Movies I Saw in 2023

Fewer and fewer movies this past year attracted my attention, and for the most part was happy to watch movies via screening services rather than return to the cinema. The inevitable result of this is that there are probably more 2022 movies seen during this calendar year than this year’s releases. It also doesn’t help that so many of this year’s releases have been less than compelling draws. Nonetheless, here’s my list of what movies I DID see during 2023.

*** ½ – John Wick Chapter 4 – A franchise that raises the stakes of action sequences higher with each outing, “Chapter 4” again delivers high-octane carnage of balletic proportions. A world- weary Keanu Reeves once again is being pursued by hundreds and hundreds of professional assassins and manages to outfight all of them, in stunningly choreographed set pieces. The movie introduces several new characters to the mix, most notably Donnie Yen as blind foe and friend of Reeve’s Wick.

The movie is perhaps overlong at 2 ¾ hours, and its continued expansion of the Wick World’s international coterie of assassins, all part of a worldwide organization called “The High Table” is perhaps a bit much. (One longs for the relative simplicity of the first film in which Wick is motivated strictly by revenge over the killing of his dog). But the ground rules of the vast world of assassins primarily lays down the ground rules for why everyone is motivated to kill Wick, and everything he must do to survive. With that established, we get about a half dozen lengthy action sequences which are some of the best seen on screen. Director, and former stuntman, Chad Stahelski lets his camera pull back so one can watch the intricately choreographed mayhem unfold in long, seemingly unbroken shots. The action is much more visceral than the rapid-fire editing more typical of action pictures. One remarkable sequence (out of several), has a gun battle and arm to arm combat taking place at the Arc de Triomphe while cars circle and speed around the action. It’s a triumph (no pun intended) of high impact action sequences.

Bravura filmmaking for anyone looking for high-adrenaline escapism.

*** ½ Mission Impossible – Dead Reckoning – Part 1 – In a close tie for best action picture of the year (with John Wick Chapter 4 above), Tom Cruise’s Mission Impossible series continues to set high standards for great action sequences. Despite having lost his boyish looks, Tom Cruise still allegedly does his own stunts, and what makes these MI movies so compelling is that you know that many of the stunts are being done by him and live actors, and not just the product of CGI. The action in Marvel movies and many other franchises doesn’t have the veritas this sort of film does. It delivers the thrills the earlier 007 movies did — in that the spectacular feats look and feel real in a way CGI action doesn’t. Of course, we realize that visual effects are still a big part of the picture, and enhance the action, but there is a level of believability here that can only come from a crack stunt team.

This action-packed 2 and three quarters hours seems to fly by, as its extended action sequences are always gripping. The Lalo Schifrin theme still provokes a visceral reaction that is a combination of nostalgia and a signal for action. It may be the best TV theme music ever created. While we’ve seen variations on all these action sequences before, they are infused with new energy, and Cruise tirelessly runs, runs, runs throughout the picture. The film ends with a terrific set piece that updates the well-worn ‘fight atop a train’ trope with new energy and a literal cliffhanger finish!

The plot here is complex, convoluted and confusing – but keeping up with the plot is besides the point. The plot is simply there to provide motivation for one exciting fight or chase or potential explosion after another. The film has callbacks to previous MI movies, reintroducing characters and concepts from the earlier films — but at least for me, it’s been too long to remember the references. Suffice is to say that Ethan Hunt is back fighting to save the world, and a variety of femme fatales and dastardly villains are working with or against him. I have no idea whether I’ll remember the plot lines of part 1 when part 2 arrives in theaters 11 months from now … but I doubt it’ll matter. This is just great escapist movie making on a grand scale. MI (and the John Wicks movies), are the cream of the crop in “must see it on a big screen” moviemaking and may be the sole defense against the inevitable shift of watching most movies via screening.

*** ½ The Holdovers – Isn’t it nice to see an old-fashioned, adult movie of the type they hardly make any more? The always dependable Alexander Payne, with the always watchable Paul Giamatti, give us a holiday film that may well become a yearly viewing. It’s a bittersweet drama with touches of comedy, in which a scrooge-like teacher in a late 1960s private high school learns lessons from a hard-to-handle teenager and vice versa. There’s some wonderful little Laugh lines layered in throughout. The adapted screenplay wisely takes its time plumbing the depths of its characters, including an interesting Da’Vine Joy Randolph as a grieving cook who just lost her son in Vietnam. While the storyline is somewhat predictable, it takes some nice little zigs and zags as it proceeds, intentionally and effectively mirrors the opening credits and style of films from its time period, and fulfills all the right notes for a holiday film without succumbing to sticky sweetness.

*** 1/2 Barbie – OK, given the tremendous obstacles in making a successful movie out of nothing other than a toy, you’ve got to give tremendous credit to Greta Gerwig (and co-writer Noah Baumbach) for exceeding all expectations. The movie succeeds in creating a fun, humorous, upbeat family movie, that even scores points for its examination of gender politics, while providing a decent emotional punch in bringing a family together. Does it all work? No. A few of the songs and dance numbers don’t exactly land, and the integration of the ‘real world’ with Barbieland doesn’t always register satisfyingly, but I’m just quibbling. Most product-inspired movies are dull and derivative and this is a high-water mark for turning a product into a movie and has landed both positive critical acclaim with incredible box office success. The production design is delightfully clever, and it’s filled with easter eggs and satisfying bits for anyone deeply steeped in Barbie and Mattel lore. That’s not me of course, but I still recognized some of the many spin-off dolls. It’s wonderful seeing constructed sets instead of CGI for most of the visual elements, and the costumes, backdrops, and playhouses are wonderful to behold.

I’m not sure Will Ferrell was the best fit for the Mattel CEO since the role didn’t call for his usual smarmy buffoonery, but Margot Robbie was terrific at playing the many colors of a Barbie going through a crisis of confidence. Ryan Gosling does a good job too with what is ultimately a difficult role to find the correct tone for. For summer fun comic entertainment, it doesn’t get much better than this. I just hope and pray they don’t decide to make a cheesy sequel that dilutes the wonderfully self-contained story line presented here. (Though given its incredible financial success I fear they will not be able to resist. I truly doubt that lightning like this can strike twice!)

*** 1/2 Oppenheimer – I’m not sure what it says that such an intellectual, political movie has done as well as it has at the box office, but its a good sign there is still an audience for ‘adult’ movies. I was lucky enough to see it in a 70mm screening with astonishingly good sound, but was surprised to see such an intimate movie on such a big screen. That said, I was somewhat at a loss following the movie since I came in with little or no background on Oppenheimer’s career and politics. Christopher Nolan’s screenplay almost demands familiarity with the man’s history, as it whipsaws through multiple time periods and its a bit dizzying to follow the non-linear plotting. Instead, you’re immersed in a number of storylines and it isn’t until well into the movie that you get a sense of which is when. The latest date is distinguished by being in black and white, which is a reversal from most movies that dabble in black and white footage, usually using black and white to signify the earliest time period. It also is challenging because there are so very many characters in the story, and it takes a while to know who is who and what their position / role is. On the other hand, the production elements of the movie are excellent: interesting camera work (shot entirely in imax), interesting cinematography, and an atmospheric music score that underscores nearly every moment of the otherwise talky film.

Despite the narrative confusion, the movie is very engaging due to the strength of the individual performances. Cillian Murphy is interestingly enigmatic as the brilliant and troubled Oppenheimer, and Robert Downey Jr. turns in some of the strongest work in his career as his onetime admirer, and eventual enemy, Lewis Strauss. What works best is the central time frame, that of the construction of Los Alamos and the eventual development of the atomic bomb; the testing of which, creates a tense, thriller vibe. The final third of the movie, focused more on the politics surrounding Oppenheimer after the war, was less clear and engaging but still a major part of the filmmaker’s overall vision.

*** Spider Man: Across the Spider-Verse is a sequel to the academy award wining “Into the Spider-Verse” which brought new vigor and excitement to animation. The new film takes even a greater step into wild animation with each iteration of Spider-Man, from a separate multi-verse taking on a different animated style. The overall effect is wildly psychedelic and always interesting to look at.

That said, the recent trend in Marvel movies and elsewhere, to deal with the multiverse (the fact that many different worlds exist side by side), is losing its luster. The plot here is sometimes confusing, and movie feels overlong. And, despite its length, it turns out to end on a cliffhanger while making it clear that next year a 2nd sequel (or a sequel to this sequel) will be coming along, “Beyond the Spider-verse”. Granted, plot is not the strong point here, but the voice acting is at a very high caliber along with the fantastic illustration and animation, and the movie does have some heart in its core story of teens and their parents, and the sometimes tragic consequences of ‘with great power comes great responsibility.”

*** The Killer – A cool, methodical film about a professional assassin that’s technically adept as David Fincher’s films always are. Michael Fassbender is nearly a one-man show here, speaking largely in overdubbed monolog, repeating his mantra of being deliberate, patient, and to ‘stick with the plan’ and never improvise. He winds up more or less violating his own code when he flubs a planned contract killing and finds his employers have to decided to erase him and attack his significant other. Fincher and Fassbender show in excruciating detail his counter plan. For the most part, its quiet and slow steady pacing produce significant tension, as at one point explodes with one of the most brutal fight scenes in a long time. A Neo-noir thriller that rewards patient viewing.

***Nyad – Two documentarians directed this ‘based on the true story’ account of long distance swimmer Diane Nyad, who in her 60s, rededicated herself to her life-long dream to swim from Cuba to Florida. An incredible and inspirational story, it features terrific performances from a wonderful Jody Foster, and a determined, vanity-free performance from Annette Bening. It’s gripping and an interesting story of an interesting real-life person.

*** Asteroid City – One doesn’t go to Wes Anderson movie for the plot. As is often the case, the plot is a baffling series of stories within stories with a large cast of name actors in non-starring roles muttering his rapid-fire dialog in a low-key manner. In fact, I had a difficult time following a lot of the dialog, (though what I could make out at times was droll and clever). What Andeson’s movies DO deliver however is meticulous art design, with everything looking like a candy-colored set rather than a real world location. Such is Asteroid City: a fictional town set in the desert with lots of peripheral action happening barely in frame in the corners of its whimsical town setting (these include atomic bomb mushroom clouds, jet packs, cops and robber chases and the like, swirling around the tiny town (population 87). Once again (as in many Anderson films), precociously intelligent young people are gathered as they shyly navigate attractions to one another, and our central ‘romantic’ attraction is from a steely photographer (played with unusual maturity for Jason Schwartman), and a reclusive movie star (Scarlet Johansson). It’s a collage of drollery with Anderson’s camera panning left and right (and sometimes straight up), with as few edits as possible. A busy, whirling collage of a movie: “Our Town” set in the dawn of the atomic age with none of the emotions or deep feelings of traditional drama. A visual feast, though one that’s hard to get involved or empathetic with. Certainly won’t win Wes any converts. If you haven’t liked his previous films, best move on. But a witty diversion if you admire his style and wry design aesthetic.

*** Air – There seems to be a trend these days for movies that trace cultural phenomena, particularly start-ups and flame-outs of corporate culture. Ben Affleck, directs (and has a lead role in) the story of how Nike recruited Michael Jordan to endorse sneakers that went on to become one of the industry’s greatest success stories. Matt Damon brings considerable energy and charm to the role of Sonny Vacarro who bucked all trends and rules to get Jordan and his family, to sign with Nike. He saw the potential greatness in Jordan and went above and beyond to land this lucrative endorsement. It’s very watchable, even for a non-sports fan like myself, as it looks at the inner workings of a company seeking to grow past its rivals, and the risks and strategies needed to close the deal. Surprisingly interesting even if you don’t care about sneakers and basketball.

*** Guardians of the Galaxy, Volume 3 – Director/Writer James Gunn makes the most fun super-hero movies, and this third GOTG movie is no exception. What’s enjoyable here is the cheeky humor, irreverant and gratuitous violence (albeit PG-13 style in this case), and wild imagination. The visual design here is bright, crazy, and like an explosion of the Star Wars Cantina idea of alien gatherings. All that said however, the film is overlong at 2 and a half hours, and has what seems like a dozen endings. It’s as if he couldn’t stop throwing more explosions, fights, and action into the mix. The actors have a field day with their heroic or horrific characters, and the cast is mostly appealing and enjoyable. However, it lacks the freshness that the original Guardians of the Galaxy movie had, and just gives us more, more, more. It’s pure escapism, and the peril is cartoonish — but still a lot of fun if you enjoy this sort of thing. It does suffer from sequelitis though… I prefer the original much more.

*** Theatre Camp – this amiable comedy takes a nostalgic look at the phenomena of ‘theatre camp’, a touchstone for theatre nerds and pre-broadway babies who spent a summer taking acting and singing classes and putting on musicals in a camp setting. It is made in pseudo-documentary style and was written and directed by actors who clearly have had that experience. Anyone who spent formative years wanting to be an actor or performer will probably find something to enjoy here. I found it sort of charmingly fun, but I suspect its of little interest to anyone who wouldn’t find the humor in a 12 year-old auditioning by singing ‘they all deserve to die’ from Sondheim’s Sweeney Todd. Ben Platt, is the only nominally known star, he of ‘dear Evan Hansen’ fame (broadway) and infamy (film version).

** ½ – Beau is Afraid – Be afraid, be very afraid of this divisive train-wreck of a film. Like a major accident, it doesn’t reward viewing, and yet one can’t help but look at it and see where the outcome might be. This may be the longest film I’ve seen this year (at 3 hours that felt like every bit of that and more), but it gets off to a fascinating start as a high-wire exercise in paranoia, as a totally committed Joaquin Phoenix goes through a series of misfortunes in a violent, scary city populated by crazy, violent, drugged urban street people. In short order he receives mysterious notes under his door about noise in his apartment (though there is none), oversleeps causing him to miss a plane to visit his mother on the anniversary of his conception and his father’s death, has his apartment key stolen, takes medication that absolutely must be taken with water only to find that the water in his apartment no longer works, has his apartment vandalized by street crazies, and is run down by a car. All this takes place in the cacophony of the first 30 minutes!) Ari Aster, who wrote and directed after the success of his two horror films (Heriditary and Midsommer), pitches this as an almost black comedy, reminiscent of Scorsese’s “After Hours”. But the continued haphazard escalation of Beau’s woes skids off the tracks and becomes grimmer and grimmer as the movie heads to its final revelations about Beau and his mother. Need I say it includes being confronted by a giant penis monster, a not-so-subtle manifestation of Beau’s fears and Mommy issues that has kept him a middle-aged virgin? There is a play within a play, animation, characters returning from the past and the dead, and it just keeps getting longer and longer. I did find the visual imagination fascinating, and the surrealism sometimes reminiscent of David Lynch at his worst, but ultimately this is not a movie for most tastes and though I was fascinated for its first third, I kept praying for it end the longer it went on.

** ½ May / December – Todd Hayne’s latest enigmatic melodrama has terrific performances by Natalie Portman and Julianne Moore, and all the tone, cinematography, and care that makes it seem like assured ‘serious’ cinema. But ultimately the characters and plot are somewhat confusing to follow, and where its headed and what its saying is muddy at best. It appears the lack of clear moral is intentional but it makes the film hard to get into or feel affected by. On the one hand its about a moral crime, the relationship that developed between a married woman of 36 and a boy of 13, that ended in imprisonment and eventually marriage. And on the other hand it’s about the intrusion of an actress into the lives of these people who she seeks to ‘understand’ them so that she can exploit them through her ‘art’. Or is it just about the slippery nature of truth? Hard to say, but ultimately despite the pedigree the film left me rather cold. A bit of a dissapointment for me.

** 1/2 Fast X – How does one review a movie franchise that has become as silly as this one has? It’s almost like a drinking game now, where you take a shot every time Dom mutters something about family being the only important thing, and when a shot of nitro is added to the car so it can fly off a plane or hoover dam. Still, you get a lot of big car chases, stunts (that by now look more digital than stunt-driver oriented) and bigger and bigger piles of car crashes. A little research tells me that this is a continuation of a story line started in Fast V (5?) though at this point who can keep track of all the characters that have been added to this franchise. They all seem to pop up for a scene or two, flexing a lot of muscle and scowling. The best thing in this film is the silly, over-the-top preening of Jason Mumoa, delighted with all the evil and chaos he is raining down on the Furious ones. It lightens the load and makes this laughable in a good way. The plot here is of course, ridiculous, as well as the destruction reigned down on the city of Rome (though amazingly, there seems to be no human casualties, just smashed everything else!), and the movie ends with a series of cliffhangers that inevitably mean there will be a fast 11 (and rumored, 12) to wind up the silly storyline here. Will this franchise ever come to an end? Will Din Diesel still be racing as he and the other characters become seniors?

** ½ Indiana Jones and the Dial of Destiny – Speaking of franchises that should have quit while they were ahead… It’s not that IJ and the DOD is a bad movie, but it’s certainly an unnecessary one. It doesn’t add anything to the canon of Indiana Jones movies that have produced decreasing returns since the original. This time, it lacks the touch of Steven Spielberg and just feels like a rote adventure movie with the usual exotic locales, caves, and chases on a variety of vehicles. Yes, there’s even a fight on top of a train (that pales in comparison to the one in this year’s Mission Impossible). Nothing new to see here, unless you count the unnerving site of a digitally de-aged Harrison Ford that looks rather rubbery and unconvincing. The only thing worth seeing in this movie is Ford himself (when the scenes shift him back to his actual age), who still maintains his usual charm. Phoebe Waller-Bridges (so wonderful in her own “Fleabag” TV series), brings nothing special here, and even stranger, Antonio Banderas has a small role in which he’s virtually unrecognizable. It’s time for this series to hang up its signature fedora and whip!

** ½ Maestro -Despite strong performances by both director / writer / star Bradley Cooper and a steely and emotional portrait by Carey Mulligan, audiences may be surprised that they learn little about Leonard Bernstein, the artist, composer and conductor in this oddly written not-quite-a-bio- pic. The movie seems entirely focused on the relationship between Bernstein and his wife – and the strains his bi-sexuality and exuberant personality puts on their marriage. Other than showing us how he got his start as a conductor, there’s little discussion of his art and creativity (though we do see him playing piano and conducting quite a bit). Little or no of his political stances appear in the movie as well, nor his important role in explaining music to audiences and young people. Despite strong cinematography and a sure director’s hand, the plight of the characters never engaged me. I found it difficult to find the heart of the story line or throughout the picture was asking myself “what exactly is this about?” Perhaps those more familiar with Bernstein’s life and work, or able to unearth the subtext of the dialog, would find greater interest in the slice of his complex personality that the movie chose to focus on. I found myself restless with its slow pacing, and the sometimes surreal representations of his psychology (particularly in a dance sequence with sailors). I would have been more interested in the artist, and was less in his sex life.

** ½ – The Flash – This latest super-hero feature from the D.C. camp is better than most of the recent D.C. Universe movies, but that isn’t saying much. At least this D.C. film doesn’t take itself quite as seriously as the many Zach Snyder influenced movies, and has a bit of a sense of humor. For me, Ezra Miller’s Flash isn’t the Flash I remember from the comic books, and is a bit too nerdy and “kid” Flash-like. The film doubles down on this by playing with time paradoxes, and yet another now rote dip into the ‘metaverse’ concept, which means we get multiple versions of the Flash, as well as cameos by a number of other D.C. superheroes. One interesting side-effect of this is Michael Keaton returning to the role of Batman, though he’s certainly a bit long in the tooth to be returning to the role. Still, he’s better than several of the recent Batmen. There’s a few clever ideas, and early on, some nice action sequences related to the super-speedsters ability to see things in slow motion. But unfortunately, by the third act of the film things get increasingly messier and turn into more rote free-for-all battles that we’ve seen far too often. Still, by D.C. standards, this is better than most of their recent fare, and enjoyable for at least the first half of the film. Faint praise.

** 1/2 – Sharper – A movie following in the footsteps of far better ‘grifter’ films like “The Sting” and, well, “The Grifters”, Sharper wants to trick us by pulling the rug out from under our feet with its twists and turns. It does this successfully and the less known about it before viewing the Better, so I’ll avoid any spoilers. But ultimately, it tries to twist things a few times too often, and the third act begins to stretch credibility way too far. It boasts a bit of star power in Sebastian Stan and Julianne Moore, but it’s far from her best work. Not surprising this one didn’t get a theatrical release, and premiered on Apple TV+. A reasonable diversion, but a bit of a letdown by the time its over.

** ½ Chicken Run – Dawn of the Nugget – I’ve always enjoyed the work of Aardman studios, whose claymation animation and dry British wit enlivened their Wallace & Gromit shorts to make them singular little pleasures. In this, their latest, they have created a sequel to their feature length “Chicken Run” and sadly it feels a bit unnecessary and repetitive. The movie has fewer laughs, and in many ways rehashes the earlier picture (as sadly, so many sequels do), and while its a painless viewing, it doesn’t generate the laughs or sense of cleverness of earlier Aardman efforts. More interesting is this accompanying documentary showing the complex design and animation methodologies that went into the six years it took to make this film. Its just disappointing that six years didn’t produce a more engaging picture.

** ½ – Cocaine Bear – A hit and miss attempt at B-movie comic horror. Supposedly based on a true story of a shipment of cocaine that falls from a plane and is ingested by a bear, the movie gleefully plays with the trope of a rogue bear that mauls people while in a cocaine-induced stupor. It’s mostly played for laughs with a cast playing broad stereotypes who you can ‘enjoy’ getting dismembered, eaten, and shot by one another, it piles on the grotesque details of people being eaten, mostly for laughs. It isn’t in any way scary or suspenseful, just playfully gross. Sadly, it marks one of the final performance of the great Ray Liotta, who is eaten in a finale that doesn’t quite work and isn’t satisfying. There’s some gross fun sequences here and there, but the concept of the film (drugged out bear wreaking violence) is more fun to consider than in execution. Snakes on a Plane this isn’t.

** Antman and the Wasp: Quanumania – As the Marvel Comics Universe (MCU) enters its so-called 5th phase, the emphasis seems to be increasingly on fringe characters and the continuing expansion of the metaverse. The Antman movies have never been amongst Marvel’s best, and in this 3rd entry the emphasis seems to be primarily on increasingly wild CGI and creating visual fireworks — at the expense of character and plot. As with the most recent Dr. Strange movies, the visual imagination is interesting to behold — but the movie feels long and even ponderous because the action within all the colorful craziness is quite routine. The group of 5 travellers into the quantum world (Antman, the Wasp, their daughter, and Michael Douglas and Michelle Pfeifer) get separated from one another and held hostage by a power-mad tyrant (in this case, the introduction of Kang the Conquerer) played with all mighty bravado and Shakespearean style by Jonathan Majors). Divorced from the ‘real’ world, anything and everything seems possible and we just get a lot of super-powered battle scenes that go on endlessly. The humor here is only mildly amusing, and the emotional responses (“I’ll do whatever you want, just don’t harm my daughter”) are trite and melodramatic. Is Marvel losing its touch? We’ll see what the rest of the 5th phase has in store for us, but for now, things are ho hum. As the reign of the Marvel Universe films finally ended?

*** ½ – RRR – I was curious about this Indian “International Sensation” that’s been on Netflix, and decided to give it a go. I was quite surprised that it was one of the most engaging action pictures I’ve seen in a long time. It’s about two historical figures that led resistance against British colonization, but one of the lengthiest disclaimers I’ve ever seen at the start of a movie, tells us it is strictly a work of fiction (since these two heroes probably never met in real life). There’s also a disclaimer about how no animals were hurt (they’re all CGI), and that’s probably a good thing as there are some amazing scenes of animal attacks. The action sequences are breathtakingly filmed, with huge casts and stunning stunts. It’s a mashup of stunt fights, slow-mo, CGI, wire- work and about everything you’ve ever seen in the movies of James Cameron, John Woo, Steven Spielberg and others. The level of the visual effects isn’t up to the best of U.S. standards, but there is an energy to this film that’s quite exhilarating. The plot got a bit confusing at times, people aren’t always what they seem, and flashbacks are used to tell us what’s really happening, but the momentum and energy makes the 3+ hours roar by. There are always a few great Bollywood dance numbers, and one of the song/dance sequences in the film even got nominated for this year’s Oscars. It’s certainly melodramatic, (The evil Brits are so so evil and sadistic), but it has two greatly charismatic leads, and energy to spare.

*** The Banshees of Inisherin – What’s the deal with Irish writers? Their characters always seem depressed and unhappy. Nonetheless, Martin McDonagh has had considerable success with his sardonic comedy-tragedies that take Irish characters through extremes reminiscent of a cross between Tarantino and Mamet. Here we have a somewhat simple story, of a friendship that for no particular reason seems to have ended. Colin Farrel’s Padraic, a simple-minded, agreeable but dull fellow, is made very unhappy when his pal of many years, Brandon Gleeson’s Colm, says he no longer wants to speak to him anymore. Colm, an aging man, wants to devote himself to more important artistic pursuits, composing fiddle tunes, and doesn’t have time to waste with his former friendship. Padraic insists on reigniting the friendship, and Colm threatens he will cut off his fingers if Padraic doesn’t leave him alone.

Set in 1923, the grudging conflict feels like a metaphor for the Irish Civil War (we hear distant sounds of fighting on the mainland from time to time). The relatively quiet movie escalates as irresistible object Padraic, continues to try to right things with immovable object Colm. The story is oddly touching and sad (Padraic’s only relationships are with a village idiot, his sister who eventually leaves as well, and his miniature donkey Jenny.). As always with writer/director McDonagh, there is dark humor to be found in the dialog, and the growing incredulity of how things get out of hand (literally).

*** Babylon – A polarizing, epic, extravaganza that tries to out-Fellini Fellini. It postulates that the Hollywood of the 20s was a loud, out-of-control, no holds barred orgy of excess. Director Damien Chazelle, who gave us the sentimental and lovely Hollywood of “La La Land”, now indulges his love for jazz with this raucous, loud, excessive, overlong roar of a movie. It’s fascinated by the mechanism of the motion picture industry, with elaborate scenes showing just how much work the making of a movie is. These scenes are perhaps the film’s most interesting (much more so than the many orgies and parties it shows in equal measure). It’s hard to believe that in the silent film era movies were the massive spectacles shown here, but perhaps they were. There are multiple characters and story-lines at play here, the decline of a movie idol, touchingly played by Brad Pitt, the rise and fall of a starlet played with exuberance by Margot Robbie, the rise to power of a Mexican American ingratiating himself to the film industry, and the struggles with Hollywood racism of an inspired jazz trumpeteer named Sidney as sounds comes into the movies creating a demand for music-focused features.

We’ve certainly seen the story of the problems created for Hollywood’s old guard when the silents were replaced with Talkies before. So this story isn’t exactly fresh — but we’re interested enough in Pitt and Robbie’s characters to care about how this ends their careers. Overall, it’s a star- studded spectacle with huge, complex, heavily populated scenes. It’s all a bit overwhelming. But I was interested in the overall scope of the film and impressed by its verve, even as I was aware that it was probably just too much too much in its depiction of a grotesque Hollywood full of excess. Probably the loudest movie in a long time. And certainly one that turned off and just plain wore out many who saw it.

*** The Fablemans – Now 76 years old, Steven Spielberg is more than entitled to create a movie that reflects back on his youth and tell us the story of a boy who becomes fascinated in making movies. It comes to us as a didactic family picture, in which his mother, Mitzi, played by Michelle Williams is an artistic free spirit who encourages the boy (making up for her decision to abandon a professional career as a pianist) in his movie-making fascination, and his father, played by Paul Dano, is an amiable, though practical scientist, successful in the budding computer industry. Young Sammy Fabelman is the son of two brilliant, talented parents who represent two sides of the brain, and the movie explores the fractious nature of the family.

The episodic film is sometimes heavy-handed in stating the price one pays for pursuing the creative arts (Judd Hirsch plays an uncle who all but states the thematic issue), but the film nonetheless succeeds in showing the sources of inspiration and passion that led Fableman/Spielberg to become a director. The film also shows the difficulties of growing up Jewish in an anti-semitic world, particularly pronounced in high school, and those scenes have power. While the family drama often borders on sentimentality, the film nonetheless touches the heart as most Spielberg films do. The film ends on a high-note with a wonderful short scene in which Sammy meets legendary director John Ford (engagingly played by a surprising David Lynch), and a winking last shot with a visual joke. It ended the film on an upbeat color that I wish more of the film had shown, but I left suitably touched by Spielberg’s tribute to the forces that shaped his career.

*** To Leslie – Propelled by a surprising best actress nomination for Andrea Riseborough, this small independent film chronicles the difficult and sad life of its tragic title character, Leslie, who won life-changing lottery money as a young mother, and squandered it with alcoholism. Now, years later, she’s homeless and drifting. Riseborough brings great depth to this sad, rural character as she struggles to find a life for herself, and somehow redeem herself for abandoning her son and wasting her life. It’s painful to watch her try to return to her hometown where her friends now hate her for wasting her life. You can’t help but hope she’ll pull out of the desperate downward spiral that has become her life, living on the streets with her only belongings in a pink suitcase. She is given a job as a maid in a hotel by a sympathetic man (in an unexpectedly warm and sweet performance by Marc Maron), but even there, she can barely manage to avoid screwing up her life. Ultimately, the acting is better than the script, which can’t resist being at turns predictable and hopeful, but still a touching film and a standout performance by this previously unheralded performer. The director’s decision to include long unbroken shots of her feeling, thinking and watching gives the movie remarkable emotional heft, and a real lived-in feeling.

*** Living – this remake of a Kurosawa film gets a fresh lease on life through this quiet remake featuring the remarkably understated Bill Nighy. It has the feel of a film made many years ago, with its old-fashioned view of work-a-day England, but it slowly spins its charm and tackles a weighty topic with grace and dignity. Slow to start, it eventually fills you in on its central character who blossoms from his life as “Mr. Zombie” to a man filling his days with purpose. A lovely meditation on life. *** Good luck to you, Leo Grande – A charming and sensual two-hander film that explores the complications of a woman trying to have a sexual reawakening after the death of her husband. Emma Thompson, subtle and fascinating as always, plays retired widowed, schoolteacher Nancy Stokes, who hires a young, male sex-worker to see if she can satisfy her desire and curiosity to experience the sensuality she never had in her marriage. It’s a delicate dance and beautifully directed by Sophie Hyde, with a script by Katy Brand that feels much like the material might have originated as a two-person, one-set play. Engaging and succinct, and the feelings of both characters are surfaced in interesting ways.

***Jerry Lee Lewis: Trouble in Mind – Ethan Coen, of the Coen brothers, makes a rare solo effort here, putting together a documentary that serves as a tribute to Jerry Lee Lewis. Completed, it seems, just before his death, it’s a valentine to this volcanic early star of rock n roll, and later, country music. Unlike most career-spanning musician biographies, it doesn’t feature talking heads or people attributing the influence that the artist had on them, but rather, it’s archival footage from throughout Lewis’ career, with most of the backstory being told through interviews over the years with Lewis himself. Its strong point is the great concert footage, often presented uncut, that show the amazing piano pyrotechnics of his distinctive boogie-woogie style, as well as his emotive, expressive one-of-a-kind voice. A mere 72 minutes, but as a concert film it gives one a real appreciation for what a singular artist he was.

*** Triangle of Sadness – An Oscar best picture nominee and palm d’or winner at Cannes, this is an uneven social satire that nonetheless packs some interesting comic punches. Divided into three segments with its two main characters in each segment, the first one is a bit overlong but plays with gender-based bias as two social influencers navigate their relationship and roles in their shallow business. The most successful and funny of the segments, the second one is set on a luxury yacht and shows the divides in social classes while poking fun at the cluelessness of the entitled rich. This segment plays like an extended variation of the HBO series “The White Lotus”. The third segment is the hardest hitting as power dynamics are reversed and features a compelling performance by Dolly De Leon. The movie ends abruptly leaving the audience to ponder what might or might now happen. Long, but entertaining, its difficult to see what the ‘best picture’ appeal here is, but director/writer Ruben Ostlund has long been a favorite in European circles.

*** Emily The Criminal – A tense, indy suspense drama with a stand-out performance by Aubrey Plaza. Emily is a desperate gig worker strangled by debt and a temper that gave her a felony conviction earlier in life. The desperation in her life leads her to fall in with a gang of credit card thieves and she winds up deeper and deeper enmeshed in their criminal enterprise. A series of wrong choices makes things worse and worse and the movie is good at ratcheting up a viewer’s level of discomfort as things spiral out of control.

*** She Said – Films that depict the agonizing process of newspaper people (in this case, two women at The NY Times), chasing down a difficult story, and trying to get both the facts, and people to go on record in a painful story, are always interesting. This one’s no exception, with Carey Mulligan and Zoe Kazan playing the two reporters who researched and broke the story of Harvey Weinstein’s abuse of power and sexual exploitation. The incident, when finally reported, resulted in the “Me Too” movement, and the film clearly depicts how difficult, emotionally complex, and even dangerous it has been for women to come forward to report sexual harassment in the workplace.

The movie plays like a procedural thriller, where we see what an uphill battle it is to track down evidence of a very personal sort of crime. The presence in the film of some of Weinstein’s actual victims gives everything a feeling of authority – and the scenes in which woman painfully recount Weinstein’s actions are harrowing.

*** Tar – This may be the most literate movie I’ve ever seen in its discussion of the creative process of interpreting music. Its lead character, Tar, played with vigor and force by Cate Blanchett is incredibly articulate in her discussions around music. She is also the embodiment of strength, confidence and Privilege. The movie quickly establishes her as a figure of iconic stature and success. The movie then traces her downfall as her misuse of her power and position become undermined by the rise of cancel culture.

Despite the compelling nature of the film, things are a bit difficult to follow. While we can see Tar uses her power to control the careers of young woman she seems attracted to, the movie never explicitly shows her doing this. Much of it is implied, though the suicide of a young woman once involved with her brings things to the forefront. She certainly seems guilty of abusing her power, but the second half of the movie raises questions as to whether things that are happening to her are literal or imaginary. She is troubled by noises only she hears, she ventures into dark hallways, and hears screams while out running. The filmmaker, writer/director Todd Field intentionally keeps things non-specific, using a number of motifs that create atmosphere. The film is in no ways a procedural in which a powerful person is brought to reckoning with her abuse of power. It’s much more an art-film, wrestling with ideas over the ways talent and abuse of power are intertwined. Blanchett’s powerful and articulate performance anchors the film in a compelling way, even if one wrestles with the through line of the plot.

*** All Quiet on the Western Front — Full disclosure: I don’t generally like war films. This movie is hell bent on showing us the horrors of war, but does little to explain or justify what the fighting was all about. It’s focus is solely on the horrific realities of war on the front lines. Granted – it does a gangbuster job of showing massive battles, senseless slaughter, and horrifying violence done in the name of country. And we can’t help but feel deep sadness for its young, central character. But for the most part the characters are simply cannon fodder. So though this may be a nominated ‘best picture’, largely because of the verisimilitude of its battle scenes and its foreboding sense of doom, it’s just not enjoyable to sit through. A film you can respect, but not necessarily enjoy.

*** Glass Onion – A Knive’s Out Mystery – This awkwardly titled movie shows just how desperate studios are to capitalize on sequel-itis. Granted it’s the same director and the return of the detective hero from Knive’s Out, but the film is fresher, and a bit more fun than its predecessor. That said, it’s another ‘clue’ like murder mystery with a lively cast, and the return of Daniel Craig’s southern corn-pone detective Benoit Blanc, who now seems to have a more significant reputation than in the earlier film. There’s nice comic edge here, and a sense of fun with over the top performances. However, the film stalls when it moves into flashback in its 2nd third, to show us what we did not know when we watched the initial murders unfold. As comic murder mysteries go, this is a fun example of the genre, but whether one likes it or not depends on how you like the genre. Glamorous and fizzy, it’s enjoyable enough.

*** The Whale – This claustrophobic, uncomfortable movie is centered around a strong performance by Brendan Fraser, who is literally swallowed by a monstrous fat suit and makeup, but despite this provides a touching a harrowing performance. At some level the movie is a bit of a freak show, as it wants us to gawk at its unfortunate, central figure as he punishes himself through his grief for his lost male lover, by gorging himself with food. It’s unpleasant to watch, despite its core plot of a father trying to reestablish a relationship with the daughter he abandoned. As sweet as Fraser works to make the character, it’s difficult to like or sympathize with him.

*** Women Talking – A strong acting ensemble populates the black and white story of, well, women making a decision. What they’re talking about is the fact that in this secluded Mennonite community, many women and girls were drugged and raped by the men in the community. They must decide what to do: fight back, leave, or do nothing. The decision is complicated by the fact that leaving means they will abandon their chances to enter the kingdom of heaven. The majority of the film takes place in the loft of a barn, where the women debate, and talk through their options. While little happens in the way of plot — the effective adaption of the book its based on, and the strong, compelling performances of the women of various ages that populate the movie, make it a compelling watch — even though it feels more like a play than a movie.

*** Avatar 2: The way of the water – James Cameron certainly is a force to be reckoned with in the movies — and he has made some of the most exciting films in cinema history. That said, it’s not at all clear why Avatar needed a sequel (much less several as apparently there are already plans for Avatar 3 and 4, and perhaps more). I can understand the desire from a studio’s perspective – but it’s not clear why Cameron felt there was more story that needed to be told. One would have wished he’d set his considerable talents towards something new and original.

That said, what do we have here? A gorgeous looking film, with state of the art visual effects. I chose to see it as he intended, in 3-D with high Frame rate, and it indeed was impressive to look at. However … for the first hour I wasn’t sure exactly what was happening (having not boned up on the earlier movie from 3 years or so ago), and at no point was I particularly moved or interested in the characters or their situation. Ultimately, it was a battle between relentless bad guys (the ‘sky people’ from Earth, now reinserted into new avatar bodies – albeit ones just like the first film), and the native people of Pandora (was that what this mythical world was called?). One thing that proved difficult was that you couldn’t tell the characters apart — nor even figure out which actor was playing which 3-D animated digital character. I kept wondering which one was Kate Winslett – but the transformation of the actors performances, into digital characters somehow robs the feeling we normally get when we empathize with actors performances.

It is, without a doubt impressive technology – and the digital characters certainly are more expressive than any other effects or animations we’ve seen in the cinema — but ultimately they are digital characters, living in a digital terrain, and the overall effect of this robs one of relating to things in a normal way. The story and its themes ultimately felt overly familiar and lacked any real power — so what’s left is another great visual story with terrific effects. The dangers of sinking in the water, so familiar from Titanic, is amped up here, but essentially the same thing — how do you get out from a sinking vessel? And things blow up a lot. And there our lots of battles with giant animals, flying birds, and so on.

At over 3 hours the movie felt bloated and overlong, despite being visually cool. Visually stunning is great, but it can still be wearying if one isn’t truly invested in the story and the characters. And yet, there are more Avatar movies to come! Hopefully Cameron can find something else to say and somehow ratchet up the story line to make returning to pandora worthwhile. *** Fire of Love – this academy award nominated documentary tells the story of two volcano researchers who married and travel the world together to witness and research volcanic eruptions. The film gives tremendous insight into the nature (and frequency) of volcanic activity and has absolutely spectacular footage of volcanos, lava flows, and the fury and destruction of these natural phenomena.

*** Guillermo del Toro’s Pinocchio – Did the world really need another retelling of the 19th century Pinocchio story (there was quite a rash of them in 2022). Probably not. But at least del Toro infuses his unique vision and style to this one, which features excruciatingly detailed stop- motion. The story is mostly familiar, though del Toro has added significant religious and anti- fascistic overtones to this retelling. It’s dark, perhaps too dark for children, but the details of the sets and puppets are quite outstanding. The human characters run a bit on the grotesque side, but the Pinocchio character is a marvel, looking much like a wooden puppet with the grain showing and knots for eyes. I think I appreciated the artistry in the design and animation far more than the story itself, which is all too familiar.

** 1/2 M3gan – A horror film with a sense of humor – it manages to be entertaining while creating enough suspense and scares to satisfy a popcorn-movie audience. We’ve seen malignant, dangerous dolls turn bad in movies before, but this one has a little fun with the genre, and the robotic M3gan has a made-for Meme quality about it that seemed to capture its audiences imagination.

** ½ – Black Panther – Wakanda Forever — Yes, it’s truly sad that Chadwick Boseman passed away and at some level I guess this film had to show respect for that. But as a valentine to the late actor, this mournful sequel was far too reverential and sentimental for a good comic book movie. I guess it felt like it would have been an insult to simply replace the actor with a new one and allow the character to go on, but… The woman warriors that served as the leads in this sequel were just too regal and dignified and the result was an action film that was high on respectfully addressing black pride and female pride and woefully short on fun and thrills. Even the introduction of Prince Namor, the submariner with a long history with Marvel Comics was yet another regal and over-serious character. This film with its underwater characters reminded me too much of another over-serious ‘epic’ film – Avatar 2. While I understand and respect the importance of showing positive role models for characters of color and young women, the film felt like little more than social imperative. Long and austere. I sure miss the cheekier Marvel of old.

**½ – Roald Dahl’s Matilda the Musical – This awkwardly titled movie is the film version of the broadway musical based on Roald Dah’s book. I’ve seen it on stage and always felt it was an attempt to take all the worst elements of “Annie” the musical, and repackage it as a new kids-age musical. Personally, I find the majority of the songs tuneless, and it’s difficult listening to high- pitched child voices squeaking endlessly through the material with thick British accents. On the other hand, the film adaption is fun to behold with its over-the-top performances, sets, and candy- colored everything. Emma Thompson is totally unrecognizable as the most horrifying schoolmaster of all time but terrific-campy fun. Less successful are the loud, horrible parents of Matilda, as tacky and over-the-top as they can be. Alisha Weir is a charming and sympathetic Matilda, and when one gets over the strident style of the film, it can be fun. Others however, will find it, as the kids call themselves in song, ‘revolting’.

**½ – Nope – critics seem to love Jordan Peele’s movies — but despite critical raves I found this Spielbergian tale of aliens lurking in the heavens disjointed and confusing. Granted, it’s great looking with its wide-open vistas, and shadowing things lurking in the heavens, but I found the connections between its various parts tenuous at best. It does a good job of creating a sense of mystery and foreboding, but ultimately I found its 5 central characters unappealing, and I didn’t really care about what was happening to them.

Granted, the movie is a bit unique in what I supposed is implied criticism of those who seek to make money out of sensationalism, but I just couldn’t understand the path taken by the former child star who was exploiting the tragedy of an incident from his childhood TV show. How that incident led to him opening up a Wild West tourist attraction, and why his implied life-changing show hadn’t ended in disaster the very first time he created the attraction, escaped me. And the attitudinal switch from being horse trainers for movies to deciding to cash in on frightening events at their ranch also seemed odd. I felt that the characters should all have taken advice from Peele’s earlier movie and should just ‘get out’.

Still, the movie holds your attention due to its sense of mystery and one’s need to see where things are going. Ultimately though, the destination didn’t feel worth the trip to me.

** ½ Marcel the Shell with Shoes On – nominated for a best animated feature award, this simple, cute, and ultimately endearing little film combines live action settings with the cute adventures of a 1-inch shell with one google eye, and tennis sneakers. A documentarian moves into its home and makes a you-tube sensation out of it and it eventually goes on 60 minutes who assists in finding his lost community / family. It’s very low key and somewhat slow movie, but cute in its own way. Just not terribly compelling viewing.

** ½ Ticket to Paradise – This completely predictable rom-com has little reason to exist save for three things: George Clooney, Julia Roberts, and beautiful Bali scenery. Everything about the screenplay seems derived and formulaic, but there’s still fun to be had watching the bickering Clooney and Roberts, channeling fizzy comedies of the past ala Doris Day and Rock Hudson.

** The Pez Outlaw – This is a documentary about Steve Glew, the self-proclaimed “Pez Outlaw” which tells the story of a man who sought to find his fortune in the Pez Collector market by traveling to Eastern Europe and smuggling in Pez Dispensers unavailable in the U.S. and selling them to the collectible market. It’s an obscure fish-out-of-water story that gives insight into a very fringe part of the collectibles craze. Despite the story, the documentary itself is not terribly well constructed, relying primarily on recreations of Steve’s adventures 20+ years ago. there is plenty of recent footage of present-day Steve (and his wife) telling the story, but as they tell their tale we are taken to flashback recollections. Ultimately not the best approach to documentary filmmaking. That said, its still a sort of interesting shaggy dog story.

** Don’t Worry Darling – In terms of story, this movie treds familiar ground of far better movies. It’s a ‘Stepford Wives’ sort of plot, in which a woman comes to realize that the ‘idealized’ setting she is living in has something sinister about it. Unfortunately, the movie is rather muddy in its plotting, and is hampered by the weak casting of singer Harry Styles in one of the leading roles. He is adorable looking as required by the part, but can’t rise to the acting needed to make him an interesting or credible character. This movie caught the public’s eyes due to backstage affairs between its director and Mr. Styles, and so it had a lot of buzz going for it. Unfortunately, the movie itself is a tired retread with a rather unsatisfying, almost ambiguous ending.

*** Pig (2021) – A return to form for Nicolas Cage, showing he’s capable of highly emotional acting when he’s in suitable material (not often during this last decade). Here he plays a man who lives out in the forests of Oregon, along, except for his beloved truffle-hunting pig. He barely speaks and has little contact with the outside world. However, when someone assaults him and steals his pig, he sets out for Portland to recover his pet. At first it seems this may prove a John Wick rehash, but this movie has higher sights than being an action revenge thriller. Instead, it’s a rather somber piece slowly revealing why he’s left society and became a modern hermit, as he revisits elements of his former life to gain clues as to who abducted his pig. Disheveled, bloodied, soft-spoken, Cage is an internalized hothouse of emotion, and ultimately the film is sad and somber with a great performance by Cage.

*** Matchstick Men (2003) – Since I’ve watched a few recent con-man movies I was pleased to see this 20 year old Ridley Scott directed entry to the genre available for streaming. Starring Nicolas Cage, in his twitchy, compulsive prime as an actor, as a career grifter now working with his protégée/partner played by Sam Rockwell, its an amiable piece of work. The story turns on his being persuaded by a psychiatrist to look into his ex-marriage and a child he fathered but never met. His teenage daughter reenters his life and the film becomes reminiscent of Paper Moon, with a father daughter team forming. While anyone familiar with the genre will probably see the inevitable twists and turns, the strong performances make this a watchable little movie.

*** Phil Spector (2013) – This HBO film centers around the criminal trial of egomaniacal record producing genius Phil Spector and features an all-star cast with Al Pacino as the perfect incarnation of the madness associated with Mr. Spector. Helen Mirren plays his lead defense attorney, as she tries to find a way to convince a jury that Spector did not, in fact, kill Lana Clark. The screenplay and direction is by David Mamet and unfortunately it lacks his usual verbal sharpness. The performances are interesting but the script, following life, is inconclusive of whether Spector is or isn’t guilt. I was hoping for a more thorough telling of Mr. Spector’s rise and fall, but its focused primarily on his trial and the point in his career when he was highly unstable.