Tag: Nathan Lane

BEAU IS AFRAID (2023)

~ jbg ~ Leave a comment

Written & Directed By: Ari Aster
Cinematography: Pawel Pogorzelski
Editor: Lucian Johnston

Cast: Joaquin Phoenix, Nathan Lane, Amy Ryan, Richard Kind, Patti Lupone, Parker Posey, Stephen McKinley Henderson, Zoe Lister Jones, Kylie Rogers, Denis Menochet, Hayley Squires, Bill Hader

Following the sudden death of his mother, a mild-mannered but anxiety-ridden man confronts his darkest fears as he embarks on an epic, Kafkaesque odyssey back home.

This review isn’t a total explanation, as there is no such thing, but what at least as an audience member I came away with. 

The film and the director Ari Aster, Take a swing at the fences in subtle ways. In the same style as most of his previous films. Though here it is more in your have. Yet still shocking as it is taking place in surroundings you wouldn’t necessarily expect. 

Though the film does have a voice. It’s tough to determine if the audience speaks Its language fully. Though after a while it does become blunt with only a thin layer hiding the weapon. 

Though it feels like a film made more for the director to enjoy and decided to share with an audience. And becomes a Film That others believed in and a film that could only be made when one has the power to write their own check. Their big swing at a dream project almost. 

The first 40 minutes stay fascinating that it could be its own adventure. After that, it seems to become a little more maddening. As it moves along it stays unpredictable and becomes a road movie.

Whenever it gets to the next setup In this odyssey. It’s just as off the wall but feels more weird domestically than anything though it never quite feels as dangerous instead it just feels creepy.

As in the beginning, the character is on a journey physically unexpected just as he ends up on. emotionally. The tone becomes Unflinching, Surreal and ends up becoming the Ultimate guilt trip. While exploring Intimacy and lack of it. While being Terrorized by Anxiety and exaggeration. As All That he sees is danger.

No one can ever truly be trusted. Even those nice to him never feel comfortable exactly. So that he and the film stay obscure and unhinged. 

It explores how we all can be easily dismissive. Not to mention Generational trauma, Mental illness as a kind of entertainment.

The film becomes Episodically violent at times. That is A punishment or torture. That seems preferable to the emotional violence that the main character goes through. As well as supporting characters. 

It seems mundane and skewed but keeps raising the stakes and then when it seems to calm down it becomes random Again and manages to shock. So it keeps building though for some in the audience it might feel like it is either showing off or they get used to the wackiness and shock and it’s hard to reach a level within again as it seems par for the course. It might have its reasons to back it up, but for some, it might still make little to no sense. 

Can see why some might not like the film as it can be a chore or a challenge to sit through. Some might see it as brilliant others might actively hate it or some might appreciate it yet not think it was all that. This is one of those films where many will feel different and take it differently. Though it will keep them talking. 

As this is a film billed as a comedy that is easy to come back to and try to dismantle, explore and examine. 

Through his travels to his apartment and to the store across the street. Have some of the most creative action sequences on such a small scale.

SPOILER ALERT

How I saw it is that his Big balls represented pent-up animosity and feelings. Showing his father as a penis monster in the attic meaning that to his mother his Father was insignificant and just a dick. Him always being defensive to a degree is how Defense was the last shred of his self-esteem and self-respect. That his Mother’s issues and has filled him with fear of the outside world. As he has this fear he constantly doesn’t 

Know what was real or not. Was it a fantasy of projection or was it as it was presented and experienced?

Some might say that the ending is Warped and that he did die during sex and everything after are fantasies or illusions of his dying mind. Kind of like people who have their theories about the ending of TAXI DRIVER.

Though it does in some weird way come off as a more disturbing version of DEFENDING YOUR LIFE mixed a bit with THE GAME. 

Grade: B-

AUSTIN POWERS IN GOLDMEMBER (2002)

~ jbg ~ Leave a comment

Directed By: Jay Roach

Written By: Mike Myers & Michael McCullers Cinematography: Peter Deming

Editor: Jon Poll & Greg Hayden

Cast: Mike Myers, Beyoncé, Michael Caine, Seth Green, Michael York, Verne Troyer, Robert Wagner, Fred Savage, Mindy Sterling, Diane Mizota, Carrie Ann Inaba, Nobu Matsuhisa, Nichole Hiltz, Aaron Himelstein, Josh Zuckerman, Tommy Tiny Lister, Jim Piddock, Masi Oka, Clint Howard, Michael McDonald, Tom Cruise, Gwyneth Paltrow, Kevin Spacey, Danny DeVito, Steven Spielberg, Quincy Jones, Britney Spears, Burt Bacharach, Donna D’erico, Fred Stoller, Brad Grunberg, Greg Grunberg, Scott Aukerman, Nikki Ziering, Nathan Lane, Katie Couric, Ozzy Osbourne, Sharon Osbourbe, Kelly Osbourne, Jack Osbourne, John Travolta, Rob Lowe

Upon learning that his father has been kidnapped, Austin Powers must travel to 1975 and defeat the aptly named villain Goldmember, who is working with Dr. Evil.

This Is where the franchise jumped the shark. It got too big and popular for it’s Own good Believing it’s Own hype. Not only referencing itself but making fun of itself to be part of laughing with others. Which ends up damaging itself and not as much fun as the previous films.

The opening plays more like an mtv movie awards spoof than a witty or memorable opening. 

It also doesn’t help that mike Myers was taking out his problems over the problems he was having on a film project SPROCKETS with Ron Howard (supposedly) which is why Seth green dons a similar look as Howard towards the end.

The film is filled with stunt casting that makes it feel more like an homage. Having Michael Caine is more of a co-star than Beyoncé as the current love interest. Where it seems she is only in the film more out of popularity. Just as many of the cameos seem there only for their then current popularity and to be in on the jokes. Rather than it being more organically funny. 

It feels constantly like the steam has run out of the premise. As this is more mike Myers seems to make it more of an occasion to make it a show to try out and play more characters almost similar to Eddie Murphy in THE NUTTY PROFESSOR. 

The film just feels like gags and leftover fat from the previous films with tired jokes and bad attempts at pop culture humor. 

This could almost be like one of those spoof films that came out at the end of the year. That made fun of bee trends in all media culture but tried to tie it under one bow like DATE MOVIE or EPIC MOVIE or MEET THE SPARTANS. This franchise started off as an homage and felt original and now has become a spoof itself.

The second film in the franchise was good but while stretching it seemed to go all the way with what still worked. This feels like it was left out of shape and warped working in those perimeters.

If you enjoy mike Myers this film is for you more as a completist. But this feels like him at his most mega maniacal. As the film is just him going through excess

He also believes his own hype. Trying to bring in modern celebrities and have them make more fun of themselves but also show their own clout. As there truly is no reason for them to be here other than to show off. It comes off as begging whoever is popular at the time to guest star in the movie to get more surprises and show a sense of being somewhat timeless, it also truly dates itself, even though it tends to jump through time periods anyway. 

Grade: C-

THE BIRDCAGE (1996)

~ jbg ~ Leave a comment

Directed By Mike Nichols 
Written By: Elaine May 
Based on An Earlier Screenplay By: Francis Veber, Edouard Molinaro, Marcello Danon & Jean Poiret
Based in the play La Cage Aux Folles by: Jean Poiret
Cinematography: Enrique Lubezki
Editor: Arthur Schmidt 

Cast: Robin Williams, Nathan Lane, Gene Hackman, Dianne Wiest, Hank Azaria, Christine Baranski, Dan Futterman, Calista Flockhart, Tom McGowan, Grant Heslov, Kirby Mitchell, Ann Cusack, Trina McGee-Davis

A gay cabaret owner and his drag queen companion agree to put up a false straight front so that their son can introduce them to his fiancée’s right-wing moralistic parents.

this film at the time was a little daring or a bit of a gamble for a mainstream audience. Though it was also self-assured because of the popular cast. Though behind the scenes you had a bunch of heavy hitters. Who managed to raise the bar on a familiar tale and still knock it out of the park. 

Which shockingly had some actors playing against type. Where we have a fun yet more restrained Robin Williams while playing more of a funny conservative grouch. Seeing gene hackman in drag is certainly different and new.

The film also tries to put in some satire of the political culture at the time and while camping up gay culture at least offers a glimpse inside of it and offers representation.

This film also is really the big screen introduction of Nathan Lane as Albert the drag queen lover who has been practically a mother to robin Williams son in the film. Playing a role that was abandoned by Steve Martin last minute due to scheduling problems. Thilough broadway star Nathan lane took it and made it a star-making Role.

Hank Azaria also makes his presence felt in his supporting role as the couples maid, assistant and cook. Who is also part of the slapstick laughs later in the film.

This is one of those films that came around at the right place and right time. As the film and play was already a hit In France and waiting for an American remake for years that never got made which might have been out of fear in the 1989’s to portray a gay relationship. non chalantly with mainstream big name actors. So that when it did come along the culture was a bit more relaxed and if made today might not even bat too many eyelashes.

Luckily it is still hilarious to watch even on this day and age. Even when the Jokes are a little more obvious they still make you laugh. As there is wit on display as well as physical comedy and just plain old slapstick in the third act.

Out of the cast if anyone is flat It’s the young couple looking to get married played by Claista Flockhart and Dan Futterman though in a film filled with flamboyant and over the top characters you need some to be more quiet and seemingly normal to even it out a little. though they come off a little dull and Futterman Looks way older than Flockhart 

While the film is a laugh riot from beginning to the end it also has character moments that come off more serious and dramatic. As even after the so called Macho lesson the scene where lane tries to act like a straight male in a suit is a thing of beauty and partial pain.

You can feel its theatrical roots throughout it truly strongly in The theirs act where everything comes to a head. What truly is amazing is that while it was dating at its time it plays off so cute that now it feels like a more modern comedic classic that the whole family can enjoy. Even if there are times when it feels overloaded with stereotypes. 

It is so styled yet feels so haywire. That while it might seem like it is filling turbulence it’s always smooth sailing. 

Though there is an overwhelming comedic quality with heart and care that had me going to see it in theaters more than once or twice. 

Grade: A-