Everything That Dies, Some Day Comes Back

This is a strange film, a comedy of sorts taking place over a few hours at a shiva (the Jewish equivalent of a wake).  The main character, Danielle is a somewhat directionless young woman, who is only at the shiva at the behest of her parents.  Her mood is not helped by the fact that also at the shiva is Maya, a friend she once was romantically involved with, and Max who she is currently having sexual relations with in return for some much needed money.   Max is accompanied by his wife Kim and a baby - the existence of whom comes as something of a shock to Danielle.  Although why it should bother Danielle as much as it does is a bit puzzling if her relationship with Max is simply transactional. I'm getting rather tired of the overbearing Jewish parents trope, which may explain why I didn't enjoy this film as much as I had hoped.  Not only are Danielle's parents more irritating than amusing (especially the father) we also get a shedload of other interfering ...

From the trailer and the poster, not to mention the casting (Andrew Scott and Paul Mescal - wow!) I had assumed that this film would be about the relationship between the two leads. I was therefore surprised that the main emotional impact for me derived instead from the relationship between Andrew Scott's character Adam and the ghosts of his dead parents.  The final scene between the three of them really set me off.  M aybe that's because both my parents are no longer with me.  Hats off to Claire Foy and Jamie Bell for their beautifully understated performances throughout. In comparison I found the relationship between Adam and Harry (Mescal) touching, but no more than that.  Which is not to take anything away from their performances, which are top-notch.  Andrew Scott in particular (who I think is in every scene) carries the film.  He is so good at conveying vulnerability.  (Maybe that is why I was less taken with him as Ripley in the recent Netflix a...

This film by Todd Haynes is based on real events concerning a long-running legal battle with DuPont. Mark Ruffalo stars as a corporate lawyer Robert Bilott who reluctantly gets dragged into representing a farmer from his home town whose cattle are dying in large numbers and in mysterious ways. Superficially it starts off as though this is simply going to be Erin Brockovich Redux. But whereas ‘Erin Brockovich’ is ultimately a feel-good story ‘Dark Waters’ is much less so. Erin Brockovich’s story is one of personal triumph, given her lack of legal training, whilst in contrast the DuPont case, which runs for many years, takes a heavy toll of both Bilott’s health and of his finances, putting his marriage under great strain. Haynes could of course have chosen to focus on Bilott's legal successes but instead we zoom in on the reality of what it is like to single-handedly take on a ruthless corporate behemoth.  This makes for a less commercially attractive film maybe but also a more truth...

This 1964 World War II drama directed by John Frankenheimer is a beauty: lovely black-and-white photography including some great tracking shots, a gripping story (based very loosely on real events), a fine cast headed up by Burt Lancaster, Paul Scofield and Jeanne Moreau, and, for those who like that sort of thing, lots and lots of 'steam engine porn'.  The film covers similar ground to the more recent 'The Monuments Men', but is far superior in every way.   The source is a book by Rose Valland,  a  French art curator, a  member of the   French Resistance ,  and one of the most decorated women in French history.   Maybe she deserves a film in her own right?   Here she has to make do with a couple of scenes at the beginning.  (She fares even worse in 'The Monuments Men' where the screenplay makes her seem quite irrational in her behaviour.) There's an interesting moral question at the heart of both films: is great art worth...