A Woman and a Robot Have a Trial for Affection

Maren Eggert and Dan Stevens in 
"I'm Your Man"
Photo Credit: RottenTomatoes.com

Given how much technology has evolved over the years, it’s always been interesting to see how it’s depicted in film.  Whether it be how modern films show technology as it stands now or where it’s going, or even looking back on movies from the past and seeing how much of those celluloid futures came true.  Some of the most intriguing incidents of stories about technology are the ones that revolve around a time that’s quite like our own, but may be just a few steps ahead of where we might be going.

Such a setting is presented in director Maria Schrader’s sci-fi romantic-drama, “I’m Your Man,” which gifts the audiences with a tender, thought-provoking, and sometimes witty look at 21st-century relationships.

Alma (Maren Eggert) is a scientist who decides to participate in a three-week study to see if humanoid robots could make adequate companions for those seeking a connection.  For her trial, Alma is paired with one such humanoid named Tom (Dan Stevens).  As their time together unfolds, Alma’s experience with Tom will have her confront personal issues that she’s been unwilling to face.

Eggert delivers a performance that beautifully captures her character’s sense of conflict concerning what she wants out of her relationship with Tom.  Eggert displays Alma’s unease when it comes to the notion of falling in love with Tom, presenting reasons that are both logical and personal, and the feeling that Eggert puts into her work allows us to understand Alma from both of those sides in equal measure.  Her handling of Alma’s situation presents a layered view to her interactions with Tom that become increasingly complicated, as we see her express hesitation for getting to close to him, joy whenever they share nice moments, and regret when she has second thoughts her happy memories with him.  

Stevens inhabits an AI character by having the right mix of humanlike and robotic characteristics in the way he talks and moves, and he accomplishes this with a dexterity that results in a performance that’s well-acted in terms of both dialogue delivery and physicality.  The way in which Stevens has his character try to understand the world and who he is adds plenty of emotion to his arc, particularly in a tranquil scene in which Tom and Alma take a late-night trip to a museum.  Aside from this, Stevens also imbues his character with a humor that adds to how engaging his character can be.

The screenplay by Schrader and Jan Schomburg takes a familiar premise and adds layers of subtly that make us see this type of story from a few new angles.  We’re given views into Alma’s personal life, both in terms of her romantic relationships and her family, and we see how her time with David has an impact on both in one way or another.  Within all of this are small details that quietly stand out in the midst of the film’s meditative tone, ones that provide you with how Alma envisions the concept of love.

The narrative also raises intriguing questions, such as, could robots that are as advanced as the ones in the film have their own desires?  Can relationships between them and humans be more damaging than beneficial?  What’s the point of the pursuit of happiness if there’s instant gratification?  This all adds to how you see Alma and Tom’s relationship during the movie, and also has you reframing it once the movie is over and you think about it more.

As a director, Schrader maintains a contemplativeness for the duration of the movie as we try to figure out our answers to the questions that the movie asks.  When thinking about what we would do, it helps that Schrader depicts a future that looks similar to our present, which allows us to connect with the characters and setting so that we can place ourselves in this thought-provoking scenario.  And, with the steady pace that Schrader brings to the movie, she lets us sink into the movie slowly and examine the central relationship and its possibilities.  All of this makes “I’m Your Man” a moving study about what it could mean to be in love in the near future.

Grade: A

Over Thousands of Miles, Two Strangers Connect

Mark Duplass and Natalie Morales in 
"Language Lessons"
Photo Credit: RottenTomatoes.com

With everyone having to keep in touch over Zoom, FaceTime, and other video-conferencing programs throughout the last year and half, one of the last things that moviegoers might want is a film whose story unfolds via web chatting.  However, if you can get passed that notion, there’s a comedic and poignant movie to experience with director Natalie Morales’ “Language Lessons,” which unfolds over a series of video talks.  In a memorable filmmaking accomplishment, Morales offers a beautiful and grounded view of two people forming an unexpected, long-distance bond.

As a gift from his boyfriend, Will (Desean Terry), Adam (Mark Duplass) begins taking Spanish lessons from Cariño (Morales), a teacher who lives in Costa Rica.  As their sessions go on, Will and Cariño will get to know the details of each other’s lives and reach an emotional intimacy that neither one of them could have anticipated.

Duplass offers an emotional performance of someone who experiences a life-changing event and must do what he can to move forward.  He’s able to express how much the grief is weighing on him in such a way that shows how numb he feels, as if he doesn’t know what to do next.  Duplass brings us through Will’s transition from feeling beaten down to learning how to accept his situation, and we go on a tender journey with him that has you understand what he’s going through.  

Morales provides work that’s just as impactful as Duplass, portraying a character who’s compassionate and sympathetic towards what Will is facing.  Her character’s dedication to helping and educating Will helps build a warmheartedness in the film that has you experience the relief that Will feels in having someone to talk to in a time of need.  As we learn more about Morales’ character, we see that she’s experiencing as much personal hardship as Will, and the way in which Morales shows that her character is withholding certain details about her current life absorbs you in Cariño’s arc.

The chemistry between Duplass and Morales shines throughout the movie.  Right from their first interaction, you can tell that this is going to be something special.  The work that they accomplish together offers a relationship that’s as humorous as it is heartfelt, and the way in which they go from the easygoing interactions to the emotionally tense ones showcases their talents for transitioning between scenes of wit and scenes of drama.

The screenplay by Morales and Duplass uses its web-chat format to tell a deep story between two individuals who learn much about each other as time goes on, overcoming the long distance to cement an understanding of the issues that the other faces.  The events that take place later on have the narrative go into details about just how different Will and Cariño’s situations are, which adds a whole new layer of complexity to their relationship that takes this film in a direction that I wasn’t expecting.

Given how the movie comes most alive when Will and Cariño are speaking with each other, it drags a little bit during one stretch of the film, where Will stops his lessons and the two characters send video messages to each other.  But, once they start talking again, the spark between them brightens again at its fullest.

As a director, Morales is able to handle the tonal changes in such a way that shows the naturalness you’ll find in life when we can go from days that are fun to days that are challenging.  There isn’t any moment where the web-chat format feels like a gimmick, but rather highlights the possibilities of instant communication when it comes to Will and Cariño using this as their transcontinental connection.  However, Morales also shows the limits, such as in one effective scene where Will and Cariño are talking, but Will doesn’t have any visual of her, just audio.  Here, we have to rely on the intonations of Cariño’s voice and the meanings of her silences in order to comprehend the deeper significance of her side of the discussion.

“Language Lessons” is a testament to the value of communication, and there isn’t a doubt that this movie will speak to you.

Grade: A-

A Union of Like Minds Leads to Riches, Then a Fall from Grace

Jessica Chastain in "The Eyes of Tammy Faye"
Photo Credit: RottenTomatoes.com

Over the last few years, director Michael Showalter built up a filmmaking résumé that’s noted for his romantic-comedies, having directed “Hello, My Name is Doris,” “The Big Sick,” and “The Lovebirds.”  Because of this, it was enticing to see how he would handle a true-story subject that covers a decades-long scandal by one of the most prominent American couples in the latter half of the twentieth century.

In his latest film, “The Eyes of Tammy Faye,” Showalter wades into intriguing material to bring us the saga of two people who found love in each other, and then saw their empire come crumbling down.

In 1960, bible-college student Tammy Faye LaValley (Jessica Chastain) falls in love with classmate Jim Bakker (Andrew Garfield).  Later on, they marry and go on a road tour to spread their religious teachings.  After their popularity lands them on their own television show, the fame and money that the televangelist couple enjoys soon lead to their undoing.

Chastain gives one of the most committed performances of the year, diving into a role where she barely looks recognizable as the movie goes on, but never relying on the costuming and makeup to do the heavy lifting.  With her character’s midwestern accent and folksy mannerisms, Chastain channels Tammy Faye’s persona to an astonishing degree.  Some of the finest acting that Chastain accomplishes in the film is when she exhibits Tammy’s acceptance of individuals who her church looks down upon.  Such a scene comes later in the film where Tammy interviews Steve Pieters, a gay Christian minister with AIDS, and the amount of love that Chastain has Faye pour forth is a heartwarming display of emotion.  This is a performance that refuses to be a caricature, and is instead a three-dimensional portrayal where Chastain shows Tammy’s commitment to showing people how much she cares for them, no matter who they are.

Garfield is every bit as transformative as his costar.  He embodies the shyness that Jim feels around Tammy when getting to know her, but also the charisma that he exudes whenever he gets the attention of an audience.  Garfield’s expert depiction of Jim’s preacher personality shows the liveliness that Jim’s viewers saw in him.  As the film goes on, Garfield does superb work as we see that energetic exterior slowly slip away as his character becomes more and more tangled in financial straits that threaten what he’s built.  The panic and uncertainty that Garfield exhibits in his character is a total change from Jim’s self-assuredness from earlier on, and he shows the inner turmoil of what excessive extravagance and do to a person.

The screenplay by Abe Sylvia, which is based on Fenton Bailey and Randy Barbato’s 2000 documentary, “The Eyes of Tammy Faye,” follows the blueprint of a typical biopic, but the script counteracts that by including many important sections of Tammy and Jim’s lives without being rushed.  Within the film’s two hours, we see much from their rise to their downfall, and Sylvia evokes the dramatic weight of the time that goes by for Tammy and Jim.  The movie covers their time together from 1960 to 1994; and, even with the many years that are examined, Sylvia is still able to spend enough time in each of these decades to show what Tammy and Jim experienced both behind and in front of the camera.

As a director, Showalter doesn’t just give us a feel for the different time periods with the costumes, makeup, and production design, but also uses those aspects to act as windows into Tammy and Jim’s personal lives.  Between Tammy’s clothing and makeup, and the extravagant house that she and Jim share, we see the opulence of their lives and two individuals who are far from the people to whom we’re introduce in the beginning of the movie.  And, with the help of Mary Jo Markey and Andrew Weisblum’s editing, the film is able to maintain a swift pace, even with all of the material that it has to spotlight.

Despite the movie’s title, not only do you see the world through Tammy’s eyes, but you’re also given a view into her heart and soul.

Grade: A-

Haunted by Visions, a Woman Searches for Answers

Annabelle Wallis in "Malignant"
Photo Credit: RottenTomatoes.com

For a decade, James Wan has become a filmmaker who excels in stories dealing with ghosts and haunted houses, always thinking of new ways to create scares and construct scenes of tightly wound tension.  He accomplished this with “Insidious,” “Insidious: Chapter 2,” “The Conjuring,” and “The Conjuring 2.”

Now, Wan goes all out to make his most audacious horror movie yet with “Malignant.”  It’s impossible for anyone to predict what they’re in for because this film shows a whole new side to Wan that we haven’t seen before, bringing you one of the most entertainingly ridiculous cinematic rides of the year.

Madison Lake (Annabelle Wallis) is a young woman who begins to have visions of murders.  When she realizes that she’s seeing the murders as they’re happening, she’ll soon discover the disturbing truth behind her ability to do so.

Before this movie, Wallis’ background in horror only consisted of her lead role in “Annabelle,” which was the first of many spinoffs of Wan’s “Conjuring” movies.  Despite the campiness of “Malignant,” Wallis plays it straight, which works in a way that grounds the movie in a focal point of seriousness, while everything around her veers off into insanity and surprising humor.  It’s a juxtaposition that works because you go into this movie expecting something that’s similar to the tone of “The Conjuring” or “Insidious,” and then her dramatic approach helps to throw you off the film’s true intentions in its tone.

The screenplay by Akela Cooper doesn’t waste any time in throwing you into the wild nature of the story.  From the opening scene and onward, the film’s central mystery doesn’t let up in the crazy horror happenings that ensue.  We get a couple of fun reveals along the way, but it’s in the third act that the movie becomes a runaway train that can’t be stopped, leading to a gonzo reveal that will leave you aghast in the best way.

As in Wan’s other haunted-house movies, he knows how to make full use of hallways, corners, and rooms.  With his cinematographer, Michael Burgess, they move the camera around the houses in disquieting ways, such as their slow pans that give you the anticipation of seeing something frightening, and this helps to maintain a chilling horror element in the midst of the fun absurdity.  Some standout camerawork comes in a sequence when Madison is running from a malevolent force in her home, and the camera uses a tracking shot that looks straight down on Madison as she’s traversing through the halls, seeming as if it’s moving along the ceiling.

What’s memorable about this film is that it has elements from Wan’s other films and mixes them into something that’s adventurously bizarre.  We have the haunted house/supernatural aspect of the “Insidious” and “Conjuring” films; a detective story like what was seen in “Saw”; and even a climactic action scene, the technical aspects of which Wan clearly picked up when working on “Furious 7” and “Aquaman.”  Between the blending of genres and the tonal shifts that are as jarring as they are fun to witness, this is a horror film that’s unapologetic in its insanity, and this makes for a film viewing that’s all the more gleeful because of that.

“Malignant” is the type of movie that you’ll either strongly accept or strongly reject, but it’s a film where it’ll be worth it to take a look to see where your sentiments will land.  But, no matter what, it’s an experience that you should have.

Grade: B+

Once Out of Prison, a Veteran Lives a Gambler’s Life

Oscar Isaac in "The Card Counter"
Photo Credit: RottenTomatoes.com

One of the things at which writer-director Paul Schrader excels is creating notable films that focus on veterans being plagued by the horrors of their past while trying to get by in the present, which he did in 1976 with “Taxi Driver” and 2018 with “First Reformed.”  With these films, we’re given emotionally intense probes into the minds of the main characters as we go along with them to traverse the shattering difficulties that they face.

Schrader has done this once again with his crime drama, “The Card Counter,” finding a new route to take when telling such story and absorbing us in the troubled life of its mysterious main character.

William Tell (Oscar Isaac) is a former military interrogator who’s haunted by things he has done in the line of duty.  Passing his days counting cards, he meets a backer named La Linda (Tiffany Haddish), who offers him the prospect of making money through his gambling.  Meanwhile, Will gets to know casino visitor Cirk (Tye Sheridan), who requests Will’s help with an unsettling task.

Isaac provides one of the best performances of his career so far.  The understated approach that he uses to convey his character’s inner turmoil never fails to make you wonder what he feels guilty about.  And, the suaveness and intense focus that Will exhibits shows how skillful Isaac is in having his character mask his grief when spending time in the casino, displaying someone who enters another world each day in order to get away from his unsettling thoughts for a little while.  Similar to Robert De Niro in “Taxi Driver” and Ethan Hawke in “First Reformed,” Isaac offers voiceover narration in a few scenes when he writes in a journal, and we see how much he needs this in order to get his thoughts out there about what’s bothering him.  However, there’s a scene about a third of the way into the film where Will reveals his past to Cirk, and it’s here that we see Will at his most emotional, but still restrained, with Will becoming misty-eyed as he recounts the horrors that he saw during the war and in which he partook.  

Haddish and Sheridan work well with Isaac.  Haddish provides a confident transition from her comedic background to something more dramatic as a character who knows the ins and outs of professional gambling and is ready to help her new client.  Meanwhile, Sheridan presents someone who seems in control of himself, but carries the risk of being impulsive when it comes to carrying out his plan.

The screenplay by Schrader takes themes like forgiveness and redemption to construct a slow-burn story as we become familiar with Will’s day-to-day routine and learn what heavy burdens are on his mind.  By showing Will’s methodical, unsettling actions early on, Schrader keeps us in a state of disquietness as we wonder what these actions will mean for later events of the movie.  As we learn about his past little by little, the narrative immerses you in a chilling character study, one that has Will’s fate intertwine with Cirk as they both travel down a path that could ruin them.

Alexander Dynan, who worked with Schrader on “First Reformed,” provides memorable cinematography, using several effective zoom-ins to highlight the quiet intensity of discussions, while also using wide angles in a very unique way in certain flashbacks scenes, offering a heightened degree of unease.  Just like how he used a boxy 1.37:1 aspect ratio in “First Reformed” to frame his characters in such a way that captured the intensity of their interactions, his different camerawork achieves the same effect in “The Card Counter.”

Schrader is one of the finest directors working today who can maintain an ominous atmosphere.  He establishes an environment where there always seems to be some sort of threat lurking around, making us believe that several of the characters are capable of committing regrettable actions.  In the middle of this, he can provide a strong sense of emotional isolation that the main character experiences, giving us the feeling that any relationships that are formed might not last.  He provides you with a character in which you become invested, someone grappling with his morals and ethics with the hopes of becoming a better person. 

Schrader takes you on difficult journeys where you face challenging questions, and after many years in screenwriting and directing, “The Card Counter” shows that he still knows how to deal a winning hand.

Grade: A

After a Storm, a Worse One Begins

From left: Vinessa Shaw, John James Cronin,
Pat Healy, and Sierra McCormick in
"We Need to Do Something"
Photo Credit: RottenTomatoes.com

The concept of having movies unfold in one location can offer many creative choices as to where such a story can take place.  The thoughts that you have as to where the narrative will take you are enticing, making you wonder whether or not you’ll get to leave that one place before the end credits commence.

One such movie has arrived from Sean King O’Grady’s psychological horror film, “We Need to Do Something.”  Although some of the story choices may be frustrating at times, the movie still offers an intense dive into a family’s uncertainty.

When a powerful storm hits a peaceful suburb, a high-school girl (Sierra McCormick), her mother (Vinessa Shaw), her father (Pat Healy), and her younger brother (John James Cronin) take shelter in a bathroom.  Once the storm ends, they find that debris is blocking the door and preventing them from leaving.  With the prospect of help decreasing as time goes on, the family will come face-to-face with their personal issues, as well as the possibility of mysterious forces at play.

The four characters are all given a chance to show how the situation is impacting them, whether it be from the scenario itself or the tension that rises between the family members.  They all work well together to establish the strain between them that’s present right at the start of the film.  As the movie goes on, we see more sinisterness and heartbreak amongst them, and the cast members do well in having you feel their tenuous relationship.  McCormick shows her character’s stress with keeping a crushing secret; Shaw displays the strength of a mother trying to keep her family together; Healy exhibits a father whose sanity is coming undone; and Cronin gives an effective portrayal as the youngest member of the family and least argumentative, an individual who tries to remain peaceful and out of the way when most of the animosity occurs among the rest of his family.

The screenplay by Max Booth III, which is based on his 2020 novella of the same name, can sometimes be vexing in terms of the story being evasive in providing any clear answers as to what might or might not be happening outside the family’s bathroom.  While I don’t mind some ambiguity in a movie, the script sometimes does a little too much in keeping information from the audience.  However, when we leave the location for an occasional flashback, we receive a couple of clues as to what might have caused the disaster.  In the middle of all of this, the narrative uses its main location to have tense dialogues between the characters.  Although the themes that arise between the characters is ground that’s been tread a few times before, the cast’s commitment to the material still makes it resonate.

Throughout the movie, King is able to keep you invested in the drama and horror that arise amongst the family.  This is a film that has to rely on its small cast and limited setting, and King gets the most out of both.

As we head into the Halloween season, watching “We Need to Do Something” is something that you should do.

Grade: B

In Present-Day Chicago, an Urban Legend Returns

Yahya Abdul-Mateen II in "Candyman"
Photo Credit: RottenTomatoes.com

Twenty-nine years ago, writer-director Bernard Rose gave audiences the chilling horror film, “Candyman,” which was based on Clive Barker’s short story, “The Forbidden.” With this film, Rose gave a cinematic incarnation to the terrifying supernatural figure of Candyman, which was brought to life through Tony Todd’s iconic performance. Although the movie was followed by two inferior sequels, they couldn’t undo the scares that Todd brought to the first movie.

Now, director Nia DaCosta reinvigorates the franchise with “Candyman,” which is a direct sequel to the original. Despite not reaching its full potential, the film still has enough artfulness and frights to make it a worthy continuation of the series.

Anthony McCoy (Yahya Abdul-Mateen II) is an up-and-coming painter living in Chicago with his girlfriend, Brianna (Teyonah Parris), an art-gallery director. When Anthony finds inspiration for his next project in the urban legend of Candyman, his life will soon become consumed by the presence of this being.

Although the quick runtime doesn’t quite provide the cast with enough of a chance to develop, they still give effective performances that display how the horror of the scenario is hitting their characters.  Mateen does well in showing Anthony’s descent into insanity as Candyman’s influence takes hold, while Parris is just as good at trying to reach Anthony’s true self as his situation becomes more and more dangerous.  Meanwhile, Colman Domingo has a standout supporting performance as a Cabrini Green resident who passes along the story of Candyman to Anthony.

The screenplay by Jordan Peele, Win Rosenfeld, and DaCosta feels rushed at less than 90 minutes (when you exclude the end credits). It offers some relevant ideas, but doesn’t give itself a chance to explore them in greater detail. Given how Peele has dealt with topical issues in his films “Get Out” and “Us,” it’s a bit of a missed opportunity to have him as one of the screenwriters and not go further into these aspects of the story. By the time we arrive at a significant turn in the last 15 minutes, there isn’t much of an impact because of how the events and character arcs feel underdeveloped.

Despite that, one neat angle that the story offers is the concept of how urban legends change over time. The Candyman in this film isn’t just different in terms of who plays him (in this case, Michael Hargrove), but is also given a different origin. It’s a clever touch that helps to lift the movie a bit above its narrative shortcomings and provides a feeling of just how long this legend has been around within the world of the movie.

In a year that has provided us with such well-shot horror movies like “A Quiet Place: Place 2,” “Old,” and “The Night House,” “Candyman” tops them all. DaCosta offers plenty of arresting visuals, with the help of cinematographer John Guleserian, and the pair of them construct tracking shots and zoom ins/outs that utilize the settings in memorable ways.  But, the best part about the camerawork is the haunting use of mirrors and windows, particularly during the moments when Candyman makes appearances in these reflective surfaces before he strikes. This is only DaCosta’s second feature, after her 2019 debut with the crime thriller, “Little Woods,” so to see such a new filmmaker create a movie with as many standout images as this shows a confidence that is already leading her to bigger projects, as DaCosta has been hired to direct the “Captain Marvel” sequel, “The Marvels.”

There are also sequences that tell the story of Candyman with puppetry animation.  By using this form of animation, the movie calls back to the old-school methods of how stories were told decades and decades ago, highlighting the long life of not just storytelling, but the legend of Candyman within the movie and how far back that story goes.

“Candyman” might not be quite as sweet of a time as one might have expected from the return of this famous horror villain, but it still entertains with its committed performances and visually rich filling.

Grade: B