie, Viv has to stay in the San Francisco Bay Area longer than she expected. And so, Johnny ends up taking care of Jesse for longer than Johnny expected. The majority of “C’mon C’mon” is about how Johnny and Jesse’s uncle/nephew relationship evolves to the point where Johnny becomes the closet thing that Jesse has to a father figure. At one point, Johnny contemplates whether or not he should move to Los Angeles.

Johnny’s caretaking of Jesse doesn’t happen in one, long continuous stretch. There’s a point in the movie where Viv returns to Los Angeles and then has to go back to the Bay Area again, but Johnny can’t be in Los Angeles because of work commitments. Jesse begs Viv to let him stay with Johnny in New York City and then travel with Johnny on the job. Johnny and Jesse’s travels are not spoiler details, because they’re shown in the movie’s trailers.

Jesse is a precocious and curious child who loves to read. Viv encourages Jesse to be a free thinker and allows him to question things. It’s why Jesse asks Johnny some questions that make Jesse uncomfortable, such as why Johnny isn’t married. Johnny says that he was with someone named Louisa, but she broke up with him. Johnny says he still loves Louisa, who is not seen in the movie.

One question that’s harder for Johnny to answer is why he and Viv stopped talking to each other for a long time. Johnny tactfully explains to Jesse that it’s because he and Viv couldn’t agree on the caregiving for their dying mother. The mother’s cause of death is never mentioned in the movie, but there are flashback scenes of Viv and Johnny visiting their mother on her deathbed.

There were resentments and jealousies between the two siblings before their mother got sick. Viv always felt that she never got the full approval of her mother and that Johnny was the favored child. Johnny felt like Viv’s tension with their mother was the reason why Viv seemed to not be as compassionate with their dying mother as Johnny thinks Viv should have been.

Johnny doesn’t want to badmouth Viv to Jesse, so he doesn’t tell Jesse these things. However, Johnny and Viv do confront their bitter feelings for each other with arguments over the phone. Paul’s current mental breakdown has also triggered bad memories of when Johnny told Viv to break up with Paul in the past, when Viv wasn’t ready to end the relationship. Viv thinks that Johnny meddled too much in her relationship with Paul.

Soon after Johnny begins taking care of Jesse, Jesse tells Johnny that Viv correctly predicted that Johnny would be a little awkward with Jesse, but that Johnny will eventually get used to Jesse. During the time that Johnny spends with Jesse, he finds out that taking care of a child is a lot harder than he thought it would be. Viv has certain bedtime rituals for Jesse that Jesse wants Johnny to do too. Jesse also shows signs of hyperactivity, so Johnny calls Viv for advice on how to get Jesse to go to sleep.

Another thing that Johnny has to learn is how to be a responsible caregiver when it comes to children’s meals. Like a typical bachelor who lives alone and travels frequently, Johnny has a refrigerator that is not stocked with much that’s appropriate for a child. When Johnny takes Jesse with him to go grocery shopping, Johnny gets a scare when Jesse wanders off and Johnny frantically tries to find him.

The movie shows in a lot of tender and quiet moments how this uncle and nephew eventually learn to trust each other, like each other, and eventually become friends with each other. Johnny and Jesse find out that that they have a lot more in common than they originally thought. They both love Viv but they both dislike how she lets Paul’s problems consume her. Johnny and Jesse are also more comfortable talking about things outside of themselves rather than their innermost feelings. When Johnny tries to interview Jesse for his radio show, Jesse is very reluctant and says no.

However, Jesse notices that Johnny likes to make audio diaries, so Jesse starts making his own audio diaries too. Johnny also shows Jesse how to operate Johnny’s professional audio equipment. There’s an adorable scene that takes place on California’s Venice Beach where Johnny and Jesse discover that Jesse not only likes operating this equipment, he could end up having a passion for radio. When Jesse arrives in New York City, Johnny introduces Jesse to two other radio producers who work closely with Johnny: Roxanne (played by Molly Webster) and Fern (played by Jaboukie Young-White), who are both very friendly to Jesse.

One of the most effective aspects of “C’mon C’mon” is how unpretentious it is in showing that learning and protection between adults and children can go both ways. Too often, dramas with a story of an adult taking care of a child for the first time will put an emphasis on what the adult is going to teach the child. However, “C’mon C’mon” shows that Johnny learns a lot from the children he’s in contact with, whether it’s someone he met briefly during an interview, or a nephew who turns out to be a special and unexpected friend. The movie has a pivotal scene in New Orleans that’s an example of how powerful a child’s emotional protection and wisdom can be.

The black-and-white cinematography gives “C’mon C’mon” a timeless vibe to it that looks best in the New York City scenes. In other scenes, such as in the vibrancy of a New Orleans street parade or in the sunny glow of Venice Beach, some viewers might wish that the movie had been in color. The movie’s lack of color doesn’t take away from the exemplary performances and screenplay for “C’mon C’mon,” which have such authenticity, it will resonate with viewers.

In “C’mon C’mon,” Phoenix gives an understated and nuanced performance as a “regular guy” (the type of character that he usually doesn’t play), who finds out from a child that he’s not as emotionally mature as he thought he was. In the role of perceptive Jesse, Norman gives a breakout performance that will stand as one of the best from a child actor in a 2021 movie. Hoffmann brings heartache and grit to her performance as Viv, who feels conflicted and guilty over the messiness in her life, while doing her best to make what she thinks are the right decisions.

“C’mon C’mon” could have been a very sappy movie that goes off in very phony directions. Fortunately, it is not, although some viewers might be a little bored if they’re expecting more exciting action in this movie. As for the movie’s most emotional scenes, there are some genuinely sentimental, tearjerking moments, but this is not a tragic story. There are no over-the-top villains or crazy adventures.

It’s a story grounded in reality about people trying to get through life in the best way that they can. What inspired the title of this movie? It’s from one of Jesse’s audio diary entries, where he says that when unpredictable things happen in life, you just have to “c’mon c’mon.” This human resilience is celebrated eloquently in “C’mon C’mon.”

A24 released “C’mon C’mon” in select U.S. cinemas on November 19, 2021.

Review: ‘My Country, My Parents,’ starring Wu Jing, Leo Wu, Zhang Ziyi, Yuan Jinhui, Xu Zheng, Han Haolin, Shen Teng and Hong Lie

November 14, 2021

by Carla Hay

“My Country, My Parents”

Directed by Wu Jing, Zhang Ziyi, Xu Zheng and Shen Teng

Mandarin with subtitles

Culture Representation: Taking place in China in 1942 to 1945; 1969; 1978; and the 21st century, the dramatic four-part anthology film “My Country, My Parents” (also titled “My Country, My Family”) features an all-Asian cast of characters representing the working-class and middle-class.

Culture Clash: The movie tells four separate stories of struggles and conflicts over parental issues.

Culture Audience: “My Country, My Parents” will appeal primarily to people who are interested in movies about Chinese culture and about universal issues over parents or guardians who try to do the best they can for their children.

Zhang Ziyi and Yuan Jinhui in “My Country, My Parents” (Photo courtesy of CMC Pictures)

The dramatic anthology film “My Country, My Parents” is an uneven but still-interesting film with enough entertaining and emotionally moving moments that outweigh the moments when the movie falters with dull predictability. It’s a movie that is told in four parts (or four short films strung together), each from a different director who stars in each of the four stories. The four stories are “Windriders,” “Poem,” “Ad Man” and “Go Youth.” “My Country, My Parents” (which is also titled “My Country, My Family”) is the follow-up to 2019’s seven-part anthology film “My People, My Country” and 2020’s five-part anthology film “My People, My Homeland.” All of these films were created to put an emphasis on Chinese patriotism through the lens of stories about humanity and personal relationships.

“Windriders” (directed by Wu Jing)

“Windriders” is the first story in “My Country, My Parents.” Taking place from 1942 to 1945, during the Second Sino-Japanese War, it’s exactly what you might expect from a war movie. Wu Jing stars as Ma Renxing, a widower and a commander of the Jizhong Cavalry Regiment. He often clashes with his impulsive and equally stubborn son Ma Chengfeng (played by Leo Wu), who argues with his father, especially about who will get to ride a stallion called Big Boss.

Battle scenes on horseback get a lot of screen time. Although this story throws in some tragedy and sentimentality, “Windriders” puts more priority on the war action. Most viewers won’t find much to emotionally connect with or relate to in this story, unless you’ve had the experience of going into war combat with a parent or child. The filmmaking for this story isn’t bad, but it’s ultimately forgettable.

“Poem” (directed by Zhang Ziyi)

“Poem” takes almost the opposite approach of “Windriders,” by pouring on so many emotions and so much angst, it almost becomes a mini-melodrama. Zhang Ziyi stars as Yu Kaiying, a gunpowder sculptor in 1969. She has gone through two major tragedies within a 10-year period: The biological father of her two children died while serving in the military. He passed away when the kids were too young to remember him. (Du Jiang plays the father in a flashback.) And now, the children’s stepfather Shi Ruhong (played by Huang Xuan), the only father the kids have ever known, has died, also while serving in the military.

In 1969, her two children are a son nicknamed Four Eyes (played by Yuan Jinhui), who is about 7 or 8 years old, and an unnamed daughter (played by Ren Sinuo), who’s about 4 or 5 years old. Yu Kaiying is so devastated by Shi Ruhong’s death that she doesn’t know how to tell her kids, And so, she lies to them by saying that Shi Ruhong is still away from home because of military duties.

However, Four Eyes knows something is wrong because several other children in the neighborhood have missing fathers who disappered during military duty and are presumed dead. He begins to suspect that the only father he’s ever known has met the same fate, and he starts to ask questions. This leads to Yu Kaiying reminiscing about her courtship with Shi Ruhong, who liked to write poems to her.

Everything in “Poem” is bathed in warm-tinted cinematography (in dark gold and tawny), as if to give the movie a romantic glow. However, there are some harsh realities in the story that might be hard for some people to watch. Yu Kaiying is far from being an ideal parent. One day, Four Eyes has a tantrum and yells at her that she’s not a real father because his father used to spank him. She loses her temper and starts spanking Four Eyes until he’s in a sobbing heap. His younger sister witnesses this abuse and starts crying too.

Yu Kaiying shows remorse to her children for losing control of her emotions in such a negative way. The kids forgive her, but some viewers might lose any sympathy for Yu Kaiying during this domestic violence scene. It’s a jarring contrast to all the lovey-dovey courtship scenes in “Poem.” The story concludes by showing Yu Kaiying’s children as adults and what they ended up doing with their lives.

“Ad Man” (directed by Xu Zheng)

“Ad Man,” which takes place in 1978, is a welcome relief from the death and destruction of the previous two stories. The movie is a lighthearted story starring Xu Zheng as Zhao Pingyang, a struggling entrepreneur who decides to film his first TV commercial for his business of selling medicinal wine. He has bought so much wine, that it’s cluttered up his modest home that he shares with his wife Han Jingya (played by Song Jia) and their son Zhao Xiaodong (played by Han Haolin), who’s about 10 or 11 years old.

Zhao Xiaodong is so embarrassed by his father that he lies about what his father does for a living. The movie opens with Zhao Xiaodong giving a presentation in front of other students in a classroom where they have to talk about their fathers’ jobs. Zhao Xiaodong says with false pride that his father has been an architect, furniture maker, and he became the top sales manager at a pharmaceutical company. He also brags that his father predicted that phones without cords would be invented.

In the middle of this presentation, a boy stands up in class and says that Zhao Xiaodong is lying about everything. The boy announces that Zhao Pingyang is really a financially broke “loser” who’s heavily in debt and who used to sell duck eggs in front of the school. Zhao Xiaodong is so angry by what this boy says that he throws a book at him and gets in trouble for it. However, it’s true that Zhao Pingyang has serious financial problems and that he used to sell duck eggs in front of the school.

Zhao Pingyang’s wife Han Jingya is so upset with him for putting the family in a financial mess that she’s on the verge of divorcing him. Zhao Xiaodong makes it clear to his father that he’s also ashamed of him. Partially out of desperation and partially out of inspiration, Zhao Pingyang decides the best way to jumpstart his failing business is to film a TV commercial, which was still rare for small businesses in China in 1978.

Because he’s new to TV advertising, many mistakes are made, resulting in some comedic scenes. Zhao Pingyang ends up hiring a film crew of eccentric people. And eventually, he decides to star in the commercial himself. Is the commercial a success? Does he eventually get the respect of his wife and son? This is a feel-good story, so you can predict the rest.

“Go Youth” (directed by Shen Teng)

The best story in the movie is saved for last. “Go Youth” is a dramedy set in 2020, when a talking male robot (played by Shen Teng) from outer space has been sent to Earth and crash-lands in a field. He gets dismembered in the fall, but he puts himself back together. The robot eventually finds its way to the home of a boy named Xiao Xiao (played by Hong Lie), who’s about 7 or 8 years old. Xiao Xiao is the only child of his widow mother Ma Daiyu (played by Ma Li), who spends a lot of time away from home, presumably because she has to work.

Xiao Xiao finds that he can control the robot by telling it what to do. The robot is named Xing Yihao, and he tells Xiao Xiao that he’s from the year 2050. “I’m fresh from the production line,” the robot says to Xiao Xiao. “They brought me here.” (Who are “they”? That question is answered at the end of the film in a delightful plot twist.)

The robot couldn’t have come at a better time in Xiao Xiao’s life. Xiao Xiao is a lonely child who’s being bullied at school by other kids. He can’t really talk about it with his mother, whom Xiao Xiao describes as “a nag.” Because Xing Yihao looks and acts like a real human being, Xiao Xiao pretends that the robot is his new father.

Xiao Xiao’s deceased father was a scientist/researcher whose specialty was artificial intelligence. Xiao Xiao also has an interest in computer-based science, so he easily bonds with the robot. At first, he treats Xing Yihao like a toy, but then he grows fond of the robot and starts treating it like a father figure/friend. A poignant moment happens when Xiao Xiao teaches the robot how to smile.

Xiao Xiao’s mother Ma Daiyu seems to give Xiao Xiao a lot of freedom to do things without adult supervision. She’s not around to see a lot of the shenanigans that Xiao Xiao gets up to with his new companion. Xiao Xiao and Xing Yihao spend a lot of time outdoors, where Xiao Xiao teaches Xing Yihao some things about how to live on Earth.

The robot also happens to have superhuman strength, which comes in handy when Xiao Xiao wants to fend off the school bullies, or to make a big impression in an upcoming athletic competition where fathers and sons pair up in teams. It’s during this athletic competition where Xiao Xiao sees that he and Xing Yih o,make a great team. It gives Xiao Xiao a lot of self-confidence, as well as respect from many of his classmates.

Xiao Xiao gets so emotionally attached to the robot, there’s a cute scene where Xiao Xiao introduces Xing Yihao to his mother as a blind date for her when she’s startled to see the robot for the first time. Xing Yihao is dressed in a spacesuit outfit when Ma Daiyu first sees the robot, so she thinks he’s a man who’s into cosplaying. No romance happens between the mother and the robot, but Xiao Xiao attempting to get his mother to like the robot is a sign that he wants Xing Yihao in his life for the long haul.

However, things don’t go as smoothly as Xiao Xiao would like. The robot keeps talking about having to go back to its place of origin. This kind of talk makes Xiao Xiao sad and confused, so he tries to ignore this robot’s wish to go back to its original home. Eventually, this issue can no longer be ignored, but how everything is resolved is not what a lot of viewers might expect.

“Go Youth” is the best story in this anthology because of how it’s heartwarming without being overly sentimental. It has the right blend of drama and comedy. And most of all, the dynamics between Shen Teng and Hong Lie are very entertaining to watch. Hong Lie is by far the most talented child actor in this anthology. He’s believable in every single scene. And although Shen Teng plays a robot, he brings glimmers of human empathy in the robot to make it an engaging character.

If there’s any noticeable flaw in all of this movie’s anthology stories, it’s in the sexist way that children who are girls are sidelined and not given much to do or say. In every story of this anthology, a male child is the only or main focus of a parent’s attention. Considering that Chinese culture is very patriarchal, it’s not too much of a surprise that male children are given more importance than female children in these stories. However, it’s commendable that a female director got to tell her story in this anthology. It might be gender tokenism to have only one female director out of four directors, but being part of the storytelling is better than being completely excluded.

CMC Pictures released “My Country, My Parents” in select U.S. cinemas on October 8, 2021. The movie was released in China on September 30, 2021.

Review: ‘Never Stop’ (2021), starring Zheng Kai, Li Yunrui, Cao Bingkun, Zhang Lanxin and Sandrine Pinna

November 13, 2021

by Carla Hay

Zheng Kai in “Never Stop” (Photo courtesy of China Lion Film Distribution)

“Never Stop” (2021)

Directed by Bowen Han

Mandarin with subtitles

Culture Representation: Taking place in China, from the late 2000s to 2019, the dramatic film “Never Stop” features an all-Asian cast of characters representing the working-class and middle-class.

Culture Clash: A retired champion sprinter, who is going through personal struggles, is reluctant to return to the sport when his former protégé tries to coax him out of retirement to run in a high-profile race against him.

Culture Audience: “Never Stop” will appeal primarily to people who are interested “comeback” sports movies and don’t mind if the story leans heavily into schmaltzy clichés.

Li Yunrui in “Never Stop” (Photo courtesy of China Lion Film Distribution)

“Never Stop” is clearly intended to be an inspirational sports movie. It’s too bad that the way this story is told is bogged down in too many uninspired clichés. It’s yet another story about an athlete who has to overcome obstacles to achieve glory and possibly gain some self-respect along the way. It’s not a completely terrible film, but it drags with too much repetition, forgettable dialogue, mediocre acting and unimaginative action scenes.

Directed by Bowen Han and written by Jia Zifu and Li Bai, “Never Stop” (which takes place in China from the late 2000s to 2019) follows two sprinter athletes whose lives go in very different directions. The movie explores issues of athlete retirement, such as when to retire and what to do after retirement. In the movie, one athlete retires before his career goes downhill, but he finds life after retirement to be difficult. The other athlete, who is a former protégé of the retired champ, has also become famous and tries to convince his former mentor to come out of retirement to run against him in a high-profile race.

It’s a simple concept for a movie, but it’s not delivered in a clever or creative way. The movie’s scenes often stretch monotonously, and many of the issues in the story are handled in a very banal manner. The opening scene (which takes place on April 17, 2009) shows Hao Chaoyue (played by Zheng Kai, also known as Ryan Zheng), when he was 19, winning a gold medal at the Asian Athletics Championship in the city of Linghai. Because “Never Stop” establishes right from the start that Hao Chaoyue is a champion, there’s no suspense when the movie spends a lot of screen time showing him and his protégé Wu Tianyi (played by Li Yunrui) training and competing together.

Hao Chaoyue and Wu Tianyi have known each other since they were in sprinters in high school. Some of their high school experiences are shown in the movie’s flashbacks, when Hao Chaoyue was 17 and Wu Tianyi was 16. Even in high school, Hao Chaoyue excelled over Wu Tianyi. Wu Tianyi considers it a life goal to win a 100-meter sprint race against Hao Chaoyue. It’s a friendly rivalry, for the most part. Wu Tianyi has immense admiration for Hao Chaoyue, who is a very driven, intense and competitive athlete.

Hao Chaoyue generously helps his friend in training, so that’s why they have a mentor/ protégé relationship. This guidance pays off for Wu Tiyanyi, who wins his first gold medal at the National Youth Track & Field Championships. Hao Chaoyue and Wu Tianyi make a pact that they will go to the Olympics together.

In the movie, Wu Tianyi is depicted as being so awestruck by Hao Chaoyue, he would often follow Hao Chaoyue around like a puppy dog who’s eager to please. Wu Tianyi also seems to have a bit of a “man crush” on Hao Chaoyue, because some scenes look like Wu Tianyi might have amorous feelings for Hao Chaoyue. This “man crush” is obvious enough where their teammates tease Wu Tianyi about it and wonder out loud if Wu Tianyi might be gay. The movie leaves Wu Tianyi’s sexuality open to interpretation.

Wu Tianyi might or might not have a crush on Hao Chaoyue, but Hao Chaoyue does not have romantic feelings for Wu Tianyi. In fact, immediately after Hao Chaoyue wins the gold medal at the Asian Athletics Championship, he proposes marriage to a pretty TV reporter named Qi Yueyue (played by Sandrine Pinna), who is near the racetrack. The proposal is on live TV, she says yes, and everyone cheers for the newly engaged couple.

The movie never really shows Qi Yueyue and Hao Chaoyue’s courtship, so it’s a big question mark if this couple should be together in the first place. Audiences are not given a reason to root for this couple. It’s one of many missing pieces in the story of Hao Chaoyue. For example, his childhood history is not mentioned in the movie at all.

“Don’t Stop” tells the story in a non-chronological way. The flashbacks are sometimes abrupt and don’t flow very well with the story. But viewers see that in 2019, Hao Chaoyue is 29 and retired from professional sports. Hao Chaoyue is no longer in top athletic shape (he’s gained about 20 pounds), and he now owns an athletics retail store that’s struggling financially. Hao Chaoyue, who lost a lot of money from a bad investment in athletic shoes, is so broke that he has to borrow cash to keep his business afloat.

Hao Chaoyue and Qi Yueyue have a son named Hao Siqi (played by Zhang Bowen), who’s about 5 or 6 years old. However, the spouses are separated and are in the process of divorcing. Their condominium is almost sold. Hao Chaoyue doesn’t want the divorce or condo sale to happen. When Qi Yueyue stops by his place with a banker (played by Zhang Dianlun) and papers to sign for the condo sale, Hao Chaoyue angrily rips up the papers and yells, “No one is taking away my condo!”

What happened in the 10 year-period that caused Hao Chaoyue’s life to go on a downward spiral? The movie goes into some details, but they’re depicted in a very superficial way. Without giving away spoiler information, it’s enough to say that Hao Chaoyue had some extreme highs and lows. His topsy-turvy journey in professional sports also led him to training in the U.S. for a while.

Meanwhile, Wu Tianyi continued to be a professional sprinter after Hao Chaoyue retired. However, Wu Tianyi also has some personal issues: As a child, he was diagnosed with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. These memories still haunt Wu Tianyi, and he’s plagued by insecurities about his past, including having a very domineering and controlling father (played by Zhu Huige).

As an adult, Wu Tianyi is also taking medication that could get him banned from sports, but his doctors have told him that if he doesn’t take the medication, it could be so detrimental to his health that he will be forced to retire early. The stress and pressure get to him, because Wu Tianyi has a temper-tantrum meltdown at a press conference.

Zhang Benchi (played by Cao Bingkun) is a trainer who has worked with Hao Chaoyue and Wu Tianyi. He has seen the ebbs and flows of their friendship. Zhang Benchi continued to work with Wu Tianyi after Hao Chaoyue stopped working with Zhang Benchi.

Wu Tianyi still has a goal to one day win against Hao Chaoyue in a 100-meter sprint race. The two former friends lost contact with each other over the years. Wu Tianyi and Hao Chaoyue will soon cross paths again, because you can’t have a “comeback” sports movie without a has-been in need of a comeback.

Hao Chaoyue, who is now down on his luck, is desperate to recapture some of his sports glory in order to get publicity for his struggling athletics store. An opportunity comes up with the opening ceremony of a sports facility in his hometown. The city’s mayor Jia (Guo Tiecheng) used to be a well-known sports trainer. Hao Chaoyue convinces Jia that he can get Wu Tianyi to attend the opening ceremony.

Hao Chaoyue even volunteers to pick Wu Tianyi up from the airport. When the two ex-friends see each other for the first time in years, Wu Tianyi is shocked to discover that Hao is no longer the confident and physically fit athlete that he once knew. It doesn’t take long for Wu Tianyi to also find out that Hao Chaoyue is having financial problems.

Hao Chaoyue puts pressure on a very reluctant Wu Tianyi to sign a celebrity endorsement contract for the athletic shoes that Hao Chaoyue was stuck with in the bad deal. Because Wu Tianyi still wants to achieve the goal of winning a 100-meter sprint race against Hao Chaoyue, it should come as no surprise that Wu Tianyi and Hao Chaoyue end up in this race. Hao Chaoyue needs the money, and Wu Tianyi needs the good publicity (and ego boost), because his meltdown at the press conference has tarnished his reputation.

In the lead-up the race, the movie shows more flashbacks, as well as Wu Tianyi and Hao Chaoyue dealing with their current personal problems. Hao Chaoyue is nervous about coming out of retirement, and while Wu Tianyi still has doubts that he can win over someone he considered to be unbeatable for so long.

Of course, the race is just a symbol for how they each man deals with life’s challenges. “Never Stop” isn’t preachy about it, but the movie delivers its message in such a treacly, soap opera style that any authenticity seems to get lost in the syrupy mush. The movie has real-life athletes (such soccer player Fan Zhiyi and gymnast Li Ning) in cameo roles, but these brief appearances don’t help bring any special authenticity to the movie.

Zheng Kai reportedly trained with real-life sprinter Su Bingtian for this role. And the actors perform their roles adequately. The problem is that, just like a relay race track, “Never Stop” goes around in circles, by repeating the same dull tropes that are in sports movies like this, with hardly new or interesting to add. The racing scenes bring energy to the movie but they’re filmed in an entirely routine and predictable way.

The movie’s supporting characters are mostly forgettable. Hao Chaoyue has two friends who do workouts with him—taekwondo enthusiast Xie Xiaofang (played by Zhang Lanxin) and weightlifter Niu Tiejun (played by Li Chen)—but they don’t add much to the overall story. The only meaninful scene with Hao Chaoyue and his friends is when Hao Chaoyue, Xie Xiaofang, Niu Tiejun and Zhang Benchi have dinner together and get candid about their hopes and fears about life and retirement from sports.

Unfortunately, the main characters of Hao Chaoyue and Wu Tianyi are presented in only two ways: by showing their accomplishments or by showing their problems. Viewers never really get to see what Hao Chaoyue is like as a father, because he’s more worried about his failing business and making some kind of sports comeback. There are too many unanswered questions about Wu Tianyi and Hao Chaoyue. And the end result is a movie where the protagonists have a lot of blank voids that are never filled.

China Lion Film Distribution released “Never Stop” in select U.S. cinemas on June 11, 2021, and in China on June 12, 2021.

Review: ‘Belfast’ (2021), starring Caitríona Balfe, Judi Dench, Jamie Dornan, Ciarán Hinds and Jude Hill

November 11, 2021

by Carla Hay

Pictured in front row: Caitríona Balfe, Jamie Dornan, Judi Dench, Jude Hill and Lewis McAskie in “Belfast” (Photo by Rob Youngson/Focus Features)

“Belfast” (2021)

Directed by Kenneth Branagh

Culture Representation: Taking place in 1969, in Belfast, Northern Ireland, the dramatic film “Belfast” features an almost all-white cast of characters (with a few black people and South Asians) representing the working-class and middle-class.

Culture Clash: A tight-knight family in Belfast has conflicting feelings about moving out of this Northern Ireland capital city, as Northern Ireland has become increasingly affected by violent conflicts between the Irish Republican Army movement and the United Kingdom government.

Culture Audience: “Belfast” will appeal primarily to people who are interested in watching bittersweet and nostalgic movies about families trying to survive in an area plagued by violent civil unrest.

Judi Dench, Jude Hill and Ciarán Hinds in “Belfast” (Photo by Rob Youngson/Focus Features)

“Belfast” is more than a love letter to filmmaker Kenneth Branagh’s Northern Ireland hometown. It’s also a love letter to childhood memories that tend to put a rosy glow on some very grim realities. Branagh wrote and directed this semi-autobiographical dramatic film, which he says in the “Belfast” production notes is “the most personal film I have ever made. About a place and a people, I love.” Branagh is also one of the producers of the “Belfast,” which won the top prize (the People’s Choice Award) at the 2021 Toronto International Film Festival, after the movie had its world premiere at the 2021 Telluride Film Festival.

Taking place during the last half of 1969, “Belfast” (which was filmed entirely in black and white) is told from the perspective of a 9-year-old boy named Buddy (played by Jude Hill, in an impressive feature-film debut), who lives in Belfast and is a lot like many 9-year-old boys: He loves to play and has an active imagination. He’s very fond of adventure stories and watching sci-fi shows and Westerns on TV.

Buddy is a bright and curious child who is particularly fascinated with stories about heroes and villains. He often roleplays as a hero with a miniature sword and shield. And in one scene in the movie, Buddy is shown reading a “Thor” superhero comic book, which is an obvious nod to “Thor” fan Branagh ending up as the director of the 2011 movie “Thor” in real life.

Buddy has a loving, working-class family, which includes his teenage brother Will (played by Lewis McAskie); homemaker mother Ma (played by Caitríona Balfe); joiner father Pa (played by Jamie Dornan); and Pa’s parents Granny (played by Judi Dench) and Pop (played by Ciarán Hinds). The real names of Buddy’s parents and grandparents are not mentioned in the movie. Buddy also has assorted aunts, uncles and cousins who live in the area. The family members are Protestant and live in a mostly Protestant part of Belfast.

Buddy’s mother is the glue who holds the family together. She has a strong sense of morality that she tries to instill in her children. She’s the more serious parent, while Buddy’s father is the more “fun-loving” parent who has an irresponsible side to him. Will is a kind and protective brother to Buddy, but the two siblings naturally have their share of minor squabbles. Buddy’s grandfather has a playful and mischievous side, while Buddy’s grandmother has a no-nonsense nature.

In 1969, Belfast had neighborhoods that were segregated according to religion: Catholics lived in mostly Catholic neighborhoods, while Protestants and other non-Catholics lived in mostly Protestant neighborhoods. This type of religious segregation in Belfast and Northern Ireland still largely exists today. This segregation is directly related to the conflict between those who believe that Northern Ireland should be given back to the mostly Catholic nation of Ireland and those who believe that Northern Ireland should remain under the rule of the mostly Protestant nation of the United Kingdom.

It’s this conflict that was the basis of the Troubles, a historic period that took place mostly in Northern Ireland from the late 1960s to 1998. The Troubles consisted of protests, riots and bombings in the disagreements over which government should be in control of Northern Ireland. It’s in this backdrop, when the Troubles began, that Buddy’s family must decide if they are going to remain in Northern Ireland or not.

Before the start of the Troubles, Buddy was leading a fairly idyllic life, where his biggest problem was trying to get the affections of his classmate Catherine (played by Olive Tennant), who is his not-so-secret crush. Buddy and Catherine are both outstanding students who are at the top of their class, so there’s a friendly rivalry that the two of them have with each other. Buddy would like to think that his intellect will impress Catherine, so it motivates him to do well in school. In his free time, Buddy likes to play outside, read, watch TV, and go to the cinema with his family.

This happy life bubble gets burst one day (August 15, 1969), when Buddy sees firsthand the violence erupting in the streets because of the political conflicts over Northern Ireland. While he’s playing outside, Buddy gets caught in the street where rioters are committing violence, including throwing Molotov cocktails. Buddy’s mother runs outside to rescue him and tells him to hide underneath the kitchen table.

It’s the end of Buddy and his family feeling completely safe in Belfast. Although they try to continue to lead their lives as normally as possible, the threat of violence and being harmed is always near and has become increasingly probable. Adding to the family’s stresses, Buddy’s father is heavily in debt, including owing back taxes, and the only work he can find is in England. And so, for about two weeks out of every month, Buddy’s father has to be away from home because of his job.

Buddy’s father is as attentive as he can be to his children, but he has another problem that is causing a huge strain on his marriage: He has a gambling habit, which obviously makes it harder for him to pay off his debts. Buddy’s parents try to hide these problems from the children, but the movie shows from a kid’s perspective how children eventually find out what causes their parents to argue.

Meanwhile, some local Belfast men, who are part of a group of violent protesters against the U.K. government, try to intimidate other people in the area to join their cause. Buddy’s father is one of the people who’s targeted for this recruitment. The gang’s leader is a menacing lout named Billy Clanton (played by Colin Morgan), who comes from a large family. Billy’s brother Fancy Clanton (played by Scott Gutteridge) and their friend McLaury (played by Conor MacNeil) are two Billy’s sidekicks who go with Billy to threaten people in the area.

When they approach Buddy’s father about becoming part of their group, they tell him that he has the choice of “cash or commitment”: In other words, if he doesn’t join, they expect to get extortion money from him. Buddy’s father tries to stall them for as long as possible about what decison he’ll make. But the thugs become impatient, and Buddy’s father knows that his time is running out. These threats, as well as his worries about his family’s safety (especially when he’s not in Belfast to protect them), make Buddy’s father more inclined to want to move out of the area as soon as possible.

“Belfast” isn’t all gloom and doom. There are moments of joy, such as when the family spends time together doing things that they like. For example, there’s a nice scene where the family watches the 1968 musical film “Chitty Chitty Bang Bang” in a cinema. There’s also a cute moment when Buddy’s grandparents give him advice on how to charm Catherine. And the movie has some other levity, such as a recurring comedic scenario about the family’s minister (played by Turlough Convery), who seems more concerned about collecting money from the parishioners than in giving sincere sermons.

The mutual prejudices between Catholics and Protestants fueled the Troubles, but the movie pokes some fun at this religious bigotry. Buddy’s father comments in a scene: “I’ve got nothing against Catholics, but it’s a religion of fear.” The scene then cuts to the family’s minister giving a fear-based “fire and brimstone” type of sermon in church.

“Belfast” realistically shows how ambivalent a family can be in deciding whether or not to risk staying in a hometown that has become increasingly violent or leave behind family members, friends and other loved ones to start over in a new place where they might not know very many people. England is the most obvious place where Buddy’s father wants the family to move. However, at one point, Buddy’s father considers relocating the family to a U.K. commonwealth, such as Canada or Australia.

Buddy is not at all happy about the idea of moving out of Belfast. From his child’s point of view, moving away will ruin his life. Things become even more complicated when one of the grandparents ends up having a serious medical problem that requires an extended stay in a Belfast hospital. Meanwhile, Buddy’s parents become increasingly at odds with each other about if or when they should move out of Belfast.

What isn’t so realistic about “Belfast” is a pivotal scene in the movie that involves a showdown in the streets with Buddy’s father and Billy Clanton. There’s an action sequence during a riot that looks like a very “only in a movie” moment, including a slow-motion stunt shot. This scene can be excused if viewers take into account that it’s supposed to be from the memory of child who’s fascinated with hero/villain stories. However, it’s a scene that might have some viewers rolling their eyes in disbelief, even though this scene is supposed to be the most suspenseful part of the movie.

Some viewers might also have a hard time completely believing Balfe and Dornan in their roles as working-class, stressed-out parents. Balfe’s and Dornan’s performances are very good, but they look like very polished actors in roles that require them to look like life is getting rough for them. These parents are not supposed to look movie-star glamorous, which they do in a few too many scenes.

Nowhere is this “movie star glamour” more evident than in a scene where Buddy’s parents are out on a date in an attempt to rekindle some of the romance in their marriage. They’re at a dancehall, where Robert Knight’s 1967 hit song “Everlasting Love” begins playing. And suddenly, Buddy’s father gets in front of everyone and starts singing in perfect tune with perfect surround-sound audio (even though he has no microphone), like he’s the star of a concert. (Dornan does his own singing in obviously pre-recorded vocals.) And then, Buddy’s parents begin dancing and twirling as if they’re the 1969 Belfast equivalent of Fred Astaire and Ginger Rogers.

It’s a musical number that’s a feel-good moment, but might be too corny for some viewers. This song-and-dance scene certainly doesn’t fit with the more realistic family scenes in the film. Perhaps this is Branagh’s way of showing how a child’s memories can be embellished to remember things as a heightened version of reality.

Because of this childlike point of view, “Belfast” doesn’t get too bogged down in politics. There are hints that the adults in Northern Ireland either identify more with being Irish or being British. The movie doesn’t take sides on any political issues because Buddy’s family is not a political family. However, the “Belfast” soundtrack consists mostly of songs from Northern Irish artists, particularly Van Morrison. Morrison’s songs on the “Belfast” soundtrack are “Down to Joy,” “Caledonia Swing,” “And the Healing Has Begun” “Carrickfergus,” “Jackie Wilson Said,” “Stranded,” “Warm Love” and “Days Like This.”

Despite some of the flaws in the “Belfast” screenplay, none of the actors gives a bad performance in this film. Dench and Hinds are excellent as usual, but they’ve played these types of characters many times before in other movies. Balfe has more emotionally charged scenes than Dornan does, but Dornan and Balfe both capably handle their roles as parents trying to hold their family together, even though their strained marriage threatens to break them apart.

As the character of Buddy, Hill is an absolute delight to watch. He gives a completely charming performance, with intelligence that isn’t too smart-alecky, and with authenticity that doesn’t try too hard to look convincing. It will be interesting to see what kind of career that Hill will have as an actor, because some precocious child actors burn out and leave showbiz, while others end up thriving and go on to bigger and better accomplishments as actors.

“Belfast” is neither too dark nor too light in its tone. And the movie’s black-and-white cinematography gives a classic-looking sheen to the film. Except for a few unrealistic moments, “Belfast” is an emotionally moving journey into the difficult decisions that a family can make in the name of love.

Focus Features will release “Belfast” in U.S. cinemas on November 12, 2021. The movie’s release date in the U.K. and Ireland is January 21, 2022.

Review: ‘Hive,’ starring Yllka Gashi, Çun Lajçi, Kumrije Hoxha, Aurita Agushi and Adriana Matoshi

November 5, 2021

by Carla Hay

“Hive”

Directed by Blerta Basholli

Albanian with subtitles

Culture Representation: Taking place in 2005 in Kosovo, the biographical drama “Hive” features an all-white cast of characters representing the working-class.

Culture Clash: Based on a true story, a mother in her 30s, who lost her husband in the Kosovo War, forms a small business with other ‘”war widows” to make jars of ajvar (a red pepper) as a creamy condiment spread, but their entrepreneurship gets disapproval from people in the community who think women shouldn’t be business owners.

Culture Audience: “Hive” will appeal primarily to people who are interested in stories about women who have to battle against sexism.

Kumrije Hoxha, Yllka Gashi, Adriana Matoshi, Molikë Maxhuni, Blerta Ismaili and Valire Haxhijaj Zeneli in “Hive” (Photo by Alexander Bloom/Zeitgeist Films/Kino Lorber)

Based on true events, the dramatic film “Hive” takes place in Kosovo in the 2000s, but it speaks to universal experiences of women who overcome discrimination and misogyny to become business entrepreneurs. It’s not a flashy story with larger-than-life personalities, because it’s meant to show that “ordinary” people can do “extraordinary” things with the right amount of persistence and the right people who are allies and supporters. It’s also an inspirational story of how devastating circumstances can often make someone stronger.

Written and directed by Blerta Basholli, “Hive” had its world premiere at the 2021 Sundance Film Festival, where it won the Grand Jury Prize, Directing Award and Audience Award in the festival’s World Cinema section. “Hive” is also Kosovo’s official entry for consideration for the 2022 Academy Awards category of Best International Feature Film. The movie’s protagonist is Fahrije Hoti (played by Yllka Gashi), a Kosovo woman in her 30s who has experienced a tragic loss: Her husband Agim disappeared during the Kosovo War in 1999, and he is presumed dead.

The story begins in 2005, when Fahrije is a single parent in the town of Krusha e Madhe. She’s raising her two children: daughter Zanu (played by Kaona Sylejmani), who’s about 15 or 16, and son Edoni (played by Mal Noah Safçiu), who’s about 10 or 11 years old. Also in the family home is Fahrije’s father-in-law Haxhiu (played by Çun Lajçi), who is 75 years old. Fahrije works as a bee keeper (which was her husband’s business before he disappeared), but the money she makes can barely pay her family’s living expenses.

The opening scene of “Hive” shows the grim aftermath of the war: Fahrije looks through body bags in a government truck to see if her husband is among the bodies. These are bodies that are still being discovered as war casualties. Fahrije is not supposed to be in the truck, and she’s eventually ordered to leave. But it’s an example of her anguish and desperation over not knowing what happened to her husband and trying to find out if he’s dead or alive.

As the movie continues, it becomes more and more apparent that Fahrije has grit, determination and a strong sense of self where she doesn’t kowtow to her community’s widespread patriarchal beliefs that men have to be dominant and in control of everything. And she finds some other women who also believe that a woman can and should have places in society that are equal to men. There are many “war widows” in Krusha e Madhe—so much so that the town has been nicknamed Village of War Widows.

One of the town’s feminists is named Zamira (played by Aurita Agushi), who runs a women’s group that gives financial aid and advice to women in the community. Zamira leads a meeting of local women to encourage them to get their driver’s licenses. Fahrije is at the meeting too. And the next thing you know, Fahrije is taking her driver’s license test, and she’s the only woman in the room.

Getting her driver’s license is the practical thing to do, since Fahrije is the family’s only breadwinner, and having her driver’s license would be a benefit to her business and give her more flexibility in how she and her family can travel by automobile. However, because it’s rare for a woman to have a driver’s license in this community, Fahrije becomes the subject of malicious gossip when people see her driving and working alone.

Zamira’s group is running low on money. At another meeting, Fahrije tells Zamira that the women who are being helped by the group need jobs more than they need handout money. It’s at this meeting that one of the women tells Fahrije about what some of the town gossips have been saying about Fahrije behind her back: “They’re saying if Agim were alive, he would be ashamed of you.” Fahrije storms out of the meeting.

Far from being embarrassed, Fahrije is actually angry that people want to shame her for taking over her husband’s struggling beekeeping business when she has no choice but to provide for her family. It’s implied throughout the movie that Fahrije doesn’t think having a husband will solve her financial problems. She shows no interest in dating or remarrying. The hostility over Fahrije being an independent woman is manifested when she finds one of her car windows has been deliberately broken.

This act of vandalism just seems to fuel Fahrije’s motivation to do something else besides beekeeping to make money. And that’s when she decides to start a business: making jars of ajvar (a red pepper) as a creamy condiment spread. But starting her own business means that some sacrifices have to be made that cause friction in her family.

In order to get the money to start the business, Fahrije sells a table that has sentimental value to the family. Fahrije’s father-in-law Haxhiu and her teenage daughter Zana get very angry about it. Zana yells at her mother, “I hate you with all my heart!” Fahrije sarcastically replies, “Should I cry now?”

Zana snipes back: “You never cry about shit! You’ll cry when dad comes back because he’ll ruin your plans!” This last remark seems to hurt Fahrije’s feelings, but she remains steadfast in her decision to start the business.

Fahrije sells sample jars to a local grocery store after much convincing to get the store to try a new product. The ajvar condiment spread becomes a hit, the word gets out about it, and Fahrije soon needs people to help her keep up with the orders coming in for more jars of her ajvar condiment spread. After a while, Zana sees how the business is helping the family and how it’s brought out a positive spark in her mother, so Zana ends up helping with a few of her teenage friends.

Fahrije also enlists the help of some other women who become her employees; almost all of them are war widows too. They include Nazmije (played by Kumrije Hoxha), Lume (Adriana Matoshi), Emine (played by Molikë Maxhuni) and Edona (played by Blerta Ismaili). They form a sisterly bond that doesn’t always go smoothly because there are some expected disagreements. Their bond gets tested when they face resentment and anger from people in the community who think it’s wrong for women to be business leaders and that it’s even more radical to work at an all-female company.

During the growth of Farhije’s business, the unknown fate of her husband is never far from her mind. She has a difficult conversation with her father-in-law Haxhiu to ask for his DNA because it will help identify Agim if a body matching his description is ever found. Fahrije and Haxhiu have a poignant talk where they reminisce about Agim.

Fahrije says, “He knew how to work with bees. I don’t ever remember him being stung.” Haxhiu comments, “He was a quiet person. Even as a child, he was really calm.” Fahrije adds, “He was really happy when he built the hives himself. I miss him, father.” Haxhiu replies, “I miss him too.” It’s in these private moments that “Hive” has some of its greatest resonance.

A Hollywood version of this story would have probably created an over-the-top villain to be the obvious antagonist who would be intent on destroying Fahrije’s business. “Hive” is more realistic in showing how sexism in a culture isn’t always committed out in the open by obvious villains. This type of bigotry can come from people who are friends, relatives or neighbors who think of themselves as good people. The derogatory comments that are made about Fahrije aren’t said to her face, but she hears about them secondhand, and she sees how certain people treat her with disapproval when she becomes a business owner.

Gashi’s portrayal of Fahrije is also realistic: She’s not a cheerful heroine who’s always optimistic. She’s often stressed-out and sometimes ill-tempered. She has moments of feeling discouraged. And given the circumstances, who wouldn’t be? All of the acting in the movie is solid. By keeping the movie grounded in realism, writer/director Basholli makes Fahrije’s story so much more relatable and thereby more impactful than if the truth had been embellished too much for dramatic purposes.

Zeitgeist Films and Kino Lorber released “Hive” in select U.S. cinemas on November 5, 2021. “Hive” is scheduled for release in U.S. virtual cinemas on December 3, 2021. The movie’s release date on digital and VOD is February 1, 2022.

Review: ‘Spencer,’ starring Kristen Stewart

November 4, 2021

by Carla Hay

“Spencer”

Directed by Pablo Larraín

Culture Representation: Taking place during a few days in December 1991, primarily in Sandringham, England, the dramatic film “Spencer” features a predominantly white cast of characters (with a few black people) representing the working-class, middle-class and wealthy royalty.

Culture Clash: Feeling trapped in a crumbling marriage, Princess Diana of Wales spends a restless few days at a Christmas holiday family gathering, where she tries to assert her independence in a family that wants to control her.

Culture Audience: “Spencer” will appeal primarily to people who are interested in stories about Princess Diana and/or people who are fans of Kristen Stewart, who gives a riveting performance.

Kristen Stewart, Freddie Spry and Jack Nielen in “Spencer” (Photo courtesy of Neon)

“Spencer” is more of a fever-dream drama than a precise biographical portrait of the late Princess Diana of Wales, formerly known as Diana Spencer. In the title role, Kristen Stewart portrays Diana at a low point in the troubled princess’ life, but Stewart’s performance is the high point of this frequently repetitive and sometimes far-fetched film. Directed by Pablo Larraín and written by Steven Knight, “Spencer” is intent on portraying Diana as a tortured and wounded soul instead of making her a well-rounded, complicated person with other interests besides her children and her bad marriage. (The movie basically ignores Diana’s work as a humanitarian/philanthropist.) This fixation on Diana’s misery serves Stewart’s performance well, but it does somewhat of a disservice to the real Diana.

The first sign that “Spencer” veers into fantasy (which it does more often than some viewers might care for) is in the prologue, which labels the movie as “A Fable From a True Tragedy.” The movie’s fictional aspect continues in the opening scene, where Diana is seen driving by herself in her Porsche in the English countryside. It’s close to Christmas in 1991, and she’s on her way to a family gathering at Sandringham Estate, which is owned by her mother-in-law, Queen Elizabeth II. This scene is extremely unrealistic because Diana has no bodyguards or other security personnel nearby. And she’s not being followed by paparazzi, which would surely happen in real life, since it would be nearly impossible in those days for Diana to drive somewhere by herself undisguised without the media finding out.

The movie has an additional contrivance of Diana getting lost on the way to the estate. She tries to find her way by reading a map. “Where the fuck am I?” she mutters while looking in a confused manner at the map. This scene in the movie tries to make Diana look like she’s just a regular upper-class woman on her way to her family’s country estate for the Christmas holidays. Except Diana was no ordinary upper-class woman. At the time, she was royalty and probably the most famous woman in the world.

While she has gotten lost on the way to Sandringham Estate, Diana casually walks into a diner and asks “Where am I?,” as shocked customers gawk at her in silence. In reality, people would be approaching her and would quickly surround her, because she was so beloved by people around the world. Because Diana has presumably been to this estate many times before, it makes her look very unobservant (at best) or not very intelligent (at worst) that she could get lost on the way to a place she’s been to several times in her life.

Sandringham Estate is near where Diana grew up, so the movie makes a point of showing Diana pensive and wistful about her childhood. By all accounts, she had an unhappy childhood, due to her parents’ bitter divorce, although that family history is glossed-over/ignored in “Spencer.” The movie’s childhood flashbacks of Diana are brief and don’t have much bearing on the overall story. Kimia Schmidt portrays Diana at 9 years old, Greta Bücker portrays Diana as a teenager, and Henry Castello portrays Diana’s younger brother Charles Spencer when he was 9 years old.

While Diana gets lost driving, she comes across an open garden field that’s nearly deserted except for a scarecrow that she remembers being there, ever since she was a child. She walks through the field in her dress suit and high heels, and she takes the red jacket that the scarecrow is wearing. It’s at this point that you just know it won’t be the last time that Diana is seen with this scarecrow in the movie.

Diana sees royal head chef Darren McGrady (played by Sean Harris), who’s in this field too in that odd/contrived way in which movie characters show up in a scene without any explanation. He’s conveniently there to give Diana directions when she tells Darren that she’s lost. Darren asks Diana how on earth she was able to travel there by herself, without any security personnel, as required by royal protocol. Diana’s glib response is that she just walked out of the room where she was at, and she impulsively drove to the estate without telling anyone and without anyone else finding out.

Diana claims that she was able to make this getaway without her bodyguards noticing. We all know that wouldn’t really happen at this point in her life. Considering that she died in a 1997 car crash while being chased by paparazzi, it requires a a huge suspension of disbelief that Diana could just slip away unnoticed, by driving alone in a car somewhere while undisguised.

With this opening scene, “Spencer” tries a little too hard to push the improbable narrative that Diana could easily slip in and out of anonymity, undisguised, whenever she wanted. It’s the “whenever she wanted” part that’s the most incredulous because people with enough knowledge of the British Royal Family know how carefully the family’s public appearances are planned. It’s been well-documented how someone on Diana’s level of royal fame had to get strict approval and clearances to go out in public.

“Spencer” has other unrealistic scenes showing Diana casually going out in public, whenever she felt like it, without any security personnel. (For example, there’s a scene where she takes her sons to Kentucky Fried Chicken, where they order a meal at a drive-through window.) The concept that Diana could shed her fame and be anonymous when she wanted is a direct contradiction to the other narrative pushed by the movie: Diana lived her life like a hunted animal who was always under scrutiny by the media and controlled by the British Royal Family. It’s this more “tortured” narrative where Stewart gets to showcase her acting talent the most as Diana.

One of the more visually striking scenes in “Diana” is early in the movie, which shows a military-like procession of trucks and vans driving to the Sandringham Estate. Items in crates are being transported and guarded in these trucks and vans with the importance of top-secret weapons. What could possibly be in these crates? It turns out that the cargo consists of lobster and other seafood for the estate’s kitchen that will be preparing the royal family’s Christmas holiday meals.

The point that’s made is as subtle as a 21-gun salute. Viewers are supposed to notice the contrast between the arrival of Diana (alone and with no bodyguards) with the arrival of the seafood (which has more security escorts than most celebrities have), to show that the British Royal Family seems to care more about their food being protected than about Diana being protected on the way to the estate. Overseeing the kitchen is Chef McGrady, who leads his crew like a no-nonsense military commander.

Diana arrives late to this family gathering. The first person to greet her at the estate is Major Alistar Gregory (played by Timothy Spall), a longtime friend of the royal family, and he mentions it’s the first time he’s on royal duty at this gathering. The first thing that Diana has to do when she arrives is weigh herself on a large weighing scale placed in the foyer, and her weight is announced aloud. This weighing ritual has been a longtime royal tradition for people who arrive at the estate. When Diana gripes about it, Major Gregory replies sternly, “No one is above tradition.”

This forced weighing serves as a symbol of Diana’s insecurities over her weight. At the time, her bulima was a secret from the public. She later revealed this secret in Andrew Morton’s tell-all bombshell 1992 book “Diana: Her True Story In Her Own Words.” In “Spencer,” Diana’s bulima becomes a subplot, as there are multiple scenes of her vomiting in toilets and sneaking into the royal pantry for binge eating.

Chef McGrady knows about Diana’s eating disorder and discreetly avoids talking about it with her. Diana’s husband Prince Charles (played by Jack Farthing) isn’t as delicate about Diana’s feelings. Through clenched teeth and a condescending, whispered voice over the dinner table, Charles scolds Diana about her habit of getting up during a meal to vomit. Charles tells Diana that the kitchen staff went through a great deal of trouble to prepare the meal and the least she could do is show some respect and “not regurgitate the cooks’ hard work before the church bells ring.”

The world now knows that at this pont in Diana’s life in 1991, her marriage to Charles was close to a permanent collapse. (Charles and Diana announced their separation in December 1992, and they officially divorced in 1996.) However, Charles and Diana were still putting up a united front to the public in 1991. It was a façade that was taking a toll on Diana’s self-esteem and mental health.

Charles’ ongoing extramarital affair with Camilla Parker-Bowles (played by Emma Darwall-Smith), a woman he dated before he met Diana, is depicted in the movie as some furtive and catty glances that Diana and Camilla exchange when Camilla is nearby at royal events. (Charles would later marry Camilla in 2005. “Spencer” stays focused primarily on a few days in Diana’s life in 1991.) Diana’s infidelities, which she later publicly admitted, are briefly mentioned but not shown in this movie, because it’s intent on making Charles the villain and Diana the victim.

The movie also makes a big to-do about Diana being upset over discovering that Charles gave identical pearl necklaces to Diana and Camilla. There’s a melodramatic scene where Diana literally rips the necklace off of her neck and does something with the pearls (which won’t be revealed here) that is supposed to be shocking to viewers. Therefore, not only does “Spencer” have a royal woman literally clutching her pearls in distress, but there’s also an added horror element that the movie throws in too.

And speaking of horror-inspired elements, get used to seeing a ghost in this movie: Anne Boleyn, King Henry VIII’s second wife, who was beheaded in 1536 for treason and other charges. Anne Boleyn (played by Amy Manson) appears as a vision to Diana several times and speaks out loud. Diana, who is a distant relative of Anne Boleyn, says that she can relate to her because of being unhappily married to a British royal. The beginning of the film shows Diana reading the book “Anne Boleyn: Life and Death of a Martyr,” which seems to fuel Diana’s hallucinations of seeing Anne.

The only joy depicted in Diana’s life comes from her two sons: William (played by Jack Nielen) and Harry (played by Freddie Spry), who were 9 and 7 years old, respectively, at the time this story takes place. Some of the best scenes in the movie are showing Diana spending time alone with William and Harry. It’s in these scenes that she shows her playful, protective and loving side to her personality.

But in between, the movie wallows in more angst and unhappiness. Diana is an “outsider” in the British Royal Family. And this pariah status is depicted in various ways.

For example, when she first arrives at the estate, Diana complains that the indoor temperature is too cold. She’s annoyed that the royal family, instead of allowing her request to turn on the indoor heating, expects people to just wear heavier jackets and use more blankets inside. It’s an indication of how Diana has so little control/respect/power in the family that she can’t convince them to turn on the heat in their own home.

Diana is also late for the family’s Christmas portrait. This tardiness could be her subconscious way of rebelling or her way of showing that she wanted to delay spending time with certain members of the family as much as possible. In “Spencer,” Charles is Diana’s main antagonist.

The other members of the British Royal Family are depicted as emotionally distant from Diana, and they don’t have much to say to her. Stella Gonet is Queen Elizabeth II, Richard Sammel is Prince Philip, Lore Stefanek is the Queen Mother, Elizabeth Berrington is Princess Anne, Niklas Kohrt is Prince Andrew, and Olga Hellsing is Sarah Ferguson. In real life, Diana and Sarah were close friends when they were married to brothers Prince Charles and Prince Andrew. However, this friendship between Diana and Sarah is completely ignored in “Spencer,” to serve the movie’s agenda of making it look like Diana was completely friendless and isolated.

Later in the movie, the contrast is shown between how Charles (who spent his entire life in the public eye) and Diana (who became famous at age 19 in 1981, when she and Charles got engaged and married within a seven-month period) are handling the media scrunity. Charles is resigned and jaded when he explains to her how he deals with it all: “There are two of you and two of me: The real one and the one they take pictures of.”

Because the rest of the adult royals have an aloof attitude toward Diana, the movie shows her confiding more with the royal servants than with members of the royal family. The staffer whom Diana bonds with the most is royal dresser Maggie (played by Sally Hawkins), an amiable worker who has immense admiration of Diana. As an example of how acutely aware Diana is of being in a royal building that goes back several generations, she tells Maggie, “The dust in this house suddenly contains everyone who’s ever stayed in it.”

But since the movie makes it look like the royal family didn’t want Diana to get close to any of “the help,” Maggie is abruptly sent away and transferred to work somewhere else. Diana is disappointed and upset, because Maggie was her closest confidante at the estate, and because the decision to send Maggie away was made without Diana’s knowledge or input. Diana’s efforts to get Maggie re-instated at Sandringham Estate just lead to more examples of Diana feeling ignored and disrespected by the royal powers that be. Maggie and Diana later see each other again in a brief reunion, where Maggie makes a personal confession to Diana.

Maggie is replaced by a dresser named Angela (played by Laura Benson), who isn’t as warm and friendly as Maggie. Angela tactfully reminds Diana not to get undressed with the room curtains open, because someone could take photos and sell them to the tabloids. Apparently, Diana got undressed with the curtains open during her visit at the estate, the royal family found out about it, and passed the word down to Angela to tell Diana not to do it again. The movie uses it as an example of why Diana felt paranoid that the other members of the royal family were spying on her.

Even though Stewart gives one of the best portrayals of Princess Diana that’s been on screen, Stewart’s performance is very self-conscious and very self-aware. You never forget the entire time that she’s acting, compared to a performance where an actor truly disappears into the role of a real-life person and you feel like you’re watching a documentary instead of a scripted drama. It’s a performance where you can tell Stewart was thinking while filming this movie: “I hope I get an Academy Award and other awards for this performance.”

Despite this type of very self-conscious acting, Stewart portrays the real Diana’s mannerisms and speech patterns with uncanny accuracy. It’s especially true in the way that she walks in public when many cameras are present. She slightly hunches over with her head slightly bowed, while looking up with a smile but with sad eyes that convey her true feelings. Her body language shows that she’s not completely relaxed. Stewart went through her own paparazzi/tabloid hell during the height of her “Twilight” movie fame from 2008 to 2012 (although it wasn’t nearly as intense as what Diana went through), so it’s easy to see how Stewart could draw from her own personal experiences in this exceptional portrayal of Diana.

In real life, Stewart is 5’5″, while Diana was 5’10″—Diana’s tall female height was one of her more striking physical characteristics. In “Spencer,” thanks to the artistic cinematography of Claire Mathon, this height discrepancy is cleverly disguised by filming Stewart with many closeups, upward angles (to make her look taller), and in cutaway shots when she has a scene with an actor who would have been close to the real Diana’s height.

In addition to the above-average cinematography and noteworthy acting from Stewart, “Spencer” has outstanding costume design from Jacqueline Durran and a haunting but effective musical score from Jonny Greenwood. And any movies about the British Royal Family usually have to meet high standards for production design. Fortunately, “Spencer” production designer Guy Hendrix Dyas and the rest of the team met those high standards.

“Spencer” takes risks, but not all of them pay off in the way that the filmmakers perhaps intended. It can certainly be appreciated that the filmmakers didn’t want to do a standard Princess Diana biopic, which has already been done multiple times, usually with middling results. And her personal problems should not be ignored when telling any aspect of Diana’s adult life and her doomed marriage to Prince Charles.

However, leaning into a story arc that involves Diana hallucinating about the ghost of Anne Boleyn, among other things, somewhat backfires because it reinforces a stereotype that Diana had a severe mental illness. In real life, Diana said the stigma of mental illness was a negative stereotype that was used against her. One of Diana’s public complaints about the British Royal Family was they tried to make her look “crazy” to the point where she might be considered “unfit” to carry out royal duties.

Yes, Diana admitted to being suicidal at one point in her life, but it seems a bit irresponsible for filmmakers to make a gigantic leap from Diana being depressed to being so delusional that she’s seeing a ghost. This filmmaking choice is a bit off-putting because it seems like it was done for melodrama’s sake, not with a great deal of compassion. If not for Stewart portraying Diana with humanity and as a person trying to stay dignified in degrading situations, “Spencer” would be a hollow exercise in filmmakers using Diana’s fame to do an exploitative movie about her private pain.

Neon will release “Spencer” in U.S. cinemas on November 5, 2021.

Review: ‘Finch,’ starring Tom Hanks

November 3, 2021

by Carla Hay

“Finch”

Directed by Miguel Sapochnik

Culture Representation: Taking place in a post-apocalyptic United States, the sci-fi drama film “Finch” features an all-white cast of characters representing survivors of an apocalypse.

Culture Clash: A robotics engineer named Finch Weinberg, who has been living by himself during the post-apocalypse, builds a human-like robot to help him and his dog survive, but the robot sometimes has trouble learning how to do things the way that Finch wants.

Culture Audience: “Finch” will appeal primarily to people who are fans of star Tom Hanks and people who are interested in well-acted road trip movies that take place after an apocalypse.

Tom Hanks with the character of Dewey in “Finch” (Photo courtesy of Apple TV+)

How many movies have there been about a person who’s surviving alone after an apocalypse or other disaster? There are too many of these movies for most people to recite from memory. “Finch” aims and usually succeeds at being a drama that stands out from most other films with the same concept. The acting in “Finch” is well above-average for most post-apocalyptic movies. However, the acting is the best asset for “Finch,” whose screenplay and direction can at times can be plodding and trite.

For “Finch” star Tom Hanks, it’s not the first time that he’s done a movie where he has depicted an isolated disaster survivor. He got an Oscar nomination for the 2000 drama “Cast Away,” in which he portrayed a plane crash survivor stranded by himself on a remote island in the South Pacific. There won’t be any major award nominations for “Finch,” not because it’s a bad film—in fact, it’s a fairly good film, with Hanks turning in yet another believable and heartfelt performance.

However, “Finch” (directed by Miguel Sapochnik and written by Craig Luck and Ivor Powell) breaks no new ground in filmmaking and is entirely predictable. It hits all the expected beats and story arcs that have been in other similar post-apocalyptic movies. There are absolutely no subtle moments or surprises in “Finch,” but the movie is still very entertaining, mostly due to Hanks’ engaging performance.

“Finch” has only one human character speaking in the entire film. His name is Finch Weinberg (played by Hanks), who has been living an isolated existence in his hometown of St. Louis, Missouri, for an untold number of years after an apocalypse destroyed the world’s environment. As Finch explains at one point in the movie, a massive solar flare hit Earth, and “completely fried the ozone.” This disaster also knocked out all of Earth’s electricity. Batteries, gas, fire or solar energy are now the main ways to operate anything mechanical that needs a source to operate that is not automatically built into the mechanism.

The daytime temperature in this post-apocalyptic world is now too hot (an average of 150 degrees Fahrenheit per day) for a human being to survive outdoors during the day without protective gear, because of the “holes” in the ozone layer. In addition, the apocalypse has left Earth covered in dust and looking mostly like a desolate desert. Giant dust clouds are a very real threat. Even though there are extremely hot temperatures during the day, it’s safer for humans to move about during the day, because the nighttime brings out people who can and will commit deadly crimes in order to steal food, water and resources from other people.

Early on in the movie, Finch reads a book titled “The Effects of Exposure to Ionizing Radiation.” And when he gets a nosebleed and later starts coughing up blood, you know exactly where this movie is going to go. About halfway through the movie, Finch even says out loud what he knows is happening to him, in case it wasn’t obvious enough. No subtlety at all.

Finch spends his days traveling in a sanitation truck. While wearing an astronaut-styled hazmat suit, he goes from building to building to look for food and for other survivors. When he finds a building that’s completely abandoned, he uses red spray paint and sprays a general prohibition sign/symbol (a circle with a slanted slash through it) on the front of the building, to indicate that the building was inspected and no one was found inside. During these excursions. Finch brings with him a four-wheeled robot that he created named Dewey, which is meant to act like a dog that looks like a moving cart.

Dewey does not speak, but Finch has designed a human-like robot that does speak. Back in his bunker, where Finch lives with a male terrier mix dog named Goodyear, Finch uploads computer data to the human-like robot and tests this robot. He is elated to find out that the robot works. The robot, which has the skeleton body of a man who’s about 6 feet tall, has superhuman strength and has the ability to process information like a computer. Finch exclaims triumphantly about his robot invention: “One small step for man! One giant leap for Finch Weinberg!”

Most importantly to Finch, the robot can have conversations and can mostly understand the commands that Finch gives to the robot. Caleb Landry Jones is the voice of the robot, which has an accent that sounds like a combination of Russian and American. There are some cardinal rules that the robot has been programmed to always follow: A robot cannot harm a human. A robot, through inaction, cannot allow a human to be killed. And the most important command that Finch has taught this robot is to always take care of Finch’s dog Goodyear, no matter what happens. The robot quickly learns to move like a human.

Later in the movie, the robot chooses its own name: Jeff. Because “Finch” is a essentially a road trip movie, the reason why Finch and his companions have to be on the move is shown early on in the story. One night, Finch sees from a distance that a collection of storm clouds seem to be headed in the direction of his shelter. Jeff calculates that the storms will intersect over the shelter within 24 hours and will last about 40 days. In other words, it’s unlikely that any living being caught in the storm will survive.

Finch hastily evacuates with Goodyear, Jeff and Dewey in his RV camper. He has a collection of postcards of famous bridges, such as London Bridge, the Sydney Harbor Bridge, the Brooklyn Bridge in New York City, and the Golden Gate Bridge in San Francisco. The Golden Gate Bridge postcard has the most sentimentality to Finch. He tells Jeff that his uncle sent him this postcard, and that their road trip will be to San Francisco, with a vague hope that maybe Finch might be able to find some relatives there.

The movie implies that Finch is a never-married bachelor with no children. He mentions later in the movie that he was brought up by a single mother, who is now deceased. Because Finch does not mention having any siblings, it’s also implied that Finch is an only child.

During conversations that Finch has with Jeff during this road trip, it’s revealed that before the apocalypse, Finch was a loner at work and in his personal life. Finch used to work at a company called Tri-Alpha Engineering, which is where he was when the apocalypse happened. Finch tells Jeff an anecdote about what life was like for him on the job.

In this anecdote, Finch says that he was able to solve a work problem on his own, even though his co-workers said it was impossible. When a head honcho at the company stopped by for a visit, he singled out Finch for praise in finding this solution. However, Finch knew that because of office politics, he had to do the polite thing and say that he couldn’t have done this accomplishment without the rest of the team.

The supervisor seemed to know that Finch was lying, but appreciated Finch being aware that things go smoother on a team when people don’t feel undervalued by a co-worker who outshines them and where co-workers trust one another. This story demonstrates that Finch was a co-worker who liked to think and work independently, but he was also aware that working on a team meant that he needed social skills. Finch tells Jeff that his work experience taught him this lesson: “I just work better by myself.”

And it’s why Finch often loses patience with Jeff when the robot makes mistakes that the robot wasn’t necessarily programmed to understand in the first place. Expect to see several scenes where Finch and Jeff develop a father/son type of relationship, as Jeff learns more about life and how to survive this apocalypse. When Finch scolds Jeff for doing something wrong, it sounds exactly like how a parent would scold a child.

After a while, Finch’s impatience becomes repetitive and actually makes Finch look like the one who’s being immature and illogical. After all, if Jeff makes any mistakes, it’s really because Finch failed to give proper instructions or didn’t program the robot well enough to prevent these mistakes. No one said Finch had to be perfect, because no one is.

However, the movie tends to veer a little bit on the shallow side when it makes it look like Finch’s biggest flaw is that he gets impatient with Jeff. If the movie had more of a backstory for Finch, it would’ve made this character more well-rounded. There are only a few hints of what Finch’s life was like before the apocalypse, based on what he mentions. However, enough information is given about Finch to assume that he’s been coping with having an isolated life better than most people would cope because he was already a loner before the apocalypse happened.

“Finch” skimps on other details. The movie ignores issues of indoor plumbing, how to get fresh water, and how it all relates to sanitation and grooming. There’s plenty of emphasis on Finch getting food for himself and Goodyear, but there’s no depiction of getting water, even though water is more important than food for a human being’s survival, especially in an extremely hot environment. The movie never mentions or shows if Finch bathes or showers, although viewers can probably speculate that he keeps bottled water somewhere for any sanitation and grooming.

Of course, “Finch” has some moments that are meant to be suspenseful, which usually has to do with the danger of being seen by other people who are up to no good, or if there’s another hazard that could be life-threatening. One of the most emotionally poignant moments is when Finch tells Jeff a harrowing story of a horrible crime that he witnessed. And there are a few other tearjerking moments that happen right when you expect them to happen.

Because the landscape is covered in dust and because this movie is about a road trip in this depressing-looking world, “Finch” doesn’t have dazzling cinematography, but the camera work gets the job done in the right places. The movie’s visual effects, particularly with Jeff and any disastrous weather, are believable but not particularly outstanding. Jones’ voice as the robot Jeff might be annoying to some viewers. It’s a voice that people will either like/tolerate or absolutely loathe.

Goodyear is the expected adorable and loyal movie dog, filmed with the type of human-like facial expressions and canine noises to indicate that he mostly understands what’s going on. Predictably, Goodyear is suspicious of Jeff at first. Jeff is a new member of this “family,” and the movie makes a point of showing how this new family dynamic affects Goodyear.

Some scientific-minded people might roll their eyes in disbelief at how robot Jeff seems to develop emotions during the course of the story, just like human beings can develop emotional maturity from childhood to adulthood. This movie takes place in an unnamed year in the future, so viewers have to be open to the possibility that artificial intelligence could advance in the future where computer-generated robots can mimic emotional maturity over time. Ultimately, “Finch” is a science-fiction drama that is meant to be more about emotions than the nitty-gritty details of scientific technology. In other words, there’s really no point in nitpicking a fictional movie’s science that’s supposed to exist in an unknown future.

One of the movie’s best scenes is when Finch admits to Jeff that his biggest fear is the fear of the unknown. There’s another scene in the movie where Finch tells Jeff that what made the apocalypse worse wasn’t the natural disaster but how human beings turned on each other when food and other resources became scarce. “Hunger turned men into murderers,” says Finch. “But me, it made me a coward.”

Actually, Finch shows a lot of courage in this story by retaining his humanity and overall compassion. “Finch” effectively tells through one man’s story how disasters can bring out the worst in people, but can also bring out the best in people, especially when people are forced to confront the fragility of life. Finch’s journey might be easy to predict, but it will have some impact on viewers who believe that hope does not have to be sacrificed when surviving a disaster.

Apple TV+ will premiere “Finch” on November 5, 2021.