Wanda (1970) Review

Title: Wanda 
Year: 1970
Director: Barbara Loden
Country: US
Language: English

In 1966, while Barbara Loden was married to household name Elia Kazan (On the Waterfront), a mutual friend named Harry Schuster, offered Loden $100,000 to make her own movie. She used this to write the screenplay for Wanda, but unfortunately it did not attract any Hollywood directors, including her own husband. Loden decided to direct it herself and collaborated with cinematographer/editor  Nicholas T. Proferes in order to give the picture a very minor budget of $110,000, 

Wanda (Barbara Loden), a lonely housewife, drifts through mining country until she meets a petty thief (Michael Higgins) who takes her in.

The only American film to be accepted in the Venice Film Festival in 1970, Wanda won the International Critics' Prize that year. The film is notable because there were so few women film-makers in New Hollywood & Loden was able to break new ground on such a small budget. Loden's character is somewhat of an anti-heroine; not strong in any-way that would appeal to feminists and very noteworthy for being imperfect. Wanda feels like Bonnie and Clyde (1967) blended with Five Easy Pieces (1970).

Through her main protagonist Loden says a lot about her fellow women's lack of autonomy in their own lives. Even a half century after women getting the right to vote, its seems like women don't fully feel in control of their own destiny. In one scene Wanda wants to work, but she is told, from her male boss,  that the only work available is for men only. I appreciate Loden's ability to speak honestly and from the heart; the lack of/absence of female filmmakers in American Cinema is something we viewers often take for granted. 

Wanda is a great overlooked picture, perhaps the greatest picture depicting the difficulties & frustrations of the average woman (in the sense of a lack of autonomy). I loved it, will watch it many more times, and will encourage everyone I know to view it through their own eyes. Loden deserves a great amount of praise. 

The Fallen Idol (1948) Review

Title: The Fallen Idol
Year: 1948
Director: Carol Reed
Country: UK
Language: English

Despite working with very similar cinematographers, such as Robert Krasker or Oswald Morris, Carol Reed's filmography has been quite diverse throughout his career. In one decade he makes an innovative film noir in The Third Man (1949), the next he makes a wartime romance The Key (1958) and the decade following that he wins Best Picture with Oliver! (1968). I find myself quite amused when I watch his pictures, as I am entertained by something quite different everytime. 

In this, a butler (Ralph Richardson) working in a foreign embassy in London falls under suspicion when his wife (Sonia Dresdel) accidentally falls to her death, the only witness being an impressionable young boy (Bobby Henry).

The Fallen Idol reminds me of a Simpsons' episode where Mayor Quimby's cousin is accused of murdering a chef over the pronounciation of "chowder" (Chow-dere? It's chow-da!) and the only witness is Bart Simpson. Reed's picture is a perfect example of entertainment that is accessible to both children and adults. Though the majority of the scenes' are viewed through the young boy's, Phillipe, eyes and framed through his energy there are many adult scenes that would capture the minds of an older audience. 

The film's ultimate moral, that a lie leads to more lies which leads to trouble, is perfectly suitable for audiences of all ages. Graham Greene's screenplay gives a fairly obvious statement ("don't lie") that doesn't come off as preachy or lecturous. Like Alfred Hitchcock's Rebecca, The Fallen Idol feels, and looks, like a gothic fairlytale that has the possibility to not have a "happily ever after". 

Though it isn't as great as The Third Man (1949), I was impressed and entertained by The Fallen Idol. Considering it's a 1940's picture, its quite unusual to see an adulterer be the main protagonist of this story. Would make a rather interesting double feature with Brief Encounter (1945). 

Fighting With My Family (2019) Review

Title: Fighting With My Family 
Year: 2019
Director: Stephen Merchant
Country: UK
Language: English

I remember, because it wasn't that long ago, watching Saraya-Jade Bevis (aka Paige) debut on the WWE main roster and defeated AJ Lee for the then called "Divas Championship" on a post-Wrestlemania 30 Monday Night Raw. It was an exciting and monumental moment because up until then the "diva's division" (what they called the female wrestlers in WWE) was dominated by models and women who couldn't really perform that well. Paige had been a professional wrestler for 6 years before that point & her win helped pave the way for women to be taken seriously in WWE. 

Fighting With My Family is, to a smaller extent, about Paige's family struggling to get by as wrestlers in the UK while maintaining a strong family unit. To a larger extent it's about Paige (Florence Pugh) herself slowly rising to the top of the female wrestling world. 

Florence Pugh does a good job at creating this underdog character that has to overcome both physical and mental shortcomings (such as low self esteem, fear of rejection) in order to reach her true potential. Her acting provides the foundation of drama throughout the picture. Nick Frost, who plays Paige's dad, gives a much needed comedic undertone to the film that prevents Fighting With My Family from being weighed down by heavy emotion. I loved the Who's Coming to Dinner-like scene wherin upper middle class British folk have dinner with these barbarian-like wrestlers. 

The script is, well, a bit cliche. Many scenes are formulaic and could be in any other underdog story, but as mentioned the actors give an average script some nice flow and longevity. Though it is fairly unfortunate that much of the later scenes are manufactured, taking the "based on a true story" moniker very loosely. Paige was an under-dog, but she was still NXT women's champion by the time she fought AJ Lee, but I digress. 

Paige's story is fairly unique, her family did rise from poverty, and it is a story worth telling on the big screen. I feel like the film-makers' got as much out of the story as anybody else could have. It succeeded in holding my attention, but I don't think it rose above a popcorn flick. Certainly worth at least one viewing. 

Mother (1996) Review

Title: Mother
Year: 1996
Director: Albert Brooks
Country: US
Language: English

Though Woody Allen is most well known for his neurotic intellectual character, I'd argue Albert Brooks does it better in his two classics Lost in America (1985) & Mother (1996). Both are very smart comedies that seem to have slowly vanished from the public eye with time, even though neither feel or look dated. Having discovered his films through Criterion Channel, I'm developing quite a fondness for the director/actor's works.

Mother revolves around a novelist, played by Brooks, who moves back in with his mother (Debbie Reynolds) after the demise of his second marriage. Attempting to pick up the pieces of his life, jumpstart a his stalled career, and, perhaps, learn something about women, the writer finds his new lifestyle full of nostalgic challenges.

Having fallen in love with Debbie Reynolds in Singin in the Rain (1952) and The Unsinkable Molly Brown, I don't think I was quite ready to view her as a mother figure in, well, Mother (1996). She plays her part as a passive agressive, slightly controlling, parent pretty well. Her and Albert Brooks have great chemistry, as most of the humor derives from them playing off each others' weird psychological tendencies. 

The writing is wonderful; in addition to being full of subtle jabs in the dialogue, the script is rife with freudian material that would be welcome in any undergraduate classroom. The comedy is top notch; rather than going for the quick and easy laugh, each chuckle that Brooks gets from his audience come well earned due to a mastery of his craft. 

Mother (1996) is a fun film that deserves to have a place among the comedy greats like Airplane and Blazing Saddles. It is far more poignant and observant than both of those, albeit not as strong in visual humour. I hope the rest of his filmography is as good as this.