MURDER, MY SWEET.

 Dick Powell may not have had Bogart's insouciance but he was just as good with the one-liners, maybe better, of which there are many in John Paxton's superb adaptation of Raymond Chandler's "Farewell, My Lovely" which, if it's not the best film Edward Dmytryk ever directed, is almost certainly the most enjoyable. It is, of course, classic Film Noir with just enough of a convoluted plot to please the most ardent of mystery fans as Powell's Philip Marlowe is hired by Mike Mazurki's 'Moose' Malloy to find his old girlfriend Velma. Meanwhile, he's also asked to act as bodyguard to Douglas Walton's gigolo in a deal involving stolen jewels, a deal that brings him into the orbit of Claire Trevor, (they were her jewels), and some suitably shady characters. When 'Moose' turns up in the same orbit it isn't hard to put two and two together.

Bogart's  Marlowe was undoubtedly a tough guy, (Bogie's snarl counted for a lot); Powell
is clearly softer and more cynical along the lines of Elliot Gould's later personification and there were times when I was sure Dick was going to burst into song. Mazurki is the surprise here giving what is probably his most finely modulated and memorable performance while Trevor positively sizzles with duplicity. Beautifully shot by Harry J. Wild and with Dmytryk for once displaying the lightest of touches, what's not to love.

TWILIGHT

 Clearly influenced by Bela Tarr and determined to outdo him when it comes to pacing, (funereal at best), and general moroseness Gyorgy Feher's "Twilight" isn't so much like watching paint dry as staring at the grey wall before it's painted. Based on the same Friedrich Durrenmatt novel as "It Happened in Broad Daylight" and "The Pledge" Feher strips it of all suspense yet gives it a sense of dread as it moves with all the slowness of a lackadaisical snail from scene to scene, image to image that is both disquieting and disorientating.

An eight year old girl is found murdered in the woods and the policeman whose last case it is is determined to find the killer even after retiring. We can just about figure this out from the material onscreen but really it helps if you've read the book or seen the other films. This is more like a palimpsest of Durrenmatt's novel, something not quite fully formed, a series of beautifully grim images rather than an actual narrative and not helped any by the monosyllabic performances of its cast.

It is, in other words, the worst kind of art-house movie, one determined to hold onto its 'masterpiece' credentials whatever the cost. Amazingly it's never really boring; you watch it transfixed in the vain hope that something might actually happen and, of course, it never does. As Jean Brodie might say, 'For those who like this sort of thing, this is the sort of thing they like'.

SHIP OF FOOLS

 It has become fashionable to deride Stanley Kramer as nothing more than a maker of turgid polemics and his early standing as a director of intelligent trailblazers passed quickly and, despite its success at the Oscars, by the time he got around to making "Ship of Fools" the critics really had it in for him. It may be no masterpiece and despite its subject, (antisemitism), it's no trailblazer but it's certainly intelligent, superbly acted, (particularly by Oskar Werner and Simone Signoret), and a fairly faithful rendering of Katherine Anne Porter's novel; Abby Mann did the outstanding screenplay working with sometimes highly melodramatic material.

The setting is a liner on its way from Vera Cruz to Germany in 1933 with the kind of sundry group of passengers on board you might find in a mini-series. They are a mixture of Germans, a few Americans, (including Vivien Leigh in her last film as an amalgam of Blanche Du Bois and Mrs. Stone), and for dramatic purposes the obligatory Jews, ostracized and heading unknowingly perhaps to a concentration camp.

Mercifully, these are more than mere stereotypes thanks to a superb cast, (Kramer was always a good actor's director). The problem is we've met them all before and since and more successfully. Nevertheless, whatever its faults Werner, in a career-best performance, and Signoret together raise it to the level of art whenever they are on screen. It's a joy to watch acting this good.

SEPTEMBER 5

Making a movie now about the 1972 Munich Olympic terrorist attacks might be considered something of a political hand-grenade since political opinion is clearly divided between those who side with Israel's continuing attacks on Gaza and those who are sympathetic to Palestine.

In "September 5" the 'villains' are clearly the Palestinian terrorists and the horrors of what is currently happening in the Middle East may put many people off seeing this film but then you could also say that "September 5" isn't so much about the hostage taking as it is about the reporting of the situation by ABC and this is definitely the best film about political journalism since "All the President's Men".

Director Tim Fehlbaum films it like a documentary and his remarkable cast respond beautifully. Every performance is pitch-perfect as is Markus Forderer's cinematography, Hansjorg WeiBbrich's editing and Fehlbaum's screenplay co-written with Moritz Binder and Alex David which doesn't feel like a script at all but a piece of actual news reportage and the thrills come not so much from hostage taking as from the dangers involved in simply recording it. The result is terrific cinema that simply shouldn't be missed.
 

NICKEL BOYS

 Using a subjective camera throughout, RaMell Ross' "Nickel Boys" shows us its world through the eyes of, not one but both , it's principal protagonists, (Elwood and Turner), as they struggle to survive life in the Nickel Academy, a 'reform' school run like a concentration camp and it betrays its director's origins in documentary film-making. On the one hand it's something of a visual marvel but it's also a difficult watch and not always an easy film to like or empathize with which is probably the very antithesis of what Ross intended.

This is a 'clever' film, clearly aimed at an art-house audience and magnificently photographed by Jomo Fray in the Academy ratio but the technique leaves no room for the actors to express themselves, (someone's always talking directly to the camera or, as in a lengthy scene near the end, being observed by the camera in a single take).

This is a pity because the technique detracts from what the film is really about, namely the horrors of the Academy, and because there is still a lot to admire here. I mean, if you are going to adapt a Pulitzer Prize winning book for the screen this is as original a way of doing it as any but it's also likely to alienate many of its audience. Worth seeing, certainly, but far from the masterpiece 'Little White Lies' and other critical publications think it is.

A REAL PAIN

 The first time I remember seeing Jesse Eisenberg was as the teenage nephew of Campbell Scott in an underrated little gem called "Roger Dodger" which he had no trouble in stealing from his co-star and then as the teenage son of divorcing parents in "The Squid and the Whale". I knew then he was a talent to watch. Unfortunately, apart from "Adventureland" the films in which he subsequently found himself cast did little for his career until the dream role of Mark Zuckerberg in "The Social Network" came along.

He was brilliant in the part but by now it also had become clear that Eisenberg was no character or method actor; he was recognizably Eisenberg in every part he played; nerdy, fastidious if always a little challenging. If he has grown as an actor he has also grown as 'Eisenberg', cementing his reputation for nerdy heroes and he's no different in "A Real Pain" but here he's not just playing a variation of Eisenberg created by someone else. This time he's written the film and directed it as well; he's his own 'Eisenberg' and quite frankly he's magnificent.

Pain is the operative word in this picture which is about two youngish American cousins who go on a Holocaust tour of Poland to honor the memory of their deceased grandmother. Eisenberg, naturally, is the nerdy, sensible one and an equally magnificent Kieran Culkin, giving the performance of his life, is the bombastic, extrovert and deeply troubled one; the pain is all his and watching them play off against each other is a masterclass in acting.

Clocking in at around the ninety minute mark this is a film of real depth and says as much about the legacy of the Holocaust as any number of "Schindler's List"s. Who could fail but to be deeply moved by the scenes in the concentration camp or by Culkin's reaction to the visit. This is a film that's profound on so many levels yet nothing in it feels like overkill.

It may seem odd to go as far as to class it as a comedy and yet it's often laugh-out-loud funny. Eisenberg's genius as a writer and director is that he can move from comedy to tragedy in the blink of an eye; he seems to see them simply as the opposite sides of the same coin. Culkin, of course, is the one whose performance will win the Oscar but Eisenberg, too, deserves his place in the sun, (Best Original Screenplay, perhaps). Nerdy he may still appear on the surface but that boy from "Roger Dodger" has definitely come a long way.

JUROR #2

 If "Juror #2" turns out to be the last film Clint Eastwood makes, (quite possible since the man is 94 now), at least he will have gone out in some style. This may not be a late career masterpiece but it's certainly the best thing he's done for awhile and is undoubtedly one of his best non-westerns.

The story-line, (a little far-fetched initially but as it progresses it becomes increasingly more realistic), concerns a juror on a murder trial who from the very start doubts the guilt of the accused because he realizes he himself may be the inadvertent killer so it works both as suspense movie, (who is the killer? Was the killing a tragic accident?), and a well-judged and thought out morality piece.

With an outstanding screenplay from Jonathan A. Abrams, beautifully nuanced direction from Eastwood and first-rate performances from the cast, (Nicholas Hoult is particularly good as the conscience-stricken juror), this is both an excellent entertainment and a film that challenges us to think before rushing to judgement.

DIDI

 

Coming-of-age movies don't come much better than "Didi", the first feature film from Sean Wang, who has clearly a big future ahead of him. This movie, set mostly amongst the Asian American community, is so authentic it feels like a documentary as young Chris Wang, (an excellent Izaac Wang), negotiates the pitfalls of early adolescence. (fighting with his older sister, hanging out with his friends, learning to skateboard, falling for a girl and perhaps most significantly learning how to make videos).

His mom is a luminous Joan Chen and his grandmother the wonderfully expressive Zhang Li Hua, real-life grandmother of the director, who prefer to speak Mandarin at home and live a mostly traditional lifestyle, (dad is away working in Taiwan), and despite the arguments and the squabbling this is as loving a family unit as you will find in the movies. Indeed Wang has nothing but affection for every character in the film which is clearly autobiographical. Funny, very touching and a joy to watch.

CONCLAVE

Robert Harris doesn't do things by halves; he writes far-fetched thrillers and none more far-fetched than "Conclave" so anyone who goes to see the film version expecting to see a documentary-like account of how the Catholic Church elects a pope are in for a shock. "Conclave" is a melodramatic political thriller with the most ridiculous plot anyone could concoct. It's entertaining but in a very bad movie kind of way with more twists than a sailor's knot, each one sillier than the one before with a punchline that would be laugh-out-loud funny if it weren't in such questionable taste.

The director of this nonsense is Edward Berger who also made the Oscar-laden and overrated "All Quiet on the Western Front" and to be fair he does bring a certain style to the material. It's also quite well acted by a cast that's far too good for the script they've been saddled with. Ralph Fiennes brings his usual gravitas to the presiding Cardinal Lawrence while, once again, Stanley Tucci steals the movie from his co-stars. If you're Catholic and take any of this rubbish as fact you'll probably run from the Church and set up your own religion but anyone with a modicum of intelligence should see through it twenty minutes in.
 

EMILIA PEREZ

 Musicals come in all shapes and sizes. This year alone we've already had "Joker: Folie a Deux" which certainly broke new ground in the way in which it incorporated its musical numbers into its dark narrative but "Joker: Folie a Deux" feels almost commonplace when set beside Jacques Audiard's extraordinary "Emilia Perez", the tale of a Mexican drug-lord's transition from male to female with the musical numbers so seamlessly woven into the narrative it often feels like an opera with swathes of dialogue sung by its large cast; it really is quite unlike anything else out there.

It's been described as 'a women's picture' in that it is dominated by its mostly female cast, with all four leading actresses taking the Best Actress prize at Cannes, namely the incredible trans actress Karla Sofia Gascon who plays both the male drug-lord Manitas and Emilia, the woman he becomes, Zoe Saldana, the lawyer who helps Emilia on her journey, Selena Gomez as Jessi, Manitas' wife and Adriana Paz as the woman who becomes Emilia's lover.

Indeed this is a work of real brilliance and imagination; if it does have a failing perhaps it lies in its score, (by Camille and Clement Ducol), which doesn't always come off and the treatment, however bold and remarkable, is unlikely to appeal to a mass audience. This is a film for the critics and the awards circuit and I'm sure the prizes will keep coming. In fact, this may even turn out to be a classic.

JOKER: FOLIE A DEUX

 What should a sequel be? More of the same or something radically different? If you go down the radically different route you risk alienating the very audience that perhaps made the first film the hit that spawned the sequel which is exactly what has happened with "Joker: Folie a Deux". Having given us the darkest of dark comic-book villains with "Joker" where was Todd Phillips to go with part two? Down the 'Batman' route with diminishing returns or break the mold and take the risk? Thankfully he chose the latter.

"Joker: Folie a Deux" may be a failure both critically and commercially but artistically it's a triumph. It's also a musical in the same vein as Herbert Ross's masterpiece "Pennies from Heaven" only this time the cast sing the songs which have been brilliantly woven into the plot and which, as with "Pennies from Heaven", explore the feelings of the characters making this one of the very finest American musicals and a sequel superior to the original with Joaquin Phoenix even surpassing his initial outing as Arthur Fleck. This is one of the great performances by an American actor.

This time round he's got a co-conspirator in the form of Lady Gaga's 'Harley Quinn' who he meets in Arkham State Hospital, (in a music class, naturally), and it is she who gives him something to live for but this is no "Bonnie and Clyde", no "Wild at Heart", no boy and girl killers on the lam movie, (about 95% of the film takes place in either the hospital or the courtroom), but a dark psychological study of tortured souls filtered through the gaze of the Hollywood musical. In fact, it's so 'out there' it's almost an art movie. (Did Phillips really expect the same audience who embraced the first film to embrace this one?). Phoenix's Oscar should be in the bag but it's highly unlikely the Academy will embrace this one. It's a downer but it's magnificent.