Thursday, October 14, 2021


 Matt Damon     Adam Driver     Jodie Comer     Ben Affleck     Marton Csokas     Harriet Walter


           I can’t think of any movie I would want to see three times back-to-back.  But that is a little like viewing The Last Duel.  It is supposed to be a story told from different points of view, but since the versions are not all that different from one another, the effect is repetitiousness.  Why am I seeing the same scenes over and over?

            The setting is in Normandy, France, during the 14th Century, with all its primitive beliefs about women and religion at that time.  The main characters are drawn up in detail.  Jean de Carrouges (Damon) is a by-the-book kind of man with a strict moral code.  He is loyal to the king and a noteworthy fighter, but he is not personable in any way and turns people off with his bluntness.  Although they start out as friends, he and Jacques de Gris (Driver) end up being rivals to the death.  Jacques is just the opposite of Jean; good-looking, charming, persuasive, and quite willing to cut corners to please Count d’Alencon (Affleck), and the Count rewards him generously.  

            The part of the story that’s the most interesting is the transformation in the relationship between these two men—and all the players who contributed to that transition, along with the basic nature of each man.  The movie is good at showing how Jacques elicits Jean’s suspiciousness, and Jean’s lack of awareness of Jacques speaking up for him.  It shows how common gossip can work both for and against those who perpetrate and foster it.  It shows how an autocratic regime is ultimately bad for most people and how it stymies efforts directed toward the good.  It also makes the point loud and clear about women in that era being the property of their husbands, and a crime against a woman is really a crime against her husband.

            The acting is another strength of The Last Duel.  Damon, Driver, and Affleck live up to their reputations for playing various kinds of characters successfully.  Driver is especially skilled in facial expressiveness and demonstrating the nuances of a role, particularly one like this where he has to appear both genuine and duplicitous.  Damon can do the same thing, but this role is typical for him in its earnestness and honesty.  I almost didn’t recognize Affleck as the oily Count d’Alencon with a blond wig! But he aced it.  A shining new star is Jodie Comer (TV’s “Killing Eve”, Free Guy and Star Wars Episode IX) who appears authentic as a woman of the 14th Century in a role completely unlike those she’s had before.

            The movie shows the brutality (to us in the 21st Century) of the 14th Century ethos and possibly make us grateful for the time we live in.  It depicts the last legally sanctioned duel in France’s history

            The Last Duel could be a lesson well told; but it’s just too bad the filmmakers didn’t spot some contradictions.  Number one is that Jean’s superior fighting/dueling skills would lead us to think that he could make quick work of the partying, bureaucratic Jacques.  That duel went on far too long.  The battles shown were also unnecessary, particularly since it was almost impossible to distinguish the fighters from one another and determine what was going on—a huge task for the cinematographer.  This film needed an editor with a skilled pen.


Given the talent involved in The Last Duel, it’s quite surprising that it didn’t soar.


Grade:  C-                             By Donna R. Copeland


Kotone Furukawa     Aumu Nakajima     Kiyohika Shibukawa     Katsuki Mori     Aoba Kawai

 Fusako Urabe     Hyunri     Shouma Kai 

            The wheels of fortune and fantasy do spin around in this finely executed Japanese film.  Adding to the mysteriousness for English speakers will be the challenge of keeping track of the characters matched to the actors, especially since some of characters’ names may change during the segments.  There are three stories: “Magic (Or Something Less Assuring)”; “Door Wide Open,” and “Once Again”—all cleverly acted out—with the cleverness becoming more apparent after one sees the whole movie.

            “Magic” – After a successful commercial photoshoot, Meiko (Furukawa) is seen in a café chatting with a girlfriend (who may have been her make-up artist), Tsugumi (Hyunri).  “Gumi” is elaborating on an encounter she has just had with someone she met online.  They seem to have really hit it off, calling one another pet names, and she is hoping for another meeting.  The women talk about first dates and what they will/will not dare to do.  After they part, Meiko recognizes the man as someone from her past.  What will she do with this information?

            “Door Wide Open” – We see Professor Segawa ((Shibukawa) sit stoicly as a student kneels down with his head on the floor before him, begging not to be given a failing grade in a class.  The class is taking place just across the hall, and the instructor there tries to get the student up and to close the door, but the professor insists it remain open.  It turns out that one of the other students in the class, Nao (Mori), is having an affair with the begging student Sasaki (Kai) and the two get together soon afterward when they see that Segawa has won an award for his book.  Sasaki wants to use Nao to his advantage after she admires Segawa’s book, and he manipulates her into a ruse to discredit Segawa.  We get to see how this turns out.

            “Once again” – Two women pass one another on escalator in a train station.  One seems to recognize the other, and Nana (Kawai), after going down, goes right back up again to catch up with the woman who looks like her high school friend.  Nana who had just come from her high school reunion, where she looked for Moka (Urabe) and didn’t find her there, thinks she has now run across her.  After talking a bit, Moka invites Nana back to her house for tea.  In the course of their conversation, real information is revealed, and Nana seems to be content as she returns for home.

            You will not guess the contents of each of these stories but will be intrigued as you listen to them and discover the realities behind so many obfuscations.  I actually prefer the literal translation of the title, which is Coincidences and Imagination.  The film is more than simply entertainment; responses from all sides will resemble what one might see in a therapy room, both in terms of insight and solutions to problems (my tribute to the writer/director Ryusuke Hamaguchi for his insights and apparent knowledge of what people so often seek from others but fail to receive).  The overall theme could be seen as people trying to find out who the people they meet really are, showing how avoidant behaviors might obscure the very things people want to know which would be helpful all around.  

            My parting question is how much Hamaguchi intentionally mixes up names to make us continually search to figure things out, or whether he is making a point about individual names being less important than observations about human nature.


Puzzlers will find this film intriguing as will those of us who are interested in human motivations and how we go about solving problems.


Grade:  A                              By Donna R. Copeland


 Vicky Krieps     Tim Roth     Mia Wasikowska     Grace Delrue     Anders Anderson Lie

            We meet Tony (Roth) and Chris (Krieps) as they are getting on a ferry to Fårö Island, home for 40 years of the renowned writer/director of Swedish films, Ingmar Bergman.  And you can see why he lived there so long; it is lush and evocative of special island places.  But place is not the issue or main point in this production.  Both Tony and Chris are Bergman fans.  He is older, a filmmaker considered as one of the experts on Bergman, and he has been invited to screen his latest production, hence his excitement about visiting the island.  Chris is younger and earlier in her career as a screenwriter.  She has had some success but is currently suffering from writer’s block.  Right away one senses the two are in different places in their minds.  And the story is primarily about their relationship.

            Krieps is the lead actor in this production written and directed by Mia Hansen-Løve (All is Forgiven, The Father of My Children), who was acclaimed for her last film (Things to Come).  Having read that she was a close collaborator and partner of the filmmaker Olivier Assayas and her penchant for semi-autobiographical films, I got the impression she identified with Chris, the character in this film.  She is quoted as saying, “the film really came together when I thought of the island of Fårö as a possible setting for the story”, and this line is uttered by the character Chris during the film when she is summarizing her thoughts to Tony about the script she is writing.

            In Bergman Island, Chris and Tony seem like a mismatched couple.  He is well established in his career, confident and decisive, but withholding in talking about his work with Chris.  (Although he did say he was writing about “how invisible things circulate within a couple”, which could easily be referring to the two of them, but of course he doesn’t elaborate.)  On the other hand, she is fearful (even of flying), lacks confidence in her abilities, and is frequently asking Tony for help.  When she goes into detail about her ideas for a plot, he interrupts her twice to answer his phone.  That is, there is a fundamental mismatch between them.  Although he denies his lack of interest, it seems obvious from his behavior that he gets bored.  And that’s not surprising, given the plot.

            Chris introduces her script plan to Tony by saying, “It’s a series of failure, betrayals, dramas…of impossible mourning and suffering overshadowed by a few memories” and I thought, “Who would want to see that?”  And indeed, one gets the impression her story  (told in film-within-a-film) is about a frustrated love interest of the woman Amy (wonderfully captured by Wasikowska) versus the much more thoughtful, planful first-love Joseph (Lie) who has enough insight to have a conscience.   He points out her ambivalences in relationships by saying, “You want to have two children by two different men.”  (And this is a reference to Chris’ earlier negative reaction when she was told that Ingmar Bergman had 9 children with five wives.)  Joseph’s condescension mirrors Chris’ earlier “harumph!”

            As a fan of Bergman films, I was all set to relish Bergman Island; and indeed there are many references to him and to his films (Through a Glass Darkly, Cries and Whispers, Persona), but none seem to relate to Mia Hansen-Løve’s plot.  Rather, it seems to be something of an autobiographical account of her relationship with Olivier Assayas, her partner for a number of years, and more generally with questions about a (female) writer claiming her own voice, particularly alongside a man of with a proven reputation.  There are mostly plusses for this film, but it could have been more explicit and decisive in its plot.



Not an ode to Ingmar Bergman, but a contrast between his career and that of a female screenwriter of today.


Grade:  B-                                         By Donna R. Copeland

Thursday, October 7, 2021


 Noomi Rapace     Hilmer Snaer Gudnason     Bjorn Hlynur     Ingvar Sigurdsson

            This surreal production written by Sjon (poet/novelist/lyricist, known for von Trier’s Dancer in the Dark) and writer-director Valdimar Johannsson based on Nordic legend, creates an otherworld kind of experience.  The first part depicts the lives of Maria (Rapace) and Ingvar (Gudnason) on their sheep farm in Iceland where they obviously work very hard but seem not to have much conversation or intimacy.  Or are they dealing with some pain?  A bit of tenderness is shown between them, but one wonders what holds them together beyond the chores and responsibilities.

            They have apparently lost a child, so when a sort of miracle occurs while they’re helping a ewe give birth, what emerges is a being with a sheep’s head above a child’s body.  Parental instincts take over, so the couple adopts her and names her Ida, the same name as their dead child, setting up a crib in their bedroom and feeding her with a bottle.  Ada seems to bring a spark of happiness to the household, and she begins to grow up, wearing human clothes and shoes.  She’s treated like a real child and seems to understand language.

            Of course, all this seems very strange to Ingvar’s brother Petur who has suddenly turned up one day.  Petur tries to talk to Ingvar about the strange situation, but his brother tells him to lay off and not disturb their happiness.  Petur’s incredulity and discomfort persists until he puts himself to a test.

            The story takes sudden twists from time to time, alternated with breath-taking views of the Icelandic countryside in the winter with snow and ice and in the spring when flowers are blooming.  With these scenes and the neatness and orderliness of the farm, one gets a sense of order and place in the universe as a whole.  Now, when the natural world is “messed with”, even the animals—the  sheep, the dog, the cat--all react with stares and skeptical eyes that seem to convey, “What is going on?”

            Hopefully, you will see the film without knowing much about it, because some of the events and the ending will surprise and shock you, which makes for a much richer experience, giving you clues about what the filmmakers had in mind.

            Noomi Rapace as a consummate actor, always bring more than a hint of mystery and intrigue to her roles (e.g., The Girl with the Dragon TattooThe Girl Who Played with Fire, Prometheus), and here as Maria she is mostly taciturn but decisive, taking whatever action she is compelled to do. We never really know what is going on in her mind.   Gudnason plays Ingvar as the cool, silent, competent type whose gentleness shines through, and I admired the egalitarian relationship she and Ingvar achieve.  

            Although Hlynur as Petur plays his role well as a conflicted soul without high principles, it isn’t clear to me why he is included in the story.  What does he represent?  Perhaps society as a whole—judgmental, but he is clearly not one grounded in solid principles.

            This is apparently Johannsson’s first direction of a feature film, which he can be proud of.  With more experience, I expect that such things as pacing, antecedent information, and elaboration of details will improve.


What to do with a human/animal hybrid?  One couple sees no problem at all.


Grade:  B                              By Donna R. Copeland


Daniel Craig     Ana de Armas     Rami Malek     Lea Seydoux     Ralph Fiennes

Christopher Waltz     Jeffrey Wright     Lashana Lynch     Ben Wishaw     Naomie Harris 

            Quintessential Bond with the complex plot, hair-raising chases, pretty women, and lots of booze and gadgets.  Bond (Craig)—who has “disappeared” after seeing that arch-enemy Blofeld (Waltz) is incarcerated—is found in Jamaica by his old friend, CIA officer Felix Leiter (Wright), after Bond has just unceremoniously put his girlfriend Madeleine (Seydoux) on the train because of his suspicions about her.  She is heartbroken, proclaiming her innocence, and walks down the aisle seeing him in passing windows as the train leaves the station—an eloquent graphic image—thanks to Linus Sandgren (La La Land, The Hundred-Foot Journey, American Hustle), whose photography in the film is impressive throughout.

            Leiter points out that an important scientist, Valdo Obruchev (David Dencik) (has been abducted and needs to be found to prevent a scheme that could result in the death of millions.  The plot thickens from there, with Bond having to confront forces of which he was previously unaware.  It brings him into contact with his old boss at British Secret Intelligence Service, M (Fiennes) and staff, and tensions he now encounters and must manage between the U.S. CIA and British Intelligence.  Most touchy is the fact that M has assigned another agent, female Nomi (Lynch), to be 007.  This awkward situation must be dealt with because the old 007 wants to be involved in the case because it still seems to be connected with Spectre’s Ernest Blofeld (Waltz), whom Bond had put in prison.

            The most alarming danger comes from an evil man, Llyutsifer Safin (Malek), who has a poison plan that threatens millions across the world.  Getting to him is of course a tall order, and will require cooperation among all the parties involved, including international interests.

            The film is overly long with too many implausible chases and fights—as are found in most/all action films.  But it is successful in gripping intrigues and nail-biting dilemmas.  Daniel Craig is at his best in portraying for his last time the brave strategist Bond is known to be, with the additional acquisition of personal commitment and less womanizing.  He comes across as actually gallant at times.  

            A bright spot in the deluges of combat is shown by Ana de Armas as Paloma.  She kicks a.. impressively and with a little bit of humor, giving the viewer frequent “so there!” satisfactions.  Bad guys like Blofeld and Safir send plenty of chills up the spine, both because of their physical appearances and their evil nature.  Seydoux lacks some of the glamour and keenness of mind that Bond women usually have, but Lashana Lynch, the new 007, is appealing in her level-headedness and combat skills.  Lynch attributes part of her character’s success to the contributions of Phoebe Waller-Bridge to the script.  Hans Zimmer’s music for his first Bond film adds color to the action, and has just the right number of references to music in previous Bond films, most notably, the recognizable “suspense” motif.  Billie Eilish singing the title track co-written by her and her brother Finneas O’Connell provides additional inspiration.


No Time to Die will reward fans of the Bond films with plenty of intrigue and spine-chilling tension.  


Grade:  B+                            By Donna R. Copeland