Reviews

  • Le nez [Empire of the Scents] (2014)

    Le nez [Empire of the Scents] (2014)

    ByChristian Sauvé Movie Review

    (On TV, April 2021) As far as documentaries go, Le nez has an asset that most lack — a first-rate filmmaker in French-Canadian writer/director Kim Nguyen, here taking a break from fiction feature films. (In the arc of Nguyen’s career, Le nez comes right before his turn to better-known English-language films such as Two Lovers and a Bear, as well as The Hummingbird Project.)  Le nez, as the title suggests, takes aim at the sense of smell, and just about everything related to it — perfume, food, emotions, seduction and sex. The film benefits from a great variety of interviewees — most notably chemist François Chartier, whose work on the chemistry of taste remains definitive (he has an evocative moment in which he describes the experience of tasting a very old and expensive wine that practically puts you there.), astronaut Chris Hadfield describing the smell of space (similar to cordite, if you’re curious), and journalist Molly Birbaum (who evocatively describes her loss of smell after a severe accident). Other highlights include an intriguing exploration of the world of fragrance, a look at ambergris, and a squirm-inducing segment on the link between smell and sexual attraction. From a filmmaking perspective, Le nez is put together far more strikingly than most documentaries, but the topic itself remains fascinating even if there’s an impression that Nguyen has only scratched (and possibly sniffed) the surface of the topic.

  • Save Yourselves! (2020)

    Save Yourselves! (2020)

    ByChristian Sauvé Movie Review

    (On Cable TV, April 2021) One of the reasons why it’s so difficult to tear anyone away from their cell phones is the oft-repeated “What if I miss something important?” Hence the built-in irony in Save Yourselves’s premise of seeing a hip Brooklyn couple head upstate for a week-long digital detox… right before an alien invasion begins. Much of the film’s first half is a drawn-out joke, as background gags keep suggesting world-changing events even as our characters are too busy bickering to care. Thanks to funny, fast and hip execution from writers-directors Alex Huston Fischer and Eleanor Wilson, Save Yourselves is seldom dull even when its lead characters are at their most grating. Much of the film’s likability comes from the irresistible Sunita Mani as one of the two leads — compared to which John Reynolds’ irritating man-child character takes far more time to become sympathetic. But they eventually get there, and the film is at its best when its protagonists become mildly competent at understanding the alien threat and working together to fight back. Save Yourselves (which provides the punchline to one of the jokes in the film) makes the most out of a limited budget and restrained filming locations — the dialogue is good enough to be interesting by itself, and the structure of the film is solid enough to keep viewers invested. It does become quite a bit more serious in the third act, and I’m still mulling over what I think of the ending — it’s an expansive logical conclusion that fits into my idea of how Science Fiction conclusions should push the extrapolation to its limit, but part of me would have liked to see our now-likable hipster family go back to their apartment after such an experience and cope with that. Still, I liked Save Yourselves quite a bit. “Pouf on the roof!” still has me chuckling days later, and I won’t need too much prompting to watch anything else featuring Mani. What could have been an irritating one-joke film becomes something better than that, and the comedy treatment of the apocalypse is exactly what we need in Pandemic Year Two.

  • Between Waves (2020)

    Between Waves (2020)

    ByChristian Sauvé Movie Review

    (On Cable TV, April 2021) Few things are as frustrating as an ambitious film that fails to click, and while I’ll be one of the first to point out Between Waves’ strengths, I’m not going to be so positive when it comes to the film itself. As a low-budget Canadian film, it goes for high concept rather than spectacle, as a photographer mourning her physicist husband becomes convinced that he’s still alive and travelling between parallel universes. Told in non-linear fashion, the film details their romance, his death, her search for him and eventually a trip to the Azores in order to piece together the puzzle of their existence. It’s an ambitious concept, and at times it looks as if writer-director Virginia Abramovich has what it takes to get it right. But as the film goes on, it also becomes more muddled. Billed as “a metaphysical love story,” it leaves realism behind to operate on a more abstract level, to the point where the rules it has established for itself eventually seem arbitrary or mere suggestions. Clearly, the film is executed in a register that doesn’t play by the usual aesthetic preferences of genre Science Fiction — which may be an advantage for some. But it takes some patience to get through even the film’s 100 minutes, and some indulgence as the urgency of the first act gives way to a lackadaisical trip to the Azores and then a meandering third act that seems to delay the inevitable. Between Waves has good ideas (as someone who wrote a few science fiction novels about parallel universes, I give a thumbs-up at the film’s take on converging realities but I’m not so enthusiastic about the way it’s not explored) — alas, the result doesn’t have the spark of the premise.

  • I Am Jackie O (2020)

    I Am Jackie O (2020)

    ByChristian Sauvé Movie Review

    (On Cable TV, April 2021) Stepping away from the entertainment celebrities that characterize most of its topics, Network Entertainment’s newest entry in its “I am” series takes on Jacqueline Kennedy Onassis. Once one of the most famous women in the world as the First Lady of the John F. Kennedy administration and then the wife of one of the world’s richest men, “Jackie O” is now a bit of a historical trivia — her considerable influence was not something that translated well to history books, and it’s noteworthy that the latest event film about her, Jackie, was an examination of the days immediately following the assassination of her first husband. In this context, I Am Jackie O serves more as good refresher about the woman behind the easy clichés and historical pictures. Born to a wealthy family but incredibly intelligent, the young Jackie seemed to have trouble finding a husband until the young and ambitious John F. Kennedy Jr. walked into her life. The Camelot years remain the highlight of her life, as the young and culturally hip couple brought a revitalization of Washington. The impact of the JFK assassination is brought home by the film’s explicit commentary that, at once, she lost her house, her job and her husband — leading to a later romance with a billionaire that many took as a betrayal. I am Jackie O goes a bit too fast on the Onassis marriage and her later years as an activist in New York City, perhaps out of recognition that, no matter what she did in the thirty years after the JFK assassination, people had trouble seeing her as anything else. Fortunately, the portrait that the rest of the film offers is revelatory — both of her sharp intellect and her turn toward architectural activism late in life. Plenty of talking-head interviews and historical footage pepper the film — plus a few great pictures showing her adorable freckles. As with other films in the “I Am” series, the portrait is highly sympathetic — we may, at most, hear a few lines about JFK’s affairs and their estrangement when he was constantly on the campaign trail, or the critical reactions to her marrying Onassis, but the film seldom goes further. On the other hand — what else would there be to say? While perhaps not as revelatory as other entries in the series (something inevitable considering the historical distance of the topic), I am Jackie O nonetheless remains a serviceable history lesson in an approachable package.

  • El habitante [The Inhabitant] (2017)

    El habitante [The Inhabitant] (2017)

    ByChristian Sauvé Movie Review

    (In French, On Cable TV, April 2021) Combining a “thieves break into a house and discover a terrible secret” premise with a “possessed exorcism” execution, El Habitante looks good and progresses well, which is just about what we can ask of a better horror film. The Mexican setting of the film does give it a more interesting flavour than most American exorcism films, even if its accessibility remains just as compelling. Most of writer-director Guillermo Amoedo’s twists and turns are not that surprising considering the kind of film this is (even the ending, meant to be shocking, stems from an early background broadcast that seasoned viewers will immediately latch on as significant), but the Catholic details are convincing and it’s all wild enough to be interesting even when it escapes credibility. But then again, this is a film about demonic possessions, so do we really care about credibility? While not all that good, El habitante is better than quite a few of the horror movies I’ve seen this week alone, so there’s that.

  • Never so Few (1959)

    Never so Few (1959)

    ByChristian Sauvé Movie Review

    (On Cable TV, April 2021) The 1950s were a victory lap when it came to Hollywood movies and World War II. Even absent the propagandist imperative of the war years, studios kept revisiting the conflict in generally heroic tones, praising the American soldier and considering the war as a series of adventures. You can see that tone at work in Never so Few, which explores an understudied facets of war (the Burmese theatre) in a way that evolves from slight comedy to revenge thriller. It is, at the very least, heavy on stars with Frank Sinatra and Gina Lollobrigida in the lead roles, and notables such as Steve McQueen, Charles Bronson and Paul Heinred in supporting roles. In an attempt to throw everything in its expansive two-hour running length, there’s a depiction of troops in wartime and a mission behind enemy lines, but also a shoehorned romance and a travelogue as well. It works, but just — Never so Few isn’t some kind of forgotten classic or anything: it’s worth a look if you like the cast, or if you want another illustration of another corner of WW2, but it’s not always as compelling nor as consistent as similar films from the era.

  • The Nest (2020)

    The Nest (2020)

    ByChristian Sauvé Movie Review

    (On Cable TV, April 2021) One of my weaknesses as a movie reviewer is my over-eagerness to expect genre elements when there’s even a remote possibility that there will be. My disappointment when something turns out to be depressingly mundane probably won’t be shared by other reviewers perfectly at ease in down-to-earth drama. To be fair, if The Nest can lead viewers to expect a fantastic finale, it’s because much of the film is built along foreboding lines, with a family moving into a strange house and the father being a bit too invested in his delusions to be completely sane. Everyone in the family looks glum, and at times explicitly share their concerns about their new house. With a title like The Nest, wouldn’t you too expect some kind of horror-film third act? But no — The Nest is about broken birds gathering together, and specifically a protagonist making bad decisions for which his family keeps paying. It’s a good thing that he’s played by a charismatic performer such as Jude Law, because otherwise the film would be far less interesting than it already isn’t. Filmed in surprisingly bad fashion (including office scenes washed-out by exterior light — can someone get fill-in lighting in there?), it’s bland and unappealing and, more fatally, not interesting at all. The Nest can’t keep up with its own subplots, eventually forgetting almost everything to focus on the father’s financial woes. Nor does it end with any kind of finale beyond the characters sadly eating at the dinner table, their problems revealed but still intact. I’m clearly not meant to appreciate such shades-of-beige drama — I wanted zombies to eat them, vampires to suck them dry (reinforcing the theme) or ghosts to drive them crazy. Anything would have been better than this pointless mess.

  • Johnson Family Vacation (2004)

    Johnson Family Vacation (2004)

    ByChristian Sauvé Movie Review

    (On TV, April 2021) It’s not as if Johnson Family Vacation is a particularly smart movie, but its charm is to deliver almost exactly what viewers can expect from its first few minutes. Heck, maybe even from a cast list and the plot premise, as Cedric the Entertainer plays a family dad heading a few states west to attend a family reunion, driving all the way there with his estranged wife (Vanessa Williams), three kids (the two eldest being played by Shad “Bow Wow” Moss and Solange Knowles) and an enormous vehicle with accessories he doesn’t particularly care for. If you’re thinking, “black-cast road trip family comedy, lowest-common denominator,” then I have nothing to add. An episodic comedy in which several segments end with the family running back to their car, Johnson Family Vacation doesn’t aim high, but does hit its targets. Most of the jokes are drawn along very predictable lines, but if director Christopher Erskin has one ounce of wittiness to his plan for the film, it’s in the way he plays with viewers: You know it’s coming and I know it’s coming and let’s see how long we can draw this out. The cast of a few supporting roles occasionally adds interest, whether it’s seeing Steve Harvey as a family antagonist, Shannon Elizabeth as a hitchhiker or Jason Momoa in a small role as a Native American hunk. The incredibly familiar premise will have you wondering if this is a remake of anything, but apparently not — although Cedric the Entertainer seems to be aping his performance on Chevy Chase in the Vacation series. There isn’t much to say about the perfunctory way the film is executed, completely aligned with the way broad comedies are filmed. It’s not much, but Johnson Family Vacation clearly knows what it’s contractually obliged to deliver, and only expends the minimum effort required to do that.

  • Sweet Home (2015)

    Sweet Home (2015)

    ByChristian Sauvé Movie Review

    (In French, On Cable TV, April 2021) The more I watch lower-profile horror films (that is: those that never stood a chance of theatrical distribution in North America — straight-to-video, steaming exclusives, festival favourites and foreign productions), the more my expectations run low. Ironically, this can work to some films’ advantage — those that manage to rise above low expectations, usually through execution rather than concept. There isn’t anything startlingly new about Sweet Home, for instance. Most of it takes place in a near-abandoned building, as a young woman decides to use the place for a romantic tryst. Bad idea — there’s an effort underfoot to empty the building by all means necessary, and that includes anyone trying to have fun in the abandoned units. On paper, Sweet Home feels like many, many similar films, with a couple of protagonists trying to survive while trapped in a big empty building. But director Rafa Martínez has a pretty good understanding of how to play with familiar elements, and above-average cinematography does help make the film interesting to watch. Ingrid Garcia-Jonsson anchors the film as its resourceful damsel-in-distress, effectively selling both the initial vulnerability and the eventual ferocity of the role. An overly long climax is a bit of a blemish (by this time, everything feels familiar all over again), but much of Sweet Home works well in the kind of entertaining gorier-than-average thriller that fills up an evening without making too many demands on its viewers.

  • Events Transpiring Before, During, and After a High School Basketball Game (2020)

    Events Transpiring Before, During, and After a High School Basketball Game (2020)

    ByChristian Sauvé Movie Review

    (On Cable TV, April 2021) Ugh. Writer-director Ted Stenson goes for very specific aesthetics in Events Transpiring Before, During, and After a High School Basketball Game (as if the title wasn’t enough of a clue) and it’s really not one that I like. The plot is in the title, or rather the lack of plot is in the title: There’s a high school basketball game that brings a few people together, and the film studies in little subplots the slice-of-life moments of its characters’ lives. In other words: No big plot, lots of little subplots, lending to the result not only a fragmented impression, but an uneven one as well as not all of the stories are compelling. As a matter of fact, most of the stories are rather dull — from stereotypically dramatic drama students to a basketball player trying to plug in The Matrix in each conversation (the film is set in 1999) to a referee with marital problems to an assistant coach trying to get his team to adopt a complex system of play — this is definitely small-potato drama, and that’s what the film is going for. Don’t expect any big climax. The dialogue isn’t all that interesting, and its repetitiveness goes against the idea of using dialogue to reveal new things or advance the narration — by the fifteenth minute, we already know everything about the characters. Worst of all, however, is the film’s obstinate decision to handle every shot in static cinematography, often letting the camera running long after anything happens. This is both clunky and completely intentional — while it matches the low-budget aesthetics of the film, all of these things are a deliberate attempt to create something… that I don’t particularly care for, nor is particularly successful. It’s possible for flatly-directed films to succeed if they have something else—dialogue, wit, acting—but everything comes up lacking. Despite its significant flaws, it’s a bit too likable to be a failure (I’ve hated better movies because they were meaner), but Events Transpiring Before, During, and After a High School Basketball Game is too self-consciously quirky and misguided to achieve anything it could have aspired to.

  • Intent to Destroy (2017)

    Intent to Destroy (2017)

    ByChristian Sauvé Movie Review

    (On Cable TV, April 2021) As I’ve written before, everything I know about the Armenian genocide comes from Turkish interests trying to deny it, from Serdar Argic in the mid-1990s Usenet to the hubbub surrounding Ararat and The Promise to the latest efforts of the Turkish government to criticize the possibility of recognition from the American government. Intent to Destroy, from veteran documentary filmmaker Joe Berlinger, chronicles the shooting of The Promise and uses this as a springboard to discuss the Armenian genocide, and the increasingly desperate attempts from the Turkish government to deny that it happened. As a documentary, it really ties everything together, from a succinct description of the events, their magnitude and their legacy, to the reasons why the Turkish government has been so invested in denying it. The link between the Armenian Genocide and the Holocaust is stronger than you may think, and the film spends a few valuable minutes explaining how the Armenian genocide actually led to the definition of the legal notion of genocide. (Much of the Turkish justifications boil down to a legalistic argument that “yes, many Armenians were killed, but it wasn’t technically genocide,” which is a hilariously stupid justification.)  Canadian director Atom Egoyan is interviewed, and proudly displays an entire book put together by the Turkish government to criticize Egoyan’s entire career in anticipation of Ararat’s release. One of the film’s most eloquent anecdotes comes late during the film, as a former American official describes the diplomatic fireworks when he recognized the Armenian genocide at an event, in contradiction to the American foreign policy meant to appease Turkey. That last segment means to conclude the film with the militant stance that the American government needs to recognize the Armenian genocide, and what do you know — on the day I write this review, shortly after seeing Intent to Destroy, here is Joe Biden formally recognizing the Armenian Genocide, marking a significant evolution of US policy. It took until 2004 for Canada to recognize the Armenian Genocide, but at least we did—and as Canada has its own genocidal history to consider, I’d like to reassure Turkish readers that ignoring your own history is not a demonstration of moral superiority—as often said, recognition is the first step toward justice.

  • Stake Land (2010)

    Stake Land (2010)

    ByChristian Sauvé Movie Review

    (In French, On Cable TV, April 2021) I’m constantly amazed at the prevalence of the “let’s escape to Canada!” trope in American dystopian science fiction and horror — whenever the Americans imagine their country going to hell, the idea of Canada holding it together seems to be of great comfort and/or storytelling convenience as a goal. (As a Canadian, I’m not so sure about our chances if our southside meth lab implodes, but I’d rather be here than there.)  So it is that, once again, Stake Land establishes Canada as the goal, while our protagonists race north to avoid hordes of vampire zombies. The rest of the picture will feel intensely familiar to seasoned post-apocalyptic road movie watchers, although Stake Land is a bit more hopeful than many by not leaving a trail of destruction everywhere it leaves — and an ending that could be qualified as hopeful. (Another element of the “let’s escape to Canada!” trope: The refuge doesn’t usually turn out to be illusory.)  It’s slightly better than the norm, slightly more optimistic, slightly more tightly-directed… but in the end, Stake Land is very much a known quantity and another entry in a familiar genre. Fun for fans, not necessarily any more interesting for those that aren’t.

  • The Theatre Bizarre (2011)

    The Theatre Bizarre (2011)

    ByChristian Sauvé Movie Review

    (In French, On Cable TV, April 2021) As far as horror anthologies go, The Theater Bizarre is a bit more striking than most. For one thing, it doesn’t hold back on the gore, sex and disturbing material; for another, it’s also curiously versatile in the ways it approaches horror. There’s a framing device (starring Udo Kier) having to do with a woman discovering the titular bizarre theatre and being told macabre tales until terrible things happen to her. The first story, “The Mother of Toads,” is probably the blandest of the bunch, what with an entirely predictable bit of Lovecraftian folk horror. Things don’t necessarily get better with “I Love You,” a tragic anti-romance with another completely predictable ending — although the segment does get blackly hilarious as a standard I’m-leaving-you speech gets progressively crueller, to the point where it leaves no awfulness unturned in its quest for the ultimate put-down. “Wet Dreams” abruptly cranks the gore and the body horror within another tale of adultery — and a supporting role from horror legend Tom Savini, who also directs the segment. “The Accident” is the oddest and best segment of the bunch, largely gore-free but haunting in illustrating a conversation about death between a mother and her young daughter. “Vision Stain,” from well-known Canadian cinematographer Karim Hussain (you can spot downtown Montréal streets in the exterior shots), looks great but more immediately renews with the horror by way of needles in eyeballs to make up for a nonsensical story. Finally, “Sweets” does end in predictable gore, but takes an interesting path to get there, going for food-based grossness for once — it’s remarkably disturbing. Clearly meant for fans of all-out horror leaving nothing to the imagination, The Theatre Bizarre remains a better-than-average horror anthology, especially considering the ways some of the segments take a slightly askew approach to the genre.

  • LD 50 Lethal Dose (2003)

    LD 50 Lethal Dose (2003)

    ByChristian Sauvé Movie Review

    (In French, On Cable TV, April 2021) An overwhelming number of low-budget horror movies can’t even justify their own existence — relying on stock plotlines, flat direction and even worse acting, they feel identical to dozens of other films: manufactured products made to order for low standards. When they are noteworthy, it’s usually for the wrong reasons — such as casting. So it is that if you’re looking for narrative satisfaction from LD 50 Lethal Dose, you’re going to be disappointed: taking its cues from what low-budget films do worst, it’s set inside a disaffected industrial factory, where our plucky protagonists encounter a variety of monsters until some of them make it outside alive. There’s some of the usual nonsense about military programs to create (all together now:) super-soldiers. Simon De Selva’s direction isn’t any more inspired, relying on visual familiarity to do exactly what many other movies have done since. Where LD 50 Lethal Dose does better is in casting, what with a pre-stardom Tom Hardy and a post-stardom Melanie “Scary Spice” Brown being part of the ensemble cast. Considering that I always enjoy watching Brown, I shouldn’t complain too much — but twenty years later, casting is the only reason why anyone would want to watch a film undistinguishable from countless others.

  • Panic in Year Zero! (1962)

    Panic in Year Zero! (1962)

    ByChristian Sauvé Movie Review

    (On TV, April 2021) If you want to understand in which kind of context the October Crisis happened in 1962, you may want to have a look at Panic in Year Zero!, a surprisingly effective Cold War nightmare in which an ordinary Los Angeles family out for a camping trip reacts to a nuclear attack on the United States, including the vaporization of Los Angeles. Better-prepared than most with a fully-loaded camping car, they still have to face many challenges before making it to relative safety. You may by misled by credits listing American International Pictures and Frankie Avalon — after all, their biggest hits of the 1960s were the frothy colour “Beach Party” comedies. But that came later—Panic in Year Zero! is a sober, dystopian take on something that seemed almost inevitable by the early 1962—massive nuclear exchanges between the United States and the Soviet Union. Millions of deaths and a complete breakdown of social order were the starting point of such survival films, and this one is no exception. Crisply directed by Ray Milland, who also stars as the patriarch making tough choices for his family, the film is a lower-budgeted but surprisingly credible exploration of the now-familiar scenario of a family having to survive a societal breakdown. Avalon plays the son of the family with a mixture of innocence and growing maturity, making a good contrast with his later fun screen persona. It’s largely an episodic film, with various incidents meant to show how mean and/or helpful various people can be in crisis. I suspect that the sheer number of post-apocalyptic films since 1962 has probably dulled the impact of Panic in Year Zero!, but it did get there early, and its mild-mannered take on a wide-scale crisis is an interesting period take that endures as a reflection of how it was seen at the time. The film makes for compulsively interesting viewing — a real surprise if ever you see it pop up.