(Netflix) I’m not going to say that THE WOMAN IN THE WINDOW is good, and I’m definitely going to ignore the author of the source material — I haven’t read the original novel and have no plans to do so, but if you need some backstory, here you go: https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2019/02/11/a-suspense-novelists-trail-of-deceptions — and I can certainly see why Tracy Letts was drawn to it. If you’ve seen (previously recommended) BUG, you know how entranced he is by writing about Hitchcockian women, plus it allowed him to indulge his love for classic Hollywood films. (The film runs through the gamut of Hitchcock’s many suspense films and thrillers, but especially the previously recommended THE LODGER and, naturally, REAR WINDOW.)
Allegedly, it got away from him, but it does seem like the film started off with good intent. While the Brooklyn townhouse seems wildly unrealistic as an urban space, I can’t help but marvel at the use of color, space, and general production design. The cast is tremendous, and it’s well-paced, at least until the final act.
Again, I don’t want to oversell this film. Letts has gone on the record saying that adapting it was an extremely unpleasant experience due to the litany of studio notes, and then there were endless rewrites and then reshoots, and I can’t wait for the inevitable oral history of the production that’ll come about in five years or so. That said, if you can overlook the reveal, ending, and epilogue, it’s far more interesting than say, THE GIRL ON THE TRAIN.
(DVD/BR/YT) ELECTRIC DREAMS is an odd high-concept romantic rivalry/surveillance thriller about architect Miles (Lenny von Dohlen, best known as the agoraphobic florist from TWIN PEAKS), his computer, cellist Madeline (Virginia Madsen), and the love triangle they inhabit, one with shades of CYRANO DE BERGERAC.
Given that I was both a computer nerd and practicing cellist as a youth, I’ve seen this film more than a few times over the years. Yes, its portrayal for what a mid-1980s computer was capable of doing was wildly overblown, but it had a fantastic soundtrack — as you would expect as it’s courtesy of Giorgio Moroder — and was extraordinarily shot. It has a number of lush scenes that highlight the difference between video and film, as well as a more than a few fantastically composed visual vignettes, and Madsen is absolutely charming as Madeline. It certainly was one of the first narrative films that ‘spoke’ to me, that made me feel seen, given that it was both about computers and a cellist.
The film features a musical number where Madeline warms up by playing Bach’s Minuet in G Major (what the ELECTRIC DREAMS soundtrack dubs as the ‘Mad Minuet’), which was one of my warm-ups when I was a young cellist so I can’t help but love it, but I also adore how long and -fun- the scene is. I was never a brilliant cellist — although I was good enough to be in a quartet to play for then-Vermont governor Howard Dean — but when I got on a roll, when I was in the zone, it felt just as exuberant and gleeful. You can view the number below:
ELECTRIC DREAMS has been unavailable in the U.S. for some time now, but there was a recent UK Blu-Ray release via Second Sight. There’s also a copy floating around YouTube that I may have already ‘accidentally’ linked to. (Shh, don’t tell!)
“Hm. Very smart, but weird.”
P.S. There’s a great post-mortem about the film available on YouTube. And, for what it’s worth, there are two scenes I remember vividly from watching it as a youth: the motherboard being washed out, and Madeline’s cello being crushed in the elevator. Madsen’s method time was worth it.
(VOD) I am a sucker for films that put fragile masculinity on display, and not only does this film have it in spades, but you have Gene Hackman and Al Pacino doing all of the leg work! Long story short: Hackman is a repeat violent offender who randomly meets Pacino, a jokey people-pleaser, on the road. They become ill-suited partners trying to work towards their specific endpoints: Hackman wants to set up a car wash in Minneapolis. Pacino wants to indulge him, but first wants to deliver a lamp to his estranged son. Matters escalate.
SCARECROW was directed by Jerry Schatzberg, who previously helmed an adaptation of THE PANIC IN NEEDLE PARK (the screenplay happened to co-written by Joan Didion), and it was a breakout role for Pacino. With SCARECROW, Pacino brings a vulnerability and heart to his role that he rarely exudes. Hackman is a surprisingly nasty piece of work, steamrolling through scenes, but you can sense far more behind his actions than simply being a vicious bastard.
(HBO MAX/VOD)? I recently rewatched WHEN HARRY MET SALLY with my wife and remarked about how modern rom-coms simply don’t talk about sex. If they do, it’s often bawdy and meant for laughs as opposed to sincerity.
FRIENDS WITH KIDS is very much in the WHEN HARRY MET SALLY mould, as it’s about two friends who platonically love each other: Jason Fryman (Adam Scott, toeing the line between asshole and sweet guy) and Julie Keller (Jennifer Westfeldt, who wrote/directed it, but — based on your age — is probably best known as Pauline on YOUNGER or for appearing in and co-writing the cult classic KISSING JESSICA STEIN*). Neither of them are getting any younger and both want a child, but they’ve seen their friends who have had children flounder in their marriages. Consequently, they decide to have a child and ‘split the cost down the middle’ and pursue separate relationships. They assume it’ll be a win/win.
Despite FRIENDS WITH KIDS being rather overstuffed with abrasive personas — it’s brilliantly cast with folks like: Jon Hamm, Kristen Wiig, Chris O’Dowd, Maya Rudolph, Megan Fox, -and- Kelly Bishop — I ultimately found it winsome solely on the merits of Scott and Westfeldt. Your mileage may vary, of course, as it’s extremely heteronormative, and definitely an affluent white person film, but under all of that is a refreshingly adult take on friendship and romance.
Oh, and it’s rather audacious when it comes to letting time lapse, as it effortlessly hopscotches across months, even years, to cut to the quick regarding how these friends’ relationships change.
It stumbles a bit crossing the finish line, but in a world that’s succumbed to mostly-forgettable Hallmark or Netflix romantic fare — nothing wrong with ‘em, I enjoy those breezy trifles from time to time! — it’s a substantial examination of relationships.
See https://www.autostraddle.com/kissing-jessica-stein-is-a-classic-of-queer-jewish-anxiety/ and http://gomag.com/article/millennial-queer-girl-reviews-kissing-jessica-stein/
(Criterion/VOD) 444 days. That’s how long it had been since I’d been in a theater. I’m finally fully vaccinated, so yesterday I rode the bus for the first time in almost as long to visit the Music Box Theatre to see the only film I could catch there: Haifaa Al-Mansour’s THE PEFECT CANDIDATE. Thanks to the Chicago Transportation Authority, I arrived late. The lobby was empty, apart from one employee who glanced at the ticket on my phone and instructed me to leave on my mask at all times during the film.
I walked into the theater which, under normal conditions, can house over a thousand people. I stumbled through the darkness, trying to seek out my favorite seat, only to find it roped off to enforce proper social distancing. I found the closest seat with some leg space and settled in, trying to catch up with the film.
A few minutes later my eyes had adjusted, and I realized I was the sole person there.
Granted, this was a mid-afternoon screening of a two-year-old feminist Saudi Arabian film (just now receiving a U.S. release), but still. This was the first time I’d ever been the lone viewer for a Music Box screening, much less for a film playing in the main theater. It’s a miracle they’re still operating, but I’m glad they are.
If you aren’t familiar with Haifaa Al-Mansour, she’s often cited as ‘Saudi Arabia’s first female filmmaker’. WADJDA (2012) was her breakthrough film, but she’s also helmed American films such as MARY SHELLEY (2017) and NAPPILY EVER AFTER (2018). THE PERFECT CANDIDATE is the first film of hers I’ve seen, and I’m quite excited to dive into her back-catalog.
THE PERFECT CANDIDATE is about a woman doctor in a small Saudi Arabian town, Maryam, who lives with her father — a recent widow and musician — and her two sisters, and she aspires for more. The street leading to the hospital she works at isn’t paved and is a consistent mess — people are constantly being wheeled through mud — and incoming patients often outright refuse her, even if they require emergency care, solely because she’s a woman.
Due to a confluence of religious, bureaucratic, and patriarchal issues, she’s unable to attend a medical conference in Dubai, which she’d hoped would serve as a way to work her way into a better position, and due to similar religious, bureaucratic, and patriarchal issues, she ends up inadvertently applying to run for election to govern the town.
What follows is a relatively straight-forward, definitely disheartening, activist film that completely hammers home the gender inequality in Saudi Arabia while still being a thoughtful portrait of a family trying to repair themselves after the sudden death of their mother. Al-Mansour inserts a number of deft character touches, such as Maryam’s brand-new car, which she retains the plastic on the seats, but the car’s wheel wells are covered in mud because of the shoddy road. The sister dynamics are especially nuanced, with the younger sister outright rejecting her older sister’s attempts to make a difference, and the older sister being a savvy, confident, semi-supportive entrepreneur working within ‘the system’.
Was this film the one I imagined would be my inaugural post-vaccinated filmgoing experience? No, but I’m glad it was. It represents everything I’ve missed about cinema in the pandemic: the ability to walk blindly into a tale of another space and then leave the theater feeling altered.
(kanopy/Prime) I’d argue that THE LAST BLACK MAN IN SAN FRANCISCO has one of the best opening scenes in the last five, maybe ten years? It’s brilliantly executed: it tells you everything you need to know about the world, the primary characters drawn with so little dialogue, and does it so artfully and succinctly:
Even if the film was just this short scene, I’d still be raving about it. I can’t get enough of Adam Newport-Berra’s visuals or Emile Mosseri’s Michael Nyman-esque score.
However, THE LAST BLACK MAN IN SAN FRANCISCO is far more than its opening. I -love- this film. It intersects with a lot, but the male friendship portrayed here is something rare. It’s also about an infatuation with a house, the history of a building, and the complex history of a city.* It’s also about exploitation, gentrification, modern classism, economic race disparity, the obligations of those who come into a city, and homeownership all dovetailing regarding a space with pre-existing history. It’s dense, but it never overwhelms you. It’s an astounding work, an intimate tale that takes on a larger context.
* If you want to read about the origins of film and San Francisco in one big gulp, I highly suggest THE INVENTOR AND THE TYCOON, which is the story of early photographer Eadweard Muybridge and his railroad tycoon backer Leland Stanford. (Yes, Stanford University is named after him.) I guarantee you that it’s far more interesting and intriguing and ruthless than you’d suspect. https://www.penguinrandomhouse.com/books/7965/the-inventor-and-the-tycoon-by-edward-ball/
(Criterion/HBO MAX/VOD) In A WOMAN UNDER THE INFLUENCE, Peter Falk is Nick Longhetti, a construction foreman married to Mabel (Gena Rowlands, who was married to Cassavettes until he died in 1989) and they have three young children as well as a litany of family and friends that constantly drop by, barely giving Nick or Mabel a moment of peace. While this would be difficult for any couple, it’s complicated by the fact that Rowlands is incredibly intense woman, and often interacts with people in socially unacceptable ways. Nick describes her as “unusual, not crazy”.
What unfolds is a story of the two of them trying to cope with Mabel’s behavior, Nick’s detachment and frustration, and eventually Mabel’s breakdown. It’s a stunning depiction of a couple, one enriched by Rowlands’ absolutely astounding performance. She completely inhabits the role, bringing to life a character unlike one I’ve ever seen. It’s a nervy, nuanced take on a character that could otherwise come across as cartoonish. Rowlands was nominated for a Best Actress award for her role, but lost to Ellen Burstyn for the also-exceptional ALICE DOESN’T LIVE HERE ANYMORE. (I do prefer Rowlands’ performance, but they’re both great.)
It’s worth noting that Cassavettes never meant for Mabel to be considered ‘crazy’ — his words, not mine — but that she’s “frustrated beyond belief. More than being crazy, I think she’s just socially inept.” He also pulled from his own personal experience and his relationships, which seems obvious given how close everyone involved in this project are. To callback to my write-up regarding PLEASE STAND BY, this is the difference between writing a puzzle box story about someone with a neurological disorder, and writing an intimate tale about coping with people’s very human and divergent idiosyncrasies.
Just one more thing: COLUMBO fans will almost certainly be surprised to hear Falk whistling ‘This Old Man’, which was a tune that Falk turned into a Columbo affectation with the iconic episode -Any Old Port in a Storm-, which pre-dates A WOMAN UNDER THE INFLUENCE. Falk just always liked to hum or whistle it.
(Hulu/kanopy/VOD)? Every film nerd I’ve known has their favorite seat. I certainly do: I prefer middle aisle as I have long legs and prefer not to be tightly compacted for ~two hours, and I enjoy a slightly more distanced view of the screen, as opposed to having the screen fully fill my vision.
However, sometimes — especially with film fests — you aren’t going to score your favorite spot. Sometimes you’ll get the worst seat in the house. My wife and I certainly did when we nabbed stand-by tickets for a screening of MELANCHOLIA during the 2011 Chicago International Film Festival.
If you aren’t familiar with MELANCHOLIA, it’s Lars Von Trier’s meditation on depression and, while I run hot-and-cold on von Trier (especially regarding his on-set approach to filmmaking), MELANCHOLIA is certainly one of his more palatable films and features fantastic performances all around, but especially from Kirsten Dunst. It’s also arguably one of the most visually jaw-dropping films from von Trier; there’s a scale and scope and painterly look to MELANCHOLIA that’s absent from the majority of his other works. (One exception might be the psychodrama horror of ANTI-CHRIST.) While it’s absolutely gorgeous, this is a film that was not meant to be viewed in an offset front row seat which, surprise, was what our stand-by tickets garnered us.
You’re left without any distance from the mind-numbing depression and cosmic confrontation. It hammers itself into your head; you have nowhere to run. I’m sure von Trier would smirk if he read this, but it turns the film into something absolutely appropriately overwhelming and suffocating, but a perspective on the film that I would not recommend. Keep with the middle row or watch it at home and keep your distance, or it will mess with you even more than it’s intended to.
(hoopla/kanopy/VOD) I’ll preface this by saying this isn’t exactly a recommendation. I found merit with the film and ultimately enjoyed it, but it is not a perfect work and is, perhaps, inherently exploitative.
PLEASE STAND BY is the story of a young autistic woman, Wendy (Dakota Fanning), who has been placed in Toni Collette’s home for autistic individuals by her older sister Audrey (Alice Eve), who has recently had a kid and self-proclaims that she doesn’t have the time to babysit Wendy as well.
Wendy, who has always been a huge STAR TREK nerd, sorts this out by writing a four-hundred some-odd page STAR TREK screenplay involving the complicated relationship between Spock and Kirk — Spock representing herself, Kirk representing her sister — for a $100,000 competition to celebrate STAR TREK’s 50th anniversary. Shortly after Wendy completes the absurdly long script, she realizes there’s not enough time to mail it, so she has to go on a journey to deliver it by hand.
A personal note: when I was a kid, I -loved- STAR TREK, and I particularly identified with Spock because he struggled with similar emotional issues that I grappled with. So, to see Wendy do the same warmed my heart, even if Spock is one of the easiest autistic analogues.
PLEASE STAND BY mirrors another relatively recent work centered around an autistic protagonist, Mark Haddon’s THE CURIOUS INCIDENT OF THE DOG IN THE NIGHT-TIME: autistic person is mostly sheltered, has to venture out in the world, and their life becomes a living hell. It, like CURIOUS INCIDENT, was also written by a dude that found the concept of an autistic character ‘interesting’ and ‘challenging’, and they decided they were the ones to tell this story. In the case of PLEASE STAND BY, writer Michael Golamco was inspired by the New York Times article ‘What Autistic Girls Are Made Of’ to write a one-act stageplay, and then turn that into PLEASE STAND BY. (Similarly, CURIOUS INCIDENT started as a novel, then became a Tony award winning musical.)
CURIOUS INCIDENT frustrated me because of how little research Haddon did. He wanted to tell the tale that he envisioned, details be damned. PLEASE STAND BY frustrates me because it’s a work extolling the creative nature of those with autism, but it’s written, directed, and performed by neurotypicals. It feels inherently disingenuous, despite the amount of research and experts they enlisted.
That said, it’s still an entertaining film, with fantastic performances all around, and it seems to have been well-received by the autistic community, especially since it is a positive portrayal of an autistic woman. Representation matters, but I would rather that it wasn’t via the writerly curiosity of a neurotypical man, regardless of how well-wishing his intents were.
(HBO MAX/VOD) Let’s collectively ignore the fact that sex offender Jeffrey Jones (the titular Dad) is in this — something all DEADWOOD fans have to do — and focus on the credited writers: Chris Matheson and Ed Solomon of BILL & TED fame.
Before you get too excited, let me be clear that this sci-fi film is silly and dumb and campy and cheap and not even close to their best work; Solomon has mostly disowned it, and your tolerance for it will definitely depend on your tolerance for Jon Lovitz. Lovitz plays Emperor Tod Spengo, ruler of a world full of idiots, who is plotting to destroy Earth because of reasons, falls in lust with Marge, a.k.a. Mom, right before pulling the trigger blow up Earth and decides to abduct her to keep as his own.
It’s also occasionally smart and features some great slapstick bits, such as a bit with a light grenade that predates THE SIMPSONS’ rake bit, an Errol Flynn Robin Hood riff near the end, and some quality callbacks. It also has surprisingly good puppet and animatronic work, although at the expense of the rest of the production and costume design budget, most of which wouldn’t look out of place on a MYSTERY SCIENCE THEATER 3000 set. That said, that’s part of the film’s charm.
It’s mostly good-natured stupid fun and sometimes that’s what you want to watch while working on a project at three in the morning. Although it’s worth noting that yeah, when Lovitz finally ropes Marge to their planet, he administers a ‘love shot’, so there’s still a pretty big creep factor you should be aware of.
