Author: Christian Sauvé

  • Les nouvelles aventures d’Aladin (2015)

    ByChristian Sauvé Movie Review

    (On TV, February 2022) The Arabian myth of Aladdin (filtered through many pop-culture sources) goes for wild parody in silly French comedy Les nouvelles aventures d’Aladin. Placing its bets on all-out comic devices, the story has a framing device (with a ne’er-do-well trying to distract kids from an upcoming robbery by narrating a version of Aladdin’s story) that presumably explains the pop-culture references, multiple anachronisms and tone shifts in the genie’s tale. You probably know the basics: a likable thief, a beautiful princess, a marriage-hungry king and a mischievous genie. The production values are not bad—there are plenty of rough special effects to get the point across, some rather good set design, and one expansive musical number executed as a rap music video. Kev Adams plays Aladdin with some panache, Vanessa Gudie is cute as the princess and Eric Judor turns in a nicely charismatic performance as the genie. I strongly suspect that much of the film’s comedy relies on a thorough knowledge of French pop-culture circa 2015, as some of the jokes land weirdly from a French-Canadian perspective, and the film occasionally gesticulates wildly toward walk-on characters. (Sequel Alad’2 is much worse in this regard.)  There isn’t much here in terms of plotting, which is perhaps just as well considering how the film can rely on audience familiarity with the plot to tweak it humorously. (The sequence in which the traditional three wishes are extended to more of them is expected, but amusing.)  I smiled throughout much of the film and even chuckled a few times, which already makes this much funnier than several so-called “comedies” I’ve watched recently. Les nouvelles aventures d’Aladin is not meant to be particularly witty, but it does score a joke every few minutes. Not bad—although I seriously wonder how the film would fare in translation.

  • Witch Hunt (2021)

    ByChristian Sauvé Movie Review

    (On Cable TV, February 2022) I was expecting more from Witch Hunt. I’m not sure what exactly, but what it delivers is limp and disappointing in so many ways that nearly anything else would have been more interesting. Positing a parallel universe where witches are real and living in contemporary America, it soon becomes obvious that writer-director Elle Callahan is far more interested in social commentary and character drama than any notion of rigorous fantasy or alternate reality. Yes, witches exist in the film’s reality and they have power such as telekinesis, pyromania or teleportation—but what’s really important here is a paper-thin metaphor on sexism and discrimination in America. It’s highly significant that the film takes place (and ends) near a wall separating the US from Mexico—but you don’t need to wait until the very end to feel tired of the bluntness with which the film scores its points. The plot has to do with a teenage girl whose mother hosts witch refugees and, in the least surprising plot twist imaginable, starts showing signs of witchery herself. But temper those expectations, because the entire film is executed in this boring low-key approach that doesn’t move fast enough to paper over its dumb plotting, poor character choices (exposing witchery to an entire bar, for instance) and wholly unconvincing world-building. Witches are real, but nothing much has changed: the film lovingly details the ways in which the red-headed witches are oppressed and killed, but otherwise posits a world so much like ours that Thelma and Louise’s digital restoration is a thing. (No, you don’t get any points for guessing that Witch Hunt’s inconclusive ending involves a speeding vehicle.)  This is lazy, disappointing, unbearable naïve writing—not even taking advantage of the possibilities of its premise to deliver a ham-fisted message about admirable ideals. So disappointing—it’s bound to frustrate large audiences, starting with anyone expecting a coherent fantasy story.

  • Simon (1980)

    ByChristian Sauvé Movie Review

    (On Cable TV, February 2022) In Simon, we’ve got a dark comedy imagining what would happen if a human was brainwashed into believing that he’s an alien with a message for humanity. The weird humour of the film is clearly explained in its terrific few minutes, during which it’s explained that just about everything of significance in 1960s–1970s America happened at the whim of a handful of incredibly smart scientists growing increasingly bored and unethical in their experiments. That’s an excellent premise and in fact, it’s almost too good for Simon’s own good: Once past the great first ten minutes, the film sinks back into a plot that’s nowhere near as interesting as the hilariously demented scientists running large-scale social experiments on an unsuspecting population. In comparison, the story of the brainwashed protagonist taking on the small annoyances of life because he’s convinced that he’s from a superior civilization almost falls flat. The ugly shooting style, very close to found-footage documentary, certainly doesn’t help: using the depressing palette of 1970s cinema does Simon no favours and actually runs against the film’s more uplifting intentions. An interesting cast (Alan Arkin, Wallace Shawn, Madeline Kahn) can’t do much. As a consequence of starting with a premise better than its plot, Simon also suffers from constant lulls and weak moments: there isn’t enough plot to sustain the film, nor enough wit or imagination to get it purring throughout. It ends almost because it has to, without much of a climax. Frankly, rewind Simon to the end of its opening minutes and remake the rest—it’s bound to be a more interesting film than what follows.

  • Nightkill (1980)

    ByChristian Sauvé Movie Review

    (In French, On Cable TV, February 2022) Many Classic Hollywood stars ended their filmography with lower-end horror films, and it’s Robert Mitchum’s turn in the wringer in Nightkill, as he plays a gruff police officer whose role in the film only comes into focus rather late in the story. He’s obviously the box-office draw here in a film more concerned about cheap mean last-minute twists than anything else. There’s some promise to the initial premise, as two lovers plot the demise of her husband and then must deal with his body. But that’s far from the end of the murders and twists, all the way to a mean-spirited finale that shifts the film closer to horror than thriller. Murkily shot in dark grainy 1970 style, Nightkill was a German production that only saw release in the United States as a TV movie-of-the-week: The lack of good technical qualities shows up in slack editing, a meandering script (even at 97 minutes) and a failure to capitalize on the elements at its disposal. Mitchum’s gruffness is used effectively, but it’s clear that he’s slumming in a short easy role made to make the film more financially attractive to the production side. Nightkill is not much of a movie, but the sadistic ending helps (if that’s the word) make it more memorable than it should be. The premise could be used for a much better film, but in the world of low-budget films, in 1980 as of now, sometimes a bankable name and a quick shooting schedule are really all the producers are looking for.

  • Turkey Shoot (1982)

    ByChristian Sauvé Movie Review

    (In French, On Cable TV, February 2022) You may think that great movies make the grandest statements, but sometimes it takes a cheap and nasty exploitation picture to talk bluntly about things. Director Brian Trenchard-Smith’s Turkey Shoot is not meant to be a deep or elegant film—but its exploitation shenanigans about human hunting and concentration camps find justification in bog-standard totalitarian government recast in future Australia, which does add some interest to an otherwise schlocky film. Otherwise, anyone’s reaction will depend on their tolerance for out-and-out exploitation for gratuitous violence, sexual content and sadism. Turkey Shoot does have some energy, but it’s not necessarily harnessed in productive directions: everyone involved in conceptualizing the film clearly wanted some common-denominator financial returns rather than try anything as ambitious as its own world-building. I found it slightly more interesting and better-executed than many of its bottom-of-the-barrel equivalents, but that’s not saying much.

  • The Turning Point (1952)

    ByChristian Sauvé Movie Review

    (On Cable TV, February 2022) There are several films called The Turning Point. One of them, released in 1977, is about ballet, was nominated for a Best Picture Academy Award and I’ve been trying to track it down for a while now. The 1952 film called The Turning Point is most certainly not that film. No, this one is about a journalist fighting big-city corruption and paying a high price for it. Relatively obscure despite high production value and a good cast headlined by William Holden, it’s also a film that hits surprisingly hard toward the end, with a conclusion that seems unusually glum for the time. (Unlike other Production Code-era films that pulled out happy ending out of nowhere, this one does exactly the inverse.)  Despite being set in some Midwestern town, the film is obviously shot in Los Angeles, sometimes with landmarks that have since disappeared. As a story of cops and newspapermen fighting corruption, it’s still quite relevant even today, and has something grander on its mind than just a crime thriller. (Digging around the film, there’s quite a lot of then-contemporary material that doesn’t translate to modern audiences—such as a mid-film parody of a famous anti-crime committee witness.)  Holden is his usual dependable 1950s self here, as an incorruptible professional fighting the good fight and eventually paying for it. A rather good sense of urban atmosphere permeates the film, including a third act largely set in a boxing arena. While it’s sometimes a bit too cerebral to be as good as it could have been, The Turning Point has its own specific appeal—and an ending that defines the film, albeit not in an entirely satisfying way.

  • Boomerang (1992)

    ByChristian Sauvé Movie Review

    (On TV, January 2022) I know that Boomerang has a pretty good reputation in many circles. If you want to be specific about it, it’s one of the few noteworthy black-cast romantic comedies of the early 1990s, and it features not only Eddie Murphy at his most charismatic self, but such notables as Martin Lawrence and Chris Rock—not to mention a scene-stealing turn from Grace Jones, and lovely performances from Halle Berry, Robin Givens and a very sexy Eartha Kitt. It follows the romantic comedy formula of teaching a valuable lesson to its protagonist, as the womanizing protagonist (Murphy) meets his match in an equally-ambitious and promiscuous female executive, and spends the film learning how to appreciate true love beyond appearances and easy conquests. But beyond the bare bones of the plot, much of Boomerang’s best moments are spent in banter between Murphy and his co-leads (although the transphobic snippet hasn’t aged well at all), in Jones’ bravura satire of herself, in Manhattan locations and early-1990s period detail. I should, by all accounts, be pretty happy with the results… except that I can’t shake the impression that the film ends with the wrong romantic coupling, and misses an occasion to match its protagonist with an equal. Let me explain (and never mind the spoilers)—the third act of Boomerang has the protagonist give up his womanizing ways, realize that his female counterpart (Givens) is not the right choice and instead pursue the sweet, humble, authentic character played by Halle Berry. Fairy-tale ending, roll the credits, pick up your coat and walk to the exits. Except that I don’t believe it. I don’t buy into Murphy’s character’s “evolution” into a humbler, artistic down-to-earth monogamous person. Not helped at all by Murphy’s person, the protagonist is still grossly overpowered compared to his romantic partner — “I give them six months,” essentially. I’m bothered by the missed opportunity of engineering both of the insanely ambitious (and bed-hopping) characters to figure out a way of making it work at their matching levels. That would have been a more interesting third act to the film, and something far more credible than the idea of a leopard abruptly changing his spots. Now, I know, I know: romantic comedies are like that. But I still think he ended up with the wrong woman.

  • Metropolitan (1990)

    ByChristian Sauvé Movie Review

    (On Cable TV, February 2022) If ever you wondered what kind of film Woody Allen would have directed in 1990 had he been forty years younger, Metropolitan looks like a solid answer. A very dialogue-based, quasi-theatrical experience featuring preppy Manhattanites on the cusp of their true adulthood, it’s a film based on the accidental inclusion of a lower-class young man in rarefied social circles, and the tension, drama, conversations and ideas that spark from the ensemble cast of characters. Writer-director Whit Stillman makes his debut here, and the film’s threadbare production history is a succession of heroic filmmaking almost unexpectedly resulting in a solid movie. There’s a compelling rhythm to the dialogue of the young adults grasping at understanding the world and their place in it, especially as they feel that the once-structured society that was built for people like them in changing in ways they can’t predict. Some of the dialogue is charmingly naïve; other moments are simply compelling, as ideas build upon each other. The ensemble cast (still largely unfamiliar) makes a good go at the film’s blend of social concerns, romance, jealousy, drama, breakups, exits and desperate rescue. The film is at its strongest when it portrays Manhattan as a playground for aimless rich young people, creating a timeless sense of place and time that still works rather well. I wasn’t necessarily expecting to be swept up in Metropolitan’s very stylized execution, or characters that I would usually find annoying in a the-rich-aren’t-better-than-others way. But it works, and it works in a distinct way that has few equals… except perhaps Woody Allen in some of his films.

  • Edge of the World (2021)

    ByChristian Sauvé Movie Review

    (On Cable TV, February 2022) Considering the very long history of colonialist films, I really shouldn’t be criticizing Edge of the World all that much for its critical look at the British rule over its far-flung empire, especially when it’s lushly located in Malaysia (meant to be the historical Raj of Sarawak) and taking as a premise the existence of a white ruler after a series of events. It’s all in the jungle, confronting the realities of British imperialism and characters finding their own direction so far away from London. Boasting some impressive cinematography, complex performances and a story with a built-in hook for western viewers (it’s adapted from a true story that also led to the classic The Man Who Would be King), Edge of the World nonetheless fails to achieve much of its potential. To put it bluntly, it’s not particularly interesting. The script wastes the elements at its disposal, and the result feels like a spoon-fed history lesson. I expect opinions to vary widely depending on personal preferences—but director Michael Haussman can’t make the result as snappy or compelling as it should be, and that feels like a missed opportunity. It feels like a twenty-first century film about colonial history, though, so not quite a complete waste.

  • Devi (1960)

    ByChristian Sauvé Movie Review

    (On Cable TV, February 2022) Ah well—another classic Satyajit Ray film that I don’t quite like. As usual, I can recognize the kernel of something interesting in Devi—namely, the way a young woman is literally deified by her surroundings, showing both the lunacy of religion, but also the terrible costs paid by the woman, as others begin to consider her as more than herself. But while that’s a solid premise, I was rapidly bored by the execution. Ray’s typical style is slow from the get-go, but Devi seems to take things even more leisurely than usual. I can’t deny the cultural barrier either, as the film takes place deep in historical India with very few reference points and explanations for non-Indian viewers. (I recommend reading the plot summary prior or during watching the film, just to have a holding hand to unlock much of the film’s less-than-obvious meaning.)  I can see the care through which the film was made, I can appreciate the credibility of the historical recreation, and I can’t say much against the actors involved in the production. But when it comes to the essential “Well, did you like it?”, I can think of several Ray films I liked more than Devi (and just about as many that I liked equally, which is not very much). But so it goes—not all international cinema is as effective for everyone, and that’s part of the game.

  • Jungle Cruise (2021)

    ByChristian Sauvé Movie Review

    (Disney Streaming, February 2022) There are some good moments in Jungle Cruise, but then there are others where the film struggles to keep its traction. Unfortunately, many of the best bits are toward the beginning of the film, and many of the worse ones toward the end, which doesn’t help the film leave a good impression. Dwayne Johnson stars as an Amazonian River captain who is recruited by a female adventurer (Emily Blunt) to find a long-lost wondrous plant. If much of director Jaume Collet-Serra’s work feels incoherent and apparently designed by a committee, some clues can be found in how it’s from Disney, it’s adapted from a theme park ride, and it’s apparently written by no less than five people in what looks like at least three separate writing teams. You can see the flavour of Jungle Cruise’s plotting steadily slide from much-heightened “realism” to out-and-out supernatural fantasy à la Pirates of the Caribbean the longer it goes on. Johnson’s charisma helps make the entire thing hold together, but even him and Blunt can’t quite manage to smooth the bumps out of a script that makes sure to fit, in slightly more than two hours, not only a supernatural historical adventure, but socially-conscious quips, a CGI jaguar, as much of the original ride’s patter as possible, and a German proto-Nazi submarine to boot. By the time bees are telling the German captain where to navigate his submarine through the estuaries of the Amazon (don’t laugh or acknowledge the average depth of the river), well, Jungle Cruise is the kind of film it’s meant to be. It doesn’t work and the ride is not quite as smooth as it should have been. By the end, it all becomes too much: in the tradition of films that overstay their welcome and don’t accelerate their pacing in their third act, the final complications are more exasperating than anything else and prevent Jungle Cruise from ending while we’re still entertained by its antics.

  • Jai Bhim (2021)

    ByChristian Sauvé Movie Review

    (Amazon Streaming, February 2022) It’s uncomfortable to be against films that espouse virtue. Jai Bhim is, at its core, not that different from a long tradition of Hollywood films in which a lawyer goes to fight against injustice in a system designed to marginalize the oppressed. Here, Suriya plays an idealistic lawyer who takes on a case in which a tribe member is falsely accused of theft by an upper-caste woman, and then disappeared by the police. At its best, Jai Bhim gets deliciously overdramatic in portraying its protagonist in slow-motion going through the halls of justice, tirelessly fighting for justice and equality. It may all be a bit too much, but at least they’re entertaining moments of too much in a film that vastly overstays its welcome at two hours and 44 minutes. Despite the crisp images, slick direction and heartfelt intention to denounce a social problem, Jai Bhim feels interminable, repetitive and obvious. I did like Suriya and many moments of the film, but in total it all becomes overbearing—and that’s all without mentioning the de rigueur musical numbers that kill the pacing of the film even more. This assessment won’t go over very well in some corners of the Internet, as IMDB votes for the film appear to have been subject to an organized campaign to make this the highest-rated film on the site. This kind of organized brigading is frequent for Indian films on the platform—but in doing so, they expose flawed films to greater scrutiny—I expect the ratings to go down significantly over time. In the meantime, Jai Bhim ends up recommended to anyone trying to keep track of highly-rated Indian films… but even that may be putting expectations far too high.

  • Blades (1989)

    ByChristian Sauvé Movie Review

    (In French, On Cable TV, February 2022) There’s a long and strong tradition of horror comedies going for a parody of horrifying plot devices while trying to be funny about it. The trick, however, is making it funny—when that doesn’t work, you can be stuck in a film that doesn’t seem to do anything right. There is, notionally, something amusing about Blades—trying to transform Jaws into a golf-course horror film by way of an autonomous killer lawnmower. You can even see how using protagonists best known for being golf professionals would be somehow amusing. (Although, as a Canadian, my pick would be hockey players spending the summer on the links.)  But Blades simply and continually flubs the most elementary condition of horror comedies: it’s not funny, and it’s constantly pulling its punches as so not to be an extreme horror film. What remains isn’t much of a film. Coming from Troma, it’s surprisingly toothless and, well, safe: it’s as if writer-director Thomas R. Rondinella thought so much of the premise that he stopped putting in any effort after that. The result is a failure of execution built on a very thin foundation. A disappointment if you were expecting anything… which isn’t necessarily absurd considering the number of horror comedies that at least got a few smiles out of their audiences.

  • Weary River (1929)

    ByChristian Sauvé Movie Review

    (On Cable TV, February 2022) From a contemporary perspective, the most striking thing about Weary River is how it straddles the frontier between silent films and the earliest sound era—parts of the film are silent, whereas others have sound and music. It doesn’t work all that well—the sound segments overpower the silent passages (especially given how the title song is so predominant toward the end), and there’s not that much of an artistic justification for the passage from one medium to another. (There’s obviously sound whenever the characters are singing, but there’s not as big of a structural justification as would have been, say, the protagonist leaving prison behind to take up a music career.)  At 86 minutes long, it still feels long—one of the underappreciated impacts of sound film was a more consistent narrative rhythm, but this too is only partially achieved here. There’s some visual innovation from director Frank Lloyd (including a shot taking us “inside” a radio to the studio—fancy!) and some of the gangster/prison material prefigures what Warners would churn out throughout the 1930s. Otherwise, though, Weary River remains more a curio for students of the transition between silent and sound film—it’s not completely dull, but there’s an artificiality to the way it transitions from one paradigm to the other that calls attention to both.

  • I Walk Alone (1947)

    ByChristian Sauvé Movie Review

    (On TV, February 2022) As far as film noir headliners go, it’s hard to do better than Burt Lancaster and Kirk Douglas (even if Douglas here plays a supporting character—he would get top billing later in his career). In I Walk Alone, Lancaster is a gangster coming out of prison after 14 years, and finding that his old partner (Douglas) has built a successful nightclub. Getting him to honour an agreement to share past criminal proceeds, he’s met with a frosty reception. A nightclub singer becomes involved and soon transfers her affection from one man to another. It’s all crunchy noir, with nightclubs, singers, criminals, characters slapping each other, revenge and a finale that makes sure to resolve matters. The film originally attracted some controversy for not quite sticking to the Hays Code and leaving the main character profit from his crimes… which works rather well today. Lancaster fully uses his bulk for implicit menace here, with Douglas playing a meeker character. Lisbeth Scott is in-between them as the nightclub singer/girlfriend. As with other late-1940s films, there’s a touch of melodrama underscored by the insistent soundtrack, but it all works rather well in the end. I Walk Alone remains a solid noir, even if Douglas doesn’t quite occupy the space he would later in his career.