The Woman in the Yard: A Review (Review #2227)

THE WOMAN IN THE YARD

What could be scarier than a creepy woman, cloaked all in black, sitting ominously outside one's house? My guess would be just about anything. The Woman in the Yard attempts to be eerie and ominous. It ends up being both unintentionally hilarious and surprisingly insensitive towards a serious topic. 

Ramona (Danielle Deadwyler) is a physical and psychological mess. Recently widowed, she cannot escape the video memories of her late husband David (Russell Horsby). Judging from appearances, she would like to escape her teenage son Taylor or Tay (Peyton Jackson) and her younger daughter Annie (Estella Kahiha). They live on an isolated farm that was never formally named. They have little food, virtually no money to pay the various utilities, and one dog. 

Out of nowhere, a woman covered all in black appears near their house. Ramona goes to confront "the woman in the yard" but finds that said woman (Okwui Okpokwasili) is not easily persuaded to leave. In fact, The Woman tells Ramona that "today is the day". Tay is all for getting rid of "Miss Weirdo Funeral Lady". Ramona, however, insists that she can take care of it. We don't know how given that they have no telephone service and apparently have little to no communication with any neighboring farms. 

It becomes a game of supernatural cat-and-mouse where one wonders which one of the two women is the more bonkers one. Is it the creepy creature sitting in her noir ensemble, or is it the mother who fantasizes about stabbing her daughter in the back? Not is all at it appears to be, especially when we flash back to David's death. 

He was killed in a car accident that left Ramona injured. However, we learn that Ramona was deeply unhappy with her life? Could the accident have been a failed suicide attempt? Only the woman in the yard knows, and she tells all to Tay. We discover that both the woman in the yard and Ramona are truly connected, but will the former manage to get the latter to join David in the afterlife?

Perhaps I can find how The Woman in the Yard had a very small cast something to admire. Other than that, I think I'm pretty out of things to admire or like about this film. I do not know if screenwriter Sam Stefanak and director Jaume Collet-Serra thought some tall woman skulking about a front yard would send chills. I was too busy wondering why, given her leg injury, Ramona wouldn't have done better to stay on the ground floor instead of schlepping up and down the stairs. I think Collet-Serra wanted to compensate for the lack of frights by filming much of The Woman in the Yard with various Dutch angles and with rapid editing. 

It did not work for Battlefield Earth. It did not work for The Woman in the Yard. 

Perhaps the point of The Woman in the Yard was not that it was scary. In that case, the film succeeded beyond the hopes of anyone involved. I think that The Woman in the Yard fancied itself a metaphysical exploration of grief and the evil lure of suicide. If memory serves correct, the film ends with information about how to contact suicide prevention. If that was the intention, I find another problem with the film.

Suicide is a very serious topic. It has devastated millions of lives. Treating suicide, even unintentionally, as something prompted by otherworldly figures is very troubling to me. I am deeply uncomfortable with that idea. I am also deeply troubled when any film puts children in danger. The Woman in the Yard has a sequence where it looks like Ramona is stabbing Annie. We quickly see that she is really stabbing a pillow and that Annie is safe. Still, no matter how disturbed Ramona may be, the entire concept of killing your children is not something I would put in a supposed supernatural film.

Stefanak's screenplay is pretty much a mess. It certainly isn't subtle. Late in the film during a flashback to the fatal car crash, we see the title The Mirror Has Two appear reflected on the passenger side. I presume that the film was The Mirror Has Two Faces. Granted, I have yet to see the Barbra Streisand film as of today. However, I don't exactly know what exactly a film I was led to think was a romantic comedy has to do with supernatural figures urging women to kill themselves. I figure that the title was used to flash "SYMBOLISM" in our face.

It might have done better not to flash so many lights in the third act. At this point, the title character has now been able to enter the house and is threatening everyone inside. I figure that we are supposed to be frightened to terrified. However, the thing that is supposed to make things scary doesn't. It really is just hard to follow with a lot of flashing lights all over the place. It reminds of those low-rent amusement carnivals that had those haunted houses. If I understand Ramona's motives, she opts to, perhaps unintentionally, kill poor David because she fills unfulfilled and is unhappy with her life.

This is not exactly a strong motive for murder. Ramona can change her life. She does not have to kill her husband or herself to do so. It does also lead to a moment that did make me chuckle. "But if you want things to get better, you've got to dig deeper", David tells her before he dies. I just wondered, "where was Mama Odie when you need her?" 

I think The Woman in the Yard tried too hard to be twisty when it just ended up muddled. That third act is just so convoluted that one has completely lost interest.

It also does not help that The Woman in the Yard has some absolutely terrible performances. Danielle Deadwyler had a tough act to follow after Till. We were incessantly told how Deadwyler gave the single greatest acting performance in all human history in Till. I suppose that it would be impossible to reach such grand heights after giving the most brilliant, awe-inspiring acting performance ever captured or likely ever to be captured on camera for Till. Now, I think that The Woman in the Yard showed that she could not muster a second greatest acting performance in all human history. I never felt Ramona was a troubled, grieving figure trying to keep it all together. I thought she was a mean, bossy, abusive figure to her kids. 

Both Peyton Jackson and Estella Kahiha looked bored and lost in The Woman in the Yard. There was no emotion in their performances. Okwui Okpokwasili, I figure, might have been having some fun coming across as a demonic Miss Grace Jones, skulking and posing all over the place. I will give Jackson a bit of credit for making me laugh after he shouts, "She's on crazy pills!" when it came to his mother. 

Suicide is a serious topic, one that should be handled with finesse. The Woman in the Yard, to my mind, used it as a plot device to what we were led to think was a horror film. I do not think that the two mix, at least here. The Woman in the Yard is not scary. It is not insightful. It is not well-acted. If I were to find anything good in it, at least it was short at around 89 minutes. Try as the film did, one cannot make black-cloaked ladies into something to fear. 

DECISION: F

You, Me & Tuscany: A Review

YOU, ME & TUSCANY

Contrary to popular belief, I am not a harsh critic. I judge a film based on what it is aiming for. As such, I found You, Me & Tuscany to be totally and completely serviceable. It is not original or particularly well-acted. However, the film has pleasant, affable (and beautiful looking) leads and is a nice hodgepodge of past romcoms to make it a nice little date movie.

Briana Celeste Montgomery, better known as Anna (Halle Bailey), once aspired to be a renowned chef. She had been a top culinary school student when she dropped out after her beloved mother's death. Now, Anna is floating about life and getting herself into jams due to attempting to pass herself off as the actual owner of places she is merely housesitting at. Anna looks to her friend Claire (Aziza Scott) for help in finding food and shelter. Claire offers her a discount at the restaurant hotel where she works at. Anna also finds Matteo (Lorenzo de Moor), a nice Italian guy who takes a shine to her. He's into real estate and not the family vineyard business back in Italy.

They share some good food, good feelings, but no cavorting. Impulsively, Anna jets off to Tuscany inspired by Matteo's suggestion that she live her life rather than try and imitate other peoples. Unfortunately, she chose the wrong time to come, as a major festival leaves her without lodging. That is, until she remembers Matteo's empty villa. Desperate, she crashes the villa. Things look alright until she finds an engagement ring in a junk drawer and Matteo's mother and grandmother find Anna in the villa. Comedic hijinks (and lies) lead them to think Anna is Matteo's fiancée.

Now, the boisterous Italian family (and a highly suspicious Grandmama) welcome Anna into the fold. They also hope that Anna will help bring Matteo back home after a falling out. What Anna had not counted on was Matteo's cousin/adopted brother Michael (Regé-Jean Page). They did not hit it off, but in the ways of the world, they soon start finding themselves drawn to each other. Things, already complicated owing to Anna and Michael's growing attraction, grow more complicated when Matteo himself arrives. There is a sibling rivalry between them. There is also guilt from Matteo about his fraught relationship. Who will end up with Anna's heart among the beautiful Tuscan landscape? 

I found You, Me & Tuscany unoriginal. It was a curious blend of other films. It was a bit like The Princess and the Frog minus the voodoo. It was a great deal like While You Were Sleeping minus the head injury. You even had a dash of A Walk in the Clouds and Bridget Jones' Diary within this film. I did not see Under the Tuscan Sun, but I figure You, Me & Tuscany also draws from that romcom too. As I said, I found You, Me & Tuscany unoriginal. That does not mean that I found You, Me & Tuscany awful. 

Instead, I found the film to be harmless, predictable, frothy and sweet. Ryan Engle's screenplay (from a story by Engle and Kristin N. Engle) know that You, Me & Tuscany is essentially cinematic candy. It is not deep. It is not witty. It is, however, simple and built on eccentric situations and cliches. If you watch the film with the mindset that it is just well-meaning, slightly silly romantic comedy goofiness, you will not be disappointed. 

This is the type of film where essentially everyone is in on the joke. Director Kat Coiro features lush Italian vistas, broad performances from the cast and Regé-Jean Page's exceptional torso. No one in You, Me & Tuscany gives what I would call a "great performance". Each performance, rather, is good or bad ranging on how broad to somewhat less broad the character was. Each of the Italian family members were inoffensive if not a bit exaggerated. Stella Pecollo as the loud, bombastic but loving Aunt Francesca and Tomasso Cassissa as the Instagram-obsessed Cousin Enzo were pleasant in their manner. Isabella Ferrari's Mother Gabriella is the closest to lending drama to something as frothy as You, Me & Tuscany. She wants Matteo to return and reconcile with the family. That is about the most drama the film has.

Our two leads work well together. It is nice to see a romantic comedy where both the male and female leads are black and even nicer that such a detail is unimportant. The closest the film comes to acknowledging that detail is in a bit of dialogue between Anna and Michael. Noting their similarities when they first meet-angry, Anna starts by saying, "We're the only two people here..." at which point Michael answers, "Who speak English". It helps that Page speaks it with a beautiful British accent.

No one questions Anna being engaged to Matteo. Michael's family connection to Matteo is explained easily. He's the son of Gabriella's sister and an Englishman who died when Michael was young. Gabriella and her husband later adopted him as a son. Therefore, he is both their son and nephew. I would not call the casting a cinematic breakthrough. I would call it a good example of how diversity can be both an asset and irrelevant to the plot itself. 

Halle Bailey and Regé-Jean Page work well together. They have a nice chemistry, and both play their parts well given the thinness of the premise. I would say that Page did better as Michael came across as pleasant and sensible. He also had the obligatory shirtless scene where one can enjoy how fit he is. Bailey was a bit more exaggerated as Anna, the constant efforts to keep up the rouse playing a bit broad. That, however, is the character and scenario, so I cannot fault her for being broad when she is in a farce. To her credit, she does have good moments when she talks about her late mother and their dreams to go to Italy when she graduated from culinary school.

I would argue that Aziza Scott's Claire was pushing a stereotype of a loud, cartoonish BFF. Fortunately, she was mostly heard on the telephone, so we did not have to see a lot that performance.

Everything in You, Me & Tuscany points to this being a deliberately cutesy, frothy concoction. Of particular note is John Debney's score, which felt like something I would hear in a Hallmark movie. Perhaps that is a good way to think of You, Me & Tuscany: as a Hallmark movie with a larger budget. It might not be as good as Solo Mio, another love letter to love Italian style released this year. However, overall, I found You, Me & Tuscany a pleasant, inoffensive romp. 

Either that, or it's almost impossible to have a bad romantic comedy if it is set in Italia. 

DECISION: C+

Polly: The Television Movie

POLLY

This review is part of the Summer Under the Stars Blogathon. Today's star is Brock Peters.

I do not know if the expression "Pollyanna" to be incessantly optimistic no matter how bad a situation may be is still in use. If so, that might explain why Polly, the African American adaptation of the Eleanor H. Porter novel is mostly forgotten. That it is unavailable due to streaming and broadcasting rights issues does not help. That is a terrible shame, for Polly is a sweet, delightful adaptation. It is also unafraid to tackle the serious issue of race, albeit with a gentle touch.

Sweet and optimistic Polly Whittier (Keshia Knight Pulliam) has been orphaned after her parents' death in a car accident in 1955. Now, she goes from Detroit to Harrington, Alabama to live with her Aunt Polly Harrington (Phylicia Rashad). It is no coincidence that Harrington, the town, shares the same name as Harrington, the woman. Aunt Polly is the richest black woman in Harrington. She is also formidable, intractable and intimidating to just about everyone in town. Miss Harrington, as everyone calls her, is not a dictator. She is, however, a quietly forceful figure. Aunt Polly even pushes her own sermon ideas on Reverend Gillis (Larry Riley); judging by his sermon, Miss Harrington is from the very dry Protestant worldview.

Polly finds everyone and everything in town delightful. Miss Harrington's assistant Nancy (Vanessa Bell Calloway) and Miss Harrington's maid Mrs. Conley (Barbara Montgomery) see that Polly has brought an enchantment into the home. Polly believes that we should be glad in all circumstances. Miss Harrington believes that we should be correct. Polly also wonders why there are no white folk in Harrington. Her new friend Jimmy Bean (Brandon Adams) tells her that the white folk are on one side of the creek, the black folk on the other, with both sides almost never crossing. A bridge had almost been completed, Jimmy adds, but burned before it could be completed.

Miss Harrington's quiet demeanor has everyone in town shaking except for one person. That is Dr. Shannon (Dorian Harewood). He is a "doctor of music" who moved to Atlanta some time back. Dr. Shannon, however, is back in town. He is also Miss Harrington's long-lost love. Both still pine for the other, but Miss Harrington's rigid manner prevents her from opening up. She is not the only one who is keeping things within themselves. Local recluse Mr. Even Pendergast (Brock Peters) wants to be left alone despite Jimmy and Polly's insistence. There is also Miss Snow (Celeste Holm), the white woman that Polly dares to see. Miss Snow is the white equivalent to Miss Harrington, who came close to literally bridging the gap between the two communities until the bridge burned. 

Polly's optimism and gentle rebellion against Harrington's rigidity (town and woman) soon starts paying off dividends. Townspeople start looking to themselves to fund the orphanage instead of looking for Miss Harrington's largesse with strings attached. The church starts finding joy in the Lord. Things culminate at the bazaar that Nancy's secret sweetheart George (T.K. Carter) organizes. Even Miss Snow emerges from her seclusion to participate. She and Mr. Pendergast share a past that connects them to the destroyed bridge. Polly, forbidden to go to the bazaar, is talked into sneaking out with and by Jimmy. That one act has devastating consequences for everyone in town. Will Polly lose her optimism? Will she be the one to metaphorically bridge the gap between black and white?

Polly was directed by Debbie Allen, who is also Phylicia Rashad's sister. That is a very talented family. In terms of directing, Allen did an excellent job. It is not surprising how well Polly's musical numbers were staged. Of particular note is Stand Up, as rousing a gospel number as has been committed to film. When we first encounter the church choir, they are a perfect reflection of Miss Harrington: respectable but deeply restrained. When we get the second encounter, one can feel the Spirit freely flow with a sense of joy and liberation. Leaning on the gospel music tradition of having the Spirit move you, Stand Up is big, bold and wildly enthusiastic. I would even argue that Allen as a choreographer drew from Alvin Ailey in how she staged the Stand Up number. Allen also showcases her multitalented skills in that she cowrote Stand Up. 

Polly's script by William Blinn even allows for some witty comments about the first and second choir numbers. Polly finds the very restrained choir not to her liking. She remarks that she's never heard a black choir sing like that. Aunt Polly mistakenly takes this as a compliment.

You also have a wonderfully upbeat number with Honey Ain't Got Nothing on You. Nancy, under Miss Harrington's instruction, has taken Polly to the posh dressmaker's shop. Polly asks if the classical music is all they have. She then looks for "Detroit" music, where we hear the Motown-like Honey Ain't Got Nothing on You. Again, we see a joie de vivre as Polly, Nancy and the shopgirls all get down with their joyful bad selves. 

Perhaps the biggest number is Sweet Little Angel Eyes. This song, performed after the very dull first church service, showcases Brandon Adams' extraordinary singing and dancing. Despite being a child, Adams dominates with his physical and vocal dexterity. Keisha Knight Pulliam does well in keeping up with Adams. However, every time Adams appears on the screen, we are drawn to him. 

Debbie Allen, however, shows that she can also have remarkably restrained numbers. Something More, Phylicia Rashad's solo number, would fit perfectly in a Broadway production. It is a moving number, well-sung and delivered by Rashad. Pulliam's solo number, By Your Side, is sweet and charming as she sings to her doll. By Your Side, curiously enough, is the only Polly number cowritten by Alan Menken, who has a long history with Disney music. By Your Side is darling, just like Pulliam in the role. Despite the various songwriters, none of the songs seem out of place. This is a credit to Allen to corral all the musical numbers into a cohesive whole.

It is also a credit to Allen that she drew strong performances out of the cast. Keisha Knight Pulliam is, yes, adorable and precious as Polly. She and Adams were wonderful together as Polly and Jimmy Bean, quickly transitioning from minor antagonists to solid friends. They play their roles with great earnestness, if not completely smooth in terms of characterization. It takes a great amount of skill from director and actor to have children talk about race without having them look or sound harsh or unnatural. When discussing Miss Snow, Polly asks, "She mean?". Jimmy replies, "She's white" in a pretty noncommittal and direct way. His delivery suggests that he does not know if Miss Snow is mean, only that her own race makes the mystery woman almost alien. Polly argues that a person's color is irrelevant to their goodness or badness. This is a pleasant idea that Pulliam sells.

The adults also acquit themselves well in their roles. Phylicia Rashad is intimidating and icy as Aunt Polly. She is able to convey a surprisingly imperious manner without looking ridiculous. Anyone who can ask "What is a Fats Domino?" with a straight face deserves major props. Her scenes with Dorian Harewood's Dr. Shannon work well. Harewood may be a bit forced in his manner, but it is not a dealbreaker. 

Brock Peters makes Mr. Pendergast into a slightly Boo Radley type figure in his reclusiveness. However, when he takes Polly's advice on how his lamp could make more rainbows if he opened up the window is a nice, gentle moment. His eyes reveal a man finding a metaphorical and literal new light. His scene with Celeste Holm also is a strong moment. The secret about the bridge is revealed in a soft, gentle manner. The regret shown is moving, a credit again to Allen's directing and Peters' acting.

Celeste Holm may be the "token white character" in Polly.  She, however, delivers the goods as the old lady who is brought back by Polly's enthusiasm and genuine warmth. Holm and Peters as stated do work well together. As they discuss the past and future bridge, Mr. Pendergast comments that there may a bridge yet. "Don't you think that "yet" should become "now"?", Miss Snow replies. Holm also works well with the other cast members. The last scene where Miss Snow and Miss Harrington come together is touching without having to use dialogue.

T.K. Carter's George and Vanessa Bell Calloway's Nancy make a nice couple. Both also work well with the other cast members. Overall, Polly is quite well acted.

It also couches the sensitive issue of race in strong but mostly family-friendly terms. The doctor who sees Polly after her accident calls her "a brave pickaninny". This is a surprising statement even if does reflect the time and was not said with any intended malice. Rashad as Aunt Polly tells him that her niece will grow up to be a strong black woman and is no one's pickaninny. Looking sheepish, the doctor replies that sometimes change comes fast to where some struggle to keep up. Again, the term might not be understood by younger viewers. The term, unfortunate as it is, was also spoken in a tone that denotes more foolishness than overt hostility. Polly does well to not condemn ignorance and show that people can overcome fear and prejudice once they get to know the other.

However, while race makes up an element of Polly, the film mostly revolves around the need to show how little acts of love and kindness can change lives for the better. Polly is meant as a sweet story about a little girl whose firm belief in seeing the good side to everything lifts those around her.

Polly has excellent musical numbers and strong acting from its cast. It might give Butterfly McQueen little to do in her final role. Overall, Polly works as the sweet, gentle story I think it set out to be. Polly will be appreciated by children for its upbeat manner and by adults for handling serious topics in a gentle way. It also will be enjoyed by all for some wonderful musical numbers. Hopefully, Polly will escape its lack of availability and find a welcome home everywhere. 

8/10

Sounder: A Review (Review #2119)

SOUNDER

Growing up is difficult at any age. It is much harder when the general society is openly against you. Sounder, based on the young adult novel, is a deeply moving adaptation. Standout performances from both the adult and child actors and a relatable story elevate Sounder to being a solid film for all generations.

Life is hard all around for everyone in 1933's Louisiana. For the Morgan family, it is harder. The Morgans are sharecroppers who scrape by season through season. However, what they do not have in terms of financial wealth is made up for with a wealth of love. Patriarch Nathan Lee Morgan (Paul Winfield) works hard and plays hard. Baseball, that is, with an incredible pitching arm. Mother Rebecca (Cicely Tyson) watches over their three children. The oldest, David Lee (Kevin Hooks) does go to school. However, he has to sit at the back of the class due to his race. 

The Morgans are a strong family unit, struggling but loving. The family has six members: two parents, three children and their beloved dog, Sounder. Along with the sharecropping, Rebecca makes extra income by washing clothes for Mrs. Boatwright (Carmen Matthews) who lives in town. Things seem to be getting better when Nathan manages to bring meat for the family. It soon becomes clear how he got that meat. Sheriff Young (James Best) has to arrest him. Nathan is sentenced to one year at a labor camp.

Sheriff Young cannot or will not divulge which camp Nathan is going to. Mrs. Boatwright does manage to get the name of the camp. With that, David and Sounder set off to make contact. On that journey, David encounters a school made up of black students, complete with a black teacher. Miss Camille Johnson (Janet MacLachlan) welcomes David into her class and home. She also gives Nathan, a voracious reader already, nonfiction books. Alongside his beloved Three Musketeers, a gift from Mrs. Boatwright, there are biographies of Harriet Tubman and The Souls of Black Folk by W.E.B. DuBois. Will David make contact with Nathan? Will Nathan return to his wife and children? Will David return to Miss Johnson's school or follow in the sharecropping ways?

Sounder focuses on an African American family in the early half of the twentieth century. However, its story of love and familial bonds is a universal one. I was reminded of Coal Miner's Daughter in how a loving and united family can be a greater resource than mere money. Sounder does not shy away from the hardships of the Morgans. It also does something that is sadly still rare in many films: present a family with strong parents and obedient children. Sounder is a very languid film, with a steady pace throughout. It never rushes. It never builds up to big dramatic moments. Instead, it moves at an almost quiet pace.

This quiet allows the viewer to know all the characters, with their virtues and their flaws. We see Nathan and Rebecca as loving and protective. They are deeply committed to each other and their children. A particularly effective moment is when the children find meat for breakfast. Nathan, David and Sounder had all failed to catch a racoon. How exactly Nathan managed to find meat is understood by Rebecca but not the children. Paul Winfield and Cicely Tyson look at each other, and their glances tell us everything.

It is all but impossible to not be moved when Nathan returns. As Sounder barks at someone coming down the road, we see the growing figure. Rebecca recognizes him and rushes to his side. In this reunion, I think there would not be a dry eye in the house. 

This is due, I believe, to the performances. Paul Winfield and Cicely Tyson received Best Lead Actor and Actress nominations for Sounder. Both of our leads crafted moving characters. Tyson made Rebecca a strong and loving figure by how she balanced gentleness with resolve. Even at her angriest, such as when she makes clear that she will bring in the crops on time, Tyson never shows shouting rage. Instead, we see in Tyson a firm determination. Rebecca does things because she has to if she is to care for her family. We also see Rebecca's grace and love of family. One of best moments is when she goes to see Sheriff Young to see about visiting Nathan. She is told that visiting days are only on Sundays and that "womenfolk" are never allowed. In other films, perhaps, there would be a great dramatic moment. Instead, Tyson underplays the shock and disappointment. It is that sense of disappointment that makes her more effective.

Winfield has his best moment at the end. He is first jolly, then somewhat enraged that David wants to stay with the family rather than go to school. Eventually, father and son talk. It is clear that Nathan knows that David has a greater opportunity by moving than by staying. He explains this in a loving way that the young David can understand. It is a wonderful moment not just of acting. It is a wonderful moment of fatherly love.

Young Kevin Hooks was also excellent as David Lee Morgan. Sounder is really about him and his evolution to a greater knowledge of the world around him. He works well with the adult cast, which is no small feat given the caliber of talent in the film. Special mention should also go to Janet MacLachlan as Miss Johnson. She, like Tyson, gives her character grace and strength. It is almost as if they represent different sides of the same coin. Tyson's Rebecca and MacLachlan's Camille both cared about David. All their actions were motivated by their concern. One was educated and one was not. However, they both were strong women.

Blues legend Taj Mahal, who has a small role as wandering musician Ike, wrote Sounder's score. It is surprising that Mahal was not singled out for Academy Award consideration. Sounder received four nominations: Picture, Lead Actor and Actress and Lonne Elder III's adaptation of William H. Armstrong's novel. The blues-tinged score and Martin Ritt's able and firm direction were oddly left out.

Sounder is a love letter to the strength of family. It is also an ode to the power of education to have us rise. Heartfelt performances and the universal themes of familial love elevate Sounder to be a deeply moving film.

DECISION: A-

Behind the Movement: The Television Movie

BEHIND THE MOVEMENT

Living history. It is one thing to be living history. It is another, quite another to be living as though you are consciously aware that you are living history. Behind the Movement covers a tumultuous few days between Rosa Parks' arrest for refusing to give up her seat to the one-day boycott to protest segregation. I figure that everyone involved was aware of the story's importance. Pity that such importance blocked out any sense that the people were involved were human.

Montgomery, Alabama's black community is already on edge after the murder of Emmett Till. Among those upset to quietly enraged is seamstress Rosa Parks (Meta Golding). Mrs. Parks calls her husband Raymond (Roger Guenveur Smith) and asks him to buy milk before she leaves work. She boards the city bus and will not give up her seat when told to.

Her refusal gets her arrested, where she talks to a woman in the next cell. The other woman may have been in jail for defending herself against an abusive man, but that was nothing compared to what Mrs. Parks did. The demure, proper Mrs. Parks may be the perfect test case to fight the segregation laws. NAACP lawyer E.D. Nixon (Isaiah Washington) gets the importance of the situation. So does local community activist, Professor Jo Ann Robinson (Loretta Devine). Everyone, save perhaps the Parks couple, understands how important this is.

Eventually, Mrs. Parks agrees to be the test case. Now, it is time to rapidly organize what is intended as a one-day boycott to coincide with Mrs. Parks' trial. The organizers will need all the help that they can get. That means turning to A. Philip Randolph (Al Mitchell), head of the Brotherhood of Sleeping Car Porters labor union. It also means turning to the various church ministers, including a young up-and-coming preacher named Martin Luther King, Jr. (Lashaun Clay). Mr. and Mrs. Parks may have misgivings and fears, but history will not be denied. 

Behind the Movement is in the tradition of "important stories told in very serious tones" telefilms. Everyone, cast and crew, knows that this is oh so serious and oh so important. They are not exactly wrong in that idea. The Montgomery bus boycott and the slow but steady push to change is still a vital story to know. However, Behind the Movement is one where everyone is so noble, so serious, that no one is allowed to be human. Almost every statement is historic. Almost everyone presented is important. Almost every action is loaded with significance. 

This is where Behind the Movement went wrong, oh so very wrong. By behaving as though everyone and everything is of such lofty weight, Behind the Movement forgot that there were actual people involved. When, for example, Randolph and Reverend Ralph Abernathy (Keith Arthur Bolden) go to the Dexter Avenue Baptist Church, everyone there realizes the importance, the significance, the epoch changing appearance of Reverend King.

King would leave a long-lasting legacy on American history. However, when Behind the Movement takes place, King was still a new figure in Montgomery. At the time of the boycott, Dr. King was a month shy of twenty-seven years old. To have Randolph, Abernathy and Nixon behave as though they were now in the presence of greatness is already bad. To suggest, as Behind the Movement does, that they were all aware of it, ironically diminishes Dr. King. It does not help that director Aric Avelino bathes Dr. King in an almost divine light when Randolph, Abernathy and Nixon are in King's office to discuss the boycott.

I do not think that Behind the Movement should have painted King as some bumbling kid. However, over and over throughout the film, everyone behaved as though they knew that the boycott was of worldwide importance right from the get-go. There is an air of profundity in Behind the Movement that does what a lot of historic pieces do. They rob the individuals of their humanity, trading in lofty images to replace flawed, even frightened people. 

People are reduced to almost walking audio-animatronic figures, always noble and aware. The closest that Behind the Movement has in terms of levity is when Alfonso Campbell (Sir Brodie) is, to use modern terms, voluntold to coordinate carpool groups. Even that was in a blink-and-you-miss-it manner. To be fair, there is a slightly comic moment when the bold Professor Robinson hoodwinks a campus security guard to let them exit the campus by claiming to be doing end-of-term grading when they had actually been using campus equipment to make flyers.

Apart from that though, Behind the Movement never failed to make everyone very grand, noble, aware of how important this particular case, this particular boycott, was to world history. Ironically, treating everything that everyone in Behind the Movement did as this lofty moment robbed us of a potentially good story. Stories that transform people into monuments tend to be bad. Stories that transform monuments into people tend to be good. Behind the Movement is squarely in the former category. 

This grand manner extends to almost all the performances. The standout for me is Loretta Devine as Professor Robinson. She is always a welcome sight, and here she brought what little humor there was. I do not think that one needs to go into the other performances. This is not to say that they were bad. They were just all the same, playing everyone as these noble figures. They differentiate only in degrees of seriousness. 

Meta Golding does her best to make Rosa Parks into a less secure figure, but she still carries such a sense of history that it diminishes Mrs. Parks. Roger Guenveur Smith seems wasted as the eternally supportive Raymond, though to be fair he looks enough like Harry Belafonte that I think Smith should play him in a Belafonte biopic. 

Perhaps the worst of the "EVERYTHING I DO AND SAY IS IMPORTANT TO HISTORY" performance was that of Isaiah Washington as E.D. Nixon. Washington's Nixon was so loaded with the weight of history one half-expected him to literally walk on water. 

I think that much of the blame for Behind the Movement being so self-serious is on Katrina O'Gilvie's screenplay. The telefilm is loaded with some almost cringe bits of dialogue. Having a scene where a woman who survived abuse by attacking her attacker comments that Rosa Parks was the brave one is already a curious parallel to draw. Having Parks comment, "I just figure some things are worth standing up for" makes it almost cross into the pompous. 

Behind the Movement might be a good way to start learning about Rosa Parks' story. It is not a good way, though, to find the woman behind the movement.

1913-2005

4/10

Sinners: A Review (Review #2030)

SINNERS

Gather around, brothers and sisters, to hear about those who pursued the Devil to find that the Devil pursued them back. Every year without fail, I find that there is one movie that is wildly and irrationally overrated. This year, it looks like Sinners is a strong contender for that title. Overly long, sometimes unintentionally hilarious, Sinners thinks it is saying a lot when it actually says nothing.

Twin brothers Elijah "Smoke" and Elias "Stack" Moore (Michael B. Jordan in dual roles) have returned to Mississippi after stealing money from Chicago mobsters. 

At this point, I want to stop to say that "Smoke/Stack" is the first thing that I found hilarious. I figure that writer/director Ryan Coogler meant it to have them called "Smoke" and "Stack". However, I cannot take characters whose nicknames are "Smoke" and "Stack" seriously, let alone see them as menacing. It's as idiotic as having the twins nicknamed "Wrist" and "Watch". Yet, I digress.

Smokestack want to start a juke joint. They get their cousin Sammie (Miles Caton), a skilled blues guitarist, to join their venture. He is also a PK or preacher's kid. Sammie's father Jedidiah (Saul Williams) disapproves of this devil's music and wants his son to follow in his steps to be a preacher. However, the call of the blues and of beautiful women like the married Pearline (Jayme Lawson) is too strong to get Sammie on the path of righteousness.

Smokestack get blues legend Delta Slim (Delroy Lindo) to drop his weekly booking at another juke joint to be the headliner for their new establishment, Club Juke. They also get their friends the Chows to supply both the booze and the signage for Club Juke. Smokestack finds a bouncer in Cornbread (Omar Miller), a large man working the sharecropping cotton fields. 

One person who probably wouldn't get bounced out is Annie (Wunmi Mosako), the Voodoo Queen of the Delta and Smoke's estranged wife. Smoke/Elijah and Annie lost a child despite her powers. She is, however, an excellent cook. One person who would get bounced out is Mary (Hailee Steinfeld). She is Stack/Elias' former lover and, if my calculations are correct, 1/8th black (she says that her mother's daddy was half-black, making her mother's makeup as quarter-black). Mary has been passing as white, so any association will be dangerous for both Mary and Stack.

There is a more dangerous force out there. For once, it is not the Klan. It is Remmick (Jack O'Connell). He is an Irish vampire who has managed to escape the nearby Choctaw community and found delicious refuge with KKK members Joan and Bert (Lola Kirke and Peter Draimanis). At the juke joint's opening, Sammie (whose stage name is Preacherboy) plays some mean blues that has summoned the music of the past and future. Everything from traditional African dancers to hip-hop DJ's float onto Club Juke. However, that also summons Remmick and his growing vampire clan. Not to be left out, Remmick, Joan and Bert try a little bluegrass before being rejected entry.

However, you can't keep white vampires out permanently. They turn Mary into one. She in turn turns Stack into one. Annie, in tune with the spirits, realizes the danger that they are in. Now, the remaining survivors find themselves besieged at Club Juke by a multicultural vampire horde. Who will live to see the sun rise? Who will continue to play the blues long after October 16, 1932? Will Preacherboy Sammie become a musical legend, or will he turn towards the light?  

I rarely criticize fellow film reviewers publicly. I still will not mention specific names here. I will say, however, that a certain reviewer that I see on the YouTube stated that Jack O'Connell was "terrifying" as Remmick. I literally burst out laughing at this statement. My first thought on hearing this was, to quote Sophia Petrillo, "You're nuts". I did a lot of laughing while watching Sinners. I figure that writer/director Coogler did not mean for me to do so. I do wonder though, what kind of reaction he thought I should have had when I see a group of vampires break out into Will You Go, Lassie? outside the juke joint. I do not know if a trio singing a folk song is "terrifying". I was more puzzled as to what exactly this was doing in this very long film. Less terrifying is seeing O'Connell break out into an Irish jig while singing All the Way to Dublin, with a group of new vampires dancing along.

I was howling with laughter at this. To be fair, I may be among the few Mexican Americans who loves Celtic music, so I did enjoy the soundtrack. 

It is not as if I do not get what Coogler was aiming for. There is the scene when through Annie's voiceover, we get to hear Preacherboy's I Lied to You as we have dancers of the past, present and future all sweep around him. Here, Coogler makes an overt call-out tying in Preacherboy's blues to both traditional African music right down to twerking dancers and gangster rap. I get that Coogler was stating how all this music ties itself together, bringing Africa to America (with a little Chinese opera in the mix thanks to the Chows). 

The sequence, however, felt self-indulgent, almost comical. I suppose it would have been too much to ask that singers in the Mahalia Jackson, Marion Anderson, Diana Ross and Ella Fitzgerald manner pop up in this elaborate fantasy number.

What would any of those women know about the African American musical experience?

Preacherboy could summon up DJs and twerkers. He could not summon up Louis Armstrong or Smokey Robinson. Hip-hop and rap were heavily represented at Club Juke. There was just no room for jazz or Motown. 

I know many people simply loved that sequence and think that it is a highlight of Sinners. That is their right. I watched thoroughly bored, thinking that Honeydripper covered a similar subject better. Granted, there were no vampires in Honeydripper. 

Sinners was meant to be horror. Again, I get that. Also again, I was laughing when I was not counting down the time. Sinners at over two hours and fifteen minutes is simply too long. Honeydripper, sans vampires, is almost fifteen minutes shorter. Granted, it might be longer than it needed to be too. However, it is well over half an hour before we even get to the juke joint opening. I felt as if the film was just spinning its wheels. At an hour and fifteen minutes, I was bored and felt as if it ran out of story.

I think Sinners lost me early on, when we get the Smokestack Twins. Try as I might, I cannot take characters named "Smoke" and "Stack" seriously. That others never commented on how they were Smokestack, let alone did it without breaking out in giggles, I cannot explain.

I also cannot explain the performances. I felt that almost all the acting was a bit too stylized and unnatural. Michael B. Jordan in his dual role felt far too forced in the Smokestack swagger. I never believed that Smoke or Stack were real people. They were more caricatures of men working to look tough and menacing. 

That sense of exaggeration extended to almost everyone in Sinners. Hailee Steinfeld felt very overly dramatic as Mary, the woman who longs for Stack but whose fair complexion gives her a little white privilege. She was a bit overwrought before she became a vampire. Once she got the bite, she just became comical. Jack O'Connell was nowhere near "terrifying". He was hilarious and not in a good way. Except for Delroy Lindo (underused) and Mosaku as Annie the Voodoo Queen, I think the acting was pretty lousy.

As a side note, if Annie got the bite too, how does she narrate after she makes her sacrifice? Moreover, we see Annie and Smoke reunite postmortem with their child. I did not care, and I won't delve into any theological matters involving how the Voodoo Queen can achieve an almost heavenly resolution. 

I will say that I did like the music. 

Sinners got its mojo working, but it don't work on me.  

DECISION: F

Nickel Boys: A Review (Review #1930)

NICKEL BOYS

Nickel Boys has a fascinating subject that uses a unique and rarely used cinematic method to tell its story. In a curious twist, the concept that most people praise Nickel Boys for left me cold and removed from the characters rather than inviting me in.

In segregated Florida, young Elwood Curtis is becoming active in the growing Civil Rights movement. He also has a supportive Nana Hattie (Aunjanue Ellis-Taylor) who is part of a group that encourages him to go to the Melvin Griggs Technical School where he could advance. On his way to the technical school, he accepts a ride from someone who stole the car. Elwood is arrested as an accessory.

He is sent to the Nickel Academy, a reformatory school where he will ride out his sentence. Nickel is segregated, where the white pupils get nicer accommodations and a chance to play football while the black pupils are de facto slaves in this orange plantation.

Here, Elwood (Ethan Herisse) bonds with Turner (Brandon Wilson), a fellow Nickel detainee whoEvewants to finish out his time and move on. As Elwood and Turner continue serving their time, they see how the Nickel administration favors the white students, down to telling a fellow black inmate to throw a boxing match in favor of the white boxer. Elwood wants to expose the abuses at Nickel to inspectors, but it is Turner who manages to get the info to the inspectors. That only causes the Nickel Academy to target Elwood. That requires an escape, where not everyone will survive. 

Now the mantel will have to be taken up by someone else to eventually, decades later, reveal the mass graves and abuses at Nickel Academy. It will be time for a reckoning.

The twist that Nickel Boys has is that director RaMell Ross (who cowrote the screenplay with Joslyn Barnes from the Colson Whitehead novel) uses a first-person point of view where we see the events from sometimes Elwood's perspective and sometimes from Turner's perspective. The notion behind this cinematic venture is to put you in the character's shoes. 

I can think, off the top of my head, only one other film that did this first-person POV: the Robert Montgomery film Lady in the Lake. As I have not seen Lady in the Lake, I cannot say how well or poor the effort work. Here, the first-person POV had the opposite effect that I think Nickel Boys intended. For myself, rather than place me in either Elwood or Turner's world, I found myself more removed and separated from them than had Nickel Boys adopted a more traditional manner.

I think it is because somewhere in the middle of the film, we shift from Elwood's POV to Turner's. That shift is indicated by how the film repeats the scene from Turner's perspective after we saw it from Elwood's. Once we got that switch, Nickel Boys goes between them, rarely allowing us to see from both of them simultaneously. I get that this was the intention. For me, it ended up looking like a cold, aloof gimmick.

I could not connect with either Elwood or Turner. I found Nickel Boys to have a certain coldness, distance even. This comes from how in what would be the present or non-Nickel Academy scenes are shot. We do not get in these scenes a direct POV from Elwood/Turner but with the back of the character's head visible. Try as the film might, I just felt so removed from them that I was never invested in the story.

This aloofness extended to almost all the performances. I think that because we had the actors look directly at the camera when speaking to us or to other characters, it felt again like a gimmick. Even in moments that would call for more gripping drama, such as when Elwood finds himself in a hot car, everyone seems to be surprisingly slow and calm, almost catatonic. The stateliness made the film feel longer than its already long two-hour-twenty-minute runtime.

Another issue that I found was how the film would sometimes jump to what would be the future. We get bits of Elwood's future as a moving company president. We meet a fellow former inmate at somewhere in what I think was the 1970s, but I don't think anyone knew who he was. The impact is lost because we are so cocooned with just Elwood and Turner. There is a minor character whom we are told is half-Mexican, so the poor kid gets shifted between the black and white sections, with Nickel Academy leaders unsure where to place him. I was more curious about his story than on Elwood and Turner. 

It is a shame that Nickel Boys, despite its best intentions, failed to take me into this world. The abuses that the Nickel Academy detainees, down to the mass graves, is like the film itself to me: at arm's distance, unwelcoming. I never felt part of or invested in these Nickel Boys. For me, that was a wasted opportunity.  

DECISION: D+

The American Society of Magical Negroes: A Review

THE AMERICAN SOCIETY OF MAGICAL NEGROES

The term "Magical Negro" is shorthand for a black character whose entire existence is to offer sage wisdom to the white protagonist. Perhaps a good film mocking this trope could be made. The American Society of Magical Negroes is not it. Boring, insipid and in its own way racist, The American Society of Magical Negroes fumbles badly whatever ideas rattled in its head.

Meek artist Aren (Justice Smith) is quickly recruited by Roger (David Allen Grier) into a secret society of black people whose entire purpose is to placate white people to prevent said white people from going on murderous rampages against black people. After practicing with an insecure white policeman whom he gives confidence to, Aren's first official assignment is Jason Monk (Drew Tarver), a web designer at Meetbox,  a facial recognition company. 

Unbeknownst to Aren, also working there is Lizzie (An-Li Bogan), a pretty girl whom he met at a coffee shop (after accidentally spilling coffee on her). To his dismay, Aren must fix Jason's professional and romantic life, one that includes Lizzie. Meetbox is in the middle of a scandal due to its failure to distinguish between faces in Ghana, a glitch that was of Jason's making. Despite this, Jason has been selected to present the new and improved facial recognition system to Jason's idol, Meetbox CEO Mick (Rupert Friend). It might have been Lizzie's work, but Jason still gets use out of his white male privilege.

Aren, however, is starting to get a sense of himself. So are other Magical Negroes, causing Magical Negro Queen Dede (Nicole Byer) to lose her ability to float. She has already expelled one Magical Negress, forcing her to live as a "regular black woman" (and thus, removing her protection from certain death at the hands of white people). Now she faces greater rebellion by Aren. Will he be able to lead his people to the promised land while still landing the "ethnic" Lizzie?

I remember hearing something about some kind of outrage over the word "Negro" appearing on black crayons. I figured that this was some kind of Internet joke, but apparently not. I came across a petition to remove the word "negro" from Crayola crayons because "negro" was offensive. Never mind that "negro" is the literal Spanish word for the color "black" and that the offensive crayon also contained the French word for "black" (noir). To the creator of this Change.org petition, the word "negro" had to be expunged in the same way that Confederate statues, the country music groups Lady Antebellum and the Dixie Chicks (now Lady A and The Chicks respectively) and Gone with the Wind needed to be removed. I read the comments by those signing the "No Negro Crayons" unsure if they are serious or seriously stupid.

Watching The Magical Society of Magical Negroes, I am reminded of this faux-rage because its thinking is as shallow as those who find a foreign language needs to be altered due to their own sensibilities (and as a side note, the creation of "Latinx" falls into that mindset). Writer/director Kobi Libii is not subtle about his ideas. The film climaxes in an America Ferrera in Barbie-like rant about how "this country wants (Aren) dead". I would argue that this country does not give a damn about Aren, but it has nothing to do with his race.

Rather, it is because Aren is, to use a good Yiddish term, a nebbish. Right from the opening, Aren is so meek and docile that it would be a wonder if anyone actually cared about him to even bother hating him because he's biracial. There's a quick mention by Aren that his mother is white, but this is irrelevant to The American Society of Magical Negroes. Whatever conflicts already existed within Aren about his identity are not explored in this blink-and-you-miss it moment.

As a side note, Aren's art is ugly and the gallery owner is right: if he won't fight for his artwork, why should she? His yarn art is being rejected because it is awful, not because he is black. This may be a subconscious recognition from Libii that he may believe his creative output is rejected because of his race versus the fact that it isn't good. 

Libii stumbles greatly in his worldbuilding. Within the first ten to fifteen minutes, Aren gets swept into the world of the ASMN, but there is no sense of mystery or logic to this universe. Who is Dede? Why is she the Queen of the Magical Negroes? Why does she float in the air? What does Thomas Jefferson and Monticello have to do with anything? None of these questions are answered. I am not sure they are even asked. Why not just jump into Jason's story rather than take up time with the insecure cop? Why also would Ghanaians actually want facial recognition? I figure this was to suggest that "all black people look alike", but again, would the lack of facial recognition in Ghana cause this much worldwide outrage?

The American Society of Magical Negroes ends with Lizzie herself being part of a secret society: SOSWAG (The Society of Supportive Wives and Girlfriends). I figure this was meant to be a great twist. I push back against that because Lizzie was neither a wife nor girlfriend to anyone, let alone a supportive one. It's the last unclever moment in a film that imagines itself much funnier and smarter than it is.

It is curious that Libii could have had a better story if he had put a greater focus on the love triangle between Aren, Lizzie and Jason. The accidental encounter between Aren and Lizzie in another other film would have been the beginning of a "meet-cute" story. We could have even made Aren a magical being, one of a long line of them, who finds himself falling for his assignment. There is potential in that idea. However, The American Society of Magical Negroes is more interested in trying to find racism everywhere than in mining its potential.

I cannot say what kind of actor Justice Smith is. The two other films that I have seen him in (Jurassic World: Fallen Kingdom and Dungeons & Dragons: Honor Among Thieves) have him playing the same type of character that he played here. In The American Society of Magical Negroes, he is playing what I think of as Woody Allen's illegitimate black son: a total nebbish, weak, meek, halting and stumbling. It is to where I now genuinely wonder if Justice Smith is acting or being. He has played the same character three times, so my growing idea that this is how he is in real life is not without some evidence.

No one really "acts" in The American Society of Magical Negroes, though I think Grier and Bogan are better than the material. To be fair, the brief parodies of The Legend of Bagger Vance and The Green Mile, heavy-handed as they were, did have the potential to be amusing (though the former used billiards rather than golf). I would argue, however, that 1923 and 1955 were different from 2024. 

The American Society of Magical Negroes is too convinced of its own moral rightness and cleverness to be good. It is not funny, it is not romantic, it is not insightful. It is worse than nothing; it is boring. I was nodding off by the end, awakened only by Justice Smith yelling about how American wanted him dead. I know America would not care one way or the other.  

DECISION: F

The Book of Clarence: A Review (Review #1788)

THE BOOK OF CLARENCE

Is there such a thing as black blasphemy? The Book of Clarence, I figure, thought of itself as a more inclusive representation of Scripture by having an almost all-black cast. However, it ended up playing like a spoof of Biblical films that was in turns bizarre, silly and downright offensive.

Separated into three Books (The 13th Apostle, The New Messiah and The Crucifixion), we start in Jerusalem, 33 AD. Street hustler Clarence (LaKeith Stanfield) and his little buddy Elijah (RJ Cyder) are doing their best to survive the rough streets of the Roman occupied Judean capital. Clarence is dismissive of the newest Messiah to come through Jerusalem, even if one of His disciples is Clarence's own twin brother Thomas (Stanfield in a dual role). Clarence has gotten into trouble with local boss Jedediah the Terrible (Eric Kofi-Abrefa) and needs to come up with a lot of shekels to pay back his debt.

Now, during a marijuana-induced hallucination where the smokers literally get high, Clarence hits upon two good ideas (at least good to him). First, he will join Jesus' crew and become the 13th Apostle. After that causes the other apostles to break out into laughter, Clarence decides he will become a rival Messiah. He does become successful in his Messiah hype, aided by Elijah and a gladiator slave Clarence managed to free, Barabbas (Omar Sy), who claims to be immortal save for his heel.

Clarence becomes so intoxicated with his growing wealth and influence that he can afford to dismiss the claims of Jesus' mother Mary (Alfre Woodard) and adoptive father Joseph (Brian Bovell) about Jesus' miracles, such as bringing clay pigeons to life. He can romance Jedediah's sister Varinia (Anna Diop) but cannot escape the wrath of Pontius Pilate (James McAvoy). Will Clarence end up showing he can rival Him? What of Benjamin (Benedict Cumberbatch), the dirty unkempt beggar who comes through the story and finds himself alongside Clarence? Will he look like a literal white savior?

The Book of Clarence is for those who thought Monty Python's Life of Brian was too reverential towards Christ. In many ways, The Book of Clarence plays like a whacked-out parody of Biblical epics, with a little representation thrown in. After all, isn't it time we had black Hebrew Israelites? 

You can read the casting in The Book of Clarence one of two ways. One is to have the Jewish characters played by black actors because for some reason people just assume Jews in the time of Christ were not black. This line of thinking also allows for the Judeans in The Book of Clarence to be reflective of our times, as the oppressive Romans are all played by white actors. It might have been daring to have a literally all-black cast and had the Romans also played by black actors. However, since The Book of Clarence appears, in part, to try and "reflect the modern world", it was not about to suggest black people were anything other than oppressed.

As a side note, it is interesting that representation via casting black actors in historic films and television applies only to white historic figures (Jodie Turner-Smith as Anne Boleyn, Adrian Lester as Lord Randolph 2018's Mary Queen of Scots). To my knowledge, there has never been a call for LaKeith Stanfield to play Cesar Chavez or Jodie Turner-Smith to play Anna May Wong. I am curious as to what the reaction would if Turner-Smith were indeed cast as Wong. Yet, I digress.  

The other way of looking at things is to see The Book of Clarence as being about the Black Israelite movement, which then makes the film closer to propaganda. The Black Israelite movement maintains that black people are the true Jews, and that is one of their less eccentric ideas. They have been labeled anti-Semitic, racists and Holocaust deniers. I do not know if writer/director Jeymes Samuel had that in mind when crafting that film. However, having literal black Israelites does leave him open to accusations as such.

I have no way of looking into Samuel's soul. I can look at The Book of Clarence and declare it simply awful separate from any real or unintended propaganda elements. In many ways, the film plays like a joke, and an unoriginal one at that. Certain times, Samuel's music plays like Miklos Rozsa's Ben-Hur score on steroids. Other times, the hip-hop soundtrack makes things look even odder than people literally floating after smoking weed.

Perhaps a little leeway can be granted when you have Elijah's sole character characteristic be smoking joints. However, The Book of Clarence's determination to be simultaneously of its time and of our time makes the dichotomy look nutty.

What is one to take when your performances are all over the place? David Oyelowo's John the Baptist is playing things for laughs, slapping Clarence for trying to fake his way to baptism (which John does anyway). Cumberbatch too seems to think the film is spoof until he meets a grisly end, one filled with bitterness. One moment he's camping it up (I think he did the "Buddy Christ" from Dogma meme), the next he's going on about how humans are "God's only mistake". 

The worst is McAvoy, who is so hammy as Pilate to where one could see he isn't bothering to try and make this remotely serious. That may be the point, and perhaps The Book of Clarence is meant as a spoof. If so, no one informed Stanfield, who is so stoic for most of the film. With an affected theatrical accent, Stanfield thinks he is in a serious film. Everyone else appears to think they are in a comedy, intentional or not. 

I will touch briefly on the theological aspects of the film; limited as my knowledge of Scripture is, I am aware that the story Mother Mary told about the clay pigeons is from the gnostic Infancy Gospel of Thomas, which was seen as heresy even in the third century after Christ, though apparently is accepted as fact in the Koran. The story of the woman caught in adultery (the Gospel of John 8:1-11) is similarly far off from actual Scripture. For reasons unclear, the wanton woman being stoned was Mary Magdalene (Teyana Taylor), whom was condemned as "that whore who sexes the Romans". In a more bizarre twist, the woman was saved when Jesus (Nicholas Pinnock) literally raised His hand and stopped the flying stones midair.  

Granted, Biblical knowledge may not be strong among even self-proclaimed Christians, but why add these elements when they are not needed?

Clarence is rejected by the Apostles, in part, because he rejects the Immaculate Conception. The Apostles literally use the term "immaculate conception". It is the laziness of The Book of Clarence to confuse the doctrine of The Virgin Birth (Christ being conceived through the power of the Holy Spirit to a virgin) with the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception (the Roman Catholic belief that Mary herself was conceived free from sin). They are not the same. Moreover, if we go by The Book of Clarence, Clarence is theologically correct to reject "the Immaculate Conception" as it is about Mary, not Jesus.

I think The Book of Clarence, far from being about representation in Biblical films, is a comedy. It is unclear if it was meant to be a comedy. I do know the audience was laughing at various points in the film. It is not well-acted. It is not well-directed. While one song, Nights Over Egypt, is good, it feels so wildly out-of-place even in the hip-hop soundtrack. As a side note, referencing King Tut is so out-there since it would not make sense on any level.

Those who would look upon The Book of Clarence as blasphemy might miss something entirely. Yes, it is blasphemous. It is also idiotic, boring and a waste of everyone's time: cast, crew and audience. 

DECISION: F

The Color Purple (2023): A Review

THE COLOR PURPLE 

It is a bit difficult for me to look on the musical adaptation of The Color Purple because I am familiar with the 1985 film adaptation. As such, I already know the story and cannot help thinking of the original film. With that said, 2023's The Color Purple does have some good elements despite my familiarity with the subject.

Going from 1909 to 1947, we get the life of Celie Johnson. Young Celie (Phylicia Pearl Mpasi) is abused physically, emotionally, and sexually by her father Alonso (Deon Cole). She is on her second child by Alonso, who promptly takes her child away after birth. If not for her sister Nettie (Hallie Bailey) life would be unbearable.

It is not long before Nettie catches the eye of Mister (Colman Domingo). Alonso would rather pass Celie off to him, and with that, Celie goes to marry Mister. Mister is as abusive to Celie (Fantasia Barrino) as Alonso. In one respect, he is worse: he drove Nettie off his land when she refused his advances. Celie lives forever under the shadow of Mister's true love, blues chanteuse Shug Avery (Taraji P. Henson). Shug is her own woman, unbossed and unbought as they say. She is not afraid of Mister, down to calling him "Albert", his actual name.

Also unafraid of Mister is his son's wife Sophia (Danielle Brooks). She's large and in charge, telling Mister and his son Harpo (Corey Hawkins) what's what. She won't allow Harpo to beat her and promptly leaves when he so much as tries. Shug eventually comes to stay with Albert and bonds with Celie, finding in her a kindred spirit. Harpo turns his house into a juke joint, where Shug is Queen of the scene.

Celie, through time and the encouragement of Shug, Sophia and Harpo's new girl Squeak (pop singer H.E.R., billed as Gabriella Wilson H.E.R.) slowly comes into her own. Able to at long last stand up to Mister after discovering a cache of letters from Nettie, she embarks on her own as Shug's traveling companion and eventual career as a seamstress of renown. Things come full circle for Celie, able at last to reconcile her past and future through curious twists of fate.

When you have a film as well-known and beloved as 1985's The Color Purple, one runs the risk of merely copying the original when making a remake. 2023's The Color Purple has the difference of being a musical adaptation of Alice Walker's novel. I would not have thought that the story would lend itself to a musical. I was somewhat wrong, in that The Color Purple can work as a musical.

I say "somewhat wrong" not out of ego. Rather, it is because try as the film might, it could not shake off its Broadway roots. My mind kept going to the phrase "too staged". Almost every musical number felt unrealistic. I know that is a strange criticism of a musical, but I hope to clarify myself. In the most successful film musicals, like The Sound of Music or 1961's West Side Story, the musical numbers were as organic as possible. There is, granted, an unreality to people singing and dancing on film, but those films did not feel unnatural or exaggerated in how that was presented.

The Color Purple, conversely, made almost every musical number grand, big and obvious that it veered very close to parody. The opening number, Mysterious Ways, was so massive in the choreography that I thought I was watching a stage presentation versus a film. Another number, She Be Mine, is almost bizarre when young Celie is walking through a group of men in a chain gang keeping rhythm before she ends up walking through a group of women who choreograph a dance at a waterfall while doing laundry.

Intentionally or not, She Be Mine brought to mind Sam Cooke's Chain Gang. Again, I know this is a strange criticism for a musical, but The Color Purple was curiously big on choreographing its musical numbers with elaborate dance numbers that looked more suitable for a theater stage than a film. I can see how a number like Push Da Button might be big and almost over-the-top. It is Shug Avery's debut performance at Harpo's juke joint. However, why have an elaborate dance number for Workin, where Harpo is singing and dancing with his work crew when building said juke joint? 

I understand that several numbers from the stage musical were cut from the film version, with only Keep It Movin and Superpower (I) being written for the film. Both new songs are fine, the former catchy and the latter well delivered by Barrino. However, I think some of the other songs could have been cut, or at the very least not delivered in such an elaborate fashion that only served to call attention to themselves.

On the whole the performances were quite good. The standout was Brooks as Sophia. Big, bold and brassy (as Mister, Senior observed, "more entertaining than a radio show"), Brooks dominates whenever on screen. That is not to say that she does not have quiet moments. When softly pleading with Celie for her to stay when Sophia is locked up, Brooks is deeply moving. 

Henson is commanding as Shug Avery, though at times I felt she was making the character less bold and assertive as she should have been. Wilson aka H.E.R. had a smaller part but she did well as Squeak (real name Mary Agnes). Barrino, who played Celie on Broadway, really came into her own late in the film, particularly her solo number I'm Here. She and Henson also had a wonderful scene in What About Love? (not the Heart song), an Art Deco fantasy that subtly suggests a Sapphic relationship between them. 

I think that we did not see as much acting as we could have from Barrino or Henson due more to director Blitz Bazawule and screenwriter Marcus Gardley, which despite the film's two-hour-plus runtime felt oddly rushed. The directing of the male actors showed a curious element. Domingo and Hawkins came across as almost too nice to be these harsh men. Yes, Domingo's Mister slapped Celie hard. As I watched, however, I never felt that Domingo was brutal. In short, I think he was playing someone who was cruel, but he never convinced me that he was Mister. He was Colman Domingo playing Mister. Only Louis Gossett, Jr. as Old Mister in a small part did well. 

I would say that David Alan Grier as Reverend Avery, Shug's disapproving father, was the most cartoonish in his portrayal.

The Color Purple does have excellent production work and cinematography, capturing the look of early Twentieth Century rural South. It also has some nice bits of dialogue. "If they're rough around the edges, you know they soft on the inside," Celie tells Shug. While talking about seeds, the double meaning is well-crafted. 

It is hard to shake the memory of the 1985 original in this adaptation. Using Miss Celie's Blues (Sister) from the original here helps. It is not a bad inclusion, but those kinds of callbacks don't help separate the new from the old. Ultimately, I think it did not translate well from stage to screen, yet while The Color Purple fails to get away from the past, it does decent enough in its crowd-pleasing presentation.

DECISION: B-