Vengeance (4/5 Stars)

Actions Speak Louder Than Words

This adventure in West Texas is brought to you by B. J. Novak, its writer/director/star. Mr. Novak is well known for his role as the temp Ryan Howard in the long running TV Show "The Office." The interesting thing about Novak's contribution to "The Office" is that he was also one of the writers. I once heard that he and Mindy Kaling (also a writer) were always in the office's backroom so that they would not have to spend an inordinate amount of time onscreen as they had other responsibilities. Also notable about Novak's contribution to the "The Office" is that his character was the most amoral on the show. He didn't mind how his writing affected how his character was presented to the world. I think it is fair to say he has a sense of humor.

This type of self-deprecation shows up right away in Vengeance. Novak plays Ben Manalowitz, a writer from New York, who receives a seemingly random phone call about a funeral is West Texas. The funeral belongs to Abilene Shaw, a girl he had hooked up with a couple of times in Manhattan. Apparently, she had told her family about him and made it seem like they were more serious than he ever considered them to be. She went back home to West Texas (perhaps because of a lack of making it in New York) and overdosed and died at a party. The family wants him to attend the funeral.

Ben attends the funeral seemingly to avoid breaking it to the family that he didn't care at all about Abilene. He puts on a good face the entire time. This fools Abilene's brother Ty Shaw (played by Boyd Holbrook) and he decides to let Ben in on a secret. Abilene's death was no accidental overdose. She was murdered and a lot of people were in on it. It's a conspiracy. Ben doesn't see a conspiracy afoot. He does see opportunity though: a story that he can turn into a podcast. A bunch of hicks in the middle of West Texas, slowly dying in their dead-ass towns, looking for bogey-man to blame for all their problems because they won't take responsibility for their lives. He pitches this idea to his producer Eloise (played by Issa Rae) who thinks he has something. They give the podcast a working title: "Dead White Girl." Ben Manalowitz decides to stay in Texas and "help out" by making this grieving family famous for being stupid. Ben is an awful person.

B.J. Novak understands where the satire lies. It is about time someone poked fun at the innumerable number of podcasts wherein people without any specialized knowledge riff on their views of the world. The prominent one that comes to mind is "Serial" by Sarah Keonig, which is the story of a clueless woman trying and failing to solve a murder that has already been solved. As a wise man in this movie aptly puts it, the truth is drowned out by everyone needing to give their own "take" on a story. Inaction and conspiracies prevail because the average person's urge to put themselves into the story makes it far more complicated than what it is in actuality.

There is plenty of red-state blue-state humor here and Novak does a fine job of spreading the jokes evenly. For the city slickers, the main problem is The Tyranny of Choice. This occurs whenever you go to the supermarket to buy cereal and are confronted with way more options than you require. (Aziz Ansari's "Master of None" TV series is perhaps the best exploration of this phenomenon.) The outcome is a character like Ben who won't engage in something meaningful because he is always afraid of missing out on something better. Was Abilene, that girl he hooked up with a couple of times, a special person? Ben didn't stay around long enough to find out. For the Texans, the problem is the opposite. They do not have any choices and fill in that emptiness with an absurd amount of pride. Why do they love Whataburger and will fight you about it? Because its there.

"Vengeance" starts getting interesting when it subverts its own premise by introducing certain evidence that Abilene may not have just overdosed at a party. It is revealed for instance that the scene of her death was in a hazy no-man's land of four separate legal jurisdictions: city, county, highway, and border patrol. If one wanted to murder Abilene, where she died would be a good place to do it.

"Vengeance" has a lot to say and a lot of thoughtful characters to articulate it. The conspiracy may not be corporate evil doers and/or crooked cops. The conspiracy may be a sort of cultural decay brought about by vague outside forces. If Abilene was using drugs, why was she doing that? Was she unhappy? She had a loving family and a small town's respect. Was that not enough? 

Close by to this nowhere town in West Texas is a another town called Marfa. This is a well-known real place where well-to-do artists with lots of time go to work on their hobbies without distraction from the outside world. A recording studio run by a guy named Quentin Sellers once produced several songs written and performed by Abilene. Quentin Sellers is played by Ashton Kutcher in one of his best roles. (I think this is the first dramatic role I have seen him in). He is particularly good at coaxing performances out of clients. In one scene he compares the woman singing at the microphone with the creation of the universe. I was reminded of the great Will Durant quote, "Those who cater to human vanity, seldom starve."

Why does it matter whether art is recorded? So that it can be packaged and sold to strangers? So that one can become well known to people whom they have never met before? How did fame, in and of itself, become meaningful? "Vengeance" ends on an impulsive act performed in secret. It is shocking and fitting. This movie will be one of the best written of the year.

Men (2/5 Stars)

 

 Looking at the trailer for “Men”, I had a feeling that this was going to be either a bad or weird movie and probably both. But, the movie was written and directed by Alex Garland, who has made some of the better movies in the past five years including “Annihilation” and the exceptional “Ex Machina”. So, I thought I would give “Men” a chance. The movie is both weird and bad. 

The story is simple (or maybe not). A woman named Harper (played by Jessie Buckley) has been recently widowed. She broke up with a man who couldn’t handle it and committed suicide by jumping off the roof. She decides to visit a cottage in the English countryside for rest and relaxation. The visit is not relaxing for very long. She is stalked by a naked man and then has a series of encounters with other creepy men from the village. Actually, the men are all the same man. Each one is played by Rory Kinnear with different accents, makeup, and costumes. There is a metaphor in here somewhere, but I’m not sure what it is supposed to be. 

This is the second Jessie Buckley movie that I’ve seen that features her wandering around a weird home with weird inhabitants. The first was “I’m Thinking of Ending Things”. (Come to think of it, that movie too had a weird love interest.) “Men” though is more of a horror movie. I think. Well, at least there is more violence and much more gore. Actually the ending is quite gruesome, but after it goes on for quite awhile, you may find yourself considering the spectacle with the expression of Jessie Buckley, as in: Is this still going on now? and where did I leave that hatchet so I can finally put an end to this movie? 

As I said, the men in “Men” are all played by one actor, Rory Kinnear, who is generally underrated. I have seen him play the comic relief in rom-coms like “Man Up” and meld into the bureaucratic background in James Bond movies like “Skyfall” and “No Time to Die”. Given that he is usually a supporting actor, one may then be surprised that he can throw down with great orations as he does in “Peterloo” where he plays the historical public speaker Henry Hunt. In this movie, the most we can say about Rory Kinnear is that he is a very good sport. He gives up the full frontal nudity, grows plants from his face, and tries some silly accents. I hope Alex Garland got what he was looking for at least because one might characterize the performance as embarrassing. 

What is this movie about? I can only really glean one attempt at metaphor. There is an apple tree in the front yard of the house that might be analogous to the apple tree in the garden of Eden. Beyond that though, what is anything else supposed to be? I suspect there may be some message critical about men or how men treat women, but why do you need a vague metaphor for that? Aren’t there enough real world examples that don’t require the use of metaphor? Am I supposed to watch this movie, and come to the realization that a woman’s experience is like being chased around a british cottage by Rory Kinnear in different costumes? 

Is this movie offensive to men? Well, I don’t think so, but maybe that is just because I didn’t understand what the movie may have been trying to tell me. After all, to be truly offended requires understanding. For instance, I got Jordan Peele’s message in “Get Out”. I was offended because I understood it. I can’t say the same for “Men” and this is not one of those movies that was at least interesting enough where I would be curious to hear the director’s commentary. 

One last thing: like “Thor: Love and Thunder” there is a scene that employs CGI to digitally enhance a human body where it should be totally unnecessary. There is a boy character whose face is digitally enhanced so it looks like a young Rory Kinnear. The CGI is really obvious and distracting in a bad way. I don’t understand why a young actor that vaguely looks like Rory Kinnear couldn't be used or why regular makeup was not utilized.

Thor: Love and Thunder (3/5 Stars)

 

I don’t think anyone could have predicted that Thor would be the Marvel character to be the first to get a fourth movie. After all, Iron Man had gotten his third before anyone had even gotten their second and Thor’s second movie “The Dark World” is arguably the worst Marvel movie ever made. But Marvel took a fairly substantial and ultimately successful risk with the third movie “Ragnarok”, replacing the pseudo-Shakespearean seriousness of the first two installments with the rainbow goofiness of Taika Waititi, the new director of “Ragnarok” and here as well “Love and Thunder”. So dramatic was the reorientation of the Thor franchise, that the third movie left out entirely the largest subplot of the first two movies, Thor’s romantic relationship with the scientist Jane Foster, played by Natalie Portman. Say all you want about the acting chops of Natalie Portman (and there is much to say), but she isn’t all that funny. Given the new direction, ditching her was probably a wise move. But her story was still out there to wrap up. This “Love and Thunder” does while expanding dramatically the “Thor” universe of the “Marvel Universe”. 

There’s a lot of expanding going on all over the place in the Marvel Universe Phase 4. I watched the TV Series “Loki” and that introduced an infinite amount of timelines. I watched “Spider-Man: No Way Home” and “Dr. Strange in the Multiverse of Madness” and that introduced an infinite amount of universes. I didn’t watch “The Eternals” but it seemed from the trailer that Marvel had decided to start its own religion (diverse and abnormally good looking, just like the world’s present elite). Now “Love and Thunder” establishes that every polytheistic religion in history has real gods that all hang out together in Omnipotent City. There is, among others, Queztalcoatl the Aztec god, Bast the Egyptian god, some sort of Samurai god, and Bao the god of dumplings. They are ostensibly led by Zeus, played here by a fat Russel Crowe with a Greek accent. It is hard to tell where Marvel is eventually going with all of this, but I expect it will be a bit more difficult to tie together something with the weightiness of the previous Avengers movie. After all, what does it matter what occurs in an Avengers movie when it has been established that we are watching but one timeline in one universe with an infinite amount of other timelines and other universes where something else entirely different occurs. I expect Marvel was always going to have this problem no matter what if had gotten so successful that it eventually introduced all of its characters. It seems like an exceedingly wise decision looking back to start the journey with the simplest of heroes, Iron Man, whose superpower was mechanical in nature. It helps to ease the audience into it. 

It was once opined by some person whose name escapes me that the advent of comic book characters was like the resurrection of the old polytheism. (I only remember that this person went on to prepare a thesis about this topic and then became a professor who taught this class for his entire career). I think that is only fitting that a villain of the “Thor” universe be a character named Gorr, The God Butcher, who vaguely resembles Jesus. What do I mean by that? Well, for one he is played by a thin Christian Bale and is dressed in sandals and a robe. He looks vaguely like Jesus might if he were a character in a Marvel movie. Also like Jesus (at least as compared to the old polytheistic gods) he lacks a sense of humor and is a bit of zealot. But really, the biggest similarity is that he is going around killing all of the gods, much like the intolerant Christians (and also Muslims) of history. It is not a mistake that Marvel did not include Jesus (and especially not the Prophet Mohammed) in the crowd in Omnipotent City. There would have been protests in America and riots in the Middle East. 

In “Ragnarok” the villain played by Cate Blanchett was kind of by-the-numbers and the weakest part of the movie. Here, Gorr the Butcher is one of the strongest parts. In particular, Christian Bale’s performance is so strong and his arguments so on point there is a real danger that his seriousness might overpower the goofiness of Thor’s new groove. Here is an example of how Taika Waititi (and his co-writer Jennifer Kaitlin Robinson) deftly avoid that. In one scene the children of New Asgaard (appropriately now a tourist attraction in the Disney owned Marvel Universe, see The Northman) are kidnapped by Gorr the Butcher, spirited to the Shadow Realm and threatened with death. Thor explains to the children that they are in a tight spot, but as they are Vikings of Asgaard, they will gain eternal reward in Valhalla should they die in glorious battle. Classic Thor. 

Two more notes. First, in one scene Thor gets his clothes blown off. The movie clearly uses CGI on Thor’s naked body. Really? Is even Chris Hemsworth not good looking enough for a Marvel movie? Second, one of the throw-away scenes involves an allusion to gay romance. I don’t think Marvel should get diversity credit for that unless they keep it in the Chinese version.

The Unbearable Weight of Massive Talent (4/5 Stars)

 

It appears that I will be talking about Jackie Chan for two movie reviews in a row. That’s okay. I love talking about Jackie Chan. In the 1980s, Jackie Chan made a series of movies that were not great in any classical sense because the plots, to put it mildly, they were contrived, that is deliberately created to showcase martial arts sequences.)Also, since Jackie Chan made family movies, the action itself was contrived so that nobody died or was hurt too bad). This is the sort of thing that movie critics get haughty about. But, as far as I am concerned, these are great movies because what they excel at, the physicality, creativity, and humor of the martial arts is unsurpassed in cinema. Sometimes, a movies contrivance in pursuit of showcasing a certain excellence is the draw.

Enter “The Unbearable Weight of Massive Talent” starring Nicolas Cage as himself. What Nicolas Cage has been doing in movies for the past forty years has led to many jokes, memes, and YouTube Compilations, the best of which has to be a four minute compilation entitled “Nicolas Cage Losing his Shit”. The thing is that Nicolas Cage has been in a lot of bad movies and is prone to taking acting choices that are interesting/loud. To take his most emotional scenes and cut them together without context is a lot of fun and also very unfair. Something seems to be happening to his celebrity that I can best define as the “Keanu Reeves is Sad” affect.

There was once a meme called “Keanu Reeves is Sad”. It was just a picture of Keanu Reeves on a bench eating a sandwich. He was alone and looked sad. It went around the internet and lots of people laughed. Keanu was a really good sport about it. Then those same people seemed to feel guilty about it, and ever since. Keanu has received an upswell of goodwill. They all went to see John Wick.

Now Keanu Reeves is a good action star and “John Wick” are good action movies. Nicolas Cage is not a good action star (I mean come on). He is though a good actor, or at least a very interesting one. He has won an Oscar that was deserved (Leaving Las Vegas). But what he is best known for is trying really really hard to elevate mediocre material. This basis of competence and the fact that we all made fun of him and feel bad about it, I think is the reason why “The Unbearable Weight of Massive Talent” exists. It is a movie contrived to give Nicolas Cage as many moments of throw down acting as possible. That is the point of the movie. They threw in a kidnapping plot, a drug lord, and the CIA to tie the threads together. But what you want to know is this:

Does Nicolas Cage give a scene reading in a desperate and inappropriate manner? Yes

Does Nicolas Cage quit acting and cry about it? Yes

Does Nicolas Cage have conversations with an imaginary friend, himself 20 years younger? Yes

Does Nicolas Cage leave a man behind in dramatic fashion? Yes

Does Nicolas Cage take LSD? Yes

Does Nicolas Cage say “The bees! The bees!”? Yes (although that scene was perhaps too contrived even for me)

I was surprised by how well this movie worked. I think the main reason it does, is not Nicolas Cage, but who is acting opposite to him. Nicolas Cage is invited to a birthday party of a drug lord named Javier Martinez (played by Pedro Pascal) who is a big fan of Nicolas Cage. There are two levels of awkwardness that need to be handled here. One is how Pedro Pascal’s acts toward Nicolas. He has a true appreciation for Nicolas Cage, and is also aware that his level of appreciation might be creepy to Nicolas Cage, so he is shy and guarded about it (while also being really excited that he is hanging out with Nicolas Cage). Nicolas Cage, on the other hand, notices this and is cool about it. That is, he is not freaked out, and in a weird very Nicolas Cage way, decides to match the weirdness. A good example is the scene where Nicolas Cage is given a tour of Pascal’s Nicholas Cage memorabilia den. Pedro Pascal owns a life sized sculpture of Nicolas Cage from the movie Face/Off. Seeing this statue of himself in this guys den, Nicholas Cage calmly asks how much it costs.

“$5,000” says Pedro shyly.

“I’ll give you $20,000 for it.” says Nicolas Cage

“I’m sorry, it’s not for sale.” says Pedro (truly sorry and hoping not to hurt Cage’s feelings)

Then the contrived plot devolves into an action climax which turns into a movie that there is a premier of. Demi Moore plays his estranged wife. You get the idea. I recommend it.

Top Five Nicolas Cage Movies (No Particular Order)

1. Pig

2. Bad Lieutenant: Port of Call New Orleans

3. Leaving Las Vegas

4. Honeymoon in Vegas

5. Peggy Sue Got Married.

Everything, Everywhere, All at Once (5/5 Stars)

 

There are plenty of big budget movies that are designed to be sensation overload, think of your run-of-the mill action blockbuster. You sit there for several hours as armies run into each other and/or worlds are destroyed but you do not come away feeling like you have seen something new. After all, armies running into each and worlds being destroyed (looking at you Emmerich and Abrams) happen a lot.

Then there are a few rare small budget movies that can be described as sensation overload. These movies do not have the money for a stupid amount of special effects. What they have instead, is a stupid amount of creativity. “Everything, Everywhere All At Once” is one of these rare movies. On a scale of 1 to Being John Malkovich, I would give it around 8 or 9 Charlie Kaufmans. I haven’t seen a movie so jam packed since 2018’s Sorry to Bother You. This will be one of the best movies of the year.

This movie was written and directed by Dan Kwan and Daniel Scheinert. They are relatively new. I had not heard of them before I saw this movie. Almost as important are Brian Le and Andy Le. These are the fight choreographers. They also join many action scenes as stunt men. These four have made a movie that feels big budget and action packed, but if you really think about it (you don’t have to), most of everything takes place in two locations, a laundromat and an office building. This is a master class in efficient film making. There are things that money can buy that do not matter. Then there are things that do matter that do not take a lot of money. Fight choreography is one of those things. Practical effects are another. A sense of humor only comes in cheap (raccoonnie shoutout). But the cheapest and most important thing of all when making something fast paced and complicated is this: a clear vision of what it is you want say. “Everything, Everywhere All at Once” may seem like it is all over the place, but there is a theme to this film that all the different strands of its multiverse are relevant and building to. Like a great symphony, there are many places where discordant themes and notes take center stage, but then they all intertwine and culminate in a climatic harmony, a sum greater than the multitudinous parts.

The plot conceit can be briefly summarized. Today is the day of an IRS audit of a laundromat business owned by Evelyn Wang (Michelle Yeoh) and her husband Waymond Wang (Ke Huy Quan). Evelyn Wang is in a middle-aged crisis. She is not happy with her business or her marriage or her daughter. Her disapproving father Gong Gong (James Hong) is in town for a visit and the IRS auditor Deidre Beaubeirdre (Jamie Lee Curtis) says things like this: “You see all these auditor of the year awards. You don’t get these if you haven’t seen a lot of bullshit”.

On her way to the audit and in the middle of it, her husband’s body is taken over by her husband in an alternate dimension who explains that the fate of the universe relies on her fast action, that there are forces from other dimensions out to kill her, etc. It is explained that every decision in her life creates another universe where the possibilities are developed endlessly in an infinite cycle. In some lives she is an opera singer, a Beni-hana chef, an action move star [whose red carpet appearances look like they come from a Crouching Tiger Hidden Dragon press circuit :)]. An evil force is on the loose and, sort of like The Matrix, can inhabit the ordinary beings around them. This is how Michelle Yeoh gets into a ridiculous martial arts fist fight with Jamie Lee Curtis. I knew Michelle Yeoh could fight. I did not know Jamie Lee Curtis could.

The fights are ingenious and reminded me of a Jackie Chan movie. They are not as good (how could they be) but they have the same sense of humor. The moves are jokes, they use mundane items as fodder, and the outcome is the punchline. A very good example is Ke Huy Quan’s initial fight in which he fends off several security guards with a fanny pack. The martial arts are very good. The scene is shot in wide angles so you can see it all. And it ends with a move that I would do an injustice trying to explain (Essentially Ke kicks the fanny pack into the security guard’s nose, brings it down with force, and the security guard does a face plant into the floor. I’m sorry you just have to see it). Then there is a tour de force scene with Jenny Slate and her dog/nunchuk. Enough said.

Ke Huy Quan? Who is that? Could it possibly be that kid? It is!! Ke Huy Quan is none other than that adorable asian kid in Indiana Jones: The Temple of Doom. Shortround! The one that went around saying “Okie Dokie Dr. Jones” in the cutest imaginable way. Apparently after being everyone’s favorite in two big Spielberg movies (the second one being “Goonies”), he stopped acting. There weren’t any roles, so he transitioned into a being a stunt actor. This is his first speaking role in twenty-five years. And he kicks ass! Who knew? Look, If Ke Huy Quan was wondering whether the world remembers him with fondness, my God, we do. He is incredible in this movie. What a comeback.

Beneath all the action and practical effects is a story with true heart. In a way, this movie is a mirror to another great movie that came out this year, Pixar’s “Turning Red”. That movie was about a Chinese-Canadian daughter with a tiger mother. “Everything, Everywhere, All at Once” is about a Chinese-American mother with a daughter who is having a crisis of nihilism. How Evelyn Wang deals with her daughter’s depression, depends a lot on how she feels about her life, her business and her marriage turned out. The movie has something very specific to say about this. It definitely has a point of view, which at one point is expressed in one of the multiverses wherein reality is a Wong Kar Wai movie.

When one great movie comes out, its a great movie. When two great movies seemingly from the same area of people, you’ve got a cultural moment. What is ironic, is that I don’t think the government in China would approve of either of these movies and especially not “Everything, Everywhere, All at Once.” The communists would disapprove of the effete men, the crude humor, and, above all, the idea that life could be any different (or better) than what it already is.

The Northman (5/5 Stars)

 

If there ever was a movie that I hoped would make its money back and a whole lot more, it would be "The Northman". This is writer/director Robert Eggers' first medium sized budget movie. His previous movies, "The Witch" and "The Lighthouse" were small independent films. What made these movies special was the attention Robert Eggers paid to historical detail. In particular the dialogue stood out. "The Witch" took place in 17th Century Puritan New England. "The Lighthouse" took place on some non-descript 18th century British Isle. Robert Eggers not only took the time and study to unearth the way people back then would talk, but he also had enough faith in his audience to grasp all the temporally foreign words and phrases. The movies are insular and specific, they feel like you have been fully immersed in another place and time. This generally makes a good movie but almost never one that makes a lot of money. So when I heard that a studio had given Eggers a lot of movie with understanding that this would be an Eggers film, not the latest installment of a franchise, I knew that with would be a potential cinematic moment. And it is. "The Northman" is the most unique action blockbuster since "Mad Max: Fury Road". You haven't seen anything quite like it.

Or maybe you have a dozen times. There is plenty of originality in the movie: the culture and lore of Vikings is explored in depth in all its pre-Christian savagery and weirdness. but the plot should be instantly recognizable and for good reason. The story being adapted is the medieval Viking saga of Amleth, a prince whose father kings is murdered by his uncle who then marries his mother. Yes, this is the same saga that William Shakespeare adapted and modernized (in the year 1600) for his stage play Hamlet. It is well that the plot should be familiar because almost nothing else is likely to be recognizable. The Vikings were the white man's last gasp of tribal barbarity before Christianity fully covered the continent and made its inhabitants, in ideal if not in deed, a loving people. For those white people interested in the triumph of the will, it is fitting that they would look to the Vikings for inspiration. Their culture is not for the faint of heart. Having said that, I believe we can all understand the basic instinct for a prince to avenge the death of his father.

There is a level of energy about this movie that is on some level of badass. We get to witness a Vikign coming of age ritual wherein Young Amleth joins his father King Aurvandil War-Raven (Ethan Hawke, doing well) and the town shaman (Willem Dafoe) in some Viking version of a Native American sweat lodge. We get to witness the pre-battle fireside rituals of the berserkers in which they obtain their trancelike rage. We get to witness an actual Berserker raid in which unarmored Nordic men terrorize and butcher a hapless Rus village. We get to witness a Viking proto sport called Knattleikr (translates as "ball game") in which men with clubs try to hit a pole with a ball while also hitting each other until one is left standing. We get to watch a swordfight in a Volcano. This is exhilarating stuff, and amazingly, historically accurate.

 Amleth is played by Alexader Skarsgaard, a very tall and muscular Nordic actor. I got some real Arnold Schwarzenegger in Conan the Barbarian vibes from him. The love interest of Amleth is Olga, a slave from the Rus village he attacked. She is a cunning survivor played by Anya Taylor-Joy. Eggers fans will remember her from The Witch. She has a face and presence that belongs in movies about the distant past. Other familiar faces show up: there is Willem Dafoe from The Lighthouse and Ralph Ineson and Kate Dickie is minor roles. An actor new to Eggers and exceptionally suited to his type of material is Nicole Kidman who plays Amleth's Queen Mother. There is a subtext in Hamlet that is hinted at in some adaptations. That subtext is brought out in full in The Northman in an exceptional scene that twists the story right round.

It is disheartening that "The Northman" had an underwhelming record at the box office. Hopefully the VOD marketplace will make up for it. I very much want artists like Robert Eggers to be successful, not just for their sake, but for other artists like them. It is hard to make movies about the distant past. If these movies are made at all, there seems to be this overwhelming urge to twist the motivations of the characters in some inauthentic way so that it will not offend modern sensibilities. Viking culture is not so different from other pre-Christian cultures. In particular, I believe it has much similarity with polynesian culture. Both peoples were seafaring (and thus exceptionally tall people), had warrior classes, and volcanoes. But imagine if you wanted to make a movie like "The Northman" about a non-white group of people. I'm not sure it would be allowed (Mel Gibson's Apocalypto is the exception that proves the rule). However, if artists like Robert Eggers made money, I don't see why there couldn't also be an artist who has an idea for a badass movie about the Maori. I would love to see that. Right now, all we have is Disney's Moana. 

OSCARS 2022

I had a few things to say about the 2022 Oscars, although at this point, most of it has already been said a thousand times over. So I won't say anything about Will Smith and make a general complaint about something else entirely.

I have a big problem with the choice of "CODA" as Best Picture. It is not a problem with the movie. I have no opinion of the movie. I have not seen it. That is my complaint. The movie is hard to see. CODA exists entirely on Apple+ TV. It was never in any theaters and you cannot rent it on DVD, on YouTube, on Amazon, or anywhere else. There is only one place to see it, and you need a annual Apple+ subscription.

Way way back in the day, the Academy had this rule that all movies in contention for the Oscars needed a theatrical run. This theatrical run was limited but ostensibly, it meant that if you were looking for a movie, you could see it (if you lived in NYC or LA). If you didn't live in NYC or LA, at the least you could wait for the VHS/DVD release and see the movie. Those days are over and not coming back. I'm not saying we need to bring back that particular rule, but the idea behind the rule was sound: that is a celebrated movie should be able to be seen. You should be able to buy a ticket to or rent the thing. There needs to be some new rule that mandates all Oscar nominees should be available somewhere other than a closed streaming subscription service. If the Oscars are good for anything, it is to give suggestions to the audience as to what people who make movies think are good movies to see. If the movies cannot be seen, the Oscars truly are pointless, a vapid stew of pretension where rich and beautiful people complain about inequality in designer dresses. 

Here are my picks for 2022. The best that can be said about 2022 is that it was a better year than 2021, which was the worst ever. I have excised the categories for Animated film and Foreign Language film, perhaps permanently as they seem to be kids' table categories, and have added a category for Stunt Direction, an integral part of many movies which has been overlooked for way too long of a time. 

Best Adapted Screenplay

Dune

Drive My Car

The Green Knight

House of Gucci

The Power of the Dog

Best Original Screenplay

The French Dispatch

A Hero

Licorice Pizza

Midnight Mass

Red Rocket

Best Production Design

Dune

The French Dispatch

The Green Knight

Spencer

The Tragedy of Macbeth

Best Costume Design

Dune

House of Gucci

Last Night in Soho

Nightmare Alley

Spencer

Best Makeup and Hairstyling

Dune

The Eyes of Tammy Faye

The House of Gucci

The Green Knight

The Suicide Squad

Best Supporting Actress

Brenda Deiss - Red Rocket

Kirsten Dunst - The Power of the Dog

Vera Farmiga - The Many Saints of Newark

Meryl Streep - Don't Look Up

Marisa Tomei - Spider-Man: No Way home

Best Supporting Actor

Matt Damon - The Last Duel

David Dastmalchian - The Suicide Squad

Ethan Darbone - Red Rocket

Hamish Linklater - Midnight Mass

Jeffrey Wright - The French Dispatch

Best Actress

Jessica Chastain - The Eyes of Tammy Faye

Lady Gaga - House of Gucci

Alana Haim - Licorice Pizza

Frances McDormand - The Tragedy of MacBeth

Best Actor

Nicolas Cage - Pig

Benedict Cumberbatch - The Power of the Dog

Adam Driver - House of Gucci

Simon Rex - Red Rocket

Denzel Washington - The Tragedy of Macbeth

Best Use of a Song in a Movie

“Nearer My God to Thee” – Midnight Mass

“The Battle Hymn of the Republic” – The Eyes of Tammy Faye

“In the Heights” – In the Heights

“L’Ultima Volta” – The French Dispatch

Gym Dance “Mambo” - West Side Story

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9xtkGKeccLI

Best Use of Cultural Appropriation

The Green Knight – Dev Patel

Midnight Mass – Catholicism and Vampires

The French Dispatch – The French Dispatch of the Kansas Evening Sun

Licorice Pizza – waterbeds, sushi bars, licorice pizza, L.A., the movies, Haim, hustlers

West Side Story – “America”

Best Visual Effects

Black Widow

The Suicide Squad

No Time to Die

Dune

Spider-Man: No Way Home

Best Stunt Direction

Black Widow

The Suicide Squad

No Time to Die

Dune

Red Notice

Best Film Editing

No Time to Die

Dune

The French Dispatch

The Power of the Dog

Red Rocket

Best Sound

Dune

No Time to Die

The Power of the Dog

The Green Knight

West Side Story

Best Cinematography

The Tragedy of Macbeth

Red Rocket

The Power of the Dog

The French Dispatch

The Green Knight

Best Director

The Green Knight – David Lowery

Dune – Denis Villeneuve

The French Dispatch – Wes Anderson

The Power of the Dog – Janet Campion

Red Rocket – Sean Baker

Best Picture

Pig

The Green Knight

Midnight Mass

Dune

The French Dispatch

The Power of the Dog

Licorice Pizza

Red Rocket

The Tragedy of Macbeth

A Hero

Bad Luck Banging or Loony Porn (3/5 Stars)

 

 A few years ago (2019) Romania produced a documentary called Collective that was nominated for two Oscars, for best International Feature Film and Best Documentary Feature. It was one of those documentaries that does not find its greatness in art but in journalism. It chronicled a story of corruption on an absurd level. A fire broke out in a nightclub in Bucharest instantly killing twenty-seven people and hospitalizing 180 more with severe burns. Of those 180, 37 inexplicably die in hospital burn wards. It turns out local corruption resulted in hospitals purchasing diluted and/or fake disinfectants. The documentary chronicles the efforts of a reformer who attempts to fix this system against corrupt lobbyists and disinformation propagated by the local media. By the end of the movie, he has been voted out of office and witnesses a man that is legally barred from managing a hospital appointed to replace him. He has a phone conversation with his father who wonders why he is still living in Romania. There is nothing for you here.

“Bad Luck Banging or Loony Porn” is the comedic equivalent of that sober documentary. It chronicles a humiliating day in the life of Emi (Katia Pascariu), a teacher at a private high school who faces removal once a sex tape she made with her husband leaks on the internet. It is unclear exactly how the video got there, either her husband uploaded it or a computer repair man did it, but it is out there now and every time she succeeds in getting it removed on one website, it keeps popping up somewhere else. Meanwhile, there is a COVID-19 pandemic gripping the country that is pervasive in every scene. What do I mean by that? Well, everyone in the movie wears masks and socially distances in every scene. This movie leans into the pandemic like no other movie has so far in this new time. It adds levels of absurdity and frustration onto every scene. If younger generations ever ask not what happened in 2020-2021, but how it felt to live in 2020-2021, this would be perfect movie to show them.

The movie is divided into three parts. The first part involves Emi walking around town, doing errands on her way to parent-teacher conference. She walks past incompetent city administration, rude people, and the general annoyances of living. The second part involves a slide show dictionary of Romanian words. The writer director Radu Jude presents words like “Justice” or “Peace” or something like that and shows the hypocrisy of the world as a demonstration of what those words mean. It is an exercise in cynicism on the level of Jonathan Swift or Kurt Vonnegut. These two parts are disposable. The third part is indispensable.

The third part is the parent-teacher conference. It takes place in a courtyard with all participants wearing face masks and in folding chairs six feet distanced between each other. They all watch the porn video (because not everyone has seen it yet and they need to know what they are discussing) before the enter into the discussion as to whether Emi should be fired. The arguments for and against are both familiar and ridiculous, go on dumb tangents via clueless participants like all public assemblies do, and is equal parts infuriating and hilarious. One can write a thesis on what all these points of view are really about. Given that Emi was having sex with her husband and did not distribute the video herself, it is hard to say what moral boundary she crossed. The argument that makes the most sense against Emi is that the school is supposed to be prestigious and the video is humiliating, so to keep Emi at the school is to share in the humiliation. That is, the parents want their kids to rise in society and don’t want Emi unduly harming that rise. In her defense, Emi has much to say about education and whether she is a competent educator, but whether she is a good teacher seems to be besides the point to these parents. Their kids are here at this expensive school to make connections and get ahead, not to learn things. Katia Pascariu is particularly good at evoking a sense of her soul deadening as she is forced to listen to this bullshit, not the easiest thing to do in a pandemic when half of your face is masked and there is nothing you can use but your eyes. Life may be shit in Romania, but hey, at least the arts are flourishing.