Review: The Favourite

The recent death of Albert Finney revived interest in the movie that first made him a star in the U.S. (he was already a sensation in the U.K. thanks to Karel Reisz). Tom Jones attempted to obliterate the stuffy British costume drama with its focus on the low stakes bawdiness that was prevalent in 18th century literature but theretofore ignored by the movies. Whatever its worth as art, it paved the way for a more nuanced, naturalistic take on the historical record. The Favourite is a natural outcome of that legacy, and in the hands of provocateur Yorgos Lanthimos it goes beyond earthy effrontery. Like Lanthimos’s other works, it is sublimely ridiculous, and thanks to a witty script (not written by Lanthimos, but rather by Deborah Davis and Tony McNamara) that ridiculousness for once has a firm narrative footing.

Supposedly based on some kind of truth, The Favourite invades the court of Queen Anne (Olivia Colman), who, reigning over England in the early 18th century, has problems with affairs of state that she isn’t expected to understand, mainly because she’s a woman, but also because of her wayward personality as a result of more than a dozen miscarriages. Constitutionally unwell and in possession of a temperament that’s wildly unstable, she relies on her lady-in-waiting and part-time lover, Lady Sarah (Rachel Weisz), who not only arranges her toilet and keeps her on as even a keel as possible, but mostly dictates affairs of state, including an impending war with the French. Into this cozy nest steps Sarah’s cousin, Abigail (Emma Stone), whose own fortunes have been squandered by her father’s gambling habits. She comes to Kensington Palace a “fallen woman” to take employment with the household staff under Sarah’s direction, and the first thing she does when leaving the stage carriage is fall into a deep puddle of muck.

There’s nowhere to go but up, and the rest of the film is essentially the story of Abigail’s resentment-fueled rise in the palace, propelled by her competitive nature, prodded ever upwards in reaction to Sarah’s haughty attitude. As a caustic romantic triangle, all of whose points are female, the story necessarily trades in certain stereotypes associated with cats and claws and using feminine wiles to get ahead. Abigail eventually worms her way into the queeen’s good graces after sussing out Sarah’s Achilles Heel, which is that nobody seems to know about their affair, but rather than expose it, she studies its ramifications and finds ways to make it work for her. First, she marries up by luring the scheming, self-important Robert Harley (Nicholas Hoult), who fancies himself a statesman of some discernment, into her plan without his knowing. Buoyed in society by the match, she gains access to the queen and quickly steals her affections, but, of course, Sarah is not one to mess with.

What’s refreshing about The Favourite is that its cynical take on romantic manipulation for social betterment is balanced with a close study of historical exigencies that deepens not only the theme but the comedy, as well. The dialogue is almost too deliciously baroque for its own good, but it’s used in situations, like the one where Abigail pleasures Robert in the most hilariously distracted way, that really take advantage of Lanthimos’s talent for weirdness. Henry Fielding, and Albert Finney, would no doubt approve.

Now playing in Tokyo at Toho Cinemas Hibiya (050-6868-5068), Toho Cinemas Shinjuku (050-6868-5063), Shibuya Cine Quinto (03-3477-5905), Toho Cinemas Roppongi Hills (050-6868-5024).

The Favourite home page in Japanese.

photo (c) 2018 Twentieth Century Fox Film Corporation

Posted in Movies | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

Review: Aquaman

To anyone who filters the DC Comics cinematic universe through the overwhelming success of the brand’s rival, Marvel Studios, Aquaman the movie is best seen as a reply to the Thor series, which is where Marvel pointedly plays up the most ridiculous attributes of superhero blockbusters. Aquaman the character has always fit into a dodgy slot in the realm of comic fantasy as a guy who is half Atlantean-half American and talks to fish. And while there’s plenty to laugh at in the movie, its interminable length and earnest attempt to stuff as much “incident” into its two-and-a-half-hour running time leaches all the humor out of it.

The main difficulty faced by director James Wan is not so much the visual challenge of making underwater action scenes feel credible—for what it’s worth, they look perfectly OK—but rather squaring the epic prerogatives of an aquatic empire with the relatively real-world concerns of modern-day landlubbers. Aquaman/Arthur Curry (Jason Momoa) is the son of Queen Atlanna (Nicole Kidman), who has escaped the royal confines of her birthright, and the human lighthouse keeper Tom Curry (Temuera Morrison), who discovers her half-alive and washed up on the rocks below his keep. Atlanna eventually returns to Atlanta and Arthur grows up a bastard, but the main reason he’s bullied as a child is his affinity for fish and all things marine; and for most of its first 30 minutes the film makes for a compelling origin story. It’s when Arthur has to confront his fishier half that things become problematic plot-wise and thematically.

For one thing, the script relies too heavily on the viewer’s understanding of the mythology of Antlantis, which feels almost made up on the spot. Then there’s the surfeit of characters whose rationalization of good-vs.-bad becomes baffling very quickly. When Mera (Amber Heard) arrives at the lighthouse to beg him to claim his birthright from his evil half-brother, Orm (Patrick Wilson), the stakes seem clear, but then the writers throw in lots of complicated iconography, including a trench where exiles are punished, an extraneous super-villain named Black Manta (Yahya Abdul-Mateen II), a trusty royal advisor (Willem Dafoe), and a plot by Orm and his father, King Nereus (Dolph Lundgren) to make war on the human race. It’s this last bit of story that brings Aquaman into his own, but getting there proves to be a confusing, incoherent journey. The battles are vivid and ingeniously staged, but when things calm down the compositions feel overly stylized, like those tacky environmental paintings that were so popular in the 80s. Momoa, it should be pointed out, takes the ridiculousness of his character in stride, and the movie would have been funnier if it weren’t so damned busy.

Now playing in Tokyo at Toho Cinemas Nihonbashi (050-6868-5060), Toho Cinemas Hibiya (050-6868-5068), Marunouchi Picadilly (03-3201-2881), Shinjuku Wald 9 (03-5369-4955), Shinjuku Picadilly (050-6861-3011), Toho Cinemas Shinjuku (050-6868-5063), Shibuya Toei (03-5467-5773), Toho Cinemas Roppongi Hills (050-6868-5024).

Aquaman home page in Japanese.

photo (c) 2018 Warner Bros. Ent. and DC Comics

Posted in Movies | Tagged | Leave a comment

Review: First Man

Damien Chazelle’s third feature is an oddly circumspect blockbuster. Though this biopic of Apollo 11 astronaut Neil Armstrong fits neatly into the big-budget hero stylings of The Right Stuff and Apollo 13, its focus on a character who was basically unknowable makes for a striking contrast in tone. The action set pieces are as good as space movies get, while the expository drama has a purposeful flatness that often feels inert. And while Ryan Gosling doesn’t look anything like Armstrong, his patented lack of affect sort of prepares you for the Enigma of Neil. In those rare instances where some sort of meaning peaks through the blank facade, the viewer feels they’ve learned something monumental.

In the domestic scenes, what works usually feels accidental, but that may be due to Chazelle’s command of his mise en scene. Though we’ve been bombarded by any number of films set in the early 1960s lately, First Man feels more comfortably situated in the age, not so much because of its detailed production design but rather its leisurely pacing. Life in these United States, mostly Houston and the Midwest, where Armstrong lived before moving to Texas to join the Apollo program, is strictly regimented, which is perfect for Armstrong’s meticulous sensibility. So when his very young daughter dies of a brain tumor, the news feels telegraphed, stressing its inevitability and the idea that Neil and his wife, Janet (Claire Foy), have more than enough time to process their grief despite Neil’s work obligations. Janet herself is an unabashed full-time homemaker in a time and culture when such a calling was normalized to the point of a fetish, but the script by Josh Singer avoids the cliches of the over-worried astronaut wife by making Janet’s anxiety an almost tactile experience. She’s the red hot emotion-burner next to Neil’s cold-as-ice egghead, but you can see how that difference makes their marriage work, though it could only work in this particular milieu.

The movie also nails the peculiar occupational environment of the space program, which is portrayed as being neither macho nor super competitive but rather a job still in the process of achieving definition. Neil spends quite a few evenings popping beers with the other astronauts, who tend to be more emotionally demonstrative. If he fits into this boys club it’s because he understands before anyone else that teamwork is the soul of the program. Comradeship is not romantic wish fulfillment but a life-or-death requirement for these men. And when the movie finally enters into the Apollo 11 mission, you appreciate not just Armstrong’s stoical, over-achiever’s mein, but also his love for his fellow workers. The quasi-religious overtones of the visuals—the dusky browns reflecting off the surfaces of the dinky capsule interior, the deep blue-greys of the powdery dirt under Armstrong’s feet as he steps on the moon’s surface and delivers his famous line—bring home the real feeling of accomplishment, obviating most of the ethical struggle Armstrong felt with the cost of an enterprise that many believed wasn’t worth it. Chazelle himself often seems to wonder if it was worth it himself, beyond its obvious utility as a further means of proving himself to be Spielberg’s most natural heir.

Now playing in Tokyo at Toho Cinemas Nihonbashi (050-6868-5060), Toho Cinemas Hibiya (050-6868-5068), Shinuku Wald 9 (03-5369-4955), Shinjuku Picadilly (050-6861-3011), Toho Cinemas Shinjuku (050-6868-5063), Toho Cinemas Shibuya (050-6868-5002), Toho Cinemas Roppongi Hills (050-6868-5024).

First Man home page in Japanese.

photo (c) 2018 Universal Studios

Posted in Movies | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

The Cramps 1998

In commemoration of the 10th anniversary of the death of Lux Interior, here is a review I wrote for the Japan Times of a Cramps concert that took place some time in 1998 at Club Citta in Kawasaki, Japan. 

The decision to have Japan’s most famous amateur rock guitarist, Guitar Wolf, open for the Cramps at their Tokyo area shows is understandable, since both artists channel early American rock and stake their professional reputations on outrageous stage antics.

Stage antics can’t always hide musical incompetence, and in Guitar Wolf’s case they aren’t meant to. I have his album. I’ve even listened to it twice. But I didn’t recognize a thing he played at the June 13 show at Kawasaki Club Citta. What I heard was thirty minutes of the same three chords augmented by the standard vocabulary of rock epithets and the kind of stage moves perfected by everyone who was ever a Ramone. 

But the clincher, the move that sealed Guitar Wolf’s fate as last year’s weird Japanese rock act, was when he pulled a guy out of the audience, strapped his guitar on him, and prompted him to continue the song already in progress. The kid didn’t know how to play and since the song didn’t suffer for it we in the audience are supposed to realize that it isn’t the music but the spirit that matters, which is, of course, a load of crap. I’ve seen him do this before and I know he does it at every concert. Spirit has nothing to do with it.

So Guitar Wolf was a poor choice for an opening act, since his example served as a reminder that the Cramps, in addition to plugging the same glam-trash rockabilly and Nuggets-era psychedelia for more than two decades, have done the depraved sex thing on stage thousands of times. On the back of their latest album, “Big Beat From Badsville,” there is a warning to “proceed with caution” because the band “that dares to be different” has come up with “more music of anti-social significance designed with the fiendish in mind.” No matter how ironically you put it, insisting that you’re still shocking after all these years will strike some as a bit desperate-sounding.

After all, lead singer Lux Interior and guitarist Poison Ivy Rorschach, who formed the band during New York’s peak punk period in the mid-seventies, have reached that age when physical decadence goes beyond being an aesthetic statement and becomes an everyday fact of life. 

Ivy, dressed in a striped one-piece bathing suit, large-mesh black stockings, and vinyl stiletto boots, still looked pretty good, but Lux exuded every one of his forty-odd years and then some. Set below dyed black hair, his pale complexion and deep set eyes gave him the appearance of the ghouls he often sings about. On top of that there’s the lean, abused body and the grossed-out sissy convulsions that come in waves as he sings. If he ever quits the Cramps he can probably make a career as the Emcee in touring productions of “Cabaret.”

The rhythm section of fey blonde bassist Slim Chance and notably normal-looking drummer Harry Drumdini maintained a reliable throb throughout the ninety-minute performance, while Ivy set the tone with her standard battery of I-IV-V chord progressions and familiar 50s & 60s riffs (Duane Eddy twang, Link Wray rumble, Standells freak-out).

Lux took the stage in a long, black coat, gag sunglasses (the ones with eyes painted on the lenses), and sheer black gloves. The band moved swiftly from “Cramp Stomp” to “Love Me” to “Garbageman” before Lux finally threw off the coat to reveal a shiny skin-tight black ensemble. It looked pretty hot, and I don’t mean style-wise.

Once the coat was gone, the music picked up. “Creature from the Black Leather Lagoon” and “God Monster” provided a one-two punch of Lux’s favorite reference — B-grade monster movies (the new album is dedicated to the late Cleveland TV schlockmeister Ghouldini). This was followed by “It Thing Hard-On,” one of the better songs from “Badsville,” which describes perfectly the singer’s ideal badass rocker. “Well, the doctor pulled me out and smacked me in the can/Wiped me off, took a look and said ‘It’s a man’.”

On the raunchy and slippery “Goo Goo Muck,” and the even less inhibited “Hot Pearl Snatch,” Lux prostrated himself before the temple of Poison Ivy, while the guitarist rewarded his attentions with icy indifference, an attitude that never changed the whole evening. “The city is a jungle and I’m a beast,” he screamed, but rather than sounding like a statement of purpose the humiliating posture revealed it as an admission of unbearable sexual frustration.

Even when effecting youthful cool on “Teenage Werewolf” (which Drumdini played with oversized femurs) and “Sunglasses After Dark,” Lux came off as an adolescent in a state of denial about his miserable sexual prospects. The low-down style that the band values has less to do with the demimonde chic of the New York Dolls — the band that first inspired them to form a group — than it does with the juvenile garbage culture of Mad Magazine and “Big Daddy” Ed Roth. 

For those who had come to rock out, however, the Cramps’ thematic carryings-on didn’t make up for what was in the end a monotonous musical attack. There was a knot of fans in front of the stage who boogied the whole show, but everyone else held back and looked merely curious. During the 10-minute destructo encore of the Trashmen classic “Surfin’ Bird,” the crowd perked up, but it had nothing to do with the song. 

Like Guitar Wolf’s audience participation gambit, Lux’s violent post-set behavior has become an obligatory signature flourish. After swallowing the microphone whole, climbing the speaker stacks and jumping off, rolling around in agony, and then pulverizing the mike stand, Lux peeled off his costume and exposed the sad source of his creative inspiration. Most people had to strain to see above the heads in front of them, a few laughed, and everyone forgot about the music.

Posted in Music | Tagged , | Leave a comment

Review: Hannah

Thematically and structurally similar to 45 Years, which also starred Charlotte Rampling as the wife of a man who undergoes a startling change in situation, Andrea Pallaoro’s heavily circumscribed character study is less emotionally involving but more evocative. Set in France, the movie keeps its focus on the title character, an unassuming and undemonstrative housewife whose husband (Andre Wilms), we gradually learn, is about to embark on a lengthy prison stay. The opening sequence, which finds Hannah dutifully packing a back for her spouse, is so devoid of dramatic signifiers that as the truth reveals itself the viewer may find himself questioning his eyes…though not his ears. There is virtually no dialogue for the first ten minutes or so.

The unnamed husband’s crimes are never explained, though in Hannah’s subsequent encounters with friends and family it’s easy to get an idea of the nature of his trasngressions. These encounters are situated in daily routines that include acting classes whose purport is purely expository. Indeed, Hannah seems as incapable of empathizing with fictional characters as she is with her husband’s alleged victims, though her son (Simon Bisschop) is explicit in his determination to have no more contact with his parents. Whatever sins the father committeed, the son sees the mother as complicit. To us she seems oblivious.

The difficulty of the movie is in Pallaoro’s decision to divorce these brief spurts of melodrama from the overall tone of the film, which is so evenhanded as to be almost hypnotic. At one point, while visiting her husband in prison, her stone face fads, but only for a second, when the husband hints that, of course, he isn’t guilty of the crimes he’s been accused of. If anything, Hannah’s steely demeanor may not just be a front to avoid thinking of her responsibility in the matter, but also a means of denying the obvious; and as the movie wears on her self-contained quietude takes on a desperate cast, a form of acting in and of itself, even if the only audience is herself. Her suffering is indirect; not a function of pain but rather one of avoiding pain. Pallaoro keeps the tension taut through intractable closeups and a sound design that reminds us that Hannah exists in the real world, even if she seems trapped in her own self-created hell. You wait for her to unravel. And wait some more…

In French. Now playing in Tokyo at Cine Switch Ginza (03-3561-0707).

Hannah home page in Japanese.

photo (c) 2017 Parner Media Investment-Left Field Ventures-Good Fortune Films

Posted in Movies | Tagged | Leave a comment

Review: Burning

Before he became the most vital director of the Korean film renaissance, Lee Chang-dong was a successful novelist, and the most penetrating aspect of his movies is their unpredictable but nevertheless natural plot developments. In his two best films, Oasis (2002) and Poetry (2010), he sets up simple storylines that stress character interactions and then tests those interactions by setting off catastrophes that are both shocking and seemingly inevitable. Consequently, the melodrama that is so intrinsic to the Korean cinema sensibility feels neither sentimental nor contrived, making for the purest catharsis.

Burning is Lee’s first film as a director in 8 years, and this time he adapts someone else’s work, a short story by Haruki Murakami, which I haven’t read. Reportedly, Lee took the basic idea of the story, written in the early 90s, and made it relevant to South Korea right now. If the movie differs appreciably from his earlier work, it’s in the way he plays with thriller elements that may have been inherent in Murakami’s story. The most common complaint about Burning the film is the way the “mystery” propelling the plot is or isn’t resolved, and thus the motivations of the protagonist, a young, ineffectual would-be novelist named Lee Jong-su (Yoo Ah-in), remain unknown, though it doesn’t take a big leap of imagination to guess what those motivations are.

As with most Lee protagonists, Jong-su’s inner life is initially characterized as being inert. His annoying countenance usually presents an open mouth and eyes that rove as if trying desperately to make sense of his surroundings. He rarely responds to stimuli, spoken or otherwise, giving the impression he’s slow on the uptake. And yet, as he explains to Hae-mi (Jun Jong-seo), an old classmate he runs into while delivering merchandise to a department store where Hae-mi is doing promotional work in leather miniskirt and boots, he attended college where he studied creative writing. If no one seems surprised at this calling, it’s probably because no one seems to believe it. How could this guy, so incurious, make fictional worlds?

Jong-su could simply be an empty vessel, and one night of sex with Hae-mi gives him at least some sort of goal, which is to make her fall in love with him. She goes to Africa in an ambitious bid to learn about a certain tribe she’s read about, and while she’s gone he takes care of her cat, an animal he never sees, and masturbates in her empty apartment while thinking about her. However, when she returns, she’s with Ben (Steven Yeun), a rich, handsome, internationally savvy dude who befriended her overseas. Jong-su can’t quite get a handle on their relationship—are they lovers, just friends, or something in between? Jong-su obviously sees Ben as a rival, and not just for Hae-mi’s affections.

Plotwise, there isn’t much beyond this threeway dance of meaning, but when Hae-mi disappears without a trace, Jong-su falls into an obsessive pattern of stalking Ben and sinking deeper into his own fancies, which are opaque to the viewer even if Lee attempts to visualize them to a certain extent. The director’s game is to widen the socioeconomic gap between Jong-su and Ben without ever having either character comment on it, unless you consider Jong-su’s description of his rival as a “Gatsby” to be criticism. Actually, what he says is that there are a lot of Gatsbys in Korea these days, a situation that seems to perplex him, a lower middle class, marginally employed individual living for free on his family’s farm while his volatile father is tried for assault. Like his stalled literary career (we never see Jong-su write anything except a petition for leniency for his father), the social milieu of Burning feels stuck in neutral. No one and nothing seems to be going anywhere, including Ben, who doesn’t work and spends most of his days lounging around his high-rent Seoul pad, tooling aimlessly in his Porsche, and entertaining friends, many of whom are similar in demeanor to Hae-mi—or maybe that’s just us looking at them through Jong-su’s eyes.

This, to me, is Lee’s comfort zone, an ambiguous moral environment where one’s sense of right and wrong is a matter of improvisation, but if the characters in Lee’s past films eventually reached a state of grace without necessarily achieving happiness, Jong-su falls on the other side of the divide, and this would seem to be the Murakami effect. Certainly, the seminal scene where Ben, after smoking some weed, confesses to Jong-su that his hobby is burning down derelict greenhouses, feels straight out of Murakami, and Lee seems to accept that non sequitur as a challenge; not just in terms of fitting it into the plot, but in making it the central motif in a movie that smolders rather than burns—until the end, that is, when all bets are off.

In Korean. Now playing in Tokyo at Toho Cinemas Chanter (050-6868-5001).

Burning home page in Japanese.

photo (c) 2018 Pinehouse Film Co., Ltd.

Posted in Movies | Tagged , | Leave a comment

Review: The Front Runner

Pardon me if I initially confused Gary Hart with John Edwards. Though the two presidential candidates’ respective career-destroying sex scandals happened almost two decades apart, they tend to blur together in my mind. All those WASPy Democrats look alike, I guess.

However, the distinction is importnat, or, at least it is from director Jason Reitman’s point of view. Reitman and his co-scenarists, Matt Bai and Jay Carson, clearly believe Hart was railroaded by an overzealous press for an indiscretion that didn’t amount to much even in terms of the sex. The promotional campaign for The Front Runner wants you to see the “timeliness” of the film in the age of Trump, when sex scandals count for nothing any more. Gary Hart (Hugh Jackman), as the film’s trailer puts it, “changed American politics forever” by essentially martyring himself on the altar of principled adulthood. After that, Bill Clinton could get away with a lot, and though John Edwards didn’t, it’s mainly because he knocked someone up and didn’t have the moxie to hire a team that could play it down effectively enough. And forget about Trump.

Too cynical? The scenario is only convincing up to a point, and given how determinedly Reitman tries to ram it home, it feels forced and a bit tired. Much footage and production values are expended to prove the titular label: Hart barely lost to Walter Mondale for the Democratic nomination in 1984 and definitely, according to the film, had a more progressive and rational platform. He was thus perfectly positioned to win the nomination in 1988 after eight years of Reaganomics and right wing shrillness. The Colorado senator has it all, the smart stand on issues, the charisma, and, most importantly, the looks.

How this freight train of political inevitability gets derailed is told in a sketchy and not altogether convincing manner, but it is told with passion, which should count for something. As it happens, Hart separated from his wife, Lee (Vera Farmiga), for part of the campaign due mainly to her exhaustion. After all, she’d essentially been doing it for more than four years. Then two reporters for the Miami Herald, portrayed as dogs on the trail of a raccoon, reveal that a campaign worker, Donna Rice (Sara Paxton), had spent an evening and maybe the night at his single-guy apartment on the road. From there, the rest of the press, including the Washington Post, whose respected editor, Ben Bradlee (Alfred Molina), at one point fondly remembers the days when reporters respected Jack Kennedy’s indiscretions, piles on with lots of innuendo that snowballs in the face of Hart’s intransigence. The problem for the viewer is that, despite Reitman’s demonization of the Fourth Estate, it’s difficult to get a bead on Hart. He’s definitely irresponsible for getting himself in this mess, but is he actually guilty? The fact that Reitman confuses the matter by insisting it’s nobody’s business doesn’t get to the heart of the movie’s point—Was Hart actually unfaithful and were he and his wife on the outs anyway? Of course, life is messy, but the movie is so adamant about taking Hart’s side that it gives the impression it’s playing fast and loose with history. It’s exciting and utterly frustrating at the same time.

Now playing in Tokyo at Toho Cinemas Nihonbashi (050-6868-5060), Toho Cinemas Hibiya (050-6868-5068), Toho Cinemas Shinjuku (050-6868-5063), Toho Cinemas Roppongi Hills (050-6868-5024).

The Front Runner home page in Japanese.

Posted in Movies | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

Review: The Wife

Glenn Close’s surprise Golden Globe win for Best Actress in a Drama already pegs Bjorn Runge’s film as a must-see mediocre movie, and, in truth, Close makes it worth your money. As the wife of blowhard writer Joe Castleman (Jonathan Pryce), who is being awarded the Nobel Prize for Literature, Close conveys her character’s mixture of horror and self-satisfaction with unusual delicacy. Why the wife of a man who is being feted for such an achievement has such polarized feelings is the question at the heart of the story’s conflict, and as high concept it’s a doozy, which is why the movie doesn’t live up to its star’s portrayal of the title character—Runge won’t leave well enough alone.

The first assumption the viewer makes about Joan Castleman’s ambiguous response to the announcement is that she’s finally forced to confront the fact that she has never loved her husband, despite the deceptively tender opening scene. As the directness of the title would seem to indicate, Joan’s position in this marriage is decidedly secondary, but the truth turns out to be even worse. Joan has not so much wasted her love on this man, but wasted her life and her native talents. The plot occasionally shifts into the past, when Joan was Joe’s student. He acknowledged her gifts as a fiction writer and eventually left his wife for her. But that act of adultery is not the source of Joan’s towering resentment, and as the scenes in Stockholm, where the couple repair to wait out Joe’s ascension into the Valhalla of world letters, play out in bars and hotel rooms, Joan’s feelings can no longer be denied, and Joe’s own guilt comes to the fore in very ugly ways. Based on a novel, the story didn’t really need to go any further than these sequences where husband and wife go at each other as if in an Edward Albee play, stabbing each other in the psyche with their pointed accusations of exploitation and self-serving monomania. The thing is, Joan’s hurt is real and justifiable. What Joe has done to her in his own passive-aggressive way is monstrous.

So why does Runge add a son (Max Irons) who tags along to present his own resentments about his stalled literary career? To further make the point that Joe is too full of himself to care about even his own flesh and blood? And why the unauthorized biographer (Christian Slater) who corners Joan in a restaurant to torment her with his theory of Joe’s fraudulent front and knowledge of his sexual indiscretions, both of which she is very familiar with and hardly needs to be reminded of? Is it a device to reveal Joe’s execrable personality, which is hardly necessary since we can see from the start that he’s a priggish asshole? It’s obvious that the core issue of the film is why Joan has put up with him all these years, and the movie gets to the solution mainly through Close’s performance. You can see her panic at the realization she’s wasted it all, and when a reckoning does come it’s appropriately apocalyptic, if not necessarily convincing when scrutinized thoroughly. (It helps that the movie is set in 1992, meaning that Joan is the product of an earlier era when women weren’t taken as seriously as they were later as writers, but it doesn’t help that much.) The Wife needs to be seen if only for proof that Glenn Close is one of the most accomplished actresses of her generation. But like Joe in relation to Joan, it’s not a fitting monument to her talents.

Now playing in Tokyo at Shinjuku Picadilly (050-6861-3011), Kadokawa Cinema Yurakucho (03-6268-0015), Yebisu Garden Cinema (0570-783-715).

The Wife home page in Japanese.

photo (c) Meta Film London Ltd. 2017

Posted in Movies | Tagged | Leave a comment

Media Mix, Jan. 27, 2019

Futenma air base

Here’s this week’s Media Mix about the protocol relationship between Japan-Russia negotiations over the Northern Territories and the U.S. base issue in Okinawa. According to writer Koji Yabe, Japan is totally in thrall to the U.S. military and thus cannot make any assurances to third parties with regard to its own strategic interests if the U.S. doesn’t sign off on those assurances. The media, for the most part, buys into the government’s narrative of “hope”—that there is still a possibility that the Northern Territories will someday revert to Japanese sovereignty, and that the contested Henoko air base will mean the shutdown of the even more contentious Futenma air base—but that there is little chance that what they suggest is happening will actually come to pass.

What’s particularly galling about Yabe’s point is that his findings are not exactly secret. They are there for any journalist to see. During his Golden Radio conversation cited in the column, he talks at length about the so-called secret agreement behind the revised Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA) signed in 1960, the one that essentially allowed the U.S. to carry nuclear weapons on its vessels when they came to Japan. Though at one time this agreement was classified, it has been common knowledge for a few decades now, and available for anyone to read and study. To Yabe, the dynamic outlined by the agreement informs the relationship between Japan and the U.S. military to this day. Nobusuke Kishi, Shinzo Abe’s grandfather, was prime minister when the secret agreement was signed two weeks before SOFA was concluded, but his successor, Hayato Ikeda, apparently was not informed about the agreement, so several years later when opposition lawmakers heard that nukes were being brought into Japanese harbors, they questioned the ruling party in the Diet, because it wasn’t allowed, and Ikeda firmly denied the rumors, thinking they weren’t true. The Americans became nervous, and then-ambassador Edwin Reischauer sat Foreign Minister Masayoshi Ohira down and explained the secret agreement to him and the use of the vague term “introduce”—as in “the U.S. will not introduce nuclear weapons on Japanese territory”—which was used in the public documents. The thing is, the U.S. thought the current Japanese administration knew about this, but apparently Kishi and his people didn’t tell anyone. From then on, the Liberal Democratic Party stuck to the secret agreement and pretended that nukes were not being carried by American submarines into Japanese harbors (as well as other nukes that didn’t become known until later). As a result, Japan was able to maintain its image as a nuke-free country and Eisaku Sato could win the Nobel Peace Prize for something—the storied three non-nuclear principles—that was basically a lie.

Yabe tells this story to reinforce his theory that Japan’s foreign ministry has absolutely no authority when it comes to negotiating with the U.S. on almost anything. Moreover, this idea is so deeply ingrained in the bureaucratic and political sensibility that the government has used it for its own ends. When Yukio Hatoyama became in 2009 the first non-LDP prime minister in more than a decade, he proceeded to realize his campaign promise to move the Futenma air base out of Okinawa, something the U.S. didn’t want. He was then visited by bureaucrats from the foreign and defense ministries who showed him something they called the U.S. military operations manual, which said that helicopter bases could not be situated more than 120 kilometers from a land forces base. Hatoyama was planning on shifting Futenma to Tokunoshima, which is more than 120 kilometers away. That’s why Hatoyama eventually dropped the idea for the move. As a result, his government collapsed and he resigned.

But, according to Yabe, there is no such manual. It was a story made up by bureaucrats who knew the U.S. would never go for Hatoyama’s plan to move the Futenma base off Okinawa. Yabe says the mass media knows about the bureaucrats’ lies, but never discuss it. Even Hatoyama seems to have accepted his fate. It’s no use trying to resist the Americans.

Posted in Media | Tagged , | Leave a comment

Review: Suspiria

Few genres have become as formulaic as horror movies, and one of the better things you can say about Luca Guadagnino’s reimagining of Dario Argento’s 1977 slasher classic is that it avoids the cliches you expect. Unfortunately, it replaces them with other cliches, mostly from opera and political thrillers. In fact, it’s probably best not to categorize this new version of Suspiria as a horror film, since it will mislead fans of the genre—there’s not a whole lot of suspense, and rather than gore the film charges its shocks with unsettlingly bizarre visuals—and repel those who usually eschew horror movies, though even this latter group might find it difficult to swallow.

Having never seen the original, I approached it with an open mind and, since I don’t really like conventional horror, the movie exerted a certain peculiar fascination, though, to tell the truth, I really had no idea what was going on from scene to scene and would have a very hard time trying to explain the plot in detail. The story takes place in Berlin in the autumn of 1977, when West Germany was going through political upheaval due to antics by the likes of the Red Army Faction. A member of a local avant garde dance troupe, Patricia (Chloe Grace Moretz), consults with an elderly psychiatrist (Tilda Swinton with tons of makeup) about a coven of witches who use the dance company as a kind of front. When Patricia disappears, the doctor tries to investigate the dance troupe to find out what happened to her, and in the process we learn that he lost his wife in the Holocaust, though it’s not clear if she was killed or just disappeared, like Patricia. Eventually, this through-story becomes annoyingly complex and muddied as Guadagnino intercuts it with scenes from inside the dance troupe that suggest the leader, Madame Blanc (also Swinton), is, in fact, a witch who recruits young women as dancers to fulfill some sort of Satanic inevitability that I could never really figure out. The film shifts its focus on a new American recruit, Susie (Dakota Johnson), who has escaped a rigidly religious upbringing in the Midwest to feed her art jones in Europe’s most celebrated divided city.

To say the dance sequences, which are set to Thom Yorke’s hyperventilating score, are ridiculous is to question the film’s priorities. Good horror revels in ludicrous brainstorms, but one thing that Suspiria truly lacks is a relatable sense of humor. The scary scenes are usually built around body horror meant to mimic the unnatural choreography that Madame Blanc favors, and which Susie seems to understand preternaturally. There is a kind of genius to these scenes, though they aren’t really scary, just discomfiting, and, to paraphrase Bob Dylan, they sit in the movie like a battleship in a bathtub, overcompensating for the meandering plot and the confused themes. And it just goes on forever. One thing you have to say about Suspiria is that its original, but I’m not sure if that’s what horror fans are really into.

In English, German and French. Now playing in Tokyo at Toho Cinemas Hibiya (050-6868-5068), Toho Cinemas Shinjuku (050-6868-5063), Human Trust Cinema Shibuya (03-5468-5551), Toho Cinemas Roppongi Hills (050-6868-5024).

Suspiria home page in Japanese.

photo (c) 2018 Amazon Content Services LLC

Posted in Movies | Tagged , | Leave a comment