Month: July 2018

Ideal Home

Posted on by victorfraga

The tale of accidental “parenthood” (or, more broadly speaking, of the awkward and unexpected bonding of a child and an adult) is no big novelty. They includes classics such as Central Station (Walter Salles, 1997), Son of Saul (Laszlo Nemes, 2015) and also the more mainstream About a Boy (Chris and Paul Weitz). Ideal Home is a welcome addition to the list, providing a very gay and Camp touch to the subgenre.

Erasmus (Steve Coogan) and his partner Paul (a heavily bearded and mega cuddly version of Paul Rudd) lead a mostly pedestrian life, and bickering seems to be their biggest source of entertainment. Erasmus is an accomplished and respected TV boss, while Paul is some sort of younger househusband. One day, the 10-year-old grandson that Erasmus never knew he had shows up for dinner, and he has nowhere to go. That’s because his father, Erasmus’s estranged son, has been arrested on domestic violence charges. The two men are forced to look after the child (Jack Gore), who refuses to reveal his own name.

Both the dramatic and the comedic elements of the movie revolve around Erasmus and Paul trying to reconcile their mega-gay, NSFW lifestyle with bringing up an innocent child. They must quickly adapt. They have to hide their aptly-named porn Buttpluggerz and Bareback Mountain, the cocaine and the anxiety meds from both the child and the social workers who visit them occasionally in order to vouch for the minor’s safety. One day, Bill (a name the unnamed child picks for himself roughly halfway through the movie) wants a drink from the fridge while Erasmus and Paul engage in very heated and loud intercourse.

The acerbic and bitchy jokes provide the final touch to the comedy. The poster reads “These dads suck”, hinting at the sexual nature of the film’s humour. Erasmus and Paul mistake a banner that reads “felting” for “felching” upon a visit to Bill’s school. Pearls of wisdom include “everything is temporary, except herpes” and “a baby goat won’t visit you when you are old” (while pondering about the differences between parenthood and adopting a pet).

Paul is the first one to bond with the child. That’s because Erasmus is mostly busy at work and he’s left with most parental duties, including driving Bill to school and also picking him up. One day, Bill is nearly run over by a car, triggering a panic attack in Paul. He’s clearly emotionally attached to the child, and he’s also very insecure about his parenting skills.

Ideal Home successfully blends the thorny topics of domestic abuse, mental health issues and drug-taking with fatherhood and infancy, and it also extracts some humour from them. All the ingredients of a conventional romcom are there: the troubled romance, the humour and the upbeat/mawkish soundtrack. (with C+C Misc Factory’s Gonna Make You Sweat playing over and over).

The problem with Ideal Home is that – unlike the jokes – the dramatic element is only partly effective. This is for a number of reasons. Firstly, the chemistry between the two adults and the child actor isn’t entirely convincing. Secondly, some of the topics are not examined in too much depth, such as Paul’s mental health issues. The ending feels a little stale and unexciting. But do stay for the final credits, when images of real homossexual families with children are shown – perhaps the most engrossing part of the film.

This is an extremely personal film, which was in the making for 10 years. It is based on the experiences of the director Andrew Fleming. Like the film protagonist, the helmer is gay and works mostly on television. Far more significantly, he has helped to bring up the child of his partner of 23 years.

Ideal Home is out in cinemas across the UK on Friday, July 6th, and then on VoD the following Monday.

The Deer Hunter

Posted on by Jeremy Clarke

Russian roulette. You put a bullet in the chamber of a revolver. You spin the chamber. You put the barrel to your head and pull the trigger. The chance is one in six you shoot yourself. Theoretically, the chamber containing the bullet is the heaviest, so that sinks to the bottom and you’re emptying an already empty chamber. But that’s not always the case. Also, if the spin is arbitrarily stopped, your chance is definitely one in six.

Russian roulette is about as dirty a pastime as you can imagine. Especially if players are not taking part of their own free will and if spectators are gambling money on the game. Games in which the participants are gambling their very lives.

Games of Russian roulette take centre stage in The Deer Hunter and function as its central metaphor. It’s a series of snapshots from the lives of a group of Pennsylvania steelworkers who enlist in the Vietnam War.

In the first hour, Michael (Robert De Niro), Nick (Christopher Walken) and Steven (John Savage) leave their factory workplace and, prior to shipping out to ‘nam, they attend Steven’s wedding and party then go on a deer hunting trip.

Surprisingly, the wedding party seems to take up the best part of the first hour. It’s unclear how much is scripted and how much improvised but Cimino is clearly fascinated by setting up such scenes for the camera and letting them play out with actors. These scenes feel at once well prepared and open to anything that happens on camera, lending them a convincing realism.

If both wedding party and deer hunt showcase a degree of male horseplay, the hunt also hones an aspect of Michael/De Niro who by the end of the film has emerged as its main protagonist. As far as the hunt goes, Michael takes only one of his friends seriously: Nick. Certainly not Stan (John Cazale) who wants to borrow Michael’s spare pair of boots having forgotten to bring his own.

Even so, Michael goes off on his own to hunt and shoot a deer, determined to do so with a single shot. And he succeeds. The single shot anticipates the subsequent Russian roulette where a single shot decides a participant’s fate.

About an hour and 10 minutes in, just when you’re wondering why anyone should refer to this as a war film aside from its young men about to go to war theme, an edit abruptly cuts to the Vietnam War. Michael is lying hidden in the dirt as an enemy soldier opens a trap door hiding terrified villagers and tosses in a grenade. At once shrewd and possessed of a righteous indignation, Michael is soon wielding a flamethrower against the enemy. After which the rest of his unit, including Nick and Steven, show up.

Another cut and the three are held prisoner waist deep in water below a bamboo hut on stilts above a river. Steven is not coping well. In the hut above, other prisoners play Russian roulette at gunpoint for their captors’ amusement and gambling bets. Keeping his head, Michael devises a plan to get three bullets put into the revolver for the game as the trios only possible hope of escape.

In line with De Niro’s physicality and commanding presence – he’d already played three of his great Scorsese roles Mean Streets (1973), Taxi Driver (1976) and New York, New York (1977) plus Coppola’s The Godfather: Part II (1974) – he does indeed break the trio out in a tense escape sequence.

In the 1970s, a new De Niro film was a cultural event. He articulated the emotional arc of a generation and you had to see it, at least if you were male. This ceased to be the case somewhere in the 1980s. It’s hard to think of an actor (male or female) since for whom this is true to the same degree.

Michael/De Niro takes centre stage in further sequences in Saigon and Pittsburg. Nick disappears into Saigon’s dangerous and shady Russian roulette gambling netherworld under the patronage of a mysterious, enigmatic French promoter (real life Bangkok restaurateur Pierre Segui) while Steven has been reduced to life in a wheelchair in a military nursing home. Peter Zinner’s groundbreaking editing means that Nick/Walken’s slow personality disintegration is fed to us in devastatingly effective bursts.

A Pittsburgh subplot also develops Nick’s girlfriend who becomes involved with Michael when he returns but Nick does not. She’s brilliantly played by Meryl Streep who turns a minor bit part into something very special indeed.

Russian roulette not only causes Steven’s trauma and Nick’s disappearance but also affects Michael’s attitude to the world around him. Back in Pittsburgh, he avoids a ‘welcome home’ party. He goes hunting again but can’t bring himself to shoot a deer. He’s clearly not the “man” he once was. Whether this is good or bad is open to debate – perhaps that’s part of what makes this such a great film.

The lethal game provides a wider metaphor too. The war kills and damages people at random. But perhaps life as a steel mill worker isn’t so good either, otherwise why would enlisting in a war seem such a good idea? Michael talks about shooting the deer with “only one shot”, but in the Russian roulette scenes “only one shot” keeps coming again and again until it kills someone. War is about lots of “only one shot”s one after another. It’s also the case in a wider sense, outside the war context, that you only get one shot at life but life can take as many shots as it wants at you and any one of them could prove fatal.

It may be 40 years old and ostensibly about the Vietnam War, but The Deer Hunter actually tackles deeper issues – not only how the horror of war changes people but also how people deal with their lot in life generally. Made in 1978, it looks as fresh today as it did on its original release. A beautifully judged, dirty masterpiece.

The Deer Hunter is back out in the UK in a 4K restoration on Wednesday, July 4th. Watch the film trailer below:

Postcards from the 48%

Posted on by victorfraga

As the voice of Brexit drones on, it’s time to look back and evaluate what has been achieved since the referendum in 2016. Postcards from the 48%, as the title suggests, is a proud Remainer of a film. It lays out solid reasons as to why Brexit is insane, and the UK has been mis-sold a fantasy. It’s also a call to action: there’s still time to reverse a catastrophe. It’s mandatory viewing for those looking to consolidate their Remain views and opinions, and also for those in doubt.

Some of the arguments in the film are very familiar to most of us: only 27% of the UK population – 17,410,742 people – voted to leave the EU, key groups such as under-18s and EU citizens were denied a vote, the referendum was purely consultative and, perhaps most significantly, the Leave pledges were entirely preposterous (such as the infamous £350m for NHS painted on a bus).

But the film also investigates other reasons why the outcome of the referendum must be questioned and it does not represent the hackneyed “will of the people” mantra. It reveals that only 1.1% of the UK budget was destined to the EU. We also learn that fishery quotes were set up by the UK, not by EU, and that we will always remain subjected to international standards and laws, whether we remain in the EU or not, thereby undermining the “sovereignty” argument. “We will be poorer, and we will be weaker on the world stage, and that’s a crying shame”, viewers are told. The former deputy prime minister Nick Clegg notes that Brexit is “cloaked in patriotism, and that’s very un-British”. The current Lib Dem leader Vince Cable voices very similar opinions. Conservative and Labour Remainers are also featured in the documentary, if to a lesser extent. They include the Tory peeress Baroness Wheatcroft.

The hard border in Ireland and the likely collapse of the Good Friday Agreement is probably the most urgent reason why she should stop Brexit, and the one the film investigates in more depth. We learn that no less than 10,000 bomb attacks between 1969 and 2001 claimed the lives of more than 2,300 people, in what is euphemistically described as The Troubles. The director visits the most notable points-of-pain of Northern Ireland, such as Derry and Omagh, where he engages in conversations with locals about the eventual return of “borderism”. He crosses a picturesque bridge in at tiny Donegal village of Pettigo, reminding viewers that border controls could soon be implemented there, thereby shattering peace and destroying the quaint and idyllic quality of the community. The helmer is often in front of the camera, making this an intimate and conversational piece of filmmaking.

Other highlights include an elderly voter confessing that he illegally handed his vote to his 17-year-old grandson, whose future depends on the EU. A woman recalls her father crying at the formation of the EU, as that would prevent future slaughters such as in WW2. The labour argument is made during a visit to a soap manufacturer. The employer explains that migrant workers are not easily replaceable by British people, and he provides figure to support his views.

A very pertinent analogy is made at the end of the movie. If you buy a house and find out it sits on a sinkhole, you should be able to to challenge your purchase. That’s why Britain should be given a second referendum and the opportunity to challenge the 2016 vote, which was heavily influenced by fallacies and lies.

One question, however, remains unanswered in the doc. A question that became a chant in the last protest two weeks ago, when more than 100,000 people gathered in front of Parliament in order to demand a vote on the final Brexit deal: “Where is Jeremy Corbyn???”. The controversial Labour leader, who campaigned for Remain but has since embraced Brexit and even a departure from the Single Market, is virtually absent in Postcards from the 48%. His name isn’t even mentioned.

Postcards from the 48% was out in cinemas on Friday, July 6th. It’s available on VoD in March 2019).

Whitney

Posted on by victorfraga

This is not an esoteric documentary exclusively for die-hard fans. This is a deeply moving film about one of the most commercially successfully musicians of the 20 century, whose personal life was the antithesis of prosperity and contentment. And the film isn’t timid; it goes into the most controversial and least glamorous facets of the pop star. Whitney Houston exuded talent and charisma, but her relationship to her family and the battle against cocaine prevented her from thoroughly enjoying her relatively short life.

During her 48 years of existence, Whitney (or “Nippy”, as her family and closest friends would call her) was constantly in search of something. She sought acceptance as a black artist, stability through marriage and also professional recognition, but she partly failed in all of these aspects. Her premature death to cocaine six years ago saddened the world, but it did not surprise many people. Her erratic lifestyle combined with the disappointments and deceptions experienced throughout finally made her pay the ultimate price.

Whitney was accused of going too mainstream and leaving her black roots behind, which prevented her from being recognised as the black artist she envisaged. She was booed, and the press nicknamed her Whitney “Whitey” Houston. Even as a child, she was bullied for being “too white”. This reminded me a lot of Carmen Miranda in the 1940s, who was accused of becoming “too americanised” and leaving her South American roots behind. The Brazilian Bombshell also became addicted to cocaine, had a stormy and abusive love life, and a premature death at the very similar age of just 46.

Secondly, she never achieved stability through marriage. Her relationship with Bobby Brown was extremely stormy, and he was routinely abusive and even violent towards her. He’s interviewed for the film, but refuses to talk about drugs and the dark side of their marriage. The interviewer tries to elicit as much information as possible from behind the camera, in a very persuasive and provocative talking heads interview type of approach. Bobby refuses to cooperate, coming across as selfish and conveniently in denial of his negative impact on Whitney’s life.

Whitney’s sexuality is also a central topic. She was abused by her talented singer cousin Dee Dee Warwick (Dionne Warwick’s sister), in the unusual scenario where the sexual predator is a female. The film suggests that Whitney was in a relationship with her openly lesbian assistant Robyn Crawford. This homossexual relationship is euphemistically described as a “safety net”, while Whitney’s bisexuality is “fluid”. Robyn was probably one of the most stable and reliable people in Whitney’s life. Sadly, she shunned the female in favour of the dysfunctional, abusive, jealous and envious Bobby Brown.

In addition to her marriage and her “blackness”, the doc reveals that Whitney failed in other aspects of her life. She tried to be a good mother to her daughter Bobbi Kristina by taking her on tour, but instead the girl became a broken woman who would eventually take her own life. Her father was exploitative, and Whitney did not attend his funeral. She tried to convey the image of the strong and stable performer, but instead she became the poster girl for drub misuse and failed marriage. The film ends with the camera travelling down the corridors of the Beverly Hilton Hotel all the way to the bath tub where Whitney passed away. A very harrowing journey.

But the film isn’t all doom and gloom. A register of her impressive achievements is also conspicuous. This includes the recording of I Will Always Love You for the The Bodyguard (Mick Jackson, 1992), which “shot her into the stratosphere”. She also served as an invaluable symbol of reconciliation between black Americans and white Americans when she sang The Star Spangled Banner (the American anthem is often associated with oppression and racism) ar the Superbowl. She was also the first foreign artist to sing in post-Apartheid South Africa. These are no mean feats.

Whitney runs in cinemas across the UK from Friday, July 5th. It’s out on VoD in November. It might feel a little redundant for those who watched Nick Broomfield and Rudi Dolezal’s documentary Whitney: Can I Be Me just last year. Otherwise, it’s a sobering and humanistic portrayal of the late singer.

Swimming with Men

Posted on by victorfraga

A small group of British men of all colours, shapes and girths get together in a field not often associated with males. They have to overcome their own prejudices, to challenge orthodox notions of masculinity as well as to face objections from their family and friends. What they are doing raises a lot of eyebrows. They have to dance, rotate, swivel, do a little acrobatics and look entertaining for a large cheering audience. And they are wearing skimpy clothes. And the action culminates with a Tom Jones song. Sounds familiar? No, this is not Peter Cattaneo’s The Full Monty (1997). This is Oliver Parker’s Swimming with Men. Basically, the difference between the two is that the gear doesn’t come off at the end. And the Tom Jones song is It’s a Man’s World instead of You Can Leave Your Hat On.

Eric Scott (Rob Brydon) is having a mid-life crisis. He can no longer connect with his wife. He’s convinced that she’s cheating on him, and he feels intimidated that she has an elected job at the local council. His job as an accountant is banal and mundane. Swimming becoming his only venting outlet. He becomes part of an all-male, middle-aged, amateur synchronised swimming team, a sport normally associated with women. What initially looks like an uncompromising hobby suddenly becomes the central pillar of Eric’s life, a predicament not dissimilar to the other seven men’s. Then the unthinkable happens: the group is invited to take part in the unofficial World Championship of Male Synchronised Swimming. But could they win the tournament, thereby overcoming their personal fears and barriers and also honouring Britain with the unusual and novel prize?

Swimming With Men is a feel-good tale about ageing and finding redemption in sports. It has all the ingredients of a conventional romcom, such the sexually insecure protagonist seeking to rekindle some sort of affection, and finding an very awkward solution to the problem. There’s also a like bit of British patriotism, but thankfully not enough to poison anyone. The director was careful to avoid an all-English film by creating a Welsh character. The choice of Welsh singer Tom Jones to top the film soundtrack is no coincidence. Most significantly, this is a film that challenges ageism and body fascism. The eight males learn not to be embarrassed of their real bodies in all of their dirtylicious imperfections. There’s nothing ugly about “wilting like a flower”. It can be done gracefully and with confidence.

I am surprised that Swimming With Men only received a 12 certificate. I think that this is a film perfectly suitable for children. I don’t remember seeing drugs and discriminatory language. Perhaps it’s the bit about imitable behaviour! You probably wouldn’t want your children engaging in dangerous manly acrobatics, would you? I would hazard a guess the Oliver Parker was disappointed.

Swimming with Men is out in cinemas across the UK on Friday, July 5th. It’s out on VoD on Monday, November 5th