Sight (2023): A Review (Review #2125)

SIGHT (2023)

"Mine eyes have seen the glory of the coming of the Lord". So begins The Battle Hymn of the Republic. That could also encapsulate Sight, a deeply moving and effective film. Sight is based on a true story. If there are any deviations from fact, it would not lessen Sight's emotional impact.

Sight flips from Nashville in 2007 and 1960-70's China. Dr. Ming Wang (Terry Chen) is a pioneer in eye surgery. He is able to give sight to those with deeply damaged eyes. Dr. Wang and his Wang Vision Institute partner Dr. Misha Bartnovsky (Greg Kinnear) have had great success with their surgeries. Dr. Wang now has the biggest challenge of his career. Sister Marie (Fionnula Flanagan) is Catholic nun who has brought an Indian girl named Kajal (Mia SwamiNathan) for treatment. In a shocking act, Kajal's mother blinded her so that she could be a legitimate beggar.

Dr. Wang is reluctant to take the case, knowing the immense damage done to Kajal's eyes. However, he takes the chance. However, Dr. Wang is a haunted man. He continues to struggle with the aftereffects of the Cultural Revolution which he and his family barely survived. Young Ming (Ben Wang) wants to follow in the footsteps of his father and mother (Donald Heng and Leanne Wang) into medicine. He also fancies pretty Lili (Sara Yi), the proverbial girl next door. However, these are dangerous times for educated people. The Cultural Revolution is in full force. Red Guard thugs push everyone around and demand that Ming and Lili join them.

The dangers eventually put them all at risk. It is through sheer good luck and the Cultural Revolution petering out that the Wangs manage to survive. Ming's brilliant mind allows him to return to his education and even go to America to continue them. He is also eventually able to bring his family to America, including his lazy brother Yu (Garland Chang).

What he is not able to do is restore Kajal's sight. Ming is bitter and reproachful. No one can get him out of his funk. Misha cannot. His family cannot. Not even pretty bartender Anle (Danni Wang), whom Ming is too shy to approach at first. He feels great guilt about his medical failure. He feels greater guilt over Lili's fate, which is still unknown to him. Approached to try again with another patient, Ming at first declines. However, when he finally finds peace through another meeting with Kajal, Dr. Ming Wang is ready to try again. Will he be able to exorcise his private demons? Will he be able to see internally the way he helps others see externally?

At the end of Sight, the real Dr. Ming Wang appears to tell us that everything that we saw is true. We see footage of Dr. Wang dancing with Kajal at the EyeBall fundraiser. We see pictures of the real Misha and his wife, June. We also see Dr. Wang with the real Arle, whom we discover did end up married. This stays close to a standard biopic. 

What sets Sight apart from other biopics is that we get moments of lightness and humor that play closer to a fictional film.

Dr. Wang opted to name the fundraiser with the deliberate pun of "Eye Ball". In Sight, Misha chides him for choosing such a silly and cliched name. The interactions with his family also have humor, such as his brother Yu's continuing efforts at business that always sound eccentric. Arne and Ming have one of the best "meet-cute" moments. She is working at the hotel bar where Ming is having a drink after an event. The man next to him asks if the food there is good. After Ming tells him that it is, that patron says that "the green stuff" looks great. Before Ming and Arne have a chance to warn him, that patron swallows a massive amount of wasabi. As the poor misguided patron is taken away by ambulance, an immediate bond comes between Ming and Arne. In one of Sight's flashbacks, we see Ming and two other Chinese students arrive at college. The three immediately realize that their suits are inappropriate for the setting. They have little money for new clothes. Enter a scene at the Salvation Army thrift store, where they marvel at jeans for fifty cents. 

Let's just say that their new threads are not exactly the latest styles either.

Moments like these make Sight into a nice, charming film. The audience is not drowned in misery or tragedy or seriousness. However, director Andrew Hyatt does not shrink from showing us particularly dark moments. Hyatt adapted Dr. Wang's autobiography From Darkness to Sight along with John Duigan and Buzz McLaughlin. The various Cultural Revolution scenes shock the viewer with their terror and brutality. They are not graphic. However, the scene where Wang, having been severely beaten, is unable to help a terrified Lili is deeply moving. Sight does not shrink from showing how the Cultural Revolution did great damage both culturally and individually.

It also gives us an insight into Dr. Wang's current dark night of the soul. In Sight, we see a haunted man, privately tormented by what he went through and what he failed to do. This carries over into his work. He is devastated when Kajal does not regain her sight. However, in time he, thanks to people like Misha, Arle, Sister Marie and Kajal herself, is able to forgive himself.

Sight is beautifully acted all around. The film floats between past and present, so we get two Wangs. Ben Wang leaves a very strong impression as the young Ming Wang. He is smitten with Lili, respectful and loving towards his parents, and able to display both courage and fear whenever facing against the Red Guard bullies. Wang shows a wonderful range throughout Sight. After a positive turn in Karate Kid: Legends, Ben Wang shows that he is fast becoming a solid actor in both English and Mandarin. Terry Chen as the adult Ming Wang also displayed moments of almost naïve charm. He also showed Dr. Wang's commitment and tenacity along with his fears and doubts. 

Most everyone else had smaller roles. Even Greg Kinnear, ostensibly the biggest name in Sight. The various figures flowed and ebbed throughout the film. Kinnear was asked to play the loyal, slightly goofy sidekick. He did that well. Danni Wang also was not a major part of Sight as Anle, the woman who eventually agrees to date Ming. She however is both charming and intelligent, a break from the usual portrayal of potential love interests as nothing more than supportive (though she is that). 

Sight blends humor and heart to tell this truly inspirational story. It shows our characters as flawed but ultimately good people, always attempting to do what is right. Dr. Ming Wang is a person of faith. "There is more to life than what we see", the real-life Dr. Wang tells us at the end of Sight. On that, we agree.    

 

DECISION: B+

The Secret Agent: A Review

THE SECRET AGENT

It pains me to go against the grain on occasion. Sometimes, there are small elements that push something just low enough to be mildly negative. Such is the case with The Secret Agent. The film has many strong elements. Unfortunately, one or two aspects of The Secret Agent make it hard for me to fully recommend. 

1977 Brazil is, according to the on-screen text, "a time of great mischief". It is a time where people can stumble onto decaying corpses at gas stations. One such unfortunate soul is someone calling himself "Marcelo Alves" (Wagner Moura). He is on his way to the town of Recife. Here, he will stay at the inn run by Doña Sebastiana (Tania Maria). Everyone is celebrating Carnaval, but everyone there is also keeping their true identity secret.

Marcelo is really Armando Solimoes. He wants to see his son Fernando (Enzo Nunes), who has been watched over by his maternal grandparents. Armando, a widower, is essentially hiding out from Henrique Ghirotti (Luciano Chirolli). Ghirotti has a major grudge against Armando after the latter spoke out against him over business dealings. Henrique is also angry that Armando dared stand up to him when he insulted Armando's wife. 

Marcelo/Armando has a new job at the city clerk's office thanks to the underground helping him. Here, Armando attempts to find his mother's identity card in hopes of finding more about her. He also connects with Fernando. His wary father-in-law Sr. Alexandre (Carlos Francisco) works as a projectionist. He will not allow Fernando to watch Jaws. He does, however, allow his office to be used for Armando's secret interview. The interviewee Elza (Maria Fernanda Calzido) tells Armando that Henrique has put out a contract on Armando. He wants to flee Brazil with Fernando, but it will take time to get the fake passports for both. 

Meanwhile, local chief Euclides (Robério Diogenes) has his hands full. A shark has been found with a human leg inside of it. A wealthy lady ignored her maid's child despite her promise to watch over him when she sent the maid grocery shopping. The child wandered off and was hit by a car. The lady's wealth protects her from the poor maid's wrath. Chief Euclides delights in bothering Hans (Uri Kier), a German tailor. Euclides thinks that Hans is a Nazi hiding out in Brazil when he is really a Holocaust survivor. He also is very friendly with the men sent to kill Armando. Neither group knows Armando and Marcelo are the same person.

Things come to a head when the hitmen steal the leg and dump it into the river. Wild stories of the Hairy Leg coming to life and attacking gay men at the park where pickups take place run rampant. More assassins come after Armando. Will he manage to come out of this alive? Will the adult Fernando (Wagner in a dual role) remember his father or help two students who listen to his late father's recorded interviews?

The Secret Agent runs nearly three hours long. Sometimes that is not a hindrance in a film. It is not even a hindrance in a foreign language film such as with Seven Samurai. Here, however, it is. The film begins with Part 1: The Boy's Nightmare. For the life of me, I do not remember if there were more parts. Granted, I was nodding off a few times. However, I do not know if I genuinely want to rewatch The Secret Agent to find out. At least for a while.

I have often said that while I can get what a film is going for, it does not mean that I accept it. Such is the case with The Secret Agent. Once we had the sequence of this dismembered leg beating up gay men, I thought the film went off a bit. I wonder if people watching such a scene would find it funny or dumb. I lean towards the latter.

I also wondered if the Hans section was necessary. I again figure that it was to show Chief Euclides' personality as a bit of a bully and idiot. He, for example, is oblivious to a menorah that is in Hans' private office. It is very late in The Secret Agent when we even learn that two girls in present-day Brazil are listening to Armando's tapes. It is almost at the end when we learn the reason: they are transcribing Elza's archives. 

I did struggle staying awake for The Secret Agent. There have been occasions when a film did tire me out, but I was curious enough to return. This was not the case here. I think it was the hopping Hairy Leg. 

I think there is maybe too much story in writer/director Kleber Mendonca Filho's screenplay. It felt overstuffed with so much extra (Hans, the apparently homophobic Hairy Leg, the wealthy woman hiding out in the makeshift police office) that the central story of Armando/Marcelo came close to getting lost. I also found the late bouncing from 1977 to circa 2020s a bit jumbled. It is not terrible. I just found it a bit jumbled. 

It is a shame, as The Secret Agent had some good elements. At the top of the list is Wagner Moura as Armando. He was generally quiet and still, showing the emotion in small ways. There are moments when Armando shows rage, such as his confrontation with Henrique. For the most part though, Moura plays Armando as a man besieged and not knowing why it is happening. He knows that people are after him because of a personal vendetta. However, Armando is not a violent or angry man. He defended his wife. He still mourns for his wife. He dearly loves Fernando and will do whatever he can to protect him. 

Moura gives a solid, moving performance. He shows cleverness in avoiding the hitman who ends up killing Euclides'' officers. He shows a mix of weariness and frustration during the interview. Wagner Moura does an excellent job in The Secret Agent. He is the standout in the film. This is especially true at the end, where he plays his own son. It is such a good performance that one is convinced that the adult Fernando is another person even if it is clear that it is the same actor. 

However, I found that The Secret Agent was stuffed with excess amount of story to fully recommend. I know that The Secret Agent has been highly praised. I am not saying that it is terrible. I just found it longer than it should have been. That is something that I am not keeping a secret even if people might want to throw hairy legs at me.  

DECISION: C-

Send Help: A Review

SEND HELP

I might have caught one or two episodes of Survivor. I never understood the appeal of the show. However, Survivor is still popular, going on twenty-six years and 50 seasons as of this writing. Send Help has one of its characters deeply fascinated by Survivor, which may explain part of why the premise went as it did. However, Send Help is not original. It is as if someone blended Triangle of Sadness and Misery.  

Seemingly meek corporate drone Linda Liddle (Rachel McAdams) does all the hard work only to see men like Donavan (Xavier Samuel) take the credit and the promotion. Despite an off-screen promise from her late boss, Linda is not given an executive promotion by that boss' successor and son, Bradley Preston (Dylan O'Brien). Bradley is a bit of a nepo baby, engaged to the beautiful Zury (Edyll Ismael) and more interested in his golf than in the corporation. He also has decided that Donavan will get the job. Preston executive Franklin (Dennis Haysbert in basically a cameo) advises him to keep the late Mr. Preston's promise. Seeing how slovenly, meek and frankly disheveled Linda is, however, Bradley balks.

Still, she is needed and goes with Bradley, Donavan and another man to Bangkok. On the plane, Donavan shows the other men Linda's failed Survivor audition tape. They openly laugh at the footage, but a sudden storm causes the plane to crash into the ocean. The next morning, Linda finds herself a literal survivor. She eventually finds Bradley washed up on the shore, alive but injured. It is now where Linda's Survivor skills kick into high gear. It is also here where the power dynamics shift. 

Bradley slowly recovers from his leg injury. He is displeased at how good Linda is at being Robinson Crusoe to his incompetence. He has some right to be displeased given how Linda tortures him physically and psychologically. They become the ultimate frenemies. More twists and turns take place between them. Some are almost murderous. Their interactions are nothing compared to what Linda has in store for Zuri, who unexpectedly shows up. Who will live and who will die on the island? Will the mystery of what is beyond the rocks that form an X reveal unexpected comforts? Who will triumph in the end?     

I saw Send Help with my cousin. He is the one who pointed out the similarity between Send Help and Misery, one of his and my late aunt's favorite films. It was later that I thought of how Send Help also draws from Triangle of Sadness. I have no way of knowing if screenwriters Mark Swift and Damian Shannon drew inspiration from any of those films. My guess is that they drew more inspiration from Survivor than from Misery, Triangle of Sadness or perhaps Cast/Swept Away (for full disclosure I as of this writing not seen either Cast Away or either version of Swept Away). As I left Send Help, I was very uncomfortable with its ending. 

I have rarely if ever warmed to a film where the villain wins. My first thought after finishing Send Help was that it was like Misery if Annie Wilkes had won. Linda Liddle is not a good person. Right from the start, she is intrusive, clingy and slovenly. I think we are meant to see her as quirky, maybe endearing. I found her more like Selina Kyle in Batman Returns, only more annoying than put-upon. The old "man taking credit for all the work a woman does" bit is old hat. Why she opted to put a Post-it sticker with her name on the report rather than type it onto the page one can guess at. My guess: it was to show how Donavan could easily remove it and thus, take credit for something that he did not do. Presumably, everyone knew that Linda did the work. However, no one seems to think that Donavan getting the credit would not work. 

She attempts to invite herself to an after-hours karaoke group by mentioning her favorite go-to song, Blondie's One Way or Another. I found her song selection, which ends Send Help, a bit too on-the-nose about her supposed triumph over all those evil men pushing her down. Moreover, in a curious bit, I wondered about her cockatiel. Before she leaves for Bangkok, we see Linda's sole companion is her parakeet. Presumably, she has no friends or family. She was stranded on the island for perhaps a week, maybe longer.

Who fed the bird? We are meant to think that the cockatiel that she leaves with at the end of Send Help is the same one that she had before she left on her ill-fated flight. I think that bird would have been dead by the time she returned. 

Also, Send Help seems pretty happy to paper over how much of a psycho Linda Liddle was. I might point out that the name "Linda Liddle" seems a bit again, too on-the-nose. Linda means "pretty", something that she is not. Liddle, I figure, is meant to suggest how small and meek she starts out as. She wasn't. Try as the film might, I actually found myself siding more with Bradley than with Linda.

One of his major objections early on is on her appearance. It should be noted that Linda openly eats at her desk. She also has bits of food (tuna if I remember correctly) on her face. If she is so slovenly to not care about her appearance in an office setting, how would she work at the executive level? If she makes it clear that she does not care about how she looks or comes across, how would she interact with high-level officials? Linda's manner would make potential clients wary of hiring the Preston financial management group. Bradley might be a nepo baby, but he also knows that how one presents themselves reflects on his company. 

As a side note, I do not know if director Sam Raimi opted to deliberately echo Office Space with Donavan's appearance. I genuinely expected someone to comment how he looked like Gary Cole's Bill Lumbergh. To be fair, Donavan does have a touch of American Psycho's Patrick Bateman in him, though that might just be my interpretation. 

There is also the question about Linda's Survivor audition tape. What we were shown was silly and made Linda look both desperate and ridiculous. It did not look like a serious effort to get on the show. It looked like someone making a fool out of themselves. I think most anyone who came upon Linda's Survivor audition tape would have laughed. It has been years since I have seen American Idol. However, people still laugh at the cringeworthy failed auditions. Why would this be any different? 

Are we also meant to ignore how Linda murdered up to four people? One she killed prior to the events of Send Help if we go by the screenplay. A scene where it is implied that Linda will castrate Preston is the equivalent to Annie Wilkes' maiming of Paul Sheldon. Granted, I knew that she was not actually castrating Bradley. However, that whole scene should have made people turn against Linda, not towards her. Did I mention how she is essentially a serial killer?

My moral compass has not shifted to a level where I can cheer on someone who kills and ends up triumphant. 

The more I think of it, the more I reject Send Help's premise. I do not think that, given the situation, that Bradley and/or Linda would have behaved the way that they did. 

In terms of acting, I think both Rachel McAdams and Dylan O'Brien did well. I have been a longtime O'Brien champion. His Bradley Preston kept a pretty solid balance between entitled and desperate. McAdams played the part correctly as this needy woman who turns more psychotic. 

I was not convinced by the ending. Apart from having our murderess win, I never believed that Bradley would not have discovered the island's great secret so late in the game. I also was a bit puzzled on Zuri's fate. Not so much on what happened to her. More of how she ended up where she did. I found it to be one of those "something will happen if the plot requires it to" moments.

I know Send Help is getting high praise. I figure many people enjoyed it. I left Send Help initially not loving it but not hating it. I still do not hate it. I just found myself liking it less and less. McAdams and O'Brien make Send Help tolerable viewing. Send Help, to my mind, is a strong contender for the most overrated film of 2026.  

DECISION: D+

Peter O'Toole Oscar Nomination Number Five: An Analysis

PETER O'TOOLE NOMINATION 

NUMBER FIVE: 

AN ANALYSIS

How was Peter O'Toole to know that his fifth Best Actor nomination would find itself embroiled in controversy? Not the actual nomination itself for his performance in The Ruling Class. Instead, he was one of the four men who lost to a winner who opted to turn Best Actor into a now famous or infamous moment of political activism on the Oscar stage. Had he won, the chances of Peter O'Toole going on about Native American rights and representation in film/television would have been thin. Still, one can imagine that his The Ruling Class character would certainly have disrupted the ceremony far worse than what ultimately happened that night.

The 45th Academy Awards finds our favorite Oscar bridesmaid facing off against three films instead of four. He also faced, once again, almost impossible odds to have any real chance in winning.

Peter O'Toole found himself facing a very lonely battle in 1972's Best Actor race. His performance in The Ruling Class was that film's sole Oscar nomination. This was the first time that O'Toole was singled out for recognition when his film was ignored for any other Oscar consideration. This would happen twice later on when both My Favorite Year and Venus were similarly not nominated for anything else except for O'Toole. 

That was already bad enough for O'Toole's chances. Making matters worse is that his other competitors were in films that had multiple Oscar nominations. The Godfather had ten nominations, tying it with Cabaret as that year's most nominated film. Sounder and Sleuth had four nominations each.  Both The Godfather and Sounder were Best Picture nominees. Those were very hard hurdles for someone with one nomination to overcome.

Add to that how Sleuth had not one but two Best Actor nominees: Laurence Olivier and Michael Caine. With The Godfather, Sounder and Sleuth getting more recognition, it would have been pretty much impossible for The Ruling Class to break out to be O'Toole's first win. 

As a side note, Sleuth is one of only three films where the entire credited cast received Oscar nominations. Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf? and Give 'Em Hell, Harry! were the others. 

Despite those odds, there was still a chance, thin as it was, for O'Toole to have something of a fighting chance. Films where two actors compete in the same category rarely led to either one of them winning. More often than not, two nominated actors from the same film in the same category almost always cancel each other out. There are as of this writing 77 occasions when two actors/actresses have been nominated in the same category for the same film. Of those 77 dual nominations in all four acting categories, one actor/actress has beaten out his/her costar and fellow nominee to win an acting Oscar a mere 25 times. Peter O'Toole himself had faced off against his Becket costar Richard Burton in 1964. Both of them lost. 

As such, the likelihood that either Olivier or Caine would win was small. Prior to Sleuth's dueling nominations, one nominee beating out his costar for Best Actor had happened only twice. The first was Bing Crosby over Barry Fitzgerald for Going My Way. The second was Maximilian Schell beating his fellow Judgement at Nuremberg costar/nominee Spencer Tracy. 

Complicating matters is how Fitzgerald was nominated for both Lead and Supporting Actor the same year for Going My Way. While he ended up winning Best Supporting Actor, Fitzgerald's situation could have led to a bizarre double win for the actor. This was the first and only time that someone was nominated in both acting categories for the same performance. Fitzgerald's dual nomination for the same role in the same film was the impetus to alter Academy rules. From now on, an actor could be nominated in only one category for a particular film. An actor could be nominated in Lead and Supporting in the same year, but it had to be for different films. 

That would lead to another unforeseen effect: category fraud. There would come occasions when a leading performance would be submitted in the supporting category and vice versa. I have long argued that Peter O'Toole's sixth nomination for The Stunt Man was a supporting role. There have been arguments that Jennifer Connelly and Zoe Saldaña won Supporting Actress Oscars for leading roles. Conversely, one of O'Toole's fellow nominees this year could be considered a supporting role in a leading category.      

Marlon Brando had approximately 40 minutes of screentime in The Godfather. He was nominated for Best Actor in a Leading Role. Al Pacino had approximately one hour and seven minutes of screentime in The Godfather. He was nominated for Best Actor in a Supporting Role. As the kids say, "make it make sense". Yes, Brando was the title character in The Godfather. However, his role was significantly shorter and smaller than Pacino's was. Was Brando lead? Was Brando supporting? 

That same issue, curiously enough, affects the last Best Actor nominee. Paul Winfield was on screen for 35 minutes in Sounder which runs one hour and forty-five minutes long. That means that Winfield was off the screen for most of Sounder. The plot required him to be absent as his character was imprisoned and his son's journey was one of Sounder's main plot points. However, as with Brando, a strong case can be mounted that Winfield was a supporting and not lead performance. Curiously, few people take issue with Winfield's Best Actor nomination the way that they do with Brando's Best Actor nomination.

With all that said, let us now look at our nominees. The nominees for Best Actor in a Leading Role of 1972 were:

Marlon Brando in The Godfather

Michael Caine in Sleuth

Laurence Olivier in Sleuth

Peter O'Toole in The Ruling Class

Paul Winfield in Sounder  

This was an interesting race as we had two nominees from the same film, two nominees with remarkably short screentime and one nominee who was that film's sole nomination. If one looks at this year's slate, I think it becomes clear that the winner was pretty much inevitable.

Poor Peter O'Toole was not going to win. The Ruling Class faced off against other films that had more nominations and more recognition. He was excellent as Jack Gurney, 14th Earl of Gurney. He was on the screen longer than both Marlon Brando and Paul Winfield. However, The Ruling Class was not going to push The Godfather or Sounder or Sleuth out. 

Paul Winfield's major drawback was that his screentime was so limited. He did have some benefits. Sounder was a Best Picture nominee. Sleuth and The Ruling Class were not. Sleuth was competing against itself. Winfield therefore could almost count on Caine and Olivier cancelling each other out. With O'Toole having almost no chance, Paul Winfield could mount a more serious challenge to Marlon Brando. Winfield's strengths were, however, no match against two points. First is that limited screentime. Save for Marlon Brando all his other nominees were on screen longer than Winfield was. That meant that Caine, Olivier and even O'Toole left longer and stronger impressions than Winfield. 

Second was Marlon Brando's star power. Brando was mercurial. Brando was temperamental. Brando was slipping into greater and greater eccentricity. Despite all that, Marlon Brando was still a name. He was a bigger name than Paul Winfield. He was probably a bigger name than Michael Caine or Peter O'Toole. Laurence Olivier is probably the only one of the other nominees who could legitimately challenge Marlon Brando in terms of both star power and acting prowess. 

Fortunately for Marlon Brando, The Godfather was a bigger hit than Sleuth. It was also a bigger hit than both Sounder and The Ruling Class. I think more people saw The Godfather than any of the three other Best Actor nominated films. The Godfather also had more nominations than The Ruling Class, Sleuth or Sounder. It had more nominations than those three films combined: ten to nine. 

As I think of this year's Best Actor race, I think that Marlon Brando won less because of his specific performance and more because the other nominees could never mount a serious challenge to him. Caine and Olivier were pretty much evenly matched in Sleuth. That ended up knocking each other out. Winfield pretty much disappeared for most of Sounder. O'Toole was in a film with one nomination. Each of Brando's competitors faced a stumbling block that they could not overcome.

That is not to say that Marlon Brando was not worthy in terms of his performance. His Don Vito Corleone was highly praised then. The film and Brando's performance have grown in stature in the ensuing years. There are people who absolutely adore Marlon Brando in The Godfather. His performance has become iconic down to being easily recognizable and ripe for parody. Yes, it is a relatively short performance. However, Marlon Brando did leave his stamp on the role. It just looked that through a series of circumstances, and the quality of his performance, Marlon Brando was going to easily win.

How was anyone to know that Marlon Brando playing a gangster would lead to his proxy Sacheen Littlefeather talking about Native American representation when declining the Oscar on Brando's behalf? This is not the time to talk about Miss Littlefeather's role at the Oscar ceremony. Neither is this the time to talk about whether Sacheen Littlefeather really was whom she claimed to be. I will say briefly that I found her short speech eloquent given the immense pressure that she was under both from the Academy and from Brando himself. I also think that she was put in a very difficult situation and handled the whole thing with grace. Finally, I maintain that the Academy Awards are not the place for any political causes. 

The story of John Wayne allegedly attempting to rush the stage and being held back by six security people is a myth. It never happened. If you see the post-Oscar interviews, you can see Wayne clearly avoiding any discussion on what had occurred. He was not enraged, let alone violently so. He, like Littlefeather, was quite dignified and succinct. The press persisted in getting Wayne to say something, anything, about the whole kerfuffle. He cut them off gracefully. If memory serves correctly, he told them either "Talk to Brando" or "Go get Brando". It makes for a nice story: the embodiment of the Western and solid right-wing Republican furiously attempting to storm the stage against a small Native American woman. In this case, however, I think it is blending the John Wayne image with Marion Morrison the person. 

Finally, how would I rank the nominees? Here is my slate in terms of Best to Worst:

Marlon Brando

Michael Caine

Laurence Olivier

Peter O'Toole 

Paul Winfield

I should start out by saying that none of the five nominated performances are bad. I would be happy had any of them won. As I think on it, I put Brando first despite his short screentime.

He dominates the screen whenever he appears. The Don is the title character. People instantly recognize Marlon Brando in/as The Godfather. They do not do that with any of the other nominees save perhaps Paul Winfield.

As Sleuth has two leads, how to match them against each other? Thinking long and hard, I think Caine had the harder role and the better performance. Sleuth is a masterclass of acting with Caine and Olivier both giving bravura performances. It makes it hard to choose which one would edge out the other. However, one must, and I went with Caine barely beating out Olivier.

Both Caine and Olivier were neck-and-neck. That forced the last two nominees down. Peter O'Toole went all-in with The Ruling Class. I could have easily had him at second. However, O'Toole was in a very eccentric film that veered dangerously close to going over-the-top. Peter O'Toole touched that line of being too much but never went over it. As I kept thinking, I simply could not put O'Toole over either Caine or Olivier. 

It pains me to put Paul Winfield last. He was deeply moving in Sounder. Unfortunately, his limited screentime was a major issue. He was simply in too little of Sounder to be a lead. 

Marlon Brando should have won Best Actor for The Godfather over all the other nominees. His Best Actor win stands.

In conclusion, the Academy made the right choice in not awarding Peter O'Toole the Best Actor Oscar on his fifth nomination.

Melania: A Review

MELANIA

In these highly charged times perhaps it would be impossible to judge the documentary Melania without bringing in one's own feelings on the subject. Melania is a slickly produced film that gives one little insight into the enigmatic First Lady. It is also not without some positives that make for an interesting albeit curious viewing.

Melania Trump tells her story of the twenty days the New Year's Day 2025 and Inauguration Day when her husband would be sworn in as the 47th President of the United States. There is a lot to do as she goes from the Trump estate of Mar-a-Lago to their penthouse at Trump Tower in Manhattan.

Her staff presents her with the official invitations to the pre-Inaugural candlelight dinner. Her longtime designer Hervé Pierre works on her Inaugural coat and gown. He is excited that his creation will be at the Smithsonian. I suppose that he was too excited to notice that Mrs. Trump's Inaugural coat made her look like the love child of Carmen Sandiego and the Hamburglar. 

In between all that though comes events that will force a personal reflection. Former President Jimmy Carter had died shortly before the Inauguration. His funeral was set for January 9, 2025. This would require that the Trumps attend the funeral as a former President and First Lady at the time. January 9, 2025, was also by coincidence the first anniversary of the death of Mrs. Trump's mother. All those conflicting feelings, coupled with the preparations for the ceremonial aspects of the Inaugural, swirled around Mrs. Trump.

Grief comes, but it also goes. With the official state funeral done, Melania can return to her many focuses. There is the Inauguration. There is her Be Best and Fostering the Future Initiatives. There is her son, Barron, who wants to stay out of the limelight. At last, the former First Lady becomes First Lady again, and she can dance until her feet are tired.

One should not even bother pretending that Melania would give anyone genuine insight into this most mysterious of First Ladies. Melania Trump enters and exits wearing high stiletto heels. The viewer learns very little about her. While Mrs. Trump narrates the documentary, she never has a formal sit-down interview. In many ways, Melania does not reveal the First Lady as it shields her. She begins and ends Melania as a mystery.

We do learn a few things about Mrs. Trump. We learn that she not only loves Michael Jackson music but met him once, describing him as nice. She reveals that her favorite song out of many in his catalog is Billie Jean. She even sings a bit for us, though she quickly dismisses the idea that she is doing a version of Carpool Karaoke. 

I think some of the musical choices in Brett Ratner's documentary are more revelatory. Melania starts with sweeping images of Mar-a-Lago set to the Rolling Stones' Gimme Shelter. Frankly, I found that a very odd choice. It does not help that we hear The Crystals' Then He Kissed Me playing when the-now President and First Lady are returning from one of the three inaugural balls that they attended. I do not know if either or both Ratner and Trump were deliberately echoing Goodfellas or not. There is a strange blending of the elegant pre-Inaugural candlelight dinner with Chase from Midnight Express. 

What exactly were Trump and Ratner attempting to do here? My own sense is that both of them are signaling a certain defiance against all who oppose them. 

Melania features sometimes amusing moments. There is Hervé Pierre, forever fluttering about with his couturier frocks. The film sometimes attempts to show a more home movie feel with presumably footage shot by Mrs. Trump's father Viktor Knavs. A more unintentionally amusing moment is when the once and future First Lady examines some of the dishes for the candlelight dinner. We see a golden egg almost floating on a dish. One wonders if Mrs. Trump had raided Willy Wonka's factory. 

More unintentionally amusing moments come from President Trump. We see and hear him sporadically. He's still rather boastful and slightly conspiratorial. He brags about how his electoral college vote was the biggest (it isn't). He also believes that the College Football National Championship was deliberately scheduled to overshadow his inauguration. To be fair, other unintentionally amusing moments came from other political figures. We were not shown former President George W. Bush's eccentric reaction to things; we did see then-President Joe Biden look a mix amused and confused by the goings-on. We also saw then-Vice President Kamala Harris clearly unamused by the same goings-on. 

The few times Barron Trump popped up were also interesting. We saw him shake hands with former President Biden and even egg on the crowd at the Capital One Arena where the Inaugural Parade was shifted due to the weather. Barron Trump never spoke. Those moments: the dinners, the celebrations, the elaborate choreography of ceremony, were interesting. 

A little-noted moment in Melania should be in my view. Before the inauguration, Mrs. Trump had a private meeting with Aviva Siegel. She was one of the hundreds of Israelis that Hamas abducted during the horrors of October 7. At the time, her husband Keith was still being held prisoner. As Mrs. Siegel described her experiences and hopes for the safe return of her husband it is hard not to be moved by her story. We see Mrs. Trump hug her and tell her that her husband will bring Keith Siegel back*. As she leaves in the elevator, it looks as if Mrs. Trump's brittle veneer cracks slightly. Melania Trump seems close to tears as the elevator door closes. 

My sense is that Mrs. Trump never wants to be seen as vulnerable. She would rather be seen discussing her initiatives with French First Lady Brigitte Macron or Jordan's Queen Rania. The only time that Mrs. Trump acknowledges the camera is right before she is escorted into the Capitol Rotunda for the formal Inauguration. Turning slightly mischievously to face us, she says, "Here we go again". She wants to present herself as a confident woman. "I will move forward with purpose, and of course, with style," she closes as Sunny plays while her official White House picture is taken. However, I think that even her harshest critics will find the Siegel section impactful.

"Nobody like here. She's difficult but nobody like her," now-President Trump tells Ratner as Melania closes. He adds that he is joking. One thing is certain: Melania Trump is set on controlling her image and narrative. She is in the history books, for good or ill. Melania does not reveal much if anything that Mrs. Trump does or does not want revealed. She begins and ends Melania as a Slovenian Sphinx. 

*We are told in an on-screen postscript that Keith Siegel was released alive.

DECISION: C+

Train Dreams: A Review

TRAIN DREAMS

Dreams come and go speeding through one man's life in Train Dreams. Visually arresting, Train Dreams may try some viewers' patience with its poetic, lyrical manner. However, Train Dreams is worth the effort if one has that patience.

Told in voiceover by an unnamed narrator (Will Patton), we learn the life story of Robert Grainier (Joel Edgerton). Robert has no past as he was orphaned early in life. He arrives in the Pacific Northwest on presumably an orphan train. Robert wanders through life until he meets Glady Olding (Felicity Jones). He is immediately smitten with her as she is with him.

They marry and soon have a daughter, Katie. Robert travels far for whatever work he can find. He lays track for the trains. He is a lumberjack. He is also haunted by a strange incident while building a bridge over a gorge. For reasons never explained, a couple of the men grab a Chinese laborer and toss him over the almost complete bridge to his death. Robert is literally haunted by the man, seeing him appear randomly.

As time goes on, Robert finds joy in Gladys and Katie. He yearns to spend more time together and work closer to home. He pretty much keeps to himself while working in the forest. Robert does bond with the wise Arn Peeples (William H. Macy), an old hand at logging who is seen as eccentric by the younger men. A freak accident kills Arn, which pushes Robert to stay put with his family.

Their plans are consumed by fire. This forest fire devastates Robert beyond measure. He bears his great personal losses with stoicism. Now as a cart hauler for the local community, Robert takes Clare Thompson (Kerry Condon) to her new station at the forest's edge. She is with the newly formed Forest Service and has a similar outlook to Robert's. Robert may chuckle at being the local hermit, but there is truth to that. As the decades go by, what will be the end of Robert Grainier?

Train Dreams is a little over an hour and a half. I suspect that the film's very steady, stately pace will drive some viewers bonkers. That sense of frustration will also probably come from Patton's narration. He fills in a lot of information about Robert Grainier that sometimes comes across as overbearing. I struggled to remember where I saw and heard a similar conceit. I now remember. It was in The Life of Chuck. Both films have much in common. They attempt to make a relatively simple life something of an epic. They rely heavily on voiceover. They attempt to speak on the importance of even the most mundane life. They are both adaptations of short works (in Train Dreams' case, Denis Johnson's novella).

Unlike The Life of Chuck, I found that director/cowriter Clint Bentley (adapting Johnson's work with Greg Kwedar) opted to not load the voiceover to a maddening degree. I would not call it sparse. I would call it less intrusive. I also would say that it was a bit overdone in terms of what was being said. 

Train Dreams is a very quiet film. It is slow, but not in a bad way. It does have moments of action, like the forest fire that consumed Robert's life. However, for the most part even what could have been shocking moments are shown as quite still. There is when a random black man appears and ends up killing a logger who talked endlessly about Jesus. The killer informs the surprisingly passive loggers that the man they knew as Apostle Bob was really Buckskin Sam, an outlaw who had killed the killer's brother. This scene was shot with one long master shot, which I thought a curious choice. 

Arn's death was a bit odd. It had both voiceover and a surprisingly comic manner despite the filmmaker's best intentions. Again, while I see what Train Dreams was going for, it did not mean that it always worked. 

What did work in the film, worked well. Adolpho Beloso's cinematography is almost sinful in its luxurious and lush look. Even the mass forest fire looks beautiful. Train Dreams fits the title, creating this visually splendid film that makes it almost like a series of painting.

The film is also quite well-acted. Joel Edgerton has had his share of misses. In Train Dreams, he has a strong performance. His Robert's stoic manner is what makes the story work. He is able to have moments of drama, such as when he imagines Katie returning. However, Edgerton knows that Robert is an internal man, one who keeps things within himself. A standout moment is when he is with Condon in a smaller but no less effective performance. As he talks to Claire about his loss, we see Robert as quiet and soft. This is a man who keeps so much within himself. However, this scene is devoid of big, dramatic moments. He does not cry nor break down in tears. Instead, Edgerton stays true to the character. Robert is a man who observes and feels but rarely is overwhelmed by his feelings.

As stated, Kerry Condon also does well as Claire, the impatient but caring Forest Service ranger. "The dead tree is as important as a living one", she tells Robert. The subtext I think is clear. In his role, William H. Macy gives Arn a weary acceptance of life. It is almost as if he is what Robert might become. 

Train Dreams does have a dreamlike quality to it. That might make some viewers grew impatient. However, when one sees it, I think it might be best to accept the film's placid manner than to fight it. See it for the beautiful visuals, which is one of its best qualities. 

DECISION: C+

I Want to Live! A Review (Review #2120)

I WANT TO LIVE!

True crime meets true tragedy in I Want to Live! Blending film noir with a documentary manner, I Want to Live! gives us a sympathetic portrait of a mostly unsympathetic figure.

Barbara Wood (Susan Hayward) is a good-time girl who loves the men and the jazz. This jazz baby is also a longtime criminal. She drinks, dances, flirts and presumably more than flirts through life. Her BFF Peggy (Virginia Vincent) cuts out after two mutual friends ask Peg and Babs to provide false alibis. Barbara, for her part, agrees to lie for them and ends up locked up for perjury. 

After her prison term, Barbara tries to go straight. She marries Hank Graham (Wesley Lau) and has a child, Bobby. However, Hank is a junkie who even slaps Barbara around when she refuses to turn over their last $10 so he can get a fix. She then goes back to petty crime to keep body and soul together. Her old criminal partner Emmett Perkins (Philip Coolidge) welcomes her back with open arms. His associate John Santo (Lou Krugman) is thoroughly antagonist and openly hates baby Bobby. 

Things go wildly wrong after their latest heist. Barbara was the getaway car driver of a robbery. However, an elderly crippled widow, Mable Monahan, was murdered. The police have tagged Perkins, Santo and Graham for the crime. Barbara, initially unaware of the murder, plays up her image as "Bloody Babs: The Tiger Woman". She finds the whole thing just the latest in her defiant run-ins with the law.

All this makes great headlines for San Francisco newspaperman Ed Montgomery (Simon Oakland). It is not until after she realizes that murder was the case that they gave her that Barbara panics; horrified by the charge, Barbara foolishly attempts to get a false alibi as Hank is nowhere to be found. To her horror and disappointment, she finds that her supposed alibi is really officer Ben Miranda (Peter Breck). Her past dooms her to be found guilty. The press attention also plays a role in dooming the so-called Queen of the Murder Mob, along with Perkins and Santo, to be sentenced to death.

Montgomery soon begins having doubts about Graham's guilt. She was involved in the Monahan robbery. However, was she the actual murderess? Psychiatrist Carl Palmberg (Theodore Bikel) diagnoses that Graham is amoral but averse to violence. She is also left-handed, while Monahan's killer was right-handed. Montgomery shifts from Graham's antagonist to ally. He begins writing articles making a case that she is innocent. At the minimum, he pushes for a commutation on her death sentence by gas. It is now a battle against the clock to save Barbara Graham. Will she make it out alive? Has her time finally run out?

The veracity of I Want to Live! has been brought into question in the ensuing years. Nelson Gidding and Don M. Mankiewicz's screenplay makes the case that Graham was innocent and wrongly executed. Gidding and Mankiewicz used actual court testimony, Montgomery's articles and Graham's own correspondence to craft their story. As such, one can argue that I Want to Live! is biased in Graham's favor. We also see this when Graham does her best to go straight. 

The film, however, does not downplay Graham's less-than-noble virtues. We see her consistently defiant even when it goes against her own best interests. She is a party girl, ready with a snippy comeback no matter what the circumstances. "Life's a funny thing", someone observes to Graham early in I Want to Live! She replies with a touch of sarcasm, "Compared to what?". As the film comes to a dramatic close, one of the guards in the gas chamber advises her to take deep breaths to make the execution easier. Graham softly but bitterly replies, "How would you know?".

A strong element that makes I Want to Live! both gripping and moving is director Robert Wise's decision to make the execution preparations very methodical. We see the precise preparations for the execution. As stated earlier, I Want to Live! has an almost documentary-like manner in these scenes. There are many dramatic moments, especially when Graham is in her cell waiting to see if she lives or dies. In between them though, we see how the gas chamber is set up. It makes for very sad viewing.

Sadder viewing comes from Graham's final hours, which feel stretched into days. At one especially difficult moment, she is being walked towards the gas chamber when the silence is broken by a telephone ring. As she is walked back to her cell, Susan Hayward as Graham softly says, "Why do they torture me so?".

I Want to Live! has a firm anti-capital punishment slant. It also has a heart in Susan Hayward. Winning an Academy Award on her fifth nomination, Hayward creates a moving portrait of this at-times self-destructive and self-defeating woman. Hayward makes Barbara Graham into a tough but vulnerable broad. Graham is a survivor, a sly and tough cookie who knows the score. "What's your occupation? What do you do?" one of her criminal cronies asks her. Her smart reply? "The best I can". 

We get to see Graham's tough exterior in the film. We also see through Hayward's performance the frightened and desperate woman railroaded into a disaster. Hayward has what always helps an actress: a court testimony scene. On the stand, we see Graham's shift from disbelief to desperation and ultimately to quiet resignation. Once the jury hears about her past conviction for perjury, Graham realizes that it is all over for her. 

Hayward as Graham has a running manner of throwing fake dice to see what comes up. We see that ultimately, she got snake-eyes. She plays Graham as belligerent, showing that she will stand up to everyone. She also makes one feel great sadness for her at the end. Hayward does this effectively by controlling her voice. She never fully screams or rages. However, it is when she is quiet and soft that makes her performance all the more impactful.

As her final appeal fails, she says softly, "I want a mask". She does not want to see anyone on the way to the execution. Moments like those break your heart.

I Want to Live! also has strong performances from Oakland as Montgomery. He shifts well from someone who uses her to sell papers to someone who tries to undo the damage. Virginia Vincent in her small role does well as Peg, the girl who cut out to become a respectable housewife. She stayed loyal to the end. 

A surprising element in I Want to Live! is the use of a jazz score written by Johnny Mandel. It gives the film an urgency and decadence that matches the story. Of particular note is when we see Graham slip back into a life of petty crime. The drums and bongos push the tension of the situations. Fortunately, Wise also opted to keep the final section quiet. That too makes the end more tragic.

I Want to Live! in some ways is a B-picture. There is a strong element of grittiness and lack of polish. However, these are not noble people. They are criminals and hoods. I Want to Live! shows us that Barbara Graham was also a person. She made terrible choices and paid the ultimate price for them. One cannot but be moved by the film. The real-life Barbara Graham may have ultimately been guilty of murder. The film version of Barbara Graham was a victim who was sleazy but innocent.

1923-1955

DECISION: B+