OSCAR WARS: A HISTORY OF HOLLYWOOD IN GOLD, SWEAT AND TEARS by Michael Schulman

 

It was pure coincidence that I finished this excellent book right about the time when the Oscar nominations for 2024 were being announced. But what better time could there be? Oscar Buzz was in the air, and my head was buzzing with all the inside information about the origins of the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences in 1927 and its evolution since then. Rest assured that Michael Schulman's book will tell you everything you ever wanted to know, and then some.

But the book isn't just a collection of facts, dates and names of prominent movie moguls. It's a fascinating history of the movie industry itself and its cultural importance. Schulman discusses how the awards ceremony, which began as a rather subdued dinner party in 1929, gradually morphed into the hours-long, overblown fashion spectacle we have today. He also highlights several important events in Oscar history, many of which reveal the power struggles between studios, directors, writers and stars. 

When I first opened the book, I found myself quickly drawn into Chapter Four: The Greatest Star, and that's where I decided to start reading, making my way to Chapter One afterwards. Chapter Four covers the nominees for the year 1950, focusing mainly on the race for Best Actress. The nominees for that award were Ann Baxter and Bette Davis for ALL ABOUT EVE, Judy Holliday for BORN YESTERDAY, Eleanor Parker for CAGED, and Gloria Swanson for SUNSET BOULEVARD. This was probably the most exciting lineup of actresses to ever compete for the Oscar, and it was a major surprise when newcomer Judy Holiday won, since many were expecting a two-way battle between seasoned veterans Davis and Swanson. Schulman gives us the backstory and quotes from the various contenders. This chapter reads like a script for a Hollywood movie and provides great fun for hardcore fans. ALL ABOUT EVE, of course, was the big winner that year, setting a record with fourteen nominations and six wins. That record would stand for the next forty-seven years until TITANIC came along.

Other chapters cover the notorious Hollywood blacklist era, the controversy surrounding Orson Welles and CITIZEN KANE in 1941, and the nomination of the first X-rated film, MIDNIGHT COWBOY (1969). Chapter Eight: Fiasco is one of the most fascinating and entertaining parts of the book. It covers the ill-fated Oscars of 1989 when Allan Carr, the producer of GREASE in 1978, took charge of the ceremony, including its musical numbers. Carr's disastrous, overblown opening production number, featuring a young actress portraying Snow White, is legendary, but for all the wrong reasons. Schulman takes us step by step down Carr's ill-fated road to ruin, and even includes quotes from Eileen Bowman, the unfortunate actress chosen to play the Snow White. 

Other chapters take on more serious issues: the rise and fall of Harvey Weinstein, racial discrimination down through the years in Hollywood, the #OSCARSOWHITE controversy, and the confusion at the 2017 ceremony when presenter Warren Beatty mistakenly announced LA LA LAND as the Best Picture winner instead of MOONLIGHT

The book ends with a chapter entitled Gettin' Jiggy Wit It, which recounts how Best Actor nominee Will Smith introduced violence into Oscar history when he lost control of himself and went onstage to slap host Chris Rock in the face during the 2022 ceremony. A sad ending, indeed.

I thoroughly enjoyed this book, but I have to admit that my fascination with the Oscars moving forward is at an all-time low. A question keeps coming into my mind: Was it a good idea to introduce competition into the film industry? And a related question: Do the votes for the various awards have more to do with business interests or exchanges of favors rather than sincere appreciation of works of art? This book doesn't attempt to answer those questions, although serious readers will no doubt feel compelled to keep asking.

In the meantime, the Red Carpet beckons.

MIKE'S QUICK-STOP COMMENTARIES

 

FROM THE TERRACE (1960)

High-grade soap opera and enjoyable from start to finish. Paul Newman plays the son of Leon Ames, an unloving father and the owner of a steel plant that he expects Paul to work in and end up as miserable as his father. Myrna Loy plays Paul's unhappy alcoholic mother. Paul escapes all of this negativity through aggressive social climbing and marriage to high society doll Joanne Woodward, eventually becoming a big wheel in an investment firm in the Big Apple. But he soon finds out that all work and no home life result in an unhappy wife who starts sleeping around as a cure for her loneliness. Paul is beset by existential angst until he meets simple country girl Ina Balin, who just happens to be drop-dead gorgeous. Will Paul escape from his meaningless existence and find true love in the country with sweet, simple, drop-dead gorgeous Ina? What do you think? Top acting honors go to Miss Loy.

PICTURE MOMMY DEAD (1966)

Strange little movie about the most dysfunctional family imaginable. Adolescent Susan Gordon, having spent three years in a convent hospital following the mysterious death of her mother, Zsa Zsa Gabor, returns home to find herself surrounded by a group of despicable adults, all of whom are apparently out to get her. The film, directed by Miss Gordon's father, Bert I. Gordon, isn't terribly good, but it does have the advantage of a decent cast of actors and some very striking sets and art direction. Don Ameche plays the father, and Martha Hyer plays the evil, grasping stepmother. As Susan Gordon is in nearly every scene, the entire project rests on her, which is the biggest problem with the film. Her acting range is severely limited, and she spends most of the time with the same perplexed look on her face, no matter what's happening. Miss Gabor is an elegant, ghostly presence, a role that doesn't overtax her own acting abilities. Actually, I thought she was the best thing about the movie, which gives you an indication of what we're dealing with here. I managed to stay wide awake until the end, at which point I was rewarded with one of the most bizarre and truly distasteful plot twists I've experienced in quite a while, a twist I did not see coming. With Anna Lee, Wendell Corey and Signe Hasso.

THE SEDUCTION OF JOE TYNAN (1979)

Alan Alda does a decent job as an ambitious senator who gets caught up in his political life at the expense of his family life. There's really nothing new going on here, and the project has the look and tone of a TV movie of the week, complete with a rather predictable audience-pleasing conclusion. But it makes for an enjoyable watch. Acting honors go to the marvelous Barbara Harris as Alda's wife, who isn't emotionally suited for the high-profile life her husband's job has dragged her into. Harris is able to convey more emotion with a subtle change of facial expression than most actresses do with three pages of dialogue. Meryl Streep plays the cool blonde political assistant who becomes Alda's mistress. She is almost too cool, seeming to be detached from her character, the polar opposite of Harris. Still, she gets your attention. Featuring Melvyn Douglas, Blanche Baker and an outrageous supporting performance by Rip Torn.

FIESTA (1947)

This is intended as a star vehicle for MGM's aquatic icon Esther Williams, who does her usual capable job and, naturally, gets to do a little swimming. It's also the American film debut of handsome, charismatic Mexican actor Ricardo Montalban, whose intense performance almost knocks Esther right out of the water, so to speak. The story is set in Mexico and involves bullfighting. Esther and Ricardo play twins, Maria and Mario, so there's no romance between the two stars. Esther is paired with John Carroll and Ricardo is linked with Cyd Charisse. When aspiring matador Mario gets all bullheaded and walks away from the ring, plucky sister Maria takes his place to save the family honor. The film asks the viewer to believe that Esther Williams in a tight-fitting matador costume could conceivably pass for Ricardo Montalban in similar attire. I've heard of MGM magic, but this is quite a stretch. There is some terrific Spanish dancing with Ricardo and Cyd Charisse, and screen veteran Mary Astor plays the twins' Mexican madre, complete with a black wig and a lace mantilla.

NOSFERATU (2024)

 

Providing indisputable proof that some crypts should remain sealed, and some coffins should be permanently nailed shut, we have yet another version of NOSFERATU currently keeping audiences enthralled in theaters. This remake has been given to us by director Robert Eggers, the undeniably talented, creative gentleman who directed THE WITCH (2015), THE LIGHTHOUSE (2019, and THE NORTHMEN (2022). I haven't seen the latter film, but I was greatly impressed by THE WITCH when I saw it during its big screen release. Eggers' slow-burn approach with THE WITCH is also present in this new film, although at 132 minutes, one might say that approach was overdone.

I already had mixed feelings about this film before going to see it. After reading several reviews and listening to commentaries on Youtube, my expectations were rather low. But I also wasn't that enthusiastic about seeing a remake of a classic silent film, F. W. Murnau's 1922 masterpiece, which had already been brilliantly updated by Werner Herzog in1979. What did we need with this remake, which Eggers himself described as a "passion project"? How could this man, talented as he was, hope to improve on the two previous efforts?

Having survived all 132 minutes of the movie without missing a single scene (although my beleaguered body was crying out for a bathroom break), my overall impression is negative. There are some good sequences and some very good performances. But there is a pervading feeling of frenetic desperation about the production, as if Eggers was so determined to outdo his predecessors that he threw in as much action, gore and Gothic overkill as he possibly could.

There's no need to describe the plot, since anyone reading this blog post is already familiar with the saga of Count Orlock, who is based on Bram Stoker's Count Dracula. The 2024 screenplay, written by Eggers, follows the original storyline, but with one major difference. Eggers chose to alter the character of Ellen Hutter (Lily-Rose Depp), the wife of Thomas Hutter (Nicholas Hoult), the real estate agent who journeys to Count Orlock's castle, thereby setting all of the evil events into motion. Eggers' vision makes Ellen the central character, establishing a dark, spiritual connection between her and the Count, which is not, in my opinion, satisfactorily explained. Apparently, the very young Ellen, lonely and afraid, prays for a guardian angel to come and protect her. Because of some cosmic glitch in the human-to-angel communication lines, she got in touch with Count Orlock, the darkest angel of them all. (Let's meditate for a moment on the power of prayer.) So then, all of the evil that befalls Thomas, his family, and his village has been preordained. Got it. Sort of.

I have to hand it to Miss Depp, the second generation of the Johnny Depp cinematic dynasty. She works hard in this movie. Not only is she playing a traditional Gothic horror film heroine/victim, which consists of wandering through dark rooms looking frightened in a series of lush facial closeups, but she is also asked to perform all manner of bizarre physical stunts. You see, Ellen isn't just spiritually connected to Count Orlock; she's also possessed by him as one would be possessed by a demon. And when Ellen feels the demonic thing coming on, she suddenly starts performing an exhausting combination of cleverly choreographed contortions, fits of shaking, screaming, and some really ugly facial expressions, all of which are meant to show us her evil side and frighten us out of our wits. Personally, I didn't find these acrobatics all that scary, but I must give credit to Miss Depp for her obvious dedication to the character. By the way, I didn't stay for the end credits, but I strongly suspect that Linda Blair was listed as technical consultant for demonic demonstrations.

In my opinion, the changes made to the Ellen character added nothing to the story besides distractions and opportunities for the director to inject ugliness and morbidity into an already dark-themed story. They also add unnecessary screen time. I also have to wonder if Eggers was bowing to modern-day gender sensibilities by adding more aggression to Ellen, perhaps to satisfy those who prefer more of a dominant, girl-boss heroine. Perhaps Eggers felt that Ellen's act of self-sacrifice in offering her life to Orlock to save her village, as depicted in the two earlier films, was outdated.

The look of the film is exceedingly dark, as I suppose it should be. However, it's not clear if all of the darkness was intentional, or because someone simply neglected to pay the electric bill on several shooting days. There are some incredible visual sequences from cinematographer Jaron Blaschke, who worked on Eggers' previous films, as well as KNOCK AT THE CABIN (2023). Many scenes, however, are framed in such a way that it was like watching a widescreen movie on my 27" Sony Trinitron, pan and scanned to fit the small screen. The combination of a roving camera, darkness and the overuse of soft focus was unpleasing to my eyes. I was reminded of a recent film, A HAUNTING IN VENICE (2023), a film I detested, which was photographed in the same way. Compare the look of this film to the works of Mario Bava, who knew how to make practically every scene in a film look like a still picture. The same can be said of the horror films of Roger Corman and the best efforts from England's Hammer Studio.

I found the performances to be quite good, notwithstanding Miss Depp's orgiastic gymnastics. Nicholas Hoult is beautifully restrained as the ill-fated Thomas, making his portrayal a slow burn in itself, and his increasing fear and suffering is completely believable. Simon McBurney as Herr Knock, the slave of Count Orlock, plays crazy quite well, and is called upon to give a physical performance nearly as taxing as Miss Depp's. I will be happy to forget the scene where he bites the head off of a dove. Willem Dafoe is somewhat verbose and irritating much of the time as Professor Von Franz, the Van Helsing-inspired character. However, his final scene more than makes up for it. 

Then there is Bill Skarsgard as Orlock/Nosferatu, the most troublesome characterization in the film. Granted, I can't help but compare this incarnation of Count Orlock to the truly unique and terrifying image of Max Schreck from the silent film. Klaus Kinski's effective portrayal in the Herzog film paid homage to the uncanny Schreck, and justifiably so. Eggers obviously decided some serious updating was necessary, again, no doubt, to impress modern audiences who have been spoiled by CGI monstrosities in the franchise universe. So, Orlock is remade into a sort of demonic sexual predator with superpowers, rather than a once-human creature filled with a desperate need for blood in order to survive until the next sundown. I will give Skarsgard credit for his commanding presence and use of movement. He wears all of that makeup well. I just don't think the character is the least bit mysterious or frightening. But hey, what do I know?

Eggers does get credit form me for showing some restraint and not making the film as graphically violent as it certainly could have been. I'm also quite surprised that he only spent $50,000,000 on the film. When I last checked, the box office returns have nearly reached that amount, so it looks as though the film will be a hit. And I hereby predict a few Oscar and Golden Globes nominations for the movie. You heard it here first, folks. 

Perhaps after this most recent, and definitely most ambitious, cinematic resurrection, Count Orlock, or what's left of him, will be allowed to decay in eternal repose. Of course, the ending of the film is somewhat ambiguous regarding Ellen's fate. Is she really dead, or just the next Nosferatu in the making? Could a sequel happen? If so, then Miss Depp needs to keep up those Pilates classes.

UN TENTATIVO SENTIMENTALE aka A SENTIMENTAL ATTEMPT (1964): A BARBARA STEELE OBSCURITY

 

One of my favorite things about collecting is searching out and finding obscure films that I've heard about for years but never expected to see. Most of these films have no commercial release on DVD, and certainly not Blu-ray, but can sometimes be found on Youtube. If physical media copies are available, they're only to be obtained from online sellers who provide DVD-R copies which are sometimes recorded from television and sometimes copied from VHS tapes. I've picked up a lot of titles from such sellers over the last several years. Most of these folks are honest and reliable, although there are a few that I've learned to avoid.

Some of Barbara Steele's work on film and on television has been notoriously difficult to track down. So much of her European filmography consists of low-budget titles that don't seem to exist anywhere. It can also get a little confusing, as her French and Italian movies were released under different titles in different countries, making her career seem much more extensive that it really was.

For example, UN TENTATIVO SENTIMENTALE was released in France as AMOUR SANS LENDEMAIN. I seriously doubt if it was ever released in the United States, unless it was shown in art houses. Steele's European work, outside of horror films and prestigious releases like 8 1/2 and YOUNG TORLESS, remains largely unknown to American film fans. Only the most obsessive Steele freaks, like me, are seeking them out, giving us not only a reason to live, but a creative way to spend more money. The passion is real, my friends.

I found a very watchable print of an Italian language version of UN TENTATIVO SENTIMENTALE with scene selection and English subtitles. The subtitles, however, are of very little help, as they are nearly incomprehensible. They almost seem to have been added by AI bots, or maybe by someone completely unfamiliar with spoken English. This makes it hard to follow the story. But there's a plot summary given on IMDB, and here is the basic outline; Carla (Francoise Prevost) and Dino (Jean-Marc Bory), both unhappily married to others, meet in an airport and decide to begin an affair at a seaside house owned by Dino. They make a pact to return for another tryst but agree that if one of them doesn't show up, the affair is over. Emotional confusion ensues, which often happens when people use adulterous sex as a solution for boredom. Barbara Steele has a supporting role as Silvia, a woman who previously had an affair with the freewheeling Dino and is unable to let go of him. Her romantic frustration leads her to an attempted suicide.

 This French-Italian production was co-directed by Massimo Franciosa (THE LEOPARD 1963) and Pasquale Festa Campanile (WHEN WOMEN HAD TAILS 1970). The filming took place near the Italian coastal village of Sabaudia. The locations and stylish sets are enhanced by the striking black & white cinematography by Ennio Guarnieri (A BRIEF VACATION 1973 and SWEPT AWAY 1974). It must be said, however, that the film is a rather standard soap opera, and, for the most part, not terribly engrossing. Lead actress Prevost is quite beautiful and gives a sensitive performance. She was completely unknown to me, but she has an extensive filmography, including De Sica's THE CONDEMNED OF ALTONA (1962). Her co-star, Bory, was also an unfamiliar name. A Swiss actor, he appeared in Louis Malle's THE LOVERS (1958). Also in the cast is Letitia Roman, known for Mario Bava's THE GIRL WHO KNEW TOO MUCH (1963).

The function of these various actors is simply to fill up the time until the glorious Miss Steele is again onscreen in another closeup. Looking sexy and stylish with her hair cut short, she gives an effective, restrained performance as the jilted lover who tries to drown herself by slowly walking into the sea, but survives when Carla, her rival, pulls her out of the water. It's wonderful to see Barbara in a contemporary setting for a change, not chained to a wall or wandering through a windswept castle or climbing out of a coffin.

UN TENTATIVO SENTIMENTALE does not appear to have set the film world ablaze with excitement. The only critical comment I've found is from the French magazine Postif, which says: "Must one see a very bad film for the sole pleasure of seeing Barbara Steele in it with short hair? Undoubtably." The film does give Barbara very special billing in the credits:

Just think of this as another opportunity to allow Miss Steele to put you under her spell. What better reason to watch a movie?

Notes From the Movie Room 11/30/2024

🎬 The double-dipping dilemma struck again recently, once out of necessity and twice by choice. Of course, when it comes to obsessive collecting, I guess the concept of necessity doesn't enter into the equation...necessarily. However, I'll give myself a pass when one of my favorite films on DVD stops working. My copy of DARK CITY (1998), beautifully packaged in a handy-dandy slipcase with terrific artwork, started freezing up when I tried rewatching it a while ago. I gave it a good washing in warm water and dried it off carefully. No improvement. So, I tried some of the extra features on the disc, and the problem persisted there as well. Another careful, gentle washing didn't help. Then I did what any conscientious collector would do: I put it in the washing machine, used the heavy-duty cycle with hot water and detergent, and spin-dried for an hour. Oddly enough, that didn't seem to work, either. So, I gave up and ordered a Blu-ray from my local Barnes & Noble.

The Blu-ray has the director's cut, which my DVD also had. It also has the same extra features. I didn't hesitate to order the replacement, as this has long been a favorite of mine, ever since I saw its first run in a theater. Actually, I had double-dipped already, because I first bought the theatrical cut on DVD, but then decided I couldn't survive without adding the director's cut. I eventually gave my original copy to a friend. Triple-dipping! Is a 4K upgrade in my future? I hope not. I sincerely hope I never cross over that line.

The voluntary upgrading happened twice, both on impulse. I was browsing around at my B&N, looking at the new release section, and I noticed a Blu-ray copy of the 1956 classic INVASION OF THE BODY SNATCHERS, a release from Kino-Lorber. I didn't need to get it, as my DVD is in good shape.

But suddenly, something clicked inside of my brain. An uncontrollable urge overtook me. I could feel my hand reaching out toward the shelf where the Blu-ray sat. The shiny, colorful package seemed to be looking at me, taunting me. As hard as I tried to pull my hand back, I was unable to do so. It was as if I became possessed by an evil spirit, and I was powerless to resist. Despite my great agony, I succumbed to the evil forces that had taken control, grabbed the Blu-ray from the shelf, and, screaming inwardly, made my way to the checkout area.

I was immediately consumed with buyer's remorse and self-recrimination.

But I got over it. Very quickly, in fact. And the Blu-ray is wonderful!!

 Having completely recovered from all of that existential angst, I found it very easy to upgrade to a Blu-ray of THE BREAKFAST CLUB that I found at my local Disc Replay just a few days later. This movie is another big favorite of mine, one that I can rewatch again and again. The DVD copy I've had for years doesn't have any extras, so that was the main selling point, along with a very low price. No remorse ensued.

🎬I've been thinking quite a bit lately about this whole collecting thing and where it's going. And when I talk about collecting, I don't just mean DVDs and Blu-rays. I also mean books, records, CDs, magazines, etc. I don't mean to suggest that my house is so hoarded up that I have things piled up to the ceiling and have to walk through narrow pathways. Not yet anyway. However, I do have an occasional lucid moment when I look around and think: "Mike...what have you done?" Some of my fellow collectors on Youtube, mostly the ones who are in my age category, talk about this issue in terms of what will happen to our "stuff" when we leave this earth for the next emanation. (In my case, that will no doubt be an extended stay in Purgatory.) This preys on my mind quite a bit. My life clock is ticking away quite loudly. Either that, or there's a bomb in the crawlspace. Luckily, I've discovered the sheer joy of going through my "stuff" on a regular basis and giving things away to Goodwill. I was amazed to discover that once I allowed myself to let go of things I thought I could never part with, it became easier and easier.

Another idea I've picked up from my fellow Youtubers is the concept of curating a collection as opposed to simply acquiring as much stuff as we can drag into the house. We all need to stay focused on what really matters to us personally and not view collecting as some kind of competition. Just because a few collectors have all the latest new, shiny steel books, or 3,000 copies of HALLOWEEN, doesn't mean that you have to own them as well. And just because more and more people are dumping all of their DVDs and Blu-rays into the nearest trash bin and spending money on 4Ks...well, you get my drift. Some of these same folks are already anticipating the possibility of an 8K format. Hopefully, I'll be settled into Purgatory long before that happens.

 

Notes From the Movie Room October 11, 2024

 🎬 One of my longtime Youtube friends, Joe Mayo, ( MeanMrMayo - YouTube and Mr Cinemayo - YouTube  ), recently posted a "rant" video (RanTcid Mayo | "I'm Not Interested!" (youtube.com)) about people who pressure their friends to see a certain movie that they love and refuse to take no for an answer. Joe has both a marvelous speaking voice and a terrific sense of humor, so his "rant" videos are intended to make serious points, but with a comedic edge. In this particular video, Joe is discussing a friend who expresses horror and near indignation upon learning that Joe hasn't seen the 2018 remake of A STAR IS BORN starring Lady Gaga and Bradley Cooper. The guy insists that Joe must see the movie, post haste. When Joe expresses non-interest, the guy just gets more and more insistent, bringing on a rather heated discussion between the two friends.

Joe's video made me think of many heated discussions I've had with friends regarding films and music. I'm one of those people who tends to get overly passionate about certain films that I either love or hate. And I admit to encouraging people to watch certain films and then being disappointed when they don't end up loving those films as much as I do. However, I don't get upset or offended. Well, maybe sometimes. Years ago, when I showed THE PIT AND THE PENDULUM (1961) to a friend who'd never seen it, I was hoping to initiate a new member into the Cult of Barbara Steele. He thought the movie was kind of slow and boring and felt that Miss Steele "didn't stand out". Although my gut reaction was to strangle him and bury his body in my crawl space, I quickly recovered and took it all in stride. I'm much calmer than I was in those days. Besides, the crawl space is full...

Even I have to admit that many of the movies I'm passionate about are so far on the eccentric side that many film geeks aren't going to be intrigued enough to seek them out or respond favorably if they do. When I sent a DVD copy of Ray Dennis Steckler's 1964 enduring classic THE INCREDIBLY STRANGE CREATURES WHO STOPPED LIVING AND BECAME MIXED-UP "ZOMBIES" to a friend, I wasn't at all surprised or hurt when his reaction was, shall we say, tepid. This movie is definitely an acquired taste, or, as some might say, evidence of a lack of taste.

When someone encourages me to watch a movie, I usually agree to take them up on their suggestion, unless it's an item I consider so objectionable that I don't want any part of it. My mind is generally open to new ideas. When I was still working, I had several incidences where co-workers, knowing what a film freak I was, would walk up to me, hand me a DVD or VHS tape, and say: "Here. Take this home and watch it." And I always did. Most of the time, I enjoyed what they handed me, some more than others. One of the movies was the original TERMINATOR, starring Governor Arnold, a movie I had ZERO interest in watching. To my surprise, it turned out to be a fun watch, although I didn't rush out to find and collect the various sequels. 

One day a friend handed me a DVD of a movie I'd never heard of. It was THE RED VIOLIN (1998), starring Samuel L. Jackson. This particular friend had rather eclectic tastes in films and books, so I was eager to give the film a chance. It turned out to be one of the most amazing and emotional experiences of my life. This film is so beautiful, so totally unique, that any description I might give couldn't do it justice. All I can say is, my friend handed me an incredible gift, and I gladly extend his recommendation to anyone who reads this post. No pressure, though. You can live a long and happy life even if you never see this wonderful movie.

Getting back to the 2018 remake of A STAR IS BORN, here is my own opinion: MIKE'S MOVIE ROOM: A STAR IS BORN (michaelsmovieworld.blogspot.com)

SPEAK NO EVIL (2024)

 

It takes a lot of inspiration these days for me to drag my sluggish self into a theater to see a current film. My movie room is much too comfortable and private. No distractions, no unwanted human contact and no inflated prices for popcorn. And no ringing, flashing, beeping cell phones except for mine.

Of course, laziness isn't the only reason I tend to venture out to theaters less frequently. There aren't that many modern films that interest me enough to make the effort, and many of the films I have seen in recent years have been disappointing. This trend was happening long before the pandemic lockdown. I find myself appreciating the cultural past so much that it's easy to ignore the cultural present. 

Recently, however, I was intrigued by a positive review of the 2024 thriller SPEAK NO EVIL. The review was written by film critic/scholar Chuck Koplinski for our local newspaper. Chuck is also the instructor of many of the film classes I've taken, and I have a lot of respect for his opinions, even though we sometimes disagree. His review of SPEAK NO EVIL made it sound like the kind of "slow burn" thriller I appreciate. Directed by James Watkins (WOMAN IN BLACK 2012), the film is a remake of the 2022 Danish film of the same name. Knowing nothing about the film or the director, I decided to give it a chance.

The story involves an American couple, Louise and Ben Dalton (Mackenzie Davis and Scoot McNairy), and their young daughter, Agnes (Alix West-Lefler). Living in London, and going through personal and professional challenges, the family is taking a vacation in Italy. While there, they become friends with another couple, Paddy and Ciara, (James MacAvoy and Aisling Franciosi) and their young son, Ant (Dan Hough), also vacationers from England. Ant is unable to speak, and his father said the boy has a deformity which caused his tongue not to grow to normal size. 

Paddy and Ciara. Would you go on vacation with these people?

The Daltons enjoy the company of their new companions, but are occasionally taken aback by their odd behavior, usually that of Paddy. Nevertheless, after the vacation has ended, and the Daltons are back in London, they decide to accept an invitation from Paddy and Ciara to spend a weekend at their remote country house. Although the visit starts out well, the Daltons are increasingly disturbed and puzzled by the strange actions and passive-aggressive behavior of their hosts. Gradually, they find out exactly why Paddy and Ciara invited them.

I don't want to give away any spoilers, because there are surprises in the movie that need to be experienced, not read about. The slow burn aspect is certainly at play, but the overall atmosphere of disorientation and dread begins as soon as the Daltons arrive at this isolated house and never lets up for a second. Even though the land surrounding the house is expansive, the house itself is very small and cramped, which adds to the Daltons' tension. They very quickly realize that they're trapped in the middle of nowhere with people they barely know. Their daughter, who suffers from anxiety issues, manages to become friends with the non-communicative Ant, a friendship which becomes the key to revealing the mysteries surrounding the house and the odd couple living there.

Fans of horror films won't be disappointed by what ensues in the last one-third of SPEAK NO EVIL. There's more than enough action and excitement to satisfy the modern filmgoer's thirst for the macabre. All of the contemporary horror movie elements are present: jump scares, physical pain, blunt instruments, sharp instruments, endless screaming, and enough blood to feed an audience of vampires. The entire enterprise is extremely well done, I must admit. In fact, I would almost describe the film as somewhat predictable and by-the-numbers, except for one important fact: the movie makes us care about the characters, at least the ones who end up being victimized. The story is brilliantly written and none of the characters are one dimensional. And the viewer learns that each person in that claustrophobic house is complicated, flawed, and keeping a secret.

The smiling Daltons, not having a clue what they're getting themselves into.

The film's conclusion, shocking and depressing, stays with me. I'm not terribly happy about that situation, but I guess it means the filmmakers accomplished what they set out to do: shock people and leave them depressed for weeks. My understanding is that the original Danish film had a different ending, although not necessarily less downbeat. Maybe one day I'll search out the original film and find out.

The acting by all the players is excellent, kids included. I wasn't familiar with any of them, but when I looked them up on IMDB, I realized I had seen some of them in other films. James MacAvoy is the standout, and his character, Paddy, is the most difficult and multi-layered character in the film. MacAvoy rises to the challenge. He is at times supportive and loving, and at other times a seductive trickster. But he always conveys the possibility of becoming suddenly dangerous, even when he's being friendly and supporting, until his character finally explodes with violence. MacAvoy crosses all those emotional lines brilliantly. But the other actors don't pale in comparison. Davis and McNairy are called upon to be desperate, terrified, and heroic, while being torn apart by their own inner demons and fragile marital relationship. Franciosi is somewhat in the background for most of the film, a smiling, beguiling image of exotic beauty who is difficult to read. But when she's called upon to display her character's weirdness, she doesn't hold anything back.

SPEAK NO EVIL will only consume 110 minutes of your life. Before you know it, you'll be walking out of the theater lobby, depressed beyond belief and searching for your car. The film is apparently quite popular. The budget was only $15,000,000, and so far, the box office has collected nearly $60,000,000. Be forewarned: there are a lot of depressed individuals walking around out there. As for me, I'm safely back in the movie room, binging on Shirley Temple and Doris Day, just to take the edge off.

Go see this movie. You have nothing to lose but your good mood.