STAN & OLLIE

John C. Reilly     Steve Coogan     Shirley Henderson     Nina Arianda     Danny Huston     Rufus Jones

     Laurel & Hardy were a sensation beginning in the ‘20’s, faded a bit in the ‘40’s, and then had a comeback in the ‘50’s.  Their act was an old-time slapstick comedy, with each being a buffoon or a straight man in turn.  But Stan & Ollie is less about their act and more about the relationship between them during their long association, which survived when their other relationships did not, necessarily.

     In the film, we see them working, amiable and jostling together as they dream up their act.  Stan Laurel was the writer, and his work got them started on planning an act.  As time goes on and, as in all relationships, previously overlooked feelings start surfacing.  It gets more complicated as their wives join them on their last tour through Europe, ending in London.  Hardy’s wife is the traditional American wife, nurturing and ever mindful of her husband’s welfare.  Laurel’s wife is more cosmopolitan and has had something of a career as a dancer.  Her acerbic personality provides more entertainment in its contrast with the American conception of the “ideal” wife.

     The casting by Andy Pryor is right on.  John C. Reilly, in his usual “nailed it” mode, shows Ollie as someone who looks like he doesn’t know much and is a buffoon underneath, but actually shows a kind of intelligence that complements the Laurel character’s creativity. Steve Coogan likewise shows both sides of the buffoon-smart character.  Each deals with the business of entertainment in very different ways, and each is successful in his own way, although they don’t necessarily fit together in a negotiation.  Best to leave them negotiating on their own.

     I especially enjoyed the wives.  Shirley Henderson is a staple in British theatre and television, reliable in projecting color and meaning into a story.  Nina Arianda similarly gives movies she’s in a special punch. The writer (Jeff Pope) and director (Jon S. Baird) wisely use the two wives to illuminate the personas of Stan Laurel and Oliver Hardy.

     The kind of comedy Laurel & Hardy embody is not especially appealing to me, but I found this account of their association compelling and moving.

Laurel and Hardy as Stan and Ollie in their private lives.

Grade:  C+                                    By Donna R. Copeland

ALL I SEE IS YOU

Blake Lively     Jason Clarke     Danny Huston     Ahna O’Reilly     Miguel Fernandez

       I see little value in this production, except for the cinematography, which is stunning right from the beginning in its visual artistry.  Matthias Koenigswieser cleverly indicates Gina’s (Lively) blindness by adjusting the camera to show a blurry, whitish image with vague spots when scenes are from her point of view.  Many of his scenes are impressionistic and/or like an abstract painting that attracts our attention.  He varies the framing in close-ups, such as when the doctor is examining Gina’s eyes, to sweeping land- and seascapes around Barcelona, Spain.  (The picture was filmed in Thailand and Spain.)  Gina and her husband James (Clarke) live in Thailand, so we also get views of that country with its colorful markets, interesting architecture, and lush parks. 

       Koenigswieser is well known for his use of lighting, camera technology, and instincts to achieve artistic effect.  Here is a revealing quote: Atmosphere and lighting go hand in hand for me. I feel it makes everything more natural and relatable. In nature as well as interiors you have a different atmosphere all the time which in turn makes for a certain mood. Different weather conditions, light in different countries and continents, a variety of street light on a clear night, fog or rain. Smokey interiors, and open window next to the ocean and a setting sun. The varieties are endless and the best lighting school is nature (https://fstoppers.com/video/what-we-can-all-learn-beautiful-world-cinematographer-mattias-koenigswieser-2920).

     Gina and James are very much in love, trying to have a baby, and exploring the possibility of eye surgery that will restore her vision after she lost it in an accident.  He is devoted to her, and patiently serves as her visual aid.  She does have to assert herself sometimes in doing things for herself, such as putting in her own eye drops, which she is clearly capable of doing.  Then she undergoes the surgery, which restores her vision in one eye. 

     It is delightful to see her rediscovering colors and all the visual complexities of daily life.  He likewise shows pride and joy for her, and in celebration arranges for a trip to Barcelona to visit her sister and her family and to revisit the places they enjoyed on their honeymoon there.  Unrest begins to creep in, though, when she shows dissatisfaction with how she looks (no makeup) and dresses (conservative, bland), and begins exercising her creativity in changing her appearance.  James clearly expresses ambivalence toward these changes, and begins worrying about losing her to someone else.  He starts getting testy and more possessive and controlling.  It doesn’t help when they get to her sister’s, where Gina’s brother-in-law is an artist with few boundaries or restraint.  James begins to resist joining the others in their escapades, and is seen as a wet blanket.  The situation doesn’t get any better once the couple arrives home, and Gina wants to find a new place to live, just another change that is upsetting to James.

     Despite ramping up the intrigue and mystery in the last half of the film, co-writer (with Sean Conway) and director Marc Forster have delivered a film with a largely predictable plot that comes to resemble a daytime television show.  The two stars play their roles well; Blake Lively is believable as a blind person and one who regains her sight, and Jason Clarke captures well the Type-A personality confronting change that will lessen his control and reveal the insecurities underneath.  Lively herself is more controversial, with sharp contrasts between the “love her” “hate her” camps.  Clarke is more consistently regarded as a talented actor since his most famous role in Zero Dark Thirty. 

See this film primarily for the impressive cinematography.

Grade:  C                                    By Donna R. Copeland

WONDER WOMAN

Gal Gadot     Chris Pine     Connie Nielsen     Robin Wright     Danny Huston     Elena Anaya

Etta Candy     David Thewlis     Ewen Bremner     Eugene Braverock     Said Taghmaoui

   Wonder Woman is a delightful mix of female power with wisdom and compassion, intelligent action, thrills and intrigue of war, and amusing humor.  I especially like that Diana/Wonder Woman (Gadot) possesses these characteristics just within herself.  But beyond that, all the main characters illustrate these features at one time or another.  Steve Trevor (Pine) is certainly a hero with smarts, and his interactions with Wonder Woman are so funny at times, especially when mixing up his modern day sensibilities with her mythological spirit and sentiments. 

    Among the Amazons, Queen Hippolyta (Nielsen) and General Antiope (Wright) are strong figures who cherish and counsel the young Diana.   Other characters represent the value of doing one’s job, as Trevor’s secretary who goes where he says or does anything he tells her to, and Trevor’s three undercover agents (Bremner, Brave Rock, Taghmaoui) exercising their specialties with dedication and humor (i.e., the “Sharpshooter” Charlie (Bremner) also sings for entertainment). 

     Then there are the forces of evil:  Sir Patrick (a.k.a. the god Ares) (Thewlis), Maru, “Dr. Poison” (Anaya), and Nazi General Ludenoff (Huston).  They represent the kind of threat to the world that the Amazons have heard about and train for.  And they are truly evil in their intentions to sabotage peace in the world at all costs.  Currently, it will be in the form of a gas invented by Maru, against which, gas masks are futile. 

  Will Wonder Woman, Steve Trevor, and their allies be effective in forestalling the decimation of mankind?

   In addition to being a thriller, Wonder Woman has substance in commentary about humankind, mythological references, the nature of war, and, perhaps, men (although the latter is disputable, in that women have not necessarily proven themselves yet in leadership with compassion).

     Praise is due for Patty Jenkins in moving the genre of superheroes into more substantive material that goes beyond special effects.  Likewise, William Moulton Marston, the creator of the Wonder Woman character, should be praised for recognizing that girls need a heroine to overcome sexism in the genre.  He is the one who envisioned that magic and super strength needed to be accompanied by wisdom and compassion. 

     Gal Gadot appears to be a perfect choice for playing Wonder Woman, with her ravishing good looks (All men seem to fall at her feet, but the best line is “I’m both frightened and aroused” when she performs her heroic feats.) and athletic prowess combined with naïveté and single-minded purpose.  Chris Pine as well is able to combine an American boyishness with smarts and heroism.  Supporting cast as both the “good guys” and “bad guys” help make this film a winner. 

Take your daughters to see this film.

Grade:  A                               By Donna R. Copeland