SO-SO’S 2021 YEAR IN REVIEW

No two ways about it – 2021 has been another year for the garbage dump. Covid-19 has kept us stuck in our homes, away from family and friends and, in the very worst cases, has taken from us the ones we love the most. 

With that in mind, compiling a list of the goings on in the world of film, in 2021, might seem trite or even unnecessary. I get that, but I love films and I’m currently in a mood to write. What’s a uomo to do? 

TARATINO’S DISPOSABLE DISCOURSE

Quentin on The Late Show with Stephen Colbert, November 2021

” …a lot of the classic movies I saw, I saw on late night television…but it’s also a disposable experience – there is an aspect about it that is disposable.” 

“This audience, here, is a collective. There’s you by yourself – you, talking to you. There’s you by yourself, but then there’s all of you together and then you start appreciating the movie in that way. And, when you have a good experience – it’s not always a good experience – but, when you have a good experience, those are the things that stay in your mind and that you remember for the rest of your life and they become indelible…indelible snapshots.”  

First off, on this very blog, I, too, separate my reviews between those I watch IN CINEMAS and those I watch AT HOME. I can’t say I gave that distinction much thought, but, even I will concede that they are two very different experiences. What I won’t concede is that one is superior to the other, because, for me, anyway, it just isn’t true. 

Just like Tarantino, I, too, first discovered many of my favourite films on late night TV. I still remember turning the channel to CBC (I’m Canadian!), late one night, in the early 1990s, and stumbling onto a spooky, witty and visually dazzling British anthology film called “Dead of Night” (1945). I couldn’t believe what I was seeing. What a find! Even today, some 30 years later, the recollection still makes me smile. 

Then there was the other late night, again, in the early 1990s, when I flipped over to CKVR-TV (Barrie) and watched, with jaw dropped, a scratchy print of this strange and disorienting black and white film starring Rock Hudson. It concerned a depressed, middle-aged man who fakes his own death in order to begin again, in a new place, in a new life, under a different identity, in an attempt to fill up all of those dark and empty spaces deep down inside of him. That film was “Seconds” (1966). 

Those two remain among my very favourite films. More importantly, though, there was nothing even remotely “…disposable…” about those two experiences. Tarantino may think watching a great movie on TV is an experience not worth holding on to, but I don’t. I still get chills remembering stumbling upon them and that was when I only had a 24 inch TV bought in the late 70s to watch them on. 

For me, few things speak more to this artform’s incredible and undeniable ability to pull you in and make you a happy prisoner to its arresting images and compelling sounds than being dazzled by two of its finest examples while viewing each on a crappy 1970s 24 inch TV.

More to the point, the fact is that this supposedly “…disposable…” way of watching movies is more sympatico with the very beginnings of cinema itself than the collective one that Tarantino is going on about. How so? 

In 1894, Thomas Alva Edison’s invention, the Kinetoscope was put into commercial use by the Holland brothers at their Kinetoscope Parlor, located at 1155 Broadway in New York City. 

Those Kinetoscopes were machines in which one person would look through a viewfinder (magnifying glass) as an electric motor ran back lit strips of film past a shutter. 

In other words, the very first commercial motion picture viewing experience was a solitary, not collective, experience viewed…wait for it…on a small screen. 

I rest my case. 

MARVEL v. SCORSESE

If you’re on Twitter and happen to follow people who tweet about the movies, you may have run into a Marvel fan or two endlessly bitching about Martin Scorsese. What??? 

To be fair, lots of Scorsese fans have dumped on the Marvel movies, too. Anyway…

Back in October of 2019, Empire Film Magazine asked the great Italian-American filmmaker, Martin Scorsese (“Taxi Driver”, “Raging Bull”, “Last Temptation of Christ”) to share his thoughts on the then current box office mega-buster, “Avengers: Endgame” (2019). This is what he said…

“I don’t see them. I tried, you know? But that’s not cinema,” Scorsese told Empire. “Honestly, the closest I can think of them, as well made as they are, with actors doing the best they can under the circumstances, is theme parks. It isn’t the cinema of human beings trying to convey emotional, psychological experiences to another human being.”

Fans of A:E and the entire, super-bloated Marvel Universe reacted to this observation by throwing an online tantrum. 

Even Spidey himself, (at least Spidey of the last three Spideys, not Spidey of the two Spideys before that or Spidey from the three Spideys before the two Spideys before that) Tom Holland has had it with Scorsese…

“I’ve made Marvel movies and I’ve also made movies that have been in the conversation in the world of the Oscars, and the only difference, really, is one is much more expensive than the other. But the way I break down the character, the way the director etches out the arc of the story and characters — it’s all the same, just done on a different scale. So, I do think they’re real art.”

Yes and there’s no difference between eating a delicious, made from scratch plate of pasta and eating a pop tart. Sure…

Of course, Holland, here, is not talking about content, he’s talking about process – and, not coincidentally, therein lies the difference.  

As you may have picked up on by now, I am squarely on Scorsese’s side. I’ve seen Marvel movies and have no problem with them – they are entertaining and fun, with special effects that are, mostly, remarkable. 

Yet, let’s be honest, the stories are all silly and overblown – the fate of the entire world or universe is always at stake. For once, it would be refreshing if only, say, New Jersey was at stake – no offence to folks from the Garden State. Also, let’s not forget the flimsy, one note characters and the very simplistic world view and the increasingly ridiculous explanations for these unbeatable super villains’ superpowers/plans for world domination and how our superheroes have no way of stopping them, until, miraculously, our superheroes have just, in the nick of time, no less, found a way of stopping them. Like a Twitter user recently told me, it’s a lot like watching somebody else play a video game. That sounds about right. 

Finally, isn’t it enough that your beloved movies – that must not be criticized by anyone under no circumstances – rule the box office, have endless spin offs on TV and multiple streaming platforms, are obsessed over, non-stop, on social media, movie websites and will, most likely, be produced, many times, each year, for the next 500 years? 

Apparently not. 

A RANT ABOUT SCREENRANT

Technically, this ridiculous movie list from SCREENRANT is from December 22, 2020, but it turned up on my Twitter feed a few weeks ago, so, let’s pretend it’s from 2021, shall we? 

In this list, the writer offers 10 observations about Frank Capra’s Christmas classic, “It’s a Wonderful Life” (1946) – 5 “Why it still holds up” entries and 5 “Why it’s way too dated” entries.

#10 in the “Too Dated” entries is “Foggy-Like Cinematography.” 

True, modern cameras, lenses and digital technology offer a far sharper image than was possible in 1946, but to describe IAWL’s cinematography as “…foggy…” is just baffling. 

I just found a couple of clips of the film on YouTube and they look great – no fog.

#8 in the “Too Dated” entries is “Undertones of Abuse.” 

Get this…

“Although people in the ’40s and ’50s might not have thought much about the way George treats his family or his wife, several things he does in the movie have raised alarms with modern-day viewers.”

The way society viewed domestic abuse up until far too recently was, to say the least, horrific. One need only read this Time magazine article about a study published in 1964 in the Archives of General Psychiatry that, among other things, said this…

‘The periods of violent behavior by the husband,’ the doctors observed, ‘served to release him momentarily from his anxiety about his ineffectiveness as a man, while giving his wife apparent masochistic gratification and helping probably to deal with the guilt arising from the intense hostility expressed in her controlling, castrating behavior.’

Keep in mind that these are doctors talking in 1964. As I said, horrific. 

Yet, in IAWL, the way George “…treats his family…” is seen, by the very filmmakers themselves, as horrific. Proof of that is that, in a key scene, after George yells at his wife and kids, he is immediately apologetic. 

“I’m sorry, Mary. Janie, I’m sorry, you go ahead and practice. Pete, I owe you an apology, too. I’m sorry.” 

True, he follows this apology by angrily saying…

“What’s the matter with everybody? Janie, go on, I told you to practice, now, go on, play.” 

Yet, by including his apology, clearly, the film presents George’s behaviour as awful and I’m guessing 1940s audiences would have seen it that way as well. 

This is also a weird point to make when you consider that the whole point of this scene is to show just how far George has fallen. His desperate desire to escape Bedford Falls and do great things and his failure to do so reaches its crescendo, here. Afterall, It’s no coincidence that this very scene also sees George destroying a model of a bridge that he’s clearly been painstakingly working on for months. George is at his lowest point, where he’s allowed the Potters of the world to get into his head and heart and convince him that a man’s riches can only be counted out in coins and paper bills. 

Credit, too, the brilliant Jimmy Stewart for momentarily scaring us by showing just how much darkness is hidden underneath his usual sunny persona. Actually, maybe this ScreenRant writer is responding to that alone. If so, I think that’s a good thing and far from dated.

Then, the writer brings up the playful scene where George and Mary, post falling into a pool during a Charleston dance competition, walk through the neighbourhood at night – she in only a robe and he in a ridiculous looking football uniform (ridiculous because, at best, his spindly frame suggests badminton).  

At one point, while watching the two would-be lovebirds from his porch, a man grumbles to George, “Why don’t ya kiss her instead of talking her to death.” When George reacts by promising to show the man what real kissing is all about, Mary races away in embarrassment. Unfortunately for her, George is standing on a part of her robe so that when she rushes away, it slips off and she is left naked with only a large hydrangea bush to hide in. 

While Mary begs George for her robe back, he delays and makes light of the situation, saying…

“This is a very interesting situation. Hmm…a man doesn’t get in a situation like this everyday – not in Bedford Falls, anyway. This requires a little thought, here. I’ve read about things like this, but I never…” 

Is George being a jerk here? Yes, a playful jerk, but, yeah, a jerk, nonetheless. The two are smitten for each other, though, and have known each other all of their lives and, besides, George doesn’t ever seem to be contemplating anything more serious than making Mary squirm a bit before giving her back her robe, which he does. 

Even those two misguided complaints are nothing compared to a doozy of an entry for #2 – “At Moments Depressing and Sad.”

Get a load of this…

“The sad truth is that George’s wish was to leave his small town and make something out of himself never came true and in the end, he ended up right where he didn’t want to be. It seems that for George it’s not such a wonderful life after all.”

If you miss the entire point of a film, is it wise for an online publication to trust you to write about it? 

Yes, George dreamt of getting the hell out of Bedford Falls, in order to see the world, do great things and become a rich man in the process. What he didn’t realize, however, is that he already was a rich man – rich in love and friendship. Meanwhile, Potter, clearly a stand-in for one of those “rich” men whom George so desperately wanted to be, has so much money that he has no room for compassion or connection. 

The film is about the emptiness of greed and the cruelty of predatory capitalism. It’s also about it’s antidote – kindness, generosity and collective action. 

How could this writer have missed that? No idea. 

Also, if you think that there’s no way a black and white film from 1946 could be relevant in the 21st century, read this…

“Just remember this Mr. Potter – this rabble you’re talking about, they do most of the working and paying and living and dying in this community. Well, is it too much to have them work and pay and live and die in a couple of decent rooms and a bath? Anyway, my father didn’t think so. People were human beings to him, but to you – a warped, frustrated old man – they’re cattle. Well, in my book he died a much richer man than you’ll ever be.” 

In 2021, when the sickening greed of the money mad elite continues to keep so many people down and out, in desperate financial situations, doesn’t this fiery speech, delivered with such passion and brilliant modulation by Jimmy Stewart, just about say it all?  

TERRIFIC FILMS I SAW IN 2021 AND WHERE TO SEE THEM

Netflix – 2020

Director: Matias Mariani

Writers: Chika Anadu, Francine Barbosa, Maíra Buhler, Matias Mariani, Júlia Murat, Chioma Thompson, Roberto Winter.

Cast: O.C. Ukeje, Indira Nascimento, Chukwudi Iwuji, Oula Alsaghir.

Low-key, deceptively casual mood piece about a Nigerian musician who goes to Brazil to find his brother. 

It’s about the madness of two people: one who believes he’s God and the other who unintentionally confirms it. 

YouTube – 1969

Director: Ronald Neame

Writers: Muriel Spark (novel), Jay Presson Allen (play).

Cast: Maggie Smith, Gordon Jackson, Robert Stephens, Pamela Franklin.

From light to darkness.

1930s. At first, Maggie Smith glows as rebel teacher Brodie at an all girls school. Later, darkness swallows her up as her crush on then Italian dictator Mussolini leads to tragedy.  

Lots of layers, including how the painter, Teddy Lloyd, treats Brodie like his very own personal Benito.  

Netflix – 2020

Director: Remi Weekes

Writers: Remi Weekes, Felicity Evans, Toby Venables.

Cast: Sope Dirisu, Wunmi Mosaku, Malaika Wakoli-Abigada, Matt Smith. 

Married refugees from Sudan fight off a demon from their past while struggling to adjust to life in a small English town. 

Unsettling & deeply moving. A story ripped from the headlines and reinvented in a bold & imaginative way.

Criterion Collection – DVD – 2008

Director: Jan Troell

Writers: Niklas Rådström, Jan Troell, Agneta Ulfsäter-Troell, Maja Öman. 

Cast: Maria Heiskanen, Mikael Persbrandt, Jesper Christensen, Callin Öhrvall.

Deeply moving story about an abused and neglected housewife, in the early 1900s, who finds an escape in a camera she and her husband win at a fair. 

Heiskanen and Persbrandt shine as a married couple suffocated by the cruel limits society has placed on their humanity. 

Netflix – 2017

Directors: Benny Safdie and Josh Safdie

Writers: Ronald Bronstein, Josh Safdie.

Cast: Robert Pattison, Benny Safdie, Jennifer Jason Leigh, Buddy Duress, Taliah Webster, Barkhad Abdi. 

Do the Safdie brothers know how to make a film or what? 

A punch to the gut and a remarkably moving film about two brothers and the ways in which both have trouble understanding and existing in the real world. 

Opens with a blast of energy and hardly lets up until the end credits. Stunning filmmaking. This is the type of film Scorsese was talking about when he took his stand against the Marvel Universe. Can’t wait to see “Uncut Gems” (2019).

Criterion Collection – Tubi – 2008

Director: Andrea Arnold

Writer: Andrea Arnold

Cast: Katie Jarvis, Michael Fassbender, Kierston Wareing, Rebecca Griffiths.

15 year-old Mia lives in a cramped, low rent apartment with her not quite there mother and bothersome little sister. 

Her only escape is hip hop dancing, that is, until her mother’s new boyfriend, Connor shows up. 

Raw portrait of a young woman adrift in an uncaring world, looking for a life raft and finding a shark instead. Powerful stuff. 

DVD – 2015

Director: Julia Ducournau

Writer: Julia Ducournau

Cast: Garance Marillier, Ella Rumpf, Rabah Nait Oufella, Laurent Lucas. 

First year of veterinarian school has been a stressful time for Justine. Things get worse when she develops a taste for the unusual. 

Compelling, gruesome story about the horrors of not fitting in & the varied consequences of self-discovery. 

 YouTube – 1984

Director: Bill Forsyth

Writer: Bill Forsyth

Cast: Bill Paterson, Eleanor David, Clare Grogan, Alex Norton, George Rossi, Peter Rossi. 

Alan, ‘Dickie Bird’, a morning radio DJ in Glasgow, has just been left by his long time girlfriend. 

One day, while driving home, he trades smiles with a beautiful young woman in a Mr. Bunny Ice Cream truck. Smitten, he follows the vehicle and, after buying a cone for himself, watches in horror as a group of masked thugs smash the truck up with bats and metal clubs.  

Hilarious, off its rocker comedy from the great Bill Forsyth (Local Hero) goes to places few other films do in showing Alan’s quest to heal not only his own, but more than a few other broken hearts. 

A definite comfort, joy and peculiar movie experience.

HAPPY NEW YEAR

Well, that’s all I got for you folks. I wish you the happiest of New Year’s celebrations and a fantastic 2022. I think it’s about time we got out from under this dark cloud. Here’s hoping that happens soon. Ciao for now. 

Author: domdel39

2 thoughts on “SO-SO’S 2021 YEAR IN REVIEW

Comments are closed.