THE BRIDGES OF MADISON COUNTY  4.0****

    

        Based on Robert James Waller's surprisingly successful novella, this movie has Clint Eastwood straying from his  action material and winding up with one of the most passionate love story/dramas. Who knew Eastwood could aim so perfectly for the heart without the help of a gun and holster.

In adapting this story for the screen, Eastwood shrewdly (and graciously) shifts the point of view from Robert Kincaid to Francesca Johnson. With Meryl Streep as its primary focus, how could anything go wrong? Streep is simply luminous here as the foreign-born Iowa farmwife and mother consigned to a life of drudgery. Her family away for the week, she happens upon a handsome, worldly photographer briefly in town scouting out locations for his next National Geographic spread. What results is a beautifully mature story of spiritual and unconditional love. Eastwood himself displays a rare, vulnerable side as the reserved Kincaid who has grown accustomed to a solitary, self-serving existence. The chemistry between Eastwood and Streep is surprisingly potent and ultimately moving, a real tribute to their contrasting styles.

We slowly become familiar with these two unlikely strangers. A harmless lunch...a cozier dinner...revealing conversation...a slight brush of the shoulder...the casual adjustment of a shirt collar...a spontaneous sensual dance. Once their true feelings finally come to the surface, we feel for them and understand and rationalize their attraction. Significantly, Francesca's husband is not portrayed here as an abusive lout deserving of such betrayal. He is simply a remote, unresponsive farmer who has settled routinely into mid-life -- devoted to his family.

The four day affair, of course, is beset with feelings of guilt, anguish and fear, but never regret. The ending of this movie is one of the most searing, emotional screen moments I’ve experienced. I teared up… well cried is a better word and if Sara was not with me I may have bawled.

This is like Casablanca in that it evokes the agony of having to make choices based upon what you think will make your life bearable, at the expense of losing something wonderful, that then becomes a treasured memory. The performances were impeccable and the limited sets made the viewer focus on the relationship that was central to the plot. It's a very intense portrayal of a very real emotional dilemma more so for Francesca because she has a family.

To sum it up, this lyrical movie is like a song, a song about dreams, about love and about living your life the way you want to, even if for a small period of time. As small as four days !

Rated PG-13  for some sexuality and brief strong language .

NOTE: During the filming of an argument between the couple in the kitchen, Robert (Eastwood) begins to cry but turns his back to the camera, so we don't see him cry. Meryl Streep asked Clint Eastwood why he was filming it like that, and by doing so he was missing the opportunity to shine as an actor. Eastwood replied that the scene worked better without seeing Robert cry directly. Streep was amazed and  praised his talent for thinking more about the moment, than his chance to shine as an actor.

 

THE CURRENT WAR 2.8***

At first the title to the movie was strange and confessing. What the heck was a current war ?? Well soon after getting into the movie the title quickly makes sense, like a light bulb coming on. The movie is about the battle between Thomas E, Edison ( played by Benedict Cumberbatch) and his “direct current” (DC) for electricity and George Westinghouse (Michael Shannon) and his “alternating current” (AC). Edison’s DC was weak in strength and could only cover a small area so there had to be lots of generating stations to provide the power. Westinghouse’s AC current was much stronger and could cover a large area but required big generators to produce the AC current. As it turns out Nikola Tesla becomes an important key player in the story. Although he started off working for Edison he become dissatisfied with him and felt under appreciated. So he quit and joined Westinghouse and was the genius who invented the large generators needed to power the AC current. With that accomplishment, Westinghouse had the far better and cheaper AC current for the nation’s electrical needs.

However Edison was quite the competitor and used his showmanship to promote his weaker DC current. Edison also continually attacked AC current as being dangerous. This was somewhat confirmed when Westinghouse’s AC was used for the first execution in an electric chair.  As Edison and Westinghouse grapple for who would power the nation, they sparked one of the first and greatest corporate feuds in American history, establishing for future Titans of Industry the thought  that sometimes you need to bend or break the rules to win, i.e. “the end justifies the means”.

Their current war came to a conclusion with the two men competing for the same prize: a contract to illuminate Chicago's Columbian Exposition in 1893, a full 13 years after the film's event-packed story begins. Edison wants to win so badly that he's prepared to electrocute large animals to demonstrate AC's dangers. As for who  is the victor, you’ll have to see the movie. I don’t want to spoil the outcome.

"The Current War" is a fascinating story but badly told. And even more badly edited. It is a casualty of the Harvey Weinstein scandal that caused this movie to languished on the shelf for two years. The story isn't nearly as illuminating as it should be, despite a good cast .The film's release is being billed as its "Director's Cut," but cutting -- and editing -- is a big part of the problem. As constructed by Director Alfonso Gomez-Rejon  the scenes are so short and choppy -- it's as if there's a 30-second limit on them -- as to undermine the performances, making the high-wattage actors looking little more than the players in dramatic reenactments on some National Geographic special.

I still enjoyed the movie for it’s historic value and good acting. But it could have been SO much better,

Rated PG-13 for some disturbing/violent images, 

                AD ASTRA    3.3***

  Basic plot::   Thirty years ago, Clifford McBride led a voyage into deep space, but the ship and crew were never heard from again. Now his son -- a fearless astronaut -- must embark on a daring mission to Neptune to uncover the truth about his missing father and a mysterious power surge that threatens the stability of the universe.    

“Ad Astra” ( The title means "to the stars" in Latin ) follows Roy McBride, (Brad Pitt) an astronaut in the near future, as he ventures through space in hopes of finding his father, who has been missing for 30 years. Along the way, which includes stops on the Moon and Mars which have been settled) more secrets are uncovered and even deep emotional stakes are explored. Now, this premise seems like your average rescue mission, but it's definitely not that in the slightest. Yes, the movie takes you on this journey, but it really asks you to sit back, enjoy some breathtaking visuals, great sound design, a wonderfully immersive score, and a central character in Roy, who Brad Pitt commits very strongly to.

All of these elements are fantastic and I never found myself bored, but the pacing of this movie is intentionally very, very slow, which may turn off some viewers. At two hours, this movie isn't very long, but it can feel it at times. Other than that, I think what this movie sets out to accomplish is done quite well. I was  immersed in this world and the slow pace almost had me in a trance.  

As aforementioned, Brad Pitt leads this film and demands your attention. Everyone knows that he's one of the best actors out there today, but it's always nice to see when a great actor goes the extra mile in terms of committing to a character. He is excellent and deserving of an Oscar nomination for best actor. Through his performance alone, I truly cared about this movie and how it would end.

. If you come into the film expecting a 'space action adventure', you might be disappointed. The focus is on the character of Roy and how he changes, what he discovers about himself at the end of his journey. The cinematography is gorgeous with vibrant colors, stark contrasts and dazzling lighting, as well as spectacular visual effects depicting a stark, but gentle rendition of outer space.

 Rated PG-13 for some violence and bloody images, and for brief strong language

Sara and I watched one of our all-time favorites this week. It’s the 1983 sci-fi/drama “Wargames” starring a young Mathew Broderick and Ally Sheedy & others. Even though the time period is 1983, it is about computer hacking and the serious threat that presents. So the movie is still applicable to today’s problems.

I highly recommend this movie. Find it on cable or streaming. I guarantee you will enjoy it.

Below is the review by Roger Ebert with some editing by me

I give it 4*** out of 4****

 'Wargames"  4.0***

        Sooner or later, one of these self-satisfied, sublimely confident thinking machines is going to blow us all off the face of the planet. That is the message of "WarGames," a scary and intelligent new thriller that is one of the best films so far this year (1983). The movie stars Matthew Broderick ( who later stars in “Ferris Bueller’s Day Off” 1986) as a bright high school senior who spends a lot of time locked in his bedroom with his home computer. He speaks computerese well enough to dial by telephone into the computer at his school and change grades. But he's ready for bigger game.

He reads about a toy company that's introducing a new computer game. He programs his computer for a random search of telephone numbers in the company's area code, looking for a number that answers with a computer tone. Eventually, he connects with a computer. Unfortunately, the computer he connects with does not belong to a toy company. It belongs to the Defense Department, and its mission is to coordinate early warning systems and nuclear deterrents in the case of World War III. The kid challenges the computer to play a game called "Global Thermonuclear Warfare," and it cheerfully agrees.

As a premise for a thriller, this is a masterstroke. The movie, however, could easily go wrong by bogging us down in impenetrable computerese, or by ignoring the technical details altogether. "WarGames" makes neither mistake. It convinces us that it knows computers, and it takes its knowledge into an amazingly entertaining thriller.

I've described only the opening gambits of the plot, and I will reveal no more. It's too much fun watching the story unwind. Another one of the pleasures of the movie is the way it takes cardboard characters and fleshes them out. Two in particular: the civilian chief of the US computer operation, played by Dabney Coleman as a man who has his own little weakness for simple logic, and the Air Force general in charge of the war room, played by Barry Corbin as a military man who argues that men, not computers, should make the final nuclear decisions.

"WarGames" was directed by John Badham, best known for "Saturday Night Fever" . There's not a scene here where Badham doesn't seem to know what he's doing, weaving a complex web of computerese, personalities and puzzles; the movie absorbs us on emotional and intellectual levels at the same time. And the ending, a moment of blinding and yet utterly elementary insight, is wonderful.  

Sara And I saw this wonderful movie the other night at a theater. Both of us highly recommend it. Below is a review by Pete Hammond of The Deadline Review which I totally agree with and says it better than I could although I made a few revisions.

THE ART OF RACING IN THE RAIN  4.0***

might sound odd to say it, but Kevin Costner gives one of  his better performances  in The Art of Racing in the Rain, but you never once see him onscreen. His touching, funny and very wise work as the voice of Enzo, the dog at the heart of this adaptation of Garth Stein’s bestselling book, is truly extraordinary. The book stayed on the New York Times Best Seller list for 3 1/2 years, translated into 38 languages, and has finally, and lovingly, been brought to the screen in a superb way by director Simon Curtis (Woman In Gold) and screenwriter Mark Bomback. They have created a real crowd-pleaser, a wonderful, funny, joyful and enriching motion picture experience not just for dog lovers and lovers of dog movies (count me in), but everyone who still has a beating heart.

Milo Ventimiglia ( TV’s “Life is Us”) plays Denny Swift, an aspiring Formula One driver who one day adopts golden retriever Enzo as a puppy. The two are inseparable, and Enzo takes a keen interest in his new master’s profession, uniquely tying a philosophy of life into what drivers must use to win on the track. As the years go by, eventually life intervenes when Denny meets the woman he will marry, Eve (Amanda Seyfried), and they have a daughter named Zoe. Suddenly Enzo has his hands full, and this becomes a full-bodied family story, one in which tragedy intervenes. That is where complication also rears its head in the form of a major family conflict between Denny and his in-laws, Eve’s parents (Kathy Baker and Martin Donovan). Balancing the personal problems with his professional goals, there’s always Enzo, who acts as kind of a guide for the audience through it all.

 The Art of Racing in the Rain is first and foremost a human and humane story that is simply glorious, centered on a dog whose real desire in life he says is to become human one day. It seems Enzo, who watches a lot of TV, saw a documentary about Mongolia, where local custom convinces him that in his next life he will indeed become a human if he is a good deserving dog. That is always lurking in the background of the current life he leads, a dog often wiser than any human he actually knows.

Costner is key to making this work, with a vocal performance that never misses a beat. There wasn’t a moment in this heavily-narrated film that I didn’t believe he was Enzo. This is the art of doing voice-over in movies. Ventimiglia is perfectly cast in the lead human role, a compassionate man facing some tough times and trying to keep his life on track. Seyfried offers a warm presence as always, but beyond Costner’s superlative work, you have to credit the three dogs who play Enzo so brilliantly  with  those soulful eyes that will make you melt. Camera work by Ross Emery is right on target, always seeming to feature the POV of the dog, not an easy task. In a summer of sequels and remakes this one is a purebred original about a dog who can teach us all invaluable lessons about life.

Rated PG for thematic material ( meaning every day events that sometimes but rarely affect kids)

THE KITCHEN  2.3***

The Kitchen, is a double entendre, referring to women’s traditional place, but also to Hell’s Kitchen, the Manhattan neighborhood which in the late ’70s was home to poor working-class families and Irish American gangs like the one portrayed here.

Kathy (Melissa McCarthy), Ruby (Tiffany Haddish), and Claire (Elizabeth Moss) are the wives of three small-time Irish crime bosses in New York’s Hell’s Kitchen in 1978. When the men are sent to prison, the financially strapped women decide to take over their husbands’ work, gathering protection money from local businesses. The organization-minded Kathy becomes an empowered community leader. Ruby’s ruthlessness and uncompromising negotiating tactics help the women get what they deserve. Claire, whose husband, Rob, abused her, uses the opportunity to learn to defend herself (and how to efficiently dismember and dispose of a body), and she eventually becomes the group’s enforcer, alongside her partner, Gabriel (and Claire’s sometime lover).

The three lead actresses and the rest of the cast work hard but the poor script fails them. But I have to say I had a hard time imagining Melissa McCarthy as a bad-ass mobster .. so that did not work for me at all.  The writing  is messy, uneven, and somewhat bland. It’s also hard to root for the characters. After all, they become full-fledge criminals and murderers.  The movie just feels like a lot of disjointed scenes that don’t always connect into a story, leading to a third act twist that feels both forced and obvious. Also Gangster films rely heavily on tension, and unfortunately that is lacking in this movie.

Essentially, The Kitchen is a movie that I wanted to like more than I did. It’s not a terrible movie but ends up being a disappointing waste of talent.

Rated R for violence, language throughout and some sexual content 

SPIDERMAN: Far From Home  3.3*** When the movie starts out the viewer gets all the emotions back from the ending of Avengers: Endgame which included Spider-Man and his very special relationship with Iron Man a/k/a Tony Stark.  The movie follows Peter Parker and his high school science class on their field trip around the world. The film does a great job of showing how a teenager, here Peter, develops a crush on a girl, MJ, and how nervous he is about being around her. It's a nice touch to have super hero with teenage angst about a girl.  When things start going well, a villain appears and Peter Parker must work with a new hero that people name "Mysterio." The movie does a great job of keeping the viewer sucked into the screen with constant, well timed humor and heart-tugging moments. Once you feel like the movie should be coming to an end, you look at your watch and realize you're only an hour in. That is when the movie has a brilliant plot twist and much of what you thought you knew about the movie was just an illusion. As characters get reestablished in their roles, the viewer is treated to more thrills, suspense, and fun as the story unfolds.   Surprisingly enough, the centerpiece of this film is not the superhero's extraordinary world-saving abilities, but the budding romance between  very ordinary human characters. It might be more accurate to describe this film as a blend of rom-com and action-comedy under the disguise of a superhero movie, since the scale of the "world-saving" and the stakes for the final showdown are more much limited compared to what happened in Endgame.   I was impressed with Zendaya's performance as MJ, which finally breaks the stereotype of a superhero's love interest. Instead of your typical dumbed-down eye-candy, Zendaya's MJ is intelligent, quirky, interesting, and absolutely lovable. Tom Holland is, at this point, Spider-Man's alter ego. I cannot really imagine Spider-Man being anyone else other than him although I liked Toby McGuire in the 1st Spider-man movie. Mysterio (played by Jake Gyllenhal) is the new Marvel character appearing for the 1st time in a Marvel movie.  Gyllenhal was born for this role and performed the part quite well .  The movie makes us cheer for its big heart in addition to the action sequences. Maybe Spider-man falling in love is just as important as saving the world. That's something we can relate to. "Spider-Man: Far from Home" is definitely worth seeing and if you can,  see it at I-MAX in 3D.