Twin film review: Immaculate and The First Omen

2024 ‧ Religious Horror ‧ 89m (Immaculate) and 119m (The First Omen)

This review contains light spoilers for The Last Omen.

Twin films happen occasionally. Two films with similar plots or subject matter are released, usually within a year of each other. Some famous examples are Deep Impact and Armageddon; recently Elvis and Priscilla; and on the podcast Dr. Strangelove and Fail Safe were discussed. It is rare though for both films to be so closely released that one could double-feature them in the same multiplex. Such is the case with Michael Mohan’s Immaculate and Arkasha Stevenson's The First Omen.

The twinning aspect of both films can be simply stated as: an American nun travels to Italy and through a church-driven conspiracy, must deal with an unwanted pregnancy. There are some differences, of course. Immaculate takes place in the present day, whereas The Last Omen is in the early 1970s. It needs to align with the 1976 Richard Donner film it prequels, after all.

Immaculate is an independent production with a smaller scale which aids a more gothic tone. Sister Cecilia, played by Sydney Sweeney, has come to a convent where elder nuns spend their last days. The convent is cloistered away in an old building with relics, dark corridors, and secret rooms. Soon Cecilia becomes “immaculately” pregnant, much to the surprise and the joy of everyone there. Sydney Sweeney had apparently been wanting to do this project since 2014, and her performance is quite harrowing. She does an excellent job of conveying the body horror of pregnancy, especially when juxtaposition to the others. Mohan’s director is tight and moody.

The Last Omen is a studio-backed IP connected work, so the scale is a little larger. There is money for scenes of student riots and pyrotechnic effects. There’s more CGI and also Bill Nighy, in a marquee-value only role. Such casting is in-keeping with The Omen franchise. Sister Margaret, played by Nell Tiger Free, arrives in Rome to help at an orphanage. Her childhood priest, Nighy, got her to the position. She learns her way around the orphanage and soon becomes connected with a teenage orphan named Carlita. In-keeping with the franchise, strange things start happening and Margaret starts having hallucinations. Soon she becomes privy to a plan to bring about the birth of the Anti-Christ. Nell Tiger Free’s performance is engrossing and Stevenson’s direction is haunting, particularly the hallucinations.

Both films have intriguing stories, good performances, direction, and mood. One of the places Immaculate excels is runtime. At 89 minutes, it is very lean and impactful. The two-hour runtime for The First Omen feels a little excessive, especially because of the screentime for certain elements that only seem to be for franchise continuity’s sake. We didn’t really need an “It’s all for you” scene again. One wonders what this could have been like if all connections to the Donner film were more muted. Or if instead of The First Omen it was called Sister Margaret and we didn’t get any clues about an Omen connection until Gregory Peck’s picture shows up at the end. Such secrecy is basically impossible today, and would only help the second week box office and not the all-important first.

These two films also share something in common with two other twin films from 2020, the drama Never, Rarely, Sometimes, Always, and the comedy Unpregnant. Both of those are also about unwanted pregnancies. In those films, both protagonists need to cross state lines to find an abortion clinic. These two films and their horror counterparts show what a difference 4 years can make. Horror is often a reflection of modern societal fears, and these post-Dobbs decision films showcase those fears, albeit in not particularly subtle ways. Not exactly a recommended quadruple feature, but it is interesting to see how very real concerns can permeate into film. Unpregnant and Never, Rarely, Sometimes, Always showed how difficult things were before, and The First Omen and Immaculate show how it is now. Both horror films are clearly influenced by the pre-Roe v. Wade film, Rosemary’s Baby. Abortion isn’t really an option for either protagonist.

Both The First Omen and Immaculate are entertaining religious horror and are more layered than one might think. If one is edges out over the other, it is Immaculate. It has a better use of its runtime, and has a more satisfying ending. The First Omen’s biggest problem is that it needs to be an Omen movie and not its own thing. Such is the plight of prequels, and thus to the success of Immaculate.

Grades:

Immaculate B-

The First Omen C+

~Andrew

Ghostbusters: Frozen Empire and a life-long fan’s internal struggle

2024 ‧ Supernatural Comedy ‧ 115m

The Spengler family return to New York City in a new installment of the Ghostbusters franchise. The remaining members of the original team help out as a new threat comes to the big apple.

 The Spenglers have set up shop busting ghosts in the 3 years since the events of Ghostbusters: Afterlife. After a lot of collateral damage occurs during a routine bust, Mayor Walter Peck threatens to shut them down. Phoebe, a minor at fifteen, is sidelined from the business until she is old enough. She spends time at Ray Stanz’s occult bookstore with her friend Podcast. Ray has started a video series where people bring in their potentially haunted objects and he runs a test to see if it is haunted or not. A Haunted Antiques Roadshow if you will. One day a man comes in with an orb whose spectral presence is off the charts. It is taken to Winton’s lab for further study. It is determined to be imprisoning a apocalyptic ghost wishes to take over the world via fear and freezing. Inevitably it gets out and once again something strange indeed is in the neighborhood and who you gonna call?

This entry has more laughs than Afterlife. The ghosts are creepier, though not nightmare inducing. McKenna Grace is basically the lead again, and she makes Phoebe a fun and compelling character. Dan Aykroyd is probably the heart of the film. You can tell he relishes playing Ray Stanz, even if he isn’t the one in the writer’s chair. Like Stallone in the Creed movies, he is eager to foster and guide the next generation. Other alumni show up as well, like in Afterlife. Ernie Hudson is getting more to do here, which is nice to see. Kumail Nanjiani is quite funny as the orb owner who gets swept up in it all. Paul Rudd does what is expected of him.

Pun intended, but some will find the pacing to be glacial. Though understandable, it is also fun to “hang out” with these characters. Both the old and the new. There are probably too many characters though and it doesn’t quite gel to a real ensemble. Finn Wolfhard and Carrie Coon feel like they are missing from the action often. Pacing tastes aside, the only real issues Froze Empire stem from trying too hard to be the 1984 film. The nostalgia feels a little less weaponized than the last entry, but still overdone. If Afterlife was a 9 on the overly nostalgic scale, Frozen Empire is 7.5. The mini-pufts did not need to return. Nor did the library ghost. The score also could stop being recycled so much.

Frozen Empire is an enjoyable entry for the lamentably contentious franchise. There are laughs and ghosts are busted. And that is probably enough.

Grade: C+/B-

It is difficult for me to be objective when it comes to Ghostbusters. The original 1984 film is my favorite movie. I cannot tell you how many times I have seen it. I had the toys, I watched the cartoon religiously, I have been to Hook & Ladder 8 more than once, and I once saw a print of the original in the cinema twice in one day. I smuggled in twinkies for the second show. In many ways Ghostbusters is my Star Wars.

The ensuing years since Ghostbusters II were not the best for fans. There was a cartoon revival in the 90s, but that was about it. Merchandise would wax and wane. In 2016, the remake happened. I had fun, ghosts were busted, and it was funny enough for me. Though I was a little let down with the movie, I had already ascribed myself to that expectation when Harold Ramis died. Like Ghostbusters II taught us, it was never going to have the magic, so the new cast seemed a fair idea. However, a vocal collection of fans were very unhappy. To say the least. That vocal contengency, though not all fans, hurt the franchise for me. So when the news of Afterlife came about and it was going to be a GB II sequel, I was skeptical. It felt like those fans were being kowtowed to and that bothered me. Nonetheless, I was going to see the next film.

When I walked out of Afterlife I had a bad taste in my mouth. The use of recycled concepts, tropes, and jokes had the film rightfully and derisively compared to The Force Awakens. The villain was Gozer again, and a similar plot happens, just this time in Oklahoma. What upset me the most was the copy/pasting of the score from ’84 film. And perhaps the most disappointing was that Afterlife wasn’t that particularly funny. Not that they didn’t have funny moments, it was just few comparably from previous GB movies, including the remake. At risk of spoilers, I’ll simply say the ending felt exploitative. I know they did the work to make it feel less so, but I found myself thinking of the adage: “Just because you can, doesn’t mean you should.” I did like the new characters though, so much so that bringing in the old Ghostbusters felt more obligatory than necessary. Annie Potts as Janine probably could have been enough. So when I heard that we were going to have a new one, and this time it would be in New York, I was cautiously pessimistic. Pretty sure I was going to be more annoyed than entertained, but I am a die hard fan.

That mindset is probably the saving grace for this entry. Looking at other critiques, that are not wrong, I find myself not as bothered by them. I went in just wanting a funny flick where ghosts are busted, and I got that. It isn’t amazing, but I didn’t expect it. Unlike Afterlife, I find myself wanting to watch it again soon. The highest compliment I can give Frozen Empire, and this really is high praise, is that it made me a little more okay with being a Ghostbusters fan again.

~Andrew

2024 Oscar Nominated Shorts

The short films nominated each year are typically a great way to learn about up-and-coming filmmakers. Additionally, established artists can experiment and expand their craft. The short form nominees can be an interesting glimpse into film innovation. Here is a rundown of this year’s nominated shorts.

Animated Shorts

Our Uniform

Our Uniform

From Iran, a woman reminisces about her school uniform and other gender related issues in Tehran. It is mostly presented as drawings on clothing. Innovative, informative, and quite real. Of the animated nominees, this is probably the best and most deserving to win. Grade: A-

Letter to a Pig

From France and Israel, a holocaust survivor tells a classroom of children about a time a pig saved his life while fleeing Nazis. One of the children has a particularly artful dream about the story and humanity in general. The art is a mixture of realistic and abstract. Fascinating, but might be a little muddled in the dream sequence. Grade: B+

Pachyderm

From France, a woman recalls a summer visit to her grandparents. It is darker than it sounds, but at the same time not unexpected. The animation is fairly traditional. Grade: C

Ninety-Five Senses

The filmmakers behind Napoleon Dynamite present the story of a man recollecting upon the end of his life through his senses: touch, taste, etc. Tim Blake Nelson narrates as the man and different animators tackle each sense. This is one of the stronger nominees, though it plays a little folksy. Grade: B

WAR IS OVER! Inspired by the Music of John and Yoko

Two men in opposing sides of a war are playing a game of chess via carrier pigeon. The style is typical 3D CG animation, not unlike Illumination or Pixar, but lacks flair. The story is nice, but the inclusion of the titular song really sinks the short. Grade: C-

Live Action

The Wonderful World of Henry Sugar

The After

After his wife and daughter are murdered, a London corporate worker (David Oyelowo) becomes a ride-share driver to support himself while he mourns. On his daughter’s birthday, he picks up a family whose daughter reminds him of his own. Oyelowo acts extremely well, but ultimately it feels like the first part of a longer film. This is something that seems to happen more often with live action shorts. We are given a snippet and not a fully formed story. Currently on Netflix. Grade: C+

Red, White, And Blue

Faced with an unwanted pregnancy, a single mother (Brittany Snow) must drive nearly 8 hours from Arkansas to Illinois to get an abortion. There’s more to it than that, but it would be difficult to explain without spoilers. Shares a lot in common with Never Rarely Sometimes Always. A line of dialogue near the end falls real flat, and some will find it ham-fisted, but like Never Rarely Sometimes Always this short should be required viewing for all men. Grade: B

Knight of Fortune

From Denmark, a man is having a difficult time viewing his recently deceased wife at the chapel. He meets a man who seems to be having the same issue himself. It’s actually quite funny despite the mournful premise. The short shows an aspect of grief that rarely gets screentime: the weird things we do when we grieve. Grade: B+

You can even watch it here:

Invincible

From Quebec, the film shows 48 hours of the life of Marc, a teenager in a detention center. Marc is a bright boy focused on his freedom. An interesting character study that functions great as a short, but could easily expand without becoming too extraneous. Grade: B+

The Wonderful Story of Henry Sugar

Probably the most entertaining of the nominees, Wes Anderson adapts Roald Dahl again with a star-studded cast including Benedict Cumberbatch, Sir Ben Kingsley, and Ralph Fiennes. This is one of four Dahl shorts Anderson released last year for Netflix. It has that layered narrative that Anderson often utilizes. Anderson fans will find much to love. It is a fun short, but at 37 minutes it may overstay its welcome a little. Grade: B

It is difficult to say which live action short seems the most deserving to win. Each of the nominees brings something to the table that is fascinating and/or thought provoking. With the exception of The After, any of the them could win and it would not be a surprise.

~Andrew

The Boys in the Boat

2023 ‧ Sports Drama ‧ 124m

George Clooney goes back behind the camera to give us a crowd-pleaser. Based on the non-fiction book of the same name, The Boys in the Boat tells the story of a University of Washington junior varsity crew team beating the odds and competing in the 1936 Olympics.

Joel Edgerton gets top billing as the crew coach, but Clooney focuses on Joe Rantz. He is our audience surrogate and the de-facto protagonist in this largely ensemble film. Rantz, played by Callum Turner, is an engineering student who needs a job and finds out that the crew team pays. We see how grueling the tryouts are and Clooney does a good job conveying the physical burden rowing involves. The film’s three acts are structured around important competitions for the team. Folded into the plot is Rantz’s romance with a girl from back home also at UW, which any Seattle local will tell you is pronounced “U-Dub.” Though probably true to life, the relationship seems perfunctory and does not add much.

We’ve seen stories like this before, and the audience knows basically everything that is going to happen from frame one. A ragtag group of scrappy novices overcome the odds. There is no deviation from that formula. Considering Clooney’s previous directorial choices, The Boys in the Boat seems an odd decision. The story does not have the edge of his previous films. When the crew make it to the Olympics in Berlin, there is a moment with Jesse Owens, which feels obligatory. Perhaps Clooney is saying something there, but the film focuses so much on the idyllic past that any message would be muddled at best.

Clooney does succeed in technical merit. The rowing scenes are shot with a good visual flair and the editing is tight and exciting. It excels in the not easy task of getting the average person to care about crew. Though a sports drama, and it has many of the associated tropes thereof, it feels more in tune with 1990s crowd-pleasers like October Sky and Mr. Holland’s Opus. The performances are good, if not exactly award worthy. Turner and Edgerton are engaging leads, but the standout performance comes from Jack Mulhern. Who probably has less than a hundred words of dialogue, but does a lot with what little he has.

The Boys in the Boat is in many ways a standard issue triumph over adversity film. Nothing particularly bad about it, but nothing remarkable either. It’s a nice time at the movies. There are worse ways to spend your time.

Grade: C+

~Andrew

Dream Scenario

2023 ‧ Black Comedy/Fantasy ‧ 100m

Occasionally the genesis of a film can be boiled down to a simple question. Daniel Kwan asked, “What if my mom was in the Matrix?” and that question produced Everything, Everywhere, All at Once. With his third feature, Dream Scenario, Kristoffer Borgli asks: “What if Freddy Krueger was sad?” Joking aside, the Springwood Slasher is name checked a couple of times so the filmmakers encourage the comparison.

Paul Matthews, Nic Cage, is a tenured evolutionary biology professor at a New England university. He has a wife and two daughters and is very non-descript. A generic middle-aged white man. One evening, an old girlfriend runs into him and says she had been lately dreaming of him a lot. She writes a blog post about the dreams and soon many others say they too have been dreaming of Paul. This causes him to go viral. At first, Paul is merely a bystanderin the dreams. Something outlandish will be happening, such as an earthquake or a bed surrounded by alligators, and Paul simply walks in. Paul has to contend with his newfound fame, which then takes a turn as everyone’s dreams with him turn into nightmares.

Fans of Cage’s acting will be treated to a performance of range. Reality Paul and Dream Paul are very different personas and Cage really revels in the roles. It’s essential Cage. Paul’s family has to deal with much of the negative side effects of his fame and their performances add a realness to a ridiculous situation. Michael Cera and Tim Meadows have memorable, if more understated, roles as well. Julianne Nicholson, playing Paul’s wife Janet, gives the best performance of the supporting characters. She brings a grounded sense to the story. The dream sequences are a great feature. Borgli often chooses darker subject manner for them, but there is still a flavor of whimsy in most of them. That whimsy might be what keeps the film from being a little too dire. The film never forgets the absurdity of the situation and has several laugh out loud moments.

Despite the obvious Elm Street connection and a number of disturbing sequences, Dream Scenario is not a horror film. But perhaps keeping it lean and mean, like an 80s slasher, may have served the story better. The concept might not have enough steam for 100 minutes. This is more of a scripting issue than an editing one. Had Borgli written it with perhaps an 85-minute target, he likely would have had a stronger and more impactful film. There are also some eye-rolling moments about Gen Z sensitivities and cancel culture that sours enjoyment, but it does fit the characters.

Dream Scenario may not totally live up to its core concept, but it is an entertaining and fascinating watch.

Grade: B-

~Andrew

Killers of the Flower Moon

2023 ‧ Western/Crime/Drama ‧ 206m

Based off the popular history book, Martin Scorsese dramatizes a particularly nasty part of American history. Marty’s two favorite leading men, Robert DeNiro and Leonardo DiCaprio, are together for the first time in 30 years in the film. Lily Gladstone, however, is the film’s real star.

This review contains some minor spoilers.

 In the late 1800s oil is found on Osage land in Oklahoma and into the 1920s the Osage become incredibly wealthy. Of course, people on the outside want to get their hands on the wealth, and that is where it becomes a “Martin Scorsese movie.” At the heart of it, Killers of the Flower Moon is an organized crime flick. The mob is not involved, but there is a crime family. William Hale, played by Robert DeNiro, orchestrates a long con plan for his family to get more and more Osage land through marriage. His nephew Ernest, Leonardo DiCaprio, gets roped into it when he comes home from the Great War. Eventually, Ernest gets married to Mollie Kyle, an Osage member with an ailing mother and much land to inherit.

Over time, more and more Osage die. Some from suspicious reasons, others from health issues. Mollie narrates how many in the tribe perish. But even disease and sickness could be foul play in this situation. Many of Mollie’s epitahs end with her saying, “No investigation.” After several of her family and tribe die, Mollie heads to Washington DC and directly asks the president to help investigate the deaths of the Osage. In the last third of the film Tom White, played by Jesse Plemons, is sent from the newly formed Bureau of Investigation and the screws tighten on Ernest and his uncle. Scorsese takes an epic scope, looking at the lives of the people and peoples involved.

Summarizing the action of the plot however minimizes the real emotion of the film. Reportedly, Scorsese and screenwriter Eric Roth originally focused on Tom White in early drafts of the script. Scorsese realized the importance of Mollie and the Osage people and then rewrote the script with that in mind. That is the right choice. Without it, Killers of the Flower Moon is just another crime drama, albeit a well made one. The relationship between Mollie and Ernest is examined in depth, reminding the audience that these were real people in a real time. Many forget that about history. By shaping the story more around the community as well as the crimes might add to the runtime, but with it Scorsese creates something more visceral, emotional, and though provoking. Lily Galdstone is the heart of the film because of it, and her realness and soul contrasts so well with the banal yet profound evil Robert DeNiro shows in Hale. DiCaprio is stuck in the middle, and does a great job of showing a man tore between Mollie and his own sense of white supremacy. Though to be honest, it isn’t much of a fight for him. But the self-delusion Ernest has is masterfully portrayed by DiCaprio.

Admittedly it would be better if this story was told by a person of Osage heritage, instead of an 80-year-old white man. A filmmaker with a lived experience closer to the people portrayed would have likely added deeper truth, but it is still a good thing that this story is out.

Grade: A-

~Andrew

Cassandro

Another Sundance ’23 title makes it out to the masses, this time via Prime. The first narrative film by celebrated documentarian Roger Ross Williams, Cassandro tells the story of Saúl Armendáriz. A budding luchador, Saúl takes on the titular persona as an exótico. Not just a regular exótico, but one that wins.

In the late 1980s Saúl (Gael Garcia Bernal) lives in El Paso with his mother, regularly crossing the boarder to wrestle. As El Topo, he isn’t finding success. He meets a trainer named Sabrina and she suggests becoming an exótico. Luche libre, like professional wrestling in the US, has its characters and drama. Exóticos are not exactly either heels (villains) or faces (good guys), but a campy characters to liven up the entertainment. They are men in drag performing as gay caricatures. Usually portrayed by straight men, Saúl is an actually gay man, in a secret relationship with a married man who is also a luchador. As Cassandro, Saúl rises in popularity and secures a bout with the Son of Santo in Mexico City. The expected biopic beats occur along the way.

Williams’ direction really excels with the character scenes. The wrestling sequences, though exciting, seem to lack flair. Thankfully, this is more a character study than a sports action film. Cassandro is more Rocky than say Rocky IV. More Rocky than the The Wrestler for that matter with maybe some Raging Bull added in. This is more focused on the life of Saúl, and also Cassandro. As with many biopics, many liberties seem to have been taken, if only to steamline the drama. The film has little fat to it, but the pacing stumbles in the latter part of the film. Some of the family aspects of the drama, particularly Saúl’s relationship with his father, fall flat. Bernal’s performance really makes the film however and Williams’ singular focus showcases this best. It might be his best performance and the best reason to watch the film.

One wonders how this could have done in cinemas instead of straight to streaming. Stories like this deserve a wider promotion, but any distribution is better than no distribution.

Grade: B-

The Adults

2023 ‧ Comedy/Drama ‧ 91m

The relationship of adult siblings is a subject that can become overwrought. Oftentimes, a pair of brothers or sisters go on some kind of adventure that strengthens their bond, or perhaps the family members go through a collective trauma that deeply affects sibling ties. Rarely do we see siblings just being siblings. Dustin Guy Defa’s third feature gives us just that.

The collective trauma has already happened when older brother Eric (Michael Cera) comes to have a fleeting visit with his sisters, Rachel and Maggie (Hannah Gross and Sophia Lillis respectively). Their mother died some years ago and their father isn’t mentioned. Rachel lives and maintains the family home while working at a radio station and Maggie has recently dropped out of college, but is living on her own. The are clearly adults as the title suggests, at least by most measures. Eric travels a lot for work, though it is never really explained how he makes money. He seems to be quite good at poker and calls around to see if he can get a game going with his old friends in town. It's possible that is the real reason he is visiting, and feels obligated to see his sisters through familial guilt. Eric extends and extends his trip in order for him to play more games. This poker angle becomes a bit of a b-plot that doesn’t quite get to the depth one would expect.

The main focus of the film is the siblings just being siblings. The weird behaviors they will have when no one is around and how adults can revert to childhood roles even in the absence of parents. We are treated to several scenes of Eric, Rachel, and Maggie play-acting characters and singing the silly songs they created while growing up. It is an unusual choice for Defa to make. Eric clearly feels alienated by his family, and these moments of whimsy are a respite. Though it is interesting to compare Cera’s poker player scenes to the ones in Molly’s Game, where he plays a much more scummy card shark, these scenes don’t have the same magic as the sibling ones. Save for a pretty funny scene where The Lion King is wryly retold. The film does not offer exactly much in the realm of plot, but there does seem to be an emotional depth that will resonate with those with siblings.

It is entirely possible this will be some of the strangest behavior audiences will see this year. But there is something endearing and real in this quiet little comedy-drama.

Grade: B-

~Andrew

Talk to Me

2022 ‧ Horror ‧ 95m

It is probably a tale as old as time: teenagers doing stupid stuff. Always a good premise for a horror film. A relatable element in the otherwise unreal situation. Danny and Michael Phillipou’s debut plays with this trope to modest success.

The teens’ aforementioned “stupid stuff” here involves holding an embalmed hand and saying the titular phrase. The holder then sees a deceased person only they can see. The next step is to say “I let you in” and the deceased possesses the holder until the bond with the hand is broken. Don’t go more than 90 seconds, bad things happen if you do that. Naturally, teens film themselves doing this at parties and of course someone breaks the 90 second rule. The concept has a creepypasta/”Bloody Mary” vibe that serves the story well. Talk to Me has a bit more depth than the average internet post.

Sophie Wilde plays Mia, who lost her mother to suicide 2 years prior. She has made a second family with Jade and her brother Riley. They go to a party one night and Mia has a round with the hand, but she stays with it a little longer than 90 seconds. She soon finds herself seeing things and compelled to do the ritual again. This feels reminiscent of Flatliners, but it works for this story as well. During another party with the hand one of her friends has a pretty traumatic experience and then the horror starts in earnest.

The filmmakers seem to be exploring how one copes with grief. There are several references to Mia’s past drug use, and her denying that she is currently using. It might not be the most subtle connection, but the Phillipou’s do a fair job of not making it heavy-handed. Grief has been something horror films have been tackling a lot in the last decade. Talk to Me is not quite up to The Babadook or Ari Aster’s films, but it is on par with perhaps We Are Still Here. It does offer a pretty fascinating form of existential dread, there is a quick vision of the ethereal plane that rivals Event Horizon’s, but it might be more philosophical than overt. More likely to give you chills thinking about the implications later than while watching. This speaks to the film’s staying power.

It is always nice to see R-rated, non-franchise horror. Not that this couldn’t be the beginning of a franchise, but there isn’t much else to really explore after this outing that would not quickly become trite. Heaven help us if some exec wants to explore the origin of the embalmed hand.

 It doesn’t break new ground really, but that doesn’t mean Talk to Me isn’t effective. It is a good, somewhat scary, time at the movies.

Grade: C+/B-

~Andrew

Lynch/Oz

2022 ‧ Documentary ‧ 108m

Alexandre O. Philippe has made a name for himself in film documentaries. 78/52: Hitchcock’s Shower Scene, about the famous scene in Psycho, is probably his most well known. His work isn’t just about film itself, but also its cultural and personal impact. Lynch/Oz examines the influence of Victor Fleming’s 1939 masterwork The Wizard of Oz on the films of cult director David Lynch, and to us all.

The documentary is presented in six sections, each narrated by people in the film industry. Film critic Amy Nicholson opens the discussion, and directors take up the other five sections. Nicholson puts forth that there are two archetypal American films that have the most profound influence: The Wizard of Oz and It’s a Wonderful Life. Two films with similar story beats that flopped initially, but found new life on television. Oz, according to Nicholson, might be America’s quintessential fairy tale and an illuminating conduit into understanding the work of David Lynch. There are a lot of red shoes and curtains in his films after all.

The additional segments dive deeper and deeper into this idea. Room 237 director Rodney Ascher speaks of the Kansas dynamic in Lynch’s Lumberton. John Waters speaks at length of his kinship with the director as a fellow cult movie weirdo, but also about how Oz is so inspiring. Karyn Kusama, director of cult favorite Jennifer’s Body, offers a deep analysis of Oz and Mulholland Dr. Justin Benson and Aaron Moorhead, known as Moorhead and Benson (Spring, The Endless), bring up how the Campbell myth in Oz might be the most influential use of said myth as well delving into concept of “Judy” in Twin Peaks. The film ends rather interestingly with David Lowery talking about children growing up into adults and how we understand the world. Lowery and Lynch have a Disney connection that colors his segment.

The fact that Janus films distributed this all but confirms Phillipe’s doc is destined to be a special feature on future 4K release from the Criterion Collection. Lynch/Oz is less a typical documentary and more a collection of visual essays. This is probably the film’s biggest flaw. We never see the contributors, we just hear their voices over various film clips. Though expertly done, it at times feels like one is watching a series of Youtube videos. One could watch each section separately, but to Phillippe’s credit they do seem to build upon one another or at least create a thematic throughline. Redundancy is avoided. The filmmakers resist the temptation to speak at length of all the Oz references in Wild at Heart, but somehow no one mentions that the band who scored Dune is named Toto.

Yes, Lynch/Oz is very much a movie for film nerds to really nerd out on. Some will find that boring or insufferable, and that is understandable. However, Phillipee brings to the discussion an interesting look at how art works and how it influences not just one person but also how it gets into cultural zeitgeist. It is unlikely someone without much interest in film studies would want to give Lynch/Oz a watch, but even those with a passing interest will find something in Phillipee’s documentary. It posits questions and answers, but still leaves that lovely romantic and dark mystery of Lynch’s work. Although Oz might offer a way to understand Lynch’s work, it does not explain it.

Lynch/Oz is a fascinating look at how a seminal work can affect not just one filmmaker but all of us. It is hard to recommend to the uninitiated, one will want a good understanding of Lynch’s work to fully appreciate the film.

Grade: B-

~Andrew

You Hurt My Feelings

2023 ‧ Comedy/Drama ‧ 93m

The Sundance comedy-drama You Hurt My Feelings opens wide as the summer blockbuster season descends upon us. Written and directed by Nicole Holofcener, the film offers an antidote to the bombast and grandiosity. Not that those are bad traits, but sometimes a quiet indie film is needed to start off the sunny season.

Beth, Julia Louis-Dreyfus, is a writer trying to publish a new book. Her first novel after making a name for herself with a memoir. She is married to currently “off-his-game” therapist Don, played by Tobias Menzies. They are they perfect couple. They share their food and even ice cream cones, much to the chagrin of their grown son Elliott, played by Owen Teague. They are so perfect, at one point Elliott tells them he feels like a third wheel as their son. The film may spend more time than it needs establishing the status quo with these characters before the conflict arises. While on an outing with her sister Sarah, played by Michaela Watkins, they find their husbands talking while shopping for socks. Don is lamenting to his brother-in-law Mark, Arian Moayed, that he does not like Beth’s novel and is tired of reading the various drafts. Beth overhears this, and thus the titular feelings are hurt. Beth feels betrayed, and it affects their relationship. Holofcener here very much succeeds in having a low-stakes issue, become a high-stakes problem.

The performances feel authentic, not just because the actors know what they are doing, but also Holofcener’s script. Though Beth and Don are the main focus, her sister Sarah and her husband Mark offer a different predicament. Mark is a struggling actor, and Sarah is a frustrated interior designer. All the couples are dealing with the ennui and malaise that comes with getting older. Holofcener often juxtaposes the characters with Don’s therapy clients. We are treated to several couples’ therapy scenes with Carolyn and Jonathan, played by real life marred couple Amber Tamblyn and David Cross. These interactions add a foil to our main characters, showing a wider spectrum of marital issues. The film might not have the biggest sense of conflict, but that is not the point of this story. Most marriages are not filled with big dramatic fights, but usually small sad tiffs and arguments. Which can lead to bigger issues, and Holofcener shows that with Don’s clients.

One will likely think of Holofcener’s other films, particularly Friends with Money. Her films often deal with the beautifully mundane day-to-days of marriage and family. Michaela Watkins, who is great as Sarah, does seem to be in a Katherine Keener role in the director’s other movies. Somewhat muddled at first, the film seems to finally gel toward the final act. In hindsight that makes a lot of sense with what the characters are going through but can be frustrating in the moment. In that sense, it grows on the viewer, giving them something to process. Minor nitpick, which may turn off some viewers from watching, the title is not great. It fits the film and the themes, but it comes up somewhat incongruous for a film about adults and adult problems. Though perhaps there might be a comment on how supposedly adult behavior always has a root in small things.

There are too few films about adults in this day and age, and You Hurt My Feelings a welcome entry.

Grade: B

Enys Men

2022 ‧ Experimental/Folk Horror ‧ 91m

Mark Jenkin, an independent filmmaker from Cornwall, opened Enys Men at Cannes last year with a US release last month. The film is now available on demand.

Set in 1973, a volunteer, played by Mary Woodvine, stays on a remote Cornish island. Everyday she does a series of tasks, noting temperature, and changes of plant life. She drops a rock into a shaft by a ruined lighthouse, listening to it fall. We see this routine play out a number of times, one can’t help but think of Sisyphus with her daily rock drop. She becomes obsessed with some flowers growing on the cliffside, and the lichen growing near. It isn’t a film with a lot of action, but it has a mood and an atmosphere that is effective and dread inducing. The viewer may be left with questions about ghosts, memories, and doppelgangers.

Shot on 16mm, Jenkin nails the early 70s aesthetic and feel. One could almost believe it’s a recently discovered “lost” film from that era. Like we are watching something meant to be forgotten. This adds to the tension and surreality. The color palette, with Woodvine’s reoccurring red jacket, is rich and saturated. Heightening the otherworldliness of the island. At 91 minutes, the film has just enough time to get under your skin without overstaying its welcome.

The film has some subtle and superficial influences. Bergman’s Persona comes to mind, as well as The Shining and Don’t Look Now. At risk of a mild spoiler, it would be interesting to see the Creepshow segment "The Lonesome Death of Jordy Verrill" as “a short before the feature” with Enys Men.

The mood and atmosphere will be hypnotic to some, while others may find it tiresome. Though there is something to appreciate in what Jenkins is trying out, some audiences will likely get frustrated. Another experimental horror film from this year, Skinamarink¸ similarly tried audiences’ patience. If you got something out of that film, you are more than likely to get something out of Enys Men. As a narrative, it might feel lacking. As an experiment in subdued folk horror, it works.

Grade: C+/B-

Classic Review: The Last of Sheila

1973 ‧ Mystery ‧ 120m

Cinephiles are always on the hunt for a “hidden gem.” A little known or discussed film that strikes a chord with the viewer. For whatever reason, The Last of Sheila isn’t talked about much. What dug it out of the content abyss was Rian Johnson’s one-two punches of Glass Onion and Poker Face. Johnson mentioned it as a film that influenced his murder mystery projects. That was enough for me to check it out, but during the opening credits “Written by Stephen Sondheim and Anthony Perkins” came up and I thought: “Mr. Broadway AND Norman Bates wrote this?” I was immediately game for whatever Last of Sheila was going to throw me.

The film opens outside a party where gossip columnist Shelia, Yvonne Romain, is having an argument with Clinton Greene, played by James Coburn. Shelia storms off and is promptly hit by a car in a hit-and-run accident. Cut to a year later and Greene, a film producer, is assembling a reunion of people who were at the party where Shelia died. Everyone is connected with the business in some way. Raquel Walsh plays actress Alice Wood, whose career seems to be slumping at the moment. Her husband/manager Anthony Wood, played by young Ian McShane. Dyan Cannon is Christine, a talent agent. Richard Bejamin, noted 70s "that guy," plays screenwriter Tom Parkman. Joan Hackett plays his wife, Lee, and James Mason is film director Phillip Dexter. They are all invited onto Greene’s yacht, aptly named Sheila, for a vacation and a intricate multi-day parlor game of sorts. A classic mystery premise where surely nothing will go wrong.

Without going too heavy into the details, Greene lets on that he knows who killed Sheila and has devised a way to get the truth out. Utilizing Sheila’s gossip knowledge, he gives each guest a “secret” on a card that they are supposed to keep from the others. Each night they will go to a location and solve a small game to reveal someone’s secret. The first night goes off well, the second night not so much. As expected of whodunits infighting and suspicions arise, but in subversive and fresh ways. To get into specifics would probably hurt the viewing. The film was made and takes place in the early 1970s, but the way Sondheim and Perkins craft the mystery and storytelling one could easily have it take place today and not need to change much. Director Herbert Ross knows exactly how much information to give the audience and that is a crucial ingredient to Last of Sheila’s mystery.

The performances are key here. James Coburn is fabulously sleezy as Greene, but who really shine are Mason and Benjamin. The two take on the “detective” role for the guests and for the audience. I couldn’t help but feel that they were Sondheim and Perkins stand-ins. Raquel Walsh seems perhaps underused, but when reconsidering a 1973 context, it is probably a choice the filmmakers deliberately made. It’s easy to see how Dyan Cannon’s performance would be an influence on Kate Hudson’s in Glass Onion.

This year marks the 50th anniversary of The Last of Sheila, check your area revival cinemas to see if it will be playing.

Grade: B+

~Andrew

Cocaine Bear

2023 ‧ Comedy/Action/Adventure/Horror/WTF ‧ 95m

The third film by Elizabeth Banks offers the audience exactly what the title claims, a Cocaine Bear.

A horror-tinged adventure film with a high concept inspired by the death of Andrew C. Thornton in 1985. Thornton was found with 35 kilos of cocaine on his person having died after jumping out of an airplane. Investigators determined that numerous bags of cocaine were thrown out and accidently strewn about the Georgia wilderness, as part of an elaborate distribution plan. This was confirmed a couple months later when a dead black bear with several grams of the narcotic in its system was found. You can see this bear, stuffed and nicknamed Pablo Escobear, in Lexington, KY.

This article may already be taking things too seriously. Andrew Thornton and the bear are the only true elements of the film’s story. Banks and writer Jimmy Warden give us a few parallel storylines around the idea of a coked-out bear wreaking havoc. Two drug dealers, O'Shea Jackson Jr. and Alden Ehrenreich, head into the woods in search of the product on orders from their boss, played by the late Ray Liotta. Isiah Whitlock Jr plays a detective pursuing Liotta, who determines that he must be involved with Thornton. Keri Russell plays a mother searching for her daughter with her daughter’s friend. There are other characters who mostly serve the slasher-esque role of being bear bait.

A gory film about a bear attacking and killing people in the woods sounds like a horror story, and one could pretend the bear is replacing Jason in a Friday the 13th entry, but it’s a comedy. A bonkers black comedy, no less. Not exactly In Bruges type humor, but something akin to Shaun of the Dead and Hot Fuzz. Jackson and Ehrenreich have good buddy chemistry, as does Russell and Christian Convery. Liotta gives off a comic intensity that is already missed.

Cocaine Bear is the kind of movie that knows what it is and generally succeeds in what it wants to do. It may have one plotline too many, which drags the last act a little, but it is funny and features some solid horror/action sequences. Is it a “good” movie? That depends on what you look for in a movie. For the most part it achieves its goals, which is saying something. It is entertaining and fun with a crowd. Hard to say if it could become a “cult classic,” but it would play well at midnight. Fans of Lake Placid and Piranha will find a lot to like here. It’s the kind of flick you are either going to be into the concept or not. I was.

Grade: C+/B-

~Andrew