90 minute running time but I wasn’t in the mood for a “witty repartee” movie from the early 30s… the mystery wasn’t interesting … I don’t know why it was a hit, must have been an escapist thing following the Depression, but it doesn’t hold up well 90 years later, it’s just annoying.
My wife's on a bender. I'm trying to sober her up.
From Nicholas Lemann’s interview on Booknotes:
“I think clearly Lyndon Johnson did the most for people in the great migration, or for black America in general. It's easier to point to what he did for George Hicks than it is to point to what he did for Mrs. Haynes, although he did things for both.
Mrs. Haynes' grandchildren are all in Head Start, a program that Lyndon Johnson started. Her, you know, basic benefit on--on—on Social Security is higher, thanks to Lyndon Johnson and succeeding presidents. If she gets sick, she's taken care of through Medicare and Medicaid, a Lyndon Johnson program. Some of her grandchildren, I think, are going to end up going to college. The grants they get will probably be grants that were instituted by Lyndon Johnson. The reason that she can go into any place in Clarksdale--if she gets sick she can go to Clarksdale hospital. The reason she doesn't have to ride on the back of the bus anymore and the reason she can vote is because of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, passed by LBJ; Voting Rights Act of 1965, passed by LBJ.
To some extent, you can argue that George Hicks lives where he lives today because of the Fair Housing Act of '68 passed by LBJ. I think there is no question--there isn't anyone close; there isn't any second place--that LBJ did the most of--for black America in the panoply of white American politicians.”
109 minute running time … yes, I’m on a Nuri Bilge Ceylan kick since I loved Once Upon a Time in Anatolia and really liked The Wild Pear Tree. Three Monkeys was less successful and doesn’t get a green-go rating. The story just wasn’t that interesting … loyalty, adultery, cycles of violence or exploitation, family tragedies which poison things forever (a.k.a, ghosts), class, money, power, etc. It wasn’t bad, the acting is first rate, it was just a little drawn out, and as I said, the story itself didn’t really hold me, but you can see that Ceylan was on the road to his later greatness at this stage.
As if it’s the first time she’s lied.
101 minute running time … has someone hacked John Farr’s website and injected these terrible recommendations? (Oh it looks like Farr may have a crush on Iko Uwais.) This is an action / kung fu / ultraviolent movie from Indonesia of all places … sure, the action and fight scenes are impressive, but I tire so quickly of this stuff and can’t get through it fast enough at 8x fast forward. I’m too old now (testosterone levels at zero) so I just don’t care … give it a miss if you’re another fifty year old white guy.
Grimacing after falling five stories
101 minute running time … men don’t come across well in this one, they’re all predators or assholes or perverts masturbating at you on the subway, or slobbering over your outstretched hand, etc. … this was well made though and the lead actress was really good, the scene of intrusive (and revelatory) questioning that I’ve screencapped below was powerful stuff, she really knocked it out of the park there. Tough to watch, but necessary. Thanks to John Farr for the recommendation.
It’s a teenage pregnancy / abortion story … how a poor white girl from rural Pennsylvania deals with it … could she really not have turned to her mom for help? Or some other supportive adult, including a man, even a … dare I say it, dad? And what of the baby’s father? Sad and disturbing. It’s also about friendship and loyalty and teen girls toughing things out together. Money, class, sexual abuse, bureaucracy … heavy stuff, not light entertainment. It’s cleverly made propaganda of sorts which all teenage girls (and boys) should see for a scare. This gets a green-go.
Dick Brody called it “stark and harrowing,” which is surely is. Justin Chang writes, “what makes the movie so forceful is its quality of understatement, its determination to build its argument not didactically but cinematically.“ I found it pretty didactic, but… it is still good.
Also love Armond White’s take on it …
“I want to make sure you’re safe.”
122 minute running time so at least 30 minutes too long … John Farr did me dirty once again but recommending a clinker, though he’s right about it being “relentless” … Korean period war drama with more than a dozen cuts a minute for the length of the movie which was totally exhausting … bad action movies and good video games indistinguishable now. You can give it a miss.
It’s all in the elbow
101 minute running time … this was terrible … the only good thing about it was seeing the very handsome Chiara Mastroianni (Marcello, her dad, and Catherine Deneuve, her mother) but that was it … DUMB story with a really SORDID ending, just awful. Why do people like John Farr love Claire Denis so much? It wasn’t even well edited, just a mess. “Moody neo-noir,“ no, “dark thriller,“ no, “riveting tale of perversion and vengeance,“ no and no, it’s just shit.
Xan Brooks gets it: “I had the sense that Denis's painstaking approach was little more than an act of concealment; that her actual story was thin and tacky and that her elaborate style was precisely that.“
Girls look like Dad
124 minute running time so at least 30 minutes too long … I have no idea what John Farr was thinking when he recommended this one … Belgian farmers, cop killing, steroid smuggling, an act of child-on-child violence so horrific I couldn’t even look. Farr right to say that it’s brutal and disturbing, wrong to say it’s unforgettable. You can give it a miss.
Et tu, Bruno?
157 minute running time, which I’d normally say is an hour too long, but I loved this movie so it gets a pass. This was even better than The Wild Pear Tree, which led me to this movie (same director). This is a deep movie, very cerebral, 99.99% of the viewing public couldn’t possibly sit through it. It’s a movie only for special people like me and … you?
SPOILERS: Let me explain the ending. The doctor, who represented science and logic and rationality, did not include the fact that the murder victim had been buried alive in the autopsy report because he wanted to spare the child, the murderer’s son, the full truth about his father’s crime. It was horrible enough as it was and didn’t need the added indignity that he had buried a man alive. After a long night and many conversations, he understood that it’s sometimes better to hide the truth. It’s the children who suffer most from their parents’ crimes. People of the present suffer the sins committed by those in the past. Who writes history?
The fleck of blood on the doctor’s cheek represents his being sullied, being stained … he’s human now and making choices which humans make, for good or ill. The last line is: “Doctor, step back a bit, or you’ll get stuff on you.” Too late for that!
The screencap below is of the village mayor’s beautiful teenage daughter who serves them tea and causes each man to stop in wonder and astonishment … it’s a religious moment … she’s like a vision and in fact moves the murderer to hallucinate that his victim is there among them and makes him weep and shortly after confess more details about the crime.
It’s a great, great movie.
The beautiful usually have a bad fortune, doctor.
