Home Blog Page 191

Op-Ed: The Inability to Quantify Guy Pearce

Kristin Battestella
-
0
Op-Ed: The Inability to Quantify Guy Pearce

Almost immediately after casually pitching the idea of a Top Ten Essentials Guy Pearce ranking here at InSession Film, I realized it’s nearly impossible to whittle down the decades-long tenure of an actor with some eighty credits to his name who never seems to make a bad movie.

Sure, we can eliminate cameos and supporting prestige like The Hurt Locker, Rules of Engagement, The Road, and The King’s Speech. If this is purely a film study, that excises television performances ranging from a cowboy in Snowy River: The McGregor Saga and an Emmy-winning playboy in Mildred Pierce to Ebenezer Scrooge himself and Down Under detective Jack Irish. Tent poles like Iron Man 3 and Prometheus contrast heavies like Lawless, and standard action flicks like Domino or Seeking Justice even out, thanks to impressive crime dramas such as Animal Kingdom and a delicious short film called Lorne.

There is derivative science fiction such as The Time Machine, Lockout, Equals, and Bloodshot. Yet even in a misfired film, Guy Pearce is never the problem. Fortunately, there is yet more on the horizon with The Last Vermeer, Without Remorse, and Mare of Easttown. Biopics, international indies, exorcism thrillers, a directorial debut – for a real deep dive, check out his two albums and the music videos on Guy Pearce’s YouTube channel. It’s possible being an actor who consistently turns in one quality performance after another isn’t even his best pursuit.

Here then are ten Guy Pearce essentials showcasing an impressive range and variety – listed chronologically because tie breakers on my favorites are impossible.

The Adventures of Priscilla, Queen of the Desert

Husband Hugo Weaving (The Matrix), hothead Guy Pearce, and transwoman Terence Stamp (Superman II) embark on a sparkling, chuckle inducing, cross country trip full of flamboyant Best Costume Design winning frocks in this 1994 Australian comedy. I used to stay up watching every Priscilla late night cable airing, and upon rewatching I’d forgotten how much I enjoyed the excellent banter, sing song deliveries, and catty interplay. Back then, I initially thought this was just a quirky show about drag queens who aren’t very good at what they do – putting on lipstick alongside the outback lizards and their broken down bus with the terrible zebra print interiors. The more I watched, however, the more I loved the interwoven details and courageous relationships, and Stamp is awards worthy as the grieving Bernadette facing old age and uncertainty. Persecutions and pain arise at bars not serving “people like you” while rough housing and unreceptive crowds exacerbate our trio’s jealousy, kept secrets, and conflicts. How does a father come out or explain his unconventional marriage to his fellow queens? Amusing flashbacks also provide deeper characterizations; being a man one day and a woman the next is not an easy thing to do, and some parents won’t speak to their child after his “chop.” While the old white folks drive past our three girls in need of assistance, Aboriginals and youths join in with the Gloria Gaynor, opera, and classic tunes. A blow up doll kite, a jogger repeatedly passing the bus, the flip flop dress, and that giant high heel shoe atop the Priscilla add flair to the beautiful landscapes that just happen to have a man in a dress dancing on the hill. Although there are a few dated stereotypes and inappropriate terms here; the honesty, tenderness, and sincerity shine through. Putting on the performance is really about being bold enough to live in your skin – or wear an Abba turd around your neck – and yes, Mitzi and Felicia become a couple, prove me wrong. I wish every budding bigot could be cut off at the homophobic pass by watching this film.

L.A. Confidential

“Have you a valediction, boyo?” Tween me knew why classics were classics, but this 1997 crime thriller directed by Curtis Hanson (Wonder Boys) and co-written by Brian Helgeland (Mystic River) based on the James Ellroy novel was the first modern film where I realized great cinema was still being made. Russell Crowe (Gladiator), James Cromwell (Babe), Best Supporting Actress winner Kim Basinger (Batman), and more join Guy Pearce for an interwoven, complex tale of corruption, racketeering, politics, murder, blackmail, racism, and hookers cut to look like movie stars. The excellent, ever quotable Best Adapted Screenplay retains the essentials from the novel while mood-setting classic cars, curls, satin, television references, and vintage tunes create a silky smooth veneer to hide the seedy and cigarettes. Nods to filmmaking from the era give way to contemporary pace as subtle actions happen in both the foreground and background, forcing the viewer to pay attention to the visual sleight of hand and re-watch at least twice or…one hundred and fourteen times. Sex, violence, and sophisticated characterizations never underestimate the audience as the puzzle pieces come together for more interconnected scandals, elaborate crimes, and old fashioned good cop/bad cop. Two-way interrogations and shotguns blasts in the elevator provide grit, shocks, and suspense; yet the camera knows when to be still while the the actors act – riding the drama to its crest without need for compensation like today’s over the top hitting the audience on the head. Pearce’s Exley is the hated, calculating lieutenant we come to cheer, and our detectives must unite as dames, tabloids, and set ups collide in one final shootout. How Titanic won Best Picture over this I will never understand, and it’s also is a Christmas movie, fight me. Remember, “Reciprocity…is the key to every relationship,” “A hooker cut to look like Lana Turner is still a hooker, she just looks like Lana Turner,” and “Rollo Tomasi.”

Ravenous

Heaps of blood can’t hide the rushed production, behind the scenes turmoil, and technical mistakes in director Antonia Bird’s (Mad Love) 1999 horror western comedy mixing Mexican War history, Donner family meatiness, and nineties tongue in cheek. Patriotic, gluttonous celebrations nauseate Guy Pearce’s cowardly Captain Boyd, who played dead while the bloody bodies of his fellow officers dripped into his mouth. Boyd is posted to a seemingly quaint former Spanish fort with other army misfits, drunkards, and silent locals. Crosses and rosaries contrast peyote and Wendigo legends of men consuming their enemy to take his spirit, but that’s no different from the white man eating the body of Christ on Sundays. Half frozen stranger Robert Carlyle (The Full Monty) tells fireside tales of famished pioneers eating the malnourished deceased, so our troops set off to rescue any survivors. Beautiful mountains, period uniforms, and rustic scoring suggest an innocent adventure, but screams in the night and claims of someone licking their wounds raise the ominous mistrust as the banjo twang changes to pulsing beats and eerie discord. Separations, revelations, and a pit of bones escalate to quick violence, stabbings, axes, and gunshots. Zany one liners and crazy chases laugh at themselves and the bone cracking soldiers who fell for it – literally – but the hesitant Boyd remains sickened by his tasty temptations. Faith versus thirst quenching cannibalism layers the social commentary amid vampire-esque blood at the mouth, phases of the moon indicating the passage of time, and freezing soldiers resorting to desperate delectables, juicy deceptions, and mad men reversals because the more you eat, the stronger you become. The inside out cloak is now a symbolic red, and while the first half provides isolated outdoor horrors, the last forty minutes is cabin fever claustrophobic with intimate fighting, homoerotic psychological tension, and cannibal contemplation. Chill perpetrators invite fellow soldiers to contribute in the hearty stew and embrace their palate predilections before a final savory struggle and battle of wills. Despite the moral questions, viewers must be able to laugh at this demented, fascinating parable and it’s delicious food for thought. 

Memento

“I have this condition.” Perhaps it’s understandable that the backwards storytelling and interwoven black and white conversations in this 2000 Christopher Nolan mind bender nominated for Best Original Screenplay and Best Editing bother many viewers. However, from the opening reverse gunshot to the final stop at the tattoo parlor, we’re within the dilemma, trying to solve a crime when we can’t remember the scene before despite Polaroids, repetition, habit, and routine. As an insurance investigator, Leonard Shelby spotted the phonies, but anterograde amnesia has left him with the need to avenge his late wife but with no concept of time. Early scenes explain the memory loss, but the homemade tattoos, similar women, redacted files, and generic facts are suspect. Pulsing beats and hectic imagery match the hurried in medias res before sudden stops as the ignorance is bliss resets. Mirrors and reflections add to the who’s helping or using whom friend or foe duplicity. The audience is aware something’s off kilter, but we’re on Leonard’s side thanks to tender music, loss, and the nights alone with his wife’s belongings. Tears, doubts, realizations, and willful denial ironically make for one of the most unforgettable performances of the aughts – for which Guy Pearce received no Oscar nomination when, by golly, he should have won. Even if he’s not faking, Leonard is frustrated at bluffing through the need to socialize or converse. He feels guilty without knowing why, but distrusts hearing the truth from others. Leonard is aware people mess with him and laughs off the double motel booking and those tricky push or pull doors. We take certainties for granted while he desperately scribbles notes before waking up to grief and the cold bed. Viewers see slip ups Leonard dismisses – his hurt hand, the missing pens, needles, scratches, license plates. He says he’ll take a photo and get another freaky tattoo when the deed is done, but his vengeance must have meaning whether he remembers it or not. Rather than intrude, the backward design amplifies the lies we tell ourselves to be happy, and this ahead of its time multiple viewing masterpiece keeps on giving in this age of social media distortion. Leonard is helpless to retain critical information, yet we’re fascinated when he lets details pass because he remembers what he wants to be true. Don’t we all? “Now, where was I?”

The Proposition

Prison wagons, burned homes, barren trees, and lightning mar beautiful prairies, cliffs, night skies, and the ever watchful moon in this 2005 western written by Nick Cave and directed by John Hillcoat (both of whom reunited with Pearce for The Road and Lawless). The so-called civilized attempt to tame the hellish, godforsaken Australia struggles thanks to shabby buildings, muddy streets, and violent attacks. The Union Jack billows high in the dusty breeze, but the white picket fence can’t keep out the assaults, spears, or whips, and the only way to stop the brutality is to be more brutal. Trooper Captain Ray Winstone (The Departed) offers outlaw Guy Pearce the chance to save his younger brother from the scheduled noose on Christmas if he kills their older, said to be more beast than man, brother Danny Huston (The Constant Gardener). Town official David Wenham (Lord of the Rings) demands a flogging display and genteel Mrs. Emily Watson (Breaking the Waves) intrudes upon the massacres, revenge, and chains with parasols and tea. The crazed and fearful don’t sleep as nightmares underscore the lack of life giving in this on edge, unforgiving land. Outlaws are mannerly one moment and disloyal or barbarous the next, but they sing so sweetly as they attack. Emaciated Pearce is a wounded shell, his ribs showing as if he’s consumed from inside out, guilty and wasting away on this quest. Slow motion, hard riding scenes become slightly surreal as if our historical walkabout strayed into an inescapable purgatory while Cave’s lyrics and score address unspoken characterizations like a voice on the wind in the wilderness. Colonial wrongs, racism, and Aboriginal mistreatment intertwine with the tormented fates as boarded up homes await retribution. Buzzing flies, beatings, and dead animals escalate to gory head shots, beheadings, and putting foolish people out of their misery because the violence doesn’t respect holiday prayers and the Christmas turkey. This film makes you feel the need to bathe – not because of the dirty, grimy, and bloody, but its festering complexity.

Traitor

1978 Sudan prayers and car bombs give way to contemporary Yemen raids, explosive business deals, and political intrigue in this 2008 terrorism thriller as FBI Agent Guy Pearce pursues suspected soldier Don Cheadle (Hotel Rwanda) amid underlying racism, religion, and officially unofficial interrogations. Parallel prison escapes and bombing investigations make the case for both sides, but our southern baptist agent is not willing to consider the stereotypical, radical extremes of our Muslim special forces expert despite deliberate actions and conflicts of faith. Who kills the innocent and lies to themselves about being the good guys? Compared to today’s cool high tech; multiple languages, old school maps, folders, and paperwork keep the case tactile alongside retro push the button explosives and homemade devices. Choice direction with point of view zooms and camera movement following the players builds tension toward the costly connections, crossfire, and inevitable bangs as hypocritical leaders, interpretive beliefs, and withheld intel question who’s on the right side – or just thinks he is. The truth is complicated thanks to lies, turncoats, and those in too deep losing control. Though dated in its portrayals and occasionally confusing thanks to superficial transportation fixes and fast locations making things easy when we’re now accustomed to a long form attention to detail. The chess characterizations, chases, one on one roughness, and ticking clocks in the final twenty minutes provide personal dilemmas of interest both then and now. Freedom from consequences is not absolution and bigotry hasn’t changed. This is an intense little caper with fine performances and a whiff of bigger themes making one wonder why mid budget thrillers fell out of favor and how audiences were still sleeping on Cheadle and Pearce back then – and for shame if you still are.

The Rover

Robert Pattinson (Twilight) co-stars in director David Michod’s (Animal Kingdom) 2014 desolate Australian parable set ten years after an economic collapse. Despite little dialogue, the audience is immediately hooked by the empty highways, horizon to nowhere, and road rage with desperate revving and relentless standoffs. Guy Pearce’s car has been stolen, and you don’t want to get on his bad side. Everything has a price – his car for the robber’s simpleton brother Rey – but triggers are always at the ready and army remnants get in the way. The dirty bearded Pearce matches the tumbleweeds and road trip to nothing as social skills are gone. Yet all are old enough to remember life before this torment. Somber notes and simple music people could make themselves create a subdued score while retro beats mirror the uncivilized regression and a lone pop moment recalls what used to be. Trains, previous industry, mines, and the US dollar remain of value compared to other worthless papers, but loyalty seems lost and there’s little reason to wake up in the morning. Talkative, annoying Rey is somehow endearing; we enjoy his chuckle inducing moments and surprising innocence because we know he would be different if life was as it should be. Unnamed onscreen Pearce has a crazed look in his eye and a jaded, terse delivery when he bothers to converse. His aim is excellent, killing one but protecting another when not eating and only sleeping outside if at all. We have every reason not to trust him, yet his quiet threatening is our off center moral compass questioning why nothing matters except this sense of loss and lawlessness. Ironically, he is a better brother to Rey, and the younger starts to emulate him in all the wrong ways as their relationship develops with superb one on ones and inadvertent teamwork. Neither can stop thinking about the dead and that is the price they pay. Interior confrontations, shootings gone wrong, and lack of consequences lead to blame, tears, and nothingness. We have no reason to like this world, yet we care thanks to the powerful performances and upsetting but beautiful storytelling. This is an excellent character study laced with social examinations, and once again, it’s disappointing more awards were not won.

Results

Some may dislike writer and director Andrew Bujalski’s (Computer Chess) mumblecore style and the meandering focus of this 2015 slice of life romance starring feisty Cobie Smulders (The Avengers), clueless Guy Pearce, and lazy Kevin Corrigan (Grounded for Life). Our tidy expectations make the uneven random seem unpolished low budget, however the guru fitness winks, rustic Texas film making, and not so perfect people do not adhere to the stereotypical romantic comedy formula. Each immature piece of our love triangle struggles despite his or her age, wealth, or status, leading to an understandable awkwardness between the fit and not so fit. Trainers insist they aren’t the food police, but…you’re only lying to yourself, virtually stalking, and throwing money away to fix what you can’t control. Youtube gym promos match the naturalistic dialogue – amateur but realistic, scripted but off the cuff. There are no poised cross coverage cuts with romantic crescendos here, just in scene raw emotion and vulnerability. Elemental mantras and goal setting regimes stand no chance against blurred professional lines, misunderstood attractions, transferred emotion, and depressing honesty. Chuckle inducing asides, off key music, and goofy montage twists accent the bickering, it’s complicated business deals, and visions of grandeur giving way to the dog sleeping on the treadmill. The “No Fear, Excuses, Surrender” poster has its “No” obscured, and we see our messy selves in these in love or in therapy personalities. Deflections and defense mechanisms mean you don’t give in so you get your way, but then you also miss the bumbling feelings trying to be expressed while you’re always on the run – literally and figuratively. Such competitive interplay and lack of perfection is refreshingly fun, and calling this a romantic comedy is a little unfair to the self aware quirky drama not following the happily ever after recipe. At first I wasn’t sure if I liked this, but the charm here has grown on me with repeat viewings, and this unique, sarcastic, offbeat tale is worth a look.

Brimstone

Dakota Fanning (Once upon a Time in Hollywood) is the mute midwife afraid of foul minister Guy Pearce in this layered, heavy, and uncomfortable 2017 European co-production written and directed by Martin Koolhoven (Schnitzel Paradise). Sermons warn of false prophets and abductions. Torturous injuries and hellish persecution come disguised as divine. Western shootouts, brothels, servitude, and injustice accent the abstract medieval morality play while horses, hymns, and wagons add desolate authenticity and a lawless atmosphere. The natural outdoor palette parallels the out of order vignettes – rustic autumn, summer saloons, fertile spring, and snowy cleansing – as white steeples, men in black, burning buildings, and women in the mud speak for themselves. Many actors today would not take on the role of a foreboding reverend justifying his demented righteousness, but Pearce is an extremely unlikable manipulator, nameless save for his misused title and creepy scriptures. His taunting punishments and shuddering attachments fester into an unstoppable, almost immortal embodiment, and this hellbent howling may be his darkest, finest performance. Likewise, Fanning looks the pioneer part, strong but worn, struggling in this unforgiving landscape and resisting evil no matter the price. Carice van Houten’s (Game of Thrones) gagged and whipped wife is also sorrowful and helpless, and we root for the women who must obey the patriarchal nastiness. Once there is blood there is no innocence, and the vicious Little Red Riding Hood cycle escalates with gunfire, hangings, and choice red. Horrific scenes, hardcore storytelling, and numbing brutality are not for the faint of heart, but the lack of cinematic restraint transcends genre and strips viewers to our limits.

Spinning Man

Professor Guy Pearce, detective Pierce Brosnan (GoldenEye), and wife Minnie Driver (Phantom of the Opera) crisscross amid police blotters, yellow tape, and missing students in this cerebral 2018 thriller. Seemingly happy family fun gives way to professors debating guilt versus objective reason amid student crushes, stolen glances, and unspoken flirtations as the camera lingers on an inviting smile and the long cigarette drags. Although unnecessary flashes of possible crimes and wishful fantasy break the suspect or family man tension; paralleling mirrors and choice editing accent the argumentative. Philosophy lectures and literal versus figurative plays on words build intrigue, for it’s easy to talk one’s way out of anything if the truth is subjective. Routine interrogations, circumstantial evidence, and mismatched alibis, however, make our professor lose his cool, and the pesky, close to the vest police have their own unnerving existential theories. No one says what they mean, and a mother must protect her children as guilty perceptions and don’t look good deceptions provide duality and destructive facades. Viewers looking for tense a minute may be disappointed by some of the did he or didn’t he round and round spin, but the dramatic ensemble provides mature introspection as the lies come full circle.

 

More Honorable Mentions: The Count of Monte Cristo, First Snow, Hateship Loveship, 33 Postcards

 

What’s YOUR favorite Guy Pearce performance?

Chasing the Gold: Best Supporting Actress Nominees Analysis (2021 Oscars)

Joey Gentile
-
0
Chasing the Gold: Best Supporting Actress Nominees Analysis (2021 Oscars)

When Mo’Nique accepted what is hands down arguably the most worthy Supporting Actress win ever in the history of the category, she said something that has always stuck with me- “Thank you to the Academy, for showing that it can be about the performance and not the politics.” If you don’t understand what exactly that means, I’m gonna make it super simple to understand. The Oscars are the politics of Hollywood, winning a little golden man can increase box office revenue by millions, while only getting a nomination may only get the film a “few extra hundreds of thousand” a gold statue has been shown to almost double profits if not triple. With that said, when an actor gets a nomination, they are expected to go on a campaign tour to talk about their performance, shake hands, snap a few photos, and “play the game”.

Mo is famous for many reasons, but she’s a legend in the Oscar world for pundits and critics alike for refusing to play the game and campaign. So when she won her Oscar, it was solely on merit (which it should be ALWAYS). But we know, unfortunately, it’s rarely ever won on merit, and yet here we are looking at a lineup 11 years removed from Mo’Nique’s Oscar win and we’re looking at a winner this year based on MERIT, which is so refreshing. Lemme break each down for you-

Borat 2's Maria Bakalova on the Role & Working with Sacha Baron Cohen - Variety

Maria Bakalova literally became the breakout star and Cinderella story of the Oscars. Every season has one from Gabourey Sidibe, Marisa Tomei, Quvenzhane Wallis, Rooney Mara, to even last year with Cynthia Erivo. There’s an amazing trend that happens and it’s always a delight to see this person’s career blossom. This year it came from Maria in a sequel no one saw coming, Borat 2. The film premiered during one of the boiling points of American politics and it played perfectly into the narrative of the time. What stood out was the comedic perfection of Maria, who was plucked from obscurity to an Oscar nomination. Many doubted that she could even pull off a nomination due to the Academy’s awful bias towards comedies but she ended up being (on paper) the front runner by hitting every single televised award for a nomination. She’s won: CRITICS CHOICE

Glenn Close talks astonishing 'Hillbilly Elegy' transformation: 'I didn't want to be distracted by my own face'

Glenn Close is now on her 8th nomination and is the proof of the truth pudding that even if you’re in a crap film and your performance is good, you can still get recognized for your work (also see Brenda Vaccaro, Sylvia Miles in ‘75, or Diana Scarwid for a few examples in this category). If there is a certain branch of fandom that can drive one crazy & yet are the most endearing weirdos in the world that you look at with a heavy heart, it is the stans of Glenn Close. If you want to see her win, you truly want it to be THE performance of her career. On paper, she has the narrative of an overdue factor. If you look at the performance, you can see she’s the best thing about the movie she’s in and that alone as a voter could garner her votes, however, this nomination and campaign is using its overdue narrative instead of truly focusing on the performance. There’s a big “it’s time” factor but at the same time is almost confusing because the campaign itself doesn’t know if it should move on solely that or her performance. And despite this being on her 8th, I think it’ll hurt her chances of winning, and honestly this year I think Glenn is just having the time of her life, still being recognized by the industry she’s called home for 40+ years. 

Olivia Colman knows what she's doing, even when she doesn't - Esquire Middle East

Olivia Colman is on her 2nd nomination in two years and finds herself up against Glenn Close again with what many thought was going to be a rematch again for the little gold man. Many doubted the actual chances of what The Father could be as it was mentioned that Sony Pictures Classics had messed up the campaign for the film but as it has shown at Globes and now Oscars, don’t ever doubt the strength of a good film and a studio behind it that knows how to get its baity films it’s Oscar nominations (Melissa Leo in Frozen River says hello). Colman is in an atypical Oscar supporting role and still has afterglow as a previous winner under the five-year range. Will it be enough to pull through for a win? 

Mank': Amanda Seyfried talks Oscar buzz, farm life with her new baby

Amanda Seyfried in Mank has gone from (like everyone else in this category) the “lock” win to “can she pull it off” and while many (yes myself included) has doubted if she can actually win it, now I think that if this year has taught us that anything it’s that anything is possible and Amanda knows this as she’s kicked her campaign into high gear with the help of Cher & Vanessa Redgrave as of late as they’ve openly video campaigning for her. She benefits from being the major sentiment from the majority of people as being the best thing about her movie and could actually pull off what would actually be considered an “upset” for this specific category. 

Minari' Star Youn Yuh-jung Makes History With SAG Awards Win | Hollywood Reporter

Youn Yuh-jung in Minari is proof that success can happen at any age and after last night’s SAG Award win is also showing that on paper like Bakalova has a really good chance to win this based on stats of years past. She also benefits like Seyfried, Bakalova, and Close as being the best part of her movie from the majority of others who have seen the film and carries the narrative of only becoming the SECOND (Miyoshi Umeki is the only woman of Asian descent to win an Oscar) Asian woman to win the award. She’s won: SAG, BAFTA

2021 Oscar nominations: Full list of Academy Awards nominees - National | Globalnews.ca

This is a year where both Actress race’s are open to any one of the five and it’s refreshing. Any pundit will tell you in order to become a “front runner” you have to hit every single televised precursor, which are – Golden Globes, BAFTA, SAG, and Critics Choice. If you can’t do that then you must win a major INDUSTRY award, which are gonna be SAG and BAFTA as they are the only two awards that have some type of direct interaction with Academy voters. Winning awards like Golden Globes and Critics Choice look great for that FYC Campaign but in the end, don’t end up securing a win. However, I would like to note that if one actually carries any weight into actually helping gain votes from Academy voters its the Golden Globe as it is a Hollywood staple, however it is extremely important to note that a win doesn’t mean a lock and Jodie Foster winning this year is testament to that as she won for The Mauritanian yet didn’t get an Oscar nomination. 

This is a year where anyone can win for any reason. Remember that!

Who SHOULD Win and Who WILL Win?: Any one of them.

Podcast: Billy Wilder Movie Series

Ryan McQuade
-
0
Podcast: Billy Wilder Movie Series

Following their Wachowski Movie Series, the boys at Extra Film go back in time to cover the films of the legendary writer, director Billy Wilder. Known for making some of the greatest films of all time, Wilder is not only a prolific writer of some of the best Hollywood screenplays of all time but has a tone and eye for making something truly beautiful with every film he creates. He also a little more cynical than one would think, making him such a well-round director. Throughout the series, the boys go in-depth and dissect some of Wilder’s best work, while also talking about the legacy he left behind.

Double Indemnity, 1945

Listen to our review below as heard on Extra Film.

The Lost Weekend, 1946

Listen to our review below as heard on Extra Film.

Sunset Boulevard, 1951

Listen to our review below as heard on Extra Film.

Ace in the Hole, 1952

Listen to our review below as heard on Extra Film.

Some Like It Hot, 1960

Listen to our review below as heard on Extra Film.

The Apartment, 1961

Listen to our review below as heard on Extra Film.

Podcast: The Apartment / Shiva Baby – Extra Film

Ryan McQuade
-
0
Podcast: The Apartment / Shiva Baby – Extra Film

This week on Extra Film, Ryan and Jay conclude their Billy Wilder Movie Series with his classic The Apartment, and they also discuss the indie comedy Shiva Baby.

After talking about Some Like It Hot, the boys end their Wilder Movie Series on his other 1960 Best Picture film, The Apartment. Regarded as one of the best Best Picture winners of all time, Wilder brings in a wonderful trio of performances to demonstrate what love in the workplace was like at the time. Funny, tragic, and romantic, The Apartment is still as good as when it was released.

In the back half of the episode, the boys talk about the indie comedy Shiva Baby. An indie darling on the festivals last year, Shiva Baby has graced the VOD platforms to critical acclaim as a deeply personal look at a young Jewish girl’s life crumbling around her at a religious service. While it may not have been the guy’s favorite film, they still say there is a lot to admire about it.

Thanks for listening!

– Movie Review: The Apartment (7:26)
Director: Billy Wilder
Screenplay: Billy Wilder, I. A. L. Diamond
Stars: Jack Lemmon, Shirley MacLaine, Fred MacMurray

– Movie Review: Shiva Baby (1:01:09)
Director: Emma Seligman
Screenplay: Emma Seligman
Stars: Rachel Sennott, Molly Gordon, Polly Draper, Danny Deferrari

– Music

The Apartment – Adolph Deutsch
The Truth Comes Out – Ariel Marx
The Return of the Eagle – Atli Örvarsson

We try to make this the best movie podcast we possibly can and we hope you enjoy them. Subscribe today on iTunes, Spotify, or Stitcher, and please leave us a review on iTunes. You can also find us on Soundcloud, PlayerFM, and TuneIn Radio as well. We really appreciate all your support of the InSession Film Podcast.

Subscribe to our Podcasts RSS
Subscribe to our Podcasts on iTunes
Listen on Spotify
Listen on Stitcher
The Apartment / Shiva Baby – Extra Film

[divider]

To hear this Extra Film episode and everything else we do, download our apps on the Amazon Market for Android and the Podcast Source app on IOS devices. The mobile app covers all of our main shows, bonus podcasts and everything else relating to the InSession Film Podcast. Thanks for your wonderful support and for listening to our show. It means the world to us.

Op-Ed: 100 Years…100 Passions – ‘West Side Story’ (#3)

Zita Short
-
0
Op-Ed: 100 Years…100 Passions – ‘West Side Story’ (#3)

I will be watching and reviewing all of the films included on AFI’s 100 Years…100 Passions list. The list contains the 100 greatest love stories in American cinema and I plan to consider how our views on romance and social issues have changed over the years as well as judge whether the romances in these films actually made me swoon. As a fan of the romance genre, I expect to love each and every one of the nominees but I also don’t know if I would consider all of them romantic.

Whenever I speak to people who love West Side Story (1961) they are quick to acknowledge the film’s flaws. With a sigh, they complain about how bland Richard Beymer is, how dodgy the brown face is and how annoying it is that Natalie Wood’s singing had to be dubbed. Then they’ll tell you that the film makes up for all these flaws by featuring revolutionary choreography, catchy tunes, and a bravura performance from Rita Moreno. I have always responded to Moreno’s soulful, empathy-filled performance but there are flaws that I can’t bring myself to overlook. I was never fully under its spell and it was a problem that all of the seams were on display even though Robert Wise was aiming for an authentic look and feel. Before all of you musical fans crucify me, I would like you to know that I am a fan of Thoroughly Modern Millie (1967) and Goodbye, Mr. Chips (1969).

Tony, Richard Beymer, falls in love with Maria, Natalie Wood, even though they are members of rival gangs. Their love affair is carried out in private but a misunderstanding involving Anita, Rita Moreno, leads them down a tragic path.

Tony and Maria are really the biggest problems with this film. The two of them are written as the dullest lovestruck teenagers of all time. There isn’t enough hysteria or madness behind the emotions that they claim to feel and the script has no interest in analyzing their motivations. One of the most compelling aspects of Romeo and Juliet is the fact that Romeo is presented as too impulsive. He is callow and often driven by the desire to be in love rather than experiencing the real feeling himself. West Side Story wants us to earnestly believe that these two have an entirely pure, uncomplicated love. They seem to entirely misunderstand the point of the original story and our hero is ‘too good for this world’ rather than being a foolish youth whose injudiciousness was only exacerbated by the environment that he grew up in.

It doesn’t help that Beymer and Wood are horribly miscast in their roles. She’s clearly not of Puerto Rican descent and the orange face paint is very distracting in every scene as well as being horribly offensive. I also don’t understand why she was cast when she is not a very good dancer or singer. Wood was in her element in sex comedies and films that allowed her to play off against her image as the girl next door but she doesn’t feel like a musical theatre star. Beymer was meant to be a major star but he never quite panned out. He looks like dozens of other leading men from this period and his face blends in with that of George Peppard and even Russ Tamblyn. Neither of them bring much conviction to their delivery of their lines and Moreno can effortlessly blow them off the screen with one flash of her hazel eyes. We never understand why we’re meant to care about Tony and Maria when Wood and Beymer turn them into dummies who are severely lacking in personality. 

West Side Story (1961) directed by Robert Wise, Jerome Robbins • Reviews, film + cast • Letterboxd

They aren’t helped by the fact that every line of dialogue is fairly painful to listen to. The speech is pedestrian and has none of the lyrical grandiosity of Shakespeare. I understand that they were aiming to ground this story in the tough streets of New York City but this is a movie and you show up to listen to people speaking more articulately than the average human being. Most of the people that I know are able to express themselves more eloquently than Tony and Maria and they also possess basic common sense. The screenwriters want us to feel some sympathy for these characters and the difficult situation that they are in but they also have such disgust for people who are members of gangs and can’t imagine anybody who isn’t a member of the Los Angeles intelligentsia being relatively smart. It reminds us of how inauthentic this depiction of gang life is and increases the degree to which all of the emotional beats fall flat. 

They also try to take on race relations and they end up reducing an incredibly complex problem down to cheap platitudes. It is clear that they wanted to sell this to the widest audience possible so they did not do anything that would have been truly shocking to people in the audience. They cast white movie stars in the leading roles and are content with saying that racism is bad. They leave it at that and you roll your eyes at how simplistic and mild their version of racism is. Critics were willing to praise it as an important message movie at the time because it paid lip service to this issue. Mind you, these critics were people like Bosley Crowther, who was willing to praise the work of minstrel performers in his film reviews. This was not a progressive or shocking piece of work back in 1961 and you have to wonder how the Puerto Rican community reacted to this. The pretentious, safe comments that it makes on this ‘issue’ helped it to win Academy Awards and it reminds you that people within the film industry are less socially aware than they would like to believe.

I just don’t think that this story, in the manner, that it is told, warrants 152 minutes of your time. Like most musicals made during the Golden Age of Hollywood, it is stretched out to an unbelievable length and you wonder why the scenes in between the song and dance numbers have to last for so long. I suppose they were all aiming to be seen as epics with wider scopes than your bargain basement schlock but they seem bloated rather than giving you more bang for your buck. There are a few extended dance sequences that do make use of their length but you find yourself yawning during the “Tonight” performance. The editor would have done the audience a great service by cutting this down significantly. 

I’ve spent a fair amount of time attacking West Side Story and I do think it’s pompous, distasteful musical that is not deserving of even a small fraction of the praise that it receives. I would write it off as worthless if it were not for Moreno’s vivacious, effervescent turn. She’s full of the energy and vitality that Wood sorely needs and whenever she arrives on screen you know that things are about to heat up. She has spoken about the fact that it was very difficult to dance in time with Leonard Bernstein’s compositions. She was used to working with different counts and the 5/4 time and 6/8 time that he employed was disorienting for her. Fortunately, she rose to the challenge and when she kicks out her legs or teeters on the edge of rooftops before effortlessly pirouetting back into the center of the congregation of women who are part of her gang. She does take your breath away when she pulls off dance moves that were clearly very difficult to perform. I didn’t believe for one second that she was a tough chick from a rough part of town and not a professional actress who had been groomed by 20th Century Fox. This ultimately didn’t matter because she handled all of this with such ease.

Leonard Bernstein, Jerome Robbins, and the Road to West Side Story | Vanity Fair

Sadly, the greatness of Moreno’s work is diluted by the poorly written conclusion which she is involved in. One of the most sacred elements of Romeo and Juliet is the tragic ending, which forces us to come to terms with a bleakness that we may not have been prepared for. West Side Story is afraid of alienating its audience with anything that could make them feel slightly uncomfortable. Tony dies but Maria gets to live and because we don’t care for the two of them, we’re almost glad to see them go. It feels like they lost their nerve and didn’t want to put all of their chips in when it came to turning it into a tragedy. I seriously question their thinking when they decided to adapt Romeo and Juliet while removing one of the most important aspects of the story. Through a silly plot contrivance, Anita ends up inadvertently causing Tony’s death and Ernest Lehman didn’t work hard enough to make any of this credible. 

There is a general shoddiness at work here. You can tell that they invested a lot of money into this production but I can’t say that it was well spent. The Technicolor has the unfortunate effect of making every hue of orange, pink, and yellow blend together. This means that Wood’s face turns into melted block of processed cheese whenever she’s surrounded by blush colors and this happens quite often. It won an Academy Award for its cinematography and I seriously question this decision as this film frequently looks garish and tacky rather than appearing sumptuous and extravagant. If you compare this to something like Fanny (1961), which showcased the sights of Marseilles with great brio, you see where West Side Story falls short.

Despite my distaste for it, this was a huge hit at the time of its release and did receive exceedingly positive reviews. Its middlebrow appeal was reflected in the fact that it received ten Academy Awards and it feels like the sort of picture that the stuffy, behind-the-times Academy wanted to hold up as great art. It doesn’t have as much to say as musicals like Oliver! (1968) and even Fiddler on the Roof (1971). What seems to count is that it gestures at saying and doing the right things and it pats its audience on the back for being high minded enough to take something like this in. 

Movie Review – West Side Story

This placed so highly on the list and it makes me extremely annoyed. Maybe they just love Moreno enough to overlook all of the glaring flaws that are present in this film. I can see ranking her performance highly but I don’t think that West Side Story itself is deserving of much recognition. I would be very happy if somebody locked this in a vault and protected future generations from being subjected to its wretchedness. They can sit down and listen to Peter O’Toole screeching about violets in Goodbye, Mr. Chips. I know that I found that terribly charming when I was a twelve year old girl.

It is quite obvious that I would not have included this film on the list but I wanted to take this opportunity to talk about the bizarre bias that AFI has towards musicals. In my estimation, it’s a genre with an iffy track record and when it was at its height in terms of popularity, it often produced very expensive pabulum. The bias towards them probably comes from actors. So many of them think of themselves as triple threats and they all harbor dreams of being professionals singers or dancers even if they become movie stars. Ostensibly, musicals give performers the chance to show off all three skills and they don’t have to rein themselves in, which is not something that they ever want to do. The love for them is also derived from a nostalgia for the Golden Age of Hollywood. Musicals were the dominant genre during that period and people would flock out to see films like Mother Wore Tights (1947). That doesn’t happen nowadays and because the industry loves to pat itself on the back, they want to keep the legend of a dying genre alive. There are some fine musicals out there but AFI certainly overrepresented them, based on the average quality of films within the genre.

Chasing The Gold: Best Adapted Screenplay Nominees Analysis (2021 Oscars)

Daryl MacDonald
-
0
Chasing The Gold: Best Adapted Screenplay Nominees Analysis (2021 Oscars)

The category for Best Adapted Screenplay at this year’s Academy Awards feels a little like a gimme for Chloé Zhao. The director of critical hit Nomadland is likely to walk away with a number of Oscars come April 26th, and Adapted Screenplay would be near the top of the list of ones you should expect to see her take. But what of the other contenders? In a year of strong original screenplays, can the same also be said of adapted screenplays? Did Regina King’s adaptation of the play One Night in Miami deserve a mention? How on Earth did Borat get in there? Below we take a look at the contenders for Best Adapted Screenplay and analyze their chances of winning the big gold statue.

The Nominees:

Frances McDormand is the reason that Chloe Zhao made 'Nomadland' - GoldDerby

Nomadland – Chloé Zhao’s stunning Nomadland has collected an impressive six nominations at this year’s Academy Awards, and it’s easy to see why. Its beautiful tale of survival and hope in an America suffering through late-stage capitalism has captivated audiences and critics alike, winning it several awards from Golden Globes and Critics Choice, as well as BAFTA nominations. It’s also pure Academy catnip, making it the most likely winner of the evening across most of the major categories, including this one. Couple that with an incredible performance from Frances McDormand and an excellent use of non-actors to highlight a very real issue, and what you have is often jaw-dropping. It deservedly leads the way and will likely win the night.

Sony Pictures Classics Sets 'The Father' and More New Dates | IndieWire

The Father – Based on Florian Zeller’s play (Zeller also directs here) of the same name, The Father is a dark horse contender which could cause some upset on the evening. With stellar performances from both Olivia Colman and Anthony Hopkins, it’s got all the trappings of an Academy winner. However, of the last 25 Adapted Screenplay winners, only three were from plays. Considering that The Father is up against another play, One Night in Miami, it’s possible the two might just cancel each other out as the Academy goes with its preferences of novel based adaptations. However, The Father also has six nominations, making it possible that it takes the award here as compensation for missing out on the others.

Borat Subsequent Moviefilm': Review | Reviews | Screen

Borat Subsequent Moviefilm – This one came out of nowhere. Recently winning the WGA award for Best Adapted Screenplay, Sacha Baron Cohen’s triumphant return as the hapless Kazakhstani journalist beat out such luminaries as Ma Rainey’s Black Bottom and News of the World. While remaining true to its farcical roots and political potshots, Borat Subsequent Moviefilm manages to mine from real sentiment and pathos from its content. It’s likely this strange turn of events that has endeared awards bodies towards it, despite the fact you could argue against its inclusion as an adapted screenplay given it hasn’t actually adapted its source material from anything other than the original character of Borat. In any event, Borat is unlikely to come away with a win at the Academy and its inclusion can be seen as more of a nod to its outstanding achievements within its field.

One Night in Miami | Movie review – The Upcoming

One Night in Miami – Regina King’s adaptation of Kemp Power’s, ahem, powerful stage play about four iconic black activists – Martin Luther King Jr, Muhammed Ali, Jim Brown, and Sam Cooke – who gather to discuss their roles within the civil rights movement of the 1960s, is pure, uncut Academy bait. It deals with the Big Issues, features incredible performances from up-and-coming actors such as Leslie Odom Jr, and Kingsley Ben-Adir, and is a debut directorial effort by a woman in a field sorely underrepresented by them. It’s got everything you would want in an nomination and had this been a less strong year for the Academy, it wouldn’t have been surprising to see One Night in Miami lead the pack as the favorite. Alas, strong competition means it’s unlikely to take home the gold.

The White Tiger Is a Crime Drama with a Dazzling Performance | Time

The White Tiger – Of the last 25 Adapted Screenplay winners, nine were from novels. This makes The White Tiger something of an outlier considering it is the only screenplay adapted from a novel in this category. Up against two plays, a non-fiction, and something which defies the Adapted Screenplay categorization, The White Tiger is historically the safest option of the bunch. Aravind Adiga’s scorching novel is kept mostly intact in the big screen translation, and Ramin Bahrami’s direction ensures the dialogue, the wordplay, and the feel of the novel comes across perfectly. It is an excellently done adaptation and a shame it’s up against such strong competition. With this being the only category it’s nominated in, it’s hard not to feel like The White Tiger is little more than a token nomination – a nod to the Academy preference of novel adaptations. Still, it deserves to be named on this list.

News24Nation | Thought. Information. Truth - Nomadland Review: A Poetic Meditation On Grief With An Awesome Frances McDormand Performance

Who Will Win?

Nomadland is almost a dead cert in this category now. It’s also the bookies’ favorite and considering the other nominations in the category, it seems very likely Chloé Zhao will walk away with a few of the awards. It’s very likely Mank will beat out Nomadland in some of the other categories but given it’s not a contender here, it’s fair to say the Academy might give this one to Nomadland in recompense for losing out to Mank in a different category.

Who Should Win?

Take your pick, they’re all great nominations. The Father and One Night in Miami are both well-established and well-received plays which have expertly adapted and acted, while Nomadland‘s semi-improvisational style and use of non-actors is inspired and gives a real grounding and intimacy that would not have otherwise. Elsewhere, The White Tiger is an excellent and true adaptation of a great novel and manages the difficult trick of evoking the sense and style of the novel without losing the voice. Each of the above would be worthy winners, but Nomadland perhaps squeaks ahead of the rest for the pure ingenuity and originality of Zhao’s script and execution.

Podcast: Terrence Malick Movie Series

JD Duran
-
0
Podcast: Terrence Malick Movie Series

Terrence Malick is a filmmaker we’ve talked about many of times over the years, and has become a favorite of ours, with The Tree of Life even landing in JD’s Top 10 Movies of All-Time. Understandably, some will find his films meandering, but his lyricism and poetry is something that deeply resonates with us. He’s an emotional and spiritual filmmaker whose visual storytelling and intimate dialogue is uniquely his own. It’s become such a vivid distinction that the term “Malickian” has become a descriptor for others using his techniques. Say what you will about Malick, but no one makes movies like he does, thus making him one of the more influential directors in recent years. So, join us in our journey, as we travel through the badlands of Montana, the new world of America, Texas in the 1950s (which somehow also includes the Big Bang and dinosaurs), and so much more.

Badlands, 1973

Listen to our review below as heard on Episode 418.

[divider]

Days of Heaven, 1978

Listen to our review below as heard on Episode 419.

[divider]

The Thin Red Line, 1998

Listen to our review below as heard on Episode 420.

[divider]

The New World, 2005

Listen to our review below as heard on Episode 421.

[divider]

The Tree of Life, 2011

Listen to our review below as heard on Episode 421.

[divider]

To the Wonder, 2013

Listen to our original review below as heard on Extra Film.

[divider]

Knight of Cups, 2015

Listen to our original review below as heard on Episode 161.

[divider]

Song to Song, 2017

Listen to our original review below as heard on Extra Film.

[divider]

A Hidden Life, 2019

Listen to our original review below as heard on Episode 359.

[divider]

While we have officially covered To the Wonder, Knight of Cups, Song to Song and A Hidden Life, we will have an epilogue at the end of this series where we revisit those films in one conversation. We’ll talk about how we initially felt about those films, how things may have changed and where we stand with them now as time has progressed. Be sure to leave any feedback in the comment section below or hit us up on social media!

Classic Film Review: ‘In the Mood for Love’ Is Intellectually Challenging

Zita Short
-
0
Classic Film Review: ‘In the Mood for Love’ Is Intellectually Challenging

This is one of those situations where I find myself just loving a film, even though I know that I’m meant to absolutely lose my head over it. Critics and friends had told me that it was easily one of the best films of the 2000s. That praise doesn’t usually get heaped onto anything that is mediocre and I was sure that this would inspire me to plunge into Wong Kar-Wai’s filmography as soon as I possibly could. Things didn’t exactly work out as I expected them to…

In the Mood for Love is about a romantic relationship between people who choose to repress their natural desires instead of giving into them, and end up hurting themselves in the process. It is set in British Hong Kong in 1962 and deals with members of the middle class. The focus is on their time off work and the hours that they spend alone when their closest relatives are occupied. The protagonists are Su Li-zhen (Maggie Cheung) and Chow Mo-wan (Tony Leung) who realize that their spouses are having an affair with one another. After learning this, they find themselves forming a friendship. They resist giving in to their attraction but enjoy being in each other’s company and continue to agonize over the demise of their respective marriages. 

In the Mood for Love (2001) is a foreign language film, and, as the dilettante I am, I expected it to work with a visual palette that would seem completely foreign to me. My silly, narrow minded notions were quickly dispelled by the way that Wong sets up the opening scenes. He presents us with hustle and bustle, tight, confined spaces, and loud, showy colors that seem to be at odds with the grim expressions worn by all of the characters. Curiously, one is brought back to the melodramas of William A. Wellman, that great purveyor of sob stories that came paired with a cynical message. Wong presents us with a dizzying beautiful Hong Kong, in which even inconveniences can appear trendy and stylish. He and Wellman both share an anthropological sensibility and seem more interested in portraying how ordinary people would react to living in this perfect world, than simply being extravagant. It is this quality that makes this film immediately accessible to fans of classic cinema. That is a rare quality in the world that we currently inhabit. It’s hard to imagine Zack Snyder making a film in which there was actually some substance behind the flash.

Wong is able to look askance at Wong and Su and leave us to make up our minds about their actions. He distances himself and the audience from them and then forces us to accept the artificiality of their world. They are two people who never directly confront their spouses and they seem to be fully capable of living in denial. The camera dutifully picks up on their beauty, a quality that we tend to associate with goodness, and yet it does not go further than that. I never felt as though these characters had been sexualized and it was always as though I was inspecting statues. There are times when the camera will just rest on Cheung’s anguished profile and she seems otherworldly. Wong is telling us to study their features, instead of desiring them or projecting our own emotions onto them. It’s an odd approach to telling a story that could have been all about emotional outpourings. 

You’ve probably noticed that I’ve done a lot of contemplative evaluation of the themes involved in this story. I do that because I don’t have a firm handle on In the Mood for Love. Maybe it will take time for the film to take its grip on me. I do find myself thinking back to scenes and images from it and I have a loose image of what Wong was trying to communicate, I just haven’t put all the pieces together yet. Sometimes it’s lovely to have an evolving relationship with a piece of cinema and I suspect that this will be one of those times. With reflection and reading of various pieces of film criticism, I can gain a firmer understanding of what has made this such a beloved piece of cinema. 

Grade: B-

Criterion Crunch Time – ‘Always Shine’

Dave Giannini
-
0
Criterion Crunch Time – ‘Always Shine’

Comparison is one hell of a drug. A drug with some truly vicious side effects. And this only gets worse when that comparison is between you and a friend. Especially a close friend. And yet, it feels like human nature. Even people who are successful compare themselves and come out of it the worse for wear. And this dangerous habit is well documented in the world of film. But one such documentation is leaving the Criterion Channel at the end of the month, so here we are. Sophia Takal, perhaps better known for directing the remake of Black Christmas, but this work, Always Shine, should have garnered more attention.

Always Shine is the story of two friends, who used to be close. Both are young actresses, but at very different levels of success. Beth (Caitlin Fitzgerald) is more accomplished, to the point of being considered for lead roles and mentioned in best of young Hollywood articles. Anna (Mackenzie Davis), on the other hand, is struggling to make a name for herself in any real way. The two are friends, but have drifted apart, and they are set to spend a weekend at a cabin together to reconnect.

Director Sophia Takal shows a stunning amount of promise and subtlety here, in just her second feature. She wears her influences on her sleeves here, and I mean that in a complimentary fashion. Much like Bergman’s Persona, Takal uses reflections and perspecitive to tremendous effect. It also seemed obvious to this viewer that Queen of Earth may have been on Takal’s mind, as well. It is very clear that we are aligned with Anna, as she has had to struggle and work for every crumb she has received. To hammer that point home, there is a tremendous scene with Davis and Fitzgerald taking turns playing the same role. In this scene, it becomes painfully clear that Anna is the superior actress. But because she doesn’t fit a specific type, she is not given half the opportunities that Beth has been gifted. Additionally, in the sequences which use mirrors, our focus and perspective is focused on Anna. Beth is limited to the edges of the mirrored reflection, lurking behind Anna.

This focus on Anna, punctuated by Davis’s powerful performance of wearied pain, puts us in a truly uncomfortable position. Anna’s slow unraveling leads us to feel unsure if we should really be on her side, and Always Shine never gives you that answer. Yes, Anna clearly snaps and makes, let’s say mistakes. But that doesn’t let Beth off the hook. She, by her own admission, has been a terrible friend. In the climactic moment, in which she is caught admitting to her boyfriend that she has lied to and betrayed Anna, the film switches from dread to pure horror.

But despite that switch, it is only momentary. Takal had every opportunity to dive into gore and show Beth’s murder. Instead, she does something much more interesting. Davis, who would go on to be a relatively known actor, is given the challenge of embodying the much more demure version of herself, making stylistic choices similar to Beth. She manages this without ever dipping her toe into imitation. Instead, she focused on politeness, agreeableness, and overall, speaking with much less detail. This makes her a less identifiable person, and sadly, more attractive to the people around her, especially men.

This, in many ways, ties into the opening scene. This moment, which begins with voiceover on a black screen, is simply Beth auditioning for a part in a horror movie. This is the same movie that both actresses read to each other in the scene mentioned earlier. But in this opening scene, we hear Beth essentially begging for her life. At first, due to the lack of imagery on screen, it is unclear if this is something that is actually happening. As Beth appears, it is clearly the audition setting. Importantly, as this character is begging for her safety, she is asking the other character what she can do for him to save her life, including mentions of sexual activity. It is no coincidence that the people making the decisions about her role are men. Men who, at first, are simply disembodied voices; a literal personification of the male gaze focused on both sex and violence.

Beth finds a way to make them happy, both in the scene and in her willingness to perform a nude scene. There is some tremendous work here from Fitzgerald, making it clear to us that she is wildly uncomfortable, all while comforting these men and assuaging their worries. This ability continues throughout the film in all of her interactions with men. She is quiet, pretty, and completely non-threatening. Anna, on the other hand, is loud, sometimes abrasive, and direct when she is flirting. But by the end of the film, she has not only taken over for Beth in name but seemingly subsumed her personality, as well.

In Always Shine, Sophia Takal solidified herself as a young director to watch. Although Black Christmas received less than stellar reviews, thankfully she has three projects lined up moving forward. She showed serious talent in this film, as well as an eye for talented actresses. She also tackled difficult themes, such as jealousy in female friendships without delving into stereotypes or playing to the back row. Always Shine is a powerful example of smaller film’s ability to open new doors to old themes.

In the next column, we will discuss The Postman Always Rings Twice

Podcast: Reactions to 2021 SAG Award Winners – Chasing the Gold Ep. 34

JD Duran
-
0
Podcast: Reactions to 2021 SAG Award Winners – Chasing the Gold Ep. 34

On Episode 34 of Chasing the Gold, Ryan is joined by The Oscar Expert and Brother Bro to talk about the 2021 SAG Award winners and what it means for this year’s Oscars!

We are three weeks away from the 2021 Oscars finally telling us who the winners are. Over the past couple of weeks, the Hollywood guilds have presented their awards, no more important than the Screen Actors Guild. SAG has been known to be a great precursor when it comes to predicting who will win the acting winners and even Best Picture. With that, Ryan and his guest explore what the winners this year mean as well as where they see the Best Picture race heading into the final stretch of the awards season.

On that note, have fun with this week’s Chasing the Gold, and let us know what you think in the comment section below. Thanks for listening!

– Music

The Return of the Eagle – Atli Örvarsson

We try to make this the best movie podcast we possibly can and we hope you enjoy them. Subscribe today on iTunes, Spotify, or Stitcher, and please leave us a review on iTunes. You can also find us on Soundcloud, PlayerFM, and TuneIn Radio as well. We really appreciate all your support of the InSession Film Podcast.

Subscribe to our Podcasts RSS
Subscribe to our Podcasts on iTunes
Listen on Spotify
Listen on Stitcher
Reactions to 2021 SAG Award Winners – Episode 34

[divider]

Mobile App

To hear this Extra Film episode and everything else we do, download our apps on the Amazon Market for Android and the Podcast Box app on IOS devices. The mobile app covers all of our main shows, bonus podcast’s and everything else relating to the InSession Film Podcast. Thanks for your wonderful support and listening to our show. It means the world to us!

[divider]

Help Support The InSession Film Podcast

If you want to help support us, we would greatly appreciate it! For more info, CLICK HERE.

Classic Film Review: After 45 years, ‘The Bad News Bears’ is still one of the scrappiest underdog films

Brett Doze
-
0
Classic Film Review: After 45 years, ‘The Bad News Bears’ is still one of the scrappiest underdog films

This week saw the return of major league baseball for the 2021 season. In recent years, I’ve found that I like to indulge in my fandom by not only watching games, but baseball movies too. This year, one of the all-time baseball comedies celebrates its 45th anniversary the same week as Opening Day in pro baseball. When The Bad News Bears came out in 1976, it was overshadowed by another underdog movie that happened to win Best Picture and spawn a franchise: Rocky. Still, the former was a box office success and takes a different direction than the tale of the boxer from Philly. 

Michael Ritchie’s film begins with an immediate introduction to the lead character, Morris Buttermaker (Walter Matthau). We’re given an indication of his alcoholic tendencies when he pulls up to a youth ballfield, in a car that is past its glory days, and pulls out a beer from the cooler in the backseat. It turns out that he’s a former pitcher who never made it past the minor leagues, and he’s just agreed to coach the Bears, a team of pre-teens in Southern California. He’s not taking the job out of the kindness of his heart, but rather because he gets paid to do it. He spends his days lazily cleaning swimming pools without much purpose, and it appears the pool-cleaning business is not treating him well. 

The Bears are the definition of ragtag. They only exist because the father of one of the players sued the high-maintenance league to ensure the team could join, and they have no chemistry when they first begin practicing. They trip over themselves while chasing fly balls, jump out of the way when ground balls come their way, and their chances of hitting a pitch are barely above zero percent. This is all very humorous, and it doesn’t seem to bother Buttermaker, who could not care if they win or lose. However, as arguments brew between him and the arrogant coach of the league’s best team (Vic Morrow), his competitive nature pushes him to make the Bears a championship team. 

While the film has laughs that are still effective to this day, it’s clearly a product of the 1970s in a number of ways. Part of that is in the style of the film, which has a sort of low-budget quality in its graininess and overlapping dialogue that at times makes it sound like an Altman film. It’s also apparent through the stars of the film, including Matthau, who was coming off of two Oscar noms in previous years of the decade. Even more interesting is his co-star Tatum O’Neal, who is clearly not a co-lead but received top billing alongside Matthau due to her Oscar win for Paper Moon three years earlier. 

O’Neal is a force in the film, and she’s one of few characters that can wear down Buttermaker. She plays an 11-year-old who sells maps at intersections and learned how to throw a mean curveball from Buttermaker when he dated her mom a few years earlier. She’s joined by the likes of a young Jackie Earle Haley, who plays the uber-talented and almost mythic Kelly Leak, a bad boy who joins the team late in the season as a way to get under the skin of Morrow’s character. 

The rest of the team consists of kids who all have their own little quirks, even if they aren’t given the development of O’Neal’s. Most of them have dirty mouths, and nearly all of them are willing to fight when the moment arises. A real strength of The Bad News Bears that has stood the test of time is in the casting of the players. The kids actually seem like real kids. This shouldn’t be such a difficult task, but Hollywood has a history of hiring 15-year-olds to play characters that are actually 11 or 12. That’s not the case here (except for the casting of Haley, though that’s kind of the point of his character).

Still, the Bears wouldn’t be bad news without their leader, and Matthau was meant for this role. There seems to be a realization that the performance should not strive to make the character likable. Part of the strength of the role is in how lazy Buttermaker comes off, and Matthau combines that with hilarious line delivery that also denies the “try-hard” attitude. His character development serves as a comment on competition in American sports, particularly in his toxic handling of his coaching duties and how he transforms that by the end of the film. It’s tough to imagine anybody else playing the role, even though Billy Bob Thornton did do quite well with it in the 2005 remake. 

Beyond the actors and performances, the film is a reflection of the 1970s–and especially 1970s cinema–in terms of its plot and the themes behind it. On the surface, this is the simple story of how a youth baseball team turned their season around to take on the overconfident league leaders (aptly named the Yankees). But it’s important to consider why the Bears came to be, and how the team is constructed. Though unintentionally, the continued participation of the Bears in the “North Valley League” is a challenge and opposition to the uptight authority. This is supported by the unconventional ways the Bears play baseball, from O’Neal sneakily throwing illegal pitches to players leaning into pitches to get on base. It’s a reflection of a pretty common theme in 70s media, especially in the midst of distrust of the government after Watergate and the Vietnam War. 

When looking past the big picture, the film is also a celebration of those that work against the norm. Though the sports genre is filled to the brim with underdog stories, the Bears take that to a new level. Not only are the players bad-mouthed, dirty, and originally quite terrible compared to the rest of the league. They also don’t maintain the suburban recreational league style. Their late submission to the league means they don’t get the “good uniform colors” or a notable sponsor. Rather, they wear a shade of mustard yellow and are sponsored by the now iconic “Chico’s Bail Bonds.” And most importantly, these are the heroes of the movie, while the clean, “normal” teams are the bad guys. 

Granted, there are some aspects of the film that could have stayed in the 70s. One of the most recognizable members of the Bears, played by Chris Barnes, has a few lines that are racist and homophobic in nature. Some viewers might not be in tune to the basic storytelling style or the humor that doesn’t try particularly hard for gut-busting laughs. As a baseball film, it’s more of a lesson on how not to coach youth sports than anything else. However, the film has aged very well in many other areas, particularly in how it takes the underdog story in a unique direction. Just when we think these players are going to transform into a more sportsmanlike and caring group of kids, the film ends with them sipping beer after the championship game and telling the other team to stick their trophy and apology where the sun doesn’t shine (though in a much harsher fashion). And yet, somehow the film is better as a result of that. 

Grade: B+

List: Top 3 Monster Brawls

JD Duran
-
0
List: Top 3 Monster Brawls

This week on Episode 424 of the InSession Film Podcast, inspired by our review of Godzilla vs. Kong, we discussed our favorite monster brawls in movies. I mean, who doesn’t like giant monsters fighting each other? It’s some of the most fun we’ve had in the cinema over the years. Of course, much of it is silly and over-the-top, but some of it is truly weighty and riveting. Either way, there are plenty of great monster brawls to choose from for our lists. And we had fun talking about them. That said, here are our lists:

(Note: Please keep in mind that we each had different criteria for our selections)

JD

1) Kong vs Vastatosaurus Rex – King Kong (2005)
2) Hong Kong Battle – Pacific Rim
3) Godzilla vs Ghidorah – Godzilla: King of the Monsters

Brendan

1) Toothless vs Drago’s Bewilderbeast – How to Train Your Dragon 2
2) Playground Fight – Colossal
3) Godzilla vs Zilla – Godzilla: Final Wars

Honorable Mentions (Combined)

Kong vs T-Res – King Kong (1933)
Final Battle – Pacific Rim
Tokyo Battle – Pacific Rim: Uprising
T-Rex vs Spinosaurus – Jurassic Park III
Blue vs Indominus Rex – Jurassic World
Godzilla vs Muto (ending battle) – Godzilla
Kong vs Skull Crawler – Kong: Skull Island
Monster Chaos (ending) – The Cabin in the Woods

Hopefully you guys enjoyed our lists and if you agree or disagree with us, let us know in the comment section below. As mentioned above, there are plenty of monster battles to pick from if you’re familiar with this genre. So, it’s quite possible that your list is different than ours. That being said, what would be your Top 3? Leave a comment in the comment section or email us at [email protected].

For the entire podcast, click here or listen below.

For more lists done by the InSession Film crew and other guests, be sure see our Top 3 Movie Lists page.

Poll: What is your favorite film from 1981?

Brendan Cassidy
-
0
Poll: What is your favorite film from 1981?

Many great filmmakers either got their start in the 1980’s, or suffered what some people dub the “80’s slump” (see Robert Altman and William Friedkin as prime examples). But the start of this particular decade not only showed promise, it would go one to become one of the most influential cinematic years ever, especially for genre films. This weekend, we are celebrating the 40th anniversary of Michael Mann’s directorial debut Thief, starring James Caan. This got us thinking about the cinematic year that was 1981, and how strong it ultimately was; so why celebrate just one film from this year when we can celebrate them all?

With that said, what is your favorite film from the year 1981?


Podcast: Godzilla vs. Kong / Top 3 Monster Brawls – Episode 424

JD Duran
-
0
Podcast: Godzilla vs. Kong / Top 3 Monster Brawls – Episode 424

This week’s episode is brought to you by ExpressVPN. Sign up today and get 3 months FREE with a 1-year package!

This week on the InSession Film Podcast, we discuss the epic battle that is Godzilla vs. Kong and our Top 3 monster brawls in film! Plus, a few passionate thoughts on the Netflix comedy Bad Trip.

The new MonsterVerse may not be a groundbreaker in terms of quality, but it’s been a fun thrill ride for the most part. Godzilla and Kong are two of the most iconic characters in cinema, and at the very least, it’s compelling when they’re on screen. The series had been building to this moment and it’s one fans have been anticipating. Us included. And we a had a blast talking about the film and all of its bombastic glory. Monster brawls was also a lot of fun as well.

On that note, check out this week’s show and let us know what you think in the comment section. Thanks for listening and for supporting the InSession Film Podcast!

– Movie Review: Godzilla vs. Kong (8:19)
Director: Adam Wingard
Writers: Terry Rossio (story), Michael Dougherty (story), Zach Shields (story), Eric Pearson (screenplay), Max Borenstein (screenplay)
Stars: Alexander Skarsgård, Millie Bobby Brown, Rebecca Hall

– Notes / Bad Trip / I Care A Lot (1:10:17)
While Godzilla vs. Kong dominated theaters and HBO Max over the weekend, it was the raunchy hidden camera movie Bad Trip that took Netflix by storm. It recieved decent reviews and most of the feedback seemed to be positive. Well, that certainly lent itself to some passionate thoughts from JD and Brendan, who also caught up with the film. Brendan also saw the Netflix drama I Care A Lot, and he gave his thoughts on that one as well.

[divider]

RELATED: Listen to Episode 413 of the InSession Film Podcast where we discussed our Top 10 Movies of 2020!

[divider]

– Top 3 Monster Brawls (1:27:14)
Who doesn’t like giant monsters fighting each other? It’s some of the most fun we’ve had in the cinema over the years. Of course, much of it is silly and over-the-top, but some of it is truly weighty and riveting. Either way, there are plenty of great monster brawls in movies to choose from for our lists. And we had fun talking about them. That said, what would be your top 3?

Show Sponsor: First Time Watchers Podcast

– Music

Godzilla Theme – Tom Holkenborg
Kong Theme – Tom Holkenborg
Pacific Rim Theme – Ramin Djawadi
The Return of the Eagle – Atli Örvarsson

Subscribe to our Podcasts RSS
Subscribe to our Podcasts on iTunes
Listen on Spotify
Listen on Stitcher
InSession Film Podcast – Episode 424

[divider]

Next week on the show:

Review: Thief
Top 3: N/A

[divider]

Help Support The InSession Film Podcast

If you want to help support us, there are several ways you can help us and we’d absolutely appreciate it. Every penny goes directly back into supporting the show and we are truly honored and grateful. Thanks for your support and for listening to the InSession Film Podcast!

VISIT OUR DONATE PAGE HERE

Chasing the Gold: SAG Awards Winners Reveal Oscar Frontrunners

Bradley Weir
-
0
Chasing the Gold: SAG Awards Winners Reveal Oscar Frontrunners

The 2021 Screen Actors Guild Awards were held virtually on Sunday night, with the broadcast having a very different feel to previous years. With every winner’s speech performed via zoom, the shorter-than-usual night had a much more low-key and intimate tone.

However, the importance of the awards is as significant as any year when it comes to the Oscars, and we now know our frontrunners in the four major acting categories.

The two male categories have felt the most certain throughout the last few months, and there were no surprises as Chadwick Boseman and Daniel Kaluuya deservedly won their respective awards for Lead Male Actor and Supporting Male Actor.

Simone Ledward Boseman gave a passionate speech on behalf of the late Chadwick, with the night allowing everybody to celebrate the fantastic actor and performance once more.

Kaluuya’s path to his first Oscar on his second attempt seems relatively straightforward now, although it remains to be seen what effect (if any) his Judas and the Black Messiah co-star LaKeith Stanfield’s nomination will have in the Supporting Actor category.

The wide-open races this season have been with the ladies, but Sunday night proved big for two women.

Viola Davis took home the prize for leading female actor in a close contest alongside stellar contenders Frances McDormand and Carey Mulligan. While the win provides a foundation to declare Davis as the frontrunner, it must be stated that SAG liked Ma Rainey’s Black Bottom much more than the Academy, while Nomadland and Promising Young Woman are arguably the two strongest performing films at this year’s Oscars nominations.

In Supporting Female Actor, it was Minari star Youn Yuh-jung who picked up a huge win and must surely be the frontrunner in a category that has lacked one all season.

These four winners created history, with this marking the first time in the SAG awards history that the four-film acting winners were actors of color.

In the tightly contested ensemble category, The Trial of the Chicago 7 won big for its star-studded cast, beating Minari and thus likely ending (unfortunately) any Oscar hopes for Lee Isaac Chung’s masterpiece.

The win also gives a Best Picture route still for Sorkin’s drama despite his directing snub, although Nomadland’s recent PGA win will make it a near-impossible task. The smart money would be to bet on Nomadland or Chicago 7, clearly making this a two-horse race.

The Trial of the Chicago 7 didn’t manage a surprise stunt ensemble win, however, with that award going to Wonder Woman 1984, replicating its 2017 win for the first installment.

All eyes are on London this weekend for the upcoming BAFTAs, then it’s full steam ahead to April 25 as this year’s unprecedented awards season will wrap up with the 93rd Oscars.

Share your thoughts below on this year’s SAG film winners.

Streaming movie picks: 'Chicago 7' is Aaron Sorkin magic

BEST ENSEMBLE: THE TRIAL OF THE CHICAGO 7

BEST MALE ACTOR: Chadwick Boseman, MA RAINEY’S BLACK BOTTOM

BEST FEMALE ACTOR: Viola Davis, MA RAINEY’S BLACK BOTTOM

BEST MALE SUPPORTING ACTOR: Daniel Kaluuya, JUDAS AND THE BLACK MESSIAH

BEST FEMALE SUPPORTING ACTOR: Youn Yuh-jung, MINARI

BEST STUNT ENSEMBLE: WONDER WOMAN 1984

Op-ed: Noted Posthumous Oscar Winners

InSession Film Staff
-
0
Op-ed: Noted Posthumous Oscar Winners

With his recent Oscar nomination for Best Actor, Chadwick Boseman becomes the latest to receive posthumous recognition and could be on his way to winning. If he wins, Boseman would be the third acting winner after Peter Finch and Heath Ledger to win and the latest posthumous nomination since August Wilson, who was nominated back for adapting his own play Fences. The most recent posthumous winner is Gil Friesen, producer of Best Documentary Feature 20 Feet From Stardom. If Boseman does win, he will be among the list of recognizable names who have taken Oscar glory, unfortunately, after they have died. Note: this will be constrained to non-acting winners.

Sidney Howard 

Sidney [Coe] Howard at his desk in Playwrights' office — Calisphere

The first Oscar winner to have died prior to winning was screenwriter Howard, only forty-eight years of age when he was killed in a farming accident on August 23, 1939.  He was primarily known for his work on Broadway, writing or adapting more than seventy plays, and his 1925 novel They Knew What They Wanted, which earned him a Pulitzer Prize. Howard was hired by MGM in the 1930s and his adaptations for Arrowsmith (based on the novel by Sinclair Lewis) and Dodsmith (based on his own play) garnered him two Academy Award nominations. Even though he wasn’t the only writer to work on Gone With The Wind, he was the only writer credited for writing the screenplay, thus granting him the posthumous victory on Oscar night months after his tragic death.

William Horning

The art director won two Academy Awards, but never saw his wins alive, having died on March 2, 1959, aged 54. Joining MGM in 1931, Horning would begin his career working with Cedric Gibbons, who would design the very iconic Oscar statuette he would get. Horning’s first nominations included the biopic Conquest, the musical The Wizard Of Oz, and the epic historical drama Quo Vadis. It was in the last years of his career (and life) did Horning hit his peak as the lead art designer with his work in Les Girls, Raintree Country, and, one week prior to his death, Gigi, for which he’d win the first of his two of Oscars. A double nominee a year later, he’d win for Ben-Hur while getting his other nod for North By Northwest, making him the only posthumous winner in consecutive ceremonies.

Sam Zimbalist

History Museum recognizes "Oscar" contenders | Valley Roadrunner

Speaking of Ben-Hur (and Quo Vadis for that matter), the film had two posthumous winners with Zimbalist dying of a heart attack during the production of the Ben-Hur, making him the only posthumous Best Picture winner, with his widow accepting in his honor. He started his career as an editor in multiple Hollywood films in the 1920s before being hired by MGM’s Hunt Stromberg as an associate producer. Zimbalist would have a solid career with works including Thirty Seconds Over Tokyo, Adventure, King Solomon’s Mines, Mogambo, and the aforementioned Quo Vadis? Because of the high stress of the lengthy, expensive production of Ben-Hur, people felt that it was the film that killed Zimbalist, aged 57.

Raymond Rasch and Larry Russell

Their victorious work for Best Original Score was rewarded in 1973, but Limelight was originally produced in 1952. Their collaborator in Charlie Chaplin, however, left the United States for good and the film, which was boycotted by major theatres due to Chaplin’s alleged communist sympathies. (This was another Cold War casualty.) Therefore, it was not shown in Los Angeles until twenty years later. The rules have altered since, but at the time, it still made Limelight eligible. By then, Chaplin had returned with much fanfare, but it was no justice for Rasch (died in 1964) and Russell (died in 1954), both of whom passed at young ages.

Howard Ashman

At the end of Beauty And The Beast, you will notice the tribute: “To our friend Howard, who gave a mermaid her voice and a beast his soul, we will be forever grateful. Howard Ashman 1950–1991.” In a short period, Ashman left a major legacy with Disney, as well as a large void. After moderate success on Broadway with Little Shop of Horrors, Ashman was hired by Disney to work on Oliver & Company and was partnered with Alan Menken for The Little Mermaid, starting a magical collaboration with Menken that included being a creative influence on voice actors with strong singing parts and storylines which matched the songs.

He won his first Oscar for Best Original Song with Menken for “Under The Sea,” and then privately revealed he was dying of AIDS. Even in the poorest of health, Ashman would complete work for Beast, as well as some songs for Aladdin, which he pitched to Disney. Howard Ashman died on March 14, 1991, aged just 40. Upon winning his second Oscar, it was accepted by his partner, Bill Lauch, who remarked that Ashman was the first Oscar winner to have been afflicted with HIV/AIDS. Even after his death, the Disney Renaissance continued to flourish, having started with Ashman’s creative genius on the lyrical front. 

Follow me on Twitter: @brian_cine (Cine-A-Man)

Chasing the Gold: Best Original Screenplay Nominees Analysis (2021 Oscars)

Amy Smith
-
0
Chasing the Gold: Best Original Screenplay Nominees Analysis (2021 Oscars)

When going into the Best Original Screenplay category a few months ago, it seemed like there was a clear frontrunner that would sweep the season. However, things have changed quickly as a new nominee seems to be creeping up the ladder. Not only that, but the omission of David Fincher’s Mank only makes the race more interesting than initially expected. Let’s take a look at who is in the race and who might end up winning on the night.

The Nominees:

How the Lucas Brothers Wrote 'Judas and the Black Messiah'

Judas and the Black Messiah – It was unknown how Judas and the Black Messiah would do on nomination morning, after the late release date meaning it made little impact on the precursors. However, nominations for two actors, screenplay, cinematography, and picture shows the passion that lies behind this film. However, with a lack of wins to back it up and the film most likely getting its big award with Daniel Kaluuya, it would be a major upset if Judas was to take home to prize on the night.

For 'Minari,' Lee Isaac Chung Returns to the Home He Longed to Leave - The New York Times

Minari – Whilst it can never be fully clear with how A24 promotes their films during awards season, it seemed like Minari was going to be a strong contender for numerous nominations, in which it ended up with six. There does not seem to be an obvious place yet to reward the film with a win, but I am also struggling to see it winning Best Original Screenplay. Where the film shines is with the performances and the aesthetic around it, from the score to the cinematography. Unfortunately, I do not think the screenplay is “showy” enough to get its way to the win.

Emerald Fennell On 'The Only Ending That Made Sense' For Promising Young Woman

Promising Young Woman – In contrast to Minari, Promising Young Woman is certainly a film that has a showy screenplay. It was unknown how branch members would react to a film as tough as this, but the love for this film is clear. Not only did it get five major nominations including Director, Picture, Original Screenplay, Actress, and Editing, but it has been taking several major wins for Original Screenplay. Not only did Fennell win Original Screenplay for the Critics’ Choice Award, but she also won it for the WGA. Right now, she is in a strong position to take the win at the Oscars.

Darius Marder On Directing His Latest Sound of Metal - MUSE TV

Sound of Metal – Leading up to the nominations, Oscar pundits were hesitant on whether Judas or Sound of Metal was getting the final spot. Instead, it was Mank that missed out whilst the other two films both got nominations. This is such a lovely nomination for a film that performed exceedingly well on nomination morning. However, for this film, it feels like the nominations are the wins. We can celebrate the representation of the deaf community being present, especially with the Paul Raci nomination. We can celebrate the success of Riz Ahmed across the board this season. However, I struggle to see it climbing its way to a win.

First Look at Aaron Sorkin's 'The Trial of the Chicago 7' | Vanity Fair

The Trial of the Chicago 7 – For a while, it felt like Aaron Sorkin was ready to win another Screenplay Oscar for The Trial of the Chicago 7. Having won the Best Screenplay category at the Golden Globe Awards and with the success of the film across the board, it was hard to see anyone else stepping forward as a competitor. However, it is clear now that the love for Sorkin and Trial is not as strong as expected. Not only has the film missed out on some major wins such as the WGA, but Sorkin missed out on a Best Director nomination. Quite simply, the narrative for the win is starting to fall, as are all of the other wins it was predicted to have.

Who Will Win?

Read 'Promising Young Woman' Script by Emerald Fennell - Variety

If you had asked me this a few months ago, I would have said that Aaron Sorkin was walking away with his screenplay. However, it really looks like the voting bodies are connecting with Promising Young Woman. For the Original Screenplay category, voters tend to appreciate a level of difficulty that comes with the story and the themes, looking particularly at the past with winners such as Parasite and Get Out. And since her win at the WGA a couple of weeks back, the screenplay has become the odds-on favorite to win the award and come allow the film to not go home empty handed on Oscar night. With the dark themes and the tricky narrative, it could end up being the selling point to get Emerald Fennell her first Oscar and without having to take away Chloé Zhao’s Director Oscar.

Who Should Win?

Emerald Fennell on Twitter: "Day 1 of “Promising Young Woman”!!!… "

For the exact same reasons that I listed above, Emerald Fennell should walk away with the Oscar. In the past decade, not a single woman has won either Screenplay category, and there is a strong chance that a woman can win both this year between Promising Young Woman and Nomadland. I certainly think it is time to reward women in writing, especially when a film as strong as Promising Young Woman is the film that is rewarded.

Podcast: Some Like It Hot / Bad Trip – Extra Film

Ryan McQuade
-
0
Podcast: Some Like It Hot / Bad Trip – Extra Film

This week on Extra Film, Ryan and Jay continue their Billy Wilder Movie Series with his classic comedy Some Like It Hot, and they also discuss the Netflix comedy Bad Trip.

After talking about Ace in the Hole, the boys return with one of the most beloved comedies of all time with Some Like It Hot. A big hit at the time, Some Like It Hot is still as funny and even progressive as when it came out. And even though it is a comedy, there is still a little of that Wilder cynicism in there that grounds everything.

In the back half of the episode, the boys talk about the Netflix comedy Bad Trip. Skyrocketing to the number one movie on next, comedian Eric Andrea’s prank narrative film is one of the best comedies to come out in a long time. Though it was delayed for a while due to the pandemic, you will be hard pressed to find a comedy that is as funny right now to watch, with pranks and gags that will have you laughing for days after you’ve seen them.

Thanks for listening!

– Movie Review: Some Like It Hot (7:26)
Director: Billy Wilder
Screenplay: Billy Wilder, I. A. L. Diamond
Stars: Marilyn Monroe, Tony Curtis, Jack Lemmon, Joe E. Brown

– Movie Review: Bad Trip (1:01:09)
Director: Kitao Sakurai
Screenplay: Dan Curry, Eric Andre, Kitao Sakurai
Stars: Eric Andre, Lil Rel Howery, Tiffany Haddish

– Music

Runnin’ Wild – Marilyn Monroe
Bad Trip – Joseph Shirley, Ludwig Göransson
The Return of the Eagle – Atli Örvarsson

We try to make this the best movie podcast we possibly can and we hope you enjoy them. Subscribe today on iTunes, Spotify, or Stitcher, and please leave us a review on iTunes. You can also find us on Soundcloud, PlayerFM, and TuneIn Radio as well. We really appreciate all your support of the InSession Film Podcast.

Subscribe to our Podcasts RSS
Subscribe to our Podcasts on iTunes
Listen on Spotify
Listen on Stitcher
Some Like It Hot / Bad Trip – Extra Film

[divider]

To hear this Extra Film episode and everything else we do, download our apps on the Amazon Market for Android and the Podcast Source app on IOS devices. The mobile app covers all of our main shows, bonus podcasts and everything else relating to the InSession Film Podcast. Thanks for your wonderful support and for listening to our show. It means the world to us.

List: Top 3 Terrence Malick Scenes

JD Duran
-
0
List: Top 3 Terrence Malick Scenes

This week on Episode 423 of the InSession Film Podcast, inspired by our Terrence Malick Movie Series and our review of The Tree of Life, we discussed our Top 3 Malick scenes. All the way back on Episode 161, we discussed our favorite Terrence Malick moments after the release of Knight of Cups. However, JD was gone that week and missed out on that particular exercise. And after re-watching all of Malick’s films for this Movie Series, it made sense for us to revisit that Top 3 and see how things shaped up this time around. Understandably, Malick’s poetic wandering won’t be for everyone, but you can’t deny the beauty in his imagery and how he’s created a singular cinematic experience. From Badlands to most recently A Hidden Life, Malick has created some profound and unforgettable moments that makes this exercise both exhilarating and challenging. That said, here are our lists:

(Note: Please keep in mind that we each had different criteria for our selections)

JD

1) Creation of the Universe – The Tree of Life
2) Death of Pvt Witt – The Thin Red Line
3) Pocahontas and John Smith Romanticism – The New World

Brendan

1) Final Scene – The New World
2) Young Jack’s Rebelliousness – The Tree of Life
3) Cpt Staros Refusing Orders – The Thin Red Line

Honorable Mentions (Combined)

Church Scene – A Hidden Life
Family Life (Opening) – A Hidden Life
Ending Sequence – The Tree of Life
Forgiveness Scene – The Tree of Life
Jack Questioning God – The Tree of Life
“Poor Boy” Sequence – The Tree of Life
Rolfe Reads Letter – The New World
Pocahontas Brings Food/Supplies – The New World
Witt / Sgt Wlsh conversation – The Thin Red Line
“Swing” Scene – The Thin Red Line
“I Blew my Butt Off” – The Thin Red Line
Attacking the Japanese Camp – The Thin Red Line
Locusts / Wildfires – Days of Heaven
Ending – Days of Heaven
Cato Scene – Badlands
Holly / Kit in Woods – Badlands
Ending – Badlands

Hopefully you guys enjoyed our lists and if you agree or disagree with us, let us know in the comment section below. As mentioned above, Malick is a unique filmmaker and your picks will likely vary depending on how you respond to his style and evocative emotion. So, it’s quite possible that your list is different than ours. That being said, what would be your Top 3? Leave a comment in the comment section or email us at [email protected].

For the entire podcast, click here or listen below.

For more lists done by the InSession Film crew and other guests, be sure see our Top 3 Movie Lists page.

Movie Review: ‘Godzilla vs. Kong’ delivers spectacular action despite lackluster human characters

Ryan McQuade
-
0
Movie Review: ‘Godzilla vs. Kong’ delivers spectacular action despite lackluster human characters

Director: Adam Wingard
Writers: Eric Pearson, Max Borenstein
Stars: Alexander Skarsgård, Millie Bobby Brown, Rebecca Hall, Brian Tyree Henry

Synopsis: Two of the greatest icons in motion picture history fight against one another – the fearsome Godzilla and the mighty Kong – with humanity caught in the balance.

[/info]

We need to be honest with ourselves, we miss big-budget action films. With the release of Zack Snyder’s Justice League, WandaVision, The Falcon and the Winter Soldier, and now the latest film in the ridiculously titled ‘MonsterVerse’, it’s clear what kind of entertainment that’s been missing on a regular basis since the beginning of the pandemic and what people want to see moreover as they get back to a sense of normalcy. And what can be more normal than a giant lizard fighting a giant monkey by land and by sea, right?

Picking up after the events of Godzilla: King of the Monsters, and decades after Kong: Skull Island, we find out two titular characters butting heads for the first time on screen in close to fifty years. With Kong, he is living in a habitat, enclosed from the world and oblivious to everything around him. His enclosure is a digital representation of his home on Skull Island, where Dr. Ilene Andrews (Rebecca Hall) and her adopted daughter Jia (Kaylee Hottle) are in charge of taking care of Kong. Meanwhile, out in the real world, Godzilla is on a rampage, destroying many Apex Cybernetics facilities, run by Walter Simmons (Demián Bichir). In order to stop Godzilla from continuing to rip apart the world, Simmons assigns Dr. Nathan Lind (Alexander Skarsgård) to team up with Dr. Andrews and get Kong to come back into the world to stop Godzilla. But to do this, they will need to go on a mission with the giant primate that will unlock the secrets of both species, thus unleashing an ancient rivalry of monumental proportions.

Are you keeping up here because it’s a lot to take in. But, to be honest, audiences aren’t supposed to go into these films for the plot (if you want that, go watch any of the films nominated for Best Picture this year). We come into these movies wanting to see big monsters fight one another, delivering carnage wherever they go, taking no prisoners in the damage they cause. It’s why this is one of the most popular IPs of all time because we’ve all seen some version of these movies with these two blockheads destroying each other or foes from deep within our world. But Godzilla vs. Kong finally gives us what we all wanted, which is a ton of over the top action, shot within impeccable lighting so we can actually see what is going on in all the battle sequences.

Credit this to Adam Wingard, a director who started with small indie pulp films last decade and now has transitioned into a stable director who can make decent properties good. By no means does he elevate the script and the human characters, who are thinly written and almost slow the momentum down of this project. But he does have a true scope and visional flare to the action sequences that make them all stand out to anything we’ve seen over the previous three entries in this rebooted franchise. Both the day sequence at sea and the night fight in Hong Kong perfectly capture some much needed flair to show every angle of this fight, so we fully know who has the upper hand (even though the dumb humans tell us as well, ugh).

Beyond the visuals, the world building, and seeing these two big creatures fight, the rest of the film is a bit of a mess. All the human characters, including the team of Millie Bobby Brown, Brian Tyree Henry, and Julian Dennison, are just downright awful. The only people that bring anything interesting to the story are Hall and Hottle because of their connection to Kong, other than that, the rest of them are just in the way from us seeing more of these guys go toe to toe for two hours straight.

Even though the humans are the sour mark on the overall film, Godzilla vs. Kong is still an enjoyable, action packed adventure that you will enjoy from beginning to end. The final 30 minutes of the film is worth the price of admission alone. And by the end, no one knows where they will go next, but the franchise seems to be going in the right direction. Hopefully, it can finally fix its human problem in the next installment in the way they fixed how we see the action sequences in this one. If that happens, WB might have something special on its hands. Till then, they have this.

Grade: B-

1...190191192...387Page 191 of 387