MAY DECEMBER - MIFF 2023

 

As per the MIFF guide: “At 36, Gracie caused a worldwide furore and landed herself behind bars after her predatory sexual relationship with a 13-year-old boy was made public. Some 20 years later, with Gracie now married to him with children of their own, the complexities resurface when actor Elizabeth arrives in their hometown of Savannah, Georgia, ahead of playing her in an upcoming biopic. But Elizabeth’s stripping of her subject’s layers triggers a crossing of boundaries – from every which way.”

I was late in discovering the cinema of Todd Haynes but once I finally came across his work, it didn't take me long to recognise his genius, nor to the fact that I am on the same cinematic wavelength of this great director. His films just speak to me, and now each time a new film from Todd Haynes is released, it is something of an event. “May December” is his latest, and it may come as no surprise that it was my second most anticipated film at MIFF after Christian Petzold's “Afire”. Unlike the Petzold film which was my first film screened at MIFF this year, I had to wait until the second last day of the festival to see “May December”, but unsurprisingly, it was definitely worth the wait. I loved this film, and from the reaction of the audience I saw it with, it certainly seemed like a crowd favourite too.

While it is never stated in the film as such, the story of “May December” is based on the real-life case of Mary Kay Letourneau, who was a school teacher that was sent to prison for her part in the “romance” between her and a twelve year old boy, in Washington. Without going into too many details, the interesting thing about this case is that Letourneau, while in prison (or waiting to be imprisoned), gave birth to two children fathered by this boy. Further more, once Letourneau was released from jail after doing her time, Letourneau and Vili Fualaau (the boy, who now, was over the age of twenty) ended up marrying each other, living together as husband and wife. Such a relationship fascinated America because it questioned whether or not Letourneau was in the wrong if it was true love all along, but at the same time, she was 22 years Fualaau's senior at the time of the “assault / romance” so the power dynamics clearly were in favour of Letourneau, with Fualaau clearly not being of a mature age to be making such decisions on his life. Anyway, none of that is part of “May December” except in the background, as Haynes briefly addresses the scandal of his characters via a quick montage of newspaper articles and headlines detailing all of this, so we understand why a Hollywood actress would want to take the time to meet these people and then play them onscreen. As you can tell, all of this is very heavy stuff, so you would think that it would ultimately force Todd Haynes' film to be a serious drama to examine all of this, but the most surprising aspect of “May December”, and the biggest reason for why it is so great, is the gutsy, (and very deliberate) campy tone that Haynes gives to his film. I was not expecting “May December” to be a funny film at all, and yet at times it is hilarious!

One of the keys to getting this very hard to capture tone just right, comes down to the use of the excellent over-the-top score by Marcelo Zarvos, which is actually re-purposed music from Joseph Losey's 1971 film, “The Go-Between”. The way Todd Haynes first introduces this music into his film is so funny due to how dramatic it comes across, especially as it follows this simple line of dialogue: “We may not have enough hot-dogs”. My cinema erupted into laughter during this moment, which I'm sure is exactly what Haynes wanted, as he is giving his audience the okay to laugh during the film; do not fear, it is intended that way, even during some of the most uncomfortable moments and scenes.

“May December” is filled with wonderful performances especially from the three lead characters. This is Julianne Moore's fifth time working with Todd Haynes and I always feel like magic is created when these two get together. Whilst I doubt that they could ever top their masterpiece, “Far from Heaven” (a rare five-star film for me), Moore once again creates a complex character with Gracie. She plays her as a woman who still feels she has nothing to apologise for, that she has done nothing wrong, nor is she embarrassed or ashamed of it, and yet we can see through interactions with both Joe and her own kids, just how manipulative she can be through her words and tone. It is interesting watching the power dynamics between her and Joe even now, as Gracie still stands over him like he is a little kid even though he is now a fully grown adult and much bigger in stature than her. Gracie is definitely the dominant party in this marriage and gets angry when she doesn't get her way, belittling Joe in the process. She also projects the image of a woman who is popular and successful in her community, but this image is slowly eroded the more Elizabeth questions Gracie and her friends for her research in the role. Julianne Moore plays Gracie with a lisp, which is something I never like, because it usually feels so forced, but funnily enough, Moore has done it so subtlety here, that I didn't notice it until late in the film when Elizabeth herself is practising Gracie's speech patterns.

Speaking of Elizabeth, “May December” is Natalie Portman's film, hands down. Granted, she has the most “showy” role in the film, but she does it so, so well. When she first enters Gracie's house to meet the family, she comes across as really down to earth and friendly, but as she asks more and more personal questions, particularly to Joe involving the psychological aspects of what happened, you can feel she isn't as genuine as she wants to come across. She keeps saying that she only wants to be true to the story, but her questions are loaded to the point that it feels like Elizabeth has already come to town with her own opinion on Gracie's story, so instead of actually listening to what both Gracie and Joe are saying, she keeps trying to steer the conversations towards the more controversial or salacious material of their story. The more and more Elizabeth tries to embody Gracie and get under her skin to understand her fully, the creepier Portman's performance gets, where by the end she goes to quite a dark and controversial place, all under the guise of capturing the “truth”. The very final scene of the film is particularly creepy as we finally realise that through her research, Elizabeth may have gone way too far in her attempts to get to that truth, so far that she herself is in danger of becoming a predator. It is a wonderful performance from Portman, and so much deeper and complex than you ever think it is going to be when we first meet her. She has a standout monologue late in the movie, when she portrays Gracie (lisp and all) reading out one of her (real) letters to Joe. I also really liked the progression in her physical acting as she mimics Gracie's actions and movements, and gets closer to perfecting them the more they are together. Wardrobe helps amazingly in this too, and the scene at the twin's graduation ceremony, where Gracie and Elizabeth meet and are almost indistinguishable (with echoes of Bergman's “Persona”) is just masterful.

The other performance of note in “May December” is that of Charles Melton, who plays Joe. I mentioned above how tricky the tone of this film was, particularly in regards to the campy comedy to it, as it could come across as though Haynes is treating the rape/sexual assault of a teenage boy in a trivial manner. I am happy to report that the character of Joe, and his ordeal, is never treated in this fashion. In fact, Melton's performance as Joe is the most grounded and realistic of all the characters in the film, mainly because he seems to be the only one truly looking inside of himself, and trying to come to terms with exactly what happened to him and what he has lost because of it. He realises that maybe what they are telling the world, that they are happy and in love, isn't really the case, and he has in fact been hurt by the past that he has buried so deep within. Joe is the most genuine character within the film, and he has the most gentle and loving relationship with his children. There is an amazing scene on a rooftop, where Joe and his son share a joint. Joe explains he has never tried it before, which shocks his son, as Joe begins to understand just how much of his childhood he lost or was taken from him, due to needing to grow up so quick. Unfortunately, Joe is also the character who is manipulated the most, with even Elizabeth bending his will, all in the name of her research.

“May December” is the first Todd Haynes film not to be shot by his regular cinematographer Edward Lachman since “Velvet Goldmine” in 1998, and to be honest, I actually missed his contribution to the film. That is not to say that “May December” is not an attractive looking film, but it does look different than the norm for a Haynes picture. Unfortunately, Lachman was away shooting Pablo Larrain's new film “El Conde” in Chile, so Haynes turned to his friend Kelly Reichardt's cinematographer Christopher Blauvelt to fill in, and he does a nice job. The film is brightly lit, although as the story evolves, shadows begin to deepen and darkness creeps in more. At times, he gives the movie a gaudy soap opera feel, but this is no doubt deliberate as it goes well with the story itself.

Overall, I adored “May December”, and I got amusement out of a patron describing the film to another as “the best and most Todd Haynes picture yet”. While I wouldn't go that far, I knew exactly what she meant, as the film feels like it could have only been made by this director. He is mining material and themes similar to that he has done before, but it never feels derivative of anything else he has made. It is a fantastically complex film, told in a deliberately campy style, filled to the brim with great performances. As much as I loved the film, I think film festivals are the perfect place for people to watch a Todd Haynes film, and I do worry how “May December” will be received outside of the festival circuit. I really hope it is able to find its audience because it is another entertaining and engaging film from this super talented director.

4 Stars.

 

TRENQUE LAUQUEN - MIFF 2023

 

As per the MIFF guide: “In the small town of Trenque Lauquen, a woman named Laura goes missing. As two men in love with her haplessly search for clues, the mystery only deepens and Laura’s story expands: Is it an erotic affair hidden between pages in the local library? A recollection of history’s formidable feminist icons? An affectionate study of rural Argentinian life? A botanical survey of talismanic flowers? Or a supernatural puzzle that has the whole town abuzz?”

Out of all the films I saw at MIFF this year, I was most intimidated by “Trenque Lauquen” due to its epic running time of four hours and twenty minutes. Intimidated and excited actually, because for some reason, I had a really good feeling about the film. Still, there is nothing worse than being stuck in a cinema with a film you hate, where time just stops, feeling like it is never going to end. Knowing the extended running time of “Trenque Lauquen”, it was my biggest fear going into the film. It is not that I am afraid of films with massive running times, it is just that I prefer to watch them in the comfort of my own home, when you can control the viewing situation better. It turns out my fears were unfounded and those good feelings I had about “Trenque Lauquen” were ultimately prophetic as I absolutely loved the film, and for such a long film, it just breezed by.

I think the reason for the success of “Trenque Lauquen” and why it was so easy to sit through was due to the fun atmosphere of the film and with how playful it all was with format. In actuality, the entire story is two films, but I think this has only been done to make it more digestible for cinema goers rather than any story reason, because the film just continues in part two right where it finished off in part one. Either way, MIFF chose to present “Trenque Lauquen” as a single film, playing both parts immediately one after the other. In a way, the film almost plays like a novel in that it is broken down into twelve chapters. What it really reminded me of though was an old silent serial where each new chapter added more fun and intrigue to the storyline. I am quite a big fan of pioneering French filmmaker Louis Feuillade and his silent serials like “Les Vampires”, “Judex” and “Tih Minh”, and to me “Trenque Lauquen” truly felt like an updated modern version of the types of films he used to make one hundred years ago, which I think may be one of the reasons I love this film so much.

Like those serials, director Laura Citarella playfully tells her tale by mixing genres so what you initially think is going to be a straight ahead drama, ends up dipping its toes into other genres like romance, mystery, suspense, horror and even sci-fi (seriously), which is just delightful. It just makes the film so much fun because you never really know where it is going to go next. It is always bubbling away from scene to scene, full of energy, light-hearted and always fun. This is true even when serious things are being explored, like for instance Laura's disappearance. What I think the film is really about are stories themselves, and the importance of storytelling and how telling a person's story keeps that person alive or relevant. There are many times during “Trenque Lauquen” when a story thread begins and is followed for how ever long Citarella sees fit, but doesn't always feel the need to close out that story or thread. It sounds like it could be frustrating for the viewer, all lead up and no pay off, but actually experiencing the film, it turned out to be the opposite as I found it exhilarating, as it was more about the journey than the destination. I know that is a total cliché but I also found it to be true in this case. I think also because each plot strand is followed so genuinely by Citarella and her cast, you are willing as an audience member to go along for the ride too. You feel the same excitement the character's do as they are investigating something, finding clues and making educated conclusions.

A couple of examples of this that I loved was the main thread point (or what initially seems like the main plot) when Laura and Ezequiel find secret letters hidden in books from the local library that are a century old, that expose a secret correspondence between a girl and a man who fall in love. As Laura and Ezequiel continue their search, the plot of the love affair within the letters starts to mirror their own relationship until Laura disappears (just like one of the letter writers themselves do). The investigation between the two is so fun, and involving that you are just in on it with them as they discover things; it feels so real, so much so that Ezequiel is convinced that these letters have something to do with Laura's disappearance. Without giving too much away, eventually the whole thread about the letters becomes less and less of the focus of “Trenque Lauquen” as Citarella moves her story in other directions, but that doesn't dissipate how fun that part was during it. This sort of thing happens a lot during the film, elements at the time that feel really important, end up meaning little or brief things heard in the background of other scenes, suddenly becoming the focal point later on in the film, when initially it felt like they were nothing comments. This brings me to a later part of the film that I wanted to mention that I loved which is the “alligator boy” story. I do not want to ruin the specifics of this part of the plot because it is truly out there, but this is when the film goes “sci-fi”, but again what I loved about it was just how real it all played, despite how ridiculous it all is when you actually stop and think about it. Once again, Laura becomes so involved in the whole story of it all, that we too become fully invested. I remember when “Trenque Lauquen” finished and I was thinking back on it, and I couldn't believe that director Laura Citarella had the balls to include both of these story strands in the same movie, AND get it to work so well! Each plot strand seems to leave behind a little piece of something which starts another fresh strand, which I guess is what life really is, at the end of the day.

From a technical point of view, the film is well made and definitely well acted. The film is shot digitally, which you would expect of something this length, but it really does have that harsh digital look to it at times that I am not a huge fan of. Seeing as how the film is told in a non-linear fashion, editing is paramount to the success of “Trenque Lauquen” and editors Miguel de Zuviria and Alejo Moguillansky do a wonderful job, with the regular changing of times from before and after Laura's disappearance never feeling jarring at all. They also do a fantastic job within scenes to keep the momentum moving so we never feel the four hour running time whilst watching. Probably my favourite contribution to the film though was Gabriel Chwojnik's very playful score which really reflects the changes within the narrative and genre as the film goes along. I particularly got a kick out of just how sci-fi he went with the music as the story heads down that path too. Like the film itself, the music is light, energetic and a whole lot of fun.

You would think that a film about the disappearance of a certain character, that the person playing that character would have little to do, but that is not the case here, as while Laura is the person who goes missing, she is also the main character of “Trenque Lauquen”, and actress Laura Paredes is outstanding in the role. She also co-wrote the film with director Laura Citarella, so you assume that her character is very close to her heart but she doesn't produce a false note in this very long film. You just believe her in every moment even when she is experiencing or reacting to the very unbelievable. In fact, the majority of the cast is excellent, with most of the characters named after the actor that plays them. The only misgiving I have in terms of performance is that of Ezequiel Pierri, who doesn't give a bad performance, but who regularly has this pathetic sad sack, grumpy look on his face throughout most of the film, which often goes against the fun tone of the rest of the film. I just wanted to slap him at times and tell him to stop being a baby, and enjoy the moment you are in!

Overall, whilst I was initially intimidated by the length of “Trenque Lauquen”, I ended up absolutely loving it and thought the film flew by. You might imagine that I have barely scratched the surface of the plot, or indeed the characters of the film, and you would be right because at over four hours long, there is a lot in it and well more than I could ever cover. All you need to know is that director Laura Citarella and her cast have created a super fun film that not only celebrates stories themselves, but also the art of telling those stories. For me, it all just worked wonderfully well, but I am sure that due to its four hour run time, it may be a little divisive in regards to if it all builds to a satisfactory enough ending. For me, the answer is a big fat “YES” and I cannot wait to revisit “Trenque Lauquen” again in the future, sometime soon.

4 Stars.

 

MONSTER - MIFF 2023

 

As per the MIFF guide: “Rural tween Minato has been acting strangely since his dad’s death: drastically cutting his hair, leaping from a moving car, claiming his brain has been replaced with a pig’s. When he comes home from school injured, his mum Saori is convinced something more sinister is at play and sets out on a relentless campaign to expose Minato’s teacher, Hori, as the culprit victimising her son. In turn, Hori claims Minato is a bully. But Minato has his own perspective, focused on his new friend, with troubles of his own.”

“Monster” is popular and successful Japanese director Hirokazu Koreeda's latest film, returning to his home country after his previous film, the South Korean drama “Broker”. When initial word broke about the film, it was described as something a little different from Koreeda, who is known for his family dramas, but little else was said about the project. It was one of the hot ticket films at MIFF this year, with all of its sessions selling out, and if word of mouth is anything to go by, it was greeted very enthusiastically. Many times I heard patrons, when asked what is the favourite thing they have seen at MIFF this year, responding with “Monster”, so I give you fair warning that this review will be of a contrary opinion, as sadly, the film fell totally flat for me. I will admit that it is an incredibly well made film, with some excellent performances, but outside of this I had a lot of issues with “Monster” that I couldn't get past.

The main issue I had with the film was the structure of it; the way the story has been told. It is a film that has been broken into thirds where each time we go back to the same beginning (a large fire burning in Tokyo, where a well known brothel exists on one of its floors), except from a different character's point of view each time. The first being Saori's, the mother's, point of view, then the teacher Hori's, before finally we get the point of view from Minato himself. In each segment, some scenes are repeated but like I said from a different point of view, but a lot of the time we see different moments involving these characters that begin to fill the timeline and picture fully. Personally, I love the exploration of time in cinema, and seeing scenes repeated from different points of view, but the way it was handled in “Monster” was both confusing and frustrating. My first point of frustration was not being able to determine whether what we were seeing in each segment was the “truth” or only that person's truth. Akira Kurosawa's “Rashomon” is probably the most well known film of this type, and it is very easy to tell that each segment there is only true of the person telling it. With “Monster” because certain scenes fill in the gaps of moments that the other participants wouldn't know about, I assumed that the whole thing (all three parts connected) was to be considered the truth. However the problem with this is in the inconsistencies in the portrayal of Hori between the first and second segments. He comes off very uncaring, flippant, angry and even belligerent at times in his interactions with Saori, which doesn't come close to the type of teacher he is portrayed as in his own segment. He is so caring, worrying about his student's well being and learnings. He cares more about them, then the politics of the school he works at, where they try to get him to apologise for something he may or may not have done, just so it causes them less issues to deal with. Things get more murky after he is accused of abuse towards his students and the way he then struggles to deal with these accusations. He is, rightly, devastated and without spoiling anything it gets pretty dark in regards to his mental state, but the way this is quickly turned around in the third segment, Minato's point of view, to build towards the film's finale, just felt so false. I did not buy it at all! (It is really hard to talk about without giving away the main secrets of the film). The character arc of Hori just did not feel realistic from a humanistic sense, rather it seemed to function in a way that serviced the film's story instead.

The inconsistencies of this also carry over into the performances in the film too, which to be fair are mostly excellent. Sakura Ando is very good as Saori, who at times comes across as a fun and carefree mother, but is very serious when her child's health (both mental and physical) is threatened, and will not suffer fools lightly. She is great, but I think Eita Nagayama as Hori gives the best performance within “Monster”; he is outstanding, particularly in the segment from his own point of view. What I felt was strange though is how different he performs Hori in the first segment compared to the second; it is so different which further blurred the line of what was meant to be reality and truth in this film.

My biggest issue with “Monster” though comes down to the final segment when it all comes out, and we learn what is really happening. Again, I cannot spoil this moment because it is essentially the point of the film, but when I finally learned the “truth” behind Minato's ordeal and why he was behaving like so, I was made so angry by it all. Firstly, I felt that the story was strong enough on its own, without it being watered down via the fragmented way it was told, which by the end only comes across as a narrative gimmick. This fractured narrative takes away all of the story's potential and power, but worse (and this is what upset me the most), it trivialises it. Worse still, is when I thought back to everything that had occurred prior and what was being insinuated (both in story terms and the type of film that it was pretending to be), I was disgusted by how disingenuous and exploitative it was in regards to the subject matter. It was like the filmmakers did not want to be upfront with the type of story they were telling and decided to hide it behind a very exploitative title and disgusting tagline (“Who is the monster?”). I am not sure why I have reacted so negatively against this, as my concerns around “Monster” have not been echoed by anyone I have spoken to or I overheard talking about the film during MIFF, but it really rubbed me the wrong way. This is a shame too because from a technical standpoint, “Monster” has been extremely well made. It is one of the most beautiful films, pictorially speaking, from Koreeda's filmography, due to the stunning countryside cinematography from Ryuto Kondo, and has a really lovely score from the late, great Ryuichi Sakamoto, who sadly passed away in March of this year. It was to be Sakamoto's final score of his career, but he goes out on a high, as it is quite beautiful particularly towards the end of the film when the music really takes over and helps to portray the kid's emotions.

Briefly, I want to make mention that “Monster” is the first time since way back in 1995, with his debut film “Maborosi”, that Hirokazu Koreeda did not write, or at least contribute to, the screenplay of one of his films. Now maybe this is just me looking for a way to give an out to a great director, but with the screenplay not his own, maybe he felt compelled to keep the way the narrative had been (ineffectively) structured (although, he did edit “Monster” himself), or keep the inclusion of certain clunky moments that he wants audience members to remember between each segments, which come across more like “signpost” moments rather than organically integrated into the story. I just think it is interesting that Koreeda has been able to successfully make two films in different languages he does not speak, but still had a hand in the scripting duties, but has failed here with a film he didn't write at all. Like I said, maybe I am trying to give him an out, but it just didn't feel like a normal, humanistic screenplay that is the norm for Koreeda.

Overall, I was seriously disappointed in Hirokazu Koreeda's “Monster”, but my opinion of the film is definitely not the consensus one. Whilst the film is well acted, beautifully shot and has a lovely score, I thought the story itself was very poorly handled and found it very exploitative in regards to the main themes of the film once they are revealed (the fact that “Monster” won the “Queer Palm” at Cannes is a very big clue!). The fractured, fragmented narrative only served to take the film's power away and because of this I felt the story just did not come together to make a complete satisfactory whole. “Monster” was a massive disappointment.

2 Stars.

 

AFIRE - MIFF 2023

 

As per the MIFF guide: “Leon escapes to the coast to work on his second novel, accompanied by his friend Felix, who has grand plans for his art-school portfolio. Expecting solitude, they’re instead met with company in the form of bubbly Nadja, who leaves the cottage each morning and invites her local lover over in the evenings. As surrounding wildfires threaten to encroach on their languid retreat, so too do the suffocating pressures of creative unrest and social insecurity bear down on Leon’s malaise. Group dynamics shift, attraction builds and, all the while, a sense of foreboding hangs around like a cloud of smoke.”

My most anticipated film at this year's MIFF was Christian Petzold's latest “Afire”, which also turned out to be the very first film I saw at the film festival this year. Personally, I like to build into a festival, so having the one movie I was most looking forward to first up, I didn't think was ideal. However, we obviously have no say when certain films are playing; you just have to see them when you can, and in the end it was a perfect way to start MIFF, having a fantastic film right from the get-go to build the anticipation of what was still to come.

Once again Christian Petzold has shown to the world just how great a director he is with “Afire”. Right from the opening frame of the film, his direction felt effortless; the consistency in his work that he has shown throughout his career, but particularly from “Barbara” onward, is phenomenal. Like always, I felt like I was in the hands of a master filmmaker whilst watching “Afire”, as he is able to construct an involving social drama, that is also very funny at times, while having his film anchored with something that could be a death knell to a lesser director, and that is a very unsympathetic lead character. Let's get this out of the way, Leon is an utter douche bag; he is so self involved, so self-important, totally inept in social situations, while also being jealous of those who find these situations easier to be in then himself, and he is nowhere near the talented writer he thinks he is. When the first trailer for “Afire” dropped, it was very apparent that Leon was going to be unlikable, but what I was really worried about was if he would turn you off the film itself because of this. Somehow, this not only doesn't happen, but Petzold actually gets you to care for the guy at the same time you are rolling your eyes at him. So often you just want to slap Leon and get him to wake up, get him to remove his head from his own arse, so he could notice exactly what was happening in front of him, and through all this, I still found myself caring for the douche and worrying about the things he was going through. No doubt, actor Thomas Schubert deserves a lot of the credit here in creating a performance that exposes Leon's insecurities and flaws as a person, but doesn't go too far over the edge where we hate the poor guy.

It probably also helps that the majority of his scenes are played opposite Paula Beer, Petzold's current muse, who returns for her third consecutive film with the director. She is outstanding in her role as Nadja, so light, free and full of life, almost like the opposite of Leon. She lives in the moment, finding enjoyment wherever she can, but at the same time she is also a serious academic. You may find yourself wondering why she is drawn towards Leon, or why she wants to help him, but her offer of help is genuine, which is ultimately wasted by Leon. When he does finally decide to show Nadja his manuscript of his second novel, “Club Sandwich”, I'm sure he is expecting her to praise it, even if it is insincere praise, but he is shocked when she is brutally honest with him calling the novel “shit”, and telling him that he knows this, and also that she knows he could do better. The relationship between Nadja and Leon is very complex, and essentially the backbone of the film, as it is constantly evolving (and at times devolving), but at all times you can see that Nadja only wants to help Leon to become both a better writer and person, someone who can actually live in the moment. As I mentioned above, Beer is so naturalistic in her performance, that you cannot help but love her character.

Christian Petzold stated that he wanted to make a “summer” movie with “Afire”, where characters are together, enjoying the sun and water, and each other. After the Covid years where the world shut down, Petzold said that he needed to see people interacting again, and at times because of this “Afire” feels like a hang-out movie, where we just exist with the characters, listening in on their conversations and such. The film drifts, building very slowly, that you could almost be excused for thinking that the film is going nowhere, but which could not be further from the truth, as it all wraps up in the most brilliant ending that is particularly poignant due to everything that has come before it. Unlike most modern filmmakers, Petzold is fantastic at finding the perfect ending to his stories, or the perfect moment to end a film on. I cannot stress enough just how many films fall apart these days when they get to their end, but Christian Petzold never seems to have this problem, and “Afire” has yet another brilliant ending, with the image of some hands being incredibly powerful.

One of the most impressive things about “Afire” is its regular tonal shifts, both in the film as a whole, or even within a single scene. At times the pace of a moment can feel languid and quiet, before suddenly tensions rise, or we find ourselves laughing out of the blue (often laughing at Leon's ego and inflated value of self). It all feels very real and of the moment, rather than something that has been falsely manufactured. There is also the element of the surrounding bushfires which, although start far away, soon begin to get closer, and we can feel the tension and unease this causes amongst the group.

As usual Hans Fromm's cinematography is naturalistic and very beautiful, often relying on the bright summer sun to light things, or the fire in the distance to tint the visuals red. The beach scenes particularly are gorgeous. One element that I think is less successful though is the ability to express the extreme heat that the characters are having to deal with. Heat is so hard to portray successfully in movies, with probably only “Do The Right Thing” and “Body Heat” being the most successful at portraying it on film. We constantly hear from the characters just how hot it is, but I do not think it translates perfectly in the images (but this is a minor nitpick). I mentioned the fire above, and just want to briefly highlight two moments involving the fire that I thought were both terrifying and superb. The first is a night scene when the characters are on the roof of the holiday house just drinking when it appears to start raining. One of them quickly realises that it isn't rain but actually ash falling from the nearby fires. It is a powerful moment as you feel that this is the first time the group actually thinks they could be in some danger. The other moment is when Leon is running through the nearby forest, and he hears a rumbling, before a family of wild pigs burst out running, on fire, fleeing for their lives. The fire then roars up the hill near where Leon is standing, in what is the film's most terrifying image and moment.

Overall, although it was not a surprise, I ended up loving Christian Petzold's “Afire”, and even though it was the very first film I saw at this year's MIFF, it also remained my favourite of the festival. I have barely scratched the surface of “Afire” in this review (I haven't even mentioned the two other main characters that help form the friendship group with Leon and Nadja), so there will be plenty to experience for those of you who end up watching it. It is a sensational film filled with complex characters and relationships, but breaking it down to its base element, “Afire” is really about a man learning to live in the moment, not taking himself too seriously and take notice of what is in front of him, which if he begins to learn these lessons, will see him become a better writer and human being in general. “Afire” is another fantastic film from Christian Petzold, one of the best and most consistent directors working in world cinema today. Highly recommended to everyone!

4 Stars.

 

 

COBWEB - MIFF 2023

 

As per the MIFF guide: “...an ambitious but beleaguered director [is] desperately trying to finish the movie – a black-and-white melodrama entitled ‘Cobweb’ – that he’s convinced is going to be his masterpiece. The project is rife with chaos: censors are interfering, bewildered actors and producers struggle to make sense of the rewritten ending, and everything else that seemingly can go wrong does.”

This is the brand new film from South Korean director Kim Jee-woon, and stars Song Kang-ho in his fifth collaboration with Kim. Song plays the director within the movie who is convinced and determined that his latest film will be nothing short of a masterpiece. Whilst most Western audiences would know Kim Jee-woon from his very violent thrillers like “I Saw The Devil” and “A Bittersweet Life”, “Cobweb” sees him play in the genre of comedy once again. Personally, I believe that this is a genre that Kim really likes a lot, particularly because he started his career making comedies before he turned to the horror and thriller films that he is most known for. I must admit that I feel a little sorry for Kim, because lately he seems to have been left behind by his cinematic comrades Bong Joon-ho and Park Chan-wook, who both have found large and continued international success. Kim is just as talented as these other two directors, (all three of them are also good friends), but for whatever reason, Kim's international fame has started to wane and his films are now barely seen outside of South Korea. I'm not sure why this is, because he is still an unbelievable talent and the films he has been making recently are of a high quality, maybe it is just that Kim is happy enough being a big director in his home country and international success is no longer the carrot it once was. Anyway, “Cobweb” is another very entertaining and funny film from this very talented director.

The film opens with Song's character, director Kim, having intense nightmares about his new film “Cobweb” which he has just finished shooting. He wakes full of ideas, and suddenly believes that if he could just re-shoot certain scenes in the film, he could turn it into a masterpiece. The only problem is he has to re-group his cast (who have moved on to other projects) and get everything shot within two days before all the sets are torn down and destroyed. Not only that, he needs to get censorship approval for the new scenes he has written before he can shoot a frame of film. Comedy ensues.

This is actually a very, very funny film, but it is a tad overlong. If it had been tightened by about 15 to 20 minutes, I think it would've benefited the film greatly as Kim Jee-woon struggles to keep the laughs going for such an extended time. Song Kang-ho proves once again just how brilliant an actor he truly is, and how big his range is. He is fantastic playing the in-over-his-head director, and is the key to most of the laughs in the film. While he is no doubt a fantastic dramatic actor too, personally I believe Song shines his brightest when he makes comedies. I will admit that there are a couple of scenes when he may go a little too broad and over-the-top, (particularly the ones when he is forced to act in his own movie when the original actor passes out from drinking too much), but really this is a part of the fun of “Cobweb”. It is not a film to be taken too seriously, and both Kim Jee-woon and Song Kang-ho understand exactly the type of film they are making, and just have fun with it. The film takes place in the 1970's so Song is dressed in some very funny stylings from that decade which also add to the laughs too.

Kim Jee-woon's films always look amazing, and “Cobweb” is no exception; in fact I really love the look of this film a lot because the majority is shot on sound stages where the artifice of filmmaking is totally embraced. It gives the film a hyper-stylised look, where cinematographer Kim Ji-yong (who just came of lensing Park Chan-wook's “Decision to Leave” prior to this) is able to use very dramatic and unrealistic lighting to great effect. All of the “back of stage” scenes are presented in colour, but when we are witness to the actual shooting of scenes of the film-within-a-film, “Cobweb”, these scenes are in stark black and white. While I do like these black and white scenes a lot, I really wish that they could have been shot on real black and white film, because they do have a very digital appearance which does not suit the time period the film is set in.

In terms of the comedy, it isn't what I would ever call subtle. This is broad, in-your-face laughs, but thankfully it is actually quite funny. It is a very funny satire on filmmaking and the behind the scenes dramas that can take place on set. At times it almost borders on slapstick or even a screwball comedy, it is that silly. Kim Jee-woon finds laughs in seeing Song's director character attempting to get censorship approval, finding access to an actress who has moved back to shooting her television commitments, being abused by film critics who accuse him of being a hack, dealing with actors who are either drunk or distracted by love affairs with other actors on set, to him trying to dodge his producer who has explicitly told him not to shot the extra scenes. Like I said earlier, it is all very funny, particularly as the stakes get higher the more time is running out for them to finish the picture.

One thing that I got a big kick out of was the fact that the film director Kim thinks will be his masterpiece, was clearly based on Kim Ki-young's seminal thriller “The Housemaid” (from 1960) although a much cheesier version of it. The staircase, the shots from outside looking into the room, the rain, the crazy woman carrying the knife; it is all from “The Housemaid”, a film that I absolutely adore. The brilliant thing is, at the end of the film we get to see the finale of “Cobweb”, the film-within-a-film, uninterrupted, to see once and for all if director Kim is the hack the critics claim him to be, or if he has indeed created the masterpiece he thinks. The look on Song Kang-ho's face when he has his answer is absolutely perfect too.

Overall, I really enjoyed Kim Jee-woon's latest film, “Cobweb”, as did the majority of the audience I saw it with. It is overlong, but for the most part Kim has created a very silly, over-the-top satire of the filmmaking process and the perils that can lie within. Technically, the film is extremely well made, and look gorgeous, as Kim is able to really embrace the artifice of cinema, as it makes perfect sense to do so in the story that is being told here. Because of this “Cobweb” has a very stylised appearance and has quite an impressive, and big old-style score attached to it (think Bernard Herrmann) that is just outstanding. Coupled with Song Kang-ho's very funny portrayal of a director struggling to finish his movie without compromises, and you have a great night out at the movies. “Cobweb” is a whole lot of fun!

3.5 Stars.

 

 

SUBTRACTION - MIFF 2023

As per the MIFF guide: “Driving instructor Farzaneh spies on a person who appears to be her husband, Jalal, heading towards the upmarket residence of another woman. Jalal claims to have been out of town but Farzaneh isn’t placated, so she enlists the help of her father-in-law, who is stunned to discover a man identical to Jalal … with a wife who’s a dead ringer for Farzaneh. Existing on opposite ends of Tehran’s socio-economic spectrum, the couples soon find their lives intertwined in unexpected ways.”

Director Mani Haghighi is like the rock star of Iranian directors, in which I mean he just doesn't seem to care about what is considered the norm in films from that country (which are mainly social dramas). His films are so different from anything else coming out of Iran in that they are big, broad, often very funny, and less political, and he never makes the same thing twice. They are also very, very entertaining. I had seen Haghighi's two previous films, “A Dragon Arrives!” and “Pig”, at past MIFF's and loved them both, so I was very excited when I noticed that he had a new film premiering at this year's MIFF. When I then saw that the film was a thriller that dealt with doppelgangers, it became one of my most anticipated at MIFF because I am a massive fan of films that deal with the doppelganger phenomenon, and issues of identity. Thankfully, “Subtraction” did not disappoint and I was enthralled right from the beginning.

Whilst the film crackles with directorial energy, the true key to the success of “Subtraction” all boils down to the two leads abilities to create two different characters , making them easily identifiable from one another because obviously each looks the same. Both Taraneh Alidoosti and Navid Mohammadzadeh are phenomenal at achieving this task, as you become convinced that you are watching two distinct couples, and this is done with more than just the average change in clothing and make-up. I must admit that when the two couples originally crossed paths with one another, I initially struggled to work out who was who, but once I worked it out (which didn't take long at all) I was never in doubt as to which variation of the character I was looking at onscreen. The two married couples are Farzaneh and Jalal, and Bita and Mohsen. Farzaneh is pregnant, a driving instructor, and appears to be suffering from some form of depression or anxiety. She is quite withdrawn, says little, and her body posture is quite slumped. Her husband Jalal comes across as the most beautiful man, alive and energetic, always smiling and caring for his struggling wife. He is respectful towards everyone, and willing to lend a hand if someone needs it. Bita on the other hand, is almost like the complete opposite of Farzaneh in that she is full of life, happy, cares about her appearance (often wearing light make up), and adores her young son. Her bright outlook on life is impressive when you see what she has to deal with in her husband Mohsen on a daily basis, who is a dog of a man. He is angry, violent, arrogant, rude and disrespectful, has little time for his son, and expects his wife to do everything for him. If there is a villain of the film, Mohsen is him. As I mentioned above, both Alidoosti and Mohammadzadeh are extraordinary in their two separate roles. It is hard to believe at times that Jalal and Mohsen are played by the same guy due to how extremely different Mohammadzadeh is. You fear him when he is Mohsen, but are totally drawn into him when he is Jalal. Taraneh Alidoosti, who I consider one of the very best Iranian actresses, also effectively plays two sides of the same coin with her characters, but she is able to make you care for them both. You love being in the presence of Bita because of how light and happy she is, but you also feel so sad for Farzaneh he is obviously struggling and it is not her fault at all. Whilst Haghighi doesn't do it often in “Subtraction”, the scenes where Farzaneh and Bita play off one another are superb and highlight just how impressive Alidoosti is at creating these two roles and making them distinct from one another.

What is interesting about the whole doppelganger element to “Subtraction” is that they are not real doppelgangers at all. Even though there is also a scene in the film where Farzaneh states to her doctor that “They don't just look like us. It's like we are clones”, that is not really the case, as they are two distinct couples living apart from one another, unaware of each other, until they eventually cross paths. It is only then that the trouble starts to begin for each couple as questions of identity are raised, as well as the morals behind falling in love with another woman or man who happens to look exactly like your partner. Can it be helped or stopped if one of them falls in love or is drawn to a “better” version of the person they already love? It is actually really interesting stuff. There is a really sad moment when Bita laughs slightly at something Jalal says, and he replies that her laugh reminds him of his wife. She says “of course”, to which he follows “...but she hasn't laughed like that in years”.

The suspense of “Subtraction” comes when, due to the volatile nature of Mohsen, the other three decide not to tell him of the weird phenomenon they have discovered, initially leaving him in the dark. Mohsen has a number of problems in his life, and refuses to either own up to them or even attempt to fix them, but with Jalal and his helpful personality, he wants to pose as Mohsen to fix these problems and ease the pain in Bita's life. The fact that Mohsen does not know of Jalal's existence is where the real suspense kicks in, as they then end up in the same place at the same time. Will Mohsen destroy the attempts of Jalal to fix the situation, and what will happen if or when Mohsen finds out about Jalal and Farzaneh? In fact when you look back at the film after you have seen it, most of the problems come out of Jalal's nature of being helpful, so I wonder if Haghighi is saying that it is often better to not get involved in other people's business, even if you are doing so for the right reasons.

From a technical point of view, “Subtraction” has been handsomely put together. It has some quite gorgeous cinematography by Morteza Najafi, some of the best I have ever seen in an Iranian film, that is very theatrical at times and revels in the artifice of cinema. I am not sure if I am making sense here, but a lot of films that originate out of Iran have a documentary look and feel to them, whereas “Subtraction” has the look and feel of a movie, not real life. It gives the impression that the film was produced on a big budget. Najafi's lighting also adds real suspense to “Subtraction” too, particularly during the scenes that take place in a thunderstorm. One element of the film that I have failed to mention, that is paramount to the tension and suspense built in the movie, is the fact that during the entirety of “Subtraction” Tehran is experiencing a freak weather occurrence where it is pouring with rain the whole time. From a production point of view, this would've made the film that much harder and longer to make, but it really adds so much to the film, similar to how the rain creates the atmosphere in David Fincher's “Se7en”. The rain in the film may even be supernatural in origin, as one of the characters mentions the constant fall of rain, but there are no clouds in the sky. However this is never explored further than this. The other aspect of the film that I loved so much was the non-traditional (from an Iranian point-of-view) score from Ramin Kousha. It is very “big” and continually builds as the tension in the film does.

Going into a film that deals with doppelgangers, you can often sense where the movie is going to end up. There is really only one ending that makes sense, and so while the end of “Subtraction” is a little predictable, I must admit that I was also quite surprised with how Mani Haghighi concluded his film (how's that for a contradictory statement?!). In fact, I was pleasantly surprised and genuinely liked the end of the film, which then finishes on a coda of sorts, with a brief exchange of dialogue between two minor characters, that I found to be chilling.

Right now, director Mani Haghighi is three for three with me, as I found his new film “Subtraction” to be a stunning achievement. It may not be as deep and thoughtful as is the norm for Iranian film, but there is still a lot to digest in “Subtraction”, and it is always very entertaining. Haghighi proves once again that he is brilliant at eliciting excellent performances from his cast (no doubt, him also being an actor has helped him in this regard), and both Taraneh Alidoosti and Navid Mohammadzadeh are outstanding in their double roles. I cannot wait to watch this again one day, and really hope it gets an English friendly blu-ray sometime in the near future, as this is a film I want to own.

4 Stars.

 

PERPETRATOR - MIFF 2023

 

As per the MIFF guide: “Something peculiar is going on with 17-year-old Jonny. Experiencing simultaneous nosebleeds with her face-morphing father, she’s shipped off to stay with her austere aunt, Hildie. There, she learns more about her magical blood and shapeshifting abilities – known as ‘forevering’ – that also equip her with a form of hyper-empathy. Which is just as well, as girls at her new school are disappearing at the hands of a mask-wearing killer, and they’ve all been linked to the local jock.”

At this point in time director Jennifer Reeder was something of an enigma to me. After watching her 2019 feature “Knives and Skin” I was so impressed by both it and her ability to create an unusual atmosphere, that I was sure we were seeing the beginnings of a new and important cinematic voice. However, her follow-up film “Night's End”, was the total opposite in that I absolutely hated it, and worse I felt the film had no atmosphere at all, nor did I feel Reeder's “voice”; it came off as a nothing effort. Had I been wrong with my initial opinion of Jennifer Reeder, or did she just fluke the success of “Knives and Skin”? The only thing I could equate the huge gulf in the success between the two films was that with “Knives and Skin”, Reeder was also the writer of the film (something she was not with “Night's End”), so perhaps was more invested in that project since it originated with her. Either way, I had a feeling that with “Perpetrator” I was going to finally have my answer to the question I posed above, and I must say that I went into the film with a fair bit of hope once I noticed that Reeder had also written this film too. Thankfully, I'm happy to report, “Perpetrator” is the work of the creator of “Knives and Skin”, rather than the director of “Night's End”, even if it may not quite be at the level of that earlier 2019 film.

“Perpetrator” is definitely an uneven film, in tone, pacing and performance, but what I loved most about it was the exact same thing I loved about “Knives and Skin”, which was its atmosphere, which was incredibly weird, but felt perfect within the world Reeder has created her story to exist in. And it is a story which has a lot in it. The film initially plays out like a coming-of-age story, but with a supernatural bent to it. Jonny struggles with the changes in her body (and mind), as her new abilities start to manifest themselves. I was worried at first that the reveal would be that Jonny was some type of vampire, which would have been too same-old same-old, so I was happy when it turned out that she was some sort of shapeshifter instead, which I felt was more original. That said, I am not sure that Reeder spends enough time explaining the mythology of the creature and the special abilities that comes with being one of these things. It feels skimmed over, as Reeder needs to move on to the second phase of the film which is the missing school girls, and Jonny's search for them. It is during this section that I think that “Perpetrator” is at its strongest, as it is here when the humanity of the film is found when Jonny starts to make real connections and friendships with the girls from her school. The disappearance of the girls starts to get a weight to it, as does the fear that it could happen to any one of them next. The conclusion goes full genre-style, and full supernatural craziness, but again, I feel like Reeder hasn't given these moments enough time to breathe to illicit the strongest response from her audience. It is certainly interesting, and very bloody, but it also feels a little rushed.

One thing that is absolutely apparent from “Perpetrator” is that director Jennifer Reeder is a massive fan of David Lynch, and hugely inspired by his films. This was obvious also in “Knives and Skin”, but within the first half an hour of “Perpetrator” there were two direct visual homages from Lynch's work; one from “Blue Velvet”, the other “Twin Peaks: Fire Walk With Me”. Like Reeder, I myself adore David Lynch, and one thing I have noticed in my time watching movies is that he is a true original, and that he is impossible to copy. To her credit, Reeder doesn't try to copy Lynch with her films, but rather tips her hat at someone she is inspired by. The atmosphere she creates in her films is all her own, rather than attempting to ape Lynch's style. Something that didn't show up in “Knives and Skin”, but does so in her new film, is her love of David Cronenberg, as there are elements of “Perpetrator” that could have come directly out of either “Videodrome” or “eXistenZ”. For those that have seen “Perpetrator”, it should be obvious that I am talking about the orifices in the chests of the kidnapped girls where the killer is draining them of their blood. Not to mention the fact that there is a body horror element to the story line which sees society's elite attempt to slow the progress of ageing and keeping their youth for as long as possible. Whilst Reeder is not afraid to show off her influences, as her filmography is growing, it is becoming apparent that she has her own fetishes that she likes to tackle in her films, mainly in the use of the “lost” girl. Be it an actual lost girl, or an outsider who feels alone on the margins of society, or the girls who fall through the cracks of life, it is clear these are the characters Reeder is most interested in telling stories about.

I mentioned above that the film is uneven from a performance perspective, which is true, but for the most part I believe that “Perpetrator” is a well acted film. It is important to note that the film is quite stylised, so none of the performances would be what you call naturalistic, but all of them feel cohesive and of the same world, except one (which I will get to soon). Kiah McKirnan gives an excellent lead performance as Jonny, showing the right amount of fear and confusion early on when her powers are coming into fruition, and then showing enough sass when getting more comfortable with who she is and what she can do, whilst looking for the missing girls. She also has really good chemistry with the girls who play her school mates, particularly Ireon Roach who plays Elektra, Jonny's best friend. All the girls are great, but the big surprise is the casting of Alicia Silverstone in the role of Aunt Hildie. Silverstone gives an effective performance whilst being dark, cold and mysterious in equal measure. It is something I had never seen from Silverstone before, in fact if someone had told me at the time “Clueless” came out, that Silverstone also had this in her, I'd have said “OH, AS IF!!!” (sorry!). Unfortunately, the person who plays the role of the villain in the film (and it isn't hard to work out, but I will not mention them by name, to still keep it a secret) is absolutely dreadful. Yes, I mentioned before that none of the performances were truly naturalistic, but this person feels like they have come from a different movie entirely! They have no grasp on the tone of the film, nor the kind of film they are in, so they come off very badly in it. It feels like they have stepped off the set of a comedy, rather than the mystery/horror film that they are in, and it sadly, does hurt the film, particularly its ending.

Before I finish up, I have to mention the film's best scene, which I thought was total genius. We learn that one of Jonny's powers is that she can feel people (emotionally), and then mimic them. The scene in question takes place at a teenage party where Jonny and Elektra are searching for clues on the missing girls. As Jonny is new to her powers, she cannot control them, so as she walks through the house, she is constantly mimicking all the people around her. It may not sound like much here, but it is so well done, and so intricately choreographed because it actually all feels real and happening in the moment. The background actors do not look like they are doing pre-planned actions but talking and moving naturally, and totally in the moment, but as Jonny moves past them doing the exact same moves, it is just something else; it is a brilliant moment, and one of the reasons I am so excited to see Jennifer Reeder grow as a filmmaker and continue making more films.

Whilst I had a very good time with “Perpetrator”, I have to say that this is going to be a divisive film (if my session is anything to go by). There were quite a few walk outs during my screening, and my own brother (who saw it with me) stated it was probably his worst film he saw at this year's MIFF. I obviously disagreed, and I think that those who are able to get on the film's wavelength, will get a lot out of “Perpetrator”. It may not have the polish and cohesiveness of “Knives and Skin”, but there was enough in it to enjoy the film and get me excited again for Reeder's future. All the different and disparate elements don't quite come together as well as they could have, but “Perpetrator” is filled with lush cinematography and a great synth score, not to mention the atmosphere of the film is to die for. Is “Perpetrator” entirely successful? Probably not, but it is a massive bounce back after the dreadful “Night's End”.

3 Stars.