Vampires, Assassins, and Romantic Angst by the Seaside: Takoma Reviews

Blue, 1993

Against an unchanging blue backdrop, Derek Jarman and a handful of voice actors explore Jarman’s experience of being seriously ill with AIDS, the impact it’s had on his physical and mental state, and the social framing of HIV/AIDS.

An involving mix of the personal and the political, uniquely suited to expression through film.

I’ve read a few reviews or comments about the film saying that it would be just as good as only audio. (And I am aware that the audio of this film was broadcast over the radio). But for me, I think that the visual element, an unchanging blue screen, is a big part of the point of the film. With every moment, you are forced to be aware that there could be an image, but there isn’t.

One of the strongest responses I’ve had to all of Jarman’s work is his incredible eye for composition. While anyone facing the loss of their sight evokes deep sympathy, there’s an extra heft of emotion to the idea of someone who communicates so visually losing that ability. A moment in the film that stuck out to me was when Jarman describes leaving the hospital and offering a ride to a despondent woman. As the two share a taxi, the woman begins to cry. But because she is sitting in his peripheral vision, he notes that he can’t see her but can only hear her. Later he bluntly asks, “If I lost my sight, will I lose my vision?”.

Jarman also lays out the bleak series of humiliations and decisions that accompany going through a treatment that is nearly as physically devastating as the disease itself. In one stretch of the film, Jarman reads aloud the possible/probable side-effects of the medication he is given as treatment. At the end of the exhaustive list, Jarman notes that in order to get the treatment, he must sign a release saying he understands the risks. “I am going to sign it,” he deadpans. What other choice does he have?

What’s hard to convey in writing about this film is the masterful way that it alternates between serious introspection and engaging bleak humor. After a deeply personal reflection, culminating in the line “We have always been mistreated, and so if anyone gives us the slightest sympathy, we overreact with our thanks”, a chorus suddenly kicks up in which angelic voices sing “I am a muff-diving size queen with a bad attitude.” There’s an acknowledgement of the mistreatment of the queer community and a defiant streak about the absurdity of the bias.

Overall, I found this film incredibly moving. It’s not just about what it means to face death--and Jarman knows that he will not survive--but the process of dying and how it changes your relationship to yourself and the world around you. I’m not sure how it would feel to watch this film not having experienced Jarman’s other films, but I really loved it.

Which scene did you like more?

This one:


or this one?

__________________
IMDb
Letterboxd

They were both pretty stellar, but you know my tastes. I assume the answer is obvious.

Next time you wanna spoil the entire movie, use spoiler tags.

__________________
Look, I'm not judging you - after all, I'm posting here myself, but maybe, just maybe, if you spent less time here and more time watching films, maybe, and I stress, maybe your taste would be of some value. Just a thought, ya know.

I watched Blue during the pandemic, but like everything during the pandemic, it's like it happened to someone else and I only have the vaguest of memories

Honestly, it was kind of hypnotic (in a good way, for me), so I could see it fading in a way.

But certain of his stories really stuck with me, especially the part with the woman in the taxi.

A Place in the Caribbean, 2017

Sofia (Lali Gonzalez) and her father, Marcelo (Daniel Zacapa) take a cruise to Honduras, but then fail to make it back to the boat before it departs. They end up at a beachside resort in Honduras, where Sofia meets the dashing Paolo (Rodrigo Guirao Diaz), while Marcelo meets local bartender Angela (Ana Clara Carranza). Meanwhile, author Gael (Jose Zuniga) begins to fall for Camila (Gabriela de la Garza), who happens to be the girlfriend of his editor.

Pretty, but a bit shallow is the name of the game in this by-the-numbers romance that fills its screen with beautiful actors and scenery.

There’s nothing wrong, per se, with this film, and plenty that is perfectly pleasant.

The movie was filmed in Honduras, and the landscape (in particular the beaches) are very beautiful. It’s the perfect setting for a love story or three.

The actors themselves also do just fine. Zuniga was the only actor I recognized in the film, and he’s got a lot of personality. All of the other actors play their roles well, though most of them don’t get a lot of depth. The relationship between Gael and Camila is the most relatable and complicated. On the other side of the scale, every frame of the romance between Sofia and Paolo looks like the cover of a romance novel. They are so attractive that it lends an extra layer of artificiality to their scenes. Won’t anyone think about how hard it is for people with six-packs and stunning good looks to find someone to love?! Now, obviously even gorgeous people can have romantic woes, but the lack of depth of the characters doesn’t mix well with their model-level good looks.

In the end, though, nothing here really rose above the level of “fine” for me. I don’t have all that many criticisms of the film, I simply wasn’t engaged by it. I thought that it ended up stranded between being a more serious, drama-leaning film and being something a bit more frothy and light. It doesn’t have the weight for the former, and numerous serious conversations bog down the chance of being the latter.

Not a movie I’d steer anyone away from, but neither is it a film I’d strongly recommend.

Amira, 2021

Amira (Tara Abboud) is a young Palestinian woman whose father, Nuwar (Ali Suliman) is in prison--considered a “terrorist” by the government and a “prisoner of war” by his family--and whom she idolizes. When Nuwar and his wife, Warda (Saba Mubarak) decide to have another child, Nuwar pays to have his sperm smuggled out of the prison. But as a result of the testing involved in the fertility treatment, the family learns life-changing secrets about Nuwar and, by extension, about Amira.

This film is at its best when it juxtaposes the intimate, familial roles of its characters with the larger context of the roles they are expected to play in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. It loses a bit of heft in its last act as it tries to go a bit too big with its character arcs.

The strongest element of this film is the way that it examines the idea of identity and the way that people are expected to slot into certain roles based on their identities. Amira is the daughter of someone that her peers consider a hero. She even expresses out loud that she believes her boyfriend mostly loves her because of who her father is, not who she is. Naturally, especially as a teenager, Amira experiences a whole range of emotions related to her father. She loves him and is proud of him. She undergoes time-consuming and humiliating procedures in order to be able to visit him in prison.

So what does it mean, then, if Amira is not Nuwar’s biological child? Is she no longer a true daughter of the cause? How much does DNA factor into how a person is regarded in their community, or in their family?

Something that this film highlights is that in the context of something like the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, this goes beyond a question of biology. Amira’s paternity could make her an embarrassment to the cause or, worse, even make her the enemy. There’s a heated, tense middle act to the film where Amira’s male relatives and other members of the cause are trying to determine who Amira’s biological father is. Amira’s mother, Warda, is determined to stay silent on the matter, even in the face of intimidation and threats of violence. Her role also, the role of the suffering wife who has never had real intercourse with her husband, hangs in the balance.

Amira is told over and over again that her “real father” is the person who raised her. And in another situation, that could be the end of it. But here an answer must be found, even knowing that such an answer may be at great cost to Amira and her mother.

The last act is where, for me, the movie lost a bit of its momentum. When the identity of Amira’s biological father is learned, it sets off a chain of events in which Amira is determined to play the main role. But at this point, there are so many questions that are raised that I really wanted the film to answer. Questions, especially, about what Amira’s mother knew, and when, and how she ultimately feels about it all. It was her body, her pregnancy, that was at the center of the whole thing, and she ends up displaced in the last act so that we can follow Amira’s quest for justice. Likewise, there are people who were complicit in what really happened whose perspective would also be valuable and interesting, but we don’t really get much of them.

I know that this film was the center of some controversy, with some arguing that this film disrespected Palestinian prisoners and their families. I thought that the film raised some powerful questions about bodily autonomy, the personal price that many innocents play when such a conflict exists for so long, and about the “non violent” ways that people can be harmed or oppressed by those in power.

Ludo, 2014

In an isolated house by the seaside, a girl (Lea Blaaberg) lives with her father (Hjalmar Dam) and mother (Hildigunn Eyofinsdottir). The mother seems to suffer from some sort of mental illness, and the girl and her father try to keep up a cheery front despite her highly changeable moods.

With some beautiful scenery and a few striking images, this horror never really coheres into something very compelling.

This is a relatively short psychological horror from the Faroe Islands, and it certainly has an engaging setting. Water and wind-whipped cliffs generate plenty of wild atmosphere, and the best sequence of the film involves the girl and her father walking together while her mother stays behind in the house. The girl finds a dead chick, and she and her father construct a funeral mound for it, complete with flowers and seashells for decoration.

Despite a lovely setting and all the atmosphere generated by crashing waves and the immensity of the water, the film doesn’t quite escalate to a compelling level. The mother’s mental illness is portrayed in a very stereotypical way: she is moody, has a long conversation with a Jesus figurine in the home, alternates between being cutting with her husband and trying to seduce him, and at one point gets all of the knives out of the kitchen drawers.

The main thrust of the film seems to be the girl’s relationship with her parents, and trying to cope with the tension between them. I did really like a line of dialogue in which she tells her parents that she loves them “equally, and more than anyone else”. It’s a good portrayal of the way that children will sometimes think that if they just say the right thing, they can fix problems in their family. The girl clearly wants her mother’s love and affection, and her emotions are taken on a roller-coaster ride as her mother can go from harsh criticism to sweet endearments at the drop of a hat.

Unfortunately, there’s just so little development of the characters. The father seems like a good guy, and clearly he has a good relationship with his daughter. There are numerous indications through the film that this is a problem they’ve been struggling with for a while: the husband seems to have a separate bedroom, a town doctor asks pointedly about how his wife is doing, etc. But it all seems to point too directly to an obvious development: the mother is going to do something crazy. Unfortunately, the mother is so thinly drawn that she’s not much more than a plot point. It means that the film ends up being a waiting game to see just what the mother will do, and to whom she will do it.

I will give the film credit for a final shot that I thought was nicely ambiguous and well-shot. It also gets some decent mileage from the natural chemistry between the actors who play the daughter and the father. Plus, clocking in at just 71 minutes, you can’t say it drags its feet.

Outside of the distinction of being from the Faroe Islands, this one doesn’t amount to being more than a very average psychological horror movie.

Rafiki, 2018

Kena (Samantha Mugatsia) forms a friendship that quickly turns into something more serious with the lovely Ziki (Sheila Munyiva), the daughter of her father’s political rival. In addition to facing broader cultural backlash to being in a queer relationship, Kena must deal with her father’s disappointment that she’s spending time with “the enemy”.

This colorful, but at times intense, drama-romance is a simple but effective story of forbidden love.

If you talk queer films with any frequency, a common complaint is that so many of them tend to be downers. Perhaps the thing that I enjoyed most about this film was that it was able to portray the verbal, emotional, mental, and physical abuse that gay people encounter, while still maintaining a place for joy in its characters.

The film itself is a brilliant pop of color. In the happy scenes, the vibrant palette only reinforces what the characters are feeling. In the more down moments, the vivid hues make for a stark contrast: how can someone who practically glows in neon be so unhappy?

From the beginning, you know that the relationship between Kena and Ziki has a slim chance of survival. Homophobia is so deeply ingrained in the society around them---from casually homophobic remarks by men at cafes, to assertions at weekly church sermons that being gay is literally demonic possession--that they do not have the space or grace to be allowed to simply exist. Yet despite waiting for the other shoe to drop, the scenes between Kena and Ziki have a lightness to them that only highlights the absurdity of the bigotry they’re set to encounter.

The most interesting dynamic of the film, for me, was the way that the characters’ feelings about their relationship changed as the social pressure on them picks up. Initially, Ziki is carefree and chastises Kena for wanting to be cautious about when and where they show affection. But when Ziki’s friends and the neighbors begin to pick up on what’s happening between the two young women, Ziki is not ready for the consequences.

Mugastsia and Munyiva are engaging leads. I also enjoyed Jimmy Gathu as Kena’s surprisingly supportive father, and Patricia Amira as Ziki’s mother, a woman who believes that she can “fix” her daughter.

Aside from the amazing colors on display, this story doesn’t contain too many surprises. At the same time, it tells its story very well, and with just the right mix of realism and optimism.

The Long Walk, 2019

An older man (Yannawoutthi Chanthalungsy) is followed by the silent ghost of a young woman (Noutnapha Soydara) who he found dying in his childhood. When the man is hired by a young woman to contact the spirit of her dead mother, we follow his interactions with her as well as seeing flashbacks to the man’s experiences as a child (Por Silatsa).

With plenty of atmosphere and an appealing, time-bending mystery, this supernatural thriller is well worth a watch.

When films include time travel, or other time-bending elements, there’s often a danger of falling into one of two traps. The first trap is spending way too much time and attention on the mechanics of the time travel. The other, opposite trap is leaving the “rules” so vague that it becomes overly confusing trying to keep track of what is happening and why.

I think that this film leans a bit toward the latter problem. Honestly, I was very confused at many points during the film, and I can see someone who is a more literal, logical thinker getting frustrated. But while normally I AM that person who wants it all to make sense, this movie gets around that problem by pushing clear themes and building an aura of tension in a way that puts the emphasis of the story on the logic of the characters’ emotions, not the literal events that happen to them.

Movies like this are hard to review, because every 15-20 minutes something will happen that will totally reframe your understanding of the characters and their circumstances. A lot of the enjoyment of this film is letting those new understandings wash over you with all of their implications.

What I think I can safely say in a spoiler-free way is that I really loved the way that the film portrayed that people can have both benevolent and selfish impulses, and that sometimes those impulses are intertwined in a way that can be uncomfortable to think about. It also examines the way that our past experiences can inform our future actions, using its time-bending elements to put a different spin on that concept.

The film is generally somewhat melancholy in tone, but I think that it has things to say about optimism, kindness, and empathy. The character of the ghost---a character almost entirely without dialogue--gives a great inkblot dynamic to the scenes with both the older and younger incarnation of the main character. Is she grateful? Angry? Resigned? Understanding her point of view is key to unlocking the meaning of the film, but she remains an enigma as we watch the main character try to make the best of his situation, whether that’s a child dealing with an abusive parent or a older man dealing with long-standing social isolation.

There were times that I was frustrated with this film, even rewinding scenes to see if there was dialogue I’d missed that would help me resolve my confusion. But once I adjusted my focus to the characters and away from the time-travel mechanics, I eased into the film and ended up really enjoying it. I am still a bit bothered by two plot points I simply do not understand, but overall found it a rewarding viewing full of good performances.

Young Einstein, 1988

In this, ahem, fanciful retelling of the life of Albert Einstein, Einstein (Yahoo Serious) is a young Tazmanian man working on his family’s apple farm. When he stumbles across a world-changing discovery--how to put bubbles into beer--he ventures to England to share his new knowledge. Along the way he woos Marie Curie (Odile Le Clezio) and must save his great ideas from the scheming Preston (John Howard).

For the most part, this “knows it’s stupid” film succeeds in entertaining, even if its silliness keeps you from developing a real affection for the characters.

I go back and forth on the whole “meeting movies where they are” thing, but I find myself inclined in that direction when it comes to this film, mainly because it is so committed to its silliness that typical criticisms just seem absurd to apply to it.

I think that your mileage will wildly vary with this one, depending on how funny you find it seeing 90 straight minutes of goofball slapstick. After a string of more serious films, I more than welcomed a movie where every character action resulted in either a chicken flapping wildly across the screen or a large explosion.

Yahoo Serious, who stars and also wrote and directed, is an enjoyable enough lead. His Einstein is earnest and guileless, and so despite the character being rather thinly written, it’s enough to root for him. Likewise, Clezio as Marie Curie is defined mainly by being sweet and French, but she brings a warm, fun energy to her role. Howard makes for a goofy, easy-to-hate sweaty villain, a man we first meet as he mansplains the workings of a gramophone to a politely disinterested Marie.

The film is basically a series of set-pieces, loosely connected by the plot of Preston stealing Einstein’s formula and then conspiring to get rid of the young upstart. In an attention-addled mindset, this was perfect for me. I can imagine that it might otherwise come off as a bit jarring and disconnected.

The comedy here is very broad, and it can be a bit hit-or-miss. There are some unfortunate and very dated elements like what looks like a Blackface gag, a single Asian character who exists to be the butt of a joke about Asian people talking weird, and some animal mistreatment that I had a hard time watching (both the content in the film and the real way that the animal “actors” were handled).

One thing I did like about this movie was the number of jokes made around famous scientists. No, they aren’t very deep. But I think you could have a neat conversation with a kid about who Marconi, Curie, or Darwin were and their contributions to science.

Throw this one in the pile of movies my 10 year old self would have watched to death.

I remember watching Young Einstein way back in the 80’s, sometime after it came out on VHS. I remember very little of it.

It’s at the very bottom (way, way down!) of my watch list

Like I wrote, it was a nice break from a run of more dour films. I don't see myself revisiting it.

The Getting of Wisdom, 1977

Laura Rambotham (Susannah Fowle) is an incredibly bright young woman living in the country and being educated by her mother. When she’s accepted into an upscale academy in Melbourne, she must adapt to the whirlwind of friendships and rivalries within the school. But her blunt manner and extraordinary academic and musical talents don’t always endear her to her classmates or her teachers. She also must navigate a crush that she has on a young music teacher named Evelyn (Hilary Ryan).

Both elevated and dampened by its adherence to the rhythms of real life, this charming slice-of-life film gets a real boost from a great lead performance.

Life for a person like Laura is not easy, despite her many gifts. Fowle really captures the impatience of a young person who sees the school curriculum and the musical instruction as beneath her and too easy. Laura has an unfortunate habit of expressing her opinions bluntly, which means that both her classmates and her teachers are more than happy to put her in her place. Laura has learned to read French fluently, but does not know how to pronounce it. Her teacher and the other girls twitter as she struggles to read a passage aloud, despite having just done a wonderful job of translating it to English.

The movie does a nice job of portraying the way that young people form friendships, real and tenuous, with those they must spend time around. Between the girls there is a constant mix of camaraderie and competition. One moment they are allies, the next they are threatening to spill each other's secrets to the rest of the school. At one point, Laura gets some social clout because the other girls believe she’s having a secret fling with the school’s hunky Reverend Shepherd (John Waters--no, not THAT John Waters). Enjoying this new level of interest, Laura makes up stories about her exploits, only to have it all come crashing down in humiliating fashion when the other girls realize the truth.

The movie feels very true to the ups and downs of an actual childhood, and this has an impact on how the narrative plays out. On one hand, the story feels much more real because of its episodic nature and situations that end with more of an anti-climax than a bang. There is no one overarching plot, but rather a series of encounters between Laura and the others. While I mostly liked this, it did mean that the film at times lacks momentum. A lack of resolution is realistic, but can also be frustrating.

Still, some of the true-to-life moments are real winners. I think that maybe the best for me was when Laura manages to get herself invited to dinner with Reverend Shepherd and his wife. Laura is incredibly excited about it, and as they sit down to eat . . . Shepherd childishly pitches a fit because there is no mustard at the table. He then insists on communicating via gestures so that he can save his voice for a sermon. The look on Laura’s face as her crush curls up and dies is incredible. Most people have had that experience of having a crush only to get up close and personal and realize they’re a total goober. And yet when she returns to the school, she can’t bring herself to tell the other girls the truth, instead spinning an elaborate story in which she romanticizes the Reverend and demonizes his wife.

Much of the film shows how environments like the school foster unhealthy habits. The need to fit in and not be at the bottom of the pack leads the girls to be very cruel to one another. The girls are expected to be smart, but not too smart, lest their teachers decide they are showing off. In a normal story, you’d expect Laura to eventually form a solid relationship with one of the other girls. But no. Laura does have her short-lived romance with Evelyn, but even that cannot last. Laura doesn’t seem to learn much at the school---where students are expected to memorize dates of different monarchies and learn mediocre piano pieces---except for lessons in cruelty and lying.

Worth a watch for Fowle’s performance alone. I’m shocked that she only has a handful of titles to her name.

I broke up my usual run of dour films with a viewing of Sgt Kabukiman NYPD. I have no regrets.

Today I watched Titicut Follies and I'm most of the way through Deliver Us from Evil, so I'm going to need one heck of a spirit cleanser tonight.

Sgt Kabukiman says hi

PS. I’m not seriously recommending Sgt Kabukiman NYPD, mainly because I don’t think you would be up for the male gaze that is prevalent in this film.
Consider this a warning.

Also, no vampires.

Is it much worse than most early 90s movies?

Okay, that is a dealbreaker. Boo! Boo I say!