They are leaving to stay alive. “Beyond Utopia” (2023)

SashLeave a comment
directed by Madeleine Gavin
© 2023 Roadside Attractions. All Rights Reserved.

The reason why I like documentaries so much is because thanks to them I quickly learn something new about the world (or even beyond). However, there are some documentaries that I wish were fictional. Because what I see in them is unbelievable and terrifying. Today’s recommendation is such film and despite being highly unpleasant, I definitely want you to watch it. North Korea is a specific country, incredibly mysterious, because we have a rather limited access to news coming from there. The country’s authorities pay a lot of attention to their national PR and do their best to be perceived as a perfect country. Still, we all know that the pretty picture they’re painting is in fact hideous. In this documentary, we get to know Seungeun Kim, a pastor from South Korea, who’s been rescuing people from North Korea since the year 2000. In order to present the struggle that refugees are dealing with, we’re following a family trying to escape North Korea. Crossing the border and getting to another country isn’t the worst part, because neighbouring countries are obliged to send such runaways back to their country of origin. So if one wants to escape North Korea, they must go much further. In this case, the family has to cross several countries and end up in Thailand, and only then they might feel safe. We also get to know a woman whose son tried escaping North Korea and got caught. Now, she’s doing everything to keep him safe, but she’s aware that such people either get murdered or are sent to work in horrible conditions and eventually die. I’ve seen several films and read several books about North Korea, but this documentary hit me hard. I guess the most emotional moment for me was when the filmmakers were asking the family members about their opinions on their country and their leaders. I had chills when the grandma, an over 80-years-old lady, said she doesn’t mind living in North Korea, but she left because she didn’t want to separate from her daughter. That’s it. People living there are manipulated and taught to believe that their reality is good, even though they are being treated like slaves. That’s why they are not allowed to have contact with the outside world. It sounds like a sci-fi production, but no – it’s the reality of a country that’s on the same planet as we are. I have huge respect towards such people like the pastor, because they risk their own safety and life for others. I want you to see this documentary, because if we have a chance to get informed about that situation, let’s use this privilege. The access to knowledge is a treasure we often don’t appreciate enough.

My rating: 8/10
S.

The world is gonna know my name. “Pearl” (2022)

SashLeave a comment
directed by Ti West
© 2022 A24. All Rights Reserved.

It’s not common for me to absolutely dislike one film by a specific director, and then adore their other production. Mostly, I either dislike them all, adore them all, or just… tolerate them all. When I was watching “X” by Ti West, I really hoped for it to end faster. Not because I’m sensitive and can’t handle slashers, but that film’s aesthetics and form weren’t my piece of cake. Yes, you can also appreciate the aesthetics of slasher films, surprise surprise. So that was a big no from me. But then I heard of the prequel titled “Pearl” and a lot of cinephiles were actually recommending it so I had to give it a chance. And let me just tell you – if you also didn’t like “X”, please, try watching “Pearl”. But if you haven’t seen “X” – no worries, you may watch this prequel without knowing the first film (perhaps it’s for the best). We’re moving back to 1918 where Pearl (Mia Goth) is a young woman (in “X” she’s an elderly lady) living with her parents on a farm. Her father is paralysed and needs constant support, and her mother is incredibly strict and demanding. Pearl seems to be struggling with her mental health, mostly due to her environment and the way she lives. However, in order to distance herself from the reality, she’s dreaming of becoming a film star. When an important audition is announced, the woman focuses on that and truly believes she’s going to be a celebrity. But her family is a big obstacle to make this dream come true. What if they just… Okay, stopping here. This film is a horror and it is highly disturbing, but way more consistent in its form than “X”, at least to me. So from the technical point of view it’s pleasant to watch, but from the psychological point you might need an extra session with your therapist. In most reviews I spot that Pearl is presented as a psycho whose actions are unpredictable and it’s entertaining to watch. Well, not in my opinion. Pearl isn’t just a bad person – she was made to be bad. She grew up in a very toxic environment, feeling unloved, unappreciated and simply unseen. The number of expectation mixed with lack of perspectives created a true monster out of her. Yes, in the end this film might be watched during a Halloween movie night, but if you take a moment to analyse the character of Pearl, the story becomes way deeper. I guess I could say it’s a reminder that villains are not born, they are formed. And mostly, they are formed by other people. Maybe it’s not a masterpiece and I guess I can’t be called Mr. West’s fan numero uno, but I recommend you this film for sure. Especially because of the character of Pearl and the way Mia, the actress, presented a wide range of strong emotions in just one role. Chapeau bas.

My rating: 6/10
S.

If you erase the pain, you erase the person. “Meet Cute” (2022)

SashLeave a comment
directed by Alex Lehmann
© 2022 Peacock. All Rights Reserved.

Do you know what “meet cute” is in cinema? It’s the scene where two characters, potential future lovers, meet for the first time. We all enjoy that unique feeling of excitement and curiosity, which can never be repeated. Unless you’re Sheila (Kaley Cuoco) from Manhattan, who one day meets Gary (Pete Davidson) at a bar and the date goes so well that Sheila wishes to experience it again. But not just regularly date Gary – she wants to repeat the same first day. In order to do it, she goes back in time using a tanning bed in a nail salon (I know how it sounds, please stay with me here) and meets Gary for the first time, again. It really sounds like a silly romantic comedy, but the longer you watch it, the more you realise how realistic it actually is. Obviously, I still haven’t found a tanning bed that works like a time machine, but the reason why Sheila keeps repeating that date is very much understandable. If you want to find it out yourself, please stop reading the post and go watch the film. I’m about to share her motivation, which allows me to slightly discuss it. So, at some point Sheila reveals that she used the time machine on the day she wanted to kill herself and that very evening she met Gary for the first time. Their date was so unusually pleasant that she wished for it to never end. It was a meeting that literally saved her life. At first I thought it’s just a goofy comedy about time travelling and repeating the date until it’s perfect and the guy falls in love with Sheila. However, it shows the real mask of depression that many people wear on a daily basis. Those are often gorgeous, successful, physically healthy people who deep inside feel incredibly empty and lost. When we first see Sheila, there are no signs of her personal struggles – she’s energetic, spontaneous and cheerful. Why would such woman want to end her life? Well, because that’s how depression works. It doesn’t choose the person, it just hits you hard. This film has quite poor ratings and I know it is a bit too messy when it comes to the screenplay, but generally, I believe more people should see it. The story of Sheila and Gary reminds us that we all have our backgrounds and we all go through difficult moments, so the most important is not to hide this authentic part of us and find a person who stays for better or worse. It’s easy to find a date for a night out, to attend a loud concert and have overpriced drinks till 4 in the morning, but finding a person who’s there for you to listen, to just keep you company when things are the worst – that’s a quality relation. Yesterday, we had World Suicide Prevention Day, but such day should be everyday. We should prevent it everyday by being present, attentive and empathic. Sometimes a simple conversation can literally save a life. Keep that in mind.

My rating: 6/10
S.

The juice is loose. “Beetlejuice Beetlejuice” (2024)

SashLeave a comment
directed by Tim Burton
© 2024 Warner Bros. Pictures. All Rights Reserved.

Day-o, day-o!
Daylight come and me wan’ go home…
If that song has been stuck in your head during every family dinner, you’re a Millennial with a very good taste in films. Uncle Burton decided to bless us with a sequel to remind us all about that disgusting green-haired creature in a striped suit. Obviously, I was worried because sequels aren’t generally a great idea (except making money on people’s nostalgia), but seeing Burton’s film on a big screen? Honey, I’m in! Especially, when it comes to such random and fantastic pictures that you can see in “Beetlejuice”. In the second part, we move forward in time where Lydia (Winona Ryder) is already an adult, has a successful careers as a medium and a daughter named Astrid (Jenna Ortega), who isn’t really fond of her much. Oh, I guess I don’t have to tell you this film should be seen only if you’ve seen the first part? Really, don’t even try skipping the 1988 one. Moving on – Lydia’s father dies in an accident so his funeral is an occasion for Lydia, Astrid and Delia (Catherine O’Hara) to meet all together in the old house. And since they are already there, I guess they shouldn’t leave without saying ‘hello’ to Betelgeuse (Michael Keaton), right? Let me tell you that the idea for the beginning is quite smooth and logical, in my opinion, considering the circumstances (Jeffrey Jones, who played Charles – Lydia’s father, has had quite dirty problems with the law, so the production team didn’t want him to be a part of the film). Besides, casting Jenna as Lydia’s daughter was a brilliant idea and we can tell that Jenna has a good vibe with the director; she understands his cinematographic madness and joins in. However, the film has rather average ratings and here’s my personal view on that (potential SPOILERS coming): the main reason why this part isn’t as enjoyable as the previous one is because of too many subplots and unnecessary characters. As much as I adore Monica Bellucci, her Delores is just a fun story to tell, but in fact, this whole chasing of Beetlejuice makes no difference. Another character that I would skip is actually Wolf Jackson (Willem Dafoe), the detective/actor. Again, great actor, but if you think about it, completely unnecessary role for the main plot. The character of Jeremy (the treehouse boy), however, very on point and actually loved the idea of him meeting Astrid. I would even extend that relation and skip Delores and detective subplots. You see, in the first part of “Beetlejuice”, we had only the couple of ghosts, Betelgeuse (love the spelling, forgive me), and the family. Period. And that’s why it was easy to follow. In the second part, we have too many distractions from the main story. Personally, I’d make the 3rd film and introduce the character of Delores then – it would actually have a potential for a great main plot. And my last complaint – not enough Beetlejuice. He was way calmer and less visible in this part, which is a huge pity. After leaving the cinema, I immediately wanted to watch the first part to Betelgeuse myself more. Wait, does it sound inappropriate? Didn’t mean to. I just really wanted to see more of Michael in that role, because it’s iconic. But hey, in general, this is still a Burton’s film, totally crazy, totally weird, extending your imagination in all possible ways, so thank you for this ride in a soul train and may a children church choir sing “Banana Boat” at your funeral one day.

My rating: 7/10
S.


P.S. I just LOVE the fact that the first part is titled “Beetlejuice”, and the second one “Beetlejuice Beetlejuice” instead of adding numbers or some pointless subtitles to that. Thank you for this little gift to cinephiles! Now they have to make the third part or our OCD destroys us from the inside…

Pigs don’t know how to hate. “Conspiracy” (2001)

SashLeave a comment
directed by Frank Pierson
© 2001 HBO Films. All Rights Reserved.

Except the fact that I watch a lot of films, I’m also a bookworm who tends to choose rather difficult books. Recently, I’ve read a reportage about the crimes that were taking place in the first half of the 20th century in psychiatric hospitals in Poland. I imagine you know what was happening in Poland during the WWII, but except the death camps, people were being killed also in such hospitals. Nazis believed in eugenics, so eliminating people that weren’t beneficent to the society or needed a more advanced support from others. It means they were killing people with disabilities (both mental and physical), with specific health issues, or even those who seemed annoying to them. Numerous parents were forced to give away their children to such hospitals where the little patients were supposed to be taken care of, but instead they were being poisoned and weakened until death. Absolutely horrible. When I finished reading the book, a film popped out on a streaming platform – and that’s the film I’m recommending you today. I always laugh that I have a secret agent stalking me on the internet, because it’s enough to think about something and suddenly my browser and social media are full of the necessary content. I call my secret agent John. So, thanks John! This time I had a chance to see a film I’d never heard of before, yet I’m absolutely amazed by it, despite its general topic. It tells us about a secret meeting Nazi officials had in 1942 during which they discussed how to eliminate Jews from their territory. Let me remind you that occupied countries were also considered their territory. The whole film basically happens in one conference room, yet it’s very dynamic and emotional. You see a bunch of men sitting and talking, but your head is all over the place. Most of us know the basic history, so we’re aware of the events from that time, but it’s totally different to actually hear certain dialogues being said. The actors playing in the film are fantastic, so they made the meeting look even more realistic and disturbing. To be honest, I got honestly terrified watching this film, because one – the real meeting happened not that long time ago, and two – I cannot imagine someone talking about people’s lives in such ignorant and hateful way. The main question at that table wasn’t whether it’s moral to do what they’re doing, but how to do it more efficiently. I was speechless. And I believe the film should be remembered, especially on days like this one. 1st of September 1939 – the beginning of World War II. That is why I’m sharing the post today, after 85 years, hoping such 1st of September doesn’t happen again. But to finish the post in a more cinephile mood, I’d like to say that “Conspiracy” really reminded me of “12 Angry Men” when it comes to the form. The topics of the discussions were obviously very different, yet the pace and general picture were quite similar. That’s just my little observation, so check it out yourselves.

My rating: 8/10
S.

It’s a story that starts on a train. “Our Story” (“Notre histoire”, 1984)

SashLeave a comment
directed by Bertrand Blier
© 1984 AMLF. All Rights Reserved.

Recently, we’ve lost Alain Delon, a French cinema icon. In order to remember him or to introduce him to you, I’d like to recommend you “Our Story”. It’s not a film with high ratings and mine isn’t a 10 either, but there’s something unique about this production, so I hope you’ll feel encouraged to see it. Plus, it’s the only film Alain played in which was awarded, so it’s an important title to know while remembering the actor. Today’s film is absurd and it’s not just my personal opinion. It’s absurd from the beginning till the end. We see a man (Alain Delon) taking a train and telling us a story about a man taking a train – probably referring to himself. Soon, a lovely woman (Nathalie Baye) joins him and she is also telling a story of herself (as if she was a narrator). The two passengers begin a conversation which is basically telling one story that now involves both of them. Are you still with me? I’ve told you, it’s absurd, but hang on. The lady gets off the train and the man follows her as if they knew each other before. They continue the story but no longer as strangers, so it feels like we’re introduced to a new story, yet with the same characters. At some point they are not just random passengers on a train, but they become lovers getting closer to each other, or even a husband and wife. It’s difficult to describe the film, so I guess that’s the first reason why you should see it – out of pure curiosity. To me it looked like an improvisation session that actors may have sometimes. You know, they go on stage, not switching the background or costumes, just simply changing characters, relations and motivation. I must say it’s a film that makes you think hard and stay focused, because if you lose concentration, you may not spot the moment the actors changed their stories. I’m not surprised the film has rather average ratings, because it’s a difficult form to follow by viewers and somewhere in the middle I was already a bit tired as well. Still, I appreciate the idea and how well the actors managed to find themselves in such absurdity. If you want to know how I understand this film… I haven’t found anyone sharing my opinion on the internet, but to me it shows the variety of love relations. Sometimes it’s just a flirty chat with a stranger, sometimes it’s supporting your partner who’s struggling with a personal problem. Sometimes it’s a passionate night spent with a beloved person, sometimes it’s feeling lonely because your person of interest is not on the same page. So if you meet someone, the common task is to find your own love story. Also, it reminds us that such stories are not always pretty and covered in glitter, which is a very basic conclusion, yet universal and always welcome in cinema. To sum up, it’s not an easy film, but the experience is worth your time. And may Mr Delon rest in peace.

My rating: 6/10
S.

What is your love life like? “Paris, 13th District” (“Les Olympiades”, 2021)

SashLeave a comment
directed by Jacques Audiard
© 2021 Memento Distribution. All Rights Reserved.

It’s not a film I’d watch again, but I’m actually glad I’ve seen it at least once. Generally, I’m unsure about modern productions made in black and white, because very often there’s absolutely no point in losing the colour. I know, I know, black and white films look more artistic, less conventional, as if they were made by some independent artist who’d spent three months in a jungle discovering themselves by sleeping in a hammock and meditating at dawn. And that’s why I’m often discouraged by such films. Not because I’m against meditating in the jungle, but because very often such films have basic screenplays and are horribly overrated. So imagine my face when I pressed play to see “Paris, 13th District” and I saw a black and white screen. Oh boy… But hey, since, I’m writing about it, I guess it wasn’t the case, right? The story isn’t much complicated, because it’s about four people that meet with each other at some point. Émilie (Lucie Zhang) is looking for a flatmate and that’s how Camille (Makita Samba) starts living with her in the 13th district in Paris (as the title says). Not to spoil too much, but at some point we’re introduced to the character of Nora (Noémie Merlant), who gets mistaken for yet another person, Amber (Jehnny Beth). But the way all those people get connected should stay a secret for you to reveal while watching, because that’s one of the points of this films, I believe. It shows how randomly we may come across someone who can change our life or connect us with even more people that become somehow relevant for us. However, if I had to describe this film in 3 words, I’d say “brutal millennial relations”. All those people are young adults (in theirs 20-30s), who search for company, appreciation and some kind of intimacy. Unfortunately, the world we’re living in doesn’t alway provide us with relations that we actually need, so we may start looking for different ones. What they present in the film is quite depressing, because it shows how lost one may be in the search of intimacy, how disrespectful one can be towards another person just for the sake of their pleasure, and how dishonest most relations are. Watching this film I was asking myself whether there’s still a chance for a meaningful connection where both sides feel complete. The scariest part is that this insecurity is contagious, because if one person isn’t sure about their feelings, the other person may start questioning their own. And that is why I support keeping this film in black and white – because this is an accurate visualisation of relations quality we have these days. We really miss concrete colours in love life; everything seems blurred and shallow. As I said, I wouldn’t watch this film again, but once is enough to keep my mind busy for a while.

My rating: 7/10
S.

Every man has to go through hell to reach paradise. “Cape Fear” (1991)

SashLeave a comment
directed by Martin Scorsese
© 1991 Universal Pictures. All Rights Reserved.

Once upon a time, uncle Martin (Scorsese) and uncle Steven (Spielberg) decided to exchange their projects – Steven continued working on “Schindler’s List” and Martin finalised “Cape Fear” (a remake of a film from 1962). What a wonderful barter, I’m telling ya! If you follow my social media, you know that “Schindler’s List” is my beloved production made my Spielberg, while “Cape Fear” definitely suits Scorsese more. In fact, it’s one of my favourite films by him as well. Generally, I believe that Scorsese’s style is perfect for middle-aged and older men, who enjoy watching films with a glass of whiskey and a cigar in their hands. I’m not such guy, so that’s why I don’t always fully appreciate his ideas. However, today’s film is definitely more universal and I bet a wider audience may enjoy it. In the 70s, Max Cady (Robert De Niro) was sentenced for committing a horrible crime – raping a teenager. He spent 14 years in prison, which could have been shortened or avoided if only his attorney, Sam Bowden (Nick Nolte), hadn’t hid some important evidence speaking against the victim. The lawyer did that because he was disgusted by Max’s actions and losing the case was actually considered a good thing to do. Unfortunately, 14 years have passed and Max is out there, ready to get revenge. He’s no silly criminal – he’s actually a very clever psychopath ready to “thank” Sam for his service. As you might be guessing, this film is incredibly creepy and I believe it’s one of the most interesting roles of De Niro. I know how it sounds, but he makes a perfect psychopath. No idea how he found so much disturbing energy in himself, but he really did a great job here. However, what I appreciate this film for is presenting the problem of judiciary, more specifically being a defence attorney of a criminal. If two people are getting a divorce and they are fighting over a piece of furniture, that’s a different story. But if you’re a lawyer and you know from the beginning that the person you’re working for is guilty, then what’s the right thing to do? Fight to prove what a great lawyer you are, or let the defendant end up in prison? Especially if that person has done something terrible like in this story. Quite often, even in films, when someone commits a big crime they are told “oh man, you’ll need a very good lawyer”. They know they are to blame, but still – if they hire the right person, there’s nothing to worry about. And here comes quite hurtful reflection – does justice even exist anymore? And it gets even more complicated because like in Max’s situation – if the lawyer had been honest, Max would have avoided going to prison, but Sam knew that the man is still a sick criminal who may hurt someone else. Do you see what a mentally tiring story that is? And I loved it. If you need to exercise your brain and reflect on the world that we’re living in, that’s your film for today.

My rating: 7/10
S.

If they call you crazy, just thank them. “Nobody is Crazy” (“Nadie está loco”, 2019)

SashLeave a comment
directed by Federico J. Arioni
© 2019 Vendetta Furiosa. All Rights Reserved.

The best part about writing a film blog is when you get to meet other cinephiles and learn about productions you would probably never hear of. What a nice surprise it was when Federico reached out to me to share his film “Nobody is Crazy”. As usually, I avoided reading any short descriptions or watching the trailer – I simply pressed play and let the story begin. Oh boy, how lucky I feel to be writing this blog, have I told you that already? Because this film is a true gem that I would have missed, so I’m happy to be recommending it today and I truly believe you should see it yourselves. We get to meet Rafael (Manuel Gutierrez), who’s a rather introverted teenager that perceives the world differently than other. His background is complicated as he’s an orphan who got adopted, but his parents eventually got divorced, so now he’s being raised only by his adoptive mother. The woman struggles to understand her son as his psychological issues become too overwhelming for her. She gave him an ultimatum – he either works hard on himself and changes his behaviour, or he’ll be sent to a military high school. Rafael doesn’t seem to be much hopeful about any potential changes happening until he meets Nobody (Federico J. Arioni). Nobody is a guy in a black mask, who claims to be a time traveller. He’s also considered a crazy person by everyone around, but he’s not bothered and he makes his craziness a feature to be proud of. Rafael wishes to learn how to be normal, how to act properly, so others wouldn’t consider him a weirdo. Since Nobody looks like a guy who understands him, those two start spending more and more time together. Will Rafael learn how to be normal? That’s for you to see. I have to say that from the very beginning of the film I was engaged in the story. First, the characters of Rafael and Nobody are very well planned and presented. They are unique and very concrete, so both actors know exactly what to do, how to play and what feelings to deliver on the screen. One of the actors is the director, so it was definitely easier for him to know what the author had in mind, but seeing the other actor, I can tell they had a quality communication on the set. Second, I adored the camerawork, because even during longer dialogues, we couldn’t get bored. Something I personally dislike in films is when a film becomes a podcast with several frames. No, a film is a film and even if there’s a 10-minute conversation, I need the camera to move, to show me various angles, to zoom in, zoom out, and do all other tricks to keep me even more engaged. And that’s what’s present here. Third, if you’re a true cinephile with most classics watched, you will be satisfied to see how the director got inspired by numerous productions. He even mentioned his inspiration on the film’s page, but I’m not sharing the titles here, because I recommend you to see the film and try finding those inspirational “Easter eggs” yourselves. The only thing that wasn’t sometimes working for me was the music – in some moments I’d choose different tracks for the background, but it’s just my opinion. Other than that, I was really happy to see a film about an incredibly important social issue nowadays. More and more teenagers struggle to feel accepted, validated and simply loved. There’s so much pressure and at the same time lack of understanding that those young humans cannot handle it. Some decide to fight, some hide in the shadow, and some others decide not to continue their own journey… This film reminds us in an unusual way that there’s no such thing as normality – it’s some idiotic concept made up by hell knows whom. Nobody is crazy, because we’re all crazy in our individual way. Just like they say in the film: if they call you crazy, just thank them. Because that’s probably the most accurate compliment you can receive. Once again, so happy I could experience this story and I wish you all to enjoy it as well!

My rating: 8/10
S.

One never knows what joy one might find amongst the unwanted. “Kinky Boots” (2005)

SashLeave a comment
directed by Julian Jarrold
© 2005 Buena Vista Pictures Distribution. All Rights Reserved.

About two months ago I went to see “Kinky Boots” play at a theatre in my city. Later, when I was recommending it to my friend, he said: “Oh I know this story, I’ve seen the film”. Wait a minute… The film? And that’s basically how I found out about “Kinky Boots” by Julian Jarrold. Sometimes all you need to do is visit a theatre to later end up watching the same story on the screen. Life can be mysterious. Anyway, as you can see, I’m recommending the film, so seems like I enjoyed it. But did I liked it more than the play? That’s for you to find out at the end of the post. First – the plot. We’re going to Northampton in England where Charlie (Joel Edgerton, Sebastian Hurst-Palmer as young Charlie) is running his family business – a shoe factory. Charlie’s father was incredibly dedicated to his work, so the factory was flourishing. Unfortunately, his son isn’t equally enthusiastic about it, plus some difficulties have occurred since their shoes aren’t that sought-after anymore. No selling, no money, muchos problemas – simple maths. One night, Charlie notices a lady being harassed by a group of men and he decides to save her. Turns out that the lady is named Lola (Chiwetel Ejiofor, Courtney Phillips as young Lola) and she’s a drag queen. For Charlie it’s really difficult to understand the concept of being a drag queen, but Lola is more than happy to make it clear to him. Except those two sharing private sociocultural lessons, Charlie comes up with a great idea how to save his business. You see, drag queens are mostly men (because we also have female drag queens, just so you know) who dress up in a more feminine way, which often includes wearing high heels. However, the heels that are made for women might not necessary be comfortable or even safe for men. Besides, generally men have bigger foot sizes, so finding a pair of heels becomes a challenge. Charlie decides to cooperate with Lola and start producing high heels for drag queens. Brilliant, right? Well, keep in mind that being a drag queen is still controversial in many places, so this new adventure requires a lot of patience, understanding and support from both sides. The screenplay is based on a true story, which makes it even more interesting. If you asked me to come up with an idea for a film about tolerance, I’d probably never end up with anything like “Kinky Boots”. Saving a shoe factory by making heels for drag queens? How crazy and brilliant that is? So the story definitely needs to be shared. However, not sure whether it’s because I also saw that play in the theatre with a different cast, but I actually wouldn’t choose Chiwetel Ejiofor for the role of Lola. He’s a fantastic actor, don’t get me wrong, he gave me chills with some of his other performances, but in this one – I felt nothing. It’s not about the appearance, but about this something, this spark that drag queens have. I believe not everyone could be a good drag queen, because it’s not enough to wear a dress, a wig and strong make-up. As a man, you have to wake up this feminine part of yours and make everyone around you feel your feminine power. Every step, every glance, every hand movement has to be screaming with this beautiful feminine and sexual energy. Chiwetel did a very good job preparing for the role, but you either have the spark or not, and in this case I couldn’t spot it. But hey, maybe you will, so make sure to check this film out. Despite touching quite difficult topics, it’s still a comedy to enjoy. Plus, the performance at the end is worth waiting for, trust me. So, did I like the play more? Yes, I did, and it’s because of two reasons. First, the screenplay was a bit different and, in my opinion, some elements were more engaging in the play (for example the relation between Lola and her father). Second, Lola was played by one of my beloved actors and he really understood the task. No idea how he did that, but he didn’t play a drag queen – he became a drag queen. Still, give a chance to the film because this story is really worth your time. And remember: “Red is the colour of sex! Burgundy is the colour of hot water bottles!”

My rating: 7/10
S.