The Assassin (orig. Nie yin niang) [2015]

MPAA (UR would be PG-13)  Fr. Dennis (3 1/2 Stars)

IMDb listing
AsianWiki listing*

Film Comment (R. Liang) interview director / the film's two key stars 

APUM.com (A. Saéz) review*
aVoir-aLire.com (G. Crespo) review*
RogerEbert.com (J. Monji) review
Sight & Sound (G. Andrew) review
Slant Magazine (J. Catalgo) review
South China Morning Post (E. Lee) review

The Assassin (orig. Nie yin niang) [2015] [IMDb] [AW] (directed and cowritten by Hsiao-Hsien Hou [IMDb] [AW] along with Cheng Ah [IMDb] and Hai-Meng Hsieh [IMDb] based on the short story by Yuan Xingpei [wikip] [GR] [WCat] [Amzn] [IMDb]) is a top-quality Chinese / Taiwanese "period piece" / "martial arts film" if perhaps with (at least in English) a needlessly / quite unfortunately reductive title.  The film played recently at the 2015 (51st Annual) Chicago International Film Festival and has subsequently returned to Chicago to play week-long runs at the Music Box Theater and the Gene Siskel Film Center.

Set in the closing stages of the Tang Dynasty (618-907 C.E.) in/around the rebellious / already (then) de facto independent Weibo Province [en.wikip] [zh.wikip]* (_perhaps_ "kinda like Taiwan" today ...) the story centers on a 20-something woman named Nie Yianning (played quite excellently by Shu Qi [IMDb] [AW]) -- after whom the film, in Chinese, was named.  As per RogerEbert.com's reviewer Jana Monji (link above), Nie Yianning's name is indeed quite evocative - Yianning means "Secret Daughter" and Nie the surname means "Said in Whispers."

So... Nie Yianning was born and spent much of her early childhood in a tiny, thoroughly inconsequential village in rural Weibo Province and yet had been betrothed (as a child) to a distant (and richer) cousin of a similar age named Tian Ji'an (played by Chang Chen [IMDb] [AW]) back when the Tian family was _merely_ "quite rich."

However, when the Weibo Province made its play to break away from the rest of China, the Tian family became the breakaway Province's  de facto rulers and it became important for young Ji'an to marry someone "appropriate to [his family's] _new_ station."  So poor Yianning was left in the village while Ji'an married and had children with a "better-born" Lady (played by Zhou Yun [IMDb] [AW]) and began to live as "a little Emperor" (of the breakaway Province).

So what happens to girl like Nie Yianning, who was betrothed by her family to someone in childhood, who when the time came, chose to marry someone "richer"?  Well her family handed her over to a strange "princess turned wandering warrior nun" (IMHO played magnificently by Sheu Fang-yi [IMDb]) whose backstory would certainly justify its own film.  Well this "princess turned wandering warrior nun" trains Nie Yianning to be an exceptionally lethal assassin, wreaking "black clothed" (of course...) "dropping in out of the blue" vengeance on all sort of powerful (usually male) potentates in the region.   Nie Yianning silently "drops in" ("like the wind..."), slits the powerful evil man's throat, slips out ... and is done.  Another powerful "Evil Doer" meets his (one hopes ...) "just deserts."

And Nie Yianning is certainly "good" at what she does.  We watch her deflecting swords and arrows launched at her by terrified / awestruck guards of said powerful "Evil doers" as if they were mosquitoes or butterflies.

Well, after a short 5 min, b&w introduction introducing us to the awesomely well-trained / supremely "good at what she does" Nie Yianning, she's given by her "former princess turned wandering warrior nun" mentor her next mission.  Guess who she's asked to kill? ;-) ...

Can she do it?  From a purely "skills" POV, certainly _yes_.  There's NO place that the 20-something, "hurt as a little girl," "secret daughter, spoken of in whispers..." Nie Yianning can not penetrate.  BUT _can_ she do _this_ "job" (even if her assigned target _certainly_ "kinda deserved it")?

The rest of the story follows ... ;-)

 It makes for a quite compelling story, and the cinematography, both indoors and out, is once again simply exquisite.  Anyone who's ever enjoyed traditional chinese paintings with their impossibly steep fog strewn cliffs or beautiful silky interiors will certainly appreciate this film.

So good job folks, very good job.  I just wish that the film's English title didn't simply reduce Nie Yianning to "The Assassin."  Her name was far more evocative than that ...


* Foreign language webpages are most easily translated using Google's Chrome Browser. 

< NOTE - Do you like what you've been reading here?  If you do then consider giving a small donation to this Blog (sugg. $6 _non-recurring_) _every so often_ to continue/further its operation.  To donate just CLICK HERE.  Thank you! :-) >>

The Hateful Eight [2015]

MPAA (R)  CNS/USCCB (L)  ChicagoTribune (2 Stars)  RogerEbert.com (2 Stars)  AVClub (A-)  Fr. Dennis (3 Stars)

IMDb listing
CNS/USCCB (J. Mulderig) review
ChicagoTribune (M. Phillips) review
RogerEbert.com (M. Zoller Seitz) review
AVClub (I. Vishnevetsky) review  

The Hateful Eight [2015] (written and directed by Quentin Tarantino) is, for better / worse, "a Quentin Tarantino movie" ;-).

Hence it is _needlessly long_ and is punctuated with brief moments of QT's signature (but still needlessly) extreme violence.  Seriously, it's obvious that Tarrentino thinks very highly of himself in forcing his viewers here to sit through this 2hr 45min movie that could have easily been an hour shorter and better for it.  As it is, the only humane way to watch this movie is on a widescreen TV at home.

YET, the characters, dialogues and even outdoor cinematography in this "Agatha Christie meets The Western" mash-up are often exceptional, outstanding even spectacular.  Again, seriously, by the end of the film Jennifer Jason Leigh's Daisy Domerge is _utterly unforgettable_, and Samuel Jackson's former Union soldier turned black bounty hunter Major Marquis Warren, Kurt Russell's more conventional "John Wayne-like" white bounty hunter named "John Ruth" and Walton Goggin's Chris Mannix a former "Confederate Marauder" turned future Sheriff of a "hole in the wall" Wyoming hamlet called "Red Rock", together comprising the first four characters introduced to us in the film, are all extremely well (and with very broad strokes quite amusingly) drawn. 

And the story, which by the end (not much of a spoiler alert here ...) doesn't exactly "leave a lot of people still standing" takes place in the context of a spectacular "Big Sky Wyoming winter blizzard" and then largely at a circa-1880s "Stage Coach Inn" in the middle of nowhere.

To say more would start to spoil the film.  My only advice is wait for it to come out on DVD / Blue Ray, because it's really too long to watch in a theater.


<< NOTE - Do you like what you've been reading here?  If you do then consider giving a small donation to this Blog (sugg. $6 _non-recurring_) _every so often_ to continue/further its operation.  To donate just CLICK HERE.  Thank you! :-) >>

Daddy's Home [2015]

MPAA (PG-13)  CNS/USCCB (L)  ChicagoTribune (3 Stars)  RogerEbert.com (2 Stars)  AVClub (C+)  Fr. Dennis (3 Stars)

IMDb listing
CNS/USCCB (K. Jensen) review
ChicagoTribune (K. Walsh) review
RogerEbert.com (G. Kenny) review
AVClub (J. Hassenger) review  


Daddy's Home [2015] (directed by Sean Anders, story by Brian Burns screenplay by Sean Anders, Brian Burns and John Morris) is not exactly a kids movie (though _very_ strictly speaking there's little that would particularly disturb or offend most kids).  However, it seems clear to me that the film's intended audience are the adults perhaps particularly those who find themselves in "blended family situations."

I write this because the film is actually about the insecurities of a step-parent, in the case at hand of Brad Whitaker (played actually quite well by Will Farrell).  He is the super-responsible if inevitably nerdy (seriously, he works for "Radio Panda - Satellite Radio's 24 hour continuous slow jazz" ;-) second husband of Sara (played by Linda Cardellini).  Her _really cool_ if truly never-at-home, doing truly "only God knows what" (again seriously, he seems to have been some sort of a gun-running 'copter pilot for the CIA/DEA) Harley-riding first husband was Dusty Mayron (played by Mark Wahlberg) who had proven, at least as a husband / father, truly _irresponsible_.

And Sara then had two precocious little kids, Dylan (played by Owen Vaccaro) and Megan (played by Scarlett Estevez), with said super-cool if never-ever-around first husband, who in as much as 6 or 4 year olds could "hate" a step-parent (because, well, Brad's not dad ...) ... do.

So ... six months after Sara and Brad got married  ... and after a two year period of having been totally "out of the picture," Dusty, first dad, real / biological dad, rides back into town ... and the rest of the movie ensues ;-).

Again, the film is more far more for adults than for kids and actually treats both Farrell's Brad and Wahlberg's Dusty as well as Sara (Cardellini's character) quite well.  And the film could give both college aged young adults and young married's much to talk about: Do you marry for dependability or for cool?  And yes, there's a choice being made there, and all choices do have consequences (their pluses and minuses).


<< NOTE - Do you like what you've been reading here?  If you do then consider giving a small donation to this Blog (sugg. $6 _non-recurring_) _every so often_ to continue/further its operation.  To donate just CLICK HERE.  Thank you! :-) >>

Concussion [2015]

MPAA (PG-13)  CNS/USCCB (A-III)  ChicagoTribune (3 Stars)  RogerEbert.com (3 Stars)  AVClub (C+)  Fr. Dennis (3 1/2 Stars)

IMDb listing
CNS/USCCB (J. Mulderig) review
ChicagoTribune (K. Walsh) review
RogerEbert.com (G. Kenny) review
AVClub (J. Hassenger) review  

Concussion [2015] (screenplay and directed by Peter Landesman by based on the GQ article "Game Brain" [GR] [WCat] [Amzn] by Jeanne Marie Laskas [wikip] [GR] [GQ.com] [WCat] [Amzn] [IMDb]) tells the story of Nigerian-born Dr. Bennet Omalu (played with Oscar Nomination worthy sobriety in the film by Will Smith) who while working as a coroner for the Allegheny County, PA Medical Examiner's office performed autopsies on several former National Football League Players including Pittsburgh Steelers greats Mike Webster (played in the film by David Morse) and Justin_Strzelczyk (played in the film by Matthew Willig) who "died young" often by suicide in the years following their retirement from the NFL and discovered that they were suffering from early onset dementia, which he came to believe was the result of Chronic Traumatic Encelopathy (CTE), caused by "repetitive brain trauma" caused by concussions, and subconcussive hits to the head during the course of their decades long (from childhood, into their 30s) football careers.

Needless to say, Dr. Omalu's findings, which he published though the University of Pittsburgh in the medical journal Neurosurgery, 2005 July; 57(1):128-34, produced a good deal of blowback, as watching football is a beloved American pasttime, and he was finding this condition in retired, though still quite young (in their late 30s-40s) athletes in Pittsburgh (!) where Football has arguably been all-but a religion. 

His boss, then Allegheny County Medical Examiner Dr. Cyril Wecht (played in the film by Albert Brooks) though portrayed as supportive of Dr. Omalu throughout, noted to the puzzled-by-the-reaction Nigerian immigrant that: "You've found yourself taking on a national institution that owns a day of the week, the same day that the Church used to own, but now it [the NFL] does."   Still, as Dr. Omalu (presented as a practicing Catholic, incidentally) noted: "The truth is the truth," and while "Football Management" was certainly "running scared," preferring to just deny or at least minimize everything, Dr. Omalu was shown as getting increasing support from the players families, the players themselves, and even some of their trainers.  Notably former Pittsburgh Steelers' sports doctor / trainer Dr. Julian Bailes (played by Alec Baldwin) who had worked with the former players while they played for the Steelers is shown to take Dr. Omalu's side.

It all makes for a quite sobering film, and just as in the case of the story behind Spotlight [2015], which was largely about how it took a new editor, Jewish, from Miami, to expose the cover-up of pedophilia among Catholic priests in the Archdiocese of Boston, the current film also reminds Viewers of the value of "the Outsider," who can perhaps see more clearly (and act more courageously) than those closer to the situation / problem.

Again, a quite excellent and sobering story and one that one hopes that the NFL will be able to effectively deal with.  American Football is a beautiful game, but it should not have to kill its stars / heroes.


<< NOTE - Do you like what you've been reading here?  If you do then consider giving a small donation to this Blog (sugg. $6 _non-recurring_) _every so often_ to continue/further its operation.  To donate just CLICK HERE.  Thank you! :-) >>

Point Break [2015]

MPAA (PG-13)  CNS/USCCB (A-III)  ChicagoTribune (1 Star)  RogerEbert.com (1 1/2 Stars)  AVClub (D+)  Fr. Dennis (3 Stars)

IMDb listing
CNS/USCCB (K. Jenson) review
ChiTrib / WashPost  (S. Merry) review
RogerEbert.com (P. Sobczynski) review
AVClub (I. Vishnevetsky) review  

Point Break [2015] (directed by Ericson Core, screenplay by Kurt Wimmer, story by Rick King, W. Peter Iliff and Kurt Wimmer) is INSPIRED BY / A REMAKE OF of the CULT (SURFER) CLASSIC Point Break [1991] (directed by Kathryn Bigelow, screenplay by Peter Iliff, story by Rick King and W. Peter Iliff) only EXPANDED to take into account developments (an arguably AN EXPLOSION OF DEVELOPMENTS) in the realm of EXTREME SPORTS since the making of the original.

AND it is ALSO IMPORTANT / IMPERATIVE TO NOTE that Ericson Core the director of the current film was DIRECTOR OF PHOTOGRAPHY for the first Fast and Furious [2001] movie.  Otherwise, one simply won't understand the nature / purpose of the current film.

AS IN THE 1991-ORIGINAL, THE PLOT _QUITE NOMINALLY_ FOLLOWS Johnny Utah (played in the original by Keanu Reeves, and in the current film by Luke Bracey) a (former "star college football athlete" in the original, and a former "extreme athlete" in the current film) who's since joined the FBI. He's tasked with infiltrating a group of ["surfers" in the original film, and "extreme athletes" in the current one] whose enjoyment of Nature (or of the "Rush" that comes from participating in Extreme Sports) _may have_ turned them into a particularly dangerous / nihilistic Band of Criminals -- living for the thrill, they appear utterly unafraid of death, hence the (folks at the Bureau) fear that they could become capable of anything...

... 'Cept it's more complicated than that.  The Band of Extreme Surfers (1991) / Extreme Athletes (2015) led by Bodhi (played in the original by Patrick Swayze and in the current film by Édgar Ramírez) are motivated _at least partly_ by an Eastern tinged / radical environmentalist ideology.  Hence they don't really commit random crimes.  Instead, they appear to commit "actions" (remaining at least partly _crimes_ ...) aimed, at least in part, to "restore balance to Nature" / "the Earth" / even "Society."   Hence, they rob Banks (in the first movie), Diamond Dealers, Gold Miners, etc (in the current one) and "restore" the ill-gotten goods of (evil) Corporate Interests "to the Earth" (or "to the Poor") "to whom they belong."

In both films, the young Johnny Utah, who is at least in part seduced by Bodhi's Eastern / "Zen" tinged radical environmentalist idealism, is partnered with an older, no nonsense, curmudgeon of an FBI agent named Pappas (played in the original by Gary Busey and in the current film by Ray Winstone) who finds the aspirational ideology supposedly behind Bodhi's band of criminals' crimes a bunch of nonsense -- "They (criminals) always have an explanation / an excuse for what they are doing" he tells the partly/largely "starry eyed" entranced Utah at one point in the current story.

And so much ensues ... Is Bodhi and his group just a bunch of adrenaline crazed nihilistic criminals?  Or are they actually on a (perhaps quite crazy / stupidly dangerous) path to Nirvana / Enlightenment?   Where will Johnny Utah's (and even the film-makers') loyalties finally go?

BUT HONESTLY FOLKS, ALL OF THIS IS REALLY BESIDE THE POINT.  The story, in as much as it exists, does so to allow the film-makers to offer Viewers of the film one truly spectacular sequence after another of death defying "extreme sports" stunts that could honestly serve as a "Stress Test" for us "mere mortals."  AND IT IS EXHILIRATING ;-).

MY CONCERN -- as a Catholic Priest -- is that it ALL becomes, at times, truly Nihilistic:

EARLY / UNNECESSARILY STUPID Death is shrugged off by Bodhi's band of extreme athletes as perhaps an inevitable passage to "Enlightenment."  Each time one of the group's members die, the others salute him with the phrase: "See you soon..."

I do think I understand "the thrill" of doing something that NO ONE (or VERY FEW) have done -- like SNOWBOARDING down a random rock-strewn cliff-face somewhere in the Alps (after being dropped off there by a helicopter), or WING-SUIT FLYING through a winding, narrow / deep canyon at speeds aproaching 160 mpg, or SURFING insanely high 100 foot waves that appear from time to time in random parts of the globe, or ROCK-CLIMBING (with no rope or gear) 3200 feet up the shear face of a cliff _beside a spectacular waterfall_, that also _randomly spews mist about_ (dampening everything around...).

It's all spectacular.  But then, if someone dies as a result, it just seems so hollow to respond by essentially saying: "Oops..." 

We're more than "Oops."  Our lives are more than "Oops." 

Something to remember.

Still, the film _is_ ONE HECK OF A RIDE ... ;-) ... and definitely worthy of lively discussion afterwards.

ADDENDUM -

A good part of the current film has the extreme athletes seeking to complete a list of challenges called "The Ozaki 8" after a supposed extreme athlete / Zen-ish mystic from Japan named, well..., Ozaki ;-).  The eight challenges were all in some way supposed to highlight one-or-another of the "forces of nature."  In the film, after completing each of these challenges, Bodhi's gang committed one or another of their "actions" (arguably crimes) to "give back to nature" something of what they / humanity was taking from it.

It turns out that there was no renowned extreme athlete named Ozaki, nor (then) his eight challenges until the making of this film (article by Michael R. Powell on the matter).  However, one gets a sense that the Eight Challenges (hopefully minus the crimes ...) will be with us from now on. 

What are The Ozaki Eight Challenges?  Well their names are:

1.Emerging Force
2.Birth of Sky
3.Awakening Earth
4.Life of Water
5.Life of Wind
6.Life of Ice
7.Master of Six Lives
8.Act of Ultimate Trust.


<< NOTE - Do you like what you've been reading here?  If you do then consider giving a small donation to this Blog (sugg. $6 _non-recurring_) _every so often_ to continue/further its operation.  To donate just CLICK HERE.  Thank you! :-) >>
 

Carol [2015]

MPAA (R)  CNS/USCCB ()  ChicagoTribune (4 Stars)  RogerEbert.com (3 1/2 Stars)  AVClub (A-)  Fr. Dennis (4 Stars w. parental advisement / warning)

IMDb listing
CNS/USCCB () review
ChicagoTribune (M. Phillips) review
RogerEbert.com (S. O'Malley) review
AVClub (M. D'Angelo) review  

Perhaps the most important thing to know about Carol [2015] (directed by Todd Haynes, screenplay by Phyllis Nagy), aside from (1) it being an appropriately R-rated film (there is some nudity in the film and it is a lesbian love story after all, if by now a _quite classic_ even _somewhat dated_ one, so parents of teens would want to know that and have some discretion / control over whether or not / how to let their older teens to see it) and (2) the film being quite good / excellent, is that (3) it is based on a novel, The Price of Salt (1952) [GR] [WCat] [Amzn], by Patricia Highsmith [wikip] [GR] [WCat] [Amzn] [IMDb].

Now why should it be significant that the film is based on a novel by this particular novelist?  Well, Patricia Highsmith [wikip] was (1) a fairly significant / compelling American writer of the 1950s with _many_ of her works adapted for the screen, including two iconic films Strangers on a Train [1951] the classic suspense thriller by Alfred Hitchock, and the already homosexually themed The Talented Mr. Ripley [1999] starring Matt Damon in the title role, and (2) while briefly (and quite unhappily) married (to a man), Patricia Highsmith was a Lesbian.

To some extent, that brief and unhappy marriage (to a man) was the inspiration for the story recounted in her novel, The Price of Salt (1952) [GR] [WCat] [Amzn] adapted for the screen here under the title Carol [2015] who was the story's central character.  Basically fair is fair.  Various works by Highsmith have been previously adapted to the screen, SO _why not_ the work which MOST CLOSELY EXPRESSED who SHE ACTUALLY WAS?  A Lesbian.

And so it is, set in the early 1950s, this film is about a divorcing late-30 / early 40-something socialite named Carol Aird (played in the film excellently / quite credibly for the time by Cate Blanchett) living in upper middle-class suburban New Jersey, who after a chance exchange in a Manhattan department store with a much younger, still starry-eyed / learning-to-make-her-way-in-the-world early 20-something clerk at the cash register named Therese Belive(t / k) (played quite wonderfully / credibly by Rooney Mara) have an affair together.

Why?  /  How?  Well ... Carol's marriage to Harge Aird (played in the film again quite well by Kyle Chandler) was falling apart _precisely_ because SHE WAS NOT INTERESTED IN HIM.  It was _not_ as if she HASN'T TRIED (they had a young daughter played in the film by Seidy and Kk Heim) But SHE'S A LESBIAN.  And Therese (the confusion about the last letter of her last name stemming from the fact that she was of Czech descent where her last name would have ended with a "k" but American immigration officials presumably first heard it as if the last name were French and thus ended name with a "t" -- Readers note here that _I'm_ of Czech descent ;-) ALSO had a boyfriend, Richard (played by Jack Lacy).  BUT THERESE WAS _ALSO_ FINDING that SHE WAS NOT PARTICULARLY ATTRACTED TO HIM EITHER.  She still didn't really understand WHY she was not particularly attracted to him (or to other men for that matter) but she did find Carol to be interesting / increasingly attractive.

And so there it is, and it so happens that the two Carol and Therese take together one of the _saddest_ roadtrips in American cinematic / folk history -- from New York "west" toward Chicago, ending up in Iowa, "in the winter" / "during Christmas time," during which, obviously "much ensues."

A couple of observations to make here:

(1) No matter what one may think of homosexuality / lesbianism (and let's face it, I'm writing this as a Catholic blog, so a fair number of Readers here will be doing so continuing to believe that as per continuing Church Teaching homosexuality is "an intrinsically disordered condition") THE STORY HERE, originally written by a woman, Patricia Highsmith, who was a lesbian who _even tried to become straight_ (and _failed_ / _gave up_) is about TWO WOMEN WHO JUST _WEREN'T_ INTO MEN.  IT IS WHAT IT IS ... data / experience _do count_ even in theological reflection ...

(2) By today's standards, A BIGGER ISSUE with regards to the relationship between Carol and Therese would not be its homosexual/lesbian nature BUT THE AGE DIFFERENCE.  Let's face it, a story about a significantly older man (in his 40s) "awakening the sexual desires" of a "naive 20 year old woman" WOULD BE ROUNDLY CONDEMNED AS BEING _VERY CREEPY_.  So why would it be somehow "okay" for a 40-ish woman to arguably _groom_ a naivish 20-something woman into a lesbian affair?  Again, I'd think "fair is fair" and if one kind of relationship is to be taken as INHERENTLY CREEPY and arguably ABUSIVE that the other kind would be considered inherently creepy / arguably abusive as well.

And (3) an observation about the "very sad road trip" from New York, past Chicago toward Iowa IN THE WINTER.  This is the THIRD TIME in almost as many years, that I've seen a similar 50s-era road trip being made -- On The Road [2012] (the film adaptation of Jack Karouak's 1950s-era classic); Inside Llewyn Davis [2013] (by today's Coen Brothers) and now the current film (based on a novel written by a Karouak contemporary...).  I would have TO ASK the question, WHY?

In part, no doubt, there's a dramatic consideration, certainly in the case of Inside Llewyn Davis [2013] and the current film, where in both cases, the "road trip" is _intentionally_ presented as "a sad one" (taking place in a _cold, seemingly uncaring / hostile world_).

HOWEVER, I'd also suggest that THIS WAS SIMPLY THE REALITY BEFORE THE 1960s CIVIL RIGHTS ERA.  Northerners, generally DIDN'T LIKE "GOING SOUTH" (or if they went, they went STRAIGHT TO FLORIDA - Miami / Key West and on to Havana) PRECISELY BECAUSE of a NORTHERN DISCOMFORT WITH THE DEEP SOUTH'S THEN ENTRENCHED _RACISM_ / GENERALIZED CLOSED-MINDED BIGOTRY.  Indeed, in the case of the story here, one would suppose that NOTHING (but pain...) _could possibly await_ a 1950s era lesbian couple "heading South" ... so AS (physically and even emotionally) COLD AS IT WAS IN THE NORTH, it was arguably BETTER than "down south." 

Anyway, I found the film fascinating and challenging throughout and one that certainly college aged and above audiences would appreciate and find much, much to talk about afterwards.  Good job!


<< NOTE - Do you like what you've been reading here?  If you do then consider giving a small donation to this Blog (sugg. $6 _non-recurring_) _every so often_ to continue/further its operation.  To donate just CLICK HERE.  Thank you! :-) >>

Joy [2015]

MPAA (PG-13)  CNS/USCCB (A-III)  ChicagoTribune (2 Stars)  RogerEbert.com (3 Stars)  AVClub (C+)  Fr. Dennis (4+ Stars)

IMDb listing
CNS/USCCB (J. McAleer) review
ChicagoTribune (M. Phillips) review
RogerEbert.com (S. O'Malley) review
AVClub (I. Vishnevetsky) review  


Joy [2015] (directed and screenplay by David O. Russell, story in part by Annie Mumolo) continues a remarkable run of generally quite _excellent_ blue collar-ish / "regular people" oriented films by the writer / director - The Fighter [2010] (4 Stars), Silver Linings Playbook [2012] (2 1/2 Stars), American Hustle [2013] (3 1/2 Stars).  Indeed, I'd put this film as his best yet.

Why do I prefer this one over the others?  I believe that this is still _the least_ "exotic" of Russell's "studies" of the the trials / tribulations of regular people.  The Fighter [2010] was still about boxing and though life is often a fight / challenge, very few people actually box for a living.  The Silver Linings Playbook [2012] may have been about some quite ordinary people but several in the film were struggling with some rather particular (and certainly as presented, rather exotic) psychological conditions.  American Hustle [2013] was about a couple of fairly low key "con artists," and while most people may occasionally "flirt in their minds with the darkside," very few are actual "con artists."

The current film, Joy [2015], is about Joy Mongano (played beautifully by Jennifer Lawrence) a woman from suburban Long Island, who while certainly quite smart (she was the valedictorian of her high school class, but then there are many high schools, all over the country, each with a valedictorian, best student, each year) would have appeared to any of us as an otherwise utterly unremarkable person ... 'CEPT ... she made her mark on the world by ... reinventing _the mop_  ;-).  More precisely, she invented a simple self-wringing "miracle mop" with a "when you're done, just throw it in the wash" mop-head ;-).

Many of the reviewers that I list above expressed the concern: Can a movie about a quite average young woman from a quite unremarkable family who "reinvented _the mop_" POSSIBLY be "compelling"?

 Well folks, IMHO what she went through _in her family_ with her initial business contacts, etc, MADE FOR A SURPRISING yet CERTAINLY COMPELLING STORY ;-)

For honestly, HOW does one "make a mop" -- even a prototype -- and then proceed to make them on a larger, approaching "industrial scale"?  Even the simplest mop would need 3-4 parts -- a pole, a mophead, a means to attach the mop-head to the pole.  Those parts have to be bought / made and assembled. Then Joy's "miracle mop" was a bit more complicated than the "simplest mop."   For this basic mop to become "self wringable" would require additional parts -- at least some kind of spring, some kind of lever as well as attachment devices / fasteners to them (so maybe 10 or as many as 15 parts, some needing to be specially molded / made).  How does one go about getting those parts made / assembled?  Finally, while a "self-wringable miracle mop" may seem like a great idea, "somebody, somewhere" could have come up with the idea already and if not then if the product proved a success, "somebody, somewhere" or perhaps a fair amount of "somebodies, somewhere" would want to steal the idea to make "knockoffs."

Okay Readers, you're a quite average person like Joy from a quite average family with its inevitable "assortment of characters" --  Joy's (divorced) parents Rudy and Terry (played by Robert De Niro and Virginia Madsen); Rudy's new-to-the-scene (and surprisingly moneyed) widowed girlfriend Trudy (played marvelously by Isabella Rossellini); Joy's grandmother Mimi (played by Diane Ladd) who actually narrates good parts of the story; Joy's own ex-husband Tony (played by Édgar Ramírez); her best friend since childhood Jackie (played by Dascha Polanco) and Joy's half-sister Peggy (played by Elizabeth Röhm) -- all trying to be (kinda) helpful, while (some) being naturally _kinda jealous_, and very few actually having a clue, with certainly no one being able to easily articulate what to do.

So the story involves _a lot_ of blind "flailing around" even after Joy gets a "shot in the dark" meeting (thanks to a quite random lead from her still nice guy ex-husband Tony) with QVC cable channel executive Neil Walker (played by Bradley Cooper) who gives her product a shot on his Home Shopping(like) Network.  And even with the moderate success that follows, it becomes clear that almost _everybody_ (and I mean everybody from family (naturally), to seemingly random but both well-hidden / well-placed mob-like characters) wanted a piece of her and her newly earned / hard earned money.

Indeed, Joy becomes the Ulysses of "entrepreneur fables."  It becomes a _compelling_ (you're right there beside her, cheering her on) story about HER and ... _her mop_ ;-)

And one's left honestly wondering: Oh my! if it's THIS HARD to (1) come up with, (2) manufacture, (3) sell and finally (4) DEFEND something as _simple_ as a "self-wringing mop" HOW DOES ANYTHING GET MADE?? ;-)

Beyond that, what makes the story remarkable for a blog like this is that DESPITE "the cast of characters at home" and DESPITE A LOT OF FRUSTRATION / FLAILING AROUND and even SHAKE-DOWNS and (arguably) BETRAYALS Joy _remains_ NICE, yes TOUGH at times but still fundamentally NICE to that "cast of characters at home."

So this is just a LOVELY, LOVELY STORY ... DESERVING _A LOT_ OF PRAISE.

So good job folks!  Very, very good job!


<< NOTE - Do you like what you've been reading here?  If you do then consider giving a small donation to this Blog (sugg. $6 _non-recurring_) _every so often_ to continue/further its operation.  To donate just CLICK HERE.  Thank you! :-) >>