Reviews

  • The Notorious Bettie Page (2005)

    The Notorious Bettie Page (2005)

    ByChristian Sauvé Movie Review

    (On Cable TV, July 2017) There’s an obviously voyeuristic appeal in watching a movie about “Queen of Pin-Ups” Bettie Page, but The Notorious Bettie Page takes us beyond nudity to expose us to Page’s unusual joie-de-vivre and how she became a target of the morality wars of the late fifties. Gretchen Mol is rather good as Paige (even though they don’t quite look like each other), carrying much of Page’s reputed vivaciousness on-screen. From a cinematographic perspective, director Mary Harron chooses to shoot the film largely in black-and-white, with occasional colour sequences to underscore various story points. Compared to documentary films about Page, The Notorious Bettie Page effectively dramatizes the high points of her early life, even though much of her story is reduced to a few on-the-nose lines, especially toward the end. (Page reportedly saw the movie, but there are conflicting accounts about her reaction: One of them has her shouting “lies!” while the other has her being pleased and commenting that Gretchen Mol was prettier than she was) This being said, Page fans who are familiar with the second half of her life will be disappointed to see that the film ends far too soon to be considered complete—while the real Bettie Page did turn to a religious life, her life took a turn for the worse from the mid-seventies to the early nineties, landing her in hospital and detention. None of that is in the film, perhaps in-keeping with the film’s desire to focus on Page as an unusual icon of changing morality. Those who want the real story may want to look online, or screen the far more complete 2012 documentary Bettie Page Reveals All. Meanwhile, The Notorious Bettie Page still does have a place as a reasonably accessible dramatization of Page’s early life, but it’s not the entire story … and everyone should know the real story.

  • The Secret of NIMH (1982)

    The Secret of NIMH (1982)

    ByChristian Sauvé Movie Review

    (On Cable TV, July 2017) There was a time during which renegade-Disney-animator/director Don Bluth represented perhaps the only credible alternative to Disney when it came to animated movies. The Secret of NIMH was the first such challenge, and even today it’s easy to see that it had things to offer that couldn’t be found in Disney movies: a darker, harsher, more epic-fantasy-like story that similar offerings such as Disney’s The Rescuers. The quality of the animation is average at best, but there is some ambition in presenting a story of this scope in animated format. This being said, I’m not as taken by The Secret of NIMH as I expected to be. The darker tone proves a hindrance at times, and the scattered subplots don’t help either, oscillating between light comic relief and far more serious dark fantasy involving uplifted rats, deadly succession game, magic and a widow trying to escape death. Whew. Then there’s the shaky logic of the premise, in which the “talking sentient animals” is justified by way of a scientific experiment, raising far many more questions about the presence of other talking sentient animals (such as the birds) that weren’t in the lab. As such, The Secret of NIMH feels dull, dark and unpleasant. Not quite what I was expecting.

  • Take Shelter (2011)

    Take Shelter (2011)

    ByChristian Sauvé Movie Review

    (On Cable TV, July 2017) Writer/Director Jeff Nichols is now firmly on my radar after Mud and Midnight Special: his quasi-tactile sense of verisimilitude is astonishing, the local colour he brings to his stories is exceptional and he gets to control his movies by acting both as screenwriter and director. His frequent collaborations with Michael Shannon also help, as exemplified by Take Shelter, in which Shannon plays a young dad trying to keep himself and his family together through increasingly worrisome premonitions. It’s not a big movie, but it’s effective. The tension ramps up, Shannon is mesmerizing and Jessica Chastain shows up as a wife who tries to understand what her husband is going through. The ending packs a surprise whammy. It’s a good movie. But, if I can dedicate the rest of this review to post-viewing thoughts, I approached the film as low-key fantasy: there wasn’t any ambiguity in my mind as to whether the protagonist was suffering from delusions or prophetic dreams. I’m a genre-movie fan, and didn’t really bother with any realistic interpretation. When the surprise-ending came, I was more than willing to see it as a classical, literal fantastic twist with no other interpretation. Imagine my surprise when I started seeing references to the ending being open-ended—as a genre-comfortable fan, I hadn’t bothered with the depressingly realistic interpretation of the ending, in which we go back into the protagonist’s mind for another premonition. There’s probably a lesson here in terms of audience expectations and what they get from a movie, but I’m perhaps more interested in noting that Take Shelter’s ending does successfully walk a difficult line between literal and metaphorical interpretation … while being unusually successful in fulfilling both.

  • The Jerk (1979)

    The Jerk (1979)

    ByChristian Sauvé Movie Review

    (On Cable TV, July 2017) My history of film comedy is shaky, but if I recall correctly, The Jerk was an early example of the idiot-protagonist subgenre, especially as executed as a continuous series of gags. Steve Martin was trying to broaden his appeal beyond stand-up comedy at the time, but the film he wrote ended up reflecting his gag-a-minute sensibilities, with a generous side dish of absurdity. Does it still work? Well, sort-of: While comedy audiences today are far more used to rapid-fire idiot comedies (Will Ferrell’s career comes to mind), The Jerk acts as a prototype of the form and, as such, can feel a bit slack compared to later examples. Its eagerness to throw everything on-screen to see what sticks can feel desperate, and it does have strange ideas about pacing that occasionally stop the film dead. It’s amusing more than funny (although I couldn’t help but laugh audibly at the kitten-juggling moment, probably helped along by the fact that I was caring for a kitten at the time) but it does have a good-natured tone that’s hard to resist even today. Steve Martin is irreplaceable as the title character, and it’s always nice to see Bernadette Peters going for laughs in her prime. The Jerk appealed to a specific kind of viewer back then (i.e.; Steve Martin fans) and while that audience may have grown since then, it’s still not a comedy for everyone. I found the details and throwaway gags funnier than the overall story, but that’s to be expected from a quasi-slapstick comedy.

  • Invasion of the Body Snatchers (1978)

    Invasion of the Body Snatchers (1978)

    ByChristian Sauvé Movie Review

    (On Cable TV, June 2017) on the one hand, there isn’t much in Invasion of the Body Snatchers that hasn’t been done elsewhere. The idea of seeing neighbours becoming alien is pure paranoia fuel, and it’s exactly the kind of stuff that leads to remakes (2007’s rather dull The Invasion), uncredited rip-offs or overall spiritual successors. Still, what it does here is done well, whether it’s Donald Sutherland’s eccentric protagonist, Brooke Adams as a decoy heroine, the steadily mounting sense of tension or the various set-pieces. Plus, hey, there are minor but solid roles for Jeff Goldblum and Leonard Nimoy. Late-seventies San Francisco is worth a look no matter how long it’s been, the special effects aren’t bad (wow, that mutant dog!) and director Philip Kaufman knows what he’s doing in steadily cranking up the tension. The paranoia grows throughout the film, and perhaps the best thing about it is that its third act does not shy away from consequences or magically resolves the increasing bleakness of its plot. Frankly, Invasion of the Body Snatchers’ ending is still very effective—and is likely to remain so even as modern studio-driven movies desperately try to avoid anything that may upset audiences.

  • Pink Floyd: The Wall (1982)

    Pink Floyd: The Wall (1982)

    ByChristian Sauvé Movie Review

    (On Cable TV, June 2017) I’m not going to claim that I understood much of Pink Floyd: The Wall. I’m not even going to claim that I watched it attentively. But I can reasonably say that, even twenty-five years later, there hasn’t been a film quite like it ever since. A blend of animation and surreal live footage going into the mind of a rocker undergoing a mental breakdown, The Wall flips between reality, flashbacks and nightmares to present a delirious vision. As a musical, it barely features any conventionally spoken dialogue—much of the film consists of songs brought to life. As someone who (cough-cough, can I admit this?) has never warmed up to either Pink Floyd or progressive rock, I certainly didn’t listen to the film for its music—and the visuals became almost unbearable at times. Still, there are a few strong moments in the film, and it pains me to say that the fascistic imagery late in the movie seemed a bit too real for comfort. There’s also the whole “Another Brick in the Wall” sequence that acts as a dark highlight on the education system. This being said, I’m not sure I got any joy, entertainment or pleasure out of The Wall … nor did I expect the film to provide any. I suppose that those who are likely to listen to Pink Floyd will get more out of the film than I did.

  • Witness (1985)

    Witness (1985)

    ByChristian Sauvé Movie Review

    (On Cable TV, June 2017) For a film often derided as “Harrison Ford among the Amish”, Witness does have quite a bit running under the surface. Its somewhat predictable story does hide a well-executed thriller with a few surprising moments and a fairly harsh tone throughout. It rarely makes any compromises when it comes to presenting the danger of its thriller elements: there is blood, numerous violent deaths, real danger for most characters and pervasive paranoia once the outline of the corrupt cops becomes clear. Harrison Ford is rather good in the main role, a policeman who seeks refuge with the Amish once he’s badly hurt and surrounded by people who want to kill him. The romance that emerges between him and another Amish woman is handled decently (I did not expect this much nudity…) and resolved in a somewhat atypical manner. Better yet is the climax, which sees the non-violent ways of the Amish overcome a dangerous man with a gun: the film does make a point of espousing the virtues of its subjects, and the consequent respect of Amish values help make Witness more than a curiosity piece even today.

  • The Warriors (1979)

    The Warriors (1979)

    ByChristian Sauvé Movie Review

    (On DVD, June 2017) It’s a bit of a shame that The Warriors, as a whole movie, never quite lives up to the striking impression left by its first few minutes, as director Walter Hill quickly sketches a nightmarish vision of near-future-New York City dominated by colourful gangs and pervasive decay. By the time the gangs congregate and realize they can take on the Law, we expect a different film than the one that is revealed a few minutes later, as a small gang is framed for a prominent assassination and must fight their way from the Bronx to Brooklyn if they want to survive the night. This initial burst of cool gives way to a far more ordinary narrative, the episodes accumulating in-between the titular heroic gang and their morning salvation. As with such stories, the unlikeliness of characters appearing and reappearing defy logic, but then again The Warriors if far more about the rule of cool than plot logic. We are, after all, asked to cheer for gang members with unsavoury pasts (and, as one of the dumbest characters show, an uncanny ability fall for the most obvious honey traps). On the other hand, there is some kind of panache in seeing gangs listening to a single DJ able to move forces across the island. The 2005 “Ultimate Director’s Cut” heighten the parallels between the Warriors and Xenophon’s classic Ten Thousand tale, and heighten the link between the film and comic books. Still, neither of those changes are more than mildly amusing extras—they don’t add much to the core film. What still works about the film, however, is its stylish presentation. The dialogue isn’t particularly good, the characters are mildly repellent at best but The Warriors manages to remain interesting because it’s a blend of seventies insecurities and timeless stylistic flourishes.

  • Everybody Wants Some!! (2016)

    Everybody Wants Some!! (2016)

    ByChristian Sauvé Movie Review

    (On Cable TV, June 2017) I’m not sure when Richard Linklater landed on my list of interesting directors. Probably by the time I got tired of writing, “you know, I didn’t really expect to enjoy this but…” about nearly every one of his recent films. Here, Linklater goes back to college in describing the first few days of his protagonist’s arrival on campus. Unlike other college movies (and much in-line with Linklater’s playful habit of playing with time in his films), Everybody Wants Some!! takes place nearly entirely before the beginning of classes, in-between our protagonist’s arrival at the house where his baseball team stays, and the first course he attends. The three days in-between are a charmingly plotless mixture of girl-chasing, parties, baseball practice and spirited conversations. There is a plot of sorts, but much of the movie feels like the pilot episode of a much longer series, delicately setting up plot threads but ending on an upbeat anything-is-possible note. Against every single one of my expectations (and keep in mind that my college experience was barely PG rated), Everybody Wants Some!! is immediately and steadily engrossing. The characters are likable, the situations have just enough nostalgia to be compelling and the dialogues are razor-sharp. Blake Jenner is blandly likable as the viewpoint protagonist, while Zoey Deutch is too cute for words as the eventual romantic interest and Glen Powell steals the show as the wizened sarcastic Finnegan. A terrific soundtrack wraps up everything nicely. Atypical and successful as most of Linklater’s movies now seem to be, Everybody Wants Some!! feels like an unexpected hit, even for those who have nothing in common for the early-eighties nostalgia it invokes.

  • A Walk in the Woods, Bill Bryson

    A Walk in the Woods, Bill Bryson

    ByChristian Sauvé Book Review

    Anchor, 1997 (2015 reprint) 304 pages, C$21.97 pb, ISBN 978-0385686037

    In reviewing a book, it’s hard to give bigger praise than to explain why and how a book led to concrete action in the reviewer’s life. It’s commonly accepted that books that have the biggest impact lead to real changes in behaviour, to perceptible improvements in the reader’s life. But Bill Bryson’s A Walk in the Wood has me thinking along opposite lines: What if a book’s ultimate success could be measured in carefully considered and embraced inaction?

    I’m not sure Bryson himself would approve. After all, he has made his reputation as a writer by doing things and then writing about them. Best-known (if unfairly so) as a travel writer, Bryson has proven himself an uncommonly polyvalent writer, notably by delivering a compulsively readable scientific vulgarization tome A Short History of Nearly Everything that floored me when I read it a few years ago. A Walk in the Woods is closer to a classical travel book, albeit with a twist—it’s all about hiking a few thousand miles not too far away from Bryson’s home.

    The Appalachian Trail, should it need to be reintroduced, it a 3,000-mile trail that goes from Georgia to Maine, crossing rivers, peaks, valleys, roads and other areas of the Eastern United States. Maintained largely by volunteers (with some assistance from the U.S. Park Service), it is attempted by thousands of people every year, even though a much smaller percentage (10–25%, depending on whom you believe) manage to walk the entire trail during the hospitable season. Bryson was 44 when we decided he’d attempt to hike as much of the trail as possible. The book is a journal of his experiences.

    Newcomers to Bryson’s style will be quickly hooked by the authors’ breezy prose, equally laden with fact as it can be compulsively funny. Bryson masters the art of delivering exposition with a comedian’s touch, and so A Walk in the Woods can drop lengthy passages about the U.S. Park Service’s fondness for building roads, the environmental collapse of the American chestnut tree or Thoreau’s conflicted feelings about nature and make it feel like highly entertaining reading. It helps that, in-between the delicious exposition, we get personal anecdotes about Bryson walking the trails, nearly succumbing to hypothermia, and the perils of walking alongside a vaguely disreputable friend.

    Then, of course, there’s the minutia of long-distance hiking. Completing the Appalachian Trail means not falling prey to injuries, bears, dehydration, lost bearings, occasional murders and other annoying hikers. Bryson spares few details in telling readers about setting up camp in the wilderness, spending days without washing, being terrified by night-time noises, the shock of reintegrating civilization and the bare comforts of the trail for months on end.

    (Those who came to the book by way of the Robert Redford movie will be happy to find out that while much of the book’s first half is adapted reasonably well to the big screen, the second half of the book is almost completely different, and feels far more interesting than the pat third act manufactured by the screenwriters. Plus there’s a lot more of Bryson’s delightful exposition to read.)

    I started reading A Walk in the Woods still clinging to the notion that hiking the Appalachian Trail, as unlikely as it would be to arrange (“Hi Boss; I’m going for a walk… I’ll be back in a few months”) would be a pretty cool thing to do. By the time I was finished reading the book, though, Bryson’s meticulous description of what it implies had put me off the project forever. Hiking still seems like a great idea; hiking for a few days still sounds pretty good to me. But the 3000 miles, six-month odyssey from Georgia to Maine? Nope, no way, I’m good.

    Hence my assertion that some of the best books are those who carefully lead us to a measured lack of action. Thank you, Bill Bryson, for curing me from that unrealistic notion—I’ll sleep better knowing that I do not, in fact, want to do this. On the other hand, I will read more of Bryson’s books…

  • Ben-Hur (2016)

    Ben-Hur (2016)

    ByChristian Sauvé Movie Review

    (On Cable TV, June 2017) Ugh. Everyone knows that the risk in remaking a classic film is producing a remake so bad that it disappears without a blip. With Ben-Hur, the remake is dull enough that it self-erases from mind moments after the movie wraps up. Other than two standout sequences (the galley sequence and the remake of the classic chariot race), much of Ben-Hur is undistinguishable from so many other recent sword-and-sandal movies … and considering that there haven’t been that many of them, it’s already telling. But director Timur Bekmambetov’s strength is in strong visuals and action sequences, so the film only really comes alive during those moments—the rest is straight-up historical drama, loosely coupled with biblical content. At least it features a few largely unknown cast, the best of which (Jack Huston, Toby Kebbell, Nazanin Boniadi, Ayelet Zurer) have reasonable chances of landing roles in better movies. At least there are a few action sequences to make things worthwhile: While overly and obviously CGI-ed, the chariot race is frantic and event-filled (too much so at times—longer shots would have helped), while the galley sequence is one set of nightmares piled upon others. I would seriously recommend fast-forwarding the movie until you hit those sequences—the rest can barely be recalled after watching the film.

  • The End of the Tour (2015)

    The End of the Tour (2015)

    ByChristian Sauvé Movie Review

    (On Cable TV, June 2017) Movies often get a bad reputation as a sub-literate art form, especially when compared to prose fiction. But that narrow-minded view of cinema usually ignores a small but strong subgenre that portrays writers as authentic characters on-screen. Even ignoring films based on Stephen King fiction, there’s enough material out there from Wonder Boys to Stuck in Love to Genius (and others) to hold a writers’ film festival, and one of the newest additions to the corpus is The End of the Tour, which details five days in which Rolling Stone journalist (and envious novelist) David Lipsky interviewed novelist David Foster Wallace at the end of his promotional book tour for Infinite Jest. Lipsky is played by Jesse Eisenberg in a likable and very Eisenbergian performance, but it’s Jason Segel who earns most of the attention by playing Wallace: Segel is better known as a goofy comedian, but seeing him in a strongly dramatic performance as Wallace is enough to demolish his usual screen persona. Shot in a very naturalistic fashion (i.e.; grimy, unglamorous, etc.) by director James Ponsoldt, The End of the Tour focuses on the lengthy, literate, eventually contentious conversation between Lipsky and Wallace as they meet, share Wallace’s house, fly to promotional events, spend a day goofing off, compete for two women’s attention and come back home with loathing for each other. It’s not a very dramatic film, but it does have drama, and most importantly it allows the conversation to unspool at an unhurried pace. The portrait of a profile-writer journalist is revelatory as well, giving us uncommon insight into something rarely explored elsewhere. This, in short, is a movie about two writers, two intellects that can’t help but measure themselves to the other. It’s surprisingly compelling, occasionally profound and decently far from the usual formula fed by Hollywood. And it does so while having some Broken Arrow footage thrown in—if it gets better than this, please tell me how. I have a hunch that The End of the Tour will soon earn a place on the film curriculum of novelists and journalists, alongside other celebrated depiction of writers on the big screen.

  • Legends of the Fall (1994)

    Legends of the Fall (1994)

    ByChristian Sauvé Movie Review

    (On DVD, June 2017) Back in the nineties, if you wanted to win Oscars, there weren’t better strategies than going big in the way Legends of the Fall goes big. Take a western, throw in a war drama, then a prohibition subplot, then keep going so that the love complications span decades, involve numerous horrible deaths and settle into some kind of American-frontier bromides. (Plus, add as blatant a case of Chekhov’s gun as I can recall.) It seems cynical, but it does work: The film has uncommon scope and sweep even as it lines up a different subgenre every thirty minutes or so. It helps that it can depend on the reliable Anthony Hopkins as an opinionated patriarch (even though his later appearances in the film can cause unintentional hilarity) and cusp-of-stardom Brad Pitt in the bad-boy role … and Aiden Quinn as the son trying to be socially respectable. Opposite the men, Julia Ormond plays the object of three brothers’ affection, with Karine Lombard showing up briefly to provide a distraction. The stereotypes flock and accumulate in the film, but they sort-of-work, especially if you have a soft spot for American-frontier epics. Legends of the Fall may not be subtle, and it may not be innovative, but there’s something respectable in its blunt-force approach to a moderately respectable tear-jerker.

  • Il racconto dei racconti – Tale of Tales (2015)

    Il racconto dei racconti – Tale of Tales (2015)

    ByChristian Sauvé Movie Review

    (On Cable TV, June 2017) I had reasonably high hopes pure fantasy film Tale of Tales—it’s Italian, based on lesser-known fairy tales rather than familiar stories, and it seems to have a decent-enough budget to do itself justice. Then there was the film’s rating, easily aimed at adult audiences. Before long, we start understanding why: As the film adds up cruel deaths, raw desires, nudity, unpleasant plot developments and a fair heaping of violence, it’s clear that Tale of Tales is not in the comfort business, nor does it particularly care if you’re feeling put-off by the results. But then there are other issues: The three tales don’t appreciably feed off each other, they end without much in terms of denouement and they’re often pointlessly cruel like only classic fairy tales could be. The topline cast is impressive (in-between John C. Reilly, Salma Hayek, Vincent Cassel and Toby Jones) but their roles are often repellent or cut short, which stands for the rest of the film in many ways. It really doesn’t help that the film clocks in at more than two hours, far too long for the stories being told. Tale of Tales, in other words, is not just dull and long—it’s mean-spirited, unpleasant and empty of meaning. This is not a good combination, no matter one’s initial expectations.

  • Tango & Cash (1989)

    Tango & Cash (1989)

    ByChristian Sauvé Movie Review

    (In French, on TV, June 2017) Sometimes, we’ve grown so accustomed to the parody that we’ve forgotten what the original looked like. If your idea of 80s cop action drama dates from Last Action Hero, then go back to Tango & Cash for a look at what the pure ridiculous source material could look like. To be fair, it’s not as if Tango & Cash takes itself seriously—there’s already a bit of self-parody built in the film, and the results, as seen from nearly thirty years later, are often nothing short of ridiculous. There’s Sylvester Stallone, fooling no one by wearing glasses that don’t seem to serve any purpose. But then there’s Kurt Russell, chomping scenery as another loose-gun policeman. It takes place in Los Angeles, of course. It covers quite a bit of male bonding between two headstrong partners. It’s bonkers in the most asinine action-movie ways, such as sending two cops in jail, and them allowing them to break out. To be fair, the prison sequence is the film’s highlight—the subsequent investigation back in the world pales in comparison. Tango & Cash is a bit of a mess, which can be explained if you read about its troubled production history. Unfortunately, it’s not a particularly entertaining one, except in bits and pieces. At least Stallone and Russell are both quite good in their characters, with a showy supporting role for Jack Palance and pre-stardom Teri Hatcher. Tango & Cash is a must-see for whoever is interested in the history of buddy-cop movies, but let’s not pretend that it’s anything essential for everyone else.