This week on Women InSession, we talk about some of our favorite book to film adaptations, why they work and the challenges of transitioning a story from the page to the screen! The two mediums are obviously very different, thus making the art of adaptation a unique skill that some films have truly mastered. Whether it’s faithful to the book or not, it’s made for some iconic films over the years.
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!
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.
Director: Bradley Cooper Writers: Bradley Cooper and Josh Singer Stars: Bradley Cooper, Carey Mulligan, Matt Bomer
Synopsis: This love story chronicles the lifelong relationship of conductor-composer Leonard Bernstein and Felicia Montealegre Cohn Bernstein.
Even though Maestro contains an array of dynamic set pieces that serve as visual cinematic eye candy, Bradley Cooper’s biopic about one of the greatest composers to ever walk to the Earth, Leonard Bernstein, ends up being prosaic due to the focus on showcasing the actor-turned-filmmaker’s talents on and off the screen instead of that of its subject.
Last year, Cate Blanchett’s Lydia Tár, the fictional lead character from Todd Field’s masterpiece named after the conductor herself, said many things, some of which had reason (mainly relating to artistry) and others paved the way for her downfall. One of the first things you hear her say and details you know about her during the interview she has with Adam Gopnik from the New Yorker is her love and admiration for two of the most recognizable and acclaimed composers of all time, Leonard Bernstein and Gustav Mahler – the two shapeshifting the landscape of classical music as a whole at different points in time. She recalls the maneuvers filled with elegance and poise, with the addition of a rebel-like vision and effervescent charisma needed to reconstruct some of those beloved pieces from the Austro-Bohemian Romantic composer.
Although fictional, Tár’s words are inspired by those who have lauded these maestros’ works. Like Tár, Bernstein had an obsession with Mahler, to the point where he played plenty of his symphonies throughout the 1960s and 80s. All of this is explained in full detail, as well as the other aspects of his complex and legendary life, in the 2021 documentary Bernstein’s Wall by Douglas Tirola. However, we have never seen a feature film depicting or inspired by his life throughout the different stages of his career. We have witnessed biopics about Mahler’s trajectory and relationship with his wife Alma via Ken Russell’s film back in 1974. But what about Bernstein? – as Lydia Tár would have yelled. Well, actor and filmmaker Bradley Cooper is up for the task with a film called Maestro, the title given out of respect to an accomplished musician with enormous talent.
From the title alone, Cooper is already giving out flowers to the conductor. Maestro begins with Leonard Bernstein (Bradley Cooper) being interviewed while sitting at one of his most prized possessions, the piano. In a song by British recording artist Sampha, he sings about nobody knowing him like the piano; that may also be true for Bernstein, but there’s someone who does so to another level, one that transcends his artistry and masterfulness, Felicia Montealegre (Carey Mulligan). He’s playing some somber pieces, one of which is inspired by his late wife. Bernstein loved her very much, telling the camera crew that he misses her – Felicia’s presence is still lingering in these now haunted walls where he resides and the gardens accompanying it.
This first glance at an old, but not completely broken, Bernstein offers the viewer what would be the core of the story Cooper wants to tell – the love he has for both the craft and his wife, more so the latter. There’s some poignancy in these initial frames captured by cinematographer Matthew Lebatique’s eye with such ease and elegance, albeit it is missing the daring nature present in his work with Daren Aronofsky. After this scene, we travel back in time, where color switches to monochrome in a stylistic exercise by Cooper that’s just for flash rather than a storytelling mechanism. We see the moment when Bernstein meets the love of his life at a party, just moments after conducting with the New York Philharmonic. Immediately, you sense a connection between the two, which is elevated by the lead pair’s chemistry and talent.
Their personalities match with one another, even with Bernstein’s complex persona. The two have a high level of confidence and liveliness, amongst other similar qualities, that attracted them to one another. They will end up together for years to come. But these moments that lit their spark are featured to make the audience understand the reason why this film is seen through her lens. There are plenty of sequences in whichthis is shown: a woman who stands beside her love through thick and thin, as well as through fame and artistry. This induces instances where she must live in the shadow of her husband’s grandiose stature. At the center of it all, there’s the stage – the theater or podium. This setting or object that’s at the center of the spotlight shows us the ups and downs of this relationship, full of tides.
A playfulness within the scene-to-scene transitions helps map out how they stand in union – the roles they play in each other’s lives. They both love the arts, but even more so, they love one another. We have seen similar relationships depicted on the big screen in ways that there’s space for a fully-fledged exploration of both players. However, what the actor-turned-filmmaker does with Maestro is dwelling in the classic and predictable biopic structure that makes its presentation lackluster and its ideas surface-level. There are a couple of reasons why the film falls flat. But the reason I would like to point out is the film’s mundane emotional resonance – the crux of Maestro and the key to Bernstein’s passion for the craft, the love he has for his wife.
Of course, Cooper and Mulligan are great performers. (Mulligan cast as a Latina woman, alongside her accent and lines about her homeland – both of which are pretty abasing, was weird to understand the reasonings for it.) And they do some intriguing work here that doesn’t rank amongst their best but does show us some new abilities they might have been keeping secret. However, the complexity of the main character’s relationship is not explored in a way that I would find personally engaging due to the creaky screenplay that Cooper and Josh Singer (Spotlight, First Man) have concocted. The film does have scenes that, on paper, seem complex, as Leonard and Felicia have some confrontations and discussions about several topics. But the words encrypted in the script don’t match the passion and sheer emotion that the actors contain within their portrayals. You end up feeling that this is more of a showcase for Cooper’s growth as a director and actor.
He experiments with many techniques to see if he can nail them (and in most cases, he does so) instead of focusing on its subject – the main reason why people are anticipating this picture. You see how Cooper embodies the late great maestro with such panache as if he has transformed into another being. While I still prefer his work on his adaptation of A Star is Born, which I also deem as underwhelming, I truly appreciate how he can get into character so efficiently. He lets the music puppeteer into his every act and does vice versa as he conducts. And, in a sense, that’s also part of the problem. Cooper operates under a guise that he is forcing onto himself rather than acting naturally. While occasionally stilted, he makes the better of it, even if it doesn’t feel technically real – veering into a version of Bernstein that’s not true-to-life but embraces the fanciful.
It helps him veer into interesting territories, storytelling and performance-wise. Yet, I don’t believe it is enough to shake off the feeling that there’s plenty missing from the film. Most of those aspects that Maestro lacks keep it at a distance on a thematic and psychological level. Bradley Cooper’s sophomore feature ends up being unimpressive and uninspired, unlike the talents of the conductor being portrayed by this film’s director. The few lines that Lydia Tár dedicated to honor her admiration for the maestro are of more worth than Cooper’s two-hour Oscar bait tour-de-narcissism.
On this episode, JD and Brendan review John Carney’s new film Flora and Son! We are big fans of Carney, especially Once and Sing Street, and have been looking forward to this all year. There are few filmmakers that can capture the heart of music like Carney, and it makes his films a distinct experience. Flora and Son may not be his best film, but there’s still much to admire.
Review: Flora and Son (3:00) Director: John Carney Writers: John Carney Stars: Eve Hewson, Jack Reynor, Orén Kinlan, Joseph Gordon-Levitt
Director: Cal Brunker Writers: Cal Brunker and Bob Barlen Stars: McKenna Grace, Taraji P. Henson, Marsai Martin
Synopsis: A magical meteor crash lands in Adventure City and gives the PAW Patrol pups superpowers, transforming them into The Mighty Pups
Whether you wanted one or not, a sequel to PAW Patrol: The Movie is here in PAW Patrol: The Mighty Movie. Reviewing a movie like this is always daunting, as its target audience isn’t adult moviegoers but small children. However, children can’t roam free on their own in the theater. Their parents are quasi-forced to sit through the film and enjoy (or endure) what’s in front of them while their kids are distracted by the colors and bright animation on the screen. Most animated movies these days are indeed distractions. Small children will enjoy how pretty it looks, but those looking for a deeper message or at least something to grasp won’t get much out of them. PAW Patrol: The Mighty Movie is no different. However, it is far superior to the first movie.
Part of the reason why it’s a better movie has to do with the fact that the PAW Patrol become full-fledged superheroes, with a meteor carrying magical crystals giving each respective member of the crew superpowers: Skye (Mckenna Grace), for example, can fly, while Chase (Christian Convery) can travel at super-speed. It plucks powers from the Justice League and Fantastic Four. It wraps them into the Mighty Pups, where the team now has to go after Victoria Vance (Taraji P. Henson), who wants to steal the crystal for her gain, and Mayor Humdinger (Ron Pardo), who returns from the first film to exact his revenge on the PAW Patrol.
As you can see, the plot is not very sophisticated, and one doesn’t expect it to be with a film titled PAW Patrol. But the film contains more than enough compellingly crafted action sequences to at least mildly entertain adults and blow away small children’s minds. One kid sitting in front of me was at his first movie and couldn’t believe the scenes where Skye could destroy meteors with the power of flight or when Chase dodged Vance’s electroshocks in bullet-time fashion. Did I expect to see visual references from The Matrix in a PAW Patrol movie? Absolutely not. Nor did I see an Olivia Rodrigo needle drop coming within one of the first action sequences that reintroduce audiences to the world – and team – that comprise the PAW Patrol.
These elements make the film surprisingly off-kilter, with enough direct references to appease adults. At the same time, kids get their first exposure to what the power of cinema can achieve. Of course, the story isn’t at all developed convincingly. There are too many plot holes to explain exactly what Vance wants to do with the crystals or how they work. How can the crystals magically bind to the pups and somehow give them powers? And how are they suddenly able to hone them instantly? In superhero origin stories, it takes weeks, if not months (and sometimes two movies), for a hero to finally understand their place in the world and master their powers.
In PAW Patrol: The Mighty Movie, it takes five seconds. Skye realizes she can fly, and we’re supposed to buy into the fact that she’s now the film’s Supergirl (the cape during the climax was a nice touch). They do, however, play around with the concept of how the powers work through Liberty (Marsai Martin), who has a hard time figuring out what her powers are, until they magically appear during the climax, in a moment everyone, except the kids (who yelled out WHOAAAAA) saw coming.
The animation is also nicely done. It’s not as detailed as Spider-Man: Across the Spider-Verse, but that feels like an apples-and-oranges situation. We can’t compare the two because they don’t appeal to the same audience. PAW Patrol’s animation is more towards small children, with strong sequences of action that are never too violent nor too edgy but with the right amount of kinetics to engage the smallest possible viewer. I was even surprised when the meteorite blew up the Patrol’s tower, though it was a light thrill.
The animation work is primarily aimed at small children, in which characters feel like cartoons and the world doesn’t only feel lived in and grounded in reality but with enough fantastical elements to blow the small kids away. However, that doesn’t prevent Mikros Animation from crafting some truly incredible textures on the titular pups and playing with light and color to enhance the action sequences on screen.
As a result, PAW Patrol: The Mighty Movie is completely inoffensive. No, it won’t change cinema. Yes, it’ll be forgotten in a day for adult viewers who went to see it with their kids, but it doesn’t matter. What matters is whether or not the smallest viewer will have the time of their lives. I can confidently say they absolutely will, and that’s the only thing in the world worth caring about with a movie like this. Take your kids and watch them have an incredible time on the silver screen. They may get hooked for life.
Director: Emily Atef Writers: Emily Atef, Lars Hubrich, and Josune Hahnheiser Stars: Vicky Krieps, Gaspard Ulliel, Bjørn Floberg
Synopsis: Hélène and Mathieu have been happy together for many years. The bond between them is deep. Faced with an existential decision, Hélène travels alone to Norway to seek peace and meet a blogger she found on the internet.
For many writers, terminal illnesses only serve as a source of dramatic tension when they can provide a fatalistic ending to a story that wouldn’t be quite as romantic if it concluded with two lovers walking off into the sunset together. Teenage girls have spent decades lusting after Byronic heroes who suffer from mysterious illnesses, so it’s only natural that most filmgoers have an idealized vision of what life as the victim of a terminal illness is like. It’s all tearful deathbed confessions and intense declarations of love. If you throw a loving, supportive husband into the mix and set the story in a series of picturesque locations, you can expect that certain viewers might start to get the wrong idea.
Emily Atef’s More Than Ever (2022) is no Camille (1936) but it also refrains from being the anti-melodrama that one might expect it to be. It dispenses with many of the tropes that we associate with the ‘sick girl’ genre but it doesn’t necessarily play out as Love Story (1970), as reimagined by the Dardenne brothers. When approaching this sort of material, which has traditionally been the stuff of sappy melodrama, directors tend to employ a visual style that provides an obvious counterpoint to the content of the narrative. Atef is confident enough to avoid obviously signaling that this isn’t your grandmother’s four-hanky picture. Her exploration of one woman’s struggle with major existential questions is absent of the sort of art school affectations that typically weigh down this sort of genre experiment. This is a full-throated melodrama that tackles weighty issues head-on and it’s all the better for it.
We get an inkling of what Atef is working towards early on, when we drop into the film’s narrative at a surprisingly late point in the game. Hélène (Vicky Krieps), is introduced as a successful young urbanite who maintains a stable, loving relationship with her husband Matthieu (Gaspard Ulliel). Their comfortable lives are thrown into turmoil when Hélène learns that she suffers from terminal lung disease. Matthieu tries his hardest to meet her on her level and relate to her struggles but Hélène comes to feel that she needs to get away from everything and everyone she’s ever known. She begins to interact with Mister (Bjørn Floberg), a Norwegian blogger who suffers from a terminal disease and ends up traveling to Norway to live with him. Matthieu agrees to this arrangement, on the condition that he will still be able to contact and visit her. However, Hélène feels herself drifting further and further away from the people that she knew in her previous life and begins to question whether she wants to cut off contact with Matthieu altogether.
This is one of those films that subtly advances a mildly provocative thesis statement. Our heroine endures grief and trauma while wrestling with the knowledge that there’s no way to escape from the fact that she’s dying. The finality of this statement is almost impossible to come to terms with, so she starts to address the problems in her life through a utilitarian lens. As time goes on, we see her compartmentalizing her emotions and treating those who are close to her like pawns on a chessboard. One naturally assumes that she is attempting to limit the amount of damage that her eventual death will cause, but there is a darker undercurrent to her attempts to organize the final months of her life down to the nth degree. She is convinced that she is taking control of her life and regaining the sense of independence that she lost when those around her began to treat her like an invalid. It’s easy to get swept up in the excitement that she feels when she starts to put her life back in order but, as the film comes to a sudden, unexpected close, you are left with plenty of questions about the toll that Hélène’s actions could take on her mental health.
This is just one of many ways in which this thoughtful drama creeps up on you. Atef’s generous, carefully controlled style of direction helps to bring out the best in both Krieps and Ulliel, while also introducing unexpected tonal shifts into the progression of the narrative. There isn’t one flashy showpiece that serves as a selling point for this quiet, emotionally restrained film but it’s strong enough to stand on its own terms. It’s the sort of finely observed, textured character study that tends to fly under the radar but it should find an audience among fans of European art cinema.
Director: Justin Benson, Aaron Moorhead, Michael Waldron Writers: Eric Martin, Michael Waldron Stars: Tom Hiddleston, Owen Wilson, Gugu Mbatha-Raw
Synopsis: The mercurial villain Loki resumes his role as the God of Mischief in a new series that takes place after the events of “Avengers: Endgame.”
Loki had a magnificent freshman season. Their sophomore effort confirms the show is the best Marvel series, by far. While the first season was soaked in its well-regarded, irreverent mischievousness, the second season abandons some of that dark playfulness for deeper, richer themes. The filmmakers behind the shape-shifting trickster, easy to love but hard to embrace, have found that sweet spot where Loki has begun to see his soul and redemption arc brought out by his new partner while his nefarious nature is always near the surface.
The sophomore season of Loki (Tom Hiddleston) starts with the titular character jumping through different variant timelines after Sylvie (Sophia Di Martino) kills Victor Timely, AKA the notorious He Who Remains (Jonathan Majors) in last year’s finale. His death caused a splintering of variant timelines, creating major internal problems for the bureaucratic organization known as the Time Variance Authority (TVA). Not only are lines drawn and sides chosen, but Sylvie’s actions have caused a branching off of thousands of timelines, something the organization is meant to stop and protect the one true sacred timeline.
This was all part of He Who Remains’ plan, as the Multiversal War caused him to create the Sacred Timeline and the TVA to protect it. However, we discovered that everyone is a variant, even the leading players like Loki’s new BFF, Mobius (Owen Wilson), Hunter B-15 (Wunmi Mosaku), and even Ravonna Renslayer (Gugu Mbatha-Raw). Heck, it seems like Miss Minutes (voiced by Tara Strong), the He Who Remains AI creation, is the only original, even though she’s been through various updates over the years.
That sets up the story. While two different factions debate the merits of keeping or eliminating timelines, Loki and Mobius are set to chase down Sylvie, Ravonna, and Miss Minutes to protect everyone, not just themselves. This sets the impressively darker tone and more decadent themes in Loki’s second season as they debate faith, control, and, above all else, the value of human life, no matter the variant.
What I admire about the second season of Loki is that creator Michael Waldron doesn’t get bogged down in the trappings of the season finale; he cuts the cord immediately. Waldron could have spent the entire season trying to bring Loki back to the Sacred Timeline but wisely cuts to the chase in the first episode, having Loki jump back into the original future quickly. Otherwise, you’d have abandoned what made the first season enjoyable—the buddy chemistry between Hiddleston and Wilson.
What makes this season so interesting is that Marvel embraces Loki’s antihero character, which sets up the plot and slowly transforms his character into something gradual, heartfelt, and empathetic. For instance, Sylvie saw timelines as a source of control for uncaring and cold government officials last season, while Loki understood there was a greater good. That’s where Waldron and company begin to fold into those themes we talked about above, something that the film The Creator played with last month (and even The Matrix), like freedom of choice versus conformity, individualism versus collectivism, existentialism, and most importantly, morality.
The cast is near pitch-perfect, with the addition of Ke Huy Quan, who plays the author of the TVA manual, O.B., who consistently delights by bringing a positive energy to the series’ darkest scenes. Then you have Blindspotting’s Rafael Casal, who plays agent X-5, who questions the TVA’s actions and finds solace in the life that was taken from him (think Joe Pantoliano’s Cypher in The Matrix), like being the star of a 70s star of a shlock horror film.
And, of course, we need to address the elephant in the room: Jonathan Majors’s role not being cut in Loki reportedly because filming had already wrapped well after the abuse allegations surfaced. (Producer Kevin Wright was also quoted saying Majors won’t be recast because he was hesitant to do so without knowing how the case would play out.) I know the late Roger Ebert made a famous point to his partner Gene Siskel about being able to separate them two decades ago. Still, you can’t watch Loki with Majors in the scene without the alleged issues of domestic violence popping into your head. Still, Majors is a gifted talent, and his turn as Victor Timely is very good here, showing some of the innocence of Timely before the change of personas.
However, if you can get past the real-life issues of Majors, the show is great fun with its combination of mind-blowing storytelling and disarming charm from the cast. The series is a creative burst of fresh air, embracing the famous comic’s limitless storytelling and using the plot of branching timelines to keep viewers on the edge of their seats.
Frankly, Loki uses the multiverse storyline better than most of Marvel’s famed filmography. With multiple jaw-dropping moments that keep you guessing and knowing the unexpected can be coming at every turn, that’s a rarity in television, where networks and streaming services want to do nothing else but follow the episodic rule book step by step. Loki is more morally complex, engaging, even divisive, and suspenseful than anything Marvel has done in recent years.
This week on the InSession Film Podcast, using The Creator as inspiration, we talk about our favorite movies featuring artificial intelligence! We also remember the late-great Michael Gambon and discuss Martin Scorsese’s comments about indie films.
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!
– Martin Scorsese Comments (4:13) Last week, our beloved Martin Scorsese talked about how he doesn’t like the term “indie film” because it offers up a stigma that may keep some from seeing them, and that he hopes theaters embrace them as they do blockbusters. While he makes some great points, there’s some missing context that he didn’t have time to articulate in a 60-second red carpet interview. So, we felt compelled to talk about how he’s right, but also how it’s more complicated than hoping theaters play “indies” as much as the bigger movies.
– Remembering Michael Gambon (26:39) Last week’s news on the passing of Michael Gambon was sad to hear. He’s arguably best known for his theatrical work (an absolute legend in that arena), but for us film nerds he’s going to be remembered for playing Albus Dumbledore in the Harry Potter franchise. His take on the character was slightly different than the late-great Richard Harris, but one that was appropriate and remarkably endearing. What’s interesting, however; is how his performance as Dumbledore juxtaposed many of his other film roles where his characters were a bit sleazy. Regardless, though, he was always magnetic on screen and he will be deeply missed.
– AI in Movies (1:01:38) The Creator may have been presumptuous with its use of artificial intelligence, however; we thought it would be a great excuse to talk about how films have used it over the years. Starting with Metropolis back in 1927, a fantastic film that was decades ahead of its time, AI has been a staple of sci-fi movies. Some have been about AI directly, while others have simply used it as a tool for larger exploration, but either way it’s been a fun trope in cinema. And in this conversation, we talk about some of our very favorite examples of artificial intelligence in film.
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!
Director: Kevin Gruetert Writers: Pete Goldfinger and Josh Stolberg Stars: Tobin Bell, Shawnee Smith
Synopsis: A sick and desperate John travels to Mexico for a risky and experimental medical procedure in hopes of a miracle cure for his cancer only to discover the entire operation is a scam to defraud the most vulnerable
When Saw opened up at the 2004 Sundance Film Festival it took the world by storm, the buzz coming from this mysteriously original horror film echoed all the way to even my 7th grade class room and this was before the internet that we know today. When it hit theaters that Halloween season it was a mega hit with the ultimate mouth to the floor reaction that hadn’t been seen since 1996’s Scream, and as we know in Hollywood, what works once must work again and again and again and just when you think it cannot work again; it barely does and then takes a breath.
From 2004-2010 we got a new installment into the Saw series with seven straight films, each film opening in first place until the fifth one came out. Its competition the year Saw 5 came out and to boot it to 2nd place, High School Musical 3. By then the steam was up on the series and the “torture porn” category of this type of horror film was on its way out. Eventually the movies did end for a while after the abysmal seventh chapter, ironically named “The Final Chapter.” This lasted for about seven years until the weird eighth and forgettable chapter that was Jigsaw. Again, the series would stay dormant for four years until it got a ninth chapter with a odd boost of star power from Chris Rock and Samuel L. Jackson with Spiral, another weird entry that is odd but not memorable.
With the announcement of Saw X last year, one could only imagine where it could or would go, and then tonight after watching it I’m truly glad to report back, this was a big swing and a hit for a franchise that eventually became its own punchline. The tenth installment is a huge breath of fresh air and I’m extremely happy to see critics embracing this as much as they did the original. Fans on the other hand, we shall see- because what this one does so right is what the sequels forgot to do. It creates a story with these characters. In this case, when characters are killed off you feel something for them. While this was the base formula for Saw 2, it got muddled at the halfway mark, and from there onward, the remaining sequels were simply mind numbing with the amount of red shirts they would bring in to just die a whole two minutes later.
The last time a Saw movie did this was the original film, and what I mean by that is that this movie builds its world. Its story line, its characters are genuine and it takes its time in doing so. even get an opening trap to this film because the initial focus is on world building. What we do get is a daydream trap but it’s never brought to fruition. In the nearly two hour runtime, we don’t get a trap until almost the 50 minute mark, and honestly- it works for me, for this film, and the series that once relied only on the traps themselves and not the story. This movie is so much like its original counterpart that it is the ultimate love letter to itself, and is the perfect actual “Final Chapter” if it were to become it, because I’m not really sure where the series could go from here without a full on remake.
Of course one couldn’t talk about this movie without talking about Tobin Bell and the wonderful return of Shawnee Smith as Amanda, whose exit in Saw 3 was massively felt by a lesser Detective Hoffman character taking over. It was so nice to see the chemistry that they’ve developed between these two characters over the last 19 years.
So, should you watch all 9 movies before you go into this? If you’d like. Do you have to watch all 9 movies before you go into this? Absolutely not. Saw X is actually set in between Saw and Saw 2. So no, you don’t have to watch all 9 (but go ahead, who am I to dictate that for you). What is really refreshing about a nearly two decade long franchise to come back with something that feels fresh and different is that the writers did it the right way (unlike last year’s Halloween Ends that was such a swing and giant miss that it’s universally panned by critics and fans alike) meaning that what they could have done here is given us another run of the mill sequel but instead they took the liberty to craft a story based on what made the original so great and bring in characters to support the story and not take it over.
So whether a fan of the franchise or a casual movie goer, as long as you’ve seen the first Saw, go see Saw X. You will have a blast if you can put on your 2004 glasses and enjoy the holiday season.
Director: John Carney Writer: John Carney Stars: Eve Hewson, Jack Reynor, Joseph Gordon-Levitt
Synopsis: It follows Flora, a single mom who is at war with her son, Max. Trying to find a hobby for Max, she rescues a guitar from a dumpster and finds that one person’s trash can be a family’s salvation.
Overall, Flora and Son will be your least favorite John Carney film, but it may be the most relatable and honest. It also features the best performance in any of Carney’s films from Eve Hewson. Her off-key and inharmonious character gives the viewer some grounded discord that sets Carney’s film apart from the rest of his filmography.
The story follows Flora (Hewson), a single mother stuck in arrested development. Flora and her ex-boyfriend Ian (Jack Reynor) are co-parenting her troubled teenage son, Max (Orén Kinlan), who has been detained several times for fighting and petty theft. A local guard (Don Wycherley) wants Max to join a local boxing club to keep him out of trouble because the next time he’s arrested, he will serve some time in a juvenile detention center.
The issue is that Flora and Ian had Max when they were very young, and both parents are still trying to find themselves, just like Max. Ian is between jobs, and Flora still loves the beats of club music, where she dances and takes strange men home to her apartment, not considering if Max is there. In fact, Flora is so self-involved that she forgets her son’s birthday.
To rectify that, Flora finds a string guitar, pays someone to fix it, and gives it to Max as a gift. After the peace offering blows up in her face, she takes guitar lessons herself. Flora finds a handsome music teacher named Jeff (Joseph Gordon-Levitt) online for $20 a session so she can start strumming the strings and find some purpose in her life.
Flora and Son was directed by John Carney, the ingenious maestro behind such musical films as Once, Begin Again, and the cult favorite Sing Street. His latest work is more like the love child of Sing Street and Once in tone, with fewer musical numbers and gritty artistry. It is more focused on depicting the aftermath of the characters’ failed musician dreams (Jeff), the youthful exuberance of musical aspirations (Max), and the redemption music can offer (Flora).
Carney’s script deals with that in-between with Hewson’s Flora, who had a child so young she’s still trying to find her way, stunting the progress of her flesh and blood. What’s exciting about this concept is that Flora is openly transparent and honest with everyone around her, which makes for a refreshing experience for the audience.
This becomes even more apparent as Flora and Jeff’s practice sessions progress. Carney has created a bond with these sessions and weekly meetings that begin to be more therapeutic than educational. This offers vulnerable characters self-reflection, providing a connection when those expressions of personal emotional connection are needed.
As they continue to talk, the boundary from education to therapy is crossed into something intimate. Imagine how personal writing your song can be, and collaborating with someone you are attracted to can be euphoric. Carney incorporates some very clever camera editing maneuvers to evoke these emotions as if Jeff were in the room with Flora.
While we can wax poetic about the utterly charming chemistry between Flora and Jeff, the wholly unapologetic performance by Hewson keeps the film from floundering in its third act, practically nose-diving headfirst into mediocrity. Hewson’s Flora is a natural, authentic, and, at times, almost despicable mother who finally finds her way when faced with an opportunity to change her life, make a choice, and ultimately show some overall maturity. Case in point: Hewson is a character that’s three-dimensional, unvarnished, and hard to like in one moment but charming the next.
My big issue with Flora and Son, however, is that songs swoon exempt the final number that’s meant to tie everything together. You’ll watch Jeff and Flora heat up the screen and be vibrant when Max begins to assemble his dance beats.
However, the film shifts into something overtly sentimental, and the film’s most significant musical number it ends with is underwhelming, even if it’s meant to change the movie into something heartwarming that feels cheaper than anything Carney has ever done.
Ultimately, Flora and Son offer an experience unique to Carney’s cinematic worldview, where music can bring people together. It may not be Carney’s best work, but it’s his most grounded and enjoyable.
On this episode, JD and Brendan review Gareth Edwards’ new film The Creator, starring John David Washington! As is the case with all of Edwards’ films, it’s visually stunning to look at and incredibly immersive as a world building exercise. But how does the film function as a story? Are the characters compelling? These are questions we constantly keep asking with Gareth Edwards and The Creator is no different.
Review: The Creator (3:00) Director: Gareth Edwards Writers: Gareth Edwards, Chris Weitz Stars: John David Washington, Gemma Chan, Allison Janney, Madeleine Yuna Voyles
This week on Women InSession, we continue our critic spotlight series as we get to know Shadan Larki further and talk about her passions and journey as a film critic! Shadan is absolutely wonderful as a critic and as a person. Not only can she be heard on this show, but she’s made appearances on Chasing the Gold as well. So, it was really fun getting to hear her talk about her cinephile journey.
Panel: Kristin Battestella, Shadan Larki
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!
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.
Director: Pedro Almodóvar Writer: Pedro Almodóvar Stars: Pedro Pascal, Ethan Hawke, George Steane
Synopsis: After twenty-five years Silva rides a horse across the desert to visit his friend Sheriff Jake. They celebrate the meeting, but the next morning Jake tells him that reason for his trip is not to go down the memory lane of their friendship.
Beautiful garments and shots are all over Pedro Almodóvar’s most recent short film, Strange Way of Life. But he holds back on answering the tough questions from the complex relationship of its characters, which are brought to life via dedicated performances by Pedro Pascal and Ethan Hawke.
In 2020, Pedro Almodóvar blessed the world with a brilliant short film (which should have been nominated for the Oscar in its category and eventually won it) and his first English language project, the Tilda Swinton-led The Human Voice. The short seemed like a halfway point for the Spanish director’s most personal works to date, Pain and Glory and Parallel Mothers. These three projects made me think that after decades of providing influential and generational works for filmmakers across the world with his melodramas, he is heading for a more mature set of films that explore his own past (alongside his country’s history), as well as the human condition in a clearer note, one that demonstrated defined and sharper notes than what we have seen before. But his latest project, a Yves Saint-Laurent short of the Western genre, titled Strange Way of Life, doesn’t seem to depart from that recent trajectory.
Pictured through the lens of one of Spain’s most artistic auteurs in Pedror Almodóvar, Strange Way of Life is a story about lovers turned rivals who later connect after a series of unfortunate events. They were separated by their desire for something more in life. They meet once again, noticing that, even though they are currently living totally different personas, they still hold on to their memories together – lighting a candle that hasn’t burned in many years. We have seen similar stories like this. Most of them aren’t set in the Wild West. Most of these tales are told in modern settings, varying in their time of release. If one director tried their hand at reworking such to a time when outlaws and cowboys were running up and down the saloon, Almodóvar would be a proper fit, as he’s known for having not only a specific style to his films, which is highly present in this film (to a fault) but also handling his melodramatic affairs with dashes of complexity.
The main characters in Pedro Almodóvar’s latest short are Silva (Pedro Pascal) and Jake (Ethan Hawke), both appearing in dapper attire courtesy of Yves Saint Laurent. It has been almost three decades since they had their last emotional experience. And a lot has happened since then. They have similar lives with partners they hold dear and children to care for. Jake is a sheriff; he has his eyes on the bandits and runaways so that they don’t cause any trouble on his “turf”. Meanwhile, Silva has a more calm life in comparison; he’s a rancher in the hills. However, as expected, they will soon reconnect after a sticky situation that involves both of them occurs. Silva’s son, Joe (George Steane), has been accused of killing Jake’s sister-in-law. This creates a psychological and emotional debacle for both parties.
Their “reunion” is forged by a tragedy, yet it feels as if it was fate that gathered all of these people together. As the time comes for the two to see eye to eye after almost thirty years, a couple of questions pop into your head. What will Silva do to save his son from a gruesome fate? What will be Jake’s reaction to his appearance and Silva’s connection behind the death of his sister-in-law? A dinner, some red wine, and conversations about their past almost make Jake excuse Joe’s action. But he concludes that Silva uses such to keep his son safe. The pair’s relationship fractures even more, causing them to stand off against one another as the anger fuels their body, while on the inside, they still have feelings for one another.
From the luscious costumes and cinematography by frequent Almodóvar collaborator José Luis Alcaine, Strange Way of Life has a beautiful look. The Spanish filmmaker always has an eye for creating fabulous designs that pop because of the color palette and are lifted by the intimacy (and, in some occasions, eroticism) in the story. And with Yves Saint Laurent backing up the project, of course, you will have some fantastic cowboy looks that plenty of people would love to rock – although I don’t think they will pull it off like the film’s cast here. If there’s one specific factor that I can praise, it is that Almodóvar still has the gift to make his movies have a similar atmosphere and aura yet separate them from one another in his approach to each respective story. Not many directors have that ability; he remains one of the few who achieves it on a more consistent and gratifying basis.
However, unfortunately, the reason why this short film doesn’t work is because Almodóvar seems to be holding himself back and relying more on the aesthetic of this fashion design company-concocted Western. He doesn’t seem to be completely interested in answering those questions that linger in your head, leaving the complexity of his melodramatic directorial touches and opting for a more visual banquet. And, as I mentioned before, he nails it entirely on that aspect. But you aren’t given much to care about, as the intricate story beats of Silva and Jake’s relationship are too flimsy. On an emotional level, there’s nothing to hold on to. The thirty-minute runtime doesn’t do justice to this story’s potential. Since this is a minor project compared to his other works, you won’t be getting all the details from their relationship. Yet, that doesn’t mean you have to leave out what makes these two people click – what ignited their hearts in the first place – mainly since the story relies on reuniting these two souls back, whether by chance or forced. After giving us The Human Voice and Parallel Mothers in this decade alone, two projects that are among his best to date, I thought he would continue his mature approach and keep delivering some self-analyzing and determined works. Strange Way of Life may be ambitious, but the restraint in its characters and story’s development keeps it from becoming something of greater value than its expensive garments.
This week on Episode 553 of the InSession Film Podcast, we continued our year-by-year retrospective series by taking a look at 2001, a very strong year on the whole. In fact, it may be one of the best years for movies that doesn’t get the recognition it deserves. Not only does 2001 feature some all-time films that resonate deeply with us, but it has some incredible depth. In particular, we had a lot to say about The Royal Tenenbaums, A.I. Artificial Intelligence and In the Mood for Love, three films that would rival any other year as far as top end films go. Which is to say, there was plenty to consider and we had an amazing time talking about it all on the show. That said, what would be your Top 10?
NOTE: We spend most of our time only discussing our Top 10 movies of 2001, however, as you’ll see below, we have listed our full Top 20 lists from that year.
JD
1) The Royal Tenenbaums
2) A.I. Artificial Intelligence
3) In the Mood for Love
4) The Lord of the Rings: Fellowship of the Ring
5) Ocean’s Eleven
6) Mulholland Drive
7) Memento
8) The Devil’s Backbone
9) Amélie
10) Moulin Rouge!
11) Black Hawk Down
12) The Man Who Wasn’t There
13) Waking Life
14) Ghost World
15) Training Day
16) Monsters Inc.
17) Hedwig and the Angry Inch
18) The Others
19) Fat Girl
20) Wet Hot American Summer
Brendan
1) A.I. Artificial Intelligence
2) The Royal Tenenbaums
3) In the Mood for Love
4) The Devil’s Backbone
5) Cure
6) Ocean’s Eleven
7) The Lord of the Rings: Fellowship of the Ring
8) Memento
9) Wet Hot American Summer
10) Black Hawk Down
11) Ghost World
12) Mulholland Drive
13) Monsters Inc.
14) Gosford Park
15) Waking Life
16) Training Day
17) American Pie 2
18) In the Bedroom
19) Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone
20) Legally Blond
Hopefully you guys enjoyed our lists and if you agree or disagree with us, let us know in the comment section below. Clearly there are a lot of other contenders from 2001 that battled for our lists, that just missed the cut. That being said, what would be your Top 10? Leave a comment in the comment section or email us at [email protected].
All of the films coming out this month are part of the horror/suspense genre. From the time of silent films, these stories have been part of the cycle of movies being shown to audiences. It is classical and always attractive to make. Two of these horror classics are being re-released for 4K, two more are from the 21st century, and a three-film set honors a director who was never revered during his lifetime. The horror films of the month from Criterion are worth seeing.
Tod Browning’s Sideshow Shockers (1925-1932)
Tod Browning started as a vaudeville and circus performer before being hired to act, write, and direct different melodramas where his past was part of the stories he made. In an era before the Code came in and censored certain topics, Browning told stories of the exotic, psychosexual, and inner beauty which was way ahead of his time. Three of his films are being brought out for Criterion: Freaks, The Mystic, and The Unknown.
Made during his tenure with MGM, these films unleashed his eccentric, shocking, and downtrodden characters which stand the test of time. Freaks is considered his magnum opus and the most direct from his past life in the circus, portraying those characters with disabilities that were sideshow acts while also being compassionate about them. Nearly forgotten, Browning’s legacy has built up a cult following which endures to this day.
Don’t Look Now (1973)
The first of two re-releases is Nicholas Roeg’s supernatural masterpiece starring Donald Sutherland and Julie Christie. After the drowning of their daughter, the couple relocates to Venice for work when images suddenly appear that foreshadow what is coming to them. Roeg’s story of grief and the memories that haunt us after is beautifully shot and edited, keeping viewers off their toes on what could be the actual thing that is creeping up behind them. It is the supernatural at its finest.
Videodrome (1983)
The second re-release is a staple of David Cronenberg’s filmography, a cyber tech body horror tale of cable TV and the disturbing connections it can have. James Woods is a TV producer looking for new programming for the channel and sees this disturbing show he wants. It is surreal and quite visually haunting, causing the necessary shock Cronenberg is known to produce as in Scanners and The Fly. TV is certainly today “the new flesh” that has controlled the public’s mind.
The Others (2001)
Director Alejandro Amenábar’s gothic horror story was also his first English-speaking film following the acclaim of Open Your Eyes, which was remade the same year as Vanilla Sky. Nicole Kidman plays a mother who stays with her two children on an island in 1945 towards the end of WWII. When three new servants move into the home, a strange phenomenon occurs in which the dead begin to reach out to the living. The darkness that shrouds everyone creates a sprint-tingling sensation for viewers that still seeps through twenty-two years after its release.
Nanny (2022)
The debut of director Nikyatu Jusu features a young Senegalese immigrant (Anna Diop) to the United States who has left her son to make money as a babysitter for wealthy white couples. Willing to take some of the exploitation by them, memories of anger come upon her which threatens to destroy her from within. It won the Grand Jury Prize at the Sundance Film Festival, a first for a horror film, and displays a unique power that makes Jusu a director to keep an eye on.
This week on the InSession Film Podcast, we continue our 2001 Retrospective as we discuss the year in cinema and dive into our Top 10 Movies of 2001! Plus, a few thoughts on the new WGA deal that was just announced.
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!
– WGA / Golden Globes News (3:58) Before we dive into our 2001 Retrospective, we began by talking about the WGA’s new deal with the AMPTP and ending their strike. It’s a short-term deal, but it’s one with vital protections. We also take a moment to discuss whatever the hell the Golden Globes are up to with these new, dumb categories.
– 2001 Retrospective (10:36) As always, we begin our retrospective by talking about the year as a whole and the movies that shaped its trajectory. It’s a year full of incredible comedies. Some middling action films. A few iconic animated movies. And its movies up at the top…well, they’re all-timers.
– Top 10 Movies of 2001 (44:39) 2001 is perhaps the most underrated year in cinema history. It’s often not in the conversation for “Best Movie Year” but if you ask us, it should be. There are some profoundly stirring films up at the top. It has incredible depth. The year is well rounded with an eclectic mix of genres and types. It’s as good as any year we’ve seen in the last 30 years and has some of our personal favorite films ever made.
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!
Director: Grant Singer Writers: Grant Singer, Benjamin Brewer, and Benicio del Toro Stars: Benicio del Toro, Justin Timberlake, Eric Bogosian
Synopsis: Nichols, a hardened New England detective unflinching in his pursuit of a case where nothing is as it seems, one that begins to dismantle the illusions in his own life.
Reptile is an atmospheric Southern crime thriller dripping with an ominous and obsessive style that gradually seeps under the skin, keeping the viewer on edge and making them uneasy. Grant Singer’s haunting tale excels when the script delves into fear and explores how good people create a moral gray area to unburden themselves of the guilt of doing very bad things.
The story follows Tom Nichols (Benicio del Toro), a once-celebrated Philadelphia detective who has taken a job in a small township. His wife, Judy (former del Toro Excess Baggage co-star Alicia Silverstone), arranged the position, and his uncle, who suffers from multiple sclerosis (Eric Bogosian), secured the job after a scandal back east left a bad taste in everyone’s mouth. That move pays off when Nichols is assigned to investigate the scandalous murder of a local real estate agent.
Her name was Summer (Matilda Anna Ingrid Lutz), and she was separated but dating a wealthy real estate magnate, Will Grady (Justin Timberlake), who discovered her brutally murdered body in a house they were both preparing to put on the market. Summer was stabbed so brutally that the murder weapon was left behind, lodged in the victim’s pelvis with sheer force. Assisting in the investigation is Nichols’s partner, Detective Dan Cleary (Ato Essandoh), another officer with aspirations beyond the police department (Domenick Lombardozzi, exceptional here), and a mysterious sleuth (Michael Pitt) with an agenda.
This is Singer’s directorial debut after directing music videos for some of the industry’s mega-stars, including The Weeknd, Sky Ferreira, Lorde, Sam Smith, and Skrillex. In short, the man knows style. Still, what makes his debut feature so surprising is its autonomy. From an ominous climb up a dark staircase to a shadowy figure trapping its prey, minimalist symmetry is clean and conveys a visual sense of order and balance. Yet, this is all an act to give the appearance of order when what is happening around the characters is nothing but sinister.
The film’s title refers to the cold-blooded nature of people. In the first few minutes, a character finds a snake that has shed its skin, a metaphor for how some can shed their covers, exposing their cruel nature. Singer co-wrote the script with del Toro, and Benjamin Brewer has infused this discerning story with that sentiment, loading the frames with the subtlest of symbolic imagery. By the time the third act rolls around, the smallest revelations are enhanced by the carefully meticulous plot, the unsettling cinematography of Mike Gioulakis, and the sinister musical score by Yair Elazar Glotman and Arca.
Generally, I never have an issue with a movie’s running time because movies have to be as short or long as they need to be. As Roger Ebert would say, no great film is long enough, and no bad film is short enough. While this review is very positive, Reptile has a longer-than-expected run time, but upon a second watch, most of it was needed to understand the plot. With the exception of the puzzling beginning dinner scene (and the divisive ending sequence), the film’s visual and pitch-perfect pacing hardly make the 132-minute running time barely noticeable and never drags along. While some subplots within the first two acts seem like filler, everything works out in the end.
Even at Reptile’s weakest moments, the film never fails to entertain, even if the ending has a giant plot hole involving witnesses looking through a window, which can be maximized based on how you interpret the conclusion, which is meant to create discussion points.
Regardless of the perspective, Reptile can gracefully navigate the viewer with a steady hand thanks to del Toro’s magnetic performance, which effortlessly seizes your attention. Disregard those critics intent on comparing Reptile to the king of underbelly crime thrillers, David Fincher, which is an unnecessarily high standard. Movies deserve to be evaluated on their own merits, and they have entirely missed the point because they were not carefully paying attention.
Director: Gareth Edwards Writers: Gareth Edwards and Chris Weitz Stars: John David Washington, Ken Watanabe, Gemma Chan
Synopsis: Against the backdrop of a war between humans and robots with artificial intelligence, a former soldier finds the secret weapon, a robot in the form of a young child.
Let’s get some housecleaning out of the way immediately. The Creator is not the original film that many outlets have claimed it to be. Let’s face it; it’s the classic cliche, most notably lifted from Dances with Wolves, where a member of the powerful military trades sides for the greater good. And that’s not to say Gareth Edwards’s visionary science fiction epic isn’t worthy of its praise. It’s bold and affecting, emotional, and even profoundly spiritual. Ultimately, it’s an action-packed movie with more on its mind than meets the eye.
In the sometime-distant future, an uprising of artificial intelligence will form a rebellion against the world. Mainly, it’s against the United States after the AI soldiers set off a bomb, killing thousands and leaving a crater the size of SoFi Stadium teeming with a deadly amount of radiation. Of course, the government powers cannot look themselves in the mirror, taking responsibility for their hand in the civil war and choosing to blame China for its blatant disregard for AI and the overproduction of robots worldwide.
That’s where Joshua (John David Washington), an undercover special forces agent, comes into play. He’s been tasked with locating the mysterious architect known as The Creator, who, rumor has it, is developing a war to end humankind, leaving Earth to itself. After infiltrating one of the leaders of the uprising, Harun (Ken Watanabe), complicating matters is Joshua’s relationship with Maya (Gemma Chan), a human whom the AI race took in when she was a child (sound familiar?). Complicating things even further, Maya and Joshua are married and are expecting a child.
Yes, we’re pretty sure that’s against protocol. Still, this plot device gives the script its juice because Joshua’s cover is blown. The military begins peppering the rebel compound with a weapon called “Heaven,” which drops military-grade weapons from space, leaving Joshua with emotional scars that run deeper than his physical pain.
However, Joshua gets a second chance at happiness when military officers Andrews (Ralph Ineson) and Howell (a terrific Allison Janney) show a recording that holds special meaning to him and ask his help in infiltrating the facility, holding the weapon everyone is searching for.
Edwards wrote the script with his Rogue One scribe, Chris Weitz, an Academy Award nominee for About a Boy. Their focus is on a girl, an AI named Alphie, whom Joshua locates and who is the secret weapon. (The trailer reveals this within the first minute.) The plot is well-crafted, allowing the viewer to invest in the universal story of lost love, with Joshua going rogue with Alphie because he may have been the last person to see Maya alive.
Janney’s Howell leads the chase and plays a ruthless badass (she has one of the film’s most poignant moments talking about her sons), making tough business decisions and continuously putting her soldiers in harm’s way. Her character is easily one of the best villains of the year. Ken Watanabe continues to bring his usual brand of gravitas to the role. His character is the moral counterpoint to Howell, but he has no qualms about doing what needs to be done. Both these performances further enrich the poignant nature of the film’s underlying subject matter.
While The Creator cannot truly be called original, the plot is essentially rebranded for issues today. However, the script’s basic structure is borrowed from past movies but now feels fresh and new because it taps into timeless themes that, unfortunately, have not changed. These themes revolve around the spawning of oppression leading to conflict and a lack of cultural understanding and tolerance. All of this is wrapped in an enthralling sci-fi saga elevated by the ideals of a mindful heart.
None of this would be possible without John David Washington’s enthralling portrayal of Joshua. It’s a performance that resonates deeply and can be felt, as Washington possesses his uber-famous father’s soulful gaze, enhancing the high-stakes relationship with Alphie. It’s a performance that may be underappreciated, but Washington has the charisma and ability to connect with the audience that few possess, which is often considered the nature of stardom.
The Creator is stunning, a beautiful piece of escapist cinema. It’s a visionary epic that relates more to our current world than any doomed future because we are already there.
Director: Monia Chokri Writer: Monia Chokri Stars: Magalie Lépine-Blondeau, Pierre-Yves Cardinal, Micheline Lanctôt
Synopsis: Sophia’s life is turned upside down when she meets Sylvain. She comes from a wealthy family, while Sylvain comes from a family of manual workers. Sophia questions her own values after abandoning herself to her great romantic impulses.
There isn’t a single more extraordinary filmmaker working in Québec today than Monia Chokri (some will say Denis Villeneuve, but he’s out here making large-scale Hollywood blockbusters, so it may or may not count, depending on who you ask). Her first feature, A Brother’s Love (La femme de mon frère), is one of the most revelatory debuts this province has seen, perhaps since Villeneuve’s August 32nd on Earth (Un 32 août sur terre). And her sophomore feature, Babysitter, takes parts of A Brother’s Love’s anxiety-fueled ultra-absurd scenes and cranks it up to a thousand. For some, it was too much. For me, it was 88 glorious minutes I will gladly watch again (and again), and one of the boldest productions Québec has seen during this new decade.
Not even a year after Babysitter’s release, Chokri premiered her latest movie, The Nature of Love (Simple Comme Sylvain), at the Cannes International Film Festival – and now the film has finally hit our screens after months of anticipation. In this feature, Chokri dials down on the absurdity and instead offers a poignant, often lyrical, mediation on humanity’s desire to love. It may very well be the best film released in Québec this year, but it’s also one of the best dramedies of the year. Period.
If we want to analyze a director’s recurring motifs, Chokri’s fascination with philosophy is a good place to start. It plays a significant role in A Brother’s Love but is even more prominent in The Nature of Love. Heh, and the English titles for both films end with LOVE, and both main characters are named Sophia, who study/teach philosophy. In The Nature of Love, Sophia (Magalie Lépine Blondeau), teaches a philosophy class for seniors focused on…love but has difficulty communicating with her partner, Xavier (Francis-William Rhéaume). The biggest visual sign that they aren’t in love is apparent from the beginning: the two don’t sleep in the same room, even if they tell themselves they love each other before bed.
Sophia has to go to the summer cottage to supervise its renovations, where she meets Sylvain (Pierre-Yves Cardinal), an independent construction worker with an outlook on life that feels so freeing for Sophia that they immediately lock arms and have sex. Of course, you probably know where the movie will go from there, but there’s something in Chokri’s picture that makes it stand out amongst the rest of most clichéd romantic comedies.
For instance, she teams up with cinematographer André Turpin (best known for his collaborations with Xavier Dolan) and gives the movie a visual palette that’s so unlike anything we’ve seen before, it’s almost indescribable. Some of the visual cues feel evident, splashes of Michel Brault, François Truffaut, Jacques Demy, John Cassavetes, and even shots that feel plucked out of Denis Héroux’s Valérie are found. Turpin frequently uses crash-zooms to enhance the intimacy, not only in Sophia and Sylvain’s relationship but in visually representing how the characters evolve as the movie continues to morph from light-hearted romantic comedy to absurd mumblecore, to then finish with an intimate drama examining not only “the nature of love,” but the nature of life itself.
How Chokri frames her actors is the key The Nature of Love holds. Some shots don’t feel as well-stitched together as others, particularly in a sequence where Sylvain and Sophia engage in primal screams, but that’s by design. There isn’t a single visual moment in this film that doesn’t feel important, whether it’s setting the locations or representing Sophia’s internal monologues, which the audience tries to examine as she sits alone outside, smoking a cigarette, only for the movie to interrupt her moments of solitude with an unexpected event, or character, appearing in the frame.
Even the background noise feels essential and enhances our understanding of the world Sophia inhabits (and Émile Sornin’s score is impeccable). Family conversations with the different parents she encounters throughout the film, whether her mother (Micheline Lanctôt), Sylvain’s (Linda Sorgini) or Xavier’s parents (Marie Ginette-Guay & Guy Thauvette), show different facets of the nature of love –and life: whether it’s heated family discussions at the dinner table (lord knows Quebecois love to talk loudly about anything and anyone) or brief, fleeting glimpses of a love that once existed, but is no longer there as disease progresses. It’s equal parts hilarious and devastating, striking a rare balance between comedy and drama that feels integral to how the film is shaped.
But it’s also bolstered by incredible acting – Lépine Blondeau gives the best performance of her career. She shares electric chemistry with Cardinal, who is equally charming and funny. The supporting cast is also excellent, with Chokri herself appearing alongside Babysitter’s Steve Laplante in some of the movie’s funnier – and more awkward – scenes. Without spoiling anything, one of the film’s final scenes is The Nature of Love’s most integral and encapsulates its entire message.
Everyone will have a different definition of what “The Nature of Love” is, and Chokri smartly leaves room for interpretation. Those who are expecting the same level of absurdity found in A Brother’s Love and Babysitter may be disappointed, but there’s no denying how massively ambitious this picture is, not only for Chokri’s incredible career as an artist but also for Québec cinema as a whole. It’s one of the funniest and most heartbreaking movies you’ll see all year, and it cements Chokri as one to watch as a daring auteur who never made the same film twice and will seemingly continue pushing the boundaries of what modern Québec cinema can – and should – be.
On this episode, we begin our 2001 Retrospective by reviewing one of Wes Anderson’s greatest films in The Royal Tenenbaums! There are so many great films from 2001 and this is among the most defining of that year. It’s a film we’ve featured on the show several times before, but we’ve never given it a full discussion. We’ve now remedied that in one of our most thorough reviews to date.
Review: The Royal Tenenbaums (6:00) Director: Wes Anderson Writers: Wes Anderson, Owen Wilson Stars: Gene Hackman, Gwyneth Paltrow, Ben Stiller, Luke Wilson, Owen Wilson
This week on Women InSession, we take a look at the career for the classic filmmaker Elia Kazan, whose works include A Streetcar Named Desire, On the Waterfront, and East of Eden, among many others! He’s made some classic films that have stood the test of time, and that makes him a compelling figure in the history of Hollywood, but there are also controversies that surround him that complicate his legacy. And we do our best to get into all of that in the conversation.
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!
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.
