Divergent Forces: A Perspective on “Star Wars” and It’s Characterizations by Ben Cahlamer

To my childhood, “Star Wars” was the expression of imagination. Admittedly, I was 1 when George Lucas’s space epic hit cinemas in May, 1977. As I grew up, it didn’t take me long to latch on to his world for my imagination to take over (partially fueled by Gene Roddenberry’s “Star Trek;” yes, I’m one of THOSE fans.)

Lucas’s film changed the box office, taking it by storm. His film also changed film merchandising as well, a lesson that Twentieth-Century Fox did not immediately recognize, thinking the filmwasn’t going to do very well.

Ever the entrepreneur, Lucas used every dime he had and then some to develop a film, based in part on Akira Kurosawa’s “The Hidden Fortress,” and finally had to turn to Fox to complete the film in exchange for the rights to that first film, in perpetuity.

That first film was a success and spawned three more films each of which were bigger successes. Those two films allowed him to be an independent filmmaker, retaining rights and control to the two sequels, “The Empire Strikes Back” and “Return of the Jedi” as well as future entries.

This trio of films followed a lone farm boy, Luke Skywalker (Mark Hamill), Princess Leia Organa (Carrie Fisher(, Han Solo (Harrison Ford), Chewbacca (Peter Mayhew), the androids C-3P0 (voiced by Anthony Daniels) and R2-D2 (Kenney Baker) and the villainous Darth Vader (voiced by James Earl Jones; performed by David Prowse)

Following an extended hiatus, Lucas returned to the world that had made him a modern household name. (“THX-1138” and “American Graffiti” brought him to the minds of general moviegoers.) This new trilogy focuses on . . . *SPOILER ALERT* Luke Skywalker’s father, Anakin Skywalker (Jake Lloyd in “Episode I” and Hayden Christensen in “Episode II” and “Episode III”).

Lucas would wow audiences with amazing computer generated images/effects and amaze us with a rather complex story involving economics and governance, amidst a trio of films in which we see young Anakin growing to the powerful, villainous figurehead he would become . . . . *SPOILER ALERT*, Darth Vader. This prequel trilogy began in 1999 with “Star Wars – Episode I: The Phantom Menace” continuing with 2002’s “Star Wars – Episode II: Attack of the Clones” and finally, 2005’s “Star Wars – Episode III: Revenge of the Sith.”

Lucasfilm, the company that George Lucas started to own the copyrights, fostered an open environment in which fans could “play with the characters” in the environment that “Star Wars” was set in. It allowed, in a way, fans to take control of the future of “Star Wars.”

Mind you, this way of thinking doesn’t make the company money and Lucas, feeling pressured by the fans, decided to sell the company to Walt Disney in 2012.

Disney immediately ramped up with Kathleen Kennedy, a stalwart producer in her own right at the head of the Lucasfilm division of Walt Disney. 2015 saw the release of the first Disney “Star Wars” film, “Episode VII: The Force Awakens” from J.J. Abrams and in 2017, Rian Johnson directed “Episode VIII: The Last Jedi.”

These two episodes featured our returning heroes, Leia, Han, Chewbacca, R2, 3P0 and introduced a new series of characters including Poe Dameron (Oscar Isaac), Rey (Daisy Ridley), Finn (John Boyega) and Kylo Ren (Adam Driver) among other characters . . . .

Characters. That’s become one of my favorite subjects when discussing films recently. Characters can be animate and inanimate. They can make us laugh; they can make us cry.

In the case of Rambo, they can probably make us bleed, if not end up with a profuse headache by the end . . . .

I digress. The characters that populate the “Skywalker Saga” as it is now being referred to are as complex as we want them to be, or, as simple as they appear on the screen. Of course, the characters influence the path a story takes, but no one destiny is held for our characters.

Except for when it comes to an all-powerful, all-knowing Force. As Obi-Wan Kenobi defined 42 years ago, “the force is what gives the Jedi his power. It’s an energy file created by all living things. It surrounds us. It penetrates us.”

The Force is a parallel for believing in one’s own abilities, having faith that, when we set our minds to something and focus on it, we can accomplish anything.

So why then is Anakin Skywalker an exception to this rule?

As we discovered in “The Phantom Menace,” Anakin was created out of midi-chlorians. Qui-Gon Jinn (Liam Neeson) explains to the young Anakin, “Midi-chlorians are a microscopic lifeform that reside within all living cells and communicates with the Force.” Qui-Gon goes on to say that midi-chlorians continually speak to us telling us about the Force.

Notice here how the perspective of the Force changed between “Star Wars” in 1977 and “The Phantom Menace” in 1999 – perspective shapes our view of the world, or in this case, the universe.

More importantly, and I feel the key to understanding “Star Wars” is the vantage point from which each of the two trilogies is told. Obi-Wan would tell Luke that he was “going to find that many of the truths we cling to depend on our own point of view.”

Experience shapes our worldview. Yet, experience isn’t everything. It takes knowledge too, making “Star Wars” one of the most unique sets of trilogies of films out there to be told, or rather framed, from a certain point of view.

“Your destiny lies along a different path from mine.”

In the original trilogy, the three stories are about a young, impetuous boy, Luke Skywalker (Hamill), not the central character telling his own journey to become the greatest Jedi in the [future] history of the universe. Luke is nothing without Obi-Wan Kenobi (Sir Alec Guinness), who in the first film tells young Luke of his father, Anakin Skywalker.

As I mentioned, Luke isn’t telling his own story. It is about Luke. We discover, almost immediately, that R2-D2 is actually conveying this first story along with C-3P0.

“But, BEN! R2 just beeps!”

Well, R2 does beep, but each beep has a different tone conveying emotion. C-3P0 is a universal translator and in this first movie, 3P0 is there to translate R2’s needs.

R2 eventually leads Luke to Obi-Wan, who has the knowledge and the experience, plus the wisdom to tell Luke of his father and what became of him, the treacherous Darth Vader. In this R2 develops enough of a bond with Luke that the droid becomes synonymous with him throughout “The Empire Strikes Back” and “Return of the Jedi.” By the point at which Obi-wan tells Luke of Darth Vader, we’ve already seen what a menacing figure he is; Lucas established there’s a direct correlation between R2 and Darth Vader with Leia in between.

The scene where the Master Jedi and the young wayward boy both with a troubled past and a cloudy future, who also happens to be an amalgam for George Lucas, slowly begins a transition of the Force between Obi-Wan and Luke. This is repeated in a final confrontation with Darth Vader and Obi-Wan:

“I’ve been waiting for your, Obi-Wan. We meet again, at last. The circle is now complete. When I met you, I was but the learner. Now I am the master.” Obi-Wan quickly responds, “Only a master of evil, Darth” marking the ascension of Luke’s journey.

Obi-Wan continues to be a presence in Luke’s training as a Force Ghost in “The Empire Strikes Back,” and of course, in “Return of the Jedi.” Yoda (Frank Oz) would be a physical manifestation of the Force while remaining a peripheral character. But there is no more potent moment in Sci-fi cinema history than when Obi-Wan and Luke first meet, as told by R2-D2. This is Lucas’s masterstroke.

We still haven’t dealt with Anakin, but he is as divergent a character as any one.

“You were the Chosen One!”

If you’ve watched “The Phantom Menace,” you notice a similar trend in Lucas’s use of characters. He realized that as he was writing this new, prequel trilogy, that it still needed to be about Anakin, but finding the right vessel to tell the story where he can frame Anakin’s journey was actually in the hands of that pivotal moment where Luke meets Obi-Wan in “Star Wars”.

Lucas used the prequel trilogy to back fill the myth of the Force, the Jedi, the Sith, the light and the dark (we have cookies.) That is for every positive, there is a negative.

Obi-Wan becomes the prequel trilogy’s torchbearer if you will, his presence at the very beginning of the movie as he describes his feeling of something “elusive” to Qui-Gon, who tells his padawan apprentice to be mindful of the moment, “to concentrate your feelings on the present.”

A similar transition in the Force happens between Qui-Gon and Obi-Wan in “The Phantom Menace” as it does in “Star Wars.” Qui-Gon who actually discovers Anakin, leading to the wholly cheesy midi-chlorian explanation as Qui-Gon explains Anakin’s reason for existence and yet, it works. We’re convinced that this young boy will eventually “bring balance to the Force.”

And just like R2 becomes attached to Luke in the later episodes of the original trilogy, Obi-Wan becomes attached to Anakin in the prequel trilogy, even as Padme Amadala (Natalie Portman) and Anakin form a relationship in secret, something that goes against the Jedi code.

This, of course leads to a confrontation toward the end of “Revenge of the Sith” that forces Obi-Wan to kill Anakin and in a way, he succeeds; Anakin left to die in the fiery hell that is Mustafar. Obi-Wan is not happy to have to kill his padawan learner, but when he learns that Anakin has a new master, he must do so to protect the future of the Jedi Order. It’s a lesson in failure, supported by hope for a better future.

In that moment, Anakin becomes Darth Vader connecting that prequel trilogy to the original trilogy.

Lucas had in fact always planned to do a nonet of films to tell the Skywalker saga. The fans seem to have gotten in the way of his ability to tell his own story, which is what prompted him to sell to Disney. A story that seems to be affecting the perspective of this new series of films.

In the current trilogy, JJ Abrams uses the same approach only this time, the small droid BB-8 frames the Resistance efforts to stop the First Order. BB-8 is loyal to Poe Dameron (Oscar Isaac), but finds Rey (Daisy Ridley), which leads them to Han and then to Leia and ultimately to Luke and Kylo Ren (Driver), so Abrams and then Rian Johnson have laid the seeds with respect to telling a similar trio of films.

What will happen next? I’ll see you at the theater on December 20, 2019. For now, May the Force Be With You. Always.

Jumanji: The Next Level - Movie Review by Monte Yazzie

Jack Black, Kevin Hart, Dwayne Johnson, and Karen Gillan in ‘Jumanji: The Next Level’. Photo by Hiram Garcia - © 2019 CTMG, Inc

Dir: Jake Kasdan
Starring: Dwayne Johnson, Kevin Hart, Jack Black, Karen Gillan, Colin Hanks, Danny Glover, Danny DeVito, and Nick Jonas

What started with a mystical jungle board game in the ‘90s, then reinvented to an adventure video game for a new modern audience, the mischievous “Jumanji” continues to play its wicked games with a group of young people who narrowly escape being entrapped inside it forever in “Jumanji: The Next Level”.

The sequel to the 2017 reboot, directed again by Jake Kasdan, continues the adventure with the same cast, adding three new players to the mix with the grumpy duo of Danny DeVito and Danny Glover and a thieving in-game burglar played by Awkwafina, and much of the same thematic adventure storytelling that made the 2017 film such a hit with audiences.

The young group of friends who barely escaped Jumanji have returned to normal life, graduating high school and moving to different colleges, though they still remain close friends after their video game adventure. Spencer (Alex Wolff) however is having trouble adjusting in New York city after leaving his larger-than-life video game personality Dr. Smolder Bravestone (Dwayne Johnson). Spencer is also struggling to maintain a relationship with his girlfriend Martha (Morgan Turner), who helped him inside Jumanji as Ruby Roundhouse (Karen Gillan). After coming home for the holidays Spencer is tempted by Jumanji to return to play the game one more time, leaving Spencer’s friends to return to the game to try and save him.

Returning for the fun and laughs is the lively cast lead by the charismatic Dwayne Johnson, the hilarious talents of Kevin Hart and Jack Black, and the spirited Karen Gillan. This cast is a major reason this film, which often retreads much of what it does well in the first film, works so well. The chemistry of the group, who are game to do the silly stuff with the most serious face, keeps the film very lighthearted, entertaining, and fun. It has an odd Saturday morning cartoon tone.

As the film likes to reinstate numerous times, “the game has changed”. It has, well…it wants to…but it never fully deviates in any way that would cause the film to stray too far from the formula that found success a few years ago. It has changed some of the flaws from the first film, this time strengthening the big bad guy known here as Jurgen the Brutal (Rory McCann) and allowing the lone female actioner Ruby Roundhouse (Karen Gillan) more time to lead the group. Also, a nice narrative touch found in a body of water that allows the video game characters to switch avatar personalities provides the funniest moments in the film.

Still, this doesn’t prevent “Jumanji: The Next Level” from feeling very familiar and more formulaic than the last outing. Some scenes here are directly replicated from the last movie, replace CGI hippos with CGI anacondas or squabbling young people with irritable old people and repeat scenes that worked before. Still, the focus here is fun and laughs, and even though the film doesn’t try to reinvent the story it proudly understands its own entertainment value.

Monte’s Rating
3.00 out of 5.00

Mickey and the Bear - Movie Review by Jeff Mitchell

James Badge Dale and Camila Morrone in ‘Mickey and the Bear’.

Take notice of Attanasio’s feature film debut ‘Mickey and the Bear’

Written and Directed by: Annabelle Attanasio

Starring: Camila Morrone and James Badge Dale

“Mickey and the Bear” – “Well, I was born in a small town, and I live in a small town. Probably die in a small town. Oh, those small communities.” – John Mellencamp

Writer/director Annabelle Attanasio’s “Mickey and the Bear”, sounds like a throwback 70s or 80s television detective drama like “Hardcastle and McCormick”, “Starsky and Hutch” or “Jake and the Fatman”.

Except for this film’s focus on two people, it doesn’t carry much resemblance to those aforementioned programs at all. Mickey (Camila Morrone) and the Bear (James Badge Dale) are not partners, live in a big city or solve crimes. They are daughter and dad. They reside in a modest trailer in Anaconda, Mont. – population 9,000 and located between Missoula and Butte – and Hank (a.k.a. The Bear) is not solving anything at the moment. He plays video games, drinks too much and isn’t earning a steady living. He’s a military vet who suffers from PTSD, but he also carries a noticeable case of arrested development.

He does, however, have a thoughtful, pleasant daughter, who acts as his caretaker but - in the process - enables his behavior. Mickey doesn’t exactly have much choice, because she’s his dependent, at least legally, but she’s also a high school senior. The right path for her future clearly lays in front of her: any step away from her current circumstances is the right one.

“Mickey and the Bear” is an intimate indie, and writer/director Annabelle Attanasio wholly captures the physicality of this small town located in a beautiful part of the world. Neighboring buttes embrace Anaconda, and they also spring lush streams, as on-screen memories of “A River Runs Through It” (1992) may come rushing back. People seem generally happy, but Mickey sees dead ends, and Attanasio expresses this teen’s perspective with opening shots of, not necessarily blight but, limited opportunities throughout the community, where construction may have last occurred 50 years ago. Mickey works at a taxidermy shop after school, where the animals posted on the walls feel as alive as new possibilities.

A slice of life picture, we see snippets of Mickey’s days at school and work, and she also has bright moments with a new classmate named Wyatt (Calvin Demba). Mickey rides her bicycle everywhere, because she’s free when outside of her home, where - in this backwards family relationship - Hank comfortably nests into a daily irresponsible haze.

Mickey’s choices are obvious, but family loyalties and perceived responsibilities can cloud anyone’s judgement. Over the course of the film, however, these previously hard choices might just become easy ones.

Morrone and Dale easily and effortlessly play disconcerting on-screen adversaries, and their unequal relationship is framed by her youth and naivety versus his grizzled experience and years of ongoing resentment.

Free of makeup and usually wearing old sweatshirts, Morrone projects Mickey’s stripped down innocence. Mickey is girlish and navigates through life without her mom, so she’s particularly vulnerable to negative forces, and Hank freely and willingly exploits these pain points. Meanwhile, Dale, 41, purposely looks older than his years, with a graying beard and a supply of wife beater t-shirts. The actor has a recent history of playing screwups (“Little Woods” (2019)), and tough guys (“Only the Brave” (2017)), and here, he cements both personas into Hank, which makes this particular character a combustible one.

“Mickey and the Bear” can be hazardous and painful to watch at times, and even though it sports a nifty runtime of 88 minutes, Attanasio’s film isn’t a disposable 80s television show that will be forgotten the next day. Not even close.

(3.5/4 stars)

Jeff – a member of the Phoenix Critics Circle – has penned film reviews since 2008, graduated from ASU’s Walter Cronkite School of Journalism and is a certified Rotten Tomatoes critic. Follow Jeff and the Phoenix Film Festival on Twitter @MitchFilmCritic and @PhoenixFilmFest, respectively.

Richard Jewell - Movie Review by Jeff Mitchell

Sam Rockwell and Paul Walter Hauser in ‘Richard Jewell’. Photo Credit: Claire Folger

Eastwood’s ‘Richard Jewell’ is a gem

Directed by: Clint Eastwood

Written by: Billy Ray, based on Marie Brenner’s magazine article

Starring: Paul Walter Hauser, Sam Rockwell, Kathy Bates, Olivia Wilde, and Jon Hamm

“Richard Jewell” – Who is Richard Jewell?

Richard Jewell is a hero.

During the summer of 1996, Richard (Paul Walter Hauser) became – in a flash - a bona fide hero and was widely recognized across the country by anyone who picked up a local newspaper or who casually watched television in late July. During the 1996 Summer Olympics in Atlanta, Ga., Richard - working as a security guard in Centennial Olympic Park - discovered a backpack filled with pipe bombs and helped evacuate the area. The bombs killed one person and injured over 100 others, but the numbers could have been much worse, if not for the quick action of Jewell and other nearby police and security officers.

Richard appreciated the national and worldwide recognition, but for someone who dreamt of becoming a police officer, the simple act of saving lives was the ultimate personal satisfaction. No, the swarming media attention was not his dream, and his life soon became a nightmare.

Richard Jewell is a villain?

He became the FBI’s prime suspect, and the mass media attention immediately and dramatically altered from a welcoming spotlight to one thousand red laser beams pointed at his head. He was innocent, but through the laws of inertia, this erroneous accusation stayed in motion, and the media exponentially increased its speed.

The history books have rightfully and thankfully written Jewell’s true story, but director Clint Eastwood decided to raise awareness with his cinematic document.

“It’s a great American tragedy that should be pointed out,” Eastwood said in November 2019 interview.

Well, Eastwood pointed to Paul Walter Hauser to play Jewell, a stroke of casting genius. Hauser burst onto the scene with his “I, Tonya” (2017) breakthrough supporting performance as Shawn Eckhardt, the infamous accomplice in the 1994 Nancy Kerrigan attack. “I, Tonya” skates between black comedy and drama, and just about every speaking moment from Hauser induces smiles or robust laughter, including Shawn’s absurd claims of working as an international counter terrorism expert. Shawn also planned the assault while munching on potato chips – without wearing a shirt - in the back seat of a moving car.

Yes, Hauser certainly leaves an impression.

Here, he plays the title role, and although Eckhardt and Jewell were both caught in white hot national scandals, Richard is the only one with altruistic, noble intensions.

In a key way, Hauser’s two performances feel like Christoph Waltz’s turns as the brilliant but sinister Col. Hans Landa in “Inglourious Basterds” (2009) and the helpful, friendly bounty hunter Dr. King Schultz in “Django Unchained” (2012). Quentin Tarantino cast Waltz as a despicable villain in the former and a warmly received hero just three years later, and this talented Austrian actor won two Oscars for his dazzling work. Hauser probably won’t win a coveted golden statue as Jewell, but he should be considered for a nomination.

He’s that good. Hauser’s Richard is a gentle loner, someone who has been bullied about his weight for years and years and has retreated to familiar, stunting comforts for solace. Aside from hoping to become a police officer, Richard is not terribly ambitious, and this current moment of national scrutiny overwhelms him. Of course, it would overwhelm anyone, but rather than repeatedly lash out and cry foul, Richard swallows these accusations like so many taunts from his off-screen past.

He cannot fight the media and FBI blitzes on his own, so he turns to his friend, a lawyer named Watson Bryant (Sam Rockwell) for help. Oscar winner Rockwell is so good as an everyman coping with conflict much larger than his initial capabilities, and Watson becomes Richard’s much-needed ally. In fact, Eastwood and Hauser scoop us up so easily into the narrative, we need Watson to help Richard almost as much he does. Oscar winner Kathy Bates assists as well by dialing in a terrific performance as Richard’s mom Bobi, a woman coping with the dual roles of dutiful mom and public defender.

Hauser, Bates, Rockwell, and Eastwood all offer their support to the late Richard Jewell in this enlightening public service announcement that kindly and enthusiastically offers the answer to the question: Who is Richard Jewell?

A hero.

(3/4 stars)

Jeff – a member of the Phoenix Critics Circle – has penned film reviews since 2008, graduated from ASU’s Walter Cronkite School of Journalism and is a certified Rotten Tomatoes critic. Follow Jeff and the Phoenix Film Festival on Twitter @MitchFilmCritic and @PhoenixFilmFest, respectively.

In Fabric - Movie Review by Ben Cahlamer

Marianne Jean-Baptiste and Fatma Mohamed in ‘In Fabric’.

Written and Directed by: Peter Strickland

Starring: Marianne Jean-Baptiste, Hayley Squires, Leo Bill, Gwendoline Christie, Julian Barratt

It is interesting to note just how informed horror and drama are by comedy or vice versa.

Take for instance, A24’s “In Fabric” which is hitting American cinemas this weekend from writer-director Peter Strickland. Here he weaves an intricate tail of a dress who possesses its owner. But said owner is not just any bloke can buy the dress off the rack for their partners.

No, this dress is wont to own its owner, and in this case it is the recently divorced Sheila (Marianne Jean-Baptiste) who takes up these stunning red threads. Strickland takes great care to define who Sheila is and is not. We get a sense of modern dating for those in the later years of their lives (I’m not discounting myself from that statement).

The caretaker of the dress is Miss Luckmoore, played divinely by Fatma Mohamed. As Sheila is drawn into the store with 1970’s – esque television commercials, appealing to her prurient needs rather than her practical needs, she decides to buy the dress, though as we discover throughout the film, the dress really chose her.

Strickland goes to great lengths to build Sheila as a character. We see her ups and downs as she first tries to date and then secondly, has to ward off what appears to be her lazy son Vince (Jaygann Ayeh), who happens to be dating the exceptional – looking Gwen (Gwendoline Christie). Add to which, Sheila is a bank teller. We don’t know much about the company she works for, but there are definitely rules within which she must operate, both professionally and personally. These points are deftly handled through meetings with her managers, Stash (Julian Barratt) and Clive (Steve Oram) give her the third degree for small infractions with the funniest one being that Sheila waved inappropriately to the bank managers’ wife on the street one time.

Though much of the drama is driven by humor, we can feel the blanket of horror bearing down on us as Sheila becomes uncomfortable with the dress, trying to return it. Ari Wegner’s camerawork uses beautiful close-ups and odd angles to define the deviant nature of the people who inhabit the store, especially Mr. Lundy (Richard Bremmer), who pleasures himself over a mannequin. This dark humor plays to the story’s strengths as the film attempts to dominate its audience.

Because the story is more about the dress than its inhabitant is, Strickland is able to weave in a second story involving Reg Speaks (Leo Bill). The dress in fact ends up in one of his mates’ hands as a fun moment during Reg’s stag party. The dress latches itself on to Reg and affects his relationship with his fiancée, Babs (Hayley Squires). It is this second story that becomes more gruesome. Yet, there is a beauty in the horror being presented to us that compels us to see this story through.

From the opening credits, Strickland’s vibe is mid-1970’s fashion catalogue look through disrupted VHS video or ads that appealed to a certain mindset. Even the characterizations felt of the sterilized corporate-governance feel of Terry Gilliam’s “Brazil”: even poor Reg is chastised for fixing his own washer (he’s a washer repair man). His boss just decimates his working life with a look, and a swallow. Strickland spares no character any shame in this story.

Once the dress takes its own shape, the story changes, but Strickland keeps the story’s sensibilities in tune to a 21st century audience and that’s what is so compelling about this horror film – it plays off our love of laughter, our feelings of freedom when we get that perfect outfit and the horror of being dominated and controlled.

3.75 out of 4 stars.

The Aeronauts - Movie Review by Ben Cahlamer

Eddie Redmayne and Felicity Jones in “The Aeronauts”. Photo: Courtesy of Amazon Studios

Directed by: Tom Harper

Screenplay by: Jack Thorne

Story by:  Tom Harper and Jack Thorne

Starring:  Eddie Redmayne, Felicity Jones, Himesh Patel, Tom Courtenay

Arizona in Winter brings out a particularly fascinating opportunity, that of hot air balloon rides in the desert. While I’ve not personally done an excursion, I look up to the morning sky and see these small dots and think about what it must be like to be lifted into the air by hot gasses and to be able to experience the air without any other limitations than the basket you’re standing in, or the air you’re riding on.

I applied this same curiosity as James Glaisher (Eddie Redmayne) and Amelia Rennes (Felicity Jones) take to the air in the 1860’s – set “The Aeronauts” which opens this weekend.

Tom Harper, who co-wrote the story with Jack Thorne and directed the film uses some of the same tropes he developed in “Wild Rose” to tell the story of two people who desperately needed to prove their theories to a world who would not give them the time of day.

More than that though is the adventurous spirit with which Glaisher and Wren go about their adventure into the atmosphere. The time when the film is set, dirigibles are the only way off the ground and no one has a fundamental understanding of how the weather works, but Glaisher does.

In order to prove his theories though, he needs a way up into the air, and that’s where Amelia comes in. We get the sense from the opening frames, as they each try to one-up the other, that there is an unexplored sexual tension between the two. Amelia, a widow is as restrained a character as Redmayne is an actor and yet, Harper manages to get more mileage out of Redmayne because Jones is so effervescent in her determination as Amelia to prove the male-led Royal Society wrong and set a new height record while proving his theories correct.

There is an understated bravery in the adventurous spirit with which Glaisher and Amelia take to the skies supported through flashbacks. Thorne designed them to fill in gaps as the story reflects on what brought our characters to where they are today. These flashbacks are filled with wonderful characters, most notably that of Arthur Glaisher (Tom Courtenay), but do very little to support the modern adventure that Amelia and James are on.

Harper drives a feeling of romanticism between the characters. There is a tension between the two as Amelia, just having come out of a panic attack, tries to upstage James at the beginning of the movie. By the end of the movie, they find that they can rely on one another.

Where the use of flashbacks deter the course of the journey, the special effects more than support Glaisher’s and Amelia’s ambitions, allowing the wonderment of each of their characters’ excitement or horror to leap out of the screen. Nevermore is this present than in the harrowing scene where they realize that they must let the gas out in order to begin a descent. The trouble is that they’ve hit the coldest part of the atmosphere and the cap has frozen shut. In a brilliant moment that plays to our modern sensibilities, Amelia climbs out on to the balloon and manages to de-ice the latch, but not without putting herself in considerable danger.

It is this ambition that appeals to me; that adventurous spirit that captures a “brave new world” so very well. While I’m ambivalent toward the flashbacks, they do ground the characters a bit more, giving each of them a foundation. Amelia’s spitfire attitude is more about Felicity Jones’s performance than it is the character background, which is interesting because, while James Glaisher is a real-life individual who made these feats, Amelia is a completely original character and Jones filled the adventurous spirit with great aplomb.

The effects and the performances are what save “The Aeronauts” from completely deflating the story, but the unnecessary flashbacks put just as much pressure on those performances. Felicity Jones and Eddie Redmayne shine against the special effects and still come out on top.

2.75 out of 4

My Week with Marilyn - Movie Review by Jeff Mitchell

Michelle Williams as Marilyn Monroe in ‘My Week with Marilyn’.

With Eddie Redmayne starring in “The Aeronauts” (2019), which arrives in theatres on Friday, Dec. 6, let’s look back at his notable, complimentary performance with Michelle Williams’ turn as Marilyn Monroe in “My Week with Marilyn” (2011).

‘My Week with Marilyn’ says so much in a short time capsule

Directed by:  Simon Curtis

Written by:  Adrian Hodges, based on Colin Clark’s books “The Prince, The Showgirl and Me” (1995) and “My Week with Marilyn” (2000)

Starring:  Michelle Williams, Eddie Redmayne, Kenneth Branagh, Julia Ormond, Toby Jones, and Judi Dench

“My Week with Marilyn” (2011) – “Everyone remembers their first job.  This is the story of mine.” – Colin Clark (Eddie Redmayne)

Colin Clark, a 23-year-old dreamer, decides that he needs to work in the film business, and it just so happens that Sir Laurence Olivier (Kenneth Branagh), of all people, says, “Let’s try to find him something to do.” 

Olivier is about to direct a comedy called “The Sleeping Prince” - which eventually becomes “The Prince and the Showgirl” (1957) - and his production stars Marilyn Monroe (Michelle Williams).

After a completing a series of errands, Mr. Clark eventually befriends Ms. Monroe and becomes her escort during her stay in London on the shoot, and since she’s a stranger in a “strange country and playing a strange part” (as noted by her co-star Dame Sybil Thorndike (Judi Dench)), Colin’s sincere, positive outlook provides the support that she needs. 

Williams and Redmayne are perfect support for director Simon Curtis and his film, which is based on Colin’s memoirs. Williams – who rightfully earned a Best Actress Oscar nomination for her work here - is quite uncanny as Monroe.  She not only looks the part and captures Monroe’s cutesy charm and bombshell looks, but Williams also channels the woman’s insecurities and bad habits that come with the noted positive qualities. 

“My Week with Marilyn” cannot work without the audience believing that Williams is Monroe.  Well, cue the movie’s opening scene.  Clark sits in a theatre and marvels at Monroe belting out “When Love Goes Wrong (Nothing Goes Right) and “Heat Wave” on-screen, and before you can say, “It’s me, Sugar”, Williams has us believing. 

In a 2011 interview with journalist and humorist Mo Rocca, Williams reveals that she spent months studying Monroe and even wore a belt tied around her knees to properly capture Marilyn’s wiggle while she walks.  Williams is a star in her own right, but she did her homework before playing one of Hollywood’s biggest celebrities, and Redmayne’s turn as a starry-eyed young assistant is this movie’s perfect compliment. 

Colin is just a kid, but he displays good judgment and cultural wherewithal.  Olivier trusts Colin, and so does Marilyn, but hey, this upstart is still a mere mortal.  Yes, he’s a friend to Marilyn, but he also channels considerable fortitude to prevent his knees from turning to jelly in front of this living legend.  Redmayne is wholly likable here, and in many ways, Colin is Marilyn’s British knight in shining armor, as he helps shield her from negative forces with a kind face and warm words. 

He’s her confidant, friend and muse.   

“My Week with Marilyn” is a confident and brisk 93-minute biopic.  Although it captures a short moment in time, it says so much about Monroe, at least through the eyes of Clark.  The movie hooks us through Williams’ remarkable performance but also with Clark’s luck, because he finds himself helping Ms. Monroe in her time of need…on his first job. 

Quite a remarkable line on his resume, don’t you think?  For Williams and Redmayne, “My Week with Marilyn” is a proud line on theirs.

(3/4 stars)

Jeff – a member of the Phoenix Critics Circle – has penned film reviews since 2008, graduated from ASU’s Walter Cronkite School of Journalism and is a certified Rotten Tomatoes critic.  Follow Jeff and the Phoenix Film Festival on Twitter @MitchFilmCritic and @PhoenixFilmFest, respectively.

Five Essential Mark Ruffalo Performances by Jeff Mitchell

Mark Ruffalo stars in “Dark Waters” (3.5/4 stars), a true story about Robert Bilott, a lawyer who exposed Dupont’s pollution practices in a small West Virginia town.  Bilott’s work helped so many lives and brought light to an insidious 21st century problem that has been cultivating since the mid 20th century. 

You can easily see Ruffalo’s passion for the film in his performance, and he’s offered that same emotion in his on-screen work for over 20 years.  He’s delivered many, many memorable moments during his fruitful career in films like “13 Going on 30” (2004), “The Brothers Bloom” (2008), “Margaret” (2011), “Begin Again” (2013), “Infinitely Polar Bear” (2014), “Foxcatcher” (2014), and more, but let’s look his five most essential performances, and note that his work in “Dark Waters” is probably his sixth.

“Dark Waters” opens in Phoenix theatres on Wednesday, Nov. 27.

Mark Ruffalo in “You Can Count on Me” (2000)

Terry, “You Can Count on Me” (2000) – Writer/director Kenneth Lonergan earned a Best Original Screenplay Oscar nomination in his directorial debut, a soulful family drama about Sammy (Laura Linney) - a lending officer and single mom - taking in her irresponsible brother Terry (Ruffalo) for a short while. 

Linney garnered plenty of accolades too with a Best Actress Oscar nomination, and Ruffalo’s portrayal of an unfocused, unreliable drifter is the breakout role that eventually led to a supporting turn in “Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind” (2004) and Jennifer Garner’s love interest in “13 Going on 30” (2004).  Speaking of ages 13 and 30, Terry owns a serious case of arrested development, but Sammy hopes that he might still be a good influence on her young son.  The other men in Sammy’s life have fallen short, but can she count on her brother Terry?  Oh, we really, really hope so.

Mark Ruffalo as police inspector David Toschi in “Zodiac” (2007)

Police Inspector David Toschi, “Zodiac” (2007) – A serial killer, who calls himself Zodiac, is baffling Northern California police officers and newspaper reporters, and an all-star ensemble cast - including Jake Gyllenhaal, Robert Downey Jr., Brian Cox, Anthony Edwards, and Ruffalo – are willing pawns in director David Fincher’s sprawling, purposely exhausting crime drama.

While San Francisco Chronicle reporter Paul Avery (Downey Jr.) and cartoonist Robert Graysmith (Gyllenhaal) track grizzly clues, San Francisco police inspector David Toschi - who carries his gun like Steve McQueen’s Bullitt and has a fondness for animal crackers - hits the pavement with pragmatic sensibilities.  All the men feel the stress of continually falling one step behind the killer, and the results impact them in unpredictable ways.  Toschi is not immune from the frustration of missing Zodiac’s signs, but perhaps Graysmith, of all people, might eventually point the case in the right direction. 

Julianne Moore, Annette Bening, Mark Ruffalo, Josh Hutcherson, and Mia Wasikowska in The Kids Are All Right (2010)

Paul, “The Kids Are All Right” (2010) – Joni (Mia Wasikowska), 18, and Laser (Josh Hutcherson), 15, are doing just fine.  They have two loving and supportive parents, Nic (Annette Bening) and Jules (Julianne Moore) and live comfortably in a wealthy Southern California suburb.  They seem it have it all, but Laser wants to know their biological father.  Both moms were artificially inseminated by an anonymous sperm donor, so Joni and he arrange to meet him.  His name is Paul (Ruffalo). 

Director Lisa Cholodenko finds some room for Paul in this modern American family, as this free-spirited restaurant owner takes some hesitant steps forward to meet and connect with his kids and their four-person household in a constantly-engaging comedy/drama.  In 2010, “The Kids Are All Right” was a forward-thinking picture, and nine years later, it continues to age well.  Meanwhile, all the leads deliver spot-on performances, and Ruffalo is the film’s perfect wildcard, as Paul unloads equal measures of good intentions and awkward moments that ripple throughout the narrative and the aforementioned happy home.

Mark Ruffalo as Dr. Bruce Banner/The Hulk in The Marvel Cinematic Universe.

Dr. Bruce Banner/The Hulk, The Marvel Cinematic Universe (2012 – Present) – Bill Bixby, Eric Bana and Edward Norton played live action versions of Dr. Banner, but Ruffalo has enjoyed an eight-year-run as the green gargantuan over a number of marvel films, and his future looks bright for more romping, stomping adventures.  Ruffalo carries Banner’s intellectual panache, but also gives the good doctor spaces for emotional vulnerabilities - like having feelings for Natasha Romanoff (Scarlett Johansson) – but he also can rip amusing one-liners to keep up with the refreshingly-comic Thor (Chris Hemsworth).  These days, Banner and Hulk are bosom buddies, and “Avengers: Endgame” (2019) recently introduced audiences to a new version of the character:  Professor Hulk.  He is an intellectual smashing machine, so Ruffalo has zero reason to be angry.  Just the opposite, actually, as MCU fans and he are all smiles!

Michael Keaton and Mark Ruffalo in Spotlight (2015).

Mike Rezendes, “Spotlight” (2015) – Four reporters – Walter ‘Robby’ Robinson (Michael Keaton), Sacha Pfeiffer (Rachel McAdams), Matt Carroll (Brian d’Arcy James), and Mike Rezendes (Ruffalo) - make up The Boston Globe’s Spotlight Team, and they dive into long, investigative stories that could take a year to come together.  In 2001, the paper’s new editor Marty Baron (Liev Schreiber) suggests that someone follow up on a specific sexual abuse case involving the Catholic Church by filing a motion to lift a seal on court documents.  Many wish to proceed with caution, but not Rezendes. 

“He wants to sue the church?  Hey, that’s great,” Rezendes says. 

The reporters soon discover that the Boston Archdiocese is involved in a vastly larger conspiracy, so Robinson, Pfeiffer, Carroll, and Rezendes persistently knock on doors, ask questions, look for documents, and chronicle their findings.  Director Tom McCarthy’s “Spotlight” presents the very best of journalism, as Keaton, McAdams, d’Arcy James, and Ruffalo play reporters who pursue one thing:  the truth.  In 2019, journalists who report the truth are under siege more than any other time in recent memory, so McCarthy’s film and the actors’ first-rate work are precious reminders of the Fourth Estate’s vital importance.

Jeff – a member of the Phoenix Critics Circle – has penned film reviews since 2008, graduated from ASU’s Walter Cronkite School of Journalism and is a certified Rotten Tomatoes critic. Follow Jeff and the Phoenix Film Festival on Twitter @MitchFilmCritic and @PhoenixFilmFest, respectively.

Knives Out - Movie Review by Monte Yazzie

From left to right. Linda (Jamie Lee Curtis), Harlan Thrombey (Christopher Plummer), Richard (Don Johnson), Walter (Michael Shannon), and Jacob (Jaeden Martell) in “Knives Out”.

Dir: Rian Johnson
Starring: Daniel Craig, Chris Evans, Ana de Armas, Jamie Lee Curtis, Don Johnson, Michael Shannon, Toni Collette, LaKeith Stanfield, and Christopher Plummer

It was Colonel Mustard in the library with a candlestick!

Everyone loves a good, old fashioned whodunit; that stealthy murder mystery suspense thriller in the vein of an Agatha Christie or Arthur Conan Doyle novel. The kind of mystery story that starts with the discovery of a dead body and weaves through a group of people, where everyone is a suspect, leading towards the final reveal of the devious plans and the uncovering of the murderer who tried to get away with it all.

Writer/director Rian Johnson, who last helmed the monolithic “Star Wars: The Last Jedi”, takes a step back with a smaller more restrained film and also into the past with “Knives Out”. Johnson, obviously influenced by films like the Agatha Christie adaptation “Death on the Nile”, Joseph L. Mankiewicz’s “Sleuth” starring Laurence Olivier and Michael Caine, and “Deathtrap” from Sidney Lumet, crafts a clever and entertaining whodunit with an exceptionally talented cast of players.

The mystery takes place at the sprawling, ornamented estate owned by world-renowned mystery author Harlan Thrombey (Christopher Plummer). His family, a group of ravenous vultures who have become dependent on the immense wealth Harlan has cultivated with the production of his library of novels, is celebrating his birthday when at the end of the evening, Harlan is found dead in his study.

Funeral arrangements are made, the last will & testament reading is planned, but the police (LaKeith Stanfield and Noah Segan) have some final questions concerning the circumstances of Harlan’s death. Most especially interested is Benoit Blanc (Daniel Craig), a sort-of-famous investigator, who’s involvement in the proceedings is dubiously unknown. As are the motives of Harlan’s caretaker Marta (Ana de Armas), his arrogant nephew (Chris Evans), belligerent son (Michael Shannon), and entitled daughter (Jamie Lee Curtis). Everyone is a suspect.

Rian Johnson clearly understands the setup and execution of these specific narratives, spending a meticulous amount of time building the maze of clever clues, amusing MacGuffins, and witty fake outs. Johnson understands that what makes these types of films so enthralling is that viewers will place themselves into the story as amateur gumshoes, analyzing background objects, dissecting comments made by characters, and following the many diverting bread crumb trails. Johnson executes this component effectively throughout, building the mystery and revealing secrets in interesting, if sometimes familiar, ways. There are only a couple of moments when the twists and turns overtake the pacing and momentum of the story.

The cast is exceptional and part of the reason the film works so well. Everyone in the film has a specific motivation and each has very identifiable character traits that set them apart from one another. Daniel Craig as Benoit Blanc, with a thick southern accent and showy gestures, swaggers through scenery with confidence and glee. Jamie Lee Curtis, playing the stoic figure of the family, is having fun giving long glares and sly smirks. Michael Shannon, playing Harlan’s son, is consistently amusing to watch as he stumbles and grumbles from scene to scene. The entire ensemble is provided an opportunity to shine.

“Knives Out” is a meticulously crafted environment and story from start to finish. While there are a few moments when the film reveals its tricks too early and sometimes too plainly, Rian Johnson ultimately displays a masterful understanding of how to craft a good ol’ fashioned whodunit.

Monte’s Rating
4.00 out of 5.00

Dark Waters - Movie Review by Ben Cahlamer

Mark Ruffalo stars as "Robert Bilott" in director Todd Haynes’ “Dark Waters", a Focus Features release.

Directed by: Todd Haynes

Written by: Mario Correa and Matthew Michael Carnahan

Starring: Mark Ruffalo, Anne Hathaway, Tim Robbins, Bill Camp, Victor Garber, Mare Winningham, Bill Pullman

Mark Ruffalo’s career continues to amaze me. There is an earnestness and a seriousness for each of the roles he has taken on. Within that seriousness, there is an empathy drawing you into his performance and we feel his compulsion to see something through to its end.

In Todd Haynes’s latest film, “Dark Waters,” Ruffalo takes on, not only DuPont Chemical Corporation, but the very health of a small community and ultimately the nation when it is discovered that DuPont purposely withheld vital information about the toxic pollution of a West Virginia town’s water supply.

Ruffalo plays Robert Bilott, a Philadelphia corporate defense attorney, whose law firm, Taft Stettinius & Hollister, curiously starts out as a part of DuPont’s defense against such claims. Haynes paints Bilott as a hard working attorney, who understands where his paycheck comes from, but doesn’t mind it either. He plays his promotion off with jokes as his status raises, leaving behind colleagues.

Haynes sets up the drama in a bold way as a mysterious visit by a cattle farmer, Wilbur Tennant (Bill Camp) rattles Bilott; firstly because he wasn’t expecting a visitor and secondly, he wasn’t expecting to revisit his home, Parkersburg, West Virginia. Tennant, an obtuse individual storms his waiting room with a box of video tapes, demanding that Bilott look at them as he levies a charge of corporate malfeasance.

Bilott, who has been defending the very company that Tennant charges a wrongdoing with, doesn’t want to believe him. Nevertheless, Ruffalo’s earnest and empathetic nature compels him to start investigating, which as we know eventually takes years.

The script by Mario Correa and Matthew Michael Carnahan, based on Nathaniel Rich’s The New York Times Magazine’s “The Lawyer Who Became DuPont’s Worst Nightmare” methodically lays out the evidentiary phase as Bilott starts uncovering the surface-level evidence. His investigation takes him to Phil Donnelly, the CEO and Chairman of E.I. du Pont de Nemours & Company. Donnelly, played by Victor Garber is at first helpful. There’s an early soiree where Donnelly and Bilott are friendly. As Bilott’s investigation deepens, Donnelly withdraws his support.

Haynes and Ruffalo underpin the dramatic tension with Billot’s family life or lack thereof.

His wife, Sarah played by Anne Hathaway, is also an attorney. However, she is a stay-at-home mom, taking care of their kids. We get a sense early on that there are challenges in their relationship, that Rob is keeping things from her; it’s not an untrusting relationship between them, rather a “I’m protecting you by not telling you everything” type of relationship.

“Dark Waters,” follows in the footsteps of Michael Mann’s “The Insider” with a solid antagonist in its own unfolding drama. Haynes uses his pacing in a deliberate and methodical manner to stymie Rob at every corner, through his own firm; DuPont, the legal system, the pressure to find the evidence and collect it, and his own health.

On the periphery of Rob’s discovery phase is lead partner Tom Terp played with great bombast by Tim Robbins. Robbins’ role is dialog-heavy; he relishes the opportunity to chew scenes, especially when Rob’s investigation finally leads to a push by the law firm that formally represented DuPont. There’s a scene that sets the third act in motion, where a junior partner, James Ross (William Jackson Harper) speaks out against the firm taking on the class lawsuit. An exhausted Billot is silent while the established partners argue for taking on the case. Terp just blasts out what the audience is feeling, not even looking at the reams of bound paper in front of him: he knows that their moral obligation is to defend the indefensible.

Bill Camp deserves recognition for his performance as Tennant, carrying a range of emotion as he tries to save his farm and then, desperately, his family. Victor Garber’s repulsed look as he is presented evidence of his company’s malfeasance echoes our own horrors.

But, it is Anne Hathaway’s silently frustrated performance that reminds us of what’s truly at stake: not the burden of carrying the case (I know the feeling, I’ve pulled stunts like Billot did before, but not at such a great sacrifice), but the burden of not being there for his kids and wife as they grow up around him.

Haynes cleverly disguises the passage of time through each vehicle Rob drives. There’s a running gag throughout the film that he buys cheap, used cars until they run into the ground, a sign of his sparse nature.

That’s the brilliance of Haynes’s direction: all throughout the drama and the horrific scenes that permeate the film, there are subtle touches that define each performance as well as the flow of the film, the subtlety punctuated with explosive, emotional anger, keeping our pulse rate elevated.

“Dark Waters” is about the compulsive nature of Rob Bilott. Ruffalo’s earnest and empathetic performance plays right into the unfolding drama. That drama plays directly into the themes that are on the minds of moviegoers around the world.

And that makes “Dark Waters” a compelling and worthy trip to the movies.

3 out of 4 stars

The Irishman - Movie Review by Monte Yazzie

During a break in the trial of Jimmy Hoffa, Chuckie O’Brien (Jesse Plemons), Bill Bufalino (Ray Romano), Frank Sheeran (Robert De Niro) and Hoffa (Al Pacino) are shocked at the news of JFK’s assassination. © 2019 Netlfix US, LLC.

Dir: Martin Scorsese
Starring: Robert De Niro, Joe Pesci, Al Pacino, Harvey Keitel, Bobby Cannavale, Jesse Plemons, Anna Paquin, Kathrine Narducci, Stephanie Kurtzuba, and Ray Romano

A deliberate camera wanders elegantly through a nursing home, down hallways and past medical staff, finally coming to rest in a cold and lonesome room where one single old man sits, almost waiting for the arrival of someone to engage his company. This all happens as “In the Still of the Night” by the Five Satins sets the mood for the story about to be told, a tale of murder and mobsters, tough guys with tough tales, with both the known and unknown elements of history equally famous and infamous supplying influence.

“The Irishman”, from director Martin Scorsese, is another gangster story from the auteur many would identify as the curator of the modern mob movie. Films like “Goodfellas”, “Casino”, and “The Departed” all tackled stories of money, power, respect and the violence, arrogance, and betrayal that permeates those areas. “The Irishman” sets a different mood, the familiar elements are all still present but the emotion and intention are different this time around. Scorsese tells a tale that focuses on loss and remorse, decision and intention; it’s a three and a half-hour long cinematic achievement from one of the greatest film directors of all time. 

Frank Sheeran (Robert De Niro) is the Irishman and also the lone elder waiting in the nursing home to tell a story about his life. Frank, after being a soldier in World War II, made a living as a truck driver in Pennsylvania, but after a chance meeting with a local gangster named Russell Bufalino (Joe Pesci), Frank takes a role as “the muscle” for the Philadelphia mob. It doesn’t take long for Frank to impress the higher-ups, opening an opportunity for him to work with James Riddle Hoffa (Al Pacino), president of the International Brotherhood of Teamsters. 

The plot for “The Irishman” is an interesting device, told with voice-over narration from Frank, who is in the nursing home, and with the same emphasis that old men recall stories about long-forgotten fishing trips or family vacations from the past. Frank looks back on the past, recalling the events that will eventually lead to the disappearance of Jimmy Hoffa while taking moments to talk about other gangsters, family life, and historical events pertinent to Frank and his journey through time. With such an extensive running time, it might seem like all these elements would become convoluted or muddle the emotion for the characters. It’s the exact opposite, the deliberate pacing and extensive time spent wandering through time with Frank and other associates helps in establishing the conflict Frank develops as elements of betrayal and loyalty arise throughout his life. It’s less about the history of things or the structure of the mob and more about the emotion of everything that happens to the characters. 

The script allows so much for the cast to work with, it’s a beautiful thing watching these amazing actors work in this film. De Niro is fantastic throughout, offering a character that starts as a loyal soldier who matures into a leader who is conflicted yet still devoted to his superiors. It’s a fascinating transition for the character, but also, transformation as De Niro and others in the cast are digitally de-aged for the film, an effect that is strange at first but quickly dissipates. Al Pacino plays Hoffa with a combination of big bold swagger when in the public eye but also sensitivity in smaller scenes when he and Frank are sharing hotel rooms or having ice cream with the family. Joe Pesci completely captivating here; the actor, who hasn’t been in much on the silver screen since the ’90s, composes a quiet character, doing more with subtle glances and small expressions than big dialog moments or boastful gangster antics like we’ve seen in the past. 

The look of the film, photographed by Rodrigo Prieto, is stunning at times. The film seems to glow during flashbacks and slowly desaturate as Frank and Russell make a fateful road trip with their wives. The beginning long, continuous shot is beautifully composed and a scene involving a big celebration for Frank looms with ominous intentions.  

“The Irishman” comes at an interesting time in the career of Martin Scorsese who recently has come under criticism from some film fans concerning his views on the state of cinema and the connection to Marvel comic book movies. Film is a subjective art-form, but if anyone has the right to make comments on the art of cinema, it’s Martin Scorsese. If the auteur’s past catalog doesn’t prove that point, “The Irishman” displays all the reasons why cinema should be regarded with the kind of seriousness Scorsese commands.  

Monte’s Rating
4.50 out of 5.00

Waves - Movie Review by Jeff Mitchell

Kelvin Harrison Jr.; left, and Sterling K. Brown in “Waves.” (A24)

‘Waves’:  An explosive and hypnotic domestic ride

Written and directed by:  Trey Edward Shults

Starring:  Sterling K. Brown, Renee Elise Goldsberry, Kelvin Harrison Jr., Taylor Russell, and Lucas Hedges

“Waves” – Writer/director Trey Edward Shults’ vibrant and explosive film is about families.  Fathers and sons.  Mothers and daughters.  Parents and children.  

Actually, it’s about one family, and no matter how much love and guidance that Ronald (Sterling K. Brown) and Catharine Williams (Renee Elise Goldsberry) openly bequeath to their kids Tyler (Kelvin Harrison Jr.) and Emily (Taylor Russell), open lines of communication between generations are sometimes impossible to find, even when a father, stepmother, son, and daughter live under one roof, frequently within whispering distances.

First definition of a wave:  Move to and fro with a swaying or undulating motion while remaining fixed to a point.

Ronald and Catharine Williams created a world of support for Tyler and Emily in the Miami suburbs.  They work hard and expect a lot from their teenage children, although the focus these days is squarely on Tyler.  Tyler is the older sibling, and Ronald seems to relish pushing him to excel, especially on the high school wrestling mat.  He even trains with his son, and they frequently lift weights without their shirts and flex in front of the mirror, which pushes their collective macho-quotient to 11.  Despite having a tight, ever-present rein on Tyler, Ronald has no idea that his son is stressed about two massive issues.  

Second definition of a wave:  a long body of water curling into an arched form and breaking on shore.

Tyler and his girlfriend Alexis (Alexa Demie) enjoy a carefree, loving relationship, and Shults introduces the audience to the happy couple with dazzling camerawork, as the two zip along the highway.  His camera somehow swivels and spins in tight quarters, and modern, pulsating beats are in sync with the kids’ laughter and smiles, as their heads and limbs sometimes extend outside the open windows.  With passion in the hearts and nothing but time on their hands, Tyler and Alexis perfectly capture the joy of youth in just a minute or two of screen time. 

Shults presents similar movements at the kids’ high school, as he dives and darts in the weight and wrestling rooms, but also outside on green football fields where cheerleaders practice.  Libraries and books aren’t particularly featured, but we get a first row seat into this aforementioned celebratory fervor.  School, however, is also noticeably separate from the rigidity of Tyler’s and Emily’s home life, so a clear divide between parents and kids exists.  

Third definition of a wave: a sudden occurrence of, or increase in, a specified phenomenon, feeling or emotion.

Unfortunately, the exuberance of youth can spill into immaturity and irrationality.  This fragile combination can quickly manufacture unexpected consequences, and not even the strongest parental foundations can prepare for them. 

It’s difficult to prepare for a couple key moments in “Waves”.  It’s a film that tests our limits.  It throws the audience into a meat grinder, but then opens up hypnotic spaces to help us cope.   It feels organic.  Then again, Shults’ direction is certain and unmistakable, and we are powerless to course correct.  Thankfully, we can regain autonomy after the movie, and the best course of action is to search for those evasive lines of communication in our own lives.  In the meantime, waves are always crashing against the shore.

(3.5/4 stars)

Jeff – a member of the Phoenix Critics Circle – has penned film reviews since 2008, graduated from ASU’s Walter Cronkite School of Journalism and is a certified Rotten Tomatoes critic.  Follow Jeff and the Phoenix Film Festival on Twitter @MitchFilmCritic and @PhoenixFilmFest, respectively.

A Beautiful Day in the Neighborhood - Movie Review by Ben Cahlamer

Tom Hanks and Matthew Rhys star in TriStar Pictures’ ‘A Beautiful Day in the Neighborhood’. Photo Credit: Lacey Terrell

Directed by: Marielle Heller

Written by: Micah Fisteman-Blue and Noah Harpster

Based on: “Can You Say… Hero?” by Tom Junod

Starring: Tom Hanks, Matthew Rhys, Susan Kelechi Watson, Chris Cooper, Enrico Colantoni, Maryann Plunkett

As Marielle Heller’s “A Beautiful Day in the Neighborhood” unfolded in front of me, it was difficult not to compare my own childhood experience of seeing Fred Rogers appearing on the television, talking directly to me.

I get misty eyed just thinking about it.

Tom Hanks’s nearly pitch-perfect performance has something to do with my misty eyes. However, it is the way Ms. Heller used the script from Micah Fitzeman-Blue and Noah Harpster to define the well-nuanced layers of the story.

More importantly, their script and Ms. Heller’s treatment of the script relies on the audience being open to what the film’s message is truly about, which is to say that Fred Rogers is telling Lloyd Vogel’s (Matthew Rhys) story as if it were another of the 895 episodes that Rogers produced between 1968 and 2001. The film opens to Vogel giving yet another award-winning speech, laced with sarcasm, but we can tell from the onset that there is a lot of pain.

The film is set in 1998 and follows the cynical Vogel, who at the time was writing for Esquire Magazine when he was asked to do a profile on Mr. Rogers. There’s a scene early in the film in which Vogel is sitting in his editors’ office and she reminds him why this assignment is being pushed in his direction. It’s a darkly humorous moment which begins a journey of change.

When Mr. Rogers and Lloyd first meet, there’s a playful banter between he and Lloyd; sitting just off the set, Lloyd begins a series of questions, but the focal point is the bandage across Lloyd’s nasal bridge. Within that moment, something brilliant happens as their conversation reaches through the cinema screen with that endearing trait that Mr. Rogers was known for – his ability to get people comfortable enough to open up.

Ms. Heller also buoys that sequence with Lloyd’s arrival on set – a child who is suffering is willful and disrespectful as his parents try to get him to calm down. While the parents scramble to control their child, Lloyd is having a conversation with Bill Isler (Enrico Colantoni), the President & CEO of Family Communications, Fred Rogers’s production company. Isler comments on the quality of Vogel’s articles, saying that he had Rogers read every article they could find written by Vogel and that Vogel was someone who Rogers loved to work with. Incredulously, Vogel asks Isler, “why, because I’m broken?”

The story’s conflict is one of family; a distanced father, Jerry played by Chris Cooper and an isolated, but understanding wife in Andrea (Susan Kelechi Watson) along with a son, Gavin. It is also about perspective and that’s something that Rogers thrived on – changing perspectives through gentle probing questions. There is never malicious intent in their interactions.

This thesis is supported through a scene about midway through the movie where, following a traumatic argument with his dad, Lloyd returns to Mr. Rogers as a way of escape. They meet in an Asian restaurant and through their conversation, Lloyd admits to certain things. Mr. Rogers asks Lloyd to take a moment of silence, seeking out all the people who love him. The low hush of dishes clattering in the kitchen and other diners’ conversations comes to a halt; the passersby outside the restaurant and the traffic just completely stop. It’s a moment of pure serenity as just a simple exercise and taking a moment to stop and realize just how much support we all really have was amazing.

As I think about it, Hanks flourished in bringing his own iconic mannerisms to another icon while keeping within the boundaries of who Fred Rogers was. Rhys had a conviction about himself that his cynic side was his driving force. There was a stoic side to him, but he always had a twinkle about him as if he was ready to laugh.

There’s a natural symmetry and flow to the story. Nothing ever really feels forced about the way Hanks portrays Rogers. In fact, the primary method of Rogers’s outlets for his anger and rage, for which he was known for having a temper, is beautifully contrasted with the opening outlet for Lloyd.

“A Beautiful Day in the Neighborhood” does not pander. It doesn’t suggest that change can happen immediately; that the change within ourselves is a constant battle. But, given the circumstances of the story, the speed with which that change happens quickens in the second half of the film and I think that pace weakens the film just slightly.

One might be inclined to think that change isn’t possible, that we’ve gone down a dark path and that we can’t change our ways. The world thrives on failure and “A Beautiful Day in the Neighborhood” reminds us that we are each of us, special in our own unique way and that we can be loved just for who we are.

3 out of 4 stars

Honey Boy - Movie Review by Ben Cahlamer

Shia LaBeouf plays his own father in his film ‘Honey Boy’.

Directed by: Alma Har’el

Written by: Shia LaBeouf

Starring: Shia LaBeouf, Lucas Hedges, Noah Jupe

I remember watching the Disney movie “Holes” on DVD in the late 90’s and the young actor at the center of the film, Shia LaBeouf was dramatically captivating. He went on to other roles, but his biggest performance has been his fall from Hollywood’s grace over the years.

His prophetic screenplay for “Honey Boy,” Alma Har’el’s directorial debut, serves as much of a release from his own internal pressures as much as it is an apology letter to his fans and his colleagues for his transgressions.

The story starts in present day as Otis Lort played by Lucas Hedges enters rehab following a DUI. He doesn’t believe he has a problem, but he does have Laura San Giacomo’s Dr. Moreno to talk about his challenges. The story is predicated on this DUI and his visit to a rehab facility as being his third strike.

The stakes for Lort have never been more serious and through Hedges’s expert performance, he simply doesn’t care. At the beginning.

Har’el takes us back to when Otis was a lad. Noah Jupe plays the younger Otis. In the opening scene, Jupe is set against a pitch black background and a cream pie just hits him perfectly square in the face – the joke’s on him. We quickly realize he’s a child actor and his father, James (LaBeouf) is his manager.

We can tell from James’s reaction to the production running later than scheduled, that there’s a lot of pent up anger. James teaches, or remind Otis to mind his manners and his place. We know that young Otis is a playful soul; one that is not being let out, so acting is his release.

Although we know that “Honey Boy” is autobiographical in nature, the way the film switches from young Otis to present day Otis doesn’t give the film an autobiographical feeling, allowing Hedges and Jupe to naturally progress through the opposite ends of one personality. Jupe is the standout here, showing a range of emotions, eventually taking control of his own life from his abusive father.

Adding a rich context to the characters is the court motel outside L.A. that James has them shacked up in; a home to prostitution and drugs and not exactly the best way to raise a son. LaBeouf’s performance as his own abuser is some of the most powerful acting I’ve seen this year – it is truly a release for him to finally acknowledge his own pain and to deal with, but it is Jupe that truly supports LaBeouf’s transformation.

Hedges, who is having yet another amazing year in 2019 stands out as the result of all the abuse. More importantly, the character realizes that his outlet is just an escape, something his father did to himself as well – life father, like son, until they both eventually become drifters; there is a lyricism about the way in which they drift, the powerful music from Alex Somers drives the characters toward their destinies.

As strong as the performances are, Natasha Braier’s cinematography must not go unnoticed: her work during the modern day settings with lots of natural sunlight flowing through the interior spaces, suggesting, in fact encouraging an open place in which to share our darkest fears contrasts with dingy, cramped surroundings of the motel young Otis and James lived in. Braier’s exterior shots are all about the gorgeous sunsets, the golden halo that permeates the Los Angeles Basin punctuating the dreams with which Otis has for his life, but his father can’t see.

LaBeouf has continued his acting career even through his recovery period and his performances get deeper and deeper; “The Peanut Butter Falcon” from earlier this year is a shining example.

As a screenwriter, even if he focuses on down and out recovery type characters, he has a future as a screenwriter. “Honey Boy” proves the exception to LaBeouf’s rule and I, for one, hope he continues to write as well as act.

3.75 out of 4

Marriage Story - Movie Review by Jeff Mitchell

Adam Driver and Scarlett Johansson star in Noah Baumbach’s heartfelt drama ‘Marriage Story’. Photo Credit: Wilson Webb

Baumbach’s ‘Marriage Story’ vows to leave a mark

Written and directed by:  Noah Baumbach

Starring:  Adam Driver, Scarlett Johansson, Laura Dern, Alan Alda, Ray Liotta, and Julie Hagerty

“Marriage Story” – “We were perfectly happy until we decided to live happily ever after.” – Carrie Bradshaw, “Sex in the City”

“Marriage is compromise and hard work, and then more hard work and communication and compromise.  And then work.  Abandon all hope, ye who enter here.” – Gillian Flynn

If the weather doesn’t comply with your family’s proposed weekend plans, a most-reliable backup is always at your disposal:  start a pot of coffee, make some sandwiches, open a box of cookies, and reach into the hallway closet and pull out Monopoly.  During blustery weekends, millions of families stay inside, huddle around a squared-circle chock full of streets, railroads and utilities, and giggle, argue, buy properties, pay rent, get rich, and go broke.  Oh, temporary incarceration is also a frequent fact of life too, but it’s just a game.

In the pleasing, breezy and soulful opening minutes of writer/director Noah Baumbach’s “Marriage Story”, he – in a most unique way – introduces Charlie (Adam Driver) and Nicole (Scarlett Johansson) and their life in New York City with their elementary school-age son Henry (Azhy Robertson).  Charlie is an avant-garde playwright, and Nicole stars in his live theatrical constructions.  They work together very well, recognize each other’s strengths and vulnerabilities, and live symbiotically.  Baumbach also includes some footage of a lively Monopoly match, which is one of many, many small moments that help tether this very likable family to our own.

We want Charlie and Nicole to continue to thrive for the next 60 years, but as Ms. Bradshaw and Ms. Flynn opined, sustained marital success is not a certainty.  

Other than co-writing “Fantastic Mr. Fox” (2009), Baumbach isn’t particularly known for depicting healthy relationships in his films, which are evenly mixed with comedy and misfortune.  Just look to “The Squid and the Whale” (2005), “Greenberg” (2010) and “While We’re Young” (2014) as prime examples.  No, “Marriage Story” does not run victory laps in celebrating a healthy partnership for 2 hours and 16 minutes, because Charlie and Nicole are in crisis, and talking-it-out with a soft-spoken third party in a comfortable office at 200 dollars a click probably won’t solve it.

“It is personal,” Baumbach said in an August 2019 interview.  “As a teenager, my parents divorced, and then I went through a divorce as an adult.”  

He adds that he used elements from his own experiences, but he wanted to broaden the film, because it’s such a huge subject.

Baumbach does this figuratively, but also literally, as this family’s journey volleys between New York and Los Angeles, and the movie proudly celebrates these coastal locales while shutting out the flyover states.  Still, the film’s threads champion the universality of Splitsville, which is familiar in every community, coast to coast.

With plenty of space and time, the razor-sharp, perceptive script covers a lot of ground, like personal negotiation, lawyers knowing what’s best, distance making the heart grow less-fonder, and the impact on children.

Baumbach, however, regularly checks in with Charlie, as this character’s universe seems to ever-so-slowly evolve into a place that he no longer recognizes.  Even though “Marriage Story” frequently poses as Charlie’s Story, Nicole isn’t a villain.  The two are just guilty of being human, and Laura Dern and Alan Alda don’t break laws when playing lawyers, but they steal every on-screen moment by delivering levity through absurdity in a system that defies logic.

“Marriage Story” rarely gets explosive, except one signature scene that channels Richard Linklater’s “Before Midnight” (2013).  Otherwise, the simplicities of imperfect-but-agreeable bliss seem to constantly and painfully shift into something else. 

Something more distant.  More clinical.  More transactional. 

Although a failing marriage can go to a thousand places, one thing is certain:  a lazy Sunday filled with coffee, sandwiches, cookies, and stops at St. Charles Place, Vermont Avenue and Boardwalk is not one of them. 

(3.5/4 stars)

Jeff – a member of the Phoenix Critics Circle – has penned film reviews since 2008, graduated from ASU’s Walter Cronkite School of Journalism and is a certified Rotten Tomatoes critic.  Follow Jeff and the Phoenix Film Festival on Twitter @MitchFilmCritic and @PhoenixFilmFest, respectively.

Frozen II - Movie Review by Monte Yazzie

‘Frozen 2.’ Photo: Walt Disney Pictures

Dir: Chris Buck and Jennifer Lee

Starring: Kristen Bell, Idina Menzel, Josh Gad, Jonathan Groff, Sterling K. Brown, Evan Rachel Wood, and Alfred Molina

Happily, Ever After. Disney has used this sentiment to build an illustrious career of animated feature films filled with fairy godmothers, poison apples, singing mermaids, and, in the case of “Frozen”, a magical snow queen. All these stories come with enchantment, romance, and their fair share of evil villains, but they also have near-perfect happy endings.

“Frozen”, released in 2013, ended with two sisters reunited, the kingdom of Arendelle saved from eternal winter, the snowman Olaf finding a family, and every young audience member singing “Let it Go” for the next 6 years. It was as perfect an ending as one would expect from Disney.

So why continue the story of Elsa and Anna? “Frozen II” doesn’t need to exist but it does, and the result is a better than expected tale of growing up, becoming mature, and dealing with change.

Arendelle has found peace with Queen Elsa (Idina Menzel) in power, Anna (Kristen Bell) and Kristoff (Jonathan Groff) are growing closer in their budding relationship, and Olaf (Josh Gad) is soaking up human life while learning as much as possible. But Elsa’s magical power grows stronger and echoes from the past start to call for answers. Arendelle is threatened and Elsa, Anna, Kristoff, Sven, and Olaf must travel to an enchanted kingdom to find a solution.

“Frozen II” does a great job of utilizing its strongest assets which is the cast of characters. The story makes that a point of emphasis, initially, by focusing on the interconnected storylines the characters all have with one another. Specifically, Elsa and Anna’s connection as sisters, but also as powerful women in leadership positions, is more prominent throughout the film. Olaf, who mostly plays the comedic relief, is also provided with more matured character traits that assist in both offering levity but also insight with the characters along their journey. Even Kristoff is provided with more to do to assist Anna and Elsa through the major changes happening in the film.

The narrative works best when the theme of dealing with change is at the forefront. Sequels struggle with showing how characters grow, we become so familiar with great characters in the first film that often the sequel fails to offer the conflict that allows the characters to mature and handle change. “Frozen II” keeps that in mind as Elsa searches for answers about her past and gaining an understanding of how to handle her powers. The real admirable focus, surprisingly, is the development of Anna who must handle the more realistic, world-weary struggles of growing up and taking control of the complications that arise in life.

Unfortunately, the general journey of the story, the trip into the enchanted autumnal land with walking giant stone people, progresses in dull and predictable ways. While this shouldn’t be a surprise for an animated Disney feature, the progression just falls flat as the story follows the same familiar fairytale formula. Also, the plot introduction of an indigenous forest group in the enchanted land, who were betrayed in the past, offers an opportunity to introduce elements associated with the trauma found throughout history (heavy material but important subject matter conversations for young viewers) but it never follows through on these points. However, the composition of these environments, the dense fog-laden forest and one exquisite scene involving a water horse, keep the story interesting to look at.

There is a lot for young people to enjoy in “Frozen II”, while many of the songs don’t reach the heights of “Let it Go”, there are few notable songs, specifically a number that feels straight out the ‘80s, that will please. Still, the heart established by the characters and the focus on maturity and change keeps this sequel interesting and enjoyable.  If “Frozen” was about gaining the confidence to “let it go”, “Frozen II” is about the process of “letting go” and grasping the change that is in front of you. That’s a good lesson to share.

Monte’s Rating
3.25 out of 5.00

Interview of ‘Frozen II’ Animator Justin Sklar by Jeff Mitchell

“Frozen II” is flying into theatres on Friday, Nov. 22, so Disney animator Justin Sklar flew into Phoenix for press interviews and appearances on Nov. 15.  Justin sat down with the Phoenix Film Festival for a fun and insightful one-on-one interview, and we talked about his start with Disney, his influences and naturally, his work on “Frozen II”.

Disney animator Justin Sklar started his career as a trainee for “Wreck-It Ralph".

PFF:  You were a Disney trainee on “Wreck-It Ralph” (2012), and the studio promoted you to a full animator for “Frozen” (2013).  That’s like being a first-round draft pick and then winning the Super Bowl during your inaugural season.  How was that experience, and is “Frozen II” like coming home?

JS:  For sure.  I definitely got lucky, and I showed up (at Disney) when everything started to be awesome.  The way the training program normally works is you roll into crowds, and by the end of “Ralph”, I started doing a couple shots.  They try to give you one or two by the end of the movie, but “Frozen” was my first real (chance) to animate the whole show.  Obviously, at that time, none of us thought, “Yea, ‘Frozen’ is going to make a billion dollars.”   

And does it feel like coming home?  Yea, there’s an interesting thing that happens for animators.  (We think) sequels are cool.

(Normally,) we spend a year animating these characters, and by the end of that year, you (say), “Yea, I finally figured out who they are,” but you never get to animate them again.  Now, we can come into “Frozen II” with all that (past) knowledge.  (We can) really focus on honing the details that (we) didn’t get to do in the first movie.  It’s definitely cool to do “Frozen II”.

PFF:  In “Frozen II”, you worked on Kristoff (Jonathan Groff) and Mattias (Sterling K. Brown).  How closely did you work with Jonathan and Sterling?

JS:  We use all of what they do in the booth.  We look at all of their recordings, Mattias in particular.  We changed stuff in the model and a bunch of things (on) how Mattias moves, and (he) is heavily based on Sterling.  There are a lot of choices that we made with his mouth and jaw that are based on how Sterling not only looks, but how he talks and moves. 

A lot of that (work) is cool and interesting, but we have so many animators, (so) it really helps to ground the performance and (point out) something specific (about a character).  When you have 90 people animating every character across the whole movie, (you want Mattias to) feel like one character and not the work of 90 people.

Justin Sklar in Phoenix for “Frozen II’.

PFF:  I understand that the team used old-fashioned keyframing for the character Gale, who represents wind. 

JS:  The way that Gale works - because we are animating wind - is we hand-animate most of the leaves in Gale.  We get a leaf and then pose it per frame, until we get the motion that we want.  In the case of Gale, we (did) five or ten of those, and then (the Effects Team) will then duplicate them and spread them out.  So, you get this feeling that there’s (a) whole sweep of leaves, but we had to do a lot of work to animate those individual leaves to just set all that up anytime Gale did anything. 

PFF:  “Frozen” is about discovery, and “Frozen II” seems to be about maturity.  Do you think that there’s a parallel between the film and the audience?  Kids discovered “Frozen” six years ago, and now they are a bit older.

JS:  For sure, I think it’s a combination of things.  There’s plenty of stuff for the younger audiences, but I think “Frozen II” is talking to an older audience, and the filmmakers have matured as well.  Movies that directors would have made 10 years ago (are different than) the movies that they make now.  They have kids who are growing up, so we’re starting to see those experiences (playing) out on screen, and it’s lining up with the maturity of (our) audience.

PFF:  I read that you drew massive charcoal drawings in high school.  How big did they get, and were you influenced by certain artists?

JS:  I did a series (during) my senior year, a bunch of 6-foot by 4-foot portraits, and I think I had an 8.5-foot by 6-foot drawing.  They were pretty big.  (I did) a lot of portraiture, but mixed with the fact that we were all in high school, there were a lot of drawings of friends.  Ha ha.   

I’m trying to think who I referenced a lot.  Eric Fischl.  Chuck Close is an interesting person to me, but I wouldn’t say that he had a lot to do with the work that I was doing.  Euan Uglow!  Those are good ones!

Jeff – a member of the Phoenix Critics Circle – has penned film reviews since 2008, graduated from ASU’s Walter Cronkite School of Journalism and is a certified Rotten Tomatoes critic. Follow Jeff and the Phoenix Film Festival on Twitter @MitchFilmCritic and @PhoenixFilmFest, respectively.

The Warrior Queen of Jhansi - Movie Review by Ben Cahlamer

Devika Bhise in the movie “The Warrior Queen of Jhansi.” (Nick Wall / Roadside Attractions)

Directed by: Swati Bhise

Written by: Swati Bhise and Devika Bhise

Starring: Devika Bhise, Rupert Everett, Derek Jacobi

As I recount my experience watching “The Warrior Queen of Jhansi,” I couldn’t help but think of two important things. First, the quote, To the Victor go the spoils. Although the native peoples of India that suffered at the hands of the British in the late 1850’s, many noble souls were brave enough and courageous enough to rise above the situation with a voice louder than their oppressors.

The second thing that Devika Bhis’s performance as the Rani of Jhansi reminded me of, was that of William Wallace of “Braveheart” fame or of General Maximus of “Gladiator” fame, of which Derek Jacobi, who plays Lord Palmerston of the British East India Company in “The Warrior Queen of Jhansi”. Both characters, although men, represent a similar uprising for which they are standing up to foreign aggressors who underestimated their targets.

Swati Bhise’s direction is methodical, treating the British incursion from the perspective that they were not going to win. The story telegraphs this point, diminishing the historical narrative. However, in its defense, this also serves to allow Lakshmi Bai (Devika Bhise) to play to the characters’ strength as someone who earns the respect of her people, even in the face of her greatest counsels’ advice that they are beaten by the British.

Within the conflict, there is dissention among the various factions, with infighting on the rise, In order to be one voice and to outsmart the British, the Rani puts pride aside to bring her people together, much like the sword she would yield on the battlefront.

The British are no less formidable as a result of the story’s vantage point.Rupert Everett as Sir Hugh Rose pushes his legions to press forward, even as the doctors are telling him that the wounded cannot press on in their condition.

There is a modern day parallel to this theme that is not lost on this critic. At the same time is a love story brewing with Major Robert Ellis (Ben Lamb); something forbidden by the ongoing conflict. As she realizes the higher road, you can see the pain in Ms. Bhise’s performance. It something that reminds us to be courageous and just when a decision requires a hard stance.

The story issues aside, the film has a ‘television-movie-of-the-week’ quality about it as simplistic visuals compel you to see the story unfold with the characters and performances driving the story forward.

Mr. Jacobi’s performance is that of man desperate to quell the uprising at any cost, and history was not favourable toward his position. The scenes between he and Queen Victoria (Jodhi May) were shot in a way that carried his desperation and that of a Queen who had sympathies for the resistance where she too needed to balance out her duties with her desires.

There were no real victors in this conflict. Many died, but it is the voice from the grave that rose up against the oppression that gives rise to “The Warrior Queen of Jhansi.”

2 out of 4 stars

Radioflash - Movie Review by Ben Cahlamer

Brighton Sharbino and Dominic Monaghan in the thriller “Radioflash.” Photo courtesy of IFC Midnight.

Directed by: Ben McPherson

Written by: Ben McPherson

Starring: Brighton Sharbino, Dominic Monaghan, Will Patton

As recently as “Terminator: Dark Fate,” our future is unknowable; we cannot control it. Similarly, our futures are dictated by choice with Ben McPherson’s “Radioflash” sitting somewhere in between.

Radioflash is the former term for a nuclear electromagnetic pulse (EMP) in which a burst above the surface of the earth would fry every electric circuit, essentially sending humanity back into the Stone Age.

In the case of McPherson’s film, Reese (Brighton Sharbino) is a resourceful young lady living with her dad, Chris (Monaghan) in Seattle while Frank (Patton) lives off the grid. We learn quickly in the early parts of the story that Frank Chris’s ex-father in law.

McPherson sets up Reese’s backstory through flashbacks of her mother being wheeled into a hospital, being bedside as she dies. This gives rise to a totemic symbolism of death that permeates their journey to escape the pandemonium that ensues as people who are reliant on technology now scramble for anything that will keep them alive.

McPherson does a solid job of keeping the panic to a minimum, allowing Reese’s resourcefulness to stand out. The characters we meet along the way blend into the off-the-grid style of living that the migrating public of our expansion westward experienced back in the 1930’s. There is even a specific mention of the Dust Bowl.

Reese is someone of both worlds - that of a technophyte because she knows how to use radios and understands the limitations of the technology. She also has the patience to wait out a situation before taking action. Monaghan has a smaller role in the film, but is just as fundamental in giving Reese what she needs to survive. Their relationship was a parallel to the radioflash in a small way, giving her the energy she needed to move forward.

The cinematography by Austin F. Schmidt is the film’s highlight, Using the rocky terrain in the Washington mountains really heightens the sense of danger as Reese tries to find her grandfather.

The scenes in the cabin with a wheelchair-bound Maw (Fionnula Flanagan) were some of the most tense because of the closer quarters as Bill (Michael Filipowich) relentlessly chases after Reese as if she will go to the authorities for discovering them. Reese also discovers Quinn (Kyle Collin), someone who has been held captive. McPherson telegraphs the outcome, but maintains the tension just long enough to question the outcome - again a reflection of the fact that our choices dictate our future.

The dystopic nature of the story is, thankfully, not lined with zombies, although the look and feel of the film very easily could have supported it. Instead, “Radioflash” is a reflection on our reliance on technology and a look at how we would survive, or not survive without it and that understanding our history will give way to our future survival.

2.5 stars out of 4

The Good Liar - Movie Review by Jeff Mitchell

Helen Mirren and Ian McKellen star in ‘The Good Liar’

‘The Good Liar’:  Mirren and McKellen are terrific, but seeing this movie once is plenty.  No lie.

Directed by:  Bill Condon

Written by:  Jeffrey Hatcher, based on the novel by Nicholas Searle

Starring:  Helen Mirren and Ian McKellen

“The Good Liar” – “It’s weirdly difficult to lie on screen.  As an actor, you really have to believe that you are telling the truth.  In reality, you know that you aren’t telling the truth…but you have to utterly convince yourself, as the character, that you’re telling the truth.”  - Helen Mirren

“What’s trickier than straight-forward lying is the lying being badly done.” – Ian McKellen

Betty McLeish’s (Helen Mirren) husband died within the last year, but she feels ready to start dating again.   It’s 2009, and she embarks on a path like most singles do: online dating.  

She likes Roy Courtnay’s (Ian McKellen) dating profile, and whoo hoo, the feeling is mutual.  Their first date goes well, and before you can say, “Second date,” Betty invites Roy to move in, and he suggests that they form a joint checking account. 

Say what?

Her grandson Steven (Russell Tovey), however, is the voice of reason, and he believes that she is moving way too fast.  Oh, he’s not feeling the warm fuzzies for Roy either.  With good reason, because we discover very early in the first act, that Roy is a con man.  He’s a professional swindler who invites marks into his fake real estate schemes, and his partners and he run away with easy six-figure scores.  

For Roy, life is good, and he’s a good liar.  Now, he is setting a trap for Betty to embezzle her life savings, worth over 2.5 million British pounds. 

Director Bill Condon splits his time between making substantial, weighty dramas like “Mr. Holmes” (2015) and “Kinsey” (2004) and fluff pieces like the two-part series finale “The Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn” (2011, 2012), so he falls somewhere in between with “The Good Liar”.  This is a light thriller, a con artist picture with two masterclass thespians.

McKellen seems to be having a ball as Roy.  His character – with sociopath tendencies - pretends to have affections for Betty in one moment, and then calculates his hopeful windfall in the next.  He’s a total creep, however Betty is easily fooled, as she drops all defenses and openly lets this wolf into the hen house.  Mirren perfectly plays a damsel void of distress, although the script and its pacing undermine her efforts.

The film is based on Nicholas Searle’s novel, and one might imagine that the author builds Roy’s trap over a couple hundred pages, but in the film, Betty drops her aforementioned resistance within the first 30 on-screen minutes.  One moviegoer might be caught up in the drama, turn to their friend or date and say, “Has Betty lost her mind?”

For others, her extreme naivety may not believable, and they could opine, “It’s so stupid that Betty is this stupid.”

In any film adaptation, jamming a novel’s narrative into a 100-page screenplay can be a daunting challenge, and writer Jeffrey Hatcher cannot quite get this one to fit, especially when the happy couple takes a holiday to another European city, and suddenly, a flashback into the way distant past seems like we’ve been shuttled to another movie entirely.

Quite frankly, this film does not play fair, but admittedly, it is a joy to see Mirren and McKellen figuratively dance around, with and through Roy’s lies, and since this is a con artist film, expect the unexpected.  Condon and Hatcher leave us some clues, but it might take a second viewing to catch them.   Then again, seeing this movie just once is plenty.  No lie.

(2.5/4 stars)

Jeff – a member of the Phoenix Critics Circle – has penned film reviews since 2008, graduated from ASU’s Walter Cronkite School of Journalism and is a certified Rotten Tomatoes critic.  Follow Jeff and the Phoenix Film Festival on Twitter @MitchFilmCritic and @PhoenixFilmFest, respectively.