|
Review by Daniel Lima  As a black man who believes in the power of art to speak truth to power, I often find myself conflicted in how to approach films that attempt to do so through wholly conventional means. Does the message supersede the message takes? Should a film be lauded for shedding light or providing an underrepresented perspective on an issue, even if the way it does so is aesthetically compromised? The Palestinian drama The Teacher has me asking these questions yet again, and while it is worth commending, it is also clearly a work limited by certain constraints. Saleh Bakri plays a schoolteacher in the West Bank, long past his firebrand activist youth but whose ideals have never wavered. As the occupying Israeli forces and settler bear down on his neighborhood, he attempts to guide a student to cultivate his anger in productive ways. Doing so proves difficult under the unceasing yoke of oppression and colonization. Helmed by the Palestinian-British director Farah Nabulsi and shot in the West Bank, there is a refreshing lack of throat clearing in the film’s condemnation of Israel’s treatment of the West Bank and Palestine. These characters live under constant threat of assault, they have little to no recourse through any system that could preserve their rights, and there is an explicit understanding that this inescapable great evil is wrong. That’s not a given these days. To that end, characters discuss life under occupation and how it affects them in a direct manner, without ever feeling the need to justify or couch their anger and pain. This dialogue could be called heavy-handed, but it carries the ring of truth, like conversations that the people living in such oppressive conditions may regularly have. That Nabulsi takes a more naturalistic approach to these scenes, emphasizing the soundscape of the environment and relying on the powerful and nuanced performances of her actors — Bakri and Muhammad Abed Elrahman in particular — to sell the dialogue goes a long way. This is most evident in how the film addresses violence against the Israeli state and individual settlers encroaching on Palestinian land. Characters may treat it as a necessity, they may speak of it in anger, and they may be disabused of it, but the film pointedly never gives voice to the idea that this violence is wrong because violence is in general wrong, only that it should never be prosecuted out base anger and should strive to better the conditions of Palestinians. A lesser artist may have struck a more genteel form of discourse, one that flatters the sensibility of goodhearted Western liberals but ignores the experiences of a population whom violence may be visited upon with impunity. To Nabulsi’s great credit, she never feels the need to apologize for or explain why these people feel the way they do.  That this is not present is a testament to the lived-in understanding of the world of these characters, and the challenges faced by oppressed populations the world over. It is, without a doubt, the strongest part of The Teacher, the thing that sets it apart as an important film that speaks to one of the great moral issues of our time. That audacity, however, is not reflected in the storytelling.
Whenever the film wavers in its attention to the struggle of the Palestinian characters, things come to a screeching halt. A storyline about an IDF soldier held hostage by militant Palestinian forces attempts to provide more perspectives on this struggle, and when it does intersect with the leads it does allow for meaningful exchanges between them. Unfortunately, too much of it shifts the focus onto people who are given no time to be fleshed out, and interrupts the sense of place and focus the film would otherwise have. Worse yet is Imogen Poots, playing a young aid worker who grows close to Bakri. Her performance is serviceable, but every time she shows up it feels like an intrusion. Had the film been interested in addressing the role of well-meaning Westerners in an occupation aided and abetted by their governments, perhaps this wouldn’t feel so superfluous. As it stands, it’s hard to shake the feeling that white British woman is only here to secure funding for the film. As much as I respect the forthright manner the issue of Palestinian oppression and liberation are addressed in The Teacher, that is not to say that it aesthetically matches the fire of its rhetoric. While Nabulsi tends towards that more naturalistic approach, the score does creep in to underline the emotion of a scene, clashing with the rest of the film. When it does, the blunt dialogue can ring less as authentic, and more as the kind of self-important social issues drama the film otherwise feels like a departure from. This is not helped by the fact that, by necessity, almost the entirety of the experiences of these people is reduced to suffering and reacting to suffering. Here is where I find myself most conflicted. As of late, I have found myself very disappointed by the black cinema of today. Too often, I find these works only portray the black American experience as unceasing suffering, never argue for revolutionary change, lack any creative ambition, and so fail to meaningfully speak truth to power. To give a recent example, the film Nickel Boys may be aesthetically audacious, but roots its observations about black America firmly in the past, narrowing its scope and impact. The Teacher, however, is a film that is wholly of its time. The occupation of Palestine and the subjugation of Palestinians is an evil that is if anything not even discussed enough, let alone argued against with such vigor. Though the form is takes is somewhat wanting in terms of narrative cohesion and structure, it is a film that feels important not because it announces itself as such, but because it forcefully speaks for justice and empathy on an issue where so many in power are comfortable with neither. We would be so lucky if more cinema was this engaged with the world. The Teacher is now in theaters. Rating: 3.5/5
0 Comments
Review by Daniel Lima  Conceptually, The King of Kings could work in several ways. It could function as an earnest rendition of the story of Jesus of Nazareth, aiming not to educate per se, but to impress upon the viewer the majesty, tragedy, and grandeur of the Son of God. It could serve to contextualize the story for nonbelievers, as a sort of road map that shows why this figure resonates with so many people thousands of years after his death (or, less charitably, as propaganda). At the very least, it could just be a fun adventure for undiscerning children. Sadly, it fails on all fronts, begging the question of why it was made in the first place. At first glance, it seems a curious object. While it is being distributed by Angel Studios — no stranger to religious or politically conservative media — the film was produced entirely by the South Korean animation house Monoc Studios, even going so far as to recruit Hollywood A-listers as voice actors before seeking distribution. Even more interesting is the form the narrative takes. Technically, this is an adaptation of a Charles Dickens manuscript that he would recite to his children every Christmas, and so here the framing device is Dickens telling his son the greatest story ever told. Incidentally, the man himself begged his family to never publish it, and they patiently waited until his last child died before selling the manuscript to a publisher. This does not make it into the movie. The film attempts to weave Dickens and his son directly into the narrative as observers, with the son growing increasingly enraptured in a tale that we are told is self-evidently enrapturing. This is obviously inspired by The Princess Bride, but fails to work here for two reasons. Firstly, while the interactions between the child and adult in that film are charming, the pair here are incredibly grating, with a bit of physical comedy in the beginning giving way to constant interruptions of the child screaming about how exciting this story is. This breaks up the momentum that the Biblical narrative might actually have otherwise, and since the two can’t directly interact with the story, it just serves to add to the runtime with increasingly annoying shouting. The bigger issue, however, is that The Princess Bride tells an exciting story, and this does not. The nativity, meeting the apostles, the crucifixion, the resurrection, the story of Jesus Christ clearly holds power as written in the Bible. A religious text, however, does not have to engage an audience in the way art does. Past films have gotten around this by focusing on a particular time in his life and treating him like a person with thoughts and feelings worth examining, or else telling the broad narrative in the form of a cinematic epic. Instead, this is a “nothing but the hits” rendition of his life, jumping through important parts of his life that even someone not well-versed in Christian lore is sure to be familiar with. It's a dramatically unsatisfying approach, inherently creating distance between the audience and the man.  Perhaps The King of Kings could have been compelling even without a traditional structure, but that would require selling this material in an artfully composed, visually dynamic way. Monoc drop the ball here, delivering a film that recalls lazy direct-to-video licensed films from a decade ago. There is a notable lack of detail to the 3D modeling, a lack of the imagination in bringing to life the world of first century Judea, a pronounced stiffness to the character animation, and a plainness to the many miracles of Jesus that rob this rendition of any of the wonder or beauty one may expect from a story of divine grace. Considering the freedom that that the medium allows for, it’s a glaring missed opportunity to create a unique vision of well-trodden material.
Anyone intrigued by the cast, know that each is phoning in their performance. Oscar Isaac as Jesus sounds like either a gift or a joke, but the result is far less interesting than one might expect, as he gives the most disinterested line reads of the entire film. Kenneth Branagh, Uma Thurman, Forest Whitaker, all the name talent give the absolute bare minimum of what is expected of them. The less notable professional voice actors have some moments, with a handful of amusing jeering from Brooklyn-accented Pharisees, but this is no one’s finest work. Given the lack of narrative, visual, or dramatic appeal to anyone who is not a believer, one would assume that The King of Kings is built to preach to the choir. It makes some mercenary sense for a foreign studio to produce a film for the Christian American market, as they seem to consistently show up for media that caters to them. Angel Studios has made a name for itself catering to a religious, traditional, and conservative audience. There is nothing inherently wrong with someone who identifies as such gravitating to a film that reflects their worldview and values. Even viewed from that lens, however, it’s hard to see how this could be satisfying. I cannot imagine being a hardline Christian and preferring something as toothless and unambitious as this over, for example, the God’s Not Dead movies. Those films are clearly animated by a bloodthirsty strain of religious fundamentalism that gives them a sense of purpose and character. Indeed, there are plenty of other works that voice popular Christian grievances, that articulate a worldview, that treat Christian dogma and scripture as sacrosanct, and bring it to life with a level of care and earnestness that makes it feel important. Why would anyone settle for this? I would be remiss if I said there was no red meat for the base here. Christian animosity towards the Jewish people has deep roots, with the idea that they bear collective guilt for the sin of killing Christ being used to justify their oppression for centuries. This film all but gives a full-throated endorsement of that idea, depicting a Jewish horde enthusiastically cheering for the murder of Jesus to a reluctant Roman official. That this exists besides an insistence that the town of Nazareth is in Israel (a term always used by Jewish people for the region, but the film otherwise uses “Judea”) is even more intriguing, pointing to a dichotomy that exists within the contemporary American Christian right between their support of the state of Israel, and lingering animus towards the Jewish people. Of course, at the end of the day, this is a movie for children, so this is left unenumerated on. The King of Kings, however, does not work as a kid’s movie, and I can’t imagine a child who would prefer this to whatever they can pull up on their iPad. It’s not for Christian adults who want an energizing rendition of the story of their savior. It’s certainly not for people with not inherent interest in Jesus of Nazareth whatsoever. Whoever goes into this expecting more than the most bare bones, cursory treatment of one of the most enduring legends in written history is bound to be disappointed. The Good Book has got to be better than this. The King of Kings is now in theaters. Rating: 0.5/5 Review by Adam Donato  As time goes by it’s becoming increasingly harder to make original films. Filmmakers are trying everything from mashing up genres and keeping things current to modern times. Drop does both as it blends the horror genre with a romance setting and is centered around a tech feature that most Americans probably don’t even fully understand. Violet, played by Meghann Fahy, is on a first date with Henry, played by Brandon Sklenar, but the vibe turns sinister as Violet keeps receiving air dropped messages from a nefarious stranger. The concept itself is reminiscent of a bottle episode as the majority of the narrative takes place in one location. Christopher Landon directs as he is very comfortable in this space having already directed a couple Happy Death Day movies and Freaky. Will Drop have similarly moderate success? There is a clear hunger for the horror romance in 2025. Heart Eyes came out earlier this year with similar positive reactions and modest box office success. Drop really leans into a schtick as everything in the story revolves around random phone messages. While this is a limited concept, the movie maximizes it to fill up an entire run time. At a hundred minutes, the film feels like a breeze as the situation is clearly understandable and the characters are likable enough that you’re invested in them making it out alive. It’s really easy to question why so many hoops had to be jumped through to make this plot center around air drop messages. That being said it’s a fun enough ride that won’t have you bored enough to be asking questions.  Fahy and Sklenar have good chemistry together, which is huge because the majority of the movie is centered around a one on one conversation between the two. Fahy has experienced most of her success on the small screen, but holds her own as a lead here. Sklenar is similarly small time, but recently found success in the controversial It Ends With Us romance film. The film does a good job riding the line between shipping these two together and leaving an element of mystery as anyone within fifty feet is a suspect for our main character.
Landon is really in his sweet spot here with another solid little horror flick. It provides in multiple different ways and never feels like it’s out of options. In a busy weekend at the box office, this should have an edge since it’s a horror film. Not to mention the biggest competition is a PG family film. Drop is certainly worth the price of admission. Drop is in theaters everywhere. Rating: 3/5 Review by Daniel Lima  It says nothing good about American culture that the fantasy of one man enacting violent revenge on his wife's killer has been so pervasive. At first glance, The Amateur appears to be just another middling entry into a somewhat suspect canon. To my own surprise, it is a more textured and measured film than I had thought possible, even as it makes all too familiar missteps. Rami Malek plays an introverted, socially awkward CIA analyst whose wife is killed in a terrorist action. When his bosses dismiss his plea to target the men who kill her, he strikes off on his own to achieve his vengeance. The drive of The Amateur is less the rush of retributive justice, and more the satisfaction of a job well. This is a process thriller, reveling in the details of how a technically proficient non-combatant can both evade the all-encompassing US surveillance state, and accomplish his fatal deeds. To that end, the film's pace is controlled and methodical, spending plenty of time on the psyche of the titular neophyte before he decides to take charge. Even then, the form that takes is almost bereft of action, barring some cursory fistfights. The tension comes from this character, a desk jockey who is nearly incapable of firing a gun, devising a method of execution he can stomach as his CIA bosses attempt to leash him. Whether learning to pick a lock on the fly, or bearing down on his target as another hunter bears down on him, the film resists the temptation of rapid fire editing and shaky cam. Instead, every scene moves forward patiently and legibly, but always forward. There’s never a sense of idleness or haste, and that unfussy approach recalls the propulsive studio potboilers of decades past.  The actual narrative is bog standard, but serviceable. That the film is so deliberately paced lends Malek’s quest a sense of importance that eludes many a similar direct-to-video action-thriller, with the film often taking a break from the intrigue to give him a quiet moment to reflect on his lost love. It’s unfortunate, then, that the star is Rami Malek, an actor with a chronic inability to portray human emotion. His typical disaffected mumble acting style works well enough for this character, but the moments that are supposed to ground the espionage in real pathos fall flat because of him. He is, as usual, the weak link in an otherwise strong ensemble.
As entertaining as the story is, it is frustrating how it waffles on articulating a worldview, or a cohesive thematic through line. Much of the film is spent questioning Malek’s desire for revenge, whether it’s truly helpful in a personal or cosmic sense, and the significance of ending a human life. There’s also a slight critique of the US government’s own penchant for extrajudicial violence, and the carte blanche that covert operations are accorded. These are interesting subjects to explore (and as relevant as ever), but the film ultimately pump fakes actually engaging with them. Malek’s revenge quest concludes in a way that rings a false note considering the journey he had went through, and the moral perspective on the CIA’s power is jarringly toothless. Perhaps the source material is a bit more provocative in taking an actual stance on these ideas, but there’s a limit to how far a modern studio summer release will go in either admonishing or supporting these brands of violence. If it had, it may have been more impactful. Yet it is hard to be too hard on The Amateur for a lack of thematic heft, or emotional resonance, because that was not the assignment. Where this film does succeed is in making a solid, meat-and-potatoes, airport thriller cinema. Its primary concern is not heady ruminations on the nature of violence, but constructing little puzzle boxes for the nerdy guy to squeeze his way out of through sheer smarts. That it accomplishes that with assuredness and poise, in the cinematic landscape of today, is a cause for small celebration. The Amateur arrives in theaters April 11. Rating: 3.5/5 Review by Adam Donato  Freaky Tales is the first feature directed by the duo of Anna Boden and Ryan Fleck since Captain Marvel, a film that made bank at the box office, but sullied their street cred due to middling reviews. Since then the pair has gone back to their sweet spot directing series like Mrs. America and Masters of the Air. This film is reminiscent of their television work as it’s a collection of interconnected stories split up into chapters. There’s minor connections, but for the most part these chapters stand alone. The film sports an ensemble cast including some pretty noteworthy names. With very little marketing, can this episodic genre film catch the eye of cinephiles and put these directors on the road to redemption? The narrative touches on some serious subjects, but has little to nothing of substance to say about them. This isn’t a major problem as the film is more concerned with being a fun genre film. There’s elements of action, comedy, science fiction, and thriller all in here and it makes for a fun time. There’s a clear love for the central location of the film, which is Oakland. The setting permeates the story and the character as its essential to the whole film. It’s a fun thing when the city itself feels like a character in the movie. The format and tone is reminiscent of a movie like Trick ‘r Treat. While the stories start out very grounded, they elevate into being very high concept and everything feels like it comes together in a satisfying way.  The first of four chapters focuses on a young emo couple that is part of a rising force against this evil gang of Nazis. Jack Champion, who plays Spider in the Avatar franchise, is heavily featured in this part. It’s also shown in 4:3 format, which is fun as during the fight sequence there’s a fun moment where the blood exits the frame and sits on the borders. Just a fun little detail. Chapter two brings an 8 Mile style musical element to the film, which keeps it feeling fresh. This part is headlined by artist Normani and Dominique Thorne who has worked with a string of acclaimed directors like Ryan Coogler, Barry Jenkins, and Shaka King. Their chemistry is great and it’s the most fun sequence of the film. Also, stay for the credits as they do a musical number through the end of the film. Pedro Pascal is the most high profile name in the film and he is the star of the third chapter. This section plays up the thriller aspect of the film and is great at keeping you guessing at what’s gonna happen next. The final chapter is an eruptus sci fi action sequence that ties all the loose threads together Ben Mendelsohn is obnoxiously experienced at playing a sinister bad guy and he does it here to perfection. Jay Ellis is the star of the show here though as he plays a NBA player with this green magic power. This is a larger element that is a part of every chapter. It allows for some pretty wild action and gore that’s worth the price of admission.
Freaky Tales is definitely gonna fly under the radar, but a solid flick with no backlash is exactly what the doctor ordered for Boden and Fleck. Clearly, they’re doing just fine post Marvel and have a good enough relationship that this film is littered with MCU stars. It’s a pulpy good time and deserves more attention. Not that it’s a great movie or anything, but definitely a solid flick that’s worth a watch. Freaky Tales is in theaters now. Rating: 3/5 |