Home » Blog

We Live in Time: An Almost Great Film

Last weekend I saw We Live in Time, directed by John Crowley and starring Andrew Garfield as Tobias and Florence Pugh as Almut. This film, to me, is an example of an “almost great” movie. Crowley did a nice job directing the individual scenes. Garfield and Pugh had wonderful chemistry as a couple navigating their differences and her terminal illness while trying to maintain an air of normalcy for their young daughter. They also both gave stellar performances that could gain some recognition for both of them this coming awards season.

Unfortunately, Crowley couldn’t direct his way out of a couple of plot holes that took me out of the movie just enough to reduce the emotional impact it had on me at the end. I feel like this was a movie that should have had me with a ginormous lump in my throat by the end. Whether these ideas were in the original screenplay and got cut for the sake of running time, I don’t know. But I do know the film needed another couple of scenes to answer a couple of key questions.

Warning: Spoilers ahead. Come back after you see the movie.

What Crowley did do very well was always have the feeling of limited time hanging over the characters. Obviously, Almut has limited time to live as she battles stage 3 ovarian cancer. However, even the day-to-day things they deal with as they go through their lives always have time as a backdrop.

Where he missed the mark were some of the details. There were a couple of scenes in particular that were missing that I felt should have been there in order to tie things up better. Almut is a chef who is up-and-coming and encouraged by her peers to compete in a European chef contest. However, her doctors, concerned about her metastasizing cancer, want her to pull back. She tells Tobias that she won’t enter the contest, but she does anyway, and the final round is scheduled for the day they’re supposed to be married. Tobias finds all this out when Almut’s aggressive practice schedule causes her to miss picking up their daughter from school. She admits to Tobias that she’s doing this contest and that it conflicts with their wedding day. We then see Tobias tearfully throwing away the wedding invitations they had so carefully chosen together, which feels very much like a representation of the fracturing of a relationship.

Then, the next thing we see is Almut prepping for the contest, then going out to the floor where a cheering audience waits. A cheering audience that includes Tobias and their daughter enthusiastically holding up a sign and cheering Almut on. Personally, I found that very jarring, and I felt like at least two scenes needed to happen in between. Tobias needed to have some realization of why this was important to Almut. She spent the previous scene saying how much she needed this so that she could be remembered as something other than her daughter’s mother. We needed to see Tobias have that realization and come to understand that this was bigger than him. He then needed to say that to Almut, who then needed to give something to Tobias, perhaps marrying him in a local courthouse before the competition to make their union complete. It should have been important for them to be on equal terms here as they prepare to part ways.

There was one other thing that I thought could have brought a lot more drama to this screenplay. Their first big fight is a disagreement over kids. Tobias wants them, but Almut doesn’t. Then after discovering she has ovarian cancer, she has the option to have a full hysterectomy to lessen the chance of the cancer coming back. She opts not to do that, thinking that maybe she would like to have children someday, and then her cancer goes into remission. Then they have a baby, but the cancer comes back, this time in a much more serious way.

There was a great moment for Almut to blame Tobias for her cancer. Even if he didn’t pressure her into not doing the full hysterectomy, although that would also have been better, she could have had a line telling him that she wouldn’t have this cancer if he hadn’t wanted kids so bad. Something along those lines would have created a lot of conflict and tension that would have been a lot more engaging and dramatic. It would have been another challenge for them to overcome, which would have made the movie much more interesting.

Just my humble opinion.

Otherwise, I thought this was a terrific film. As love stories go, We Live in Time might be this generation’s Love Story without the iconically sappy line. However, the last scene, where they go skating and wave goodbye to each other, was a little on the nose. If you like a good love story, this is definitely a film you should check out.

You can also hear more thoughts on this on the Gen X v Z: A Movie Podcast, which is available wherever you listen to podcasts.

100 Words Each (Roughly) On Some Recent Films

It’s been a while since I posted anything, and I need to get caught up before we move on to one of the most exciting times of the year, movie-wise. So here are roughly 100 words each on some recent releases.

Megalopolis

Francis Ford Coppola’s passion project landed with a thud with audiences and critics. Coming on the heels of Kevin Costner’s costly fumble with Horizon: An America Saga, moviegoers should be rightly distrustful of filmmakers past their primes as 10-minute standing ovations at Cannes. Megalopolis had a non-sequitur screenplay with too many subplots that didn’t go anywhere. It had uninspired acting performances, except for Aubrey Plaza and Shia LeBeouf, neither of whom could salvage this movie wreck. And on top of all that, it didn’t even look that good. This film was a failure.

The Wild Robot

The latest effort from DreamWorks Animation proves yet again what an underrated animation studio they are. Director Chris Sanders (Lilo and Stitch, How to Train Your Dragon, The Croods) showed off his creative genius yet again with a film that’s thisclose to being a masterpiece. The Wild Robot is a great film loaded with heart, humor, some macabre wit, and stunning visuals. Not a great animated film. A great film. This fish-out-of-water story has strong thematic components about belonging, overcoming obstacles, and the challenges (and rewards) of parenting. The emotion quotient in this film is through the roof, and only the most hardened of souls will emerge from the theater with dry eyes.

Joker: Folie á Deux

I don’t know if I have anything to offer that hasn’t already been said many times. There was a lot of irony in this film. With all the fan-service movies coming out these days, this movie was like anti-fan-service. I was a huge fan of the first Joker movie, and director Todd Phillips seemed to intentionally alienate fans of the first movie by turning the entire universe on its head. I went into the theater with an open mind. I hate to be critical of filmmakers when they experiment with new things, but it felt like Phillips was doing the Joker dirty because he didn’t want to make any more Joker movies, and making this movie in this way would guarantee that. Even with my low expectations, Joker: Folie á Deux was still a disappointment.

My Old Ass

What a charming movie this was. Was it the best film of the year? Not by a long shot. That said, it did give me CODA vibes. I do not think it will shock the world and win Best Picture or even Best Screenplay as that movie did, but it did pack a nice emotional punch. The screenplay was well-written, and there was a lot of nice, subtle acting in the film, especially from Maisy Stella as Elliott and Aubrey Plaza as Older Elliott. Writer/Director Megan Park gave us an intimate and personal film about living as older people with the choices we made when we were young and how sometimes you don’t necessarily want what you think you want. Park added a nice bit of mystery in that Older Elliott tells Younger Elliott to stay away from a guy named Chad, but, despite her best intentions, younger Elliott falls in love with him, leading to a reunion of sorts between Chad and Older Elliott that is as heartwarming and heartbreaking a scene as you will ever see. The last 10 minutes of My Old Ass is a gut punch, and Plaza performs the scene brilliantly. This is a small movie that delivers big emotion.

Saturday Night

This is one of the most entertaining films of the year. It’s about the last 90 minutes leading up to the first episode of Saturday Night Live, a seminal night in the world of television and pop culture. I don’t know how accurate the portrayal of the events is, but I do know that the acting is spot-on. Corey Michael Smith as Chevy Chase, Dylan O’Brien as Dan Akroyd, Matt Wood as John Belushi, and Lamone Morris as Garrett Morris perfectly channeled those individual personalities and idiosyncrasies in ways that brought those younger men back to life. Elia Hunt as Gilda Radner, Emily Fairn as Laraine Newman, and Kim Matula as Jane Curtain rounded out the not-ready-for-prime-time-players in ways that demonstrated those women’s talents, quirks and insecurities as talented women in what was a man’s world brilliantly. This movie channels SNL perfectly. It’s frenetic, edgy, and in your face. It pulls no punches and brings the laughs and entertainment in its own stylized way. Director Jason Reitman did the show proud.

It would be fair to say that the Autumn movie season has been a mixed bag. Some very good, some mediocre, and some downright bad films have graced the theaters. That said, there are some films coming out over the next few weeks that I can’t wait to see.

If you’re interested in hearing more about the films above, check out my podcast, Gen X v Z: A Movie Podcast. In it, I discuss these films with my film school graduate daughter. It’s available wherever you listen to podcasts.

Sing Sing: An Important Film That Everyone Should See

I saw Sing Sing over the weekend, and it blew me away. This film was a masterclass in acting and directing. It was thematically powerful, had a definite point of view, and drove home emotionally charged components. It had important messages about incarceration and the ideas of rehabilitation vs. punishment.

Let’s talk about the story first.

This wasn’t a traditionally told story. The screenplay was based on the book The Sing Sing Follies by Clarence “Divine Eye” Maclin, about his time in Sing Sing Prison when he participated in a theater group. The screenplay had several contributors, and this was not a traditionally told story. If you’re looking for a traditional 3-act structure, you won’t find it in this movie. And while there is a Hero’s Journey that can be followed, that isn’t really what this movie is about. This movie is about a few direct, emotional moments, and the narrative serves to get us to those moments. This is a subtle movie in many ways, not least in the storytelling. There is a lot of subtext in this very layered narrative that the audience might not consciously be aware of, but they will be able to feel as the story moves along.

Usually, I am not a fan of this type of storytelling. I prefer screenplays that have a tight structure that builds drama throughout the story. However, the screenwriters managed to massage this story in a way that made it dramatic and emotional. Much of that had to do with the characters’ circumstances, and this is very much a character-driven movie. With that in mind, the screenwriters masterfully gave the characters outstanding character arcs that allowed the audience to engage with them on an emotional level, which made up for the lack of conflict and drama in the storyline. This is a very emotional film.

About the acting

In a word, the acting in Sing Sing is superb. Many of the actors were formerly incarcerated and went through this program at Sing Sing prison, so there was a feeling of sincerity and realism in the acting that wouldn’t have been there if regular cinematic actors who had never set foot inside a prison had gotten those roles.

In particular, Coleman Domingo, who already showed out quite well last year in Rustin, gives another masterclass in acting in this film. As with the storytelling, subtlety is the name of the game here. Domingo, playing John “Divine G” Witfield, who is serving time for a crime he didn’t commit, is a man who finds hope in the theater group, but that hope is tested by the everyday reminders that he is not free and that freedom is a long way off.

That feeling is captured in three scenes. The first scene in which he visits a room high in the prison with an open window. He stretches his hand outside as far as his arm can reach to feel the free air he can’t feel on the inside. The next is a moment at the end of his clemency hearing that ends abruptly, telling him that the judgment will likely not be in his favor. He lingers for a moment and stutters out as politely a thank you as he can muster, hoping that last act of kindness will tilt the scale in his favor. The last is when he receives a thick envelope telling him his plea has been rejected. He stands there looking at the envelope for a long time, almost hoping that looking at it long enough will change what it says. Those three moments are gut-wrenching and emotional, demonstrating strong storytelling that is carried by phenomenal acting.

Oscar Season Came Early This Year

This is likely the first of this year’s true Oscar contenders. Will it win anything? Will it even be nominated for anything? Only time will tell. We still have a lot of great films to watch. But the bar for acting has been set, and it has been set high.

Go see this movie in a theater if you get a chance. It isn’t glittering with production design or visual effects, but it deserves your attention. It has a point of view, and you need to focus on it completely to experience its full impact.

My Number 6 Favorite Screenplay of the Year: Challengers

Now that we’re halfway through the year, I thought this would be a good time to acknowledge the best of what we’ve seen so far. Traditionally, the first half of the year can be kind of a wasteland when it comes to good movies. We generally see Oscar-bait movies get their wide release after the limited releases of December made them Oscar-eligible. February and March generally bring out a cavalcade of forgettable movies that are worthy of being neither Oscar-bait nor summer blockbusters. Kids are in school, the weather across the country is terrible, and most people would rather stay home and watch TV or do something streaming. We sometimes get a gem in April to whet our appetites for the blockbuster season that is just around the corner and is finally delivered in May and June.

This year, April brought us Challengers, a movie with a budding superstar in Zendaya and two up-and-comers in Mike Faist and Josh O’Connor. My daughter and I recorded a podcast on it when it came out that can be found here.

What you might find interesting in listening to that podcast is that it might sound like I really didn’t like it. I fully recognize that I am not the target audience for Challengers, but I can also appreciate what they did with the screenplay, even if I wasn’t a fan of the overall film.

This was an unconventional script and an unconventional film.

While I was not a huge fan of the movie, I really liked what screenwriter Justin Kuritzkes did in crafting the story. The movie is about tennis players in a love triangle, and Kurtzkes structured the story in much the same way as the back-and-forth of a tennis match. Anyone who follows tennis knows that when two evenly matched players face off against each other, the momentum of the match can go back and forth. Kurtzkes’ screenplay matches that flow very well over the course of the script.

This was an interesting one for me. After walking out of the theater, my initial reaction was that I didn’t like it. Then, after reflecting on it for a while and discussing it with my daughter on our podcast, I saw more value in the screenplay than I previously had. Kurtzkes and director Luca Guadagnino were not spoon-feeding us the story. They required us to watch and to pay attention to interpret it in our own minds. It was a smartly written screenplay that required active viewing from the audience. You had to pay attention to what was going on to appreciate the symbolism of what Kurtzkes and Guadagnino were doing. If you missed the symbolism, the screenplay would be diminished. If you got the symbolism, the screenplay’s greatness would be revealed.

From a nuts-and-bolts standpoint, the script did what it needed to do. It dripped with conflict, it created a dramatic third act, and it challenged the characters to learn and grow. Some of the characters learned and grew more completely than others, which is what needed to happen. Kurtzkes wasn’t afraid to put his characters in uncomfortable and even painful situations, and the movie was better for it.

Now, this still isn’t my favorite movie of the year, and that’s fine. I’m not the target audience, and people who I’ve spoken with who are in the target audience all loved it. Ultimately, the screenplay did what it needed to do. It just did it in a very unconventional way.

Six! My Six favorite screenplays of the year so far!

We are essentially halfway through the year. In no particular order, my top 5 favorite screenplays of the year are:

Inside Out 2

Dune Part 2

Wicked Little Letters

The Ministry of Ungentlemanly Warfare

The Fall Guy

Challengers

Over the next few days, I will discuss each of these screenplays in detail. I will examine what the screenwriters did right, what they could have improved on, and why the screenplays were integral to the film’s success.

Inside Out 2: PIXAR Picks Up the Slack

I will admit that when I first heard that Inside Out 2 was on the slate, I was underwhelmed. While I liked the first movie, I never considered it to be one of PIXAR’s best efforts. Maybe it was a top-15 or even top-12 PIXAR film, but it wasn’t in my personal top-10, and I personally didn’t feel like it warranted a sequel. I thought it was a solid B, maybe B+ movie, but not quite at the upper echelons of PIXAR’s best films. I was also nervous because the only thing consistent about PIXAR’s movies over the last decade and a half has been their inconsistency. For every Soul, there was a Good Dinosaur. For every Coco, there was a Lightyear. And considering PIXAR’s track record for sequels outside of the Toy Story franchise, I anticipated another letdown.

As is often the case, I was wrong.

Inside Out 2 is a fantastic film and one of their best sequels. While lacking the overpowering emotion of its predecessor, it nevertheless delivers a thematically compelling story about having to accept all facets of who we are, the bitter and the sweet.

Picking up after the original, we see Riley and her best friends getting a special invitation to a prestigious hockey camp that could set them up well for high school. But Riley finds out on the way that her friends will be going to a different high school. Add to that that she’s just entering puberty, and we’re introduced to a new cast of emotions, Anxiety, Boredom, Embarrassment, and Envy, to go along with our familiar friends, Joy, Sadness, Fear, Anger, and Disgust.

Joy has been forcing bad memories to the back of the mind to create a sense of self for Riley that is overwhelmingly positive and altruistic. Feeling the old emotions are outdated and not up to the task of seeing Riley through this tumultuous time, Anxiety and the other new emotions banish Joy and the others so that they can create a new, more nuanced sense of self for Riley that Joy obviously feels is not who Riley really is.

To be honest, I thought the movie was fine through the middle of the second act. I wasn’t blown away, but I was enjoying it. Then the third act rolled around, and I think it needs to be said that no one, and I mean NO ONE, sticks the landing like PIXAR. When they’re on their game, the endings of their films are spot on. Many times, their outstanding endings have saved mediocre films. Nothing about Inside Out 2 is mediocre, but the ending absolutely took it to another emotional level.

What I liked about this film was that PIXAR’s filmmakers were able to keep the world we were familiar with and create new scenarios organically. Of course, a girl hitting puberty and getting ready for high school would have more complex emotions than she did before. It makes sense that these new emotions would turn the world inside Riley asunder until everyone could understand their place and their role. Inside Out 2 isn’t just a blatant money grab for new merch like Cars 2 and Cars 3. It isn’t a square peg being forced into a round hole trying to expand on stories that were totally fine as they were, like Monsters University and Finding Dory. This was an organic continuation of a story we all loved or at least really liked in which the stakes are raised, and new challenges await. You could conceivably see Inside Out 2 without having seen Inside Out and still enjoy it immensely.

It also should be pointed out that Inside 2 may very well salvage the summer movie season.

Inside Out 2 opened last weekend with a whopping $155 million, nearly twice what Dune 2 did in its opening weekend and the highest weekend debut since Barbie last July. To say that this summer has been disappointing at the box office would be a gross understatement. But has often happened, an animated feature has ridden to the rescue. With the latest installment of Despicable Me coming out in July, it’s reasonable to believe that animation could once again save the summer box office season.