What was the last film you watched?

[Angela Channing]

While you're looking, there's also a 1955 TV version called (for some reason) THE Miracle on 34th Street. I have a DVD of that and one of the original . All the TV versions are on YouTube.

Thank you so much in going to check them out shortly.

 

[Mel O'Drama]

Pride (2014)

​

funny and inspiring, a totally brilliant film and one of the few films that even made a tough guy life me shed a tear.

absolutely loved it. I laughed. I cried. I learned.

that same slightly larger-than-life, not-quite-cartoony-but-almost style that a lot of recent-ish British films (and TV series) adopt when dealing with this country's recent history. When it works it, it works very well as it does here and in Pride (film about the '80s miners strike)

this lazy, cookie-cutter piece of British cinema.

This has been on my radar since... well, probably since it was released, a decade ago now. And so many intriguing hints dropped in this thread, how could I not want to see what the fuss is about? And since it's on iPlayer...

This is my second consecutive film based on true events from the 1980s but, unlike Hillsborough, this particular story wasn't one with which I was familiar. Of course I was very aware of the Miners' strike which was huge news for anyone who lived in South Wales, but I remember nothing of this particular aspect being reported (the one incident during the strike that really registered with me at the time was the death of David Wilkie, the taxi driver who had a concrete block thrown onto his car by two miners on a road bridge).

In viewing terms, the strike most recently got many a mention in Brookside during 1984-85 episodes, particularly from union man Bobby Grant who is still doing his union thing in the late 1986 episodes I'm currently watching. Coincidentally, these episodes also feature some of the series' own working class characters discovering there are gay men in their midst, and it's been interesting to compare this actual mid-Eighties content with a 21st Century film made as a period piece. On Brookie there have been comments about "benders", "shirt-lifters", "queers" and keeping backs to the wall. All were fairly common pejoratives at the time, though the first two seem mostly forgotten... including by the writers of Pride who mostly stick to the more tried and tested (and recent) insults. Still, it all works.

It's no secret I'm quite hard to please when it comes to period films, not just with language used, but also rhythms of speech which in Britain have changed a lot in the last four decades (and even in the three between the miners' strike and Pride). I'm happy to report didn't find too much to nitpick with Pride. The march itself was called "Gay Pride", as it would have been in 1985, before the LGBTQWERTY stuff. But on that note, I think (but couldn't swear) someone in the film used the term LGB or LGBT which I'm pretty sure would have been (to be generous) extremely forward thinking in the mid-Eighties when the catch-all was "GLB", "Gay and Lesbian" or simply "Gay". As far as speech patterns, again, there's not much to complain about. The guy playing Mark Ashton was the least period-authentic in terms of delivery (lots of 21st Century pauses and random "OKs") which I put down to the actor's age until I read afterwards that he's actually American where I found myself marvelling at how good his accent was.

One more thing regarding terminology, one of the young characters sagely tells another that there's an age old tradition among gay people that if a word is used against them "You take it and you own it". There's truth to this - I've known people who've referred to themselves or their friends as "homo", "poof", "queen", "dyke" etc. - but it still made me shudder because it just made me think of how, in the longer term, people end up throwing around volatile "reclaimed" words without experiential understanding of the harm they've done. Which is where we are with "queer" today.

And the accents are pretty good in here. Of course, with Imelda Staunton or Bill Nighy, it's apparent they're "doing" Welsh because I've heard them speak in so many other parts. Objectively, though, they nailed it. Likewise, I was surprised to find out that some of the actors playing Welsh characters were English or Irish since I formed the impression many were cast locally.

The film evoked nostalgia in me on many levels, from the warmth of the Welsh people to the journey of coming out paired with the camaraderie of activism to the Eighties in general. The music, of course, is great.

It's an accessible film with a sense of fun and lightheartedness. This makes for a very accessible film despite the story's political roots. I can fully understand how this won't satisfy everyone. It could have gone much harder and delved much deeper, but it's still quite a feat to tell a number of important stories in a short space of time in a balanced way. And I found out just enough to want to hit a search engine and explore some more. Any film that can raise awareness in this way has done its job well.

This will definitely be featuring in at least one of the next couple of Top Tens.

 

[Willie Oleson]

FIRST REFORMED (2017)




In preparation for PRIEST '94 (which arrived today) I decided to watch this film from 2017 knowing absolutely nothing about it.
Since I love stories about the church and priests and nuns (unless it's one of those awful Exorcist/Omen knockoffs) I didn't expect to be disappointed, and Ethan Hawke is a famous name although I always confuse it with Ewan McGregor.

Well, disappointed, definitely not, but maybe not the best choice as a last-thing-to-watch-before-bedtime.
Written and directed by Paul Schrader from TAXI DRIVER fame, First Reformed is indeed quite similar to that 1970s classic, only much darker and downbeat.
And like my recently watched KILLER JOE, this film also ends "Sopranos" style!
I think the most interesting thing about FIRST is that it's very restraint, as one would expect from these characters, and that it also deals with larger than life dilemmas.
I'm sure some people will read "propaganda" into it but I think it's more about the fear of the topic than the topic itself.
Reverend Toller played by Ethan Hawke is a character I won't easily forget.

 

[James from London]

I love stories about the church and priests and nuns

Have you seen Black Narcissus?

 

[Julia's Gun]

This feels like a hyperreal account of my life.

Especially poor Artex, that horse....

 

[Willie Oleson]

Have you seen Black Narcissus?

Yes, it's very colourful!

Church people usually have to deal with earthly issues in a specific way, they can't say whatever they like (and they probably wouldn't want to say it).
I feel this often creates a fascinating tension, even in the most boring scenes.

 

[Mel O'Drama]

My Beautiful Laundrette (1985)

As mentioned in the Top Ten Eighties films, this is a film I've been aware of for a long time but never got round to watching.

With much of my viewing of late being made or set in mid Eighties Britain, it's not surprising there's a common running thread of Thatcher-fatigue running through them. Here we are smack in the middle of her devastatingly oppressive reign, and that oppression can be felt simply by running the camera and showing what is there. I don't believe the country ever looked as grey as it did during this decade. We've come a long way, but in a case of plus ça change... right wing thugs commit random acts of senseless violence driven by racism.

A curiosity regarding billing was the discrepancy between the two main characters and the two lead actors. It makes sense when considering that the main characters are younger and played by virtual unknowns who are respectively appearing in their first lead role and their first feature film, whereas the older characters are played by relatively well-known and respected actors who have seniority. Saeed Jaffrey and Roshan Seth are both wonderful as the two older estranged brothers, and steal each scene in which they appear.

Equally, though, the pretty younger actors playing the leading characters are revelations. Gordon Warnecke (whose very familiar face I could swear I remember well from EastEnders even though IMDb says he was only in six episodes) has great chemistry with both his screen father and uncle. There's something incredibly hopeful and optimistic about his expressive face, with a novel smile and an excited sparkle behind the eyes in any given situation. It doesn't matter if he's being passed a bucket with which to clean a car; watching his cousin strip off her top half and flirtatiously wave her boobs at him; listening to his drunken father chatter away; or enjoying the energy coming from one of the hooligans. It feels as though every challenge is new and exciting and filled with possibilities. Then there's Daniel Day-Lewis. I believe this is the first DDL film I've watched (the only other place I would have seen him was a cough and spit in an episode of Shoestring). Pleasingly, I didn't even register his name in the credits so I spent the latter part of the film wondering who this actor was and thinking I need to find out more about him. He convinces completely as the former thug trying to start over, and a testament to his performance that Johnny is both extremely likeable and vulnerable while still fitting in effortlessly with his former friends. It's no surprise that this is the film that put him on the map, and it's a courageous first role for a number of reasons.

The main context (I don't know if it would be classed as a genre) in which I've heard of this film is as a gay story but, while that element is there, it's about so much more than that. In fact, somewhere around the halfway mark, I started questioning if I was misremembering what I'd read because there was no overt mention or demonstration of homosexuality, but we'd seen Shirley Ann Field shagging the life out of Omar's uncle and the aforementioned prolonged mammary shots. It's perhaps a political message of its own - or at least a reflection of the time - that the most graphically sexual scenes here are heterosexual. Still, there is a sense of fun to the way affection is shown in the same sex relationship, and there are some charming and memorable moments that come from it, from the champagne sharing to the simple-but-hot neck public-but-covert neck-licking moment (which apparently the director came up with on the day, but didn't tell Gordon Warnecke about in order to elicit a genuine reaction).

The politics of the time add subtext. It's important, for example, that the more affluent middle class family is Pakistani. The way that race informs the relationship between Omar and Johnny is also interesting. It's barely mentioned, but then bubbles to the surface in a kind of backlash aimed at the politics at the time when Omar talks down to Johnny and says words to the effect that he's proud of himself for having a white subordinate.

The tone of the film also intrigues. I didn't care for the bubbly "washing machine music" that played over the opening credits (and recurred occasionally throughout). It was just too quirky for me. But I applaud that this can be pulled off in a film that also has outbursts of violence. There's a gritty realism to the film, but occasionally it's so real it seems almost unreal. Case in point, the flat directly next to the railway tracks which is very real, but here somehow feels whimsical and cosy (it put me in mind of Mrs Wilberforce's studio based street from 1955's The Ladykillers).

This is a film with layers. So much so that I came away feeling that I'd missed something. Not because it fell flat, but because the writing is so nuanced and the layers so rich that I feel it's a film that requires several watches to really appreciate. And it probably needs discussion or some reading up to pick up some of the subtler things that may have gone over my head on this first outing.

 

[Mel O'Drama]

Usually I check if anyone else has commented on a film before posting, but I forgot to do that this time.

Now I've done this, @Angela Channing has perfectly summed up the film far more succinctly than I managed:

From the second when the titles first appear on the screen this film appears dated and low budget but don't be put off by that as it's a good story told in an engaging way that at times is funny and always is intelligent. It successfully captures the vibe of 1980s Britain, covering the racial tensions, views on homosexuality and generational and class differences that existed at the times and many ways still exist today.

 

[Julia's Gun]

I watched this film back in the 80s and was really fond of it. It was way ahead of its time and broke boundaries at a time of widespread racism and homophobia in the UK. It has a real charm too.

 

[Willie Oleson]

I know for sure that I have watched BEAUTIFUL LAUNDRETTE but when I try to remember it all I get is images from BEAUTIFUL THING (1996).

 

[Mel O'Drama]

It was way ahead of its time and broke boundaries at a time of widespread racism and homophobia in the UK.

Yes. The context of when this film was made makes it far bolder and riskier than it can appear now. It has a lot to say about the Britain at this time.

when I try to remember it all I get is images from BEAUTIFUL THING (1996).

Another that's been on my radar for many years (I had the soundtrack and loved it). And now it's on my Top Ten Homework list.

 

[Mel O'Drama]

Speaking of Top Ten homework...

Touch Of Pink (2004)

Despite the presence of "Cary Grant" in this film (albeit the imaginary spirit of Cary, played by Kyle MacLachlan), and Jimi's character's mother referencing Doris Day in That Touch Of Mink more than once, the title's play on words took until the latter part of the film to click with me. It's one of a number of Grant-related Easter eggs in the film. Some are obvious - such as actual scenes from old films - while others are less so and seem to be there to ensure the viewer is paying attention. At one point on their tour of London, Giles takes Dolly to a boutique where she buys a suit based on one Doris Day wore. The sign outside names the dressmakers as "Bristol-Leach".

Some of it turns out to be built into the plot as relating to the characters' psyches: a comforting creation from characters' psyches, based on the Hollywood imagery that they found so reassuring in years past (an element that WandaVision would later do incredibly well). All the same, while not without novelty, this aspect of the film feels rather gimmicky.

A little like Pride, the casting for this film involves a whole lot of switcheroos. British Jimi Mistri plays a Canadian living in London. Canadian Kris Holden-Ried is his British lover. American Kyle MacLachlan plays Bristolian Cary Grant, sustaining Grant's trademark bizarre attempt at a mid-Atlantic accent throughout.

While completely unplanned, the film has many similarities with My Beautiful Laundrette, particularly with the lead character trying to reconcile his conventional Muslim heritage with his very unconventional relationship. Touch Of Pink feels comparatively more frivolous and safe, and even twee at times. It also suffers from a degree of quirk of the mid-Noughties variety, but the charm of the actors carries it through.

There's one aspect of the ending that, while probably not unrealistic, I found unsatisfying, since one person's conduct was glossed over rather too quickly to wrap things up which ultimately left me feeling their partner could have done better. But such is life, and I suppose it keeps things from being too perfect.

It's not the best film I've watched this week, but I've seen much worse.​

 

[Willie Oleson]

Top Ten homework

I like that!

CAROL (2015)



There are films that I love, and then there are films I fall in love with. Off the top of my head: Brief Encounter, Roman Holiday, Melody and Local Hero - and now this brilliant film by Todd Haynes.
No idea why it's taken me so long to watch it since I've enjoyed some of his other films, especially Velvet Goldmine. Julianne Moore's Safe is still on my to-watch list but it's only available on an out-of-print Criterion DVD.

Anyway, back to CAROL, the first thing to like is the department store, and this made me realise that I usually like shops-in-films or TV series. From Constance MacKenzie's bookstore in Peyton Place to the the mini-supermarket in Number 96 to The Store in Dallas to the Italian department store in Elizabeth Taylor's The Driver's Seat.
Actress Cate Blanchett often reminds me of Glenn Close, it's that balance between intrigue and intensity, and with just the right amount of vulnerability - and this is exactly what CAROL needs.
None of the other characters are upstaged, certainly not Cate's co-star Rooney Mara, and Sarah Paulson and Kyle Chandler are terrific in their respective supporting roles.
In fact, I would watch the other version of "Carol" from the husband's point of view. That would not be a prequel or sequel but an....equel?

Miraculously, I had managed to avoid all trailers and spoilers, and since it's a story about uncertain situations with impulsive actions and reactions it kinda felt like watching it play out "live".
Cinematography and soundtrack are pitch-perfect without a single moment of overdoing it, and the scene of the custody settlement reminded me a lot of Sable and Jason Colby's divorce settlement.
As a lush melodrama (with an LGBTQ theme) it simply doesn't get better than this, but it remains to be seen if it will top my Top Ten Gay movies. There's also the ethereal Moonlight (2016) and William Friedkin's visceral film adaptation of The Boys In The Band.
That's going to be another tough ranking but I'll just think of it as a luxury problem.

 

[James from London]

Gordon Warnecke (whose very familiar face I could swear I remember well from EastEnders even though IMDb says he was only in six episodes) has great chemistry with both his screen father and uncle. There's something incredibly hopeful and optimistic about his expressive face, with a novel smile and an excited sparkle behind the eyes in any given situation.

He just popped up in my Enders re-watch as the male half of a teenage arranged marriage involving the show's first Pakistani family, the Karims. It's a screamingly obvious storyline to give an Asian family, but Warnecke elevates his small-ish role with the same charm and optimism that he exhibits in My Beautiful Launderette. This would have been in 1990, by which time, of course, Daniel Day Lewis was already a major film star in a way that Warnecke just couldn't be because that simply wasn't an option for Asian actors.

Then there's Daniel Day-Lewis. I believe this is the first DDL film I've watched

His career benefitted hugely from Launderette coming out at the same time as A Room With a View (which I just loved), in which Lewis is pretty much unrecognisable as Helena Bonham Carter's socially awkward, slimily unappealing suitor. He'd been offered the romantic lead, but famously turned it down in favour of the smaller, more eccentric role. The contrast between his performances in the two films, coming as they did when he was a complete unknown as far as the public was concerned, pretty much sealed his reputation.

 

[Mel O'Drama]

I would watch the other version of "Carol" from the husband's point of view. That would not be a prequel or sequel but an....equel?

A... hequel, if you will.

it remains to be seen if it will top my Top Ten Gay movies. There's also the ethereal Moonlight (2016) and William Friedkin's visceral film adaptation of The Boys In The Band.
That's going to be another tough ranking but I'll just think of it as a luxury problem.

Since you mentioned it, a few previously-watched films have sprung to mind, then I've found myself questioning if they're gay films or just films which happen to be about gay people. For instance, I'm still deciding if Prick Up Your Ears qualifies (I'm feeling more and more certain it does), and likewise Rope (I don't think it does, but an argument could be made).

He just popped up in my Enders re-watch as the male half of a teenage arranged marriage involving the show's first Pakistani family, the Karims.

Oh, that rings bells. Thanks for the refresher.

Warnecke elevates his small-ish role with the same charm and optimism that he exhibits in My Beautiful Launderette.

And this probably explains why he remained familiar to me for this one smaller role.

This would have been in 1990, by which time, of course, Daniel Day Lewis was already a major film star in a way that Warnecke just couldn't be because that simply wasn't an option for Asian actors.

As I watched the film, I found myself wondering why Gordon hadn't had the level of high profile success enjoyed by Daniel when they both gave great performances. You've pinpointed exactly why. It's screamingly obvious now you mention it, but didn't even occurred to me as I puzzled over it.

His career benefitted hugely from Launderette coming out at the same time as A Room With a View (which I just loved), in which Lewis is pretty much unrecognisable as Helena Bonham Carter's socially awkward, slimily unappealing suitor. He'd been offered the romantic lead, but famously turned it down in favour of the smaller, more eccentric role. The contrast between his performances in the two films, coming as they did when he was a complete unknown as far as the public was concerned, pretty much sealed his reputation.

Understandably. The stars definitely seem to have been an alignment, but it's impressive that he was bold enough to make such choices at an early stage of his screen career.

Whenever I see his name, I always think of My Left Foot which I've never seen but remember was acclaimed at the time for his performance (I actually found the buzz a bit off-putting at the time, but would certainly like to check it out now that the hubbub has long since died down). A Room With A View is a very familiar title but, again, a film that's eluded me. Now I'd be interested in watching to see his performance there (as well as the performance that could have been with the lead).

 

[Willie Oleson]

then I've found myself questioning if they're gay films or just films which happen to be about gay people. For instance

Good point.
While there are some gay aspects in DEATH IN VENICE I feel that's not really what the film is about.
I've also removed MYSTERIOUS SKIN from my list because it's about child abuse and one of the characters just happens to be the gay. Not that that character isn't important, but I feel he's defined by his sociopathic behaviour rather than his sexuality (it wouldn't be much different if he wasn't gay).

On the subject of the very commited actor Daniel Day Lewis, his role in THERE WILL BE BLOOD is by many people considered one of the most extraordinary acting performances in the history of film. It's that difference between playing a character and becoming a character.
A few days ago I've added his film IN THE NAME OF THE FATHER to my prime list, thinking it would be about that kind of "Father". But I still have to find out if that's the case.
Phantom Thread and The Crucible are also very good.

 

[Willie Oleson]

In preparation for PRIEST '94

Which I have watched just now, and it was just as good as I remembered.
The two stories of secrets and guilt and forgiveness come together beautifully in the emotional finale but at the same time it adds a bit of a potboiler-y tone to the story.
The dialogue about celibacy and homosexuality in the church is there, but I felt it could have gone a little deeper.
No decision is being made about the future of Father Greg's sex life, is he going to have his cake and eat it or not, and what does that mean in the grand scheme of things?

Nevertheless, the film is very entertaining on all levels, the drama: the romance, the friendship, the humour and the Bishop's shocking bitchiness.
There are some nice surprises from the supporting cast, like the wild guy on the beach who literally drops in the middle of a conversation, tries to steal their coffee and then starts chasing the seagulls.
Linus Roache plays Father Greg with convincing anguish, resulting in some uncomfortable but very interesting scenes.

 

[James from London]

No decision is being made about the future of Father Greg's sex life, is he going to have his cake and eat it or not, and what does that mean in the grand scheme of things?

The bit that's always stayed with me is the older priest whom Linus Roache has confided in saying that while he (the older priest) has been given the gift of celibacy, Roache's priest has been given the gift of faith. I guess that means there is no black and white solution.

 

[Monzo]

I recently watched Mort sur la piste, a French TV movie starring Jason Priestley as the male lead.

Jason Priestley plays an American detective and former racing driver who comes to Le Mans on an exchange detective program just before the famous 24 Hours of Le Mans race and - quelle surprise ! - just before the race a murder occurs, which Jason Priestley's character helps the French police investigate.

I was amazed at how much (not necessarily well) Jason Priestley speaks French. Only when his character gets emotional does he switch to English. The film has a good set-up thanks to the race, but in terms of plot it is the typical French crime of the week: even if you try hard, after half an hour or an hour you don't know who the murderer is and what his motive is. There are many red herrings, but it's not until the last quarter of an hour that everything becomes clear.

 

[Willie Oleson]

while he (the older priest) has been given the gift of celibacy, Roache's priest has been given the gift of faith

Yes, at least it raises the question, what's more preferable: the flawed believer or the flawed celibate.
Interestingly, the only person who knows exactly what he's doing and isn't plagued by any sort of dilemma is Lisa's abusive father (who also happens to be a devoted Catholic).
I was very surprised by the confident explanation he gives during the confession, and while that takes nothing away from the criminal aspect (pedophilia, sex without mutual consent) there is something about the way he describes the desires of "men" that made me think it might not be entirely false.
Again, that doesn't justify his actions but sometimes I find it more challenging and interesting to delve into the dark psyche of humanity.
Not to find a way to agree with it, but to understand it. Sometimes, knowledge can be just as rewarding and useful as thinking "I'm right and the other person is wrong".

I also wasn't sure if Father Greg asked for forgiveness for being gay or for his homosexual actions. After all, if he hadn't done anything - and therefore never been caught - no one would have to know about his sexuality.

I guess that means there is no black and white solution

I'm not sure if I wanted a perfect solution but at the same time it does feel a bit like a cop-out. One can continue to sin because it will be forgiven anyway - ironically, that's what the confessions seem to be all about.
But what makes the finale so great - and it's written as a story after all - is that he's not forgiven by the bigots but by the only person he had seriously wronged.

But if the dilemma about celibacy and homosexuality couldn't be explored to the fullest in the story itself, I think they could have at least dropped it in the lap of the viewer. In this case I feel it doesn't particularly linger on.
I don't know if it's related to any of this, but the film has many short "cuts" and sometimes it disrupts the emotional flow and urgency of the dilemma.

Or perhaps I simply shouldn't have watched FIRST REFORMED in preparation for PRIEST. But the DVD, despite its underwhelming picture quality, will be added to The Collection, so I guess it's still a winner anyway.