Earthquake Bird

Earthquake Bird 2019

R - 106 min

Tension in this is palpable.  

Guilt is a strong motivator, and we find that the other side of the world, for this bird, Lucy, it is not far enough to escape it.  Played by Alicia Vikander (Ex Machina is the first time I saw her acting), she has a way of putting on cold and indifferent, or distant that is unique in that only her eyes can be read.  Her acting, along with her other 2 principles in this screenplay, Riley Keough and Naoki Kobayashi, is clean, taut, brilliant.  Great job of directing by Wash Westmoreland, camera work is Chung-hoong Chung.  He used traditional framing and color, and it was an incredibly well-shot piece.  The editing, especially the creepy tense sequences and "disappearing people" in flash moments, was brilliant, reminiscent of some of the "shock" work done in the 80s, cleaned up and sfx'd.  No shots were strikingly outside of the mindset of Lucy's point of view, but blended in seamlessly with the narrative.  

Summary: it all added up to a very slow burn of a psycho-drama, surprisingly fresh and unexpected really.  Great handling of the narrative sequences as well as far as the timing and flashbacks, which were limited in their screen time, but even more effective because of that.   Shifting time around here was a great device, and although the pieces were diverse and widespread, it still held together nicely and kept tension right up to the very last shot.   

Because of the trifecta of acting, directing, and camera work in this film, the following happens: The genuinely soft and approachable character of Teiji comes slowly into focus for us despite his seemingly rigid exterior manor.   When Lucy is tearing down the stereotypes of Japanese people, along with the "height" thing that she points out as false, we are along with her in the ride of the romance that gains our trust as the audience as well,.  We feel betrayed with her when the novice American girl, Lily, comes between them.  So...there is a real consistency here in the film's total approach that sticks closely to the Lucy character, and keeps us in suspense, and the suspension of disbelief.  Even the side actors and smaller parts were cast and played to perfection, especially Mrs. Katoh by Akiko Iwase.  I still think casting directors should be getting their own Oscars (see this ARTICLE).

Very nicely done.


- Agitatus

The Irishman, Martin Scorsese - 2019

The Irishman 
- a Martin Scorsese film
Tribeca-Sikelia-Winkler-STX
R - 3 Hours 29 min

When you take part in a Scorsese picture, you’re participating in a history.  It’s a history played back with as real an intent and as close to honesty as you can get.  We’re talking about his version of reality and history, sure;  “Things as I see them”, by M. Scorsese.  But things as he has seen them stay faithfully close to the truth as we can know it with regards to the world that he was birthed out of, and was close to, in regards to “La Familia” and his ethnic roots. 

I don’t personally buy everything that Marty has done, especially when he went to work “outside his neighborhood” element in works like “The Last Temptation of Christ”.  Boxcar Bertha was better than that.  Ok, that was a low blow, anything was better than BBertha…but really let me sum that up this way: There was a reason that Marty dropped out of his studies to be a Catholic Priest, just like there was a reason that Nikos Kasantzakis was always just next to excommunication status with the Greek Orthodox Church…incendiary hyperbolistic rabble-rousing showmanship.  Ok, wait…so maybe the reasons for both of these are not the same, you get the idea.  

But I’m not roasting Mr. Scorsese here.  Hold on please.

You have to know that all these fireworks are tightly wrapped, under control, and orchestrated.  And did you know too that despite the fact that fireworks are almost exclusively set off in the hours after dark, you’ll notice that they have the tendency when lit to be so bright as to bring out the details and contours, lines, and pit marks and eye bags of the person next to you?  Yes, they do that.  Seen often as a singular source of light, every bit as bright as lightning at times, fireworks for those brief moments become a searing tool of exposition and self-reflectance. 

So ok, let me re-define, or add to the definition here: When you take part in a Scorsese picture, you’re participating in a history that goes off like a blazing firework, searing the backside of your eyes, sometimes even until the next day if you stare right at it.  

And now that I’m through all that buildup, about the motion picture at hand…The Irishman.  Warts, eyebags, yep, all that and more.  The Shearan daughters do not HAVE to say anything, no lines of dialogue in this extensively long motion picture, other than “Where are you going Daddy?”, in order to completely dismantle the whole charade, to keep it clear the Xray vision that Marty put into this, to keep us the audience from becoming too enamored as we have in times past with underworld life, with mob action and revenge, with their brazen misdirection and misbehavior.  The girls, as we see them grow up during the course of the story, return time and again in those key moments with knowing and accusing eyes, body language, and in the end a clear demonstration of the cost of doing business with the devil, or playing with fire.  The lines of dialogue are not necessary of course.  It only takes a glance to bring about the clear and ever-present silent dialogue that we have as we’re absorbed into the story crashing in.  This silent underbody of subtext and meaning grows in this film like some kind of unavoidable volcanic gush, the irony being that the actual human interaction, banality, and tone of conversations get lower and lower, the pace of each scene more patient, the implied action always just a bit off screen, and the suspense palpable.  Take for instance the conversation in the slow car ride in the red car near the end, as the men discuss a fish being in the car, the smell of it, the smell of it never coming out of the car, the over-the-top worn cliche’ of being told that and then layered with yet another statement that is even more asinine, “You should remember that.  It will help you in life”.  Funny, yes, but deadpanned, dropped like a lead weight into the atmosphere of the car.  In all that drudgery… all those fireworks, we keep wondering when they’re going off.

And then I have to turn my attention to the scene in prison, DeNiro and Pesci, the dynamic duo sitting next to each other, looking about as old as they can make them, sharing what…a loaf of bread and “the best grape juice” that bribery can buy in their circumstances (unlike the scene in Goodfellas, very distanced now, where the whole group of robust men have their own cell block and cooking area, smoking cigars and reading papers, playing cards, and cutting up garlic until it’s so thin it melts in the pan). There they are, breaking that bread together, taking hunks of it by hand, and dipping it in the "best" grape juice…together. Communion.  Clear and simple.  “He who dips his hand with me in the wine…”.   All the scenes after that deal with the futile and pandering, vacuous attempt at remorseless, religious, rote dogmatisms that leave us more distanced, and our character more lonely than can be imagined.  The last shot of the film, echoing another shot earlier in the film of his hero Jimmy when he left the doors to his room in the suite slightly ajar, says all there needs to be said.  That’s why it’s the last shot in the film.  The cataclysmic dead end, no daughters or wife there to hand-hold, no one to ask forgiveness from other than the young and contrasting, apple-cheeked priest and his supposed authoritative ability to negotiate a peace that was never sought from the start, until now...no one in the audience that would walk out wanting to be in his shoes, an ultimate loneliness.

Wait, it was quoted from the start wasn’t it, of his film career? I mean except for Mean Streets when Marty was breaking in his chops, his very first film, Taxi Driver…yep…”God’s lonely man.”  Possibly prophetic?  

Maybe it’s Marty that has felt alone all this time in his struggle to use this very difficult art form to convey just what that is, that far end of the spectrum of life that is lived with covered and closed dishonesty, that vacuum, unavoidable, that makes you stick your finger in a candle flame to experience what fire is really like because you know hell is described that way.  It makes you shave your hair into a mohawk and buy a gun and get close to a politician that is spouting empty, selfish promises, then cleaning up his work for him in the red light district.  It makes you crazy that you can’t buy love even with a drawer full of jewels and a closet full of furs, and you definitely can’t buy trust with it.  It makes you even more crazy when you realize that even beatings from your old man can’t beat that desire out of you once you’ve gotten hold of it and drop out of school to work at a cab stand.  Or you end up reciting self-centered poetry in a small and unknown bar.  To watch your restaurant burn down.  To find out your boy gets gunned down when he just wanted to stand up for himself.  To waste towels on a guy bleeding on your doorstep.  

This I am sure is Marty’s swan song of a film, at least with regards to the whole gangster genre.  I don’t think you can say any more than this one without it seeming like you’re just bringing up more facts from the books, going over territory again.  But….you know Marty is Marty, and hey, “whad elsa he gonna do eh”?  Personally however, I think he should, as his predecessor has advised, “Leave the gun, and take the cannoli”.    

- Agitatus

PS: I believe I’ll want to write another post on this, I think so…don’t know yet.  This seems enough, but I just saw the film, so it may take awhile to settle in.  

Jack Ryan - Season 2 Opening Credits

CREDITS:Images are Screenshots of the show Jack Ryan, Amazon Original Production: JACK RYAN 
Visual Effects Team IMDB: LINK

The King, Netflix - 2019

The King 2019

R - 122 min

NETFLIX

A Good piece of history, and cinematically told well, with much drama unfolding, a layer at a time around a seemingly indifferent young man, who undergoes a transformation from drunken high-life and wonton affections to disciplined leader of a monarchy.

While undoubtedly historically correct and vigilantly researched, the character himself, played by Timothy Chalamet, seems always in a fixed state of grievance that he never quite gets away from.  There is only one moment in the film when Timothy displays a different look on his face other than grim, during an original moment of drunknness, staring into the camera with dull bliss and a huge smile. 

I liked the history, but really didn't connect with the character.  His "transformation" never quite takes shape.  Whether that is the fault of the actors' range, or the director's inability to draw that from him it's not clear, as Timothy seems an actor capable of emotional range, yes.  It's just not in this film.  Direction and camera work could have helped his war speech near the end, where he's called upon as many leaders in the past to rouse the troops to fight with words of valor and nobility and a cause.  While loudly proclaimed, that speech still left something to be delivered.

His acting opposite, the French Dauphin played by Robert Pattinson, had more range in his short performances than Chalamet.  He was simultaneously able to portray both a frowardness and kind of awkward arrogance along side a creeping fear underneath the confident exterior.  His pitiful end was truly sad, despite what was supposedly a triumphal moment. That of course was purposeful, he too being seen as only a pawn of the entire constituency.

But the entire story as told in this historical remake was not about either of them really.  While titled, "The King", it really could just as easily have been titled, "He Who Whispers in my Ear".  The story was really about the revelation of what drives a monarchy under it's skin, just below the surface, the blood of it really being greed and deceit by those whose desires are not noble at all, but land-grabbing and power-hungry, the chief piece here being William, the young King's advisor and "friend".  No spoilers here, but seeing through this kind of misdirection is the stuff king's are supposed to be made of.

Joel Edgerton plays a fantastic performance as John, a true friend of the King, whose end in contrast is not lost on us, punctuating the distance that wealth and power puts between the players.  William spends the entire trip to France in a carried and covered wagon, while John horse-backs the trip like everyone else.  During the battle, the loss of his helmet to all-in fighting contrasts sharply with William, hiding up in the trees behind the archers, watching the pigs below wallow in the muddy-bloody mire, deciding for him how much land he would acquire.  

- Agitatus

Bradley Belcher’s SEMA Young Guns Video

Bradley Belcher's SEMA Young Guns Video 2019

 I worked with Bradley and his dad Michael on their first production called Millennials and Their Mustangs, just 2 years ago, and last I heard they were shopping it around for a TV series, but THIS has happened since then, and I'm sure Bradley is preoccupied with this, and school.  Fascinating!
So go here and watch this, then go vote for Bradley!
And while you're at it, go check out his previous 1/2 hour episode Millennials And Their Mustangs HERE, as mentioned above, produced by XyVector Media Services of Indiana.
Go Bradley!  (and Maxine)

-Agitatus

Undone, Amazon - 2019

Undone

2019

TV-MA - Series of 30min ea.

Since SCANNER DARKLY the replacement of real actors with cartoonified versions has risen exponentially as a new millennial style favorite, at least in looks.  There are practical reasons for the use of this "augmented reality animation" style for this particular show.  The subject matter and circumstances, which involve willful manipulations of time and space, sometimes in a frantic pace, and repeated visual tricks that would be very expensive and daunting to implement by any practical or SFX team for a production, make it a great idea.  You can animate a scene change MUCH easier than in a real live production.  And it's also much easier to be naked in front of children when you're animated as well.  Right.  Yes, that does happen here.  There's a reason, just hold on now, don't         flag my post, ok?   

The very real and solid performances from Rosa Salazar, who plays Alma, and Bob Odenkirk, who plays her deceased dad, and the other actors in the lineup make the animated versions of themselves sometimes even more alive than a real appearance.  There are some very genuinely funny and moving moments throughout.

The story moves forward at a very rapid pace, and logically develops what should be considered a very complex, interlocked situation, with multiple twists and backstory, and does it in such a succinct way, the writing crew with Kate Purdy and Bob Waksberg leading it should probably get an award.  There is SO much information both on the plot level and the relational level compressed into these brief episodes, when done viewing the very quick season I was amazed at how much distance with these characters I felt like I had travelled.  Nicely done.

Ok, that's all aesthetics and production.  How about the meat of the story?  It's all about the strangely shaped central core area of the brain of those often traumatized and marginalized schizophrenics in our world, and how in reality they are "shamanistic" and capable of bending time and space.  Yep, so far, that's what it appears to come down to.  Fascinating study in theoretical physics, metaphysical manipulation, genetically flawed savants, and...time travel without a flux capacitor involved.  Or is it about a simply disturbed and misguided young lady who is malfunctional?  Well, that's where the last episode leaves us hanging still I'm afraid, like every great media marketing ploy ever conceived before it.

So for a far-out spin in psychobiology, but a VERY good spin at production value and great storytelling...you can check out Undone, and for free if you're a Prime member.

Amazon that is, Texas Tea, Millionaires, Movie Stars.

-Agitatus

In Full Bloom, Adam VillaSeñor - 2019

In Full Bloom 2019

R - 85 min   Adam VillaSeñor, Reza Ghassemi, Narrative Feature (85min)

Set after WWII, In Full Bloom follows two fighters, a down and out boxer from the US and the other, the Japanese champion. We follow each of their inner journeys as it culminates into a world championship fight against both men that will test the very limits of their spirit.

This is amazing. Best fight scenes I've ever witnessed since Raging Bull. That film was amazing of course because at the time it was made, the kind of fight scenes that Scorcese created had not really been invented, so there was the "first to market" effect, and this film most likely owes much to that. But the realistic nature of the fight in this film, combined with the depth and focus of the story inside the minds of these 2 men made this incredible. I felt it overly melodramatic at first, until I understood that the entire film was at least in keeping with that style, and it turned out to be a psychological drama and in a unique portrait style, like a great painting, that was being staged more than the American-ish styled event-driven, or goal-driven storytelling we are used to. It transcended my expectations and somewhere right around the time of the blindfold sequence, facing the fear in the forest, it became instead an engrossing reality. 

THIS IS A PSYCHOLOGICAL DRAMA AND WORK OF ART...not a traditional-based film that follows a narrative that forms a history and surroundings, side-scenes, like in Rocky where we have so much side-story that builds the drama. This sticks as close to the inner drama of the fighters as you can get, even incorporating highly stylized arthouse dream sequences in motif rather than personal historical moments like Rocky and his trainer "get up ya bum!"  There is none of that. It is very much like the plain difference between a character-driven film and the plot driven film. The plot had no place here, even though you can look for it in vain. There is history here, sure, but it's cut off and relegated to the personal realm, so these men become all men who struggle with the same fight, and not just a moment dragged out of a news drawer and given new life with revisitation.

I was bothered at first that the American's experience was almost totally shot in a red locker room, until I also realized that, yes, the story needed to be placed in the present-tense situation, but more-so this was in keeping with the character's mindset, his situation being the present-tense, his experience being a past so very different and distant. He was fighting an inner demon, a red one, claustrophobic, tightening around him, like the pressure on his chest. It was perfectly good storytelling. Incredible. Will watch again.

As I say this however, I am also hesitant and wondering if, like many outsider types of films, this one being Japanese, will make it in pop cinema here in the states.  I am now a fan. I get it. Congratulations on a powerful piece of art. PS: on further reflection...you know how sometimes a great visual drama piece falls apart in the story department, like something doesn't make sense, etc? This one did NOT do that. Everything makes perfect sense, as far as I can figure right after seeing it. There is a tie-in everywhere, right down to the last line "I just wanted peace". This ties back to the WWII fight scenes. Super well-written

Adam VillaSeñor, Reza Ghassemi, Narrative Feature (85min

Set after WWII, In Full Bloom follows two fighters, a down and out boxer from the US and the other, the Japanese champion. We follow each of their inner journeys as it culminates into a world championship fight against both men that will test the very limits of their spirit.

IMDB Link

- Agitatus

Heartland International Film Festival SHORTS - MY Picks that made it in, and MORE.

Heartland Festival Shorts

My time as a Screener for the Heartland International Film Festival SHORTS was well-lived.  I screened over 240 films for the festival this year, and while that may seem like a great number of films, consider that the festival received over 3100 entries, just for the Short Film competition!  There are over 60 screeners worldwide that view the films for inclusion, and several advanced committees that co-review them for final judging after we're done with them.  We're now currently reviewing the many feature-film length entries, expected to again take awhile to get through.

LINK:

Indy Shorts - next Week!  July 25-28

My top list included films from many genres and styles, BUT...of course not all of my picks were included in the final entries.  However...5 of them were.  I was told that out of that many films and screeners that to have more than 2 of my picks included in the lineup was a very good thing.  Meaning...I have good taste?  Well, tastes are not all that matter at a festival.

Film festival screening and judging are very subjective kinds of things, to some degree, because "tastes" run in as many directions as there are people.  However, there are basic rules to aesthetics, mechanics, and overall good judgment that form a base of criteria that almost everyone must follow to have films included in a list of "must watch" films.  Each film is viewed by at LEAST 3 screeners, and at least 2 committee members to be included.  Each one must pass through at least 2 levels of judgment prior to being given the "boot", meaning "not this year" or "try again next year".  So it's not as subjective as it might seem, especially when the screeners, like myself, must first pass a fairly rigorous and daunting exam of our tastes and judgment by viewing a few example films and making assessments that are both numerical on a scale, and written.  Each film screened by me had to be viewed for at least 5 minutes prior to moving on to another film, given a scale of 1-5, 1 being "weak", and 5 being "amazing", and also a Thumbs-Up or Down, meaning "I think this film should be included in this festival".   And consideration for the guidelines must be in play there as well.  THEN...we need to write a short reasoning why we came up with our judgment.

The basic bottom line summary of what we look for is summed up in the following statement:

Heartland looks for a solid blend of message/story and artistic/technical quality, and ultimately asks you to consider this question: does the given film combine a strong story or unique vision with technical skill? 

So, the guidelines are fairly basic and easy to assess if you ask it only that way, and honestly, the way that I completed my task for these films was to create my judgment almost right away when the film was finished, fill in the boxes, give it a number, and write a few sentences.

Well, if you follow me as my blog reader, you know that "a few sentences" are not that easy for me, and so it proved true for the festival entries.  On about 20% or more of the entries I wrote about, I spent a few paragraphs about them, especially if they were on the extreme ends of the spectrum, either 4s and 5s, or a 1.  What I ended up doing so that others may not need to spend a great deal of time reading through all of my comments was summarizing first with a few comments, and then posting the rest of my assessment in another paragraph that started with, "Other Comments, if you care to read them..."

So here is MY personal pick list, and if you're among them and you didn't make it in, sorry, but you did get my support.  I'll list the 1st 5 that DID get included in the festival first, by title, style, selected category, Director/Writer, and country of origin, run time:

Guaxuma - Animated - Finalist for Grand Prize - Nara Normande - France/Brazil - 14 min.
Judas Collar - Narrative - Official Selection "Beyond the Healines" - Alison James - Australia - 15 min.
Pinchpot - Animated - Official Selection "For the whole family" - Greg Holfeld - Australia - 5 min.
Reality Baby - Documentary - Wild Card Official Selection - Nodlag Houlihan - Ireland - 13 min.
Patision Avenue - Narrative - Wild Card Official Selection - Thanasis Neofotistos - Greece - 13 min.

Congratulations to those 5!


- Agitatus

A Hidden Life, Terrence Malick - 2019 Premier

A Hidden Life 

This highly anticipated "next" film of Terrence Malick, has opened at Cannes.  Release dates not available elsewhere as of this writing.   But like the investors in Malick's work are not in it for the money, us fans of his work are not into his films like some TV series.  It's been 3 years in the making, we can wait a few weeks until it hits the theaters. But be sure, I'll make sure it's a perfectly good theater with a great screen, great sound system, and a fresh bulb in the projector.

Malick's work continues to fascinate me, in the same way Bertolucci's has, the magnanimous poetic image weaving its own tale it seems.  The naturalist can take in a Malick film and come away I believe saying they "slept with nature".  The filmmaker can do the same, and without a doubt say "I've seen an auteur".  The historian..."uncannily period perfect".  Most film directors...."I want to get the performances he does out of his actors".

Part of what all of us in these categories usually don't think about is just how much time and patience Terrence spends "getting" those moments.  I would love to visit one of his sets sometime to see him work, but I know about his work via others' experiences, how this film took 3 years to complete, plus viewing his other films, especially The New World, it's not a secret to me at all any longer.  Especially considering how short a period of time every day the "magic hour" is and how much he shoots during those times, either sunup or sundown, and I'm sure spending most of the day preparing for those few brief magic moments to happen.  It's the love of the thing, the beauty of the art form, not a paycheck, and not a metal statue or a  nomination, or a star in a sidewalk.

Well, ok I'm going to stop now before writing a book.  Just look for it to be out and get your ticket.

- Agitatus

Love and Revelation, Over the Rhine - Music/Vinyl - 2019

Love and Revelation

2019 Over the Rhine

Linford Detweiler and Karin Bergquist's 1st album in 4 years since Meet Me at the Edge of the World.

I just found out about it today.  I'm slow, I know...too many irons.

But I found a really good article on it with a website that I haven't seen yet either, and so I'll defer here to that.  Please read it...very accurate and complete picture of the album as far as I know, and also a good review of OTR if you're not familiar with them yet.  And...why aren't you??

Ok, here's that link:

Love and Revelation on All Eyes Media

Over the Rhine's Home Site

- Agitatus

Cold War, Pawlikowski - 2018

R 1hr 29min Drama, Music, Romance

At first glance, the title and sparse pictures that announce this film on IMDB or in my case my Amazon Prime, make it appear to be a gritty version possibly of something like Red Sparrow, only B/W, to make it more of a period piece.  And considering the atmosphere we've been in since Trump has taken office, not taking sides here, just commenting...Cold War seems to be a more contemporary and relevant term that Millennials and 00s are getting to know, while the rest of us review Dr. Strangelove and Trumbo.

So, enthralled by the fact that this is Pawlikovski that directed (knew that name instantly when I saw it), and that it was included with my Prime membeship!  awesome....I took off time from my regularly scheduled 3 or 4 Film Fest films and watched this instead.  Ok, let me back up here....where in the world have I been, you may ask that you have not seen or even heard of this film yet?  Yes, it took a blogger on Tumblr of all places to bring my attention to it, and someone I'm not even following.  First of all, I missed the Oscars, not such a big deal, but since January I've seen over 190 films now for the Heartland International Film Festival.  So it took Pawel's name at the bottom of the row of Black and White stills from the movie to get my attention and look it up only to find that it swept awards in EU and was nominated for Oscars here.  Wow, instantly on the new "must watch" list.  So...like I said, I decided to take a break from HIFF and do this instead.  I really needed a full-length break into something else.

And as I mentioned, even up through the first 20 min. of this film, and beyond, I had the suspicion that this was one of those plot-driven works where she makes love with this man so he's thinking with his pants and she ends up spying in the U.S. and becoming some major faux-pas in the intelligence gap right after the war, and this is how she got in. 

Could not have been more wrong.  I'm going to enjoy going back now and viewing this again with the right frame of mind.  This is an analogous dance between the romance and the times, the times themselves being the echo and taking a back seat to the relationship on screen, a perfect mirror in fact, perfectly played as a game of ping-pong across the borders of 3 countries and 3 major cities, and they, the couple in love..with really no country to go to.  The Polish immigration official put it fairly accurately to Wiktor, the lead male character, "I don't know how to help you.  You are not French, and you're not a Pole either.  As far as we're concerned you don't exist."

But exist they did, for a time, always finding each other amid their other parallel lives. They become the object of hope that was carried through that time across the generation that followed the great war, and also the ultimate object of despair and resignation.  The ending is one of the most controversial and yet perfect ones I've ever seen.  But the stuff in between...wow...

 This is near perfect cinema.  I could go on and on and talk about the cinematic features of this film that make it the captivating and great piece of art, poetry, and especially music that it is, commenting mostly on the absolutely opaque similarity to films made in the 60s (if you had sat me in front of this with no indication of when it was made, it absolutely would have fooled me - a perfect rendition of that period, right down to the types of shots and cuts made and the grain and lighting- incredible film study here).  But I believe I'll drop off here and defer to a New Yorker article that does a better summary than I could. (see this link: CLICK HERE).  Instead, I believe I'll do a follow up at some point with another post at a later time, and just say this...I rarely go directly to the purchase page and buy the BluRay version of any film.  This one...no brainer...I got it right away.  Will be here tomorrow.

In the meantime...See the film.



- Agitatus

Jerry Saltz - Tiffany Primer on Art photos - Rated 8yo or less

Tiffany & Co.
The NYTimes
Art that is Digital


Senior art critic Jerry Saltz steps on the screen hosted by Tiffany & Co. and placed in the NY Times web space.  Cutesy, expensive, and well-produced product telling us that Art is important, and that digital art changes things. Yes.  But evidence of flawed thinking abounds.  The moment I'm referring to the most, out of many in this #1 of the series is the moment near the end when Jerry holds his phone, vertically I might add, which rebels against good media convention in the first place, and takes a picture of a live art piece that was just invented on set of the video, and is MUCH wider than his screen is allowing.  Ok, so it's for posterity.  But then he turns and states (his one vertical picture of the horizontal art in place on his phone now)"This is going to look so good on my wall".  And then he talks to the camera in the next shot and goes on to say, "You see what I did there?  It's the same cave, but it just got a lot bigger."  Ok, he's trying to tell us that his photo made the artwork more accessible because it's going out to the internet, or it's going out via his fairly bad or at best limited representation of that.

To WHOM is Jerry talking to?  Some little kids?  This is kindergarten crap.

Jerry Saltz is creatively lecturing on the new platform afforded everyone today, and gaining his space online probably before funding runs out for further programs, and probably also compliments of the NYTimes as we are told they are as left-leaning and artsy a crowd as it gets.  I'm guessing NY Magazine and NY Times are not very far apart in ideology.

This is simply a saccharine space-filler from an art "fan" point of view and will make people feel good about spending so much money on colorful objects created from imagination and fashioned to look like something you've never seen before...because honestly you haven't...because it came from someone else's mind, and they are out to put it in yours.

Granted, art seen is better than art not seen, for the most part, but if you're going to talk about it, please do it justice and examine it for real, and turn the dang camera the right way.  

The Upside, Cranston/Hart/Kidman - 2017

The Upside 2017    Released 2018

R - 126 min

-->

This one looks both up and down.  Up a long way from the bottom where the reality of the street and life with each other seems impossible, and down a long way from what was a gloriously fulfilling life it would seem of money, privilege, invention, creativity, and a shallow bunch of followers, including those who could take advantage of that situation.

The crossed and ironic relationship between Dell, our man of the street, and Phillip, our man of the penthouse, is much like the Lion and the Mouse, comparable also to the Princess Switch, getting another side's view, or even at a distance, Rich Man Poor Man (ok, reversed because they knew each other and grew apart).  But the "upside" to this film and it's strength I believe is in finding the redemptive character that can lay in any person's kit bag, pulling it out, and giving it a chance to be nurtured.  It's not so much about the hustle, as it is laying the hustle aside when given an opportunity.  Ethical behavior and the thoughtful reflection of the effect of one's relationship on those we influence (Father to Son and Wife in the case of Dell) are key points on the very straight look at what could have/should have been (according to stats) the end of a family structure.  But the story doesn't pick a side and bring blame on the wealthy, or even the situation, rather it sticks closely to the view that, even on the bottom, you still have control of who you are. The story keys in on the actions and interactions and decisions of the characters, not looking for scapegoats here.  Hart's character gets confronted on many levels with regards to his sometimes unwise choices, and also brings up the vulnerability that he has for needing to prove, quite naturally so, that he is a provider.  It is a clear story about how that unravels in the hood, and how influence works in many directions to pull people down, and into a vortex of negative expectations. 

There is plenty of material for Kevin Hart the comedian to work with inside the script, and it comes out bold, yet contained from his live stage personality, which means.... Kevin has true acting ability and the range to draw the tear and the sigh as well as the guffaw.  His confrontations with every character are also balanced; teeter-totter like between him serving up a good dose of reality to the upper Crusties, as well as taking sometimes deserved hits to his own behavior.  Prejudices, we know are not completely undeserved, are also confronted as a barrier to the healthy function of repair to our social world, the most prominent case in point being made about the insipid neighbor that complains about Dell's presence in the building, and brings up Dell's prison record to demonstrate his distrust to Phillip.  Phillip turns the tables on the neighbor, with a comment on art that I'll not elaborate on because it's a spoiler.  So there is basically redemption all around in this film, putting it firmly in the class of "feel-good".

As for the Up-Side of Phillip's tale (Cranston), he definitely needed to care again, to be alive again, and that's the ironic hope that the man from the Bottom Side brings with him, reason to live, pointing out the vagaries of Phillip's position to the world, bringing a therapy that he was surely not aware of on hiring him.  Dell allowed Philip to...no actually encouraged him to get angry, to be real, to experience again (albeit at one point some of the experience had to do with some street poon that he had to bribe the doorman to ignore).  He did inevitably set him free on the inside, forced him out into the world, and became...the best candidate for the job.

The peripheral role played by Kidman as Yvonne was flawless, as usual for her.  She shines as a great actress once again and plays a pivotal "replacement" role in this story for the space where a spouse should have been, creating as well the inevitabilities of sexual tension as well as situation laughs that happen in a trio like this.  That character being drawn in the story also plays a huge role in her absence.  The vacuum of her leaving draws attention to the downward spiral of Phillip's near "2nd crash".  

Great stuff.  

- Agitatus