Books > Men. “Madam Yankelova’s Fine Literature Club” (“HaMoadon LeSafrut Yaffa Shel Hagveret Yanlekova”, 2017)

SashLeave a comment
directed by Guilhad Emilio Schenker
© 2017 Rock Salt Releasing. All Rights Reserved.

Perhaps my post surprises you, because I’m about to recommend a film that has quite bad ratings. And honestly, I guess I know why. But I looked at the film from a different perspective and realised, it’s just their kind of humour that isn’t similar to mine. Yet, it doesn’t mean it’s not funny. As you see the title of this film is horribly long, both in Hebrew and English, so I believe it took you a lot of time to read it, that’s why I’ll try to keep this post short. The main character is Sophie Kafry (Keren Mor), who’s a middle-aged librarian. Boring? Just wait. She’s a member of a secret book club only for women that meet once a week to discuss good quality literature. Boring? Waaaaait… Each lady has to bring a man for the meeting and every gentleman is rated according to his attractiveness. The woman who brings the most handsome partner wins a special trophy and all the male guests are later… turned into hot dogs. Yes, you’re reading correctly. Sophie has won 99 of such trophies (not such a innocent librarian anymore, huh?), but she still cannot get the 100th one which would give her the opportunity to join the Lordesses’s House, the most important status in the club. One day she meets a very attractive man at the library who asks Sophie for help in finding some information. Those two start spending more and more time together, so the woman knows he will agree to join her for the next book club meeting and she will finally win the last trophy. And guess what can go wrong? Oh you will see. It’s hard to say what this film really is. Some say it’s a drama, but I would say it’s an art comedy that presents how women, in some different reality or perhaps in the future (who knows?), may cherish art and knowledge and despise men. The opposite sex is there just to make food out of them, however, books are something holy that should be highly respected. I know how ridiculous it sounds (although books are a bless indeed, no kidding), but if you look at the story from this perspective, of presenting female-male relations, you may appreciate it more. Especially with such an ending. This film relaxed me and inspired to thinking about how different our society would look like if we paid more attention to such goods as books instead of running after hot representatives of the opposite sex. I promised a short post, but didn’t manage. Well, reading it good for you, so feel free to thank me.

My rating: 6/10
S.

Not every puzzle is intended to be solved. “Puzzle” (“Rompecabezas”, 2010)

SashLeave a comment
directed by Natalia Smirnoff
© 2010 Sophie Dulac Distribution. All Rights Reserved.

As I mentioned in my yesterday’s post, today I’d like to share a few words about the original “Puzzle.” This one was made in Argentina and it became an inspiration for the producers of the American remake. The story is absolutely the same, so there’s no point of writing it all again. If you missed my previous post, check it out. There are only some tiny elements that are different, but generally it’s a copy-paste. In the Argentine version the main character is played by María Onetto. I believe both ladies, Onetto and Macdonald, did a fantastic job, even though they aren’t the same in this role. And that is why I’m recommending both versions of the film. I’m glad that Americans made a remake, because they showed that the topic of treating women as servants is universal. Both the ladies act differently, but accordingly to their culture. I enjoyed watching the same story in two various versions. I believe those films would be a wonderful material for a discussion during a psychology/sociology class. However, I’m rating the original film a bit lower because of one reason: the hand-held shooting. It sort of made me feel as if I was watching a documentary and I was a person standing right next to the main character, but on the other hand it was all shaky and it seemed cheap for me. I really dislike using hand-held shooting in fictional productions and I believe it wasn’t necessary in this one. Other than that, I loved it, just like I loved the American remake. Even though they tell the same story, I recommend you to see both, because you may compare two world with each other and look at the problem of excluding women from the social life from two perspectives.

My rating: 6/10
S.

When you complete a puzzle, you know that you have made all of the right choices. “Puzzle” (2018)

SashLeave a comment
directed by Marc Turtletaub
© 2018 Sony Pictures Classics. All Rights Reserved.

Can you imagine a film about puzzles interesting? Neither could I. But I just played it because I was too lazy to search for something more ambitious and I was too tired for something more complex than watching a person putting all the pieces together to have a picture of a dog or some other animal on their table. And I made a huge mistake, because this film is nothing like that. It’s actually horribly difficult and, if you’re not a fan of keeping women in the kitchen, incredibly frustrating. I mean, the main character is Agnes (Kelly Macdonald) who’s married to Louie (David Denman) and they have two grown sons, Ziggy (Bubba Weiler) and Gabs (Austin Abrams). She’s a typical housewife, whose life focuses on cleaning, cooking and doing absolutely nothing for herself. The film starts with a party during which Agnes doesn’t even have time to sit and relax, because she needs to serve her family and guests. Soon we realise it’s her own birthday party. Feminists all over the world are screaming right now – trust me, I got pissed off too. Anyway, one of the presents she’s got is a 1000 piece jigsaw puzzle. After the party, she starts working on it and it’s so enjoyable for her that she decides to get another one. At the shop, Agnes notices an advertisement saying that someone is searching for a puzzle partner. She contacts Robert (Irrfan Khan) and those two begin the preparation for a puzzle tournament. Obviously, Agnes needs to keep everything in secret, because her family definitely wouldn’t approve her new hobby. First of all, it’s such a simple story, but it intrigues a lot. The character of Agnes is living a very limited life. Her reality is just serving her family and listening to the husband. Puzzles are a way to experience something new and forget about her everyday routine. It may seem trivial for us, but for this woman it’s something meaningful. This story makes you think a lot about our lives and our roles in the society. I must say the ending is quite surprising and it also gives a lot of food for thought. The film is actually an American remake of an Argentine drama of the same title made in 2010, but I’ll share more about it in my next post.

My rating: 7/10
S.

If I do what you tell me, will you love me? “Vertigo” (1958)

SashLeave a comment
directed by Alfred Hitchcock
© 1958 Paramount Pictures. All Rights Reserved.

I spent a week analysing this film. So if you’re searching for something to watch for two hours and move on, forget about “Vertigo.” I mean, you can just watch it, but I’m sure some of you might find it incredibly cheesy and boring. Personally, I didn’t like it that much at first. Hitchcock is an absolute genius and his films are exceptional, but this one disappointed me. But then I started analysing, reading some interpretations and even listening to the director’s opinions. And I realised that this production is fantastic, yet a bit too confusing. So for those who haven’t seen it, here’s the story. Everything starts on a rooftop where detective John Ferguson (James Stewart) finds out about his fear of heights. He’s too scared to climb and a policeman, who’s trying to help him, falls down and dies. After this accident, John retires and decides to fight with his fear. Then one day he’s asked to follow his friend’s wife, Madeleine (Kim Novak). The husband is worried that she may be in some kind of danger. John starts following the woman, who’s acting mysteriously, and that will lead to very interesting events… It’s impossible to write about Hitchcock’s films without revealing too much. This is enough, you have to see what happens next yourselves. Honestly, this story just seems like a random drama/romance, but it’s so complex I can’t even handle it. I mean, nothing is as it seems. You think you understand? You don’t. You think you know why he did this or that? You don’t. I think the idea for this film was very good, but Hitchcock made everything too complicated. I mean, he knew what’s going on and why some things occur, but it’s not that clear for someone who watches the film for the first time without analysing it. Besides, I think you would have to watch it at least 10 times to notice the small elements that change the meaning of some scenes. It’s not my favourite film by Hitchcock, but I admire him anyway. If I was to rate it after the projection, that would be 5/10. But since I’ve learnt more about all the details, it’s definitely a strong 7/10 (minus points for making it too messed up and unclear). And that obsessive score from the film keeps playing in my head. I hope I won’t start suffering from vertigo myself. In case I start following a blond woman in a green coat, stop me.

My rating: 7/10
s.

Ka-ching! “The Laundromat” (2019)

SashLeave a comment
directed by Steven Soderbergh
© 2019 Netflix. All Rights Reserved.

Have you ever heard Gary Oldman speaking with a German accent? No matter what your answer is, you have to see him in today’s film. If I was asked to point out the most important character of the story, that would be his. Without Oldman, this film wouldn’t be the same. Obviously, I’m joking a bit, but it’s really worth watching “The Laundromat” just to hear this accent. If you check today’s film’s ratings, you’ll see very different opinions. I don’t think it’s a masterpiece, but it’s not that bad either. I would say it’s an average film, but I want to recommend it, because of two reasons. Firstly, it presents the topic of money laundering. Secondly, it’s very relaxing, despite its main topic. So lets focus on the story. There are actually three of them. Each story presents people whose life has been somehow affected by the Mossack Fonseca company. If you haven’t heard of them, let me tell you it’s a Panamanian law firm and corporate service provider. And just so you know, they were huge. The past tense isn’t a mistake here. They stopped existing in 2018 because of Panama Papers. I know, you have no idea what I’m talking about. Let’s just say the company knew how to earn money by not obeying the rules. The film explains the whole process in an easy way, so you will see yourselves. The company was run by two men, Jürgen Mossack and Ramón Fonseca, and they are the narrators of the film (played by Gary Oldman and Antonio Banderas) telling us how much they screwed people’s lives. Sweet! As I said, this production is very relaxing and, even though it explains quite complicated stuff going on in the company, you can get it even if you’re super tired and hangover. I’m glad they didn’t make any serious drama out of this topic, because that would be pointless and boring. Instead, I had a good laugh and learnt something new. True that the stories in the film are overdramatised, but I think it’s on purpose. The ending in on point and it also explains the way the film is done. At least I understood it like that. Besides, Meryl Streep is there, so it’s a must-see!

My rating: 6/10
S.

How high can I fly? “Heaven” (2002)

SashLeave a comment
directed by Tom Tykwer
© 2002 Miramax Films. All Rights Reserved.

Today I have a real heaven for you. And it’s not just a lame joke to start my post with. The title of this film is very accurate, because it’s been some time since I saw such a good script. It was written by two men, Krzysztof Kieślowski and Krzysztof Piesiewicz, who worked on a project and created this trilogy. “Heaven” is the first part, then there’s “Hell” and the last is “Purgatory.” However, those are three separate stories so I’ll write only about the first one, because I haven’t had a chance to see the second one and the third part didn’t meet my expectations. Yet, if you can, I recommend you to watch the whole trilogy because it may change the way you see each of the films. Anyway, I’d like to write a few words about the story of “Heaven.” The character that we focus on is Phillipa (Cate Blanchett), who is an English teacher living in Turin, Italy. We see her preparing a bomb at home. Quite an original way to present the protagonist, you have to admit that. She’s planning to use it to kill one particular person. Therefore she goes to his office, manages to leave the bomb and it’s set to explode in a few minutes. Unfortunately, when it does, the target isn’t anywhere close. Instead the bomb kills 4 innocent people, who were unlucky to be nearby. Phillipa is arrested and interviewed about what happened. She explains that some students at the school she’s working have died because of drug-related causes. The woman was informing the police about the man who’s responsible for drug dealing, and who’s also responsible for the death of those students. But since nobody reacted, she decided to deal with it herself. The officers aren’t much concerned about her story, but there’s one man who believes Phillipa. His name is Filippo (Giovanni Ribisi) and he translates between the woman and the other officers. At some point, the man makes a decision to help Phillipa… And the rest you will see. As I said, I think the two gentlemen who wrote the script did a wonderful job. I really enjoyed every part of the film and I love how its elements fit to one another. Besides, duo Blanchett-Ribisi is perfect. I’m not sure I would choose such two actors together, but I’m glad someone did. I guess I wouldn’t be a good casting manager. Anyway, it’s not a typical action film, so don’t expect it to be full of car racing or special effects. In fact, it’s a production that lets you be a part of the story and go through everything that the characters are experiencing. Or maybe I’m empathetic, so that’s why I was feeling them so much. Yet, I believe it’s a film worth your time and I wish to watch the middle part of the trilogy, so I can judge them all together. The last part isn’t something I would recommend, for me it was quite average, but feel free to try. And if I watch “Hell” and like it, I’ll make sure to write you about it.

My rating: 7/10
S.

All we have are the choices we make. “Disobedience” (2017)

SashLeave a comment
directed by Sebastián Lelio
© 2017 Curzon Artificial Eye. All Rights Reserved.

Recently I’ve seen an interesting drama, that isn’t rated high, but the story seemed tempting so I went for it. And I’m glad I did because it was a quality production and some rates are way too low. The main character is Ronit (Rachel Weisz) who is a woman of Jewish origins living in New York. She works as a photographer and lives the typical life of a New York single. One day she finds out that her father, Rav Krushka (Anton Lesser), has died. Ronit decides to fly to London and attend his funeral. However, it won’t be that easy, because she has left her family and the whole Jewish community. The person who informed her about the funeral is Dovid (Alessandro Nivola), a family friend, who felt the need to call Rav’s only daughter. When Ronit arrives, she learns that her old friend Esti (Rachel McAdams) is now married to Dovid. It surprises Ronit, because the two women used to be very close. I mean VERY close. And now Esti is an obedient wife of a very religious Jew. Ronit stays with them for some time and tries to understand this relationships, but also reconnect with the community, because of her father. For me this film was very emotional. Indeed, it is a bit slow and boring in some parts, but generally I felt this lack of emotions there, which was actually emotional for me. Is it understandable? I mean that the fact they shared no emotions made me feel lots of them. And I think it’s a success of this production. The film is made quite simply, but it’s definitely complex when it comes to the plot. Firstly, there’s the topic of religion and how people treat others differently based on their beliefs. Secondly, the family issue, so the dilemma how much we can forgive our child or parent. Thirdly, several ways to express love, which you might understand when you watch the film, because I don’t want to explain exactly what I mean not to spoil the story. But as you can see the film is full of interesting topics that deserve a decent discussion after the projection. That is why I recommend it to you and I hope more people appreciate such a “slow and boring” production. By the way, it’s one of those films that have a satisfying and unpredictable ending, so check it out.

My rating: 6.5/10
S.

Would you forgive? “The Salesman” (“Forushande”, 2016)

SashLeave a comment
directed by Asghar Farhadi
© 2016 Filmiran. All Rights Reserved.

Today’s post might not only give you an interesting film recommendation, but also open your eyes on the situation between some countries. “The Salesman” is an Iranian-French production that presents lots of different topics in the story. Personally, I see it as a fantastic film about human nature, but I bet it’s not the only way to see it. The main characters are Emad (Shahab Hosseini) and Rana (Taraneh Alidoosti), who are married actors working in the theatre. The film starts with them running away from their flat, because the whole building is about to collapse and everybody has to leave it. They cannot return home, because it’s dangerous. That is why they need to find another place. Their friend Babak (Babak Karimi) offers them to stay at one flat, which has been empty for some time. The woman that used to live there moved out in hurry and never returned. It’s quite strange, because she’s left all her stuff in the flat. However, she’s gone and the couple needs a place to stay, so they accept the offer. Except plenty of stuff, nothing seemed to be disturbing. Then one night Emad gets back home to find blood in their bathroom and no sign of his wife. At the hospital he’s informed about what happened. Unfortunately, it wasn’t an accident. Someone broke into their flat and assaulted Rana. Soon the couple finds out that the woman who used to live there was a prostitute and the attacked must have mistaken Rana for her. Emad wants to do everything to find the person who’s hurt his wife. It’s definitely not a thriller and there’s no bath scene with lots of screaming (wink, wink, Hitchcock, wink, wink). The story is quite universal I would say. Of course, it’s not usual that a woman is attacked by some stranger in her flat, but what I mean is the way it all ends. I’m not going to tell you the ending, but let me just say that Emad has a choice to make and it’s a real dilemma. Honestly, I don’t know what I would do if I were him. Because there are some problems in our life that have no good solution and yet we have to make a decision. It’s also interesting that the director of this film had to make a difficult decision some years ago. His film was nominated for an Oscar, but the filmmaker refused to attend the ceremony. When the film won, his representative read a note written by Fargadi: “My absence is out of respect for the people of my country and those of the other six nations who have been disrespected by the inhumane law that bans entry of immigrants to the US.” Perhaps some “important people” on this planet would profit from watching “The Salesman” as well…

My rating: 7/10
S.

Even serial killers live next door to somebody. “Summer of 84” (2018)

SashLeave a comment
directed by François Simard & Anouk Whissell & Yoann-Karl Whissell
© 2018 Gunpowder & Sky. All Rights Reserved.

Is there a better day to write about a horror than Monday? You say Friday? I say “nah.” Monday it is. We all look like zombies willing to eat our bosses, colleagues or just random people on the street. Anyway, today’s film is nothing like a typical zombie horror. If you’ve been raised watching “The Goonies” (1985) or you’re a fan of “Stranger Things” series, you may actually enjoy this one. Sometimes the soundtrack in today’s film reminded me of “Stranger Things,” but maybe it’s just me. Anyway, the characters we follow are a group of teenagers living in the US in… 1984 (surprise! I know you love them). They try to solve the mystery of Cape May Slayer, who has kidnapped several boys, but nobody knows who he or she is. One day Davey Armstrong (Graham Verchere), a teenager, starts suspecting that the murderer might be his neighbour, Wayne Mackey (Rich Sommer). However, that’s not an easy theory to prove, because Wayne is a police officer, so it would be irrational to think he’s the bad guy. Still, Davey keeps observing the man and really feels there’s something wrong with him. The boy even asks his friends, Dale Woodworth (Caleb Emery), Curtis Farraday (Cory Gruter-Andrew) and Tommy Eaton (Judah Lewis), to help him. At first they all think it’s a ridiculous idea. But day after day all of them start suspecting the policeman. If you expect a scary horror, wrong address. There’s nothing to be afraid of, except some blood or stuff like that. I would say it’s more of an adventure film. And at the beginning I thought it wouldn’t surprise me, but it actually did. Firstly, it’s really cute to watch those guys. I felt like watching Goonies again. Although these children are slightly less creative. Well, new century, new kids. But I enjoyed the whole suspense and I think the ending made me give one extra point, because it’s not that ordinary. Actually, while watching the ending, I thought “okay, so now this happens, then that happens and then the end,” but suddenly the film said “hold my beer, I’m gonna show you a good ending.” And I smiled, as if really the ending changed because of my ignorant thoughts. I admit, I didn’t appreciate Canadian filmmakers enough. Thank you and I’m passing the film forward. Hope more people will get positively surprised.

My rating: 7/10
S.

I’ve been a whore with dolphin condoms. “Bridget Jones’s Baby” (2016)

SashLeave a comment
directed by Sharon Maguire
© 2016 Universal Pictures. All Rights Reserved.

And then there was a baby. This part of Bridget Jones’s adventures is the most controversial, I think. Some people were excited about the continuation, some others were afraid. You know how it is with sequels… the first part is often the best one and then it’s a total roulette – it can be either fine or horrible. Second film wasn’t that fantastic and I guess you know why. If not, read my previous post so you can learn about my opinion. When it comes to the third part… What can I tell you? I think it’s more Bridget-ish than the second part. What’s interesting both, the 1st and the 3rd films were directed by the same director, only the 2nd part was directed by someone else. I can’t tell if that’s the reason why, but it’s worth noticing. Still, I give 7/10 to both the 2nd and 3rd. The 2nd was full of unnecessary elements in the script, but I liked Bridget for the way she fought for her rights, for who she was and where she was going to. In the 3rd part the script was better, everything made more or less sense, it was full of jokes that really made me laugh, but… Bridget! What happened? I know it took them around 12 years to get back to her story and all the actors got older, but why did she and Mark split up? And why she spent so many years alone? That’s not the Bridget we fell in love with. I mean… okay, she was a miserable single woman back then as well, but she was at least flirty and tried to catch some guy. And after many years we get a sad workaholic with no friends to spend time with. Yes, adulthood gets boring, people find partners, make babies, move to other places, but why in the film? Bridget was supposed to cheer us up and I don’t feel better watching her old and lonely. Anyway, I’m wondering what was the first script they had for the 3rd part. Because at first, all three main actors agreed to take part in the continuation: Renée, Colin and Hugh. However, at some point Hugh resigned because, apparently, he didn’t like the idea for the film. So they needed to rewrite the script and the responsible one for that was Emma Thompson, who also played Bridget’s doctor. And that’s why Daniel dies at the beginning. However, do you remember how the 3rd part ends? There’s a note in a newspaper saying Daniel has been found. Does that mean Hugh changed his mind when he saw how the 3rd part was going? Or maybe it’s an invitation for him to join them back? Will there be the 4th film? No idea. But I know I will keep getting back to this series. Love you, Bridget!

My rating: 7/10
S.