Mubi Monday: The Beast (2023)

I'll start this review by admitting that it took me a while to get a firm hold of what was being explored here. It's a sci-fi drama that explores humanity and human connection, and it helps that the two leads are played by the excellent Léa Seydoux and the solid George MacKay, but the structure of the narrative is more convoluted and complicated than it needs to be, as far as I'm concerned.

Seydoux plays Gabrielle, a young woman who signs herself up for a process that will purify her DNA. This is done by regressing her to past lives and scrubbing away strong emotions, but that becomes a bit tougher, and Gabrielle may regret her decision, when she keeps meeting a man named Louis (George MacKay). Gabrielle and Louis seem destined to dance around one another in various lives, not entirely unlike two strands winding around one another to form a DNA helix, but the chances of the two of them having a happy ending is drastically reduced by the very process that keeps reminding them of their times together.

Based loosely on a novella, "The Beast In The Jungle", by Henry James, director Bertrand Bonello was clearly drawn to the heart of the material, so much so that he also worked on the screenplay with Guillaume Bréaud and Benjamin Charbit. That makes it easier to hold Bonello accountable for the mishandling of the main ideas, which may leave some other viewers as disappointed as I was.

Seydoux is as good as she always is, but she also has the benefit of playing someone who acts quite consistently throughout the various time persiods shown. MacKay suffers slightly from the fact that the script requires him to play at least one of his personas in a way that is very different to other incarnations, but he does well enough to often hold his own opposite Seydoux. There are a number of supporting characters, but most of them fade into the background like so much wallpaper. The main exception is Guslagie Malanda, quite brilliant as the "caretaker" who looks after Gabrielle in between her purification sessions.

I've seen a lot of love for this elsewhere already, and I have loved the other four films (three features, one short) I have seen from Bonello, but this didn't work for me. I never really felt the strength of the connection between the characters, nor did I feel the weight of what they could be adding or removing from their lives, despite always rooting for Seydoux and MacKay to somehow overcome the material. I'll just have to wait patiently for whatever comes next for any of these three individuals - Bonello, Seydoux, MacKay - but it's a major disappointment that the three of them couldn't work together on something that could stand out as a highlight for all of them.

And don't even get me started on an "end credit sequence" that asks you to scan a QR code. I couldn't have rolled my eyes any further back into my head if I was able to remove them from their optic nerves.

4/10

If you have enjoyed this, or any other, review on the blog then do consider the following ways to show your appreciation. A subscription/follow costs nothing.
It also costs nothing to like/subscribe to the YouTube channel attached to the podcast I am part of - https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCErkxBO0xds5qd_rhjFgDmA
Or you may have a couple of quid to throw at me, in Ko-fi form - https://ko-fi.com/kevinmatthews
Or Amazon is nice at this time of year - https://www.amazon.co.uk/hz/wishlist/ls/Y1ZUCB13HLJD?ref_=wl_share

Crimes Of The Future (2022)

It's comforting to know that David Cronenberg has managed to remain resolutely David Cronenberg for the past four or five decades now. Crimes Of The Future reminded me of two things. One, I have yet to watch the much earlier film from him that shares the same title (although everyone has pointed out that the two films are otherwise unconnected). Two, despite his filmography seeming to take him further away, at times, from his very specific mindset and worldview, he has never let go of firm beliefs that have helped to shape so many parts of his oeuvre.

Crimes Of The Future is set, to the surprise of nobody, in the future. People tend to interface even more directly with machines and computers, often using the kind of furniture and equipment that looks like a cross between something ergonomically designed and something created as a torture device. Humans don't really suffer from disease any more, and physical pain is largely a thing of the past. That leads to people seeking more and more ways to feel . . . something. Saul Tenser (Viggo Mortensen) is one half of a performance art couple, partnered with Caprice (Léa Seydoux), and his special skill involves displaying his body while new organs grown inside him are removed. This is important, for the order of things that it threatens to unbalance, but it's also secondary to a plot that revolves around the potential next steps in human evolution, the ways in which people feel sexual thrills, and a mission to perform an autopsy on a dead child as a shocking work of performance art.

While full of great actors doing great work, Crimes Of The Future feels like Cronenberg being allowed to display and celebrate ideas that weren't allowed to be front and centre in his work years ago, despite always being there. He finally gets to craft something in which there's a beauty contest for the insides of the participants, something Cronenberg had a character state a longing for in the superb Dead Ringers, and there are ideas and images here that rank up there with the best of his work, although the movie, as a whole, suffers slightly if you compare it to his very best. But the very best films from Cronenberg are a very high bar to be measured against.

As well as Mortensen and Seydoux, who are both excellent in their roles, there's yet another great turn from Kristen Stewart, playing a nervy bureaucrat who seems star-struck by Mortensen's character, Tanaya Beatty and Nadia Litz make a strong impression in the few scenes they have, and you get solid performances from Don McKellar, Scott Speedman, Welket Bungué, and Lihi Kornowski, the latter three all connected to that aforementioned dead child.

I think it's obvious from the plot description here that you shouldn't choose to watch Crimes Of The Future if you're after something light and fun. Mind you, that applies to almost every David Cronenberg movie (as well as anything by his son, Brandon). This deserves your time though, and I encourage people to get themselves in the right headspace for it. It's thought-provoking, disturbing, smart, and sometimes confusing. In other words, bearing in mind that you also get another impressive music score from Howard Shore, it nicely slots into the Cronenberg canon, and it shows that he's lost none of his brilliance.

8/10

If you have enjoyed this, or any other, review on the blog then do consider the following ways to show your appreciation. A subscription/follow costs nothing.
It also costs nothing to like/subscribe to the YouTube channel attached to the podcast I am part of - https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCErkxBO0xds5qd_rhjFgDmA
Or you may have a couple of quid to throw at me, in Ko-fi form - https://ko-fi.com/kevinmatthews

No Time To Die (2021)

I have to admit to being a bit Bond-fatigued by the time No Time To Die was released. It was a culmination of various factors. I was greatly disappointed by Spectre. I was as fed up as most people were by the seemingly constant whinging from Daniel Craig in between every instalment in the franchise. And, of course, the global pandemic meant that the release date was pushed back for quite some time. I decided that I would remain hopeful, but be prepared for disappointment.

Disappointment was certainly not forthcoming.

No Time To Die is immediately up there with the very best of the Bond films, vying for a top spot alongside On Her Majesty’s Secret Service and a couple of other superior 007 adventures, and it allows Craig to end his tenure on a real high note. It’s a film that gets so much right that it almost makes up for the stumbling steps that got us to this point.

The plot is simple. Bond is retired, he wants to get on with his life with Madeleine (Léa Seydoux). Retirement is interrupted by the pesky Blofeld (Christoph Waltz) being a sneaky schemer once again, and Bond eventually ends up looking to return to his old role when he learns of a deadly bioweapon that can be used to target not just individuals, but entire races. Bond being involved doesn’t make everyone happy. There’s a new agent using the 007 tag (Lashana Lynch) and M is under a lot of stress with the situation. Blofeld, still imprisoned, may actually welcome the chance to see Bond once more, especially as they both seem to have a common enemy, Lyutsifer Safin (Rami Malek).

Directed by Cary Joji Fukunaga, who also helped on the screenplay with Neal Purvis, Robert Wade, and Phoebe Waller-Bridge, this is a near-perfect Bond film that packs enough into every main sequence to distract you from the aspects that aren’t present. You don’t get Bond the womaniser, you don’t get a whole load of gadgets, and you don’t get gunfights and explosions without a lot of consideration and attempts at diplomatic diversions by those giving the orders.

You do get just enough of everything though. There are glamorous women around Bond. There are a couple of decent gadgets used in the midst of the action. And it’s interesting to think that, for all the growth of the character we have seen over the last couple of decades, Bond is shown as essentially the same blunt tool used when needed. The world may have moved on, but new and different problems can be solved with the same old solution.

Craig does well once again in the main role, all blue-eyed piercing stares and pouting. Waltz is underused once again, but also once again superb in his limited amount of screentime. Seydoux does well with what she's given, and she is able to play her part with some ambiguity as others try to figure out whether or not they can trust her. Lynch is a badass, and quickly shows why she was assigned the 007 number, so I wouldn't be averse to a spin-off with her character in it (or seeing her have a similarly strong presence in whatever we get next in the series). I also wouldn't be averse to seeing another main role for Ana de Armas, playing an agent named Paloma in a fantastic set-piece that takes place in Cuba. Ralph Fiennes, Naomie Harris, Ben Whishaw, and Rory Kinnear are as good as ever in the respective roles of M, Moneypenny, Q, and Tanner. But what of the main villains? Dali Benssalah is a good henchman, and has a memorable look thanks to his character having one electronic eye alongside one normal eye, and David Dencik is enjoyably cowardly and selfish as the scientist who has created a scarily effective weapon. Malek is really the only weak link, sadly as Safin, a character who isn't written well played in a way that is far too quiet and lacking any real sense of showmanship (which all of the best Bond villains have). Can Malek do anything other than the soft-spoken and kind of awkward character he has made his specialty over the last few years? I'm not seeing anything to prove otherwise, and I don't think he was the best person to put in this role.

Transplant a better villain into this and you could have had the greatest Bond film of all time. As it is, well, it remains a strong contender. Fukunaga directs like someone who simply knows how to run a well-oiled machine, from the sound design to the sets, from the wardrobe to the lighting, and on and on. It's also well worth mentioning the music by Hans Zimmer, providing a score that pieces together various motifs while always complementing the visuals (as any great score should). The stuntwork is superb, the pacing means that the hefty 163-minute runtime goes by briskly enough, and there's at least one moment that feels like one of the most unexpected and iconic moments in modern action cinema. 

By the time the end credits roll . . . you may very well be slightly shaken. 

9/10

If you have enjoyed this, or any other, review on the blog then do consider the following ways to show your appreciation. A subscription/follow costs nothing.
It also costs nothing to like/subscribe to the YouTube channel attached to the podcast I am part of - https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCErkxBO0xds5qd_rhjFgDmA
Or you may have a couple of quid to throw at me, in Ko-fi form - https://ko-fi.com/kevinmatthews