Dune: Part Two (dir. by Denis Villeneuve) Review


“The Mahdi is too humble to say he is the Mahdi. Even more reason to know he is!” — Stilgar

Dune: Part Two picks up right where the first film left off, diving headfirst into Paul Atreides’ quest for revenge on the desert world of Arrakis, and it absolutely delivers on the epic, operatic scale the setup promised. The first movie was all mood and table-setting; this one cashes in that patience with a story that’s bigger, louder, and way more emotionally volatile, without totally ditching the cerebral, slow-burn vibe that makes Dune feel different from other sci-fi tentpoles. Denis Villeneuve isn’t just continuing a story; he’s doubling down on the idea that this whole saga is less about a hero’s rise and more about the terrifying consequences of people begging for a savior and then getting exactly what they asked for.

Narratively, the film tracks Paul and his mother Jessica as they embed deeper into Fremen culture while House Harkonnen tightens its stranglehold on Arrakis. Paul trains, raids spice convoys, and slowly evolves from accepted outsider to full-on messianic figure, even as he keeps insisting he doesn’t want that role. The emotional throughline is his relationship with Chani, who acts as both partner and conscience, pushing back against the religious fervor gathering around him. At the same time, you’ve got Baron Harkonnen scheming from his grotesque oil-bath throne and Feyd-Rautha unleashed as the house’s rabid attack dog, chewing through enemies in gladiatorial arenas and on the battlefield. The stakes are clear and simple—control of Arrakis and its spice—but the film keeps twisting that into something more existential: control of the future itself and who gets to write it.

Visually, Dune: Part Two is just ridiculous in the best way. Arrakis still feels harsh and elemental, like the planet itself is a character that occasionally decides to eat people via sandworm. The desert exteriors are shot with that hazy, golden brutality where every wide shot makes the Fremen look tiny against an uncaring landscape. When Paul finally rides a sandworm, it’s not played as some clean, heroic moment but as a thrashing, chaotic stunt that looks legitimately dangerous—he’s clinging to this titanic creature, sand exploding in sheets around him, the camera swinging wide so you feel both the scale and the sheer lunacy of what he’s doing. The Harkonnen world, by contrast, is stark and stylized, all cold geometry and void-like skies, leaning into monochrome to make it feel like you’ve stepped into some industrial underworld. Villeneuve’s obsession with scale and texture pays off; every frame feels like it was composed to be stared at.

The action this time is more frequent and more brutal. Where Dune: Part One held back, this one goes for full war-movie energy. You get Fremen ambushes out of sand, night raids lit by explosions, and a final battle that’s basically holy war meets desert cavalry charge. Sandworms surf through shield walls, ornithopters slam into the ground, and a sea of troops gets swallowed by sand and fire. The choreography stays clean enough that you can track who’s doing what, but it never loses that messy, grounded feel—knife fights still feel close and ugly, even when they’re surrounded by massive spectacle. The duel between Paul and Feyd is the peak of that: sweaty, vicious, and personal, more about willpower and ideology than just skill.

Performance-wise, the film runs on the tension between Timothée Chalamet’s Paul and Zendaya’s Chani. Chalamet gets to shift from haunted survivor to someone who realizes he can pull the strings of history—and chooses to do it anyway. He plays Paul as a guy who genuinely hates what he sees in his visions but can’t stomach losing, which gives the final act a bitter edge. Zendaya finally gets the screen time the first film teased, and she makes the most of it. Chani isn’t just “the love interest”; she’s the one person in the story who consistently calls bullshit on prophecy, seeing how Fremen belief is being turned into a weapon. That skepticism, that refusal to be swept up, becomes the emotional counterweight to everything Jessica and the Bene Gesserit are engineering.

Rebecca Ferguson’s Jessica goes full political operator here, and it’s honestly one of the most interesting arcs in the film. Once she takes on the role of Reverend Mother, she leans into manipulating Fremen faith, playing up visions, symbols, and omens to lock in Paul’s status. She’s terrifyingly pragmatic about it, and the movie doesn’t let that slide as a “necessary evil”—it’s part of how this whole situation curdles into fanaticism. Austin Butler’s Feyd-Rautha is pure menace: feral, theatrical, and oddly charismatic, like a rock star who decided to become a warlord. He feels like the dark mirror of Paul, another bred product of a toxic system, but one who embraces cruelty instead of burden.

Then you’ve got Florence Pugh’s Princess Irulan and Christopher Walken’s Emperor Shaddam IV, introduced with real weight as the heir to the throne and the man who greenlit House Atreides’ betrayal—but then largely sidelined as bit characters rather than the shadowy power brokers they should be. On paper, they’re the architects of galactic order, pulling levers from opulent palaces while Paul scrambles in the sand. The film gives them poised entrances and sharp dialogue, but parks them as observers to Paul’s whirlwind, more like well-dressed cameos than forces reshaping the board. Walken nails the Emperor’s weary calculation, and Pugh hints at Irulan’s future scheming, but without deeper scenes of imperial intrigue, they orbit Paul’s story instead of challenging it head-on, underscoring how his rise eclipses even the old guard.

Hans Zimmer’s score keeps pushing that strange, alien soundscape he built in the first film and then amps it up. The music leans hard on percussion, guttural vocals, and warped instruments that feel half-organic, half-industrial, like you’re listening to the desert itself breathing. The score doesn’t really do the classic “themes you hum on the way out of the theater” thing; instead, it sits in your bones. During the big set pieces, it’s almost overwhelming—drones, chants, and pounding rhythms layering on top of each other until your seat feels like it’s vibrating. In quieter scenes, Zimmer pulls back just enough to let a harsh little motif peek through, usually when Paul is weighing his choices or when Chani realizes how far things are slipping away from what she hoped for.

Thematically, Dune: Part Two sinks its teeth deepest into the dangers of blind faith and the double-edged sword of prophecy—how it can shatter chains of oppression only to forge far heavier ones in their place. Frank Herbert’s original warning pulses through every frame: belief isn’t just a comfort or a spark for revolution; it’s a weapon that smart people wield to hijack desperate hearts. The Fremen, crushed under imperial boot and environmental hell, latch onto their Lisan al-Gaib legend like a lifeline, and figures like Jessica and the Bene Gesserit are all too happy to fan those flames. Lines like Stilgar’s “The Mahdi is too humble to say he is the Mahdi. Even more reason to know he is!” twist logic into a pretzel, showing how faith devours reason—Paul’s every hesitation or miracle just “proves” his divinity more. Chani’s gut-punch retort, “This prophecy is how they enslave us!” lays it bare: what starts as liberation from Harkonnen greed morphs into submission to a new myth, one engineered off-world to keep Arrakis in check.

Paul embodies this tragedy most painfully. His spice-fueled visions reveal futures of jihad consuming the stars, yet the “narrow path” he chooses—embracing the prophecy—breaks the Fremen’s subjugation to outsiders while binding them to him as unquestioning soldiers. It’s not accidental heroism; it’s a calculated gamble where prophecy empowers the oppressed to topple one empire, only for Paul to birth a deadlier one, fueled by the very zeal that freed them. Princess Irulan’s cool observation, “You underestimate the power of faith,” chills because it’s the Emperor admitting belief outstrips blades or thrones—faith doesn’t just win wars; it rewrites reality, turning Fremen riders into galaxy-scouring fanatics. Even the Reverend Mother Mohiam’s “We don’t hope. We plan” unmasks prophecy as cold manipulation, a multi-generational con that breakers colonial chains today while guaranteeing control tomorrow.

Villeneuve doesn’t glorify this cycle; he revels in its horror. The final rally, with Fremen chanting “Lisan al-Gaib!” as Paul seizes the throne, thrills like a rock concert and curdles like a cult initiation. Chani riding off alone isn’t defeat—it’s the last gasp of clear-eyed doubt in a tide of delusion. Faith topples the Baron and humbles Shaddam, sure, but it installs Paul as its high priest-emperor, proving Herbert right: saviors don’t save; they scale up the suffering. The film tweaks the book to amplify this, giving Chani more agency to voice the peril, making the “victory” feel like a velvet trap. It’s prophecy as breaker of chains—smashing Harkonnen spice rigs and imperial ornithopters—then creator of new ones, with Paul’s jihad looming not as triumph, but inevitable apocalypse.

If the film has a real sticking point, it’s that tension between being a massive, audience-pleasing sci-fi epic and being a deeply cynical story about the cost of belief. On a surface level, it totally works as a grand payoff: you get your worm rides, your duels, your big speeches, your villains being humbled. But underneath, Villeneuve keeps threading in this idea that what we’re watching isn’t a happy ending; it’s the start of something worse. The sidelining of Irulan and Shaddam reinforces how Paul’s myth-centered rise devours old powers, prophecy steamrolling politics.

As a complete experience, Dune: Part Two feels like the rare blockbuster that respects its audience’s patience and intelligence. It assumes you remember part one, assumes you’re willing to sit with long, quiet moments and sudden bursts of violence, and assumes you’ll notice that the “hero’s journey” here is more of a slow moral collapse dressed up as triumph. It’s messy in spots—some pacing jolts, some underused heavy hitters in the cast—but it swings so hard and with such confidence that the rough edges end up feeling like part of its personality. The result is a movie that works both as an immediate, visceral ride and as something you keep chewing on afterward, wondering if you were supposed to be as excited as you were by the sight of a new god-king being crowned in the desert.

Dune: Part One (dir. by Denis Villeneuve) Review


“I said I would not harm them and I shall not. But Arrakis is Arrakis and the desert takes the weak. This is my desert. My Arrakis. My Dune.” — Baron Vladimir Harkonnen

Denis Villeneuve’s Dune: Part One is one of those big, monolithic blockbusters that feels less like a movie night and more like being slowly lowered into someone else’s dream. It’s massive, deliberately paced, and sometimes emotionally chilly, but when it hits, it really hits, and you can feel a director absolutely obsessed with getting this universe right. The film adapts roughly the first half of Frank Herbert’s novel, following Paul Atreides, heir to House Atreides, as his family accepts control of the desert planet Arrakis, the only source of the spice melange that powers space travel and heightens human abilities. The setup is pure operatic space-feudalism: the Emperor orders House Atreides to take over Arrakis from their bitter rivals, House Harkonnen, in what is basically a beautifully staged death trap. Villeneuve leans into the political trap aspect; even if you’ve never read Dune, you can tell from minute one that this is not an opportunity, it’s a setup, and that sense of doom hangs over everything.

What Villeneuve really nails is the “ancient future” texture that people always talk about with Dune but rarely pull off on screen. The technology looks advanced but worn, ritualized, and heavy, from the gargantuan starships to the dragonfly-like ornithopters that rattle and pitch like actual aircraft instead of sleek sci-fi toys. The production design and Greig Fraser’s cinematography go all-in on scale: Caladan’s stormy oceans, Arrakis’s endless dunes, cavernous fortresses that make the human figures look insignificant. It’s not just pretty—it’s doing character work for the universe, selling you on the idea that people here live under forces (political, religious, environmental) that absolutely dwarf them. In theme terms, this is Villeneuve visually translating Herbert’s obsession with ecology and power structures, but he externalizes it more than the book: instead of living inside characters’ heads, you’re constantly being reminded how small they are against their environment.

All of that is backed by Hans Zimmer’s aggressive, sometimes overwhelming score, which sounds like someone trying to invent religious music for a civilization that doesn’t exist yet. It’s not subtle; there are bagpipes blaring on Caladan, guttural chants over Sardaukar warriors being ritually baptized in mud, and wailing voices that basically scream “destiny” every time Paul has a vision. But it syncs with Villeneuve’s approach: this is myth-making by way of blunt force, and the sound design and music are part of the same strategy of immersion and awe. Compared to the novel’s intricate, almost clinical tone, the film leans much harder into a mythic, quasi-religious mood. That means some of Herbert’s more sardonic or critical edges get smoothed out, but it also lets Villeneuve foreground the feeling of a civilization that already half-believes its own prophecies.

Narratively, Dune: Part One walks a weird tightrope. On one hand, this is a story about prophecies, chosen ones, and a messiah in the making, but on the other, the film quietly undercuts that fantasy. Villeneuve and his co-writers emphasize the Bene Gesserit’s centuries-long manipulation of bloodlines and myths, including seeding prophecies among the Fremen, so Paul’s “chosen one” status comes prepackaged with a lot of moral unease. That’s one of the places where Villeneuve stays very faithful to Herbert: the idea that religious belief can be engineered and weaponized. At the same time, by stripping out so much of the book’s interior commentary, the movie makes that critique more atmospheric than explicit. You feel that something is off about Paul’s destiny—the visions of holy war help with that—but you don’t hear the narrative voice outright interrogating the myth the way the novel does. It’s like Villeneuve wants the audience to experience the seduction of the messiah narrative first, and only slowly realize how poisonous it is.

Timothée Chalamet’s performance takes advantage of that approach by playing Paul as a kid who has been trained his whole life for greatness but absolutely does not want the role he’s being handed. Early on, he’s soft-spoken, almost recessive, but you see flashes of arrogance and temper, especially in the Gom Jabbar test and the later tent breakdown after his visions of a holy war in his name. Villeneuve doesn’t try to turn him into an instant charismatic leader; instead, he feels like a thoughtful, scared teenager caught in a machine that’s been running for centuries. That divergence from the source material is subtle but important: book-Paul, with all his internal analysis and mentat-like processing, comes off almost superhumanly composed. Film-Paul is less in control, more overwhelmed, which shifts the theme from “a superior mind learning to navigate fate” toward “a boy being crushed into a role he might never have truly chosen.”

The supporting cast is absurdly stacked, and the film uses them more as archetypes orbiting Paul than as fully fleshed-out characters, which is both a feature and a bug. Oscar Isaac’s Duke Leto radiates tired nobility, a man who knows he is walking into a trap but refuses to show fear because he needs his people to believe. Rebecca Ferguson’s Lady Jessica might be the most compelling presence in the movie: a Bene Gesserit trained in manipulation and control, visibly torn between her loyalty to the order and her love for her son. Ferguson gives Jessica a constant undercurrent of panic; even when she’s composed and commanding the Voice, you can feel the guilt and fear simmering underneath. In Herbert’s text, Jessica carries a heavy burden of calculation and self-critique through internal monologue; Villeneuve replaces that with rawer, more visible emotion. That choice makes Jessica more immediately relatable on screen but also shifts the theme slightly—from a cold, almost chess-like examination of breeding programs and long-term plans to a more intimate conflict between institutional programming and maternal love.

On the more purely fun side, Jason Momoa’s Duncan Idaho brings some sorely needed looseness and warmth. He’s one of the only characters who feels like he exists outside the grim political machinery, which makes his relationship with Paul read as genuinely affectionate instead of court-mandated mentorship. His big stand against the Sardaukar is shot like a mythic warrior’s last stand, and it sells Duncan as the kind of legend people would sing about after the fact. The tradeoff is that Duncan’s characterization leans into straightforward heroism; some of the book’s emphasis on the complexities and limits of loyalty gets compressed into a single grand gesture. Josh Brolin’s Gurney Halleck mostly glowers and shouts in this installment, but there’s enough there—especially in the training scene—that you get a sense of this gruff soldier-poet without the film ever stopping to spell it out. What’s missing, though, is the more overt sense of Atreides culture and camaraderie that the novel lingers on; Villeneuve sketches it, then moves on.

If the heroes lean archetypal, the villains almost go minimalistic to a fault. Stellan Skarsgård’s Baron Harkonnen is an imposing, bloated specter, more a presence than a personality; he spends a lot of time floating, brooding, and letting the makeup and lighting do the talking. In the book, the Baron is a much more talkative schemer, constantly plotting and vocalizing his nastiness, which underlines Herbert’s theme of decadence rotting the powerful from within. Here he’s closer to a horror-movie monster, which works visually but makes the political conflict feel a bit less textured. It’s a conscious trade: Villeneuve sacrifices some of Herbert’s satirical bite for a cleaner, more archetypal good-house-versus-evil-house dynamic. The Mentats, like Thufir Hawat and Piter de Vries, also get sidelined, and with them goes a lot of the book’s focus on human computation and the consequences of tech bans; the movie nods to that world-building but clearly doesn’t prioritize those themes.

Where Dune: Part One really shines is in its set-pieces that double as worldbuilding lessons. The spice harvester rescue sequence isn’t just about a sandworm attack; it’s a crash course in how dangerous Arrakis is, how unwieldy the spice operation can be, and how Paul reacts when the spice hits his system and his visions start intensifying. The hunter-seeker assassination attempt in his room does something similar for palace intrigue and surveillance, even if the staging (Paul standing unnervingly still as the device inches toward him) has rubbed some viewers the wrong way. These scenes make Arrakis feel like a living trap: environmental, political, and spiritual all at once. Compared to the novel’s detailed ecological and economic exposition, Villeneuve’s version is more experiential—you feel sandstorms and worm sign before you fully understand the larger ecological philosophy that Herbert spells out. That keeps the film more cinematic, but it also means the deeper environmental thesis is only hinted at rather than explored.

The downside of Villeneuve’s devotion to mood and worldbuilding is pacing. This is a two-and-a-half-hour movie that very much feels like “Part One,” and you can sense the absence of a conventional third-act climax. The story peaks emotionally with the fall of House Atreides—Leto’s death, Duncan’s sacrifice, Kynes’s end—but then keeps going, drifting into the deep desert with Paul and Jessica. The final duel with Jamis is thematically important—Paul’s first deliberate kill, a step toward becoming the kind of leader his visions imply—but as a closer for a blockbuster, it’s quiet and off-kilter. What’s interesting is how that duel distills one of Herbert’s key themes—the cost of survival and leadership—down to a single, intimate moment. The book wraps that in a ton of cultural detail and internal reflection; the film pares it down to body language, breath, and a few lines of dialogue. Villeneuve keeps the moral weight of the act but narrows the lens, trusting the audience to sit with what it means for Paul to cross that line without spelling it out.

If you come in as a Dune novice, the film is surprisingly navigable but not always emotionally generous. Villeneuve strips away the novel’s dense internal monologues and replaces them with visual suggestion and sparse dialogue, which keeps the movie from turning into a two-hour voiceover but also makes some motivations feel opaque. Characters like Dr. Yueh suffer the most from this approach; his betrayal happens so quickly and with so little setup that it plays more as a plot requirement than a tragic inevitability. That’s a clear case where the film discards a major thematic thread: Herbert uses Yueh to dig into ideas of conditioning, trauma, and the limits of “programmed” loyalty, but Villeneuve mostly uses him to push the plot into the Harkonnen attack. The tradeoff is understandable in a two-part film structure, but it’s a noticeable hollow spot for viewers who care about the story’s psychological underpinnings.

Still, as an opening movement, Dune: Part One feels like a deliberate choice to build the cathedral before lighting the candles. It’s more concerned with making Arrakis, its politics, and its religious machinery feel tangible than with delivering a neatly wrapped narrative. That can make it frustrating if you want a self-contained story, but it pays off in atmosphere: by the time Paul and Jessica join Stilgar’s Fremen and we get that final image of a sandworm being ridden across the dunes, you believe this is a place where myths can walk around as real people. Villeneuve stays true to Herbert’s broad thematic architecture—power, religion as control, ecology as destiny—but he discards a lot of the author’s density and interior commentary in favor of a more streamlined, sensory-driven experience. As a result, the film feels less like reading a dense political text and more like standing inside the legend that text would later be written about.

As a complete film, it’s imperfect—sometimes emotionally distant, sometimes so in love with its own scale that character beats get swallowed—but it’s also one of the rare modern blockbusters that feels handcrafted rather than committee-engineered. As an adaptation, it respects the spirit of Dune while making sharp, cinematic choices about what to emphasize and what to streamline, even if that means some beloved book moments get reduced or reconfigured. And as a foundation for a larger saga, it does exactly what “Part One” says on the label: it sets the board, crowns no clear winners, and leaves you with the distinct feeling that the real story—the dangerous one—is only just beginning.

Zardoz (1974, directed by John Boorman)


Welcome to the year 2293.  Savages known as the Brutals live in a wasteland and worship a giant stone head named Zardoz, who comes out of the sky, tells them to shoot guns and not have sex, and then dumps hundreds of firearms on them.  One Brutal, Zed (Sean Connery, wearing what appears to be a big red diaper) jumps into Zardoz’s mouth and discovers that Zardoz is actually a spaceship that is piloted by Arthur Frayn (Niall Buggy).  Zed shoots Arthur and then flies with Zardoz to the Vortex, where a bunch of overdressed and overaffected Immortals are having a perpetual garden party.

The Immortals, who can live forever because they’ve mentally learned how to slow the aging process, take an immediate interest in Zed.  They want to know where Arthur is.  Zed wants to explore the Vortex and learn what’s going on.  The Immortals assign Zed to do menial tasks.  Consuela (Charlotte Rampling) falls in love with Zed but keeps trying to kill him.  If you could live forever, the film asks, wouldn’t you eventually want to die?  I would not.

John Boorman, you nut!  Boorman is one of the greatest directors ever, responsible for Point Blank, Deliverance, and ExcaliburZardoz shows what happens when a great filmmaker falls so in love with his vision that no one can tell him that it’s not working.  Zardoz is pure Boorman, obsessed with nature, curious about paganism, and cynical about religion.  Boorman had something that he wanted to say about nature and humanity and he deserves a lot of credit for that.  He had just directed Deliverance and could have had his pick of projects in 1974.  He could have directed an action spectacular or he could have just gone home to Europe and counted his money.  Instead, Boorman decided to go with a dream project that he had been trying to put together for years.

Did it work?  No, it did not.  A few stunning images (that stone head!) aside, the movie itself is slow and talky and Sean Connery, with his deep brogue, is miscast as Zed.  (As Lisa said last night, “I’m glad to see Scotland survived the apocalypse.”)  With his pony tail and his handle-bar mustache, Connery seemed like he was doing a dry run for his Highlander character.  Charlotte Rampling is beautiful as Consuela and some viewers — mostly men — will appreciate her costumes, but the society of the Immortals is never as interesting as Boorman seems to think it is.

Zardoz is bad but still compelling because Boorman was so dedicated to whatever it was he thought the message of the movie was.  Watch it with a bud and try to figure it out,

Live Tweet Alert: Join #FridayNightFlix for Zardoz!


Zardoz (1974, dir by John Boorman, DP: Geoffrey Unsworth)

As some of our regular readers undoubtedly know, I am involved in a few weekly watch parties.  On Twitter, I host #FridayNightFlix every Friday and I co-host #ScarySocial on Saturday.  On Mastodon, I am one of the five hosts of #MondayActionMovie!  Every week, we get together.  We watch a movie.  We tweet our way through it.

Tonight, at 10 pm et, I will be hosting #FridayNightFlix!  The movie?  Zardoz, starring Sean Connery, Charlotte Rampling, and a big ugly head!

If you want to join us this Friday, just hop onto twitter, start the movie at 10 pm et, and use the #FridayNightFlix hashtag!  I’ll be there tweeting and I imagine some other members of the TSL Crew will be there as well.  It’s a friendly group and welcoming of newcomers so don’t be shy.

Zardoz is available on Prime!

See you there!

#MondayMuggers presents FAREWELL, MY LOVELY (1975) starring Robert Mitchum!


Every Monday night at 9:00 Central Time, my wife Sierra and I host a “Live Movie Tweet” event on X using the hashtag #MondayMuggers. We rotate movie picks each week, and our tastes are quite different. Tonight, Monday June 2nd, we are showing FAREWELL, MY LOVELY (1975) starring Robert Mitchum, Charlotte Rampling, John Ireland, Sylvia Miles, Anthony Zerbe, Harry Dean Stanton, Jack O’Halloran, Joe Spinell, and Sylvester Stallone.

FAREWELL, MY LOVELY finds Los Angeles private eye Philip Marlowe being hired by paroled convict Moose Malloy to find his girlfriend Velma, a former seedy nightclub dancer. All kinds of intrigue ensues as Robert Mitchum puts his droopy-eyed, world-weary spin on the famous detective!

So join us tonight for #MondayMuggers and watch FAREWELL, MY LOVELY! It’s on Amazon Prime. The trailer is included below:

Horror Film Review: Angel Heart (dir by Alan Parker)


First released in 1987 and set in 1955, Angel Heart tells the story of Harry Angel (Mickey Rourke).

With a name like Harry Angel, it’s perhaps not surprising that Harry is a private investigator.  Harry operates out of New York.  He’s got a shabby apartment.  He wears wrinkled clothes.  He rarely shaves.  He smokes almost constantly.  (In a rare moment of comedy, the camera catches Harry blithely emptying a full ashtray in the middle of the street.)  Harry looks like he reeks of tobacco, beer, sweat, and lost dreams.  And yet, it’s difficult not to like Harry.  He’s got a charming smile, even if his face is often bruised from his latest beating.  He speaks in a low whisper and it’s hard not to get the feeling that Harry is actually kind of shy.  He’s incredibly sleazy but there’s something about him that just makes the viewer want to take care of him.

Harry is hired by a mysterious man named Louis Cyphere (Robert De Niro, cheerfully overacting).  Louis wants Harry to track down a singer named Johnny Favor.  As Cyphere explains it, he did a favor for Johnny and Johnny has yet to pay Cyphere what he owes.  Johnny has been suffering from PTSD ever since he served in World War II.  When last seen, Johnny was receiving electroshock treatment in an upstate hospital.

Harry’s search for Johnny leads him into an increasingly complex and disturbing conspiracy.  He meets a doctor who is addicted to morphine and, when the doctor turns up dead, Harry coolly uses the dead man’s shoe to light his match.  Eventually, Harry’s investigation leads him to New Orleans, where he meets both Johnny’s wife (Charlotte Rampling) and Johnny’s unacknowledged daughter, Epiphany (Lisa Bonet).  As Harry searches for Johnny, he deals with strange visions of his own mysterious past.  He sees himself wandering around Times Square shortly after the attack on Pearl Harbor.  Harry also finds himself having to deal with the fact that almost everyone that he talks to ends up being brutally murdered.  Every time that Harry tries to quit the case, Cyphere offers him more money.  (Cyphere tends to show up whenever Harry finds himself on the verge of abandoning his search.)

Angel Heart moves at its own deliberate pace.  In fact, the first hour can feel a bit slow but that first hour definitely pays off during the second half of the film.  By the time that Harry starts to truly uncover what has happened to Johnny, the audience actually cares about Harry and is actually worried about what’s going to happen to him when he reaches the end of the case.  Mickey Rourke was (and is) an eccentric actor but he’s at his most effective in Angel Heart.  A lesser actor would have just played Harry as being a typical hardboiled detective.  Rourke plays Harry as being a lost soul, a vulnerable man who is often as confused and scared as the people that he’s looking for.  By the end of the film, Harry realizes that the answer to the mystery was right in front of them and his look of despair is surprisingly powerful.  If De Niro gives a good performance that is almost totally on the surface, Rourke gives the type of performance that allows the audience to explore what’s going on beneath the surface of a character who many would initially view as being a cliché.  Mickey Rourke’s Harry Angel is right up there with Bogart’s Sam Spade and Jack Nicholson’s Jake Gittes.  He’s a familiar character who also seems to be a human being.

Full of sex, violence, and increasingly disturbing imagery, Angel Heart is not for everyone.  Alan Parker’s direction emphasizes the darkness of Harry’s world and the bleakness of his situation.  The film ends with a twist that may not be totally unexpected but which is still undeniably disturbing.  The more you think about it, the most disturbing it gets.  Angel Heart is an atmospheric and intelligent chiller.  It’s existential horror at its most nightmarish.

Film Review: Three (dir by James Salter)


Coming to us from 1969, Three is a film about three of the most boring people on Earth taking a vacation together.

Bert (Robie Porter) and Taylor (Sam Waterston, in his 20s but looking like he’s in his early 40s) are two American college students who are taking a trip through the Mediterranean.  We really don’t learn much about Bert and Taylor, beyond the fact that they’re close friends and they go to college together.  Though they visit several historical sites, they don’t really seem to get much out of it.  Though they both appear to be wealthy, they still make it a point to drive an old car.  It’s one of those affectations of poverty in which a certain type of rich person has always enjoyed indulging.

Anyway, Bert and Taylor wander around for a while and basically act like a bunch of stereotypical American tourists.  “Do you speak English?” they ask far too many people.  They drink too much at night.  They stare at every young woman who walks by.  They spend some time lying in a field and talking about life.  Unfortunately, since neither one of them has much depth, it’s kind of a boring conversation.  Bert, it appears, is a bit more experienced with the “ways of the world” that Taylor.  Taylor’s an idealist.  Yawn.

Eventually, Taylor meets an English tourist named Marty (Charlotte Rampling) and, despite the fact that she could obviously do better, she decides to travel around with Taylor and Bert.  Both Bert and Taylor find Marty to be attractive but they decide that all of three of them will just be friends, with no romance and no commitment.

Of course, it doesn’t really work out that way.  Taylor quickly falls in love with Marty but Marty is more attracted to Bert.  Bert, meanwhile, is kind of a jerk who picks up a French girl even after it’s obvious that Marty has feelings for him.  There’s an odd close-up of Bert blowing cigarette smoke on the French girl’s hands.  I’m not really sure why the shot was included in the film, beyond the fact that Three was made in 1969 and filmmakers in the late 60s were bizarrely obsessed with unnecessary close-ups.

Anyway, Three is an oddly lethargic story.  Sometimes, I enjoy films where nothing happens but with this one, it didn’t really feel as if either Taylor, Bert, or Marty had earned the right to suffer from ennui.  Instead, they just seemed like three shallow people who bumped into each other on vacation.  Films like this are only interesting if the characters are interesting but these three seem like they’re all destined to end up working in real estate and boring everyone with stories about the trip they took overseas during their senior year of college.  To be honest, the story is really only interesting if you assume that Taylor and Bert are actually in love with each other and that their obsession with Marty is their way of dealing with their own suppressed feelings for one another.  That’s pretty obviously the subtext of the story, though Three is too much of a product of its time to openly admit it.

It is somewhat interesting to see Sam Waterston playing a character who isn’t in his 60s but again, Waterston is one of those actors who comes across as if he was born middle-aged and that’s certainly the case in Three.  For the most part, Three is a pretty forgettable film, though the Mediterranean scenery is certainly nice.

Film Review: Red Sparrow (dir by Francis Lawrence)


God, this film was a mess.

Red Sparrow is a spy thriller that features a lot of spies but not many thrills.  Jennifer Lawrence plays Dominika Ergova, a Russian ballerina whose career with the Bolshoi is ended when another dancer drops her on stage.  Fortunately, Dominka’s sleazy uncle Ivan (Matthias Schoenaerts) has a new career in mind!  Maybe Dominka could be a sparrow, a spy who seduces the enemy!  Just in case Dominka doesn’t want to spend the rest of her life seducing westerners, Ivan arranges for her to witness a murder and then informs her that she’ll be eliminated as a witness unless she does what he tells her.  This, of course, leads to Dominkia attending State School 4, where she is schooled in the arts of seduction by Matron (Charlotte Rampling).  Upon graduation, Dominka is sent to Budapest, where she falls in love with a CIA agent named Nash (Joel Edgerton) and a lot of predictable spy stuff happens.  Despite all of the sex and violence, it’s just not much fun.

Red Sparrow has all the ingredients to be an enjoyably trashy 90-minute spy flick but instead, it’s a slowly paced, 140-minute slog that just seems to go on forever.  Throughout the film, director Francis Lawrence (no relation to the film’s star) struggles to maintain a steady pace.  Too much time is spent on Dominka’s life before she suffers the injury that should have opened the film.  Meanwhile, the only interesting part of the film — Dominka’s education at State School 4 — goes by far too quickly and, despite the fact that she was giving one of the few interesting performances in Red Sparrow, Charlotte Rampling vanishes from the film early on.  Once Dominkia gets to Budapest, the film really slow down to a crawl.  Joel Edgerton’s a good actor and an even better director but he gives an overly grim and serious performance in Red Sparrow and he and Jennifer Lawrence have next to no romantic chemistry.

(That lack of romantic chemistry petty much dooms the final forty minutes of the film.  It’s easy to imagine a much better version of Red Sparrow in which Bradley Cooper played the role of Nash.  True, that would have been like the 100th time that Cooper and Jennifer Lawrence starred opposite each other but why not?  It worked for William Powell and Myrna Loy.)

As for Jennifer Lawrence, her performance is okay.  It’s not one of her best and there’s a few moments where it seems as if she’s more concerned with maintaining her Russian accent than with what’s actually going on in the scene but, for the most part, it’s a good enough performance.  That said, you do have to wonder how long she can go without having another hit film.  Despite being heavily hyped, Passengers, Mother!, and Red Sparrow all underperformed at the box office.  (In defense of Mother!, it was never going to be a box office hit, regardless of who starred in it.)  As talented as she is, it’s sometimes hard not to feel that, as an actress, Jennifer Lawrence has lost some of the natural spark that took viewers by surprise in Winter’s Bone, launched a whole new genre of dystopian YA adaptations with The Hunger Games, and which previously elevated unlikely films like The House At The End Of The Street.  She was a far more interesting actress before she became J Law.

Here’s hoping that she finally gets another role worthy of her talent!

Here Are The Oscar Nominees!


Oscars

I am so happy that Mad Max, Brooklyn, and Room were nominated but considering how many great films were released in 2015, it’s hard not to be disappointed with the nominees for Best Picture.  No Carol.  No Ex Machina.  No Sicario or Inside Out.  No Straight Out Of Compton, Creed, or Beasts of No Nation.  Is The Martian the only best picture winner to even have more than one African-American prominently featured in the cast?  10 years from now, when people can see past the politics and concentrate on the filmmaking, The Big Short will be recognized as one of the worst best picture nominees of all time.

As for other snubs, I am so sad to see that Kristen Stewart and Benicio Del Toro were not nominated in the supporting races.  For that matter, Rooney was the lead in Carol and that’s where she should have been nominated.  It’s also interesting to note that Mark Ruffalo was nominated for giving the worst performance in Spotlight.

I know that Spotlight is the official front runner but, looking at the nominations, I wouldn’t be surprised to see The Revenant win.  Or maybe even (bleh!)  The Big Short.

Best Picture
“The Big Short”
“Bridge of Spies”
“Brooklyn”
“Mad Max: Fury Road”
“The Martian”
“The Revenant”
“Room”
“Spotlight”

Best Director
Lenny Abrahamson, “Room”
Alejandro Gonzalez Inarritu, “The Revenant”
Tom McCarthy, “Spotlight”
Adam McKay, “The Big Short”
George Miller, “Mad Max: Fury Road”

Best Actor
Bryan Cranston, “Trumbo”
Matt Damon, “The Martian”
Leonardo DiCaprio, “The Revenant”
Michael Fassbender, “Steve Jobs”
Eddie Redmayne, “The Danish Girl”

Best Actress
Cate Blanchett, “Carol”
Brie Larson, “Room”
Jennifer Lawrence, “Joy”
Charlotte Rampling, “45 Years”
Saoirse Ronan, “Brooklyn”

Best Supporting Actor
Christian Bale, “The Big Short”
Tom Hardy, “The Revenant”
Mark Ruffalo, “Spotlight”
Mark Rylance, “Bridge of Spies”
Sylvester Stallone, “Creed”

Best Supporting Actress
Jennifer Jason Leigh, “The Hateful Eight”
Rooney Mara, “Carol”
Rachel McAdams, “Spotlight”
Alicia Vikander, “The Danish Girl”
Kate Winslet, “Steve Jobs”

Best Original Screenplay
“Bridge of Spies”
“Ex Machina”
“Inside Out”
“Spotlight”
“Straight Outta Compton”

Best Adapted Screenplay
“The Big Short”
“Brooklyn”
“Carol”
“The Martian”
“Room”

Best Cinematography
“Carol”
“The Hateful Eight”
“Mad Max: Fury Road”
“The Revenant”
“Sicario”

Best Costume Design
“Carol”
“Cinderella”
“The Danish Girl”
“Mad Max: Fury Road”
“The Revenant”

Best Film Editing
“The Big Short”
“Mad Max: Fury Road”
“The Revenant”
“Spotlight”
“Star Wars: The Force Awakens”

Best Makeup and Hairstyling
“Mad Max: Fury Road”
“The 100-Year-Old Man Who Climbed out the Window and Disappeared”
“The Revenant”

Best Production Design
“Bridge of Spies”
“The Danish Girl”
“Mad Max: Fury Road”
“The Martian”
“The Revenant”

Best Score
“Bridge of Spies”
“Carol”
“The Hateful Eight”
“Sicario”
“Star Wars: The Force Awakens”

Best Song
“Fifty Shades of Grey” – “Earned It”
“The Hunting Ground” – “Til it Happens to You”
“Racing Extinction” – “Manta Ray”
“Spectre” – “Writing’s on the Wall”
“Youth” – “Simple Song #3”

Best Sound Editing
“Mad Max: Fury Road”
“The Martian”
“The Revenant”
“Sicario”
“Star Wars: The Force Awakens”

Best Sound Mixing
“Bridge of Spies”
“Mad Max: Fury Road”
“The Martian”
“The Revenant”
“Star Wars: The Force Awakens”

Best Visual Effects
“Ex Machina”
“Mad Max: Fury Road”
“The Martian”
“The Revenant”
“Star Wars: The Force Awakens”

Best Animated Feature
“Anomalisa”
“Boy and the World”
“Inside Out”
“Shaun the Sheep Movie”
“When Marnie Was There”

Best Documentary Feature
“Amy”
“Cartel Land”
“The Look of Silence”
“What Happened, Miss Simone?”
“Winter on Fire: Ukraine’s Fight for Freedom”

Best Foreign Language Film
“Embrace of the Serpent”
“Mustang”
“Son of Saul”
“Theeb”
“A War”

Best Animated Short
“Bear Story”
“Prologue”
“Sanjay’s Super Team”
“We Can’t Live without Cosmos”
“World of Tomorrow”

Best Documentary Short
“Body Team 12”
“Chau, Beyond the Lines”
“Claude Lanzmann: Spectres of the Shoah”
“A Girl in the River: The Price of Forgiveness”
“Last Day of Freedom”

Best Live Action Short
“Ave Maria”
“Day One”
“Everything Will Be Okay (Alles Wird Gut)”
“Shok”
“Stutterer”

Here Are The Dorian Award Nominees!


Carol_(film)_POSTER

The Dorian Awards are handed out by the Gay and Lesbian Entertainment Film Critics Association.  Here are their film nominations for 2015.

FILM OF THE YEAR
The Big Short / Paramount, Regency
Brooklyn / Fox Searchlight
Carol / The Weinstein Company
Mad Max: Fury Road / Warner Bros., Village Road Show
Spotlight / Open Road, Participant, First Look

DIRECTOR OF THE YEAR
(Film or Television)
Sean Baker, Tangerine / Magnolia Pictures
Todd Haynes, Carol / The Weinstein Company
Alejandro Gonzalez Iñárritu, The Revenant / Fox
Tom McCarthy, Spotlight / Open Road, Participant, First Look
George Miller, Mad Max: Fury Road / Warner Bros., Village Road Show

PERFORMANCE OF THE YEAR — ACTRESS
Cate Blanchett, Carol / The Weinstein Company
Brie Larson, Room / A24
Rooney Mara, Carol / The Weinstein Company
Charlotte Rampling, 45 Years / Sundance Selects
Saoirse Ronan, Brooklyn / Fox Searchlight

PERFORMANCE OF THE YEAR — ACTOR
Matt Damon, The Martian / Fox
Leonardo DiCaprio, The Revenant / Fox
Michael Fassbender, Steve Jobs / Universal
Tom Hardy, Legend / Universal, Cross Creek
Eddie Redmayne, The Danish Girl / Focus, Working Title

LGBTQ FILM OF THE YEAR
Carol / The Weinstein Company
The Danish Girl / Focus, Working Title
Freeheld / Summit
Grandma / Sony Pictures Classics
Tangerine / Magnolia Pictures

FOREIGN LANGUAGE FILM OF THE YEAR
The Assassin / Central Motion Pictures, Well Go USA
Mustang / Cohen Media Group
Phoenix / Sundance Selects
Son of Saul / Sony Pictures Classics
Viva / Magnolia Pictures

SCREENPLAY OF THE YEAR
Emma Donoghue, Room / A24
Phyllis Nagy, Carol / The Weinstein Company
Charles Randolph and Adam McKay, The Big Short / Paramount, Regency
Josh Singer & Tom McCarthy, Spotlight / Open Road, Participant, First Look
Aaron Sorkin, Steve Jobs / Universal

DOCUMENTARY OF THE YEAR
(theatrical release, TV airing or DVD release)
Amy / A24
Best of Enemies / Magnolia Pictures, Magnet
Going Clear: Scientology and the Prison of Belief / HBO
Making a Murderer / Netflix
What Happened, Miss Simone? / Netflix

VISUALLY STRIKING FILM OF THE YEAR
(honoring a production of stunning beauty, from art direction to cinematography)
Carol / The Weinstein Company
The Danish Girl / Focus, Working Title
Mad Max: Fury Road / Warner Bros., Village Road Show
The Martian / Fox
The Revenant / Fox

UNSUNG FILM OF THE YEAR
The Diary of a Teenage Girl / Sony Pictures Classics
Ex Machina / A24
Grandma / Sony Pictures Classics
Me and Earl and the Dying Girl / Fox Searchlight
Tangerine (Magnolia)

CAMPY FLICK OF THE YEAR
The Boy Next Door
Fifty Shades of Grey
Magic Mike XXL
Jupiter Ascending
Stonewall