Culture Representation: Taking place in the United Kingdom, the dramatic film “The Outrun” (based on Amy Liptrot’s memoir of the same name) features a predominantly white cast of characters (with a few black people and Middle Eastern people) representing the working-class and middle-class.
Culture Clash: A 29-year-old woman recovering from alcohol addiction moves back in with her mother, who lives on a farm, and there are flashbacks to what led her to this point in her life.
Culture Audience: “The Outrun” will appeal mainly to people who are fans of star Saoirse Ronan and well-acted movies about people coping with addiction and mental health issues.
Saoirse Ronan and Stephen Dillane in “The Outrun” (Photo by Anne Binckebanck/Sony Pictures Classics)
“The Outrun” has a narrative that is told in non-chronological fragments, but collectively, the story is an impactful portrait of alcohol addiction and recovery. Saoirse Ronan gives a devastatingly realistic performance. This thought-provoking drama also has authentic portrayals of how mental illness in families can leave generational trauma.
Written and directed by Nora Fingscheidt, “The Outrun” is based on Amy Liptrot’s 2015 memoir of the same title. “The Outrun” had its world premiere at the 2024 Sundance Film Festival and its European premiere at the 2024 Berlin International Film Festival. The movie was filmed primarily in Scotland’s Orkney islands, but some parts of the story take place in London.
In “The Outrun,” the main character is named Rona (played by Ronan), a 29-year-old who has a master’s degree in biology but whose life is in spiral of alcohol addiction. It’s briefly mentioned that Rona also does psychedelic mushrooms, but alcohol is her main drug of choice. Because the movie’s timeline jumps all over the place, viewers have to put the pieces of the story’s puzzle together.
What emerges is Rona’s story of self-loathing that’s intertwined with her addiction. Her hair is different colors in the film. During her worst addiction periods, her hair is bright pink or aquamarine. During her period of recovery, her hair is mostly her natural blonde. In the beginning of the movie, Rona is seen being aggressive while she’s drunk at a pub and is eventually forced to leave the bar.
Rona grew up in Scotland’s Orkney islands but has an Irish accent because her mother Annie (played by Saskia Reeves) is Irish. For the past 10 years, Rona lived in London, where she was living a party girl lifestyle with her best pal (played by Izuka Hoyle). But a turning point came when something happened that made Rona go back home to Orkney islands and live with her mother while Rona recovers from her alcoholism.
A clue about this turning is shown early in the movie in a scene where Rona (who has a bruised right eye and lesser injuries) is being interviewed by a female counselor who asks unemployed Rona what’s her age, occupation and if her family has a history of mental illness. Because this scene takes place right after the scene where drunk Rona got thrown out of a pub for being too rowdy, it might be easy to assume that Rona got the bruised eye from a pub fight. However, “The Outrun” eventually reveals the real reason for Rona’s injuries.
Rona has a tense relationship with Annie, who is very religious and thinks that praying for Rona will help Rona on her rough road to recovery. Rona has a lot of anger and resentment over Annie’s religious beliefs and drunkenly tells her in a scene where Rona has relapsed: “They [Annie’s religious friends] have you brainwashed. That’s why dad left you … All that praying didn’t help.” Rona is immediately remorseful over these cruel remarks and sobs when she tells Annie, “I’m sorry.”
Rona’s father is named Andrew (played by Stephen Dillane), who has a sheep farm, where Rona goes to visit him. (She also helps in lambing, the birthing of lambs.) Andrew is bipolar, so Rona’s feelings about him are complicated. She clearly likes spending time with Andrew more than she likes spending time with Annie. But Andrew is unpredictable. When he’s having a manic episode, Rona often has to act like she’s his psychiatrist and parental figure to calm him down.
“The Outrun” also has some flashbacks to Rona’s childhood when 11-year-old Rona (played by Freya Lexie Evans) witnessed some horrific events because of her father’s mental illness. For example, she saw her father being airlifted by helicopter because he was being involuntarily committed to a psychiatric facility. In another scene, Andrew smashed windows in their home during a storm because he wanted to let the gusty winds to flow throughout the house.
When she was living in London, Rona was dating a man who’s about her age named Daynin (played by Paapa Essiedu), and they fall in love. However, Rona’s alcoholism gets worse during their relationship. The movie shows what happened to Daynin and Rona as she starts to get more and more out of control.
The scenes between Daynin and Rona are among the best in the film in their raw realism. For example, after Daynin has protectively come to Rona’s rescue during an alcohol-induced low point in her life that put her in a hospital, he sits with her outdoors on a street, where a pub is nearby. Rona is so deep in her addiction, she nods toward the pub asks Daynin, “Do you want to get a drink?” The incredulous expression on Daynin’s face says it all.
“The Outrun” also has scenes of Rona is Alcoholics Anonymous meetings, led by no-nonsense Julie (played by Lauren Lyle) and where she meets a goofy jokester named Samir (played by Nabil Elouahabi), who is one of the few people who can make Rona laugh. Rona finding some tranquility when she watches seals swimming in the ocean. Swimming and outdoor scenes represent Rona’s respite during the inner turmoil that she experiences during her addiction and recovery.
“The Outrun” is not an easy film to watch for certain scenes that show the painful and damaging results of addiction. Some viewers who are expecting a more traditional narrative might also be put off or confused by all how the story is told in bits and pieces instead of as a continuous storyline. However, the acting “The Outrun” is superb, with Ronan (who is one of the producers of the “The Outrun”) being entirely compelling throughout the movie. “The Outrun” might not have a traditional narrative structure, but it’s a more honest movie about addiction than many of those that follow a familiar formula.
Sony Pictures Classics will release “The Outrun” in select U.S. cinemas on October 4, 2024. A sneak preview was shown in select U.S. cinemas from September 26 to September 30, 2024.
Culture Representation: Taking place in New York City, the sci-fi/drama/comedy film “A Different Man” features a predominantly white cast of characters (with a few black people and Latin people) representing the working-class and middle-class.
Culture Clash: An aspiring actor, who has a severely disfigured face, undergoes an operation that gives him a handsome face, but he starts to psychologically unravel when a play is made about his life, and he is upstaged by a disfigured man who is cast to star in the play.
Culture Audience: “A Different Man” will appeal mainly to people who are fans of star Sebastian Stan and movies with social commentary about how physical appearances can dramatically affect people’s lives.
Renate Reinsve and Sebastian Stan in “A Different Man” (Photo by Matt Infante/A24)
“A Different Man” is an interesting social satire about the superficiality of being judged by physical appearances, and how good looks aren’t necessarily synonymous with confidence. However, the film’s concept runs out of steam in the last 30 minutes. “A Different Man” had its world premiere at the 2024 Sundance Film Festival and its European premiere at the 2024 Berlin International Film Festival, where Sebastian Stan won the prize for Best Acting in a Leading Role.
Written and directed by Aaron Schimberg, “A Different Man” takes place in New York City, where the movie was filmed. “A Different Man” begins with a scene of aspiring actor Edward Lemuel (played by Stan) acting in a filmed scene in a room, where he is directed to act less like he’s freaking out over having a brain aneurysm and act more like as if he’s woozy. Edward has a very disfigured face that he developed for unknown medical reasons. A scene later in the movie shows a childhood photo of Edward, who did not have a disfigured face when he was a child.
Edward is a loner who lives in a small apartment, where he has a leaky roof that he delays getting fixed. The leaky roof later becomes a symbol of how Edward handles his life before and after he has facial surgery. Based on what is shown in the movie, Edward doesn’t work much as an actor. The most recent gig he’s been able to get is doing a corporate workplace video on how to treat disfigured co-workers, but the video is very tone-deaf and condescending. Viewers can assume that Edward lives off of government disability payments since he is obviously not wealthy and he seems to be mostly unemployed.
One day, someone moves into the apartment across the hall from Edward. This new neighbor is an aspiring playwright/theater director named Ingrid Vold (played by Renate Reinsve), who seems to be friendly and is very curious about Edward. When she comes over to Edward’s apartment to borrow laundry detergent, it just happens to be right after he has accidentally cut himself with a knife while slicing some onions.
Ingrid immediately applies bandages to Edward’s wounded hand. He is visibly affected by this stranger showing him kindness when he has become accustomed to most people insulting him, staring at him rudely, or trying to avoid looking at him. Ingrid notices that Edward has an antique red typewriter where he has written: “They taunt me and beg me to show my face, only so when I do, they can turn away in horror.” Later, Eward gives the typewriter to Ingrid as a gift.
Ingrid is curious about Edward and seems to genuinely want to be his friend. But it turns out she has an ulterior motive. Meanwhile, Edward undergoes radical surgery to get a new face that isn’t disfigured. He is told that this surgery is risky, but the rewards could outweigh the risks. After the surgery, his hand wound disappears, his disfgured face painfully peels off, and his new handsome face is underneath. Edward keeps the outer skin of his old face as a mask memento.
Edward decides he wants a new identity with his new face. He tells people, including those in his apartment building, that Edward suddenly died by committing suicide. Edward pretends to be a bachelor named Guy Morantz (also played by Stan), who now lives alone in the apartment unit. The movie’s narrative then kind of sloppily fast-forwards to Guy being celebrated at his job as a hotshot real-estate agent, where the company uses him to be a spokesmodel in its advertising.
“A Different Man” never bothers to answer questions about how Edward/Guy was able to get this real-estate job and how he was able to establish this new identity so quickly without anyone (such as his landlord) finding out the truth. The movie also doesn’t explain why “Guy” has kept all of Edward’s belongings and why there are no records of Edward’s death. In other words, there are plot holes in this part of the movie.
Guy/Edward is a little overwhelmed by but enjoying his new life as a good-looking, available bachelor. The attention he gets from women when he’s out in public is obviously very different from when he had a disfigured face. Guy/Edward is still very much attracted to Ingrid, who seems to be distracted by something else.
Even so, Guy/Edward and Ingrid strike up a flirtation and eventually become lovers, as Guy/Edward keeps his secret about his fake Guy identity from her and everyone else in his life. Guy/Edward then finds out something shocking to him: Ingrid is writing an off-Broadway play based on Edward’s life. The play is holding auditions for the lead role of the disfigured man. Guy/Edward auditions for the role using his disfigured face mask, even though he is uncomfortable with Ingrid exploiting his life story for her own personal gain.
In rehearsals for the play, Guy/Edward makes criticisms about Ingrid’s choices for the play. He also isn’t a very good actor in this role. Things start to go awry for Guy/Edward when a British man named Oswald (played by Adam Pearson) auditions for the role and is clearly a better actor. Ingrid decides to cast Oswald in the role instead, especially since he is authentically disfigured.
Oswald has an outgoing personality and charms many people, including Ingrid, although he can be a little pushy in how he barges in on people’s social circles. The rest of “A Different Man” shows how Guy/Edward becomes increasingly unstable as his jealousy over Oswald takes over Guy/Edward’s life. Ingrid also shows that she has a sexual fetish for men with disfigured faces. Whatever her kink is, Ingrid ultimately only cares about exploiting Edward’s life story to make it into a play that she wants to be financial hit and for the play to be a means get accolades for herself.
Stan gives a very watchable performance about a man leading two different lives because of having two different faces. However, what Guy/Edward eventually figures out is that he’s still the same person inside with the same personality flaws. Pearson provides much of the comic relief in his performance as the effervescent and confident Oswald. “A Different Man” shows in subtle and not-so-subtle ways that having a physical appearance that society considers “better” than another can only get someone far enough if they don’t have healthy self-esteem and are constantly seeking approval from people based on physical appearances.
Although “A Different Man” has good acting and solid cinematography, the movie’s portrayal of the concept gets wobbly and weak toward the end of the film. The satirical situations that make Guy/Edward a buffoon start to wear thin and become tiresome. The movie also lets duplicitous Ingrid off the hook way too easily. However, if people want to watch a dark satire where there are no heroes or villains as main characters—just deeply insecure people who make questionable decisions—then “A Different Man” can pass the time but ultimately doesn’t have anything profound to say.
A24 released “A Different Man” in select U.S. cinemas on September 20, 2024, with the movie going into wider release on October 4, 2024.
Culture Representation: The documentary film “Super/Man: The Christopher Reeve Story” has a nearly all-white group of people (with one African American) who are connected in some way to actor Christopher Reeve and who talk about his life and career.
Culture Clash: American actor Christopher Reeve (who died in 2004, at the age of 52) achieved worldwide fame as the star of four “Superman” movies, but his life took an unexpected turn when a horse-riding accident left him with paralysis from the neck down, and he became a disability rights activist.
Culture Audience: “Super/Man: The Christopher Reeve Story” will appeal primarily to people who are fans of Reeve, superhero movies, celebrity biographies, and documentaries about inspirational people.
Christopher Reeve in “Super/Man: The Christopher Reeve Story” (Photo by Herb Ritts, courtesy of Warner Bros. Pictures)
“Super/Man: The Christopher Reeve Story” is a moving tribute to his life and legacy, not only as an actor but also as influential activist for disability rights and medical care. This well-made documentary is sure to inspire repeat viewings. The movie doesn’t sugarcoat or downplay how difficult it was for Reeve to transition to being a disabled person after a horse-riding accident in 1995 left him with paralysis from the neck down. He died from infection complications n 2004, at the age of 52.
Directed by Ian Bonhôte and Peter Ettedgui, “Super/Man: The Christopher Reeve Story” had its world premiere at the 2024 Sundance Film Festival. The movie is told in mostly chronological order and features archival voiceover narration from Christopher Reeve and his wife Dana Reeve, who died of lung cancer in 2006, at the age of 44. There is also a lot of expected archival footage of Reeve from his career and his personal life. The movie features interviews only with people who were close to him. Don’t expect any talking-head “expert” interviews examining the sociological impact of the “Superman” movies starring Reeve.
Even though Christopher was best known for his title role in four “Superman” movies that were released from 1978 to 1987, this part of his life is only a fraction of what’s covered in “Super/Man: The Christopher Reeve Story.” Instead, this documentary is more interested in presenting a well-rounded portrait of a complicated man with an unpredictable life—someone who, with support from loved ones, chose to make the best out of a situation that would crush the souls of many other people who might experience similar things.
“Super/Man: The Christopher Reeve Story” also acknowledges that Christopher’s fame gave him certain privileges in medical care, although he was not as financially well-off as many people would assume that he was. More importantly, he used his fame to help others in his ongoing quest for civil rights, accessibility and medical care for disabled people. This activism included establishing the Christopher Reeve Foundation, which launched in 1982 as a funding center for spinal cord injury research and resources. In 2007, the non-profit group’s name was changed to the Christopher & Dana Reeve Foundation.
People interviewed in the documentary include Christopher Reeve’s three children: Matthew Reeve, Alexandra Reeve Givens and Will Reeve. Other people interviewed include Christopher Reeve’s British former live-in girlfriend Gae Exton, the mother of Matthew and Alexandra; Christopher’s longtime friend/foundation executive director Matthew Manganiello; Christopher’s half-brother Ken Johnson; Christopher’s primary care provider Dr. Steven Kirshblum; “Superman” movie producer Pierre Spengler; politician John Kerry; actor Jeff Daniels; and actresses Glenn Close, Whoopi Goldberg and Susan Sarandon.
Most of the people who are interviewed describe Christopher Reeve (who was born in 1952 in New York City) as someone who was haunted and emotionally damaged from growing up in a fractured and dysfunctional family. His parents—Franklin (an intellectual scholar/writer) and Barbara—divorced in 1956 and went on to get married and divorced twice to other people. Christopher craved approval from his demanding father, who was never really impressed with Christopher’s work as an actor, even though Christopher graduated from the prestigious Juilliard School for performing arts.
A story told in the movie is that when Christopher told Franklin that he got the role of Superman, Franklin seemed to show rare approval because Franklin mistakenly thought that the role was for George Bernard Shaw’s play “Man and Superman.” When Franklin found out that the role was for a Superman movie based on the DC Comics character, his approval turned to disapproval and derision. Several other people looked down on the role and told Christoper that starring in a “Superman” movie would damage his artistic credibility and ruin Christopher Reeve’s career. One of those naysayers was William Hurt, who was co-starring with Christopher and Daniels in an off-Broadway play when Christopher found out that he got the role of Superman.
The 1978 “Superman” movie turned out to be a groundbreaking blockbuster hit, long before superhero movies became a regular part of any year’s movie release schedule. It was also somewhat of a typecasting boundary for Christopher, who went to great lengths to play very different roles in non-“Superman” movies, such as a time-traveling playwright in 1980’s “Somewhere in Time”; a murder victim in 1982’s “Deathtrap” and a corrupt journalist in 1987’s “Street Smart.”
As a result of not having any good role models for a lasting and healthy marriage, Christopher spent years being suspicious of marriage and refused to get married. Exton (who was Christopher Reeve’s partner from 1978 to 1987) describes their whirlwind and passionate courtship soon after they met at a movie studio cafeteria in London. Christopher and Exton lived in England but his long-distance work schedule and entanglements with other women eventually took a toll on their relationship until Christopher broke up with her. Exton gets tearful in the documentary when she describes the end of their love affair.
Christopher changed his mind about marriage with Dana, a singer who was the mother of Will. Christopher and Dana’s courtship was very different from the courtship that Christopher had with Exton. In archival comments, Dana says she was reluctant to get involved with Chrstopher at first because of his playboy reputation. However, the spark between them was undeniable, and they ended becoming soul mates.
Dana and Christopher Reeve’s marriage was a true testament to sticking to the marriage vows “in sickness and in health.” After the horse-riding accident (which nearly severed his head from his body) it was uncertain if Christopher would live or die. Christopher’s mother thought he should be taken off of life support. Dana wanted Christopher to live but said he could make the final decision. And, as he says in an archival voiceover, Dana told him the words that made him want to live: “You’re still you. And I love you.”
As a father, Christopher went from being someone who put a lot of emphasis on athletic activities for family time (just like his own father did) to having to adjust to the painful reality that he couldn’t participate in the same physical activities that he was used to doing with his family. Instead, he learned to be more emotionally present for his family, who never abandoned him during his most difficult times, when shortly after his paralysis, he fell into a depression and wanted to be isolated from a lot of people in his life. Will’s perspective is perhaps the most heart-wrenching of Christopher’s three children because he lost both of his parents while he was still an underage child.
Perhaps one of the most poignant aspects of “Super/Man: The Christopher Reeve Story” is how it details the longtime friendship of Robin Williams and Christopher, who became fast friends while they attended Juilliard and who both achieved worldwide fame around the same time. Through the ups and downs of their lives, this friendship endured. Robin Williams and his second wife Marsha Garces Williams (who were married from 1989 to 2010) are given a lot of credit for helping the Reeve family during some tough times. Robin Williams had his own personal issues (substance abuse and depression), and he committed suicide in 2014, at the age of 63. Mutual friend Close says in the documentary that she believes Robin would still be alive if Christopher were still alive.
There are plenty of tearjerking moments throughout the documentary, but there are also many moments of joy and hope. The most important takeaway from “Super/Man: The Christopher Reeve Story” isn’t what fame, wealth and good luck can do for people but rather what people’s true characters are like when they are at the lowest points in their lives. They can ether wallow in self-pity and misery or do what Christopher Reeve did and turn his pain into something positive that helped other people. With or without a celebrity name, that is the definition of a true hero.
Warner Bros. Pictures and Fathom Events released “Super/Man: The Christopher Reeve Story” in U.S. cinemas for a limited engagement on September 21, September 25, 2024, and will re-release the movie on October 11, 2024. The movie will premiere on HBO and Max on a date to be announced.
Culture Representation: Taking place in the Netherlands (and briefly in Italy and in Denmark), the horror film “Speak No Evil” features an almost all-white group of people (with one person of Middle Eastern heritage) representing the working-class and middle-class.
Culture Clash: While on vacation in Italy, a Danish family of three meet a Dutch family of three, and later experience terror as guests in the Dutch family’s home.
Culture Audience: “Speak No Evil” will appeal mainly to people who are fans of psychological thrillers and don’t mind if there are some lapses in logic in the story.
Sidsel Siem Koch and Morten Burian in “Speak No Evil” (Photo courtesy of IFC Films and Shudder)
“Speak No Evil” rips apart the false sense of security that people have when they think strangers are instant friends. The horror in this thriller isn’t delivered until the movie’s last third, but it packs a very bleak wallop. “Speak No Evil” has some noticeable flaws and plot holes, but the movie’s message is loud and clear: If something doesn’t feel right, don’t be passive because you’re afraid people will think you’re being rude for standing up for yourself.
Directed by Christian Tafdrup (who co-wrote the “Speak No Evil” screenplay with his brother Mads Tafdrup) had its world premiere at the 2022 Sundance Film Festival. The movie begins by showing a foreboding scene that takes place at night. A grim-looking man and woman are driving a car in an isolated wooded area into the driveway of their farmhouse. With them is a boy who’s about 11 years old. Viewers of “Speak No Evil” will eventually find out who this family is and that the area is in an unnamed part of southern Holland.
The next scene shows a seemingly idyllic and sunny scene at a swimming pool at an unnamed resort in Italy. It’s here that two married couples with children, who are all about the same age as each other, will meet and have their lives collide under tragic circumstances. One of the couples at this resort is the same couple seen in the beginning of the film , but instead of looking somber, they look very cheerful.
Patrick (played by Fedja van Huêt) and Karin (played by Karina Smulders) are visiting from Holland. They have an 11-year-old boy named Abel (played by Marius Damslev), whom they introduce as their son. Abel is mute because, as Patrick explains, Abel has congenital ankyloglossia, which is the medical term for being born with a very short or stunted tongue. Patrick says he’s a medical doctor. The movie never mentions details about any job experiences that Bjørn, Louise and Karin have had.
Patrick is the first to introduce himself to the other couple in the story. Bjørn (played by Morten Burian) and Louise (played by Sidsel Siem Koch) are visiting from Denmark and are accompanied by their daughter Agnes (played by Liva Forsberg), who’s about 11 years old. Patrick meets this family when he asks if they are using an empty lounge chair next to them because he would like to take the chair over to his family and use it. Bjørn and Louise politely tell Patrick that the chair is available for him to take.
This vacation resort is the type that has long dining tables for several people to eat at the same table. Bjørn and Louise notice that Patrick is an “alpha male” extrovert type because he leads a toast at the table. Karin is less talkative and seems to be the type of wife who will do whatever her husband tells her to do. Bjørn and Louise have the opposite dynamic in their relationship: Bjørn is much more passive and less inclined than Louise to speak up if something is wrong.
Agnes is unusually attached to a stuffed bunny rabbit toy named Ninus that she has brought with her on this trip. One day on this trip, Agnes announces with distress to Bjørn that she can’t find Ninus. Bjørn goes looking for the rabbit toy and eventually finds it left on a stone barrier overlooking a scenic area.
Bjørn, Louise, Karin and Patrick eventually strike up another conversation with each other when Bjørn returns from finding Ninus and sees that Patrick and Karin are talking to Louise and Agnes. The couples and their children eventually hang out together for the remainder of their time in Italy.
When Bjørn and Louise are back in Denmark a few months later, they get a postcard from Patrick and Karin. The postcard photo is a picture of the two families on vacation in Italy. The postcard is a welcoming invitation for Bjørn, Louise and Agnes to visit Patrick, Karin and Abel and stay with them at Patrick and Karin’s home in southern Holland. The invitation says that Abel misses Agnes and would like to see her again.
Louise has some doubts about staying at the house of people they barely know, in a country they aren’t very familiar with either. But after Bjørn and Louise discuss the matter with another married couple who are close friends, they decide to accept the invitation from Patrick and Karin. It’s a decision that Bjørn and Louise will eventually regret.
Bjørn, Louise and Agnes arrive at the remote house by starting off with good cheer because of the warm welcome they receive from Patrick and Karin. But eventually, Patrick and Karin start testing the boundaries of what Bjørn and Louise will find acceptable. First, Patrick insists that Louise eat the red meat that he prepared for a meal, even though he knows that she’s a pescatarian. Louise uncomfortably obliges. In return, Patrick mocks Louise for calling herself a vegetarian when Louise says that she eats fish.
Another moment of discomfort comes when Patrick and Karin plan a family outing at a restaurant, but Bjørn and Louise are surprised to find out that Patrick and Karin don’t want the kids to come along for this outing. Instead, Patrick and Karin surprise Bjørn and Louise by telling them that Agnes and Abel will be looked after by a “neighborhood babysitter”: a scruffy-looking man named Muhajid (played by Hichem Yacoubi), who doesn’t speak Danish, Dutch or English.
Louise is very uneasy about this arrangement because she doesn’t know anything about Muhajid and is wary of leaving her child alone with this stranger. Patrick and Karin insist that the kids will be safe with Muhajid, whom they say gives cheap babysitting services. Bjørn is much more accepting of this explanation and tries to make Louise feel like she’s overreacting. Not wanting to be rude, Louise goes along with this arrangement.
Without giving away too much information, it’s enough to say that Patrick and Karin (especially Patrick) keep pushing boundaries that make Louise uncomfortable. Some of the boundary crossing is very inappropriate (such as Patrick watching Bjørn and Louise have sex without the couple’s consent) and some of the boundary crossing has blurred lines of inappopriateness, such as Karin scolding Agnes on what type of manners to have while eating.
All of the acting in “Speak No Evil” is competent, although the scenarios might frustrate some viewers who think they would act very differently from all the passiveness and indecisiveness exhibited by Bjørn and Louise. The movie doesn’t tell much about Bjørn and Louise beyond the fact that they are from Denmark. The last third of “Speak No Evil” is the most suspenseful and terrifying, but when a major secret is revealed, it’s handled a bit clumsily. The end of “Speak No Evil” is horrifyingly dark and raises questions that are never answered, which is the intention of making the ending so unsettling to viewers.
IFC Films released “Speak No Evil” in select U.S. cinemas on September 9, 2022. Shudder premiered the movie on September 13, 2022.
Culture Representation: Taking place in the Muskoka Lakes area of Canada’s Ontario province, the comedy/drama film “My Old Ass” features a predominantly white group of people (with a few black people) representing the working-class and middle-class.
Culture Clash: In the summer before she goes away to college, a restless teen takes psychedelic mushrooms on her 18-year-old birthday and meets her 39-year-old self, who gives her some advice that the teen is reluctant to take.
Culture Audience: “My Old Ass” will appeal mainly to people who are fans of the movie’s headliners and well-acted stories about growing pains in young adulthood.
Kerrice Brooks, Maisy Stella, and Maddie Ziegler in “My Old Ass” (Photo courtesy of Amazon Content Services)
“My Old Ass” capably blends comedy, drama and fantasy in this sarcastically sweet coming-of-age story about an 18-year-old communicating with a manifestation of her 39-year-old self. Maisy Stella gives a standout performance as a teen on an identity quest. The movie isn’t for everyone but it will find appeal with open-minded people who aren’t offended by how obscene cursing, casual sex and illegal drug use are presented as part of a teenager’s life.
Written and directed by Megan Park, “My Old Ass” had its world premiere at the 2024 Sundance Film Festival. The tone of the movie is much lighter than “The Fallout,” Park’s feature-film directorial debut about teenagers dealing with the aftermath of a mass-murder shooting at their school. Park has a knack for casting very talented people in the roles that are right for them because they inhabit their roles in authentic ways. “My Old Ass” is Stella’s impressive feature-film debut after having roles in television, such as the TV series “Nashville.”
“My Old Ass” takes place during a summer in an unnamed city in the Muskoka Lakes area of Ontario, Canada, where the movie was filmed on location. Main character Elliott (played by Stella) lives on a cranberry farm owned by her parents Tom (played by Al Goulem) and Kathy (played by Maria Dizzia), who are very loving and supportive of each other and their three children. Elliott is the middle child.
Elliott’s older brother Max (played by Seth Isaac Johnson) is about 19 or 20. He has chosen to be in the family business of cranberry farming. Max and Elliott have an emotionally distant relationship because they are almost polar opposites of each other. Max is introverted and straight-laced. At one point in the movie, Max says to Elliott: “I’m everything you hate. I like farming. I like sports. I hate [the TV series] ‘Euphoria.'”
The younger brother of Max and Elliott is Spencer (played by Carter Trozzolo), who is nice but doesn’t have much of a personality. Elliott definitely likes Spencer more than she likes Max. Still, Elliott doesn’t really hang out with her brothers very much. Elliott also tells anyone who will listen that she can’t wait to move away from this cranberry farm and live her life in the big city of Toronto. In the meantime, Elliott spends a lot of time cruising on a motorboat in a lake.
In the beginning of the movie, Elliott will be leaving in 22 days for her freshman year at the University of Toronto. Also in the beginning of the movie, Elliott identifies as a lesbian, but that will change when she falls for a guy about a year or two older than she is. Elliott has a flirtation with a teenage woman named Chelsea (played by Alexandria Rivera), who’s about the same age, and the flirtation turns into a sexual fling.
Elliott’s two best friends are also free spirits: Ruthie (played by Maddie Ziegler) is tactful and a romantic at heart. Ro (played by Kerrice Brooks) is more outspoken and pragmatic. For Elliott’s 18th birthday, the three pals plan to go camping overnight in the woods and take psychedelic mushrooms that were purchased by Ro. Elliott doesn’t bother to tell her family about these camping plans, so there’s a scene of Elliott’s family waiting forlornly at their dining table with a birthday cake that Elliott never sees on her birthday.
While high on the mushrooms, Elliott is near a campfire when she suddenly sees a woman (played by Aubrey Plaza) sitting next to her. The woman says that she is Elliott at 39 years old. Elliott doesn’t believe her at first until the woman shows Elliott that she has the same torso scar that Elliott got from a childhood accident. Both of the Elliotts have some back-and-forth banter—younger Elliott thinks 39 is middle-aged, while older Elliott thinks 39 is still a young age—and trade some snide quips about what the future holds for Elliott.
The older Elliott will only reveal that she is a Ph. D. student in Toronto and is dating a woman. Younger Elliott asks Older Elliott for life advice. Older Elliott tells Younger Elliott to be nicer to her family and not take them for granted. Younger Elliott also asks older Elliott what her definition is of healthy love. Older Elliott says that healthy love is safety and freedom at the same time. After some of the jokes and semi-insults, older Elliott gets serious and gives younger Elliott a dire warning to not have sex with someone named Chad, but older Elliott won’t say why. It’s a warning that confuses and haunts younger Elliott for most of the movie.
Elliott goes home after the camping trip and thinks older Elliott was just a hallucination until she sees that older Elliott had put her phone number in younger Elliott’s phone. Not long after this psychedelic experience, Elliott is skinny dipping in a lake when has a “meet cute” experience with a guy named Chad (played by Percy Hynes White), who’s also in the lake for a swim. It turns out that Chad is an undergrad college student who is working at the farm for the summer. He has plans to eventually get a master’s degree in pharmacology.
“My Old Ass” then becomes mostly about Elliott trying to navigate and understand her growing feelings for Chad, who is intelligent, funny and kind. Elliott is confused not only because her older self told her to stay away from Chad but also because Elliott had always assumed that she would only be sexually attracted to women. Chad is clearly attracted to Elliott too, but she is very reluctant to get involved with Chad.
“My Old Ass” has a lot of familiar “will they or won’t they” scenes in movies about two people who are romantically attracted to each other, but one person is hesitant to act on these feelings. The movie has some quirky comedy, including another hallucinogenic experience involving Justin Bieber’s 2009 hit “One Less Lonely Girl.” All of the principal cast members are utterly believable in their roles and have great comedic timing in the performances.
What might surprise viewers and is perhaps somewhat disappointing is that the older Elliott isn’t in the movie as much as the trailer for “My Old Ass” would lead people to believe. In fact, there’s a great deal of the movie where younger Elliott is frantic and frustrated because older Elliott won’t return younger Elliott’s phone calls. There are also huge parts of the movie where best friends Ruthie and Ro aren’t seen at all.
“My Old Ass” has themes that are timeless, but a lot of the movie’s jargon and pop culture references are very mid-2020s and already kind of outdated. Some of the dialogue sounds forced, like an adult’s idea of what a progressive-minded, motormouthed teen (Elliott) would sound like when it just sounds like movie dialogue, not real-life dialogue. These are small flaws in a movie that is overall well-paced, fairly unique and elevated by a very talented cast.
Even though there could have been more scenes between younger Elliott and older Elliott, the movie makes a point of showing that this story doesn’t want to rely too heavily on a time-traveling gimmick. And although the movie’s title is “My Old Ass,” the story’s focus remains consistently from the perspective of younger Elliott. Viewers will be curious to know what older Elliott’s secret is about Chad, but the most interesting and best part of the movie is how Elliott reacts when she inevitably finds out this secret.
Amazon MGM Studios released “My Old Ass” in select U.S. cinemas on September 13, 2024, with an expansion to more U.S. cinemas on September 27, 2024.
Culture Representation: Taking place in New York City, the documentary film “Look Into My Eyes” features a racially diverse group of people (white, African American, Asian and Latin) who are involved in some way in giving or receiving psychic readings.
Culture Clash: The seven psychics featured in the movie grapple with their own emotional baggage, trauma and self-doubt while they are in the business of comforting others.
Culture Audience: “Look Into My Eyes” will appeal mainly to people who are interested in watching documentaries about human psychology, whether viewers believe in psychics or not.
Per Erik Borja (pictured at right) with a client in “Look Into My Eyes” (Photo courtesy of A24)
“Look Into My Eyes” is not a journalistic exposé about people who claim to be psychics. This empathetic documentary about seven self-proclaimed psychics in New York City ignores the reality that con artists can use personal information that people put on social media. This movie is mostly about people wanting emotional validation from strangers. Skeptics might be amused by some of the guessing games and performances that show the so-called psychics fumbling to say things that their customers want to hear. Believers will be enthralled and will be reluctant to question the credibility of the self-appointed psychics. It’s perhaps no coincidence that all of the psychics featured in this documentary are aspiring or failed entertainers.
Directed by Lana Wilson, “Look Into My Eyes” had its world premiere at the 2024 Sundance Film Festival. The documentary is a series of scenes that alternate between two types of footage: (1) readings that the seven psychics do for their customers, who are not identified by their names in the documentary and (2) interviews and leisure time with the psychics, who talk about their own personal lives. All of the psychics featured in “Look Into My Eyes” claim to be able to see and communicate with the dead.
What the documentary uncovers about these seven psychics is that almost all of them are deeply insecure, emotionally damaged, and struggling with various issues, such as mental health, addiction recovery and/or financial instability. But they are also very good at talking and giving people the type of comfort that these customers are seeking, which is the real motivation for anyone to take a psychic seriously. “Look Into My Eyes” does not have interviews with the clients of these so-called psychics.
It’s open to debate whether or not psychic abilities exist in human beings. The seven psychics in “Look Into My Eyes” certainly don’t do much to remove skeptical doubt that they have psychic abilities because of all the inaccurate guessing that they have in their psychic readings. The documentary also never questions, investigates, or mentions if the so-called psychics could have researched their clients’ personal lives before the meeting sessions.
The seven psychics who are the focus of the documentary are:
Per Erik Borja, an aspiring actor who happens to be openly gay.
Eugene Grygo, an aspiring actor/screenwriter who happens to be openly gay.
Nikenya Hall, a writer who also claims to be an energy healer.
Phoebe Hoffman, a high-school dropout and TV-watching enthusiast whose specialty is mind reading of animal pets who are dead or alive.
Michael Kim, an aspiring actor who says he began having paranormal experiences in the late 2010s.
Sherrie Lynne, an entertainer who hires herself out for events and dresses in stereotypical psychic clothes when she does readings.
Ilka Pinheiro, a social justice warrior who brings her progressive views into her psychic readings.
All of the so-called psychics in the documentary were in their 30s, 40s or 50s when this documentary was made, except for Lynne, who appears to be in her 70s. The male psychics are all soft-spoken, while the female psychics all have outspoken personalities. The documentary gives the most screen time to Grygo and the least amount of screen time to Lynne.
Some of the scenes are kind of pathetic, such as Grygo showing he has no singing talent when he warbles off-key during his singing lessons, or when Lynne tries to scrounge up some business by asking random people if they want to hire her to be a psychic at their next party. Most of these psychics live in cramped and cluttered apartments and directly or indirectly admit that the money they make as psychics is to fund their aspirations to become professional entertainers, either in acting and/or screenwriting, because they don’t want to work in regular “9 to 5” jobs.
Out of the seven psychics, Kim (who speaks in a calm, mediatative voice) is the one who gives the most accurate readings, but he also appears to be the most skilled in figuring out the right things to say to his customers at any given moment. He rarely gets flustered when his guesses are wrong. And that could have a lot to do with his background training as an actor.
Viewers of “Look Into My Eyes” will see Hoffman talk about her troubled past in her 20s, when she became a shut-in and addicted to cocaine while living with and doing drugs with her father, who also had cocaine addiction issues. Hoffman, who says she is now clean and sober, claims she’s known about her psychic abilities since she was a teenager. But considering she says she also started abusing drugs when she was a teen, it’s hard to know how much of her “psychic visions” were drug-induced. Hoffman mentions that she’s still struggling with social anxiety and other issues, which is one of the reasons why she says she can’t have a “regular job.”
The sob stories continue. Borja gets teary-eyed when remembering how an ex-boyfriend broke his heart. Grygo breaks down and cries when discussing the ongoing emotional pain of grieving over his brother dying by suicide. The documentary doesn’t have the psychics explain if they feel like they were born psychic or if they suddenly developed psychic skills when they needed a side hustle to supplement their incomes.
Coincidence or not, even though these psychics talk about many things in their personal lives, they don’t talk about their marital status or how being a so-called psychic affects their love lives. The psychics in this documentary all come across as being lonely and unlucky in love. Apparently, their psychic skills don’t extend to being able to find the right romantic partner.
Some of the psychics say that they are more attuned to troubled souls than most people are because of their own personal experiences of feeling like an outsider. Kim says he feels a deep connection to a young female client who was born in China and was adopted by Americans but she wants to know more about her Chinese birth mother, who gave her up for adoption. Kim says that he was also adopted by white parents.
Hall talks about being originally from a conservative, religious community in Oklahoma, where she says she felt like a misfit. Hall says she only felt comfortable where she lived when she moved to New York City. Hall also gives a mini-tour of her apartment in a scene that didn’t need to be in this documentary. Viewers really don’t need to know what kinds of figurines and knickknacks she collects when a more interesting story would be her life experiences that led her to make money by claiming to be a psychic.
“Look Into My Eyes” doesn’t reveal much more background information about the psychics except that Kim used to be an actor student at the Lee Strasberg Theatre & Film Institute in New York City. At the end of the documentary, he has a session with a woman who was a Strasberg classmate and who wants Kim to contact her deceased male best friend, who was also a Strasberg classmate. Coincidence or not? We might never know, but Strasberg gets plenty of free publicity mentions in this documentary.
As for the psychic readings in “Look Into My Eyes,” most of them are not as convincing as these self-proclaimed psychics would like you to think they are, especially in this day and age when it’s so easy to find out information about people by doing an Internet search. People who are skilled in human psychology can see how the readings mainly consist of picking up on visual clues from the customers, such as body language and physical appearance. The psychics start off with vague statements until the customers reveal more information so the psychics can make better guesses.
Some of the readings are laughably bad because they just involve some common sense and guessing. In one of the readings, Pinheiro states the obvious when she does a reading for a young man with blue-streaked hair who wants to know what the future holds, in terms of his career. Her “psychic” diagnosis is that she tells him that he’s a creative type who doesn’t want to work in an office job. You don’t have to be a psychic to know that people who dye their hair blue are not conventional people and probably don’t want to be hired in an office where employees are expected to wear their hair and clothes in a conservative manner.
Even more cringeworthy is a session where Borja makes all the wrong guesses and asks to start over in the session, but he still makes the wrong guesses. In an interview after this disastrous “psychic reading,” an embarrassed Borja admits that he often doesn’t know what he’s doing in these “psychic readings.” The filmmakers of “Look Into My Eyes” should be given credit for putting this major mess-up in the documentary, but it might leave some skeptic viewers feeling unmoved and wondering why someone with questionable psychic skills is being showcased in this documentary in the first place.
Skeptics will never be able to get this question out of their minds when the psychic statements about deceased loved ones are fairly accurate: Who’s to say that these psychics didn’t look up information and photos about these clients and their deceased loved ones before the readings happened? Most obituaries are available on the Internet. The documentary has no information on whether or not these psychics knew the names of these customers before the sessions, which look like appointments, not walk-in sessions. Because “Look Into My Eyes” refuses to address these information, this omission lowers the quality of the documentary.
The pet psychic sessions have the least credibility. It’s not that difficult to tell someone who lost a pet that the pet is speaking and asking the grieving pet owner to be in a better emotional place. You don’t have to be a psychic to tell someone whose pet has been missing for years that the pet is probably dead. The dubious psychic part comes in when the “psychic” says that the dead pet who went missing is now speaking and wants the pet owner to know that the pet is not suffering anymore. And you just know the pet owner will start to cry.
As a so-called pet psychic, some of Hoffman’s psychic readings sound more like pet training tips that she could’ve gotten from watching pet shows on Animal Planet or any of the National Geographic channels. For example, in one of Hoffman’s sessions, she has a woman customer who is concerned about her Boston Terrier named Dottie, who is unruly and resistant when Dottie has to walk on a leash. (The dog is not there during this “psychic reading” session.) Hoffman’s answers to this client consist of basic dog psychology and training advice—in other words, things that a famous dog trainer such as Cesar Millan could’ve easily said too—and he doesn’t claim to be psychic.
Even though “Look Into My Eyes” has a lot of flaws and omitted information, it’s still a compelling look at people’s willingness to believe that there is life after death and that a connection with deceased loved ones is still possible. Instead of debunking these psychics, this documentary is more interested in showing how people who are troubled in some way will seek out counseling from strangers. Psychics, whether genuine or not, are unofficial therapists and counselors. And if people want to pay others to get this type of therapy in order to feel good, then people should have the freedom to do so, as long as they don’t think they’re getting conned and ripped off in the process.
A24 released “Look Into My Eyes” in select U.S. cinemas on September 6, 2024.
Ivan “Vanya” Beerkus and Angela Nikolau in “Skywalkers: A Love Story” (Photo courtesy of Netflix)
“Skywalkers: A Love Story”
Directed by Jeff Zimbalist
Culture Representation: Taking place in various parts of Europe and Asia, from 2015 to 2022, the documentary film “Skywalkers: A Love Story” features a predominantly white group of people (with some Asians) who are connected in some way to Russian daredevil skyscraper climbers Ivan Beerkus and Angela Nikolau.
Culture Clash: Beerkus and Nikolau, who became a couple in real life, have their relatonship and other aspects of their life tested as they increase the stakes of of their skyscraper climbing, also known as rooftopping.
Culture Audience: “Skywalkers” will appeal mainly to people who are interested in watching a well-edited documentary about daredevil athletes and the complexities of couples who work together.
Angela Nikolau and Ivan “Vanya” Beerkus in “Skywalkers: A Love Story” (Photo courtesy of Netflix)
With stunning cinematography, “Skywalkers: A Love Story” (about rooftopping couple Ivan Beerkus and Angela Nikolau) is an absorbing documentary that shows the parallels between the highs and lows in the couple’s skyscraper stunts and in their relationship. People who get queasy at seeing views from extreme heights, be warned: If you watch this documentary on the biggest screen possible, you might feel uncomfortable or even feel some sort of vertigo. The journey is worth seeing if you have an interest in watching true stories about unconventional people doing extreme stunts.
Directed by Jeff Zimbalist, “Skywalkers: A Love Story” was filmed from 2015 to 2022. The documentary had its world premiere at the 2024 Sundance Film Festival. Some of the footage was previously filmed archival footage from Russian couple Beerkus (whose nickname is Vanya) and Nikolau, who became a couple because of their shared passion for rooftopping, the daredevil (and often illegal) athletic stunt of climbing to the top of extremely tall buildings or structures without using ropes, nets or other safety measures.
Nikolau and Beerkus give voiceover narration to talk about their personal background, how they met and fell in love, and how they feel when their relationship goes through its ups and downs. The footage that was filmed exclusively for “Skywalkers: A Love Story” features cinematography by Renato Borrayo Serrano. Drones were used for much of the documentary’s exclusive and archival footage. The documentary begins by showing Nikolau and Beerkus attempting to do their most extreme and most dangerous stunt at the time: climbing the Merdeka 118, a skyscraper in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.
Merdeka 118 was under construction at the time the couple decided to do this stunt in 2022. With a total height of 2,227 feet (or 678.9 meters), the Merdeka 118 is the second-tallest building in the world. After showing a glimpse of Nikolau and Beerkus starting this stunt, the movie flashes back to the beginning of their love story and shows how their relationship developed and some of their rooftopping stunts in countries such as France, China, and Thailan. “Skywalkers: A Love Story” then circles back to the Merdeka 118 stunt for the documentary’s very dramatic, tension-filled climax.
Nikolau opens up about some childhood turmoil that she experienced that might explain why she chose such an unconventional profession. Her parents, who were circus performers, split up when she was a child because her father abandoned the family. Nikolau says after this breakup, her mother became severely depressed and was unable to be an emotionally present mother. Nikolau was then raised primarily by her grandmother, whom Nikolau decribes as “a caretaker who taught me to be strong.”
Nikolau adds, “For years, I didn’t let myself cry. I didn’t know who I was. I was searching for who I was.” She adds that having a tough exterior helped when she found a passion in rooftopping but got resistance and prejudice from the male-dominated group of rooftoppers who didn’t accept her because they think women can’t be just as skilled as men in rooftopping. Nikolau comments, “I don’t want to prove a woman is strong like a man. We have our own strength in femininity.”
As for Beerkus, his parents remained together, but he says he turned to climbing buldings as an escape from when he would hear his parents arguing. Beerkus (just like Nikolau) describes himself as an eccentric loner. However, he met his match with Nikolau, whom he credits for opening up his mind to being more artful in rooftopping photos and videos. It wasn’t long before Nikolau and Beerkus began collaborating and documenting their work together on social media. The documentary has some scenes of Nikolau interacting with her loving grandmother and Beerkus interacting with his supportive parents.
“Skywalkers: A Love Story” has a disclaimer in the beginning of the movie that says these stunts are illegal and should not be done by the average person. As seen in the documentary, the issue of possibly getting arrested is an essential part of rooftoppers’ planning, since they often have to find ways to avoid security employees and security equipment. The documentary has footage from 2017 of Beerkus and Nikolau getting arrested in Paris for climbing the Eiffel Tower. Beerkus and Nikola spend the night in jail before beng released. It’s mentioned multiple times that other countries have much harsher punishments than France for illegally climbing buildings and other structures.
Even though rooftoppers often trespass or break other laws to get to the top of these structures, they can still make a living from what they do from sponsors who seek out extreme athletes. Such was the case with Beerkus and Nikolau, who were able to make a full-time income from the rooftopping activities. The documentary shows how the COVID-19 pandemic had a negative effect on their income and put a strain on their relationship. A minor flaw of the documentary is that some of the editing of the couple’s arguments is very much like melodramatic reality TV. It doesn’t ruin the tone of the movie, but it’s noticeable.
“Skywalkers: A Love Story” also shows how the physical danger of rooftopping often isn’t as risky or as scary as the psychological or emotional effects of these extreme stunts. One of the people in this daredevil couple starts to have panic attacks and has doubts about staying in the relationship. “Skywalkers: A Love Story” isn’t just about looking about a couple climbing tall structures. The bigger picture is about how trust and honest communication are essential in order for a relationship to stay healthy and survive.
Netflix released “Skywalkers: A Love Story” in select U.S. cinemas on July 12, 2024. The movie premiered on Netflix on July 19, 2024.
Directed by Julian Brave NoiseCat and Emily Kassie
Culture Representation: Taking place in the Canadian province of British Columbia (and briefly in Vatican City, Italy), the documentary film “Sugarcane” features a predominantly Indigenous group of people (with some white people) who are connected in some way to the now-defunct, Catholic Church-owned residential schools for Indigenous people in Canada.
Culture Clash: Several former students at these schools tell harrowing stories of experiencing or witnessing abuse, racism and suspected murder, with most victims never getting justice from law enforcement.
Culture Audience: “Sugarcane” will appeal primarily to people who are interested in documentaries about Indigenous culture that give personal accounts of a shameful period in North American history.
Whitney Spearing and Charlene Belleau in “Sugarcane” (Photo by Emily Kassie/National Geographic Documentary Films)
“Sugarcane” is a personally intimate examination of the abuse and suspected murders in Canada’s Indigenous residential schools. Some of the investigative elements come up short, but this documentary is a powerful testament to survivor resilience. “Sugarcane” also tells a memorable story of how one particular family has been trying to heal from the generational wounds inflicted by abusers and systemic biases.
Directed by Julian Brave NoiseCat and Emily Kassie, “Sugarcane” features several members of Julian Brave NoiseCat’s family, including his father Ed Archie NoiseCat; Ed’s mother Kyé7e; and Ed’s aunt Martina Pierre. Julian is also featured prominently in the movie, which includes several poignant scenes of Julian and Ed going on a father-son road trip together. “Sugarcane” had its world premiere at the 2024 Sundance Film Festival, where Kassie and Julian Brave NoiseCat won the Sundance grand jury’s Directing Award for U.S. Documentary. Kassie is also a cinematographer and a producer for “Sugarcane,” which is the feature-film directorial of Julian Brave NoiseCat and Kassie.
“Sugarcane” begins with a memorable image of a statue of the Virgin Mary holding an infant Jesus outside of one of these now-defunct schools. The statue is splattered with an unidentified red substance that looks like blood but could be paint or something else. Whatever the red substance is, this striking image is symbolic of the documentary’s undeniable message: The clergy who operated these schools and committed heinous crimes and/or helped cover up these crimes have blood on their hands and have seriously damaged untold numbers of people.
An introduction caption in Sugarcane” gives a very brief summary of what these schools (which also existed in the United States) were about: “Beginning in 1894, the Canadian government forced Indigenous children to attend segregated boarding schools. The schools were designed to ‘get rid of the Indian problem.’ Most were run by the Catholic Church. For years, students spoke of abuse and whispered about missing classmates.” The documentary includes black-and-white archival footage clips of these residential schools in the 1950s and 1960s.
The main community that is the focus of this documentary is Sugarcane Indian Reserve near Williams Lake in British Columbia. Several of Sugarcane’s residents (including members of the NoiseCat family) were Shuswap tribe members and students at St. Joseph Mission Residential School, which operated from 1891 to 1981. It’s mentioned that at schools like St. Joseph’s Mission, Shuswap students were ordered not to speak Secwépemc, the native language of Shuswap people, and were forced to speak English instead.
The documentary also features three people who are active investigators into the abuse and other crimes committed at St. Joseph’s Mission: Willie Sellars, the chief of the Williams Lake First Nations; investigator Charlene Belleau; and investigator/archaeologist Whitney Spearing. Each investigator has uncovered hundreds of stories of horrific abuse that took place at St. Joseph’s Mission. Most of the abuse victims and perpetrators are now deceased. However, “Sugarcane” has interviews with some of the abuse survivors.
Sellars (who has an upbeat and friendly personality) is more of an “out in the field” investigator, who visits different people in the community in person and attends various events such as the National Day for Truth and Reconciliation (also known as Orange Shirt Day), a Canadian holiday (held annually on September 30) to recognize the troubled legacy of the Canadian Indian residential school system. There’s a scene where Sellars is one of the people standing next to Canadian prime minister Justin Trudeau, who gives a short speech to Williams Lake First Nations people on the National Day for Truth and Reconciliation. Trudeau, who said he was invited by Sellars, essentially says a version of “we’re sorry this happened to you” in his speech and then declares of the long journey to try to make things right: “There’s work to do.”
Belleau and Spearing are more focused on research and records for their investigations. “Sugarcane” has multiple scenes of the two women poring over archives and reading aloud some of the harrowing personal letters from witnesses, as well as newspaper clippings, that detail many of the abuse and other crimes. Belleau and Spearing also decorate the walls with some of these archives and maps of the crime scenes, just a like an investigation room at a police department.
Bealleau, like most of the Indigenous people in the documentary, has a personal and tragic connection to St. Joseph’s Mission: Her uncle committed suicide when he was a student at the school. Bealleau bitterly comments that a coroner didn’t even bother doing a report for her uncle’s death. She says of the attitude that many people in law enforcement had at the time: “It’s just another dead Indian. Who cares?”
Many of the students at St. Joseph’s Mission and similar residential schools died while trying to escape. Others died from torture and other abuse, according to many eyewitness statements uncovered in personal letters and police records. Sexual abuse, usually perpetrated by clergy, was rampant. Girls who got pregnant from rape either had their babies given up for adoption or taken away to be secretly murdered. The school campus and nearby property became a horrific graveyard full of sinister secrets.
“Sugarcane” is not one of those flashy and slick true crime documentaries with quick-cutting editing, actor re-enactments or predictably ominous music. “Sugarcane” deliberately takes its time to introduce the NoiseCat family and slowly unpeels the layers of secrets and trauma in the family. The haunting stories they tell are similar or the same to those of other families with former St. Joseph’s Mission students.
When Julian is first seen on screen in the documentary, he calls to wish his father a happy birthday. He is then seen participating in a traditional pow wow, where he wins in the category of men’s traditional dance. Julian gives a triumphant hug to his grandmother Kyé7e, who has been watching in the audience. It all looks like a happy family at first.
But then, there’s a scene where Julian explains to his father Ed that he wants to know the family’s whole story. Ed, with anguish written all over his face, seems to shut down emotionally and replies, “It’s too damaging.” (Julian’s mother is not seen in the documentary. There’s no explain for why she isn’t in the movie, but it can be assumed she chose not to participate.)
Ed (who was born in 1959) is dealing with his own issues over the family’s history: He is haunted by the stigma and the shame of knowing that when his mother Kyé7e was a student at St. Joseph’s Mission, she gave birth to him and put him in a garbage incinerator. This type of garbage incinerator was believed to have been used to murder an untold number of babies who were born from priests and other clergy raping female students. “Sugarcane” includes a short interview with a witness named Wesley Jackson, who says he was ordered to incinerate the bodies of dead babies on the St. Joseph’s Mission campus.
The trauma that gets passed down through generations is shown in a heart-wrenching scene where Julian confronts Ed about abandonment issues. Ed says that he’s never really gotten over the feeling of knowing that his mother rejected him when he was a newborn, and it led him down a path toward abusing alcohol. Julian brings up how he often felt abandoned by Ed, who was an absentee father for much of Julian’s childhood. The emotions they express are raw and real as they try to come to terms with the knowledge that emotional damage caused by abuse can be inflicted on victims’ loved ones too.
The topic of Ed’s birth is too painful for his mother Kyé7e to discuss on camera. When she does talk about it, it’s on an audio recording. Pierre (Kyé7e’s sister/Ed’s aunt) comments to Ed, “I felt dirty as an Indian, all my life, in a residential school. Residential schools taught us shame and guilt, so your mom’s still carrying that.”
Rick Gilbert, a former chief of the Williams Lake First Nations, was a former St. Joseph’s Mission student who opens up about his own generational trauma. He was born from a rape caused by a priest at the school. And then, Gilbert himself was sexually abused by another priest at the school. Accompanied by his wife Anna Gilbert, Rick tries to find some healing by traveling to Vatican City to hear Pope Francis make a public apology for the Catholic Church failing victims of abuse that was perpetrated by Catholic Church clergy.
Some other St. Joseph’s Mission alumni who are abuse survivors are also interviewed in the documentary, but their comments are fairly short. Many of these survivors say they coped with the emotional pain by abusing alcohol and other drugs. Addiction and self-harm are common results that happen to victims of abuse. The abuse is often even more traumatic when the perpetrators get away with their crimes.
St. Joseph’s Mission abuse survivor Jean William says, “Everything was so secretive … When you’re brought up in an institution like the Catholic Church, there are strict rules … The ones who were telling us it was a sin, they were the ones doing all the [sinful] action.”
Rosalin Sam, another St. Joseph’s Mission abuse survivor, adds: “I was abused by Father Price. No one listened to me.” Sam says that she reported the abuse to several authorities, who did nothing. When the Royal Canadian Mounted Police told her father, Sam says her father’s response was to beat her up. She then began abusing alcohol shortly afterward.
Ed Archie NoiseCat has an uncomfortable reunion with a former St. Joseph’s Mission student named Laird Archie, who used to bully Ed when they were students at the school. (Ed used to be physically attacked and cruelly taunted by being called Garbage Can Kid.) Archie is remorseful about this bullying and tells Ed that he was going through his own personal problems at the time, including having adopted parents who were abusive alcoholics. Archie also says his adoptive father, who had 11 kids, sexually abused the kids in the family.
In “Sugarcane,” Belleau and Spearing say that only three people were convicted of sex crimes committed at St. Joseph’s Mission, and only one of them is still alive. He’s identified in the movie only as Brother Doughty, but public records show that his full name is Glenn Doughty. Belleau makes an unnannounced call to Doughty that is brief and unproductive. Doughty cuts the conversation short when she mentions the names of certain students at St. Joseph’s Mission.
There’s a scene where Rick Gilbert meets with Louis Lougen, a superior general for the Missionary Oblates of Mary Immaculate. Lougen is apologetic to Rick Gilbert for the abuse that Rick Gilbert suffered at St. Joseph’s Mission. “I’m so sorry,” Lougen tells Rick Gilbert: “It can’t be justified, but it’s a sickness that grew in the [Catholic] Church.” (Rick Gilbert died in 2023. “Sugarcane” includes a tribute to him in the end credits.)
What “Sugarcane” doesn’t do is question why the Missionary Oblates of Mary Immaculate funded and provided housing for paroled priests and other clergy who were convicted of sexual abuse. Doughty was one of the convicted sex offenders who received these housing privileges and benefits after he was released from prison, according to several news reports. It’s a noticeable part of the “Sugarcane” documentary that doesn’t dig deep enough to investigate the systemic reasons why it’s so hard for these abuse victims to get justice.
Also mostly ignored in the documentary are discussions about the movement for Indigenous victims or their living direct descendants to get reparations for the abuse inflicted at these racist residential schools. Sellars, who is involved in political activism, should have provided some insight and commentary in “Sugarcane” about the reparations issues. If the “Sugarcane” filmmakers asked him about these issues, it didn’t end up in the final cut of the documentary.
“Sugarcane” is not an easy film to watch for anyone who is disturbed by the knowledge of how long and how many people were damaged by these tragic crimes. It’s a searing but necessary reminder that abuse often hides in plain sight and is frequently perpetrated, enabled, and/or covered up by those who are supposed to protect abuse victims. “Sugarcane” not only serves as wake-up call for those who want to look the other way but it’s also a call to action for people in communities to be more vigilant in protecting abuse victims and seeking legal justice, no matter how difficult it all might be.
National Geographic Documentary Films released “Sugarcane” in New York City on August 9, 2024, with an expansion to more U.S. cities on August 16, 2024.
Culture Representation: Filmed from 2019 to 2022, and taking place in the area of Washington, D.C., the documentary film “Daughters” features a predominantly African American group of people (with a few Latin people) who are involved in some way with Girls for a Change, a Richmond, Virginia-based non-profit group that empowers African American girls and other girls of color.
Culture Clash: Girls for Change began a Date With Dad event for incarcerated fathers and their underage daughters to spend time together during a father-daughter dance at the prisons where their fathers are incarcerated.
Culture Audience: “Daughters” will appeal primarily to people who are interested in documentaries that show the vulnerabilities and challenges of families who are affected by incarceration.
A scene from “Daughters” (Photo courtesy of Netflix)
“Daughters” is quite simply one of the most impactful documentaries of the year. This tearjerking account of a father-daughter dance in a prison tells a larger story of the long-term effects of separation from incarcerated parents. “Daughters” does not ask viewers to pity these fractured families but to take an honest and often-uncomfortable look at the circumstances that led to these traumas.
Directed by Angela Patton and Natalie Rae (their feature-film directorial debut), “Daughters” had its world premiere at the 2024 Sundance Film Festival, where it won two prizes: the Festival Favorite Award and the Audience Award: U.S. Documentary. Patton (who is prominently featured in the documentary) is also the founder of Girls for Change, a Richmond, Virginia-based non-profit group that empowers African American girls and other girls of color.
Girls for Change offers Date With Dad, a weekend event (which includes a formal dance) where underage daughters are reunited with their fathers who are incarcerated in prison. “Daughters” does not mention the crimes for which the fathers are incarcerated, which is the movie’s way of not letting these fathers’ identities be defined by their crimes. The fathers who participate in the Date With Dad event have to go through a 10-week orientation program first. According to Girls for Change, about 93% of the fathers who are paroled after participating in the Date With Dad event do not go back to prison.
The Date With Dad event was the idea of a girl in the Girls for Change program in 2008. The first Date With Dad event happened in 2009. “Daughters” (which was filmed from 2019 to 2022) chronicles what happened before, during and after a 2019 Date With Dad event at an unnamed prison in Washington, D.C., where prisoners have to pay for the privilege of seeing visitors, who can only be seen on video without any touching. The Date With Dad event is an exception to the “visitors on video” rule.
“Daughters” focuses on four girls and their fathers who go through this experience:
Aubrey Smith (who was 5 years old in 2019) and her father Keith Swepston
Ja’Ana Crudup (who was 11 years old in 2019) and her father Frank Walker
Santana Stewart (who was 10 years old in 2019) and her father Mark Grimes
Razia Lewis (who was 15 years old in 2019) and her Alonzo Lewis
For some of these daughters, the dance will be the first time that they will get to touch their father in years. In addition to interviews with the fathers and daughters, the documentary has interviews with the girls’ mothers, most of whom are single mothers. They all express a range of emotions: bitterness, hope, fear and bravery.
Aubrey Smith and her mother Lashawn Smith are feeling the weight of finding out if Swepston’s 10-year prison sentence will be reduced. Aubrey, who is clearly the star of the movie, is a precocious and intelligent child who is absolutely adorable. She excels in school and craves her father’s approval. “My dad is the strongest dad I know,” Aubrey says proudly in the beginning of the documentary. Lashawn, who says that Aubrey has “separation anxiety” because of Swepston’s incarceration, also mentions that Aubrey experienced the trauma of seeing Swepston being arrested when police raided their home at night.
Ja’Ana Crudup and her mother Unita Crudup have different feelings about Ja’Ana’s father, who is no longer in a relationship with Unita. Ja’Ana is looking forward to seeing her father, but admits, “My mom don’t like me going to jail to see my father.” Unita bitterly says that when Ja’Ana’s father was not in prison, he didn’t want to spend time with Ja’Ana. And now that it’s harder for him to spend time with Ja’Ana, he wants to develop a bond with her. Unita questions his sincerity and says she doesn’t want Ja’Ana to be disappointed by him again: “When you hurt her, you hurt me.”
Santana Stewart and her mother Diamond Stewart have the opposite situation: Santana’s father and Diamond have a cordial relationship, but Santana is the one who’s angry at her father. Diamond and Grimes were underage teenagers (he was 16, she was 14) when they had Santana. This teenage parenthood and the hardships the family experienced have had a profound impact on Santana, who says defiantly in the documentary: “I’m never going to be a mother. I can have a husband. I’m getting married at 35. If I do have kids, I’ll wait until I’m 45.”
Razia Lewis has a heart-wrenching story of how she’s been affected by her father’s imprisonment. She admits that not having her father around has made her depressed enough to have frequent suicidal thoughts. She says of her father’s absence: “It don’t feel right.” Razia’s mother Sherita Lewis does what she can to cheer up Razia, but the aching void that Razia feels in her heart can’t seem to be filled until she gets a chance to spend quality time with her father.
Patton is seen as a guest speaker during the fathers’ Date With Dad orientation program, which is led by Chad Morris. Morris gives a combination of pep talks and “tough love” lectures on what the men can and should learn from this Date With Dad experience. He warns the fathers that it will be very hard to say goodbye to their daughters after the event ends, but that they should use that sadness as fuel to become better men and make their children proud.
Patton explains the purpose of the Date With Dad event: “The girls needed a way to invite their fathers into their lives on their own terms.” The father-dance is held in a prison gymnasium that is set up with ballroom-styled seating. Many of the fathers have to learn how to put on a tie to go to this event. Also featured in the documentary is Clinique Marshall Chapman, a program manager for this prison in Washington, D.C.
Much of “Daughters” shows the planning and anticipation that go into the event. But nothing can really prepare viewers for the flood of emotions that will come when seeing these fathers and daughters spending time together and then having to go their separate ways again. Regret, emotional pain, tension, joy and sorrow are in abundance.
Most other documentaries that would cover this subject matter would end the documentary at the end of the dance. But “Daughters” admirably goes a step further by showing the long-term effects of the dance. And this is how “Daughters” packs an even bigger punch.
One daughter has reunited with her father, who has been paroled and turned his life around. This father and daughter now have an intact family that is on the path to healing. Another daughter doesn’t get this happy ending and hasn’t seen her father in person since the dance. The exuberant spirit she had when she was younger has turned into glumness and resentment.
The Date With Dad event represents mixed emotions that not only evoke powerful memories but also haunt those who participate in it. For some, the event is a step in the right direction and motivation to make things right if the father gets a chance to redeem himself outside of prison. For others, it’s a fleeting experience that represents a rare time with a father who is sorely missed and remains absent.
What happens when families are damaged or destroyed by incarceration? “Daughters” is an unforgettable glimpse into the promise and possibility of fathers reconnecting with their daughters without any guarantee that these special moments will ever happen again.
Netflix released “Daughters” in select U.S. cinemas on August 9, 2024. The movie will premiere on Netflix on August 14, 2024.
Culture Representation: Taking place over an approximately 15-year period in Las Cruces, New Mexico, the dramatic film “In the Summers” features a predominantly Latin cast of characters (with a few African Americans and white people) representing the working-class and middle-class.
Culture Clash: Two daughters have a volatile relationship with their father, who has a bad temper and who spent time in prison.
Culture Audience: “In the Summers” will appeal primarily to people who are interested in watching well-acted dramas about emotionally difficult family relationships.
Lío Mehiel, Sasha Calle and René Pérez Joglar in “In the Summers” (Photo courtesy of Music Box Films)
“In the Summers” is a well-acted portrait of two daughters and their troubled father, in a story that spans several years. More character development was needed for the daughters’ adult years, but the movie has impactful authenticity. Do not expect “In the Summers” to answer all of the questions that viewers might have about these characters. The narrative for the movie is a journey where certain time-period gaps in the characters’ lives are not shown or explained.
Written and directed by Alessandra Lacorazza Samudio, “In the Summers” is Samudio’s first feature film. “In the Summers” had its world premiere at the 2024 Sundance Film Festival, where it won two awards: Grand Jury Prize: U.S. Dramatic (the festival’s highest accolade) and Grand Jury Prize: U.S. Dramatic and Directing Award: U.S. Dramatic. “In the Summers” had its New York premiere at the 2024 Tribeca Festival.
The two daughters in the movie are named Violeta and Eva. Their ages are only about 12 to 18 months apart from each other. Violeta is the introverted and moody older daughter, while Eva is the extroverted and fun-loving younger daughter. “In the Summers,” which takes place over a span of about 15 years, is told in chronological order in three chapter-like sections, with each section focusing on Violeta and Eva at certain points in their lives.
When Violeta and Eva are underage, they visit their father Vicente (played by René Pérez Joglar, also known as rapper Residente) during the summer seasons at his home in Las Cruces, New Mexico, as part of a custody arrangement that he has with the mother of Violeta and Eva, who live with their mother in California. This mother (who is unnamed in the movie) and Vicente were never married. She is also not seen in the movie, but she is mentioned multiple times in ways that make it obvious that she and Vicente had a bitter breakup. Her absence from the movie indicates that the mother of Violeta and Eva wants as little to do with Vicente as possible.
The first third of “In the Summers” shows Violeta (played by Dreya Renae Castillo) at about 9 or 10 years old and Eva (played by Luciana Quiñonez) at about 7 or 8 years old. The middle of the movie shows Violeta (played by Kimaya Thais Limòn) at about 13 years old and Eva (played by Allison Salinas) at about 12 years old. The last third of the movie shows Violeta (played by Lío Mehiel) at about 25 or 24 years old and Eva (played by Sasha Calle) at about 24 or 23 years old.
“In the Summers” begins by showing Vicente picking up tween Violeta and Eva to take them to his house, where the two girls hang out by the swimming pool. Vicente mentions that even though he was born in Puerto Rico, all of his friends are in the United States. “This is my home now,” he says of his place in New Mexico.
Vicente takes Violeta and Eva to a bar where he frequently hangs out and introduces them to bartender Carmen (played by Emma Ramos), whom Vicente has known since childhood. Vicente teaches Violeta and Eva how to play pool at this bar. Carmen treats Violeta and Eva with kindness and respect.
It all seems like enjoyable family time, but Vicente’s flaws start to show when he takes Violeta and Eva to an amusement park, where he and the girls go on a Tilt-A-Whirl ride. After the ride is over, Eva get sick and vomits in a garbage can. A concerned passerby woman (played by Erin Wendorf) asks if they need any help. Vicente gets very angry at the woman, curses at her, and tells her to mind her own business. It won’t be the last time that Vicente loses his temper in a very hostile way.
Through conversations, it’s revealed that Vicente spent time in prison and has a hard time finding or keeping a job. He also appears to have alcoholism—or, at the very least, he gets drunk in ways that are excessive, embarrassing, and potentially dangerous to himself and people around him. Vicente is also fond of smoking marijuana. It’s unclear where Vicente is getting money to pay his bills and party habits when he’s unemployed.
“In the Summers” is told from the perspectives of Violeta and Eva, who aren’t old enough at this point in their lives to get professional help for Vicente. And if even if they were old enough, it wouldn’t matter because insecure and arrogant Vicente gives the impression that he wouldn’t want the help. He has a macho personality that is quick to deny that he has any weaknesses or vulnerabilities.
The sisters are tight-knit and rely on each other for emotional support. As an example of their different personalities, there’s a scene where Vicente is driving Violeta and Eva at a high speed in his car on a street, just because he feels like being a daredevil. Violeta is fearful during this reckless driving, while Eva loves it.
Near the end of the movie’s segment that shows tween Violeta and Eva, there’s a scene where Violeta asks Eva to cut her hair short. Violeta will keep her hair short for the remainder of the years shown in the movie. She also stops wearing traditionally “feminine” clothes and wears outfits that are more unisex or “masculine.”
During the period of time depicting the adolescence of Violeta and Eva, it becomes much clearer to Violeta that she is a lesbian or queer. She becomes romantically attracted to a girl who’s about the same age named Camila (played by Gabriella Surodjawan), who shows up at one of the many house parties that Vicente likes to host. Vicente is very homophobic, so Violeta is afraid to tell him about her true sexuality.
Violeta becomes increasingly alienated from Vicente, who senses that Violeta is not heterosexual, but he doesn’t want to talk about it with her. Because he is such an irresponsible parent, Vicente thinks that one way he can bond with teenage Violeta is to teach her how to smoke marijuana. But he still has a raging temper that comes out in very ugly and harmful ways. Later, Carmen (who is an out lesbian) becomes an important role model and confidante to Violeta.
“In the Summers” has a somewhat awkward and abrupt transition to the last third of the movie that shows Violeta and Eva in their early-to-mid-20s. By this time, they no longer have to visit Vicente or spend any time living with him. Vicente has a much-younger live-in girlfriend named Yenny (played by Leslie Grace), and they have an infant daughter named Natalia (played by Indigo Montez), who are accepted by Violeta and Eva.
By the time the movie shows Violeta and Eva in their early-to-mid-20s, there are many unexplained and unspoken things that happened in between their early teens and their early-to-mid-20s. “In the Summers” doesn’t adequately show or tell what Violeta’s and Eva’s interests or hobbies are, as indications of their hopes and dreams. Instead, “In the Summers” defines Violeta and Eva in terms of how they cope with their father’s messy parenting.
Viewers learn that by the time adult Violeta and adult Eva see Vicente again after a period of estrangement, Violeta is in grad school. What type graduate program? The movie never says. However, it’s easy to predict what will happen when adult Violeta and single mother Camila (played by Sharlene Cruz) encounter each other after not seeing each other since they were in high school. As for adult Eva, at this point in her life, she’s unattached and having meaningless flings with men.
Mehiel and Calle give perfectly fine performances as adult Violeta and adult Eva, but there are too many unanswered questions about Violeta and Eva as adults. How did their upbringing affect their relationships with other people? What type of relationships do they have with their mother? What are the most important things in life to Violeta and Eva? The movie’s story really didn’t need the parts where Violeta and Eva are under the age of 10 and should have spent more time developing the characters of Violeta and Eva as adults because those questions are never answered in the movie.
The meaningful and best-acted part of “In the Summers” is in the middle section, when the tensions between teenage Violeta and Vicente flare up and boil over into angry conflicts. As an underage teen, Violeta is too young to be able to get out of this custody visitation with her father, but she’s too old to no longer be fully controlled by Vicente, in terms of what she does in her free time and what types of clothes she wants to wear. Violeta wants to assert her independence, but as an underage teen, she still has be somewhat under the control of a parent (Vicente) whose life is very much out of control.
Joglar gives a naturalistic performance as Vicente, who has a lot of flaws, but there are many people in real life who are like Vicente or who have parent similar to Vicente. The movie doesn’t sugarcoat or make excuses for Vicente’s bad decisions and awful temper, but instead presents these characteristics as harsh realities. “In the Summers” is more of a “slice of life” film than a fully complete story about this dysfunctional family that’s trying to heal from emotional wounds. The movie isn’t groundbreaking, but it offers several poignant moments that are credibly acted.
Music Box Films will release “In the Summers” in select U.S. cinemas on September 20, 2024. The movie will be released on digital and VOD on November 5, 2024.
