Reviews

  • The Exchange (2021)

    ByChristian Sauvé Movie Review

    (On Cable TV, March 2022) If I go soft on The Exchange despite its limitations, keep in mind that some of the film was filmed a few tens of kilometres from here, in Nepean, south Ottawa and other areas in Eastern Ontario. Not that it’s much to boast about in a film that begins with the 1980s protagonist bemoaning having to live in the middle of nowhere, struggling badly with the Canadian winter and his lack of friends in a town that doesn’t know what to do with his pretentious intellectualism. (Wait, is this inspired by my true story?)  He thinks he’s about to make things better for himself by volunteering to host a French exchange student, but instead of getting a highly cultured Godard character, he gets an Arab-ethnic oversexed extrovert from the Parisian suburbs. The clash of sensibility is what drives much of this straightforward Canadian comedy: the small-town, smart-protagonist tropes are all quite familiar, and the film’s extra helping of humiliation comedy reinforces the impression of having seen much of it elsewhere. But it still has a few quirks—Avan Jogia is quite good as the Frenchman upsetting an entire village, Jayli Wolf is very cute as the romantic interest and Ed Oxenbould gradually becomes more sympathetic as the nerdy protagonist. The limits of the film’s budget become increasingly obvious as the film approaches its larger-scale climax and the contrivances of the script do it no favours, but The Exchange still goes out on a relatively high note, making sure that no one is too disappointed by the result. Francophones will get a few more jokes that aren’t translated.

  • The Unforgivable (2021)

    ByChristian Sauvé Movie Review

    (Netflix Streaming, March 2022) I’m not necessarily opposed to dark, dour gritty dramas, but it’s a genre that doesn’t take much to overstay its welcome, and there’s a sense, not too far into The Unforgiveable, that it’s just going to drag on and on until it decides to end. And then it does exactly that. Featuring Sandra Bullock as an ex-convict that attracts the vengeful attention of the sons of the man she killed (all the while trying to reconnect with her estranged sister), it’s a remarkably low-energy take on an unappealing premise. Bullock is fully de-glammed here, and the film spares few indignities in show just how difficult an ex-con’s life can be. Everyone is ugly and spiteful, picking fights or planning further murders according to a contrived narrative—the grayish cinematography may reflect its rainy Seattle setting, but doesn’t do much to make the result any more appealing. To be clear, I don’t expect every film to be an entertaining spectacle. But The Unforgiveable struggles in earning and keeping attention—it’s easy to tune out at the film wallows in its grimy surroundings and sordid backstory. It does work better as an actor’s showcase for notables such as Vincent D’Onofrio, Jon Bernthal, Viola Davis and, obviously, Bullock (few will be surprised to find out she co-produced the film) but the result is often a reminder that the expression “suffering for your art” also applies to the audience. The Unforgiveable may not necessarily be wrong, but it’s not particularly right either.

  • Antibody (2002)

    ByChristian Sauvé Movie Review

    (In French, On Cable TV, March 2022) There’s no lower limit to the quality of “made for Syfy” movies, so seeing their name at the start of a film is usually a warning. In Antibody’s case, however, it’s a bit of a red herring: while the film can’t possibly be good, it’s far from being as awful as could have expected. (It also dates from a time where it was the “Sci-Fi Channel,” not that it makes much of a difference.)  In this low-budget take on Fantastic Voyage, a team of scientists is miniaturized and injected in a dying terrorist in an attempt to stop a dead man’s switch from levelling a city. Lance Henricken stars, with a luscious Robin Givens in a strong supporting role. Some of the film’s problems are most directly attributable to its low budget: terrible special effects, cheap cinematography, ramshackle sets and slap-dash direction from Christian McIntire will tell you within moments that this isn’t a film that flies particularly high. But the script has more fundamental issues that an inexpensive rewrite could have resolved: a tone that veers from an unconvincing seriousness to a far more effective playfulness, some tangents that go nowhere, many missed opportunities in developing characters, and a plodding forward rhythm. Still, there are a few cute exchanges, effective moments, a sense of atmosphere and CGI sequences that could have worked with some more polish. No, it’s clearly far from being scientifically accurate. Yes, there are much better Science Fiction films out there. But much as “a Sci-Fi Channel” original is usually a sign to go watch something else, it can also lower expectations.

  • Roma (1972)

    ByChristian Sauvé Movie Review

    (On Cable TV, March 2022) As a love letter to a city, Frederico Fellini’s Roma is a big collage of impressions, striking scenes and impressionistic takes. The plot is optional—there’s some attempt to have a young man represent Fellini as he moves to the big city from a small town and discovers the capital in its effervescent glory, but that conceit gets lost as Fellini moves through his set-pieces, in the street or under the ground. The film spans fifty years from the 1930s (and its fascist regime) to the 1970s, with various set-pieces including brothel visits, a trip underground, a vaudeville performance, traffic jam and a haute-couture parade. It’s not top Fellini, but I have to say that I was kept entertained by his late-career unwillingness to stick to any kind of mimetic reality. It’s very colourful, weird, over-the-top and as such a welcome improvement over the neorealism of Fellini’s early career. This being said, I’m the kind of viewer who would have liked more plotting to go with the flashes of cinematic inspiration—perhaps a more strongly structured trip through the decades through the eye of an aging character, perhaps more depth to the human characters. I can tolerate the results well enough, but I was getting antsy by Roma’s final minutes, and even recognizing that Fellini basically did whatever he wanted at that stage of his career isn’t quite enough to soothe more straight-minded viewers.

  • 2001 Maniacs: Field of Screams (2010)

    ByChristian Sauvé Movie Review

    (In French, On Cable TV, March 2022) In watching a horror sequel, it’s useless to cheer for the good guys when the ones making an encore appearance are the murderous hillbillies. It’s even more useless when it’s supposed to be a comedy film, albeit of the mean-spirited sadistic kind that makes you wonder if the filmmakers were all psychopaths. As 2001 Maniacs: Field of Screams begins (as a sequel to the original 2001 Maniacs, which I’m unlikely to see any time soon.), we’re quickly brought up to speed on the antics of the Pleasant Valley folks, plain salt-of-the-earth Southern type with a fondness for killing and eating Yankees. As the film begins, the heat of the inevitable investigation gets dangerous enough that they decide to take their cannibalistic show on the road, where they encounter a bunch of reality-TV Hollywood types that make excellent appetizer, main course and desert. (The two blondes are meant to be caricatures of Paris Hilton and Jessica Simpson, making us feel some sympathy for them.)  The “comedy” moniker of the film is loose—taking the form of grand-guignol black humour, cheap one-liners and very occasional expectation-flipping that usually leads to more over-the-top gory kills. No, 2001 Maniacs: Field of Screams is not recommended. It’s terrible even by the loose standards of coarse dark horror comedies, and is more liable to make you want to take a purifying shower than entertain you. Lin Shaye doesn’t exactly cover herself with greatness in appearing here, and neither does writer-director Tim Sullivan in handling some amateurish staging, acting and plotting. Even the nudity and sex scenes aren’t nearly enough to redeem this one, and that’s saying something.

  • Divorce American Style (1967)

    ByChristian Sauvé Movie Review

    (On Cable TV, March 2022) Even if you know nothing about American history, you would be able to detect a great social disturbance in the late 1960s simply by watching how the movies expressed their anxieties about, well, everything going that was on. Some films took it out angrily, but comedy Divorce American Style goes to satire in an attempt to deal with the uneasiness. The convoluted plot has a suburbanite couple (played by Dick Van Dyke and Debbie Reynolds) resolving to divorce out of a vague sense of unease, but eventually deciding that they might as well stick together. So much for plot—the point being an excuse for sketches exaggerating the comic impact of alimony, extended families, counter-intuitive dating strategies (i.e.: finding a spouse for your ex-partner so that you can stop paying alimony) and whatever else could get a laugh at the time. There are a few chuckles here and there: the nightmarish sequence in which “picking up the kids” turns out to be a circus of roughly five reconstituted families is a highlight. There are also hints throughout the film that the script was more than ready to be used as a template for a much funnier film. Alas, and this doesn’t happen all that often, Bud Yorkin’s direction seems to do its best to make the film a dramatic one. The cinematography is dark to the point of grimness, and there’s little in terms of energy or snappiness to properly exploit the comic intent of the script. Van Dyke, comic genius that he is, can’t do much under a director that seems intent on minimizing traditional comic devices. It’s certainly not unwatchable, but the lulls in-between highlights are unacceptable—a clear sign that there was a much better film just trying to get out of Divorce American Style.

  • Cutter’s Way (1981)

    ByChristian Sauvé Movie Review

    (On Cable TV, March 2022) As TCM’s Eddie Muller is fond of saying (especially in introducing his neo-noir line-up), the difference between detective stories and film noir is that, in noir, the investigation is just as likely to be about the detective as the murderer or the victim. So it is that the crime in Cutter’s Way is almost inconsequential when measured against the character investigating it. Coming from the last echoes of New Hollywood, it’s a film that uses a murder mystery as a pretext to lash out about the previous decade. Our protagonist, a maimed Vietnam veteran (John Heard), has had enough of it all, and when he gets wind of a local tycoon having murdered a young girl, he’ll stop at nothing to get some misplaced justice, including dragging his friend (Jeff Bridges) in the mess. In the tradition of those 1970s gritty, downbeat thrillers, don’t expect much satisfaction out of the resolution. But what the film lacks in satisfying narrative expectations it makes for in characterization, anger and off-beat choices. It’s certainly not for everyone—If you’re talking early-1980s neo-noir, I’ll watch Body Heat a few more times before revisiting Cutter’s Way nihilism. But it’s certainly evocative of a certain era in American cinema, and it does so under the guide of a far more straightforward genre premise.

  • Cast a Dark Shadow (1955)

    ByChristian Sauvé Movie Review

    (On Cable TV, March 2022) British film noir is really in a class of its own—while it still plays on universal themes of lust, murder and deception, it does so from a very different context, especially as it existed in post-WW2 Britain. There are social class issues that don’t have a ready-made equivalent in Hollywood, and the atmosphere is, naturally, quite different. In some ways, you could have done Cast a Dark Shadow just as well in America: The idea of a serial seducer/killer meeting his match with a vengeful relative of a past victim is really good and timeless. But at the same time, you would not have ended up with the same kind of film, with the droll interplay between Dick Bogarde and Kay Walsh, not to mention the stunning Margaret Lockwood, the presence of an unusual police inspector or the matter-of-fact idea of vast manors fit to be inherited. It all builds to something like a cross between film noir and a light gothic thriller—that aspect could have been strengthened, but it’s intriguing nonetheless. There are many ways in which Cast a Dark Shadow could have been improved, streamlined, or punched-up—but what’s on screen (adapted from a novel) is reasonably interesting to watch, and definitely atmospheric in a way only British film noir could be.

  • The Boys Next Door (1985)

    ByChristian Sauvé Movie Review

    (In French, On Cable TV, March 2022) Like many actors with horror films in their early-career filmography, I suspect that Charlie Sheen doesn’t like to spend a lot of time talking about The Boys Next Door, a film tracking down two teenagers as they go on a murder spree. Not that the film is that much of a blight: under the direction of Penelope Spheeris (and an early script from X-Files writers Glen Morgan and James Wong), the film takes a more gradual approach to its murder spree than comparable slashers, by charting the gradual descent into violence of two high-school graduates. Exploitation is never too far away, though: the ponderous opening sequence makes statements about various American serial killers in an attempt to create a sentiment of pervasive fatalism in the viewer, and there’s a sense that the last half of the film doesn’t have a dramatic progression as much as a deliberate wallowing in one violent death after another. Sheen plays the slightly-reluctant half of the killing pair, leaving much of the psychotic heavy lifting to Maxwell Caulfield. As a slasher, it begins by being better than usual… but it’s still a film in which the protagonists go around killing other people as soon as they pop up on screen. No amount of hand-waving about how society is to blame is convincing when the film is so clearly aimed at trashy thrills. Sheen gets off easily compared to other famous actors’ early horror films. But I can understand if he doesn’t bring this title up all that often.

  • Something of Value (1957)

    ByChristian Sauvé Movie Review

    (On Cable TV, February 2022) Substantial roles for black American actors were rare during the 1950s (or, for that matter, in any decade preceding the 1970s), but there were occasional exceptions for films that were explicitly set in black environments… or for a few emerging actors such as Harry Belafonte or Sidney Poitier. Poitier doesn’t have the lead role in Something of Value—that would be Rock Hudson as the son of a white settler in Kenya. Poitier plays his close friend against a backdrop of colonialism, questioning allegiances and a buildup of violence that comes to dominate the last act of the film. Something of Value has the hallmarks of the progressive films of the time—while it’s a white-told, white-focused story that goes overseas for exoticism and showcasing its white lead, it does grapple with uncomfortable questions in as much honesty as was allowable at the time. There’s a small corpus of such pictures and while they don’t feel all that progressive today, they were nonetheless how Hollywood reached out for inclusivity and prepared itself for more dramatic changes in representativeness decades alter. Poitier, to be fair, is the film’s highlight—he’s second-billed, but his performance as a Kenyan trying to decide where his allegiances lie is the crux of the film’s moral questioning, and his self-assured performance remains a highlight when compared to Hudson’s character. Otherwise, though, there are limits to the effectiveness of Something of Value. Adapted from a novel, the film remains beholden to non-cinematic choices (although one final sequence does raise the suspense considerably by endangering a child). Evocative location shooting helps the film have an interest of its own, although it’s limited by the black-and-white cinematography that feels like a wasted opportunity. Something of Value is the kind of film you watch for social issues rather than cinematic entertainment and as such it’s a welcome title but not one you’ll ever rewatch.

  • Make It Happen (2008)

    ByChristian Sauvé Movie Review

    (On Cable TV, February 2022) I’m amazed that Make it Happen doesn’t have a higher profile, but I think I can explain why… and acknowledge that my own interest in the film isn’t that innocent. Let’s address that last idea first, since it may be the film’s biggest selling point for some: If you had told me at any point over the past few years that there was a film about Tessa Thompson doing burlesque dancing, you would not have been safe standing in the path between me and the nearest screen. But it’s true! Make It Happen dates from the late-2000s dance-movie craze, and it happens to feature a pre-stardom Thompson (in one of her first movie roles) as a dancer at a burlesque-influenced club. Now, let’s be clear on pain of setting far-too-high expectations for the film—this is burlesque-light at best, and Thompson’s showcase number is very chaste even when it showcases her quite well. It’s rated PG-13 for a reason, and the film doesn’t really go anywhere beyond most of the dancing movies of the time. It’s also very conventional in terms of plotting—ye olde “small-city girl moves to the big city, sees her initial dreams dashed, gains experience in a tangentially-related way and then finally achieves her ambitions” dramatic arc that’s been a staple of musical comedies since the 1930s. It’s thin to the point of feeling that the film ends abruptly, but it’s not necessarily unenjoyable. While Thompson is the focal point of my interest in the film, she’s a supporting character: Mary Elizabeth Winstead does rather well in the lead role, convincingly gyrating as her character should. The film is structured in a way that it’s clear when the dance numbers are on—in the proud tradition of musical comedies, each dance number becomes its own minifilm with specific cinematography and a focus on the performers. Director Darren Grant isn’t that good a director for big dance numbers, but the point gets across. (Incidentally, this was the last of the four films in Grant’s eclectic filmography that I hadn’t yet seen.)  Make it Happen amounts to a pleasant watch—nothing wild, nothing particularly memorable unless you’re a Tessa Thompson fan (and if you’re not—what’s wrong with you?) but something far more enjoyable than its near-obscure status nowadays would suggest.

  • Home from the Hill (1960)

    ByChristian Sauvé Movie Review

    (On Cable TV, February 2022) There’s something familiar to the point of boredom in the very 1950s-style small-town melodrama Home from the Hill. Technicolor cinematography can’t hide that it’s all convoluted histrionic without a millimetre of ironic distance. (There’s a reason why the near-contemporary Written on the Wind is far more beloved today.)  Oh, the film does have its traditional assets: Directed by Vincente Minelli, it features a cast with Robert Mitchum (in a role that anticipates his shift from tough guys to more elderly character-driven roles), veteran George Peppard and the young George Hamilton. MGM spared few expenses, giving this the big-budget colour treatment at a time when most such dramas were made in black-and-white. Mitchem is quite good here, using his tough-guy persona to project a character whose influence is steadily decaying. Still, the film does feel overly long and artificial: the southern atmosphere doesn’t impress, the scenes take too long to get to the point, the contrivances feel laboured and the rigidly mannered execution of the film is at odds with its raw melodrama. (But then again, that remains a problem with 1950s dramas: Hollywood did not yet have the neorealist tools to do them justice, and it would take until the New Hollywood of post-1967 to get there.)  It doesn’t help that there are several other films along the same lines as Home from the Hill, and that they usually have a distinct quality that makes them more memorable than this one. Fans of the actors, the style, and the melodrama may enjoy this, but everyone else won’t find much to remember.

  • Ride the Eagle (2021)

    ByChristian Sauvé Movie Review

    (On Cable TV, February 2022) There’s enough room in contemporary cinema for all sorts of approaches, from the bombastic to the low-key, and that the height of the stakes should not in itself be a determining factor in how or why we appreciate a film. This being said—wow, does Ride the Eagle fail to impress. Writer-director-producer Trent O’Donnell is clearly after the kind of quirky comedy that is only possible in low-budget independent film, as his protagonist learns of the death of his estranged mother, and then discovers that she’s left him a quest to follow in order to get his inheritance. You would think that such a sure-fire premise, along with an early promise that “things are going to get wild” given the eccentric nature of the deceased mother, would lead to something interesting. But Ride the Eagle undercuts its own spectacle at every single turn, minimizing the drama, making sure it’s all very dull and safe, and going for quirky character moments that will only appeal to a small group of viewers. Co-writer Jake Johnson plays the protagonist as a lovable loser, but the film spends far more time insisting on the loser aspect than the lovable. A rekindled romance with an ex-flame seems too simple and pretext for a quirky (there’s that word again) attempt at phone sex, while the film ends in very quiet fashion. J. K. Simmons shows up as a character whose (more entertaining) presence is motivated by dumb screenwriting, while Susan Sarandon has a few pre-recorded scenes. I did like D’Arcy Carden, though—even if she’s kept away from the rest of the film through plot contrivances. Ride the Eagle is pleasant, perhaps to a fault: things simply seem to fall in place for the protagonist, and by the time the credits roll by, we’re left wondering if half the film has been left on the cutting room floor. But then again: those low-stakes, low-scale, low-budget independent dramedies aren’t my thing, and even relatively successful efforts like Ride the Eagle amply show why.

  • Beanie Mania (2021)

    ByChristian Sauvé Movie Review

    (On Cable TV, February 2022) Everyone who was alive during the late 1990s remembers the Beanie Babies mania, but that’s no excuse not to revisit the topic, especially as children and grandchildren of the OG Beanie Baby maniacs are now rediscovering the tubs of stored stuffed animals collected during the boom. Through interviews by major figures in the phenomena, archival footage and some impressionistic segments (some of them faked to look like 1990s footage, complete with SD-TV aspect ratio), Beanie Mania gives an enjoyable, sometimes amazing, still relevant overview of those few years. We spend some time with ex-employees of the Ty toy company, many of them hired before the Beanie Baby phenomenon really took off. We have an overview (but no interview) of the enigmatic Ty Warner, who built the phenomenon, raked in millions in profits and was later convicted of tax evasion with a wrist-slap of a sentence. We get interviews with the hard-core fans of the time—those who bought, collected, appraised and catalogued the Beanie Babies, turning it from a toy line to a collecting and speculative investment phenomenon. (One of the interviewees is “Beanie Meanie” Harry Rinkler, who correctly warned people about the speculative bubble that would inevitably burst.)  Criticism about Ty are well-framed, discussing tensions between the company and its fans, the way its employees were not treated with respect or financial compensation, and the reclusive, litigious nature of its founder. Archival footage shows us the manic aspect of the craze at its highest, as McDonald’s restaurants were mobbed for limited-edition Beanie Babies, an accidental highway spill had people stopping their cars to grab Beanies scattered on the road, and some people, well, went a bit crazy maxing out their credit cards. It’s a wild and (now) amusing history of a fad, but the lessons to be learned here are particularly relevant at a time when there’s a new generation of suckers willing to fall for dubious investment vehicles and manic fads with no clear future. (Yes, I mean cryptocurrency.) There are a few things missing from the result—the famous story of the divorcing couple that divided up their Beanie collection in the courtroom is notably absent. While the film ends on a “new generation” of people, some of them overenthusiastic YouTube contributors, rediscovering the Beanie Babies phenomenon, nothing is said about the enduring successors to the Beanie Babies—the Beanie Boos are still relatively popular today (I’ve got a few sitting at home—great gifts for kids) and how the Ty company is still very much a thing. But let’s cut director Yemisi Brookes some slack—this is a film about the Beanie Babies craze, not the aftermath. There’s still enough here to amuse, infuriate and inform if ever you’re considering a dumb investment scheme.

  • Cold Skin (2017)

    ByChristian Sauvé Movie Review

    (In French, On Cable TV, February 2022) The good news is that Cold Skin is better than your average monster movie. If you happen to see it included in your streaming/broadcasting/pirating package, rest assured that it’s more ambitious than most comparable horror movies. It takes us to 1914 Antarctica, as a meteorologist begins a year-long stint as an observer in an isolated lighthouse. A very strange isolated lighthouse, with spikes and defences crudely installed with the obvious intention of keeping something outside the lighthouse. Before long, the Lovecraftian kinship of the film is laid bare as the protagonist spends the night awake and discovers himself besieged by hundreds of amphibious humanoids attacking the lighthouse. Weapons work, but only so much—and what’s worse, he has to contend with the lighthouse’s other, unhinged occupant and a domesticated creature. (One could say it anticipates the craziness of The Lighthouse.)  From this promising beginning, however, Cold Skin runs out of steam—there’s only so much you can do with those elements, and while the film eventually aims for circular philosophy and sympathy for the creatures, it does start running around well before then. It’s a good thing that director Xavier Gans is a veteran with an eye for visuals, because the film is rarely less than finely controlled on a visual level. But the hollowness of the plot eventually catches up with Cold Skin, leaving a final act that loops back upon itself yet still fails to satisfy. It’s still more enjoyable than most similar films… but it could have been better.