After the Wedding

First Hit: In this film, a challenging and complex situation unfolds through fantastic acting.

Isabel (Michelle Williams) is the co-founder of an orphanage in India. She very fond of the school, children, and organization. She is especially attached to a young boy Jai (Vir Pachisia) who appears to be a bit hyper and possibly having some attention disorder. This is wonderfully portrayed when Isabel, leading a meditation of the orphanage’s children, opens her eyes to see Jai lying on his back looking at the sky and waving his hands around. She lies down next to him and then says he can ring the bell to end the mediation. He is very enthusiastic ringing the bell and because the other children affectionately laugh, we know he is loved by them – he’s not an outsider.

The story then moves to New York where we find Oscar (Billy Crudup) finalizing a sculpture exhibit of his work, while his wife Theresa (Julianne Moore) is hard at work, making decisions, speaking with lawyers, and appears to be finalizing a deal to sell her large media company.

They have a daughter named Grace (Abby Quinn) who is young and with an impending wedding is nervous.

Reluctantly Isabel goes to New York because she’s been asked by a benefactor to come to New York to meet them in person to obtain a substantive amount of money to support her orphanage. When she gets to New York, we (and Isabel) finds out that Theresa is the benefactor. Their first meeting is slightly contentious because Isabel doesn’t think she needs to be in New York and Theresa seems a bit non-committal. To learn more about Isabel, Theresa invites Isabel to Grace’s wedding at their home.

Arriving at the wedding slightly late, Isabel is shocked to see that the father of the bride is Oscar, someone she had a previous history with.

The audience is getting some inkling that something is up and when Oscar gives a toast talking about how Grace helped him select Theresa as his wife.

But was this set up? Did Theresa know what she was doing when she brought Isabel to New York? Does Grace really know her history? How will Oscar explain to Grace’s past to her? Why did Theresa set this all up?

Lots of questions and the excellent acting make this complicated situation come together rather well.

Williams was excellent although there seemed to be darkness around her through the entire film. Part of me felt as though this was because of a decision she made many years ago or was Isabel’s character a bit sad, cynical and dark unless she was around the orphanage? Moore was solid as the highly motivated media company owner. She’s always on the phone, pushing through her agenda. There’s a sense of something underlying her drive to sell the business. Crudup is outstanding as Theresa’s husband and Grace’s father. There are a creative strength and vulnerability he shows that makes his character work. Quinn is good as Grace. She’s a little whiny about her nervousness of getting married, and I’m not sure why this was needed. Pachisia is perfect as the young orphan, to whom, Isabel is emotionally connected. Susanne Bier, Bart Freundlich, and Anders Thomas Jensen wrote the screenplay. It is an interesting story, and for me, because I adopted my daughter, I felt a deep connection to the story. Freundlich also directed his story. I liked many of the sets; specifically the hotel and office spaces.

Overall: I thought this was an extremely well-acted story.

Where'd You Go, Bernadette

First Hit: Not everyone will appreciate and engage with this film, and I did.

This film runs and works on many different levels, and it only works because of the fantastic performance of Cate Blanchett as Bernadette Fox.

I laughed out loud numerous times and in a theater with only thirty people, often I was the only one. However, as the film went on, others seemed to join me as the amazing Blanchett showed us the complexity and depth of this character. One such scene is when she walks into a store, comments to the sales staff that they have a wonderful Chihuly, and the salesgirl is stupidly stunned because she has no idea what Bernadette is referring to. Because I’m aware of Chihuly’s work, I saw it right away and therefore was fully prepared, got her reference, and felt that I was in on the joke as it evolved.

Bernadette is married to Elgie (Billy Crudup), and they have got a young teen daughter named Bee Branch (Emma Nelson) who is getting ready to go to boarding school for her high school education. They are living in Seattle because Elgie created a technology product company that was purchased by Microsoft. He continues to work with Microsoft developing new high tech innovations.

Early in the film, we see that Bernadette’s quirky behavior and Elgie’s work patterns have created a deep divide in their relationship. The story also points out how close Bee Branch and her mother are. Dutifully Bernadette picks up Bee Branch from school each day, and this is where we learn how disliked Bernadette is with the other mothers when Audrey (Kristen Wiig) makes fun of her and her quirkiness to anyone who is within earshot. Audrey and Bernadette, who live next door to each other, have a relationship filled with animosity.

One of the quirky things Bernadette does is use her phone to dictate all the things she wants to be done. These commands go to a personal assistant in India. An example of the types of orders she gives the assistant include “I need a fishing vest,” and one arrives at her home via Amazon.com. There are other scenes with this assistant in which Bernadette is writing an antagonist email to someone, or requesting medication that will help her not get seasick, and making a dental appointment along with other life tasks.

Although she’s afraid of being around people and doesn’t like boats, Bernadette and Elgie agree to take Bee Branch to Antarctica as a middle school graduation reward.

One day while Bernadette is visiting the Seattle Library, a young woman comes up to her and asks to take a picture of her. Bernadette is clearly annoyed because of the intrusion, and the woman insists that Bernadette is her hero because of what she brought to the world of architecture. The woman mentions an online video of Bernadette’s career.

Arriving home, Bernadette grabs her computer and begins to watch the video, and we get the opportunity to know more about Bernadette’s artistic and creative architecture skills. For the audience, it is a moment where we begin to understand this fantastic creative person.

But it is when Bernadette meets up with one of her former associate architects (Laurence Fishburne) that Bernadette’s story spills, and I mean spills, out of her in one long rant. The power of her being able to talk to a fellow architect, who will understand her, is powerful. After a long spilling of her story, I loved it when Fishburne says something like, “is that it”? “Are you finished”?

He tells her what the audience is slowly learning, she needs to get back to work, creating. However, through her quirky life and other incidents, her husband has become increasingly concerned about her behavior. But it’s when the FBI contacts him and tells him that Bernadette’s online assistant is really a Russian operative who is going to steal all their money that he sets up an intervention.

How Bernadette resolves her struggles with her neighbor Audrey, her husband, and her internal demons is the rest of the film and story.

Blanchett is absolutely sublime as Bernadette. It is by far and away the best performance of the year by an actor (or actress). I loved how she pulled me into her madness and how I fully understood what she was going through. Wiig was outstanding as the long-time neighbor who tried to put on a superior face about her family life only to realize that there was envy about Bernadette and Bee Branch’s relationship. Nelson was outstanding as Bee Branch. I loved how her faith in her best friend, her mom, was successfully tested. Crudup was excellent as the distracted focused but loving husband and father. Holly Gent and Richard Linklater wrote an engrossing screenplay and were deeply rewarding and entertaining. Linklater also directed the film.

Overall: If you go to see this film, you’ve got to be ready to accept and dive into Bernadette from the beginning, because if you do, you’ll be rewarded in the end.

20th Century Women

First Hit:  I liked it overall and some scenes are wonderfully funny, but it didn’t impress or stay with me afterwards.

There was something missing in this film and I’m not sure what it was. As I previously said, I liked many of the scenes individually but together as a story it just missed the target.

The basic story is that a single mother Dorothea (Annette Bening), in her late 40’s early 50’s, is raising her fifteen-year-old son, Jamie (Lucas Jade Zumann), in Santa Barbara in the late 1970’s. She lives in a large home with people who rent rooms; Abbie (Greta Gerwig) and William (Billy Crudup). Abbie, who’s in her early 20s, has come to Santa Barbara from New York after learning she had cervical cancer to be an artist. William is slightly younger than Dorothea is a handy man with cars and is fixing up Dorothea’s huge rundown house. Dorothea is stressing about her son and wants him to be a smart caring whole man who navigates the restlessness of the ever-changing world. There are peace protests, punk music is flourishing, and there is also the feminist movement.

Julie (Elle Fanning), is a neighbor girl whose mother is a child psychologist and requires Julie to sit in her youth therapy groups. She often spends the night with Jamie but only to talk and rest. She sneaks in by climbing the scaffolding surrounding the house. She comes back into the house, through the front door, in the morning and has breakfast with the rest of the household.

Always worrying, somewhat defensiveness, and not being forthcoming about her past is the byword of Dorothea’s character. Abbie is about finding peace with her life. She wants to express and settle down. William lives easily and as the dialogue stated, women come to him and he gets bored with them easily. Julie is exploring her freedom from her mother through sexual behavior and depressive based rebellion. Jamie is simply growing up and although he’s going out and experiencing new things, his mother seems to think that he needs more help.

Bening is very good, however I didn’t necessarily like her character much. There was a distant neediness to her that didn’t really work for me. Fanning was fantastic. She does the part woman/part girl nervousness with amazement. Watch her hands and feet move as when she’s nervous – wonderful subtle acting. Zumann was very good as the boy learning to become a man. Scenes where he becomes sullen and frustrated are excellent. Gerwig is wonderful. Her energy and engagement with the role and the other characters was perfect. Crudup was strong as handyman William. His soft kindness towards the women in the house and others was delightful. Mike Mills wrote an excellent script, however overall the film felt too scene based which may have been through his direction.

Overall:  Although I enjoyed many of the scenes, the overall film felt a little disjointed and scene based.

Jackie

First Hit:  It was a confusingly powerful portrayal of Jackie Kennedy during a most difficult time.

Confusing because my media biased view of Jackie consisted of a refined elegance and intelligence gained through a wealthy upbringing. This was challenged by the oddly phrased and pronounced speech along with the way she approached the challenges during this time. Although the assassination was an extremely traumatic event and the brief window this film uses to introduce us to Jackie is small, there was an oddity to the character that left me both confused and interestingly engaged.

Jackie (Natalie Portman) didn’t invent anything, didn't lead any social movements (non-profit or otherwise) and therefore her famousness comes from being a First Lady that revitalized the interior of The White House and that her popular husband was publicly assassinated in a short lived Presidency. The only visibility the public had of her was through the media. Glimpses of her as first lady, giving a tour of The White House, mother of Caroline and John, as a grieving widow, and dating and marrying Aristotle Onassis a Greek shipping tycoon. Regardless, the public had fascination about her and it is this attraction that probably led to this film.

This film’s timeframe is short. It begins with a post assassination interview by a journalist (Billy Crudup) as the vehicle for Jackie to share the truth as she saw it. To speak about the events of assassination, the funeral, and her time in The White House while hinting at Jack’s (John Fitzgerald Kennedy as played by Casper Phillipson) sexual indiscretions during their marriage. The film also interlays filmed sequences of her famous White House television tour, which gave many people their first look at the President’s famous home.

I enjoyed the way it was filmed in that the scenes were rich with the look of the early 1960s. Additionally, I liked the scenes of the tour. These scenes moved from the film’s richly colored set to the grainy and hazy black and white images that appeared on most television screens.

At times, I found Jackie to be very superficial by worrying so much about what something looked like and not caring so much about substance, to be followed by times where the complexities of her thinking came across as deep and intellectual, like the clarity of finding the right space to bury her husband. I never met her and because I only knew of her from the media, I’ve no way of knowing how closely Portman mimicked or embodied the role.

Her focus on making sure that Jack didn’t become just another “oil portrait on the wall” but that he stood for something was brought forth many times by her and Jack’s brother Bobby (Peter Sarsgaard). Supporting Jackie throughout the film was her assistant Nancy Tuckerman (Greta Gerwig), her closest confidant.

Although I wondered about the lack of tension and reasons why I was watching the film, I couldn’t wait to see what was going to happen next because there was an air of unpredictability in her voice and intention. As she states to a priest after the assassination, that her life was over and that she would spend the rest of her life waiting for it to be really over. This came across in the film and it was believable.

Portman was either amazing or created an odd characterization of this famous name. Again, I don’t know and given what I’ve seen and how Portman delivers performances, I’m going to say it was an amazing performance at an award-winning level. Crudup was interesting because his reactions to Jackie during the interview were, at times, priceless. An example was her telling the journalist that she doesn’t smoke as she lights up her 10th cigarette in a row was great. Sarsgaard was very good as Bobby. He was feisty and protective of his brother and what they were doing together, which matched my media understanding of him through the 1960s. Gerwig was very good. I loved her supportive actions including the visual reminders for Jackie to smile. Noah Oppenheim wrote a very strong script. Pablo Larrain’s direction was straightforward and no punches were pulled. The interspersed views of the assassination were excellent – especially the last one.

Overall:  This film isn’t for everyone and for people who have no connection to Jackie or didn’t live during her lifetime, it may not work

Spotlight

First Hit:  Excellent writing, outstanding acting, powerful scenes, and a story that turned out to be spot-on.

This is a story about how Catholic Priests took advantage of young boys (and girls) by molesting them and getting away with it for years.

It begins with the Boston Globe getting a new Chief Editor named Marty Baron (Liev Schreiber) and while doing his due diligence of current staff, discovers that the Globe has a small group of reporters called “Spotlight”. This team digs deep to uncover meaningful stories that make a difference to Boston and beyond.

An old article comes across his desk about priest abuse and he asks Walter “Robby” Robertson (Michael Keaton), head of the Spotlight team, if this is the kind of story they work on. The team of Mike Rezendes (Mark Ruffalo) Sacha Pfeiffer (Rachel McAdams), and Matt Carroll (Brian d’Arcy James) are asked to take a deeper look. As they begin to dig, the level of cover up by Cardinal Law (Len Cariou) and his crew of Bishops and Priests becomes grossly apparent.

Many people are involved with the cover up including the creation of a cottage business where lawyers and their law firms defending the church reap high fees while the abused is paid next to nothing and told to keep quiet. There were many heart breaking interviews with the abused including Eric Macleish (Billy Crudup) who, with needle marks in his arm, tells how this has affected his life and his family.

The script was sharp, always on point, and reflected a caring towards giving the audience a clear understanding of the problem. This film never lagged and reflected the urgency required to make a difference.

Ruffalo was superb. His ability to be smart, urgent and both careful and reckless and the same time was perfect. Schreiber was excellent as the steady hand looking to make the paper relevant again and seeing that this story was worthy of the effort being put in by his staff. Keaton was amazing as the leader of Spotlight, knowing when to reign in or let his staff loose. The confrontation with Ruffalo was respectfully wonderful and intense. McAdams was strong and especially good in her interviews with the abused. Her empathy and ability to obtain information was excellent. James was wonderful. I loved his caring about the home near his house and how he wanted to ensure everyone knew about the danger lurking inside for young kids. Crudup was so strong in his portrayal of an abused man that I felt his pain while he spoke. Cariou was very good as the Cardinal who tried to come across as Teflon. One of the most outstanding parts is by Stanley Tucci as an independent attorney working for the abused. His role was amazingly great because of him. McCarthy and Josh Singer wrote a remarkably strong pointed script. There was no fat, just great dialogue. McCarthy directed this film with a purpose, to tell a difficult story with clarity of purpose.

Overall:  I was fully engaged and entrenched in this story in every way.