Thursday, May 28, 2026
Friday, May 8, 2026
Ferrari (2023) [R] ****
A film review by James Berardinelli for ReelViews.net on Dec. 23, 2023.
With Ferrari, Michael Mann falls afoul of one of the pitfalls of the bio-pic: by focusing too tightly on one brief period in the main character’s life, he creates an is that all there is? feeling. Although the real Enzo Ferrari was a larger-than-life individual, the movie, which focuses on events from 1957, provides only the briefest of glimpses into the life of one the 20th century’s icons, relying on dialogue to fill in some of the blanks. Although this approach is arguably preferable to an alternative – attempting to cram 50+ years into two hours – it results in viewers never really understanding Ferrari as a man. Despite a riveting portrayal by Adam Driver, he remains an inscrutable figure even after spending 130 minutes with him.
Ferrari drops us into Enzo’s life in early 1957, follows him through several months until just after the final Mille Miglia race (May 11-12), then exits with many plot threads left unresolved. It is therefore more of a snapshot than a full-fledged biography. The movie explores the business difficulties experienced by Ferrari (the company), which is drowning in red ink. Enzo, still emotionally rent by the death of his son, Dino (who died in June 1956), is involved in an increasingly difficult marriage with his wife of 34 years, Laura (Penelope Cruz), and is facing demands from his long-time mistress, Lina Lardi (Shailene Woodley), regarding his illegitimate son, Piero. While attempting to balance family issues, Enzo hires a new, hot shot driver, Alfonso De Portago (Gabriel Leone), and enters five cars into the 1000-mile cross-Italy Mille Miglia where a win would increase the company’s prestige sufficiently to allow Enzo to enter into a favorable partnership with a larger car manufacturer, such as Fiat or Ford.
Mann’s typical high-energy approach imbues Ferrari
with intensity. The racing sequences generate tension and excitement
(especially the Mille Miglia). The film is less certain when focused on more
intimate interactions, such as Enzo’s dialogues with his wife and mistress. Mann’s
zenith as a filmmaker was in the 1990s (when he made, in succession, The Last of the Mohicans, Heat, and The Insider). Since then, his films
have been largely hit-and-miss affairs and he hasn’t made anything for eight
years (2015’s Blackhat). Ferrari seems an odd choice for his
return to the spotlight but, despite occasional moments of cinematic flair, one
would never associate this with the man who spearheaded Miami Vice.
Ferrari is anchored by the strength of Driver’s performance. Partially obscured underneath effective aging makeup, he could easily be mistaken for Michael Imperioli. Driver’s portrayal presents Ferrari as a tragic figure trapped between a loveless marriage with a mentally unstable wife and an affair with the woman and child he wishes he could acknowledge. He is hyper-focused on business but not so consumed that he ignores the gravesite of his recently-deceased adult son, Dino. To the extent that we come to understand Ferrari, it’s more due to Driver’s performance than anything in the screenplay. He is ably supported by a vibrant Penelope Cruz, who enlivens the production whenever she’s on screen. The scene in which her character confronts Enzo with the truth behind her betrayal is riveting.
Ferrari may prove a difficult sale for distributors
NEON and STX Entertainment. Despite Mann’s involvement, it doesn’t have the
cache to be a prestige film and movies of this nature are typically finding
greater interest on streaming sites than in theaters. Although Driver’s
performance may earn some deserved Oscar buzz, that likely won’t be enough to
push the needle and there probably aren’t enough sports car enthusiasts to
juice the box office. As a well-acted standard-order bio-pic, Ferrari
delivers but as something more, it falls short. (Berardinelli's rating: 3 stars out of 4)
Labels: action, auto-racing, biography, drama, Ferrari, history, romance, sport, tragedy
IMDb 64/100
MetaCritic (critics=73, viewers=65)
RottenTomatoes (critics=73, viewers=73)
Blu-ray
Netflix
Berardinelli's original review (3 out of 4 stars)
Blogger's comment: While I appreciate Berardinelli's perspective, I believe this period in time was a defining moment in Ferrari's life and I appreciate the historical accuracy. The 1957 Mille Miglia was marred by the tragic death of Ferrari driver Alfonso de Portago, his navigator and nine roadside spectators, including five children, in the village of Guidizzolo when his car hit an object on the road, blew a tire, spun out and became airborne. As a result, the Italian government forever banned all racing on public roads, permanently ending the thousand mile road race.
If you are a fan of auto-racing, and you appreciate films like Grand Prix (1966), RUSH (2013), Ford v Ferrari (2019) and F1: The Movie (2025), I predict you will enjoy Ferrari.
Barefoot in the Park (1967) [G] ****
An uncredited review published in Time magazine, June 9, 1967
Essentially, author Neil Simon has taken a plot as bland as a potato, sliced it into thin bits—and made it as hard to resist as potato chips. Two spoiled young honeymooners (Robert Redford and Jane Fonda) settle into a six-flight walk-up apartment in Greenwich Village. In Ogden Nash's phrase, a little incompatibility is the spice of life, particularly if he has income and she is pattable. And so it proves in Barefoot. The puny pad she has chosen has no heat, no bathtub, and a hole in the skylight.
When Redford remonstrates, Fonda starts sniping - only to agree to a cease-fire when her middle-class mother (Mildred Natwick) arrives. Before long, they are joined by a randy reprobate of a neighbor (Charles Boyer) known as the Bluebeard of Tenth Street. Bluebeard leads the way to an Albanian hash house that serves such delicacies as black salad and ouzo. The foursome eventually wend their way home, whereupon Fonda and Redford drunkenly declare all-out war.
She is a nut, he declares, whose idea of fun is walking barefoot in the park in 17-degree weather. Your laundry arrived, she simpers. They stuffed your shirts beautifully. But if the couple's happiness seems as short as their tempers, their misery is just as temporary. By the final reel they are neck and neck in a race for the bed, and even Natwick and Boyer have found something in common - stomach trouble.
The film is not an original-cast production. Sly substitutions have been
made, notably Fonda for Broadway's Elizabeth Ashley. Jane's performance
is the best of her career: a clever caricature of a sex kitten who can
purr or scratch with equal intensity. Among the tastiest leftovers from
the stage are Redford as the harassed husband and Mildred Natwick,
skittering on the edge of hysteria as she articulates the film's
philosophy to her daughter: Make him feel important. If you do that,
you'll have a happy and wonderful marriage, like two out of every ten
couples.
Labels: comedy, Robert Redford, romance
IMDb 70/100
MetaCritic (critics=55, viewers=68)
RottenTomatoes (critics=81, viewers=79)
Blu-ray
Blogger's comments: Barefoot in the Park is notable for another reason. When Redford asks something like: We're going to be doing this for the next fifty years? and Fonda replies: We're only going to be married for fifty years? it reminded me that exactly half a century later they would star together in Our Souls at Night (2017)
and she would say in an interview that she had fallen in love with him
so deeply that she would look into his eyes and forget her lines. And I
can see that passion in the intensity of her performance.
And
there's something else that most viewers will not see. The opening
scene of the film is at the Plaza Hotel in New York City, where they get
out of their horse-drawn carriage and enter the hotel to begin their
week-long honeymoon. The same Plaza Hotel setting is used six years
later in the final scene of the Redford - Streisand film The Way We Were (1973).
Arriving at the Plaza Hotel, Barefoot in the Park
Final Scene from The Way We Were
Remarkably Bright Creatures (2026) [PG-13] ****
A film review by Kate Erbland for IndieWire on May 7, 2026.
There is much to admire about Olivia Newman’s Where the Crawdads Sing follow-up Remarkably Bright Creatures, another film adaptation of a beloved (and bestselling) novel. There’s Sally Field, in a role that has already earned her awards accolades,
and a massive octopus voiced by Alfred Molina. There’s a crowd of
chatty best pals that include Joan Chen, Kathy Baker, and Beth Grant.
There are actual locations (a sea that is a sea! what an idea!). There’s Lewis Pullman, continuing to work his own dad’s (Bill Pullman's) charming everyman appeal.
And there’s something increasingly rare (yes, even more rare than Alfred
Molina voicing a huge sea creature): a book-to-film adaptation that
actually adapts the material, and does not just crib blindly
from the original. Fans of Van Pelt’s novel might balk at what Newman
and co-writer John Whittington have snipped from her story (huge
apologies to Pullman’s character’s early backstory and his beloved aunt,
similar regrets to Field’s character’s brother), but the trims that run
throughout the film are smart and useful. They serve the story, yes,
but also its new shape as a film.
And, as a film, this tear-jerking story about giant sea creatures, broken
people, and huge secrets works well enough. Much like Van Pelt’s novel,
it’s a cozy little drama with twists and turns that feel both
inevitable and delightful. It’s all bolstered by Field and Pullman’s
performances, which crackle with chemistry and good choices,
nothing big or showy here. If you’re looking for a pick for the entire
family, this is a solid one, and that’s no small feat in the crammed
streaming world, where it can too often feel as if there’s plenty of content but nothing that feels actually made for people.
Or octopuses! At the center of the story is Molina’s tentacled avatar, Marcellus, a giant Pacific octopus who has lived most of his life at the cozy and clean Sowell Bay Aquarium, located near Puget Sound. Many of the details of Marcellus’ life — like how he came to be rescued — will be revealed later, but his primary characteristic is on full display from the start. Marcellus is really, really smart, which Molina imparts via a wry and world-weary voice-over. In Van Pelt’s book, Marcellus gets his own chapters to share his story and observations, and transferring these bits into a consistent voice-over narration is yet another example of this smart scripting.
Marcellus is, in fact, smart enough that he’s figured out how to get out of his tank, explore (read: eat some of his fellow aquarium residents), and get back in without anyone noticing. But Marcellus is growing older, so his assignations are getting slower, and the consequences of his ramblings are getting worse. Thankfully, he has at least one other creature he can trust: Field’s Tova, the aquarium’s dedicated overnight cleaner, who shares a dream of the sea that even Marcellus can deduce.
Or, as he tell us: they both dream of the bottom of the sea and what we lost there. For Marcellus, it was his freedom. For Tova, it was her beloved only son, Erik.
That Marcellus knows that, that Tova has told him about it, is the crux of the story. If you can not only buy that, but delight in it, Remarkably Bright Creatures is very much for you. (It was very much for me.)
Tova’s existence is about to be upended by the arrival of another
flighty young man. Cameron Cassmore (Pullman) lands in Sowell Bay,
convinced his unknown father not only lives there, but is wildly rich
and perhaps interested in meeting the kid he never knew he had. Finding
him, however, is proving tricky, and the perpetually down-on-his-luck
Cameron sure needs a job in the interim. Thank God that most people in
Sowell Bay, like local grocery story owner Ethan (Colm Meaney) are so
happy to welcome outsiders. Thank God also that Tova just sustained a
minor injury (she slipped while helping Marcellus, but no one can know
that) and her gig at the aquarium needs a temp fill-in. Thank God he’s
about to meet Marcellus.
Oh, and he’s still about to meet Tova.
Despite this rambling semi-introduction, Newman’s film makes quick work
of all of this, recognizing that getting to the Tova-and-Cameron show
(with, of course, many guest appearances by Marcellus) is the entire
point of the picture. As Cameron adjusts to life in Sowell Bay (more
bonding with Ethan, who is a little hung up on Tova, plus his own
potential romance with Avery, played by a peppy Sofia Black-D’Elia),
Tova starts to inch her way out of it.
The pains and pleasures of family life are top of mind for her.
Widowed, heartbroken, and left rattling around the house her own father
built (the film has a real sense of place, both out in the town and
inside the aquarium and Tova’s home), Tova is preparing to decamp for a retirement home across the bay. Everyone — including smitten Ethan
and her rowdy pack of pals — think this is a bad idea. What, however,
will become most important is what Cameron thinks, and what part he
comes to play in Tova’s life.
The film does occasionally lean on flashbacks of Tova and her long-gone son Erik to fill in some blanks — and lay out some real winking table-setting — but Remarkably Bright Creatures fares better when Tova or Cameron are telling their woes to Marcellus or even each other. Zippy, smart editing moves us through the story, drawing connections where necessary, bolstered by that old octopus voice-over, and gently guiding us to some major plot points.
Never fear, book lovers, the film sticks firmly to its late act
upheavals and revelations, and even manages to make them feel richer and
more earned here. Maybe it’s something about seeing Sally
Field bond with an octopus, or watching a true inter-generational
friendship blossom on screen, or maybe it’s just something more obvious:
taking the best parts of a sweet story, and paring it down to its best
bits. Or, well, best arms? Tentacles? Whatever can reach out and touch
you, just as this film will. (Erbland's rating: B)
Labels: drama
IMDb 79/100
MetaCritic (critics=56, viewers=45)
RottenTomatoes (critics=79, viewers=91)
Netflix
Wednesday, March 11, 2026
The Quiet American (2002) [R] ****
A film review by James Berardinelli for ReelViews.net in 2003.
No movie exists in a vacuum, and nowhere is that more apparent than in the case of Phillip Noyce's version of The Quiet American. Filmed prior to September 11, 2001, and scheduled to open weeks after that pivotal date, the movie ended up sitting on a shelf for more than a year because its U.S. Distributor, Miramax, worried that the story line might seem anti-American. In fact, the so-called controversy surrounding The Quiet American seems blown out of proportion. The movie is critical of U.S. foreign policy regarding Vietnam in the 1950s, but, considering how things turned out, can one argue that the criticism is unjustified? Americans are not demonized, and the allegorical aspects of the story are no more damning than the ones found in the text. Ironically, considering recent (2003) current events – including the hunt for Osama Bin Laden and the buildup towards war with Iraq – one could argue that The Quiet American has far more relevance now than Noyce could have envisioned when he was constructing it.
It's 1952 Saigon, and British journalist Thomas Fowler (Michael Caine) is about to find his comfortable life upset by the arrival of a fresh-faced, self-effacing American medical aid worker. Alden Pyle (Brendan Fraser) at first seems to be nothing more than an idealistic young doctor, but his activities cause Thomas to wonder whether he has an alternate agenda. Meanwhile, Alden falls for Thomas' beautiful young Vietnamese mistress, Phuong (Do Thi Hai Yen). Because Alden is unattached, while Thomas is married to a woman in London who will not give him a divorce, Alden can offer Phuong one thing that Thomas cannot: a wedding ring.
At the time when the movie takes place, Vietnam is being torn being torn apart by the rival Communists and French, who still considered Indo-China to be their colony. Into this mix comes a third faction – that of General Thé (Quang Hai), a egotistical megalomaniac who is revered by a segment of the population and backed by an invisible financial institution with deep pockets. Thé organizes terrorist actions against Vietnamese citizen, then blames the Communists in order to curry international sympathy for his side. As the story unfolds, Thomas recognizes that Alden has unexpected influence where Thé is concerned.
The screenplay, by Christopher Hampton and Robert Schenkkan, downplays the heavy allegorical aspects of Graham Greene's source novel in favor of the romantic triangle. The Quiet American is primarily a tragic love story set against the backdrop of the beginnings of the turbulent conflict that would devastate much of the small Asian country. We see the roots of the Vietnam War, and have no trouble understanding that the United States' rabid win-at-all-costs struggle against the Devil of Communism led to bad alliances and shortsighted determinations.
The acting, especially by the male leads, is superlative. Michael Caine, who is being mentioned as a possible Oscar nominee, brings a sad, world-weariness to his portrayal of Thomas. The aging newspaper writer wants nothing more than to spend the rest of his days going through the comfortable routine of his daily life spent in the company of the one woman he truly loves. If I lost her, he comments, it would be the beginning of death. Meanwhile, Fraser trades in on his reputation for playing affable, somewhat innocent characters, to trick us into thinking that Alden is more straightforward than he actually is.
From a dramatic standpoint, I have a quibble with The Quiet American's structure. The movie begins at the end, telling most of the story in flashback. Unfortunately, this means that we know from the start how the love triangle is going to be resolved, and which character will die. While this approach heightens the movie's allegorical elements, it diminishes the dramatic and romantic tension. Director Phillip Noyce obviously felt comfortable about the trade-off, but I'm not sure it works in the film's favor. However, all things considered, Noyce has wrought an often-compelling tale of life, love, and jealousy played out under the gathering storm clouds of war. (Berardinelli's rating: 3 stars out of 4)
Labels: drama, period, romance, thriller, tragedy, war
IMDb 70/100
MetaCritic (critics=84, viewers=70)
RottenTomatoes (critics=87, viewers=72)
Blu-ray
Berardinelli's original review
It's 1952 Saigon, and British journalist Thomas Fowler (Michael Caine) is about to find his comfortable life upset by the arrival of a fresh-faced, self-effacing American medical aid worker. Alden Pyle (Brendan Fraser) at first seems to be nothing more than an idealistic young doctor, but his activities cause Thomas to wonder whether he has an alternate agenda. Meanwhile, Alden falls for Thomas' beautiful young Vietnamese mistress, Phuong (Do Thi Hai Yen). Because Alden is unattached, while Thomas is married to a woman in London who will not give him a divorce, Alden can offer Phuong one thing that Thomas cannot: a wedding ring.
At the time when the movie takes place, Vietnam is being torn being torn apart by the rival Communists and French, who still considered Indo-China to be their colony. Into this mix comes a third faction – that of General Thé (Quang Hai), a egotistical megalomaniac who is revered by a segment of the population and backed by an invisible financial institution with deep pockets. Thé organizes terrorist actions against Vietnamese citizen, then blames the Communists in order to curry international sympathy for his side. As the story unfolds, Thomas recognizes that Alden has unexpected influence where Thé is concerned.
The screenplay, by Christopher Hampton and Robert Schenkkan, downplays the heavy allegorical aspects of Graham Greene's source novel in favor of the romantic triangle. The Quiet American is primarily a tragic love story set against the backdrop of the beginnings of the turbulent conflict that would devastate much of the small Asian country. We see the roots of the Vietnam War, and have no trouble understanding that the United States' rabid win-at-all-costs struggle against the Devil of Communism led to bad alliances and shortsighted determinations.
The acting, especially by the male leads, is superlative. Michael Caine, who is being mentioned as a possible Oscar nominee, brings a sad, world-weariness to his portrayal of Thomas. The aging newspaper writer wants nothing more than to spend the rest of his days going through the comfortable routine of his daily life spent in the company of the one woman he truly loves. If I lost her, he comments, it would be the beginning of death. Meanwhile, Fraser trades in on his reputation for playing affable, somewhat innocent characters, to trick us into thinking that Alden is more straightforward than he actually is.
From a dramatic standpoint, I have a quibble with The Quiet American's structure. The movie begins at the end, telling most of the story in flashback. Unfortunately, this means that we know from the start how the love triangle is going to be resolved, and which character will die. While this approach heightens the movie's allegorical elements, it diminishes the dramatic and romantic tension. Director Phillip Noyce obviously felt comfortable about the trade-off, but I'm not sure it works in the film's favor. However, all things considered, Noyce has wrought an often-compelling tale of life, love, and jealousy played out under the gathering storm clouds of war. (Berardinelli's rating: 3 stars out of 4)
Labels: drama, period, romance, thriller, tragedy, war
IMDb 70/100
MetaCritic (critics=84, viewers=70)
RottenTomatoes (critics=87, viewers=72)
Blu-ray
Berardinelli's original review
F1: The Movie (2025) [PG-13] ****/*****
A film review by James Berardinelli for ReelViews.net, June 26, 2025.
When it comes to the nuts and bolts of car racing movies, there’s a tendency to follow the trends and tropes of the wider sports film genre in which they form a sub-category. The difference is that when Robert Redford steps to the plate or Sylvester Stallone delivers a punch, the stakes tend to be more personal than permanent. Golfers, basketball players, and sluggers generally don’t have to worry about being carted away in a body-bag; the specter of the Grim Reaper is one thing that differentiates F1:The Movie and all its car-racing contemporaries from most sports films. Sometimes in car racing, it’s not so much about crossing the finish line first but living to race another day.
There’s a lot of dramatic potential inherent in this kind of movie but F1 is less interested in developing new tracks than in doing the best it can with existing ones. Ehren Kruger’s by-the-numbers screenplay could have been churned out using AI – the film’s human element aspects are perfunctory and familiar and the narrative rarely veers from the expected trajectory. Those who see F1 shouldn’t expect any surprises or twists and the collaborative involvement of the FIA (the sports’ governing body) takes a lot of possibilities off the table. All that being said, director Joseph Kosinski delivers an experience on par with his earlier mega-hit, Top Gun: Maverick, without the benefit of nostalgia or Tom Cruise. The Grim Reaper’s hovering presence helps with the tension but F1 mostly delivers because of the easygoing charm of Brad Pitt, the energetic camerawork of Claudio Miranda, and the loud, intense score by Hans Zimmer. The movie often pushes the viewer to the point of sensory overload, and that’s where its strength lies. Good luck replicating that at home.
To the extent there’s a non-technical anchor grounding the story, it’s the antagonistic relationship between the two drivers who represent the ne’er-do-well Apex Grand Prix team (APXGP): over-the-hill veteran Sonny Hayes (Pitt) and up-and-coming Joshua Pearce (Damson Idris). Both could use Sinatra’s rendition of My Way as their theme song. Hayes is recruited by his old buddy, Ruben Cervantes (Javier Bardem), the current owner of APXGP, to come out of retirement and give Formula 1 racing one more chance. After initially demurring, Sonny has a change of heart and shows up with his megawatt smile, self-deprecating attitude, and cocky sense of self-assurance – all things that irritate Pearce, the team’s #1 driver. A rivalry develops, fueled by Sonny’s initial track failures. As board member Peter Banning (the always-oily Tobias Menzies) hovers like a vulture, Ruben begins doubting the sanity of his Hail Mary. Sonny might have been a potential star before a near-fatal accident, but that was 30 years ago. Meanwhile, as Sonny tries to build a rapport with the pit crew and other behind-the-scenes members of the team, his flirtations with the chief engineer, Kate McKenna (Kerry Condon), heat up.
It’s a credit to both Pitt and Damson Idris that the fractious relationship between Sonny and Joshua has the force and immediacy it does given the hackneyed nature of the material. Their chemistry transcends the thinness of what’s on the written page. Likewise, there’s an easygoing camaraderie between Sonny and Ruben and genuine sparks between the will-they-or-won’t-they pair of Sonny and Kate. I appreciated that the movie keeps the romantic elements mostly in the background. It adds a dash of flavor without interfering.
Unsurprisingly, F1 shines during the action sequences. As is often the case with racing movies, the events themselves aren’t cinematic (given the length associated with races) but the crashes are. Kosinski’s approach is to home in on big moments, using a variety of camera angles and expert editing techniques to keep the viewer engaged. He also leans heavily on Zimmer’s score, which is suitably overblown for the material, helping to top off the film’s adrenaline-and-testosterone cocktail.
In terms of recent racing movies, I’d put this one a slight notch below James Mangold’s 2019 Ford v. Ferrari, but at least on par with some of the other high-profile efforts like Ron Howard’s 2013 Rush. The effectiveness of the film’s overall aesthetic cannot be understated: what F1 lacks in narrative development it more than compensates for with its thrill-ride aspects. Watching the film, you may not believe you’re in a racing car but you will feel like you’re doing more than passively sitting in a theater seat. [Berardinelli's rating: 3 stars out of 4]
Labels: action, auto-racing, Brad Pitt, drama, sport
IMDb 76/100
MetaCritic (critics=68, viewers=75)
RottenTomatoes (critics=82, viewers=97)
There’s a lot of dramatic potential inherent in this kind of movie but F1 is less interested in developing new tracks than in doing the best it can with existing ones. Ehren Kruger’s by-the-numbers screenplay could have been churned out using AI – the film’s human element aspects are perfunctory and familiar and the narrative rarely veers from the expected trajectory. Those who see F1 shouldn’t expect any surprises or twists and the collaborative involvement of the FIA (the sports’ governing body) takes a lot of possibilities off the table. All that being said, director Joseph Kosinski delivers an experience on par with his earlier mega-hit, Top Gun: Maverick, without the benefit of nostalgia or Tom Cruise. The Grim Reaper’s hovering presence helps with the tension but F1 mostly delivers because of the easygoing charm of Brad Pitt, the energetic camerawork of Claudio Miranda, and the loud, intense score by Hans Zimmer. The movie often pushes the viewer to the point of sensory overload, and that’s where its strength lies. Good luck replicating that at home.
To the extent there’s a non-technical anchor grounding the story, it’s the antagonistic relationship between the two drivers who represent the ne’er-do-well Apex Grand Prix team (APXGP): over-the-hill veteran Sonny Hayes (Pitt) and up-and-coming Joshua Pearce (Damson Idris). Both could use Sinatra’s rendition of My Way as their theme song. Hayes is recruited by his old buddy, Ruben Cervantes (Javier Bardem), the current owner of APXGP, to come out of retirement and give Formula 1 racing one more chance. After initially demurring, Sonny has a change of heart and shows up with his megawatt smile, self-deprecating attitude, and cocky sense of self-assurance – all things that irritate Pearce, the team’s #1 driver. A rivalry develops, fueled by Sonny’s initial track failures. As board member Peter Banning (the always-oily Tobias Menzies) hovers like a vulture, Ruben begins doubting the sanity of his Hail Mary. Sonny might have been a potential star before a near-fatal accident, but that was 30 years ago. Meanwhile, as Sonny tries to build a rapport with the pit crew and other behind-the-scenes members of the team, his flirtations with the chief engineer, Kate McKenna (Kerry Condon), heat up.
It’s a credit to both Pitt and Damson Idris that the fractious relationship between Sonny and Joshua has the force and immediacy it does given the hackneyed nature of the material. Their chemistry transcends the thinness of what’s on the written page. Likewise, there’s an easygoing camaraderie between Sonny and Ruben and genuine sparks between the will-they-or-won’t-they pair of Sonny and Kate. I appreciated that the movie keeps the romantic elements mostly in the background. It adds a dash of flavor without interfering.
Unsurprisingly, F1 shines during the action sequences. As is often the case with racing movies, the events themselves aren’t cinematic (given the length associated with races) but the crashes are. Kosinski’s approach is to home in on big moments, using a variety of camera angles and expert editing techniques to keep the viewer engaged. He also leans heavily on Zimmer’s score, which is suitably overblown for the material, helping to top off the film’s adrenaline-and-testosterone cocktail.
In terms of recent racing movies, I’d put this one a slight notch below James Mangold’s 2019 Ford v. Ferrari, but at least on par with some of the other high-profile efforts like Ron Howard’s 2013 Rush. The effectiveness of the film’s overall aesthetic cannot be understated: what F1 lacks in narrative development it more than compensates for with its thrill-ride aspects. Watching the film, you may not believe you’re in a racing car but you will feel like you’re doing more than passively sitting in a theater seat. [Berardinelli's rating: 3 stars out of 4]
Labels: action, auto-racing, Brad Pitt, drama, sport
IMDb 76/100
MetaCritic (critics=68, viewers=75)
RottenTomatoes (critics=82, viewers=97)
Blu-ray
James Berardinelli's original review
Comment by FB Friend Miki Tokola:
While I agree it was an entertaining movie with lots of dramatic F1 racing, it was not an accurate depiction of current-day F1 racing. The production prioritized hero moments over the strict regulatory environment of the FIA, F1’s ruling body. Three examples are: diving into the inside of a corner from a significant distance back, weaving under braking, and off-track overtaking. All of these are violations of the rules and would result in penalties or disqualification. Another unrealistic element was showing the cars dancing around each other rather than staying on the ideal racing line around the apex of the corner.
I also enjoyed the movie and appreciated the efforts the production team went to include real racing drivers and locations into the movie. It’s important to remember it’s dramatic, exciting fiction and not representative of the driving one would see if you watched a real F1 race.
James Berardinelli's original review
Comment by FB Friend Miki Tokola:
While I agree it was an entertaining movie with lots of dramatic F1 racing, it was not an accurate depiction of current-day F1 racing. The production prioritized hero moments over the strict regulatory environment of the FIA, F1’s ruling body. Three examples are: diving into the inside of a corner from a significant distance back, weaving under braking, and off-track overtaking. All of these are violations of the rules and would result in penalties or disqualification. Another unrealistic element was showing the cars dancing around each other rather than staying on the ideal racing line around the apex of the corner.
I also enjoyed the movie and appreciated the efforts the production team went to include real racing drivers and locations into the movie. It’s important to remember it’s dramatic, exciting fiction and not representative of the driving one would see if you watched a real F1 race.
A Complete Unknown (2024) [R] ****
A film review by James Berardinelli for ReelViews.net on Dec. 23rd, 2024.
If one was going to cite a movie title for truth in advertising, it might be James Mangold’s Bob Dylan bio-pic, A Complete Unknown because, at the end of the proceedings, it’s an apt description of the main character. The reason it clear: Mangold doesn’t set out to present a comprehensive look at the singer, nor does it offer a probing psychological portrait. It doesn’t pander or seek to lionize. Instead, it’s a picture of an era and an exploration of Dylan’s impact on those around him. To the extent that it offers insights into the musician, it can be summed up succinctly by quoting Joan Baez (Monica Barbaro): he’s an asshole.
Although Dylan (played in the movie by Timothee Chalamet) was not officially involved in any aspect of the production – his name is absent from the end credits – he apparently was given an opportunity to read the script and responded by providing notes. A Complete Unknown’s take on Dylan is far from complimentary – he’s more of antagonist than protagonist – so the real-life Dylan presumably agrees with this perspective. That’s somewhat reminiscent of Robbie Williams’ self-portrait in Better Man (although Chalamet does not play Dylan as a chimpanzee).
A Complete Unknown follows Dylan through a roughly four-year period, beginning in 1961 with a visit to the Greystone Park Psychiatric Hospital to meet his idol, Woody Guthrie (Scoot McNairy), and ending in 1965 following his controversial performance at the Newport Folk Festival, where his decision to perform using electric instruments is met with boos and jeers. In between, he has off-again/on-again relationships with two women, Sylvie Russon (Elle Fanning, based on real-life paramour Suze Rotolo, whose real name wasn’t used at Dylan’s request) and singer Joan Baez (Monica Barbaro), and approaches fame and fans with an inscrutable façade. He befriends Pete Seeger (Edward Norton), who gives him some of his early breaks, and Johnny Cash (Boyd Holbrook). And he allows his career to be guided by his pushy manager, Albert Grossman (Dan Fogler).
Although the movie features many of Dylan’s best-known songs, all performed by Chalamet with a better-than-passable imitation of the singer’s nasal intonations, it’s not a jukebox film or a traditional musical. Instead, it’s a drama that features music. The singing comes in logical places during studio recordings and live performances. There are no instances when characters spontaneously break into song and no choreographed dance sequences. Mangold approaches Dylan’s music much the same way that he approached that of Johnny Cash in Walk the Line.
At his best, Dylan is impassive and unfeeling. At his worst, he’s dismissive and cruel (although he probably doesn’t see the latter). He repeatedly hurts Sylvie and his relationship with Joan is such that she calls him an asshole on one occasion and a jerk on another. He shows minimal affection to anyone and turns his back on a woman who admits to loving him because he hasn’t known her that long. He is deaf to the desires of fans and afflicted with delusions of grandeur.
Tasked with portraying this version of Dylan, Chalamet goes full method. For two hours, he is Dylan, recapturing the look, mannerisms, attitude, and vocal inflections of the early ‘60s musician. As always with a performance like this, questions arise regarding how much of this is acting and how much is imitation. Ultimately, it doesn’t matter because A Complete Unknown gets us to believe that we’re watching Dylan wandering around ‘60s New York City. Mangold gets the details right, creating a place that’s both recognizable and alien at the same time.
Having an affinity for Dylan isn’t necessary for A Complete Unknown to work. That’s because the movie is more about Dylan within the context of a time period than about Dylan as an individual. One could argue that he’s more of a presence than a character. We don’t know much about his past and Mangold never attempts to get into his mind or explore his motivations. Dylan comments in the film that people make up their own histories and backgrounds all the time. (Shades of The Joker in The Dark Knight.) His birth name is Robert Zimmerman but he changed it because he liked the way Dylan sounded. The screenplay uses TV news announcers as a way to pin scenes to certain critical historical events (like the Cuban Missile Crisis and JFK’s assassination).
An appreciation of Dylan’s catalog – especially his earlier songs – will enhance the movie’s effectiveness. (The title comes from a line in Like a Rolling Stone.) Still, those hoping to gain insight into this peculiar and prickly embodiment of genius will find that desire unsatisfied. A Complete Unknown isn’t shallow but the screenplay makes no attempt to psychoanalyze its subject. If there’s something to be learned, it’s how uncomfortable it could be to enter this man’s orbit. His music is iconic and speaks to many but, from the first scene to the last, he remains A Complete Unknown. [Berardinelli's rating: 3 stars out of 4]
Labels: biography, drama, music, Sixties
IMDb 73/100
MetaCritic (critics=70, viewers=72)
RottenTomatoes (critics=82, viewers=95)
Blu-ray
Berardinelli's original review
Bob Dylan wrote Boots of Spanish Leather, recorded it on August 7th, 1963, and released it on his 1964 album The Times They Are A-Changin'. The folk song is structured as a dialogue between lovers separating, often linked to his relationship with Suze Rotolo. It is noted for its poetic, bittersweet tone.
Although Dylan (played in the movie by Timothee Chalamet) was not officially involved in any aspect of the production – his name is absent from the end credits – he apparently was given an opportunity to read the script and responded by providing notes. A Complete Unknown’s take on Dylan is far from complimentary – he’s more of antagonist than protagonist – so the real-life Dylan presumably agrees with this perspective. That’s somewhat reminiscent of Robbie Williams’ self-portrait in Better Man (although Chalamet does not play Dylan as a chimpanzee).
A Complete Unknown follows Dylan through a roughly four-year period, beginning in 1961 with a visit to the Greystone Park Psychiatric Hospital to meet his idol, Woody Guthrie (Scoot McNairy), and ending in 1965 following his controversial performance at the Newport Folk Festival, where his decision to perform using electric instruments is met with boos and jeers. In between, he has off-again/on-again relationships with two women, Sylvie Russon (Elle Fanning, based on real-life paramour Suze Rotolo, whose real name wasn’t used at Dylan’s request) and singer Joan Baez (Monica Barbaro), and approaches fame and fans with an inscrutable façade. He befriends Pete Seeger (Edward Norton), who gives him some of his early breaks, and Johnny Cash (Boyd Holbrook). And he allows his career to be guided by his pushy manager, Albert Grossman (Dan Fogler).Although the movie features many of Dylan’s best-known songs, all performed by Chalamet with a better-than-passable imitation of the singer’s nasal intonations, it’s not a jukebox film or a traditional musical. Instead, it’s a drama that features music. The singing comes in logical places during studio recordings and live performances. There are no instances when characters spontaneously break into song and no choreographed dance sequences. Mangold approaches Dylan’s music much the same way that he approached that of Johnny Cash in Walk the Line.
At his best, Dylan is impassive and unfeeling. At his worst, he’s dismissive and cruel (although he probably doesn’t see the latter). He repeatedly hurts Sylvie and his relationship with Joan is such that she calls him an asshole on one occasion and a jerk on another. He shows minimal affection to anyone and turns his back on a woman who admits to loving him because he hasn’t known her that long. He is deaf to the desires of fans and afflicted with delusions of grandeur.
Tasked with portraying this version of Dylan, Chalamet goes full method. For two hours, he is Dylan, recapturing the look, mannerisms, attitude, and vocal inflections of the early ‘60s musician. As always with a performance like this, questions arise regarding how much of this is acting and how much is imitation. Ultimately, it doesn’t matter because A Complete Unknown gets us to believe that we’re watching Dylan wandering around ‘60s New York City. Mangold gets the details right, creating a place that’s both recognizable and alien at the same time.
Having an affinity for Dylan isn’t necessary for A Complete Unknown to work. That’s because the movie is more about Dylan within the context of a time period than about Dylan as an individual. One could argue that he’s more of a presence than a character. We don’t know much about his past and Mangold never attempts to get into his mind or explore his motivations. Dylan comments in the film that people make up their own histories and backgrounds all the time. (Shades of The Joker in The Dark Knight.) His birth name is Robert Zimmerman but he changed it because he liked the way Dylan sounded. The screenplay uses TV news announcers as a way to pin scenes to certain critical historical events (like the Cuban Missile Crisis and JFK’s assassination).
An appreciation of Dylan’s catalog – especially his earlier songs – will enhance the movie’s effectiveness. (The title comes from a line in Like a Rolling Stone.) Still, those hoping to gain insight into this peculiar and prickly embodiment of genius will find that desire unsatisfied. A Complete Unknown isn’t shallow but the screenplay makes no attempt to psychoanalyze its subject. If there’s something to be learned, it’s how uncomfortable it could be to enter this man’s orbit. His music is iconic and speaks to many but, from the first scene to the last, he remains A Complete Unknown. [Berardinelli's rating: 3 stars out of 4]
Labels: biography, drama, music, Sixties
IMDb 73/100
MetaCritic (critics=70, viewers=72)
RottenTomatoes (critics=82, viewers=95)
Blu-ray
Berardinelli's original review
Bob Dylan wrote Boots of Spanish Leather, recorded it on August 7th, 1963, and released it on his 1964 album The Times They Are A-Changin'. The folk song is structured as a dialogue between lovers separating, often linked to his relationship with Suze Rotolo. It is noted for its poetic, bittersweet tone.
Monday, February 2, 2026
Downhill Racer (1969) [M] ****
A film review by Roger Ebert for Chicago Sun-Times on Dec 22, 1969.
Some of the best moments in Downhill Racer are moments during which nothing special seems to be happening. They’re moments devoted to capturing the angle of a glance, the curve of a smile, an embarrassed silence. Together they form a portrait of a man that is so complete, and so tragic, that Downhill Racer becomes the best movie ever made about sports — without really being about sports at all.
The champions in any field have got to be, to some degree, fanatics. To be the world’s best skier, or swimmer, or chess player, you’ve got to overdevelop that area of your ability while ignoring almost everything else. This is the point we miss when we persist in describing champions as regular, all-round Joes. If they were, they wouldn’t be champions.
This is the kind of man that Downhill Racer is about: David Chappellet, a member of the U.S. skiing team, who fully experiences his humanity only in the exhilaration of winning. The rest of the time, he’s a strangely cut-off person, incapable of feeling anything very deeply, incapable of communicating with anyone, incapable of love, incapable (even) of being very interesting.
Robert Redford plays this person very well, even though it must have been difficult for Redford to contain his own personality within such a limited character. He plays a man who does nothing well except ski downhill — and does that better than anyone.
But this isn’t one of those rags-to-riches collections of sports clichés, about the kid who fights his way up to champion. It’s closer in tone to the stories of the real champions of our time: Sandy Koufax, Muhammad Ali, Joe Namath, who were the best and knew they were the best and made no effort to mask their arrogance. There is no humility at all in the racer’s character: Not that there should be. At one point, he’s accused by a fellow American of not being a good team man. Another skier replies: Well, this isn’t exactly a team sport.
It isn’t; downhill racing is an intensely individual sport, and we feel that through some remarkable color photography. More often than not, races are shot from the racer’s point of view, and there are long takes that nearly produce vertigo as we hurtle down a mountain. Without bothering to explain much of the technical aspect of skiing, Downhill Racer tells us more about the sport than we imagined a movie could.
The joy of these action sequences is counterpointed by the daily life of the ski amateur. There are the anonymous hotel rooms, one after another, and the deadening continual contact with the team members, and the efforts of the coach (Gene Hackman in a superb performance) to hold the team together and placate its financial backers in New York.
And there is Chappellet’s casual affair with Carole Stahl (Camilla Sparv), who seems to be a sort of ski groupie. She wants to make love to him, and does, but he is so limited, so incapable of understanding her or anything beyond his own image, that she drops him. He never does quite understand why.
The movie balances nicely between this level, and the exuberance of its outdoor location photography. And it does a skillful job of involving us in the competition without really being a movie about competition. In the end, Downhill Racer succeeds so well that instead of wondering whether the hero will win the Olympic race, we want to see what will happen to him if he does. [Ebert's rating:4 stars out of 4]
Blogger's note: When you watch the film you will notice that in German ski racing, in the starting countdown (... three, two, one) the term zwo is used, instead of zwei, for the number two, as in drei, zwo, eins. This is a specific safety measure, designed to insure that zwei (two) is not misheard as drei (three).
Labels: drama, Robert Redford, romance, sport
IMDb 63/100
MetaCritic (critics=89, viewers=74)
RottenTomatoes (critics=85, viewers=57)
Blu-ray
Roger Ebert's original review
Bridgerton (Season 4 - 2026) [TV-MA] ****
Lady Violet Bridgerton (Ruth Gemmell) is hosting the first ball of the season, and it is a masquerade. Her second son, Benedict (Luke Thompson) attends, meets and falls for a lovely young woman, but she leaves before the midnight unmasking, and refuses to give him her name. So, in Cinderella and the Prince fashion, he begins to search the kingdom for her, having only her glove to identify her.
It turns out that the young woman is Sophie Baek (Yerin Ha), a maid in the household of her stepmother and her two daughters. When her stepmother discovers that Sophie has attended the ball uninvited and in her gown and slippers, she is thrown out of the house.
By coincidence Benedict finds her working at the Cavender estate, rescues her, and eventually brings her to the Bridgerton London home where he prevails upon his mother to hire her, still not realizing she is the young woman he fell for at the masked ball.
The chemistry between Luke Thompson and Yerin Ha is palpable, and of course there are the obligatory twists and turns, but there is a positive ending to this love match. In fact I would rank season four with Benedict and Sophie as engaging and as satisfying as season two with Anthony (Jonathan Bailey) and Kathani (Simone Ashley).
The chemistry between Luke Thompson and Yerin Ha is palpable, and of course there are the obligatory twists and turns, but there is a positive ending to this love match. In fact I would rank season four with Benedict and Sophie as engaging and as satisfying as season two with Anthony (Jonathan Bailey) and Kathani (Simone Ashley).
Tuesday, January 27, 2026
Downton Abbey: The Grand Finale (2025) [PG] ****
A film review by James Berardinelli for ReelViews.net on Sept 11, 2025.
Downton Abbey: The Grand Finale, like 2019’s Downton Abbey and its 2022 sequel Downton Abbey: A New Era, is comfort food for fans. And there are plenty of them: an estimated 120 million viewers worldwide regularly watched the TV series at its peak. Of course, not everyone who tuned in during 2013 is likely to head to a theater a decade later to revisit these characters, but there remain enough devoted followers to have made the previous two films successful (even though the second earned only about half as much as the first).
Current thinking is that this will be the final Downton Abbey feature—at least, that’s what the title suggests. Then again, the same claim was made after A New Era, so whether this truly is the last dance for these beloved characters will depend on two things: how well the film performs at the box office and whether enough of the cast and crew are willing to reunite once more.
The downside of leaning so heavily on fan service is that it inevitably shuts out a broader audience. There is no conceivable reason why anyone unfamiliar with Downton Abbey would choose to see this film—and if they did, they would likely drift into sleep from a mix of confusion and boredom. The lightweight narrative all but demands prior familiarity. It is, at heart, a hangout movie for the Upstairs, Downstairs crowd. To its credit, the storyline is better tailored to the characters than that of A New Era, but there is only so much that can be accomplished in a two-hour runtime. The big screen is not the ideal format for these figures; they require time and space to let their arcs unfold. If Downton Abbey is to continue, a new television series would be a far better option than a fourth film.
With the exception of the late Violet Crawley (played by the late Dame Maggie Smith) and the absent Henry Talbot (Matthew Goode), Lady Mary’s (Michelle Dockery) no-good husband, most of the familiar TV and film regulars return—though some enjoy meatier roles than others. The two-pronged narrative focuses on the Crawley family’s financial struggles following the 1929 stock market crash and Lady Mary’s difficulties as a social pariah after her divorce from Henry. Among the upstairs contingent are Robert Crawley (Hugh Bonneville), his wife, Cora (Elizabeth McGovern), their daughter, Edith (Laura Carmichael), with her husband Bertie (Harry Hadden-Paton), son-in-law Tom Branson (Allen Leech), and Mary’s former mother-in-law, Isobel (Penelope Wilton). Downstairs, the ensemble includes the formidable butler Charlie Carson (Jim Carter), lady’s maids Phyllis Baxter (Raquel Cassidy) and Anna Bates (Joanne Froggatt), valet John Bates (Brendan Coyle), housekeeper Elsie Hughes (Phyllis Logan), and cooks Beryl Patmore (Lesley Nicol) and Daisy Parker (Sophie McShera). Also joining the cast are Paul Giamatti, reprising his role from the series as Cora’s brother, Dominic West (from A New Era), and newcomers Alessandro Nivola (as American Gus Sambrook), Joely Richardson (as Lady Petersfield), and Arty Fruoushan (as Noel Coward).
There isn’t a great deal to say about The Grand Finale. The dialogue no longer crackles the way it once did, a shortcoming that can largely be attributed to the absence of Maggie Smith, who consistently had the best lines and delivered them with just the right amount of vinegar. Smith, who was granted the chance to portray Violet’s on-screen death in A New Era before her own passing in 2024, is sorely missed—even if a prominently displayed portrait gives her character a lingering presence.
As much as screenwriter and series creator Julian Fellowes tries to provide every character with a reason to appear, many are reduced to little more than a handful of lines before they enter stage right and exit stage left. Only Mary, Robert, Cora, and Edith are afforded truly substantial roles. Michelle Dockery and Hugh Bonneville both shine, as does Jim Carter, even in a scaled-back performance. Paul Giamatti is a welcome presence, contributing a healthy dose of comedic relief, while Alessandro Nivola is deliciously smarmy in his turn.
Having seen every episode of the six-season TV series and both films, I’m ready to let go. The movies, though never narrative masterpieces, have fulfilled their purpose: they’ve given fans the chance to reconnect with beloved characters while offering nearly everyone on-screen a sense of closure. Could the story continue? Certainly. But in many ways, that would be a shame. While there is some appeal in exploring how these characters might navigate the Great Depression and the approach of the Second World War, such arcs could never be properly developed within the confines of a feature film. The Grand Finale should be what its title promises: an elegant farewell. [Berardinelli's rating: 2.5 stars out of 4]
Labels: drama, period
Current thinking is that this will be the final Downton Abbey feature—at least, that’s what the title suggests. Then again, the same claim was made after A New Era, so whether this truly is the last dance for these beloved characters will depend on two things: how well the film performs at the box office and whether enough of the cast and crew are willing to reunite once more.
The downside of leaning so heavily on fan service is that it inevitably shuts out a broader audience. There is no conceivable reason why anyone unfamiliar with Downton Abbey would choose to see this film—and if they did, they would likely drift into sleep from a mix of confusion and boredom. The lightweight narrative all but demands prior familiarity. It is, at heart, a hangout movie for the Upstairs, Downstairs crowd. To its credit, the storyline is better tailored to the characters than that of A New Era, but there is only so much that can be accomplished in a two-hour runtime. The big screen is not the ideal format for these figures; they require time and space to let their arcs unfold. If Downton Abbey is to continue, a new television series would be a far better option than a fourth film.
With the exception of the late Violet Crawley (played by the late Dame Maggie Smith) and the absent Henry Talbot (Matthew Goode), Lady Mary’s (Michelle Dockery) no-good husband, most of the familiar TV and film regulars return—though some enjoy meatier roles than others. The two-pronged narrative focuses on the Crawley family’s financial struggles following the 1929 stock market crash and Lady Mary’s difficulties as a social pariah after her divorce from Henry. Among the upstairs contingent are Robert Crawley (Hugh Bonneville), his wife, Cora (Elizabeth McGovern), their daughter, Edith (Laura Carmichael), with her husband Bertie (Harry Hadden-Paton), son-in-law Tom Branson (Allen Leech), and Mary’s former mother-in-law, Isobel (Penelope Wilton). Downstairs, the ensemble includes the formidable butler Charlie Carson (Jim Carter), lady’s maids Phyllis Baxter (Raquel Cassidy) and Anna Bates (Joanne Froggatt), valet John Bates (Brendan Coyle), housekeeper Elsie Hughes (Phyllis Logan), and cooks Beryl Patmore (Lesley Nicol) and Daisy Parker (Sophie McShera). Also joining the cast are Paul Giamatti, reprising his role from the series as Cora’s brother, Dominic West (from A New Era), and newcomers Alessandro Nivola (as American Gus Sambrook), Joely Richardson (as Lady Petersfield), and Arty Fruoushan (as Noel Coward).
There isn’t a great deal to say about The Grand Finale. The dialogue no longer crackles the way it once did, a shortcoming that can largely be attributed to the absence of Maggie Smith, who consistently had the best lines and delivered them with just the right amount of vinegar. Smith, who was granted the chance to portray Violet’s on-screen death in A New Era before her own passing in 2024, is sorely missed—even if a prominently displayed portrait gives her character a lingering presence.
As much as screenwriter and series creator Julian Fellowes tries to provide every character with a reason to appear, many are reduced to little more than a handful of lines before they enter stage right and exit stage left. Only Mary, Robert, Cora, and Edith are afforded truly substantial roles. Michelle Dockery and Hugh Bonneville both shine, as does Jim Carter, even in a scaled-back performance. Paul Giamatti is a welcome presence, contributing a healthy dose of comedic relief, while Alessandro Nivola is deliciously smarmy in his turn.
Having seen every episode of the six-season TV series and both films, I’m ready to let go. The movies, though never narrative masterpieces, have fulfilled their purpose: they’ve given fans the chance to reconnect with beloved characters while offering nearly everyone on-screen a sense of closure. Could the story continue? Certainly. But in many ways, that would be a shame. While there is some appeal in exploring how these characters might navigate the Great Depression and the approach of the Second World War, such arcs could never be properly developed within the confines of a feature film. The Grand Finale should be what its title promises: an elegant farewell. [Berardinelli's rating: 2.5 stars out of 4]
Labels: drama, period
Flashdance (1983) [R] ***
A film review by Roger Ebert for rogerebert.com on April 19, 1983.
I have a friend who has a simple test for a movie: Is this movie as interesting as the same things would be, happening in real life? A lot of movies aren’t, and Flashdance sure isn’t. If this movie had spent just a little more effort getting to know the heroine of its story, and a little less time trying to rip off Saturday Night Fever, it might have been a much better film.
My friend’s simple test applies to this movie in another way: The movie is not as interesting as the real-life story of Jennifer Beals, the young Chicago actress who stars in it. Beals graduated a year ago from Francis Parker School. She already had launched a career as a model (covers on Town & Country and Vogue), after being discovered by Chicago super-photographer Victor Skrebneski. She enrolled in Yale, took some acting classes in New York, went to an audition, and won this role
The irony is that her story, simply and directly told, might have been a lot more interesting than the story of Flashdance, which is so loaded down with artificial screenplay contrivances and flashy production numbers that it’s waterlogged. This is one of those movies that goes for a slice of life and ends up with three pies.
Jennifer Beals plays Alex, an 18-year-old who is a welder by day, and a go-go dancer by night, and dreams of being a ballet star, and falls in love with the Porsche-driving boss of the construction company, played by Michael Nouri.
These are a lot of character details even if she didn’t also have a saintly old woman (Lilia Skala) as a mentor, a big slobbering dog as a friend, a bicycle she rides all over Pittsburgh, a loft the size of a sweatshop, a friend who ice skates (Sunny Johnson), and the ability to take off her bra without removing her sweatshirt. This poor kid is so busy performing the pieces of business supplied to her by the manic screenwriters that she never gets a chance to develop a character.
Meanwhile, the movie has a disconcerting way of getting sidetracked with big dance scenes. The heroine works in the most improbable working-class bar ever put on film, a joint named Mawby’s that has a clientele out of the Miller’s TV ads, stage lighting reminiscent of Vegas, go-go dancers who change their expensive costumes every night and put on punk rock extravaganzas and never take off all their clothes and never get shouted at by the customers for not doing so.
Flashdance is like a movie that won a free 90-minute shopping spree in the Hollywood supermarket. The director, Adrian Lyne, and his collaborators race crazily down the aisles, grabbing a piece of Saturday Night Fever, a slice of Urban Cowboy, a quart of Marty and a box of Archie Bunker’s Place. The result is great sound and flashdance, signifying nothing. But Jennifer Beals shouldn’t feel bad. She is a natural talent, she is fresh and engaging here, and only needs to find an agent with a natural talent for turning down scripts. [Ebert's rating: 1.5 stars out of 4 =37.5%]
Labels: drama, music, romance
IMDb 62/100
MetaCritic (critics=39, viewers=67)
RottenTomatoes (critics=37, viewers=61)
Blu-ray
My friend’s simple test applies to this movie in another way: The movie is not as interesting as the real-life story of Jennifer Beals, the young Chicago actress who stars in it. Beals graduated a year ago from Francis Parker School. She already had launched a career as a model (covers on Town & Country and Vogue), after being discovered by Chicago super-photographer Victor Skrebneski. She enrolled in Yale, took some acting classes in New York, went to an audition, and won this role
The irony is that her story, simply and directly told, might have been a lot more interesting than the story of Flashdance, which is so loaded down with artificial screenplay contrivances and flashy production numbers that it’s waterlogged. This is one of those movies that goes for a slice of life and ends up with three pies.
Jennifer Beals plays Alex, an 18-year-old who is a welder by day, and a go-go dancer by night, and dreams of being a ballet star, and falls in love with the Porsche-driving boss of the construction company, played by Michael Nouri.
These are a lot of character details even if she didn’t also have a saintly old woman (Lilia Skala) as a mentor, a big slobbering dog as a friend, a bicycle she rides all over Pittsburgh, a loft the size of a sweatshop, a friend who ice skates (Sunny Johnson), and the ability to take off her bra without removing her sweatshirt. This poor kid is so busy performing the pieces of business supplied to her by the manic screenwriters that she never gets a chance to develop a character.
Meanwhile, the movie has a disconcerting way of getting sidetracked with big dance scenes. The heroine works in the most improbable working-class bar ever put on film, a joint named Mawby’s that has a clientele out of the Miller’s TV ads, stage lighting reminiscent of Vegas, go-go dancers who change their expensive costumes every night and put on punk rock extravaganzas and never take off all their clothes and never get shouted at by the customers for not doing so.
Flashdance is like a movie that won a free 90-minute shopping spree in the Hollywood supermarket. The director, Adrian Lyne, and his collaborators race crazily down the aisles, grabbing a piece of Saturday Night Fever, a slice of Urban Cowboy, a quart of Marty and a box of Archie Bunker’s Place. The result is great sound and flashdance, signifying nothing. But Jennifer Beals shouldn’t feel bad. She is a natural talent, she is fresh and engaging here, and only needs to find an agent with a natural talent for turning down scripts. [Ebert's rating: 1.5 stars out of 4 =37.5%]
Labels: drama, music, romance
IMDb 62/100
MetaCritic (critics=39, viewers=67)
RottenTomatoes (critics=37, viewers=61)
Blu-ray
The Flight of the Phoenix (1965) [PG] ****
A film review by Dr. Svet Atanasov for Blu-ray.com on Feb. 16, 2022.
Robert Aldrich's The Flight of the Phoenix arrives on Blu-ray courtesy of Criterion. The supplemental features on the disc include exclusive new program with filmmaker Walter Hill and film scholar Alain Silver; exclusive new program with biographer Donald Dewey on actor James Stewart; and vintage trailer. In English, with optional English SDH subtitles for the main feature.
Robert Aldrich gathered an excellent cast of international stars for this ambitious adaptation of Elleston Trevor's popular novel The Flight of the Phoenix. Despite a strong promotional campaign, however, the film did not meet studio expectations and was considered a flop. But since its release in 1965 it has evolved into something of a minor genre classic, and in 2004 John Moore even directed a loose remake for Twentieth Century Fox, titled Flight of the Phoenix and starring Dennis Quaid.
James Stewart plays the veteran pilot Frank Towns who is forced to crash land an old plane transporting oil rig workers deep into the heart of the Libyan Desert. A few of the passengers die when the plane hits the sand dunes, but the rest survive. After they bury the dead, they figure out that they have enough water for a little over ten days.
Towns takes full responsibility for the accident and tries to keep the morale up, but eventually some of the men begin questioning his authority. The first to do so is Captain Harris (Peter Finch), who thinks that waiting for a rescue mission with a limited supply of water means certain death. But the nearest oasis is more than hundred miles away and reaching it seems impossible. Nevertheless, Harris leaves the camp, and is soon after followed by Trucker Cobb (Ernest Borgnine). Meanwhile, another survivor, Heinrich Dorfmann (Hardy Kruger), announces that he is an aircraft designer and knows how to use parts of the broken plane to build a new one. Towns immediately confronts Dorfmann and declares that his plan is ridiculous, but when he describes exactly what he intends to do it becomes obvious that he could in fact succeed. However, for his plan to work Dorfmann needs everyone to get involved and follow his instructions. This immensely complicates the situation, and even after the interference of his loyal assistant, Lew Moran (Richard Attenborough), Towns refuses to see Dorfmann as anything else but an egoistic challenger who should not be trusted. While the two men openly clash and question their technical knowledge and credibility, the water supply continues to shrink.
The film is loosely broken into three uneven segments, the longest being the second one. It is in this segment that Aldrich gives each actor a chance to shine and introduces a couple of interesting what-if scenarios.
The visuals are quite wonderful and, more importantly, feel authentic. The construction of the new plane certainly looks like a very challenging project, but it is not difficult to accept that it can be made to function exactly as described by Dorfmann. The only questionable element of the project is the final phase, where the exhausted men must drag the new plane to the location chosen by Dorfmann and then test it.
Despite using the same material, Aldrich and Moore's films have very different identities. Aldrich's film has a quasi-documentary appearance and its characters certainly emerge as mortals who must roll the dice and hope that they get a chance to survive. So, there is some real drama and tension in it. Moore's film is more of a show-off piece with all the whistles and bells big-budget Hollywood productions are known for.
Labels: adventure, drama
IMDb 75/100
RottenTomatoes (critics=86, viewers=81)
Blu-ray
Criterion Films catalog entry
Blogger's comment:
In the 1840s John Stringfellow and William Henson patented designs for an Aerial Steam Carriage, a large monoplane design intended for passenger travel. In 1851 Stringfellow, working after his partnership with Henson had ended, successfully flew a small, steam-powered model aircraft, powered by a lightweight steam engine. The aircraft flew 600 meters (2,000 feet) before hitting an obstacle.
Friday, January 23, 2026
Alfie (2004) [R] ***
A film review by James Berardinelli for ReelViews.net
For me, there's a litmus test for remakes: are they sufficiently different and/or interesting in their own right that their existence is easily defended? Admittedly, it's a lot easier to argue the case for a new version of Alfie (to today's audiences, the 1966 original could be considered obscure) than Psycho, but somehow the film doesn't work as well as it should. The problem is one of context. Although director/screenwriter Charles Shyer changes the setting from '60s London to '00s New York, he otherwise stays relatively faithful to the approach (if not the specific text) of Lewis Gilbert's version. The first Alfie occurred during the birth pains of the sexual revolution, when one-night stands were the expected norm for virile young men. Applying that mindset to the AIDS era, when one-night stands can become games of Russian roulette, doesn't work. Cosmetic updates to the title character can't change the fact that Alfie is a relic lifted from one era and dropped into another one.
Having said that, however, it is necessary to point out that Jude Law does a solid job, although he's essaying a person who generates limited audience sympathy. Law does not attempt to ape Michael Caine, but makes the character his own. (Along with The Ipcress File, Alfie is the film that cemented Caine's reputation. It's odd that he doesn't have a cameo in this remake - maybe he learned a lesson from Get Carter.) Like Caine, Law seems comfortable breaking the fourth wall and addressing the audience directly. When Gilbert used the device some 40 years ago, it was fresh, but, by 2004, it is clichéd. Not to mention that it emphasizes Alfie's smugness and narcissism, making him less likable.
Shyer has never found a remake he didn't like. His recent resume is dotted with re-dos. He was involved in new versions of Father of the Bride, Father's Little Dividend (called Father of the Bride Part II so as to not confuse audiences), Once Upon a Crime..., and The Parent Trap. None of these films showed remarkable qualities, so anyone with a degree of familiarity with Shyer's career should have known about what to expect from Alfie. The original Alfie came out at precisely the right time. The remake is 40 years too late.
The storyline is one of simple karma. Throughout the first half of the film, Alfie plays the perfect womanizer, a fashion whore who goes after every pretty FBB (face, boobs, bum) he sees, without concern for the consequences. These include Dorie (Jane Krakowski), a lonely wife whose husband hasn't touched her in five months; Lonette (Nia Long), his best friend's girl; Julie (Marisa Tomei), his quasi-girlfriend who has a son Alfie adores; Nikki (Sienna Miller), who makes a convenient companion on the second loneliest night of the year (Christmas Eve); and Liz (Susan Sarandon), a confident older woman who knows what she likes. Shortly after the midpoint, the tables are turned, and Alfie discovers some hard truths about how he has been treating the opposite sex. By the end of the movie, he hasn't found happiness, but he has discovered humility. During the closing scenes, one can imagine that Charles Chaplin's Smile was written for this character (Smile, though your heart is breaking…).
Aside from Law, there aren't any standout performances. None of the women have large roles, and even the best of them (Sarandon, Miller) struggle to escape the stereotype confines in which the script pigeonholes them. As Marlon, Alfie's best/only friend, Omar Epps doesn't fare any better. Epps has one memorable moment, and it's more his facial expression than his words that make it work. Tomei is surprisingly subdued, and wears a hairdo that one could argue is paying homage to the era in which the original Alfie debuted.
Having expressed some negative thoughts about the film, however, I have to admit that Alfie grew on me. Once we get past all the smart-aleck asides offered up by the title character, and begin to get to know the real Alfie, the movie becomes more engaging. Certain individual scenes are surprisingly effective, such as Alfie's bathroom chat with an older gentlemen (who advises: Find someone to love and live every day as if it was your last), his farewell to Nikki, and the result when he finally brings flowers to a woman. Alfie shouldn't have a happy ending, and it doesn't. Thankfully, Shyer doesn't force something into the film that wouldn't fit.
Alfie has the requisite moments of pathos and humor that allow the movie to be enjoyed on some level, even if the main character occasionally feels like a walking, talking anachronism. Those who demand a sympathetic character to appreciate a film may not have a favorable feeling. I'm more open to ambiguous protagonists and anti-heroes, so this aspect didn't bother me. Still, this is a mixed bag - passable entertainment made palatable largely by Law, but the question of Why? more than What's it all about? still lingers where this remake is concerned. [Berardinelli's rating: 2.5 out of 4 stars = 62%]
Blogger's observation: Alfie's self-assessment in the final scene goes like this:
I used to think I had the best end of the deal. What have I got? Really? Some money in my pocket. Some nice threads. Fancy car at my disposal. And I'm single. Yeah. Unattached. Free as a bird. I don't depend on nobody. Nobody depends on me. My life's my own. But I don't have peace of mind. And if you don't have that, you've got nothing.
Labels: comedy, drama, romance
IMDb 62/100
MetaCritic (critics=49, viewers=59)
RottenTomatoes (critics=48, viewers=51)
DVD
Love Again (2023) [PG-13] ***
A film review by Brian Orndorf for Blu-ray.com on May 5, 2023.
Mira (Priyanka Chopra Jonas) is a children’s book author struggling to come up with an idea for her latest project, still lost in the grieving process two years after the death of her boyfriend, John (Arinze Kene). She lives with her sister, Suzy (Sofia Barclay), still reminded of the man she loved, trying to work through her thoughts by texting his number, sharing her feelings with the void. Rob (Sam Heughan) is a newspaper music critic struggling to get over being dumped by his longtime girlfriend, fighting to focus on an assignment to interview Celine Dion. He receives a new phone from his boss, with the number transferred from John’s old account, allowing Rob to receive Mira’s intimate messages of sadness. Rob eventually meets Mira at the opera, sparking an immediate attraction to the woman, and their dates turn into a relationship, though the writer can’t bear to tell his love about the messages, complicating their union.
Mira purges her feelings into texts for John’s number, confessing her fears and sadness, unaware that these messages are being received by Rob, who’s also managing heartbreak, but more pressing professional matters are found with his mission to chat with Dion, who appears in the film as a Yoda-type figure wise in the ways of love and loss. Love Again settles into sitcom-y territory with the mix-up, but Strouse fights plasticized plotting as much as possible, giving the feature over to the leads, who manage to create semi-real people in the face of ridiculousness. There’s some degree of warmth in Love Again, but it’s challenged by formula, with Rob assigned two pals at work to act as his guide into technology and human contact, giving the picture a few stabs at humor it doesn’t really need.
Rob can’t believe what’s happening with Mira, with the pair growing closer, sharing protected parts of their lives and bits of basketball-themed philosophy. He’s in possession of knowledge that will surely destroy his new relationship, and Love Again lines up with the usual in nonsense communication issues, but Strouse handles it all to the best of his ability. He has to make something accessible and familiar for fans of the subgenre, which isn’t welcome, but Love Again carries initial care for profound situations of pain, finding ways to address the reality of the mourning process without completely losing itself to cliché. [Orndorf's rating: 3 stars out of 5]
Labels: comedy, drama, romance
IMDb 5.9/10
MetaCritic (critics=32, viewers=53)
RottenTomatoes (critics=30, viewers=91)
Blu-ray
Brian Orndorf's original review
Blu-ray review by Kenneth Brown (3/5 stars)