This week on Women InSession, we get into a strong debate over what decade is the best for cinema! This is a tough task as every decade has strong candidates to offer, but that’s what made the conversation really fun, even if a argumentative at times.
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: Paul Schrader Writer: Paul Schrader Stars: Joel Edgerton, Quintessa Swindell, Sigourney Weaver
Synopsis: A meticulous horticulturist who is devoted to tending the grounds of a beautiful estate and pandering to his employer, the wealthy dowager.
Both our shared, and separate, racial history in this country has provided continual fodder for entertainment, shock value, and, in the best of cases, actual thought provoking conversation. Of course, many of these pieces of art age poorly. What was enlightening just a few decades ago, now seems trite and wildly out of touch (I’m looking at you Crash and American History X). Additionally, our own culture can be tone deaf in seeking out reasons for abhorrent behavior. It was not long ago that our media was inundated with stories humanizing white supremacy and hatred. The desire is understandable; the behavior is disgusting and, we hope, bordering on inhumane. But our history tells us that this is false, that there has always been a breeding ground for white supremacy. These attitudes may be barbaric, but they do possess human qualities, unfortunately. But here we are, in 2023, with yet another story of humanizing an (ex) racist.
Paul Schrader, the scribe behind fabulous films like Taxi Driver and First Reformed, has returned with Master Gardener. Regretfully, this film is not even close to being in the category of the aforementioned films. Master Gardener is not without merit in terms of visuals and performances, but the script itself, at a minimum, borders on the offensive. The film tells the story of an ex-white Nationalist, Narvel Roth (Joel Edgerton), who turned state’s evidence after a crisis of conscience and is living as a gardener at a palatial estate. Now, let me be specific. He is a gardener at a plantation. This is the first of many unsubtle decisions at the script level from Schrader, specifically connected to race and history.
Edgerton is truly fantastic in this role, however. He has made a pattern of understated roles that depend more on physicality and silence than extended dialogue. Every movement that Roth makes is a specific choice from Edgerton, all the way down to the way he drinks from a cup, and immediately feels out of place around the old money of the owner, Norma Haverhill (Sigourney Weaver). The sometimes physical relationship between these two is perhaps the most interesting in the film. Norma is just as racist as Narvel supposedly was, but it is couched in proper behavior and moneyed comfort. Weaver’s performance, as she seems to devour the racism on his skin, evident by the tattoos he refuses to get removed, is a terrifying thing to watch.
The problems with Master Gardener begin with the introduction of Norma’s grandniece, a troubled young woman, as his assistant. Maya (Quintessa Swindell), although impressive, is saddled with an impossible role. Frankly, she becomes the embodiment of Narvel’s forgiveness and change. She is a manic pixie dream girl but for sad racists. The quickness of her turn later in the movie is comically insulting. The script pays lip service to her difficulties but allows him to be a white knight, swooping in to save her, making actual growth from her to be impossible. The idea of using a young Black woman as a prop to forgive a white nationalist for his heinous past is misguided at best.
Of course, there are moments of bliss, even in this mess. Schrader is a talented filmmaker and coaxes great performances from talented actors. Paired with cinematographer Alexander Dynan, he is also able to show us the inherent and changing beauty of nature. The opening credits alone, showcasing the life cycles of stunning flora, is enough to make a viewer gasp. As a nature documentary, paired with some history of gardening from Edgerton’s voiceover, Master Gardener is calming and reassuring. Unfortunately, this also serves as perhaps the most obvious film symbolism in decades. Narvel has been raised in hatred, but is finding a way to be reborn in the rich soil of forgiveness, change, and growth.
There are many films that have spurred important dialogue on race in America. Master Gardener falls short of this, preferring to blanket forgive monstrosity as long as the monster feels bad. Mileage will always vary, but the idea of using Black characters to prop up and advance a man bathed in hatred is sickening. Master Gardener needed more time for these characters to grow, or it needed a writer interested in his Black characters as more than just signposts towards humanizing monsters.
One of the first major Oscar contenders of 2023 is Past Lives, opening in theaters on June 2. Celine Song’s debut film tells the story of Nora (Greta Lee) and Hae Sung (Teo Yoo), who meet in childhood but then are pulled apart when Nora’s family emigrates from South Korea. Twenty years later, they reunite and find out what could’ve been in their relationship.
The romance drama, which brings to mind Richard Linklater’s Before trilogy in the way it deals with the passage of time between two people who share a deep connection, was my favorite title at the Sundance Film Festival in January. Past Lives will likely be my favorite movie for all of 2023, its beautiful storytelling and powerful performance still haunting me months later. I’m excited for more people to discover it, and I can’t wait to see what kind of impact it will have on the next awards season.
A few potential Oscar contenders have been released so far this year, namely Ben Affleck’s drama Air from April, but Past Lives is going to be the first major 2023 release that has the potential to get into major categories at the Academy Awards next year. What are the most likely categories I see Past Lives getting into at the Oscars? Here are five of them…
1. Best Picture
With ten nominees for Best Picture, you can guarantee that Past Lives will make it into the top category. The A24 release is close to 100% on Rotten Tomatoes and has been getting raves from critics and audiences since its Sundance premiere many months ago. It’s the kind of deeply emotional story that is going to work its magic on awards voters, and I can see it winning Best Picture from some of the major critic groups at the end of the year. Even if it underperforms on Oscar nominations morning in some of the other categories, I can’t imagine it missing in Best Picture. It’s one of the most affecting films I’ve seen in the last five years, and awards voters are going to feel the same way.
2. Best Actress
The other Oscar nomination I believe with my whole heart will happen is Best Actress for Greta Lee, who is astounding in the role of Nora. A lot of the performance is internal, which might not scream awards to some, but she has a specifically heartbreaking moment at the end, a major cathartic release for her character and for the audience, that will make Lee a major contender for Best Actress. She gives Nora strength and confidence, but also a raw delicateness, her scenes with Teo Yoo as Hae Sung filled with so many complex emotions. She was excellent in Russian Doll and the second season of The Morning Show, but her role in Past Lives is her breakthrough. Look for Lee to make it into the Best Actress final five at next year’s Oscars.
3. Best Original Screenplay
If Past Lives gets into Best Picture and Best Actress at the 96th Academy Awards as I predict, there’s no way it’s missing a nod in Best Original Screenplay. It’s not a showy movie, it’s talky, it’s quiet, it’s not reinventing the wheel, and thus some voters might not put the film’s original screenplay at the top of their minds. However, the three-act structure implemented by writer-director Celine Song is gorgeously orchestrated; those moments early on with Nora and Hae Sung in childhood having incredibly effective payoffs at the narrative’s end. Past Lives not getting into Best Original Screenplay would be shocking, especially if it makes it into Best Picture.
4. Best Supporting Actor
Another performance awards voters are likely going to respond to is John Magaro as Nora’s husband Arthur. The two characters meet and fall in love, and then the way he deals with Hae Sung’s re-entry into Nora’s life is complicated and feels so real moment to moment. He also gives the film some welcome humor and levity, especially toward the end when the emotional stakes couldn’t be higher. Magaro has been consistently excellent throughout the years in Carol, The Big Short, First Cow, and The Many Saints of Newark. Outside of First Cow, Magaro really hasn’t received many nominations from critics or awards bodies, but that I imagine is going to change for his nuanced turn in Past Lives.
5. Best Film Editing
A contemporary drama like Past Lives isn’t going to show up in categories at next year’s Oscars like Costume Design or Production Design, but one technical category I can see it getting into is Film Editing. It doesn’t have flashy editing you always notice, but Academy voters will likely respond to the way the editor Keith Fraase so masterfully plays with passage of time, always keeping the narrative at a steady pace that works wonders for those powerful final scenes. There’s also one incredible cut at the end that, sadly, the trailer has already spoiled, but wow, in the moment, it’s a punch to the gut.
I would also love to see Past Lives get into Best Director for Celine Song, remarkably making her directing debut here, and Teo Yoo for Best Actor, but as of now, the most likely categories we may see the film in next year are Best Original Screenplay, Best Actress, and Best Picture. I’m not sure if the A24 release will turn into a runaway box office sensation and awards juggernaut like their 2022 title Everything Everywhere All at Once turned out to be, but I have hope, and I’ll be championing the magnificent Past Lives every step of the way.
On this episode, JD is joined by Women InSession co-host Amy Thomasson to discuss Disney’s live-action remake of The Little Mermaid! These Disney remakes haven’t always been great, but there is something about The Little Mermaid that gives it a refreshing quality. And we do our best to articulate why that’s the case.
Review: The Little Mermaid (3:00) Director: Rob Marshall Writers: David Magee Stars: Halle Bailey, Jonah Hauer-King, Daveed Diggs, Awkwafina
Stars: Sophie Thatcher, Chris Messina, Vivien Lyra Blair
Synopsis: High school student Sadie Harper and her younger sister, Sawyer, are still reeling from the recent death of their mother. They’re not getting much support from their father, Will, a therapist who’s dealing with his own intense pain. When a desperate patient unexpectedly shows up at their house seeking help, he leaves behind a terrifying supernatural entity that preys on families and feeds on the suffering of its victims.
Everything that master horror author Stephen King, who has created classic tales like Carrie, The Shining, and Pet Sematary, doesn’t turn into gold. And although I really respect his constant drive for creating horror stories decade through decade, there have been plenty of lackluster ones. An example is the short story included in King’s 1978 ‘Night Shift’ collection, The Boogeyman. The acclaimed genre auteur’s name isn’t enough to excite me to watch a feature anymore. You need a talented director who has their own voice and can translate that story from the pages onto the big screen successfully. I believed Rob Savage was once that director that could bring enough horrific pizzazz onto a project and make it its own, even if it’s an adaptation, because of his hit debut Host, which startled many horror cinema lovers during the pandemic. Unfortunately, the British filmmaker makes a highly disappointing feature that dwells in every genre trope imaginable, making it a tough watch due to its dullness.
The Boogeyman centers around a sixteen-year-old girl named Sadie (Sophie Thatcher) and her ten-year-old sister, Sawyer (Vivien Lyra Blair), who are struggling to connect and move forward in the wake of their mother’s brutal passing. Their therapist father, Will Harper (Chris Messina), seems to be so isolated emotionally that he’s distant, not only to his patients, but also to his two daughters. After introducing these characters, a cheesy high school bully scene follows, inducing plenty of eye rolls. The dialogue feels that it was generated by an A.I. of some sort. Nonetheless, Sophie heads home after an altercation with the mean girl in the locker near her. And that’s when a strange man, Lester Billings (David Dastmalchian), knocks on Will’s door, asking him to understand his pain and the belief of a dark entity haunting his daily life. Haunted by the entity that personifies his grief and depression, Lester kills himself at the Harper house, paving the way for the creature to lurk in their hallways.
Putting all of the cliches aside, the narrative is intriguing enough for the audience to put their attention into. Everything might not be sharply put together until this point, yet you go with it to see where it might lead. Unfortunately, it doesn’t go anywhere interesting. The biggest problem of them all is that The Boogeyman is, in all of its aspects , average and harmless – never having a unique identity of its own and choosing to go down a route that doesn’t deliver an emotional payoff. I heavily disliked Rob Savage’s previous feature, Dashcam. But, I’d prefer him to go broader into shlock-like horror cinema – with buckets of blood being spilled, people throwing up, foul-mouthed characters, and some experimental direction – because, in those films, he can express himself better as a filmmaker. Unfortunately, in these studio films, Savage is restrained from demonstrating his talents because he has to curate a film that targets the Stranger Things audience.
With The Boogeyman, Savage presents us with one of the most bland and uninspired horror narratives this year. Not even the titular creature has a great design; it feels like a copy of a Demogordon, albeit without the flower-like head and with a more hound look to it. Some of the same problems I had with Scott Derickson’s The Black Phone, targeted to the same audience as this one, are repeated here. Both films frustratingly rely on the precise Stephen King horror tropes to the point where they are rendered indistinguishable and hollow. This is an issue because you can’t shake the feeling that we have seen this type of film before, and has been done better by filmmakers that make twists to the narrative or, at the very least, develop a unique directorial language to tell a commonly seen tale about the effects of grief and trauma, which seems to be the central theme in most recent big studio horror pictures.
There are a few instances in which you see Rob Savage trying to breathe life into the film with some flashy lighting and using shadowplay. In those moments, you notice Savage’s gift of providing good scares. Yet, those moments are forgotten by the time the end credits arrive. The performances carry the emotional weight and heart that The Boogeyman has on its sleeve, particularly the leading girl Sophie Thatcher, Chris Messina, and the always fascinating (but ultimately wasted) Marin Ireland. Both Thatcher and Messina portray the drowning sensation grief puts onto you in a way that makes you believe in their pain. The former has several moments where she can express her desire for her mother to return with her facial expressions rather than by dialogue. Ireland has the most superficial role in the film compared with the two aforementioned actors. But she’s so engaging to watch, no matter the role, that you are excited to see her, even if it is for less than five minutes.
Nevertheless, the cast can only go as far as the screenplay, rapidly filling in the tension and risk-less blanks. It sometimes feels as if Savage and his team of screenwriters barely want to create an inventive story. Every narrative beat has been seen before multiple times; cliches and tropes of teen-oriented horror pictures are at the forefront – the unnecessarily mean bully (whom Sadie slaps at one point in the movie and people cheered for some reason), the “you never listen to me” line and a literal fiery climax. You can see everything coming from a mile away. And since the direction is uninspired, the viewer doesn’t want to engage with what’s happening. Even when the actors have shared the respective ways they prepared for the role and to connect with them more, Thatcher created a playlist that resembles the feeling of a grief-hardened heart, every cinematic element in The Boogeyman seemed that there wasn’t any care or thought put into it. I have wanted to cheer Rob Savage’s career on since he made one of the very first highly effective pandemic horror films with Host. But, his latter works have made me hopeless to see him in top form again.
Synopsis: Nora and Hae Sung, two deeply connected childhood friends, are wrest apart after Nora’s family emigrates from South Korea. 20 years later, they are reunited for one fateful week as they confront notions of love and destiny.
As humans, we’re only trying to do our best with what we’re given. Choices we make and the people who become a part of our short lives only happen through circumstance, chance, and ultimately, fate. Throughout, people will come and go and love will be had and lost, but the one thing you can never force in this world is fate.
Past Lives starts with our three characters, Nora (Greta Lee), Arthur (John Magaro), and Hae Sung (Teo Yoo) conversing at a bar while onlookers try to guess what their relation to one another is. Without delay, it jumps 24 years into the past to see a younger Nora (then Na Young) and her best friend, a younger Hae Sung. From a young age, the connection the two share is obvious and feels even more than friendship. However, when Na Young has to immigrate with her parents from Seoul to Canada, the bond they share becomes simply a memory.
Fast forward 12 years, and the two reconnect in their 20s after Hae Sung attempts to find Na Young, now Nora, through Facebook. She sees his attempts and reaches out to him looking to rekindle the dying flame. Through emails and plenty of Skype calls back and forth, they pick up as if they had never lost one another and their romance blossoms even more. That is until Nora, heartbreakingly, has to end it between them to focus on her current life, and not dwell in the past. After they end communication, she meets Arthur at a writer’s retreat over the Summer. The bond they share isn’t as quick, or as natural, as the one that is shared between Nora and Hae Sung, but it’s real.
12 years later, Nora and Arthur are now married and living in New York together, and Hae Sung is about to make a trip to see her in person for the first time in 24 years. From the first look shared between them, there is a feeling that is natural yet distant. The quiet walks and time shared feel like everything that should make for a pretty fantastic romance story, but, as shown throughout the film, not all romance is physical, and not all love is acted upon.
In her debut, writer/director Celine Song takes the quiet side of love and fate and creates something full of vibrancy. Her script is subtle, weaving in Nora and Hae Sung’s connections with poignancy, leaving some of the best moments left unsaid rather than spoken. Past Lives revolves heavily around the Korean/Buddhist term “In-Yun.” As explained in the film, this is an all-encompassing term that references fate or the ties two strangers share throughout their many lives. Sometimes the ties two people share bring them together in a way that is explored in their current life, and sometimes two people can feel so right for each other, but it just isn’t their time yet.
The love between Nora and Hae Sung is there, it is evident in every moment and the glances they share, but sometimes fate just gets in the way. While Song’s script beautifully articulates this notion, it’s her directing that truly shines. Her majestic sense of framing continuously shows how these two are so close to being perfect for one another, but there is constant space between them. Coming from a theater background makes sense given how well she positions her characters to tell a story visually rather than verbally. It might, at times, feel too precise, but it never once feels dull.
Bringing to life this vision are three performances worthy of awards consideration. Greta Lee, John Magaro, and Teo Yoo all find their place in this film. Magaro and Yoo, each playing a different half of Nora’s love. For Yoo, he is the theoretical love, someone who feels comforting to her in a fantastical way. While Magaro is the practical love, the person who is there and is present and makes sense. Each of these men wants what the other person has, and both of them effectively display the struggle that goes on with trying to be the right person for her. However, it’s Greta Lee’s transcendent performance that shines above the rest. Torn in two directions, it’s Lee who constantly has to make the impossible choice. Does she follow her heart or does she listen to fate? It’s a complex decision, especially in her case, in which one half feels right while the other half is right, and a choice is made near the end that is genuinely heartbreaking.
That’s because there are no right answers; no matter the choice made, someone will be hurt. Past Lives tells the story of the “right person, wrong time” in a gorgeously subtle way. Even if it can be too subtle at times, Song’s writing and directing help display a longingness of wanting to be the perfect person for someone, but fate makes other plans. The trio of actors all give stellar performances but it’s Greta Lee who should be remembered throughout the year. One of the most brutally honest love stories in quite some time.
Into the summer we go and here comes the next batch from Criterion. Two films are re-editions, two join the club, and a film director gets a very special box set a lot like his fellow countryman, Federico Fellini. While the re-releases are a 1930s French masterpiece and an eye-popping adventure from a Monty Python member, the two newcomers are a psychosexual drama from Britain’s New Wave and the debut film from an American modernist who stands as one of the best directors of today.
The Rules Of The Game (1939)
One of two re-releases for 4K also comes with a new cover, and I have to say, it speaks out on the era it is from and the formality in which it presents itself. Except, this film is no formality. It is a comedy of manners and it zings the bourgeois heavily, exposing the French upper class as rotten that call out their hypocrisies. For Jean Renoir, who directed and co-starred in this satirical devil of a story, it also looks back on his upbringing as the son of a famous artist and how much he despised the elite he once was part of. Banned and cut, its incredible restoration after the Second World War brings us what Renoir had originally served to unsuspecting viewers.
The Servant (1963)
Legendary writer Harold Pinter scripted this story of class structure through a psychological prism as Dirk Bogarde plays a new servant for a wealthy family. Soon, he becomes a tool in the family’s personal relationships and even gets to switch roles. The upper-class family being stripped down to unabashed power is disorienting and creates the social monster from its Victorian roots in a decade where such family values fall like dominoes. It was a great vehicle for director Joseph Losey who had been blacklisted from Hollywood and allowed him to instill his leftist views in the story.
Time Bandits (1981)
The second re-release for 4K is from Terry Gilliam and his magical fantasy tale that cemented his solo directorial skills. With his fellow Monty Python players John Cleese and Michael Palin, Gillam’s creativity went wild in this adventure of a boy and a group of thieves who go through periods of history. Sean Connery, Shelly Duvall, Ian Holm, David Rappaport, Kenny Baker, and Sir Ian Richardson are part of an ensemble that plays along the journey with impressive animation and special effects that fully encapsulated Gilliam’s visions for his future works.
Medicine For Melancholy (2008)
Barry Jenkins showcased his talent with this romantic drama of two people (Wyatt Cenac and Tracey Heggins) who have an affair and spend the day together through Bohemian San Francisco. The story focuses on the identity of Blackness and their social gentrification in a community that is mostly White and how the two see things differently. It is an inner look of being Black, very much like Moonlight and If Beale Street Could Talk, and maximizes the use of shooting on video (with a budget of $15,000) that was a first look at how artistic Jenkins could get with any story anywhere.
Pasolini 101
I wrote an article about this controversial figure last year, who was unlike anyone that had sat in the director’s chair before or since. He was flagrant with purpose and his films of the 1960s told the world what he was about. Pasolini’s films focused on the poor, such as the plight of prostitutes, sex amongst the hierarchy, and the religious quality of life, which is ironic because he was an atheist. But, he was also about attacking Italy’s embedment with capitalism and consumerism, especially by referencing the country’s past with fascism.
Nine films from the decade are now in one box, from his debut Accattone to his Greek tragedy Madea. The lifelong Communist was not afraid of angering the establishment and his films were always under attack by conservatives as immoral. This group of films spat in the face of the elite (and his final film, Salo, got him killed for it) to pick apart the hypocrisies he saw, and the injustices, and Pasolini turned them inside out to show how corrupt it all was.
Synopsis: Bert’s drunken past catches up with him 20 years down the road when he and his father are kidnapped by those Bert wronged 20 years ago while drunk on a college semester abroad in Russia.
Something that catches the short attention span of humans in the 21st century will likely be forgotten by the majority of us about an hour after we see it. We’ll see it again when someone shows it to us and we’ll agree with them that it’s a very funny thing. After about five or so viewings, it loses the spark. After a month, it’s likely gone. Then it’s three or four years later and there’s a movie adaptation because a producer saw the story potential and needed the rights to it, but film production is glacial compared to the internet. so It’s far too late. The moment has passed. So, here’s The Machine, a film that expands the world of a very funny story comedian Bert Kreischer tells during his stand up act that was captured on video and went viral.
The story is funny enough. Kreischer is funny when telling it. Yet, this new adventure Bert goes on is just O.K. The reason it never elevates beyond its source material is because it wants to be something more than just a wacky story. There is an emotional throughline in the film that is never earned. At one point Bert’s eldest daughter has an outburst at her birthday party. She starts crying and rather than the scene feeling real, it’s too intimate, too early. It’s stuck to the narrative like gum on a shoe.
This odd feeling is perpetuated by a lack of score in some of the beginning where jokes are supposed to be vulnerable and from a dark place, but fall flat. Without something underneath the tension never resolves. The jokes land with a thud. They’re funny and you know they’re funny, but unlike in the best kinds of cringe comedy, there’s not that good timing or reaction. It’s a bit of a Mike Myers effect where in the early scenes Bert has to be the only one who’s funny and the one who gets the best lines. Without music or a reaction to underscore it, he just looks like a complete jerk.
There are other pieces that don’t really fit as well. It’s mostly the action scenes. They are superbly choreographed and shot very well. They just don’t fit. They feel entirely tacked onto the film like they can be cut out and used for someone’s demo reel. Director Peter Atnecio already has a reputation as an action comedy director, but maybe he’s disappointed Marvel hasn’t brought him on for a project yet. The fight scenes make sense when Bert and Albert (Mark Hamill) get into it with some foes, but there’s no real need for so much Irina (Iva Babic) in full Black Widow mode kicking henchman keister some place else.
What is a delight to see is Mark Hamill. Hamill is so rarely given the opportunity to show off his talent outside of a Star War or some heightened version of himself that he’s a refreshing presence. He’s got such excellent comedic timing and he plays the nitpicking father so well. He’s the highlight of the film for sure.
There are enough laugh out loud one liners that the film isn’t utterly unwatchable. The Machine wants to be the kind of phenomenon that people talk about and word of mouth spreads, but it just doesn’t have the legs the original viral video had. Too much of it tries to be something it’s not, like an all out action film or an emotionally tinged comedy. It’s just so so, which can be a nice distraction from the summer heat.
Synopsis: A CIA operative and his translator flee from special forces in Afghanistan after exposing a covert mission.
I think it’s safe to say that Gerard Butler has been typecast in a slew of B-level action pictures and is on track to become the next Liam Neeson. He even reunites with director Ric Roman Waugh for Kandahar. Waugh directed Butler in Angel Has Fallen and the surprisingly fun Greenland. One who expects Butler to go through an impossible mission to get to his family (that has been the plot of every Butler action film for a while now) may enjoy Kandahar. However, those looking for serious entertainment may leave the theater feeling disappointed.
At least the action scenes are good. Waugh knows how to direct tight and exciting setpieces, ranging from a car chase inside a densely-packed market, a night vision battle between Tom Harris (Gerard Butler) and a helicopter, and a duel in the sand between Harris and ISI agent Kahlil (Ali Fazal). The latter is the coolest setpiece of the bunch, with Waugh and cinematographer MacGregor amping up the tension with long, wide shots, whilst editor Colby Parker Jr. cuts the confrontation with precision. The result is terrifically exciting and worth the price of admission for the big screen experience.
Unfortunately, it takes a long time to get going. The film spends a good forty minutes setting up its multiple storylines, of many enemies going after Harris and translator Mo (Navid Neghaban) trying to flee Afghanistan to get to Kandahar after their cover is blown. There are perhaps way too many characters that, unfortunately, do not do much other than act in a brooding evil look. Fazal’s Khalil is a one-note ISI agent with a cool motorcycle. That’s it. He does nothing else but travel on his motorcycle, travel in a truck that carries his motorcycle, and then prepares his motorcycle to travel with it once more. At least it looks cool as hell.
There’s a journalist character who gets kidnapped, which serves as a way for Waugh to insert a half-assed geopolitical commentary that goes absolutely nowhere, just like most of the film’s side characters. One character appears during a pivotal action scene, only for him to completely disappear during the rest of the film until he reappears at the end to reveal that he died. It’s as if the filmmakers forgot to show that he died in action. But since the side characters are so forgettable, maybe they thought no one would notice?
That said, Butler gives his all for the first time in a long time. He has phoned it in since starring in Olympus Has Fallen and hasn’t gotten any better with time. But in Kandahar, he seems to care about the bond between Harris and Mo genuinely, played with great emotional resonance by Negahban, who is one of the most underappreciated character actors working today (I’ll direct you to his work as The Shadow King in FX’s Legion). They’re why you slowly care about their quest because their performances are excellent. However, this exact story was done in a much better movie a month ago, with only a few differences: Guy Ritchie’s The Covenant (it also doesn’t help that I watched that film last week, which left quite an impression on me).
In a sense, Kandahar is the Cannon Group version of Guy Ritchie’s The Covenant. It’s got great action and two great lead performances. However, the difference in quality between the two is staggering, especially when it tries to shoehorn a geopolitical commentary that doesn’t work since Waugh doesn’t do anything with his journalistic subplot. There’s a lot he’s trying to balance out in this film — some of it works, but most of it doesn’t. As far as his collaborations go with Butler, it’s, unfortunately, his weakest, even if he manages to get a great performance out of him. Here’s hoping his next B-grade action film will be significantly better.
Writer: Jez Butterworth, John-Henry Butterworth, David Koepp, James Mangold
Stars: Harrison Ford, Phoebe Waller-Bridge, Mads Mikkelsen
Synopsis: Archaeologist Indiana Jones races against time to retrieve a legendary artifact that can change the course of history.
A nostalgic send off of a beloved character, a fitting addition to a treasured franchise, or perhaps a mixture of the two, Indiana Jones and the Dial of Destiny could easily fit into both categories. Mangold takes the reins on this fifth and final installment to do his very best at achieving an action-packed film teeming with quirky jokes, nostalgic callbacks and enough charm and wit to do the infamous “Indy” justice. The film is by no means perfect, though long-time fans should have fun with this ‘last hurrah’ for the legendary adventurer.
Harrison Ford is back as Indy and up to his old hijinks in the brand new installment out of Cannes. With the magic of visual effects, the film opens with a startlingly young looking explorer in the middle of his usual old antics, tussling with nemesis Jürgen Voller (Mads Mikkelsen), a former WWII Nazi Scientist. It’s an exciting opening scene with fights atop a moving train and plenty of charm, but we don’t stay here for long. Soon, we jump from the past to present and are introduced to a handful of new characters such as Helena Shaw (Phoebe Waller-Bridge), the now-grown daughter of Indy’s old sidekick Basil Shaw, played by Toby Jones. Trailing alongside Helena is Teddy (Ethann Isidore), a teenage pickpocket and sidekick whose loyalty and allegiance lies with her, aiding Helena in her escapades. With this new cast of characters introduced, pandemonium begins and the adventure is afoot.
Though the adventure afoot unfortunately isn’t quite what it used to be. With lackluster jokes, a number of classically predictable chase scenes and some underdeveloped new characters, the ventures are entertaining for sure, but overwhelmingly average. There’s nothing terribly wrong or disastrous with any aspect of the film, but there’s an old spark that used to exist in the franchise that just isn’t present with this one. A slew of characters embarking on a global chase to locate the ‘Dial of Destiny’ is fun and intriguing enough, but could be more-so. A few risks in the writing of the plot or characters by the film’s four writers could’ve gone a long way in adding something a bit more unique and memorable to this final Indy film, but it commits to what it is well enough.
On a technical note the film has much to boast about. From appealing cinematography by Phedon Papamichael and score by the infamous John Williams, it surely appeases the senses. Nostalgia is the absolute powerhouse that drives this film from the sentimental music to how it’s captured on screen, and is one of its saving graces through and through. A new generation of movie-goers will be able to experience an “Indiana Jones” title on the big screen for the first time, and long time fans should be eager to catch another final theatrical glimpse of their favorite whip-cracking swashbuckler set to the all-too-familiar theme song once more.
The performances are good enough, believable and entertaining, though the standout is assuredly Phoebe Waller-Bridge’s Helena. With her witty quips and well timed humor, she may tap into a bit of her go-to ‘Fleabag’ here and there, but she’s the one that earned most laughs from the audience and seems to fit into the Indy universe with ease. Ford is steady and seasoned, giving a solid final performance and going out on an undeniably emotional though honorable note. Mikkelson as Voller is an intriguing villain and fun addition to the film, but isn’t given much to work with and lacks in screen time and material, which is a shame due to the fact his performance and character held a lot of campy ‘bad guy’ potential.
Though it’s fun to see the seasoned and beloved fedora-adorned explorer back in action, it’s a bit of an unnecessary addition to an already complete franchise. Perhaps overwhelmingly average, Indiana Jones and the Dial of Destiny isn’t an outright disaster by any means, it checks all the boxes of a good adventure flick, though it certainly lacks the tangible charm of the Spielberg installments. Maybe the franchise should’ve been left as is, but seeing as it wasn’t, this final swan song of a film is fine enough and is sure to strum at least a string of heartwarming nostalgia into even the most cynical or doubtful viewer.
This week on the InSession Film Podcast, inspired by Disney’s latest live-action remake in The Little Mermaid, we thought it would be fun to rank (collectively) all 10 films from Disney’s iconic Renaissance Age! We all grew up with these films, and certainly nostalgia is a factor, but they are generally heralded as some of Disney’s best films for a reason. So, our final ranking wasn’t quite as divisive as last time, but there was plenty of fun to go around.
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!
– Renaissance Age Part 1 (4:27) Like last time, we talked about these movies in chronological order. During this segment, we talk about and power rank The Little Mermaid, The Rescuers Down Under, Beauty and the Beast, Aladdin, and The Lion King!
– Renaissance Age Part 2 (1:33:46) In the back half of the episode, we continue our power ranking as we talk about Pocahontas, The Hunchback of Notre Dame, Hercules, Mulan, and Tarzan
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!
On this episode, JD and Jay break down Paul Schrader’s new film Master Gardener, starring Joel Edgerton! It hasn’t received the same praise as First Reformed, and for the reasons we mention, it may go down as the film we’re most against the grain on in 2023.
Review: Master Gardener (3:00) Director: Paul Schrader Writers: Paul Schrader Stars: Joel Edgerton, Sigourney Weaver, Quintessa Swindell
This week on Women InSession, we get giddy as we talk about our favorite 90s teen comedies! We talk everything from Clueless to The Faculty to Don’t Tell Mom the Babysitter’s Dead and everything in between!
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.
On this episode, JD and Brendan discuss the Daniel Goldhaber film How to Blow Up a Pipeline! This is a film that garnered some hype at this year’s Sundance Film Festival, but it turns out much of that was genuinely warranted.
Review: How to Blow Up a Pipeline (3:00) Director: Daniel Goldhaber Writers: Ariela Barer, Jordan Sjol, Daniel Goldhaber Stars: Ariela Barer, Kristine Froseth, Lukas Gage, Forrest Goodluck, Sasha Lane
Synopsis: Fifteen year-old Xian goes to live with her father while her mother, a doctor, takes a job in Africa. Soon, she becomes fascinated by her father’s stepdaughter, a swaggering, liberated and slightly melancholic young woman.
The story being told by Zihan Geng and screenwriter Liu Yining in A Song Sung Blue has been seen plenty of times, particularly in the film festival circuit these past few years. And although the array of tropes and cliches might be bothersome for some viewers seeking a different type of journey, the elegance and naturalistic beauty of the central performances by Huang Ziqi and Liang Jing help the film be pretty engaging on an emotional level.
Youth is a fragile state that serves as a learning pattern for life’s multiple (and concurrent) ups and downs. Everyone takes it for granted before they realize later that those were some of the most important and wistful days of their life; those are the days that shape our lives. In random moments, we get glimpses of our past experience and feel a splash of youth flowing through oursoul. The directorial debut from young filmmaker in Zihan Geng, A Song Sung Blue (premiering at the Cannes Film Festival in the Director’s Fortnight sidebar) captures this essence beautifully through a story about two girls struggling to find their place in the world. Unfortunately, her film can be placed onto the sorting hat of wispy coming-of-age dramas – where a summer (and a special person) paves the way for the enlightenment of a teenager – that make the festival rounds all year round.
Set in the early 2010s, A Song Sung Blue follows a shy fifteen-year-old girl named Xian (Zhou Meijun) who lives in the northeast area of Harbin with her divorced mother (Liang Jing). Xian loves being with her mother, although her teenage angst sometimes gets the better of her. However, things will change, at least for the summer, as her mother has accepted a two-month position in Africa so that it can give her better opportunities in the future. Because of this, she is sent to live with her father (Liang Long), who runs a struggling photography studio, for a while. She hasn’t seen him since her parents’ divorce a few years ago. Xian isn’t excited to see him after all this time, asking her mother not to go to Africa so she doesn’t spend the Summer alone. From the moment he appears onscreen, you get the feeling that Xian’s chemistry with him isn’t the same as her mother’s.
There’s a lot of distance and resentment from Xian, as her father wants to connect with her by all means, even introducing her to his Korean-Chinese partner/assistant and pet monkey. The first two days are a bit rough, as the lonesome Xian is forced to have some of her classmates over at the photo studio, her father taking advantage of the situation and charging them for group pictures. She isn’t being noticed by them or by her father. So, Xian heads to the backroom to take a breather. And that’s when she meets the person that will change her life forever: her father’s stepdaughter, the eighteen-year-old Jin Mingmei (Huang Ziqi). Mingmei will be the guiding light to illuminate Xian’s road of self-discovery and desire – she treats her older step-sibling like an idol, a poster of a celebrity on the wall.
It is not only Mingmei’s aspirations of opening a shop and ditching the flight attendant courses she’s taking that make Xian want to win her affection. But also the radiance she transmits through her daily life brightens Xian’s previously lonely life; a gray-hued room pops with color the moment she arrives. Zihan Geng delves into the coming-of-age tropes and cliches through these sisters’ newly-formed relationship, serving some scenes that remind of other (and better) films. We have seen this type of dynamic hundreds of times which is a magnet to these movies because people relate to them. I think the film relies so much on the relatability factor that it fails to expand its story into something of greater narrative weight.
A Song Sung Blue may have a style that reminds of Wong Kar-wai and a blue-hued filter that covers the screen in a hazy lens, shot by a cinematographer (HJY) who seeks out the more grounded side in each frame. But that constant pressure to make audiences feel like they have gone through these same or similar situations holds it back. However, at the same time, this same relationship that is mostly forged by tropes comes through with nuance and beauty, primarily through Huang Ziqi and Liang Jing’s touching performances. An easily identifiable contrast between the two characters – the introverted Mingmei and the extroverted Xian, teenage angst versus the bliss of youth –makes some of the narrative beats quite emotionally engrossing. Mistaking emotions is a crucial aspect of growing up, and Zihan Geng directs these actresses to the point where they reflect this sensation effortlessly.
The rest of the cast doesn’t leave much of an impression since the story revolves around the two leads for the most part. But, there are a few scenes between Xian and her mother that are quite moving, although recognizable. Zihan’s filmmaking skills are admirable, often demonstrating that the issues with her directorial debut are primarily contained in its screenplay and narrative development. While A Song Sung Blue has its fair share of beautiful scenes, the lingering sensation of been-there-done-that haunts the film during its wistful ninety-two-minute runtime.
Wong Kar-wai is one of the best filmmakers in the modern era with some of the most beautiful looking movies ever made. He’s a pivotal figure of Hong Kong cinema whose influence is unmatched and unrivaled. While we didn’t get to all of the films (due to unforeseen circumstances), we have a great time delving into what makes his films exquisitely cinematic and provocative.
We hope you enjoyed the series as much as we did! If you have any thoughts on these films, please reach out to us on social media or you can email us [email protected].
Synopsis: A young mermaid makes a deal with a sea witch to trade her beautiful voice for human legs so she can discover the world above water and impress a prince.
While the ongoing debate surrounding Disney’s decision to adapt its older animated movies into live-action films continues, it is undeniable that these adaptations persist due to their financial success. The latest addition to this lineup, The Little Mermaid, not only aims to be profitable but also endeavors to capture the essence of the original animated classic while offering a fresh perspective. This recent rendition of the beloved Disney Renaissance tale manages to achieve this goal, although it is not without flaws. The film succeeds in bringing the enchanting story to the big screen, evoking a strong sense of nostalgia for Disney movies of the past. The Little Mermaid stands as one of the finest live-action adaptations released to date, if not the very best.
However, engaging with the film proves challenging from the start. While the breathtaking cinematography captures the mesmerizing and perilous nature of ocean waves, the story loses its momentum thereafter. The absence of an opening musical sequence, omitting both the sailor’s song and the introduction of the sisters, immediately raises concerns about the pacing, which persist throughout. It takes around 15 to 20 minutes before “Part of Your World” finally emerges as the film’s first musical sequence. This peculiar pacing sets the tone for the movie, struggling to strike a balance between providing an enjoyable and entertaining experience while grappling with scenes that feel necessary but uncomfortably protracted.
As one dives into the underwater realm, the captivating visual effects draw viewers into the story. While the film’s promotional campaign may have hinted at a more subdued color palette, the underwater world is surprisingly vibrant and colorful. However, there remains a pseudo-realistic quality that prevents complete immersion. In comparison to James Cameron’s Avatar: The Way of Water, which achieves near photorealism, The Little Mermaid retains a distinct animated quality. At times, it feels as though I am watching CGI recreations of the actors rather than the actors themselves, contributing to occasional clunkiness. The characters’ hair never quite appears natural, and their attempts to simulate swimming seem off, revealing that they are clearly not in water but rather creating the effect in a studio. Nevertheless, the design compensates for these shortcomings. The visually stunning mermaids’ fins appear realistically adapted, as if mermaids truly existed. The extension of scales onto their bodies creates an appearance akin to clothing, offering a unique and distinct look that sets them apart from the shell-bras of the 80s animated film.
A notable addition to the story is the introduction of mermaids possessing a unique and individual “Siren’s Song,” seamlessly integrating with the film’s narrative and aligning with the lore surrounding mermaids. Ariel’s (Halle Bailey) song serves a dual purpose, proving her voice to Ursula (Melissa McCarthy), the sea witch, while encompassing “Part of Your World” with similar melodies. This subtle addition adds significant context to why Ariel ultimately loses her voice. In addition to surrendering other aspects of her mermaid identity, Ariel must also relinquish her captivating Siren allure, including her voice. This added dimension grants her more autonomy, even in the absence of her voice. It is a much-desired inclusion that, coupled with other expanded character traits, grants Ariel greater depth, enhancing the captivation of her story.
Prince Eric (Jonah Hauer-King) also receives substantial additions that greatly enhance his character, transforming him from a somewhat bland yet visually appealing animated counterpart into a more well-rounded persona. While some of these traits effectively contribute to his emotional growth and his relationship with Ariel, others feel lacking and fail to provide meaningful progression for his character or the overall story. Instead, they seem clumsily inserted into the narrative to attempt a more three-dimensional portrayal. Unfortunately, this expansion comes at the cost of other characters such as Flounder and Scuttle, who are reduced to near accessories. Their inclusion becomes almost superfluous, reaching a point where their presence seems unnecessary from the outset.
Among the core characters, Halle Bailey as Ariel and Melissa McCarthy as Ursula truly stand out. Bailey flawlessly embodies the titular character, showcasing her remarkable voice and effortlessly capturing the naivete of the young mermaid who yearns to explore a world she does not perceive as the evil her father warns her about. McCarthy initially struggles to find her rhythm in the early scenes, but once she delves into “Poor Unfortunate Souls,” she completely embraces her performance, becoming the iconic sea witch in a truly captivating manner.
Undoubtedly, the songs are the standout moments of the film, elevating it into a truly enjoyable and entertaining experience. Alongside the heavily marketed “Part of Your World,” the film includes several songs from the original, along with a few additional songs for Ariel, Eric, and Scuttle. “Under the Sea” evokes vibrant visuals reminiscent of the animated musical numbers found in another Disney hit from 1994, “I Just Can’t Wait to Be King” from The Lion King. These songs pay homage to the grand musical style prevalent in Disney films of that era. Ariel’s new song seamlessly blends in with the rest of the soundtrack, fitting as if it were part of the original film. Eric’s song, while pleasing to the ears and visually appealing, feels slightly too modern in style, without necessarily adding a distinct positive or negative impact to the overall film. However, the same cannot be said for Scuttle’s song addition, a rap number clearly penned by Lin-Manuel Miranda, included primarily to showcase the rap skills of Awkwafina as Scuttle and Daveed Diggs as Sebastian. While both actors demonstrate impressive abilities, the song itself becomes grating and easily stands as the weakest aspect of the film, perhaps better off left on the editing floor.
Another minor point of discussion has been the decision to alter some lyrics in “Kiss the Girl.” Personally, I found the alteration to be so slight that I hardly noticed the difference. The change promotes a healthier environment by encouraging the two main characters to kiss, even though one of them cannot verbally express consent. However, it’s worth noting that the original version contains other problematic lyrics that remain unchanged in this adaptation, creating a sense of cognitive dissonance regarding the film’s intended message.
Despite the unevenness resulting from these additions and adaptations, watching The Little Mermaid was still an enjoyable experience. Halle Bailey undeniably shines in the leading role, and her future in the film industry is undoubtedly promising. The songs and story beats evoke a powerful sense of nostalgia, and although I may not actively seek to revisit the film in the near future, I can envision myself casually putting it on in the background for some lighthearted fun. The Little Mermaid successfully brings the beloved Disney classic to life, showcasing captivating visuals, enhanced character development, and memorable performances. While it may not be without its flaws, it stands as one of the finest live-action adaptations released to date, preserving the essence of the original while offering a fresh take on a timeless tale.
I found myself nervous and reaching for my water bottle so much before and during this interview, why exactly I’m not sure because I can tell you that Dan Jinks is so damn chill and a lot of fun to talk to. What I find even more comical for myself is I truly had no reason to be nervous as we’ve spoken before and have mutual friends so to find myself nervous was silly, but in the end worth it. I sat down with the Oscar winning producer (American Beauty, Best Picture, 1999) to discuss Milk on its 15th Anniversary and to look back and discuss everything about his involvement to the awards race of 2008.
Joey Gentile: Dan, thank you so much for joining me today, welcome to InSessionFilm.
Dan Jinks: Thank you so much for having me, it’s been awhile since I had the chance to talk about Milk so thank you for this opportunity.
JG: Of course. So, one of the things I like to do is break the ice with the people I interview with a really fun question, with that said- Dan, if you had the opportunity to go back and revisit any piece of material in film, television, or theater that you’ve produced and create a sequel to see where those characters are at now, what would it be?
DJ: (Laughing) Ya know, that’s a great question. I did a TV series called Pushing Daisies and I always felt that it had more life in it and I never thought we got our full due. There’s been talk of a reboot throughout the years. Ironically, this interview today is being done during the current WGA strike and PD was a show that was affected during the last writers strike. We were off the air for many, many months and when we came back our show just never picked up the momentum or the same audience we had pre-strike. I’m sure Bryan Fuller (creator/writer of Pushing Daisies) would want to take us back into stories unfinished there.
JG: Uh, about Bryan Fuller- cannot wait for Crystal Lake the Friday the 13th series he’s working on, as a huge horror fan here I am so pumped.
DJ: Oh my God, me too. It’ll be great.
JG: So, it’s been 15 years since Milk and as someone who is now 31, I was a sophomore in high school when the movie released and it came out around the time where I came out publicly as bisexual before I fully embraced and accepted myself as a gay man, so this movie has special meaning to me and my acceptance looking back. For you as a producer taking on such an important figure in American gay history who means so much to so many and for certain reasons, how did this project come across your desk?
DJ: It came to me in such an odd route and I’ll tell you that story. So I had known Dustin Lance Black, the writer, since 2000 at an OutFest party that my producing partner Bruce Cohen and I hosted. So Lance and I remained friends and I had heard somewhere that Lance was working somewhere on a script about Harvey Milk and he had attached Gus van Sant to direct. So I call him up to congratulate him and say “hey, I’m so happy for you, amazing news” just assuming there is a producer, because when a director on par of Gus van Sant is attached there’s a producer and Lance said “there’s no producer yet, do you want to read it?” I said “ what are you kidding me?” So I read it that night, called Lance the next morning and then found myself sitting in a room with Lance and Gus. Ironically, I had been such a fan of Gus and had been for years trying to set a meeting for years with him but his agents kept saying “I don’t know” and building a wall between anybody and then I sat down with him and he’s the nicest guy in the world and we got along great and it was a wonderful experience making the movie. It truly was just as simple as hearing a friend had a script and director, calling to congratulate and then I became attached.
JG: You know, something you just said caught my attention just now, and that is you saying his agents were essentially blocking a meeting with him and you. My guy, you’re an Oscar winning producer and you are being denied a meeting? How does that make sense in “Hollywood”?
DJ: It’s a good question and ya know I asked at the time, especially in the wake of American Beauty, this is a town where people get excited when there’s heat on you and there was certainly heat on us as producers and we are also openly gay producers at a time where there weren’t as many openly gay producers and Gus is openly gay so it just made all the sense in the world to meet. I just think it was odd for his agents to truly not be pushing that. I don’t think it was specifically against us, but I think in a general way they were very protective of Gus. In the end, you’d have to ask them because I was indeed surprised (Dan says this with a big grin on his face) we could not get a meeting with him but in the end we became good friends and made the movie.
JG: That is actually the perfect segueway, there was you, Bruce Cohen, Gus, Lance Black, and Elliot Graham (Editor) working on this film, and I’m sure more openly and not openly gay people working on it. It gets going and you have all these gay creatives on this project about a gay icon and you cast Sean Penn in the role of Harvey Milk. Now, I would like to note I myself, Joey Gentile am not one who believes you have to be gay to play gay. I think it actually does more harm because then you’re boxing gay actors into a gay only box. I think you need to cast the right person in the role but see everyone for the role, whether it be gay, straight, trans, any color, unknowns, knowns, get them all in the room and cast from the melting pot. However, we are now in a climate where the idea of gay in gay roles only is pushed heavily so looking back do you regret the casting and how did it happen?
DJ: Here’s the thing, even though it was only 15 years ago it was a VERY different time. The truth is though, we needed a star to get the financing to get that movie made. If we were trying to get that movie made today, (I don’t think we could get a gay actor attached to the lead) the sad thing is I don’t think it could actually be made, I don’t know who that gay actor is who could get us the financing. I want to be very clear that it’s not that I don’t think there aren’t gay actors who could play it but that the movie cost at the time somewhere around $23 million. Even Sean Penn was not enough to get the movie green lit, we had to get that ensemble of Emile Hirsch, Josh Brolin, Diego Luna, James Franco. We needed all of them to get it green lit, it was a hard movie to get financed. It was a movie about a gay politician that even at the time we did it a lot of people living in San Francisco didn’t even know who Harvey Milk was, he was not a well known figure.
There were people who would walk through Harvey Milk Plaza in San Francisco and not even know who he was at that time. Ya know, I have been asked that question a lot and I can be a little defensive about it because we felt we were so lucky to have gotten Sean Penn. I’ll be honest I spent hours and hours after reading that script, going through lists of actors and I came up with 3 actors who I felt was right for the role and could get the movie financed and the fact that one of them actually said yes was a miracle. None of them were gay men, but I’ll tell you something that was really important to me, Gus, Bruce, and Lance is that we cast a number of gay people in the film. We cast them in gay roles and in straight roles, Victor Garber and Denis O’Hare are two examples. We cast the right person for the role but we did cast a lot of gay people for the movie.
JG: I completely get it, and my opinion on the matter doesn’t line up with Twitter these days on gays needed for gay roles, so I was definitely curious to see how that process went for a film like this. A lot of what is said on Twitter needs to be taken with a shot of penicillin because in the end it’s still a business and business decisions are made that the public isn’t aware of, critics, etc. So as someone like myself who knows the ins and outs like you do, it’s always an interesting conversation to be had.
DJ: I’ll add something to it too. There are movies that I think are important movies that aren’t even getting made right now as a result of “how dare you cast a straight actor in a gay role” that as a result, a lot of straight actors don’t want to play gay roles anymore but also because we don’t have enough stars there are stories not being told, movies not being made that would probably like Milk have a lot of gay actors in them outside of a lead and giving them the opportunity to be seen but we don’t have the stars where you need a star in order to get made, and the truth is at times you need a star.
If you’re doing a TV series like Love, Victor where you don’t need a star then absolutely try harder to cast a gay actor in that part, that’s not asking much. But if you’re doing a movie that needs a star there are certain realities that are taken into it. I know of many scripts right now that aren’t being made because we don’t have gay stars, and those few gay stars we do have, you send something to such and such actor and they go “I played this already, I don’t want to do this again”. Then you have people going “well why didn’t you get such and such actor” well the truth is they don’t want to do it or they aren’t a star and there we are back at the beginning of sometimes in this business in order to get made you are required to have a star.
JG: No I get it, trust me I understand. So taking yourself back to the making of the film, is there anything you took from making Milk that maybe you didn’t know at the time?
DJ: The thing about politicians (especially local politicians) is that they use a staff of young people a lot. The kids in their 20’s working for Harvey were now in their 50’s when we were making the film and they are characters in the movie, so we’re telling their story too. They would come by the set every single day, the best known was probably Cleve Jones (played byEmile Hirsch) he was someone who Lance Black relied on a lot while he was writing the script for research and access. In the end it was such an important thing to all of them as well because it was such a big part of their life and that was amazing to learn.
JG: 15 years later, what do you hope people get from the film now?
DJ: One of the things that was so important with Harvey Milk was visibility, “if they know us they are less likely to hate us.” I feel like what is happening now with Trans issues, I have a trans niece that I love very much. I care about her health and safety and happiness and it just kills me that the Republican party, they’re looking for issues that can be headlines and rile up the base as if trans people are in any way hurting or affecting their lives and I think ya know again, it goes back to the more people you know, the more visibility in trans characters in film and television it will make it more normal to the viewer and I think that was something, the visibility of it all was hugely important to Harvey Milk and really important today.
JG: Well said. So moving onto- the movie comes out, the response is very good, critics love it, audiences respond, come Oscar time you get a whopping 8 nominations and end up winning two big ones. As someone who came off of American Beauty where you guys swept that season and won everything under the sun, is it more chill the second time around? Or are you just as nervous going into Oscar night?
DJ: Great question, listen, to go through the AB journey with awards was just an out of body experience. It was something that wasn’t expected and as a lot of people growing up I was the nerdy kid who just wasn’t going to win an Oscar. I mean that just seemed completely out of the realm of possibility and when it happened it was a thrilling, overwhelming, and exciting experience. If it ends up being the only time in my life where I win an Oscar then what a lucky person I am. So to be nominated again, as a producer nominated for the film you are the representative because it’s really the movie that’s nominated, it’s just a thrill.
There was a movie that year called Slumdog Millionaire that did very well, it was having that race to the Oscars that AB had, I called a friend of mine, one of the great Oscar prognosticators Dave Karger and asked him, I said “ does Milk have a chance to win Best Picture?” He very kindly said “ I wouldn’t say it doesn’t have a chance but it would be considered the biggest upset in the history of the Oscars” and I laughed and said “okay, that’s all I needed to know, we don’t really have a chance”. So I went into the evening having fun and feeling so lucky to even be there. I had a great time and didn’t feel the pressure of having to give a speech because I knew that I didn’t have a shot to win. I was thrilled that Lance Black won, and that Sean Penn won and listen, we got 8 nominations for ya know a movie that had a very independent movie feel to it. It happened at a time where that was less likely to happen too because there were only 5 Best Picture nominees too.
JG: Yup, I was gonna say 5, absolutely. Well that was the year that changed everything too. It was the year that caused the rift too because of The Dark Knight and even Wall-E being snubbed for a movie like The Reader. So due to that year is the reason the Academy expanded from 5 to 10 nominees. So after that you saw things like The Kids Are Alright, Winter’s Bone, Her, Philomena getting into Best Picture that wouldn’t have “happened” had it still been only 5.
DJ: Absolutely correct.
JG: I gotta know, where do you keep your Oscar?
DJ: (Smiling and pointing off camera) It’s a little cubby hole in the entry area of my house.
JG: Amazing, love that. All in all, looking back with what you did 15 years ago, are you proud of the film and how it’s aged?
DJ: Oh, I’m very happy with that movie. It was hard in a lot of ways but thrilling in a lot of ways too. I was really happy with many things that could have gone wrong. I remember seeing some miniseries that took place in the 70s beforehand and everything looked so fake from the mustaches on the guys to the tight jeans, it just looked like such a cliche. From our costume designer, a guy named Danny Glicker, to our production designer, a guy named Bill Groom, these people didn’t just research, they researched and researched and researched so to have the accuracy of the most minor details was so damn thrilling.
JG: It’s truly great to see you so cheerful and smiling and talking about your work like you’re a kid in a candy shop. That attitude is so weirdly hard to find now as most people I have talked to look back at their work with ways to change what the final product was, so to see you light up and glee about it, tip my hat to you sir.
DJ: (Laughing) Thank you. I love making movies, I feel so lucky to do what I do and I am happy that I’ve made a few things that I’m hoping have stood the test of time.
JG: You have, truly. Okay, a fun one for you- anyone who I talk to who is an Academy member I love asking this question. As an Academy member, what does it take for a film to get your number one spot on your ballot? And let’s say in the last decade, how often are you getting it “right”?
DJ: See I don’t EVER vote to get it “right,” my vote isn’t ever for what I think is going to win, my vote goes to what I consider the Best Picture, always! In terms of getting it “right” my ballot is always the right one. Ya know, sometimes I’m voting for the winner but often I’m voting for the one that moved me somehow more than the eventual winner did.
JG: That’s amazing to hear and honestly I get it, ya know I look back at this last year for an example and Triangle of Sadness was my favorite movie of the year and I ranked it at 1, until I saw All Quiet on the Western Front and was like wait a minute, nope, that’s it, that’s the best one in the lineup. So even though I rank ToS as my favorite it’s clear for me that AQOTWF was easily the Best Picture but I would vote the same way, it’s not about what is projected to win, it’s about what you think is the best in the lineups.
DJ: Oh, without a doubt. Remember if you’re a voter it’s what you have to do. It’s a different thing if you’re going to someone’s Oscar party and you’re filling out a ballot, then you’re voting on what you actually think is going to win, but for your own ballot you have to vote for what you think is the best.
JG: Nailed it. So Dan, what’s next up for you? What’s on the horizon?
DJ: Well we’re in strike mode in Hollywood, but outside of that it’s all unclear right now. I’ve got a few things set up at studios, a few things I’m trying to package, and a couple of TV things I’m working on. It’s just an odd time due to the strike so there is a lot that cannot be done and as someone who is very much in support of the writers and the WGA I want them to get a fair deal and be resolved as quickly as possible to their benefit. Right now there’s just a huge amount of uncertainty in the business and um, sort of everything I’ve been working on is on pause for the moment.
JG: Oh for sure, pay the writers! Ya know I will be kicking myself in the ass here if I don’t close with this. Fiddler on the Roof, for your consideration- Carol Kane as Yente the Matchmaker, PLEASE make this happen, it has to be done.
DJ: (Laughing) Fiddler on the Roof was a movie I was hoping was going to be made this past year but we got caught in the change of ownership from MGM to Amazon and all that, it’s right now on a slower track. We have a TERRIFIC script from Steve Levinson, Tommy Kail is literally one of the great living directors. It’s just not gonna happen as quickly as I would like it to happen, I am sad to say. But I appreciate your casting thought and will keep her in mind when we get there.
JG: Amazing, amazing, amazing. Dan, thank you so much for taking the time to talk with me today.
Synopsis: When Sebastian tells his old-school Italian immigrant father Salvo that he is going to propose to his all-American girlfriend, Salvo insists on crashing a weekend with her tony parents.
Even if you are a serious cinephile who considers film an art form, you have to be a fan of genre movies. From the drenched digital effects of an action-adventure picture to the ominous murder-mystery thriller, movies are meant to entertain the masses. The same goes for the semi-autobiographical comedy that makes you laugh from your gut, despite its faults. That’s what you have with About My Father, coming from the mind of one of the hottest comedians in the world, Sebastian Maniscalco. This is a comedy in the vein of Meet the Parents and Wedding Crashers that plays into standard family dynamic tropes but happens to be very funny,
Directed by Laura Terruso, About My Father was written by Maniscalco and veteran CBS sitcom writer Austen Earl. The story follows Sebastian, a Hilton hotel manager who is dating Ellie, a delightful artist played by Leslie Bibb. Ellie has a down-to-earth personality and a sparkling smile that lights up the room. They are your classic “opposites attract” type of couple, with Ellie bringing a smile to Sebastian that he didn’t know he had. Quite literally, Ellie has to teach him how to practice and strengthen his facial muscles to smile more consistently.
The couple comes from extraordinarily different backgrounds. Ellie’s family can trace their roots back to the actual Mayflower. Her mother, Tigger (Kim Cattrall), and her father, Bill (David Rasche), are your typical blue-blood yuppies who lament that his father only gave him one hotel to start after he graduated from Harvard. Not to mention her brothers: Lucky (Anders Holms), a champagne socialist, and Doug (Brett Dier), a hippie trained in the art of Tibetan singing bowls, round out an eccentric group.
On the other hand, Sebastian comes from a blue-collar family led by his father, Salvo (Robert De Niro), a stylist who has been building women’s confidence and hair volume for decades. Knowing the value of a dollar, Salvo would always keep his son from ordering appetizers or desserts off the menu. When Christmas came, he would make homemade toys for Sebastian, such as a skateboard (and comments next year, he will make him “one of those Nintendos”). Sebastian needs his grandmother’s ring from Salvo, which he plans to give Ellie as he asks her to marry him. However, his father will only allow it once he meets Ellie’s family at their summer home on the Fourth of July.
The comedy is inspired by Maniscalco’s father, an immigrant from Sicily and an Army veteran who supported his family by being a hairstylist in a working-class neighborhood in Chicago. As a fan of Maniscalco for years, going way back to the days of the 2008 documentary comedy tour Vince Vaughn’s Wild West Comedy Show: 30 Days and 30 Nights – Hollywood to the Heartland, not much has changed since then. The finely groomed and cologne-doused Italian American comedian, with a penchant for class, style, and dry cleaning every piece of clothing down to his boxer shorts, has the same cartoonish delivery that makes for a welcomed juxtaposition on stage, as it does in this film.
About My Father excels when Maniscalco waxes poetically about his life and nostalgically looks back at his upbringing. You’ll also enjoy how the comedian openly disagrees with his father but recognizes the differences in lifestyles with these blue bloods that cannot be ignored. It’s no coincidence that those scenes, particularly when Sebastian and De Niro’s Salvo begin to make jokes at his future in-laws’ expense in private, work because they are straight from the theme of Maniscalco’s “Can you believe this?” stand-up act.
The cast has a nice chemistry together, including the humorous rapport between De Niro and Maniscalco. This is their second film together since The Irishman, where, if you remember, the latter received a bullet to the head from the legendary actor. De Niro has always been comedically gifted in culture clash comedies, but he never plays against type for a reason. While most characters outside the leads are cardboard cutouts from genre comedies, Cattrall stands out the most here as a fire-breathing conservative politician. While some scenes are typically outlandish (such as Sebastian losing his shorts on a Flyboard) and others may elicit eye-rolls (like Salvo using a family mascot for dinner), the scenes are still funny, albeit a bit too long and overplayed at times. The scenes where Sebastian is overtly rude to his father are purely manipulative to play into themes of the comedian coming to his own realization of what family means to him.
Still, you don’t go into About My Father expecting a reinvention of the genre with its lightning-quick running time. It’s a culture clash farce that works because of Maniscalco’s style of comedy and De Niro playing to his long-established comic strengths as a cynical curmudgeon set in his ways. This highly enjoyable movie has an infectious sense of humor and delivers a handful of belly laughs that will put a smile on your face, even as you come to terms with its imperfections.
On this episode, Ryan and Jay continue our Wong Kar-wai Movie Series with one of the best films of the 2000s in In the Mood for Love! This is generally regarded as Kar-wai’s best film, and even one of the the best of all-time. So, there was certainly much to discuss here and we did our best to articulate why its reputation is so well deserved.
Review: In the Mood for Love (3:00) Director: Wong Kar-wai Writers: Wong Kar-wai Stars: Maggie Cheung, Tony Leung
