Tag: musical

Dub’s Take: Better Man (2024)

A spoiler-free mini movie review.

2 out of 5

What creative doesn’t love a contract, which includes being a good rep by spending your daylight hours fielding endless interview questions from a bevy of international reporters?

Much like film criticism, there’s a finite number of queries before you end up answering the same ones over-and-over again. But you still have to act like you’re chuffed no one’s asked you that one before, just like singer/songwriter/“Better Man” subject Robbie Williams and director Michael Gracey. Any conversation about Better Man is eventually going to devolve into an opinion on whether the monkey thing actually works or not. And much like questions at a press gala, if you have to ask so many of them to get the answer you want, then maybe it wasn’t so interesting to begin with.

Gracey says in the pre-show, “Whatever kind of movie you think (Better Man) is going to be, it’s not that movie.” But it is, following the same Sisyphean tropes that other biopics of its vein already have. While I can respect Williams’ tenacity of spirit, he hasn’t lived through anything the public hasn’t already seen from the celebrity sphere before. If Williams is this in-your-face in Britain then it’s no wonder his movie is struggling at the box office: the public already knows more than it wants to from the covers of tabloid magazines.

Better Man’s resilience, then, relies on its music & aesthetics which, for the most part, are successful. Despite some lackadaisical CGI (Williams’ avatar isn’t as detailed as those in “Kingdom of the Planet of the Apes”), the movie still looks good, including a solid visual metaphor for panic attacks. While I can’t see myself picking up the soundtrack album, the music was pretty good, too. If you go solely off the film’s cuts, you’d think Williams is a balladier like solo George Michael: these needle-drops work for the movie’s somber beats, but I longed for more up-tempo numbers like in the show-stopping Take That & Knebworth sequences.

At the film’s midway point, Robbie goes through a frosted-tip phase, but instead of solely colouring the monkey’s head hair blond, the filmmakers dye his face & neck hair, too. Does that mean his chest hair is blond as well? Where’s the walking on all-fours & clattering? Better Man gets points for trying something different, even if it’s a shallow template for another, more-bonkers film with superior follow-through.

Poster sourced from impawards.com. What do you think? Even if the film didn’t totally work, Williams & Gracey concocted some wild, “Across the Universe”-esque fantasy sequences, such as Williams & Raechelle Banno’s courting montage, when Williams is caught with heroin, or the left-field “Beowulf” climax. Would any of these scenes have played better with a human actor as opposed to a monkey? Should there have been more monkey-isms? Did the movie strike the right balance between monkey & man? Do you even care? Let us know in the comments below!

Posted on by wd 0

Jay’s Take: The Thing Called Love

A revisionist movie review.

“You have a room where you go inside and you lock the door, and I’m not even allowed in! How come you get a room like that?”
“Well, I’ve lived here for a while, and I enjoy the space, I pay the rent…”

– Samantha Mathis, getting nowhere with River Phoenix about the whole “room” issue

How many of you knew there existed a River Phoenix “gotta be a country music star” movie? That was the primary reason I chose to watch “The Thing Called Love”, controversies aside: it’s a nightmare to find anything I would consider “general viewing” in my house (ie. my wife hogs the TV & often complains about my movie choices). She was a ranch-hand in another life, so to say my spouse is a fan of country music is like saying bananas have potassium. And for the first half of “The Thing Called Love”, I thought I had found a winner: a making-it-big-in-Nashville odyssey with Samantha Mathis (Daisy from the “Super Mario Bros” movie) directed by the “Don of the Down & Dirty” Mr. Bogdanovich (“The Last Picture Show”), with music that my wife actually knew the words to? To say, then, that finishing the movie was disillusioning is pre-emptive, since no one really talks about the film: either as a Phoenix movie (even though it was his last-completed before his death) or a Bogdanovich movie. But I’ll tell you why anyway. It’s hot outside.

Continue reading →
Posted on by wd 0

Jay’s Quick Take: Cabaret

A revisionist movie review.

“Cabaret”. It’s a classic, according to “industry experts”. It’s on every “Top 1000” / “See This Before You Die” list, and all the reviews on Plex have that little “tomatoe” icon. Director Bob Fosse is known for more than his four main theatrical features, from Cabaret-on, although at least two of those movies are actual, confirmed personal favorites (full disclosure: I haven’t seen “All That Jazz” yet). Shouldn’t “Cabaret”, then, be worth 5000-words-or-more? Surely? Meh. Surely it’s been done.

Continue reading →
Posted on by wd 0

Selected Scenes: Doctor Dolittle

vlcsnap-2019-12-19-17h35m00s238

Dr. John Dolittle, MD is sick and tired of the human race: an entitled and ignorant lot they are. It isn’t like he, too, hasn’t feasted on the wealth that being a small-town physician has offered him: he lives on an opulent compound in a clean mansion, and he never wears sweatpants. But enough is enough. Animals don’t talk back the same way humans do, nor do they demand so much from him. Animals don’t demand anything except the same compassion they offer people. If he could somehow learn to talk to the animals then maybe he could achieve the fulfilled and peaceful life that he seeks. He enlists the help of a talking parrot, whose gift for mimicry helps him translate (he still speaks English, but the animals don’t). Of course, being Planet Earth’s premier veterinarian-slash-pet therapist isn’t without its challenges. Among his adventures, he breaks a seal named Sophia out of a circus prison so she can be reunited with her husband in the wild. He dresses her up Weekend At Bernie’s-style and passes her off as his infant-sized grandmother to the unsuspecting passengers in his taxi-slash-horse-drawn carriage. FOOLISH HUMANS! By the way, did I mention this all takes place at the turn of the last century? And before he releases her, he looks into her eyes and sings her a hypothetical song about if the two of them could be together. Can he connect with animals where he cannot with women? Will he ever find love? IS THE UNION OF MAN AND SEAL POSSIBLE IN TODAY’S POLITICAL CLIMATE? THE PUBLIC DEMANDS AN ANSWER.

Continue reading →
Posted on by wd 0

Jay’s Take on: West Side Story

2016

things age. stuff dies. facts of life. old electronics don’t last forever (but in nintendo’s case an eternity). people weaken. and works of fiction that once were considered timeless are now running through the eye of the contemporary critic. they will tell you that while a movie or stage play or any entertainment can age poorly it can be appreciated by anyone willing to acknowledge its place in history. i call bullshit. it boils down to one’s own opinion. at the end of the day you either like something or you don’t. it’s that simple. if you don’t like citizen kane it’s a moot point to argue that it’s aged poorly because it’s ignorant to think you will change another’s opinion based on the discourse of the establishment. that and citizen kane is a great movie and anyone who tells you otherwise probably has a queue of dtv steven seagal movies on netflix (though even some of those are watchable).

i have not seen the film adaptation of west side story. in fact before tuesday night i had never seen the play performed in any incantation, nor could i tell you what songs were associated with it. i was excited to go in fresh with only its legacy to help me along. the word ‘hack’ kept illuminating in my mind as i watched the live performance. sondheim is a god to many but to know that west side was adapted from romeo and juliet just made me play with the revisionist aspects in my head. shakespeare’s original is a simple story told through complex prose that dissected the motivation of its characters. at this point in our time every story you could possibly imagine has been done to death in every medium possible. so it is the method then that the story is told and the quality of the telling that will tell you if a work will stand up to scrutiny. the particular performance of west side story that i saw could not hold up to my scrutiny. it was poorly cast, with dream sequences cut in and out of the story like a warner brothers producer messing with the latest dc picture. the songs themselves, the pumping blood of musical theater, were quieting (though i feel pretty is a fucking classic).

so what was the problem? was it the show itself or the play? were the problems i had the choices of the director or were they intended by the writers to begin with? i am in a position now where i could watch the oscar-winning film adaptation, or seek out another live performance and make the call for myself, or hell even ask someone involved with the production i viewed. but i don’t want to. i feel like i have seen the show and it is not necessary for me to see it again. that finality tells me that it was more the script then the show. but the burden of proof is on the show i watched and not the original source material. i turned to my partner during the performance, who has seen the movie but not the play, and asked them if the balletic fight choreography and tempered delivery of the songs were deliberate. they said it was. good enough for me.

Posted on by wd 0