Film and Book Tally 2015

Man, where the hell did this year go? Felt like it just started. Anyway, I managed to stay true to my word about watching more movies and reading more books. (Not so much in regards with getting a job.) The lists start after the jump. (Believe me, I saw and read a lot this year.) Oh, and also resolutions for 2016.

Tangerine

Sometimes you don't need big-name stars or an overly complex plot to make a compelling film. Many times all that's needed are the right people for the job. Sometimes it works, other times it doesn't.

In regards with Sean Baker's Tangerine, it thankfully falls into the former category. Yes, its premise is a familiar one (a woman finds out her boyfriend's been unfaithful) but that's not what makes Tangerine stand out. What makes the film stand out is its two stars.

Kitana Kiki Rodriguez and Mya Taylor, two trans actresses with no prior experience in Hollywood, show immense promise because of their work in Tangerine. As is sometimes the case with various acting debuts, it's obvious (sometimes painfully so) that the actor is a newcomer. That's not the case with either Rodriguez and Taylor.

It's also worth mentioning that Rodriguez and Taylor's involvement in Tangerine could be the next step in Hollywood's progression. Recently television has become more progressive when it comes to trans characters (read: having them played by trans actors and actresses). Will this open more doors for other aspiring trans actors?

Tangerine is a fascinating watch. It doesn't resort to cheap stereotypes to further the story. It just relies on that stellar script. Hopefully we'll be seeing more of Baker, Rodriguez and Taylor over the coming years. (Oh, and that last scene is close to perfection.)

My Rating: *****

BOOK VS MOVIE: The Price of Salt/Carol

Love is a sensation unlike any other. It's a feeling that you only encounter once or twice in your lifetime but it's one that can be all-consuming. It's a feeling that's completely original, one that's indescribable.

And there have been countless works revolving around that very subject. Books, movies, plays, poetry, songs...it's basically the most popular topic around. Of course when the word gets thrown around a lot, it starts to lose its meaning. Thankfully there are those who make sure that the word doesn't lose its impact.

Patricia Highsmith's novel The Price of Salt focuses on a young woman's budding relationship with an older woman. This being a book published during the early 1950s, it caused somewhat of a shock during this wholesome era. (Originally using the nom de plume Claire Morgan, Highsmith didn't associate herself with her second novel until later in life.) But like what E.M. Forster did with Maurice, Highsmith shows that love has no boundaries.

Todd Haynes' film Carol alters several details of Highsmith's novel but it maintains the forbidden romance of its day. (Haynes also shines a light on a subject that he only gave a faint interest towards in Far from Heaven.) With its meticulous costume and set designs, the film displays a sharp defiance beneath the composed dispositions. (Not to mention that heteronormativity is the worst.)

Between Highsmith's novel and Haynes' film, both show a lifestyle hidden beneath the glitz and glamour of the 1950s. But both works on their own stand out so deciding which is better is hard to say. Then again, there is another option...

What's worth checking out?: Both.

Youth

As we get older, we begin to realize certain things. What we've accomplished in our lives, the opportunities we've missed, the people we've known, the things we have yet to do. We're only on this earth for a short time so we must make the most of it.

Paolo Sorrentino's Youth is one of the latest films to focus on this topic. Set at a Swiss resort, it depicts those who come at a crossroads with their lives. Personal woes, professional plights...these are what they try to resolve (or at least come to terms with).

As the film wears on, it becomes clear that Federico Fellini's 8 1/2 provided some influence on Youth. Several scenes from Sorrentino's film easily parallel to those found in Fellini's film. (Thankfully not to a point where 8 1/2 is being blatantly ripped off.)

Indeed, the lead characters of Youth share of number of traits with Guido Anselmi. Despite his disinterest, composer Fred Ballinger (Michael Caine) faces pressure from the powers that be. Director Mick Boyle (Harvey Keitel) has a complicated connection with the women that have entered his life, especially frequent leading lady Brenda Morel (Jane Fonda). And actor Jimmy Tree (Paul Dano) is struggling in preparing for his next role.

Youth is good though it might reserved only for a select few. It's far from an easily accessible film but it's certainly one that'll be appreciated if viewed by an admirer of Fellini. It's not for everyone but it will be liked by a select few.

My Rating: ****

BOOK VS MOVIE: The Danish Girl

The transgender community over the years has been far from treated properly. Though as of late, they've been represented much better throughout the media. Several TV shows and films feature trans women as actual people rather than a cheap plot twist or an even cruder punchline. It helps even more to have trans actresses to play those roles. (See Orange is the New Black, Sense8 and Tangerine as recent examples.)

However, there have also been cis actors playing trans women more frequently. (See Dallas Buyers Club and Transparent as recent examples.) There's a level of political correctness in such a depiction. Is it because Hollywood is still too afraid to advance with the times? Regardless, the printed word has been more sensible with matters like this.

David Ebershoff's novel The Danish Girl is a fictionalized account of Lili Elbe (when she was still known as Einar Wegener) and her marriage to Gerda Gottlieb (Greta Waud in the book). Ebershoff depicts this brief union not as a conflicted one because of Lili's so-called "perversion" but as one of deep understanding. (Whether it was entirely like that in real life is hard to say.)

Tom Hooper's adaptation makes Ebershoff's novel more melodramatic than it needs to be. (If anything, it cheapens the story.) Yes, Alexandre Desplat's score and Danny Cohen's cinematography make a gorgeous combination but they alone can't salvage Lucinda Coxon's thin script and Hooper's occasionally sporadic direction. (Same can be said in regards with Eddie Redmayne and Alicia Vikander's performances.)

It's easy to see which of the two is better. Ebershoff's novel is a quiet depiction of marriage and devotion. Hooper's film meanwhile reduces it to a looming scandal, a shocking story from the previous century. Both also decidedly proved which is more with the times.

What's worth checking out?: The book.

What We Do in the Shadows

It's pretty obvious early on in Jemaine Clement and Taika Waititi's What We Do in the Shadows that it's going to be something hilarious. Shot like a documentary (think The Office), the film chronicles the everyday lives of several citizens of Wellington, New Zealand...who happen to be vampires.

Very seldom does the mockumentary work well. (That is, unless your name is Christopher Guest.) But What We Do in the Shadows is one of those few exceptions. The reason? Well, if you've seen Flight of the Concords, you'll know why.

And What We Do in the Shadows doesn't pride in taking itself too seriously. (It surely wouldn't have been as funny if it did.) Though in all honesty, that's the whole point of comedy. If a comedic work takes itself either too seriously or not seriously enough, then it won't be as easy to enjoy.

Back to the film itself. What We Do in the Shadows is one of several films in recent years that has vampires as its main focus, and thankfully it moves far away from the whole Twilight frenzy. The lead characters are far from the usual sexy vampires (though they would probably suggest otherwise). It's nice to see that after that dreck of a franchise. (Then again, Only Lovers Left Alive started that trend.)

What We Do in the Shadows is a very funny film, one that we don't frequently get nowadays. It's proof that a good comedy doesn't need an absurd amount of crude humor to be funny. It just needs well-timed jokes (and the right actors to deliver said jokes).

My Rating: *****

Monsieur Verdoux

When we're first introduced to the titular character of Charlie Chaplin's Monsieur Verdoux, it's clear that he's a far cry from Chaplin's famous Tramp character. Yes, he does do a number of pratfalls and double takes normally found in Chaplin's silent films but it's certainly a new role for the comedian. Obviously so since Henri Verdoux is based on a real-life serial killer.

As if that couldn't tarnish Chaplin's previous image enough, Monsieur Verdoux was released when his career was beginning to dwindle. The was after his paternity suit, which put a sizable dent on his public image. Then to immediately follow it up with a film like Monsieur Verdoux? It's a miracle his career didn't end right then and there.

Much like The Great Dictator several years earlier, Monsieur Verdoux came under scrutiny because Chaplin expressed some of his political views in the film. After all, both films were released during a time in history where certain beliefs could ruin one's personal life. Chaplin was no exception. (The same year Monsieur Verdoux was released, Chaplin was subpoenaed to appear before the House of Un-American Activities Committee. And just five years later, he was denied re-entry into the United States.)

Another noticeable difference between the Tramp and Henri Verdoux is how they view and treat women. The Tramp practically worships any woman he comes across; Verdoux meanwhile has an almost misogynistic nature to him. No wonder Monsieur Verdoux wasn't so well-received upon its release.

That said, however, all of this information doesn't reduce Monsieur Verdoux to an unwatchable dreck. It's a nice departure from Chaplin's more optimistic films. It would be some time before his best film Limelight would be released but one has to wonder: what would his career during that time be like had Hollywood not kicked him out?

My Rating: ****1/2

The Bishop's Wife

Henry Koster's The Bishop's Wife opens with Dudley (Cary Grant) walking among the many Christmas shoppers, committing small good deeds as he passes them. Then he notices Julia Brougham (Loretta Young) gazing at a shop widow, and later on in the film they're introduced properly.

It turns out (as the title implies) that Julia's husband Henry (David Niven) is a bishop and he's trying to raise funds for a new cathedral. Henry prays for spiritual guidance, and enter Dudley. Why him? He's a guardian angel, that's why.

Released the same year as Miracle on 34th Street (and the year after It's a Wonderful Life), The Bishop's Wife is easily one of those films that you could get comfortable with during the the Christmas season. You know, the one you can watch either by yourself or with the family once the frenzy of the holiday season starts to die down. (And honestly, there's no better remedy for the holiday woes than a movie.)

The trio of Grant, Young and Niven is what makes The Bishop's Wife work so well. (To think the original cast would've featured the likes of Niven, Teresa Wright and Dana Andrews.) The charm of the actors are brought out to the fullest. (What else would you expect from the future director of Harvey?)

Anyway, The Bishop's Wife is deeply endearing, exactly the kind of film one needs during the holiday season. It's gotten lost in the shadow of It's a Wonderful Life and it deserves a re-discovery. Honestly, it does.

My Rating: *****

Mad Max: Fury Road

When you watch the trailer for George Miller's Mad Max: Fury Road, you figure it's nothing more than an overblown reboot of his earlier film, one chock full of adrenaline and massive explosions. But what about the film itself? Thankfully there's so much more to it.

"Like what?" you might be asking. Well, you know how films of this nature tend to be brimming with testosterone and toxic masculinity? Yes, the film does feature the latter in copious amounts but thankfully it's only reduced to the antagonists. (Surely this would've been a thoroughly obnoxious film to watch had it been all of the male characters.)

And though his name is in the title, Mad Max: Fury Road isn't just about Max Rockantansky (a grumbly Tom Hardy). No, this film shows that this desolate wasteland isn't just a man's world. There are women out here that know how to kick ass and take names.

And one such woman is Imperator Furiosa (Charlize Theron). Frequently we're treated to various female characters who can hold their own alongside their male co-stars when it comes to kicking ass. Annoyingly they tend to get reduced to romantic interests for said male co-stars. (*cough* Black Widow *cough*) Miraculously, that doesn't happen to Furiosa. (Thank you, Miller, for that.)

Mad Max: Fury Road is, simply put, friggin' awesome but the hype surrounding it is somewhat overselling the film. Yes, it has well-developed female characters. Yes, it has well-executed practical effects. But overall, it's another action film that has fallen victim to the Hollywood hype machine. (Bear in mind this is the critique of someone who much prefers more subdued works.)

My Rating: ****

Burning Man

It's established early on in Jonathan Teplitzky's Burning Man that Tom (Matthew Goode) is living a chaotic life. He's a man with a stormy attitude, an unstable family life, and everything else about him is falling to pieces. As the film wears on, we see why Tom's life is the way it is.

Like 21 Grams the previous decade, Burning Man is told through a non-linear narrative. We see in fragments Tom's life before and after it started to fall apart. It's a storyline frequently told throughout fiction, one that only a few choice names can do well.

Like his follow-up film The Railway Man, Teplitzky shows how the events of one's past can linger in the present. Granted, what Tom went through is nothing compared to Eric Lomax's ordeal but what Tom endured can be just as traumatic. (Life can be cruel sometimes.)

A main theme throughout Burning Man is the slow path to recovery, something that we'll encounter at some point in our lifetime. Life in of itself  is far from ideal but that's something we have to accept. We may feel as though the pain will never disappear but sometimes all it takes is that one person to help you end that dark chapter and start anew. (Sometimes that person can be you yourself.)

Burning Man is good but nothing too groundbreaking. Goode continues to prove that he's a vastly underrated (and underused) actor. (Then again, Stoker also proved that a mere two years later.) That said, Burning Man is worth a look.

My Rating: ****