Aunjanue Ellis-Taylor and Jon Bernthal. © 2024 NEON and ARRAY Filmworks.
Directed by Ava DuVernay. VFA Nominee - "Best Adapted Screenplay"
For Your Consideration (FYC) Screener
The Link of American Racism Is Beyond Through A Caste System After Ava DuVernay's documentary film 13th, audiences have been eager to see what powerful story DuVernay will make next. Origin is her next film and she brings momentum and ambitious scale to the project in a thesis-type film. It is a narrative film but with a mix of documentary filmmaking and cinematic narrative structure that only this project has the guts to do. DuVernay takes long risks for this project and the majority paid off with an important message that speaks to our current issues today. Let's explore the history of the caste system in the USA, Germany, and India. Story: Author Isabel Wilkerson writes her seminal book, Caste: The Origins of Our Discontents, while coping with personal tragedy. There is a lot to digest with this film's themes, messages, and ideas that DuVernay wants to get across. Especially for a narrative structure film, it is hard to tackle this type of thesis story since this story is based on the novel written by Isabel Wilkerson. In this case, DuVernay's vision of the story on the big screen works in ambitious ways that make the experience emotional and thought-provoking. As I said earlier, this film is a mixture of documentary and narrative with its subject matter, the material that the screenplay is adapting, and the structure of the film. From what I heard and read about the adaptation of the book, they say it was impossible or very difficult to adapt in a narrative feature film rather than a documentary or even a television series. However, DuVernay wrote the adaptation by mixing narrative and documentary into one film and it works. There are creative avenues within the screenplay and the story that DuVernay is tackling which gives the certain events being portrayed in the film have depth within the protagonist's journey and the thesis she is creating which adds importance to the film's themes. The story goes international by exploring the issues of racism that are connected to a caste system in Germany, India, and ultimately, the United States. The way we get to see her journey through each country is very depth and we get enough time in each country to see their issues and how it all comes back to racism in America. There are a lot of risky story elements. Some of them worked while some did not. Yet, with those great risky story elements, it adds nuance to Isabel Wilkerson's thesis and also adds more drama to her personal life. The one thing that audiences should know is that this film is half research and half narrative. The structure of the narrative was challenging but it was smooth for the most part and it didn't ruin the overall pacing of the film. Isabel's narrative story worked because the thesis was integral to her personal struggles which made her story more emotional and impactful when her literature journey concludes. The history sequences are ambitious and gripping. You can feel the sense of scale with those historical sequences and it can be quite emotional when you see the intense imagery. With Isabel traveling around the world, it is also quite ambitious and authentic to go to the important places that Isabel is researching for her book. When the film switches back to Isabel's personal story, it is smaller scale but there is still some big scope within the performances and the way it was directed and shot. By combining her personal story and her literary journey, it creates a huge ambitious film that has personal heart throughout in a smaller-scale story that is directed in a rich cinematic spectacle. Overall, the execution and direction of Isabel's literary story, the themes that DuVernay is tackling, and the personal story of Isabel are all fantastic and they worked very great for this type of film. For its characters, they are also great with Aunjanue Ellis-Taylor leading the cast. Ellis-Taylor's performance was amazing and she adds more emotional layers to her portrayal of Isabel than I anticipated. Her tragedy in the beginning comes to full fruition throughout her story arc and it adds clarity to her character story in which it connects to her thesis. Sometimes, I think that the way the film was shot, it felt like she was in a documentary because of her performance communication with the real-life literature authors and researchers in Germany and India. It makes her performance real and alive. The supporting cast is great and there are huge names that are part of the film. Jon Bernthal has minimal screen time but he adds that charm to the film and his chemistry with Ellis-Taylor's character is very great. I am surprised that Nick Offerman is in the film but he's only there for one scene. Fresh Emmy winner Niecy Nash as Marion, Isabel's cousin also gives a great performance and a heartful one as well. Her scenes were great and it adds to Isabel's personal even more than I anticipated. I really loved the dynamic between Marion and Isabel throughout and it was consistent. There are other big names like Blair Underwood, Connie Nielsen, and Vera Farmiga who had a very small role but have importance in Isabel's literary journey. Her journey with everyone throughout the countries she visited adds ambition to her thesis and DuVernay's vision. For a film that is focused on a book thesis, this was intriguing to see this literature journey through a narrative form but in a huge scope. Yet Altogether, it creates a personal journey for Isabel and for the audience to experience her ups and downs as a writer, wife, and sister. It looks like a mess on paper, but through its execution, DuVernay manages to juggle Isabel's personal and literary journey in eccentric ways that work well with the pacing and material that the film is handling. It is a lot but it works through my eyes. Even with its story execution, the ambitious narrative story worked because of the technical filmmaking elements behind the film.
With a budget of 38 million dollars, this is a great-looking film with some ambitious sequences in the period and modern settings. The cinematography looks crispy and very aesthetic like an early 2000s film with a documentary look to it. Yet, with the handheld technique being used constantly, it adds a bit of realism to the film and it is purposeful. I dig it a lot since I love the handheld cinematography style. The period production design and costumes are solid and you can tell with the behind-the-scenes of the film that there were a lot of hidden production elements to keep the image look real. The score is nice but nothing special. Overall, it is a great technical film with a lot of creativity in its cinematography and production design. If we go back to its story, there are some issues that made some scenes a bit messy with its pacing and the material that the film is juggling with.
The structure of the plot can be a bit scattered but it didn't ruin the overall pacing which could have been way more messier if it did. I see many critics saying that it's messy with the themes and ideas that DuVernay is trying to get across. I can say that it avoids that when it starts to be a bit messy. The flow slows down which gives a breather to the literature journey but there were at some points where the flow of a scene can be quite unexpected and it fails. There is one scene earlier in the film where Isabel experiences a tragedy and the flow of that scene was too quick and while it did happen in real life, it felt too quick. There were even some scenes that were mostly in the first half of the film, that wanted me to feel something and I did, but it felt jaded. Luckily, it started to fix those issues in the second half in which I started crying and that's where the film succeeded. It's not an easy film to watch for anyone who experienced racism, antisemitism, or any racial or even religious discrimination. However, it can be quite controversial with some of its political issues and risks that DuVernay is connecting to its core thesis. Especially in the first ten minutes of the film which raised questions about the idea of the caste system. For me, it doesn't ruin anything as long as it connects to the ideas that the filmmaker is trying to communicate and the execution of those ideas works through its story and characters. Even with those risky elements, alongside the critiques of the pacing, it is still a strong ambitious film that takes guts to pull off and it worked in the end. Quite a journey with this review, including this film. I used the word "ambitious" a lot in this review and I stand by it because it is ambitious for the story is trying to tell and it could have been a smaller film. Yet, DuVernay takes the adaptation to its limits and experiments with its structure, characters, and themes it is tackling. These issues and ideas are still relevant not just in the United States, but in the entire world. It's not an easy film but it will build your curiosity to research more about the Caste system and it did for me. This was such a bold film that I can only see DuVernay take the book material and thesis and explore it through the film medium. Already an underrated film of 2024 and a must-watch for indie filmmakers and literary writers as well.
Now Playing Only in Theaters!
Vizeit Score: "A"
(Share this review with your film friends and on social media! Thank you for continuing supporting my indie cinema website.)
Copyright © 2024 Vizeit Reviews / Vizeit Studios. All Rights Reserved. Review Written By: Everardo Garcia Jr. Editor In-Chief/Owner of Vizeit Reviews | (Chicago Indie Critics Member [CIC])
0 Comments
Jeffrey Wright. © 2023/2024 Amazon MGM Studios, Orion Pictures, MRC Film, T-Street Productions, Almost Infinite, 3 Arts Entertainment.
Directed by Cord Jefferson. VFA Nominee - 4 VFAs Including "Best Motion Picture"
For Your Consideration (FYC) Screener
Create The Message By Being The Message Itself People praise a generational piece that not only speaks to them personally but it has a meaningful impact that will be looked upon for generations. Well, Monk has a problem with that. The problem is that those generational pieces are being converted into stereotypes with no meaningful message behind them. It is just absurdity, lazy, and potentially offensive. However, it is not all about that. In Cord Jefferson's directorial debut film, he explores how the media has changed the interpretation of black culture but also criticizes the modern entertainment today that the general public is consuming. It is a mix of comedy and drama that not only gets its point across but opens it up for interpretation. Let's follow Monk's literary adventure of the hypocrisy of Black entertainment. Story: Monk is a frustrated novelist who's fed up with the establishment that profits from Black entertainment that relies on tired and offensive tropes. To prove his point, he uses a pen name to write an outlandish Black book of his own, a book that propels him to the heart of hypocrisy and the madness he claims to disdain. One of the few films this year including American Fiction has not only critiqued the media system and made fun of it, but also gives possible answers to fix those issues. Whether it is politics, culture, or race, there is a solution to every problem but you will need to find the root of the problem in order to fix it and critique it to arrive at that solution. Jefferson does that by letting the audience be in the shoes of Monk (Jeffrey Wright) and see how today's media has shifted towards stereotypical issues that we see portrayed in the media instead of smart and thoughtful media literature in film, books, news, music, and more. By making his themes work through the eyes of Monk, Jefferson uses comedy and satire to critique the modern media while using family drama as the possible solution to his point. The mixture of those elements in its screenplay and direction works very well alongside its cast. The satirical comedy of the stereotypes being used was hilarious and smartly written. The dark comedy in certain scenes with drama was placed intentionally to get the point across but the scene still allows that heavy drama to be at the main forefront. For the comedic scenes alone, they were funny and well-executed. There were a lot of memorable scenes from this film and I laughed constantly throughout this film which made me appreciate the comedy being used with the issues that the film is tackling. There are interesting ambitious sequences that take the comedy in a whole new direction and it works for this type of story. Especially for the protagonist who is a book writer. With Jefferson's screenplay, he balances out the drama and comedy by giving depth to his characters while still keeping the story engaging and funny. While the tone may be inconsistent, the screenplay manages to bring new ideas that can elevate the comedy and lay out the drama in a smart way. Monk's situation with his new book and his family issues raises the stakes and it allows Monk to make difficult decisions for his career and his family. Monk has an interesting relationship with his family and friends which creates more problems with Monk. Jefferson allows some breather between the comedy with the family drama that Monk is dealing with while creating his new book. Plus, the screenplay makes Monk's journey a bit more difficult when he finds a new relationship which can halt his book development. The characters from Monk's family and friends are hilarious and they add to the satire and family drama that Jefferson is aiming for. Every person in Monk's personal family adds more stress to his work but it allows Monk's character to find that spark for his main book that he's creating. Yet, the subplot with his family gets more complex by the third act and it changes the behavior of Monk. From the supporting cast of characters, Cliff, played by Sterling K. Brown, gives a hilarious and human performance which gives more depth to the subplot of the family drama. The chemistry between Monk and Cliff is wonderful and there are flaws within their sibling relationship that add weight to the drama and comedy as well. Even though Issa Rae's character Sintara is barely in the film, her character symbolizes modern young artists in a good and bad way which helps Jefferson's social commentary of the film. Yet, her character allows her to criticize Monk's first thought of her work which later reveals to be a completely different book than he expected. The film not only allows Monk to re-evaluate if his new book is worthy or not but also criticizes his own work and looks at the outer bubble. It brings many questions to the table but Monk still needs to finish his initial journey that he started with his new book. After all, he wants to prove that today's audience doesn't want to read complex stories anymore. They just want to read easy books that have stereotypes that prevent real critical thinking. By the end of the film, I started to realize that this film is a bit of a wake-up call to this new "media" we are consuming and how this type of media is being slipped into the air without any second looks. That is where the main social commentary of the film comes into play.
Through the social commentary of American Fiction, it is ultimately a critique of the modern "media" that audiences have been consuming for the past two decades or so. Hollywood is turning to ideas that they think are relatable to the world and the people they are targeting. Plus, the representation they are aiming at is not clicking there yet for audiences. Jefferson clearly criticizes and satirizes the book and film companies for marketing stereotypical "black" books and films. We get to see this through Sintara's book called "We's Lives In Da Ghetto" which from the title, uses stereotypes of black American culture. We get to see this multiple times in how Jefferson thinks that today's media is portraying the Black community with racial stereotypes through books and thinking it is smart and authentic. In reality, it is not in certain degrees. Even by the ultimate climax of the film which has a weird ending that makes his social commentary come all together. From the portrayal of the media, to how not just Black Americans are being portrayed, but also other ethnicities and races are being portrayed now in the media is just a satirization for Jefferson to point out. Even with the satire being a major part, it is also another way to point out the issues in America and how Americans are thinking differently about politics and the media today. Jefferson wants to point out that there are not many complex, academic, or smart books and films out there that criticize or bring light to important subjects. By explaining this issue, he uses his film by not just satirizing it and making it easier to understand, but add complexity and depth to the satirization itself. There is so much to explain about the social commentary and satire of this film but to wrap this section off, Jefferson's satire of the publishing industry is, unfortunately, a reality where executives think audiences want this or that. But the creators really want their audiences to delve into authentic stories and start real conversations about the many ongoing issues in people's personal lives, in America, or the world.
On the technical side of the film, it is a well-produced film based on the cast, locations, and filmmaking behind it. The cinematography is solid, the production design is good, and the music is surprisingly relaxing for the most part. Nothing too crazy in terms of production scale until the final ten minutes of the film which was the most shocking part of the film. Plus, those ten minutes sell on the satire that Jefferson was commentating on throughout this story. Even with its brilliant satire and smart script, the film falls short on certain subplots within the family drama and the pacing of the film itself. While I love the family drama that helps bring depth to Monk's character, the structure and pacing of that subplot were a bit messy. There were certain beats that didn't quite work in the right moments and with the editing of the film, it makes the subplot a bit harder to grasp emotionally. A certain writing decision that happened in the first thirty minutes of the film did not work for me and it should have been waited right in the second act. It felt melodramatic sometimes within certain scenes of the family drama and there were more subplots in the film where it barely had any development or it was too quick. The editing could have been tighter while still having those slow and thoughtful moments that Jefferson is communicating. There were not any weird editing decisions but the pacing overall felt off in certain bits which ruined the overall flow of the film. Finally, the ending can be a bit divisive for some audiences but it worked for me in what Jefferson was communicating with its satire. Yet, by the end of the film, I was still profound about the complexity of the story and depth of Jefferson's film with its characters and drama that Monk faced throughout his literary journey. Cord Jefferson made a film that not only speaks to today's media representation and how publishers are aiming for the wrong message, but also gives us a deeper look into the author's journey and the blockade of issues that many authors are facing within each media field from books to films. Even beyond its satire, it is a personal journey on how we face our many issues while we create art for others. It is a smart and bold screenplay with fantastic performances including Jeffrey Wright and Sterling K. Brown. Honestly, one of the smartest films of this year and it should be analyzed more in what it is critiquing while looking for the answers that Jefferson is providing us through his film. It is a fantastic directorial debut from Cord Jefferson.
Now Playing Only in Theaters!
Vizeit Score: "A-"
(Share this review with your film friends and on social media! Thank you for continuing supporting my indie cinema website.)
Copyright © 2024 Vizeit Reviews / Vizeit Studios. All Rights Reserved. Review Written By: Everardo Garcia Jr. Editor In-Chief/Owner of Vizeit Reviews | (Chicago Indie Critics Member [CIC])
Rachel Sennott and Ayo Edebiri. © 2023 MGM, Orion Pictures, and Brownstone Productions.
Directed by Emma Seligman.
For Your Consideration (FYC) Screener
Creating a Fight Club Can Help You Get To Your Crush. Fight Club but for lesbians? Well, that is a twist for sure and it does its job well. Director Emma Seligman is back with her sophomore feature Bottoms, after directing and collaborating with Rachel Sennott on her debut film Shiva Baby. A film that not only has laughs, blood, and fighting, but a film that has heart and a sense of awkwardness and love that aren't present in recent high school films. It is a film that caters to Gen Z audiences but it hits the right moments, story elements, and even some nostalgia factor that works in total as a high school film. Yet, it also embraces queer cinema with many risks that pulled off in the end. Let's take a look at the Rockbridge Falls High School yearbook and read about this so-called, "fight club", that everyone is talking about. Wait, I can't talk about Fight Club. Story: Unpopular best friends PJ and Josie start a high school fight club to meet girls and lose their virginity. They soon find themselves in over their heads when the most popular students start beating each other up in the name of self-defense. I had no expectations going into this film and I was surprised with the amount of edgy humor and heart from this film. It is totally bonkers with the comedy and direction Seligman was aiming for. Some of the more recent high school movies don't hit that well-rounded comedy edge or even the aggressiveness that this generation usually finds funny. In my personal experience, the comedy that I grew up on was mostly dark humor throughout high school and there was a lot of mature humor instead of safe humor. Seligman figures it out right from the first scene and keeps the jokes fresh and hilarious throughout while still giving it a meaningful context that makes the joke impactful. Even with some of the unintentional humor, it still naturally works. The amount of references from Fight Club and other high school films like Mean Girls really worked within each scene context and punch-line. From the queer humor to the absurdity of high school drama, the film makes fun of our high school experience and the typical tropes and clichés we see in real-life high school and high school films as well. Even with the bombastic comedy, the story and characters are the strongest core elements that make the comedy funny and even natural.
It is a breeze of a film but the story is engaging throughout with a lot of interesting aspects that keep the story flowing while keeping the energy as high as possible. The friendship between PJ and Josie was strong and their conflicts of the club made their friendship feel like a sinking ship in a good way. Josie being the introverted yet the real leader of the club made me appreciate her character. There were points where I cared more about her rather than PJ. However, I still cared about PJ's journey on her crush but there was more of a focus with Josie in this story. Yet, there is a balance between these characters and everyone has a happy ending by the third act. I was surprised that Rachel Sennott's character PJ, was more of a douchebag and their troubling friendship started to crack in the second act. I thought that relationship was necessary and it worked well with their personal goals they had. Even though PJ was a jerk in the film, her character arc redemption was good and Sennott's performance was hilarious. Of the supporting characters, Hazel (Ruby Cruz) was the most hilarious character from the club group. Her personality is through the roof and she makes the comedy funnier but her dramatic scenes are effective to her character flaws. The smartly written screenplay makes these characters feel real with personal and story stakes that keep the energy of the story still high. Some unexpected moments made the comedy even more funnier and it doesn't waste its time with the awkwardness of certain situations. It is fast and it allows the story to focus on the troubling goals and friendship of PJ and Josie. Even if the story is short, it doesn't waste its time and gets right into the comedy tone and conflicts that create this high energy that Seligman is aiming for and it worked very well. With this film being a much bigger budget compared to her last film, there are a lot of interesting technical elements that she pulled off well.
With this film carrying an 11.3 million dollar budget, it looks more higher with some of its bigger sequences, especially the final act. The cinematography is solid with a lot of well-shot sequences and the coloring is vibrant with its story tone. The production design of the high school and its home game design is nostalgic and the music choices are not that bad. There is some VFX in the film and it looks very clean which I am surprised. Overall, it is a solid well-made film with the budget being used to the max. With all the positives I encountered, I also encountered the flaws that I noticed throughout. There are certain characters that needed to be more developed and some could have been more interesting. Brittany (Kaia Gerber) was the typical popular high school girl that some people didn't like. Her character didn't work for me in the end but I liked her performance. Some of the other characters were okay but PJ's goal to hook up with Brittany wasn't as strong as Josie's journey. It felt like Josie was more of the main character which made PJ's journey a bit underwhelming but it picked up more during the final act. As for the comedy, some jokes didn't land or were a bit cringe. Luckily, it wasn't a lot. Some of the plot elements didn't click for certain scenes like the football team scenes. Those scenes were not good and I didn't care for them by the end. Even with those critiques, Seligman's direction of this story was fresh and fun from beginning to end. From the humor to the typical high school romance, Bottoms takes its spin on the high school sub-genre and makes it hilarious and fun. The comedy hits well, the characters are well-written, and the absurdity of the high school environment is well thought out. It's a simple high school comedy film but Seligman's direction of the story makes this film more engaging and fun. Definitely a surprise film and I can't wait to see what Seligman would do next.
Now Streaming on MGM+ and on VOD!
Vizeit Score: "A-"
(Share this review with your film friends and on social media! Thank you for continuing supporting my indie cinema website.)
Copyright © 2024 Vizeit Reviews / Vizeit Studios. All Rights Reserved. Review Written By: Everardo Garcia Jr. Editor In-Chief/Owner of Vizeit Reviews | (Chicago Indie Critics Member [CIC])
Colman Domingo. © 2023 Netflix, Higher Ground, and Bold Choices. Directed by George C. Wolfe.
Watched it on Netflix
Own Your Power I remember back in elementary school, I learned about the civil rights movement, especially the certain events that led to the Civil Rights Act. However, I barely knew about the person who organized the March on Washington until this film came out. This is the story of Bayard Rustin—the person who organized the March on Washington in 1963. With the film led by Colman Domingo, this film reaches its height but sometimes misses its mark in what the film can offer. Yet, it still succeeds in certain elements. Let's travel back to 1963 and follow the creation of this march and learn about the man behind one of the most crucial events in American history. Story: Bayard Rustin, advisor to Martin Luther King Jr., dedicates his life to the quest for racial equality, human rights, and worldwide democracy. However, as an openly gay Black man, he is all but erased from the civil rights movement he helped build. The powerful performance from Colman Domingo brings this film to its emotional core with the characters and the story of the March. Right from the beginning of the film, we not only get to see Rustin's personal life but also his work life and how he manages his personal and private life. The story is straightforward by letting us know the crucial people within this march and the events leading to that event. It doesn't sugarcoat it which I appreciate it because some biopics add unnecessary stuff that ruins what a biopic should be. However, some films still add more real-life moments from a person's life but I feel like this film benefits it by just showing the events leading to the march. It is effective with its short runtime but its editing pacing helps make the film flow even better. As for the characters, the cast delivers solid performance with Domingo leading the cast and being the best of all the bunch. Yet, everyone had a shining moment to drive the emotional core of the film. The personal conflict between Rustin's relationships with Tom, his current lover, and Elias, one of the helpers of a civil rights organization was the strongest element in the film. It's written well and it is balanced out well with the main central conflict of the story. Outside of that, there's nothing new or unique to offer. Still, it is a solid story that serves what it can deliver and I was invested throughout.
The technical side of this film is solid. I liked the make-up and costume design of the characters. Some of the cast were unrecognizable but I cannot lie, Chris Rock's make-up looks goofy. The cinematography is nothing special but it is good nonetheless. The production design is solid with its time period of the 60s and the song choices are pretty great. Overall, this is a well-made film in the technical side of filmmaking but through the story, there were some issues that prevented the film from growing stronger.
While this film doesn't waste its time with its story and the personal conflicts that Rustin is facing, I feel like we are missing more of the backstory of Rustin before he became an important figure in the civil rights movement. Even with that chunk missing, the film feels like a basic biopic. While Rustin's life was the strong core of the film, outside of that, it feels like we have seen this type of story about the March on Washington from a different film. I was hoping for a strong balance between Rustin's life and the March being more intense with its tone but it feels too safe. Selma will always still be my favorite civil rights film of all time but this is still a solid film that depicts this crucial time in American history. It doesn't do anything new in terms of the direction of the story of the creation of the March on Washington but the personal story of Rustin really strengths the overall story and it delivers a fine film. Even with its weakness and bringing nothing new to the table, it is still a powerful film that delivers solid performances and a strong emotional lead performance from Domingo. This film will probably be an underrated Netflix awards film that will be slid in many people's radar and they should watch it just for the performances alone.
Now Streaming Only on Netflix!
Vizeit Score: "B-"
(Share this review with your film friends and on social media! Thank you for continuing supporting my indie cinema website.)
Copyright © 2023 Vizeit Reviews / Vizeit Studios. All Rights Reserved. Review Written By: Everardo Garcia Jr. Editor In-Chief/Owner of Vizeit Reviews | (Chicago Indie Critics Member [CIC]) |
Archives
April 2024
Categories
All
Copyright © 2024 Vizeit Reviews. All Rights Reserved. |