Oppenheimer (2023): A Review

OPPENHEIMER (2023)

"Now I am become Death, the Destroyer of Worlds". These words from the Hindu scripture the Bhagavad Gita came to J. Robert Oppenheimer upon seeing the successful nuclear bomb test. Oppenheimer, the biopic of the "father of the atomic bomb" is a brilliantly acted and directed film. It is filled with remarkable images and insight into this complex figure. 

Oppenheimer flows back and forth between the past and what would be current-day events in the film. American physicist J. Robert Oppenheimer (Cillian Murphy) is being questioned by a small board over whether or not to renew his security clearance. That clearance was already hard to get when Oppenheimer headed up the Los Alamos section of the Manhattan Project during World War II. This project involved building a nuclear bomb both safely and before the Nazis could.

Oppenheimer's personal life is fraught with personal and political troubles. He has had a liaison with Jean Tatlock (Florence Pugh). He also keeps a friendship with their mutual friend, Berkeley professor Haakon Chevalier (Jefferson Hall). Both Chevalier and Tatlock are openly committed Communists, as is Oppenheimer's brother Frank (Dylan Arnold). While Robert is sympathetic to Leftist causes, he never joined the Communist Party and oftentimes urged caution about political activism/agitation. 

One person that Oppenheimer did not have caution with was with Kitty (Emilie Blunt). She may have been married when she met Oppie. However, that did not him from knocking Kitty up. He and Kitty do marry, and he stays mostly loyal to her. It is not, however, his marital fidelity that bothers high-ranking military officials now that the Second World War has begun. It is his fidelity to the United States.

Despite misgivings, Manhattan Project head General Leslie Groves (Matt Damon) ultimately recruits him. Oppenheimer gathers a hand-selected group of scientists to come to his remote New Mexico ranch at Los Alamos to begin work. He gets everyone he wants except for Albert Einstein (Tom Conti), despite Einstein being the impetus for the creation of the Manhattan Project. Now, Oppenheimer must navigate the scientific, professional and personal among all his men (and women). 

Not that there are not people who distrust Oppie. There are Major General Kenneth Nichols (Dane Dehaan) and Colonel Boris Pash (Casey Affleck). They believe that Oppenheimer would give nuclear secrets to the Soviets. There is a spy among the scientists, but it is not Oppenheimer. Post-war, one of Oppenheimer's fiercest enemies is Lewis Strauss (Robert Downey, Jr.). Despite his curious pronouncing of his surname as "Straws", Strauss tries to build up rapport with Oppenheimer through their shared Jewish ancestry. Oppie won't bite. Now that the war is over though, Strauss becomes convinced that Oppenheimer is a security risk. He also holds a grudge when Oppenheimer publicly humiliated him at a congressional hearing. Finally, Strauss and Oppenheimer are at fierce odds about the development of a hydrogen bomb.

Strauss is the mastermind of the hearing that Oppenheimer is facing. Strauss is also up for Commerce Secretary. Will Strauss manage to outflank Oppie and achieve his great ambition? Will Oppenheimer continue living with guilt over his successes?

Oppenheimer runs three hours long. Upon rewatching the film, however, I wondered exactly what if anything could have been cut out. Perhaps a bit of the extramarital liaison between Oppenheimer and Tatlock could have been trimmed. Tatlock's suicide could also have been trimmed. Overall, though, I was surprised at how well Oppenheimer held together. This is especially true given two elements that distinguish it from other films.

The first is that the film is not structured linearly. Oppenheimer goes back and forth from the board hearing to his work pre-and-post Los Alamos and to Strauss' Cabinet hearings. The second is that in almost all the sections that center around Strauss, Oppenheimer is in black-and-white. There are a few moments when Strauss is featured in color. There are a few moments when Oppenheimer is featured in black-and-white. For the most part though, we have color for the title character, black-and-white for his antagonist. 

That the balance never comes across as gimmicky or jarring is a credit to the production team. Jennifer Lame's editing never felt confusing or out of place. Hoyte van Hoytema's cinematography made the separate sections look incredible. Both would rightly win Academy Awards in their respective fields, two of the seven Oscars that Oppenheimer would receive. 

Van Hoytema's cinematography was used effectively and brilliantly in the film. Sections were downright beautiful visually. The film shows various scientific visions that on screen look exceptionally breathtaking. Curiously, Oppenheimer was not nominated for Best Visual Effects and lost Best Sound to The Zone of Interest. I can see a case for why and how that happened. However, the Trinity test sequence is a brilliant use of visual effects and sound (or lack thereof). While watching, I heard in my mind Marvin the Martian. "Where's the kaboom?! There was supposed to be an Earth-shattering kaboom!". Oppenheimer uses that silence to build up anticipation for a brilliant and terrifying sequence.

Oppenheimer also won for Best Director. Christopher Nolan, in terms of directing actors, more than merited the recognition. He directed three actors to nominations, with two wins. Robert Downey, Jr. is brilliant as Lewis Strauss. He makes him into a confident figure, cool under pressure, yet burning with quiet rage. Downey's Strauss is not a man to trifle with. We see someone who, despite his success, is still fearful that he will not measure up. I did not hate Lewis Strauss. I did not pity him either. Instead, I saw him as an effective man, driven by a curious mix of sincere belief and petty vindictiveness. He does have one moment of rage. That makes what has come before almost jarring.

Cillian Murphy is brilliant as J. Robert Oppenheimer. He maintains the calm demeanor, in keeping with how the real Oppenheimer was in public. This is a man who never rages or grows belligerent. Instead, Oppenheimer is calm and rational. His soft voice adds to the overall manner of making Oppenheimer into a deliberate man.

One scene sticks out. Oppenheimer is giving a short speech after the war is declared over. We see him say what he thinks his hardworking Los Alamos group wants to hear. The words are upbeat and even a touch jingoistic. What we see both in terms of Murphy's performance and Nolan's directing is that his heart is not in his statements. They are performative. In fact, we see Oppenheimer very alarmed and guilt-ridden by what he has brought about.

Oppenheimer's third acting nomination and only acting loss was for Emily Blunt as the fiercely loyal but equally sharp Kitty Oppenheimer. She is no shrinking violet, able to stand up against her and her husband's accusers when she testifies. However, she is also aghast and angry at Oppie for continuously not appearing to fight. Kitty endures Robert's tryst with his former mistress. She also stays besides him despite whatever doubts that she might have.

Oppenheimer is filled with top notch performances from the entire cast. This film embodies the adage of "there are no small parts, only small actors". We get small roles for a wide variety of established actors and young talents. This film features Josh Hartnett and Josh Peck as Oppenheimer's colleague Ernest Lawrence and Kenneth Bainbridge, the man who literally pushed the button at the Trinity test site. There are cameo roles from other Best Actor Oscar winners (Cillian Murphy winning for this performance). Gary Oldman appears as President Harry Truman. In his small role, we see Truman as one thoroughly unimpressed with what he sees as Oppenheimer's self-flagellation and self-righteousness. Dismissively waving his handkerchief at Oppenheimer, he tells the sad scientist that those in Hiroshima and Nagasaki do not care who built the bomb, just who dropped it. 

There are other cameo appearances in the film, each leaving a strong impression.  Among them are Kenneth Branagh as Danish physicist Niels Bohr, Casey Affleck as the cold Colonel Pash and Ramy Malek as David Hill, another physicist who dares stand up against Strauss in his confirmation hearings. Tom Conti appears briefly as Einstein, making him a serious figure versus the common idea of Einstein as brilliant but a bit wacky. 

While they are not cameo roles, actors as varied as David Krumholtz, Jason Clarke and Alden Ehrenreich work well in their roles of fellow Manhattan Project scientist Isidor Rabi, de facto prosecutor Roger Robb and Strauss' Senate confirmation aide.  

Matt Damon is probably the weakest as General Leslie Groves. He seemed to be one note, almost always raging. It was not a bad performance, but I was not enthusiastic about it.  I could also question how Alex Wolff could play fellow Berkeley scientist Luis Alvarez. Granted, Alvarez was of Spanish descent. However, it is doubtful that such casting would not raise eyebrows if done now.

A lot of Oppenheimer's power comes from Ludwig Gorasson's Oscar-winning score. It has a tense and gripping manner that also blends genuine mourning for his emotional plight. The film is almost totally filled with Gorasson's score. There are very few moments when we do not hear music. However, the score is so strong that it is not a flaw.

Every element in Oppenheimer works brilliantly (no pun intended). On every level, Oppenheimer meets its goal of being an intelligent and entertaining film. "It's paradoxical, but it works", J. Robert Oppenheimer observes to a colleague in the film. That could be a good description of the American Prometheus. 

1904-1967

DECISION: A-

2024 Best Picture Winner: Anora

One Battle After Another (2025): A Review

ONE BATTLE AFTER ANOTHER (2025)

Can one love something to death? One Battle After Another has been essentially declared this generation's Citizen Kane, a turning point in cinematic if not human history. One Battle After Another is a good movie. It is unfortunate that it will die of overpraise.

Perfidia Beverly Hills (Teyana Taylor) is part of the French 75, a Leftist domestic terrorist group who will rescue undocumented migrants from a holding facility. Aiding her is Pat Calhoun, a young man who has the explosives meant to distract the military. During the raid on the Otay Mesa Immigration Center, Perfidia captures the commanding officer, Steven J. Lockjaw (Sean Penn). Far from being upset, Lockjaw is sexually aroused by our black liberation queen. 

This does not stop him from going after all the French 75, who have moved on to bank robberies in the Symbionese Liberation Army style. Perfidia had been apprehended by Lockjaw at this time as well. However, she used her black sexual power on him. She also had become involved with Pat and had a daughter, Charlene, presumably with Pat as the father.

However, the call of revolution is too strong, so she goes to fight the good fight. That is, until she is captured. Now turning against her former cohorts, Lockjaw manages to eliminate almost all of them. Pat and his daughter manage to escape. Now, sixteen years later, Pat is Bob (Leonardo DiCaprio), hiding out in the northern California woods. He watches anxiously over his daughter Willa (Chase Infiniti). He is also a pothead, permanently addled and paranoid about the world. Lockjaw, for his part, is desperate to join the Christmas Adventurers Club, a white supremacist group. Their admission standards are very high: his parentage must be American born by Gentiles and there must not be any interracial relationships current or past. 

That is an issue, as Lockjaw did indulge in le plaisir de le femme noir and may be Willa's biological father. With that, Lockjaw now must eliminate the evidence of his miscegenation indiscretion. That sets off a chain of events that put Willa in danger; with Bob too mentally fried to be much help, he has to rely on Willa's karate instructor, Sensei Sergio St. Carlos (Benicio del Toro). Sensei Sergio has been running the Latino Underground Railroad aka been a human smuggler. He is pretty much incidental to Operation Boot Steel (the immigration sweep that is really a pretext to get Willa). With friend and foe coming and going, will Willa survive? Will Lockjaw manage to hide his shameful past? Will Bob ever remember the passwords?

I think, given the current political climate, far too many on the Left and Right are reading far too much into One Battle After Another. I can see the temptation to look on One Battle After Another as some kind of anti-ICE epic or celebration of an Antifa-like worldview. Personally, I not only have no interest in such things, but think that they are all wildly misguided.

I think One Battle After Another mocks both sides. French 75 and the Christmas Adventurers Club are both foolish, two groups made up of totally comical lunatics and imbeciles. The latter is meant to be idiotic. They have such things as Jingle Bells being the secret knock. They greet each other with "Merry Christmas, Hail St. Nick" and end with "May St. Nick be with you". The former, conversely, is also moronic. One of them at the bank robbery going on about the power of "black vajay-jay" (I cleaned up the language). While French 75 may see themselves as the new Underground Railroad, they are actually human smugglers. They are also thoroughly incompetent and when they do manage to be successful in their crime spree, they take innocent people with them.

Perfidia is no heroine. She is a slut who abandons her child and puts herself first. She may think that she is putting "the cause/revolution" ahead. However, she turns in her colleagues before ultimately fleeing the Witness Protection Program. 

Writer/director Paul Thomas Anderson (adapting Thomas Pynchon's Vineland) is fully aware of how all the characters are pretty much fools unto themselves. Bob was already bumbling and dimwitted even before he started smoking pot in mass quantities. Just before he gets notified that Lockjaw is on his way, he is seeing The Battle of Algiers on television. This was clearly done to draw a parallel between how Bob and French 75 saw themselves and how they were totally removed from the Algerian version. Bob, who is so out of it that he can no longer remember the complex word puzzles meant to verify his identity, has a phone battle with Comrade Josh (Dan Chariton). Their argument sounds more like something that occurs when you are attempting to get through to a person versus a machine.

One Battle After Another, separate from whatever parallels to the current world that people want to put, is laughing at everyone's expense. Yes, Colonel Lockjaw is not someone to take seriously, starting with the name. However, when the obnoxious Willa is lecturing her father about how he could not have driven the car if he was intoxicated, Bob snaps, "I know how to drink and drive". How can you take a premise seriously when Willa is taking shelter at the convent of The Sisters of the Brave Beaver? Everything about One Battle After Another is not meant to be taken seriously. Far from it: we are supposed to laugh at all of them.

The film is fortunate to have a good set of performances. Leonardo DiCaprio is surprisingly amusing as Bob, bumbling father, loopy pothead and eventual rescuer of his daughter. Another standout is Benicio del Toro as the unflappable Sensei Sergio. He is quite Zen in his manner, but he also can wring out humor as a result of his seeming calmness. I do not remember if someone or if he referred to himself as the "Latino Harriet Tubman", but that was funny. 

As a side note, it does reflect again how the remnants of French 75 saw themselves as carrying on the work of the Underground Railroad. However, the latter was helping slaves escape bondage. The former was smuggling de facto slaves into America. I figure that there is a difference.

I think Sean Penn has been getting far too much praise as Lockjaw. He wavered between the serious and silly of Lockjaw, with his growl at times hard on the ears. I think Chase Infiniti did well as Willa, even if the role of the smart-alecky teen is not the most original. 

One successful element is Jonny Greenwood's score, which is minimalist while keeping up the tension and mood. One unsuccessful element is the length. At almost three hours, One Battle After Another soon feels its runtime. The ending is also a bit difficult to accept. It might have done better to not let the Christmas Adventurers Club get their revenge. 

One Battle After Another is good, but it is being wildly overpraised to where it almost breeds hostility against it. I think it might have worked better as a limited series and not tried to be so on-the-nose about the characters. Still, I think it worked overall. Fortunately, I do not expect there to be any more battles.

DECISION: C+ 

2026 Best Picture Winner:

Anora (2024): A Review (Review #1932)

ANORA (2024)

I have found that there is a vast difference between love and sex. People oftentimes have sex with people that they are not in love with, as lovemaking requires putting the other's pleasure ahead of their own. Anora has plenty of sex but no love within it. I find the love for Anora rather puzzling as I did not laugh at the comedy nor feel touched by the drama. 

Anora, who prefers going by Ani (Mickey Madison) is a brash New York sex worker. Owing to her comprehension of, if not fluency in Russian, she is tasked in entertaining Ivan "Vanya" Zakharov (Mark Eydelshteyn), scion of a wealthy Russian oligarch. Vanya, who loves booze and broads, enjoys the many sexual encounters he has win Ani. Ani, in return, enjoys seeing how the other half lives. Soon, both are whisked into worlds of fantasy: Ani with the luxurious life, Vanya with his good-time girl. 

Agreeing to stay a week for $15,000, there is more sex and then more partying in Las Vegas. Here, Ivan, to obtain a way to avoid going back to Mother Russia, asks Anora to marry him in a quickie wedding. Ani may or may not believe that Ivan is truly in love with her, but she agrees anyway. 

The news of Ivan and Anora's marriage is met with shock, horror and anger once news reaches his parents. They tell Ivan's minder and henchman Toros (Karren Karagulian) to get Ivan and annul the marriage by the time they fly in from Russia. In total panic, Toros gets two other henchmen: Igor (Yura Borisov) and Garnick (Vashe Tovmasyan) to get Ivan and the new Mrs. Zakharov to agree to an annulment. Easier said than done, for Ivan manages to run away while Anora manages to beat Garnick and Igor up until she is finally subdued. 

Toros begs Anora to accept the $10,000 she is offered to have the annulment, but she refuses. However, she agrees to roam the streets of New York in order to find Ivan. Eventually, he is located, completely sloshed out of his mind and being the wastrel that he always was. Once fierce mother Galina Stepanova (Darya Ekamasova) and more placid but irritated father Nikolai (Aleksey Serebryakov) arrive, they find more complications on the road to annulling this marriage. Will Ivan prove himself a man or a man-child? Will Anora get anything close to a happy ending to her fairy tale?

I know many people who absolutely love Anora, the movie not the hooker. Anora herself would argue that she is not a prostitute, and in a way, she is correct in that she is not a streetwalker. She does agree to exchange sex for money, so I would argue that she is a prostitute, but I digress. I watched Anora stone-faced, not laughing at what I understand is a comedy, not moved by any drama, and thoroughly puzzled on why it has such passionate fans.

I think it is because, for all the originality that writer/director Sean Baker has been lauded for here, I did not think this Eurotrash reworking of Pretty Woman was original or moving. I suppose that when Garnick and Igor are forced to hold Anora down, the entire scene was meant to be funny as this tiny woman manages to beat up these Russian goons. For me though, I thought Garnick and Igor were too gentle with her. I would have tied up Anora pretty quickly as she was totally out of control. If not for the fact that Anora is a Best Picture nominee, I would have probably walked out of the film when Ivan ran off and Anora is held prisoner, having lost all interest and horrified that I still had well over an hour if not more to go in this two hour and fifteen-minute film. 

To my mind, the comedy in Anora felt forced. I suppose that the rampage at Ivan's crib was meant to be funny, but I didn't laugh. Similarly, I never thought these two were anywhere near in love with each other. Anora may have been, or she may have been in love with the wealthy, decadent world that Ivan lived in. Ivan, for his part, is someone that I figured would be a poor match for anyone, even someone like Anora, no sweetheart herself.

Not once did I believe that Anora was anywhere near in genuine love with Ivan. Not once did I believe that Ivan would stand up to his parents. Not once did I believe any of this. Worse, I did not like any of these people save for Igor, who is remarkably calm, quiet and polite throughout. 

One of the issues that I had with Anora is its length. So much time is spent early on in showing Ivan's debauched world and the seemingly endless and graphic sex that I wondered if we could not have gotten to the Vegas wedding faster. I do not think that we needed that long New Year's Eve party or that long lost Vegas weekend. Come to think of it, I think the long search for Ivan in the New York underbelly could have been shorter too. Even after Anora finally agrees to the annulment, I wondered when will this movie end. 

I cannot fault the performances, which were, I concede, good. Mickey Madison in her breakout role gets that Brooklyn accent well. Her Anora is vulgar, trashy and pretty strong to face off against even such bullies as Galina. Anora is a tough cookie, making her final scene work, in retrospect, better than perhaps I initially thought. Eydelshtein also did well as Ivan, the wastrel and immature man-child to whom video games and sexual encounters are basically interchangeable.

Though his role was smaller, Borisov lets Igor's generally quiet manner speak more than the hysterics of others. He has a wonderful bit of monologue where he talks to Anora on her last night at the Zakharov mansion, mentioning that he would not have hurt her. He also, again in a quiet manner, suggests quietly but firmly in front of everyone that Ivan apologize to Anora for all the trouble that he caused her. Never forceful, Borisov makes Igor a surprisingly complex henchman.

Again, I thought well of the performances after having some time to think on the film. However, I never found Anora funny, insightful or interesting. I thought it was longer than it should have been. Anora is not without its merits in terms of acting, but Anora is just not the girl for me.

DECISION: D+ 

2025 Best Picture Winner: One Battle After Another

Everything Everywhere All at Once (2022): A Review

EVERYTHING EVERYWHERE ALL AT ONCE (2022)

I confess to struggling with the title of Everything Everywhere All at Once. The movie, on the other hand, is surprisingly simple despite the seemingly whacked-out premise. A film that works on two levels, Everything Everywhere All at Once is a wild, frenetic ride that while perhaps long is still funny, action-packed and heartwarming.

Harried launderette owner Evelyn Wang (Michelle Yeoh) is facing a myriad of issues on this day. She is being audited by the IRS for various business expenses; she has her father Gong Gong's (James Hong) birthday party to finalize, a party to which her openly lesbian daughter Joy (Stephanie Hsu) wants to bring her girlfriend Becky to. She also is unaware her husband Wayne (Ke Huy Quan) is filing for divorce. 

Evelyn is at the IRS office, and while the sardonic auditor Diedre (Jamie Lee Curtis) is curtly dismissing a karaoke machine as a business expense, Evelyn finds herself amidst the most surreal and insane mission. Wayne insists he is really another version of Wayne from another universe, and that this Evelyn, from this universe, has to summon the resources of the other Evelyns from other universes to defeat the villain Jobu Tobaky. Jobu can see "everything, everywhere, all at once", making her dangerous.

It is unfortunate that Jobu Tobaky has the form of Joy. As Evelyn struggles between this universe and the other multiverses crashing hither and yon, she glimpses what the other Evelyns did if they had taken different routes from the path she took. Eventually, the Evelyn from this universe finds the strength to save her world.

Everything Everywhere All at Once pushes things between silly and sincere, bouncing from a world where mankind developed hot dogs for fingers to where mankind evolved into rocks that can talk without speaking. The movie excellently shifts from people laughing at poor Evelyn being overwhelmed by the mad goings-on and almost tearing up when alternate Evelyns see that different roads would not have brought her happiness.

At heart, Everything Everywhere All at Once, stripped of its wild even crazed action sequences, is about accepting life as it is versus how one would have wanted it to be. It uses the trappings of science fiction and action to deliver a moving message: life is indeed what one makes of it. 

Writer/directors Dan Kwan and Daniel Schienert (who style themselves "The Dans") are sharp in how they crafted the film. The ironically named 'Joy', the mixing of humor and pathos (Evelyn telling Wayne she should have rejected him being funny and sad) and the blending of the various multiverses all work to make this a surprisingly optimistic story.

Everything Everywhere All at Once is about the choice to give in to fatalism, apathy and hopelessness (which Jobu Tobaky/Joy does) and maintaining a hope that this world, this life still has moments of genuine happiness (as the gentle Wayne insists). The film puts these surprisingly deep ideas about existentialism vs. optimism within a wild series of action pieces and out-of-this-world locales.

The performances were all excellent. Michelle Yeoh is an international treasure, and Everything Everywhere All at Once gives her perhaps her greatest showcase to reveal the exceptional talent she is. It certainly gives her a chance to showcase her action prowess, but it also gives her moments of comedy and drama to which reveal an actress. Whether expressing confusion to irritation at having to be dragged into this lunacy or showing the glamourous film star from another multiverse regretting her lost love, Yeoh dominates the film with a delightful brilliance.

Quan too balances the more comedic elements of the slightly bumbling Wayne with the more action-oriented Alpha Wayne. He even is allowed to show a more elegant side when he is the suave Wayne in another multiverse. Hsu mostly kept to one mode (sullen) but given that was the character it was a good turn. It is also wonderful to see the living legend Hong get in on the action, playing both villain and gentle. Curtis was wild as one of Jobu Tobaki's figures, astonished at what she can do as an action figure.

There were elements that I did not think were necessary, making Everything Everywhere All at Once long. While I got the Ratatouille/Racoon-Tootie joke, I did not think it was necessary (for the record, I have not seen Ratatouille but know the gist of the plot). The elements around Diedre's awards to my mind were vulgar and unnecessary. I know the audience found it funny, but I found it coarse. 

Minor points though, as Everything Everywhere All at Once was simultaneously wild, funny, adventurous and remarkably moving.

DECISION: B+

2023 Best Picture Winner: Oppenheimer

CODA (2021): A Review (Review #1578)

CODA (2021)

In some ways, CODA is not original separate from the fact that it is an English-language remake of a French film. Despite that, CODA is a deeply moving, beautiful film that is in turns funny and dramatic.

Ruby Rossi (Emilia Jones) is a CODA: Child Of Deaf Adults. She is also the only hearing member of her family, making her the de facto interpreter for them. Her father Frank (Troy Kostur) and brother Leo (Daniel Durant) are struggling fishermen, while her mother Jackie (Marlee Matlin) generally hides away from the world and manages the family finances.

Ruby has two secret loves: music and Miles (Ferdia Walsh-Peelo). Her crush is so great that she joins the choir despite being painfully shy about singing in public. Enter wacky choir director Bernardo Villalobos (Eugenio Derbez), who pushes the kids to literally sing out. He also pushes Ruby to reach her potential and does a little accidental matchmaking by pairing Ruby and Miles for a duet.

Ruby is facing pressures on all sides. Her parents, randy and somewhat uncouth, do not shrink from sex both in having it loudly and discussing it to a shocked Miles. They also face financial pressures to where the Rossis decide to go co-op rather than endure the regulations and poor market. That only increases the pressure on Ruby to keep interpreting. Will familial bonds force Ruby to give up on dreams her family cannot partake in? Will she and Miles form a bond? 

As I said, in many ways CODA hits familiar beats. It is not a surprise that Ruby opted to take a day for herself with Miles the same day a pesky observer boards the Rossi's ship, revealing they have no one to hear emergency messages or the Coast Guard. The push-pull between a loving but unintentionally binding family and the young girl's own desires is also familiar ground. There's the montage of the Rossis integrating into the hearing world they have mostly kept separate from (Jackie for example laughing with the other fishermen's wives while they do some signing). Then there's the somewhat wacky teacher, who gives the kids Let's Get It On to sing and accidentally signs "It's a pleasure to f*** you" to Frank and Jackie. Given how sexual they are, I was a bit surprised they didn't laugh it off.

However, CODA has extremely moving and intelligent moments that hit the viewer. There is the concert where Ruby showcases her skills. Her family cannot hear the concert, but the reactions Kotsur and Matlin show when looking around how their daughter moves the hearing audience is a joyful moment. As CODA shifts to their perspective, we can focus on the pride and joy their daughter/sister is bringing to others. Seeing them mirror the audience in their standing ovation while still making the sign for "applause" is a beautiful moment. 

I found it hard not to shed a few tears when Frank, Jackie and Leo sneak into Ruby's audition and she, seeing them, begins singing and signing Both Sides Now.

Here is where the cleverness of CODA comes from through via writer/director Sian Heder's adaptation of the French film La Famille Belier. As she sees her family, as she contemplates how she loves them but also is separate from them, she has "seen love from both sides now". She has seen it from the hearing and from the deaf world. Heder gives the song an additional meaning that I figure Joni Mitchell had in mind.

Heder gives us little details that make CODA a life-affirming comedy. There's Ruby's deliberate misinterpreting to her parents that the doctor's orders of no sex for two weeks are really no sex ever. There's Frank signing his advice on condoms to Miles, who both clearly understands without needing interpretation and is quite embarrassed. However, there are other moments, beautiful moments that make CODA a delight.

After the concert, Frank asks Ruby to sing the song she sang with Miles. As he puts his hands on her vocal cords to feel, the man who loves gangster rap because of the bass shows his pride in his little girl. Despite saying only one word in the film, "Go", Kotsur clearly earned that Best Supporting Actor nomination. In turns raunchy and proud, he is proudly working class, loving his family but also uncouth. 

Matlin's equally randy but loving Jackie is also an excellent performance. She is able to handle the comedy such as when telling Ruby that Leo's Tinder scrolling is fine at the dining table because it is something the whole family can do. She also can deliver beautiful moments, explaining that she originally wished Ruby had been deaf, fearing that the difference between them would make for a fraught relationship. Durant is excellent as Leo: in turns angry at being seen as helpless without Ruby but also quietly proud of her. 

CODA clearly is Emilia Jones' film. As Ruby, she was brilliant; in turns fearful and loving, she can express defensiveness when outsiders do anything against her family but also frustration at how they bind her down. Ruby would naturally be upset that her music lessons would be thwarted by a television interview she was told about at the last minute. That her parents appear puzzled as to why Ruby would put her own dreams over them adds a layer of drama and relatability to her plight. Separate from the deafness, many children feel their parents love sometimes becomes more a burden than blessing.

CODA is a beautiful film: funny, heartwarming if a bit standard in how things will play out. That however is not a negative, for CODA plays well in how life can be, with the layer of a world most of us do not know. 

We really don't know love and life after all until we have seen them from Both Sides Now.   

DECISION: A-

2022 Best Picture Winner: Everything Everywhere All at Once

Nomadland (2020): A Review (Review #1434)

NOMADLAND (2020)

Nomadland, the adaptation of Jessica Bruder's nonfiction study into the lives of economically displaced people traveling and surviving post-Great Recession, is well-acted, beautifully shot and overall well-made. So, why did I dislike it?

Fern (Francis McDormand) is a recent widow whose whole town was literally wiped off the map after the major sheetrock plant closed. With no savings and no job, Fern makes due with a variety of odd jobs ranging from working at an Amazon processing plant to cleaning toilets at state parks. She travels the American West in Vanguard, the name she's given her van/home. Fern meets up with other nomads who either by circumstance or desire do as she does. Fellow nomad Dave (David Strathairn) obviously fancies her but she isn't interested in romance.

She also isn't interested in literally settling down despite offers from friends, her sister Dolly (Melissa Smith) or Dave himself, who has eased his way back into stationary life now that he is a grandfather. With no husband or children of her own, Fern continues on, despite the various difficulties and dangers there may be out there.

This is my own view, probably not one shared by fellow reviewers who gush endlessly about Nomadland, but perhaps this is the worst time for this film to be released. Millions of lives have been disrupted due to the COVID-created economic crash; people are out of work, perhaps having lost their businesses or even family from COVID itself or related issues (suicides or overdoses). As such, with so many struggling, who would want to watch this story of the wandering homeless (a term to be fair they'd never use for/about themselves)?

I suspect, and again this is just my own view, that many potential Nomadland audience members would kill to have that Amazon job Fern seems if not blasé at least casual about. Granted, the Nomadland characters would say they are not miserable and may even be happy, but I do think most people watching would not welcome the life those in Nomadland have, especially when they fear being on the verge of being on the street.

"Have" is a good word, for the film has very few professional actors. Most of Nomadland's "actors" are real-life nomads playing themselves. Of particular note is Bob Wells, who is a guru to those who live the nomad life and plays a version of himself. It's clear that most of the people we meet in Nomadland are not professional actors, but it's a credit to director/screenwriter Chloe Zhao that they do not appear forced or uncomfortable on camera.

In fact, Nomadland does have a documentary-like feel, down to taking its time in going through mundane presentations on the right bucket for toilet use. The film is enhanced by beautiful cinematography and a beautiful albeit mournful score. The score and sparseness of Nomadland may have been a major reason as to why I kept writing "miserable" in my notes. Despite protests to the contrary, I never sensed these people were actually "happy" or even content in this peripatetic life. It's almost as if they had to be there even if they would say they wanted to be there.

Credit should be given where it is due. The visuals and music are wonderful, as so is Francis McDormand as Fern. This is a quiet performance, but McDormand communicates much with her stillness, her control. Early on, in a curious echo of the end of Brokeback Mountain, Fern holds her late husband's jacket tightly before putting it in storage. It says so much in that silence. As she travels, Fern has both an empathy for those around her and an anger to those who question her life, even when attempting to "help". Sometimes that anger is overt (like with Dolly) and other times more puzzlement. 

Strathairn was less believable as Dave. Somehow, it didn't ring true that he was anywhere near a working class man, the baseball cap and halting manner seeming more calculated in an effort to ingratiate himself to nomads than being a nomad himself.

Nomadland has so many qualities separately but in total there seemed to be something almost "poverty/misery porn" about it. Early on I wrote in my notes, "McDormand is great but BOY is this bleak". I think that sums up my view of Nomadland.

DECISION: C-

2021 Best Picture Winner: CODA

Parasite (2019): A Review

PARASITE (2019)

I went to see Parasite based on the ebullient praise the film has received despite knowing nothing about it. Parasite is a well-crafted, logical film, with excellent performances all-around. Having said that, I found Parasite troubling and quite unpleasant, a film whose character motivations I could understand and even sympathize with while still thinking them revolting.

The Kim family lives on the edge of poverty, if not past that edge. Son Ki-woo (Woo-sik Choi) is gifted a landscape rock meant to bring fortune from his friend Min (Seu-joon Park) and a potential job as a fake English tutor to the wealthy Park family, specifically the daughter Da-hyeh (Jung Ziso). After successfully passing the interview with Madame (Yeo-jeong Jo), Ki-woo or 'Kevin' as they call him notices that the Park son Da-song (Hyun-jun Jung) might need some 'therapy'.

One by one, through rather shady means, the entire Kim family starts finding employment with the oblivious yet pleasant Park family. Ki-woo finds "Jessica" to be Da-song's art therapist, not mentioning that "Jessica" is his sister Ki-jeong (Park So-dam). Further machinations get the Park family driver fired, with Kim family patriarch Ki-taek (Song Kang-ho) as the new driver. The coup de grace is getting the longtime housekeeper Moon-gwan (Jeong-eun Lee) fired so that Kim family matriarch Chung-sook (Hyae Jing Chang) can take her place.


The Kims celebrate their success, having a drunken party when the Parks leave for a camping trip to celebrate Da-song's birthday. It's at this point that Moon-gwan returns during a thunderstorm, saying she was fired so fast that she left something behind.

Once she comes back into the Park mansion, things take one wild and shocking turn after another. To tell more would be giving things away, but suffice to say that among other plot points in Parasite we have ghost sightings, blackmail, floods and general chaos, culminating in a murderous birthday garden party. Some live, some die, and some become hidden within the bowels of opulence.

Writer/director Bong Joon-ho (writing with Han Jin Won) crafted an exception story, one that adds elements of symbolism with an understanding of human nature. He for example does not paint either the Kim or Park families as horrible people. The closest is when Mr. Park (Sun-kyun Lee) mentions to his wife that their driver has a particular odor, a notion that was mentioned prior. This was meant to be heard in as a private, intimate moment but which, due to circumstances the Kim family overhears. At the garden birthday party, this element returns to murderous results.

It makes the confusion and horror of the garden party understandable and even logical. I also think Parasite leaves it up to audiences if members think it was 'right'.


Parasite deftly balances and shifts comedy to horror. The audience I saw it with were laughing one moment, silenced into shock the very next moment. That delicate balance between humor and horror works exceptionally well in the film.

Bong gave the actors great roles, as these were people who seemed genuinely real with very little to no exaggeration about how they were and behaved. The Kim family's actions are entirely comprehensible (even if I find them equally reprehensible). Their financial need drove them to their acts, but their arrogance was also off-putting, so if I was meant to cheer them on, I couldn't. The Park family for their part were pleasant but also a bit detached from things, and again I figure Mr. Park was meant to be something akin to a villain given his repulsion at the literal stench of poverty.

I can't sympathize with his reactions, but I cannot condone his fate either. Same for Moon-gwang, as while her motives are perhaps the 'purest' she too was not above some nefarious work to keep what she had. To be honest, she is the character I thought best of given that her reasons, at least initially, were to my mind the most moral.

The performances are all excellent, as every actor portrayed his or her character with the appropriate balance of humor and heart, sometimes heartlessness. From Madame's naïve to almost innocent manner to Moon-gwang's desperation, from Mr. Kim's mostly decent manner to Mr. Park's equally mostly decent manner, the cast did so well.

Bong also had wonderful moments and montages, coordinating Jaeil Jung's score with the duplicity of the Kim family. His use of symbolism from the landscape rock eventually crashing down upon one of them to two sets of servants finding the basements are leading to death is also excellent work.

My sense is that Parasite is meant to give a message about the economic state of Koreans, the charming obliviousness of the wealthy to the poor both within and without their employ. When Mr. Kim comments that Madame is "rich but also nice", Mrs. Kim won't have it, insisting Madame is "nice because she is rich".

There are some films that one can admire and respect while still finding somewhat off-putting. Parasite is that kind of film for me. It's an exceptionally well-made film, with strong performances and an engaging story that goes into sometimes bonkers territory. However, I found our protagonists rather horrible people whom I could not cheer on in any way. I could understand why they did as they did and felt terrible about their collective fate.

In short, Parasite is a film that both entertains and makes one think.

DECISION: A-

2020 Best Picture Winner: Nomadland

The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King (2003). A Review

THE LORD OF THE RINGS: 

THE RETURN OF THE KING (2003)

Editor's Note: This review is of the theatrical version.

And thus, this massive Rings cycle concludes with The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King. The concluding part of The Lord of the Rings trilogy was richly rewarded come Oscar-time, winning eleven Academy Awards out of eleven nominations. As such, it not only tied the record for most Oscar wins with Ben-Hur and Titanic but holds the record for the biggest sweep in Academy history.

Exactly how much its 11-for-11 record is due to the film itself versus that it was the last chance to reward this epic series is a subject of debate. Now, more than fifteen years after it concluded a massive epic, we can look on The Return of the King with a slightly clearer eye. The Return of the King is a massive film that perhaps throws in more than it can carry, but one that moves quite fast for its running time and concludes things on a strong note.

Keeping to the story established in The Fellowship of the Ring and continuing in The Two Towers, The Return of the King follows two intertwined stories. The first is the continuing journey of hobbits Frodo Baggins (Elijah Wood) and Samwise Gamgee (Sean Astin) into the forbidding land of Mordor to destroy The One Ring, a powerful object that will allow its former owner Sauron to rule over all Middle-Earth and plunge it in darkness and evil. They must go into Mordor for the One Ring can be destroyed only by being thrown into the fires of Mt. Doom. Guiding them is the creature known as Gollum (Andy Serkis), whose loyalty is dubious at best, with Sam thoroughly opposed and Frodo more accepting of.

The second story involves the actual war of conquest Sauron is fighting against Men. Aragorn (Viggo Mortensen), heir to Gondor's throne, calls upon Denethor, Stewart of Gondor (John Noble) to join with neighboring Rohan to fight against Sauron's forces. Denethor, however, is a bit bonkers at the moment: mourning his son Boromir and having little interest in his other son Faramir (David Wenham), sending him on a suicide mission then despairing over both Faramir's apparent death and the massive army besieging his city.

As the massive armies fight, two little hobbits and their conflicted guide push further on, facing many dangers including a crazed Gollum, set on retaking his 'Precious' from Frodo. Things culminate in massive battles involving an Army of the Dead, massive creatures, a warrior Princess defeating the Witch-King himself, and at long last the quest completed.

Now with Middle-Earth firmly in the Age of Men our four Hobbits return to their home in The Shire, though for at least one of them and his Uncle Bilbo (Ian Holm), one last journey awaits into the West.

I remember going to see The Return of the King in theaters and the reaction was enthusiastic, at least until the first 'ending'. By perhaps the time the hobbits got back to the Shire and the film seemed to not know if it would end, the audience turned hostile, with members shouting for it to be over. Perhaps in retrospect we see how director Peter Jackson, along with his co-screenwriters Fran Walsh and Phillipa Boyens, could not find a way to formally and finally end this massive concluding chapter of this massive trilogy. Just as one thought the film ended, something else popped up again and again, and the audience by this point was exhausted.

As I look back on The Return of the King, I thought that perhaps it could have been shorter and perhaps more blasphemous, both it and The Two Towers could have been shorter. This came to me when we had a brief visit to the ruins of Isengard, which played a large role in The Two Towers but added nothing in The Return of the King. It's as if by now Jackson really wanted to put in as much as possible and didn't know when to stop.

As a side note, the creeping bloated nature of The Hobbit trilogy prequels released a decade later seem to have a precedent in The Return of the King.


However, to its credit The Return of the King did an excellent job pushing the stories forward and an especially excellent job in pacing. The film moves quite well to where you barely notice how long it is, at least until after the fall of Sauron where it finally started lurching from one thing to another.

As another side note, the audience I saw The Return of the King burst out laughing when Arargon started his hymn, as if the King belting out a musical number was just too much to take.

The performances are exceptional. High credit goes to Serkis as the damned Gollum, with the film even giving him a chance to appear on-camera versus motion-capture. In his performance Serkis gave his character a mix of horror and pathos, where one felt sorrow for and anger at him. Wood had to carry so much on his shoulders as the main character, and in Return of the King he comes into his own. His Frodo is a haunted figure, driven nearly insane by both The One Ring and the arduous journey.

Frodo's darkness as portrayed by Wood is brilliantly countered by Astin's portrayal of the ever-loyal Samwise. He despairs but never gives into despair and hopelessness, maintaining a sense of hope however dim, in this painful journey.

It's both a good and bad thing that the rest of the cast from both Fellowship of the Ring and Two Towers keeps to how they started out. Credit should be given to Billy Boyd, Dominic Monaghan and Miranda Otto as Pippin, Merry and Eowyn respectively. Each had their 'warrior' moment where he/she showcased courage under fire. Mortensen too had bravura moments whenever he rallied armies living and dead to his cause.

However, Ian McKellen as the wizard Gandalf, Orlando Bloom as Elf warrior Legolas and John Rhys-Davies as Dwarf warrior Gimli basically did as they have before: either spout off words of wisdom or keep some running tab of kills. To be fair I did enjoy the softening of relations between Legolas and Gimli to where they were genuine friends versus adversaries due to their separate ethnicities for lack of a better term.

I think now that part of my issue with Return of the King, on seeing it again, revolves around a certain repetitiveness that stems from The Two Towers. Both Two Towers and Return of the King have leaders on thrones mourning their dead sons. Both Two Towers and Return of the King have massive battles as their centerpieces, with battering rams and storming hordes. Return of the King even has two characters who appear dead but are not (Faramir and Frodo).

And then there are the various 'endings', a major point of criticism then and now. One friend wisecracked that the Academy gave Return of the King an Oscar for each ending it had, and one of the film's major flaws is that it kept going long after the war was over. It didn't seem to know how to end, so it kept ending, throwing in one apparent conclusion after another until audiences grew frustrated. This series of unfortunate finales hampers the film.

However, on a visual and emotional level, with the craftsmanship and performances elevating it, The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King is an epic and exceptional, if albeit excessively lengthy, conclusion to one of the grandest epics in cinema.

DECISION: A-

2004 Best Picture Winner: Million Dollar Baby

The Godfather Part II (1974): A Review (Review #1272)

THE GODFATHER PART II

The Godfather Part II is really both sequel and prequel to The Godfather, a sweeping tale of the rise of mob boss Don Vito Corleone and the fall of his son Michael. A massive epic running almost three and a half hours, The Godfather Part II chronicles the American dream in vivid albeit dark colors.

The film ebbs and flows between turn of the century New York and 1958 Nevada, so a plot summation requires a little dexterity. In the pre-Godfather sections we see young Vito Antolini forced into exile due to a longstanding vendetta. Coming through Ellis Island, his name is changed to that of his hometown, Corleone.

As a young Vito Corleone (Robert De Niro) attempts to raise a family and keep to an honest life, he finds circumstances force his hand into a life of crime. Joining with neighbor/small-time hood Clemenza (Bruno Kirby), Vito now takes on the local boss, Don Fanucci (Gaston Mochin) for control of the area. Vito is generally a good man, using his 'influence' to help those in need but not afraid of using the full force of his powers.

He returns to Sicily one last time for a final confrontation with elderly mob boss Don Ciccio (Guiseppe Sillato). Vito took his whole family to Sicily, though given their ages it is unlikely that toddler Michael or baby Connie would remember. Perhaps if they did, Michael would see how he echoes his father.

In the post-Godfather section family head Michael Corleone (Al Pacino) faces a host of trouble. There are the minor problems such as his sister Connie (Talia Shire), now a bitter mob princess running around from man to man. Then there are major problems. Longtime Corleone caporegime Frankie Pentangeli (Michael V. Gazzo) is furious that Michael appears to side with Jewish mobster Hyman Roth (Lee Strasberg), who is funding Frankie's rivals for control of his territory. Michael survives an assassination attempt at his home, and now he is determined to smoke out whoever is the mole working for Roth, whom Michael knows is behind the attempted hit.

Pentangeli is himself set up for assassination but the attempt is accidentally thwarted. Frankie thinks Michael sold him out, so now he's going to sell Michael out to the government. In reality, Michael's older brother Fredo (John Cazale) was the rat, though whether he was duped or not is a subject of debate. As he faces enemies on all sides, Michael's cunning and coldness helps him survive but at a high cost.

Michael's long-suffering wife Kay (Diane Keaton) takes shocking steps to ensure there will be no successor to Michael's bloody throne. As for Fredo, he like Roth and Pentangeli pays for his sin of treachery, with the cost being Michael's soul.

The Godfather Part II is more than a simultaneous continuation and remembrance of the Corleone family saga. It really is a story about family, particularly fathers and sons. We see how Michael is in many way's Vito's son. Both hold long resentments and enact cruel vengeance on those who injured them. It does not matter that one was a virtually senile old man or one's own somewhat senile older brother. It was their need to 'defend their family & family honor' that motivated their brutality.

Director Francis Ford Coppola curiously had Vito take Michael's hand after both his murders (Fenucci and Ciccio). I do not think it was intentional but one can see perhaps symbolically how Vito was passing on his bloody legacy to the one son he hoped would not carry on the tainted family legacy.

The film is absolutely fantastic about having you empathize with Vito yet recoil with Michael. We see Vito in many ways as a victim, particularly when he arrives alone and silent to America. As so many of us are either immigrants or children of immigrants, we can identify with Vito and the hope of a new life away from the burdens of the old country.

However, we see in The Godfather Part II the dark side of the American dream: the Corleone family did indeed find prosperity in America, but one built on crime, brutality and death.

The film is also a sly critique of capitalism. Note that Michael and Roth, these two mobsters who built their empire on crime, are sitting at the same table with industrialists who essentially rule Cuba. As the Revolution heats up we see only Michael realizing the danger his empire faces while everyone keeps dancing. Note that Roth and his partners metaphorically cut Cuba among themselves via Roth's birthday cake with a map of Cuba as the frosting. They are essentially businessmen, but whose industry involves criminality up to and including murder.

The corruption of the Cuban government is more brazen than that of the American government, embodied by the WASP Nevada Senator Geary (G.D. Spradling). He actually provides a humorous moment when he essentially flees the Senate committee meeting on organized crime when Michael is perjuring himself like crazy. In his flustered declarations that 'not all Italian-Americans are mobsters', Geary shows the pomposity and stupidity of those in power. We know Geary is amoral and corrupt to where Vito's dreams of a 'Senator Corleone' look rational, even hopeful. Michael is right: both are part of the same hypocrisy.

The Godfather Part II is exceptionally acted. De Niro affects Marlon Brando's raspy voice from the first Godfather and speaks almost exclusively in Italian. That isn't a distraction however, as DeNiro makes Vito a very sympathetic character: competent and decent who was basically forced into this brutal world. Gazzi and Strasberg were also exceptional as the emotion-driven Pentangeli and the cold-thinking Roth, almost balancing each other.

While all three were nominated for Best Supporting Actor (with De Niro winning), I am surprised that Cazale was not for his Fredo. It was an equally strong and moving performance. Your heart breaks for Fredo when he stumbles into his explanation as to how he ended up as Roth's stooge. In his mix of clumsiness, hurt, rage, ineptness but genuine sweetness and pathos Fredo is extremely sympathetic. You leave knowing that he did not deserve his fate.

Shire also excelled as Connie, going from angry at Michael to loyal to him. Keaton had a bravura moment when she confesses the truth about their lost baby to Michael. It's shocking and heartbreaking, Kay's pain and fury and desperation all exploding simultaneously. Robert Duvall too was strong though I think his role as Tom Hagen was diminished.

Now we go to Al Pacino as the Corleone patriarch. His performance is brilliant whether he calmly signals that Fredo's time is up or slapping Kay for destroying his dreams of a dynasty. We see Michael has destroyed what he insists he loves most: his family. That we can find even an ounce of humanity within Michael's now-dark heart is a credit to Pacino.

The last shot of him is simultaneously heartbreaking and chilling. As he remembers all his siblings long before he assumed power, we can see so much and so little in his cold eyes. Does he regret? Does he feel pain to now being the undisputed king? He is a sad and pathetic figure, alone and damned. Michael has reached the summit but still has nothing to show for it.

The Godfather Part II echoes The Godfather in many ways. Both essentially begin with religious festivities that mask nefarious goings-on. Both have the conflict of betrayal and loyalty at their center. Both touch on the struggle between doing what is right and what is necessary. It was necessary to wipe Roth out. Was it right to wipe Fredo out?

Every element in The Godfather Part II works: the performances, Gordon Willis' cinematography, Carmine Coppola and Nino Rota's score. If there is a quibble it might be that some might find the jumping between the past and present a bit jarring and/or confusing. Some may find the length a difficulty, particularly with certain parts that might have been cut without affecting the overall flow. I find those minor quibbles.

There is debate whether The Godfather Part II is superior or inferior to The Godfather. I am firmly in the former category. The Godfather Part II, this tale of corruption both external and internal, of the price of loyalty is chilling and tragic. The sins of the fathers do taint their sons, and sometimes what we do for our family may end up damning them in the long run.

DECISION: A+

1975 Best Picture: One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest

The Godfather (1972): A Review (Review #1237)

THE GODFATHER (1972)

I know people who are obsessed with The Godfather, who can quote every line and know the family ties of the Corleone family better than their own family tree. The Godfather is an epic: a story of family and loyalty and the darkness that lurks beneath them.

Vito Corleone (Marlon Brando) is the powerful head of a Mafia crime organization, one that holds immense power and sway over government officials, judges and underworld activities. Vito's heir apparent is his oldest son Santino, better known as Sonny (James Caan). Sonny is hot-tempered and easily antagonized, unlike Vito's consigliere (lawyer/adviser) Tom Hagen (Robert Duvall), Vito's informally adopted son, who is calm and methodical.

Vito's second-oldest son Fredo (John Cazale) is generally ineffective and weak, his youngest son Michael (Al Pacino) is kept out of the 'family business' and has returned from World War II as a war hero. Michael returns from the war in time for his sister Connie's (Talia Shire) wedding to Carlo Rizzi (Gianni Russo), bringing along his very WASP girlfriend Kay Adams (Diane Keaton).  After the wedding and addressing a subplot where Hagen puts the squeeze on film producer Jack Woltz (John Marley) to cast Vito's godson, crooner Johnny Fontane (Al Martino) in a war film, we get to the main plot.

Vito is offered a chance to break into the narcotics business by Virgil "The Turk" Sollozzo (Al Lettieri) in exchange for financing and protection. Vito sees drugs as the downfall of the Mafia and politely declines, but Sonny lets it slip he would be interested. Vito is angered that Sonny would share his opinions with others outside the family but Sollozzo sees an opportunity.

He puts a hit on Vito to get Sonny to be the new Don so they can do business, but he only ends up igniting a mob war, one that gets Michael fully immersed in the family business when he kills both Sollozzo and Captain McCluskey (Sterling Hayden), Sollozzo's corrupt right-hand man.

Sent into exile for his protection, Michael goes to his roots in Corleone, Sicily where he woos and marries Apollonia (Simonetta Stefanelli). The war however, goes on, ultimately claiming both Sonny and Apollonia.

Vito, seeing how things have devolved and mostly recovered from his assassination attempt, meets with the heads of the Five Families to formally end the war. He now goes into semi-retirement, putting Michael as the de facto head. Michael, deciding to become legitimate, goes to Las Vegas to make their casino partner Mo Greene (Alex Rocco) an offer he can't refuse. Greene is incensed and thinks he can push Michael around the way he does Fredo, but he's in for a surprise.

Vito's last piece of advise is that after his own death a traitor within the Corleone family will plot to kill Michael at the bidding of whoever was behind Vito's assassination attempt, as they see Sollozzo as part of a larger plan. Michael has decided to settle all family business, once and for all, in a brutal bloodbath that will make them the undisputed masters of the underworld, though with a terrible price both personal and moral.

The Godfather has achieved a mythic status, particularly from mob aficionados who look upon the world of the Corleone Family as something if not necessarily to emulate at least to admire. Unlike other gangster films such as the original Scarface, Angels with Dirty Faces or White Heat, this group is elegant, charming and wealthy. There's nothing overtly sordid or tawdry in their world apart from infidelity and spousal abuse, two things that sadly plague non-mobsters.

I think it is fair to say that The Godfather somewhat romanticizes a very brutal world where killing and other nefarious criminal enterprises take place, but the film is more than that.

It is an extraordinary piece of work artistically, a highly intelligent adaptation of Mario Puzo's novel. It is also a rich tale of family and loyalty, of how your roots both shape and sometimes bind.

On the artistic side, director Francis Ford Coppola crafts such a visually rich film where the symbolism and foreshadowing pop out. Right from the beginning at the wedding we see the juxtaposition: the brightness, joy and frivolity of the wedding countered by the darkness of the various requests the guests make of Vito. This is shown especially by Gordon Willis' cinematography: the wedding bathed in sunshine, Vito's office in almost satanic darkness.

At the famous 'leave the gun, take the cannoli' scene, note where Coppola sets the scene. Out in the distance you see the Statue of Liberty from behind, metaphorically turning her back on these immigrants and their sordid acts.

Before Corleone assassin Luca Brasi (Lenny Montana) gets killed (or whacked as the Mob term goes), you see the glass windows have a fish design, foreshadowing that soon Luca Brasi 'sleeps with the fishes'.

Coppola uses foreshadowing often. When Michael tells Kay the story of how his father helped family friend Fontane through violence, he tells her calmly "That's my family, Kay. That's not me". We can see that despite himself, Michael (the only Corleone child with a thoroughly American name versus his siblings' names of Santino and Fredo, with Connie probably being short for Constanzia) will end up as perhaps the biggest part of both 'families'. After Michael tells his father in the hospital, "I'm with you now", the double meaning of that line is clear.

As a side note, it's interesting that among themselves the Corleone siblings go by more "American" nicknames like Sonny, Freddy and Connie (Mike or Mickey being Michael's nicknames), reflecting again their own desire to be more integrated versus their parents who still hold fast to their Italian roots. Michael, if one notices, struggles with Italian, speaking it slowly, sometimes struggling with the language, again reflecting his more integrated life.

That theme of 'the sins of the fathers coming upon the sons' is reflected in Vito and Michael's final conversation, where Vito speaks of his aspirations for his sons (an old school man, he'd never consider having Connie as head of the family). He recognizes Sonny was not fit to lead due to his short temper, his unofficial son Tom Hagen was not Sicilian, and Fredo was intellectually and spiritually weak. Michael, he hoped, would have achieved greatness separate as perhaps "Senator Corleone, Governor Corleone", but there just wasn't enough time.

The tragedy of their collective failure dooms both men to this life of supporting their family at a high price.

In the climatic purging of the Five Families, the intercuts between the holiness of the baptism and the brutality of the various killings, punctured by the organ music that ties them both, reflects Michael's loss of his soul so extraordinarily well. He can claim to renounce Satan, but we now that the one least involved in the family business has given himself fully to Satan under the guise of said family.

Coppola deserves major credit for drawing simply perfect performances out of his entire cast. Brando displayed his old powers as Vito, a man who rarely broke emotionally and remained calm and mannered even when angered. Only twice does he break out: when he slaps and berates Fontane for crying and when he turns to the undertaker Bonasera (Salvatore Corsitto) to prepare Sonny's body and make him presentable given the ferocity of his killing.

"Look how they massacred my boy," the old Don almost wails, the old man as close to breaking as he ever has.

Brando's performance, much imitated and spoofed now with that soft, raspy voice and jowls, is really one of extraordinary skill. He is compelling, where he dominates every scene he is in.

Pacino also does extraordinary work as Michael, the man slowly corrupted by loyalty to his family. His performance is equal to Brando's in showing how Michael came to slowly, coldly and fully embrace the darkness. You see how Michael went from that war hero chasing after his WASP dreamgirl to the man who does not flinch from having his brother-in-law killed.

Caan, despite not being Italian, is ferocious as Sonny, the 'shoot-first-ask-questions-later-if-at-all' temporary Don who let his emotions overtake his reason. Hagen counters him brilliantly as Hagen, the cool, rational member who thinks things out rather than storm in the way Sonny does.

Though his role was smaller, Cazale was excellent as Fredo, the most sensitive of the Corleone brothers. He shows this at the attempted assassination of his father: first he bungles trying to pull his pistol out then starts weeping over his father, screaming "PAPA!". This more than anything captures Fredo's inept but gentle nature. Keaton too as Kay, the long-suffering and ultimately betrayed woman and Shire as the tormented sister are also quite excellent.

The film also has the benefit of Nino Rota's iconic score, which brings in the tragedy and romance of the story so well.

The Godfather even has at least one moment of humor. When Woltz is raging to Tom Hagen about how he wants to destroy Johnny Fontane's career, he says it's because Fontane had an affair with one of Woltz's proteges. "She was beautiful! She was young! She was innocent! She was the greatest piece of ass I've ever had and I've had'em all over the world!" Far be it for me to know the ways of the world, but how someone can simultaneously be "innocent" and "the greatest piece of ass (one has) ever had" I don't know.

As a side note, if as Godfather fans maintain Johnny Fontane is based on Frank Sinatra and his alleged Mob connections, then we can speculate that the "war film" Fontane is desperate to be in would be the equivalent to From Here to Eternity. Fontane tells the Don that the character he wants to play "is a guy like me, I wouldn't even have to act". In From Here to Eternity, the character Sinatra plays is pretty much like Sinatra: a skinny, scrappy Italian kid.

Moreover, in real life Sinatra was in a downward slide in his career, much like Fontane was in The Godfather. Both the real Sinatra and his alleged doppelganger Fontane knew 'the war picture' would put them back on top.

Sinatra at the time was also in a tempestuous relationship with movie star Ava Gardner. Could she have been 'the greatest piece of ass' a Woltz-like figure ever had? That's doubtful, as Gardner's career was riding high when she was with Sinatra, but she did lobby hard to get Sinatra cast in From Here to Eternity, with the end result that Sinatra did revive his career and win an Oscar for Best Supporting Actor for the film.

I'm in now way saying Fontane was Sinatra or that he got the role in From Here to Eternity via Mob ties and a horse's head. People can make that connection if they wish, that is all.

I think part of the appeal to The Godfather is that a viewer can relate to the Corleones because we all have family issues in the same way they do: the love for your parents and siblings, the struggle between keeping to our heritage and integrating into the more dominant American culture, the aspirations for our children which can also be terrible burdens for them.

We all know the burden of family and conversely the call to stay loyal to the family. I don't think one person doesn't relate to Michael's warning to Fredo when he sides with Mo Greene: "Fredo, you're my brother and I love you, but don't ever take sides against the family again". I doubt one person hasn't felt a sense of betrayal when a family member sides against the family.

In its way, The Godfather is very relatable to the viewer: that pull-push between the individual and our family ties.

The Godfather, this tale of love, loyalty and loss, enraptures viewers, perhaps a bit too much in presenting these criminals as elegant people. However, underneath the criminality of the Corleones we see a story of family, tradition and the high cost of them all. Expertly written, acted and directed, The Godfather truly is a triumph of cinema.

One final note on The Godfather, and it relates to the myth of the orange. I don't know how the orange became this harbinger of death and I'll take Coppola's claim that it was a coincidence that oranges were mere props that found their way at certain points. However, for those who enjoy juicing their orange myths, they can be found all over The Godfather if one wants to look for them:

Tessio (Abe Vigoda) handles an orange at Connie's wedding (he gets whacked at the end).
Woltz's dinner table has oranges when he declines Don Vito's request to put Fontane in his movie (his horse gets whacked and Woltz wakes up with its head on his bed)
Vito buys oranges right before he's shot (he almost gets whacked)
Carlo wears a bright orange suit when Sonny beats him up for beating his sister (Carlo gets whacked)
The restaurant where Sollozzo and McCluskey get whacked is bathed in orange neon light
Sonny passes a billboard for oranges as he races to rescue Connie (Sonny gets whacked)
There are oranges at the unofficial Board Meeting of the Five Families (the heads of which get whacked)
Vito stuffs orange slices into his mouth before dying in his garden

Curiously, there are no known oranges seen when Apollonia bites the dust, but there it is.

DECISION: A+

1976 Best Picture: The Sting