Review: ‘Porcelain War,’ starring Slava Leontyev, Anya Stasenko and Andrey Stefanov

February 18, 2025

by Carla Hay

Johnny and August in “Porcelain War” (Photo courtesy of Picturehouse)

“Porcelain War”

Directed by Brendan Bellomo and Slava Leontyev

Ukrainian with subtitles

Culture Representation: Filmed in Ukraine, from 2022 to 2023, the documentary film “Porcelain War” features an all-white group of people .

Culture Clash: Three Ukrainian artists (two men and one woman) keep their artistic projects going while experiencing struggles and life-threatening situations during Ukraine’s defensive war against Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.

Culture Audience: “Porcelain War” will appeal primarily to people who are interested in documentaries about how everyday people are coping with grim and dangerous circumstances in war.

Slava Leontyev, Anya Stasenko, dog Frodo, and Andrey Stefanov in “Porcelain War” (Photo courtesy of Picturehouse)

“Porcelain War” shows unique perspectives of Ukrainian artists who make porcelain figurines while living with the horrors of Ukraine’s war against Russia. This documentary is a candid and worthy look at determination and hope during war and other turmoil.

Directed by Brendan Bellomo and Slava Leontyev, “Porcelain War” was filmed in 2022 and 2023. The movie had its world premiere at the 2024 Sundance Film Festival, where it won the U.S. Gand Jury Prize for Best Documentary. A year later, “Porcelain War” was nominated for Best Documentary Feature Film for the 2025 Academy Awards.

“Porcelain War” might get frequent comparisons to director Mstyslav Chernov’s Oscar-winning 2023 documentary “20 Days in Mariupol” another Sundance Film Festival award-winning documentary about the Ukraine-Russia war. As the title suggests, Chernov (a professional video journalist) chronicled the terrifying 20 days that he was stuck in his home city of Mariupol, Ukraine, when the war started with Russia invading Ukraine in February 2022. “Porcelain War” is not as harrowing as “20 Days in Mariupol,” which chronicled a lot of death and destruction but also showed the best of humanity with heroic medical rescues and other ways that people helped each other.

“Porcelain War” is more about showing long-term, intimate stories of three particular Ukrainian residents who happen to be artists. These three artists refuse to leave their home country during a time when many of their loved ones have evacuated since the war began. “Porcelain War” also shows the grueling realities of Ukrainian civilians who have to learn military combat skills to defend themselves against Russian invaders.

“Porcelain War” co-director Leontyev, his wife Anya Stasensko and their best friend Andrey Stefanov are three artists who get the spotlight in the documentary. Leontyev and Stasensko have a male Yorkshire Terrier named Frodo who is their constant companion and whom they treat like a son. (Leontyev and Anya Stasensko do not have any human children.) A caption in the beginning of the movie says that all of the footage was filmed by the subjects of the documentary. Leontyev provides the narration. Stefanov is showing as the main cinematographer.

The movie begins not by showing bombed-out buildings or people getting killed but by showing a seemingly peaceful and beautiful field where sunflowers grow and Frodo often frolicks playfully. Stasensko can sometimes be seen lying on her back in the field and enjoyng the sunlight. But these picture-perfect scenes in the movie also show that this field is not too far from the dangers of war. Smoke from explosions can often be seen in the sky above the field.

Leontyev, Stasensko and Stefanov live in Kharkiv, in the Crimea region of Ukraine. Kharkiv is about 25 miles from the Russian border. Leontyev, Stasensko and Stefanov were all in their late 50s to early 60s when “Porcelain War” was filmed.

Leontyev and Stasensko talk about how they met and fell in love. Their families knew each other for years. Stasensko, who is about five or six older than Leontyev, says that she’s known him since he was a baby. The documentary shows a photo of her pushing Leontyev in a pram when he was an infant.

Stasensko says, “We didn’t see much each other until we enrolled in art school. It was just a matter of time before we were collaborating … We chose to work in porcelain. Porcelain is fragil yet everlasting.”

In their artistic partnership of creating porcelain figurines, Leontyev designs and molds the figurines, while Stasensko completes the figurines by painting them. They usually do figurines of animals, wth owls and dragons as the animals they make figurines of the most. The figurines are usually small enough to hold in one hand. These figurines are often placed in abandoned buildings or given to Ukrainian fighters and their children.

Stasensko’s artistic paintings are whimsical and seem inspired by Beatrix Potter illustrations. During certain parts of the “Porcelain War,” there is animation where the paintings on the figurines come life. Stasensko says that when the war began, she didn’t want to make art, but she eventually did and learned to live with her feelings of war apprehension.

Stasensko is the most outwardly optimistic in this trio of artists. She later says, “During the most revolting moments of this war, it’s critically important to just smile once in a while. That’s what I am making art for, in our time, in our country.” She says that nature inspires her the most, such as changing seasons and the evolution of a butterfly.

Leontyev trains civilians on how to defend themselves during this war. There are several scenes with Leontyev and these civilians in combat gear as they do target practice and make bombs. He comments on the political nature of the war by saying that Ukraine was naïve to believe Russia’s past promise to be a protective ally.

Among the civilians shown in this small group of trainees are people who are identified by their first names only: a dairy farmer named Johnny, a furniture sales manager named Korsar, a home contractor named August, a graphic designer named Printer, a weapons designer named Diver and an information technology business analyst named Katya, who is the only woman in the group.

Leontyev says of Russia’s occupation of Crimea: “Because of this occupation, we lost the substance of our lives, our personal space, our garden of Crimea … Resistance to evil must be undeniably persistent, must be uncompromising.” Leontyev comments on his group of combat trainees: “They don’t want to fight one minute longer than they have to.” In other words, these are civilians who are only fighting in war combat because they have to do it.

“Porcelain War” shows the heart-wrenching effects of families being separated by war by chronicling how Stefanov deals with being apart from his wife Lena and their identical twin daughters Anya and Sonya, who were born in Crimea in 2009. Lena and the twins evacuated to Poland but keep in touch through the Internet, which isn’t always easy when Ukraine’s Internet and phone services are frequently disrupted because of war destruction. “Porcelain War” shows whether or not Stefanov reunites with his wife and kids.

The documentary alternates between showing scenes of war and scenes of the artist trying to maintain as “normal” of a domestic life as possible. “Porcelain War” is an admirable example of how beauty of art can exist amongst ugliness of war, how hope can survive amongst despair. Leontyev, Stasensko and Stefanov are three examples of Ukrainians who are not letting the war break surrender their national pride and break their spirits.

Leontyev sums the message of “Porcelain War” when he says: “We are ordinary people in an extraordinary situation. During this genocidal war, the aggressors, at the first opportunity, try to destroy people who contribute to culture. Among them: writers, musicians, teachers and artists. When they erase these people, they erase Ukraine.” Anyone who watches “Porcelain War” can see without a doubt that these artistic resisters refuse to be erased.

Picturehouse released “Porcelain War” in select U.S. cinemas on November 22, 2024.

Review: ‘Good One’ (2024), starring Lily Collias, James Le Gros and Danny McCarthy

February 15, 2025

by Carla Hay

Lily Collias in “Good One” (Photo courtesy of Metrograph Pictures)

“Good One” (2024)

Directed by India Donaldson

Culture Representation: Taking place in New York state, the dramatic film “Good One” features a predominantly white cast of characters (with a few African Americans) representing the working-class and middle-class.

Culture Clash: A 17-year-old girl goes on a camping trip with her father and his divorced best friend, and something inappropriate happens that opens her eyes to how adults often deal with inappropriate actions that are reported.

Culture Audience: “Good One” will appeal mainly to people who are interested in watching a “slice of life” independent film about power issues for a teenage girl experiencing something inappropriate in a male-dominated environment.

Lily Collias in “Good One” (Photo courtesy of Metrograph Pictures)

People who watch “Good One” should not expect a lot of action or suspense. This well-acted “slice of life” drama (about a 17-year-old girl on a camping trip with her father and his best friend) quietly depicts the loss of innocence when a child learns that adult authority figures will not always protect children. A melodramatic and unrealistic film would not be subtle with this message. What “Good One” does so well is show how these moments can sneak up on people who learn this harsh life lesson by being blindsided by it and having to quickly make certain decisions on how to deal with it.

Written and directed by India Donaldson, “Good One” is her feature-film directorial debut. “Good One” had its world premiere at the 2024 Sundance Film Festival. The movie is filmed like a cinema verité documentary that chronicles this three-day camping trip in New York’s Catskill Mountain area (als known as the Catskills) in upstate New York. (“Good One” was filmed mostly in Ulster County, New York.) “Good One” doesn’t have anyone’s narration of inner thoughts or hindsight reflection. “Good One” doesn’t have exposition-dumping dialogue.

Instead, what “Good One” has are many conversations and situations that offer clues to who these campers are and the dynamics of their relationship with each other. “Good One” begins in the New York City apartment where 17-year-old girl Sam (played by Lily Collias) lives with her father Chris (played by James Le Gros) and Chris’ wife Casey (played by Diana Irvine). Chris and Casey have been married for an unnamed period of time.

Chris is divorced from Sam’s mother April, who is mentioned but never seen in the movie. Sam does not have any siblings. The movie does not mention what any of the parents do for jobs or how they make money. However, all the main characters in the film are middle-class.

Sam, who is intelligent and introverted, has a very close relationship with her best friend Jessie (played by Sumaya Bouhbal), who is visiting her at the apartment. They have the type of friendship where they both lie on Sam’s bed and look at their phones. The movie leaves it open to interpretation if Sam and Jessie have a sexual attraction to each other.

There isn’t enough shown of their relationship to make that judgment, but someone else in the movie assumes that Jessie is a lesbian without knowing Jessie at all. Jessie will start attending New York Unversity in the upcoming autumn season. It’s an indication that Jessie is probably about one year older than Sam because Sam appears to be someone who will still be in high school during that time period.

Near the beginning of the film, Sam and Chris go in Chris’ car to pick up Chris’ best friend Matt Carter (played by Danny McCarthy) at Matt’s brownstowne apartment in New York City. Matt is first seen at the building’s front door when he’s arguing with his teenage son Dylan (played by Julian Grady), who is about the same age as Sam. Dylan was supposed to go on this camping trip, but Dylan changed his mind at the last minute and refuses to go. Matt is very upset about this change of plans, but there’s nothing he can do about it.

On the way to the Catskills, the trio stops off at a diner, where Matt laments that Dylan isn’t with them for this camping trip. Matt is the most talkative of the three travelers. And it’s obvious within the first few minutes that he’s not feeling good about his personal life.

Later on the movie, Matt complains that he and Dylan aren’t getting along because Matt believes that Matt’s ex-wife/Dylan’s mother Stephanie has turned Dylan against him. Matt will mention sadly a few more times during the camping trip that he wishes Dylan was there. Matt is clearly taking Dylan’s rejection very hard.

Conversations also reveal that Chris and Matt (who have known each other for at least 30 years) have very different personalities. Chris is a meticulous planner and wants to be as prepared as possible for this camping trip. Matt is impulsive and doesn’t really care about being prepared.

For example, when Chris, Matt and Sam go hiking, Chris remarks out loud that Matt is wearing heavy jeans instead of wearing lightweight shorts, which Chris says is better-suited for this type of hiking. (Chris and Sam are wearing these types of shorts, of course.) Matt also overpacked his backpack, which a slightly annoyed Chris unloads to take out unnecessary items before they begin their hike.

Later, when the three campers arrive at the campsite to set up their tents, Chris notices that Matt forgot to bring Matt’s sleeping bag, which is still in Chris’ car. Chris expresses frustration because he had warned Matt that it was necessary to have a sleeping bag because of how cold it would get at night.

What Matt brought instead is a flask of liquor (the movie doesn’t say what type of liquor), which leads Chris to remark to Matt: “Interesting that you managed to bring booze and didn’t bring a sleeping bag.” Matt shrugs off the need for a sleeping bag and says of his liquor: “I figure I needed it for the cold.” There are other hints that Matt abuses alcohol and could possibly have alcoholism.

Later, Chris loses his temper at Matt because Matt left food in Matt’s tent overnight, going against Chris’ explicit orders to not do that, because Chris said that exposed food in tents could attract bears. Chris is angry that Matt could’ve put their safety in jeopardy and is especially incensed that Sam could’ve been harmed if a bear invaded their campsite. Matt thinks Chris is overreacting but says he’s sorry and he won’t do it again. Chris also makes an apology for yelling at Matt.

The conflict is resolved, but it’s another indication of what’s really going on in the friendship of Matt and Chris. Chris is happily married and has a good relationship with his only child. It’s in contrast to Matt, who is upset about his own divorce and strained relationship with his only child. Chris acts as if he’s intellectually and morally superior to Matt, who is clearly dealing with self-esteem issues.

At one point, Matt confides in Sam about how he feels hurt by the way Dylan has been shunning Matt. He wonders aloud when Dylan will stop hating him. Sam advises that Matt should only say positive things about his ex-wife Stephanie to Dylan.

Matt compliments Sam by telling her she’s wise beyond her years. Matt also says about how his divorce his affecting him: “I haven’t lived alone in 30 years.” (It’s an indication that Matt doesn’t have full custody of Dylan.)

“Good One” gets its title from a conversation where Matt is once again talking about his rocky relationship with Dylan. Matt tells Chris with a tinge of envy when commenting on Chris’ being Sam’s father: “Look at what you made. You made a good one.” Chris replies, “I tried not to fuck her up.”

During this trip, Sam occasionally wanders off by herself. During one of these solo excursions, she sees three guys in their late teens horsing around in a nearby pond. These three guys are Zach (played by Sam Lanier), Andy (played by Eric Yates) and Jake (played by Peter McNally), who later encounter Sam, Chris and Matt at the campsite. The three guys are invited to have a campfire meal with Sam, Chris and Matt.

The inappropriate incident that happens to Sam in the last third of the movie is an incident that is not illegal but it’s a verbal comment that is a big red flag of intentions that are more ominous and would be illegal. The person who makes this inappropriate comment is clearly testing Sam to see how she will react and to see what her boundaries are. Sam is in shock when it happens.

This review won’t reveal spoiler information with all the details. But it’s enough to say that what happens to Sam is a gray area and a “he said/she said” situation of sexual harassment where, if reported, whatever happens as a result will depend on which person is believed more. Sam sees firsthand that she doesn’t get the protection that she assumes that she would get when she tells an adult what happened. It’s a reality check that alters her perception of the world and will probably affect Sam for the rest of her life.

All of the principal cast members do well in their roles, but the obvious standout is Collias. She gives an admirable performance where she convincingly portrays quiet Sam’s inner thoughts and feelings, sometimes without saying a word. The inappropriate incident that Sam experiences in “Good One” is not a crime but it’s a test that sexual predators often use to see how far they can go with their intended targets. This test, when reported, is often dismissed as a comment that was a “joke.”

It’s why Collias does a fantastic job of portraying Sam’s inner conflict on whether or not she should tell a trusted adult about the inappropriate thing that she experienced. In the space of a few minutes and for the rest of the trip, Sam has to question everything she knows and was probably taught about who to trust and whom she can turn to for real help. Sam feels powerless, but a brief moment toward the end of film shows how she tries to take back control and have some power that she feels she lost when she became a target of covert sexual harassment.

Because “Good One” is a conversation-driven film where not much happens until the movie’s turning point, some viewers of “Good One” might lose interest in the movie long before Sam experiences this moment of truth. Viewers with patience to watch “Good One” until the end might also be frustrated by how the movie ends. Anyone who hates the ending of “Good One” is probably conditioned to believe that movies are supposed to end with all of the story’s issues wrapped up with definitive answers. “Good One” is a solid statement that life doesn’t always work that way, and bad experiences can be learning experiences on how to handle certain problems.

Metrograph Pictures released “Good One” in select U.S. cinemas on August 9, 2024. The movie was released on digital and VOD on December 6, 2024.

Review: ‘Presence’ (2025), starring Lucy Liu, Chris Sullivan, Callina Liang, Eddy Maday, West Mulholland and Julia Fox

January 20, 2025

by Carla Hay

Callina Liang, Chris Sullivan, Eddie Maday and Lucy Liu in “Presence” (Photo courtesy of Neon)

“Presence” (2025)

Directed by Steven Soderbergh

Culture Representation: Taking place in an unnamed U.S. city, the horror film “Presence” features an Asian and white cast of characters (with one Latin person and one African American) representing the working-class, middle-class and wealthy.

Culture Clash: A married couple and their two teenage children move into a house, where the couple’s daughter senses that the house is haunted by a ghost.

Culture Audience: “Presence” will appeal mainly to people who are fans of director Steven Soderbergh and don’t mind watching a haunted house movie that is more of a psychological mystery than a typical supernatural horror film.

Callina Liang, Chris Sullivan, Eddy Maday, Lucy Liu and Julia Fox in “Presence” (Photo courtesy of Neon)

The horror film Presence is told from the point of view of a silent ghost in a haunted house, so the foreboding tone is more subtle than most other supernatural movies. Viewers need patience for the buildup to the movie’s impactful ending. Anyone expecting more action and constant jump scares might be bored with “Presence,” which is a unique and competently made film, but it’s not particularly outstanding.

Directed by Steven Soderbergh and written by David Koepp, “Presence” had its world premiere at the 2024 Sundance Film Festival and its Canadian premiere at the 2024 Toronto International Film Festival. The movie takes place in an unnamed U.S. suburban city. (“Presence” was actually filmed in Cranford, New Jersey.) Almost every scene in the movie is at the house where the haunting takes place.

“Presence” begins by showing a real-estate agent named Cece (played by Julia Fox) doing a quick walking inspection of various rooms inside an empty Cape Cod-style, three-story house that could be bought on a middle-class income. Cece is taking one last look before some prosepective buyers come over to see this house, which has recently been put up for sale. In fact, the people coming over the see the house will be the first since the house when on the market again. (Even though Fox shares headline billing, she’s only in the movie for less than 10 minutes.)

The people looking at the house are a family of four: Rebecca Payne (played by Lucy Liu), Christopher “Chris” Payne (played by Chris Sullivan) and their two teenage children: Tyler “Ty” Payne (played by Eddy Maday) and Chloe Payne (played by Callina Liang), who both attend Crawford High School. Tyler is about 17 years old. Chloe is about 16 years old.

Within a few minutes of the family’s arrival, it becomes obvious that Rebecca is the most dominant person in the family. The job occupations of Rebecca and Chris are not stated in the movie, but Rebecca works as some type of high-powered position at an unnamed company, and she has a higher income than Chris. After a tour of the house, Rebecca announces that she wants to buy the house, and she’s sure that whoever sees the house next will want to buy it too.

Whatever Rebecca wants, Rebecca gets. The Paynes buy the house and don’t take long to move into their new home. After they settle in, the family dynamics start to be seen. Tyler is Rebecca’s favorite child, while Chloe is Chris’ favorite child. Rebecca has an overly close and somewhat creepy relationship with Tyler. By contrast, Chris and Chloe have a healthy father-daughter relationship with the appropriate boundaries.

In a private conversation between Rebecca and Tyler in the kitchen, she tells Tyler how she feels about him: “I’ve never felt so close to anyone,” she says in a tone that’s more like how someone would talk to a lover than to a child. Tyler asks Rebecca: “What abut Chloe?” Rebecca answers dismissively, “That’s just different.”

Although Tyler and Chloe are never seen at school in this movie, it’s easy to see that Tyler is the more popular and more outgoing sibling among their peers. Chloe is more introverted and more sensitive than Tyler. Chloe is image-conscious but not as much a Tyler, who places a lot of importance on being perceived as one of the “cool kids” at school.

Tyler and Chloe don’t really get along with each other and have a tendency to argue and insult each other. It could be just normal friction between two teenage siblings. But conversations in the movie later reveal that Chloe is in a fragile mental state.

Part of it has to do with her grieving over the death of her best friend Nadia, who died in her sleep. It’s implied that her death was drug-related because Tyler insensitively calls Nadia a “drug addict” in one of his arguments with Chloe. Nadia’s death was recent and happened not long after another death of a teenage girl in the community, who died in a similar way.

At first, the ghost seems to observe the family and doesn’t want its presence to be known. But then, the ghost makes its presence known to Chloe. In one incident, while Chloe is taking a shower in the bathroom next to her bedroom, the ghost moves some books from Chloe’s bed to a dresser in the same room. When Chloe gets out of the shower, she immediately notices that the books were moved.

Chloe sees other signs that the house might be haunted. She confides in her parents about this fear. Predictably, Chris is more understanding than Rebecca. When the parents discuss Chloe’s troubled mental state, Chris says that Chloe should see a therapist. Rebecca disagrees and says, “Time is what we need.”

There’s another problem in the family that is hinted at throughout the movie. Chris is seen making secretive phone calls, asking advice from someone named Howard (who is presumably an attorney) about how much a spouse can get in trouble for knowing about the other spouse being involved in something illegal. Chris seems very conflicted about whatever is bothering him.

Meanwhile, Tyler has gotten closer to a new friend at school named Ryan (played by West Mulholland), who comes from an affluent and prominent family. Ryan comes over to the Payne family home with Tyler one day after school. Tyler introduces Ryan to Chloe. Ryan and Chloe have an immediate and growing attraction to each other.

The rest of “Presence” shows how certain relationships change and how the ghost reacts to those changes. Although some of the movie’s scenes are nothing but the ghost observing mundane activities in the house, “Presence” always has an underlying tension that doesn’t really let up, because this is a horror movie, and you know something bad is bound to happen.

As for the ghost, certain actions show that the ghost is not there to scare but to protect. But who needs protecting and why? Some viewers might figure out the answer long before it’s revealed in the movie. The ghostly activities become a big-enough concern to the Payne family that a psychic medium named Lisa (played by Natalie Woolams-Torres), who is Cece’s sister-in-law, eventually does a reading of the house. Lisa arrives at the house with her husband Carl (played by Lucas Papaelias), who does not have psychic abilities.

“Presence” is very dependent on its cinematography to make the movie be effective. And on that level, Soderbergh’s cinematography (he’s also the film’s editor) mostly succeeds, as the camera bobs and weaves like a silent observer who can float through space. At the same time, the camera from the ghost’s point of view can also make viewers feel slightly claustrophobic when the ghost is spying in a small room with a closed door.

Liu is convincing as steely Rebecca, who seems to care more about her job than her marriage. Chris is in love with Rebecca and tells her that he knows that she’s too good for him, which is a sad commentary on his self-esteem, because he doesn’t see his worth as the kind and loving spouse that Rebecca fails to be. Some of the acting performances from the younger cast members are little stiff and awkward, but Liang does an overall very good job of conveying Chloe’s vulnerability and insecurities.

“Presence” has touches of social commentary about how people can project a certain image that could be very different from their real selves behind closed doors in private situations. This is not a ghost story where viewers can expect to see demonic characters with ghoulish appearances. Rather, “Presence” is a chilling observation of monstrous danger that’s much more insidious because it looks harmless on the surface.

Neon will release “Presence” in U.S. cinemas on January 24, 2025.

Review: ‘Union’ (2024), starring Chris Smalls, Angelika Maldonado, Derrick Palmer, Natalie Monarrez, Jason Anthony, Brett Daniels and Madeline Wesley

December 26, 2024

by Carla Hay

Christian “Chris” Smalls (center) and Derrick Palmer (third from right, in pink shirt) in “Union” (Photo courtesy of Level Ground Productions)

“Union” (2024)

Directed by Stephen Maing and Brett Story

Culture Representation: Taking place in New York City from 2021 to 2022, the documentary film “Union” features a racially diverse group of people (African American, white, Latin and Asian) who are connected in some way to corporate giant Amazon.

Culture Clash: Several past and present employees at Amazon’s JFK8 Fulfillment Center (located in the New York City borough of Staten Island) take action to have a union for the center’s employees, but the union activists get pushback and criticism from Amazon’s management, other Amazon employees, and within the activist group.

Culture Audience: “Union” will appeal primarily to people who are interested in documentaries that take a behind-the-scenes look at a “David versus Goliath” story in corporate business, from the perspective of the underdog.

A scene from “Union,” pictured from left to right in middle row: Jason Anthony (with beard and red shirt), Brett Daniels, Christian “Chris” Smalls, Natalie Monarrez (in sunglasses and bandana) and Madeline Wesley (Photo courtesy of Level Ground Productions)

“Union” is a cinéma vérité film that is minimalist almost to a fault. This pro-activist documentary (about the controversial formation of Amazon’s first worker union) is a feel-good underdog story. However, the story is one-sided, has drab pacing, and doesn’t tell enough about union members who aren’t leader Chris Smalls.

Cinéma vérité filmmaking is non-fiction storytelling without narration, re-enactments, animation and other contrived characteristics that are frequently in other documentaries. “Union” barely has a musical score, and there are no “expert” talking head interviews. This “no frills” approach to “Union” works in some ways but doesn’t work in other ways.

Directed by Stephen Maing and Brett Story, “Union” had its world premiere at the 2024 Sundance Film Festival, where it won a U.S. Documentary Special Jury Award for Art of Change. The movie also made the rounds at other film festivals in 2024, including the New York Film Festival and DOC NYC. “Union” was one of the 15 documentaries selected for the 2025 Academy Awards shortlist (eligible for the final nominations) for Best Documentary Feature Film.

“Union” is told entirely from the point of view of the activists who were involved in creating Amazon Labor Union (ALU), which in 2022, became the first employee union for Amazon, a notoriously anti-union corporate giant. ALU was created for employees at Amazon’s JFK8 Fulfillment Center, located in the New York City borough of Staten Island. The “against all odds” official sanction (by employee voting) for this union to exist was a historic business event that received significant media coverage. Most people who will be interested in watching “Union” already know that this outcome happened. Therefore, there’s not a lot of suspense in watching “Union,” which was filmed from 2021 to 2022.

When a documentary is about an event or conflict that has a fairly well-known outcome, it behooves the documentary filmmakers to present some fascinating behind-the-scenes insights into how this outcome was achieved. In that respect, “Union” mostly delivers if you want an admittedly biased “root for the underdog” approach to this story. However, the movie falls short in giving viewers a deeper understanding of who the key players were in this battle that took place during the time the documentary was filmed.

Early on in “Union,” the movie juxtaposes two types of footage: (1) the Amazon warehouse employees arriving by bus and (2) news footage of the first suborbital space flight for Blue Origin, the space flight company from Amazon founder Jeff Bezos. Bezos reportedly spent around $5.5 billion for this four-minute flight.

The contrast is obvious: These Amazon warehouse employees (who probably barely make above minimum wage) can’t afford to travel to work by car, while Bezos spends more money on a four-minute space flight than most people will ever earn in their lifetimes. It should be noted that Bezos stepped down as CEO of Amazon in July 2021, so that he could focus mostly on Blue Origin. Bezos (whose current Amazon title is executive chairman) is still the largest shareholder in Amazon, which has made him one of the richest people in the world.

Even though Bezos’ name is mentioned several times in “Union,” and he’s vilified as the chief corporate villain to Amazon employees who want to unionize, the “Union” documentary leaves out the fact that Bezos was no longer Amazon’s CEO during the making of most of this documentary. It makes “Union” look biased by omitting crucial facts. A epilogue hastily mentions that Amazon officials declined to answer questions for the documentary, but it’s not that hard to include publicly known information about Bezos’ role at Amazon during the time that this documentary was filmed.

It should come as no surprise that “Union” has relentless messaging that Amazon’s management officials are greedy and heartless villains, while the employees who want to form a union are brave and oppressed heroes. The only footage that shows Amazon’s management officials speaking is footage (usually from undercover audio/video taken at Amazon employee meetings) where Amazon’s management tries to squash support for anything related to union activities. Even viewers who agree with the union activities can see that this documentary goes a little too far with its bias.

And that’s why it’s disappointing that “Union” does not go “all in” by showing more of who these union activists really are as people. “Union” is about ALU but keeps most of the ALU members at a vague distance—seen mostly as nameless people at protest rallies or in group meetings. The exception is ALU leader Christian “Chris” Smalls, the only ALU member whose work experience is discussed and his personal life shown in the documentary.

Smalls (a married father, whose home life gets several scenes in the documentary) used to be a mid-level manager at JFK8 until he was fired. “Union” gives no details about the work history of the people who were current Amazon employees at the time this documentary was filmed. After getting fired from Amazon, Smalls put all of his work efforts into forming ALU. The documentary doesn’t give details on how ALU gets funding.

Smalls is talkative, often abrasive, and sometimes arrogant. But in his own foul-mouthed way, he can be a great motivator of people and has above-average persistence. In ALU meetings, Smalls says things such as: “We have to match Amazon’s intensity and power … Right now, Amazon is on their high horse. We need to punch them in the face.”

He is also a better strategist than most of the people who think they are more knowledgeable than he is in how to make this union official. Even with a strategy that ended up working, Smalls makes some mistakes that probably affected people’s perceptions of him as a leader. There are also indications that he’s gotten a bit conceited from the media attention he gets as ALU’s leader.

“Union” does a lot to show that Smalls has a “big personality” but the documentary skimps on a lot of details about the resources needed for this ALU battle. Smalls mentions several times in the documentary that he’s financially struggling because he’s not getting paid enough before the union becomes official. The documentary needed details about ALU’s fundraising and where the money was going during this period of time.

Smalls also mentions that ALU has help from attorneys, but these attorneys are nowhere to be seen in the documentary. And that’s why “Union” is perhaps too narrow in its focus. “Union” has an obvious agenda to make ALU members look like “scrappy, inexperienced underdogs” as much as possible. But as soon as Smalls mentions that the ALU has attorneys, you know this group is getting a lot more help from corporate professionals than what’s shown in the documentary.

All of these are unanswered questions that many viewers might have when there’s scene after scene of ALU trying to get Amazon employees to sign ALU petitions by offering the employees free fast food (such as pizza and hamburgers), free drinks, and free marijuana at makeshift booths stationed in or near the JFK8 parking lot. One of these questions is: “Who’s really paying for all of these giveaways? And how much of that money is from ALU’s budget?” Don’t expect the documentary to answer those questions.

“Union” gets a bit repetitive with multiple scenes of Zoom meetings where ALU members complain about enduring unsafe work conditions; being overworked and underpaid; and getting threats of job termination or job demotion for wanting to join a union. The repetition doesn’t have to do with the complaints themselves. It has to do with the fact that “Union” doesn’t really explain who these disgruntled employees are. If the documentary told us more of about their personal stories, then “Union” would have been a much more impactful movie.

These are the Amazon employees who get more screen time than most of the Amazon employees in “Union”:

  • Angelika Maldonado, the chair of the ALU Workers’ Committee, occasionally clashes with Smalls, but is mostly loyal to him.
  • Derrick Palmer, another Smalls loyalist, was voted ALU’s external vice-president during the making of this documentary
  • Natalie Monarrez was initially a ALU member but quit and became opposed to ALU because she disagreed with ALU’s leadership and strategy.
  • Jason Anthony, who appears to be on the autism spectrum, had an anxiety-ridden meltdown over all the time spends on ALU and threatened to quit when he started to give up hope.
  • Brett Daniels, ALU’s director of organizing, is laid-back and doesn’t try to be the “alpha male” of the group.
  • Madeline Wesley, an optimistic college graduate, is a key organizer for ALU.

Many of the ALU group meetings shown in the documentary are surprisingly bland, except for one meeting that devolves into petty arguing because Smalls scolds a member for being 15 minutes late, even though he frequently excuses himself for being tardy to meetings. The more interesting ALU member interactions are the ones that aren’t official group meetings.

For example, at an ALU recruiting booth, Monarrez confides in Wesley about her concern that ALU leadership is turning into a “boys’ club” where only men get to be at the top. Monarrez also thinks ALU should be led by more experienced union leaders, such as the Teamsters, and ALU should wait for these more experienced leaders to step in and help. Wesley disagrees and says these more experienced leaders aren’t going to arrive in time for ALU to get what they want by ALU’s deadline goals.

Much of “Union” shows ALU members getting petitions signed, planning their next move, and trying to recruit Amazon employees to join ALU or at least vote for the union. ALU has the additional challenge of getting enough petition signatures by people who will still be Amazon employees by the time the petitions need to be submitted and ratified. It’s mentioned that Amazon has a high turnover rate for warehouse employees. And after the peak seasons, the majority of these warehouse employees are almost certain to be laid off and then rehired if they choose to join the company again for the next peak season.

Other information is noticeably absent from “Union.” A few ALU members mention getting wrongfully terminated from Amazon, but the documentary doesn’t follow through to get more details on these terminations. There’s a scene where Smalls and Anthony get arrested because Smalls refused to leave an Amazon parking lot, and Anthony got into a physical confrontation with a cop over it. Smalls and Anthony were obviously bailed out, but the documentary never mentions what happened to these arrest cases.

“Union” gives so much screen time to Smalls and his personal life, while telling almost nothing about the backgrounds and lives of his ALU teammates, the documentary could almost be subtitled “The Chris Smalls Show.” ALU is much more than one man’s vision and truly was a team effort, but the documentary doesn’t give enough proper acknowledgment to Smalls’ subordinates, which is ironic for a documentary that wants to look like it’s a champion for underrepresented and overlooked people.

“Union” acknowledges some of ALU’s internal conflicts but doesn’t adequately explore or examine them. For example, observant viewers will see that Monarrez starts off as one of ALU’s most vocal and active supporters. And then she’s not seen for a great deal of the movie. And then, toward the end of the documentary, Monarrez is abruptly seen again in an interview where she says she quit ALU and will be voting against ALU. After this documentary was filmed, ALU has had even more internal problems, which have been documented in several media reports.

“Union” can be commended for getting exclusive access to filming these activists during the formation of ALU. However, the documentary is more anecdotal than educational, with many questions unanswered or details glossed over or sidelined. Viewers won’t learn anything interesting about the lives of any ALU member after watching “Union.” The documentary is about a “movement” but seems to forget that viewers should know more about the crucial people who made this movement possible.

Level Ground Productions released “Union” in select U.S. cinemas on October 18, 2024. “Union” is available for paid streaming on the movie’s official website and on Gathr.

Review: ‘Luther: Never Too Much,’ starring Fonzi Thornton, Robin Clark, Carlos Alomar, Clive Davis, Jamie Foxx, Mariah Carey and Richard Marx

November 27, 2024

by Carla Hay

A 1980s archival photo of Luther Vandross in “Luther: Never Too Much” (Photo by Don Hunstein/Sony Music/Giant Pictures)

“Luther: Never Too Much”

Directed by Dawn Porter

Culture Representation: The documentary film “Luther: Never Too Much” features a predominantly African American group of people (with a few Latin and white people) discussing the life and career of R&B singer/songwriter/producer Luther Vandross, who died from stroke complications in 2005, at the age of 54.

Culture Clash: Vandross had public and private battles over racism, his weight and his sexuality.

Culture Audience: “Luther: Never Too Much” will appeal primarily to his fans and people who are interested in documentaries about famous singers.

A 1980s archival photo of Luther Vandross in “Luther: Never Too Much” (Photo by Don Hunstein/Sony Music/Giant Pictures)

Conventionally made but still enjoyable, the documentary “Luther: Never Too Much” tells a very laudatory version of Luther Vandross’ life. More insight was needed for what he liked to do when he wasn’t working, but it’s an overall competent biography. The movie is an expected mix of archival footage with exclusive interviews filmed for the documentary. The interviewees are mostly Vandross’ friends and colleagues.

Directed by Dawn Porter, “Luther: Never Too Much” had its world premiere at the 2024 Sundance Film Festival and made the rounds at several other film festivals in 2024, including Hot Docs and the Tribeca Festival. The movie focuses almost entirely on Vandross’ career and has the bare minimum of information about who he was apart from being an entertainer. “Luther: Never Too Much” has an impressive group of interviewees, but die-hard Vandross fans will not learn anything new about him from this documentary, except maybe seeing some rare archival footage.

Vandross was born in New York City on April 20, 1951. He was the fourth and youngest child of Luther Vandross Sr. (who was an upholsterer and singer) and Mary Ida Vandross, who was a nurse. Luther Sr. died of diabetes when Luther Jr. was 8 years old. According to the documentary, Mary Vandross believed that Luther Jr. inherited his father’s musical talent.

And like his father, Luther Jr. had diabetes, which caused Luther Jr. to have health issues for his entire life. Luther Jr. was a child prodigy in music and knew from an early age that he wanted to be a singer. He learned to play the piano by ear at the age of 3. As he grew older, he became a prolific songwriter, but he wasn’t able to fully showcase his songwriting talent until he became a solo artist.

“Luther: Never Too Much” skips over most of Vandross’ childhood. Don’t expect the documentary to reveal what types of relationships he had with his siblings or what he was like in school. Instead, there is brief archival interview clips of Vandross saying that he had a happy childhood where he never felt deprived, and he felt safe and loved.

His singer idols when he was a child were Diana Ross, Aretha Franklin and Dionne Warwick. As a famous artist, he produced two albums for Franklin: 1982’s “Jump to It” and 1983’s “Get It Right.” Vandross produced Warwick’s 1983 album “How Many Times Can We Say Goodbye.” Vandross also did backup vocals for Ross and was a guest performer at two concerts (one in New York City, one in Philadelphia) that Ross did in 2000. Vandross said in many interviews that the music and culture of Motown Records had a huge influence on him as a child.

The documentary’s stories about Vandross before he became famous are mostly when he was a teenager. As an aspiring singer who lived in New York City, Vandross was able to regularly attend and learn from shows at the world-famous Apollo Theater in New York City’s Harlem neighborhood. Musicians/singers Fonzi Thornton, Robin Clark and Carlos Alomar (who are all interviewed in the documentary) were friends and collaborators with Vandross, beginning from their teenage years and through their adulthoods.

Vandross became known for his suave and soulful vocals and his romantic songs, but he didn’t start out as a solo artist. He got his earliest experiences as a professional singer by being a member of singing groups. As a teenager, Vandross was in a group with Thornton and Alomar called Shades of Jade, which performed once at the Apollo. Even in these early years, Vandross had a clear vision of the stylish image that he wanted as an entertainer.

Thornton tells a story about how Vandross insisted that the members of Shades of Jade wear a certain type of green shoes that cost $23 per pair at the time. Thornton says that Thornton’s mother initially refused to pay that amount of money for the shoes. But somehow, after Vandross had a conversation with Thornton’s mother, she changed her mind. Thornton says with admiration: “He was a boss from the beginning.”

Shades of Jade didn’t last. But as a young adult in the late 1960s, Vandross went on to get his first big break as part of a theater singing group of men and women called Listen My Brother, which had many songs about Black Pride and was managed by Apollo Theater leaders. Thornton, Clark and Alomar were also members of Listen My Brother, which had 10 to 16 members. One day, “Sesame Street” puppeteer Jim Henson saw Listen My Brother perform and was so impressed, he got the group booked on “Sesame Street” for several episodes during the show’s first season in 1969. It was the type of exposure that led to Listen My Brother getting bigger and better gigs.

Even though Vandross clearly had a unique voice and exceptional talent, Vandross was prevented from being a frontman in the confines of Listen My Brother. “He wasn’t the top dog,” according to Alomar, who blames it on the entertainment industry’s tendency to give preference to slender entertainers who fit conventional beauty standards. Alomar candidly says that Vandross had limitations put on his career aspirations because of bias against Vandross’ physical appearance: “He was too black and too heavy.”

After Vandross graduated from William Howard Taft High School in New York City in 1969, he attended Western Michigan University, but he dropped out after less than a year to pursue a career as a professional singer. According to Thornton, Vandross’ mother wasn’t too upset about him being a college dropout because she believed that her youngest child had a special talent as a singer and he was destined to become a star.

Unfortunately, “Luther: Never Too Much” doesn’t say much else about Vandross’ family during his formative years as a professional singer, particularly when it comes to his mother, who seemed to be his biggest supporter at this time. Vandross’ niece Seveda Williams is interviewed in the documentary, but she makes mostly generic comments about Vandross’ work ethic and talent.

During the 1970s, Vandross became an in-demand backup singer and a singer for commercial jingles. As an up-and-coming artist, he was influenced by 1970s Philadelphia soul music, as exemplified by hits written and produced by Kenneth Gamble and Leon Huff for artists such as the O’Jays, Harold Melvin and the Blue Notes, and Teddy Pendergrass. It was during this time that Vandross began to hone his skills as a musical arranger and producer.

Vandross’ first “crossover” hit as a backup singer was working on David Bowie’s 1975 “Young Americans” album, where Vandross can be heard prominently on the album’s title track. Vandross met Bowie through Alomar, who was Bowie’s longtime guitarist/backup singer. Clark and Alomar (who have been married since 1970) are among the backup singers on Bowie’s “Young Americans” album. The documentary includes some rare archival footage of Vandross and Bowie in these recording sessions.

Ava Cherry, who worked with Bowie as a backup singer on the “Young Americans” album and other collaborations, is one of the people interviewed in the documentary. Bowie encouraged Vandross’ songwriting talent and co-wrote the “Young Americans” album track “Fascination” with Vandross. “Fascination” was originally a Vandross song called “Funky Music (Is a Part of Me).”

Vandross also had success as a backup singer for numerous other artists, including Bette Midler, Roberta Flack, Chic and Sister Sledge. But he made even more money as a singer/songwriter for commercial jingles for company brands such as Juicy Fruit, Miller Beer, Gino’s and Löwenbräu, just to name a few. As seen in archival interviews, Vandross said he used a lot of the lucrative income that he made as a jingle singer/songwriter to fund his own demo recordings, with the hope of getting a record deal where he could perform songs that he wrote, arranged and produced.

Vandross eventually got record deals as the frontman for a group named Luther and later for a group called Change, while still maintaining a career as a backup singer. Flack is the person who is credited the most with encouraging Vandross to make the leap to become a solo artist. It wasn’t easy because he got rejected by every major label. But after getting a second chance from a different person at Epic Records, Vandross signed with Epic as a solo artist. And that’s when his career took off and never looked back.

His first solo album—1981’s “Never Too Much”—was a hit and featured the title track as his breakout solo single. The cadence of the song was unusual for R&B hits at the time and was an example of Vandross’ determination to stand out from other R&B singers. Most of Vandross’ songs were about the joys and heartbreak of love. Don’t expect the documentary to reveal the inspirations for most of these songs, since Vandross was secretive about his love life.

Nat Adderley Jr., who was Vandross’ music director at the time, comments in the documentary about the first time he heard the “Never Too Much” song: “It sounded so different than anything on the radio, but I didn’t [think] it would be a hit.” The documentary has some commentary on how Vandross created and recorded his music. But considering all the great songs that he wrote and produced, “Luther: Never Too Much” does not have enough information about this aspect of his artistry as a songwriter and a producer.

Several people in the documentary also say that in addition to his recordings, Vandross was very particular and specific about every aspect of his live performances. He personally chose the elaborate costumes for his backup singers and the type of theatrical-inspired productions he wanted to bring to his concerts. His own personal fashion sense on stage can be described as being a Vegas performer and cabaret singer.

Vandross had a steady string of hits for the rest of his solo career. His best-known songs include 1986’s “Stop to Love”; 1989’s “Here and Now” (for which he won his first Grammy Award in 1991, after previously being nominated nine times); 1991’s “Power of Love/Love Power”; 1992’s “The Best Things in Life Are Free” (a duet with Janet Jackson); a 1994 cover version of “Endless Love” (a duet with Mariah Carey); and 2003’s “Dance With My Father.”

With all of this success, Vandross still had deep insecurities about his physical appearance. In several interviews, he said he was an “emotional eater” who used food to cope with anxieties and stresses in his life. His weight drastically fluctuated and was the topic of many jokes and interview questions. (The documentary includes a 1980s clip from an Eddie Murphy stand-up comedy show where Murphy pokes fun at Vandross’ weight.) Publicly, Vandross mostly took this type of scrutiny in stride. Privately, it all bothered him immensely.

There was also gossip abut Vandross’ sexuality. Although he never publicly stated his sexual identity, Vandross (a lifelong bachelor with no kids) was a mostly closeted gay man who was afraid to come out of the closet because he knew it would upset his mother and hurt his career. “Luther: Never Too Much” doesn’t mention anything about anyone whom Vandross dated, although some of that information is publicly available elsewhere. It was only after Vandross died that people who knew him felt comfortable to publicly admit that he was gay.

Vandross usually ignored or refused to confirm or deny media reports about his sexuality. People he dated when he was famous also kept quiet about his sexual identity by not talking to the media about their experiences with him. However, one rumor that he vehemently denied was that he had AIDS. The documentary mentions that Vandross sued a British magazine in 1985, because the magazine claimed that AIDS, not dieting, was the reason for his weight loss that year.

A huge reason for Vandross’ reluctance to publicly admit his homosexuality is because so much of his image was about being a singer whose songs were the soundtracks of many heterosexual people’s love lives. Jamie Foxx (one of the documentary’s producers) comments on the effect that Vandross’ music had on people’s romances: “Back in the day, if you wanted to fall in love, you let Luther do the work for you.”

The only thing that anyone in the documentary will say about Vandross’ personal life as a celebrity was that he was unlucky in finding lasting love with a romantic partner. Vandross’ former personal assistant Max Szadek says that Vandross’ 1988 song “Any Love” (a bittersweet ballad of wanting any love that is offered) was Vandross’ favorite song because it was autobiographical for Vandross. Vandross co-wrote “Any Love” (the title track from his 1988 album) with Marcus Miller, a frequent collaborator with Vandross as a songwriter and bass player in Vandross’ band. Miller is one of the people interviewed in the documentary.

Szadek says he saw firsthand how lonely Vandross’ life was behind the scenes, which is why Szadek says “Any Love” became difficult for Szadek to hear the more he got to know Vandross. As for Vandross being coy and vague with the public about his love life, Szadek will only say, “I think he couldn’t share all of himself.” Szadek gets tearful later in the documentary when he remembers finding Vandross unconscious from a stroke in Vandross’ New York City home in 2003. The documentary gives almost no information—aside from brief archival interview clips of Vandross—about Vandross’ recovery process after he had his stroke, such as how he lost and regained his ability to walk.

Racism was another struggle that Vandross had, according to singer/songwriter Richard Marx, who collaborated with Vandross on “Dance With My Father.” Marx says in the documentary that Vandross would privately confide in him about how record companies that had contracts with Vandross would give him lower budgets and less support than white artists who were at the same level of celebrity as Vandross. Vandross also had frustrations about being pigeonholed as being an artist for mostly black audiences, when Vandross believed that his music appealed to people of all races.

Music mogul Clive Davis signed Vandross to Davis’ now-defunct J Records in 2000, after Vandross left Epic Records and had a brief one-album stint with Virgin Records. Davis is interviewed in the documentary but only comments on the race issue by saying an obvious fact: Radio can be very racially segregated. It’s a missed opportunity that the documentary did not get Davis to comment on how record-company racism affects artists, especially since Davis was in charge of one of the record companies that signed Vandross.

Even though people in the documentary explicitly say that Vandross felt he got racial discrimination from record companies, you get the feeling that Davis didn’t comment on this issue in “Luther: Never Too Much” because the documentary filmmakers were too afraid to ask Davis. “Luther: Never Too Much” has a reluctance to dig deeper and reveal uncomfortable truths about Vandross’ life. It’s a celebrity documentary that stays in the comfort zone of having interview soundbites that do nothing but praise the celebrity.

Some of the soundbites are nice but utterly bland. Vandross’ “Endless Love” duet partner Carey says predictable things about Vandross such as, “I was really honored when he brought me out to sing with him.” Warwick says in the documentary about Vandross’ tribute to her at the 1986 NAACP Image Awards, where he performed “A House Is Not a Home” and she got tearful in the audience: “He really showed out that night.” These are perfectly pleasant soundbites but ultimately say nothing interesting or informative.

Other people interviewed in the documentary include Chic co-founder Nile Rodgers, singer/songwriter Valerie Simpson, music journalist Danyel Smith, music executive Jon Platt, commercial producer Deborah McDuffie and backup singer Kevin Owens. Rodgers gives credit to Vandross for helping shape Chic’s catchy disco sound. “Luther Vandross’ vocals played a big part,” Rodgers comments in the documentary.

Even when “Luther: Never Too Much” mentions a big tragedy in Vandross’ life, the documentary leaves out important details. On January 12, 1986, Vandross was driving a car in Los Angeles, with two passengers in the car: his then-protégé Jimmy Salvemini (a singer who was 15 years old at the time) in the back seat and Larry Salvemini (who was Jimmy’s older brother/manager) in the front seat. Vandross was speeding (driving 50 mph in a 35 mph zone) when he crossed over a double line and collided with another car going in the opposite direction.

Larry was killed in this accident, while Vandross and Jimmy were injured. Vandross’ most serious injuries were a broken hip and three broken ribs, while Jimmy had bruises and cuts. Vandross was facing a charge of vehicular manslaughter, but it was reduced to a charge of reckless driving, after no evidence was found that drugs or alcohol were involved in the accident. Vandross pleaded no contest to reckless driving. His driver’s license was suspended for a year.

The documentary’s brief mention of this car accident is mostly about how Vandross felt guilty about the accident and had to take a hiatus to recover from his injuries. The documentary does not mention how this tragedy affected the Salvemini family. That doesn’t mean anyone in the Salvemini family had to be interviewed for the documentary. However, the documentary definitely downplays or ignores how this accident affected anyone other than Vandross.

What “Luther: Never Too Much” doesn’t mention is that the Salvemini family filed a wrongful death lawsuit against Vandross. The case was settled out of court with a reported $630,000 payment to the Salvemini family. There is no reason for a documentary to omit this big fact about the accident except to deliberately leave out unflattering information about the celebrity who’s the subject of the documentary. It’s really unnecessary to try to gloss over or pretend that this lawsuit didn’t exist when it’s public information and part of Vandross’ life.

In interviews, Vandross admitted that food was his biggest addiction. Some of the people who knew Vandross say in this documentary that he was also addicted to work. Lisa Fischer, who was a backup singer for Vandross from the mid-1980s until his 2005 death, remembers him as a “taskmaster” who was inspiring to work with as an artist but who demanded that his subordinates have grueling work schedules with very little free time.

Vandross’ workaholic tendencies no doubt affected his personal life. But because this documentary refuses to give or discuss any information on how Vandross liked to spend his free time, it leaves noticeable voids of unanswered questions. “Luther: Never Too Much” works best as a documentary for people who want an overview of Vandross’ public persona and his extraordinary talent as an entertainer. But for people who want a complete story of who Vandross was as a person, “Luther: Never Too Much” is not that documentary, even though it offers a few glimpses into some of his private pain.

Giant Pictures released “Luther: Never Too Much” in select U.S. cinemas on November 1, 2024. CNN will premiere the movie on January 1, 2025.

Review: ‘Your Monster’ (2024), starring Melissa Barrera, Tommy Dewey, Edmund Donovan, Kayla Foster and Meghann Fahy

November 9, 2024

by Carla Hay

Melissa Barrera and Tommy Dewey in “Your Monster” (Photo courtesy of Vertical)

“Your Monster” (2024)

Directed by Caroline Lindy

Culture Representation: Taking place in New York City, the comedy horror film “Your Monster” features a predominantly white cast of characters (with some Latin people and African Americans) representing the working-class and middle-class.

Culture Clash: An actress, who is living with a cancer diagnosis, is pining over her playwright/director ex-boyfriend, when a beast-like monster from her past comes back into her life to comfort her.

Culture Audience: “Your Monster” will appeal mainly to people who are fans of star Melissa Barrera and don’t mind quirky movies that are unfocused and dull.

Tommy Dewey and Melissa Barrera in “Your Monster” (Photo courtesy of Vertical)

Horror and romantic comedy are genres that often do not mix well. “Your Monster” is proof. The movie’s tone is erratic. The “beauty, man, and beast” love triangle story is quite boring, even with good efforts from the cast. The musical subplot falls flat.

Written and directed by Caroline Lindy, “Your Monster” (Lindy’s feature-film directorial debut) had its world premiere at the 2024 Sundance Film Festival. The movie’s concept could have been intriguing if it had a much better screenplay. Sometimes, “Your Monster” wants to be cute and whimsical; other times, the movie wants to be dark and edgy. The end result is a movie that doesn’t quite know what it wants to be.

“Your Monster” (which takes place in New York City) begins by showing protagonist Laura Franco (played by Melissa Barrera) being discharged from a hospital where she had surgery for her cancer. “Your Monster” (which was actually filmed in New Jersey) never details what type of cancer Laura has. It’s one of many unanswered questions in the movie’s disjointed plot.

Laura and her best friend Mazie Silverberg (played by Kayla Foster) are both actresses, mostly in local theater productions. Laura is introverted, reserved and passive. Mazie is flamboyant, extroverted and ambitious. When Mazie arrives at the hospital to bring Laura back to Laura’s home, Mazie is still wearing her nightclub clothes from the night before (a shaggy jacket and tight maroon leather pants) and immediately starts flirting with a hospital orderly.

Laura is feeling depressed not just because of her health problems but also because her former live-in boyfriend Jacob Sullivan (played by Edmund Donovan) left her about a year after she got the cancer diagnosis. A flashback shows their breakup, where Jacob tells Laura that he can no longer handle her health issues and he says to her: “You need a caretaker.”

After coming home from the hospital, Laura doesn’t have a caretaker. She’s all alone and wallows in self-pity about it. She cries so much, there’s a montage in the movie about her re-ordering boxes of tissue from Amazon. And what a coincidence: The same Amazon delivery guy (played by Jake Nordwind) is the one who shows up at her door every time for these deliveries. It’s all just a way to have a scene of Laura making the delivery guy uncomfortable when she hugs him and literally cries on his shoulder.

And where is Laura’s family? Apparently, she doesn’t have any family members who live near her. When she arrives home from the hospital, her mother (who is never seen in the movie) has sent packages of food and $5,000. Laura’s mother is never mentioned again. It’s one of many inconsistences in the movie’s screenplay. What kind of parent sends care packages to an adult child with cancer but then never contacts the child to check in on that child’s well-being?

Laura’s cancer eventually gets forgotten about in the movie when the cancer goes into remission and the story shifts to her obsession with being in the musical that Jacob wrote for her to star in, but because of her cancer diagnosis, Laura will no longer get to star in this musical. The musical, which Jacob is directing as his Broadway debut, is titled “House of Good Women,” but don’t expect to see a coherent plot for this musical. It’s another missed opportunity that “Your Monster” didn’t have a good “musical within a movie” storyline.

Before Laura got cancer, she was not only the inspiration for “House of Good Women,” she also helped Jacob develop this musical, whose main character is named Laurie. Laura played this character in workshops of this musical. And she feels that she has a right to at least try out for the role.

There are a few awkward scenes where Laura shows up unannounced and uninvited to audition for Laurie. Her audition is a flop. The role of Laurie goes to a well-known TV actress named Jackie Dennon (played by Meghann Fahy), who is flirtatious with Jacob.

Laura is disappointed in losing out on the role. And she’s predictably jealous of Jackie but tries not to let this jealousy show. Out of pity, Jacob offers Laura the role as Jackie’s understudy. Jacob is surprised when Laura say yes.

Mazie gets a supporting role in the musical. Laura, Jacob, Jackie and Mazie are the only people on the musical’s team to get any significant dialogue or insight into their personalities. There’s a flaky stage manager named Dan McBride (played by Ikechukwu Ufomadu), who is briefly seen for short moments of comic relief.

What exactly does all of this have to do with the monster in the movie? The name of this creature (who looks like a wolf man) is literally Monster (played by Tommy Dewey), and he’s been a figment of Laura’s imagination since her childhood. A flashback scene shows that Laura and Jacob have known each other since they were kids. (Kasey Bella Suarez has the role of Laura at about 8 or 9 years old.) Jacob treated Laura like a doormat even back then, much to Monster’s disapproval.

Monster suddenly re-appears in Laura’s life when she’s still pining over Jacob, and her cancer hasn’t gone into remission yet. Monster’s personality is every romantic comedy stereotype of a platonic friend who will inevitably turn out to be more than a friend for the lovelorn protagonist. Monster cracks jokes and uses sarcasm to mask his true feelings. He’s dependable and always ready to give advice to Laura, who’s so caught up in trying to impress Jacob, Laura can’t see that her “soul mate” is right in front of her.

However, since Monster is part of Laura’s imagination, things get weird when Monster and Laura actually develop a sexual attraction to each other that is consummated. Monster, who has a bit of a bad temper, gets jealous when it’s obvious that Laura isn’t completely over her romantic feelings for Jacob. “Your Monster” is trying to make some kind of statement about how women should be allowed to have self-love and feminine rage after a heartbreaking end of a romantic relationship, but the way this movie goes about this messaging is chaotic and dull at the same time.

The scenes in “Your Monster” look like mini-skits and don’t flow very well as part of one cohesive story. The movie’s comedy is also uneven. For example, a scene at a Halloween party—where Laura is dressed as the Bride of Frankenstein and Monster shows up as himself—should have been hilarious but isn’t.

One of the big problems with “Your Monster” is that it never shows enough of the good times in the doomed relationship of Laura and Jacobm in order for viewers to understand why Laura is willing to put herself in embarrassing situations, just so she can be in the same room as Jacob after they broke up. Jacob is a one-dimensional villain in the story, so viewers won’t know what Laura saw in him in the first place. The movie does an inadequate and incomplete job of showing the musical collaboration that Laura and Jacob had before their breakup.

Of course, Monster is the “voice of reason” when Laura makes a fool out of herself for Jacob, but this Monster character is ultimately shallow. Monster’s smugness also gets irritating after a while. The person who evolves the most in the story is Laura, but her personality change (especially in the movie’s last 15 minutes) just never looks natural or genuine. Barrera and Dewey have fairly good chemistry in their scenes together as Laura and Monster. However, much of the dialogue in the movie sounds more like conversations between underage teenagers, not adults.

As for the musical scenes, they’re not terrible, but they’re not special. Barrera (one of the stars of the 2021 movie musical “In the Heights”) has good singing talent, but the original songs she performs in the movie—the solo tune on “My Stranger” and the ensemble number “Little Miss Polka Dot,” both written by the Lazours—are somewhat forgettable. Barrera also performs a cover version of Leon Russell’s “A Song for You.” “Your Monster” has sporadic moments of eccentric charm, but the movie’s identity crisis is ultimately too big to overcome.

Vertical released “Your Monster” in U.S. cinemas on October 25, 2024. The movie will be released on digital and VOD on November 12, 2024.

Review: ‘A Real Pain,’ starring Jesse Eisenberg, Kieran Culkin, Will Sharpe, Jennifer Grey, Kurt Egyiawan, Liza Sadovy and Daniel Oreskes

November 4, 2024

by Carla Hay

Jesse Eisenberg and Kieran Culkin in “A Real Pain” (Photo courtesy of Searchlight Pictures)

“A Real Pain”

Directed by Jesse Eisenberg

Culture Representation: Taking place in mostly in Poland and briefly in New York City, the comedy/drama film “A Real Pain” features a predominantly white cast of characters (with a few black people and Asians) representing the working-class and middle-class.

Culture Clash: Two American cousins with opposite personalities bicker and bond with each other during a trip to Poland, to pay tribute to their recently deceased grandmother, who was a Holocaust survivor from Poland.

Culture Audience: “A Real Pain” will appeal mainly to people who are fans of the movie’s headliners and well-acted dramedies about family relationships.

Kieran Culkin, Jennifer Grey, Jesse Eisenberg, Kurt Egyiawan, David Oreskes and Will Sharpe in “A Real Pain” (Photo courtesy of Searchlight Pictures)

“A Real Pain” is actually a real pleasure to watch because of this comedy/drama’s skillful performances. In this story about two American cousins visiting Poland together, it uses a familiar movie formula of two opposite people who go on a trip, but this journey remains engaging. Don’t expect “A Real Pain” to be an action-adventure film or a movie with extremely shocking dramatic scenes. It’s a movie about the ups and downs of middle-class Americans as tourists in Poland, their education about the Holocaust, trying to heal fractured family relationships, and how these experiences affect the ways that they view themselves and others.

Written and directed by Jesse Eisenberg, “A Real Pain” (his second feature film as a director) is a vast improvement from 2023’s “When You Finish Saving the World,” his feature-film directorial debut, which he also wrote. “When You Finish Saving the World” is cynical and frequently dull, compared to “A Real Pain,” which is much more interesting to watch and has better pacing. With sharp-minded dialogue and appealing direction, “A Real Pain” has characters that viewers wouldn’t mind seeing more of if the story continued, whereas “When You Finish Saving the World” has the type of characters that most viewers won’t ever care to see again.

“A Real Pain” had its world premiere at the 2024 Sundance Film Festival, where Eisenberg won the Waldo Salt Screenwriting Award for the movie. “A Real Pain” also screened at the 2024 New York Film Festival. Eisenberg and filmmaking duo/spouses Emma Stone and Dave McCary were among the producers of “When You Finish Saving the World.” These three filmmakers also re-teamed for “A Real Pain.” (Stone and Eisenberg co-starred in the “Zombieland” movies.)

“A Real Pain” begins by showing the two cousins arriving separately at an unnamed New York airport so that they can go on their trip together to Poland. (“A Real Pain” was filmed on location in Poland.) The cousins are related because their fathers are brothers. The cousins, who are in their early 40s, were born three weeks apart and grew up together. They have a relationship that is more like brothers than like cousins.

David Kaplan (played by Eisenberg) is a digital sales executive who lives in New York City. David is nerdy, uptight and a happily married father of a son named Abe (played by Banner Eisenberg, Jesse Eisenberg’s real-life son), who’s about 4 or 5 years old. David is the type of person who likes his life to be as orderly and scheduled as possible. David constantly worries, but he doesn’t want his anxiousness to get in the way of any of his plans or relationships. He also dislikes over-sharing or getting too emotional in front of strangers.

David’s cousin Benji Kaplan (played by Kieran Culkin) lives in Binghamton, New York, which is about 178 miles northwest of New York City. Benji is a freewheeling bachelor with no children. Benji is an unapologetic pothead who is often unemployed and makes money by getting odd jobs (such as working in construction) whenever he can. Benji is the type of person who hates corporate capitalism and thinks it would be hell for him if he worked in an office job. Unlike emotionally reserved David, Benji has frequent curse-filled outbursts where Benji rants about how he feels, even if the way he expresses these emotions are rude and disruptive.

David and Benji had a beloved grandmother named Dory Kaplan, who was a Holocaust survivor originally from Poland. Dory, who recently died, was the mother of the fathers of David and Benji. In her will, Dory requested that Benji and David use part of the inheritance money that she left for them to visit her native Poland together, so that the cousins could better understand her personal history before she immigrated to the United States. David and Benji willingly go on this trip as a tribute to her, but this trip is also a way for Benji and David to reconnect because they haven’t seen each other in months.

Within the first 10 minutes of “A Real Pain,” it’s easy to see that these two cousins have very different personalities and contrasting lifestyles. David thinks Benji’s lifestyle is too immature and unstable, while Benji thinks David’s lifestyle is too boring and restrictive. These differences predictably cause a lot of friction during the trip. However, some of their conflicts and resentments have been brewing for months or years before the trip even took place.

When they arrive at the airport, Benji thinks he can sneak his marijuana stash on the plane in his carry-on luggage. David vehemently disagrees and persuades a reluctant Benji to throw away the marijuana in an airport garbage can before they pass through the airport’s X-ray machines and metal detectors. When the two cousins arrive in Poland and check in at their hotel, David sees that Benji found another way to have a marijuana stash in Poland: Benji secretly mailed himself a packet of marijuana to be delivered to him by the hotel’s front desk.

During conversations in the movie, it’s revealed that although Benji can be abrasive and argumentative, he is actually very sensitive deep down inside. Benji is taking his grandmother Dory’s death a lot harder than David is coping with the death. Benji says that Dory was “my favorite person in the world.” Benji expresses admiration for how Dory, who did not have a formal education beyond elementary school, was able to go from being an employee of a small real-estate company to becoming the company’s owner.

David and Benji signed up to be part of a small tour group to visit Polish landmarks, particularly those that have to do with Jewish history and the Holocaust. David told the tour in advance that the cousins would leave the tour group a day early so that Benji and David could visit the house where Dory used to live in Poland. The interactions with the other people in the tour group also show how David and Benji are different from each other.

The tour guide is a friendly and intellectual Brit named James (played by Will Sharpe), who tells the members of the tour group up front that even though he isn’t Jewish or Polish, he has tremendous respect and passion for Jewish history and Eastern European cultures. James mentions that he was an Eastern European scholar at Oxford University and is “obsessed” with Eastern Europe. James is very mindful of not doing anything to offend people, which is why he’s genuinely shocked later in the movie when Benji unleashes a torrent of harsh criticism against James for what Benji thinks James is doing wrong as a tour guide.

All the other people in the tour group are Jewish. Marcia Kramer (played by Jennifer Grey) is a divorced homemaker, who has recently moved back to New York City after living for about 20 years in Los Angeles. Married couple Mark Binder (played by Daniel Oreskes) and Diane Binder (played by Liza Sadovy)—who are from Shaker Heights, Ohio—are retired and easygoing, although Mark is much more opinionated than Diane. Eloge (played by Kurt Egyiawan) is a Rwandan immigrant/genocide survivor who moved with his mother to the Canadian city of Winnipeg when he was a child. As an adult, Eloge (who is thoughtful and philosophical) converted to Judaism.

“A Real Pain” has no interest in being a slapstick comedy. The movie’s story unfolds in a naturalistic way, where not much happens except further insights into the personalities of the two main characters. Benji and David get up to some minor mischief—at Benji’s urging, of course. It’s Benji’s idea for them to sneak up on the hotel rooftop to smoke marijuana. In another scene in the movie, Benji shows David how they can avoid paying the fare for an unexpected train trip that the two cousins end up taking separately from the rest of the tour group.

Fairly early in the movie, there’s an example of how different David and Benji are when it comes to interacting with others. While on a walking tour with the group, Benji notices that Marcia seems to be sad and lonely. Benji wants to start a conversation with Marcia to keep her company, but David doesn’t think it’s a good idea because David thinks Marcia might want to be left alone. Of course, Benji doesn’t listen to David. Benji walks over to Marcia and says to her jokingly, “Why are you walking alone? Are you a big fucking loser?”

Even though Benji and David get on each other’s nerves, each cousin has qualities that they admire about each other. And there’s obviously genuine family love that these two cousins have for each other. David is in awe of how Benji has the type of charisma that can “light up a room,” and people can still like Benji, even when Benji proverbially “shits all over everything the room.” Benji looks up to David’s intelligence. In a tender family moment in their hotel room, Benji says to David, “You look wise. It’s beautiful.”

The scenes where the tour group visits Holocaust sites are handled with sensitivity and care. And although deceased grandmother Dory is never seen in the movie, her presence is very much felt in the conversations and interactions that David and Benji have with each other. David feels a little bit envious that Benji had a closer and more special relationship with Dory.

“A Real Pain” mostly excels in how the movie lets viewers get to know these characters during this trip. The comedy flows through seamlessly in little moments, such as when Davd and Benji find themselves in awkward situations. Viewers can imagine how these two cousins might have interacted in similar ways when Benji and David were children.

The movie also realistically addresses the issues of people who used to be very close but who drift apart because of lifestyle changes. Benji has a lot of lingering anger because married father David doesn’t have as much time to hang out with Benji, compared to when David was a bachelor with no children. David has some pent-up fury over something shocking that Benji did that happened (but is not shown) six months before this trip to Poland took place.

If there’s any criticism of “A Real Pain,” it might have to do with the character of Benji, who is depicted as a not-so-lovable rogue, but he gets off the hook a little too easily for how he sometimes cruelly behaves to other people. Benji isn’t occasionally cranky. He often seems to go out of his way to hurt people with his insults. And he makes several comments that he dislikes seeing other people being happy. On the other hand, Benji is extremely moody: One minute, he could be berating someone, and within seconds he could also be praising the same person.

Benji is obviously emotionally troubled, but there’s a lot of enabling of Benji that might not sit right with some viewers. Anyone with basic knowledge of psychology can see that Benji appears to have an undiagnosed bipolar disorder, and he’s probably abusing marijuana to self-medicate. And although David smokes some marijuana too, David is obviously not dependent on marijuana to cope with life.

“A Real Pain” isn’t trying to be a movie that has the answers to Benji’s mental health problems. Rather, this movie authentically shows the helplessness that people can feel when they or their loved ones have a mental illness. By the end of the movie, some questions remain about what will happen next between these two cousins, but these are questions that are just the movie’s reflection of the real-life unpredictablity of ever-evolving relationships.

Searchlight Pictures released “A Real Pain” in select U.S. cinemas on November 1, 2024, with an expansion to more U.S. cinemas on November 15, 2024.

Review: ‘Black Box Diaries,’ starring Shiori Itō

October 26, 2024

by Carla Hay

Shiori Itō in “Black Box Diaries” (Photo courtesy of MTV Documentary Films)

“Black Box Diaries”

Directed by Shiori Itō

Japanese with subtitles

Culture Representation: Taking place in Japan from 2017 to 2019, the documentary film “Black Box Diaries” (based partially on the 2017 non-fiction book “Black Box”) features an all-Japanese group of people representing the working-class, middle-class and wealthy who are connected in some way to the rape case of political journalist Shiori Itō.

Culture Clash: Itō, who accused a fellow journalist of raping her in 2015 while she was too intoxicated to consent, faced many obstacles in getting justice, including her accused rapist having a close alliance with Shinzo Abe, who was Japan’s prime minister at the time.

Culture Audience: “Black Box Diaries” will appeal mainly to people who are interested in highly personal documentaries about getting justice for crimes.

Shiori Itō in “Black Box Diaries” (Photo courtesy of MTV Documentary Films)

“Black Box Diaries” is director Shiori Itō’s courageous and harrowing chronicle of getting justice for her rape case. The documentary is a blistering takedown of a very flawed legal system that Itō battled in her case, against seemingly insurmountable odds. It’s also a story of how rape survivors are further harmed by victim blaming from people who don’t know all the facts and are quick to assume that rape survivors are usually lying. “Black Box Diaries” had its world premiere at the 2024 Sundance Film Festival (where “Black Box Diaries” won the Human Rights Award) and also screened at the 2024 editions of the SXSW Film & TV Festival and CPH:DOX.

Itō (who was born in 1989) is a Tokyo-based political journalist who says she was raped by TV journalist Noriyuki Yamaguchi (who was born in 1966) at the Sheraton Hotel in Tokyo’s Ebisu part of the Shibuya ward, on April 4, 2015. At the time, Itō was a Thomson Reuters intern, and Yamaguchi was Tokyo Broadcast System’s Washington bureau chief. Itō says she was too intoxicated to give consent. Yamaguchi denies the accusations and say that he and Itō had consensual sex that night.

“Black Box Diaries” has hotel security video from that night that gives more credence to Itō’s side of the story. Itō and Yamaguchi are shown emerging from a taxi outside the hotel in the hotel’s front driveway. Yamaguchi is forcefully pulling Itō out of the back of the taxi, while a male hotel employee stands by and looks unsure of what to do. (This hotel employee, who is not named in the movie, later makes an impactful statement to Itō that brings her to tears.)

The video shows that Itō can barely walk and has to be almost propped up by Yamaguchi. Security video from inside the hotel shows Yamaguchi walking Itō trhough the lobby and to an elevator. According to court testimony, Itō says that Yamaguchi took her to his hotel room and raped her while she drifted in and out of consciousness and was too physically weak to fight back. Itō says she didn’t remember much of the encounter until hours later. She suspects that she had been drugged without her consent and gained back her memory after the effects of any alleged drugs wore off.

Itō reported the crime to the Tokyo Police Department, which discouraged her from filing charges because they told Itō that her case would be hard to prove. “Black Box Diaries” includes secret recordings that she made during her interview with an uncaring police investigator who is only identified in the documentary as Investigator A. This callous investigator says a lot of things that aren’t supposed to be said by a responsible and professional investigator of rape/sexual assault, such as suggesting that Itō might be partially responsible for this reported crime because she was intoxicated when it happened. It’s typical victim blaming.

Itō did not have a choice in pursuing justice in a criminal court because Tokyo Police Department decided to close the investigation. Instead, Itō held a press conference to speak out against this injustice. Footage from the press conference footage is included in “Black Box Diaries.”

In the press conference, Itō says she’s using her work as a journalist to protect herself against those who will accuse her of lying. When asked why she’s giving a press conference to talk about this rape accusation, she says the typical expectation of a rape victim is for the victim to be sad and hide from embarrassment. “I had a problem with this norm,” Itō says in the press conference. “I have nothing to hide. If I don’t speak now, the law will not change. That’s why I’m coming forward.

In 2017, Itō wrote a non-fiction book called “Black Box” and to document the ongoing investigation of her rape case as she pursued legal action against Yamaguchi by filing a civil lawsuit against him. Itō also became an activist to change Japan’s outdated rape laws, whch stated at the time that Japan’s legal definition of rape had to include assault and intimidation. The title of the book is based on how a prosecutor stonewalled Itō about her case by making this comment: “Because it’s a black box, we don’t really know what’s happening.” Itō says of this comment: “It tells everything about our justice system and how it’s not working.”

“Black Box Diaries” (which was filmed from 2017 to 2019) is an extension of the “Black Box” book, by having entries from the book (often as handwritten captions on the screen), as well as a lot of behind-the-scenes and personal footage of Itō quest for justice. She also has to deal with bullying and hate from many different people (usually online and in the media), who shame her because they don’t believe she’s telling the truth. Itō keeps her dignity throughout, but there are times when she understandably reaches her emotional breaking point when things look particularly bleak, and there are obstacles in her way. A low point happens when Itō ends up in a hospital for a reason that is revealed in the documentary.

Itō believes that the Tokyo Police Department discontinued the investigation into her rape because Yamaguchi had a close alliance with Shinzo Abe, who was Japan’s prime minister at the time. Abe was a close associate of Itaru Nakamura, who was the acting chief of Tokyo Police Department at the time. Yamaguchi wrote a flattering biography of the politically conservative Abe, and this book was published two weeks before the prosecutors dropped the rape case against him Yamaguchi for “insufficient evidence.” In addition to often getting privileged media access to Abe, Yamaguchi had other high-ranking political connections that Itō believes shielded Yamaguchi from being arrested and prosecuted in criminal court for this case.

Itō couldn’t help but feel paranoid when she found out that she was being spied on and followed by unnamed people. The documentary shows how she temporarily moved out of her apartment because of this stalking. She has some close friends who are her support system. These friends are shown in the documentary but are not identified by name.

Itō admits that her family members (who are not in the documentary) were upset when they found out that she wrote the “Black Box” book, which Itō’s book publisher warns her could be blocked by Yamaguchi from being published if real names are used in the book. Itō admits that by writing this book, “I know I’m putting them [my family] in danger.” Itō also got backlash from strangers who accused her of trying to cash in on her accusations by writing the “Black Box” book.

“Black Box Diaries” has an intimate and deliberate tone that might be too slow and too quiet for people who expect true crime documentaries to be slick and fast-paced. There are no crusading attorneys or tabloid media spectacles in this documentary. It’s a vividly candid look at one woman’s emotionally painful journey to seek justice, which involves a lot of suffering—but it’s suffering that is not done in silence, and it’s suffering that can lead to the greater good for any other rape survivors who also seek justice.

MTV Documentary Films released “Black Box Diaries” in New York City on October 25, 2024, with an expansion to more U.S. cities on November 1, 2024.

Review: ‘The Remarkable Life of Ibelin,’ starring Robert Steen, Trude Steen, Mia Steen, Lisette Roovers, Kai Simon Fredriksen, Xenia-Anni Nielsen and Rikke Nielsen

October 20, 2024

by Carla Hay

Ibelin Redmore (pictured at left) and Mats Steen in “The Remarkable Life of Ibelin” (Photo courtesy of Netflix)

“The Remarkable Life of Ibelin”

Directed by Benjamin Ree

Norwegian, Dutch and Danish with subtitles

Culture Representation: Taking place in Norway, the Netherlands, and Denmark, the documentary film “The Remarkable Life of Ibelin” features an all-white group of people who knew Mats Steen, a Norwegian video gamer who created a heroic online persona for himself called Ibelin Redmore, in order to make friends.

Culture Clash: Steen, who was 25 when he died of Duchenne muscular dystrophy in 2014, was a loner and mostly a shut-in but was a very popular extrovert in the online gaming world where he was known as Ibelin.

Culture Audience: “The Remarkable Life of Ibelin” will appeal mainly to people who are interested in well-made and fascinating documentaries about people who live double lives.

Trude Steen, Robert Steen and Mia Steen in “The Remarkable Life of Ibelin” (Photo courtesy of Netflix)

“The Remarkable Life of Ibelin” is a highly unique documentary about how a lonely, disabled young man created a heroic online persona named Ibelin in order to make friends. The story is about the power of imagination, but online addiction is acknowledged. “The Remarkable Life of Ibelin” includes animated recreations of what Ibelin said and did in a world that was kept hidden from the young man’s family until after he died.

Directed by Benjamin Ree, “The Remarkable Life of Ibelin” had its world premiere under the title “Ibelin” at the 2024 Sundance Film Festival, where the movie won the Directing Award and the Audience Award for World Cinema Documentary. The movie’s title was changed to “The Remarkable Life of Ibelin” after Netflix acquired this documentary. “The Remarkable Life of Ibelin” was filmed in Norway, the Netherlands, and Denmark.

It’s revealed in the very beginning of the documentary that Mats Steen, the young man who had the online alter ego Ibelin, is now deceased. Steen, who was born in Norway in 1989, was 25 when he died of Duchenne muscular dystrophy in 2014. Duchenne muscular dystrophy, which only affects males, is a rare genetic disease (with the gene carried by the mother) that destroys muscles over time. “The Remarkable Life of Ibelin” shows Steen in archival footage that consists most of family home videos.

Mats lived with his father Robert Steen, mother Trude Steen and younger sister Mia Steen in an unnamed city in Norway. Robert, Trude and Mia are all interviewed in the documentary, but Robert Steen is the documentary’s main narrator. He says in the beginning of the movie: “Before Mats passed away, he left his password for us. I think this was deliberate. It was something he had hoped we would find because behind the password was a world we knew nothing about.”

“The Remarkable Life of Ibelin” then flashes back to home videos and family stories, beginning when Mats was born, to show how his slow and painful physical deterioration affected his life. As a toddler, he would often stumble while walking. His muscular disabilities eventually required him to use a cane, leg braces and eventually a wheelchair.

Trude comments in the documentary: “It’s painful to watch your child growing weaker. He was born with a perfectly functioning body. But then, slowly but surely, he was robbed of everything.”

By the family’s own admission, Mats became addicted to playing video games. Robert says, “We agreed to let Mats play a lot because of the other things he missed out on.” By the time he reached his teen years, Mats had become a withdrawn loner who lost interest in a lot of outdoor activities.

Robert describes how Mats’ physical decline (he became tired easily and lost his appetite) affected Mats’ mental health: “He wasn’t as bubbly and happy as he used to be.” Robert adds, “We did worry about Mats spending so much time in front of his computer. I often tried to encourage him to go out more.”

Although Mats occasionally went outside the home for family gatherings, these outings became less frequent for him as he got older and became more defiant about not wanting to participate in family activities. In high school, he had some friends. But as an adult, he lost touch with those friends and eventually moved to separate living quarters on the first floor of the family home. Mats was a talented artist who liked to draw. He also started his own blog.

Mats would always turn down invitations to have conversations by phone or video chats with the people he knew online. He also declined offers for in-person meet-ups with the people whom he met through his online activities. Mats went to great lengths to hide his real name and what he looked like from his online friends.

“He loved his independence,” Robert says. As for the friends that Mats made online, Robert comments: “We thought these people didn’t know Mats because they never met physically and they never [verbally] talked.”

The Steen family was about to find out how beloved Mats was online as his alter ego Ibelin Redmore. Mats passed away in his sleep. And after the Steen family announced his death on social media, messages began pouring in from all over the world from people who knew Ibelin/Mats online.

Ibelin existed in World of Warcraft’s online fantasy roleplaying guild called Starlight, where people could create avatars for however they wanted to present themselves in Starlight. Some people presented themselves as humans, while others presented themselves as non-human creatures. Ibelin was a tall, muscular and heroic nobleman who was a natural leader and also had a charming way with other Starlight residents, especially women. It was the complete opposite of Mats, who never had a girlfriend in real life.

Ibelin was greatly admired, but he also had flaws. He was known to have a quick temper. And his ladies’ man ways could sometimes hurt the feelings of the women/female characters who were attracted to Ibelin. He also had a tendency to be arrogant and sometimes selfish. But overall, he was considered generous and helpful to those who were in contact with him.

“The Remarkable Life of Ibelin” interviews four of the online friends who got to know Ibelin in Starlight. They all describe how Ibelin affected their lives and the lives of other people involved in Starlight. Their stories are heartful and emotional.

Lisette Roovers, a Dutch woman with the online persona Rumour (a black-haired attractive maiden), was Ibelin’s love interest, and she says Ibelin/Mats helped get her out of a deep depression. Roovers said she developed real feelings for Mats too, but he kept her at a certain emotional distance by not telling her how he really felt. As Ibelin, he heavily flirted with Rumour, and they had a chaste romance of just kissing. In real life, Mats wrote in a journal that he had strong feelings for Roovers, but he was afraid to tell her.

Kai Simon Fredriksen, a Norwegian man with the online persona Nomine, was the leader of Starlight. He describes Ibelin as someone who had a talent for bringing people together and inspiring them to be their best. Ibelin was also considered to be very dependable, so when he took a hiatus without warning, his presence was sorely missed.

Xenia-Anni Nielsen, a Danish woman with the online persona Reike, had a platonic relationship with Ibelin that can best be described as being an older friend to him. At the time she knew Ibelin, she was having family problems in real life with her then-teenage autistic son Rikke Nielsen, who has the online persona Nikmik. “I felt like a bad mother because I couldn’t help my son feel good,” Xenia-Anni remembers.

Xenia-Anni and Rikke often had arguments each other, but they both say that Ibelin helped repair the relationship between this mother and son. Rikke adds, “I went from the most negative person in the world to the sort of person who can tolerate people.” The documentary includes a recreation of how Ibelin affected this mother and son.

You don’t have to know much about online gaming to appreciate “The Remarkable Life of Ibelin.” It’s a story about how human connections that are made entirely online can be just as “real” for the people involved as connections made in person. The animation in the documentary is thoroughly engaging, but admittedly the aesthetic will be the most pleasing to people who are familiar with video games that take place in fantasy worlds. And there are some tearjerking moments. Most of all, “The Remarkable Life of Ibelin” is testament to how one person can make an impactful difference in the lives of an untold number of people.

Netflix released “The Remarkable Life of Ibelin” in select U.S. cinemas on October 18, 2024. Netflix will premiere the movie on October 25, 2024.

Review: ‘Exhibiting Forgiveness,’ starring André Holland, John Earl Jelks, Andra Day and Aunjanue Ellis-Taylor

October 19, 2024

by Carla Hay

André Holland and John Earl Jelks in “Exhibiting Forgiveness” (Photo courtesy of Roadside Attractions)

“Exhibiting Forgiveness”

Directed by Titus Kaphar

Culture Representation: Taking place in the 2020s, with flashbacks to the 1990s, mostly in New Jersey, the dramatic film “Exhibiting Forgiveness” features a predominantly African American cast of characters (with some white people) representing the working-class, middle-class and wealthy.

Culture Clash: A successful and talented painter artist has his emotional well-being thrown into turmoil when his estranged father comes back into his life and wants to reconcile.

Culture Audience: “Exhibiting Forgiveness” will appeal mainly to people who are fans of the movie’s headliners and impactful dramas about generational trauma and family relationships.

André Holland in “Exhibiting Forgiveness” (Photo courtesy of Roadside Attractions)

“Exhibiting Forgiveness” presents an authentically raw and poignant story of a painter artist navigating different emotions when his estranged father comes back into his life. This well-acted drama skillfully shows various perspectives. Some of the narrative is a little jumbled in the beginning, but the movie gets better as it goes along.

Written and directed by Titus Kaphar, “Exhibiting Forgiveness” is his feature-film directorial debut. “Exhibiting Forgiveness” had its world premiere at the 2024 Sundance Film Festival. The movie (which was filmed location in New Jersey and in New York) is largely inspired by experiences from Kaphar’s own life. All of the artwork for the movie’s protagonist is Kaphar’s own artwork.

In “Exhibiting Forgiveness,” protagonist Tarrell Rodin (played by André Holland) is a talented painter artist who lives in his native New Jersey and seems to have it all: He’s happily married to his singer/songwriter wife Aisha (played by Andra Day); they are loving and devoted parents to an adorable and intelligent son named Jermaine (played by Daniel Michael Barriere), who is about 4 or 5 years old; and Tarrell’s career is on the rise, thanks to a recently critically acclaimed exhibit of his art.

But underneath this seemingly middle-class bliss, Tarrell is struggling with trauma and emotional damage from his childhood. Throughout the movie, it’s shown that Tarrell has used his art (which consist mostly of “slice of life” portraits of people and things in his life) as a form of therapy, in addition to being a way to express himself. The main cause of Tarrell’s unhappy childhood is his estranged father La’Ron (played by John Earl Jelks), nicknamed Ronnie to some people.

Flashbacks show that when Tarrell was about 12 or 13 years old (played by Ian Foreman), he worked part-time with La’Ron, who had his own lawn care/landscaping business. Tarrell was La’Ron’s only “employee,” although the movie implies that Tarrell probably wasn’t paid much if he was paid at all. La’Ron was seriously addicted to crack cocaine for almost all of Tarrell’s childhood. La’Ron was verbally and physically abusive to Tarrell and to Tarrell’s mother Joyce (played by Aunjanue Ellis-Taylor), who worked in an unnamed service industry job.

One of the heart-wrenching scenes in the movie is when young Tarrell accidentally steps on a nail while working with La’Ron. It’s a deep injury that causes a lot of bleeding and pain. Instead of taking Tarrell to a hospital for medical care, La’Ron shouts at Tarrell to toughen up like a man and keep working. He forces Tarrell to mow a lawn and do other work with this injured foot.

While Tarrell is a passenger in La’Ron’s truck, Tarrell then sees La’Ron take the money they made that day and drive to a drug dealer to buy crack cocaine. A disgusted and anguished Tarrell then decides to walk home while limping from his foot injury. His mother Joyce finds out what happens and takes him to a hospital.

Tarrell, who is now in his 40s, shows signs of post-traumatic stress disorder. He has nightmares but won’t talk about it with Aisha, who has grown frustrated because Tarrell is reluctant to take her advice to seek therapy. “I can’t do this with you anymore,” Aisha says in exasperation after Tarrell wakes up from another bad dream but won’t talk about it. “Call a doctor,” she adds. Tarrell says not-very-convincingly: “I will.”

After his current art exhibit gets a glowing review from an influential art critic, Tarrell’s agent Janine (played by Jaime Ray Newman) is ecstatic because she thinks this review can boost his career. “You got a fucking brilliant review from a critic who hates everything,” Janine says. Tarrell’s reaction seems to be that he doesn’t really care because he has other things on his mind.

The first time La’Ron is seen on screen, he is homeless and is in a convenience store that gets robbed. La’Ron tries to stop the robber, whose name is Tommy (played by Justin Hofstad), but Tommy beats up La’Ron and flees. La’Ron then finds a place to stay at a halfway house for recovering addicts. The halfway house has a strict 8 p.m. curfew for residents, who are also required to attend recovery meetings.

Because the movie introduces La’Ron in this way, he might generate automatic sympathy from viewers who see him as a down-on-his-luck vagrant/recovering addict who is trying to get his life together and on a path to recovery. And when La’Ron tries to reconnect with Tarrell at Joyce’s house, viewers might wonder why Tarrell is so angry at La’Ron and so resistant to forgiving him. “Exhibiting Forgiveness” reveals there’s more to La’Ron than what he appears to be in the movie’s first few scenes of him.

The flashbacks then show why Tarrell is so resentful toward La’Ron. These flashbacks might or might not change viewers opinions of La’Ron. These two sides of La’Ron will make viewers wonder if he deserves forgiveness or not. “Exhibiting Forgives” also invites viewers to ponder this question: “Who’s the best person to judge if La’Ron has really changed?”

Meanwhile, Joyce (who is very religious) has already forgiven La’Ron and wants Tarrell to do the same. Joyce acts as a mediator between La’Ron and Tarrell. “He’s trying,” Joyce pleads to Tarrell. “He’s changed.” She tells La’Ron: “You need to make peace with your son. You’re not going to back out on your promise this time.”

La’Ron insists that he’s been clean and sober, but that isn’t enough to convince Tarrell. Aisha meets La’Ron for the first time during this uncomfortable reunion. Later, Tarrell comments about La’Ron to Aisha: “I just thought the first time you would meet him would be in his casket.”

Finally, Tarrell agrees to have a one-on-one conversation with La’Ron and tries to connect with him in the best way that he knows how: through art. Tarrell brings a video camera and starts interviewing and filming La’Ron like a documentary filmmaker. Tarrell asks questions to La’Ron about La’Ron’s life story. And for the first time, Tarrell hears about La’Ron’s childhood (La’Ron also had an abusive father and a “saintly” mother) and how La’Ron got addicted to crack.

“Exhibiting Forgiveness” is also a movie about how denial and blocking out bad memories are ways that some people cope with trauma. Joyce is an example of this type of coping. In one of the movie’s most emotionally charged scenes, Joyce has a visceral reaction when Tarrell reminds her of a low point that he witnessed as a child during her troubled relationship with La’Ron.

It’s never made clear if La’Ron and Joyce officially divorced or have remained legally separated. But now that La’Ron is back in the neighborhood, Joyce almost seems giddy and ready to rekindle whatever romance that they had. She repeatedly tells people that La’Ron was her first love, as if that’s reason enough to welcome him back into her life. Joyce doesn’t want to be reminded that “first love” doesn’t always mean “healthy love.”

“Exhibiting Forgiveness” gets so wrapped up in the story of Tarrell and La’Ron, it somewhat falls short in having interesting details about Aisha and how she’s being affected by this family reunion. Because singer/actress Day first became known as a singer, “Exhibiting Forgiveness” at times seems more like a showcase for Day’s singing talent rather than character development for Aisha. Day performs an original song called “Bricks” in the movie.

The written words of James Baldwin and Maya Angelou are featured intermittently in the movie. These quotes come across as arty or pretentious, depending on your perspective. Holland, Jelks and Ellis-Taylor give compelling and very believable performances of three people who are flawed in their own ways and are trying to find a way to heal with dignity. “Exhibiting Forgiveness” doesn’t get preachy or too sentimental. Rather, it shows in unflinching ways that people can take different paths and have different versions of forgiveness that don’t always guarantee a happy ending for everyone.

Roadside Attractions released “Exhibiting Forgiveness” in U.S. cinemas on October 18, 2024.

Copyright 2017-2025 Culture Mix
CULTURE MIX